The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/23/2018 - Regular Agenda Packet - City CouncilCity Council Regular College Station, TX Meeting Agenda - Final City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 City Hall Council Chambers6:00 PMThursday, August 23, 2018 1. Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, Consider Absence Request. Hear Visitors: During this time a citizen may address the City Council on any item which does not appear on the posted Agenda. Registration forms are available in the Office of the City Secretary. This form should be completed and returned to the office by 5:30 PM on the day of the Council meeting. Upon stepping to the podium the speaker must state their name and city of residence, including the state of residence if the city is located out of state . Speakers are encouraged to identify their College Station neighborhood or geographic location. Each speaker's remarks are limited to three minutes. A group of five or more may register at the Office of the City Secretary by 5:30 PM on the day of the meeting and designate an individual to speak for 10 minutes on their behalf. All signers must be in attendance when the speaker is introduced and may not speak individually during Hear Visitors. A speaker who wishes to include computer -based information while addressing the Council must provide the electronic file to the City Secretary by noon on the day of the Council meeting. During presentations a series of timer lights will change from green to yellow and an alarm will sound after two and one -half or nine and one -half minutes to signal thirty seconds remaining. When time expires the timer light will change to red, the final alarm will sound, and the speaker must conclude the remarks. The City Council will listen and receive the information presented by the speaker, ask staff to look into the matter, or place the issue on a future agenda. Topics of operational concerns shall be directed to the City Manager. Comments should not personally attack other speakers, Council or staff. Consent Agenda At the discretion of the Mayor, individuals may be allowed to speak on a Consent Agenda Item. Individuals who wish to address the City Council on a consent agenda item not posted as a public hearing shall register with the City Secretary prior to the Mayor's reading of the agenda item. Registration forms are available in the lobby and at the desk of the City Secretary. 2. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of consent agenda items which consists of ministerial or "housekeeping" items required by law. Items may be removed from the consent agenda by majority vote of the Council. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for: • August 9, 2018 Workshop • August 9, 2018 Regular 18-05452a. Sponsors:Smith Page 1 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018 August 23, 2018City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final WKSHP080918 DRAFT Minutes RM080918 DRAFT Minutes Attachments: Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Brazos County and the City of Bryan to apply and accept a U.S. Department of Justice 2018 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). 18-05162b. Sponsors:Norris 2018 JAG Interlocal Agreement 7-31-18Attachments: Presentation, possible action, and discussion to approve a revised agreement for the City to sell reclaimed water to the Pebble Creek Country Club. 18-05262c. Sponsors:Gibbs Presentation, possible action, and discussion for an annual purchase contract with Bound Tree Medical, L .L.C for EMS supplies not to exceed $120,000. 18-05462d. Sponsors:McMahan 18300694.pdfAttachments: Regular Agenda Individuals who wish to address the City Council on an item posted as a Public Hearing shall register with the Office of the City Secretary. Registration forms are available in the Office of the City Secretary. This form should be completed and returned to the office by 5:30 PM on the day of the Council meeting. Upon stepping to the podium the speaker must state their name and city of residence, including the state of residence if the city is located out of state. Speakers are encouraged to identify their College Station neighborhood or geographic location. Each speaker's remarks are limited to three minutes. A group of five or more may register at the Office of the City Secretary by 5:30 PM on the day of the meeting and designate an individual to speak for 10 minutes on their behalf. All signers must be in attendance when the speaker is introduced and may not speak individually during that Public Hearing. A speaker who wishes to include computer -based information while addressing the Council must provide the electronic file to the City Secretary by noon on the day of the Council meeting. During presentations a series of timer lights will change from green to yellow and an alarm will sound after two and one -half or nine and one -half minutes to signal thirty seconds remaining. When time expires the timer light will change to red, the final alarm will sound, and the speaker must conclude the remarks. If Council needs additional information from the general public after the Public Hearing is closed some limited comments may be allowed at the discretion of the Mayor. Comments should not personally attack other speakers, Council or staff. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amendment to Appendix A, “Unified 18-05351. Page 2 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018 August 23, 2018City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final Development Ordinance,” Article 2, “Development Review Bodies”, Section 2.8 “Administrator”; Article 3, “Development Review Procedures”, Section 3.12 “Building Permit” and Section 3.13 “Certificate of Occupancy ”; Article 5, “District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards ”, Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards”; Article 7, “General Development Standards ”, Section 7.3 “Off-Street Parking Standards”, Section 7.6 “Landscaping and Tree Protection”, and Section 7.10 “Non-Residential Architectural Standards”; and Article 8, “Subdivision Design and Improvements ”, Section 8.3. “General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the City Limits ”, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, to correct text omissions, references, and other clerical errors. Sponsors:Gray Redlines Ordinance Attachments: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4, “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial on approximately 16.9 acres of land generally located at the southeast intersection of General Parkway and Holleman Drive South, along Old Wellborn Road. 18-05382. Sponsors:Lazo Background Information Vicinity Aerial SAM Rezoning Exhibit Zoning Map Application TIA 2 Ordinance with Condition Ordinance without Condition Attachments: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use & Character Map from Suburban Commercial to Urban for approximately 11.1 acres generally located in the City on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. 18-05403. Sponsors:Helton Page 3 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018 August 23, 2018City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final Loveless background Vicinity & Aerial Map Future Land Use and Character Map Ordinance Attachments: Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix “A”, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from Rural to Multi-Family on approximately 11.1 acres located on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. 18-05424. Sponsors:Helton Loveless background Vicinity, Aerial & Small Area Map Rezoning Map TIA Loveless Rezoning Ordinance Attachments: 5.Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items and review of standing list of Council generated agenda items: A Council Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 6. Adjourn. The City Council may adjourn into Executive Session to consider any item listed on this agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion. An announcement will be made of the basis for the Executive Session discussion. I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on August 17, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. _____________________ City Secretary This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Page 4 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018 August 23, 2018City Council Regular Meeting Agenda - Final Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun. "Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a Handgun that is Carried Openly." Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia. “Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411, Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad portando arma de mano al aire libre.” Page 5 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018 City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:118-0545 Name:Minutes Status:Type:Minutes Consent Agenda File created:In control:8/13/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for: • August 9, 2018 Workshop • August 9, 2018 Regular Sponsors:Tanya Smith Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:WKSHP080918 DRAFT Minutes RM080918 DRAFT Minutes Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for: • August 9, 2018 Workshop • August 9, 2018 Regular Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Good Governance Recommendation(s): Approval Summary:N/A Budget & Financial Summary: None Attachments: • August 9, 2018 Workshop • August 9, 2018 Regular College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ WKSHP080918 Minutes Page 1 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP CITY OF COLLEGE STATION AUGUST 9, 2018 STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF BRAZOS § Present: Karl Mooney, Mayor Council: Bob Brick Jerome Rektorik Linda Harvell Barry Moore John Nichols James Benham – via remote City Staff: Jeff Capps, Interim City Manager Jeff Kersten, Assistant City Manager Carla Robinson, City Attorney Tanya Smith, City Secretary Lisa McCracken, Record Management Administrator 1. Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present With a quorum present, the Workshop of the College Station City Council was called to order by Mayor Mooney at 4:01 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2018 in the Council Chambers of the City of College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas 7784 0. 2. Executive Session In accordance with the Texas Government Code §551.071-Consultation with Attorney, §551.072- Real Estate, and §551.074-Personnel, the College Station City Council convened into Executive Session at 4:01 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2018 in order to continue discussing matters pertaining to: A. Consultation with Attorney to seek advice regarding pending or contemplated litigation; to wit:  Kathryn A. Stever-Harper as Executrix for the Estate of John Wesley Harper v. City of College Station and Judy Meeks; No. 15,977-PC in the County Court No. 1, Brazos County, Texas; and  McCrory Investments II, LLC d/b/a Southwest Stor Mor v. City of College Station; Cause No. 17-000914-CV-361; In the 361st District Court, Brazos County, Texas  City of College Station v. Gerry Saum, Individually, and as Independent Executrix of the Estate of Susan M. Wood, Deceased; Cause No. 17-002742-CV-361; In the 361st District Court, Brazos County, Texas WKSHP080918 Minutes Page 2  Maura Juarez Garcia v. Andres Garcia and City of College Station; Cause No. 18-000419- CV-85; In the 85th District Court, Brazos County, Texas. B. Deliberation on the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property; to wit:  Property located generally in the vicinity of Highway 50 in South Robertson County, Texas. C. Deliberation on the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer; to wit:  Council self-evaluation  City Manager The Executive Session recessed at 5:08 p.m. 3. Take action, if any, on Executive Session. No action was required from Executive Session. 4. Presentation, possible action and discussion on items listed on the consent agenda. Items 2c, 2i, 2m and 2p were pulled from Consent for clarification. 2c): Tanya Smith, City Secretary, stated that there was no difference in cost to have the election in even or odd number of years. The 2017 election cost with all (5) entities involved was roughly around $18,000 and the 2016 election had only (3) entities involved, which our cost was around $25,600. (2i): Kelly Kelbly, Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation, gave a brief background on cost of the two existing sand volleyball courts at the Barracks Park. The proposed construction contract will resolve drainage issues within both volleyball courts as well as address drainage issues outside the courts. Mrs. Kelbly stated that the smaller park projects are handled internally but larger projects fall under capital projects, which they work with the other departments. (2m): Donald Harmon, Public Works Director, gave a brief background on the base failure of College Station streets. Mr. Harmon explained how the overlay is done on sections of the road that need to be repaired due to base failed. (2p): David Schmitz, Parks & Recreation Director, gave a brief background on the agreement with the City of Bryan regarding the Library. Mr. Schmitz explained the amount of $1,063,000 we gave the City of Bryan for staffing and operations, and maintenance. 5. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the FY 2018-2019 Proposed Budget. Mary Ellen Leonard, Director of Finance, presented the proposed FY2018-2019 Budget and noted that budget workshops are scheduled for August 20 and 21, to review the proposed budget of $360,680,102 and to discuss key budget decision points. A public hearing is scheduled for September 5 on the tax rate, September 13 a second public hearing on the tax rate and the proposed budget, and final action is scheduled for September 27. WKSHP080918 Minutes Page 3 6. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay process and possible changes to Section 5.11.D.2, Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts, of the Unified Development Ordinance. Justin Golbabai, Planning and Development, presented a follow-up presentation that 1) clarifies the process for establishing a Neighborhood Conservation Overlay and 2) summarizes the possible options to change this section of the UDO. UDO Requirements:  Required For All SF Overlays (Neighborhood Prevailing and Neighborhood Conservation Overlays):  Specific requirements regarding establishing the boundary of the overlay.  Required neighborhood meeting with Staff.  Requirements for a petition in which 50%+1 of the area property owners must sign in support for a valid application.  Application goes to P&Z Commission for a recommendation and City Council for a final decision.  Required of Neighborhood Conservation Overlay specifically:  6 property owners serve on a neighborhood stakeholder committee.  The development of a neighborhood conservation study with City staff. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered possible changes to the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay at their July 5th meeting. Planning and Zoning Commission did not have a consensus on no more than 2 unrelated option but was generally supportive of all other proposed modifications. Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended that the 50%+1 petition support be raised to a support level in the 58%-67% range. Council directed staff to notify property owners at the stage of the neighborhood meeting and to notify neighborhoods and adjacent subdivisions. Council directed staff to continue to waive the application fee but charge the applicants the cost of notification for the neighborhood meeting and for the rezoning application. Mayor Mooney recessed the Workshop at 6:19 p.m. Workshop reconvened at 7:23 p.m. Justin Golbabai, Planning and Development, presented 12 steps on the aspects of administrative processes establishing a Neighborhood Conservation Overlay and proposed NCO Modifications on lot coverage, tree preservation, off-street (on-site) parking, and other proposed revisions. The Neighborhood Study stated that College Station should allow a new menu option to restrict the number of unrelated persons living in a single family dwelling from 4 to 2. Planning and Zoning did not reach a consensus on the no more than 2 unrelated option. Proposed No More than 2-Unrelated Option • Allowing an NCO option that would allow no more than 2-unrelated individuals. • This option would be enforced by Code Enforcement. Proposed NCO Modification – Neighborhood Study: WKSHP080918 Minutes Page 4 • Allowing an NCO to move forward to Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council without a neighborhoods study. Council directed staff to move forward with all recommendations with exception that staff will continue to conduct a Neighborhood Study. 