packet (3)AGENDA KALISPELL CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2025
The public can participate in person in the Council Chambers or via videoconferencing. Please sign in 5 minutes
prior to the meeting to ensure connection.
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_1Xev20bfSzu662vJ8zO3DA
The City of Kalispell does not discriminate based on disability in its programs, services, activities, and employment practices. Accessible parking is available at the City lot north of City Hall, and accessible restrooms are available. If you need auxiliary aids or services for effective communication or other reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting or hearing, please contact the Development Services front desk at (406)758-7940 as soon as possible, preferably at least two working days before the meeting date.
The regular meeting and work session of the Kalispell City Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday,
May 13, 2025, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall, 201 First Avenue East, Kalispell.
The agenda for the meeting will be:
A.Call to Order and Roll Call
B.Election of Officers
C.Approval of Minutes of April 8, 2025
D.Hear the Public – The public may comment on any matter on the agenda or not on the agenda. (Commentsare typically held to 3 minutes or less.)
E.Old Business
F.New Business
G.Adjournment
The planning commission will hold a work session on the items listed below:
1.File #KA-25-03; KPUD-25-02; and KPP-25-02 – Colton Behr, has submitted applications for AndersonRanch, including requests for annexation, initial zoning of R-3 (Residential) with a Planned UnitDevelopment (“PUD”) overlay and preliminary plat approval for 166 residential lots on approximately
42.5 acres, including lots, roads, and common areas. The majority of the subject property was previously
annexed and this petition would annex the remaining 11.7 acres of the tract. The PUD is an amendmentof the overall Gardner-Anderson Ranch PUD approved in 2024, which consisted of 94.4 acres with light-industrial/commercial and residential components. This PUD amendment covers the residentialcomponent in the eastern portion of the overall PUD. The property is located on Demersville Road to the
west of Bar H Drive and can be described as a tract of land situated, lying and being in the southeast
quarter of the northwest quarter, and in the southwest quarter, all of Section 28, Township 28 North, Range21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows to wit: Tract 1of Certificate of Survey No. 22969 (records of Flathead County, Montana) and containing 42.500 acres,subject to and together with all appurtenant easements of record.
2.In the last legislative session, the Montana Legislature passed Senate Bill 382, which created the newMontana Land Use Planning Act. Under the Act, for cities such as Kalispell, the current growth policy,subdivision regulations, and zoning regulations are largely replaced with a new land use planningparadigm. The concept is that a land use plan is established with extensive public input. The plan then
becomes a guiding document for land use decisions, many of which, such as subdivisions, become
administrative rather than conducted through a public hearing process. The opportunity for the public to be engaged comes with the process establishing the plan and regulations, not with review of a site-specific project.
This work session is the seventh in a series the Planning Commission will hold in the coming months. It
is intended that the focus of this work session will be a discussion of portions of the preliminary draft land use plan. Future work sessions will be noticed and a formal hearing will be held before the Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council for its action.
Next Regular Meeting: Tuesday, June 10, 2025 PARTICIPATION
Due to occasional technical difficulties, the most reliable way to participate is through in-person attendance. Electronic means are not guaranteed. Those addressing the commission are requested to give their name and address for the record. Comments can
also be sent to planning@kalispell.com.
To provide public comment live, remotely, register for the video conference through zoom at: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_1Xev20bfSzu662vJ8zO3DA. Please sign in at least 5 minutes prior to the meeting to ensure connection. Raise your virtual hand to indicate you would like to provide comment.
Watch Planning Commission sessions live with the agenda and supporting documents or later with documents and time stamped minutes at: https://www.kalispell.com/480/Meeting-Videos. Watch Planning Commission sessions live or later on Charter Cable Ch. 190 or via the City YouTube page at:
https://www.youtube.com/@cityofkalispellmontana9632/streams.
Kalispell City Planning Commission Minutes of the meeting of April 8, 2025 Page | 1
KALISPELL CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING April 8, 2025 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Commission
members present were Chad Graham, Doug Kauffman, Shelby Leckron, Joshua Borgardt, Pip Burke, and Rory Young. Jarod Nygren, PJ Sorensen, Kari Barnhart, Kirstin Robinson, and
Donnie McBath represented the Kalispell Planning Department. Keith Haskins represented the Kalispell Public Works Department.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Leckron moved and Young seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the March 11, 2025 meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission.
VOTE BY ACCLAMATION The motion passed unanimously on a vote of acclamation. HEAR THE PUBLIC None. KA-25-02 & KCU-25-02 – MDT COMBO FACILITY
File #KA-25-02 and KCU-25-02– The Montana Department of Transportation (“MDT”) has submitted applications for
annexation, initial zoning of P-1 (Public), and a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a combination facility located at 2905 Highway 93 North. The facility would include an
approximately 28,400 square foot new building combining equipment storage, mechanics, and welding shops under one roof. MDT would continue to store salt, sand and other materials for
maintenance at the location. The property can generally be described as Tract 2 of Certificate of Survey No. 8673, lying and being in Government Lot 4. STAFF REPORT PJ Sorensen representing the Kalispell Planning Department reviewed Staff Reports #KA-25-02 & KCU-25-02.
Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-25-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be
annexed and the zoning for the property be city P-1 (Public). Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Commission adopt staff report #KCU-25-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the conditions on the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Staff clarified to Young that the screening on the plans is typical for this type of facility and that the adjacent property owners may have concerns about screening.
Kalispell City Planning Commission Minutes of the meeting of April 8, 2025 Page | 2
PUBLIC COMMENT Justin Juelfs – MDT – Provided context of the project and was happy to answer any questions. Mr. Juelfs clarified to Borgardt and Graham that the planned screening is for security and is
similar to what is presently there. Ryan Mitchell – 102 Corporate Way – Representative for the
applicant – Advised that there will be a nice building with landscaping.
MOTION – KA-25-02 Burke moved and Kauffman seconded that the Kalispell City Planning Commission adopt Staff Report #KA-25-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the property be annexed and the zoning for the property be city P-1
(Public). BOARD DISCUSSION None.
ROLL CALL Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
MOTION – KCU-25-02 Leckron moved and Kauffman seconded that the Kalispell City Planning Commission adopt staff report #KCU-25-02 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the conditional use permit be approved subject to the conditions in
the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION None.
MOTION – KCU-25-02 AMENDMENT
Young moved and Leckron seconded to amend the conditions of KCU-25-02 to change condition #3 to add the language “In the
event that state law prohibits dedication, a public road and utility easement shall be granted to the City,” ROLL CALL – KCU-25-02 AMENDMENT
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
BOARD DISCUSSION Graham stated he liked the relocation of activities from downtown to the outset of town. Nygren clarified that landscape buffer goes all the way to the south and would include landscaping to soften the look. Young liked the extension of Quail Lane, but he did not feel that there was a need to screen the building. Borgardt clarified with Juelfs that perimeter fencing is important for security during
non-business hours and that legislative audits require fencing. Young and staff discussed amending the conditions to require Architectural Review Committee approval for the screening.
Graham suggested that MDT screen around the materials and equipment and fenced around the building.
MOTION – KCU-25-02
AMENDMENT
Young moved and Borgardt seconded to amend the conditions of
KCU-25-02 to change the final sentence of condition #6 that states “any fencing shall be installed in accordance with the zoning regulation standards and locations for screening shall be
Kalispell City Planning Commission Minutes of the meeting of April 8, 2025 Page | 3
approved or reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Committee.” DISCUSSION Graham stated that he didn’t object to the amendment but that he also didn’t have a problem adding it as a condition on the Staff Report. ROLL CALL – KCU-25-02 AMENDMENT
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL – KCU-25-02
Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote
BOARD DISCUSSION None.
OLD BUSINESS Sorensen updated the commission on city council action on items from the March Planning Commission meeting.
NEW BUSINESS Sorensen updated the board on the upcoming May 13, 2025 Planning Commission meeting and Work Session. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:40 PM. WORK SESSION Transitioned into work session on the Montana Land Use Planning Act.
__________________ ___________________ Chad Graham Kirstin Robinson President Recording Secretary
APPROVED as submitted/amended:
March 2025
Prepared By
Anderson Ranch
Annexation, PUD, & Subdivision
Applications
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 1
Amended Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative a. Narrative:
The proposed PUD Amendment is intended to add acreage to the original Anderson Ranch holding. The added acreage will allow the PUD to meet the density requirement of four units er acre as prescribed in the Kalispell Growth Policy. In addition, the amendment adds area to the park/open space that can be utilized by the residents of the project.
The bulk of the Anderson Ranch property was annexed with the initial PUD but we will be adding approximately 12 acres to the annexation with this application set. The Anderson Ranch is a residential development consisting of approximately 166 lots on 42.50 acres producing a gross density of 3.9 units per acre. These lots will be approximately 4,500 square feet with small single family homes of 1,600 square feet or less. Each two units
will share a driveway to preserve area for on-street parking. b. Phasing The Anderson Ranch PUD will be developed in phases.
The applicant proposes three phases for Anderson Ranch property. The subdivision application will provide additional detail on the infrastructure and timing of subsequent phasing within the Anderson/Behr holding. The subdivision will also provide the mechanism for extending and connecting to the collector road system shown in the original
PUD. It may be that the Anderson Ranch Subdivision application comes in before the Gardner subdivision. If this is the case, all utility and transportation extensions will be address and the Anderson Ranch owners and the Garners have an agreement allowing for the extensions
of the infrastructure. c. Deviations from the R-3 Zoning Lot Size – Lot sizes for the Anderson Ranch lots will be 4,161 square feet, or greater. Most
lots measure 45-feet by 100-feet or 4,500 square feet. Lot Width -The minimum lot width in the R-3 zoning is 50-feet. We propose a deviation to 45-feet of Lot width for the smaller lots. To address the concern of providing on-street parking for guests, we propose to share the driveways and split the 24-
foot-wide driveway between every two lots. This will leave 66-feet of curb between driveways for on-street parking. (See detail on the Subdivision/PUD Map). Roadway deviation – There is a small segment of roadway Adjacent to Lots 50 and 51 in
the north east corner of the development. We request a deviation to allow a 40 to 41 foot wide right-of -way with five foot sidewalk, nine foot wide boulevard, two
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 2
foot curb and gutter and 20-foot paved drive surface drive surface. This would be a temporary design element until such time as the property to the east develops and
is able to dedicate the remain 20 foot of right-of-way and complete the road cross
section. This road segment only provides primary access to a single house and the 20 foot drive surface will allow for the City to plow the street. Use Restriction – The R-3 PUD will limit development of the lots to single family detached
structures. ADU’s and duplex dwellings would be prohibited in this development.
d. Parks and Common Areas The PUD proposes 13.31 acres of park and open space along the south side of the Anderson
Ranch property. The subdivision regulations require 0.03 acres of park per residential lot.
The 166 lots x 0.03 acres = 4.98 acres. The PUD requests a deviation to count all of the park and open space in the parkland dedication rather than excluding any park/open space within 50-feet of the wetlands. The wetlands area and the area around the ponds will be managed in a natural state to protect the wetlands and sensitive areas around the wetlands.
The maintained park area will be limited to the upland areas above the bluff. The park area
on top of the bluff would include trails, park benches and a playground. The parks and common spaces will be the responsibility of the HOA for maintenance.
e. Utilities, roads, and local services.
Water A 12 inch municipal water mains is planned to be installed within Bar H Drive with an extension stub-out at the intersection of United Drive and Bar H Drive. The planned 12”
water main will be installed as part of the initial phase of the Gardner Anderson Ranch
development. Internal water main distribution system will be installed for this development including providing for future extensions at Demersville Road.
This area is subject to the Old School Station late commers agreement.
This area is accounted for in the Kalispell Water Facility Plan Update (Figure3-1). Sewer
A Municipal Sewer main is located along the eastern Highway 93 Right-of-Way. The City of Kalispell has planned for a regional sanitary sewer lift station and commissioned a study performed by AE2S, which provided guidance for the new GD09
lift station. The regional lift station, associated gravity sewer mains and force main will be
installed as part of this development. The force main will connect to an existing manhole at the intersection of Bar H Drive and US Hwy 93.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 3
The current Sewer Facility Plan was finalized in June 2019 with updates reviewed approximately every five years. A new update is anticipated to be completed with the new
Growth Policy document required by SB 382. This would probably happen even without
SB 382. Both of Kalispell water and sewer facility plans use a 2% growth rate to project the needs of the system.
This area is accounted for in the Kalispell Wastewater Facility Plan Update (Figure 3-1). Police The City of Kalispell charges impact fees to shift the burden of the impact of development
to the developer/homebuilder rather than the taxpayer at large. The impact fee for police
is $41 per unit or $6,806.00 for 166 units. After the initial impact fees the units will pay their property taxes which would cover on-going costs. The commercial impact fees will be determined with the type and size of the commercial buildings and are hard to predict without knowing the exact Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU).
Fire The developer will install all fire hydrants within the development, and these will be turned over to the city for long term maintenance. The city charges $483 per unit in impact fees for fire protection. The 166 units will pay $80,178.00 in impact fees and property taxes
for the remainder. These fees are intended to provide equipment and buildings for the fire
department. Stormwater The proposed development will be designed so that stormwater is addressed for both the
Gardner Holding and the Anderson Ranch holding. Stormwater will be collected and
conveyed to a reginal water quality treatment device prior to discharging to an existing “closed basin” wetland along the south side of the site. A more detailed description of the Stormwater system is located in the Letter provided by Civil Solutions, dated May 25th with the subject line Stormwater and Geotechnical Narrative.
Roads The Anderson Ranch property fronts on Demersville Road on the east and the applicant is coordinating transportation linkages through the PUD with the Gardner property to the west. The Gardner property fronts Lower Valley Road on the north, Highway 93 on the
west, and United Drive on the south. With the PUD, we have created a collector road
system that provided east-west linkage and north-south linkage. The collector roads provide access to a local road system that access the individual lots. With the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was performed by
Abelin Traffic Services to address the traffic impacts associated with this project and also
improves overall levels of service.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 4
The TIS states that warrants will be met for a traffic signal at Highway 93 and the new east-west collector with this project. The TIS recommends a traffic signal be placed at the
intersection of Highway 93 and new east west collector street. The TIS indicates that a
right hand turn lane will be needed at the approach from Cemetery Road by Phase 3. Also with Phase 3, the traffic signal at Bar H and Highway 93 will need to be installed. Phase 4 will require some improvements to the Lower Valley/Willow Glen intersection, most likely a westbound right and left hand-turn lanes. (Combined impacts Anderson Ranch and
Gardner developments).
All roads within the PUD area will be constructed to City of Kalispell Public Works Standards with curb, gutter, boulevard, street trees, and street lights. The roads with the project, once constructed, certified, and accepted, will be turned over to the City as City
streets.
f. Neighborhood relationship
The property is located between Demersville Road and the Gardner property which is zone
B-5/PUD and is in the City Limits. Other than the small area added to the current PUD amendment, the property was annexed into the City of Kalispell in September of 2024 and City Services will be extended into the project with the development of the subdivision and the initial phase of the overall PUD.
To facilitate planned growth, the Anderson Ranch developer is working cooperatively with Todd Gardner, owner of the B-5 lands in the City Limits. The two property owners have developed a comprehensive transportation plan for their combined lands laying out Collector Road, Local Streets, and connections to the Highway 93 arterial.
The two landowners have also worked cooperatively to design a conceptual stormwater plan that supports both property owners as well as some of the adjacent, existing commercial uses.
The Anderson Ranch and Gardner property is identified as part of the service area of the
Old School Station latecomer’s agreement. g. Consideration of neighborhood character
The subject property consists of 42+ acres proposed for residential development with a
small additional area proposed for annexation. In a coordinated effort, the applicants Anderson/Behr and Gardner are working together to plan out this neighborhood. The original PUD lays out a transportation grid supported in the City Transportation plan and facilitate safe and convenient linkages for these and neighboring lands. This proposed
PUD Amendment does not change the transportation grid. The two landowner interests
are also proposing a coordinated stormwater management plan that supports both developments and is located on the Anderson property.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 5
The Gardner holdings are located along Highway 93 and are either currently used for commercial purposes or will be in conformance with the zoning. Neighboring uses include
car lots, appliance sales, RV Sales, gas/convenance store, manufacturing, office, and
auction yard. To the north and east of the holding are small suburban residential lots of ½ acre to 2 acres in size. To the south is agricultural. As stated previously the Anderson/Behr lands border commercial lands on the west. The urban residential proposed in the initial PUD and this amendment is a good fit for a neighborhood with a diverse land use pattern.
The transition from the commercial uses on the Gardner property to the residential uses on the Anderson/Behr property, the developers will utilize landscape buffers and fencing. h. Intensive or incompatible uses
There are no uses that would be considered incompatible as the commercial use on the Gardner portion of the PUD mirrors the neighboring commercial use. The proposed small lot urban residential is a good transition from the commercial to the less dense suburban residential densities east of Demersville Road.
Transitioning from commercial to urban residential will require fencing and landscaping between the uses as prescribed in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Section 27.20.050. For fencing, the parties have agreed to a six foot tall vinal or wood fence on the boundary
between the commercial and residential use. In addition, there will be a 15-foot wide
landscape buffer on the commercial side of the fence that buffers the uses. i. Growth Policy Compliance
This area of Kalispell is heavily influenced by the commercial land use pattern along
Highway 93 South and the commercial nodes at the intersection of Lower Valley Road/Highway 93 and the Highway 93 Bypass intersection with Highway 93. The Anderson Ranch property is directly east of the commercial designations of Kalispell’s Growth Policy.
The following Goals and Policy of the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan-It 2035 show conformance with the proposed Amendment: Community Growth and Design
G.2 Implement a comprehensive, effective growth management program that
recognizes and upholds the general welfare of the community as well as individual rights. G.3. Encourage housing types that provide housing for all sectors and income levels within the community. G.4. Commercial and residential development should be designed to take advantage of
and enhance adjacent streets, parks and natural features.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 6
P.1. Encourage resolutions of disputes involving land use policy by broad participation, education, compromise, and consideration of private property rights with that of the
neighborhood, maintain mechanisms to provide for open, well publicized public process.
P.4. Design and locate development to protect public health and safety; ensure adequate provision of services; and complement the character of its surroundings. P.8. Encourage design of urban streets to provide for convenient circulation, safe pedestrian access, and avoid excess road widths that encourages speeding and makes
pedestrian crossings difficult.
Land Use: Housing G.1 Provide an adequate supply and mix of housing that meets the needs of present and future residents in terms of cost, type, design, and location.
P.1 All residents should have the opportunity to live in neighborhoods that provide safe housing. P.2. City regulations should maintain incentives to provide for varied affordable housing types.
P.3. Encourage development of urban residential neighborhoods as the primary
residential land use pattern in the growth policy area. These developments should incorporate design features that are either consistent with or anticipate the changing character of the area. P.8. New residential subdivisions and multi-family developments should be designed in
accordance with Kalispell’s Standards for Design and Construction. When possible,
neighborhoods should connect to and complement the communities trail system. P.14. A variety of housing types and compatible land uses are encouraged in residential areas and should be designed to fit the scale and character of the neighborhood. Where necessary, developers should utilize the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process to craft
development proposals that are both innovative and creative, while maintaining the
integrity and values of the community. Natural Environment G.1. Encourage development that is compatible with or enhances natural resource values
including air, water, soil, and vegetation.
G.2. Development near environmentally sensitive areas, as shown in Figure 3 Environmentally Sensitive Resources Map, should be accomplished so that features are left in a relatively undisturbed state. G.6 Protect wetlands and riparian areas since they are important in flood protection,
maintaining water quality, and providing habitat
G.7. Encourage higher density mixed use developments on lands within and close to the City Limits. G.8. Discourage large lot developments without public infrastructure. P.5. Encourage Urban Growth only on agricultural lands entirely within the City’s
annexation policy boundary.
Transportation
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Narrative 7
G.1. Provide a safe efficient, accessible, and cost-effective transportation system that offers viable choices for moving people and goods throughout the community.
G.5. Identify and protect future road corridors that will service future developments and
public lands. P.2. Coordinate land use and transportation so that higher intensity development is located within well-established areas near arterial and collector streets. P.5. Provide access to individual lots by way of local streets to the maximum extent
feasible and avoid granting individual access to collectors and arterials.
P.8. Reserve adequate right-of-way for designated arterial and collector roads on lands proposed for new development. Public Infrastructure & Services - Water
G.3. Maintain and update water rights to ensure current and future water needs are accounted for. Much of the subject property is within Kalispell City Limits. City sewer and water are
approximately 500-feet from the property. There are no environmental constraints on the
bulk of property and no sensitive lands associated with the development. There is a bluff and wetland areas below the bluff, but the development is placing a park area between the lots and the bluff and maintaining at a minimum the 100-foot setback from the wetlands. The associated PUD outlines the transportation grid that will be developed with subsequent
subdivisions.
j. Maps See attached Preliminary Plat/PUD maps.
Description of Area to be added to the PUD and subject to annexation:
TRACT 1:
A TRACT OF LAND, SITUATED, LYING AND BEING IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, and IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, ALL OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, P.M.,M., FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TO WIT:
Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 22969 (records of Flathead County, Montana) and containing 42.500 ACRES; Subject to and together with all appurtenant easements of record.
Anderson Ranch Phasing Plan
Phase 1 Lots 56 – 84 and 148 – 166 (Total 40 Lots)
Construct Bar H Road through to Demersville Road. Construct all other roads and
utilities to support the phase. Construct Park, Regional Lift Station, and Stormwater system. Fall of 2026 completion
Phase 2
Lots 85 – 147 (Total 63 Lots) Construct all road support the phase along with utilities. Fall of 2028 completion
Phase 3
Lots 1 – 54 (Total 54 Lots) Construct all road support the phase along with utilities. Fall of 2030 completion
Ov
e
r
h
a
n
g
Overhang
Ov
e
r
h
a
n
g
84 83
85
88
87
86
91
90
89
153
154
155
149
150
151
152142
141
140
139
146
145
144
143
156
138
93 92
162
161
160
159
130
131
132
133
126
134
127
135
128
136
129
82 81
80
79
78
77
137
53
39
38
37
36
41
40
33
34
29
30
31
32
28 42
54
51
43
35
44 52
45
46
47
48
5049
9 810
121
120
119
118
125
117
124
116
123
115
122
114
94
11
12
13
164
165
158
166
157
73
72
71
110
102
109
101
108
100
107
99
106
98
113
105
97
112
104
96
111
103
95
27
19
26
18
25
17
24
23
16
22
21
20
74
75
76
68
69
70
67
3 2 17654
15 14
163
148
147
UTILITY
LOT
56 57 58 59
6055
62 63
61 66
6564
FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
CITY STREET
10' CITY STREET
Temp. HammerheadTurnaround Esmt.
Proposed Building Envelope
Building
Easement
Road
Gas Line
Electric Vault
Power Overhead
Power Underground
Sewer Line
Fiber Optics
Telephone Underground
Water Line
Proposed Driveway
Proposed Building
Notes:
Vertical Datum: NAVD88 (per SSI GPS observation, processed from Leica Smartnet Base MTKA using Geoid 18)
Contour Origin: Big Sky Aerial Solutions LiDAR point data (dated 2023-11-08).
Any changes to the ground since November 2023 are not reflected.
Basis of Bearings: Geodetic North per static GPS single-point calibration
THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 1
Return to:
GERSH, SIMPSON & JOOS, PLLP
121 Wisconsin Avenue
Whitefish, MT 59937
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS
FOR THE ANDERSON RANCH SUBDIVISION
This Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions is made as of the day of
, 20___, by Colton Behr and Douglas Gerald Anderson and Emma Gay
Anderson, as Trustees of the Douglas & Gay Anderson Revocable Living Trust (collectively, the
"Declarant").
1. THE PROPERTY. This Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions binds
the real property described in the attached Exhibit A (the "Property").
2. OWNER. The Declarant is the Owner of the Property.
3. DECLARATION. Declarant hereby declares that commencing on the date of recording
this Declaration, the Property, which is commonly known as the Anderson Ranch Subdivision,
or simply “Anderson Ranch,” shall be held, sold, used, and conveyed subject to the covenants,
conditions, and restrictions herein, which shall nm with the title to the Property. This Declaration
shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of all parties having any right, title, or interest
in the Property, or any part thereof, their heirs, successors, and assigns; and to their tenants,
invitees, and guests.
4. DEFINITIONS
4.1 Association. "Association" is the Anderson Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc., or
any successor organization.
4.2 Lot. A "Lot" is each platted Lot of the Property. There are 166 Lots.
4.3 Owner. "Owner" is any record owner of the Property.
4.4 Property. "Property" is the real property described in Exhibit A.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 2
5. PURPOSE, USE, AND ACTIVITIES. The following protective covenants are designed
to provide a uniform plan for the ownership, use, and development of the Property.
5.1 No noxious or offensive activities shall be carried on upon the Property, and nothing
shall anything be done on the Property that may become an annoyance or nuisance to the
neighborhood.
5.2 Each Owner of a Lot shall provide exterior maintenance of all structures on such Lot
and shall keep such structures in good repair, including but not limited to painting and repairing
structures. All Owners must comply with any weed management plan adopted by the
Association.
5.3 Each Lot shall be used for only one single-family residence only. No more than 1
outbuilding is allowed to accompany the one single-family residence, and those outbuildings
shall be limited to one detached garage/shop/shed. No outbuildings shall be permitted unless
there is also a main single-family residence present. No garage/shop/shed shall be used as a
dwelling for any duration.
5.4 No Lot may be further subdivided.
5.5 No temporary building, house trailer, mobile home, partly finished building or
manufactured home shall be erected or placed on the Property either during construction or at
any time thereafter. All construction shall be completed within 18 months from the date
construction begins. The Association may adopt rules governing construction, including trash
and debris removal, sanitary facilities, parking areas, restoration of damaged areas, fire
protection, and other construction activities. Owners must comply with the rules adopted by the
Association.
5.6 While modular or pre-fabricated homes placed on foundations are permitted, no trailer
homes, RVs, or mobile homes shall be placed on the Property, unless explicitly approved by the
architectural control committee.
5.7 All structures shall be constructed primarily of new materials. All construction shall
conform to all applicable codes, ordinances, laws, and regulations. If construction activity on any
Lot causes damage to the roads or improvements, the cost or repair shall be paid by the Owner of
the Lot. Lots disturbed during construction shall be landscaped or returned to natural vegetation
within 1 year of construction.
5.8 Campers, camping trailers, pickup campers, boats, trailers, or unlicensed vehicles must
be screened from public view. No such vehicles shall be used as a temporary or permanent
residence.
5.9 No signs, advertising billboards, or advertising structures of any kind shall be erected,
used, or maintained on the Property except signage on a Lot for the purpose of advertising that
Lot for sale or rent.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 3
5.10 All driveways shall be paved with asphalt or concrete surfacing from the street to the
garage.
5.11 No profession, business, or commercial activity may be conducted on the Property
except home occupations as defined by Flathead County Zoning Regulations. The terms
“profession,” “business,” and "commercial activity" do not include rental of the dwelling or
guest house for residential, dwelling, or vacation purposes. All rentals of the dwelling, of the
guest house, or of both or either shall comply with all applicable zoning, laws, ordinances,
statutes, rules, and regulations of any kind, no matter which governmental entity or entities
promulgate(s) them. Such rentals are explicitly permitted as long as they so comply. However,
no rental of the garage/shop/shed is permitted unless it is included with and together with the
rental of the dwelling or guest house.
5.12 No fuel tanks above or below the ground are allowed except propane tanks, which
propane tanks must be below the ground. Notwithstanding the foregoing, each lot may have two
portable, above-ground propane tanks associated with outdoor grilling, but they must be of 30-
pound capacity or smaller.
5.13 All utilities must be underground. There shall be no exterior antennas except for a
satellite dish receiver, which shall be 24 inches or less in diameter and located in the rear of the
structure or screened from view.
5.14 No hunting, target shooting, or discharging of any firearms or fireworks is allowed on
the Property. There are no exceptions for the Fourth of July, New Year’s Eve, New Year’s Day,
or any other day or period of time.
5.15 Cats, dogs, or other small household pets/service animals not to exceed 4 total number
for each Lot, with no more than 2 dogs for each Lot, may be kept but may not be bred. No
horses, poultry, or other livestock animals shall be raised, bred, or kept on any Lot. All
pets/service animals must be leashed, kenneled, (underground electric fences are permitted), or
otherwise confined to the Lot and not allowed loose on the Property except when leashed and
controlled by the owner. No pet or service animal shall excessively bark or otherwise cause a
nuisance or disturbance. Owners must clean up after their pets/service animals. To the extent this
Section 5.16 conflicts with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Americans with Disabilities
Act shall control.
5.16 No part of the Property shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground or storage
ground for rubbish, trash, garbage, inoperative vehicles, or other waste. Garbage containers or
other equipment for the disposal of such material shall be concealed except for pickup and must
be removed from public view by 6:00 p.m. on the day of pickup. Additionally, no construction
equipment, construction materials, or trucks or other vehicles used for contracting or
construction purposes shall be stored or kept on any Lot unless they are entirely concealed from
view from all other Lots.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 4
5.17 Owners shall comply with all applicable zoning regulations and conditions of
subdivision approval.
5.18 Owners shall maintain house numbers either on the principal residence or at the
driveway entrance. All house numbers shall be visible from the driveway entrance.
5.19 The hours of 10:00pm through 9:00am, MST/MDT as applicable, shall be quiet hours
during which all noise audible outside any dwelling or outbuilding shall be kept to a minimum.
6. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION. Each Owner shall be a member of the Association,
which is a Montana nonprofit corporation, and shall be bound by the Bylaws adopted by the
Association and any administrative rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
6.1 Each Lot shall have one vote, as designated in the Bylaws.
6.2 The Association shall be responsible for necessary maintenance and improvement of
any real or personal property conveyed to the Association which shall be at the Board’s
discretion; maintaining liability insurance; regular maintenance of roads, parks/open space
(including trails, benches, playgrounds, and other park facilities), buildings, drainage facilities,
public water system, and other facilities controlled by the Association; execution of a weed
management plan approved by Flathead County; execution of a fire prevention, control, and
fuels reduction plan and fire system maintenance plan; enforcing these Covenants; and for
architectural control. The Association may place a sign, may landscape all or part of the real
property conveyed to it, and may make any other improvements it deems beneficial to the
subdivision’s Owners or to the Association, all at its discretion and all to the extent permitted
and/or approved by Flathead County as applicable. The Association shall also be responsible for
all lawn maintenance on all Lots as well as all driveway maintenance and driveway snow
removal on all lots, and is hereby granted an easement over and across all driveways and lots
within Anderson Ranch for these purposes.
6.3 The Board of Directors shall establish and collect annual assessments and fees in an
amount sufficient to meet the annual expenses of the Association pursuant to an approved
budget, as specified in the Bylaws.
6.4 The Board of Directors may also assess special assessments to be used to meet any
deficiency that may result from any inadequate estimated cash requirement, unbudgeted
expenses, or as a result of delinquencies in the payment of operating assessment by Members.
6.5 The Board of Directors may also assess individual assessments against any Owner for
all fees, fines or other amounts owed by the Owner as a result of violation of the terms of the
Declaration, the Bylaws, or any other rules adopted by the Association, or any other liability,
indebtedness, or other obligation of the Owner to the Association.
6,6 Each Lot shall be assessed an equal share of annual and special assessments. Individual
assessments shall be assessed against the Owner incurring such cost or expense.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 5
6.7 The Board may establish a billing and payment schedule for annual and special
assessments.
6.8 Each Member is obligated to pay the annual and special assessments, which shall be a
lien on the Lot against which the assessment was made. No Member may exempt himself or
herself from liability for assessments by waiver or lease of the use or enjoyment of their Lot.
6.9 All successors to a Lot will be jointly and severally liable with the prior Owner or
Owners thereof for any and all unpaid assessments, interest, late charges, costs, expenses, and
attorneys' fees against such Lot, without prejudice to any such successor's right to recover from
any prior Owner any amounts paid by such successor.
6.10 Any installment of any assessment that is not paid within 30 days after its due date will
be delinquent. If any installment of an assessment becomes delinquent, the Association, in its
sole discretion, may take any or all the following actions:
(a) Assess a late payment penalty for each delinquency at uniform rates set by the Board of
Directors from time to time;
(b) Charge interest from the date of delinquency at the rate of 10% per annum;
(c) Suspend the voting rights of the Member during any period of delinquency; or
(d) Bring an action at law against any Member personally obligated to pay the delinquent
assessment charges.
6.11 The Association shall have such other authority as is reasonably necessary to carry out
its obligations under these Covenants, the Bylaws, and to perform all other lawful acts in support
of such functions.
7. ROAD MAINTENANCE. The roadway or roadways and all driveways within the
above-described subdivision shall be maintained in good and passable condition under all traffic
and weather conditions. The costs for maintenance and repair of the roadway or roadways and
all driveways, including any associated storm-water infrastructure and signage, shall be divided
equally among each Lot.
8. OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE. The open space areas shall be maintained at the
discretion of the Association and the vegetation shall be managed from time to time to comply
with Firewise fuels reduction. Any trails, playgrounds, or pathways developed in the open space
area shall be maintained by the association.
9. ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE. The architectural control committee
shall consist of the Board of Directors of the Association, or of a special architectural control
committee of at least three or more persons appointed by the Board, all of whom, following the
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 6
Period of Declarant Control, must be members of the Association. All Owners intending to
construct a dwelling or build or place any type of structure upon any Lot, shall first submit their
plans and specification, in writing, to the architectural control committee. Construction plans and
specifications shall include the following:
a. Site plan, including building(s);
b. Exterior elevations of all structures;
c. Exterior finishes, including paint color; and
d. Description of all fencing and landscaping.
The architectural control committee shall prepare guidelines setting forth the criteria for
approval by the committee. No house, building, fence, patio, deck, outdoor lighting, or other
structure shall be erected, placed, or altered on the Property until the construction plans and
specifications along with the proposed site and location therefore have been approved in writing
by the architectural control committee in accordance with architectural review guidelines
adopted by the Association. There shall be no removal of trees that measure at least 12 inches in
diameter, measured one foot above the ground, without prior approval of the architectural review
committee.
10. EASEMENTS.
10. 1 The Property will be subject to all easements shown on any recorded Plat and to any
other easements of record or of use as of the date of recording this Declaration. The Property
will also be subject to an easement in favor of the Association for purposes of carrying out its
duties described herein.
10.2 A general easement is hereby granted to all police, sheriff, fire protection, ambulance,
and all other similar emergency agencies or persons to enter upon all private roadways on the
Property in the proper performance of their duties.
10.3 There is hereby created a general easement upon, across, over, in, and under the
Property for ingress and egress and for installation, replacement, repair, and maintenance of all
utilities, including but not limited to water, gas, telephone, electrical, and cable. By virtue of this
easement, it will be expressly permissible and proper for the companies providing utility services
to install and maintain necessary equipment on the Property and to affix and maintain utility
pipes, wires, circuits, conduits, and other equipment under the Property. Any utility company
using this general easement will use its best efforts to install and maintain the utilities provided
for without disturbing the uses of the Owners, the Association, and Declarant; will complete its
installation and maintenance activities as promptly and expeditiously as reasonably possible; and
will restore the surface to its original condition as soon as possible after completion of its work.
Should any utility company furnishing a service covered by the general easement request a
specific easement by separate recordable document, either Declarant or the Association will
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 7
have, and are hereby given, the right and authority to grant such easement upon, across, over, or
under any part or all of the Property without conflicting with the terms of this Declaration. This
general easement will in no way affect, void, extinguish, or modify any other recorded easement
on the Property.
10.4 Declarant reserves for itself and its successors and assigns and hereby grants to the
Association, acting through the Board of Directors the right to establish, by declaration or
otherwise, utility and other easements, permits, or licenses over the private roadways in the
subdivision, for purposes including but not limited to streets, paths, walkways, drainage,
recreation areas, fire suppression, and parking areas, and to create other reservations, exceptions,
and exclusions in the interest of the Owners and the Association.
10.5 There is hereby granted to the Association a general easement upon, across, over, in,
and under the Property as may be necessary or appropriate to make emergency repairs or to
perform the duties and functions that the Association is obligated or allowed to perform pursuant
to this Declaration and the Bylaws.
10.6 All conveyances of Lots hereafter made, whether by Declarant or otherwise. will be
construed to grant and reserve the easements contained in this Section 9, even though no specific
reference to such easements or to this Section 9 appears in the instrument for such conveyance.
11 ENFORCEMENT. The Association or any Owner shall have the option and right to
enforce, by any proceedings at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants,
reservations, and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration. The
method of enforcement may include proceedings to enjoin the violation, to recover damages, or
both.
12 DECLARANT CONTROL.
“Period of Declarant Control” shall mean the period beginning on the date this Declaration is
first recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Flathead County, Montana, and ending
on the earlier of: (a) the date Declarant records a document in the Flathead County Clerk and
Recorder’s office giving notice of Declarant’s termination of the Period of Declarant Control; or
(b) the date on which the Declarant has sold 133 of the 166 Lots within the Anderson Ranch
Subdivision.
During the Period of Declarant Control, the Declarant shall have all powers and duties of the
Association. Declarant may at its sole discretion record a document or documents assigning such
powers and duties, or any portion or portions of them, to the Owners. Additionally, the during
the Period of Declarant Control, Declarant may (1) act as the Architectural Review Committee
or nominate other persons of its choosing to do so; and (2) control the makeup of the
Association’s Board of Directors. During the Period of Declarant Control, the Declarant may
exempt itself from the obligation to pay Association dues and assessments.
If the Declarant still owns any Lot or Lots following termination of the Period of Declarant
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 8
Control, Declarant shall have the same rights and obligations pursuant to the ownership of its
Lot or Lots as any other Owner would.
This Section 12 may not be amended in any manner without the written consent of the
Declarant.
12. AMENDMENT/ TERMINATION.
12.1 During the Period of Declarant Control, this Declaration or any portion of it may be
amended, modified, or terminated by Declarant in Declarant’s sole and absolute discretion. Any
amendment, modification, or termination shall be in writing and shall be recorded with the Clerk
and Recorder of Flathead County. Declarant shall provide notice of any such amendment,
modification, or termination to each Owner at the Owner’s last known address by US Mail, US
Certified Mail, UPS, and/or FedEx.
12.2 Following the Period of Declarant Control, this Declaration may be amended by an
instrument signed by Owners representing at least 60% of the total number of authorized votes.
Any amendment shall be in writing and shall be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of
Flathead County.
12.3 The provisions of the Declaration shall be binding for a term of 25 years from the date
of this Declaration, after which time the Declaration shall be automatically extended for
successive periods of 10 years.
13 GENERAL PROVISIONS.
13.1 Invalidation of any one of part of this Declaration by judgment or court order shall in no
way affect any of the other provisions, which shall remain in full force and effect. If any
provision of this Declaration is superseded by county or other regulations, it shall in no way
affect any of the other provisions, which shall remain in full force and effect.
13.2 No failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any term herein, or to
exercise any right, power, or remedy consequent upon a breach thereof, shall constitute a waiver
of any such breach or of any term of this Declaration.
13.3 If an action is successfully brought for a violation of this Declaration, reasonable
attorney's fees and costs shall be assessed in addition to any other damages.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 9
Declarant:
________________________________
Colton Behr
STATE OF MONTANA )
: ss
County of Flathead )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on _________________________, 2024
by Colton Behr.
______________________________________
Notary Public for the State of Montana
(STAMP)
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 10
Douglas & Gay Anderson Revocable Living Trust
________________________________
Emma Gay Anderson, Trustee
STATE OF MONTANA )
: ss
County of Flathead )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on _________________________, 2024
by Emma Gay Anderson, as Trustee of the Douglas & Gay Anderson Revocable Living Trust.
______________________________________
Notary Public for the State of Montana
(STAMP)
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 11
Douglas & Gay Anderson Revocable Living Trust
________________________________
Douglas Gerald Anderson, Trustee
STATE OF MONTANA )
: ss
County of Flathead )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on _________________________, 2024
by Douglas Gerald Anderson, as Trustee of the Douglas & Gay Anderson Revocable Living
Trust.
______________________________________
Notary Public for the State of Montana
(STAMP)
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Anderson Ranch Subdivision Page 12
EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FIVE TRACTS OF LAND, SITUATED, LYING, AND BEING IN THE SOUTH HALF OF
THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, and IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, ALL OF SECTION
28, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, P.M.M., FLATHEAD COUNTY,
MONTANA AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS TO WIT:
Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 22969 (records of Flathead County, Montana), and
containing 42.500 ACRES, Subject to and together with all appurtenant easements of record.
Soon to be known as:
Lots 1-166 of Anderson Ranch and all Park Area and Common Area of Anderson Ranch,
according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder
of Flathead County, Montana. Located in SE1/4NW1/4 & SW1/4 SEC. 28, T.28N., R.21W.,
P.M.M., Flathead County Montana.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 1
Anderson Ranch Environmental Assessment General Instructions It shall be the responsibility of the subdivider to submit the information required by this Section with the preliminary plat. This Environmental Assessment format shall be used by
the applicant in compiling a thorough description of the potential impacts for the proposed subdivision. Each question pertinent to the proposal must be addressed in a full comprehensive and systematic fashion (both maps and text). Incomplete Environmental
Assessments will not be accepted. The Environmental Assessment will be objectively measured to assure that all mandatory elements are included and that, based upon objective standards, all prospective impacts are adequately addressed. At a minimum the Environmental Assessment must contain the following for all assessment contents: a. Property Description b. A summary of probable impacts and statement of impact for each environmental consideration topic; c. A discussion to support the statement of impact;
d. Referenced sources and citations to support the statement of impact; e. If applicable, site specific maps and documentation to support the statement of impact discussion.
The sources of information for each section of the Assessment shall be identified. All Environmental Assessments shall contain the signature, date of signature and mailing
address of the owner of the property and the person, or persons, preparing the report and citation and a copy of all supporting information. (Note: Any response to any section not specifically sourced in this report is attributed to the Author of the report.)
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 2
Section 1 – Resource Assessment and Impact Criteria Report
1. Surface Water: Locate on plat overlay or sketch map:
The proposed subdivision is located north of Kalispell on Demersville Road south of Lower Valley Road. There is a wetland area with surface water at the base of the bluff on the south end of the subdivision. (See figure 1 and the Preliminary Plat Map A. Any natural water systems such streams intermittent streams, lakes and ponds, rivers, or marshes. There are wetlands and surface ponds on at the base of the bluff along the southern end of the subdivision. The Wetlands were delineated by Water and Environmental Technologies (WET) in the summer of 2024. Figure 1 shows the wetlands as approximated on the USGS Wetland Mapper. The wetlands shown on the
Preliminary Plat map where taken from the WET on-site investigation and delineation (Appendix E). .
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 3
Figure 1
Source: USGS Wetland Mapper.
B. Any artificial water systems such as canals, ditches, aqueducts, reservoirs, irrigation or drainage systems.
There are no irrigation well, ditches or canals located on the property. C. Time when water is present. The ponds in the wetlands at the bottom of the bluff are present all year.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 4
D. Any areas subject to flood hazard, or delineated 100-year floodplain.
The property at the bottom of the bluff is mapped in the 100-year floodplain. The floodplain boundary is depicted on the preliminary
plat C. Describe any existing to proposed stream bank alteration. There are no streams on or near the property so there will be no stream bank alterations. 2. Groundwater Using available data, provide the following information: A. The minimum depth to the water table or the historic water table and identify dates when depths were determined. What is the location and depth of all aquifers which may be affected by the
proposed subdivision? Describe location of known aquifer recharge areas which may be affected.
Montana Groundwater Information Center (GWIC) was queried for information regarding groundwater wells on or near the site. GWIC records indicated an existing well, GWIC ID: 82531 with a static
water level of 40 amsl, with production typically occurring in Pleistocene-aged alluvium. As the site is within the City of Kalispell, it is the intent of this development to be supplied with water via connection to the City’s municipal system. No wells will be installed on the site and no impacts on aquifers are likely to occur. B. Describe any steps necessary to avoid depletion or degradation of groundwater recharge areas. Groundwater recharge to the deep alluvial aquifer occurs along the margins of the Flathead Valley and is not anticipated to be impacted
by the proposed development. Proper collection, treatment, and discharge of stormwater within the subdivision will mitigate depletion or degradation of the shallow alluvial aquifer.
3. Topography, geology and soils
A. Provide a map of topography of the area to be subdivided, and an evaluation of the suitability for the proposed land uses. On the map identify any areas with highly erodible soils or slopes in excess of 15% grade. Identify the lots or areas affected. Address conditions such as: i. Shallow Bedrock
ii. Unstable slopes iii. Unstable or expansive soils iv. Excessive slope.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 5
Figure 2
See the preliminary plat map for topography. For the most part, the property subject to the residential development is gently rolling. There is a swale in the middle of the property that drops about 10-feet. The area within the subdivided lots will be completely regraded to provide proper drainage and street grades and more or less eliminating the swale. The bluff is the steepest part of the subdivision and from the top to the bottom
Source: USDA -NRCS Web Soils Survey
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 6
of the bluff, the property drops approximately 20 feet. The lots for the homes along the bluff are setback 50-fet from the top of the bluff and with
the 15-foot rear setback the homes will be a minimum of 65 feet from the bluff. There is also a minimum 100-foot separation between the lots and the wetland boundary at the bottom of the bluff.
Soils on the 40+ acres are Corvallis Silty Clay Loam, Demers-Kalispell Silt Loam, Kalispell Loam, Kalispell- Demers Silt Loam , and Swims silty clay. (Figure 2). The Upper Flathead Valley Area Soils Survey states that the Corvallis series consists of deep, silty soils in partly filled, abandoned river channels. Demers-Kalispell is a moderately deep weekly solodized Solenetz that contains salt. Kalispell-Demers is a silt loam moderately deep over sand and is well drained. Kalispell Loam is a common soil in the upper Flathead consisting of deep medium textured , well-drained soil. The Swims series is is a medium textured soil on high bottom lands. There is no presence of shallow bedrock on the property. An initial geotechnical analysis and subsequent addendum conducted by
ALLWEST determined that construction can be accommodated with the appropriate foundation system such as geosynthetic reinforcement, spread foundations, concrete mat foundations, and slab on grade (See Appendix
C for Geotech Report). B. Locate on an overlay or sketch map.
i. Any known hazards affecting the development which could result in property damage or personal injury due to: a. Falls, slides or slumps b. Rock outcroppings c. Seismic activity d. High water table The subject property is very gently rolling with little change in topography from east to west with the exception of the swale. There is no presence of falls, slumps, rock outcroppings or high
groundwater. The Geotechnical Report indicated that groundwater is 11 to 20 feet below ground surface (bgs). All of the Flathead Valley is in a seismic zone and the building code requirements
enforced by the Kalispell Building Department requires mitigation in building design to address seismic activity. With the annexation of the proposed subdivision into the City of Kalispell, all building
requirements must be in compliance with the City. C. Describe measures proposed to reduce these hazards. See answer above (3.B.i)
D. Describe the location and amount of any cut or fill more than three feet in depth.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 7
The site will be designed to minimize and balance cut and fill as much as possible. However, as stated previously, the swale in the
middle of the property will be filled to make drainage and roads work on the property. Based on preliminary analysis of the site, it is anticipated that cuts as much as 10 feet and fills as much as 15 feet
will be required. 4. Vegetation A. On a plat overlay or sketch map: i. Indicate the distribution of the major vegetation types, such as march, grassland, shrub, conifer forest, deciduous forest, mixed forest.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 8
Figure 3
Source -Kalispell GIS As indicated in the photo of Figure 3, the property is primarily agricultural. The trees and shrubs are primarily limited to the areas along the bottom of the bluff and around the ponds. All of the area on and below the bluff 13+ acres is proposed as park and open space. We do not propose removing any of the vegetation in the
Location of the Subdivision
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 9
proposed park and open space area except for the development of trails.
i. Identify the location of critical plant communities.
There are delineated wetlands around the ponds at the base of the bluff. The entire wetland area is preserved in the proposed open space and park. B. Describe measures to: i. Preserve trees and other natural vegetation ii. Protect critical plant communities iii. Prevent and control wild fire iv. Control and prevent the growth of noxious weeds Much of the 42 acres within the subdivision has been in agricultural production for generations. The only stands of trees are located along the ponds and wetlands below the bluff. The bluff and lands
below, including the ponds and wetlands, are proposed as park and open space. With the exception of some primitive trails, the vegetation around the ponds and wetlands will be preserved and
protected. 5. Wildlife
A. Identify species of fish and wildlife use of the area affected by the proposed subdivision. The property is used by a large number of bird species. Deer, coyotes, muskrat, etc use the wetland areas and the deer graze the fields. B. On a copy of the preliminary plat, identify known critical wildlife areas. The property is farmed with seasonal planting, fertilizing, and cutting of primarily hay crops. The treed area around the wetlands and ponds is
“critical” and will be preserved. The many bird species that use this area around the wetlands along with the deer and other mammals will continue to be able to use the 13 acre park and open space proposed in the plat.
C. Describe proposed measures to protect or enhance wildlife habitat.
The applicant proposed a 13+ acre park and open space that includes all of the wetland and ponds in addition to a substantial field area. For the area at the bottom of the bluff we only propose a trail system. Active recreation, tot-lot, etc. will be located in the park area at the top of the bluff. 6. Land Use
A. Describe the existing historical use of the site
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 10
The property has been in continuous agricultural production for many decades.
B. Describe any comprehensive plan recommendations and other land use regulations on and adjacent to the site. Is zoning proposed? Is annexation
proposed? Most of this property was reviewed and approved for annexation, initial R-3 Zoning, and a PUD depicting the land use. Approximately, eleven acres is being added to this project with the accompanied annexation application. The area added is primarily the additional park and open space. The property is within the annexation boundary of the City’s Growth Policy. This initial PUD approved in September of 2024 also laid out the transportation routes through this and the neighboring Gardner property. C. Describe the present uses of the lands and adjacent to or near the proposed development. Describe how the subdivision will affect access to any adjoining land and/or what measures are proposed to provide access.
The subject land is currently, and has been for many years, used for agricultural purposes. Lands to the south are also in agricultural production. Lands to the west are developed with a mix of commercial and
light industrial uses. The property to the east is developed with the Green Tree Meadows Subdivision, a county subdivision, with approximately 90 half acre lots. The property to the north is mini storage and large lot
residential. Access to the subdivision will be from two access points: on the east to Demersville Road, currently a paved County Road and to the east via easement through the Gardner property to Highway 93. The east west collection and a north south collector were proposed and approved as conditions of the initial PUD for this property. The applicant is also providing linkages to the property on the north and north east side for future connection to the City grid should the neighboring lands develop. The TIS produced for PUD indicates that a traffic Signal is warranted at the
intersection with Highway 93. The timing of this signalization could come with the later phase of Anderson Ranch and or with one of the phases of the future Gardner subdivision. Behr and Gardner have an agreement to
share in the cost of the signal when it is required. D. Describe the basis of the need for the subdivision. How much development
of a similar nature is or is not available in the area. The Flathead Valley continues to be under immense pressure for housing of all types. The median housing price in Kalispell over the past five years has gone from $299,900 in 2019 to $530,000 in 2024 (Montana Regional MLS). This spike in housing price is directly attributable to lack of supply
and a high demand.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 11
The Anderson Ranch subdivision is aiming to provide attainable single-family detached dwellings for the work force and first time homebuyers.
E. Describe any health or safety hazards on or near the subdivision (mining activity, high voltage, lines, gas lines, agricultural activities, etc.
There are no hazards that are known to exist on the property. We don’t really see neighboring farming activity as a hazard for future residents of the development as most of the adjacent agricultural ground is used for hay production or dry land grain. F. Describe any on-site uses creating nuisance. The property is currently used for farming. The uses directly to the west is commercial/light industrial and the use to the west is a large suburban residential subdivision. The City requires a buffer between the commercial to the west and there will be a six foot fence along the back of the residential lots and there will be a fifteen foot landscape buffer on the commercial side, Gardner property.
Section II – Summary of Probable Impacts
1. Effects on Agriculture A. Is the proposed subdivision or associated improvement located on or near
prime farmland The proposed subdivision is located on are Corvallis Silty Clay Loam a Class IIw-1 soil, Demers-Kalispell Silt Loam a Class VIs-2 soil, Kalispell Loam a Class VIe-1 soil, Kalispell- Demers Silt Loam a Class IIIs-4 soil , and Swims silty clay a Class IIw-1 soil as defined by the Upper Flathead Valley Area Soils Survey prepared by the USDA (Figure 1). Class I through IV soils are considered prime farmland. However, the subject property is located in City of Kalispell and most of it is currently zoned R-3 PUD which is a residential zone allowing up to four units per acre. farm land to the south is used for hay production and grain. The proposed subdivision
should have minimal impacts on the neighboring agricultural use B. Describe whether the subdivision would remove from production any
agricultural land. The subdivision will remove approximately 40 acres from agricultural
production. C. Describe possible conflicts with nearby agricultural operation. The Anderson Ranch property abuts commercial/light industrial lands to the west, a 90 lot residential subdivision to the east and mini-storage to the
north. The only adjoining agricultural land is to the south and this abuts the proposed 13 acre of park and open space of the subdivision. The
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 12
subdivision should have minimal impact on this neighboring agricultural use..
D. Describe possible nuisance problems which may arise from locating a subdivision near agricultural lands.
The City of Kalispell is surrounded by agricultural lands. If the City is to expand at all, then development will displace or be located near agricultural lands. The City’s long range planning documents identify the subject property for suburban residential use. E. Describe effects the subdivision would have on the value of nearby agricultural lands. The effect of land development adjacent to the City is that land values for housing have greatly exceeded land values for property that can only be used for agriculture. 2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities
A. Describe conflicts the subdivision would create with agricultural water user facilities, eg residential development creating problems for operating or
maintaining irrigation systems, etc. The DNRC Water Rights Query indicated there are no water rights
associated with this property and there were no irrigation systems witnessed on the property B. Describe possible nuisance problems which the subdivision would generate with regard to agricultural water user facilities. As there are no agricultural water user facilities, there are no anticipated problems. 3. Effects on Local Services
A. Indicate the proposed use and number of lots or spaces each: Residential, Single-Family Detached– There are 166 single family
detached lots within the development. B. Describe the additional or expanded public services and facilities that
would be required of the local government or special districts to serve the subdivision. i. Describe additional cost that would result for services such as roads, bridges, law enforcement, parks and recreation, fire protection, water, sewer, and solid waste systems, schools or
busing.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 13
Streets - The developer will be responsible for constructing all of the streets within this subdivision. These streets will be constructed
and financed by the developer and all the roads will be turned over to the City for long term maintenance and repair.
Law enforcement - The City of Kalispell charges impact fees to shift the burden of the impact of development to the developer rather than the taxpayer at large. The impact fee for police is $41 per unit or $6,806 for 166 units. After the initial impact fees the units will pay their property taxes which would cover on-going costs. Parks and recreation – The project is proposing 13.31 acres of park which will also include park amenities. Based on the Kalispell subdivision regulations 0.03 acres of park is required for each residential lot. The 166 lots in the subdivision will be required to dedicate 4.98 acres of parkland. With the amenities placed in the parks, the development will greatly exceed the parkland dedication. Fire Protection – The developer will install all fire hydrants within
the development, and these will be turned over to the city for long term maintenance. The city charges $483 per unit in impact fees for fire protection. The 166 units will pay $80,178.00 in impact fees
and property taxes for the remainder. These fees are intended to provide equipment and buildings for the fire department.
Water and Sewer – The developer installs all of the water, sewer, and stormwater facilities. In the development. At final plat the infrastructure is turned over to the City for long-term maintenance. The City charges impact fees of $1,900 for water, $2,879 for sewer, and $618 for stormwater. The 166 units generate $315,400 for water, $477,914.00 for sewer, and $102,588 for stormwater. These impact fees are intended to cover off-site costs such as sewer plant upgrades and the like. Solid Waste – The County land fill is operated by Flathead County and supported by property taxes. Solid waste pick-up is provided
by the City or Evergreen Disposal for a fee to cover the cost of operation and dumping charges.
Schools – Schools are supported by property taxes. School districts run their own budgets with money provided by the state from the collected property taxes. The Kalispell School District
does their own planning and population projections to determine when they need to expand or build a new school. Schools often go to the public to vote on bond requests for expanding/remodeling schools, building new schools, or supporting specific programs. C. Describe how the subdivision allows existing services, through expanded
use, to operate more efficiently, or make the installation or improvement of services feasible, eg allow installation of a central water system or improvement of a rural road.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 14
Currently City sewer and water mains are located in Highway 93
approximately 1300 feet from the subdivision. These mains, if the project is approved, will be extended throughout the subdivision. The main will most likely be closer as the first phase of the Gardner side of the PUD is in
the process of getting Public Works approval. D. What are the present tax revenues received from the unsubdivided land. The 2024 taxes are $278.62. E. Provide the approximate revenues received by each of the taxing authorities if the lots were reclassified, and when the lots are all improved and built upon. Using a typical house on a 5200 square foot lot in Greenacres West No. 4 for comparison, the taxes are broken out as follows:
Table 1
Taxes by Jurisdiction Taxes for a Green Acres House for 2024 (not including special assessments)
County $385
Education including State $1,471
City $844
F. Would new taxes generated from the subdivision cover additional public costs
Between the onetime payment of impact fees of $982,886 for 166 units and property taxes of $502,648 per year (Based on the previous Table 1 of the
typical Greenacres West home multiplied by 166 lots), not including special assessments, the subdivision should cover its costs for government services. G. How many SID would be created which would obligate the local government fiscally or administratively. There are no SID’s proposed with this subdivision. 4. Effects on Historic or Natural Environment
A. Describe and locate on a plat overlay any known or possible historic, paleontological, archaeological or cultural sites, structures or objects.
There are no known historic sites on the property.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 15
B. How would the subdivision affect surface and groundwater, soils, slopes, vegetation, historical or archaeological features within the subdivision or on
adjacent land. As stated previously there are wetlands and ponds at the base of the bluff
which is also the only part of the property with significant slopes. To minimize impacts, lots are held back 50-feet from the top of the bluff and the 15 foot building setback means that the closest home would be 65 feet from the top of the bluff. The minimum setback from the wetlands are 100 feet from the lot boundary. IN all, there is 13+ acres intended as park and open space in and around the bluff area which encompasses all of the wetlands, steep slopes, and ponds. There are no known historic features on the site. C. How would the subdivision affect visual features within the subdivision or on adjacent land? Describe anticipated efforts to visually blend the proposed development with the existing environment.
The proposed subdivision is a single family detached development. These proposed homes will be single story dwellings well below the maximum height allowance. The proposed subdivision should have minimal impacts
to the two or three residences that abut the subdivision. 5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
A. Describe what impacts the subdivision or associated improvements would have on wildlife area such as big game winter range, migration routes, nesting area, wetlands or important habitat for rare or endangered species. The property has been in agriculture production for decades and is void of trees or shrubs except for the area at the base of the bluff on the south side of the subdivision. The ponds and wetlands at the base of the bluff provide the primary wildlife areas on the site. To limit impacts on these sensitive areas, they are included in a 13.3 acre park and open space. Other than primitive trails near the ponds and wetlands no vegetation removal is
proposed for these areas. . The proposed subdivision will remove grass land from hay production and
replace them with housing, yards, streets, and parks as part of the urban expansion of the City of Kalispell.
B. Describe the effects that pets or human activity would have on wildlife. The proposed subdivision will be in the City limits of Kalispell and as such pets will be subject to the City lease laws. Dogs should not be allowed to run unaccompanied by owners. Cats may hunt neighboring fields, but they will primarily be hunting mice and voles. Ducks and geese are generally
unaffected by development as one will notice at Village Green Golf Course or the fields surrounding Applied Materials.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 16
6. Effects on Public Health and Safety
A. Describe any health and safety hazards on or near the subdivision, such as natural hazards, lack of water, drainage problems, heavy traffic,
dilapidated structures, high pressure gas lines, high voltage power lines. The property is gently rolling and the development will connect to the City of Kalispell Public water and wastewater facilities. A preliminary drainage plan is included with this application and this design shows all stormwater can be detained and managed on the property. A Traffic Impact Study was prepared for the project. The TIS recommends a traffic signal be placed at the intersection of Highway 93 and new east west collector street. The TIS indicates that a right hand turn lane will be needed at the approach from Cemetery Road by Phase 3. Also with Phase 3, the traffic signal at Bar H and Highway 93 will need to be installed. Phase 4 will require some improvements to the Lower Valley/Willow Glen intersection, most likely a westbound right and left hand-turn lanes. (Combined impacts Anderson Ranch and Gardner developments)
B. Describe how the subdivision would be subject to hazardous conditions due to high voltage lines, airports, highways, railroads, dilapidated
structures, high pressure gas lines, irrigation ditches and adjacent industrial or mining uses.
The proposed development does not have nor is it adjacent to any of these listed uses. There is light industrial use existing and proposed on the Gardner’s properties to the west of the subdivision. However, the proximity of light industrial use is viewed not as a hazard but as a benefit of providing workforce house close to employment opportunities. C. Describe land uses adjacent to the subdivision and how the subdivision will affect the adjacent uses. The subject land is currently, and has been for many years, in agricultural production. Lands to the west are either in commercial/light industrial or
planned for that use. Lands to the north are mini-storage and residential. Lands to the east include the 90-lot county subdivision called Green Tree Meadows. Lands to the south are agricultural. No impact with residential
against residential. The commercial use was anticipated in the original Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD which has fencing and a landscape buffer between the uses. To the south, the Anderson Ranch subdivision
proposes a 13+ acre park and open space adjacent to agricultural uses. The park buffer should mitigate any negative impacts. D. Describe public health or safety hazards, such as dangerous traffic, fire conditions or contamination of water supplies that would be created by the subdivision.
The TIS has mitigations to counter the effects of the development on adjacent roadways, primarily Highway 93 South and Lower
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 17
Valley/Cemetery Roads. All of the roadways with the development will be constructed with sidewalks. The subdivision will be developed to urban
standards with fire flows to fire hydrants and city streets meeting City standards. As the site is not forested, there is not a significant threat from wildfire. With the use of Kalispell public sewer, water, and stormwater
facilities, the project should not pose and risk of contamination to water supplies. Part III – Community Impact Report According to the US Census Bureau – Quick Facts, there are 2.44 persons per household in Kalispell. With potential of 166 units in the project there would be approximately 405 persons living in this subdivision at full buildout. As the City has witnessed from other projects in the Flathead, it can take many years to reach buildout. 1. Education and Busing A. Describe the available educational facilities that would serve this
subdivision. The proposed development is in the Somers/Lakeside School District for
Elementary and middle School. Flathead District for High School. According to the Flathead County Superintendent of Schools Statistical Report of Schools 2024, the 10-year enrollment for the elementary school
rose 2%. The Kalispell High School District (Flathead & Glacier) rose 7% over the ten-year period. School Aged children from this development would attend Somers/Lakeside Elementary and Middle School, and Flathead High School. B. Estimate the number of school aged children that will be added to the school system by the proposed subdivision. Using County wide average of 0.34 school aged children per residence, (There were 17,446 students recorded with the Flathead County Superintendent of Schools Office including public, private and home-
schooled children at the beginning of the 2022 school year. The US Census Bureau 2021 counted 50,808 housing units in Flathead County – 17,446 students / 50,808 housing units = 0.343 students per unit), the 166
residential units would generate approximately 56 students to the K – 12 school system at full buildout.
2. Roads and Maintenance A. Estimate how much daily traffic the subdivision, when fully occupied, will generate on existing roads and streets. The 166 units in the development will generate approximately 1600 vehicle
trips (Traffic Impact Study, Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD, November, 2024).
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 18
B. Describe the capability of existing and proposed roads to safely accommodate this increased traffic.
See Table 6 of the TIS. To be clear, this TIS looks at the Anderson Ranch development but also the commercial development of Gardner to the west.
C. Describe increased maintenance problems and increased cost due to this increase in volume. U.S. Highway 93 is an MDT owned and maintained highway. Demersville Road is currently a county road but the portion adjacent to Anderson Ranch will be annexed to the City with the mentioned upgrades. The streets proposed in Anderson Ranch will be maintained by the City of Kalispell. It is anticipated that any new development will generate vehicle trips on adjacent roads as well as add new roads to the City’s inventory which will impact maintenance needs and requirements. However, the increased tax revenues should off-set any increase in maintenance costs. There is no anticipation of out of the ordinary maintenance problems or costs associated with this proposed development.
D. Describe proposed new public or private access roads.
The new City streets within the subdivision will be designed and built to City standards. They will be paved and include curb and gutter directing street run-off to stormwater collection and conveyance facilities. These new
streets will be dedicated to the City for ownership and maintenance. As described in the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approved in September of 2024, access to the Anderson Ranch is tied to the road system located on the neighboring Gardner lands to the west. Gardner and Behr, applicant of Anderson Ranch, have a written agreement regarding roads and access between the two properties. While Anderson Ranch benefits from access to the Highway through Gardner, Gardner benefits from Anderson ranch in the shared cost of constructing these road improvements along with the shared stormwater facilities that flow through Anderson Ranch. E. Describe the closing or modifications of any existing roads.
Demersville Road will be closed for a short period of time to allow for upgrading of the road and extension of utilities. Installation of a signalized
intersection at Highway 93 may cause some temporary delays. F. Explain why road access was not provided within the subdivision, if access
to any individual lot is directly from arterial roads. N/A – All lots within the subdivision are designed to have access to local streets within the subdivision. G. Is year-round access by conventional automobile over legal rights-of way
available to the subdivision and to all lots and common facilities of the subdivision.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 19
The subdivision is designed to Kalispell Urban Design Standards with proposed City Streets providing access to all lots and parks. All City streets
are open to the public. The streets within the subdivision will connect to Demersville (County/City) Road on the east and Highway 93 through Gardner on the east. In addition there is a north-south collector road
proposed in Gardner’s development that will ultimately connect United Way with Lower Valley Road. H. Estimate the cost and completion date of the system, and indicate who will pay the cost of installation, maintenance and snow removal. Improvements will be phased in according to the Phasing Plan which
accompanies this application set. The developer will install and pay for all
road infrastructure within the subdivision and improvements to
Demersville Road. The road out to Highway 93 and future signal will be
constructed through an agreement between Behr and Gardner. All streets
will be dedicated to the City for public access. The City will maintain the
streets within the subdivision.
3. Water, Sewage, and Solid Waste (Information provided by Scott Conley,
PE; McClure) A. Briefly describe the water supply and sewage treatment system to be used
in serving the proposed subdivision. Internal water and sewer systems necessary to serve the proposed development will be connected to the City of Kalispell’s public systems. Water main connection will be made to a planned 12” stub at the intersection of United Drive and Bar H Drive. This 12” waterline has been planned as part of the initial development within the Gardner Anderson Ranch PUD area. A planned regional sanitary sewer lift station and force main will be designed and installed to convey sewage to existing City of Kalispell
facilities. The lift station will be sized to collect sewage for a larger area as defined by the City of Kalispell’s GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review Technical Memo prepared by AE2S.
B. Provide information on estimated costs of the system, who will bear the costs, and how the system will be financed.
The construction of both the water and sewer systems will be financed by the owners/developers of Anderson Ranch. The costs of constructing the water system improvements are yet to be determined. C. Where hook-up to an existing system is proposed, describe estimated impacts on the existing system, and show evidence that permission has been granted to hook up to the existing system.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 20
As previously mentioned, water supply and sewer service to Anderson Ranch will be provided by connections to and extensions of existing City of
Kalispell public water and sewer systems. In annexing the bulk of this property, the City has conditionally agree to allow hook-up. The condition is that the extensions meet all of the City’s Public Works Standards and the
developer secure their approval following the submission of construction drawings. D. All water supply and sewage treatment plan and specification will be reviewed and approved by the Department of Environmental Quality and should be submitted using the appropriate DEQ application form. Prior to construction, all water and sewer plans will be submitted to DEQ and the City for review and approval. This is an understood fact of subdivision review. E. Describe the proposed method of collecting and disposing of solid waste from the development.
Each resident of the subdivision will have the option of using the City of Kalispell solid waste collection services or contract with Evergreen Disposal for solid waste collection. Collected waste will be transferred to
the Flathead County Landfill which is located approximately twelve miles north of the proposed subdivision.
F. If use of an existing collection system or disposal facility is proposed indicate the name and location of the facility. See item E previous. 4. Fire and Police Protection A. Describe the fire and police protection services available to the residents of the proposed subdivision including numbers of personnel and number of vehicles or type of facilities.
Most of the proposed subdivision in the Kalispell Fire District. The park area is included in the new Annexation application and includes the petition to annex into the Kalispell Fire District and withdraw from the South
Kalsipell District. According to the City’s website, the Fire Department runs three platoons
with a total of 29 personnel. The Fire Department has two stations the closest is Station 62 located at 255 Old Reserve Drive. Station 61 is located in the old City Hall at 312 1st Avenue East. The Police Department is also located in the old City Hall. The police department has three divisions:
Patrol – 1 Captain, 7 sergeants, 17 patrol officers and 1 Admin.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 21
Detective – 1 Captain, 1 Sergeant, 3 detectives, 4 resource officers, 1 drug task force officer, and 1 technician.
Administration – 8 persons. B. Can the fire and police protection service needs of the proposed
subdivision be met by present personnel and facilities. Cumulative impacts of all the development within the City will require additional personnel at some point in the near future as well as additional equipment. The City of Kalispell collects impact fees so that new development compensates the City for the impacts of the new development. 5. Parks and Recreation Facilities A. Describe park and recreation facilities to be provided within the proposed subdivision and other recreational facilities that will serve the subdivision. The project is proposing 13+ acres of park/open space with recreation
amenities. Based on the Kalispell subdivision regulations, 0.03 acres of park is required for each residential lot. The 166 lots in the subdivision is required to dedicate 4.98 acres of parkland or a combination of lands and
amenities that equal the value of the required land dedication. The proposed park area and amenities exceed the minimum required park dedication.
B. List other parks and recreation facilities or sites in the area and their approximate Distance from the City. There is the Green Tree Meadows homeowners’ parks just to the east which really is not open to the public. although some members of the public may use them. The closest public park might be Lions Park complex located approximately 1.6 miles north the subdivision. . C. If cash-in-lieu of parkland is proposed, state the purchase price per acre or current market values.
The cash value of the land will be determined at the time of final plat. However, based on other appraisals for nearby subdivisions, the current
value of undeveloped lands is approximately $20,000/acre. 6. Payment for Extension of Capital Facilities
A. Indicate how the subdivider will pay for the cost of extending capital facilities resulting from expected impacts directly attributable to the subdivision. As is typical, the developer will utilize a combination of private investors
and bank financing to install the necessary facilities as well as amenities for this subdivision.
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 22
Prepared By: _______________________ Date:_________________ Eric H. Mulcahy AICP Sands Surveying, Inc.
2 Village Loop Kalispell, MT 59901 (406) 755-6481 Applicant: _______________________ Date:_________________ Colton Behr 20 Woodland Place Whitefish, MT 59937
Anderson Ranch – Environmental Assessment 23
EA APPENDICIES
A. Preliminary Roadway and Utility Plans – McClure B. Traffic Impact Study – Abelin Traffic Services C. Geotechnical Report
D. Technical Memo – GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review – AE2S E. Wetland Delineation Field Summary Report, Water & Environmental Technologies, June 2024 F. Draft CC&R’s MAPS/PLANS Preliminary Plat Water, Sewer, & Stormwater Maps
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD
Traffic Phasing &
Signal Warrant Analysis
Kalispell, Montana
Prepared For:
General One
20 Woodland Pl
Whitefish, MT 59937
March, 2025
130 South Howie Street
Helena, Montana 59601
406-459-1443
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 1 March 2025
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD
Traffic Phasing &
Signal Warrant Analysis
Kalispell, Montana
The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD is currently proposed on a 94.41-acre parcel of land located
south of Lower Valley Road between US Highway 93 and Demersville Road within the City of Kalispell. The development would be constructed over the next five to ten years and would create up to 166 new residential lots on the eastern side of the development (Anderson Ranch) and 56-acres of business park on the western side of the property (Gardner). The project would include a
new east/west connection from Bar H Drive to Highway 93 which would serve much of the development traffic. An additional north/south route would connect United Drive to Lower Valley Road to the north. The development will include internal roadways built to the City of Kalispell Road standards and would include sidewalks which would tie into the existing pedestrian facilities
along Highway 93.
The City of Kalispell requested information regarding the timing of when a traffic signal will be warranted for the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach onto Highway 93. Typically, projected traffic signal warrants on busy highways are based on left/thru entering traffic volumes from the
planned minor street approach. These volumes should be in the range of 50 to 100 vehicles in the peak hour with additional requirements for the fourth and eighth highest peak hours. At full-buildout, the projected number of PM peak-hour left-turns at the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach is 110 VPH, which is twice the required number of left-turns to meet a traffic signal warrant for this location. It is also likely that the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach onto
Highway 93 will fall to LOS F at only 25% buildout of the project without alternative traffic
controls. Additional project phasing information was provided by the developers to help identify when the recommended traffic signal will likely become warranted at the new approach onto Highway 93.
It should be noted that the Gardner and Anderson Ranch projects are separate developments and will have their own phasing. For the purposes of this analysis, the project phasing of the two developments has been merged to identify the combined impacts of the projects for specific years. Based on information provided by the clients, the first commercial facility planned for Phase 1 of the development, which is planned to be completed in 2026, will have an average daily peak-hour
exiting vehicle rate of 20-30 VPH and a peak use exiting vehicle rate of 50-60 VPH. Phase 1 will
also include 49 residential lots. Phase 2 & 3 of the project would be completed in 2028 and will include the development of ten commercial lots located adjacent to Highway 93 (167 KSF commercial space) and construction of the 63 residential lots in the Anderson Ranch. Phase 4 of the project would include 182 KSF of commercial space and 54 residential lots and would likely
be completed in 2030. Detailed vehicle trip generation by phase is shown in Table 1. As currently
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 2 March 2025
planned, Phases 1- 3 will not include the direct connection to Lower Valley Road to the north
which will drive most of the traffic from these phases onto the Highway 93 approaches. This
connection will mostly be constructed with Phase 4. ATS performed a revised trip generation analysis to determine the anticipated future traffic volumes by phase from the proposed developments using the trip generation rates contained in
Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Eleventh Edition). Based on the more updated land-use and phasing for the site, the project would produce 654 AM peak hour trips, 598 PM peak hour trips, and 6,474 daily trips at full development in 2030. See Table 1 for detailed trip generation information. No specific noon weekday data is available for these land uses within
the ITE manual. The noon weekday traffic volumes were estimated using 8% of the total daily
trip generation volume with a 50% in/out directional split. The new trip generation estimates are
lower than the original estimates from the December 2024 TIS (7,674 estimated total daily trips). Table 1 – Phases 1 - 4 Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
Units
AM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total AM Peak Hour Trip Ends
PM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total PM Peak Hour Trip Ends
Weekday
Trip Ends per Unit
Total Weekday Trip Ends
Commercial
PH1 2026* x 67 16 568
Single Fam PH1 2026 #210 49 Units 0.7 34 0.94 46 9.43 462
Business Park PH2&3 #770 167 KSF 1.35 225 1.22 204 12.44 2,077
Single Fam PH2 2028 #210 63 Units 0.7 44 0.94 59 9.43 594
Business
Park PH4 2030 #770 182 KSF 1.35 246 1.22 222 12.44 2,264
Single Fam PH4 2030 #210 54 Units 0.7 38 0.94 51 9.43 509 TOTAL 654 598 6,474
*Based on client provided data.
Using the trip generation and trip distribution numbers, ATS determined the future Level of
Service by phase for the area intersections. The following tables show the projected LOS at the
study intersections for each phase of the project. The tables indicate that the construction of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD may cause roadway capacity deficiencies in this area which will
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 3 March 2025
require additional roadway improvements. Overall, the traffic impacts by phase are similar to the
original TIS analysis and projections. The recommended intersection improvements, which may
be required before full buildout of the projects, are as follows: Table 2 – Phase 1 Level of Service 2026
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
12.5 B 10.2 B 17.1 B
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal)
19.5 B 10.7 B 17.4 B
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Two-way STOP)
22.2 C 11.1 B 17.4 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
9.9 A 9.3 A 10.0 B
Demersville Road &
Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP) 8.9 A 8.8 A 8.9 A
US Highway 93 &
United Drive
(Two-way STOP)
26.0 D 15.2 C 16.3 C
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road
(Roundabout)
10.4 B 5.6 A 11.2 B
US Hwy 93 & New West Approach
(Two-way STOP)
14.6 B 12.5 B 13.3 B
US Highway 93 and Cemetery Road/Willow Glen Drive
The proposed project will increase the number of eastbound right-turn movements at the
intersection of US 93 and Cemetery Road/Willow Glen Drive and the intersection will fall from LOS B to LOS C at full buildout. While the intersection will remain functioning at adequate levels of service through the buildout year (LOS C), the City of Kalispell requires mitigation for any intersection where the LOS is decreased. In this instance, the only
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 4 March 2025
meaningful way to improve the LOS at the intersection would be to install a dedicated
eastbound right-turn lane at the approach from Cemetery Road. This improvement would
be needed by Phase 3 to maintain the intersection LOS. Table 3 – Phases 2 & 3 Level of Service 2028
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte (Signal)
13.7 B 10.7 B 19.1 B
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal)
22.3 C 11.0 B 18.3 B
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Two-way STOP)
24.2 C 11.2 B 18.4 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP) 10.0 B 9.4 A 10.1 B
Demersville Road &
Bar H Drive
(Two-way STOP)
9.0 A 8.8 A 8.9 A
US Highway 93 &
United Drive
(Two-way STOP)
29.8 D 16.5 C 18.5 C
Cemetery Road & Airport Road
(Roundabout)
12.0 B 6.0 A 11.5 B
US Hwy 93 & New West Approach (Two-way STOP)
23.0 C 17.2 C 22.5 C
US Highway 93 and New East/West Approach The new proposed approach onto Highway 93 from the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD
will function at LOS F as a STOP controlled intersection. The only way to correct this
issue would be with the installation of a traffic signal or roundabout at this location. Based on the projected traffic volumes, the intersection will have sufficient traffic volumes to meet MUTCD warrants for traffic signal installation. The installation of a traffic signal at this location must be approved by MDT based on MUTCD warrants and must be
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 5 March 2025
constructed in accordance with MDT requirements. Currently, the two signalized
intersections on Highway 93 to the north and south (Willow Glen Drive and the Highway
93 Bypass) are not coordinated. With the addition of a new signal between these existing signals, it would be desirable to implement new signal coordination along the corridor. This improvement would be needed by the end of Phase 3 to maintain the intersection LOS.
Table 4 – Phase 4 Level of Service 2030
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 &
Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
16.1 B 11.4 B 21.4 C
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive
(Signal)
24.3 C 11.5 B 19.9 B
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Two-way STOP)
30.9 D 11.7 B 21.5 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
10.2 B 9.5 A 10.3 B
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP)
9.2 A 8.9 A 9.1 A
US Highway 93 &
United Drive (Two-way STOP) 37.5 E 18.9 C 22.8 C
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road (Roundabout) 15.2 C 6.5 A 10.9 B
US Hwy 93 & New
West Approach (Two-way STOP) 71.4 F 30.5 D 85.4 F
Lower Valley Road & New North Approach
(Two-way STOP)
10.4 B 10.0 B 10.6 B
Willow Glen Drive and Lower Valley Road
The analysis suggests that the peak hour LOS at the intersection may fall to LOS E for
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 6 March 2025
northbound traffic with the construction of the proposed project. This issue could be
corrected by the installation of a traffic signal, mini-roundabout, or separated right/left turn
lanes. Creating traffic control improvements at this location is complicated by the proximity to the signal at Highway 93 just 120 feet to the west as vehicle queues created by any traffic controls could back to Highway 93, which is not desirable and may not be allowed by MDT. The proximity to the existing Highway 93 signal would cause timing
issues for any new traffic signal at Lower Valley Road and is not recommended. It may be possible to install a mini-roundabout at this intersection to promote traffic flow through the intersection, but any long queues on the Willow Glen Drive approach could prevent the roundabout from operating and could back traffic towards the intersection at Highway 93.
It is also not known if there is sufficient ROW for a roundabout at this location. The most
feasible solution for this location would be the creation of separated westbound right and
left-turn lanes on Lower Valley Road to promote traffic flow through the intersection. This improvement would allow the intersection to function at LOS C at full buildout. It is also likely that some traffic will re-route through the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD road network to the new traffic signal at Highway 93 and decrease the left-turn traffic demand
at Willow Glen Drive. This improvement would be needed by Phase 4 to maintain the intersection LOS. US Highway 93 and United Drive
The intersection of US Highway 93 and United Drive may develop LOS deficiencies with the construction of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD. While the traffic demand at the approach will be relatively low, the left-turn movements onto Highway 93 will create delay and safety issues at the intersection due to the heavy traffic flows on Highway 93. The
proposed traffic signal at the new east/west approach 800 feet to the north will likely eliminate much of the left-turn traffic demand at this location. It would also be possible to correct the LOS deficiency by restricting left-turns at the intersection and converting the approach to right-out only onto Highway 93. This improvement would be needed with
Phase 3 to maintain the intersection LOS and should be implemented with the installation
of the new traffic signal.
With the recommended roadway and intersection improvements identified above, the study intersections would function as shown in Table 5 at full buildout of the project in 2030. Based on the information provided by the client, Phase 1 of the project alone would not create sufficient
traffic to warrant the signal at Highway 93 but would be a contributor to the need for a signal on Highway 93 when additional lots are developed. By the completion of Phase 2 of the project, the daily trip generation from the development would be approaching 3,700 trips per day, or approximately half of the projected full-buildout traffic. Peak-hour approaching traffic volumes
at highway 93 would be in the range of 90-100 vehicles per hour, approximately 30% of which
would likely be turning left onto Highway 93 (approximately 30 left-turns per hour). With this
level of traffic, the LOS at the intersection will fall to F during the peak hours. The projected level
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Phasing Analysis Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 7 March 2025
of left-turn traffic combined with the projected right-turn traffic (60 to 80 right-turns per hour)
would likely be sufficient to meet warrants for signalization at the intersection. Based on this
phasing plan, the developers should create signalization plans for the proposed intersection with the initial construction of the project and prepare for signal installation on Highway 93 by the end of Phase 2 of the development (approximately 2028) or when warrants are met. It would also be desirable to identify specific trip generation estimates for each of the commercial lots as they are
developed to help identify when the traffic signal on Highway 93 will be needed. The developers should update the City and MDT with trip generation estimates for the project though the completion of Phase 2 and install the traffic signal on Highway 93 when warranted.
Table 5 - Projected 2030 Level of Service with PUD & Intersection Improvements
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay
(Sec.) LOS
Delay
(Sec.) LOS
Delay
(Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 &
Willow Glen Drive
(Signal with RT Lane)
18.7 B 10.4 B 17.6 B
Willow Glen Drive &
Lower Valley Road
(Separated Right/Left Lanes)
23.2 C 11.2 B 18.6 C
US Hwy 93 & New
West Approach (Signal with SB LT) 8.2 A 10.0 A 9.7 A
US Highway 93 &
United Drive (Right-Out Only) 12.8 B 11.2 B 12.0 B
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 247 120 57 543 159 50 469 73 154 178 31
Future Volume (vph) 98 247 120 57 543 159 50 469 73 154 178 31
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.966 0.980 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3149 0 1793 3195 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.496 0.383 0.292 0.425
Satd. Flow (perm) 851 1716 1458 723 3149 0 551 3195 0 729 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 146 57 26 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 301 146 70 662 194 61 572 89 188 217 38
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 301 146 70 856 0 61 661 0 188 255 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 21.8 21.8 21.8 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 21.8 21.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.29 0.29
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.61 0.28 0.17 0.48 0.20 0.37 0.90 0.57
Control Delay 28.3 27.8 4.8 12.3 11.7 13.3 10.9 65.3 23.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 28.3 27.8 4.8 12.3 11.7 13.3 10.9 65.3 23.8
LOS CCABB BB EC
Approach Delay 22.0 11.8 11.1 41.4
Approach LOS C B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 75.5
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.4% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 69 15 409 8 1 4 441 764 6 6 600 38
Future Volume (vph) 69 15 409 8 1 4 441 764 6 6 600 38
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.991
Flt Protected 0.950 0.971 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3230 0
Flt Permitted 0.748 0.833 0.190 0.315
Satd. Flow (perm) 1283 1716 1458 0 1365 0 359 3257 0 594 3230 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 57 5 2 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 81 18 481 9 1 5 519 899 7 7 706 45
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 81 18 481 0 15 0 519 906 0 7 751 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.8 10.8 39.2 10.6 56.5 57.9 22.2 22.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.53 0.14 0.76 0.78 0.30 0.30
v/c Ratio 0.44 0.07 0.60 0.07 0.65 0.36 0.04 0.77
Control Delay 42.7 34.5 14.1 29.2 15.0 4.4 23.2 31.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 42.7 34.5 14.1 29.2 15.0 4.4 23.2 31.4
LOS DCB C BA CC
Approach Delay 18.7 29.2 8.3 31.3
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 74.1
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77
Intersection Signal Delay: 16.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 66 90 787 92 237 626
Future Volume (vph) 66 90 787 92 237 626
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.984
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3208 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.259
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3208 0 444 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 90 18
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 66 90 787 92 237 626
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 66 90 879 0 237 626
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 35.4 22.0 57.4
Total Split (%) 28.3% 28.3% 44.3% 27.5% 71.8%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 30.9 17.5 52.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.6 8.6 50.0 64.4 65.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.62 0.80 0.82
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.44 0.47 0.24
Control Delay 38.5 12.5 10.1 5.7 2.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 38.5 12.5 10.1 5.7 2.7
LOS D B B A A
Approach Delay 23.5 10.1 3.5
Approach LOS C B A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 22 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.2 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.5% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 109 85 381 110 65 295
Future Vol, veh/h 109 85 381 110 65 295
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 130 101 454 131 77 351
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 959 454 0 - 454 0
Stage 1 454 -----
Stage 2 505 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 285 606 - 0 1107 -
Stage 1 640 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 606 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 260 606 - - 1107 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 260 -----
Stage 1 640 -----
Stage 2 554 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 23.2 0 1.5
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 260 606 1107 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.499 0.167 0.07 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 31.9 12.1 8.5 0
HCM Lane LOS - D B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 2.6 0.6 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 60 36 4 111 44 1
Future Vol, veh/h 60 36 4 111 44 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 74 44 5 137 54 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 118 0 243 96
Stage 1 - - - - 96 -
Stage 2 - - - - 147 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1470 - 745 960
Stage 1 - - - - 928 -
Stage 2 - - - - 880 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1470 - 742 960
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 742 -
Stage 1 - - - - 928 -
Stage 2 - - - - 876 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 10.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 746 - - 1470 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.074 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 137 37 4 176 16 2
Future Vol, veh/h 137 37 4 176 16 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 137 37 4 176 16 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 174 0 340 156
Stage 1 - - - - 156 -
Stage 2 - - - - 184 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1403 - 656 890
Stage 1 - - - - 872 -
Stage 2 - - - - 848 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1403 - 654 890
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 654 -
Stage 1 - - - - 872 -
Stage 2 - - - - 845 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 674 - - 1403 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.027 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 8 051015918032514
Future Vol, veh/h 8 051015918032514
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 13 0820231428053922
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 128 116 50 120 127 28 61 0 0 28 0 0
Stage 1 60 60 - 56 56 -------
Stage 2 68 56 - 64 71 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 845 774 1018 855 764 1047 1542 - - 1585 - -
Stage 1 951 845 - 956 848 -------
Stage 2 942 848 - 947 836 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 819 765 1018 840 755 1047 1542 - - 1585 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 819 765 - 840 755 -------
Stage 1 942 842 - 947 840 -------
Stage 2 913 840 - 937 833 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.6 2.5 0.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1542 - - 886 1031 1585 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - - 0.023 0.024 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.2 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 15 864 41 68 625
Future Vol, veh/h 0 15 864 41 68 625
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 18 1041 49 82 753
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 545 0 0 1090 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 482 - - 636 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 482 - - 636 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.8 0 1.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 482 636 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.037 0.129 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.8 11.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.4 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 87 113 88 79 506 118 41 439 110 82 89 35
Future Volume (vph) 87 113 88 79 506 118 41 439 110 82 89 35
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.972 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3169 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.677 0.445 0.413 0.684
Satd. Flow (perm) 1162 1716 1458 840 3169 0 779 3162 0 1174 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 89 42 46 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 114 89 80 511 119 41 443 111 83 90 35
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 114 89 80 630 0 41 554 0 83 125 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 10.3 10.3 10.3 44.6 44.6 44.6 44.6 10.3 10.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.16 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.43 0.29 0.14 0.29 0.08 0.26 0.45 0.48
Control Delay 33.3 28.9 8.7 5.4 4.8 5.0 4.6 32.0 23.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 33.3 28.9 8.7 5.4 4.8 5.0 4.6 32.0 23.9
LOS CCAAA AA CC
Approach Delay 24.1 4.9 4.6 27.1
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 66
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.49
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.4 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 60 4 310 3 4 6 306 589 12 4 618 84
Future Volume (vph) 60 4 310 3 4 6 306 589 12 4 618 84
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.938 0.997 0.982
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1592 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3201 0
Flt Permitted 0.784 0.919 0.246 0.414
Satd. Flow (perm) 1345 1716 1458 0 1479 0 464 3250 0 781 3201 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 6 3 14
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 63 4 323 3 4 6 319 614 13 4 644 88
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 4 323 0 13 0 319 627 0 4 732 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.7 8.7 24.5 8.3 45.2 47.6 21.9 21.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.42 0.14 0.78 0.82 0.38 0.38
v/c Ratio 0.32 0.02 0.51 0.06 0.43 0.24 0.01 0.60
Control Delay 31.0 26.2 13.1 21.4 5.0 3.3 17.5 19.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 31.0 26.2 13.1 21.4 5.0 3.3 17.5 19.8
LOS CCB C AA BB
Approach Delay 16.1 21.4 3.9 19.8
Approach LOS B C A B
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 58.3
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.60
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.5% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 133 133 635 50 133 585
Future Volume (vph) 133 133 635 50 133 585
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.989
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3224 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.337
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3224 0 578 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 133 11
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 133 133 635 50 133 585
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 133 685 0 133 585
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 41.0 18.0 59.0
Total Split (%) 34.4% 34.4% 45.6% 20.0% 65.6%
Maximum Green (s) 26.5 26.5 36.5 13.5 54.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 12.7 12.7 56.2 68.3 68.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.62 0.76 0.76
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.42 0.34 0.25 0.24
Control Delay 45.7 10.2 9.2 4.6 3.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.7 10.2 9.2 4.6 3.8
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 28.0 9.2 4.0
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 18 (20%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.58
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.0 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 71 57 189 91 46 130
Future Vol, veh/h 71 57 189 91 46 130
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 75 60 199 96 48 137
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 432 199 0 - 199 0
Stage 1 199 -----
Stage 2 233 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 581 842 - 0 1373 -
Stage 1 835 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 806 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 559 842 - - 1373 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 559 -----
Stage 1 835 -----
Stage 2 775 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.2 0 2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 559 842 1373 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.134 0.071 0.035 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 12.4 9.6 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS -BAAA
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.5 0.2 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 30 3 55 34 3
Future Vol, veh/h 54 30 3 55 34 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 64 36 4 65 40 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 100 0 155 82
Stage 1 - - - - 82 -
Stage 2 - - - - 73 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1493 - 836 978
Stage 1 - - - - 941 -
Stage 2 - - - - 950 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1493 - 833 978
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 833 -
Stage 1 - - - - 941 -
Stage 2 - - - - 947 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 9.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 843 - - 1493 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.052 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 115 22 2 105 22 2
Future Vol, veh/h 115 22 2 105 22 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 115 22 2 105 22 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 137 0 235 126
Stage 1 - - - - 126 -
Stage 2 - - - - 109 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1447 - 753 924
Stage 1 - - - - 900 -
Stage 2 - - - - 916 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1447 - 752 924
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 752 -
Stage 1 - - - - 900 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 9.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 764 - - 1447 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.031 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 8 0510452705158
Future Vol, veh/h 8 0510452705158
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 10 06105634061910
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 85 82 24 85 87 34 29 0 0 34 0 0
Stage 1 36 36 - 46 46 -------
Stage 2 49 46 - 39 41 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 901 808 1052 901 803 1039 1584 - - 1578 - -
Stage 1 980 865 - 968 857 -------
Stage 2 964 857 - 976 861 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 891 802 1052 890 797 1039 1584 - - 1578 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 891 802 - 890 797 -------
Stage 1 976 862 - 964 854 -------
Stage 2 956 854 - 966 858 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 8.9 8.6 1.1 1.3
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1584 - - 947 1005 1578 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.017 0.006 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 8.9 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 59 627 45 42 676
Future Vol, veh/h 0 59 627 45 42 676
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 61 653 47 44 704
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 350 0 0 700 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 646 - - 893 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 646 - - 893 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.2 0 0.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 646 893 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.095 0.049 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.2 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.2 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 104 178 57 115 520 202 74 538 115 115 184 46
Future Volume (vph) 104 178 57 115 520 202 74 538 115 115 184 46
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 150 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.958 0.974 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3123 0 1793 3175 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.404 0.352 0.317 0.521
Satd. Flow (perm) 693 1716 1458 664 3123 0 598 3175 0 894 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 66 85 38 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 205 66 132 598 232 85 618 132 132 211 53
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 205 66 132 830 0 85 750 0 132 264 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 18.2 18.2 18.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 18.2 18.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.22 0.22
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.54 0.18 0.31 0.41 0.22 0.37 0.66 0.75
Control Delay 61.5 32.8 7.7 10.6 7.8 9.6 7.9 45.0 39.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 61.5 32.8 7.7 10.6 7.8 9.6 7.9 45.0 39.4
LOS ECABA AA DD
Approach Delay 37.4 8.2 8.1 41.3
Approach LOS D A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 81.5
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.78
Intersection Signal Delay: 17.6 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 41 3 506 5 12 6 467 701 3 2 832 73
Future Volume (vph) 41 3 506 5 12 6 467 701 3 2 832 73
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.999 0.988
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1637 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3221 0
Flt Permitted 0.740 0.922 0.114 0.346
Satd. Flow (perm) 1270 1716 1458 0 1526 0 215 3257 0 653 3221 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 35 7 1 9
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 47 3 582 6 14 7 537 806 3 2 956 84
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 3 582 0 27 0 537 809 0 2 1040 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.4 9.4 43.9 9.0 78.0 80.5 35.7 35.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.48 0.10 0.85 0.88 0.39 0.39
v/c Ratio 0.36 0.02 0.81 0.17 0.67 0.28 0.01 0.82
Control Delay 53.6 45.3 29.9 39.3 22.3 2.5 21.5 33.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 53.6 45.3 29.9 39.3 22.3 2.5 21.5 33.0
LOS D D C D C A C C
Approach Delay 31.8 39.3 10.4 33.0
Approach LOS C D B C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 91.6
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82
Intersection Signal Delay: 22.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.0% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 133 183 755 40 94 750
Future Volume (vph) 133 183 755 40 94 750
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.992
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3234 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.302
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3234 0 518 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 183 8
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 133 183 755 40 94 750
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 183 795 0 94 750
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 35.0 35.0 55.0 9.5 55.0
Total Split (%) 35.2% 35.2% 55.3% 9.5% 55.3%
Maximum Green (s) 30.5 30.5 50.5 5.0 50.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 13.5 13.5 67.5 77.0 77.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.68 0.77 0.77
v/c Ratio 0.60 0.52 0.36 0.20 0.30
Control Delay 51.2 11.0 8.5 4.3 4.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.2 11.0 8.5 4.3 4.0
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 27.9 8.5 4.0
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 99.5
Actuated Cycle Length: 99.5
Offset: 9.5 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.60
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.7 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 119 73 337 137 70 263
Future Vol, veh/h 119 73 337 137 70 263
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 129 79 366 149 76 286
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 804 366 0 - 366 0
Stage 1 366 -----
Stage 2 438 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 352 679 - 0 1193 -
Stage 1 702 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 651 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 325 679 - - 1193 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 325 -----
Stage 1 702 -----
Stage 2 602 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 18.6 0 1.7
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 325 679 1193 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.398 0.117 0.064 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 23.2 11 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - C B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 1.8 0.4 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 51 2 67 58 2
Future Vol, veh/h 16 51 2 67 58 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 18 58 2 76 66 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 76 0 127 47
Stage 1 - - - - 47 -
Stage 2 - - - - 80 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1523 - 868 1022
Stage 1 - - - - 975 -
Stage 2 - - - - 943 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1523 - 867 1022
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 867 -
Stage 1 - - - - 975 -
Stage 2 - - - - 942 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 9.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 871 - - 1523 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.078 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 186 21 2 159 33 4
Future Vol, veh/h 186 21 2 159 33 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 186 21 2 159 33 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 207 0 360 197
Stage 1 - - - - 197 -
Stage 2 - - - - 163 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1364 - 639 844
Stage 1 - - - - 836 -
Stage 2 - - - - 866 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1364 - 638 844
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 638 -
Stage 1 - - - - 836 -
Stage 2 - - - - 864 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 10.8
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 655 - - 1364 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.056 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.8 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 09207633715209
Future Vol, veh/h 13 09207633715209
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 14 0 10 2087368162210
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 117 117 27 118 118 40 32 0 0 44 0 0
Stage 1 59 59 - 54 54 -------
Stage 2 58 58 - 64 64 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 859 773 1048 858 772 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Stage 1 953 846 - 958 850 -------
Stage 2 954 847 - 947 842 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 843 761 1048 840 760 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 843 761 - 840 760 -------
Stage 1 948 838 - 953 846 -------
Stage 2 942 843 - 929 834 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9 8.7 1 2.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1580 - - 916 981 1564 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.026 0.01 0.011 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 03/04/2025
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 69 726 15 25 859
Future Vol, veh/h 0 69 726 15 25 859
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 76 798 16 27 944
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 407 0 0 814 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 593 - - 809 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 593 - - 809 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 593 809 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.128 0.034 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12 9.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.1 -
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD
Traffic Impact Study Update &
Signal Warrant Analysis
Kalispell, Montana
Prepared For:
General One
20 Woodland Pl
Whitefish, MT 59937
December, 2024
130 South Howie Street
Helena, Montana 59601
406-459-1443
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
i
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update & Signal Warrant Analysis
Table of Contents
A. Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 1
B. Project Description ........................................................................................ 1 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 1
Study Area ............................................................................................ 2
Adjacent Roadways .............................................................................. 2 Traffic Data ............................................................................................ 4
Historic Traffic Data ............................................................................... 5
Planned Road Improvements ................................................................ 5
Additional Developments ...................................................................... 6
MDT Kalispell Bypass and Airport Road Intersection Project ................ 6 Level of Service ..................................................................................... 6
Vehicle Crash Data ............................................................................... 7 D. Proposed Development .............................................................................. 9 E. Trip Generation and Assignment ................................................................ 9
Trip Types ........................................................................................... 11 F. Trip Distribution ........................................................................................ 12
G. Traffic Impacts Outside of the Development ............................................. 13 H. Intersection Control Evaluation ................................................................. 20
Signalization Warrant Analysis ............................................................ 22
Additional Considerations.................................................................... 23
Signalization Warrants ........................................................................ 24
Warrant Conclusions ........................................................................... 31
Project Phasing and Signal Installation Timing ................................... 32 I. Impact Summary & Recommendations .................................................... 33
List of Figures
Figure 1 – Proposed Development Site ...................................................................3
Figure 2 – Reported Crashes by Location ...............................................................8
Figure 3 – Proposed Gardner & Anderson Ranch PUD ..........................................10
Figure 4 – Peak Hour Trip Distribution ....................................................................12 Figure 5 – Trip Distribution ......................................................................................8
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
ii
List of Tables
Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data .................................................................................5
Table 2 – 2024 Level of Service Summary ..............................................................7
Table 3 – Crash Statistics .......................................................................................9
Table 4 – Trip Generation Rates .............................................................................11 Table 5 – No Build 2029 Level of Service ...............................................................13
Table 6 – Projected 2029 Level of Service with PUD ..............................................14
Table 7 – Projected 2029 LOS with PUD & Intersection Improvements ..................16
Table 8 – Projected Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements ..................18
Table 9 – Projected 2039 Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements .........19 Table 10 – Projected 2044 Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements .......20
Table 11 – Projected 2034 Level of Service with PUD ............................................21
Table 12 – Traffic Signal Warrant Summary ...........................................................31
Table 13 – Phases 1 & 2 Trip Generation Rates .....................................................32
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 1 December, 2024
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD
Traffic Impact Study Update &
Signal Warrant Analysis
Kalispell, Montana
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD is a 94-acre mixed-use residential and commercial development proposed east of Highway 93 and south of Lower Valley Road in Kalispell, Montana. The development would include 170 new residential lots and 56 acres of commercial property. At
full development the project may produce up to 7,674 new daily vehicle trips in this area as a
residential and commercial project. As proposed, the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD will require the installation of a traffic signal on Highway 93 at the new proposed approach location. It would also be desirable to include a northbound right-turn lane, and a southbound left-turn signal phase at the intersection with the installation of the traffic signal. This traffic signal should be
coordinated with the existing traffic signals at Willow Glen Drive and the Highway 93 Bypass.