7. Council Calendar Council reviewed the calendar. 8. Discussion, review and possible action regarding the following meetings: Animal Shelter Board, Annexation Task Force, Arts Council of Brazos Valley, Arts Council Sub-committee, Audit Committee, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board, Bio-Corridor Board of Adjustments, Blinn College Brazos Valley Advisory Committee, Brazos County Health Dept., Brazos Valley Council of Governments, Bryan/College Station Chamber of Commerce, Budget and Finance Committee, BVSWMA, BVWACS, Compensation and Benefits Committee, Experience Bryan-College Station, Design Review Board, Economic Development Committee, FBT/Texas Aggies Go to War, Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition, Historic Preservation Committee, Interfaith Dialogue Association, Intergovernmental Committee, Joint Relief Funding Review Committee, Landmark Commission, Library Board, Metropolitan Planning Organization, Parks and Recreation Board, Planning and Zoning Commission, Research Valley Partnership, Research Valley Technology Council, Regional Transportation Committee for Council of Governments, Sister Cities Association, Transportation and Mobility Committee, TAMU Economic Development, TAMU Student Senate, Texas Municipal League, Twin City Endowment, Walk with the Mayor, YMCA, Youth Advisory Council, Zoning Board of Adjustments. No meetings to report at this time. 9. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Mooney adjourned the workshop of the College Station City Council at 8:25 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2018. ________________________ Karl Mooney, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ Tanya Smith, City Secretary RM080918 Minutes Page 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF COLLEGE STATION AUGUST 9, 2018 STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF BRAZOS § Present: Karl Mooney, Mayor Council: Bob Brick Jerome Rektorik Linda Harvell Barry Moore John Nichols James Benham – via remote City Staff: Jeff Capps, Interim City Manager Jeff Kersten, Assistant City Manager Carla Robinson, City Attorney Tanya Smith, City Secretary Lisa McCracken, Record Management Administrator Call to Order and Announce a Quorum is Present With a quorum present, the Regular Meeting of the College Station City Council was called t o order by Mayor Mooney at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2018 in the Council Chambers of the City of College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas 77840. 1. Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, consider absence request. Proclamation to salute the student leaders of Camp Kesem at Texas A&M University: Mayor Mooney recognized and presented the student leaders Hannah Lykins and Samantha Buchanan of Camp Kesem at Texas A&M University with a proclamation proclaiming August 12- 17, 2018 as Camp Kesem Week. Hear Visitors Comments Fred Dupriest, College Park, came before the council to state his concerns on the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay process and possible changes to Section 5.11.D.2, Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts, of the Unified Development Ordinance. Mr. Dupriest presented a presentation on the College Station Neighborhood Association recommendations for Overlay Process Improvements. RM080918 Minutes Page 2 Jerry Cooper, Southside, stated he has been in Southside over 50 years, and appreciates how organized the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay process is with the College Station Neighborhood Association. Buck Prewett, Castlegate, stated questions for Council to look at: Can someone from outside my subdivision come in and put an overlay on his subdivision? Also, Mr. Prewett asked if there is an HOA will an overlay take over the HOA? CONSENT AGENDA 2a. Presentation, possible action, and discussion of minutes for:  July 26, 2018 Workshop Meeting  July 26, 2018 Regular Meeting 2b. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on Ordinance No. 2018-4031 ordering a General and Special Election to be held on November 6, 2018 for the purpose of electing a City Council Member, Place 4, a City Council Member, Place 6, and to submit proposed amendments to the City Charter to the voters; establishing early voting locations and polling places for this election; and making provisions for conducting the election. (Presentación, posible acción y discusión acerca de una ordenanza (Ordinance No. 2018-4031) que ordene Elecciones Generales y Especiales a celebrarse el 6 de noviembre de 2018 con el propósito de elegir un Miembro del Consejo de la Ciudad, Puesto Número 4, un Miembro del Consejo de la Ciudad, Puesto Número 6, y para presentarles a los votantes las enmiendas propuestas a los Estatutos de la Ciudad; estableciendo los sitios de votaciones anticipadas y los centros de votaciones para estas elecciones; y elaborando las provisiones para llevar a cabo las elecciones.) 2c. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on approving an interlocal government agreement with Brazos County for the conduct and management of the City of College Station General and Special Election that will be held on Tuesday, November 6, 2018. (Presentación, possible acción y discusión acerca de una resolución que apruebe un acuerdo interlocal de gobierno con el Condado de Brazos para llevar a cabo y administrar las Elecciones Generales y Especiales de la Ciudad de College Station y para aprobar la Notificación de Elecciones Generales y Especiales que se celebrarán el martes 6 de noviembre de 2018.) 2d. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of Resolution No. 08- 09-18-2d of the interlocal agreement with the City of Bryan, City of Brenham, Brazos County, Washington County, Texas A&M University, Grimes County and Brazos Valley Council of Governments; designating the Brazos Valley Council of Governments as the Managing Entity for the Brazos Valley Wide Area Communications System (BVWACS). 2e. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a construction contract 18300500 with Kieschnick General Contractors, in the amount of $830,078 for the construction of the State Highway 6 waterline phases I and II. 2f. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on calling a public hearing on the City of College Station FY 2018-2019 Proposed Budget for Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers. RM080918 Minutes Page 3 2g. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a bid award for the annual purchase of single phase pad-mounted transformers, which will be maintained in electrical inventory and expended as needed. The total recommended award is $224,500 to Priester -Mell & Nicholson, Inc. 2h. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an Amendment to the lease agreement with CEO, Etc., Inc. for lease of City Fiber Optic Cable Facilities. 2i. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on approval of the construction contract with DKing Express, LLC. in the amount of $141,399 for repairs to the two existing sand volleyball courts at the Barracks Park. 2j. Presentation, possible action and discussion on a bid award for the annual blanket order for electric meters and sockets, to be stored in inventory, as follows: Anixter: $37,952; Priester-Mell & Nicholson: $164,363; Texas Electric Cooperatives: $33,500. Total estimated annual expenditure is $235,815. 2k. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding approval of Resolution No. 08- 09-18-2k adopting the proposed FY 2019 Community Development Budget and PY 2018 Annual Action Plan. 2l. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on the second reading of Ordinance No. 2018-4032 a franchise agreement with Organix Recycling, LLC; for the collection of recyclables from commercial businesses and multi-family locations. 2m. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the approval of contract 18300622 with Brazos Paving, Inc. for base failure repairs and Type D HMAC installation in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000. 2n. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on Resolution No. 08-09-18-2n amending Chapter 2, “Administration,” Article V, “Finance,” Division 2 “Fees, Rates, and Charges” Section 2-120 of the Code of Ordinances and presentation, possible action, and discussion on amending Resolution No. 08-10-17-2Q that established the fees, rates, and charges as authorized in Chapter 2 “Administration”, Art. V. “Finance”, Div. 2 “Fees, Rates, and Charges” of The Code of Ordinances, both regarding establishing fees for the regulation of dockless bike share programs permitted to operate in the City. 2o. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a letter agreement for year 1 of the Professional Auditing Services engagement with BKD, LLP for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018 with expenditures totaling $84,000 from the City of College Station. 2p. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding the renewal of the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Bryan for Management of the Larry J. Ringer Library. 2q. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on a bid award for the annual purchase of sodium hypochlorite, the liquid-chlorine disinfection product used to treat the potable water supply at the Sandy Point Pump Station. The total recommended award is $115,847 to DXI Industries. RM080918 Minutes Page 4 Consent Item 2b was pulled for a separate vote. (2b): Carla Robinson, City Attorney, provided benchmark information on the proposed proposition on even-numbered years with the Mayor and City Council serving four year term lengths for consecutive terms of no more than eight years. MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Rektorik and a second by Councilmember Harvell, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of 2b. The motion carried unanimously. (2b) MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Benham and a second by Councilmember Rektorik, the City Council voted six (6) for and none (0) opposed, with Councilmember Nichols abstaining, to ordinance ordering a General and Special Election to be held on November 6, 2018 for the purpose of electing a City Council Member, Place 4, a City Council Member, Place 6, and to submit proposed amendments to the City Charter to the voters; establishing early voting locations and polling places for this election; and making provisions for conducting the election. The motion carried unanimously. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding Ordinance No. 2018-4033 amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 12-4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, by changing the zoning district boundaries from PDD Planned Development District to WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban for approximately 21 acres of land located approximately 0.18 miles south from the intersection of Greens Prairie Road West and Royder Road. Aliana Helton, Planning and Development, stated that this request is amending the zoning district boundaries on the property to rezone approximately 21 acres from PDD Planned Development District to WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban. At the time the PDD Planned Development District was adopted, the City of College Station had not adopted the Wellborn Zoning Districts. Additionally, a portion of this tract, approximately 2 acres, was recently rezoned to WC Wellborn Restricted Suburban on May 24, 2018. Ms. Helton also stated that the site is approximately 21 acres and is proposed to be rezoned WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban, which would allow for a maximum density of two (2) dwelling units per acre. The existing zoning district would allow for a similar density. The intent of the rezoning is allow the property owner to develop the subject 21 acres cohesively with the adjacent 34 acres that are zoned WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item on July 19, 2018 and voted 6-0 to recommend approval. At approximately 7:18 p.m., Mayor Mooney opened the Public Hearing. Joe Guerra, Castle Gate, stated he applauds the developer for putting this plan together. There being no further comments, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:19 p.m. RM080918 Minutes Page 5 MOTION: Upon a motion made by Councilmember Brick and a second by Councilmember Moore, the City Council voted seven (7) for and none (0) opposed, to adopt Ordinance No. 2018- 4033 amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 12-4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, by changing the zoning district boundaries from PDD Planned Development District to WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban for approximately 21 acres of land located approximately 0.18 miles south from the intersection of Greens Prairie Road West and Royder Road. The motion carried unanimously. 2. Presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding appointments to the Zoning Board of Adjustments. A majority of Council appointed Zoning Board of Adjustments, Alternate James Sharp as a regular member for an unexpired term. 4. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on future agenda items and review of standing list of Council generated agenda items: A Council Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. No future agenda items were discussed. 