Additional roadway improvements that may be required with the project include a new eastbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Highway 93 and Cemetery Road, the installation of separated right and left-turn lanes at the intersection of Willow Glean Drive and Lower Valley Road, and the restriction of left-turn vehicle movements from United Drive onto U.S. Highway 93. The
developers should monitor traffic volumes at the site and install improvements as warranted based
on the projected traffic volumes once the commercial land uses within the PUD are identified.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This document studies the possible effects on the surrounding road system from a proposed mixed -use development located at 2995 US 93 South, between US Highway 93 and Demersville Road
just south of Lower Valley Road in Flathead County, Montana. The document provides
information regarding possible traffic impacts in the area and identifies mitigation efforts that the development may require. The PUD would include up to 154 new residential units and 56-acres of business park at full buildout.
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The proposed development property currently consists of an approximate 94-acre parcel of level ground located on the south end of Kalispell in Section 28, Township 28 North, Range 21 West;
south of Lower Valley Road and between US Highway 93 and Demersville Road in Flathead County. See Figure 1 for a location map of the proposed development.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 2 December, 2024
Study Area
Based on discussion with the City of Kalispell, the required study intersections for the traffic analysis include:
U.S. Highway 93 & Willow Glen Drive/Cemetery Road (Signalized)
U.S. Highway 93 & United Drive (Minor Approach STOP) U.S. Highway 93 & U.S. 93 Bypass (Signalized) Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Minor Approach STOP) Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Minor Approach STOP)
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Minor Approach STOP)
Cemetery Road & Airport Road (Minor Approach STOP) New Project Approaches onto Highway 93 and Lower Valley Road Adjacent Roadways
US Highway 93 is a five-lane north/south principal arterial roadway which extends south from Kalispell. It is comprised of two 12-foot travel lanes with 8-foot shoulders in each direction separated by a 14-foot two-way left-turn lane. The road is under traffic signal control at the
intersection with the Highway 93 Bypass and Cemetery Road-Willow Glen Drive. The posted
speed limit is 55 MPH north of the Hwy 93 Bypass. The traffic data collected by MDT indicates that the roadway carried 15,628 VPD in 2023.
Highway 93 Bypass is an access controlled north/south principal arterial alternate route west
of US Highway 93. It extends north from a signalized intersection south of Kalispell and
continues north reconnecting with US Highway 94 at a common signalized intersection with West Reserve Drive. The 76-foot cross section is comprised of two travel lanes/8-foot shoulders in each direction separated by a flush median. The median is modified to provide dedicated turn-lanes at the signalized intersection with US Highway 93. The posted speed
limit on the southern end of the Bypass route is 55 MPH. The traffic data collected by MDT
indicates that the roadway carried 8,967 VPD in 2023. Demersville Road is a north/south local street, serving as a connector between Lower Valley Road (north) and Auction Road (south). The rural cross section is paved, having an average
width of 24 feet. The road terminates at STOP controlled intersection to the north and south.
The surrounding environment is mixed-use with residential development to the northeast and generally undeveloped agricultural land along the remainder of the corridor. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. The traffic data collected by Flathead County in 2021 indicates that the roadway carries 696 VPD.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 3 December, 2024
Figure 1- Proposed Development Site
Lower Valley Road is an east/west collector, which extends east from a STOP controlled intersection with Willow Glen Drive just east of a signalized intersection with US Highway 93 and serves the greater lower Flathead Valley. The road begins as a 28-foot two-lane paved roadway with curb & gutter before transitioning to a 24-foot paved rural cross section. The
surrounding environment is a mix of rural residential development and undeveloped
agricultural land. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. The traffic data collected by Flathead County in 2021 indicates that the roadway carries 1,150 VPD. Willow Glen Drive is a north/south minor arterial, which extends north from a signalized
intersection with US Highway 93 and serves the east side of Kalispell, south of US Highway
2. It is comprised of a 24-foot paved rural cross section with the addition of a dedicated left-turn lane and curb & gutter at the intersection with US Highway 93. The surrounding environment is multi-use comprising of commercial and residential properties separated by undeveloped parcels. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. The traffic data collected by the City
of Kalispell indicates that the roadway carried 5,354 VPD in 2023.
Cemetery Road is an east/west local connector, which extends west from a signalized intersection with US Highway 93 and terminates at a STOP controlled intersection with Airport Road. It is comprised of a 24-foot paved rural cross section. The cross section is modified to
= Existing Study Intersection
5,35
4
VP
D
Lower Valley Road
De
m
e
r
s
v
i
l
l
e
R
o
a
d
US
H
w
y
9
3
Hwy 93 Bypass
Cemetery Road
Wi
l
l
o
w
G
l
e
n
D
r
Bar H Drive
United Dr 15
,
6
2
8
V
P
D
8,967 VPD
= Proposed Study Intersection
Ai
r
p
o
r
t
R
o
a
d
X,XXX VPD = MDT 2023 Data
X,XXX VPD = Flathead Co. 2021
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 4 December, 2024
include a dedicated left-turn lane and curb & gutter at the intersection with US Highway 93.
The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. The adjacent roadside environment includes a travel plaza
at the intersection with US Highway 93 and mixture of residential properties in various stages and undeveloped parcels. The traffic data collected by Flathead County in 2021 indicates that the roadway carries 3,686 VPD.
United Drive is a STOP controlled local service loop for commercial/industrial properties
along and east of US Highway 93. The road is comprised of a 24-foot paved urban cross section and has no posted speed limits. Bar H Drive is a STOP controlled local residential route that serves the Green Tree Meadow
residential development east of Demersville Road. The road is comprised of a 20-foot paved
rural cross section and has a posted speed limit of 15 MPH. Traffic Data
In May of 2024, Abelin Traffic Services (ATS) collected traffic data at area intersections to
evaluate current operations characteristics. These counts included peak-hour (AM, NOON, PM) turning movement counts and daily traffic volume counts. The peak-hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of US Highway 93 with Highway 93 Bypass, US Highway 93 with United Drive, US Highway 93 with Cemetery Road/Willow
Glen Drive, Willow Glen Drive with Lower Valley Road, Lower Valley Road with
Demersville Road, and Demersville Road with Bar H Drive. The raw traffic data is included in Appendix A of this report. The raw data collected for this project was reviewed for seasonal variation in accordance with
the data collected from MDT’s annual count station located on US Highway 2 west of Kalispell
(Station A-24). This count station data indicated that data collected in May of 2024 is approximately 106% of the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) in this area. To provide a more conservative analysis no adjustment factor was used on the May traffic data values.
Traffic volume and speed data were also collected along Lower Valley Road and Demersville
Road during the May 2024 traffic data collection period. Based on the data collected in May, the average vehicle speeds on this section of Lower Valley Road were 39 MPH with an 85th percentile speed of 44 MPH, and the average vehicle speeds on Demersville Road were 36 MPH with an 85th percentile speed of 42 MPH. The travel speeds on these two roads are
slightly above the posted 35 MPH speed limits. The daily traffic volumes on these routes were
consistent with the historical volume with an ADT volume of 690 VPD on Demersville Road. The new data did suggest potential traffic volume increases on Lower Valley Road (1,150 in 2021 vs. 2,425 VPD in 2024)
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 5 December, 2024
Historic Traffic Data
Abelin Traffic Services obtained historic traffic data from the Montana DOT web sources. This data is presented in Table 1. The traffic data history for this area indicates that traffic volumes have changed significantly over the past ten years with some road segments increasing in volume and some decreasing. The changes have been caused by the Kalispell Bypass project
which was completed in 2016 and the continued commercial and residential development in
this area. There is currently not enough sufficient information to develop a conclusive background traffic volume growth rate for this area. Based on meetings with the City of Kalispell, it was determined that the best method of estimating future traffic volumes in this area (2030-2040) is to use the established and anticipated traffic volume growth rates contained
in the 2021 Kalispell Move 2040 Transportation Plan as a target growth rate for the area.
Based on the information from the transportation plan, an annual growth rate of 2.6% was used to develop future growth projections for the area roadways. Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data
Location 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
US Hwy 93 – South of Willow Glen Drive #15-7B-010 12,920 15,380 15,891 12,001 13,066 15,312 13,965 14,964 15,307 15,628
US Hwy 93 – North of Willow Glen Drive
#15-7B-011
15,770 14,050 14,516 14,284 13,013 15,989 14,582 11,872 12,335 12,594
Willow Glen Dr – North of US Highway 93 #15-7B-019 4,390 4,480 4,018 3,950 5,863 5,660 5,264 5,285 5,322 5,354
Kalispell Alt Rte – btwn Airport Rd & US 93 #15-7B-101
NA NA NA NA NA 10,656 9,718 6,958 8,783 8,967
Planned Road Improvements The 2021 Kalispell Move 2040 Transportation Plan predicts that the traffic volumes on
Highway 93 will increase significantly by 2040. The traffic volumes are predicted to increase
to 19,500 VPD on Highway 93, 9,300 VPD on Willow Glen Drive, and 4,500 VPD on Lower Valley Road. Specific recommended improvements contained in the transportation plan to address roadway capacity include the following recommended projects:
MSN- 23: Construct Willow Glen Drive to a three-lane urban minor arterial from
Highway 93 to Woodland Avenue. Length - 1.5 miles. Estimated Cost $3,750,000. MSN- 41 Construct Cemetery Road to a two-lane urban minor collector from Airport Road to Highway 93. Length 0.9 miles. Estimated Cost $1,530,000.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 6 December, 2024
Additional Developments Development plans for the parcel of land located just south of Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD are underway, which will create additional commercial parcels along United Drive. The projected traffic volumes from this project were included in this TIS update based on the values
provided by the developers of this project. MDT Kalispell Bypass and Airport Road Intersection Project
The Montana Department of Transportation is currently planning a full reconstruction of the
Kalispell Bypass/Airport Road intersection. The intersection will be reconfigured as an interchange similar to the Foys Lake Road intersection to the north. The new design will consist of an overpass, access ramps, and a pair of roundabouts where the ramps intersect Airport Road. Cemetery Road will be realigned and connected with the roundabout on the east
side of the bypass. Road work will also include widening the bypass and the Ashley Creek
bridge to four lanes. Additionally, the intersection of the Kalispell Bypass and US 93 will be reconfigured with dual northbound left-turn lanes on US 93 and a merge acceleration lane on US 93 for vehicles turning south from the bypass onto US 93 to the south. The construction timeline for these improvements has not yet been identified.
Level of Service Using the data collected for this project by ATS, a Level of Service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the study intersections. This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the
procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual 7th
Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis and the Synchro 11 roadway analysis software. Existing traffic signal timing information was provided by MDT for the Highway 93 corridor. Intersections are graded from A to F representing the average delay that a vehicle entering an intersection can expect. Typically, a LOS of C or better is considered acceptable
for peak-hour conditions. Table 2 shows the existing 2024 LOS for the AM and PM peak hours without the traffic from the proposed developments in this area. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C. The table shows that most of the existing intersections in this area are currently operating
within acceptable limits and have considerable capacity for future growth. The intersection of Cemetery Road and Airport Road is currently experiencing excessive peak-hour delay, which will require intersection traffic control improvements in the future. MDT is currently planning a major reconstruction of the Airport Road/93 Bypass intersection which will reconfigure the operations on Cemetery Road and should correct the existing LOS deficiencies at this location
as discussed above.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 7 December, 2024
The intersection of Lower Valley Road with Willow Glen Drive is directly adjacent to the
intersection of Willow Glen Drive with Highway 93 (120 feet). The close proximity of these
approaches creates queueing issues and intersection delays which are not quantified in the LOS calculations. While the intersection is currently functioning at an acceptable LOS, actual operating capacity at the intersection is restricted somewhat by vehicle queueing. Based on field observations, the intersection could benefit from an additional northbound right-turn lane
from Lower Valley Road onto Willow Glen Drive to separate traffic streams when the
intersection is blocked by queues from the nearby Highway 93 traffic signal. Table 2 – 2024 Level of Service Summary
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte (Signal) 10.1 B 8.5 A 14.3 B
US Hwy 93 &
Willow Glen Drive (Signal) 18.2 C 10.1 B 16.3 B
Willow Glen Drive &
Lower Valley Road
(Two-way STOP)
19.2 C 10.7 B 16.0 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road
(Two-way STOP)
9.8 A 9.3 A 9.9 A
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP)
8.5 A 8.6 A 8.6 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive (Two-way STOP)
18.3 C 12.4 B 13.5 B
Cemetery Road & Airport Road (Two-way STOP)
38.0 E 12.3 B 28.2 D
Vehicle Crash Data
ATS reviewed crash data from MDT’s public crash site to report the level of conflict experienced within the study area over the most recent 5-year period. This database provides insight to identify possible crash trends pointing to geometric, traffic control, and roadway characteristic deficiencies. Crashes are expressed as a rate of crashes per million vehicles
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 8 December, 2024
entering (MVE) an intersection or per million vehicle miles traveled (MVT) along a given
segment. Crash rates at rural and urban intersections in Montana typically range from 0.5 to
1.5 crashes per MVE. Figure 2 shows the reported crash site locations captured from the MDT public crash database and Table 3 shows the data used to arrive at the crash rates per MVE at each intersection study
location.
Figure 2 -Reported Crashes by Location
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 9 December, 2024
Table 3 – Crash Statistics
Intersection # of
Crashes MVE* Crash
Rate
US Hwy 93/Hwy 93 Bypass 113 19,543 3.17 US Hwy 93/Willow Glen- Cemetery 42 18,744 1.23
Willow Glen Dr/Lower Valley Rd 7 7,197 0.53
US 93/United Drive 3 15,035 0.11
Demersville Rd/Lower Valley Rd 1 1,498 0.37
Demersville Rd/Bar H Dr 0 700 0
The 5-year MDT data set reveals that the majority of the conflicts concentrate around the principle arterial networks which have extensive traffic control systems in place to mitigate the
severity of those conflicts (traffic signals, turning lanes, signage, etc.). Separate from the
principal arterial networks, the level of conflict as defined by the most recent 5-year crash history is below statewide averages for similar roadway classifications. D. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD is currently proposed on a 94.41-acre parcel of land located south of Lower Valley Road between US Highway 93 and Demersville Road within the City of
Kalispell. The development would be constructed over the next five to ten years and would create up to 170 new residential lots on the eastern side of the development (Anderson Ranch) and 56-acres (488 KSF) of business park on the western side of the property (Gardner). The project would include a new east/west connection from Bar H Drive to Highway 93 which would serve much of the development traffic. An additional north/south route would connect United Drive to Lower
Valley Road to the north. The development will include internal roadways built to the City of Kalispell Road standards and would include sidewalks which would tie into the existing pedestrian facilities along Highway 93. The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD site plan is shown in Figure 3. E. TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT ATS performed a trip generation analysis to determine the anticipated future traffic volumes from the proposed developments using the trip generation rates contained in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Eleventh Edition). These rates are the national standard and are based
on the most current information available to planners. A vehicle “trip” is defined as any trip that either begins or ends at the development site. ATS determined that the critical traffic impacts on the intersections and roadways would occur during the weekday, morning, and evening peak hours. According to the ITE trip generation rates, at full build-out the developments would produce 778 AM peak hour trips, 755 PM peak hour trips, and 7,674 daily trips at full development. See Table
4 for detailed trip generation information. No specific noon weekday data is available for these land uses within the ITE manual. The noon weekday traffic volumes were estimated using 80% of the total daily trip generation volume with a 50% in/out directional split.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 10 December, 2024
Figure 3 – Proposed Gardner & Anderson Ranch PUD
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 11 December, 2024
Table 4 - Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
Units
AM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total AM Peak Hour Trip Ends
PM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total PM Peak Hour Trip Ends
Weekday
Trip Ends per Unit
Total Weekday Trip Ends
Single Family
Residences
ITE# 210
170
Lots 0.7 119
(30in/89out) 0.94 160
(101in/59out) 9.43 1,603
Business Park
ITE # 770
488
KSF 1.35 659
(560in/99out) 1.22 595
(155in/440out) 12.44 6,071
TOTAL 778
(590in/188out) 755
(256in/499out) 7,674
While the development may produce over 9,000 vehicle trips per day using commercial land uses that are typical for a business park (office, retail, restaurant, specialty shops, etc.), if the
development were built out with more industrial land uses, such as are common on some of the adjacent properties, the total daily trip generation from the site could be as low as 3,500 daily trips. Trip Types
As proposed, the development will produce some new traffic. However, not all of this
traffic will be additive to the current road volumes in this area. There are three basic trip types that describe the traffic generated by new developments. These trip types include the following:
New Trips- This is the basic trip type created by all traffic generators. These trips
are defined as those that occur only to utilize one traffic generator at a proposed development site.
Internal (Shared) Trips- These trips are created by associated facilities within or directly adjacent to the development. The trips are combined into one joint trip to
the development and do not represent additional trips on the surrounding road
network. While the exact land uses for the site are not currently known, it can be estimated that 15% or more of trips would be shared within the development sites based on the general commercial use options within the PUD (see Appendix B).
Pass-By Trips are those characterized by a vehicle which enters the development
on their way to another destination. Upon leaving, the driver continues along the
roadway to their final destination. Pass-By trips are not generally considered new trips on the surrounding road network because they would exist whether or not the development has been constructed. A common example of this type of trip is a driver which stops at a grocery store on their way home from work. Pass-by trips
can be discounted from the through traffic on the adjacent roadways but must be
included making the appropriate turning maneuvers at intersections. It is difficult
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 12 December, 2024
to produce precise pass-by estimates for this project since no precise land uses have
been established at this time. It is likely that a PUD project such as this would have
several land uses such as retail areas, offices, restaurants, and similar land uses can produce pass-by trips at rates of 10-20%. However, since no detailed information was available no pass-by trips were calculated to provide a more conservative result.
F. TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The traffic distribution and assignment for the proposed subdivision was based upon the existing
ADT volumes along the adjacent roadways and peak-hour volumes. It is expected that most traffic will distribute onto Highway 93 at the new approach with some traffic using Lower Valley Road to the north and United Drive to the south. Vehicles will distribute onto the surrounding road network as shown in Figure 4. It is also likely that the new east/west route within the project will draw some existing traffic from Demersville Road as a more direct access to Highway 93 which
would eliminate some existing traffic from Lower Valley Road. Figure 4 – Peak-Hour Trip Distribution
Gardner/Anderson
Ranch PUD De
m
e
r
s
v
i
l
l
e
R
d
US
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
9
3
Highway 93 Bypass
Cemetery Rd
Lower Valley Rd
25%
7%
38%
8%
2%
5%
15%
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 13 December, 2024
G. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT
Using the trip generation and trip distribution numbers, ATS determined the future Level of Service for the area intersections. The no-build LOS with existing traffic controls is shown in Table 5 and the anticipated intersection LOS with the proposed PUD is shown in Table 6. This analysis assumes the intersection of Airport Road and Cemetery Road has been improved with the
planned roundabout (MDT). The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C of this report. The table indicates that the construction of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD may cause roadway capacity deficiencies in this area which will require additional roadway improvements. Table 5 – No Build 2029 Level of Service
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte (Signal)
12.9 B 9.3 A 18.6 B
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal)
19.9 B 10.7 B 18.1 B
Willow Glen Drive &
Lower Valley Road (Two-way STOP) 24.7 C 11.2 B 19.0 C
Lower Valley Road &
Demersville Road (Two-way STOP) 10.0 B 9.4 A 10.1 B
Demersville Road &
Bar H Drive
(Two-way STOP)
8.6 A 8.6 A 8.7 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive
(Two-way STOP)
21.2 C 13.5 B 15.2 C
Cemetery Road & Airport Road (Two-way STOP)
81.9 F 13.3 B 50.9 F
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 14 December, 2024
Table 6 – Projected 2029 Level of Service with PUD
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
16.2 B 11.4 B 21.8 C
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal)
24.8 C 11.7 B 20.3 C
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Two-way STOP)
36.7 E 12.1 B 24.2 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
10.3 B 9.5 A 10.3 B
Demersville Road &
Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP) 9.2 A 8.6 A 9.1 A
US Highway 93 &
United Drive (Two-way STOP) 45.0 E 19.4 C 25.0 D
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road
(Roundabout)
16.0 C 6.5 A 11.2 B
US Hwy 93 & New West Approach
(Two-way STOP)
71.4 F 30.5 D 118 F
Lower Valley Road & New North Approach (Two-way STOP)
10.6 B 9.9 A 11.0 B
The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD would increase traffic volumes on Lower Valley Road to 4,000 VPD and would increase traffic volumes on Highway 93 to 19,000 VPD. Traffic volumes would be expected to increase to 5,000 on Cemetery Road with the PUD. These volumes are well within the functional capacity of these routes. The project may help decrease volumes at other
intersections along Lower Valley Road by providing a more direct connection to Highway 93 and drawing away traffic from Lower Valley Road and Willow Glen Drive.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 15 December, 2024
The Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD will impact traffic operations at several locations around the
proposed development site. The project would impact the LOS at the intersection of Willow Glen
Drive and Lower Valley Road, US Highway 93 and Cemetery Road/Willow Glen Drive, US Highway 93 and United Drive, and US Highway 93 and the new proposed east/west approach. US Highway 93 and Cemetery Road/Willow Glen Drive
The proposed project will increase the number of eastbound right-turn movements at the intersection of US 93 and Cemetery Road/Willow Glen Drive and the intersection will fall from LOS B to LOS C at full buildout. While the intersection will remain functioning at adequate levels of service through the buildout year (LOS C), the City of Kalispell requires mitigation for any
intersection where the LOS is decreased. In this instance, the only meaningful way to improve the LOS at the intersection would be to install a dedicated eastbound right-turn lane at the approach from Cemetery Road. US Highway 93 and New East/West Approach The new proposed approach onto Highway 93 from the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD will function at LOS F as a STOP controlled intersection. The only way to correct this issue would be with the installation of a traffic signal or roundabout at this location. An intersection control
evaluation is included in Section H of this report. Based on the projected traffic volumes, the intersection will have sufficient traffic volumes to meet MUTCD warrants for traffic signal installation. The installation of a traffic signal at this location must be approved by MDT based on MUTCD warrants and must be constructed in accordance with MDT requirements. Currently, the two signalized intersections on Highway 93 to the north and south (Willow Glen Drive and the
Highway 93 Bypass) are not coordinated. With the addition of a new signal between these existing signals, it would be desirable to implement new signal coordination along the corridor. Willow Glen Drive and Lower Valley Road
The analysis suggests that the peak hour LOS at the intersection may fall to LOS E for northbound traffic with the construction of the proposed project. This issue could be corrected by the installation of a traffic signal, mini-roundabout, or separated right/left turn lanes. Creating traffic control improvements at this location is complicated by the proximity to the signal at Highway 93
just 120 feet to the west as vehicle queues created by any traffic controls could back to Highway
93, which is not desirable and may not be allowed by MDT. The proximity to the existing Highway 93 signal would cause timing issues for any new traffic signal at Lower Valley Road and is not recommended. It may be possible to install a mini-roundabout at this intersection to promote traffic flow through the intersection, but any long queues on the Willow Glen Drive approach
could prevent the roundabout from operating and could back traffic towards the intersection at
Highway 93. It is also not known if there is sufficient ROW for a roundabout at this location. The most feasible solution for this location would be the creation of separated westbound right and
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 16 December, 2024
left-turn lanes on Lower Valley Road to promote traffic flow through the intersection. This
improvement would allow the intersection to function at LOS C at full buildout. It is also likely
that some traffic will re-route through the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD road network to the new traffic signal at Highway 93 and decrease the left-turn traffic demand at Willow Glen Drive. US Highway 93 and United Drive
The intersection of US Highway 93 and United Drive may develop LOS deficiencies with the construction of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD. While the traffic demand at the approach will be relatively low, the left-turn movements onto Highway 93 will create delay and safety issues at the intersection due to the heavy traffic flows on Highway 93. The proposed traffic signal at the
new east/west approach 800 feet to the north will likely eliminate much of the left-turn traffic demand at this location. It would also be possible to correct the LOS deficiency by restricting left-turns at the intersection and converting the approach to right-out only onto Highway 93. With the recommended improvements, the study intersections which indicated LOS deficiencies
above would function as shown in Table 7. Table 7– Projected 2029 Level of Service with PUD & Intersection Improvements
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive
(Signal with RT
Lane)
18.7 B 10.5 B 17.7 B
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road
(Separated Right/Left
Lanes)
24.4 C 11.3 B 19.2 C
US Hwy 93 & New West Approach
(Signal with SB LT)
8.0 A 8.1 A 8.1 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive
(Right-Out Only)
12.9 B 11.2 B 12.1 B
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 17 December, 2024
ATS also evaluated the future 2034, 2039, and 2044 LOS conditions as requested by the City of
Kalispell. The future LOS with the planned PUD is shown in Tables 8, 9, & 10. Includes the
previous intersection improvements (Cemetery Road right-turn lane, Lower Valley Road separated lanes, new east/west approach traffic signal, and United drive left-turn restriction). This analysis included future traffic signal optimization along the Highway 93 corridor. The analysis indicates that most of the study intersection will function at an acceptable LOS through at least 2044 with
the proposed project and no additional roadway improvements. The existing LOS issues at the
intersection of Airport Road and Cemetery Road will be addressed by the MDT reconstruction of the Airport Road/93 Bypass intersection and the construction of a new roundabout at this location. The LOS at the intersection of Willow Glen Drive and Lower Valley Road may fall to LOS F by 2044, but due to the proximity to the Highway 93 traffic signal, no intersection control
modifications on Willow Glen Drive are recommended. It should also be noted that this
intersection will likely fall to LOS F by 2044 due to background traffic volume growth regardless of any development of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD properties. ATS also evaluated the turn-lane warrants for the area with the additional traffic from the
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD at the approaches onto Highway 93, Lower Vally Road, and
Demersville Road. The analysis indicates that with the additional traffic from the PUD at the intersections on Lower Valley Road and Demersville Road would be below the threshold volumes warrants for the installation of left-turn or right-turn deceleration lanes. Currently, Highway 93 has a dedicated two-way left-turn lane through this section which would provide access to the
property. If a traffic signal is installed at the new east/west approach onto Highway 93, a right-
turn deceleration lane may be desirable for northbound traffic turning into the development based on MDT Figure 13.3B (See Appendix D).
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 18 December, 2024
Table 8 – Projected 2034 Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
18.8 B 12.2 B 27.6 C
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal w/ RT Lane)
21.1 C 11.0 B 19.8 C
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Separated Right/Left
Lanes)
34.1 D 11.8 B 23.8 C
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
10.5 B 9.7 A 10.6 B
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP)
9.2 A 8.9 A 9.1 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive (Right-Out Only) 13.6 B 11.6 B 12.8 B
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road (Roundabout) 11.7 B 6.9 A 13.2 B
US Hwy 93 & New
West Approach
(Signal with SB LT)
7.4 A 8.1 A 9.3 A
Lower Valley Road & New North Approach
(Two-way STOP)
10.9 B 10.1 B 11.3 B
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 19 December, 2024
Table 9 – Projected 2039 Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
21.6 C 14.1 B 30.0 C
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal w/ RT Lane)
21.4 C 11.5 B 22.1 C
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Separated Right/Left
Lanes)
53.5 F 12.3 B 32.1 D
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
10.7 B 9.8 A 10.8 B
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP)
9.3 A 9.0 A 9.2 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive (Right-Out Only) 14.3 B 12.1 B 13.5 B
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road (Roundabout) 14.9 B 8.7 A 16.8 C
US Hwy 93 & New
West Approach
(Signal with SB LT)
7.7 A 8.3 A 9.7 A
Lower Valley Road & New North Approach
(Two-way STOP)
11.2 B 10.3 B 11.7 B
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 20 December, 2024
Table 10 – Projected 2044 Level of Service with PUD & Road Improvements
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
US Hwy 93 & Hwy 93 Bypass Rte
(Signal)
26.0 C 20.3 C 50.1 D
US Hwy 93 & Willow Glen Drive (Signal w/ RT Lane)
24.4 C 14.3 B 23.9 C
Willow Glen Drive & Lower Valley Road (Separated Right/Left
Lanes)
96.2 F 12.8 B 87.5 F
Lower Valley Road & Demersville Road (Two-way STOP)
11.0 B 10.0 B 11.5 B
Demersville Road & Bar H Drive (Two-way STOP)
9.3 A 9.2 A 9.6 A
US Highway 93 & United Drive (Right-Out Only) 15.2 C 13.9 B 31.7 D
Cemetery Road &
Airport Road (Roundabout) 11.7 B 6.9 A 15.5 C
US Hwy 93 & New
West Approach
(Signal with SB LT)
8.6 A 8.1 A 9.2 A
Lower Valley Road & New North Approach
(Two-way STOP)
10.4 B 11.1 B 12.0 B
H. INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION
The City of Kalispell and MDT requested an intersection control evaluation for the proposed
approach from the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD onto Highway 93 between Lower Valley Road and the Highway 93 Bypass. The development will produce sufficient traffic to warrant a traffic signal at this location at full buildout. It would be possible to explore the development of an alternative traffic control at this location using a roundabout. While a roundabout could function
at this location, a roundabout would not be the preferred alternative for this application.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 21 December, 2024
Typically, roundabouts function most efficiently when the two roadways entering the roundabout
have similar total traffic volumes. A route which has very high traffic volumes on the main line, most of which travel through the roundabout and do not turn onto side approaches, may not provide sufficient breaks in traffic for low-volume side streets to effectively gain access to the roundabout under peak traffic conditions. Current traffic volumes along this section of Highway 93 are over
15,000 and the proposed approach from the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD will carry
approximately 5,000 VPD, most of which will be traveling to and from the north towards Kalispell. This difference in traffic volumes combined with the overall pattern of use will not allow a roundabout to function efficiently.
A potential roundabout for this location was analyzed and compared to the recommended traffic
signal to determine which alternative would provide more efficient operations in this application. Typically, a roundabout is equally or more efficient than a comparable traffic signal. However, due to the specific traffic patterns at this location, the LOS analysis indicated that a roundabout would operate less effectively than a traffic signal under peak conditions. The LOS comparison
showed that a roundabout would function with more average vehicle delay than a comparable
traffic signal. The analysis also suggests that the LOS for individual approaches with a roundabout would be LOS D for northbound traffic on Highway 93 in the AM peak hour and LOS F for westbound from the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD in the PM peak hour. The detailed LOS analysis results are shown in Table 11.
Table 11 - Projected 2034 Level of Service with PUD
AM Peak Hour NOON Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
US Hwy 93 & New West Approach Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS
With Traffic Signal 8.0 A 8.1 A 8.1 A
With Roundabout 18.7 C 8.9 A 17.6 C
This section of Highway 93 currently has a traffic signal at the Highway 93 Bypass 2,000 feet to the south and at Willow Glen Drive/Cemetery Road 1,400 feet to the north. While it is possible to incorporate a roundabout between these two existing traffic signals, a roundabout may limit
future traffic control coordination. The overall corridor along this section of Highway 93 is
currently characterized by traffic signals which may be coordinated in the future to improve traffic operations. A traffic signal at the proposed Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach could be easily integrated into a coordinated traffic signal system along this corridor while a roundabout may limit options for coordination.
The existing multi-lane roundabouts on the Shiloh Road in Billings have circle diameters of 200 to 220 feet on 250 to 300 feet of ROW, which is significantly wider than the 130 to 170 feet of MDT right-of-way currently available for this section of Highway 93. While it could be possible to install a roundabout at this location, some additional ROW would be required from adjacent
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 22 December, 2024
properties. A traffic signal at this location could be installed without any adjustments to adjacent
properties. Typically, roundabouts operate more safely than a comparable traffic signal and lead to less severe crashes due to lower vehicle speeds entering the roundabout. In this instance, the nearby signalized intersection of Highway 93 and Willow Glen Drive has a crash rate of 1.23 per MVE while the
intersection of Highway 93 and the Bypass has a crash rate of 3.17 per MVE. Crash rates at rural
and urban intersections in Montana typically range from 0.5 to 1.5 crashes per MVE. It is likely that a traffic signal for the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach would operate with a crash rate similar to the existing signal at Willow Glen Drive, which is within the normal range of vehicle crash rates. It is possible that a roundabout may operate more safely than a traffic signal at this
location, but a roundabout would not match the character of the rest of the Highway 93 corridor
and may have LOS deficiencies which could negatively impact safety at a roundabout. Due to these factors, it is unclear if a roundabout would provide a safety benefit in this application. Based on this review, we maintain that a traffic signal is the best alternative for the
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach onto Highway 93. A traffic signal would match the
existing character of the Highway 93 corridor, would not require any additional ROW, and would provide more efficient operations without negatively impacting safety. SIGNALIZATION WARRANT ANALYSIS
A study was performed at the proposed approach onto U.S. Highway 93 between Lower Valley Road and the Highway 93 Bypass to determine if this intersection will meet signalization warrants in the future with the construction of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD. This study was
completed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the 2023 11th Edition of the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The MUTCD outlines nine traffic signal warrants. One or more of these warrants should be met before a traffic signal is installed at an intersection. In order to evaluate these signal warrants, it
is necessary to assemble 24-hour traffic volume data, pedestrian volumes, and historic crash trends
for an intersection. The individual traffic signal warrants include:
• Warrant 1 – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
• Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
• Warrant 3 – Peak Hour Vehicular Volume
• Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume
• Warrant 5 – School Crossing
• Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System
• Warrant 7 – Crash Experience
• Warrant 8 – Roadway Network
• Warrant 9 – Intersection Near a Grade Crossing
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 23 December, 2024
Additional Considerations The MUTCD allows lower minimum threshold volumes for signalization at locations where the speed limit is greater than 40 MPH or where the community has a population of less than 10,000. The current posted speed limit on this section of Highway 93 is 55 MPH. Therefore, this criterion
is met. The MUTCD also allows for the elimination of some right-turn traffic on the minor approach from the warrant evaluation. Section 4C.01 of the MUTCD stated that:
“Similar engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach
with one through/left-turn lane plus a right-turn lane. In this case, the degree of conflict of minor-street right-turn traffic with traffic on the major street should be considered. Thus, right-turn traffic should not be included in the minor-street volume if the
movement enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be
evaluated as a one-lane approach with only the traffic volume in the through/left-turn
lane considered.” In this instance, the approach for the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD would be designed with
separated right-turn and left-turn lanes on the approach to Highway 93 if constructed. To be
conservative with the traffic volume warrants, the analysis for this intersection was based on only the left-turn movements onto Highway 93 and includes a 70% right-turn reduction for total projected westbound traffic movements onto Highway 93.
It should also be noted that if United Drive has a left-turn restricted at Highway 93, all of the
existing and projected left-turns at this intersection will be diverted to the new east/west approach to the north and will augment the projected left-turns at the signal by an additional 20-30 VPH. It can be a challenge to perform precise four-hour and eight-hour warrants based on projected
traffic volumes. Typically, traffic impact analysis projects focus only on peak-hour traffic volumes
and there is little specific guidance to find the fourth or eighth highest generation hour for a residential project. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD would produce vehicle trips throughout the day proportional to the existing directional hourly traffic volumes on U.S. Highway 93.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 24 December, 2024
SIGNALIZATION WARRANTS
Warrant 1 – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume MUTCD SECTION 4C.02 “The Minimum Vehicular Volume, Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large
volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. The Interruption of Continuous Traffic, Condition B, is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not satisfied and where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor
intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. It is intended that Warrant 1 be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant 1 is satisfied and Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed.
Similarly, if Condition B is satisfied, then the criteria for Warrant 1 is satisfied and the combination of Conditions A and B is not needed.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an
average day:
A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches,
respectively, to the intersection; or B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches,
respectively, to the intersection. In applying each condition the major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach
during each of these 8 hours.” For a roadway with one lane on the minor street and two lanes on the major approach, Table 4C-
1 gives the minimum vehicular volumes of 420 Vehicles Per Hour (VPH) on the major street and 105 VPH on the minor approach for Condition A. For Condition B, the minimum vehicular volume is 630 VPH on the major street and 70 VPH on the minor approach under reduction C (major street exceeds 40 mph).
An analysis of the hourly data for Highway 93 indicates that the eighth highest hour currently has over 1,180 VPH, which is above the minimum volumes for both Conditions A and B. The projected eight-hour approaching traffic volume on the westbound approach from the project will be approximately 86 VPH with a 70% right-turn reduction which is sufficient to meet Condition B of this warrant. Therefore, this warrant may be met if a 70% right-turn reduction is used.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 25 December, 2024
Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
MUTCD SECTION 4C.03 “The Four-Hour Vehicular Volume signal warrant conditions are intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, for each of any 4 hours of an average day, the plotted points
representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) all fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1 for the existing
combination of approach lanes. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 4 hours.” The data collected by MDT indicates that the fourth highest hour on this section of Highway 93 has over 1,500 VPH, which is well above the limit of the chart for figure 4C-2. Therefore, the minor street approach needs only to meet the minimum volume (80 VPH). The future projected left-turn traffic volumes from the new approach in the 4th highest hour is 83 VPH which would be
sufficient to meet condition B of the fourth-hour vehicle volume with a 100% right-turn reduction. Therefore, this warrant may be met.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 26 December, 2024
Warrant 3 – Peak Hour Vehicular Volume MUTCD SECTION 4C.04
“The Peak Hour signal warrant is intended for use at a location where traffic conditions are such that for a minimum of 1 hour of an average day, the minor-street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street.
This signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that
attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time. The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met:
A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day:
1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: 4 vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach; or 5 vehicle-hours for a two-lane
approach, and 2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or
exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per
Approximate Minor Street Volume
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 27 December, 2024
hour for two moving lanes, and 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650
vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches.
B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both
approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) for 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute
periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the
existing combination of approach lanes.”
The analysis of the current and projected traffic data indicates that Highway 93 has an afternoon peak-hour traffic volume of approximately 1,600 VPH and the projected peak hour westbound left-turn traffic from the project is 88 VPH. These volumes may be sufficient to meet this warrant for peak-hour traffic volumes with a 70% right-turn reduction factor. However, it should be noted that this warrant is unusual and is not typically used unless other warrant criteria are met. In this
case other warrants are near or met, so this warrant should be considered at this location. Therefore, this warrant may be met.
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 28 December, 2024
Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume
MUTCD SECTION 4C.05
“The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or midblock crossing shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following criteria are
met: A. For each of any 4 hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the
corresponding pedestrians per hour crossing the major street (total of all crossings) all fall above the curve in Figure 4C-5; or B. For 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day, the
plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding pedestrians per hour crossing the major street (total of all crossings) falls above the curve in Figure 4C-7.” At this time there is little pedestrian activity crossing this section of Highway 93. An analysis of the traffic data collected in 2023 did not indicate any pedestrians crossing the roadway at this
location during the 12-hour count. Therefore, this warrant is not met.
Warrant 5 – School Crossing MUTCD SECTION 4C.06
“The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children cross
the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. For the purposes of this warrant, the word “schoolchildren” includes elementary through high school students.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered when an engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to
the number and size of groups of school children at an established school crossing across the major street shows that the number of adequate gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the children are using the crossing is less than the number of minutes in the
same period (see Section 7A.03) and there are a minimum of 20 students during the highest crossing hour.
Before a decision is made to install a traffic control signal, consideration shall be given to the implementation of other remedial measures, such as warning signs and flashers, school speed zones, school crossing guards, or a grade-separated crossing.
The School Crossing signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 m (300 ft), unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of
traffic.”
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 29 December, 2024
There are no existing nearby schools which may benefit from a traffic signal at this location.
Therefore, this warrant is not met.
Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System MUTCD SECTION 4C.07 “Progressive movement in a coordinated signal system sometimes necessitates installing traffic control
signals at intersections where they would not otherwise be needed in order to maintain proper platooning of vehicles.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following criteria is met: A. On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominantly in one direction, the
adjacent traffic control signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicular platooning. B. On a two-way street, adjacent traffic control signals do not provide the necessary
degree of platooning and the proposed and adjacent traffic control signals will collectively provide a progressive operation.”
There are existing traffic signals along Highway 93, 0.3 miles to the south at the Highway 93 Bypass and 0.3 miles to the north at Willow Glen Drive. These existing signals likely provide acceptable platooning, and there is not likely a specific need for the signal at the new approach location to provide additional platooning along this section of Highway 93. Therefore, this warrant
is not met. Warrant 7 – Crash Experience
MUTCD SECTION 4C.08
“The Crash Experience signal warrant conditions are intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal.
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that all of the following criteria are met:
A. Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency; and B. Five or more reported crashes, of types susceptible to correction by a traffic control
signal, have occurred within a 12-month period, each crash involving personal injury or property damage apparently exceeding the applicable requirements for a reportable crash; and
C. For each of any 8 hours of an average day, the vehicles per hour (vph) given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 (see Section 4C.02), or the vph in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exists on the
major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approach, respectively, to the intersection, or the volume of pedestrian traffic is not less than 80 percent of the requirements specified in the Pedestrian Volume warrant. These major-street and
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 30 December, 2024
minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8
hours.” Currently this section of Highway 93 has only a few minor approaches nearby and no significant crash history. While it is likely that a major intersection at this location could create a safety concern, there is no data to support the use of this warrant at this time. Therefore, this warrant is not met.
Warrant 8 – Roadway Network MUTCD SECTION 4C.09
“Installing a traffic control signal at some intersections might be justified to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network.”
Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the common intersection of two or more major routes meets one or both
of the following criteria:
A. The intersection has a total existing, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour of a typical weekday and has 5-
year projected traffic volumes, based on an engineering study, that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday; or B. The intersection has a total existing or immediately projected entering volume of at
least 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours of a nonnormal business day (Saturday or Sunday). A major route as used in this signal warrant shall have one or more of the following characteristics:
A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering, or traversing a City; or
C. It appears as a major route on an official plan, such as a major street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study.” Highway 93 is a principal arterial route and the proposed connection to Highway is planned as a collector route within the City of Kalispell. The intersection of Highway 93 and the new westbound approach from the project currently has over 1,600 vehicles entering per hour and is projected to meet Warrants 1, 2, and 3 for condition A and is projected to meet the necessary
volumes for condition B. The new east/west road is planned as a collector route and is therefore considered a ‘major route’. Therefore, this warrant may be met. Warrant 9 – Intersection Near a Grade Crossing MUTCD Section 4C.10
“The Intersection Near a Grade Crossing signal warrant is intended for use at a location where none of the
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 31 December, 2024
conditions described in the other eight traffic signal warrants are met, but the proximity to the intersection of a grade crossing on an intersection approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.”
U.S. Highway 93 has no at-grade railroad crossings in this area. Therefore, this warrant is not
met. WARRANT CONCLUSIONS
The development of the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD would produce up to 700 vehicle trips per hour and would require additional traffic controls to provide adequate access onto the surrounding road system. The total projected traffic volumes at this location are sufficient to meet signalization warrants 1, 2, 3 and may meet warrant 8. Based on the traffic data reviewed for this project, traffic
signal warrants will likely be met at the intersection of Highway 93 and the new east/west
connector routed. Table 12 - Traffic Signal Warrant Summary Projected 2029
Volumes 8 Hour - Warrant 4 Hour - Warrant Peak Hour -
Warrant
HWY
93
NB+SB
Traffic
E/W
APP.
Traffic*
HWY 93
Major
1A/1B
420/630
E/W
APP.
1A/1B
140/70
HWY 93
Major
1000
E/W
APP.
Minor
80
HWY 93
Major
1300
E/W
APP.
Minor
99
7:00-8:00 982 53 X/X 0/0 0 0 0 0
8:00-9:00 1049 43 X/X 0/0 X 0 0 0
9:00-10:00 1114 45 X/X 0/0 X 0 0 0
10:00-11:00 1189 66 X/X 0/0 X 0 0 0
11:00-12:00 1563 90 X/X 0/X X X X 0
12:00-13:00 1562 90 X/X 0/X X X X 0
13:00-14:00 1422 110 X/X 0/X X X X X
14:00-15:00 1448 126 X/X 0/X X X X X
15:00-16:00 1533 141 X/X X/X X X X X
16:00-17:00 1622 149 X/X X/X X X X X
17:00-18:00 1428 131 X/X 0/X X X X X
18:00-19:00 931 86 X/X 0/X 0 0 0 0
Results Criteria Hour
Met Hours
Required
Warrant 1a: Minimum Vehicular Volume 2 8
Warrant 1b: Interruption of Continuous Traffic 8 8
Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume 7 4 Warrant 3: Peak Hour 5 1
*Includes left-turn traffic plus right-turn traffic at a 70% right-turn reduction factor
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 32 December, 2024
PROJECT PHASING AND SIGNAL INSTALLATION TIMING
The City of Kalispell requested additional information regarding the timing of when a traffic signal will be warranted for the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach onto Highway 93. Typically, projected traffic signal warrants on busy highways are based on left/thru entering traffic volumes
from the planned minor street approach. These volumes should be in the range of 50 to 100 vehicles in the peak hour with additional requirements for the fourth and eighth highest peak hours. The projected number of PM peak-hour left-turns at the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach is 120 VPH which is twice the required number of left-turns to meet a traffic signal warrant for this location. It is also likely that the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD approach onto Highway 93
will fall to LOS F at only 25% buildout of the project without alternative traffic controls. Additional project phasing information was provided by the developers to help identify when the recommended traffic signal will likely be warranted at the new approach onto Highway 93. Based on information provided by the client, the first commercial facility planned for Phase 1 of the
development, which is planned to be completed in 2025, will have an average daily peak-hour exiting vehicle rate of 20-30 VPH and a peak use exiting vehicle rate of 50-60 VPH. Phase 2 of the project will include the development of ten commercial lots located adjacent to Highway 93 (135 KSF commercial space) and construction of the residential lots in the Anderson Ranch (170 units). This phase will likely be completed around 2028. Detailed vehicle trip generation for
phases 1 & 2 is shown in Table 13. As currently planned, Phases 1 & 2 will not include the direct connection to Lower Valley Road to the north which will drive most of the traffic from these phases onto the Highway 93 approaches. Table 13 – Phases 1 & 2 Trip Generation Rates
Land Use
Units
AM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total AM Peak Hour Trip Ends
PM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit
Total PM Peak Hour Trip Ends
Weekday
Trip Ends per Unit
Total Weekday Trip Ends
Phase 1
Commercial * na 67
(38in/19out) na 16
(2in/14out) na 568
Phase 2
Business Park
ITE # 770
135
KSF 1.35 182
(155in/27out) 1.22 165
(43in/122out) 12.44 1,679
Phase 2
Single-Family
ITE# 210
170
Lots 0.7 119
(30in/89out) 0.94 160
(101in/59out) 9.43 1,603
TOTAL 368
(223in/135out) 341
(146in/195out) 3,850
*Based on client provided data.
Based on the information provided by the client, Phase 1 of the project alone would not create
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study Update Kalispell, Montana
Abelin Traffic Services 33 December, 2024
sufficient traffic to warrant the signal at Highway 93 but would be a contributor to the need for a
signal on Highway 93 when additional lots are developed. By the completion of Phase 2 of the
project, the daily trip generation from the development would be approaching 3,800 trips per day, or approximately half of the projected full-buildout traffic. Peak-hour approaching traffic volumes at highway 93 would be in the range of 150-200 vehicles per hour, approximately 30% of which would likely be turning left onto Highway 93 (approximately 50 left-turns per hour). With this
level of traffic, the LOS at the intersection will fall to F during the peak hours. The projected level
of left-turn traffic combined with the projected right-turn traffic (100 to 150 right-turns per hour) would likely be sufficient to meet warrants for signalization at the intersection. Based on this phasing plan, the developers should create signalization plans for the proposed intersection with the initial construction of the project and prepare for signal installation on Highway 93 by the end
of Phase 2 of the development (approximately 2028) or when warrants are met. It would also be
desirable to identify specific trip generation estimates for each of the commercial lots as they are developed to help identify when the traffic signal on Highway 93 will be needed. The developers should update the City and MDT with trip generation estimates for the project though the completion of Phase 2 and install the traffic signal on Highway 93 when warranted.
I. IMPACT SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
As proposed, the Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD will require the installation of a traffic signal on Highway 93 at the new proposed approach location. It would also be desirable to include a
northbound right-turn lane, and a southbound left-turn signal phase at the intersection with the installation of the traffic signal. This traffic signal should be coordinated with the existing traffic signals at Willow Glen Drive and the Highway 93 Bypass. Additional roadway improvements that may be required with the project include a new eastbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Highway 93 and Cemetery Road, the installation of separated right and left-turn lanes at the
intersection of Willow Glean Drive and Lower Valley Road, and the restriction of left-turn vehicle movements from United Drive onto U.S. Highway 93. The developers should monitor traffic volumes at the site and install improvements as warranted based on the projected traffic volumes once the commercial land uses within the PUD are identified.
APPENDIX A
Traffic Data
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Kalispell - 93 and Alt 93
Date May 7 and 8
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL7:00 -7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 -7:30 99 121 0 0 0 80 3 0 3 1 75 0 4 1 0 0 3877:30 -7:45 113 184 2 0 1 120 0 0 5 4 75 0 4 0 1 0 5097:45 -8:00 112 204 4 0 1 139 3 0 7 6 114 0 2 0 2 0 5948:00 -8:15 90 139 0 0 2 140 5 0 7 1 87 0 1 0 0 0 4728:15 -8:30 100 114 0 0 2 115 3 0 6 3 109 0 1 1 1 0 4558:30 -8:45 96 117 1 0 1 119 2 0 5 1 92 0 1 0 2 0 4378:45 -9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:00 -9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:15 -9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:30 -9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:45 -10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:00 -10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:15 -10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:30 -10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:45 -11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:00 -11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:15 -11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:30 -11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:45 -12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:00 -12:15 68 131 1 0 2 106 7 0 14 2 77 0 1 1 3 0 41312:15 -12:30 63 134 1 0 0 132 7 0 8 0 68 0 0 2 0 0 41512:30 -12:45 78 121 2 0 2 136 9 0 6 0 80 0 1 0 1 0 43612:45 -1:00 79 129 3 0 0 109 8 0 4 2 67 0 1 1 2 0 4051:00 -1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:15 -1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:30 -1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:45 -2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 -2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:15 -2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:30 -2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:45 -3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 -3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:15 -3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:30 -3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:45 -4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 -4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:15 -4:30 99 154 2 0 2 159 4 0 5 1 93 0 3 1 2 0 5254:30 -4:45 104 157 0 0 1 142 6 0 7 2 130 0 1 3 3 0 5564:45 -5:00 117 132 1 0 0 174 3 0 8 1 111 0 1 5 0 0 5535:00 -5:15 122 203 2 0 1 201 11 0 4 0 109 0 3 3 2 0 6615:15 -5:30 97 137 0 0 0 167 3 0 5 0 126 0 0 0 1 0 5365:30 -5:45 86 148 1 0 0 165 2 0 4 0 118 0 0 0 1 0 5255:45 -6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 -6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:15 -6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:30 -6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:45 -7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01523232520015220476098241531024182107879
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Kalispell - 93 and Willow Glen
Date May 7 and 8
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL7:00 -7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 -7:30 5 64 21 0 3 42 24 0 14 30 3 0 23 29 8 0 2667:30 -7:45 7 114 34 0 9 57 19 0 31 54 4 0 37 53 3 0 4227:45 -8:00 4 141 57 0 10 82 17 0 28 69 2 0 37 44 10 0 5018:00 -8:15 6 106 33 0 5 82 25 0 19 42 3 0 34 44 5 0 4048:15 -8:30 2 82 23 0 8 59 8 0 14 57 7 0 31 22 4 0 3178:30 -8:45 4 71 21 0 6 54 13 0 15 55 4 0 32 32 6 0 3138:45 -9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:00 -9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:15 -9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:30 -9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:45 -10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:00 -10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:15 -10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:30 -10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:45 -11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:00 -11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:15 -11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:30 -11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:45 -12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:00 -12:15 5 93 28 0 9 78 29 0 25 29 8 0 17 18 3 0 34212:15 -12:30 2 102 26 0 6 87 23 0 19 26 5 0 19 20 9 0 34412:30 -12:45 9 105 20 0 5 88 30 0 15 24 10 0 16 15 2 0 33912:45 -1:00 6 88 31 0 10 72 22 0 23 21 7 0 20 25 10 0 3351:00 -1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:15 -1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:30 -1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:45 -2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 -2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:15 -2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:30 -2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:45 -3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 -3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:15 -3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:30 -3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:45 -4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 -4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:15 -4:30 6 110 57 0 12 110 23 0 27 34 4 0 32 39 3 0 4574:30 -4:45 9 90 34 0 12 99 30 0 27 33 4 0 40 24 4 0 4064:45 -5:00 9 85 55 0 14 115 19 0 16 30 4 0 23 33 10 0 4135:00 -5:15 8 88 33 0 11 99 30 0 33 37 5 0 30 50 7 0 4315:15 -5:30 13 104 67 0 16 122 43 0 25 47 2 0 26 37 6 0 5085:30 -5:45 6 88 33 0 20 108 16 0 24 46 2 0 29 44 6 0 4225:45 -6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 -6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:15 -6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:30 -6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:45 -7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010115315730156135437103556347404465299606220
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Kalispell - 93 and United
Date May 7 and 8
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL
7:00 -7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 -7:30 0 120 5 0 2 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 211
7:30 -7:45 0 196 2 0 2 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 320
7:45 -8:00 0 237 0 0 6 145 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 390
8:00 -8:15 0 156 3 0 6 131 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 297
8:15 -8:30 0 138 2 0 8 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 280
8:30 -8:45 0 140 3 0 1 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 244
8:45 -9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 -9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 -9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 -9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 -10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 -10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:15 -10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 -10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 -11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 -11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 -11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 -11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 -12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 -12:15 0 138 9 0 4 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 12 0 278
12:15 -12:30 0 143 5 0 6 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 295
12:30 -12:45 0 133 5 0 3 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 0 297
12:45 -1:00 0 129 2 0 5 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 0 270
1:00 -1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 -1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:30 -1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 -2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 -2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 -2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 -2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 -3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 -3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 -3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 -3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 -4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 -4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 -4:30 0 177 5 0 4 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 351
4:30 -4:45 0 133 3 0 2 176 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 0 323
4:45 -5:00 0 145 3 0 3 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 324
5:00 -5:15 0 178 0 0 2 161 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 13 0 358
5:15 -5:30 0 190 1 0 1 182 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 380
5:30 -5:45 0 139 1 0 0 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 311
5:45 -6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 -6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 -6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 -6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 -7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2492 49 0 55 2226 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 79 0 4929
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Kalispell - Willow Glen and Lower Valley
Date May 7 and 8
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL7:00 -7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 -7:30 19 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 14 0 6 53 0 0 1477:30 -7:45 29 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 22 0 7 73 0 0 2307:45 -8:00 25 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 15 0 6 65 0 0 2718:00 -8:15 20 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 13 0 13 77 0 0 2148:15 -8:30 15 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 27 0 14 59 0 0 1928:30 -8:45 19 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 7 0 14 58 0 0 1578:45 -9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:00 -9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:15 -9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:30 -9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:45 -10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:00 -10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:15 -10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:30 -10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:45 -11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:00 -11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:15 -11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:30 -11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:45 -12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 012:00 -12:15 14 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 17 0 8 27 0 0 12712:15 -12:30 12 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 16 0 7 34 0 0 11912:30 -12:45 15 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 22 0 6 30 0 0 12512:45 -1:00 10 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 15 0 10 27 0 0 1131:00 -1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:15 -1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:30 -1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:45 -2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 -2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:15 -2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:30 -2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:45 -3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 -3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:15 -3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:30 -3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:45 -4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 -4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:15 -4:30 14 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 24 0 17 53 0 0 1954:30 -4:45 21 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 24 0 9 58 0 0 1994:45 -5:00 20 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 19 0 16 69 0 0 2075:00 -5:15 29 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 29 0 12 60 0 0 2365:15 -5:30 19 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 41 0 17 61 0 0 2285:30 -5:45 13 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 23 0 7 43 0 0 1605:45 -6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 -6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:15 -6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:30 -6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:45 -7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02940202000000###328 0 169 847 0 0 2920
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Lower Valley & Demersville
Date 5/7-5/8/2024
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL
7:00 - 7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 - 7:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 - 7:45 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 14 0 0 32
7:45 - 8:00 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 5 0 0 24 0 0 53
8:00 - 8:15 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 30 0 0 47
8:15 - 8:30 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 3 0 2 24 0 0 49
8:30 - 8:45 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 14 0 0 23 0 0 66
8:45 - 9:00 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 8 0 1 14 0 0 41
9:00 - 9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 - 9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 - 9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 - 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 - 10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:15 - 10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 - 10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 - 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 - 11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 - 11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 - 11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 - 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 - 12:15 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 0 0 10 0 0 32
12:15 - 12:30 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 7 0 1 11 0 0 44
12:30 - 12:45 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 4 0 1 17 0 0 42
12:45 - 1:00 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 4 0 0 11 0 0 30
1:00 - 1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 - 1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 - 1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 - 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 - 2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 - 2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 - 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 - 3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 - 3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 - 3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 - 4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 - 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 - 4:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 - 4:45 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 6 0 0 14 0 0 39
4:45 - 5:00 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 13 0 0 8 0 0 58
5:00 - 5:15 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 10 0 0 22 0 0 63
5:15 - 5:30 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 7 0 1 20 0 0 60
5:30 - 5:45 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 10 0 0 11 0 0 72
5:45 - 6:00 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 4 0 0 13 0 0 51
6:00 - 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 - 6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 - 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 - 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
131 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 105 0 6 266 0 0 779
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Demersville and Bar H
Date 5/7-5/8/2024
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL
7:00 - 7:15 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 15
7:15 - 7:30 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 10
7:30 - 7:45 0 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
7:45 - 8:00 0 7 0 0 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 23
8:00 - 8:15 0 4 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 13
8:15 - 8:30 0 3 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
8:30 - 8:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 - 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 - 9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 - 9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 - 9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 - 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 - 10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:15 - 10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 - 10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 - 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 - 11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 - 11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:30 - 11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 - 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 - 12:15 0 10 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
12:15 - 12:30 0 6 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 14
12:30 - 12:45 0 4 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9
12:45 - 1:00 0 5 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10
1:00 - 1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 - 1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 - 1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 - 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 - 2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 - 2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 - 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 - 3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 - 3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 - 3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 - 4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 - 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 - 4:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 - 4:45 0 5 2 0 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 19
4:45 - 5:00 0 10 1 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 22
5:00 - 5:15 0 7 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 22
5:15 - 5:30 0 6 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 15
5:30 - 5:45 0 8 1 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 21
5:45 - 6:00 0 6 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 12
6:00 - 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 - 6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 - 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 - 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 91 9 0 27 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 28 0 239
Turning Movement Count
All Vehicles
Location Kalispell - Cemetary and Airport Road
Date May 7 and 8, 2024Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds Left Thr Right Peds TOTAL
7:00 -7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 -7:30 0 27 44 0 10 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 4 0 156
7:30 -7:45 0 31 97 0 13 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 5 0 2627:45 -8:00 0 57 114 0 20 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 10 0 313
8:00 -8:15 0 43 54 0 10 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 18 0 202
8:15 -8:30 0 48 44 0 22 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 17 0 199
8:30 -8:45 0 14 21 0 13 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 8 0 131
8:45 -9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09:00 -9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 -9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 -9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 -10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 -10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010:15 -10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:30 -10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:45 -11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 -11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:15 -11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 011:30 -11:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 -12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:00 -12:15 0 24 38 0 8 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 3 0 121
12:15 -12:30 0 29 30 0 2 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 7 0 128
12:30 -12:45 0 24 40 0 8 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 6 0 15112:45 -1:00 0 21 35 0 3 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 6 0 124
1:00 -1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:15 -1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:30 -1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:45 -2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 -2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:15 -2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:30 -2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:45 -3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 -3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:15 -3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 -3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 -4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 -4:15 0 35 52 0 11 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 15 0 196
4:15 -4:30 0 39 43 0 5 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 7 0 1954:30 -4:45 0 39 48 0 4 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 11 0 201
4:45 -5:00 0 53 44 0 12 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 0 19 0 262
5:00 -5:15 0 64 61 0 7 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 21 0 265
5:15 -5:30 0 37 44 0 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 16 0 0 183
5:30 -5:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:45 -6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 -6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:15 -6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 -6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 -7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0058580901525880000007821615703089
For Project:Demersville Road
Project Notes:
Location/Name:Merged
Report Generated:5/29/2024 3:11:06 PM
Speed Intervals 1 MPH
Time Intervals Instant
Traffic Report From 5/7/2024 9:00:00 AM through 5/8/2024 10:59:59 AM
85th Percentile Speed 42 MPH
85th Percentile Vehicles 636
Max Speed 83 MPH on 5/7/2024 10:27:30 PM
Total Vehicles 748
AADT:690
Volumes -
weekly counts
Time 5 Day 7 Day
Average Daily 374 374
AM Peak 8:00 AM 59 59
PM Peak 4:00 PM 66 66
Speed
Speed Limit:35
85th Percentile Speed:42
50th Percentile Speed:36
10 MPH Pace Interval:31.0 MPH to 41.0 MPH
Average Speed:36.14
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
Count over limit N/A 293 102 N/A N/A N/A N/A
% over limit N/A 53.6 50.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Avg Speeder N/A 40.6 41.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Avg Speed N/A 36.2 36.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Class Counts
Number %
VEH_SM 6 0.8
VEH_MED 678 90.6
VEH_LG 64 8.6
[VEH_SM=motorcycle,VEH_MED = sedan,VEH_LG = truck]
Merged Monthly Counts
Demersville Road from Tue-May-07-2024-09-00-AM to Wed-May-08-2024-10-59-AM
May 2024
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Week Weekend Week Day 85%
Hour Day Avg Avg Avg Speed
0 - 1 **1 ****1 0 33
1 - 2 **3 ****3 0 47
2 - 3 **1 ****1 0 27
3 - 4 **0 ****0 0 0
4 - 5 **3 ****3 0 41
5 - 6 **12 ****12 0 36
6 - 7 **21 ****21 0 41.5
7 - 8 **49 ****49 0 42.3
8 - 9 **59 ****59 0 42.5
9 - 10 *8 51 ****29.5 0 39.3
10 - 11 *61 *****61 0 40
11 - 12 *37 *****37 0 41
12 - 13 *43 *****43 0 40
13 - 14 *48 *****48 0 42
14 - 15 *54 *****54 0 41
15 - 16 *60 *****60 0 42
16 - 17 *66 *****66 0 42
17 - 18 *54 *****54 0 43
18 - 19 *44 *****44 0 45
19 - 20 *24 *****24 0 35
20 - 21 *22 *****22 0 41
21 - 22 *12 *****12 0 37
22 - 23 *10 *****10 0 39
23 - 24 *4 *****4 0 34
Totals 0 547 200 0 0 0 0
% of Total 0%73.23%26.77%0%0%0%0%
Page 1
For Project:Lower Valley Road
Project Notes:
Location/Name:Merged
Report Generated:5/29/2024 3:13:29 PM
Speed Intervals 1 MPH
Time Intervals Instant
Traffic Report From 5/7/2024 9:00:00 AM through 5/8/2024 10:59:59 AM
85th Percentile Speed 44 MPH
85th Percentile Vehicles 2234
Max Speed 82 MPH on 5/7/2024 10:02:26 AM
Total Vehicles 2628
AADT:2425
Volumes -
weekly counts
Time 5 Day 7 Day
Average Daily 1314 1314
AM Peak 8:00 AM 205 205
PM Peak 5:00 PM 242 242
Speed
Speed Limit:35
85th Percentile Speed:44
50th Percentile Speed:39
10 MPH Pace Interval:34.0 MPH to 44.0 MPH
Average Speed:39
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
Count over limit N/A 1447 541 N/A N/A N/A N/A
% over limit N/A 75.3 76.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Avg Speeder N/A 41.1 41.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Avg Speed N/A 39.0 39.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Class Counts
Number %
VEH_SM 6 0.2
VEH_MED 2472 94.1
VEH_LG 150 5.7
[VEH_SM=motorcycle,VEH_MED = sedan,VEH_LG = truck]
Merged Monthly Counts
Lower Valley Road from Tue-May-07-2024-09-00-AM to Wed-May-08-2024-10-59-AM
May 2024
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Week Weekend Week Day 85%
Hour Day Avg Avg Avg Speed
0 - 1 **10 ****10 0 37.5
1 - 2 **4 ****4 0 39
2 - 3 **5 ****5 0 36.7
3 - 4 **3 ****3 0 55
4 - 5 **7 ****7 0 47
5 - 6 **28 ****28 0 46.3
6 - 7 **79 ****79 0 45.5
7 - 8 **200 ****200 0 44.5
8 - 9 **205 ****205 0 44.3
9 - 10 *8 148 ****78 0 43.25
10 - 11 *176 17 ****96.5 0 43.4
11 - 12 *157 *****157 0 41.9
12 - 13 *162 *****162 0 44.2
13 - 14 *164 *****164 0 42.8
14 - 15 *177 *****177 0 43
15 - 16 *220 *****220 0 42.8
16 - 17 *217 *****217 0 43.5
17 - 18 *242 *****242 0 43.5
18 - 19 *143 *****143 0 45.4
19 - 20 *84 *****84 0 44
20 - 21 *94 *****94 0 47
21 - 22 *42 *****42 0 45.5
22 - 23 *26 *****26 0 48
23 - 24 *10 *****10 0 46
Totals 0 1922 706 0 0 0 0
% of Total 0%73.14%26.86%0%0%0%0%
Page 1
APPENDIX B
Traffic Model
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model PHF 0.82
Existing Traffic PHF 0.78 65 21 PHF 0.84
2024 Peak Hour 189 47 263 153 258
AM 61 162 30 131 38
168 Cemetery Rd.86 18 336 84
290 209 416 72 66 PHF 0.81 PHF 0.81
15 138 149 95
0 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.110 0 52 33
PHF 0.83 0 0 21 0
515 0
0 0
684 West Approach North Approach
May Seasonal 0
Adjustment Factor PHF 0.83
0.94 494 1 PHF 0.64
21 1 Development 0 13
683 United Dr.Site 23 0
7 3 1 Bar H
PHF 0.85 0 0
10 4 0 16
483 1 0 0
93 ALT 6 8
24 390
13 603
362 6 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model PHF 0.99
Existing Traffic PHF 0.87 98 23 PHF 0.95
2024 Peak Hour 96 21 306 73 111
NOON 20 130 28 68 29
92 Cemetery Rd.77 21 163 48
134 94 365 66 39 PHF 0.84 PHF 0.84
28 99 86 46
0 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.95 0 46 24
PHF 0.96 0 0 20 2
498 0
0 0
542 West Approach North Approach
0
PHF 0.96
481 32 PHF .80
17 11 Development 0 4
510 United Dr.Site 13 0
20 5 0 Bar H
PHF 0.96 0 0
29 6 0 24
454 4 0 0
93 ALT 4 3
30 271
4 484
274 7 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model PHF 0.87
Existing Traffic PHF 0.87 102 27 PHF 0.92
2024 Peak Hour 155 55 417 154 233
PM 26 264 57 102 51
183 Cemetery Rd.92 34 297 84
184 150 343 106 47 PHF 0.88 PHF 0.88
12 177 131 57
0 1
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.157 0 100 41
PHF 0.91 0 0 38 1
650 0
0 0
637 West Approach North Approach
0
PHF 0.91
642 30 PHF .91
8 8 Development 0 7
607 United Dr.Site 18 0
7 13 2 Bar H
PHF 0.87 0 0
22 6 0 29
643 10 0 7
93 ALT 2 5
23 414
3 591
447 3 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic 9
AM Peak Hour 8 177 6
26 33 40.92 20 28
131.9 35 15
105 Cemetery Rd.14 52 34 12
118 61.66 27.55 6 5
5 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.14 21 2 6
47 2 14 1
52 73
244 46 60%20%10%
14 70%West Approach North Approach
May Seasonal 105
Adjustment Factor 1 LT1/0 Development
1 46 14 Site
52 6 10%Internal Cap.16
105 15%United Dr.15%
22 EAST IN 30 26 10%Bar H
OUT 89 76 5%7 11
16 WEST IN 560 476
37 OUT 99 84 5
93 ALT
38
89 IN 502
OUT 175 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic 12
NOON Peak Hour 14 90 8
14 54 67.94 12 17
67.94 60 20
54 Cemetery Rd.8 90 20 17
60 36.9 36.9 9 3
3 1
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.9 28 3 9
28 3 9 1
25 124
124 88 60%20%10%
25 70%West Approach North Approach
53
1 LT1/0 Development
88 25 Site
25 11 10%Internal Cap.9
53 15%United Dr.15%
11 EAST IN 64 54 10%Bar H
OUT 64 54 5%9 6
30 WEST IN 243 207
70 OUT 243 207 6
93 ALT
19
45 IN 261
OUT 296 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic 18
PM Peak Hour 22 72 12
11 89 111 12 16
55.99 99 31
45 Cemetery Rd.8 148 20 25
48 35.5 55.49 13 3
3 1
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.8 43 5 13
27 5 8 1
20 204
101 120 60%20%10%
43 70%West Approach North Approach
43
1 LT1/0 Development
120 43 Site
20 18 10%Internal Cap.9
43 15%United Dr.15%
9 EAST IN 101 86 10%Bar H
OUT 59 50 5%14 6
42 WEST IN 155 132
97 OUT 440 374 9
93 ALT
15
36 IN 218
OUT 457 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic
Wolfpack Distribtion 17 4
AM Peak 6
Cemetery Rd.2 2
8 1
3
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.
11
23
West Approach North Approach
8 Development
United Dr.Site
15 Bar H
5
3
93 ALT
9
6
Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic
Wolfpack Distribtion 10 5
NOON Peak 6
Cemetery Rd.5 1
10 1
6
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.
16
16
West Approach North Approach
13 Development
United Dr.Site
13 Bar H
8
5
93 ALT
8
5 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Site Generated Traffic
Wolfpack Distribtion 1 0
PM Peak 0
Cemetery Rd.1 0
6 1
2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.
8
1
West Approach North Approach
6 Development
United Dr.Site
1 Bar H
4
2
93 ALT
1
0
Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Projected Traffic 73 23
2029 AM Peak 214 53 297 173 291
No Build 69 183 34 148 42
190 Cemetery Rd.98 20 379 95
328 236 471 82 74
17 156 169 107
0 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.124 0 58 37
0 0 23 0
582 0
0 0
773 West Approach North Approach
0
2024 to 2029
Growth Factor 559 1
1.13 23 1 Development 0 15
772 United Dr.Site 25 0
7 3 1 Bar H
0 0
12 4 0 18
546 1 0 0
93 ALT 6 8
27 441
15 681 `
409 6 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Projected Traffic 110 25
2029 NOON Pea 108 23 345 83 125
No Build 22 147 32 76 33
104 Cemetery Rd.87 23 184 54
152 106 412 74 44
32 112 98 52
0 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.107 0 52 27
0 0 22 2
563 0
0 0
613 West Approach North Approach
0
544 36
19 13 Development 0 4
577 United Dr.Site 15 0
22 5 0 Bar H
0 0
33 6 0 27
513 4 0 0
93 ALT 4 3
34 306
4 547
310 7 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Projected Traffic 115 31
2029 PM Peak 175 62 472 174 263
No Build 30 298 65 115 57
207 Cemetery Rd.104 38 336 95
208 170 388 120 53
14 200 148 65
0 1
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.177 0 113 47
0 0 42 1
734 0
0 0
720 West Approach North Approach
0
725 34
8 10 Development 0 7
686 United Dr.Site 20 0
7 15 2 Bar H
0 0
24 6 0 33
727 12 0 7
93 ALT 2 5
25 467
3 668
506 3 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 73 32
2029 AM Peak 214 61 492 179 295
With Projects 95 215 54 154 70
190 Cemetery Rd.98 55 381 112
434 249 531 117 87
135 159 175 113
5 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.139 21 61 44
47 2 38 1
634 84
267 46
787 West Approach North Approach
105
2024 to 2029
Growth Factor (2.6% Annual)605 15
1.13 75 0 Development 16 15
877 United Dr.Site 25 0
45 3 1 Bar H
7 11
32 4 0 18
586 1 5 0
93 ALT 6 8
74 441
15 776
409 6 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 110 38
2029 NOON Pea 108 37 445 91 130
With Projects 36 201 44 82 50
104 Cemetery Rd.87 83 189 75
206 114 512 96 60
92 118 106 55
3 3
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.116 28 55 35
28 3 31 3
588 140
140 88
638 West Approach North Approach
53
632 62
45 0 Development 9 4
630 United Dr.Site 15 0
46 5 0 Bar H
9 6
71 6 0 27
588 4 6 0
93 ALT 4 3
61 306
4 592
310 12 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 115 49
2029 PM Peak 175 84 545 186 263
With Projects 41 387 77 115 73
207 Cemetery Rd.104 137 337 125
253 178 542 141 78
62 202 160 68
3 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.186 43 117 60
27 5 51 2
754 212
102 120
763 West Approach North Approach
43
846 77
28 0 Development 9 7
729 United Dr.Site 20 0
17 15 2 Bar H
14 6
70 6 0 33
826 12 9 7
93 ALT 2 5
42 467
3 704
506 3 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 82 35
2034 AM Peak 238 67 526 199 329
With Projects 103 236 58 171 75
212 Cemetery Rd.109 57 425 123
471 277 585 126 95
137 177 195 125
5 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.153 21 67 48
47 2 40 1
701 84
267 46
876 West Approach North Approach
105
2024 to 2034
Growth Factor (2.6% Annual)669 15
1.26 78 0 Development 16 17
966 United Dr.Site 28 0
45 4 1 Bar H
7 11
34 5 0 20
648 1 5 0
93 ALT 7 9
77 492
17 854
456 7 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 123 41
2034 NOON Pea 121 40 485 101 145
With Projects 38 218 48 91 53
116 Cemetery Rd.97 86 210 82
224 127 559 104 65
95 130 117 61
3 3
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.128 28 61 38
28 3 33 3
653 140
140 88
709 West Approach North Approach
53
695 66
47 0 Development 9 5
696 United Dr.Site 17 0
49 6 0 Bar H
9 6
75 7 0 30
647 5 6 0
93 ALT 5 4
65 341
5 655
346 13 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 128 53
2034 PM Peak 195 91 599 206 294
With Projects 44 422 84 128 80
231 Cemetery Rd.116 141 375 136
277 197 587 154 84
64 225 177 75
3 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.206 43 130 65
27 5 56 3
838 212
102 120
846 West Approach North Approach
43
929 81
29 0 Development 9 8
808 United Dr.Site 23 0
18 17 2 Bar H
14 6
73 7 0 37
909 13 9 8
93 ALT 2 6
45 521
4 781
564 4 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 90 38
2039 AM Peak 263 74 560 219 362
With Projects 111 257 62 188 80
234 Cemetery Rd.120 60 468 133
509 304 639 136 104
139 195 214 137
5 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.167 21 74 52
47 2 43 1
768 84
267 46
965 West Approach North Approach
105
2024 to 2039
Growth Factor (2.6% Annual)734 15
1.39 81 0 Development 16 18
1054 United Dr.Site 31 0
46 4 1 Bar H
7 11
35 5 0 22
711 1 5 0
93 ALT 8 10
80 542
18 932
503 8 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 136 44
2039 NOON Pea 133 42 524 110 159
With Projects 41 235 51 100 57
128 Cemetery Rd.107 89 231 88
241 139 607 113 70
99 143 129 67
3 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.140 28 67 41
28 3 36 4
718 140
140 88
779 West Approach North Approach
53
757 70
49 0 Development 9 5
763 United Dr.Site 18 0
51 7 0 Bar H
9 6
78 8 0 33
706 5 6 0
93 ALT 5 4
69 376
5 718
382 14 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 141 56
2039 PM Peak 216 98 653 226 324
With Projects 48 456 91 141 87
255 Cemetery Rd.128 146 414 147
301 217 631 168 90
65 248 194 83
3 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.226 43 143 70
27 5 60 3
923 212
102 120
929 West Approach North Approach
43
1013 85
30 0 Development 9 9
887 United Dr.Site 25 0
19 18 3 Bar H
14 6
76 8 0 41
993 14 9 9
93 ALT 3 7
48 575
4 858
622 4 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 99 41
2044 AM Peak 287 80 594 239 395
With Projects 119 278 66 205 85
256 Cemetery Rd.131 62 512 144
547 331 693 145 112
141 213 234 150
5 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.181 21 81 56
47 2 46 1
835 84
267 46
1054 West Approach North Approach
105
2024 to 2044
Growth Factor (2.6% Annual)798 16
1.52 83 0 Development 16 20
1143 United Dr.Site 34 0
47 4 1 Bar H
7 11
36 6 0 24
774 1 5 0
93 ALT 9 11
83 593
20 1011
550 9 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 149 46
2044 NOON Pea 146 45 564 120 174
With Projects 44 252 55 109 61
140 Cemetery Rd.117 91 252 94
259 151 654 121 75
103 156 140 73
3 4
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.153 28 73 44
28 3 39 4
783 140
140 88
850 West Approach North Approach
53
820 74
51 0 Development 9 6
829 United Dr.Site 20 0
54 7 0 Bar H
9 6
82 9 0 36
765 6 6 0
93 ALT 6 4
73 411
6 781
417 15 Demersville Rd.
Anderson Ranch & Gardner U.S. 93 Willow Glen
Traffic Model
Total Projected Traffic 154 60
2044 PM Peak 236 105 708 247 354
With Projects 51 490 99 154 93
279 Cemetery Rd.140 150 453 158
325 236 676 182 96
67 271 211 90
3 2
Airport Rd.Lower Valley Rd.247 43 156 76
27 5 65 3
1007 212
102 120
1012 West Approach North Approach
43
1096 89
31 0 Development 9 10
966 United Dr.Site 27 0
20 20 3 Bar H
14 6
78 9 0 44
1076 16 9 10
93 ALT 3 7
51 629
4 935
680 4 Demersville Rd.
APPENDIX B
LOS Calculations
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 86 209 15 18 416 138 30 263 65 131 153 21
Future Volume (vph) 86 209 15 18 416 138 30 263 65 131 153 21
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.990 0.963 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.955 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1622 0 1793 3139 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.549 0.955 0.516 0.385 0.440
Satd. Flow (perm) 942 1622 0 974 3139 0 727 3162 0 755 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 67 45 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 105 255 18 22 507 168 37 321 79 160 187 26
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 273 0 22 675 0 37 400 0 160 213 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 17.8 17.8 42.3 42.3 42.3 42.3 17.8 17.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.25 0.25
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.63 0.04 0.36 0.09 0.21 0.85 0.54
Control Delay 28.1 26.9 8.6 8.3 9.1 7.3 61.5 23.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 28.1 26.9 8.6 8.3 9.1 7.3 61.5 23.9
LOS CC AA AA EC
Approach Delay 27.2 8.3 7.5 40.0
Approach LOS C A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 71.2
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.85
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.2 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 24 13 362 8 1 4 390 603 6 6 483 10
Future Volume (vph) 24 13 362 8 1 4 390 603 6 6 483 10
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.997
Flt Protected 0.950 0.971 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3250 0
Flt Permitted 0.282 0.379
Satd. Flow (perm) 1716 1716 1458 0 1638 0 532 3257 0 715 3250 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 104 5 2 2
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 28 15 426 9 1 5 459 709 7 7 568 12
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 28 15 426 0 15 0 459 716 0 7 580 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 7.5 7.5 26.0 7.2 44.1 48.2 15.1 15.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.48 0.13 0.82 0.90 0.28 0.28
v/c Ratio 0.12 0.06 0.56 0.07 0.48 0.24 0.03 0.63
Control Delay 30.0 29.8 9.8 25.5 4.6 2.0 20.5 22.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.0 29.8 9.8 25.5 4.6 2.0 20.5 22.8
LOS CCA C AA CC
Approach Delay 11.7 25.5 3.0 22.7
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 53.7
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.1 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.1% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 9.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 162 47 168 290 61 189
Future Vol, veh/h 162 47 168 290 61 189
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 78 78 78 78 78 78
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 208 60 215 372 78 242
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 799 401 0 0 587 0
Stage 1 401 -----
Stage 2 398 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 355 649 - - 988 -
Stage 1 676 -----
Stage 2 678 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 323 649 - - 988 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 323 -----
Stage 1 676 -----
Stage 2 616 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 38 0 2.2
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 364 988 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.736 0.079 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 38 9 0
HCM Lane LOS - - E A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 5.7 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 84 66 336 72 38 258
Future Vol, veh/h 84 66 336 72 38 258
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 100 79 400 86 45 307
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 797 400 0 - 400 0
Stage 1 400 -----
Stage 2 397 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 356 650 - 0 1159 -
Stage 1 677 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 679 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 339 650 - - 1159 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 339 -----
Stage 1 677 -----
Stage 2 647 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19.2 0 1.1
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 429 1159 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.416 0.039 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 19.2 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 2 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 21 2 95 33 1
Future Vol, veh/h 52 21 2 95 33 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 64 26 2 117 41 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 90 0 198 77
Stage 1 - - - - 77 -
Stage 2 - - - - 121 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1505 - 791 984
Stage 1 - - - - 946 -
Stage 2 - - - - 904 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1505 - 790 984
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 790 -
Stage 1 - - - - 946 -
Stage 2 - - - - 903 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 795 - - 1505 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 00101301603230
Future Vol, veh/h 0 00101301603230
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 00202002505360
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 81 71 36 71 71 25 36 0 0 25 0 0
Stage 1 46 46 - 25 25 -------
Stage 2 35 25 - 46 46 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 907 819 1037 920 819 1051 1575 - - 1589 - -
Stage 1 968 857 - 993 874 -------
Stage 2 981 874 - 968 857 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 887 817 1037 918 817 1051 1575 - - 1589 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 887 817 - 918 817 -------
Stage 1 968 854 - 993 874 -------
Stage 2 962 874 - 965 854 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.5 0 0.8
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1575 - - - 1040 1589 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.021 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.5 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 1 683 7 21 494
Future Vol, veh/h 1 1 683 7 21 494
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 1 1 823 8 25 595
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1175 416 0 0 831 0
Stage 1 827 -----
Stage 2 348 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 185 585 - - 797 -
Stage 1 390 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 179 585 - - 797 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 179 -----
Stage 1 390 -----
Stage 2 665 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 18.3 0 0.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 274 797 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.009 0.032 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 18.3 9.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 77 94 28 21 365 99 28 306 98 68 73 23
Future Volume (vph) 77 94 28 21 365 99 28 306 98 68 73 23
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.966 0.968 0.964 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.963 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1596 0 1793 3155 0 1793 3142 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.694 0.963 0.512 0.483 0.678
Satd. Flow (perm) 1191 1596 0 966 3155 0 912 3142 0 1163 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 51 64 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 78 95 28 21 369 100 28 309 99 69 74 23
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 78 123 0 21 469 0 28 408 0 69 97 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.4 9.4 46.3 46.3 46.3 46.3 9.4 9.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.15 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.44 0.46 0.03 0.20 0.04 0.18 0.40 0.39
Control Delay 32.1 23.3 4.3 3.8 4.4 3.5 31.0 21.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.1 23.3 4.3 3.8 4.4 3.5 31.0 21.2
LOS CC AA AA CC
Approach Delay 26.8 3.8 3.6 25.2
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 63.3
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.46
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.1 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 30 4 274 3 4 6 271 484 7 4 454 29
Future Volume (vph) 30 4 274 3 4 6 271 484 7 4 454 29
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.938 0.998 0.991
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1592 0 1793 3253 0 1793 3230 0
Flt Permitted 0.339 0.464
Satd. Flow (perm) 1716 1716 1458 0 1609 0 640 3253 0 876 3230 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 70 6 2 6
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 31 4 285 3 4 6 282 504 7 4 473 30
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 31 4 285 0 13 0 282 511 0 4 503 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 7.3 7.3 17.4 7.0 32.9 36.8 12.5 12.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.41 0.17 0.78 0.87 0.30 0.30
v/c Ratio 0.10 0.01 0.45 0.05 0.32 0.18 0.02 0.53
Control Delay 22.0 22.0 8.5 18.1 3.3 2.2 15.5 16.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 22.0 22.0 8.5 18.1 3.3 2.2 15.5 16.5
LOS CCABAABB
Approach Delay 9.9 18.1 2.6 16.5
Approach LOS ABAB
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 42.3
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.53
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 130 21 92 134 20 96
Future Vol, veh/h 130 21 92 134 20 96
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 149 24 106 154 23 110
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 339 183 0 0 260 0
Stage 1 183 -----
Stage 2 156 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 657 859 - - 1304 -
Stage 1 848 -----
Stage 2 872 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 645 859 - - 1304 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 645 -----
Stage 1 848 -----
Stage 2 855 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.3 0 1.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 668 1304 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.26 0.018 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.3 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 48 39 163 66 29 111
Future Vol, veh/h 48 39 163 66 29 111
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 51 41 172 69 31 117
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 351 172 0 - 172 0
Stage 1 172 -----
Stage 2 179 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 646 872 - 0 1405 -
Stage 1 858 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 852 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 630 872 - - 1405 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 630 -----
Stage 1 858 -----
Stage 2 832 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.7 0 1.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 720 1405 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.127 0.022 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 10.7 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.4 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 46 20 2 46 24 2
Future Vol, veh/h 46 20 2 46 24 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 55 24 2 55 29 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 79 0 126 67
Stage 1 - - - - 67 -
Stage 2 - - - - 59 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1519 - 869 997
Stage 1 - - - - 956 -
Stage 2 - - - - 964 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1519 - 868 997
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 868 -
Stage 1 - - - - 956 -
Stage 2 - - - - 963 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 9.3
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 877 - - 1519 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0010402405130
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0010402405130
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 0010503006160
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 61 58 16 58 58 30 16 0 0 30 0 0
Stage 1 28 28 - 30 30 -------
Stage 2 33 30 - 28 28 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 934 833 1063 939 833 1044 1602 - - 1583 - -
Stage 1 989 872 - 987 870 -------
Stage 2 983 870 - 989 872 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 927 830 1063 936 830 1044 1602 - - 1583 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 927 830 - 936 830 -------
Stage 1 989 869 - 987 870 -------
Stage 2 978 870 - 985 869 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.6 0 2
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1602 - - - 1020 1583 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.006 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 32 510 20 17 481
Future Vol, veh/h 11 32 510 20 17 481
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 11 33 531 21 18 501
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 829 276 0 0 552 0
Stage 1 542 -----
Stage 2 287 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 309 721 - - 1014 -
Stage 1 547 -----
Stage 2 736 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 303 721 - - 1014 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 303 -----
Stage 1 547 -----
Stage 2 723 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.4 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 533 1014 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.084 0.017 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.4 8.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 92 150 12 34 343 177 57 417 102 102 154 27
Future Volume (vph) 92 150 12 34 343 177 57 417 102 102 154 27
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.989 0.949 0.971 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.956 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1622 0 1793 3094 0 1793 3165 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.489 0.956 0.427 0.426 0.541
Satd. Flow (perm) 839 1622 0 806 3094 0 804 3165 0 928 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 137 45 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 106 172 14 39 394 203 66 479 117 117 177 31
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 106 186 0 39 597 0 66 596 0 117 208 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 14.7 14.7 52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 14.7 14.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.19 0.19
v/c Ratio 0.68 0.56 0.07 0.28 0.12 0.28 0.67 0.69
Control Delay 50.3 29.9 6.1 4.8 6.5 5.8 48.3 36.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 50.3 29.9 6.1 4.8 6.5 5.8 48.3 36.8
LOS DC AA AA DD
Approach Delay 37.3 4.9 5.8 41.0
Approach LOS D A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 77.9
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.69
Intersection Signal Delay: 16.3 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 23 3 447 5 10 6 414 591 3 2 643 22
Future Volume (vph) 23 3 447 5 10 6 414 591 3 2 643 22
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.961 0.999 0.995
Flt Protected 0.950 0.988 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1629 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3244 0
Flt Permitted 0.962 0.196 0.392
Satd. Flow (perm) 1716 1716 1458 0 1586 0 370 3257 0 740 3244 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 79 7 1 3
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 26 3 514 6 11 7 476 679 3 2 739 25
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 26 3 514 0 24 0 476 682 0 2 764 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 7.8 7.8 32.0 7.5 56.1 60.2 21.2 21.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.49 0.11 0.85 0.91 0.32 0.32
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.01 0.69 0.13 0.52 0.23 0.01 0.73
Control Delay 38.0 37.7 16.4 32.4 8.4 1.7 21.0 26.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 38.0 37.7 16.4 32.4 8.4 1.7 21.0 26.3
LOS DDB C AA CC
Approach Delay 17.6 32.4 4.4 26.2
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 65.9
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.73
Intersection Signal Delay: 14.3 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 10.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 264 55 183 184 26 155
Future Vol, veh/h 264 55 183 184 26 155
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 303 63 210 211 30 178
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 554 316 0 0 421 0
Stage 1 316 -----
Stage 2 238 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 493 724 - - 1138 -
Stage 1 739 -----
Stage 2 802 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 479 724 - - 1138 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 479 -----
Stage 1 739 -----
Stage 2 779 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 28.2 0 1.2
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 509 1138 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.72 0.026 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 28.2 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - - D A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 5.8 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 84 47 297 106 51 233
Future Vol, veh/h 84 47 297 106 51 233
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 91 51 323 115 55 253
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 686 323 0 - 323 0
Stage 1 323 -----
Stage 2 363 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 413 718 - 0 1237 -
Stage 1 734 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 704 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 392 718 - - 1237 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 392 -----
Stage 1 734 -----
Stage 2 667 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 16 0 1.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 468 1237 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.304 0.045 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 16 8 0
HCM Lane LOS - C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 1.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 100 38 1 57 41 1
Future Vol, veh/h 100 38 1 57 41 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 114 43 1 65 47 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 157 0 203 136
Stage 1 - - - - 136 -
Stage 2 - - - - 67 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1423 - 786 913
Stage 1 - - - - 890 -
Stage 2 - - - - 956 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1423 - 785 913
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 785 -
Stage 1 - - - - 890 -
Stage 2 - - - - 955 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 9.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 788 - - 1423 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 00207029713180
Future Vol, veh/h 0 00207029713180
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 00208032814200
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 88 88 20 84 84 36 20 0 0 40 0 0
Stage 1 48 48 - 36 36 -------
Stage 2 40 40 - 48 48 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 897 802 1058 903 806 1037 1596 - - 1570 - -
Stage 1 965 855 - 980 865 -------
Stage 2 975 862 - 965 855 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 884 795 1058 897 799 1037 1596 - - 1570 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 884 795 - 897 799 -------
Stage 1 965 847 - 980 865 -------
Stage 2 968 862 - 956 847 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.6 0 3.1
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1596 - - - 1002 1570 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.01 0.009 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Existing 2024 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 8 30 607 7 8 642
Future Vol, veh/h 8 30 607 7 8 642
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 9 33 667 8 9 705
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1042 338 0 0 675 0
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 371 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 225 658 - - 912 -
Stage 1 470 -----
Stage 2 668 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 223 658 - - 912 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 223 -----
Stage 1 470 -----
Stage 2 661 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 0 0.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 466 912 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.09 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.5 9 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 236 17 20 471 156 34 297 73 148 173 23
Future Volume (vph) 98 236 17 20 471 156 34 297 73 148 173 23
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 150 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.990 0.963 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.955 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1622 0 1793 3139 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.519 0.955 0.491 0.334 0.409
Satd. Flow (perm) 890 1622 0 927 3139 0 630 3162 0 702 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 67 45 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 288 21 24 574 190 41 362 89 180 211 28
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 309 0 24 764 0 41 451 0 180 239 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 21.3 21.3 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 21.3 21.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.28 0.28
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.64 0.05 0.42 0.11 0.25 0.90 0.54
Control Delay 27.8 26.0 10.7 10.7 11.6 9.2 69.2 23.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 27.8 26.0 10.7 10.7 11.6 9.2 69.2 23.1
LOS CC BB BA EC
Approach Delay 26.5 10.7 9.4 42.9
Approach LOS C B A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 74.9
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 19.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 27 15 409 8 1 4 441 681 6 6 546 12
Future Volume (vph) 27 15 409 8 1 4 441 681 6 6 546 12
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.997
Flt Protected 0.950 0.971 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3250 0
Flt Permitted 0.976 0.806 0.238 0.347
Satd. Flow (perm) 1675 1716 1458 0 1321 0 449 3257 0 655 3250 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 75 5 2 2
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 32 18 481 9 1 5 519 801 7 7 642 14
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 18 481 0 15 0 519 808 0 7 656 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 8.0 31.9 7.9 50.6 53.6 18.2 18.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.51 0.13 0.80 0.85 0.29 0.29
v/c Ratio 0.15 0.08 0.62 0.09 0.57 0.29 0.04 0.70
Control Delay 35.1 34.5 13.0 29.5 8.8 2.7 21.5 26.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 35.1 34.5 13.0 29.5 8.8 2.7 21.5 26.3
LOS DCB C AA CC
Approach Delay 15.1 29.5 5.1 26.3
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 62.9
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.70
Intersection Signal Delay: 12.9 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.1% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 19.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 183 53 190 328 69 214
Future Vol, veh/h 183 53 190 328 69 214
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 78 78 78 78 78 78
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 235 68 244 421 88 274
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 905 455 0 0 665 0
Stage 1 455 -----
Stage 2 450 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 307 605 - - 924 -
Stage 1 639 -----
Stage 2 642 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 273 605 - - 924 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 273 -----
Stage 1 639 -----
Stage 2 570 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 81.9 0 2.3
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 311 924 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.973 0.096 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 81.9 9.3 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 10.1 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 95 74 379 82 42 291
Future Vol, veh/h 95 74 379 82 42 291
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 113 88 451 98 50 346
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 897 451 0 - 451 0
Stage 1 451 -----
Stage 2 446 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 310 608 - 0 1109 -
Stage 1 642 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 645 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 293 608 - - 1109 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 293 -----
Stage 1 642 -----
Stage 2 609 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.7 0 1.1
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 379 1109 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.531 0.045 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 24.7 8.4 0
HCM Lane LOS - C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 58 23 2 107 37 1
Future Vol, veh/h 58 23 2 107 37 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 72 28 2 132 46 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 100 0 222 86
Stage 1 - - - - 86 -
Stage 2 - - - - 136 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1493 - 766 973
Stage 1 - - - - 937 -
Stage 2 - - - - 890 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1493 - 765 973
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 765 -
Stage 1 - - - - 937 -
Stage 2 - - - - 889 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 10
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 769 - - 1493 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 00101501803250
Future Vol, veh/h 0 00101501803250
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 00202302805390
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 89 77 39 77 77 28 39 0 0 28 0 0
Stage 1 49 49 - 28 28 -------
Stage 2 40 28 - 49 49 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 896 813 1033 912 813 1047 1571 - - 1585 - -
Stage 1 964 854 - 989 872 -------
Stage 2 975 872 - 964 854 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 874 811 1033 910 811 1047 1571 - - 1585 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 874 811 - 910 811 -------
Stage 1 964 851 - 989 872 -------
Stage 2 953 872 - 961 851 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.6 0 0.8
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1571 - - - 1037 1585 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.024 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 1 772 7 23 559
Future Vol, veh/h 1 1 772 7 23 559
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 1 1 930 8 28 673
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1327 469 0 0 938 0
Stage 1 934 -----
Stage 2 393 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 147 541 - - 726 -
Stage 1 343 -----
Stage 2 651 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 141 541 - - 726 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 141 -----
Stage 1 343 -----
Stage 2 626 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 21.2 0 0.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 224 726 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.011 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 21.2 10.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 87 106 32 23 412 112 32 345 110 76 83 25
Future Volume (vph) 87 106 32 23 412 112 32 345 110 76 83 25
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.965 0.968 0.964 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.963 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1594 0 1793 3155 0 1793 3142 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.687 0.963 0.488 0.456 0.668
Satd. Flow (perm) 1179 1594 0 921 3155 0 861 3142 0 1146 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 36 51 64 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 107 32 23 416 113 32 348 111 77 84 25
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 139 0 23 529 0 32 459 0 77 109 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.2 10.2 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 10.2 10.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.15 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.50 0.04 0.25 0.05 0.21 0.44 0.43
Control Delay 33.4 24.3 4.7 4.4 4.8 4.1 31.7 21.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 33.4 24.3 4.7 4.4 4.8 4.1 31.7 21.9
LOS CC AA AA CC
Approach Delay 27.8 4.4 4.1 26.0
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 66.1
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 34 4 310 3 4 6 306 547 7 4 513 33
Future Volume (vph) 34 4 310 3 4 6 306 547 7 4 513 33
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.938 0.998 0.991
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1592 0 1793 3253 0 1793 3230 0
Flt Permitted 0.985 0.312 0.435
Satd. Flow (perm) 1716 1716 1458 0 1585 0 589 3253 0 821 3230 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 48 6 2 6
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 35 4 323 3 4 6 319 570 7 4 534 34
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 35 4 323 0 13 0 319 577 0 4 568 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 7.7 7.7 20.0 7.2 37.5 41.4 14.7 14.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.42 0.15 0.80 0.88 0.31 0.31
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.01 0.50 0.05 0.36 0.20 0.02 0.56
Control Delay 24.7 24.8 10.8 20.2 3.4 2.2 16.2 17.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 24.7 24.8 10.8 20.2 3.4 2.2 16.2 17.8
LOS CCB C AA BB
Approach Delay 12.3 20.2 2.6 17.7
Approach LOS B C A B
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 47.1
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.3 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 23 104 152 22 108
Future Vol, veh/h 147 23 104 152 22 108
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 169 26 120 175 25 124
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 382 208 0 0 295 0
Stage 1 208 -----
Stage 2 174 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 620 832 - - 1266 -
Stage 1 827 -----
Stage 2 856 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 607 832 - - 1266 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 607 -----
Stage 1 827 -----
Stage 2 838 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.3 0 1.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 630 1266 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.31 0.02 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.3 7.9 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 44 184 74 33 125
Future Vol, veh/h 54 44 184 74 33 125
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 57 46 194 78 35 132
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 396 194 0 - 194 0
Stage 1 194 -----
Stage 2 202 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 609 847 - 0 1379 -
Stage 1 839 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 832 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 593 847 - - 1379 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 593 -----
Stage 1 839 -----
Stage 2 810 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.2 0 1.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 685 1379 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.151 0.025 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 11.2 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.5 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 22 2 52 27 2
Future Vol, veh/h 52 22 2 52 27 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 62 26 2 62 32 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 88 0 141 75
Stage 1 - - - - 75 -
Stage 2 - - - - 66 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1508 - 852 986
Stage 1 - - - - 948 -
Stage 2 - - - - 957 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1508 - 851 986
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 851 -
Stage 1 - - - - 948 -
Stage 2 - - - - 956 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 9.4
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 859 - - 1508 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0010402705150
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0010402705150
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 0010503406190
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 68 65 19 65 65 34 19 0 0 34 0 0
Stage 1 31 31 - 34 34 -------
Stage 2 37 34 - 31 31 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 925 826 1059 929 826 1039 1597 - - 1578 - -
Stage 1 986 869 - 982 867 -------
Stage 2 978 867 - 986 869 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 918 823 1059 926 823 1039 1597 - - 1578 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 918 823 - 926 823 -------
Stage 1 986 866 - 982 867 -------
Stage 2 973 867 - 982 866 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.6 0 1.8
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1597 - - - 1014 1578 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.006 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 36 577 22 19 544
Future Vol, veh/h 13 36 577 22 19 544
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 14 38 601 23 20 567
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 937 312 0 0 624 0
Stage 1 613 -----
Stage 2 324 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 263 684 - - 953 -
Stage 1 503 -----
Stage 2 705 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 257 684 - - 953 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 257 -----
Stage 1 503 -----
Stage 2 690 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 475 953 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.107 0.021 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.5 8.9 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 104 170 14 38 388 200 65 472 115 115 174 31
Future Volume (vph) 104 170 14 38 388 200 65 472 115 115 174 31
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.989 0.949 0.971 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.956 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1622 0 1793 3094 0 1793 3165 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.443 0.956 0.389 0.389 0.496
Satd. Flow (perm) 760 1622 0 734 3094 0 734 3165 0 851 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 137 44 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 195 16 44 446 230 75 543 132 132 200 36
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 211 0 44 676 0 75 675 0 132 236 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 16.4 16.4 52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 16.4 16.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.21 0.21
v/c Ratio 0.77 0.59 0.09 0.33 0.16 0.32 0.75 0.72
Control Delay 60.2 30.5 7.1 5.8 7.6 6.7 55.8 38.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.2 30.5 7.1 5.8 7.6 6.7 55.8 38.2
LOS EC AA AA ED
Approach Delay 41.2 5.8 6.8 44.5
Approach LOS D A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 79.7
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.1 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 25 3 506 5 12 6 467 668 3 2 727 24
Future Volume (vph) 25 3 506 5 12 6 467 668 3 2 727 24
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.999 0.995
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1637 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3244 0
Flt Permitted 0.909 0.922 0.152 0.359
Satd. Flow (perm) 1560 1716 1458 0 1526 0 287 3257 0 678 3244 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 55 7 1 3
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 29 3 582 6 14 7 537 768 3 2 836 28
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 3 582 0 27 0 537 771 0 2 864 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.1 8.1 40.5 7.9 67.1 69.8 26.7 26.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.51 0.10 0.84 0.88 0.34 0.34
v/c Ratio 0.18 0.02 0.76 0.17 0.61 0.27 0.01 0.79
Control Delay 45.1 43.3 22.4 37.7 15.3 2.2 21.5 31.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.1 43.3 22.4 37.7 15.3 2.2 21.5 31.2
LOS D D C D B A C C
Approach Delay 23.6 37.7 7.6 31.1
Approach LOS C D A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 79.6
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.6 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Airport & Cemetery 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 18.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 298 62 207 208 30 175
Future Vol, veh/h 298 62 207 208 30 175
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 87 87 87 87 87 87
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 343 71 238 239 34 201
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 627 358 0 0 477 0
Stage 1 358 -----
Stage 2 269 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 447 686 - - 1085 -
Stage 1 707 -----
Stage 2 776 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 431 686 - - 1085 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 431 -----
Stage 1 707 -----
Stage 2 749 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 50.9 0 1.2
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 460 1085 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.9 0.032 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 50.9 8.4 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 9.9 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 95 53 336 120 57 263
Future Vol, veh/h 95 53 336 120 57 263
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 103 58 365 130 62 286
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 775 365 0 - 365 0
Stage 1 365 -----
Stage 2 410 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 366 680 - 0 1194 -
Stage 1 702 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 670 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 343 680 - - 1194 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 343 -----
Stage 1 702 -----
Stage 2 628 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19 0 1.5
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 417 1194 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.386 0.052 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 19 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 1.8 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 42 1 65 47 1
Future Vol, veh/h 113 42 1 65 47 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 128 48 1 74 53 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 176 0 228 152
Stage 1 - - - - 152 -
Stage 2 - - - - 76 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1400 - 760 894
Stage 1 - - - - 876 -
Stage 2 - - - - 947 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1400 - 759 894
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 759 -
Stage 1 - - - - 876 -
Stage 2 - - - - 946 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 10.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 761 - - 1400 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.1 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 00207033715200
Future Vol, veh/h 0 00207033715200
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 0 00208036816220
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 98 98 22 94 94 40 22 0 0 44 0 0
Stage 1 54 54 - 40 40 -------
Stage 2 44 44 - 54 54 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 884 792 1055 889 796 1031 1593 - - 1564 - -
Stage 1 958 850 - 975 862 -------
Stage 2 970 858 - 958 850 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 871 784 1055 882 788 1031 1593 - - 1564 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 871 784 - 882 788 -------
Stage 1 958 842 - 975 862 -------
Stage 2 963 858 - 948 842 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 8.7 0 3.1
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1593 - - - 994 1564 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----0.01 0.011 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 0 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 No Build 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 34 686 7 8 725
Future Vol, veh/h 10 34 686 7 8 725
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 11 37 754 8 9 797
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1175 381 0 0 762 0
Stage 1 758 -----
Stage 2 417 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 185 617 - - 846 -
Stage 1 423 -----
Stage 2 633 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 183 617 - - 846 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 183 -----
Stage 1 423 -----
Stage 2 626 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 15.2 0 0.1
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 401 846 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.121 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.2 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 249 135 55 531 159 54 492 73 154 179 32
Future Volume (vph) 98 249 135 55 531 159 54 492 73 154 179 32
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.947 0.965 0.981 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.969 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1574 0 1793 3146 0 1793 3198 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.529 0.969 0.343 0.269 0.286
Satd. Flow (perm) 908 1574 0 647 3146 0 508 3198 0 491 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 37 58 24 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 304 165 67 648 194 66 600 89 188 218 39
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 469 0 67 842 0 66 689 0 188 257 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 32.7 32.7 42.2 42.2 42.2 42.2 32.7 32.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.38 0.38
v/c Ratio 0.35 0.76 0.21 0.53 0.27 0.44 1.01 0.45
Control Delay 21.8 29.7 16.4 16.3 18.3 15.6 98.6 19.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 21.8 29.7 16.4 16.3 18.3 15.6 98.6 19.2
LOS CC BB BB FB
Approach Delay 28.1 16.4 15.8 52.8
Approach LOS C B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 86
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.01
Intersection Signal Delay: 24.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.2% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 74 15 409 8 1 4 441 776 6 6 575 28
Future Volume (vph) 74 15 409 8 1 4 441 776 6 6 575 28
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.993
Flt Protected 0.950 0.971 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3237 0
Flt Permitted 0.748 0.836 0.205 0.310
Satd. Flow (perm) 1283 1716 1458 0 1370 0 387 3257 0 585 3237 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 65 5 2 5
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 87 18 481 9 1 5 519 913 7 7 676 33
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 87 18 481 0 15 0 519 920 0 7 709 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 39.1 10.8 55.0 56.4 21.1 21.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.54 0.15 0.75 0.77 0.29 0.29
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.07 0.59 0.07 0.64 0.36 0.04 0.75
Control Delay 42.0 33.7 13.1 28.5 14.0 4.6 23.7 31.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 42.0 33.7 13.1 28.5 14.0 4.6 23.7 31.1
LOS DCB C BA CC
Approach Delay 18.1 28.5 8.0 31.0
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 72.9
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.75
Intersection Signal Delay: 16.2 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 112 87 381 117 70 295
Future Vol, veh/h 112 87 381 117 70 295
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 133 104 454 139 83 351
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 971 454 0 - 454 0
Stage 1 454 -----
Stage 2 517 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 280 606 - 0 1107 -
Stage 1 640 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 598 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 254 606 - - 1107 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 254 -----
Stage 1 640 -----
Stage 2 542 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 36.7 0 1.6
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 340 1107 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.697 0.075 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 36.7 8.5 0
HCM Lane LOS - E A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 5 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 38 4 113 44 1
Future Vol, veh/h 61 38 4 113 44 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 75 47 5 140 54 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 122 0 249 99
Stage 1 - - - - 99 -
Stage 2 - - - - 150 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1465 - 739 957
Stage 1 - - - - 925 -
Stage 2 - - - - 878 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1465 - 736 957
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 736 -
Stage 1 - - - - 925 -
Stage 2 - - - - 874 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 10.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 740 - - 1465 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.075 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 139 47 5 175 21 2
Future Vol, veh/h 139 47 5 175 21 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 139 47 5 175 21 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 186 0 348 163
Stage 1 - - - - 163 -
Stage 2 - - - - 185 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 649 882
Stage 1 - - - - 866 -
Stage 2 - - - - 847 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 646 882
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 646 -
Stage 1 - - - - 866 -
Stage 2 - - - - 844 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 661 - - 1388 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 0510151118032516
Future Vol, veh/h 7 0510151118032516
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 0820231728053925
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 136 124 52 128 136 28 64 0 0 28 0 0
Stage 1 62 62 - 62 62 -------
Stage 2 74 62 - 66 74 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 835 766 1016 845 755 1047 1538 - - 1585 - -
Stage 1 949 843 - 949 843 -------
Stage 2 935 843 - 945 833 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 807 755 1016 830 744 1047 1538 - - 1585 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 807 755 - 830 744 -------
Stage 1 939 840 - 939 834 -------
Stage 2 904 834 - 935 831 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.6 2.8 0.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1538 - - 883 1030 1585 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.021 0.024 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.2 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 31 84 787 105 267 634
Future Vol, veh/h 31 84 787 105 267 634
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 31 84 787 105 267 634
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1691 446 0 0 892 0
Stage 1 840 -----
Stage 2 851 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 84 560 - - 756 -
Stage 1 384 -----
Stage 2 379 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 54 560 - - 756 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 54 -----
Stage 1 384 -----
Stage 2 245 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 71.4 0 3.7
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 159 756 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.723 0.353 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 71.4 12.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - F B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 4.4 1.6 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 15 877 45 75 590
Future Vol, veh/h 15 15 877 45 75 590
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 18 18 1057 54 90 711
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1620 556 0 0 1111 0
Stage 1 1084 -----
Stage 2 536 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 94 475 - - 624 -
Stage 1 286 -----
Stage 2 551 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 80 475 - - 624 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 80 -----
Stage 1 286 -----
Stage 2 472 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 40.4 0 1.3
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 137 624 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.264 0.145 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 40.4 11.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - E B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.5 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 87 114 92 83 512 118 44 445 110 82 91 38
Future Volume (vph) 87 114 92 83 512 118 44 445 110 82 91 38
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.933 0.972 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.973 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1558 0 1793 3169 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.674 0.973 0.442 0.410 0.519
Satd. Flow (perm) 1156 1558 0 834 3169 0 774 3162 0 890 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 55 41 45 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 115 93 84 517 119 44 449 111 83 92 38
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 208 0 84 636 0 44 560 0 83 130 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.8 11.8 42.9 42.9 42.9 42.9 11.8 11.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.18 0.18
v/c Ratio 0.42 0.64 0.15 0.31 0.09 0.27 0.52 0.45
Control Delay 29.6 27.2 6.3 5.6 5.9 5.3 35.8 22.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.6 27.2 6.3 5.6 5.9 5.3 35.8 22.1
LOS CC AA AA DC
Approach Delay 27.9 5.7 5.4 27.4
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 65.8
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 61 4 310 3 4 6 306 592 12 4 563 60
Future Volume (vph) 61 4 310 3 4 6 306 592 12 4 563 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.938 0.997 0.985
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1592 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3211 0
Flt Permitted 0.800 0.919 0.270 0.413
Satd. Flow (perm) 1373 1716 1458 0 1479 0 510 3250 0 779 3211 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 35 6 3 11
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 64 4 323 3 4 6 319 617 13 4 586 63
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 4 323 0 13 0 319 630 0 4 649 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.0 9.0 24.5 8.5 41.7 44.4 17.9 17.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.45 0.16 0.76 0.81 0.33 0.33
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.01 0.48 0.06 0.41 0.24 0.02 0.61
Control Delay 29.2 25.8 11.4 21.0 4.8 3.4 17.8 20.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.2 25.8 11.4 21.0 4.8 3.4 17.8 20.4
LOS C C B C A A B C
Approach Delay 14.5 21.0 3.9 20.4
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 54.8
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.4 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.0% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 75 60 189 96 50 130
Future Vol, veh/h 75 60 189 96 50 130
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 79 63 199 101 53 137
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 442 199 0 - 199 0
Stage 1 199 -----
Stage 2 243 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 573 842 - 0 1373 -
Stage 1 835 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 797 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 549 842 - - 1373 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 549 -----
Stage 1 835 -----
Stage 2 764 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.1 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 649 1373 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.219 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 12.1 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.8 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 55 31 3 55 35 3
Future Vol, veh/h 55 31 3 55 35 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 65 37 4 65 42 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 102 0 157 84
Stage 1 - - - - 84 -
Stage 2 - - - - 73 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1490 - 834 975
Stage 1 - - - - 939 -
Stage 2 - - - - 950 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1490 - 831 975
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 831 -
Stage 1 - - - - 939 -
Stage 2 - - - - 947 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 9.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 841 - - 1490 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.054 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 116 28 3 106 28 3
Future Vol, veh/h 116 28 3 106 28 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 116 28 3 106 28 3
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 144 0 242 130
Stage 1 - - - - 130 -
Stage 2 - - - - 112 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 746 920
Stage 1 - - - - 896 -
Stage 2 - - - - 913 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 745 920
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 745 -
Stage 1 - - - - 896 -
Stage 2 - - - - 911 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 9.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 759 - - 1438 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0610462705159
Future Vol, veh/h 9 0610462705159
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 08105834061911
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 90 87 25 91 92 34 30 0 0 34 0 0
Stage 1 37 37 - 50 50 -------
Stage 2 53 50 - 41 42 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 895 803 1051 893 798 1039 1583 - - 1578 - -
Stage 1 978 864 - 963 853 -------
Stage 2 960 853 - 974 860 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 884 796 1051 880 791 1039 1583 - - 1578 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 884 796 - 880 791 -------
Stage 1 973 861 - 958 849 -------
Stage 2 951 849 - 963 857 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 8.9 8.6 1.3 1.3
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1583 - - 944 1003 1578 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.02 0.006 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 8.9 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 53 140 638 53 140 588
Future Vol, veh/h 53 140 638 53 140 588
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 53 140 638 53 140 588
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1239 346 0 0 691 0
Stage 1 665 -----
Stage 2 574 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 168 650 - - 900 -
Stage 1 473 -----
Stage 2 527 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 142 650 - - 900 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 142 -----
Stage 1 473 -----
Stage 2 445 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 30.5 0 1.9
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 328 900 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.588 0.156 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 30.5 9.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.5 0.5 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 37 62 630 46 45 597
Future Vol, veh/h 37 62 630 46 45 597
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 39 65 656 48 47 622
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1085 352 0 0 704 0
Stage 1 680 -----
Stage 2 405 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 211 644 - - 890 -
Stage 1 465 -----
Stage 2 642 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 200 644 - - 890 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 200 -----
Stage 1 465 -----
Stage 2 608 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19.4 0 0.6
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 352 890 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.293 0.053 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 19.4 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.2 0.2 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 104 178 62 137 542 202 77 545 115 115 186 49
Future Volume (vph) 104 178 62 137 542 202 77 545 115 115 186 49
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 150 0
Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.961 0.959 0.974 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.964 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1589 0 1793 3126 0 1793 3175 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.398 0.964 0.347 0.306 0.387
Satd. Flow (perm) 683 1589 0 655 3126 0 578 3175 0 664 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 80 37 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 205 71 157 623 232 89 626 132 132 214 56
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 276 0 157 855 0 89 758 0 132 270 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Detector Template Left Left Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2 6 8
Detector Phase 4 4 2 2 6 6 8 8
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 18.8 18.8 52.3 52.3 52.3 52.3 18.8 18.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.23 0.23
v/c Ratio 0.77 0.71 0.38 0.42 0.24 0.37 0.87 0.75
Control Delay 60.1 35.7 12.1 8.3 10.3 8.2 76.8 39.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.1 35.7 12.1 8.3 10.3 8.2 76.8 39.2
LOS ED BA BA ED
Approach Delay 43.1 8.9 8.4 51.5
Approach LOS D A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 82.1
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87
Intersection Signal Delay: 20.3 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 42 3 506 5 12 6 467 704 3 2 803 60
Future Volume (vph) 42 3 506 5 12 6 467 704 3 2 803 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.999 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1637 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3227 0
Flt Permitted 0.740 0.922 0.124 0.345
Satd. Flow (perm) 1270 1716 1458 0 1526 0 234 3257 0 651 3227 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 40 7 1 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 48 3 582 6 14 7 537 809 3 2 923 69
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 48 3 582 0 27 0 537 812 0 2 992 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.5 9.5 43.1 9.0 75.1 77.7 33.3 33.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.49 0.10 0.85 0.88 0.38 0.38
v/c Ratio 0.36 0.02 0.80 0.17 0.66 0.28 0.01 0.82
Control Delay 52.2 44.7 27.9 38.6 20.7 2.5 21.5 32.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 52.2 44.7 27.9 38.6 20.7 2.5 21.5 32.5
LOS D D C D C A C C
Approach Delay 29.8 38.6 9.8 32.5
Approach LOS C D A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 88.7
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82
Intersection Signal Delay: 21.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 125 78 337 141 73 263
Future Vol, veh/h 125 78 337 141 73 263
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 136 85 366 153 79 286
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 810 366 0 - 366 0
Stage 1 366 -----
Stage 2 444 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 349 679 - 0 1193 -
Stage 1 702 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 646 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 321 679 - - 1193 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 321 -----
Stage 1 702 -----
Stage 2 595 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.2 0 1.8
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 403 1193 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.548 0.067 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 24.2 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 3.2 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 117 51 2 68 60 2
Future Vol, veh/h 117 51 2 68 60 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 133 58 2 77 68 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 191 0 243 162
Stage 1 - - - - 162 -
Stage 2 - - - - 81 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1383 - 745 883
Stage 1 - - - - 867 -
Stage 2 - - - - 942 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1383 - 744 883
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 744 -
Stage 1 - - - - 867 -
Stage 2 - - - - 940 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 748 - - 1383 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 186 27 3 160 43 5
Future Vol, veh/h 186 27 3 160 43 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 186 27 3 160 43 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 213 0 366 200
Stage 1 - - - - 200 -
Stage 2 - - - - 166 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1357 - 634 841
Stage 1 - - - - 834 -
Stage 2 - - - - 863 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1357 - 633 841
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 633 -
Stage 1 - - - - 834 -
Stage 2 - - - - 861 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 11
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 650 - - 1357 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.074 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 09207633715209
Future Vol, veh/h 14 09207633715209
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 15 0 10 2087368162210
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 117 117 27 118 118 40 32 0 0 44 0 0
Stage 1 59 59 - 54 54 -------
Stage 2 58 58 - 64 64 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 859 773 1048 858 772 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Stage 1 953 846 - 958 850 -------
Stage 2 954 847 - 947 842 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 843 761 1048 840 760 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 843 761 - 840 760 -------
Stage 1 948 838 - 953 846 -------
Stage 2 942 843 - 929 834 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.1 8.7 1 2.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1580 - - 913 981 1564 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.028 0.01 0.011 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.1 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 18.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 88 212 763 43 102 754
Future Vol, veh/h 88 212 763 43 102 754
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 88 212 763 43 102 754
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1366 403 0 0 806 0
Stage 1 785 -----
Stage 2 581 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 138 597 - - 814 -
Stage 1 410 -----
Stage 2 522 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 121 597 - - 814 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 121 -----
Stage 1 410 -----
Stage 2 457 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 118.4 0 1.2
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 277 814 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 1.083 0.125 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 118.4 10.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - - F B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 12.1 0.4 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 34 77 729 17 28 813
Future Vol, veh/h 34 77 729 17 28 813
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 37 85 801 19 31 893
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1320 410 0 0 820 0
Stage 1 811 -----
Stage 2 509 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 148 591 - - 805 -
Stage 1 397 -----
Stage 2 569 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 142 591 - - 805 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 142 -----
Stage 1 397 -----
Stage 2 547 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 25 0 0.3
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 300 805 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.407 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 25 9.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.9 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 98 249 135 55 531 159 54 492 73 154 179 32
Future Volume (vph) 98 249 135 55 531 159 54 492 73 154 179 32
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.981 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3146 0 1793 3198 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.494 0.368 0.297 0.422
Satd. Flow (perm) 848 1716 1458 695 3146 0 561 3198 0 724 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 165 58 24 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 304 165 67 648 194 66 600 89 188 218 39
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 304 165 67 842 0 66 689 0 188 257 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 22.0 22.0 22.0 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 22.0 22.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.29 0.29
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.61 0.30 0.17 0.47 0.21 0.38 0.90 0.57
Control Delay 28.2 27.8 4.7 12.5 11.7 13.6 11.2 65.2 23.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 28.2 27.8 4.7 12.5 11.7 13.6 11.2 65.2 23.8
LOS CCABB BB EC
Approach Delay 21.4 11.8 11.4 41.3
Approach LOS C B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 75.7
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.2% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 74 15 409 8 1 4 441 776 6 6 575 28
Future Volume (vph) 74 15 409 8 1 4 441 776 6 6 575 28
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.993
Flt Protected 0.950 0.971 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3237 0
Flt Permitted 0.748 0.836 0.205 0.310
Satd. Flow (perm) 1283 1716 1458 0 1370 0 387 3257 0 585 3237 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 65 5 2 5
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 87 18 481 9 1 5 519 913 7 7 676 33
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 87 18 481 0 15 0 519 920 0 7 709 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.0 11.0 39.1 10.8 55.0 56.4 21.1 21.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.54 0.15 0.75 0.77 0.29 0.29
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.07 0.59 0.07 0.64 0.36 0.04 0.75
Control Delay 42.0 33.7 13.1 28.5 14.0 4.6 23.7 31.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 42.0 33.7 13.1 28.5 14.0 4.6 23.7 31.1
LOS DCB C BA CC
Approach Delay 18.1 28.5 8.0 31.0
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 72.9
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.75
Intersection Signal Delay: 16.2 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 46 84 787 105 267 634
Future Volume (vph) 46 84 787 105 267 634
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.982
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3201 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.252
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3201 0 432 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 84 21
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 46 84 787 105 267 634
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 84 892 0 267 634
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 35.4 22.0 57.4
Total Split (%) 28.3% 28.3% 44.3% 27.5% 71.8%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 30.9 17.5 52.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 7.8 7.8 49.4 65.2 66.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.62 0.82 0.83
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.39 0.45 0.51 0.24
Control Delay 37.6 13.7 10.5 5.8 2.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 37.6 13.7 10.5 5.8 2.4
LOS D B B A A
Approach Delay 22.1 10.5 3.4
Approach LOS C B A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 80
Actuated Cycle Length: 80
Offset: 22 (28%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.51
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.0 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.7% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 112 87 381 117 70 295
Future Vol, veh/h 112 87 381 117 70 295
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 133 104 454 139 83 351
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 971 454 0 - 454 0
Stage 1 454 -----
Stage 2 517 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 280 606 - 0 1107 -
Stage 1 640 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 598 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 254 606 - - 1107 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 254 -----
Stage 1 640 -----
Stage 2 542 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.4 0 1.6
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 254 606 1107 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.525 0.171 0.075 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 33.8 12.2 8.5 0
HCM Lane LOS - D B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 2.8 0.6 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 38 4 113 44 1
Future Vol, veh/h 61 38 4 113 44 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 75 47 5 140 54 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 122 0 249 99
Stage 1 - - - - 99 -
Stage 2 - - - - 150 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1465 - 739 957
Stage 1 - - - - 925 -
Stage 2 - - - - 878 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1465 - 736 957
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 736 -
Stage 1 - - - - 925 -
Stage 2 - - - - 874 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 10.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 740 - - 1465 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.075 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 139 47 5 175 21 2
Future Vol, veh/h 139 47 5 175 21 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 139 47 5 175 21 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 186 0 348 163
Stage 1 - - - - 163 -
Stage 2 - - - - 185 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 649 882
Stage 1 - - - - 866 -
Stage 2 - - - - 847 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1388 - 646 882
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 646 -
Stage 1 - - - - 866 -
Stage 2 - - - - 844 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 661 - - 1388 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 0510151118032516
Future Vol, veh/h 7 0510151118032516
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 0820231728053925
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 136 124 52 128 136 28 64 0 0 28 0 0
Stage 1 62 62 - 62 62 -------
Stage 2 74 62 - 66 74 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 835 766 1016 845 755 1047 1538 - - 1585 - -
Stage 1 949 843 - 949 843 -------
Stage 2 935 843 - 945 833 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 807 755 1016 830 744 1047 1538 - - 1585 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 807 755 - 830 744 -------
Stage 1 939 840 - 939 834 -------
Stage 2 904 834 - 935 831 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.6 2.8 0.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1538 - - 883 1030 1585 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.021 0.024 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.2 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 AM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 15 877 45 75 590
Future Vol, veh/h 0 15 877 45 75 590
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 18 1057 54 90 711
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 556 0 0 1111 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 475 - - 624 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 475 - - 624 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.9 0 1.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 475 624 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.038 0.145 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.9 11.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.5 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 87 114 92 83 512 118 44 445 110 82 91 38
Future Volume (vph) 87 114 92 83 512 118 44 445 110 82 91 38
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.972 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3169 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.674 0.442 0.410 0.683
Satd. Flow (perm) 1156 1716 1458 834 3169 0 774 3162 0 1172 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 93 41 45 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 115 93 84 517 119 44 449 111 83 92 38
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 115 93 84 636 0 44 560 0 83 130 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 10.3 10.3 10.3 44.3 44.3 44.3 44.3 10.3 10.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.16 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.43 0.30 0.15 0.30 0.08 0.26 0.45 0.50
Control Delay 33.4 28.9 8.6 5.5 4.8 5.0 4.6 31.9 24.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 33.4 28.9 8.6 5.5 4.8 5.0 4.6 31.9 24.6
LOS CCAAA AA CC
Approach Delay 23.9 4.9 4.6 27.4
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 65.6
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50
Intersection Signal Delay: 10.5 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 61 4 310 3 4 6 306 592 12 4 563 60
Future Volume (vph) 61 4 310 3 4 6 306 592 12 4 563 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.938 0.997 0.985
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1592 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3211 0
Flt Permitted 0.800 0.919 0.270 0.413
Satd. Flow (perm) 1373 1716 1458 0 1479 0 510 3250 0 779 3211 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 35 6 3 11
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 64 4 323 3 4 6 319 617 13 4 586 63
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 64 4 323 0 13 0 319 630 0 4 649 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.0 9.0 24.5 8.5 41.7 44.4 17.9 17.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.45 0.16 0.76 0.81 0.33 0.33
v/c Ratio 0.29 0.01 0.48 0.06 0.41 0.24 0.02 0.61
Control Delay 29.2 25.8 11.4 21.0 4.8 3.4 17.8 20.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.2 25.8 11.4 21.0 4.8 3.4 17.8 20.4
LOS C C B C A A B C
Approach Delay 14.5 21.0 3.9 20.4
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 54.8
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.4 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.0% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 88 140 638 53 140 588
Future Volume (vph) 88 140 638 53 140 588
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.988
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3221 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.341
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3221 0 585 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 140 11
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 140 638 53 140 588
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 140 691 0 140 588
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 41.0 18.0 59.0
Total Split (%) 34.4% 34.4% 45.6% 20.0% 65.6%
Maximum Green (s) 26.5 26.5 36.5 13.5 54.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.2 10.2 58.8 70.8 70.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.65 0.79 0.79
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.23
Control Delay 45.1 12.3 7.8 3.8 3.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.1 12.3 7.8 3.8 3.0
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 25.0 7.8 3.2
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 18 (20%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.48
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.1 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 75 60 189 96 50 130
Future Vol, veh/h 75 60 189 96 50 130
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 79 63 199 101 53 137
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 442 199 0 - 199 0
Stage 1 199 -----
Stage 2 243 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 573 842 - 0 1373 -
Stage 1 835 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 797 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 549 842 - - 1373 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 549 -----
Stage 1 835 -----
Stage 2 764 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.3 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 549 842 1373 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.144 0.075 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 12.7 9.6 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS -BAAA
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.5 0.2 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 55 31 3 55 35 3
Future Vol, veh/h 55 31 3 55 35 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 65 37 4 65 42 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 102 0 157 84
Stage 1 - - - - 84 -
Stage 2 - - - - 73 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1490 - 834 975
Stage 1 - - - - 939 -
Stage 2 - - - - 950 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1490 - 831 975
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 831 -
Stage 1 - - - - 939 -
Stage 2 - - - - 947 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 9.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 841 - - 1490 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.054 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 116 28 3 106 28 3
Future Vol, veh/h 116 28 3 106 28 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 116 28 3 106 28 3
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 144 0 242 130
Stage 1 - - - - 130 -
Stage 2 - - - - 112 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 746 920
Stage 1 - - - - 896 -
Stage 2 - - - - 913 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 745 920
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 745 -
Stage 1 - - - - 896 -
Stage 2 - - - - 911 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 9.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 759 - - 1438 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0610462705159
Future Vol, veh/h 9 0610462705159
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 08105834061911
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 90 87 25 91 92 34 30 0 0 34 0 0
Stage 1 37 37 - 50 50 -------
Stage 2 53 50 - 41 42 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 895 803 1051 893 798 1039 1583 - - 1578 - -
Stage 1 978 864 - 963 853 -------
Stage 2 960 853 - 974 860 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 884 796 1051 880 791 1039 1583 - - 1578 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 884 796 - 880 791 -------
Stage 1 973 861 - 958 849 -------
Stage 2 951 849 - 963 857 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 8.9 8.6 1.3 1.3
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1583 - - 944 1003 1578 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.02 0.006 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 8.9 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 NOON With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 62 630 46 45 597
Future Vol, veh/h 0 62 630 46 45 597
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 65 656 48 47 622
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 352 0 0 704 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 644 - - 890 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 644 - - 890 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.2 0 0.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 644 890 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.1 0.053 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.2 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.2 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 104 178 62 137 542 202 77 545 115 115 186 49
Future Volume (vph) 104 178 62 137 542 202 77 545 115 115 186 49
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 150 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.959 0.974 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3126 0 1793 3175 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.396 0.347 0.306 0.523
Satd. Flow (perm) 679 1716 1458 655 3126 0 578 3175 0 897 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 71 80 37 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 205 71 157 623 232 89 626 132 132 214 56
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 205 71 157 855 0 89 758 0 132 270 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 2 6 8
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 18.6 18.6 18.6 52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 18.6 18.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.23 0.23
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.53 0.18 0.38 0.42 0.24 0.37 0.65 0.76
Control Delay 62.0 32.4 7.5 11.9 8.1 10.1 8.1 43.7 39.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 62.0 32.4 7.5 11.9 8.1 10.1 8.1 43.7 39.6
LOS ECABA BA DD
Approach Delay 36.9 8.7 8.3 41.0
Approach LOS D A A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 81.9
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.78
Intersection Signal Delay: 17.7 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 42 3 506 5 12 6 467 704 3 2 803 60
Future Volume (vph) 42 3 506 5 12 6 467 704 3 2 803 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.999 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1637 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3227 0
Flt Permitted 0.740 0.922 0.124 0.345
Satd. Flow (perm) 1270 1716 1458 0 1526 0 234 3257 0 651 3227 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 40 7 1 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 48 3 582 6 14 7 537 809 3 2 923 69
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 48 3 582 0 27 0 537 812 0 2 992 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.5 9.5 43.1 9.0 75.1 77.7 33.3 33.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.49 0.10 0.85 0.88 0.38 0.38
v/c Ratio 0.36 0.02 0.80 0.17 0.66 0.28 0.01 0.82
Control Delay 52.2 44.7 27.9 38.6 20.7 2.5 21.5 32.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 52.2 44.7 27.9 38.6 20.7 2.5 21.5 32.5
LOS D D C D C A C C
Approach Delay 29.8 38.6 9.8 32.5
Approach LOS C D A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 88.7
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82
Intersection Signal Delay: 21.8 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.7% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 88 212 763 43 102 754
Future Volume (vph) 88 212 763 43 102 754
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.992
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3234 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.304
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3234 0 522 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 212 8
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 212 763 43 102 754
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 212 806 0 102 754
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 35.0 35.0 55.0 9.5 55.0
Total Split (%) 35.2% 35.2% 55.3% 9.5% 55.3%
Maximum Green (s) 30.5 30.5 50.5 5.0 50.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Min None C-Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.7 10.7 70.4 79.8 79.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.71 0.80 0.80
v/c Ratio 0.50 0.61 0.35 0.21 0.29
Control Delay 50.9 13.7 7.1 3.5 3.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 50.9 13.7 7.1 3.5 3.1
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 24.6 7.1 3.2
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 99.5
Actuated Cycle Length: 99.5
Offset: 9.5 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.1 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 125 78 337 141 73 263
Future Vol, veh/h 125 78 337 141 73 263
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 136 85 366 153 79 286
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 810 366 0 - 366 0
Stage 1 366 -----
Stage 2 444 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 349 679 - 0 1193 -
Stage 1 702 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 646 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 321 679 - - 1193 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 321 -----
Stage 1 702 -----
Stage 2 595 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 19.2 0 1.8
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 321 679 1193 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.423 0.125 0.067 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 24.2 11.1 8.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - C B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 2 0.4 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 117 51 2 68 60 2