5. Adjournment. There being no further business, Mayor Mooney adjourned the Regular Meeting of the City Council at 7:23 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2018. ________________________ Karl Mooney, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Tanya Smith, City Secretary City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:218-0516 Name:Interlocal Agreement for 2018 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Funds. Status:Type:Agreement Consent Agenda File created:In control:7/27/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Brazos County and the City of Bryan to apply and accept a U.S. Department of Justice 2018 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). Sponsors:Brandy Norris Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:2018 JAG Interlocal Agreement 7-31-18 Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Presentation, possible action, and discussion on an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Brazos County and the City of Bryan to apply and accept a U.S. Department of Justice 2018 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Financially Sustainable City Recommendation(s): Staff Recommends Council Approval Summary: The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program is the primary provider of federal criminal justice funding to state and local jurisdictions and funds all components of the criminal justice system. JAG funded projects may address crime even through the provision of services directly to individuals and/or communities by improving the effectiveness and efficiency of criminal justice systems, processes and procedures. College Station Police Department intends to utilize this funding for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, equipment, supplies, or information technology projects in support of our community-oriented mission. Budget & Financial Summary: The 2018 JAG allocation for Brazos County is $45,115. This amount is based upon a statutory JAG formula that considers the jurisdiction's share of state population and reported Part 1 violent crime statistics. The grant has no match requirement. College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0516,Version:2 Individual recommended allocations designated by the Deaprtment of Justice are: Brazos County: $0.00, Bryan: $28,238.00 and College Station: $16,877.00 for a total of $45,115. Brazos County has been certified as a disparate jurisdiction. As such, all jurisdictions must enter into an Interlocal Agreement to specify an award distribution to each unit of local government in a manner that will address disparity and furthermore, must apply for funding jointly. College Station and Bryan Police Departments have agreed to provide 15% of their recommended funding to Brazos County Sheriff's Office in an effort to address the disparity. After providing 15% to the Brazos County Sheriff's Office, the allocations are as follows: Brazos County: $6,767.25, Bryan: $24,002.30, College Station: $14,345.45 for a total of $45,115. College Station Police Department will serve as the administering agency. Attachments: ILA with Brazos County and the City of Bryan College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ JAG Program ILA Page 1 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN BRAZOS COUNTY, THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, AND THE CITY OF BRYAN FOR THE 2018 BYRNE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM AWARD This Agreement is made and entered into by and between Brazos County, Texas (hereinafter referred to as the “County”), acting through its Commissioners’ Court; the City of College Station (hereinafter referred to as “College Station”), a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, acting through its City Council; and the City of Bryan, Texas (hereinafter referred to as “Bryan”), a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation, acting through its City Council. WHEREAS, the County, College Station, and Bryan wish to submit a joint application for grant funds under the U.S. Department of Justice’s 2018 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program; and WHEREAS, as a condition precedent to receiving a JAG award, the County, College Station, and Bryan are required to enter into an inter-local agreement designating one joint applicant to serve as the applicant/fiscal agent for the joint funds; and WHEREAS, College Station will serve as the applicant/fiscal agent; and WHEREAS, Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code, also known as the Interlocal Cooperation Act, authorizes all local governments to contract with each other to perform governmental functions or services; and WHEREAS, the parties represent that each is independently authorized to perform the functions or services contemplated by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, each governing body, in performing governmental functions or in paying for the performance of governmental functions hereunder, shall make that performance or those payments from current revenues legally available to that party; and WHEREAS, each governing body finds that the performance of this Agreement is in the best interests of all parties, that the undertaking will benefit the public, and that the division of costs fairly compensates the performing party for the services or functions under this Agreement; and WHEREAS, College Station agrees to provide the County $6,767.25 from the JAG award for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs; and WHEREAS, College Station agrees to provide Bryan $24,002.30 from the JAG award for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs; and JAG Program ILA Page 2 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 WHEREAS, College Station shall use their $14,345.45 from the JAG award for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs; and WHEREAS, Bryan, College Station and the County believe it to be in their best interest to reallocate the JAG funds as described above, NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, promise and agree as follows: 1. College Station agrees to pay the County a total of $6,767.25 of JAG funds. 2. The County agrees to use the $6,767.25 for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs. 3. College Station agrees to pay Bryan a total of $24,002.30 of JAG funds. 4. Bryan agrees to use $24,002.30 for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs. 5. College Station agrees to retain a total of $14,345.45 of the JAG funds. 6. College Station agrees to use $14,345.45 for the purpose of supporting local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, information technology, research and evaluation activities that will improve or enhance law enforcement programs. 7. The parties to this Agreement do not intend for any third party to obtain a right by virtue of this Agreement. 8. By entering into this Agreement, the parties do not intend to create any obligations express or implied other than those set out herein; further, this Agreement shall not create any rights in any party not a signatory hereto. 9. No party shall have the right to direct or control the conduct of the other parties with respect to the duties and obligations of each party under the terms of this Agreement. 10. Each entity shall ensure that all applicable laws and ordinances have been satisfied. JAG Program ILA Page 3 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 11. Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall be effective when signed by the last party who’s signing makes the Agreement fully executed and will remain in full force and effect until September 30, 2021. 12. Indemnification. Subject to the limitations as to damages and liability under the Texas Tort Claims Act, and without waiving its governmental immunity, each party to this Agreement agrees to hold harmless each other, its governing board, officers, agents and employees for any liability, loss, damages, claims or causes of action caused, or asserted to be caused, directly or indirectly by any other party to this Agreement, or any of its officers, agents or employees as a result of its performance under this Agreement. 13. Consent to Suit. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed as a waiver or relinquishment by any party of its right to claim such exemptions, privileges and immunities as may be provided by law. 14. Invalidity: If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. The parties shall use their best efforts to replace the respective provision or provisions of this Agreement with legal terms and conditions approximating the original intent of the parties. 15. Written Notice. Unless otherwise specified, written notice shall be deemed to have been duly served if delivered in person or sent by certified mail to the business address as listed herein. BRYAN: City Manager City of Bryan 300 South Texas Avenue Bryan, Texas 77803 COLLEGE STATION: City Manager City of College Station P. O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 BRAZOS COUNTY: County Judge Brazos County 300 East 29th Street, Suite 114 Bryan, Texas 77803 16. Entire Agreement. It is understood that this Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all prior agreements, arrangements, or understandings between the parties relating to the subject matter. Nor oral understandings, statements, promises, or inducements contrary to the terms of this Agreement exist. This Agreement cannot be changed or terminated verbally. No oral agreement or conversation with any officer, agent, or employee of any party before or after the execution of this Agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations hereunder. 17. Amendment. No Amendment to this Agreement shall be effective and binding unless and until it is reduced to writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of all parties. 18. Texas Law. This Agreement has been made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas. JAG Program ILA Page 4 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 19. Place of Performance. Performance and all matters related thereto shall be in Brazos County, Texas, United States of America. 20. Authority to Enter Contract. Each party has the full power and authority to enter into and perform this Agreement and the person signing this Agreement on behalf of each party has been properly authorized and empowered to enter into this Agreement. The persons executing this Agreement hereby represent that they have authorization to sign on behalf of their respective corporations. 21. Waiver. Failure of any party, at any time, to enforce a provision of this Agreement, shall in no way constitute a waiver of that provision, nor in anyway affect the validity of this Agreement, any part hereof, or the right of either party thereafter to enforce each and every provision hereof. No term of this Agreement shall be deemed waived or breach excused unless the waiver shall be in writing and signed by the party claimed to have waived. Furthermore, any consent to or waiver of a breach will not constitute consent to or waiver of or excuse any other different or subsequent breach. 22. Agreement Read. The parties acknowledge that they have read, understand and intend to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 23. Assignment. This Agreement and the rights and obligations contained herein may not be assigned by any party without the prior written approval of the other parties to this Agreement. 24. Multiple Originals. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement may be executed in a number of identical counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original for all purposes. JAG Program ILA Page 5 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 EXECUTED this the _________ day of _______________, 2018 by CITY OF BRYAN. CITY OF BRYAN By: _____________________ Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ ______________________ City Secretary City Attorney JAG Program ILA Page 6 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 EXECUTED this the ____ day of ______________, 2018 by CITY OF COLLEGE STATION. CITY OF COLLEGE STATION By: ________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ City Secretary APPROVED: ______________________________________ City Manager ______________________________________ City Attorney ______________________________________ Assistant City Manager/ CFO JAG Program ILA Page 7 of 7 Contract No. 18300651 EXECUTED this the __________ day of _________________, 2018 by BRAZOS COUNTY. BRAZOS COUNTY By: _______________________________________ County Judge ATTEST: _____________________________________ County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________________ County Attorney City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:118-0526 Name:PCCC Water Sales agreement Status:Type:Agreement Consent Agenda File created:In control:8/4/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Presentation, possible action, and discussion to approve a revised agreement for the City to sell reclaimed water to the Pebble Creek Country Club. Sponsors:Alan Gibbs Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Presentation, possible action, and discussion to approve a revised agreement for the City to sell reclaimed water to the Pebble Creek Country Club. Relationship to Strategic Goals:Financially Sustainable City Providing Response to Core Services and Infrastructure. Recommendation:Staff recommends Council approval. Summary:The Pebble Creek Country Club (PCCC) has a permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to withdraw water from Carters Creek to irrigate their golf course, issued in 1991. But because that permit can be suspended during a drought (under what’s called a Priority Call), the City signed an agreement with PCCC in 2011 that allows PCCC to purchase reclaimed water from Carters Creek under the City’s Bed & Banks Permit, during a Priority Call. However, the TCEQ stipulated that under no circumstances is PCCC’s total withdrawal to exceed 325 acre-feet per year. The PCCC owners approached the City and requested the agreement be amended, to allow the Club to withdraw more water, because during a hot, dry year, and because they share reclaimed water with the Pebble Creek Owner’s Association (PCOA), their needs sometimes exceed 325 af/yr. Staff and PCCC representatives met with TCEQ, and learned that TCEQ would approve this request, the City would simply need to send the signed agreement to TCEQ Staff, with a request to modify the City’s Bed & Banks permit. TCEQ Staff advised that the Club’s total withdrawal should not exceed 450 af/yr, regardless which permit is used, and both Club and City agree that this is reasonable. (Please note, the City discharges 8,000 af/yr into the two creeks.) Basic contract terms remain the same, except that the Club is required to use all reasonable efforts to continue sharing water with the PCOA. When the Club uses the City permit, the water is priced at the standard rate for raw river water that is established by the Brazos River Authority, of $72.00 per acre- foot, which is approximately $0.22 per thousand gallons. This is an appropriate price, because PCCC will own and operate the equipment that withdraws the water from the creek and transmits it to the golf course. In addition, the agreement stipulates methods to measure the water quantity, and various other protections for the City. Staff recommends approval of this agreement. College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0526,Version:1 Budget & Financial Summary:None, this agreement will be a minor revenue source. Attachment: Agreement available in City Secretary’s office College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:118-0546 Name:Annual purchase of EMS supplies Status:Type:Presentation Agenda Ready File created:In control:8/14/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Presentation, possible action, and discussion for an annual purchase contract with Bound Tree Medical, L.L.C for EMS supplies not to exceed $120,000. Sponsors:Jonathan McMahan Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:18300694.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Presentation, possible action, and discussion for an annual purchase contract with Bound Tree Medical, L.L.C for EMS supplies not to exceed $120,000. Relationship to Strategic Goals: To provide advanced medical care to our community. Recommendation(s): Staff recommends the approval of the Bound Tree Medical Purchase Contract - Contract #18300694 Summary: On June 14, 2018 Council approved an Interlocal Purchasing Agreement between the City of College Station and the City of Cedar Hill. The Cedar Hill ILA satisfied competitive purchasing requirements. The ILA allows the Fire Department with other Cities to obtain the best prices available and could see a potential savings of up to $10,000 yearly on EMS supply purchases. Bound Tree Medical LLC has satisfactorily supplied the City of College Station with EMS supplies for more than seven years. Budget & Financial Summary: Funds are budgeted in the fire department budget for this expenditure. This blanket purchase contract should provide for adequate purchasing of supplies for Fire Department's current and future needs. Attachments: Bound Tree Medical Purchase Contract College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ BILL TO CONTRACT THIS NUMBER MUST APPEAR ON ALL INVOICES,PACKAGES AND SHIPPING PAPERS. Contract # Sub Type Department Type V E N D O R Fiscal Year Vendor Information Vendor Number Vendor Contact Vendor Email Vendor Phone Number Policy Notes Start Fiscal Year Award Project Expire Percent Complete Renewal By Date Extended Encumbered Year Contract Description Original Amount Revised Amount Liquidated Amount Remaining Amount Item#Description/PartNo QTY UOM Unit Price Extended Price CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE By Buyer City of College StationAccountingDivisionPO Box 9973College Station, TX 77842-9973(979)764-3569 Fax:(979)764-3899VendorInvoiceEntry@cstx.gov 18300694 Fire Department Price Agreement BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 23537 NETWORK PLACE CHICAGO, IL 60673-1235 USA 2018 Page 1 of 2 1548 ACCOUNT RECEIVABLE 800-533-0523 08/23/2018 2018 08/23/2019 0.00 N 2018 Annual EMS Supplies $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $0.00 $120,000.00 1 This purchase contract is between the City of College Station, a Texas Home-Rule Municpal Corporation and Bound Tree Medical, LLC (Bound Tree)according to the Interlocal Purchasing Agreement between Cedar Hill and College Station (Contract No. 18300515) and the Emergency Medical Service Supplies Agreement Contract (“Cedar Hill Agreement”), between the City of Cedar Hill and Bound Tree bid number 19-0-2013, effective on February 28, 2017 and terminating on February 28, 2019. 