Future Vol, veh/h 117 51 2 68 60 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 133 58 2 77 68 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 191 0 243 162
Stage 1 - - - - 162 -
Stage 2 - - - - 81 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1383 - 745 883
Stage 1 - - - - 867 -
Stage 2 - - - - 942 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1383 - 744 883
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 744 -
Stage 1 - - - - 867 -
Stage 2 - - - - 940 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 748 - - 1383 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 186 27 3 160 43 5
Future Vol, veh/h 186 27 3 160 43 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 186 27 3 160 43 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 213 0 366 200
Stage 1 - - - - 200 -
Stage 2 - - - - 166 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1357 - 634 841
Stage 1 - - - - 834 -
Stage 2 - - - - 863 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1357 - 633 841
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 633 -
Stage 1 - - - - 834 -
Stage 2 - - - - 861 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 11
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 650 - - 1357 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.074 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 09207633715209
Future Vol, veh/h 14 09207633715209
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 15 0 10 2087368162210
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 117 117 27 118 118 40 32 0 0 44 0 0
Stage 1 59 59 - 54 54 -------
Stage 2 58 58 - 64 64 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 859 773 1048 858 772 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Stage 1 953 846 - 958 850 -------
Stage 2 954 847 - 947 842 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 843 761 1048 840 760 1031 1580 - - 1564 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 843 761 - 840 760 -------
Stage 1 948 838 - 953 846 -------
Stage 2 942 843 - 929 834 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.1 8.7 1 2.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1580 - - 913 981 1564 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.028 0.01 0.011 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.1 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/18/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 2029 PM With Mitigation Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 77 729 17 28 813
Future Vol, veh/h 0 77 729 17 28 813
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 85 801 19 31 893
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 410 0 0 820 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 591 - - 805 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 591 - - 805 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.1 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 591 805 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.143 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.1 9.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 109 277 137 57 585 177 58 526 82 171 199 35
Future Volume (vph) 109 277 137 57 585 177 58 526 82 171 199 35
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.980 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3146 0 1793 3195 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.468 0.950 0.334 0.252 0.397
Satd. Flow (perm) 803 1630 1458 630 3146 0 476 3195 0 681 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 167 59 26 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 133 338 167 70 713 216 71 641 100 209 243 43
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 338 167 70 929 0 71 741 0 209 286 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 25.6 25.6 25.6 42.5 42.5 42.5 42.5 25.6 25.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.32 0.32
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.64 0.29 0.21 0.54 0.28 0.43 0.95 0.58
Control Delay 28.4 28.2 4.3 14.6 14.2 17.0 13.1 77.2 23.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 28.4 28.2 4.3 14.6 14.2 17.0 13.1 77.2 23.5
LOS CCABB BB EC
Approach Delay 22.0 14.2 13.5 46.2
Approach LOS C B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 79.2
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95
Intersection Signal Delay: 21.1 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 77 17 456 9 1 5 492 854 7 7 638 29
Future Volume (vph) 77 17 456 9 1 5 492 854 7 7 638 29
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.994
Flt Protected 0.950 0.970 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1589 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3240 0
Flt Permitted 0.746 0.833 0.171 0.283
Satd. Flow (perm) 1280 1716 1458 0 1365 0 323 3257 0 534 3240 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 47 6 2 5
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 91 20 536 11 1 6 579 1005 8 8 751 34
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 91 20 536 0 18 0 579 1013 0 8 785 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.6 11.6 42.7 11.4 60.8 62.1 24.2 24.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.54 0.14 0.77 0.78 0.31 0.31
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.08 0.67 0.09 0.72 0.40 0.05 0.79
Control Delay 45.5 35.1 16.7 28.9 20.2 4.9 24.0 33.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.5 35.1 16.7 28.9 20.2 4.9 24.0 33.4
LOS DDB C CA CC
Approach Delay 21.3 28.9 10.5 33.3
Approach LOS C C B C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 79.2
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79
Intersection Signal Delay: 18.8 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.7% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 46 84 876 105 267 701
Future Volume (vph) 46 84 876 105 267 701
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.984
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3208 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.242
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3208 0 415 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 84 17
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 46 84 876 105 267 701
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 84 981 0 267 701
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 50.7 26.2 76.9
Total Split (%) 22.7% 22.7% 51.0% 26.3% 77.3%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 46.2 21.7 72.4
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.3 8.3 69.5 84.2 85.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.70 0.85 0.86
v/c Ratio 0.34 0.42 0.44 0.56 0.25
Control Delay 49.1 16.4 8.6 6.6 2.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 49.1 16.4 8.6 6.6 2.1
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 28.0 8.6 3.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 99.5
Actuated Cycle Length: 99.5
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 65
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56
Intersection Signal Delay: 7.4 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.4% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 123 95 425 126 75 329
Future Vol, veh/h 123 95 425 126 75 329
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 146 113 506 150 89 392
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1076 506 0 - 506 0
Stage 1 506 -----
Stage 2 570 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 243 566 - 0 1059 -
Stage 1 606 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 566 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 217 566 - - 1059 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 217 -----
Stage 1 606 -----
Stage 2 505 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 34.1 0 1.6
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 217 566 1059 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.675 0.2 0.084 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 50.4 12.9 8.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - F B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 4.2 0.7 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 67 40 4 125 48 1
Future Vol, veh/h 67 40 4 125 48 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 83 49 5 154 59 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 132 0 272 108
Stage 1 - - - - 108 -
Stage 2 - - - - 164 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 717 946
Stage 1 - - - - 916 -
Stage 2 - - - - 865 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1453 - 714 946
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 714 -
Stage 1 - - - - 916 -
Stage 2 - - - - 862 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 718 - - 1453 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.084 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 153 47 5 195 21 2
Future Vol, veh/h 153 47 5 195 21 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 153 47 5 195 21 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 200 0 382 177
Stage 1 - - - - 177 -
Stage 2 - - - - 205 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1372 - 620 866
Stage 1 - - - - 854 -
Stage 2 - - - - 829 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1372 - 618 866
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 618 -
Stage 1 - - - - 854 -
Stage 2 - - - - 826 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.9
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 634 - - 1372 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.036 - - 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.9 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 0510171120042816
Future Vol, veh/h 7 0510171120042816
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 0820271731064425
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 148 134 57 138 146 31 69 0 0 31 0 0
Stage 1 69 69 - 65 65 -------
Stage 2 79 65 - 73 81 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 820 757 1009 833 745 1043 1532 - - 1582 - -
Stage 1 941 837 - 946 841 -------
Stage 2 930 841 - 937 828 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 790 746 1009 817 734 1043 1532 - - 1582 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 790 746 - 817 734 -------
Stage 1 931 834 - 936 832 -------
Stage 2 896 832 - 926 825 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.6 2.6 0.6
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1532 - - 869 1027 1582 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.022 0.027 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.2 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 15 966 45 78 669
Future Vol, veh/h 0 15 966 45 78 669
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 18 1164 54 94 806
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 609 0 0 1218 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 438 - - 568 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 438 - - 568 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.6 0 1.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 438 568 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.041 0.165 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.6 12.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.6 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 97 127 95 86 559 130 48 485 123 91 101 41
Future Volume (vph) 97 127 95 86 559 130 48 485 123 91 101 41
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.972 0.970 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3169 0 1793 3162 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.666 0.950 0.419 0.387 0.675
Satd. Flow (perm) 1143 1630 1458 791 3169 0 730 3162 0 1158 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 96 42 47 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 98 128 96 87 565 131 48 490 124 92 102 41
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 128 96 87 696 0 48 614 0 92 143 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 10.9 10.9 10.9 43.3 43.3 43.3 43.3 10.9 10.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.17 0.17
v/c Ratio 0.52 0.47 0.30 0.17 0.33 0.10 0.29 0.48 0.52
Control Delay 34.0 29.8 8.3 6.0 5.3 5.5 5.0 32.4 25.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 34.0 29.8 8.3 6.0 5.3 5.5 5.0 32.4 25.2
LOS CCAAA AA CC
Approach Delay 24.6 5.4 5.1 28.0
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 65.2
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.52
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.0 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 65 5 346 4 5 7 341 655 13 5 622 64
Future Volume (vph) 65 5 346 4 5 7 341 655 13 5 622 64
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.941 0.997 0.986
Flt Protected 0.950 0.988 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1595 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3214 0
Flt Permitted 0.747 0.913 0.244 0.387
Satd. Flow (perm) 1282 1716 1458 0 1474 0 460 3250 0 730 3214 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 7 3 10
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 68 5 360 4 5 7 355 682 14 5 648 67
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 68 5 360 0 16 0 355 696 0 5 715 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.1 9.1 26.3 8.6 46.2 48.7 21.2 21.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.44 0.14 0.78 0.82 0.36 0.36
v/c Ratio 0.35 0.02 0.54 0.07 0.46 0.26 0.02 0.62
Control Delay 32.3 26.6 13.5 21.7 5.8 3.5 18.4 21.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.3 26.6 13.5 21.7 5.8 3.5 18.4 21.0
LOS C C B C A A B C
Approach Delay 16.6 21.7 4.3 21.0
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 59.5
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62
Intersection Signal Delay: 12.2 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 88 140 709 53 140 653
Future Volume (vph) 88 140 709 53 140 653
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3227 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.317
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3227 0 544 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 140 10
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 140 709 53 140 653
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 140 762 0 140 653
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 27.0 27.0 50.5 22.0 72.5
Total Split (%) 27.1% 27.1% 50.8% 22.1% 72.9%
Maximum Green (s) 22.5 22.5 46.0 17.5 68.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.7 10.7 67.8 79.8 79.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.68 0.80 0.80
v/c Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.35 0.27 0.25
Control Delay 51.1 13.3 7.6 3.8 2.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.1 13.3 7.6 3.8 2.9
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 27.9 7.6 3.1
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 99.5
Actuated Cycle Length: 99.5
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.2 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 82 65 210 104 53 145
Future Vol, veh/h 82 65 210 104 53 145
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 86 68 221 109 56 153
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 486 221 0 - 221 0
Stage 1 221 -----
Stage 2 265 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 540 819 - 0 1348 -
Stage 1 816 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 779 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 516 819 - - 1348 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 516 -----
Stage 1 816 -----
Stage 2 744 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.8 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 516 819 1348 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.167 0.084 0.041 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 13.4 9.8 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS -BAAA
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.6 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 33 3 61 38 3
Future Vol, veh/h 61 33 3 61 38 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 73 39 4 73 45 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 112 0 174 93
Stage 1 - - - - 93 -
Stage 2 - - - - 81 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 816 964
Stage 1 - - - - 931 -
Stage 2 - - - - 942 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1478 - 814 964
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 814 -
Stage 1 - - - - 931 -
Stage 2 - - - - 939 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 9.7
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 823 - - 1478 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.059 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 - - 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 210 104 53 145 82 68
Future Vol, veh/h 210 104 53 145 82 68
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 210 104 53 145 82 68
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 314 0 513 262
Stage 1 - - - - 262 -
Stage 2 - - - - 251 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 521 777
Stage 1 - - - - 782 -
Stage 2 - - - - 791 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 497 777
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 497 -
Stage 1 - - - - 782 -
Stage 2 - - - - 755 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.1 13.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 594 - - 1246 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.253 - - 0.043 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 13.1 - - 8 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 - - 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0610563006179
Future Vol, veh/h 9 0610563006179
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 08106838082111
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 100 97 27 101 102 38 32 0 0 38 0 0
Stage 1 43 43 - 54 54 -------
Stage 2 57 54 - 47 48 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 881 793 1048 880 788 1034 1580 - - 1572 - -
Stage 1 971 859 - 958 850 -------
Stage 2 955 850 - 967 855 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 869 785 1048 867 780 1034 1580 - - 1572 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 869 785 - 867 780 -------
Stage 1 966 855 - 953 846 -------
Stage 2 944 846 - 955 851 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 8.9 8.6 1.2 1.4
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1580 - - 933 1002 1572 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.02 0.007 0.005 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 8.9 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 66 696 49 47 695
Future Vol, veh/h 0 66 696 49 47 695
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 69 725 51 49 724
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 388 0 0 776 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 611 - - 836 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 611 - - 836 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.6 0 0.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 611 836 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.113 0.059 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.6 9.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.2 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 116 197 64 141 587 225 84 599 128 128 206 53
Future Volume (vph) 116 197 64 141 587 225 84 599 128 128 206 53
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.958 0.974 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3123 0 1793 3175 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.366 0.950 0.310 0.272 0.495
Satd. Flow (perm) 628 1630 1458 585 3123 0 513 3175 0 849 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 74 83 38 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 133 226 74 162 675 259 97 689 147 147 237 61
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 226 74 162 934 0 97 836 0 147 298 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 20.5 20.5 20.5 52.3 52.3 52.3 52.3 20.5 20.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.24 0.24
v/c Ratio 0.87 0.57 0.18 0.45 0.47 0.30 0.42 0.71 0.78
Control Delay 75.5 33.1 7.0 15.1 9.5 12.6 9.4 47.6 40.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 75.5 33.1 7.0 15.1 9.5 12.6 9.4 47.6 40.6
LOS ECABA BA DD
Approach Delay 41.6 10.3 9.7 42.9
Approach LOS D B A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 83.9
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87
Intersection Signal Delay: 19.8 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 45 4 564 6 13 7 521 781 4 2 886 63
Future Volume (vph) 45 4 564 6 13 7 521 781 4 2 886 63
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.964 0.999 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.988 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1634 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3227 0
Flt Permitted 0.738 0.927 0.093 0.316
Satd. Flow (perm) 1266 1716 1458 0 1533 0 176 3257 0 596 3227 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 28 8 1 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 52 5 648 7 15 8 599 898 5 2 1018 72
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 52 5 648 0 30 0 599 903 0 2 1090 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 46.0 23.0 23.0 46.0 97.0 51.0 51.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 19.2% 19.2% 38.3% 80.8% 42.5% 42.5%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 41.0 18.0 18.0 41.0 91.0 45.0 45.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.8 9.8 51.0 9.8 84.8 85.6 39.2 39.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.83 0.84 0.39 0.39
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.03 0.87 0.19 0.78 0.33 0.01 0.87
Control Delay 58.6 46.0 36.3 39.9 31.0 3.1 22.0 38.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 58.6 46.0 36.3 39.9 31.0 3.1 22.0 38.8
LOS E D D D C A C D
Approach Delay 38.0 39.9 14.3 38.8
Approach LOS D D B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 101.8
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87
Intersection Signal Delay: 27.6 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.2% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 120 212 846 43 102 838
Future Volume (vph) 120 212 846 43 102 838
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.993
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3237 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.272
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3237 0 467 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 204 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 212 846 43 102 838
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 212 889 0 102 838
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 39.0 39.0 61.0 9.5 61.0
Total Split (%) 35.6% 35.6% 55.7% 8.7% 55.7%
Maximum Green (s) 34.5 34.5 56.5 5.0 56.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 13.4 13.4 75.5 87.1 87.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.69 0.80 0.80
v/c Ratio 0.60 0.59 0.40 0.23 0.32
Control Delay 57.3 13.9 8.5 4.2 3.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 57.3 13.9 8.5 4.2 3.8
LOS EBA AA
Approach Delay 29.6 8.5 3.8
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 109.5
Actuated Cycle Length: 109.5
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.60
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.7 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 136 84 375 154 80 294
Future Vol, veh/h 136 84 375 154 80 294
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 148 91 408 167 87 320
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 902 408 0 - 408 0
Stage 1 408 -----
Stage 2 494 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 308 643 - 0 1151 -
Stage 1 671 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 613 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 280 643 - - 1151 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 280 -----
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 557 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 23.8 0 1.8
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 280 643 1151 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.528 0.142 0.076 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 31.4 11.5 8.4 0
HCM Lane LOS - D B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 2.9 0.5 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 130 56 2 75 65 3
Future Vol, veh/h 130 56 2 75 65 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 148 64 2 85 74 3
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 212 0 269 180
Stage 1 - - - - 180 -
Stage 2 - - - - 89 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1358 - 720 863
Stage 1 - - - - 851 -
Stage 2 - - - - 934 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1358 - 719 863
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 719 -
Stage 1 - - - - 851 -
Stage 2 - - - - 932 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 724 - - 1358 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.107 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 206 27 3 177 43 5
Future Vol, veh/h 206 27 3 177 43 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 206 27 3 177 43 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 233 0 403 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 183 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1335 - 603 820
Stage 1 - - - - 817 -
Stage 2 - - - - 848 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1335 - 602 820
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 602 -
Stage 1 - - - - 817 -
Stage 2 - - - - 846 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 11.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 619 - - 1335 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.078 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.3 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 09208637817239
Future Vol, veh/h 14 09208637817239
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 15 0 10 2097419192510
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 132 132 30 133 133 46 35 0 0 50 0 0
Stage 1 68 68 - 60 60 -------
Stage 2 64 64 - 73 73 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 840 759 1044 839 758 1023 1576 - - 1557 - -
Stage 1 942 838 - 951 845 -------
Stage 2 947 842 - 937 834 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 822 746 1044 821 745 1023 1576 - - 1557 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 822 746 - 821 745 -------
Stage 1 937 828 - 946 841 -------
Stage 2 934 838 - 917 824 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.1 8.7 0.9 2.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1576 - - 897 975 1557 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.028 0.011 0.012 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.1 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 10Y 2034 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 81 808 18 29 929
Future Vol, veh/h 0 81 808 18 29 929
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 89 888 20 32 1021
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 454 0 0 908 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 553 - - 745 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 553 - - 745 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.8 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 553 745 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.161 0.043 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.8 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 120 304 139 60 639 195 62 560 90 188 219 38
Future Volume (vph) 120 304 139 60 639 195 62 560 90 188 219 38
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.979 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3146 0 1793 3191 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.469 0.950 0.301 0.205 0.397
Satd. Flow (perm) 805 1630 1458 568 3146 0 387 3191 0 681 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 106 55 25 39
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 146 371 170 73 779 238 76 683 110 229 267 46
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 146 371 170 73 1017 0 76 793 0 229 313 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 46.0 46.0
Total Split (%) 54.1% 54.1% 54.1% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 54.1% 54.1%
Maximum Green (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 41.0 41.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 24.9 24.9 24.9 33.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 24.9 24.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.36 0.36
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.64 0.29 0.27 0.66 0.41 0.51 0.95 0.57
Control Delay 23.2 23.1 7.3 18.1 17.7 24.8 15.5 67.4 19.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 23.2 23.1 7.3 18.1 17.7 24.8 15.5 67.4 19.2
LOS CCABB CB EB
Approach Delay 19.2 17.7 16.3 39.6
Approach LOS B B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 85
Actuated Cycle Length: 69.8
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95
Intersection Signal Delay: 21.4 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.0% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 80 18 503 10 1 5 542 932 8 8 701 31
Future Volume (vph) 80 18 503 10 1 5 542 932 8 8 701 31
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.957 0.999 0.994
Flt Protected 0.950 0.969 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1591 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3240 0
Flt Permitted 0.745 0.830 0.143 0.258
Satd. Flow (perm) 1278 1716 1458 0 1363 0 270 3257 0 487 3240 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 6 2 5
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 94 21 592 12 1 6 638 1096 9 9 825 36
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 94 21 592 0 19 0 638 1105 0 9 861 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.9 11.9 45.8 11.7 66.3 67.3 27.5 27.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.54 0.14 0.78 0.79 0.32 0.32
v/c Ratio 0.53 0.09 0.74 0.10 0.81 0.43 0.06 0.82
Control Delay 48.7 35.8 21.0 29.1 27.7 5.1 24.1 35.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 48.7 35.8 21.0 29.1 27.7 5.1 24.1 35.4
LOS D D C C C A C D
Approach Delay 25.1 29.1 13.4 35.3
Approach LOS C C B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 85.1
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82
Intersection Signal Delay: 21.6 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.7% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 46 84 965 105 267 768
Future Volume (vph) 46 84 965 105 267 768
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 15 12
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.985
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3211 0 1793 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.209
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3211 0 394 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 84 17
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 46 84 965 105 267 768
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 84 1070 0 267 768
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Permitted Phases 8 6
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 46.8 20.6 67.4
Total Split (%) 25.1% 25.1% 52.0% 22.9% 74.9%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 42.3 16.1 62.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 8.0 60.4 75.0 75.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.67 0.83 0.84
v/c Ratio 0.32 0.41 0.50 0.55 0.28
Control Delay 43.4 15.0 9.7 6.6 2.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 43.4 15.0 9.7 6.6 2.4
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 25.0 9.7 3.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 65
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.55
Intersection Signal Delay: 7.7 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.1% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 11.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 133 104 468 136 80 362
Future Vol, veh/h 133 104 468 136 80 362
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 158 124 557 162 95 431
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1178 557 0 - 557 0
Stage 1 557 -----
Stage 2 621 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 211 530 - 0 1014 -
Stage 1 574 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 536 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 185 530 - - 1014 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 185 -----
Stage 1 574 -----
Stage 2 470 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 53.5 0 1.6
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 185 530 1014 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.856 0.234 0.094 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 84.5 13.9 8.9 0
HCM Lane LOS - F B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 6.2 0.9 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 74 43 4 137 52 1
Future Vol, veh/h 74 43 4 137 52 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 91 53 5 169 64 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 144 0 297 118
Stage 1 - - - - 118 -
Stage 2 - - - - 179 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 694 934
Stage 1 - - - - 907 -
Stage 2 - - - - 852 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1438 - 691 934
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 691 -
Stage 1 - - - - 907 -
Stage 2 - - - - 849 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.7
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 694 - - 1438 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.7 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 167 47 5 214 21 2
Future Vol, veh/h 167 47 5 214 21 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 167 47 5 214 21 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 214 0 415 191
Stage 1 - - - - 191 -
Stage 2 - - - - 224 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1356 - 594 851
Stage 1 - - - - 841 -
Stage 2 - - - - 813 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1356 - 592 851
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 592 -
Stage 1 - - - - 841 -
Stage 2 - - - - 810 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 608 - - 1356 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.2 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 0510181122043116
Future Vol, veh/h 7 0510181122043116
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 0820281734064825
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 155 141 61 145 153 34 73 0 0 34 0 0
Stage 1 73 73 - 68 68 -------
Stage 2 82 68 - 77 85 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 812 750 1004 824 739 1039 1527 - - 1578 - -
Stage 1 937 834 - 942 838 -------
Stage 2 926 838 - 932 824 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 781 739 1004 808 728 1039 1527 - - 1578 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 781 739 - 808 728 -------
Stage 1 927 831 - 932 829 -------
Stage 2 891 829 - 921 821 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.3 8.6 2.5 0.6
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1527 - - 861 1024 1578 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.022 0.029 0.004 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.3 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 107 139 99 89 607 143 51 524 136 100 110 44
Future Volume (vph) 107 139 99 89 607 143 51 524 136 100 110 44
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.971 0.969 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3165 0 1793 3159 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.655 0.950 0.399 0.361 0.668
Satd. Flow (perm) 1124 1630 1458 753 3165 0 681 3159 0 1146 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 100 43 48 36
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Adj. Flow (vph) 108 140 100 90 613 144 52 529 137 101 111 44
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 108 140 100 90 757 0 52 666 0 101 155 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 46.7% 46.7% 46.7% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 53.3% 46.7% 46.7%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 11.5 11.5 11.5 42.7 42.7 42.7 42.7 11.5 11.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.18 0.18
v/c Ratio 0.55 0.49 0.29 0.18 0.36 0.12 0.32 0.50 0.54
Control Delay 34.8 29.7 7.9 6.5 5.8 6.0 5.5 32.7 25.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 34.8 29.7 7.9 6.5 5.8 6.0 5.5 32.7 25.6
LOS CCAAA AA CC
Approach Delay 25.0 5.9 5.5 28.4
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 65.2
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.55
Intersection Signal Delay: 11.5 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.0% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 69 5 382 4 5 8 376 718 14 5 681 68
Future Volume (vph) 69 5 382 4 5 8 376 718 14 5 681 68
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.936 0.997 0.986
Flt Protected 0.950 0.988 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1587 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3214 0
Flt Permitted 0.746 0.933 0.212 0.362
Satd. Flow (perm) 1280 1716 1458 0 1498 0 400 3250 0 683 3214 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 8 3 10
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph) 72 5 398 4 5 8 392 748 15 5 709 71
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 5 398 0 17 0 392 763 0 5 780 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 30.0 41.0 41.0 30.0 59.0 29.0 29.0
Total Split (%) 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 41.0% 41.0% 30.0% 59.0% 29.0% 29.0%
Maximum Green (s) 36.0 36.0 25.0 36.0 36.0 25.0 53.0 23.0 23.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.2 9.2 30.9 9.2 49.6 50.3 23.8 23.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.47 0.14 0.75 0.76 0.36 0.36
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.02 0.57 0.08 0.55 0.31 0.02 0.67
Control Delay 35.4 27.0 14.0 21.3 9.0 4.2 19.0 24.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 35.4 27.0 14.0 21.3 9.0 4.2 19.0 24.1
LOS D C B C A A B C
Approach Delay 17.4 21.3 5.8 24.1
Approach LOS B C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 66.1
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67
Intersection Signal Delay: 14.1 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 88 140 779 53 140 718
Future Volume (vph) 88 140 779 53 140 718
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3227 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.285
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3227 0 489 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 140 10
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 140 779 53 140 718
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 140 832 0 140 718
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 25.0 25.0 45.0 20.0 65.0
Total Split (%) 27.8% 27.8% 50.0% 22.2% 72.2%
Maximum Green (s) 20.5 20.5 40.5 15.5 60.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.2 10.2 58.9 70.8 70.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.65 0.79 0.79
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.39 0.29 0.28
Control Delay 45.2 12.4 8.4 4.2 3.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.2 12.4 8.4 4.2 3.2
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 25.0 8.4 3.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.48
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.1 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 88 70 231 113 57 159
Future Vol, veh/h 88 70 231 113 57 159
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 93 74 243 119 60 167
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 530 243 0 - 243 0
Stage 1 243 -----
Stage 2 287 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 510 796 - 0 1323 -
Stage 1 797 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 762 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 485 796 - - 1323 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 485 -----
Stage 1 797 -----
Stage 2 724 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.3 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 485 796 1323 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.191 0.093 0.045 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 14.2 10 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS -BBAA
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.7 0.3 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 67 36 4 67 41 4
Future Vol, veh/h 67 36 4 67 41 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 80 43 5 80 49 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 123 0 192 102
Stage 1 - - - - 102 -
Stage 2 - - - - 90 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1464 - 797 953
Stage 1 - - - - 922 -
Stage 2 - - - - 934 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1464 - 794 953
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 794 -
Stage 1 - - - - 922 -
Stage 2 - - - - 930 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 806 - - 1464 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.066 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 140 28 3 129 28 3
Future Vol, veh/h 140 28 3 129 28 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 140 28 3 129 28 3
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 168 0 289 154
Stage 1 - - - - 154 -
Stage 2 - - - - 135 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1410 - 702 892
Stage 1 - - - - 874 -
Stage 2 - - - - 891 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1410 - 701 892
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 701 -
Stage 1 - - - - 874 -
Stage 2 - - - - 889 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 716 - - 1410 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0610563307189
Future Vol, veh/h 9 0610563307189
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 08106841092311
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 107 104 29 108 109 41 34 0 0 41 0 0
Stage 1 47 47 - 57 57 -------
Stage 2 60 57 - 51 52 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 872 786 1046 871 781 1030 1578 - - 1568 - -
Stage 1 967 856 - 955 847 -------
Stage 2 951 847 - 962 852 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 860 777 1046 858 772 1030 1578 - - 1568 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 860 777 - 858 772 -------
Stage 1 962 851 - 950 843 -------
Stage 2 941 843 - 949 847 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9 8.6 1.1 1.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1578 - - 926 997 1568 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.02 0.008 0.006 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 70 763 51 49 757
Future Vol, veh/h 0 70 763 51 49 757
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 73 795 53 51 789
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 424 0 0 848 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 579 - - 785 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 579 - - 785 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.1 0 0.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 579 785 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.126 0.065 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.1 9.9 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.2 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 128 217 65 146 631 248 91 653 141 141 226 56
Future Volume (vph) 128 217 65 146 631 248 91 653 141 141 226 56
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 150 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.958 0.973 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3123 0 1793 3172 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.347 0.950 0.274 0.239 0.469
Satd. Flow (perm) 595 1630 1458 517 3123 0 451 3172 0 805 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 75 87 38 33
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 147 249 75 168 725 285 105 751 162 162 260 64
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 147 249 75 168 1010 0 105 913 0 162 324 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 42.0 42.0 42.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.0 42.0
Total Split (%) 42.0% 42.0% 42.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0%
Maximum Green (s) 37.0 37.0 37.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 52.0 37.0 37.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 23.1 23.1 23.1 52.5 52.5 52.5 52.5 23.1 23.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.27 0.27
v/c Ratio 0.93 0.57 0.17 0.54 0.52 0.39 0.47 0.76 0.78
Control Delay 86.8 32.3 6.4 21.1 11.4 17.0 11.3 50.8 39.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 86.8 32.3 6.4 21.1 11.4 17.0 11.3 50.8 39.8
LOS F C A C B B B D D
Approach Delay 45.2 12.8 11.9 43.5
Approach LOS D B B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 86.7
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93
Intersection Signal Delay: 22.1 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 48 4 622 7 14 8 575 858 4 3 970 66
Future Volume (vph) 48 4 622 7 14 8 575 858 4 3 970 66
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.963 0.999 0.990
Flt Protected 0.950 0.988 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1632 0 3478 3257 0 1793 3227 0
Flt Permitted 0.736 0.926 0.083 0.289
Satd. Flow (perm) 1263 1716 1458 0 1530 0 304 3257 0 545 3227 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 27 9 1 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph) 55 5 715 8 16 9 661 986 5 3 1115 76
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 55 5 715 0 33 0 661 991 0 3 1191 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 30 30
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 44.0 23.0 23.0 44.0 97.0 53.0 53.0
Total Split (%) 19.2% 19.2% 36.7% 19.2% 19.2% 36.7% 80.8% 44.2% 44.2%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 39.0 18.0 18.0 39.0 91.0 47.0 47.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.0 10.0 52.1 10.0 88.9 89.5 43.0 43.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.49 0.09 0.84 0.84 0.40 0.40
v/c Ratio 0.46 0.03 0.98 0.22 0.46 0.36 0.01 0.91
Control Delay 60.9 45.8 56.6 40.2 17.2 3.3 21.0 41.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.9 45.8 56.6 40.2 17.2 3.3 21.0 41.6
LOS E D E D B A C D
Approach Delay 56.8 40.2 8.9 41.5
Approach LOS E D A D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 106.3
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.98
Intersection Signal Delay: 30.0 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.7% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 120 212 929 43 102 923
Future Volume (vph) 120 212 929 43 102 923
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.993
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3237 0 1630 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.243
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3237 0 417 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 212 6
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 212 929 43 102 923
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 212 972 0 102 923
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 12 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 31.0 31.0 53.5 15.5 69.0
Total Split (%) 31.0% 31.0% 53.5% 15.5% 69.0%
Maximum Green (s) 26.5 26.5 49.0 11.0 64.5
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 12.7 12.7 68.8 78.3 78.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.69 0.78 0.78
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.57 0.44 0.25 0.36
Control Delay 51.7 11.9 8.8 4.5 4.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.7 11.9 8.8 4.5 4.1
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 26.3 8.8 4.1
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 100
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.58
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.3 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 90 414 168 87 324
Future Vol, veh/h 147 90 414 168 87 324
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 160 98 450 183 95 352
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 992 450 0 - 450 0
Stage 1 450 -----
Stage 2 542 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 272 609 - 0 1110 -
Stage 1 642 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 583 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 243 609 - - 1110 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 243 -----
Stage 1 642 -----
Stage 2 521 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 32.1 0 1.8
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 243 609 1110 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.658 0.161 0.085 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 44.4 12 8.5 0
HCM Lane LOS -EBAA
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 4.1 0.6 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 143 60 2 83 70 3
Future Vol, veh/h 143 60 2 83 70 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 163 68 2 94 80 3
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 231 0 295 197
Stage 1 - - - - 197 -
Stage 2 - - - - 98 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1337 - 696 844
Stage 1 - - - - 836 -
Stage 2 - - - - 926 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1337 - 695 844
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 695 -
Stage 1 - - - - 836 -
Stage 2 - - - - 924 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.8
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 700 - - 1337 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.119 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.8 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 226 27 3 194 43 5
Future Vol, veh/h 226 27 3 194 43 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 226 27 3 194 43 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 253 0 440 240
Stage 1 - - - - 240 -
Stage 2 - - - - 200 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1312 - 574 799
Stage 1 - - - - 800 -
Stage 2 - - - - 834 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1312 - 572 799
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 572 -
Stage 1 - - - - 800 -
Stage 2 - - - - 831 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 11.7
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 589 - - 1312 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.081 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.7 - - 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 09309641918259
Future Vol, veh/h 14 09309641918259
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 15 0 10 3 0 10 7 45 10 20 27 10
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 141 141 32 141 141 50 37 0 0 55 0 0
Stage 1 72 72 - 64 64 -------
Stage 2 69 69 - 77 77 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 829 750 1042 829 750 1018 1574 - - 1550 - -
Stage 1 938 835 - 947 842 -------
Stage 2 941 837 - 932 831 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 810 737 1042 810 737 1018 1574 - - 1550 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 810 737 - 810 737 -------
Stage 1 933 824 - 942 838 -------
Stage 2 927 833 - 911 820 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.8 0.8 2.5
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1574 - - 887 957 1550 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.028 0.014 0.013 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.2 8.8 7.4 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 15Y 2039 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 85 887 19 30 1013
Future Vol, veh/h 0 85 887 19 30 1013
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 93 975 21 33 1113
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 498 0 0 996 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 518 - - 690 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 518 - - 690 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 0 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 518 690 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.18 0.048 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.5 10.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.1 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 131 331 141 62 693 213 66 594 99 205 239 41
Future Volume (vph) 131 331 141 62 693 213 66 594 99 205 239 41
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.965 0.979 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3146 0 1793 3191 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.453 0.950 0.262 0.156 0.383
Satd. Flow (perm) 777 1630 1458 494 3146 0 294 3191 0 657 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 92 56 26 39
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 160 404 172 76 845 260 80 724 121 250 291 50
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 160 404 172 76 1105 0 80 845 0 250 341 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 46.0 46.0
Total Split (%) 54.1% 54.1% 54.1% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 54.1% 54.1%
Maximum Green (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 41.0 41.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 29.4 29.4 29.4 33.6 33.6 33.6 33.6 29.4 29.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40
v/c Ratio 0.52 0.63 0.27 0.34 0.76 0.60 0.58 0.96 0.57
Control Delay 22.7 21.9 7.8 22.7 22.7 44.0 18.5 70.2 18.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 22.7 21.9 7.8 22.7 22.7 44.0 18.5 70.2 18.4
LOS C C A C C D B E B
Approach Delay 18.8 22.7 20.7 40.4
Approach LOS B C C D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 85
Actuated Cycle Length: 74.2
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.96
Intersection Signal Delay: 24.4 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.9% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 83 20 550 11 1 6 593 1011 9 9 774 36
Future Volume (vph) 83 20 550 11 1 6 593 1011 9 9 774 36
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.955 0.999 0.993
Flt Protected 0.950 0.970 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1589 0 1793 3257 0 1793 3237 0
Flt Permitted 0.744 0.832 0.114 0.235
Satd. Flow (perm) 1276 1716 1458 0 1363 0 215 3257 0 444 3237 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 7 2 5
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 98 24 647 13 1 7 698 1189 11 11 911 42
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 24 647 0 21 0 698 1200 0 11 953 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 12.2 12.2 48.9 11.9 70.8 71.4 30.0 30.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.54 0.13 0.79 0.79 0.33 0.33
v/c Ratio 0.57 0.10 0.80 0.11 0.90 0.46 0.07 0.88
Control Delay 51.5 36.2 25.1 28.4 38.8 5.4 24.8 40.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.5 36.2 25.1 28.4 38.8 5.4 24.8 40.3
LOS D D C C D A C D
Approach Delay 28.8 28.4 17.7 40.1
Approach LOS C C B D
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 90.1
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Signal Delay: 26.0 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.3% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 46 84 1054 105 267 835
Future Volume (vph) 46 84 1054 105 267 835
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 15 12
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.986
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3214 0 1793 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.181
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3214 0 342 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 84 16
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 46 84 1054 105 267 835
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 84 1159 0 267 835
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Permitted Phases 8 6
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 46.8 20.6 67.4
Total Split (%) 25.1% 25.1% 52.0% 22.9% 74.9%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 42.3 16.1 62.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 8.0 8.0 59.2 75.0 75.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.66 0.83 0.84
v/c Ratio 0.32 0.41 0.55 0.57 0.30
Control Delay 43.4 15.0 11.2 8.4 2.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 43.4 15.0 11.2 8.4 2.4
LOS D B B A A
Approach Delay 25.0 11.2 3.9
Approach LOS C B A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.57
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.6 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 20.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 144 112 512 145 85 395
Future Vol, veh/h 144 112 512 145 85 395
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 171 133 610 173 101 470
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1282 610 0 - 610 0
Stage 1 610 -----
Stage 2 672 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 182 494 - 0 969 -
Stage 1 542 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 508 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 156 494 - - 969 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 156 -----
Stage 1 542 -----
Stage 2 436 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 96.2 0 1.6
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 156 494 969 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 1.099 0.27 0.104 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 159.4 15 9.1 0
HCM Lane LOS - F C A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 9 1.1 0.3 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 81 46 4 150 56 1
Future Vol, veh/h 81 46 4 150 56 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 100 57 5 185 69 1
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 157 0 324 129
Stage 1 - - - - 129 -
Stage 2 - - - - 195 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1423 - 670 921
Stage 1 - - - - 897 -
Stage 2 - - - - 838 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1423 - 667 921
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 667 -
Stage 1 - - - - 897 -
Stage 2 - - - - 835 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 670 - - 1423 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.105 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 181 47 5 234 21 2
Future Vol, veh/h 181 47 5 234 21 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 181 47 5 234 21 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 228 0 449 205
Stage 1 - - - - 205 -
Stage 2 - - - - 244 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1340 - 568 836
Stage 1 - - - - 829 -
Stage 2 - - - - 797 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1340 - 566 836
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 566 -
Stage 1 - - - - 829 -
Stage 2 - - - - 794 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 582 - - 1340 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 - - 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.4 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 0510201124033416
Future Vol, veh/h 7 0510201124033416
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 11 0820311738055325
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 164 148 66 152 160 38 78 0 0 38 0 0
Stage 1 76 76 - 72 72 -------
Stage 2 88 72 - 80 88 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 801 743 998 815 732 1034 1520 - - 1572 - -
Stage 1 933 832 - 938 835 -------
Stage 2 920 835 - 929 822 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 768 733 998 800 722 1034 1520 - - 1572 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 768 733 - 800 722 -------
Stage 1 923 830 - 928 826 -------
Stage 2 882 826 - 919 820 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.3 8.6 2.3 0.4
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1520 - - 850 1020 1572 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.022 0.032 0.003 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.3 8.6 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 AM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 16 1143 47 83 798
Future Vol, veh/h 0 16 1143 47 83 798
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 19 1377 57 100 961
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 717 0 0 1434 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 372 - - 470 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 372 - - 470 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 15.2 0 1.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 372 470 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.052 0.213 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.2 14.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0.8 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 117 151 103 91 654 156 55 564 149 109 120 46
Future Volume (vph) 117 151 103 91 654 156 55 564 149 109 120 46
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.971 0.969 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3165 0 1793 3159 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.602 0.950 0.305 0.258 0.640
Satd. Flow (perm) 1033 1630 1458 576 3165 0 487 3159 0 1098 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 104 40 46 39
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 143 184 126 111 798 190 67 688 182 133 146 56
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 184 126 111 988 0 67 870 0 133 202 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 46.0 46.0
Total Split (%) 54.1% 54.1% 54.1% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 54.1% 54.1%
Maximum Green (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 41.0 41.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 12.9 12.9 12.9 33.2 33.2 33.2 33.2 12.9 12.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.23 0.23
v/c Ratio 0.61 0.50 0.31 0.33 0.53 0.24 0.47 0.54 0.56
Control Delay 31.4 23.8 8.0 11.4 9.1 10.2 8.3 27.5 21.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 31.4 23.8 8.0 11.4 9.1 10.2 8.3 27.5 21.7
LOS CCABA BA CC
Approach Delay 21.8 9.3 8.4 24.0
Approach LOS C A A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 85
Actuated Cycle Length: 57.2
Natural Cycle: 55
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.61
Intersection Signal Delay: 12.8 Intersection LOS: B
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 73 6 417 4 6 9 411 781 15 6 740 72
Future Volume (vph) 73 6 417 4 6 9 411 781 15 6 740 72
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.935 0.997 0.987
Flt Protected 0.950 0.989 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1587 0 1793 3250 0 1793 3217 0
Flt Permitted 0.742 0.942 0.128 0.305
Satd. Flow (perm) 1273 1716 1458 0 1511 0 242 3250 0 576 3217 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 11 5 11
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 86 7 491 5 7 11 484 919 18 7 871 85
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 86 7 491 0 23 0 484 937 0 7 956 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.2 11.2 40.4 11.0 62.7 63.8 28.4 28.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.50 0.14 0.78 0.79 0.35 0.35
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.03 0.66 0.11 0.67 0.36 0.03 0.84
Control Delay 46.7 34.8 18.4 25.4 20.3 4.5 22.7 34.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 46.7 34.8 18.4 25.4 20.3 4.5 22.7 34.3
LOS DCB C CA CC
Approach Delay 22.8 25.4 9.8 34.2
Approach LOS C C A C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 80.8
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.84
Intersection Signal Delay: 20.3 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.8% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 88 140 850 53 140 783
Future Volume (vph) 88 140 850 53 140 783
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 15 12
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.991
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3230 0 1793 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.261
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3230 0 493 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 140 9
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 88 140 850 53 140 783
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 140 903 0 140 783
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Permitted Phases 8 6
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 46.8 20.6 67.4
Total Split (%) 25.1% 25.1% 52.0% 22.9% 74.9%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 42.3 16.1 62.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 10.2 10.2 59.1 70.8 70.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.66 0.79 0.79
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.43 0.28 0.31
Control Delay 45.3 12.4 8.6 4.1 3.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.3 12.4 8.6 4.1 3.3
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 25.1 8.6 3.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.48
Intersection Signal Delay: 8.1 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 94 75 252 121 61 174
Future Vol, veh/h 94 75 252 121 61 174
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 112 89 300 144 73 207
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 653 300 0 - 300 0
Stage 1 300 -----
Stage 2 353 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 432 740 - 0 1261 -
Stage 1 752 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 711 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 404 740 - - 1261 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 404 -----
Stage 1 752 -----
Stage 2 665 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 14.3 0 2.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 404 740 1261 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.277 0.121 0.058 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 17.3 10.5 8 0
HCM Lane LOS - C B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 1.1 0.4 0.2 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 73 39 4 73 44 4
Future Vol, veh/h 73 39 4 73 44 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 90 48 5 90 54 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 138 0 214 114
Stage 1 - - - - 114 -
Stage 2 - - - - 100 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1446 - 774 939
Stage 1 - - - - 911 -
Stage 2 - - - - 924 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1446 - 771 939
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 771 -
Stage 1 - - - - 911 -
Stage 2 - - - - 920 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 10
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 783 - - 1446 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.076 - - 0.003 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10 - - 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 153 28 3 140 94 75
Future Vol, veh/h 153 28 3 140 94 75
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 153 28 3 140 94 75
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 181 0 313 167
Stage 1 - - - - 167 -
Stage 2 - - - - 146 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1394 - 680 877
Stage 1 - - - - 863 -
Stage 2 - - - - 881 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1394 - 679 877
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 679 -
Stage 1 - - - - 863 -
Stage 2 - - - - 879 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 755 - - 1394 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.224 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.1 - - 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 0610663607209
Future Vol, veh/h 9 0610663607209
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 14 092099560113114
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 139 134 38 139 141 56 45 0 0 56 0 0
Stage 1 60 60 - 74 74 -------
Stage 2 79 74 - 65 67 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 831 757 1034 831 750 1011 1563 - - 1549 - -
Stage 1 951 845 - 935 833 -------
Stage 2 930 833 - 946 839 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 815 747 1034 815 740 1011 1563 - - 1549 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 815 747 - 815 740 -------
Stage 1 945 839 - 929 828 -------
Stage 2 916 828 - 931 833 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 8.7 1 1.4
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1563 - - 890 977 1549 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.026 0.011 0.007 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.2 8.7 7.3 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2039 NOON Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 74 829 54 51 820
Future Vol, veh/h 0 74 829 54 51 820
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 89 999 65 61 988
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 532 0 0 1064 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 492 - - 651 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 492 - - 651 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.9 0 0.7
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 492 651 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.181 0.094 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.9 11.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.3 -
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 140 236 67 150 676 271 99 708 154 154 247 60
Future Volume (vph) 140 236 67 150 676 271 99 708 154 154 247 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12 12 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 0 500 0 500 0 100 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.957 0.973 0.850
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1630 1458 1793 3120 0 1793 3172 0 1630 1458 0
Flt Permitted 0.364 0.950 0.208 0.172 0.485
Satd. Flow (perm) 625 1630 1458 393 3120 0 325 3172 0 832 1458 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 55 82 36 39
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55 30
Link Distance (ft) 4916 785 1871 119
Travel Time (s) 111.7 9.7 23.2 2.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Adj. Flow (vph) 171 288 82 183 824 330 121 863 188 188 301 73
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 171 288 82 183 1154 0 121 1051 0 188 374 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Right Right
Median Width(ft) 24 15 15 12
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 9
Number of Detectors 11112 12 11
Detector Template Left Left Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Right
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 20 20 100 20 100 20 20
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 20 20 6 20 6 20 20
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm Prot Perm Perm NA Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4268
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Lane Group EBL2 EBL EBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SWL SWR SWR2
Permitted Phases 44422 6 8
Detector Phase 44422 66 88
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 23.0
Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 46.0 46.0
Total Split (%) 54.1% 54.1% 54.1% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 45.9% 54.1% 54.1%
Maximum Green (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 41.0 41.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None Min Min Max Max None None
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr)00000 00 00
Act Effct Green (s) 20.4 20.4 20.4 33.4 33.4 33.4 33.4 20.4 20.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.31
v/c Ratio 0.87 0.56 0.17 0.91 0.70 0.72 0.64 0.72 0.77
Control Delay 60.5 22.5 7.6 66.9 15.7 45.8 14.6 35.5 29.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.5 22.5 7.6 66.9 15.7 45.8 14.6 35.5 29.0
LOS E C A E B D B D C
Approach Delay 32.2 22.7 17.9 31.2
Approach LOS C C B C
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 85
Actuated Cycle Length: 64.9
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.91
Intersection Signal Delay: 23.9 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.4% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 5: Cemetery & US 93 & Willow Glen
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 8
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 51 4 680 7 16 9 629 935 4 3 1053 69
Future Volume (vph) 51 4 680 7 16 9 629 935 4 3 1053 69
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 12 12 15 12 12
Storage Length (ft) 300 300 0 0 500 0 500 0
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 0
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.961 0.999 0.991
Flt Protected 0.950 0.990 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1716 1458 0 1632 0 3478 3257 0 1793 3230 0
Flt Permitted 0.732 0.936 0.108 0.258
Satd. Flow (perm) 1256 1716 1458 0 1543 0 395 3257 0 487 3230 0
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 33 11 1 7
Link Speed (mph) 30 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 2304 831 626 1000
Travel Time (s) 52.4 18.9 7.8 12.4
Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Adj. Flow (vph) 60 5 800 8 19 11 740 1100 5 4 1239 81
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 60 5 800 0 38 0 740 1105 0 4 1320 0
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right
Median Width(ft) 12 12 30 30
Link Offset(ft)0000
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9
Number of Detectors 12112 12 12
Detector Template Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Position(ft)00000 00 00
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 6 20 20 6 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft)6666
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Perm NA pm+ov Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 9
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 44588 52 66
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 10.0 23.0 23.0 10.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 39.0 23.0 23.0 39.0 77.0 38.0 38.0
Total Split (%) 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 23.0% 23.0% 39.0% 77.0% 38.0% 38.0%
Maximum Green (s) 18.0 18.0 34.0 18.0 18.0 34.0 71.0 32.0 32.0
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min Min
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 9.6 9.6 46.4 9.6 72.4 72.8 32.2 32.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.52 0.11 0.81 0.81 0.36 0.36
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.03 1.04 0.22 0.50 0.42 0.02 1.13
Control Delay 48.9 36.0 64.9 31.6 13.2 4.1 21.7 101.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 48.9 36.0 64.9 31.6 13.2 4.1 21.7 101.1
LOS D D E C B A C F
Approach Delay 63.6 31.6 7.7 100.8
Approach LOS E C A F
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 100
Actuated Cycle Length: 89.7
Natural Cycle: 140
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.13
Intersection Signal Delay: 50.1 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.2% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 23: 93 Alt Bypass & US 93
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 10
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 120 212 1012 43 102 1007
Future Volume (vph) 120 212 1012 43 102 1007
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750 1750
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 15 12
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 500
Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.850 0.994
Flt Protected 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1630 1458 3240 0 1793 3260
Flt Permitted 0.950 0.212
Satd. Flow (perm) 1630 1458 3240 0 400 3260
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flow (RTOR) 212 6
Link Speed (mph) 30 55 55
Link Distance (ft) 776 924 713
Travel Time (s) 17.6 11.5 8.8
Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj. Flow (vph) 120 212 1012 43 102 1007
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 120 212 1055 0 102 1007
Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No
Lane Alignment Left Right Left Right Left Left
Median Width(ft) 12 15 15
Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0
Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16
Two way Left Turn Lane
Headway Factor 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 0.98 1.11
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 9 15
Number of Detectors 1 1 2 1 2
Detector Template Left Right Thru Left Thru
Leading Detector (ft) 20 20 100 20 100
Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 20 6 20 6
Detector 1 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 1 Channel
Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector 2 Position(ft) 94 94
Detector 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Detector 2 Type Cl+Ex Cl+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0
Turn Type Prot Perm NA pm+pt NA
Protected Phases 8 2 1 6
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
24: US 93 & West Approach 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 11
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Permitted Phases 8 6
Detector Phase 8 8 2 1 6
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5
Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 46.8 20.6 67.4
Total Split (%) 25.1% 25.1% 52.0% 22.9% 74.9%
Maximum Green (s) 18.1 18.1 42.3 16.1 62.9
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lead/Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None None C-Max None C-Max
Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.9 11.9 59.8 69.1 69.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.66 0.77 0.77
v/c Ratio 0.56 0.56 0.49 0.25 0.40
Control Delay 45.9 11.2 9.7 4.6 4.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 45.9 11.2 9.7 4.6 4.4
LOS D B A A A
Approach Delay 23.7 9.7 4.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 90
Actuated Cycle Length: 90
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBTL, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56
Intersection Signal Delay: 9.2 Intersection LOS: A
Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.5% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 24: US 93 & West Approach
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Lower Valley & Willow Glen 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 20
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 158 96 453 182 93 354
Future Vol, veh/h 158 96 453 182 93 354
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - Free - None
Storage Length 200 0 - 0 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 188 114 539 217 111 421
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1182 539 0 - 539 0
Stage 1 539 -----
Stage 2 643 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 210 542 - 0 1029 -
Stage 1 585 - - 0 - -
Stage 2 523 - - 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 180 542 - - 1029 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 180 -----
Stage 1 585 -----
Stage 2 449 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 87.5 0 1.9
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 180 542 1029 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 1.045 0.211 0.108 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 132.6 13.4 8.9 0
HCM Lane LOS - F B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 8.9 0.8 0.4 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 TWSC
10: Demersville & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 156 65 2 90 76 3
Future Vol, veh/h 156 65 2 90 76 3
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 193 80 2 111 94 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 273 0 348 233
Stage 1 - - - - 233 -
Stage 2 - - - - 115 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1290 - 649 806
Stage 1 - - - - 806 -
Stage 2 - - - - 910 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1290 - 648 806
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 648 -
Stage 1 - - - - 806 -
Stage 2 - - - - 908 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 11.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 653 - - 1290 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.149 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.5 - - 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
11: North Approach & Lower Valley 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 247 27 3 211 43 5
Future Vol, veh/h 247 27 3 211 43 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 100 100 100 100 100 100
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 247 27 3 211 43 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 274 0 478 261
Stage 1 - - - - 261 -
Stage 2 - - - - 217 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1289 - 546 778
Stage 1 - - - - 783 -
Stage 2 - - - - 819 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1289 - 544 778
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 544 -
Stage 1 - - - - 783 -
Stage 2 - - - - 817 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 12
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 562 - - 1289 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.085 - - 0.002 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC
20: Demersville & East Approach/Bar H 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 0930106441020279
Future Vol, veh/h 14 0930106441020279
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 22 0 14 5 0 16 9 69 16 31 42 14
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 214 214 49 213 213 77 56 0 0 85 0 0
Stage 1 111 111 - 95 95 -------
Stage 2 103 103 - 118 118 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 743 684 1020 744 684 984 1549 - - 1512 - -
Stage 1 894 804 - 912 816 -------
Stage 2 903 810 - 887 798 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 716 666 1020 719 666 984 1549 - - 1512 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 716 666 - 719 666 -------
Stage 1 889 787 - 907 811 -------
Stage 2 883 805 - 856 781 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 9.1 0.7 2.7
HCM LOS A A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1549 - - 811 907 1512 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.044 0.022 0.021 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.3 0 - 9.6 9.1 7.4 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A -AAAA -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC
25: US 93 & United Dr 11/17/2024
Scenario 1 Gardner 10:58 am 05/29/2024 Future 20Y 2044 PM Synchro 11 Report
RLA Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 89 966 20 31 1096
Future Vol, veh/h 0 89 966 20 31 1096
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - 500 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 107 1164 24 37 1320
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 594 0 0 1188 0
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - 4.14 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - 2.22 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 448 - - 583 -
Stage 1 0 -----
Stage 2 0 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 448 - - 583 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------
Stage 1 ------
Stage 2 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 15.5 0 0.3
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 448 583 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.239 0.064 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.5 11.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.9 0.2 -
APPENDIX D
Turn-Lane Warrants
Butte | Anaconda | Great Falls | Bozeman | Kalispell · waterenvtech.com
February 20, 2025
Sage L. Joyce
Chief, Montana Regulatory Office U.S Army Corps of Engineers – Omaha District10 West 15th Street, Suite 2200Helena, MT 59626
Re: US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) – General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property– Request for Corps Jurisdictional Determination (JD)
To Whom It May Concern,
The applicant is proposing to develop rural pasture lands and for development planning
purposes is requesting a Corps Jurisdictional Determination (JD), included as
Attachment 1. A wetland assessment that discusses the drainage area and associated
wetlands is included as Attachment 2. The Applicant is requesting a JD for the
areas identified as FP-1, W-1, W-2 and W-3 in Attachment 2.
Please contact Jay Slocum at jslocum@waterenvtech.com or (406) 723-1579 if you have
any questions regarding the JD request. Thank you for your attention to this application.
Sincerely,
Jay Slocum
Jay Slocum Senior Wildlife Biologist
Attachments
-Attachment 1: General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property - Request for CorpsJurisdictional Determination.
-Attachment 2: General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property – Field Summary
Report.
General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property – Wetland Delineation & Request for Corps Jurisdictional Determination
Attachments
Attachment 1
General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property – Request
for Corps Jurisdictional Determination
Appendix 1 - REQUEST FOR CORPS JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
To: Omaha District
•I am requesting a JD on property located at: _________________________________
(Street Address)City/Township/Parish: ________________ County: _______________ State: ______
Acreage of Parcel/Review Area for JD: ___________Section: ______ Township: _______ Range: _______
Latitude (decimal degrees):___________ Longitude (decimal degrees): ___________(For linear projects, please include the center point of the proposed alignment.)
•Please attach a survey/plat map and vicinity map identifying location and review area for the JD.
•___ I currently own this property. ___ I plan to purchase this property.___ I am an agent/consultant acting on behalf of the requestor.___ Other (please explain): ____________________________________________________________.
•Reason for request: (check as many as applicable)___ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to
avoid all aquatic resources.___ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to
avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.___ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require
authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictionalaquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting process.
___ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require authorization fromthe Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
___ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the U.S. which isincluded on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
___ A Corps JD is required in order to obtain my local/state authorization.___ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps confirm that
jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.___ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
___ Other: ___________________________________________________________
•Type of determination being requested:___ I am requesting an approved JD.
___ I am requesting a preliminary JD.___ I am requesting a “no permit required” letter as I believe my proposed activity is not regulated.
___ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information to inform my decision.
By signing below, you are indicating that you have the authority, or are acting as the duly authorized agent of a person or entity with such authority, to and do hereby grant Corps personnel right of entry to legally access the
site if needed to perform the JD. Your signature shall be an affirmation that you possess the requisite property rights to request a JD on the subject property.
*Signature: ____________________________________Date: _________________
•Typed or printed name: __________________________________________
Company name: __________________________________________
Address: __________________________________________
__________________________________________
Daytime phone no.: __________________________________________
Email address: __________________________________________
*Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Final Rule for 33 CFR Parts 320-332.Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above.Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website and on the Headquarters USACE website.Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property – Wetland Delineation & Request for Corps Jurisdictional Determination
Attachments
Attachment 2
General One, Inc. Demersville Road Property – Field
Summary Report
(406) 782-5220 info@waterenvtech.com waterenvtech.com
Prepared for:
General One, Inc.
307 Spokane Avenue | Whitefish, MT, 59937
June 2024
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property
Wetland Delineation Field Summary Report
Flathead County, Montana
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... i
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... ii
List of Appendices ................................................................................................................... ii
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1
Site Assessment ......................................................................................................................1
Photographic Survey ...............................................................................................................2
Wetland Determination Forms .................................................................................................2
Discussion ...............................................................................................................................3
References ..............................................................................................................................5
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Figures, Tables, and Appendices
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1a. Site Location – Topo Map – National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
Figure 1b. Site Location – Aerial Map – Montana Wetland and Riparian
Framework (MWRF)
Figure 1c. Site Location – Aerial Map – USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey
Figure 2. Wetland Assessment Results – Survey Locations and Photo Points
List of Appendices
Appendix A. Photo Journal
Appendix B. Wetland Determination Forms
Introduction
The proprietor of 330 Demersville Road, General One, Inc., proposes to subdivide the
property for future residential development. The project is located in Flathead County,
approximately 2 miles southeast of Kalispell, Montana. The subject property is located
within Section 28, Township 28 North, Range 21 West as shown on Figures 1a, 1b, &
1c. For development planning and to meet regulatory requirements, a wetland
assessment was conducted to identify and quantify Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
(WOTUS) and adjacent wetlands. Water and Environmental Technologies (WET)
conducted the assessment within the entirety of the property, with wetlands delineated on
the western portion of the property as shown on Figure 2.
This field summary report is not intended to serve as a complete wetland delineation
report that satisfies the permitting requirements of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps). The purpose of this report is to identify and describe the locations of
jurisdictional wetlands on the property.
Site Assessment
To facilitate the wetland assessment, a preliminary review of historic aerial photos, soils
(NRCS, 2024), stream (USGS, 2024), and wetland (MTNAP/USFWS 2024) data was
completed to assess the likelihood the proposed development area is located within
jurisdictional waters. It was determined that the development area could potentially
contain jurisdictional waters. Therefore, a wetland delineation was conducted. The
wetland assessment was conducted to identify the boundaries of jurisdictional WOTUS
and adjacent wetland areas, so these areas could be potentially avoided during future
development.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Field Summary Report
2
WET personnel conducted a wetland assessment within the subject property on June 5,
2024, to determine the location of jurisdictional waters and to document wetland
characteristics according to the regulations established in 33 CFR § 328.3 - Definition of
“Waters of the United States”.
The wetland assessment was conducted in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps, 1987), and the Regional
Supplement to the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and
Coast Region (Version 2.0) (Corps, 2010). Survey methodology adhered to projects
greater than 5-acres in size and equipment and resources utilized for the routine
assessment included background maps, Western Mountains Supplement Data Forms,
Root Slayer shovel, Munsell Soil Color Chart (Munsell, 2015), 50-foot tape measure,
ArrowGold RTK GNSS Receiver GPS Unit, and ArcGIS Mobile Data Collector. The
locations of plant community types were identified and sketched on a field map.
Representative observation points were selected to characterize the plant community
types. The observation points were assessed for wetland indicators. Western Mountains
Supplement - Wetland Determination Data Forms were completed to document the
habitat type and plant community.
This summary report describes field activities, survey results, and summarizes the habitat
types encountered. The wetland assessment involved an ocular and photographic survey
of the project area, as well as detailed vegetation, soil, and hydrology evaluations. The
entire survey area was visually inspected for possible jurisdictional waters and wetland
surveys were performed in suspected jurisdictional areas. Observation point locations and
wetland boundaries were flagged on-site and captured using a survey grade GPS unit.
Photographic Survey
Photographs were collected within the project area to document current site conditions.
Vegetation communities, soil test pits, and hydrologic indicators were documented and
are included in Appendix A. Photo location points and photo direction arrows are shown
on Figure 2.
Wetland Determination Forms
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Field Summary Report
3
After visually inspecting the proposed project area for hydrophytic vegetation, hydrology,
and considering topographical restraints, observation points were selected within areas
displaying wetland characteristics. Observation points were selected to represent the
most likely jurisdictional wetland areas based on the site characteristics and were paired
with upland points to aid in delineating wetland boundaries.
The observation points captured the habitat present and provided a method to assess the
proposed project area. Assessments of vegetation, soil, and hydrologic features were
used to determine the presence/absence of jurisdictional WOTUS. For a wetland to be
considered jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), three
wetland characteristics are required: 1) hydrophytic vegetation, 2) hydric soils, and 3)
wetland hydrology. Wetland areas must also meet the definition of a WOTUS. The
locations of the observation points are shown on Figure 2 and the wetland determination
forms are included in Appendix B.
To perform a rapid wetland assessment on areas greater than 5-acres in size, a baseline
was established that was parallel to the general flow of water in the area, with the nearest
major watercourse being the depressional wetland complex. The length of the baseline
was approximately 0.407-miles, thus requiring three (3) perpendicular survey transects.
Survey transects were located near the midpoint of each baseline increment then
adjusted to include all plant communities and major wetland features. The established
survey transects were assessed in the field and paired observation points were utilized
to determine jurisdictional areas encountered along each transect. Additional field
observations were collected in suspected jurisdictional areas that fell outside of the survey
transects to ensure survey completeness. Following the assessment of the survey
transects and using the additional field observation data outside the transect areas,
jurisdictional boundaries were delineated between each survey transect.
Discussion
Below is a summary of the jurisdictional waters identified during the site assessment
along with the quantity of delineated wetlands by wetland type and the difference
between Montana Riparian and Wetland Framework (MTNHP, 2024) mapped wetlands
and the wetland areas delineated by WET.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Field Summary Report
4
During the on-site assessment, wetland boundaries were identified and delineated in
areas that contained the appropriate vegetation, soils, and hydrology as shown on
Figure 2. The delineation was conservative and includes habitats which display
evidence of seasonal inundation. Following the delineation, the acreage of the mapped
wetland areas were calculated using ArcGIS. It was determined that approximately
3.331-acres of wetland habitat occurs within the property which contains all three wetland
criteria. The wetland habitat within the depressional channel on the southern portion of
the property was characterized as Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent, Continuously
Saturated (PEM1D). The wetland habitat within the depressional channel on the
northern portion of the property was characterized as Palustrine, Emergent,
Persistent, Semipermanently Flooded (PEM1F). The freshwater pond between the
channels was characterized as Palustrine, Aquatic Bed, Rooted Vascular,
Permanently Flooded (PAB3H). Wetland hydrology is influenced by seasonal
floodwaters and a high-water table. While the southernmost wetlands were not
delineated during the field assessment, it is assumed that these wetlands have a
direct, physical surface water connection to Ashley Creek, a WOTUS; therefore, these
wetlands are likely jurisdictional. According to the MRWF produced by the Montana
Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP), the total amount of mapped wetlands was 4.006-
acres. This is a difference of 0.675-acres. The areas mapped by the MTNHP located
outside the delineated boundary lacked one or more of the required wetland criteria.
The Corps has ultimate authority over the jurisdiction determination process,
nationwide permitting, and mitigation requirements. This summary report’s intended
purpose is to inform the client on the location of jurisdictional wetlands that if avoided
will prevent the need for potential permitting, and serves as the wetland delineation
field summary report in support of potential future permitting, if required. This report is
not intended to serve as a full wetland delineation report that would satisfy Corps
permitting requirements.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation References
5
References
Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP), 2022. Montana Wetlands and Riparian
Framework Mapper. Available at: http://mtnhp.org/nwi/. Accessed May 2024.
Munsell Color System (Munsell), 2015. Munsell Soil Color Book. Grand Rapids, MI. Available at: https://munsell.com/.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 2024. Web Soil Survey: Flathead
County Area, Montana. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm Accessed May 2024. United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual. Environmental Laboratory U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS. United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), 2010. Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys
and Coast Region (Version 2.0). ed. J.S. Wakely, R.W. Lichvar, C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2024. National Wetlands Inventory
Mapper. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Accessed June 2024.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2024, National Hydrography Dataset.
Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national- hydrography/nhdplus-high-resolution. Accessed May 2024.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation Figures
Figures
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a a
aa
a
a
a
a
a
a
a a
a
a a
a
a
a a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
Fl
a
t
h
e
a
d
R
i
v
e
r
Ash
l
e
y
C
r
e
e
k
Project Location
Lat: 48.15656 N
Long: 114.280181 W
S28; T28 N; R21 W
Flathead
County
Legend
Project Location
Project Area
County Boundary
State Boundary
National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
Perennial Stream/River
Intermittent Stream/River
a Flow Direction01,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500
Feet
.
Pa
t
h
:
M
:
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
G
I
S
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
.
a
p
r
x
,
A
u
t
h
o
r
:
k
s
t
a
r
r
DA
T
E
:
6
/
2
4
/
2
0
2
4
JO
B
#
:
B
E
H
R
M
O
1
FI
G
U
R
E
1
a
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
O
A
D
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
D
E
L
I
N
E
A
T
I
O
N
TO
P
O
M
A
P
-
N
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
H
Y
D
R
O
G
R
A
P
H
Y
D
A
T
A
S
E
T
(
N
H
D
)
NO
T
E
S
5432
MA
P
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
1
RE
V
I
E
W
DR
A
F
T
DA
T
E
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
NO
.
R2UBG
PSS1A
PABF
PABFx
PEM1A
PABG
R2UBF
PEM1F
PABGx
PEM1C
Rp1SS
Rp1FO
Rp1EM R3UBH
PABFh
Project Location
Lat: 48.15656 N
Long: 114.280181 W
S28; T28 N; R21 W
Flathead
County
Legend
Project Location
Project Area
County Boundary
State Boundary
Montana Wetland and Riparian
Framework (MWRF)
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Freshwater Scrub-Shrub Wetland
Riparian Emergent
Riparian Forested
Riparian Scrub-Shrub
River01,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500
Feet
.
Pa
t
h
:
M
:
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
G
I
S
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
.
a
p
r
x
,
A
u
t
h
o
r
:
k
s
t
a
r
r
DA
T
E
:
6
/
2
4
/
2
0
2
4
JO
B
#
:
B
E
H
R
M
O
1
FI
G
U
R
E
1
b
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
O
A
D
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
D
E
L
I
N
E
A
T
I
O
N
AE
R
I
A
L
M
A
P
-
M
O
N
T
A
N
A
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
&
R
I
P
A
R
I
A
N
F
R
A
M
E
W
O
R
K
NO
T
E
S
5432
MA
P
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
1
RE
V
I
E
W
DR
A
F
T
DA
T
E
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
NO
.
Kw
Sr
Db
Project Location
Lat: 48.15656 N
Long: 114.280181 W
S28; T28 N; R21 W
Flathead
County
Legend
Project Location
Project Area
County Boundary
State Boundary
USDA-NRCS Web Soils Survey
Db
Kw
Sr01,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500
Feet
.
Pa
t
h
:
M
:
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
G
I
S
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
\
B
E
H
R
M
0
1
.
a
p
r
x
,
A
u
t
h
o
r
:
k
s
t
a
r
r
DA
T
E
:
6
/
2
4
/
2
0
2
4
JO
B
#
:
B
E
H
R
M
O
1
FI
G
U
R
E
1
c
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
O
A
D
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
D
E
L
I
N
E
A
T
I
O
N
AE
R
I
A
L
M
A
P
-
U
S
D
A
-
N
R
C
S
W
E
B
S
O
I
L
S
S
U
R
V
E
Y
NO
T
E
S
5432
MA
P
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
1
RE
V
I
E
W
DR
A
F
T
DA
T
E
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
NO
.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation
Appendices
Appendix A
Photo Journal
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-01
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 1, facing south.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-02
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 1, soils.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-03
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 2, facing south.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-04
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 2, soils.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-05
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Freshwater Pond, facing north.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-06
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 3, facing southeast.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-07
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 3, soils.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-08
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 4, facing northwest.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-09
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 4, soils.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-10
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 5, facing southwest.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-11
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 5, soils.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-12
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Riparian Area, facing north.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-13
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 6, facing west.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-14
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 6, soils.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-15
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 7, facing east.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-16
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Observation Point 7, soils.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-17
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Transect 1, facing northwest.
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-18
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Transect 2, facing northwest.
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Wetland Delineation Wetland Delineation Report Photo Journal
PHOTOGRAPH NUMBER:
P-19
PHOTOGRAPHER:
Jay Slocum
PHOTO DATE:
June 5, 2024
PHOTO LOCATION:
Flathead County, Montana
PHOTO DESCRIPTION:
Transect 3, facing northwest.
General One, Inc. – Demersville Road Property Wetland Delineation
Appendices
Appendix B
Wetland Determination Forms
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 1
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Channel Concave 1
48.15445899 -114.28223306 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes PEM1C
The wetland encompassing Observation Point 1 is confined within the channel bottom, bordered by steeply sloped margins. All three
wetland indicators are present at this location. Observation Point 1 serves as the wetland paired point for Observation Point 2.
E 44A
30 m r
Crataegus douglasii 15 FAC
Prunus virginiana 5 FACU
2015 m r
Cornus alba 5 FACW
55 m r
Phalaris arundinacea 100 FACW
10030 m r
Clematis vitalba 10 FAC
100
4
5
80.00
0 0
105 210
25 75
5 20
0 0
135 305
2.25
Observation Point 1 is situated within a canal depression adjacent to a steep slope, on which all shrub and tree
strata are located. The canal itself is characterized by a monoculture dominated by Reed Canarygrass.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 1
0 3 10YR 4/2 100 Muck
3 17 10YR 5/2 100 Silty Clay Loam
The soil profile at Observation Point 1 displayed a mucky texture in the uppermost 3 inches, transitioning to a silty clay loam
from 3 to 17 inches below the surface. The presence of hydrogen sulfide was detected, accompanied by visual indicators of
a depleted matrix.
0
2
0
At Observation Point 1, surface water was present at the bottom of the channel, with the water table inundating the test pit 2 inches below
ground surface. The soils were saturated throughout. The channel was situated 10-15 feet below the surrounding topography. Notable
hydrological indicators included an algal mat, water-stained leaves, aquatic invertebrates, and the presence of a hydrogen sulfide odor.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 2
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Upland None 2
48.15445507 -114.28213718 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes
Observation Point 2 is situated within an upland field atop the marginal slopes encircling the wetland channel below, positioned approximately 10-15 feet above it. The adjacent slope
descends sharply towards the wetlands. No wetland indicators were identified at this site. Observation Point 2 serves as the upland paired point for Observation Point 1.
E 44A
30 m r
Crataegus douglasii 10 FAC
Prunus virginiana 10 FACU
2015 m r
Cornus alba 5 FACW
Symphoricarpos albus 1 FACU
65 m r
Bromus inermis 30 UPL
Cirsium vulgare 30 FACU
Bromus tectorum 10
Phalaris arundinacea 10 FACW
Cirsium arvense 10 FAC
9030 m r
Clematis vitalba 10 FAC
100
3
6
50.00
0 0
15 30
30 90
41 164
30 150
116 434
3.74
Observation Point 2 is positioned at the top of the marginal slope encircling the depressional wetland below,
situated within an upland field predominantly occupied by noxious weeds and perennial grasses.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 2
0 13 10YR 4/2 100 Sandy Loam
13 18 10YR 6/3 99 10YR 4/6 1 RM M Silt Loam
Observation Point 2 exhibited no discernible signs of hydric soil indicators. The test pit revealed a uniform
sandy loam soil texture extending from the surface to a depth of 18 inches below the surface.
Observation Point 2 is situated atop the marginal slope encircling the wetland below, approximately
10-15 feet above the wetland channel. No discernible indicators of wetland hydrology were noted at
this location.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 3
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Depression Sideslope Concave 2
48.15732131 -114.28145543 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes Riparian
Observation Point 3 is representative of both the riparian areas delineated in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). The riparian zone is elevated and remains
unaffected by groundwater or surface flows originating from the nearby wetland regions. Observation Point 3 did not exhibit any wetland indicators.
E 44A
30 m r
Populus tremuloides 25 FACU
2515 m r
Crataegus douglasii 10 FAC
Prunus virginiana 10 FACU
Symphoricarpos albus 10 FACU
305 m r
Dactylis glomerata 25 FACU
Poa compressa 25 FACU
Bromus inermis 20 UPL
Alopecurus pratensis 15 FAC
Taraxacum officinale 5 FACU
Cirsium arvense 5 FAC
9530 m r
0
1
7
14.28
0 0
0 0
30 90
100 400
20 100
150 590
3.93
Observation Point 3 is situated within a riparian zone characterized by a prevalence of meadow/hay
grasses, interspersed with shrubs primarily distributed along the slopes of the riparian depression.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 3
0 13 10YR 4/2 100 Sandy Loam
13 18 10YR 6/3 99 10YR 4/6 1 RM M Silt Loam
At Observation Point 3, the soil profile consists of a sandy loam texture from the surface to a depth of 13 inches,
transitioning to a silt loam soil with minor indications of redox processes observed at 17-18 inches below the surface. The
soil characteristics are consistent with pasture soil and do not meet the criteria for hydric soils.
Observation Point 3 is positioned within a riparian depression ideal potential wetland formation. However, this riparian zone
is elevated and remains unaffected by groundwater, in contrast to the adjacent wetland depression. Despite its location,
Observation Point 3 did not exhibit any discernible indicators of wetland hydrology.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 4
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Bench Convex 1
48.15695909 -114.28239264 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes
Observation Point 4 is positioned on a bench within the riparian corridor, situated upgradient of the channel bottom below, approximately 6 feet higher than the adjacent surface water. Positioned between the channel and
nearby upland pasture, this point displays no discernible wetland indicators. Observation Point 4 serves as the upland paired point to Observation Point 5.
E 44A
30 m r
Populus balsamifera 30 FAC
Populus tremuloides 10 FACU
4015 m r
Crataegus douglasii 5 FAC
Symphoricarpos occidentalis 5 FAC
105 m r
Poa compressa 50 FACU
Bromus inermis 30 UPL
Cirsium arvense 5 FAC
Lathyrus ochroleucus 5
Vicia americana 3 FAC
9330 m r
0
3
6
50.00
0 0
0 0
48 144
60 240
30 150
138 534
3.86
Observation Point 4, situated on a bench within the riparian corridor, displays vegetation characteristic of
riparian ecosystems found in the region, predominantly consisting of pasture grasses.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 4
0 9 10YR 3/2 100 Loam
9 18 10YR 6/3 100 Sandy Loam
Observation Point 4 consists of nondescript loam soil from the surface to a depth of 9 inches, transitioning to sandy loam
soil from 9 to 18 inches below the ground surface. The soils were dry, and no discernible hydric soil indicators were
observed at this location.
Observation Point 4 did not exhibit any wetland hydrology indicators. The point is located
approximately 6 feet above the adjacent surface water, and does not experience the hydrological
influences typical of wetland environments.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 5
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Channel Concave 2
48.156972 -114.2824549 WGS 84
Kw - Kalispell-Demers silt loams,0 to 3 percent slopes Not Mapped
Observation Point 5 is situated within a wetland fringe positioned at the toe of the channel sideslopes delineating the channel and adjacent wetland areas. All three key wetland indicators
were evident at this location; this point is located within a wetland. Observation Point 5 serves as the wetland paired point to Observation Point 4.
E 44A
30 m r
Populus tremuloides 20 FACU
Populus balsamifera 10 FAC
3015 m r
Symphoricarpos occidentalis 10 FAC
Crataegus douglasii 5 FAC
155 m r
Typha latifolia 50 OBL
Phalaris arundinacea 10 FACW
Poa compressa 10 FACU
Equisetum arvense 5 FAC
Cirsium arvense 5 FAC
Chamaenerion angustifolium 5 FACU
8530 m r
15
4
5
80.00
50 50
10 20
35 105
35 140
0 0
130 315
2.42
Observation Point 5 is situated within the fringe of a wetland channel, dominated primarily by Broadleaf Cattail.
The vegetation is comprised of mostly wetland species, interspersed with various weeds and grasses.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 5
0 2 10YR 3/1 100 Muck
2 10 10YR 5/2 100 Silty Clay
10 18 10YR 5/1 80 10YR 2/1 D M Clay
Observation Point 5 exhibits mucky soil characteristics within the upper 2 inches of the soil profile, transitioning to silty clay
soil from 2 to 10 inches below the surface. Beneath this layer, clay soil is present from 10 to 18 inches, showing signs of
matrix depletion starting at a depth of 10 inches below the ground surface.
9
0
Observation Point 5 is situated within a wetland fringe positioned at the toe slope of the boundary topography. The presence of a hydrogen
sulfide odor was noted. Groundwater filled the soil test pit up to a depth of 9 inches below the ground surface, and soil saturation was
present throughout. The point is located approximately 2 feet from the adjacent surface water.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 6
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Terrace Slope Concave 2
48.1585172 -114.27958301 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes Not Mapped
Observation Point 6 lies approximately 10 feet beyond the boundary delineating hydrophytic vegetation and is situated roughly 6 feet above the seasonal
inundation zone. No discernible wetland indicators were noted at this location. Observation Point 6 serves as the upland paired point for Observation Point 7.
E 44A
30 m r
15 m r
Crataegus douglasii 10 FAC
Cornus alba 5 FACW
Symphoricarpos occidentalis 3 FAC
Rosa woodsii 2 FACU
205 m r
Bromus inermis 25 UPL
Poa compressa 25 FACU
Dactylis glomerata 15 FACU
Phalaris arundinacea 15 FACW
Cirsium arvense 10 FAC
Alopecurus pratensis 5 FAC
Maianthemum racemosum 1 FAC
9630 m r
4
2
4
50.00
0 0
20 40
29 87
42 168
25 125
116 420
3.62
Observation Point 6, positioned on a terrace sideslope approximately 6 feet above the seasonal inundation zone, is characterized by the presence of typical
pasture grasses commonly found in this region. Shrubs are also present along the sideslope of the depressional channel.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 6
0 21 10YR 4/2 100 Loam
Observation Point 6 displayed a soil profile characterized entirely by nondescript loam extending from the surface to a
depth of 21 inches below the ground surface. No discernible hydric soil indicators were observed at this location.
Observation Point 6 is positioned at the upper slope of the depressional channel, approximately 6
feet above the seasonal inundation zone. No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at this
location.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site:City/County:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):Lat:Long:Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals:(A)(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
1
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:) % Cover Species?Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Behr-Anderson Subdivision Flathead County 2024-06-05
Colton Behr Montana Obs Pt 7
JS/CG/KS S28 T28N R21W
Channel Concave 3
48.15856209 -114.27960217 WGS 84
Sr - Swims silty clay loam,0 to 4 percent slopes PEM1C
Observation Point 7 is positioned on the fringe of the wetland channel, directly adjacent to the surface water, approximately 2 feet away at the toe slope of the bounding topography. All
three key wetland indicators were prominently observed at this location. Observation Point 7 serves as the wetland paired point to Observation Point 6.
E 44A
30 m r
15 m r
Crataegus douglasii 10 FAC
Cornus alba 5 FACW
Symphoricarpos occidentalis 3 FAC
Rosa woodsii 2 FACU
205 m r
Phalaris arundinacea 75 FACW
Cirsium arvense 5 FAC
Maianthemum racemosum 5 FAC
Hippuris vulgaris 3 OBL
Alisma triviale 2 OBL
Equisetum arvense 2 FAC
Alopecurus pratensis 2 FAC
9430 m r
6
3
3
100.00
5 5
80 160
27 81
2 8
0 0
114 254
2.22
Observation Point 7 exhibits dense hydrophytic vegetation along the edge of the wetland channel,
with some vegetation partially submerged in water.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Obs Pt 7
0 9 10YR 4/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 RM M
Silty Clay Loam
9 18 10YR 7/2 90 10YR 5/8 10 RM M Clay
Observation Point 7 displayed a soil profile characterized by silty clay loam from the surface to a depth of 9 inches below
ground surface. Below this layer, clay soil was observed from 9 to 18 inches below the surface, with evidence of redox
processes present throughout. Hydrogen sulfide was also detected at this site.
13
9
Observation Point 7, situated on a wetland fringe approximately 2 feet from nearby surface water of the channel, displays
hydrological conditions strongly influenced by groundwater. The water table within the test pit rose to within 13 inches of
the ground surface. Additionally, a hydrogen sulfide odor was detected at this location.
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
BAR H DR
BAR H DR
PARK
13.31 Ac.
84 83
85
88
87
86
91
90
89
153
154
155
149
150
151
152
142
141
140
139
146
145
144
143
156
138
93 92
162
161
160
159
130
131
132
133
126
134
127
135
128
136
129
82 81
80
79
78
77
137
53
39
38
37
36
41
40
33
34
29
30
31
32
28
42 54
51
43
35
44 52
45
46
47
48
5049
9 810
121
120
119
118
125
117
124
116
123
115
122
114
94
11
12
13
164
165
158
166
157
73
72
71
110
102
109
101
108
100
107
99
106
98
113
105
97
112
104
96
111
103
95
27
19
26
18
25
17
24
23
16
22
21
20
74
75
76
68
69
70
67
3 2 1
7 6 5 4
15 14
163
148
147
UTILITY
LOT
Temp. Hammerhead
Turnaround Easement
56 57 58 59
6055
62 63
61 66
6564 FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
FUTURE CONNECTION
FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
XUGFO
XUGFO
XU
G
F
O
XU
G
F
O
XSTR XSTR XSTR XSTR
X-W
X-W
X-
W
X-
W
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XSAN
REVISIONS
PROJECT INFO
ENGINEER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY
DRAWING NO.
NOTICE:
McClure Engineering Co. is not
responsible or liable for any issues,
claims, damages, or losses(collectively, “Losses”) which arise
from failure to follow these Plans,
Specifications, and the engineering
intent they convey, or for Losses
which arise from failure to obtain
and/or follow the engineers’ orsurveyors' guidance with respect to
any alleged errors, omissions,
inconsistences, ambiguities, orconflicts contained withinthe Plans and Specifications.
Ankeny,IA | Carroll,IA
Cedar Rapids,IA | Clive,IA
Coralville,IA | Council Bluffs,IA
Fort Dodge,IA | Sioux City,IA
Columbia,MO | Macon,MO
North Kansas City,MO
Lenexa, KS
Portsmouth, NH | Boston, MA
2024006632
AN
D
E
R
S
O
N
R
A
N
C
H
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
KA
L
I
S
P
E
L
L
,
M
T
5
9
9
0
1
S. CONLEY J. ALVAREZ B. KEMP
1700 Swift Ave., Suite 100
North Kansas City, Missouri 64116
P 816-756-0444
F 816-756-1763
MONTANA CERTIFICATE OF
AUTHORITY NO. PEL-EF-LIC-67688
EXPIRES: OCTOBER 1, 2025
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
0 10010050 EXH - C1
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
LEGEND
ASPHALT
CONCRETE
STR STR
STR
STR
ST
R
ST
R
ST
R
S
T
R
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W W
W
W
ST
R
STR
STR
STR
ST
R
STR STR
WWWW
W
W
W
WWWWWWWW W
W
ST
R
ST
R
STR
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
BAR H DR
BAR H DR
PARK
13.31 Ac.
84 83
85
88
87
86
91
90
89
153
154
155
149
150
151
152
142
141
140
139
146
145
144
143
156
138
93 92
162
161
160
159
130
131
132
133
126
134
127
135
128
136
129
82 81
80
79
78
77
137
53
39
38
37
36
41
40
33
34
29
30
31
32
28
42 54
51
43
35
44 52
45
46
47
48
5049
9 810
121
120
119
118
125
117
124
116
123
115
122
114
94
11
12
13
164
165
158
166
157
73
72
71
110
102
109
101
108
100
107
99
106
98
113
105
97
112
104
96
111
103
95
27
19
26
18
25
17
24
23
16
22
21
20
74
75
76
68
69
70
67
3 2 1
7 6 5 4
15 14
163
148
147
UTILITY
LOT
Temp. Hammerhead
Turnaround Easement
56 57 58 59
6055
62 63
61 66
6564 FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
FUTURE CONNECTION
FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
XUGFO XUGFO
XU
G
F
O
XU
G
F
O
XSTR XSTR XSTR XSTR
X-W X-W X-W
X-W
X-
W
X-
W
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XSAN
XU
G
F
O
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XS
A
N
XU
G
T
XU
G
T
XU
G
T
XU
G
T
XU
G
T
XU
G
T
XUG
E
Curb & Gutter
Cur
b
&
G
u
t
t
e
r
XOHP
XOHP
XOHP
XOHPXOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XO
H
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XO
H
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOHP
XOHP
XOHP
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XOH
P
XO
H
P
XOH
P
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
X-W
EC
ST-06
EC
BAR H DR
UN
I
T
E
D
D
R
US
H
W
Y
9
3
[I
]
[I
]
[I
]
[I
]
[I
]
[I
]
M
M
1
2
3
4
5 6
7
8
9
10
17 18
19
REVISIONS
PROJECT INFO
ENGINEER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY
DRAWING NO.
NOTICE:
McClure Engineering Co. is not
responsible or liable for any issues,
claims, damages, or losses(collectively, “Losses”) which arise
from failure to follow these Plans,
Specifications, and the engineering
intent they convey, or for Losses
which arise from failure to obtain
and/or follow the engineers’ orsurveyors' guidance with respect to
any alleged errors, omissions,
inconsistences, ambiguities, orconflicts contained withinthe Plans and Specifications.
Ankeny,IA | Carroll,IA
Cedar Rapids,IA | Clive,IA
Coralville,IA | Council Bluffs,IA
Fort Dodge,IA | Sioux City,IA
Columbia,MO | Macon,MO
North Kansas City,MO
Lenexa, KS
Portsmouth, NH | Boston, MA
2024006632
AN
D
E
R
S
O
N
R
A
N
C
H
DE
M
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
KA
L
I
S
P
E
L
L
,
M
T
5
9
9
0
1
S. CONLEY J. ALVAREZ B. KEMP
1700 Swift Ave., Suite 100
North Kansas City, Missouri 64116
P 816-756-0444
F 816-756-1763
MONTANA CERTIFICATE OF
AUTHORITY NO. PEL-EF-LIC-67688
EXPIRES: OCTOBER 1, 2025
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
0 10010050 EXH - C2
SI
T
E
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
LEGEND
ASPHALT
CONCRETE
PROPOSED SANITARY LINE
PROPOSED SANITARY
FORCE MAIN
PROPOSED STORM LINE
CONNECTION FOR FUTURE
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER OUTFALL TO
EXISTING "CLOSED BASIN"
CONNECT FORCE MAIN TO
EXISTING CITY SEWER MAIN CONNECTION FOR
FUTURE SANITARY SEWER
PROPOSED WATER LINEW
SS
STR
Page 1 of 9
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Keith Haskins, PE,
Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer
City of Kalispell, MT
From: Donovan Voeller, PE,
Lead Distribution and Collection System Modeling Services Specialist
AE2S
Re: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
Date: November 13, 2024
1 BACKGROUND
1.1 Authorization, Scope, and Model Assumptions
Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC. (AE2S) received a request from the
City of Kalispell (City) to analyze the wastewater collection system for the future Growth and
Develop Lift Station 9 (GD09) service area with consideration of recent development interest
and previous planning efforts.
The wastewater generated for the area in question will require a new lift station and gravity
sewer network in the area between Highway 93 and Demersville Road and between Lower
Valley Road and United Drive. The City has requested AE2S to determine a recommended
capacity and required sewer depths of a regional lift station that meets the needs of the proposed
developments and the regional service area. Modeling tasks included the following:
• Data Review:
o Determine the lift station service area based on known and expected
developments as well as topographical restraints.
o Identified development: Gardner/Anderson PUD (Development).
• Model Analysis:
o Determine sewer depths required to serve the regional area for GD09.
o Calculate wastewater loading for GD09.
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 2 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
1.2 Previous Studies and Other Documents
The following documents were identified as being relevant to evaluating the wastewater
collection system:
• Wastewater Facility Plan Update for Kalispell, MT dated June 2019 by AE2S (2019
WWFPU). This facility plan provides a review of model development, calibration, system
evaluation, and recommended system improvements to address existing system issues as
well as a master plan for buildout of the system as described therein.