0 EACH $1.00 $120,000.00 2 College Station is responsible for issuing its own purchase orders made pursuant to the Cedar Hill Agreement and shall pay all undisputed invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 3 Products sold by Bound Tree carry only those warranties provided by their manufacturers. This warranty shall apply to both products and equipment,if any, purchased pursuant to the Cedar Hill Agreement 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 Brandi Whittenton By Buyer Item#Description/PartNo QTY UOM Unit Price Extended Price Total Revised $120,000.00 Total Original $120,000.00 Brandi Whittenton 4 THERE ARE NO OTHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. BOUND TREE’S SOLE OBLIGATION AND COLLEGE STATION’S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR BREACH OF ANY WARRANTY SHALL BE, AT BOUND TREE’S OPTION, TO REPAIR OR REPLACE THE PRODUCT, OR TO ISSUE A REFUND OR CREDIT. 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 5 The parties may terminate this purchase contract with thirty (30) days’notice to the non-terminating party. If College Station breaches any terms and conditions of the Cedar Hill Agreement, Bound Tree may, at its sole discretion, immediately terminate this agreement and purchasing under this contract. 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 6 Any changes or amendments to this purchase contract must be made in writing by the parties. 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 7 This purchase contract shall continue for the duration of the Cedar Hill Agreement.If the Cedar Hill Agreement is terminated before the end of its term,this purchase contract will terminate after thirty (30) days’written notice to College Station. 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 8 Council Approval August 23, 2018 0 EACH $0.00 $0.00 City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:118-0535 Name:UDO Amendment/Housekeeping Items Status:Type:Unified Development Ordinance Agenda Ready File created:In control:8/8/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amendment to Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 2, “Development Review Bodies”, Section 2.8 “Administrator”; Article 3, “Development Review Procedures”, Section 3.12 “Building Permit” and Section 3.13 “Certificate of Occupancy”; Article 5, “District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards”, Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards”; Article 7, “General Development Standards”, Section 7.3 “Off-Street Parking Standards”, Section 7.6 “Landscaping and Tree Protection”, and Section 7.10 “Non-Residential Architectural Standards”; and Article 8, “Subdivision Design and Improvements”, Section 8.3. “General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the City Limits”, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, to correct text omissions, references, and other clerical errors. Sponsors:Laura Gray Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Redlines Ordinance Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amendment to Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 2, “Development Review Bodies”, Section 2.8 “Administrator”; Article 3, “Development Review Procedures”, Section 3.12 “Building Permit” and Section 3.13 “Certificate of Occupancy”; Article 5, “District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards”, Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards”; Article 7, “General Development Standards”, Section 7.3 “Off-Street Parking Standards”, Section 7.6 “Landscaping and Tree Protection”, and Section 7.10 “Non-Residential Architectural Standards”; and Article 8, “Subdivision Design and Improvements”, Section 8.3. “General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the City Limits”, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, to correct text omissions, references, and other clerical errors. Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Good Governance Recommendation(s): The Planning & Zoning Commission considered this item at their August 2, 2018 meeting and voted 6-0 to recommend approval. College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0535,Version:1 Summary: Case# ORDA2018-000007. The purpose of this proposed ordinance is to correct several known outstanding clerical errors, outdated references, and text omissions in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). These minor items were identified and compiled by the City’s planning staff to put forward in this ordinance. The proposed ordinance would: •Reestablish the Administrator’s ‘Final Action’ list, found at UDO Sec. 2.8.B.4, by reinstating two items that were erroneously removed from the list on February 22, 2018 when City Ordinance 2018-3991 “Standards as Related to Screening, Architectural Features, and Color Palette” was enacted. The two items had been previously approved by Council. The preliminary plan authority was authorized in Ordinance 2017-3967 and the site plan authority was included with the first Unified Development Ordinance in 2003. •Reinstate the percentage of change that would trigger the necessity to bring the building materials on an existing building’s facade into compliance with the UDO. This item was modified on February 22, 2018 when City Ordinance 2018-3991 “Standards as Related to Screening, Architectural Features, and Color Palette” was enacted. The percentage had been previously approved by Council when Ordinance 2018-3970 was enacted on January 11, 2018. •Clarify the ‘Average Lot Area per Dwelling Unit’, found in the Residential Dimensional Standard Table of UDO Sec. 5.2, by adding the text ‘Min.’ to the average lot area per dwelling unit text. Planning staff have administered this standard as a minimum since its inception in 2013. •Remove a typographical error (double comma) from UDO Sec. 7.3 and remove outdated International Building Code references from Sec.3.12 (A.) Sec. 3.13 (A), (C.), and (D.). •Remove an outdated landscape point calculation example and replace it with an updated example. •Complete the list of zoning districts where cluster subdivisions are allowed. The WE Wellborn Estate and WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban zoning districts were not included in the UDO Sec 8.3 H.4.c “Where Allowed” list when Ordinance 2016-3792 was enacted on July 28, 2016. Although these districts were missing from the “Where Allowed” list, the ordinance clearly allowed for cluster subdivisions in these districts as evidenced by the permitted use table in UDO Sec 6.3.C and the Specific District Standards discussion in UDO Sec 8.3.H.4.e. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Attachments: 1.Section 2.8.Administrator Ordinance Redline 2.Section 3.12. Building Permit Ordinance Redline 3.Section 3.13 Certificate of Occupancy Ordinance Redline 4.Section 5.2 Residential Dimensional Standards Ordinance Redline 5.Section 7.3 Off-Street Parking Standards Ordinance Redline 6.Section 7.6 Landscaping and Tree Protection Ordinance Redline 7.Section 7.10 Non-Residential Architectural Standards Ordinance Redline 8.Section 8.3 General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0535,Version:1 the City Limits Ordinance Redline 9.Ordinance College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 1 Sec. 2.8. - Administrator. B. Powers and Duties. …… 4. Final Action. The Administrator shall review and take final action on the following: a. Sign permits; b. Site plans; b. c. Architectural reviews; c. d. Administrative adjustments; e. Preliminary Plans as set forth in Section 3.4, Plat Review, of this UDO; d. f. Minor and amending plats; e. g. Determination of building plot (Section 7.2, General Provisions); f. h. Certificate of Appropriateness Routine Maintenance Work reviews; g. i. Determination regarding applicability of plat requirements; and h. j. Alternative parking plans (Section 7.3, Off-Street Parking). 2 Sec. 3.12. - Building Permit. A. Building Permit Required. No building or other structure shall hereafter be erected, moved, added to, structurally altered, repaired, demolished, or occupancy changed without a permit issued by the Building Official except in conformity with the provisions of this Section and the 2006 International Building Code as adopted and amended by the City, unless otherwise provided for in the City of College Station Code of Ordinances. No Building Permit issued under the provisions of this Article for land use or construction in the City shall be considered valid unless signed by the Building Official. 3 Sec. 3.13. - Certificate of Occupancy. A. Applicability. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be required for any of the following: 1. Occupancy and use of a building hereafter erected or enlarged; 2. Change in use of an existing building to a different Use Category; 3. Any change in a nonconforming use or structure; or 4. As required by the 2006 International Building Code as adopted and amended, Section 110. B. Application. Once all required building inspections have been reviewed by the Building Official and he finds no violation of the provisions of the Code, the Building Official shall issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the structure or use. C. Review and Action by Building Official. Upon the request for a Certificate of Occupancy, the Building Official shall inspect the use or structure. If the Building Official determines that the use or structure complies with all applicable provisions of the 2006 International Building Code as adopted and amended and this UDO, a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued. D. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. Pending the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued by the Building Official. The Temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be valid for a period established by the Building Official, pending completion of an addition or during partial occupancy of a structure and as provided in Section 110 of the 2006 International Building Code as adopted and amended. 4 Sec. 5.2. - Residential Dimensional Standards. The following table establishes dimensional standards that shall be applied within the Residential Zoning Districts, unless otherwise identified in this UDO. Residential Zoning Districts R WE E(N)(P) WRS RS(J) GS(J)(P) T D MHP MF MU Accessory Structures Non-Clustered Residential Zoning Districts Min. Average Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 3 acres Average 2 acres 1 Acre 20,000 SF 10,000 SF Average 5,000 SF 2,000 SF 3,500 SF >(L) None None Refer to Section 6.5, Accessory Uses(L) Absolute Min. Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 2 Acres 2 acres 1 Acre 20,000SF 6,500 SF 5,000 SF 2,000 SF 3,500 SF None None Min. Lot Width None 100 (M) 100'(M) 70' 70' 50' None 35'/DU(E) None None Min. Lot Depth None None None None None 100' None 100' None None Min. Front Setback(H) 50' 30' 30' 25' 25' 25'(D) 25'(D) 25'(D) 15' None Max. Front Setback N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O) Min. Side Setback 20' 10' 10' 7.5' 7.5' 7.5' (A) 7.5'(C) (A)(B) None Min. Side Street Setback 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' None Max. Side Street Setback N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O) Min. Side Setback between Structures(B) N/A 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 7.5' 15' 7.5' None Min. Rear Setback(L) 50' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20'(F) 20' 20' Max. Height 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) (G)(L) (G)(L) Minimum Number of Stories N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Storie s Max. Dwelling Units/Acre (Subdivision Gross) 0.33 0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 30.0 N/A N/A 5 Notes : (A) A minimum side setback of seven and one -half (7.5) feet is required for each building or group of contiguous buildings. (B) Lot line construction on interior lots with no side yard or setback is allowed only where the building is covered by fire protection on the site or by dedicated right-of-way or easement. (C) Zero lot line construction of a residence is allowed where property on both sides of a lot line is owned and/or developed simultaneously by single party. Development under lot line construction requires prior approval by the Zoning Official. In no case shall a single -family residence or duplex be built within fifteen (15) feet of another primary structure. See Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements, for more information. (D) Minimum front setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when approved rear access is provided, or when side yard or rear yard parking is provided. Min. Dwelling Units/Acre N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A Clustered Residential Zoning Districts Min. Average Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) N/A 1 Acre 20,000 SF Average 8,000 SF 8,000 SF Average 3,750 SF (P) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Absolute Min. Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 1 Acre 10,000 SF 8,000 SF 6,500 SF 3,750 SF Min. Lot Width 100' (M) 100'(M) None None None Min. Lot Depth None None None None None Min. Front Setback(H) Refer to Section 8.3.H.4, Cluster Development, Specific District Standards Min. Side Setback Min. Street Side Setback Min. Side Setback between Structures(B) Min. Rear Setback(L) Max. Height 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) Max. Dwelling Units/Acre (Subdivision Gross) 0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0 6 (E) The minimum lot width for a duplex dwelling may be reduced to thirty (30) feet per dwelling unit when all required off-street parking is provided in the rear or side yard. (F) Minimum rear setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when parking is provided in the front yard or side yard. (G) Shall abide by Section 7.2.H, Height. (H) Reference Section 7.1.2.D.1.e for lots created by plat prior to July 15, 1970 and designated as Neighborhood Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. (I) Reference Section 7.2.D.1.b for lots with approved rear access. (J) For areas within a Single-Family Overlay District, reference the Neighborhood Prevailing Standards Overlay Districts Section in Article 5 or the Ordinance authorizing the rezoning for Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts. (K) Public, civic, and institutional structures shall have a maximum building height of fifty (50) feet in these districts. (L) Reference Easterwood Field Airport Zoning Ordinance regarding height limitations. (M) In subdivisions built to rural street standards, lots shall be a minimum of one hundred (100) feet in width. There is no minimum lot width in cluster subdivisions built to urban street standards. (N) Estate lots that are part of a subdivision existing on or before September 12, 2013 are not permitted to use Cluster Development Standards without rezoning approval, which incorporates the entire subdivision. (O) For MU zoned properties, maximum side street and front setbacks may be measured from the edge of a public easement when it is in excess of the maximum setback. Maximum setbacks may be increased to up to eighty-five (85) feet to accommodate a parking lot between the structure and the street. Maximum setback requirements may be fulfilled through the use of plazas, outdoor dining, and bicycle parking. (P) Reference Section 8.3.H.4.e when using the cluster option in the Wellborn Community Plan area. 7 Section 7.3 Off-Street Parking Standards. C. Dimensions, Access, and Location. ……. 3. For all detached single-family uses other than as set forth in subsection 2 above,, at the time of construction, reconstruction, or addition to the number of existing bedrooms, parking shall be located in the areas described below: 8 Section 7.6 Landscaping and Tree Protection ….. E. Landscape/Streetscape Plan Requirements 9. Landscape Information. a. Landscape points required for site and calculations shown in the landscape legend. b. A legend showing the size, type (canopy, non-canopy, shrub) and points claimed for proposed landscaping. c. Location of landscape plants on plan identified by a symbol defined in a landscape legend (see sample legend below). City of College Station SAMPLE LEGEND LANDSCAPING POINT CALCULATIONS SYMBOL SIZE NAME & TYPE QUANTITY POINT VALUE POINT 8” AND LARGER EXISTING W/BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 2 300 600 4” TO 8” AND LARGER EXISTING W/BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 13 200 2,600 2” TO 14.5” CALIPER EXISTING W/0 BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 8 35 280 1.25 “ CALIPER AND LARGER TREE CREPE MYRTLE (Lagerstroemia indica) Non-canopy tree 6 (NEW) 40 240 5 GAL WAX LEAF LIGUSTRUM (Ligustrum texanum) Shrub 46 (NEW) 10 460 NOTE: Symbols are for reference. Any symbols used must be distinguishable at any scale. BARRICADE FOR INDICATED TREES TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH 48” HIGH ORANGE PLASTIC CONSTRUCTION NETTING AND SECURED TO STEEL T-POSTS. BARRICADE TO BE PLACED IN A CIRCLE AROUND INDICATED TREES A RADIAL DISTANCE OF 1’ FOR EVERY 1” CALIPER OF TREE. BARRICADE MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY AS WELL AS THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. STREETSCAPE: (136.57’ / 50) X 300 PTS = 820 PTS 136.57-LINEAR FEET x 6 = 819.42 = 820 POINTS (136.57’ / 25) = 6 CANOPY TREES 136.57-LINEAR FEET / 25 = 5.46 = 6 CANOPY TREES POINTS PER PROJECT AREA: 9 26,416.3 SQUARE FEET OF SITE AREA 26,416.3 / 1,000 = 26.42 26.42 x 30 = 792.6 = 793 POINTS TOTAL POINTS REQUIRED: 1,613 10 Section 7.10 Non-Residential Architectural Standards. C. Standards for Non-Residential Structures. ….. 3. Building Mass and Design. ……. e. Roof and Roofline Design. ……. 4. Building Materials. ……. e. Existing buildings may continue to utilize materials other than those listed provided that any material replacement is for maintenance purposes only and the existing material is continued. Any material change or replacement of more than ten (10) fifty (50) percent of the total area of a façade, including on a cumulative basis, shall require that all building materials be brought into compliance on that façade. 11 Section 8.3 General Requirements and Minimum Standards of design for Subdivisions within the City Limits. H. Lots. ……. 4. Cluster Development. ……. c. Where Allowed. Cluster developments are allowed in residential WE Wellborn Estate, E Estate, RS Restricted Suburban, WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban, and GS General Suburban zoning districts. Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A, “UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE”, ARTICLE 2, “DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BODIES”, SECTION 2.8, “ADMINISTRATOR”, ARTICLE 3, “DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEEDURES,” SECTION 3.12 “BULDING PERMIT,” AND SECTION 3.13 “CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY”; ARTICLE 5, “DISTRICT PURPOSE STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS”, SECTION 5.2 “RESIDENTIAL DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS”; ARTICLE 7, “GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS”, SECTION 7.3 “OFF-STREET PARKING STANDARDS”, SECTION 7.6 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PROTECTION, AND SECTION 7.10 NON-RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS; AND ARTICLE 8, “SUBDIVISION DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENTS,” SECTION 8.3. “GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS OF DESIGN FOR SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS TO CORRECT MINOR TEXT OMMISSIONS, OUTDATED REFERENCES, AND CLERICAL ERRORS; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART 1: That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 2, “Development Review Bodies”, Section 2.8 “Administrator”; Article 3, “Development Review Procedures”, Section 3.12 “Building Permit” and Section 3.13 “Certificate of Occupancy”; Article 5, “District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards”, Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards”; Article 7, “General Development Standards”, Section 7.3 “Off-Street Parking Standards”, Section 7.6 “Landscaping and Tree Protection”, and Section 7.10 “Non-Residential Architectural Standards”; and Article 8, “Subdivision Design and Improvements”, Section 8.3. “General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the City Limits”, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibits “A” through “H” and attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. PART 2: If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity or unconstitutionality does not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance or the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, that can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. PART 3: That any person, corporation, organization, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association and any other legal entity violating any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 2 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 than twenty five dollars ($25.00) and not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a violation of fire safety, zoning, or public health and sanitation ordinances, other than the dumping of refuse. Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. PART 4: This Ordinance is a penal ordinance and becomes effective ten (10) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by City of College Station Charter Section 35. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED this ________ day of _____________________, 20__. ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _____________________________ City Secretary Mayor APPROVED: _______________________________ City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 3 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit A That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 2, “Development Review Bodies,” Section 2.8, “Administrator,” Subsection 2.8.4. “Final Action” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Final Action. The Administrator shall review and take final action on the following: a. Sign permits; b. Site plans; c. Architectural reviews; d. Administrative adjustments; e. Preliminary Plans as set forth in Section 3.4, Plat Review, of this UDO; f. Minor and amending plats; g. Determination of building plot (Section 12-7.2, General Provisions); h. Certificate of Appropriateness Routine Maintenance Work reviews; i. Determination regarding applicability of plat requirements; and j. Alternative parking plans (Section 12-7.3, Off-Street Parking). ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 4 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit B That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 3, “Development Review Procedures,” Section 3.12, “Building Permit”, Subsection 3.12 A. “Building Permit Required” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Building Permit Required. No building or other structure shall hereafter be erected, moved, added to, structurally altered, repaired, demolished, or occupancy changed without a permit issued by the Building Official except in conformity with the provisions of this Section and the International Building Code as adopted and amended by the City, unless otherwise provided for in the City of College Station Code of Ordinances. No Building Permit issued under the provisions of this Article for land use or construction in the City shall be considered valid unless signed by the Building Official. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 5 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit C That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 3, “Development Review Procedures,” Section 3.13, “Certificate of Occupancy”, Subsection 3.13. A. “Applicability” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Applicability. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be required for any of the following: 1. Occupancy and use of a building hereafter erected or enlarged; 2. Change in use of an existing building to a different Use Category; 3. Any change in a nonconforming use or structure; or 4. As required by the International Building Code as adopted and amended, Section 110. That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 3, “Development Review Procedures,” Section 3.13, “Certificate of Occupancy”, Subsection 3.13. C. “Review and Action by Building Official” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Review and Action by Building Official. Upon the request for a Certificate of Occupancy, the Building Official shall inspect the use or structure. If the Building Official determines that the use or structure complies with all applicable provisions of the International Building Code as adopted and amended and this UDO, a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued. That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 3, “Development Review Procedures,” Section 3.13, “Certificate of Occupancy”, Subsection 3.13. D. “Temporary Certificate of Occupancy” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: D. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. Pending the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued by the Building Official. The Temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be valid for a period established by the Building Official, pending completion of an addition or during partial occupancy of a structure and as provided in Section 110 of the International Building Code as adopted and amended. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 6 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit D That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 5, “District Purpose Statements and Supplemental Standards,” Section 5.2 “Residential Dimensional Standards” Dimensional Standard Table of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 5.2 Residential Dimensional Standards. The following table establishes dimensional standards that shall be applied within the Residential Zoning Districts, unless otherwise identified in this UDO. Residential Zoning Districts R WE E(N)(P) WRS RS(J) GS(J)(P) T D MHP MF MU Accessory Structures Non-Clustered Residential Zoning Districts Min. Average Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 3 acres Average 2 acres 1 Acre 20,000 SF 10,000 SF Average 5,000 SF 2,000 SF 3,500 SF >(L) None None Refer to Section 6.5, Accessory Uses(L) Absolute Min. Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 2 Acres 2 acres 1 Acre 20,000SF 6,500 SF 5,000 SF 2,000 SF 3,500 SF None None Min. Lot Width None 100 (M) 100'(M) 70' 70' 50' None 35'/DU(E) None None Min. Lot Depth None None None None None 100' None 100' None None Min. Front Setback(H) 50' 30' 30' 25' 25' 25'(D) 25'(D) 25'(D) 15' None Max. Front Setback N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O) Min. Side Setback 20' 10' 10' 7.5' 7.5' 7.5' (A) 7.5'(C) (A)(B) None Min. Side Street Setback 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' None Max. Side Street Setback N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15'(O) Min. Side Setback between Structures(B) N/A 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 7.5' 15' 7.5' None Min. Rear Setback(L) 50' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20'(F) 20' 20' ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 7 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Max. Height 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) 35'(G)(K)(L) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) (G)(L) (G)(L) Minimum Number of Stories N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Stories Max. Dwelling Units/Acre (Subdivision Gross) 0.33 0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 30.0 N/A N/A Min. Dwelling Units/Acre N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A Clustered Residential Zoning Districts Min. Average Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) N/A 1 Acre 20,000 SF Average 8,000 SF 8,000 SF Average 3,750 SF (P) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Absolute Min. Lot Area per Dwelling Unit (DU) 1 Acre 10,000 SF 8,000 SF 6,500 SF 3,750 SF Min. Lot Width 100' (M) 100'(M) None None None Min. Lot Depth None None None None None Min. Front Setback(H) Refer to Section 8.3.H.4, Cluster Development, Specific District Standards Min. Side Setback Min. Street Side Setback Min. Side Setback between Structures(B) Min. Rear Setback(L) Max. Height 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 35'(G)(K) 2.5 Stories/35'(G)(K)(L) Max. Dwelling Units/Acre (Subdivision Gross) 0.5 1.0 2.0 4.00 8.0 ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 8 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Notes : (A) A minimum side setback of seven and one-half (7.5) feet is required for each building or group of contiguous buildings. (B) Lot line construction on interior lots with no side yard or setback is allowed only where the building is covered by fire protection on the site or by dedicated right-of-way or easement. (C) Zero lot line construction of a residence is allowed where property on both sides of a lot line is owned and/or developed simultaneously by single party. Development under lot line construction requires prior approval by the Zoning Official. In no case shall a single -family residence or duplex be built within fifteen (15) feet of another primary structure. See Article 8, Subdivision Design and Improvements, for more information. (D) Minimum front setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when approved rear access is provided, or when side yard or rear yard parking is provided. (E) The minimum lot width for a duplex dwelling may be reduced to thirty (30) feet per dwelling unit when all required off-street parking is provided in the rear or side yard. (F) Minimum rear setback may be reduced to fifteen (15) feet when parking is provided in the front yard or side yard. (G) Shall abide by Section 7.2.H, Height. (H) Reference Section 7.2.D.1.e for lots created by plat prior to July 15, 1970 and designated as Neighborhood Conservation in the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. (I) Reference Section 7.2.D.1.b for lots with approved rear access. (J) For areas within a Single-Family Overlay District, reference the Neighborhood Prevailing Standards Overlay Districts Section in Article 5 or the Ordinance authorizing the rezoning for Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts. (K) Public, civic, and institutional structures shall have a maximum building height of fifty (50) feet in these districts. (L) Reference Easterwood Field Airport Zoning Ordinance regarding height limitations. (M) In subdivisions built to rural street standards, lots shall be a minimum of one hu ndred (100) feet in width. There is no minimum lot width in cluster subdivisions built to urban street standards. (N) Estate lots that are part of a subdivision existing on or before September 12, 2013 are not permitted to use Cluster Development Standar ds without rezoning approval, which incorporates the entire subdivision. (O) For MU zoned properties, maximum side street and front setbacks may be measured from the edge of a public easement when it is in excess of the maximum setback. Maximum setbacks may be increased to up to eighty-five (85) feet to accommodate a parking lot between the structure and the street. Maximum setback requirements may be fulfilled through the use of plazas, outdoor dining, and bicycle parking. (P) Reference Section 8.3.H.4.e when using the cluster option in the Wellborn Community Plan area. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 9 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit E That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 7, “General Development Standards,” Section 7.3 “Off-Street Parking Standards,” Subpart C.3. of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. For all detached single-family uses other than as set forth in subsection 2 above, at the time of construction, reconstruction, or addition to the number of existing bedrooms, parking shall be located in the areas described below: a. Anywhere on the lot behind the structure with no limit on the size of the area. Parking located behind the structure shall be screened by a solid hedge wall, fence, or wall, at least six (6) feet in height. All solid hedge walls shall be one-hundred (100) percent opaque. All shrubs planted for a hedge wall shall be a minimum of 15 gallons each and evergreen; b. Anywhere in the side yards of the lot with no limit on the size of the area; and, c. Any area located in front of the primary structure not to exceed a size equivalent to fifty (50) percent of the front area. The front area is defined as the area of the lot within the side lot lines, the front plane of the primary structure and the public right-of-way (see graphic below). The driveway area shall be included in this calculation. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 10 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit F That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 7, “General Development Standards,” Section 7.6 “Landscaping and Tree Protection,” Subpart E.9. of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 9. Landscape Information. a. Landscape points required for site and calculations shown in the landscape legend. b. A legend showing the size, type (canopy, non-canopy, shrub) and points claimed for proposed landscaping. c. Location of landscape plants on plan identified by a symbol defined in a landscape legend (see sample legend below). City of College Station SAMPLE LEGEND LANDSCAPING POINT CALCULATIONS SYMBOL SIZE NAME & TYPE QUANTITY POINT VALUE POINT 8” AND LARGER EXISTING W/BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 2 300 600 4” TO 8” AND LARGER EXISTING W/BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 13 200 2,600 2” TO 14.5” CALIPER EXISTING W/0 BARRICADE LIVE OAK TREE (Quercus Virginiana) Canopy tree 8 35 280 1.25 “ CALIPER AND LARGER TREE CREPE MYRTLE (Lagerstroemia indica) Non-canopy tree 6 (NEW) 40 240 5 GAL WAX LEAF LIGUSTRUM (Ligustrum texanum) Shrub 46 (NEW) 10 460 NOTE: Symbols are for reference. Any symbols used must be distinguishable at any scale. BARRICADE FOR INDICATED TREES TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH 48” HIGH ORANGE PLASTIC CONSTRUCTION NETTING AND SECURED TO STEEL T-POSTS. BARRICADE TO BE PLACED IN A CIRCLE AROUND INDICATED TREES A RADIAL DISTANCE OF 1’ FOR EVERY 1” CALIPER OF TREE. BARRICADE MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY AS WELL AS THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 11 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 STREETSCAPE: 136.57-LINEAR FEET x 6 = 819.42 = 820 POINTS 136.57-LINEAR FEET / 25 = 5.46 = 6 CANOPY TREES POINTS PER PROJECT AREA: 26,416.3 SQUARE FEET OF SITE AREA 26,416.3 / 1,000 = 26.42 26.42 x 30 = 792.6 = 793 POINTS TOTAL POINTS REQUIRED: 1,613 ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 12 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit G That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 7, “General Development Standards,” Section 7.10. “Non-Residential Architectural Standards” Subpart 7.10 C.3.e.4. “Building Materials” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas , is hereby amended to read as follows: e. Existing buildings may continue to utilize materials other than those listed provided that any material replacement is for maintenance purposes only and the existing material is continued. Any material change or replacement of more than fifty (50) percent of the total area of a façade, including on a cumulative basis, shall require that all building materials be brought into compliance on that façade. ORDINANCE NO. ___________ Page 13 of 13 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit H That Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 8, “Subdivision Design and Improvements,” Section 8.3. “General Requirements and Minimum Standards of Design for Subdivisions within the City Limits” Subpart 8.3 H. 4. C. “Where Allowed” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: c. Where Allowed. Cluster developments are allowed in residential WE Wellborn Estate, E Estate, RS Restricted Suburban, WRS Wellborn Restricted Suburban, and GS General Suburban zoning districts. City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:218-0538 Name:Butler Tract Rezoning Status:Type:Rezoning Agenda Ready File created:In control:8/9/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4, “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial on approximately 16.9 acres of land generally located at the southeast intersection of General Parkway and Holleman Drive South, along Old Wellborn Road. Sponsors:Rachel Lazo Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Background Information Vicinity Aerial SAM Rezoning Exhibit Zoning Map Application TIA 2 Ordinance with Condition Ordinance without Condition Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Public Hearing,presentation,possible action,and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix A,“Unified Development Ordinance,”Article 4,“Zoning Districts,”Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map,”of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station,Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial on approximately 16.9 acres of land generally located at the southeast intersection of General Parkway and Holleman Drive South, along Old Wellborn Road. Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Good Governance ·Financially Sustainable City ·Core Services and Infrastructure ·Diverse Growing Economy Recommendation(s):The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item on August 2,2018 and voted 5-0 to recommend approval with the condition that the development does not exceed 198 trips in the PM peak hour,as identified by scenario 3 in the TIA until a second point of access is provided. Case #REZ2018-000011 College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0538,Version:2 Summary: The applicant has requested a rezoning for approximately 16.9 acres of land from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial. REZONING REVIEW CRITERIA 1.Whether the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan:The subject area is designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map as Urban and in Growth Area V. The Urban land use designation is generally for areas that should have a very intense level of development activities. These areas will tend to consist of townhomes, duplexes, and high-density apartments. General commercial and office uses, business parks, and vertical mixed-use may also be permitted within growth and redevelopment areas. For the Urban area located within Growth Area V, the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that intense land use activities including general commercial, office uses, townhomes, high-density apartments, and vertical mixed-use are appropriate. The property is currently zoned R Rural, a zoning district for low-density acreage home sites, with a small amount of GS General Suburan, a zoning district for medium-density single family use. The proposed zoning of General Commercial would better suit the current designation on the Comprehensive Plan for more intense uses. 2.Whether the uses permitted by the proposed zoning district will be appropriate in the context of the surrounding area:The properties to the south and east of the subject property are zoned R Rural and currently undeveloped. They were designated R Rural upon annexation, but the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use and Character Map shows this area as Urban and Growth Area V, which allows for very dense development. The property to the west is currently developed with multi-family structures. The property to the north, across FM 2154, is zoned GC General Commercial and currently under construction for various commercial uses. This proposed zoning change would be compatible with the adjacent properties. 3.Whether the property to be rezoned is physically suitable for the proposed zoning district:The property is currently zoned R Rural and GS General Suburban.Rural uses would not be ideal here due to the size,location,and close proximity of high-classification roads and commercial uses.The size of the tract would allow for approximately 8 rural,single-family homes, which is significantly less dense than projected in the City’s Comprehensive Plan,and would not be compatible with the adjacent multi-family development.However,the proposed zoning district would allow for higher-density residential and commercial uses,which would be more appropriate for a tract immediately abutting a 6-lane major arterial and railroad. 4.Whether there is available water,wastewater,stormwater,and transportation facilities generally suitable and adequate for uses permitted by the proposed zoning district: Water service will be provided by Wellborn Special Utility District (SUD).It has been verified that the existing 12-inch Wellborn SUD waterline on the west side of Holleman Drive South may be extended to the subject tract to provide required domestic and fire flow service.There is also an existing 10-inch sanitary sewer line along the northwestern property boundary available to serve the site.Based on estimated sewer demands,existing infrastructure appears to have sufficient capacity to support the proposed use. Currently,there is no FEMA Special Flood Hazard area located on this tract.The property generally drains to the east within a tributary of the Bee Creek Drainage Basin.Detention will be required with site development.Drainage and other required public infrastructure shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines.The subjectCollege Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0538,Version:2 designed and constructed in accordance with the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines.The subject tract is located at the temporary end of General Parkway which is designated as a Minor Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan.General Parkway will be extended further to the south and eventually to Cain Road as the remainder of the Butler tract and other tracts in the area are developed. Additional connections between General Parkway and Holleman Drive South will also occur as future development occurs. A traffic impact analysis (TIA)was performed for the rezoning request.The TIA included the completion of the Holleman Drive South widening to a 4-lane Minor Arterial,which is underway as a City capital project.As the subject tract currently only has one roadway connection and that is shared with the adjacent Aspen Heights multi-family development,the TIA provided three different scenarios of commercial development intensity to assess the availability of roadway capacity in the area.In order to maintain an acceptable level of service of General Parkway at Holleman Drive South and North Dowling Road at Holleman Drive South,the TIA recommends limiting the number of development trips to up to 198 trips in the PM peak hour.The applicant offered to limit development on the tract to 198 trips in the PM peak hour until a second street or Public Way access point is provided that further distributes traffic. 5.The marketability of the property:The subject property is adjacent to an existing multi- family development and surrounded by property also slated for dense urban-style development. This site does not have a high potential to be marketed as a rural/single-family residential development as it is located along a major arterial,adjacent to a railroad right-of-way,and will have frontage to a future minor collector.Due to these characteristics,it has limited potential with an R Rural zoning designation.Overall,the proposed GC General Commercial rezoning is anticipated to increase the marketability of the property. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Attachments: 1.Background Information 2.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 3.Rezoning Exhibit 4.Zoning Map 5.Application 6.Traffic Impact Analysis 7.Ordinance (with condition) 8.Ordinance (without condition) College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: August 2, 2018 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: August 23, 2018 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: The Barracks and Great Oaks Property owner notices mailed: Ten (10) Contacts in support: None Contacts in opposition: None Inquiry contacts: None ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use North (across FM 2154) Urban GC General Commercial Commercial South Urban R Rural Undeveloped East Urban R Rural Undeveloped West Urban PDD Planned Development District Multi-Family DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: Tract 1 - Annexed February 1970 Tract 2 - Annexed November 2002 Zoning: Tract 1 - Zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential upon Annexation Tract 2 - Zoned A-O Agricultural Open upon Annexation A-O Agricultural Open Renamed R Rural (2013) R-1 Single-Family Residential Renamed GS General Suburban (2013) Final Plat: N/A – Property is currently unplatted Site development: Vacant HOLLEMAN DRIVE SOUTHG E N E R A L P A R KW A Y CALLED OLD HIGHWAY 6 R.O.W.TBPE NO. 12327 911 SOUTHWEST PKWY E. College Station, Texas 77840 www (979) 764-3900 ENGINEER: ZONING MAP BUTLER TRACT COMMERCIAL 16.934 ACRES CRAWFORD BURNETT LEAGUE, A-7 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS SURVEYOR: H. Curtis Strong, RPLS No. 4961 Strong Surveying, LLC 1722 Broadmoor Dr, Ste 105 Bryan, TX 77802 (979) 776-9836 SCALE: AS SHOWN JUNE 2018 OWNER/DEVELOPER: J&J BUTLER FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD 6010 Thoroughbred RDG College Station, TX 77845 VICINITY MAP HARVEY MITCHELL PKWY S.WE L L B O R N R D .HOLLEMAN DR . S . NOT TO SCALE GENERAL PARKWAY Application completed in full. This application form provided by the City of College Station must be used and may not be adjusted or altered. Please attach pages if additional information is provided. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING) APPLICATION MINIMUM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: NOTE: If a petition for rezoning is denied by the City Council, another application for rezoning shall not be filed within a period of 180 days from the date of denial, except with permission of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Land affected Legal description of area of proposed change; Present zoning Zoning classification of all abutting land All public and private rights-of-way and easements bounding and intersecting subject land. a. b. c. d. e. APPLICANT/PROJECT MANAGER'S INFORMATION (Primary contact for the project): PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION: Name E-mail Street Address City State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number TOTAL ACREAGE GENERAL LOCATION OF PROPERTY, IF NOT PLATTED: Name E-mail Street Address City State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number Traffic Impact Analysis or calculations of projected vehicle trips showing that a TIA is not necessary for the proposed request. Rezoning Application Fee. (Refer to the Planning and Development Fee Schedule for all applicable fees) Written legal description of subject property (metes & bounds or lot & block of subdivision, whichever is applicable). Copy of a fully dimensioned map Revised 1/17 Page 1 of 3 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CASE NO.: DATE SUBMITTED: TIME: STAFF: LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Lot, Block, Subdivision) ADDRESS NAME OF PROJECT Date of Optional Preapplication Conference GENERAL THIS APPLICATION NOT REQUIRED IF APPLYING ELECTRONICALLY Jim Butler jgb9611@aol.com 6010 Thoroughbred Ridge College Station TX 77845 (979) 229-5471 40.707 South of the Aspen Heights Subdivision at the end of General Parkway J & J Butler Family Partnership, LTD jgb9611@aol.com 6010 Thoroughbred Ridge College Station TX 77845 (979) 229-5471 Crawford Burnett (ICL), Tract 135, 42.738 Acres Holleman Drive South Butler Tract Rezoning 1/31/2018 REZONING SUPPORTING INFORMATION List the changed or changing conditions in the area or in the City which make this zone change necessary. Indicate whether or not this zone change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. If it is not, explain why the Plan is incorrect. How will this zone change be compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood? 1. 