• New Development Water and Wastewater Design Guidelines, dated June 2019 by the
City of Kalispell (2019 Design Guidelines). This document summarizes planning design
guidelines for water and wastewater.
• Anderson/Gardner PUD information as provided by the City.
Refer to the Figure 1 for a general overview of the GD09 location and service area as identified
in the 2019 WWFPU. The Development is proposing to install the lift station at an alternate
location as shown in Figure 1 which alters the station’s potential service area. Refer to Figure 2
for a general overview of the Garnder/Anderson PUD, the relocated lift station, and the updated
service area.
Figure 1: 2019 WWFPU GD09 Location and Service Area
2019 GD09
Lift Station
2019 GD09
Lift Station
Service Area
2019 GD11
Lift Station
Service Area
2019 GD11
Lift Station
Alternate
GD09 Location
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 3 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
Figure 2: Revised GD09 Location and Service Area
2 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Analysis Assumptions
The 2019 WWFPU and 2019 Design Guidelines established the following analysis criteria based
on requirements from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), the City, and
recommended industry standards.
• Average annual wastewater loading factors:
o Single Family Residential Unit = 1 ERU = 200 gpd.
o Multifamily Residential Unit = 0.8 ERU = 160 gpd.
o Commercial Land Use = 540 gpd/acre
Additional GD09 Lift Station
Service Area
(by Gravity Main)
Gardner/
Anderson
PUD
Future GD11
Lift Station
Service Area
Additional GD09 Lift Station
Service Area
(by Low Pressure System)
New
GD09
Location
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 4 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
o Undeveloped Growth Area: 4 single family dwellings per acre
• Peaking factors formula:
• Population estimated as 2.5 people per dwelling unit for the purpose of peaking factor
calculation.
• Minimum bury depth: 4 ft.
• Minimum Slope: 0.004 ft/ft.
• Minimum Velocity for force mains:
o 4 ft/s (City standard)
o 3 ft/s (MT DEQ standard)
• Maximum Velocity for force mains:
o 8 ft/s (City and DEQ standard)
• Maximum flow depth for gravity sewer d/D:
o ≤ 10 inches: 0.7
o >10-15 inches: 0.73
• Minimum Force main Size: 4-inch
2.2 GD09 Service Area Considerations and Layout
The proposed lift station location was used as the starting point for determining the new service
area. The proposed lift station is positioned in the eastern portion of the Development and lies
within a depressed area. Low and high points within the area were identified and gravity sewers
were added to the model based on an assumed 8-inch diameter with a minimum grade of
0.004 ft/ft. Manholes were placed at intersections and at high and low spots. Each manhole
assumes an elevation drop of 0.2 ft.
Inverts were assumed to begin 6 ft below existing grade. This equates to a minimum cover of
slightly greater than 5 ft with 8-inch sewer. This assumption is considered appropriate for
planning sewer shed service area while providing slightly more conservative bury depth than the
required minimum cover of 4 ft.
Figure 3 provides an overview of the rim and inverts of the proposed gravity sewer that is
required to serve the regional lift station area. Figure 4 provides an overview of corresponding
sewer depths (depth to sewer invert out of the manhole). Figure 4 also points out four low-lying
and shallow manholes that control the sewer depths within the gravity network. Maintaining
sewer depths on Lower Valley Road and the low-lying area within the Anderson Development
results is deep sewers in the range of 20-27 ft within certain corridor. Rim elevation is based on
publicly available elevation data. Site grading by the developer may result in alternate sewer
depths or rim elevations.
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 5 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
Commercial lots 1-5 within the Development may be able to tie into existing gravity sewer along
HWY 93. Due to uncertainty of building placement on lots, final building grade elevation, and
relative shallow existing sewer depth it was assumed that all flow from the PUD goes to GD09.
Similarly, shallow sewer along United Drive was deemed unable to serve commercial lots north
of United Drive.
The eastern service area along Trails End Drive and Wild Goose Lane was reviewed with City
staff. A deep gravity sewer network (in excess of 25 ft) will be required to serve these areas due
to local low lying areas. Due to the established neighborhood, easement requirements, and road
network it was concluded that this area would be best served by a future low pressure force main
system while still contributing flow to GD09. The low pressure service area is identified in
Figure 2.
Figure 3: Manhole Rim and Inverts.
Rim: 2920.17
Invert Out (W):
2913.91
Rim: 2925.35
Invert Out (E):
2898.43
Rim: 2918.60
Invert Out (E):
2895.15
Rim: 2919.12
Invert Out (S):
2909.53
Rim: 2919.82
Invert Out (N):
2912.18
Rim: 2918.18
Invert Out (S):
2912.18
Rim: 2919.99
Invert Out (W):
2906.07
Rim: 2915.25
Invert Out (W):
2904.80
Rim: 2920.25
Invert Out (W):
2903.41
Rim: 2910.22
Invert Out (N):
2893.00
Rim: 2902.48
Invert Out (E):
2896.48
Rim: 2921.18
Invert Out (E):
2900.47
Rim: 2921.34
Invert Out (N):
2914.79
Rim: 2916.01
Invert Out (N):
2910.01
Rim: 2915.58
Invert Out (E):
2908.28
Rim: 2913.22
Invert Out (W):
2907.25
Rim: 2915.73
Invert Out (S):
2906.24
Rim: 2917.37
Invert Out (W):
2908.23
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 6 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
Figure 4: Sewer Depths
2.3 System Loading
Table 1 provides a summary of the Development and the additional growth areas that would
contribute to the regional lift station. The summary includes the dwelling unit count, estimated
average and peak flows, and peaking factors.
The calculated average daily flow for the Development is 37.1 gpm. Note that this includes all
commercial lots with the PUD. The calculated average daily flow for the remaining service area
of GD09 was calculated to be 33.6 gpm. The total daily flow for the regional lift station is
calculated to be 70.1 gpm.
Rim: 2919.82
Invert Out (N):
2912.18
Rim: 2918.18
Invert Out (S):
2912.18
Rim: 2902.48
Invert Out (E):
2896.48
Rim: 2913.22
Invert Out (W):
2907.25
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 7 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
Table 1: Regional Lift Station Summary
Development Land Use
Type Acreage Dwelling
Units
Wastewat
er Duty
Factor
Average
Wastewater
Flow
Average
Wastewater
Flow
Peaking
Factor
Peak
Flow
(Ac) (Du) (gpd/DU) (gpd) (gpm) (gpm)
Anderson Single
Family 170 200 34,000 23.6 4.0 94.7
Gardner Commercial 53.98 540 29,149 13.5 4.0 54.4
Subtotal Flow for
Gardner/Anderson: 63,149 37.1 3.9 143.3
Gravity Area Existing2 Single
Family 105 200 21,000 14.6 4.1 59.8
Gravity Area Infill3 Single
Family 15.5 62 200 12,400 13.5 4.2 56.4
Low Pressure Area2 Single
Family 40 200 8,000 5.6 4.2 23.6
Subtotal Flow for
Additional Area: 41,400 33.6 4.0 133.3
Total Regional Flow: 104,549 70.7 3.7 263.1
1Assumes all commercial lots flow to GD09.
2Based on count of parcels with existing homes.
3Based on undeveloped area within service boundary.
Using the MT DEQ peaking factor formula based on 2.5 people per dwelling unit the peaking
factor was calculated and varies based on the contributing population. Note that the peak flow for
the Development is estimated to be approximately 143 gallons per minute (gpm) while the total
peak flow into the regional lift station is estimated to be 263 gpm.
3 MODELING SCENARIOS ANALYZED
One model scenario was used to analyze the peak flow into the Development and regional lift
station.
• 10_States_Exist.: Used to evaluate average and peak flow.
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 8 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
4 MODELING RESULTS
The model was used to assess the system under peak conditions. Hydraulic modeling results are
discussed in the following sections as they relate to lift station capacity, force main capacity, and
gravity sewer capacity.
4.1 Existing System Hydraulic Analysis Review
Lift Station Capacity:
As previously established in Table 1, the Development contributes a peak flow of 143 gpm to
the lift station. The regional lift station would require a minimum firm pumping capacity of
263 gpm to meet peak hour flow for the entire service area. Pumping requirements to meet force
main velocities are discussed in the following paragraph.
Force Main Capacity
The minimum size force main allowed by City standards is 4-inch. The velocity in a 4-inch force
main at 263 gpm is 6.7 ft/s while the velocity in a 6-inch force main would be 3.0 ft/s. Therefore,
the minimum force main size of 4-inch would be required to meet City velocity requirements.
Gravity Sewer Results
Maximum flow rate allowed within an 8-inch sewer is 288 gpm as calculated using Manning’s
equation with n = 0.011; minimum slope = 0.004 ft/ft; and d/D = 0.7. The maximum flow and
gravity sewer capacity was reviewed using the model under the peak flow conditions. Proposed
gravity main for the regional lift station should be 8-inch.
Technical Memorandum
RE: Kalispell On-Call Modeling
Utility Modeling Task No. 15
GD09 Service Area Layout and Capacity Review
November 13, 2024
Page 9 of 9
E:\Data\Projects\K\Kalispell\Phase 021 - Wastewater Utility\TO-15 GD-09 Lift Station\TO-15 GD09 Service Area Review - FINAL.docx
5 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
5.1 Sizing Requirements for the GD09 Regional Lift Station
Summary of modeled conditions and recommendations for a regional lift station are as follows:
• Modeled Flows:
o Average Development Flow: 37.1 gpm
o Peak Development Flow: 143.3 gpm
o Average Lift Station Inlow: 70.7 gpm
o Peak Lift Station Inflow: 263.1 gpm
▪ Based on MT DEQ peaking factor formula.
• Infrastructure Sizing:
o Recommended Force main Size: 4-inch
o Recommended Firm Capacity: 263 gpm
▪ Velocity will be 6.7 ft/s in a 4-inch force main.
• (meets City minimum velocity requirement of 4 ft/s)
• (meets MT DEQ minimum velocity of 3 ft/s)
• (mees the maximum velocity restraint of 8 ft/s)
o Recommended Gravity Sewer Size within Development 8-inch.
Ov
e
r
h
a
n
g
Overhang
Ov
e
r
h
a
n
g
84
83
85
88
87
86
91
90
89
153
154
155
149
150
151
152
142
141
140
139
146
145
144
143
156
138
93 92
162
161
160
159
130
131
132
133
126
134
127
135
128
136
129
82 81
80
79
78
77
137
53
39
38
37
36
41
40
33
34
29
30
31
32
28 42
54
51
43
35
44 52
45
46
47
48
5049
9 810
121
120
119
118
125
117
124
116
123
115
122
114
94
11
12
13
164
165
158
166
157
73
72
71
110
102
109
101
108
100
107
99
106
98
113
105
97
112
104
96
111
103
95
27
19
26
18
25
17
24
23
16
22
21
20
74
75
76
68
69
70
67
3 2 17654
15 14
163
148
147
UTILITY
LOT
56 57 58 59
6055
62 63
61 66
6564
FU
T
U
R
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
CITY STREET
10' CITY STREET
Temp. Hammerhead
Turnaround Esmt.
Proposed Building Envelope
Building
Easement
Road
Gas Line
Electric Vault
Power Overhead
Power Underground
Sewer Line
Fiber Optics
Telephone Underground
Water Line
Proposed Driveway
Proposed Building
Notes:
Vertical Datum: NAVD88 (per SSI GPS observation, processed from Leica Smartnet Base MTKA using Geoid 18)
Contour Origin: Big Sky Aerial Solutions LiDAR point data (dated 2023-11-08).
Any changes to the ground since November 2023 are not reflected.
Basis of Bearings: Geodetic North per static GPS single-point calibration
84 83
85
88
87
86
91
90
89
93 92
126
82
81
125
94
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
Proposed Building Envelope
Building
Easement
Road
Gas Line
Electric Vault
Power Overhead
Power Underground
Sewer Line
Fiber Optics
Telephone Underground
Water Line
Proposed Driveway
Proposed Building
Notes:
Vertical Datum: NAVD88 (per SSI GPS observation, processed from Leica Smartnet Base MTKA using Geoid 18)
Contour Origin: Big Sky Aerial Solutions LiDAR point data (dated 2023-11-08).
Any changes to the ground since November 2023 are not reflected.
Basis of Bearings: Geodetic North per static GPS single-point calibration
Airport Way T win Acres Dr
U
S
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
9
3
S
B
urlin
gto
n
N
orth
ern
S
a
nta
F
e
Lower Valley RdCemeteryRd
United
Dr
Welf Ln
US Hig h w ay 93 Alt
US
Highway
93
S
Demersville
Cemetery
SnowlineLn
A s hley M dws
U
S
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
9
3
S
S tillwaterRive
r
W
i
l
d
G
o
o
s
e
R
u
n
StillwaterRiver
Lo
w
e
r
Valley
Rd
Demersville
Rd
Silver
Leaf
Dr Wild
Goose
LnTrails
End
Dr
Bells Ln
Demersville
Rd
Foys Bend Ln
UNZONED
Unzoned
Roadway
B-5/PUD
Industrial-Business
With Pud
B-2 General
Business
B-2/PUD General
Business
With Pud
RA-1/PUD Residential
Apartment With Pud
B-5/PUD
Industrial-Business
With Pud
B-5
Industrial-Business
B-2/PUD General
Business
With Pud
R-3/PUD
Residential
With Pud
Subject Parcels
Data Sources:
Montana Cadastral,Flathead County GIS
City of Kalispell GIS,
Austin Bachurski -
0 775 1550 2325387.5 Feet¯
Subject Parcels
B-2 General Business
B-2 General Business w/PUD
B-5 Industrial Business
B-5 Industrial Business w/PUD
R-3 Residential w/PUD
RA-1 Residential Apartment w/PUD
Unzoned Right of Way
Basemap:
Esri Community Maps, ArcGIS.com
Kalispell Zoning
Anderson Ranch
April 9, 2025
Airport Way T win Acres Dr
U
S
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
9
3
S
B
urlin
gto
n
N
orth
ern
S
a
nta
F
e
Lower Valley RdCemeteryRd
United
Dr
Welf Ln
US Hig h w ay 93 Alt
US
Highway
93
S
Demersville
Cemetery
SnowlineLn
A s hley M dws
U
S
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
9
3
S
S tillwaterRive
r
W
i
l
d
G
o
o
s
e
R
u
n
StillwaterRiver
Lo
w
e
r
Valley
Rd
Demersville
Rd
Silver
Leaf
Dr Wild
Goose
LnTrails
End
Dr
Bells Ln
Demersville
Rd
Foys Bend Ln
Urban
Mixed Use
Industrial
Floodway
Suburban
Residential
City Airport
Commercial
Public Or
Openspace
Urban
Residential
Suburban
Residential
Urban
Residential
Industrial
Subject
Parcels
0 775 1550 2325387.5 Feet
Kalispell Growth Policy
Anderson Ranch
Data Sources:
Montana Cadastral,Flathead County GIS
City of Kalispell GIS,
Austin Bachurski -¯
Subject Parcels
Commercial
Industrial
Urban Mixed Use
Urban Residential
Suburban Residential
City Airport
Public/Quasi Public, Openspace
Floodway
Basemap:
Esri Community Maps, ArcGIS.comApril 9, 2025
Lower Valley Rd
Welf Ln Al
f
a
l
fa
Dr
U
S
Highway
93
S
93
93
United
Dr
US
Highway
93
S
StillwaterRiver
Lower Valley Rd
Demersville
Rd
SilverLeafDr
Wild
Goose
Ln
Ekalaka
Ln
Bar H Dr
Trails
End
Dr
Demersville
Rd Bells Ln
Bells
Ln
0 425 850 1275212.5 Feet
Kalispell Mailing List
¯
Subject Parcel
Mailing List Parcels
Other Parcels
Basemap:
Esri Community Maps, ArcGIS.com
Anderson Ranch
April 9, 2025
Data Sources:
Montana Cadastral,Flathead County GIS
City of Kalispell GIS,
Austin Bachurski -
Development Services Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning
To: Kalispell Planning Commission From: PJ Sorensen, Assistant Director Date: May 13, 2025 Work Session – Anderson Ranch PUD BACKGROUND: The work session for the Anderson Ranch Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) will begin immediately after the conclusion of the regularly scheduled meeting. This PUD is an update/amendment of the Gardner-Anderson Ranch PUD approved in 2024, addressing the residential portion of the overall PUD. At this
work session, planning staff will give an overview of the project and answer general questions from the Planning Commission. Per Section 27.19.020(5)(a), a work session for a PUD application must be completed prior to any public meeting. The work session is intended for informational purposes only to inform both the public and the
Planning Commission about the various aspects of the project. It is not intended to be a public hearing and the Planning Commission will not take any formal action on the application.
The Planning Commission will hold a work session on the item listed below: 1. File #KA-25-03; KPUD-25-02; and KPP-25-02 – Colton Behr, has submitted applications for Anderson Ranch, including requests for annexation, initial zoning of R-3 (Residential) with a Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) overlay and preliminary plat approval for 166 residential lots on approximately 42.5 acres, including lots, roads, and common areas. The majority of the subject property was previously annexed and this petition would annex the remaining 11.7 acres of the tract. The PUD is an amendment of the overall Gardner-Anderson Ranch PUD approved in 2024, which consisted of 94.4 acres with light-industrial/commercial and residential components. This PUD amendment covers the residential component in the eastern portion of the overall PUD. The property is located on Demersville Road to the west of Bar H Drive and can be described as a tract of land
situated, lying and being in the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and in the southwest quarter, all of Section 28, Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana, and more particularly described as follows to wit: Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 22969 (records of Flathead County, Montana) and containing 42.500 acres, subject to and together with all appurtenant easements of record. Questions for the Planning Commission to consider 1. Are the application requests appropriate for the project?
2. Is there other information that the Commission would need in order to be able to make a recommendation to the City Council on these application requests? Next Steps Following the discussion in the work session format, the Planning Commission may hold a public hearing on the application requests at the Tuesday, June 10, 2025, regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission may then forward the matter to the City Council. Attachments: Application materials
Rail, Transit and Planning Division Phone: (406) 444–3423 Fax: (406) 444–7671 An Equal Opportunity Employer Toll–free: (800) 714–7296 TTY: (800) 335–7592 Web Page: www.mdt.mt.gov
2701 Prospect ▪ PO Box 201001 Helena MT 59620-1001 Christopher Dorrington, Director
January 6, 2025
Eric Riese
25 New Hampshire Ave Suite 255 Portsmouth, NH 03801
Subject: GardnerAndersonRanchPUD_US93_MP109_Kalispell_D1
Dear Eric Riese,
The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) has reviewed the December 2024
Gardner/Anderson Ranch PUD Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Update and Signal Warrant Analysis for
the mixed-use development off US93 and south of Lower Valley Rd. in Kalispell, MT. MDT concurs
that a traffic signal will be warranted at the build-out of Phase 2 with the currently proposed trip
generation. However, MDT requests that as development plans finalize, the developer must also
update the trip generation and overall TIS, so mitigations required for each phase can be reviewed
by MDT.
Currently, MDT has no comments/concerns with Phase 1 of this development as proposed.
I am available for any questions you may have and can be reached at (406) 444-6126 or
bcotton@mt.gov.
Sincerely,
Brittany Cotton SIAP Transportation Planner copies: Justun Juelfs, Kalispell Area Maintenance Chief
Rebecca Anderson, P.E., Kalispell Area Traffic Engineer Bob Vosen, Missoula District Administrator
Development Services Department
201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning
To: Kalispell Planning Commission From: Donnie McBath, Planner II
Date: May 13, 2025 Work Session – Montana Land Use Plan BACKGROUND: In the last legislative session, the Montana Legislature passed Senate Bill 382, which created the Montana Land Use Planning Act (MLUPA). Under the Act,
for cities such as Kalispell, the traditional growth policy, subdivision regulations, and
zoning regulations are largely replaced with a new land use planning paradigm. A key concept of MLUPA is that a land use plan is developed through extensive public input and becomes the central guiding document for land use decisions. Many actions—such as subdivisions—transition from public hearings to administrative review. Public
engagement is intended to occur at the stage when the plan and regulations are created,
rather than during review of individual projects. This work session is the seventh in a series the Planning Commission will hold in the coming months. The focus of this session is a review and discussion of the preliminary
draft land use plan, with particular attention on Chapter 4: Housing. Future work sessions
will be publicly noticed, and a formal hearing will be held before the Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council for its consideration. Chapter 4: Housing
Chapter 4 presents a comprehensive assessment of Kalispell’s housing landscape and
outlines long-term strategies to ensure that the city can meet future residential demand in a balanced, inclusive, and fiscally responsible manner. Kalispell’s population is expected to grow by approximately 19,000 residents by the year
2045, creating the need for between 8,800 and 10,000 new housing units. The city
currently has an estimated 15,847 housing units, consisting of approximately 60% single-family homes, 30% multifamily units, and 10% manufactured or mobile homes. While recent development activity has made progress toward meeting demand, challenges remain—particularly related to affordability, limited vacancy, and an imbalance in the
geographic distribution of housing types.
To address these issues, Chapter 4 promotes a set of housing strategies aimed at increasing access to attainable housing for all income levels. It supports compact and connected neighborhood patterns through infill development, redevelopment of
underutilized sites, and higher-density housing near services and transportation corridors.
The chapter also calls for aligning housing growth with infrastructure capacity, reducing regulatory barriers, and streamlining the review process.
This chapter is foundational to Kalispell’s implementation of MLUPA. It reflects the city’s continued commitment to proactive, plan-based decision-making and reinforces a long-term vision for residential stability. By advancing equitable, efficient, and resilient housing opportunities, the plan ensures that Kalispell is prepared to meet future growth in a manner that
supports community values, infrastructure capacity, and the principles of sustainable
development. An attached memo identifies 14 potential housing strategies currently under consideration. From these, the city will ultimately select five to prioritize for implementation. Each strategy is intended to address critical housing challenges identified in Chapter 4, including affordability,
product diversity, and infrastructure coordination. These options will serve as the basis for
continued public input and technical review as the land use planning process advances. Attachments:
Montana Land Use Planning Act (CHAPTER 25. MONTANA LAND USE PLANNING ACT - Table of Contents, Title 76, MCA) Chapter 4 Housing Section
Housing Strategy Memo
Development Services Department 201 1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning
To: Kalispell Planning Commission
From: PJ Sorensen, Assistant Director Date: May 13, 2025 Work Session – Land Use Plan Housing Strategies
As part of the update of the zoning regulations that would occur after the adoption of the land use
plan, Section 76-25-302, MCA, requires that our zoning regulations include at least five specific housing strategies which are intended to encourage the development of housing for the community. The land use plan itself would not necessarily need to include the strategies, but the implementation of the plan through the zoning regulations would need to include them and would need to be adopted
by the statutory deadline. It should be noted that some strategies build on others, such as allowing
duplexes on single family lots and allowing fourplexes. Adopting both only counts as one, not two. Part of the City’s outreach efforts have included questionnaires (both hard copies and through our website) and responses noted on display boards at live outreach events. These responses related to
which housing strategies the respondent would support and should be a factor in the eventual
selection of the specific strategies. The purpose of this work session is to gauge the relative support of the Commission for each strategy based on the pros/cons of the strategy, the potential to encourage housing, the potential impact on the
existing community, and community response.
(a) Allow, as a permitted use, for at least a duplex where a single-unit dwelling is permitted: This strategy is a form of an accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”). ADUs are currently allowed throughout most of the city. The
zoning ordinance was updated in 2021 to allow them in all zones allowing
residential use except the R-2 and R-3. Subsequently, the legislature passed a bill requiring cities to allow them in all such zones (although it is currently possible to opt out as a 382 city under the land use plan statute). We have issued five ADU permits since 2021. Allowing them in the remaining zones
would not appear to have a major impact as a practical matter if that trend were to continue. It also
was tied for the third highest level of support of all of the strategies through community outreach. (b) Zone for higher density housing near transit stations, places of employment, higher education facilities, and other appropriate population
centers, as determined by the local government: While this strategy is a little
difficult to quantify, it also was tied for the highest level of support through community outreach. In many ways, the current zoning map substantially follows this strategy already. Specifically encouraging higher density in those areas through the land use plan and any subsequent zoning would be a
relatively simple method to adopt.
(c) Eliminate or reduce off-street parking requirements to require no more than one parking space per dwelling unit: This strategy received the fifth lowest amount of support through community outreach. However, the
legislature just approved a bill effectively requiring that this strategy be
adopted. It mandates that cities cannot require more than one parking space per residential unit, and cannot require any parking for child care, deed-restricted housing, assisted living, or residential units under 1200 square feet in size. The effective date of the new state statute is October 2026. Since this
will be required in any case, it seems to be a logical strategy to adopt.
(d) Eliminate impact fees for accessory dwelling units or developments that include multi-unit dwellings or reduce the fees by at least 25%: Reductions in impact fees have several difficult layers which aren’t necessarily readily
apparent. Impact fees are heavily regulated under state law. Generally, they
are based on a proportionate share of identified capital improvement projects with an established cost. Reductions for certain uses would tend to increase the share for other uses, such as a stand-alone single-family residence, which raises equity issues. Additionally, this strategy was tied for the third lowest
amount of support from community outreach. With those issues and the lack of support, this strategy
seems to be problematic. (e) Allow, as a permitted use, for at least one internal or detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with a single-unit dwelling occupied as a primary
residence: This strategy is very similar to (a), which allows a duplex (i.e.
two units in the same building), but extends the concept to allow two residential units on a property as either a duplex or a separate structure such as a converted garage. Otherwise, the same analysis applies. They are already allowed throughout most of the city, but only five ADU permits have
been issued since 2021. Having a separate unit received moderate support
(eighth highest through community outreach), but somewhat less than allowing only a duplex. (f) Allow for single-room occupancy developments: In many ways, this type of housing has been allowed in the city under a different name. Single-family
zoning has been a misleading term due to court decisions that do not allow for
criteria that require a family relationship to live in the same house. Effectively, one dwelling unit with roommates is considered single-family. This strategy would recognize that situation, although it could potentially expand it to more formalized arrangements where there are locked bedrooms
with shared kitchens, bathrooms, and other common facilities that are a little
more separated than the typical roommate arrangement. This strategy has the sixth highest level of support through community outreach.
(g) Allow, as a permitted use, a triplex or fourplex where a single-unit dwelling is permitted: As opposed to ADUs, the city does not currently allow triplex or fourplex dwellings in single-family zoning. The legislature entertained a bill that would require cities to allow them, but the bill was not
passed. Community outreach for this strategy was tied for the third lowest.
Concerns about the additional density impacting existing neighborhoods, the ability to plan for infrastructure, and the lack of community support would indicate that this strategy would not be preferred.
(h) Eliminate minimum lot sizes or reduce the existing minimum lot size
required by at least 25%: In many ways, we have already adopted this strategy. The minimum lot size in most residential zones is 6000 square feet. A 25% reduction would drop that to 4500 square feet. Through the PUD process, the city has routinely approved lots at that size or much less.
Formally reducing the lot size would simply be in line with what is already
generally accepted and allowed on a regular basis. Community outreach showed lukewarm support, being the ninth highest level of support. (i) Eliminate aesthetic, material, shape, bulk, size, floor area, and other massing
requirements for multi-unit dwellings or mixed-use developments or remove at
least half of those requirements: Exactly what this strategy means is difficult to interpret. Aesthetic requirements, such as architectural review, would be largely eliminated. Bulk and size requirements are related to height, setbacks, lot coverage, and similar standards. Removing all of them does not seem
appropriate, and removing half of them is difficult to define. It received the
lowest amount of support through community outreach by a substantial amount and would not appear to be a preferred strategy. (j) Provide for zoning that specifically allows or encourages the development
of tiny houses, as defined in Appendix Q of the International Residential Code
as it was printed on January 1, 2023: Under our current zoning, there is nothing that would prohibit tiny houses. We would simply apply the same setback and other property development standards as we would for any other house. With ADUs being an option through most if not all of the residential
zones in the city, tiny homes (i.e. under 400 square feet) would be a potential
method of construction. Currently adopted building codes by the city do not include Appendix Q, which mostly adjusts certain minimum floor areas and dimensional requirements to reflect the smaller footprint while still requiring a permanent foundation and other requirements. The appendix is not included within the required codes that are typically adopted when
the council adopts building codes by reference, but is an optional add-on under state regulations
which the city can choose to adopt. Providing for this option tied for the third highest level of support through community outreach.
(k) Eliminate setback requirements or reduce existing setback requirements by at least 25%: As with the reduction in lot size, the city has often reduced
setbacks in order to reflect smaller lot sizes in PUDs. Choosing this strategy
if lot sizes are reduced would make sense in the same way. However, setbacks already are at a point where greater reductions would bring other factors into play. For example, side setbacks are typically five feet, which meshes with fire code requirements for fire walls and limits on windows and
doors. Front setbacks are currently 15 feet which meshes with 10-foot utility
easements required in the front yard of new subdivisions and separation requirements from electrical pedestals. Reductions in the setbacks would still work, but would make the application of setbacks a little more difficult. This strategy had the fourth lowest level of support through community outreach. If a reduction in minimum lot size is an adopted strategy, a corresponding reduction in
setbacks should be considered. Otherwise, it would not appear to be a preferred option.
(l) Increase building height limits for dwelling units by at least 25%: Allowing the potential for additional building height is an option which may have less impact than it may initially appear. Current maximum heights in
most residential zones is 35 feet, but very few homes are built to that height.
It is more typical to have homes that are 20-25 feet tall. Increasing allowable height to 44 feet would not have much, if any, practical impact. Apartment zones are currently 45 feet (would increase to 57 feet) and commercial/industrial zones are currently 60 feet/unlimited with a
conditional use permit (would increase to 75 feet). This strategy received the fifth highest level of
support through community outreach. (m) Allow multi-unit dwellings or mixed-use development as a permitted use on all lots where office, retail, or commercial are primary permitted uses:
City zones where office, retail, or commercial are primary permitted uses
would be our RA and B zones, except for the B-5. Prior to 2023, our zoning regulations required a conditional use permit in all those zones except the B-3 (Core Area Business – following the Parkline Trail area), which was a permitted use. The 2023 Legislature amended state statutes to require that
multi-unit dwellings (which the state defined as five or more units) be a
permitted use in all commercial zones (the city has defined multi-family as three or more units). Given that change, the only thing really necessary to adopt this strategy would be to allow multi-family as permitted in the RA-1 and RA-2 zones rather than requiring a conditional use permit, at least for five or more units. Developments would still have the same design standards but would not
have the process required for a conditional use permit. This strategy tied for the highest level of
support through community outreach and would seem to be a preferred option.
(n) Allow multi-unit dwellings as a permitted use on all lots where triplexes or fourplexes are permitted uses: The city defines multi-family dwellings as three or more units, which aligns with the building code. At one level, if the
city were to allow multi-family as a permitted use in all RA and B zones,
this would be a very simple inclusion if we included triplexes and fourplexes as permitted rather than just five or more units. Because it is closely related, it is possible it may not count as a separate strategy. At another level, the legislature proposed requiring triplexes and fourplexes in all residential
zones and the bill, while ultimately not being passed, did receive significant
support. If a similar bill were to pass in the future, this strategy would allow five units or more in all residential zones. This strategy received the seventh highest level of support. With the potential issues with future legislative action and that it could be considered duplicative of allowing multi-family a s a permitted use in office/commercial zones, this strategy would need careful consideration
to avoid potential unintended consequences.
City of Kalispell
Housing Element Update
(Growth Policy Update — 2025)
City of Kalispell Planning Department
Date:
May 2025
A. Housing
Housing is a cornerstone of Kalispell’s long-term vitality, identity, and economic stability. A
well-balanced housing strategy ensures that residents of all ages, abilities, and income
levels can live and thrive in the community. This includes young professionals, working
families, seniors on fixed incomes, and individuals employed in essential sectors such as
healthcare, education, public safety, and the service industry.
As of spring 2025, Kalispell’s housing market remains highly competitive. According to
Zillow, the average rent across all property types is approximately $1,650 per month,
reflecting a $150 decrease from the previous month and a $135 decline year-over-year. This
positions Kalispell’s rental rates about 10% below the national average of $1,825. Despite
these modest reductions, the market remains tight, with only 120 active rental listings
available.
The rental vacancy rate in Kalispell stands at 1.1%, indicating a constrained rental supply.
This low vacancy rate underscores the sustained demand amid limited availability,
highlighting the importance of using updated sources beyond the U.S. Census Bureau’s
2022 ACS 5-Year Estimates to accurately reflect current market conditions.
(Sources: Zillow Rental Market Trends, April 29, 2025; Zumper Kalispell Rent Report, April
2025)
Owner-occupied units also demonstrate strong occupancy, particularly in established
neighborhoods. Demographic shifts—such as a growing senior population, declining
household sizes, and an increasing number of younger residents entering the housing
market—are contributing to the need for more diverse and attainable housing types.
Demand continues for varying housing types including townhomes, apartments, and
accessory dwelling units (ADUs), which offer flexible options suited to a wide range of
lifestyles and income levels.
Kalispell is projected to grow from approximately 33,194 residents in 2025 to 54,392 by
2045, representing a 63% increase, or about 2.5% annually. This anticipated growth will
place significant pressure on the city's housing market, services, and infrastructure.
The projected annual growth rate of 2.5% reflects a blend of historical trends and updated
demographic forecasts. Historically, Kalispell has experienced population growth averaging
approximately 2% per year. The 2.5% figure represents a modest upward adjustment to
account for increased regional in-migration, economic development pressures, and the
city’s growing role as a service and employment center in northwest Montana. This rate
aligns with observed trends over the past decade and provides a realistic yet proactive
foundation for long-range housing and infrastructure planning.
To meet baseline demand, Kalispell will require between 8,800 and 10,000 new housing
units by 2045. This estimate was derived by analyzing projected population growth, current
household composition trends, and applying an updated average of approximately 2.4
persons per household (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates) with a 5% vacancy rate. This methodology reflects local conditions and aligns
with broader regional and state-level projections, accounting for household formation,
turnover, and seasonal fluctuations.
Kalispell is actively preparing to meet long-term housing demand. Between 2021 and 2025,
the City Council approved approximately 7,500 new residential dwelling units across
multiple subdivisions, multi-family projects, and infill developments. These entitlements
reflect a proactive approach to accommodate projected growth and maintain a balanced
supply of housing aligned with the city’s long-range land use strategy. Of the approved
units, roughly 2,000 have been constructed as of spring 2025, while an estimated 5,500
units remain unbuilt.
With Kalispell’s population expected to grow by approximately 19,000 residents by 2045,
the city will require between 8,800 and 10,000 new housing units to meet baseline
demand. The currently approved 7,500 units account for a significant share—roughly 75 to
85 percent—of this projected need, positioning Kalispell to meet its growth targets,
provided that development continues in a timely and coordinated manner.
As of 2025, Kalispell contains approximately 15,847 housing units. About 60% are single-
family homes, 30% are multi-family units, and 10% are mobile or manufactured homes.
Housing types are geographically distributed throughout the city. Newer subdivisions are
generally located on the north and west edges, while a greater concentration of multi-
family developments and infill projects are found near the downtown core and along major
transportation corridors such as U.S. Highway 93 and U.S. Highway 2. Historic
neighborhoods near downtown contain much of the older single-family housing stock.
The age of Kalispell’s housing varies significantly. Many homes in the downtown and Core
Area neighborhoods were constructed before 1970, while suburban areas experienced
substantial growth between 1990 and 2020. Overall, housing conditions are generally fair to
good, though some older areas may benefit from rehabilitation efforts to maintain livability,
safety, and affordability.
Kalispell is well-positioned to meet future housing needs through a combination of
approved developments, infill opportunities, and redevelopment of underutilized parcels.
Entitled projects offer a diverse mix of single-family, townhomes, multi-family, and senior-
oriented housing across the city. Infill sites, particularly those near downtown and along
major corridors, present additional opportunities for medium- and high-density residential
development aligned with the city's long-range planning goals.
As the city grows, its housing strategy must evolve to reflect shifting demographics,
economic conditions, and lifestyle preferences. Increasingly, the city faces pressure to
provide homes that are not only attainable but also diverse in type, size, and location. This
includes smaller units for young adults and retirees, accessible designs for aging residents,
and mixed-use neighborhoods that support walkability, and a high quality of life.
A coordinated and inclusive approach to housing must address several interconnected
priorities:
• Attainability: Ensuring housing costs remain aligned with local incomes to keep
Kalispell accessible to all residents.
• Availability: Expanding the supply of housing across income levels, particularly
rental units and entry-level ownership.
• Location: Prioritizing housing near jobs, schools, parks, transportation, and
services to promote accessibility and economic mobility.
• Design and Character: Respecting the existing character of neighborhoods,
particularly historic areas, while embracing sustainability, safety, and aesthetic
quality.
Housing also plays a critical role in Kalispell’s economic development. Businesses
evaluating relocation or expansion opportunities consider workforce housing availability a
key factor. Without adequate housing options for employees across salary levels, Kalispell
risks losing economic opportunities and talent.
Moreover, the quality, attainability, and accessibility of housing influence Kalispell’s
reputation as a livable, inclusive, and forward-thinking community. Poor housing
conditions, high costs, or limited diversity can exacerbate social and economic disparities,
undermining public trust and community cohesion.
To address these challenges and ensure a prosperous future, the City must continue a
proactive and comprehensive approach to housing policy. This includes leveraging tools
such as flexible zoning, public-private partnerships, redevelopment incentives, and
aligning with regional and state housing strategies to promote long-term stability.
Housing is more than shelter—it is the foundation of a strong, vibrant, and equitable
Kalispell.
Vacant Land and Zoning Capacity
As of 2025, the City of Kalispell contains a total of 8,436 acres within its municipal
boundaries. Of this, approximately 2,484 acres are classified as vacant land, representing
about 29.5% of the city’s total land area. This available land base presents a significant
opportunity for accommodating future residential, commercial, and public facility needs
within the existing city framework. Of that acreage, 2,389 acres (96%) have zoning
designations which would support housing. See Figure XX.
Beyond the city limits, but still within the Kalispell Annexation Boundary, an additional
3,871 acres of vacant land are available for future growth and have been given land use
designations as part of the future land use map in anticipation of annexation and reflect
Kalispell’s long-term land use goals (see Figure XX). This includes a diverse mix of zoning
designations that support residential neighborhoods, mixed-use nodes, employment
centers, and green space. In that overall acreage, 3390 acres (88%) would support zoning
that would allow for residential use.
This combined inventory offers Kalispell the ability to strategically manage growth through
a balance of infill development, redevelopment of underutilized parcels, and coordinated
annexation of surrounding vacant lands. These lands can accommodate a variety of land
use types, including higher-density housing near services, neighborhood commercial
districts, parks, and infrastructure corridors.
Proactively planning for the absorption of these vacant areas—especially those within the
annexation boundary—will be critical to:
• Meeting projected housing demand through 2045
• Promoting compact and connected neighborhoods
• Delivering city services and infrastructure efficiently
• Preserving long-term fiscal sustainability
• Implementing the city’s adopted land use vision
By leveraging this land capacity, Kalispell is well-positioned to guide responsible growth
that aligns with both current needs and future community aspirations.
Issues:
1. Population Growth:
Kalispell’s population is expected to grow by 63% by 2045, increasing from approximately
33,194 residents in 2025 to 54,392. This population growth is projected to generate
demand for an estimated 8,800–10,000 new housing units based on the city’s average
household size of 2.4 persons per household (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 ACS 5-Year
Estimates) and a 5% target vacancy rate. Accommodating this growth will require sustained
investment in housing, infrastructure, and land use planning.
2. Housing Ownership Challenges:
Homeownership—particularly for traditional detached single-family homes—has become
increasingly difficult for low- and moderate-income earners. In 2022, the median home
price in Kalispell surpassed $640,000. As of 2025, the median home value is approximately
$574,000, which still poses affordability challenges for much of the local workforce and
first-time homebuyers.
3. Demographic Shifts:
Kalispell’s population includes a growing number of seniors, single-person households,
and younger residents. While much of the existing housing stock consists of single-family
detached homes, there is rising demand for a greater diversity of housing types, including
assisted living units, smaller one-person homes, townhouses, apartment buildings,
accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and seasonal second homes.
4. Rental Market Pressure:
The City of Kalispell is currently experiencing moderate rental market pressure,
characterized by strong demand, limited available housing inventory, and exceptionally low
vacancy rates. As of spring 2025, the rental vacancy rate is approximately 1.1% (Source:
Point2Homes, citing U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2022 5-Year Estimates). Continued
monitoring and support for the timely build-out of approved projects will be critical to
alleviating long-term rental pressures and ensuring a balanced and resilient housing
market.
5. Fragmented Development: Residential development in Kalispell has often occurred in a
piecemeal manner, resulting in disjointed service delivery and a lack of community
cohesiveness and interconnectivity.
Goals:
1. Adequate Housing Supply: Provide an adequate supply and mix of housing that
meets the needs of present and future residents in terms of cost, type, design, and
location, including a projection for 8,800–10,000 new housing units by 2045 to
accommodate the population increase.
2. Preserve Historic Areas: Preserve Kalispell’s National Register Historic District that
includes more than 1,000 houses, Main Street, and Courthouse Circle.
3. High-Quality Development: Encourage high-quality residential development that
enhances neighborhood character, incorporates sustainable building practices, and
promotes long-term livability through thoughtful site design, architectural
standards, and integration with surrounding land uses.
Policies:
1. Access to Safe Housing: All residents should have the opportunity to live in
neighborhoods that provide safe housing.
2. Varied Housing Types: City regulations should maintain incentives to provide for
varied attainable housing types, including units to meet the needs of a growing
population.
3. Encouragement of Urban Residential Neighborhoods: Encourage the
development of urban residential neighborhoods as the primary residential land use
pattern in the Growth Policy area. These developments should incorporate design
features that are either consistent with or anticipate the changing character of the
area.
4. Consideration for Special Needs: Give special consideration to functional design to
accommodate seniors and disabled residents who have various special needs
regarding housing, transportation, handicapped access, and services.
5. Proximity to Services: High-density housing developments and senior housing
should be located in close proximity to other necessary services and incorporate
transportation options. This includes planning for future high-density residential
nodes that are strategically integrated with public infrastructure, commercial
services, transit corridors, and walkable amenities to promote accessibility and
reduce reliance on personal vehicles.
6. Home Occupations: Allow home occupations that would not create disturbances
beyond what is normally anticipated in residential areas.
7. Maintain Integrity of Residential Districts: Maintain the integrity of existing
residential districts so they are bicycle-safe and pedestrian-friendly.
8. Design and Connectivity: New residential subdivisions and multi-family
developments should be designed in accordance with the Kalispell Standards for
Design and Construction. When possible, neighborhoods should connect to and
complement the community’s trail system.
9. Creative Design in Larger Developments: On larger tracts of land, creative design
and a mix of housing types are encouraged within the overall density requirements to
create more dynamic neighborhoods, provide more open space, and protect
sensitive resource areas.
10. Density Guidelines:
• Suburban Residential (Low-Density): Up to 7 dwelling units per gross acre.
Typically includes housing types such as single-family homes on 4,500+ sq ft lots
and townhomes. Zero lot line and patio homes, when accompanied by generous
open spaces and common areas, may also be appropriate where clustering is used
to preserve natural features, reduce infrastructure costs, or enhance neighborhood
character
• Urban Residential (Medium-Density): Up to 12 dwelling units per gross acre.
Typically includes a mix of small lot single-family and attached housing of varying
configurations, such as duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, and limited uses. Zero lot
line and patio homes, when accompanied by ample open spaces and common
areas, may also be used to provide transitional density between lower-intensity
neighborhoods and higher-density mixed-use areas or corridor developments.
• High-Density Residential: Up to 20 units per acre. Up to 40 units per acre with PUD.
Typically, may include housing types such as multi-family buildings.
11. Access to Transportation and Services: Residential neighborhoods should have
convenient access to the transportation network, business districts, parks, and
schools via streets, sidewalks, and multi-use paths.
12. Compatibility of Housing Types: A variety of housing types and compatible land
uses are encouraged in residential areas and should be designed to fit the scale and
character of the neighborhood. Where appropriate, developers should utilize the
Planned Unit Development (PUD) process.
13. Second-Story Residential Units: Encourage and promote the use of second-story
residential units in the historic downtown and in the redevelopment of the Core Area.
14. Neighborhood Revitalization: Invest in the creation of neighborhood plans that
revitalize and energize deteriorated or blighted areas.
Recommendations:
1. Housing Study and Strategy:
Pursue a targeted Housing Study and Strategy focused on delivering attainable and
inclusive housing solutions for all income levels. This approach should respond
directly to the projected need for 8,800–10,000 new housing units by 2045,
emphasizing proactive development partnerships, site readiness, and housing
diversity.
2. Alternative Funding Mechanisms: Investigate alternative funding mechanisms to
reduce impact fees.
3. Rehabilitation Programs: Develop programs for rehabilitation of deteriorating and
historically significant housing and infrastructure.
4. Zoning Updates: Periodically review the zoning text and map to remain current with
changing technologies and policies, ensuring zoning supports the projected growth
and housing needs.
5. Pedestrian and Bicycle Network: The City will implement the MOVE 2040
Transportation Plan to expand and enhance the pedestrian and bicycle network.
This effort will align future infrastructure investments with the plan’s goals for
connectivity, safety, and multimodal accessibility across all neighborhoods.
6. Attainable Housing Programs: Support the efforts of the Kalispell Community
Development Department to encourage attainable housing programs.
7. Annual Growth Policy Map Review: Conduct an annual review of the Growth Policy
Land Use Map to ensure designated densities align with projected housing
demands and support the city’s long-term growth objectives.
8. Strategy Selection through Outreach: Utilize housing outreach efforts to inform
the selection of housing strategies required by the Montana Land Use Planning Act
(MLUPA), ensuring community input guides the prioritization of policies that best
address local housing needs.
9. Neighborhood Revitalization Resources: Foster neighborhood groups that can
serve as revitalization resources.
10. Mixed Uses in Core Area: Encourage mixed uses, including residential units, in the
core area redevelopment to support a dynamic, vibrant city center.
11. Targeted Stabilization Programs: Identify older neighborhoods and areas with
deteriorated housing for targeted stabilization programs.
12. Communication on Attainable Housing: Encourage open communication
between the City Council, Planning Commission, and other relevant boards and
commissions to support and coordinate attainable housing initiatives.
Actions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.