2. 3. Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property This property was conveyed to owner by deed dated and recorded in Volume , Page of the Brazos County Official Records. Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning Revised 1/17 Page 2 of 3 Name E-mail Street Address City State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number OTHER CONTACTS (Please specify type of contact, i.e. project manager, potential buyer, local contact, etc.): This area of the city has numerous student living developments but very little commercial development to support this residential growth. This zoning change is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The adjacent tract to the northwest is multi-family use and the undeveloped property in this area is Urban Land Use on the comprehensive plan and in Growth Area 5 which is for intense land uses. The zone change will be compatible with the existing and proposed uses of nearby property. Rural General Commercial R-Rural & GS-General Suburban GC-General Commercial 06/30/2006 7551 041 Schultz Engineering, LLC - Joe Schultz P.E.eng@scultzeng.com 911 Southwest Parkway East College Station TX 77840 (979) 764-3900 (979) 764-3910 Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district. Explain the marketability of the property for uses permitted by the current zoning district. List any other reasons to support this zone change. 5. 6. 7. The applicant has prepared this application and certifies that the facts stated herein and exhibits attached hereto are true, correct, and complete. IF THIS APPLICATION IS FILED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, this application must be accompanied by a power of attorney statement from the owner. If there is more than one owner, all owners must sign the application or the power of attorney. If the owner is a company, the application must be accompanied by proof of authority for the company's representative to sign the application on its behalf. Signature and title Date Revised 1/17 Page 3 of 3 Explain the suitability of the property for uses permitted by the rezoning district requested. 4. The current zoning districts of Rural and a small area of General Suburban would allow only low density residential development, which is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan therefore is is not suitable for development with its current zoning. There is very little marketability for the property as a large lot residential subdivision in this location. Commercial uses are needed in this area so that nearby residents do not have to leave the area in order to find goods and services they need. Development of this tract will significantly increase the property and sales tax generated by the property. The property has access via General Parkway, all utilities are available and there are no topographical features that present any problems for development so the property is very suitable for General Commercial uses. The maximum number of PM peak hours trips for this area is limited to the trips shown in Table 3 of the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Binkley and Barfield, INC. and dated June 25, 2018. This provision on the development of this tract will go away when a second point of access is provided by the extension of General Parkway or the addition of another road to Holleman Drive South. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. i TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for Butler Tract College Station, Texas EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Butler Tract in College Station contains approximately 43 acres of land located along Holleman Drive South near General Parkway. It is proposed that 16.9 acres be rezoned for development. The original zoning is Rural; the proposed zoning is General Commercial. This traffic impact analysis (TIA) evaluates the traffic impacts of three development scenarios. The first scenario is a full development using retail assumptions consistent with General Commercial uses in the City ordinance. The second scenario allocates most of the developed area to a Big Shots golf facility, with the remaining area still designated and used as general commercial. The third scenario includes the Big Shots golf facility and applies a reduced intensity of development for the remaining land. The impacts of these three scenarios are evaluated at key intersections along the Holleman Drive South Corridor. The following conditions are included: • Existing (2018) • Background (2021) • Full Build Scenario 1 (2021) • Full Build Scenario 2 (2021) • Full Build Scenario 3 (2021) STUDY APPROACH The Existing (2018) conditions analysis is an evaluation of the existing traffic on the Holleman Drive South corridor in its future configuration as a four-lane road because it is currently under construction to widen to four-lanes. The Background (2021) analysis includes additional traffic generated from developments in the area to model the future conditions without additional impacts from development of the Butler tract. Three Full Build scenarios are examined: One for an intensity of development that includes 100% commercial (retail) use, one scenario that factors in the development of a Big Shots golf facility on most of the 16.9 acres, and a third scenario that includes the Big Shots and restricts the number of trips generated by the remaining land. Traffic from these three scenarios are added to the Background traffic to identify their impact on intersection operations. FINDINGS The capacity analyses forecasted poor or failing operations at Deacon Drive during the Background (2021) period that occur regardless of the development of the Butler Tract. With Scenario 1, representing full development with General Commercial retail assumptions, there are significant operational failings at Dowling Road and at General Parkway. Mitigation with traffic signals was not pursued at these locations, but with less intense trip generation assumptions of Scenario 2. Scenario 2 evaluated the impact of a Big Shots golf facility with some commercial (retail) development. The impacts under Scenario 2 are much smaller than the impacts for Scenario 1, though there are still some undesirable levels of service. In Scenario 3, these issues are mitigated with the further reductions in trips generated. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. ii RECOMMENDATIONS Unless further mitigations are pursued, such as signalization at General Parkway or at Dowling Road, and until General Parkway extends to Deacon Drive, it is recommended that development be limited to generating no more trips than what are shown in Scenario 3. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... i Study Approach ....................................................................................................................................... i Findings ................................................................................................................................................... i Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 1 Area Development .................................................................................................................................. 1 Streets and Intersections ........................................................................................................................ 1 Proposed Development .............................................................................................................. 6 Trip Distribution .......................................................................................................................... 7 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................................... 7 Projected Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... 7 Site Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................... 7 Background Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................ 12 Total Traffic Volumes. ........................................................................................................................... 13 Intersection Capacity Analysis ..................................................................................................20 Existing (2018) ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Background (2021) ............................................................................................................................... 20 Scenario 1 Full Build (2021) ................................................................................................................. 20 Scenario 2 Full Build (2021) ................................................................................................................. 20 Scenario 3 Full Build (2021) ................................................................................................................. 21 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................24 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................24 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................24 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................25 Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Site Location ............................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Background Developments ......................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Peak Hour Volumes – Existing (2018) ......................................................................... 5 Figure 4. Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................... 8 Figure 5. Scenario 1 Peak Hour Volumes – Site Generated ....................................................... 9 Figure 6. Scenario 2 Peak Hour Volumes – Site Generated ......................................................10 Figure 7. Scenario 3 Peak Hour Volumes – Site Generated ......................................................11 Figure 8. Peak Hour Volumes – Background (2021) from 2% Growth .......................................14 Figure 9. Peak Hour Volumes – Local Area Projects .................................................................15 Figure 10. Peak Hour Volumes – Total Background Traffic (2021) ............................................16 Figure 11. Peak Hour Volumes – Full Build Scenario 1 (100% Commercial) .............................17 Figure 12. Peak Hour Volumes – Full Build Scenario 2 (Big Shots / Commercial Split) .............18 Figure 13. Peak Hour Volumes – Full Build Scenario 3 .............................................................19 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Scenario 1 Land Use Data ........................................................................................... 6 Table 2. Scenario 2 Land Use Data ........................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Scenario 3 Land Use Data ........................................................................................... 6 Table 4. Scenario 1 Trip Generation Data .................................................................................. 7 Table 5. Scenario 2 Trip Generation Data .................................................................................. 7 Table 6. Scenario 3 Trip Generation Data .................................................................................. 7 Table 7. Site Generated Trips – Mission Ranch Development ..................................................12 Table 8. Site Generated Trips – Pershing Pointe Development .................................................12 Table 9. Site Generated Trips – Aggieland Xpress ....................................................................13 Table 10. Site Generated Trips – University Heights Phase 4 ...................................................13 Table 11. Site Generated Trips – River Bend Elementary School .............................................13 Table 12. AM Peak Hour Level of Service .................................................................................22 Table 13. PM Peak Hour Level of Service .................................................................................23 Table 14. Signal Warrant Analysis Using Peak Hour Volumes ..................................................24 Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 1 INTRODUCTION The Butler Tract in College Station contains approximately 43 acres of land located along Holleman Drive South near General Parkway. It is proposed that 16.9 acres be rezoned for development. The original zoning is Rural; the proposed zoning is General Commercial. An aerial map with the location of the development is shown in Figure 1. A survey of the specific location is provided in the Appendix. This traffic impact analysis (TIA) evaluates the traffic impacts of three development scenarios. The first scenario is a full development using retail assumptions consistent with General Commercial uses in the City ordinance. The second scenario allocates most of the developed area to a Big Shots golf facility, with the remaining area still designated and used as general commercial. The third scenario includes the Big Shots golf facility and applies a reduced intensity of development for the remaining land. The impacts of these three scenarios are evaluated at key intersections along the Holleman Drive South Corridor. The following conditions are included: • Existing (2018) • Background (2021) • Full Build Scenario 1 (2021) • Full Build Scenario 2 (2021) • Full Build Scenario 3 (2021) STUDY AREA Provided below are a summary of the existing land uses near the site and descriptions of developments in the area. AREA DEVELOPMENT Aspen Heights is a recently-completed complex at the General Parkway intersection and has a total of 233 units, with each unit having 2-5 bedrooms. Along Deacon Drive is The Barracks, a development nearing completion that includes detached houses and townhouses. Mission Ranch is a planned subdivision located west of Holleman Drive with approximately 540 single- family homes. Adjacent to Mission Ranch and at the corner of Rock Prairie Road at Holleman Drive is a planned elementary school. Pershing Pointe is a development near the intersection of Deacon Drive at Holleman Drive that will have 175 townhomes after two phases of construction. A gas station and convenience store (Aggieland Xpress) is planned for the northeast corner of the Deacon Drive intersection. Finally, future phases of University Heights may add some commercial development, such as a convenience store and fast food. The locations of these developments are shown in Figure 2. STREETS AND INTERSECTIONS Holleman Drive is an existing two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 60 mph. Holleman Drive is classified as a four-lane Minor Arterial on the city’s Master Thoroughfare Plan (MTP). The City is in the process of widening Holleman Drive from Dowling Road to Rock Prairie Road, to a cross-section that has four lanes (two in each direction). There will be a two-way left-turn lane from Deacon Drive to General Parkway. After the road is widened, the speed limit is expected to be 40 mph. Market Street is listed as a proposed two-lane Major Collector on the MTP. The road intersects Holleman Drive in a T-intersection controlled by a traffic signal. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 2 Dowling Road is a two-lane rural street with a speed limit of 45 mph. The intersection of Dowling Road at Holleman Drive is controlled by Stop signs for all directions. A northbound channelized right-turn lane has been recently added to reduce delay at the intersection. General Parkway is a two-lane Minor Collector that has not been fully constructed. On the north end, General Parkway intersects Holleman Drive in a T-intersection and terminates just after the Aspen Heights development, at the Butler Tract. Cain Road is a two-lane undivided roadway with a 40 mph speed limit. Cain Road currently extends from Holleman Drive South to Wellborn Road. Cain Road is currently classified as a two-lane Minor Collector from General Parkway to Holleman Drive. The eastbound approach of Cain Road at Wellborn Road is in the process of being removed as part of a project to eliminate the at-grade railroad crossing. Deacon Drive is a two-lane Major Collector extending from Holleman Drive South to Old Wellborn Road. The speed limit is 30 mph. The City is in the process of connecting Deacon Drive over the Union Pacific Railroad to Wellborn Road. With the Mission Ranch development, Deacon Drive will also extend west of Holleman Drive as a Minor Collector. The existing and proposed intersections evaluated in this study are as follows: • Holleman Drive at Market Street • Holleman Drive at Dowling Road • Holleman Drive at General Parkway • Holleman Drive at Cain Road • Holleman Drive at Deacon Drive AM and PM Peak Hour turning movement traffic counts were collected on Holleman Drive at each intersection in March 2018. The raw traffic count volume printouts are provided in the Appendix. The AM and PM Peak Hour volumes for the Existing (2018) conditions are illustrated in Figure 3. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 6 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This report addresses the development of 16.9 acres of the Butler Tract. For the rezoning of the land from Rural (R) to General Commercial (GC), the City of College Station requires that specific development assumptions be used in the analysis. Because the ultimate use of the land at this location will likely be much less intense than the required assumptions, the Full Build condition was analyzed with three different scenarios: • Scenario 1 includes development of the 16.9 acres as General Commercial use with trip generation assumptions consistent with City of College Station guidelines. This includes the ratio of 13,500 square feet of building space per acre of land and trip generation assumptions for ITE Land Use 820 (Shopping Center). Table 1 identifies the relevant land use data consulted in determining the number of trips generated for Scenario 1. • Scenario 2 includes a Big Shots golf facility on most of the available land, as shown in the Appendix. The remaining land would be developed with General Commercial use. A Big Shots facility contains a driving range with indoor tees. It was assumed the building would be sized at 32,000 sq ft, consistent with a mid-sized Big Shots development. A 32,000 sq ft Big Shots facility has 42 tee boxes. Table 2 identifies the land use data for determining the number of trips generated under Scenario 2. • Scenario 3 presents a more likely example of the intensity of commercial development that may happen with the available land next to Big Shots. The retail assumptions for ITE land use 820 (Shopping Center) are conservative and represent trip generation rates for shopping centers and malls, including regional centers with multiple uses. Such facilities are located on major and minor arterials. It is unknown how the remaining 3.2 acres on General Parkway will actually develop, but an intense retail use is not likely because there is no direct access to a major arterial (there will be no access to Wellborn Road over the railroad). Scenario 3 therefore incorporates the Big Shots design and applies a 30% reduction to the number of other General Commercial trips for a more- realistic forecast. Table 3 shows the land use data for Scenario 3. Table 1. Scenario 1 Land Use Data Land Use ITE Code Acres Units/ Acre Number of Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Trips Rate/Unit Trips Commercial 820 16.9 13.5 KSF 228 0.94 214 3.81 869 Table 2. Scenario 2 Land Use Data Land Use ITE Code Acres Units/ Acre Number of Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Trips Rate/Unit Trips Big Shots Golf1 435 13.7 — 32 KSF 0.60 19 3.58 115 Commercial 820 3.2 13.5 KSF 43.2 KSF 0.94 41 3.81 165 1 ITE Land Use 435 does not include AM trip generation data. The AM assumptions for this study are based on information from similar recreational land uses. Table 3. Scenario 3 Land Use Data Land Use ITE Code Acres Units/ Acre Number of Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Trips Rate/Unit Trips Big Shots Golf1 435 13.7 — 32 KSF 0.60 19 3.58 115 Commercial2 820 3.2 13.5 KSF 43.2 KSF 0.47 20 1.91 83 1 ITE Land Use 435 does not include AM trip generation data. The AM assumptions for this study are based on information from similar recreational land uses. 2 The trip generation rates for this scenario have been reduced by 50% from the original rates shown in the ITE Trip Generation manual. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 7 TRIP DISTRIBUTION Trips generated by the proposed development addressed in this study were distributed to and from the site based on its location with respect to area development, nearby roadways, and existing traffic patterns. Figure 4 illustrates the trip distribution utilized in the study. TRIP GENERATION For the three development scenarios, the AM and PM Peak Hour trips are determined from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) 10th edition Trip Generation Manual. Tables 4 through 6 summarize the calculated trips that are anticipated to be generated by the different uses. The Appendix contains information about the ITE data used to develop these tables. A Big Shots facility would occupy most of the 16.9 acres of the rezoned land. The location of the land, the dedication of right-of-way to the extension of General Parkway, and the need for storm water detention, the remaining land that can be developed other than the Big Shots facility is approximately 3.2 acres. Because the retail assumption of Land Use 820 is extremely conservative compared to what would likely develop at that location, Scenario 3 reduces the commercial-based trips of Scenario 2 by 30%. Table 6 has trip generation data for Scenario 3. Table 4. Scenario 1 Trip Generation Data Land Use AM Peak (vph) PM Peak (vph) Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Commercial 214 62% 133 38% 81 869 48% 417 52% 452 Table 5. Scenario 2 Trip Generation Data Land Use AM Peak (vph) PM Peak (vph) Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Big Shots Golf1 19 70% 13 30% 6 115 55% 63 45% 52 Commercial 41 62% 25 38% 16 165 48% 79 52% 86 Total 60 — 38 — 22 280 — 142 — 138 1 ITE Land Use 435 does not include AM trip generation data. The AM assumptions for this study are based on information from similar recreational land uses. Table 6. Scenario 3 Trip Generation Data Land Use AM Peak (vph) PM Peak (vph) Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Big Shots Golf1 19 70% 13 30% 6 115 55% 63 45% 52 Commercial2 20 62% 12 38% 8 83 48% 40 52% 43 Total 39 — 25 — 14 198 — 103 — 95 1 ITE Land Use 435 does not include AM trip generation data. The AM assumptions for this study are based on information from similar recreational land uses. 2 The intensity of the Commercial development (Land Use 820) has been reduced by 50%. PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES SITE TRAFFIC VOLUMES For this study, “site volumes” represent the traffic expected to be generated by the proposed site. Figure 5 shows the assignment of the generated trips for Scenario 1 based on the trip distribution shown in Figure 4. Figure 6 shows the generated trips for Scenario 2. Figure 7 shows the generated trips for Scenario 3. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 12 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES For this study, “background volumes” represent the traffic expected to occur along the area streets and roadways from the increase in traffic volumes due to normal traffic growth in the area. This study applied an annual growth factor of 2%. Figure 8 shows the background Peak Hour volumes after applying the 2% annual growth of the Existing (2018) volumes through 2021. As mentioned previously, there are some developments that are nearing completion or are under construction. These include: The Barracks, Mission Ranch, Pershing Pointe townhomes, Aggieland Xpress gas station, University Heights, and River Bend Elementary School. Because the Barracks development is nearing completion, the additional traffic from the final units will be covered by the annual 2% growth factor. The generation and distribution of trips for the other developments added to the background volumes are discussed in this section. Trip generation rates are based on information in the ITE Trip Generation Manual or from TIAs specific to the development. Mission Ranch The size of the Mission Ranch development is approximately 270 acres. It is anticipated to have approximately 540 single family units after the last phase of development. In 2021, the target year for the Background and Full Build scenarios of this study, it is estimated that Mission Ranch will be developed to 25% completion (135 units). Table 7 provides a summary of the estimated trips generated by 135 completed homes in Mission Ranch. These trips were added to the study intersections with the distribution illustrated in the Appendix. Table 7. Site Generated Trips – Mission Ranch Development Development AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Mission Ranch 101 25 76 135 85 50 Note: Represents 25% of full build conditions Pershing Pointe Townhomes The Pershing Pointe Townhomes, located near the southeast corner of Deacon Drive at Holleman Drive, is a complex that will have 175 units. The calculated number of trips generated by the townhome development for the AM and PM Peak Hours are summarized in Table 8. A raised median on Holleman Drive will limit access for Pershing Pointe to right-in, right-out on Holleman Drive. Full access to the development will be provided through Towers Parkway at Deacon Drive. The trip distribution assumptions for Pershing Pointe are shown in the Appendix. Table 8. Site Generated Trips – Pershing Pointe Development Development AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Pershing Pointe 77 13 64 91 61 30 Aggieland Xpress The Aggieland Xpress convenience store and gas station will be located on the northeast corner of Deacon Drive at Holleman Drive. The gas station will have 10 pumps, and there will be a 7,500-square foot building for a convenience store and adjacent retail space. Trips generated by the Aggieland Xpress development are summarized in Table 9. Both accesses for the convenience store and gas station on Deacon Drive and on Holleman Drive are limited to right- in, right-out, impacting the trip distribution shown in the Appendix. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 13 Table 9. Site Generated Trips – Aggieland Xpress Development Intensity AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Aggieland Xpress 10 Gas Pumps1 102 51 51 135 68 67 2,200 SF Retail 15 9 6 46 22 24 Note: 14,800 SF Convenience store included as part of ITE Land Use 945 (Gasoline/Service Station w/Convenience Market) University Heights University Heights has recently been rezoned to allow for some commercial development, with one potential use being a convenience store and fast food restaurant. The calculated trip ends generated by the development are summarized in Table 10. The trip distribution is shown in the Appendix. Table 10. Site Generated Trips – University Heights Phase 4 Development AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit University Heights 65 40 25 264 127 137 River Bend Elementary School A traffic study completed by Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. (KHA) provided the trip generation and distribution assumptions for the elementary school (River Bend Elementary) located at the intersection of Rock Prairie Road at Holleman Drive. Table 11 summarizes the estimated trips generated by River Bend Elementary School. The trips added to the study intersections by the school in accordance with the TIA for the school are shown in the Appendix. Table 11. Site Generated Trips – River Bend Elementary School Development Intensity AM Peak Hour (vph) PM Peak Hour (vph) Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit River Bend Elementary 700 Students 630 347 283 420 197 223 80 Staff 80 80 0 80 0 80 Source: Kimley-Horn & Associates TIA for River Bend Elementary Figure 9 depicts the trips added to the network from the combined local developments listed in this section. Figure 10 shows the combined Peak Hour volumes for the Background (2021) conditions, which extrapolate the Existing (2018) traffic to the year 2021 with a 2% growth factor (shown in Figure 8) and adding the site traffic of the specific local developments (shown in Figure 9). TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES. The Peak Hour volumes for the Full Build (2021) scenario are determined by adding the site generated volumes of the proposed site (Figure 5 for Scenario 1, Figure 6 for Scenario 2, and Figure 7 for Scenario 3) to the total Background (2021) volumes (shown in Figure 10). The total Full Build volumes for Scenario 1 are shown in Figure 11. For Scenario 2 and Scenario 3, the total volumes are shown in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. There are no reductions for internal trip capture or pass-by trips, despite the possibility for there to be some with commercial uses. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 20 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Level of Service (LOS) analyses of the traffic operations were performed at the study intersections. Each analysis was conducted utilizing Synchro software for the AM and PM Peak Hours. For each scenario, including the Existing (2018) conditions, it was assumed that the Holleman Drive corridor was built to its ultimate four-lane configuration from the current widening project. Mitigations for poor and failing levels of service were proposed as necessary. The findings of the analyses with the resulting delay and levels of service are summarized in the following tables: • Table 12. AM Peak Hour Level of Service • Table 13. PM Peak Hour Level of Service Observations from the analyzed scenarios are described below. EXISTING (2018) The lane configurations for Holleman Drive matched the four-lane design of the road currently under construction. For the Existing (2018) scenario, all intersections operate at an acceptable level of service. BACKGROUND (2021) The Background (2021) analysis assumed a 2% annual growth in traffic and the addition of traffic generated from nearby developments. During the AM and PM Peak Hours, the eastbound and westbound left-turns from Deacon Drive are forecasted to operate at LOS E or LOS F. While the AM Peak Hour is not as severe, the average delay for the eastbound left-turn is 145 seconds per vehicle in the PM Peak Hour. The worst vehicle queues (95th percentile) are approximately 3 vehicles or less. SCENARIO 1 FULL BUILD (2021) Scenario 1 includes site traffic with an assumption for 100% commercial (retail) development. During the AM Peak Hour, there are some movements with unacceptable levels of service, including the westbound left turn from General Parkway and the westbound and eastbound left turns from Deacon Drive. The vehicle queues at these locations are generally short. During the PM Peak Hour there are operational concerns at Dowling Road, at General Parkway, and at Deacon Drive. The intersection at Dowling Road is forecasted to operate at LOS F, with failing levels of service in the northbound and southbound directions. At General Parkway, the westbound approach fails due to the high left-turning volume. Deacon Drive experiences significant failings in level of service for the eastbound and westbound approaches. SCENARIO 2 FULL BUILD (2021) Scenario 2 includes site traffic from the combination of the Big Shots golf facility and some commercial development (3.2 acres). There are significantly fewer trips generated with development of the Big Shots compared to the typical General Commercial assumptions. As expected, the analyses of Scenario 2 show that the intersections perform better than in Scenario 1. During the AM Peak Hour, all intersections operate at an acceptable level of service, except for left-turn concerns from Deacon Drive that exist in the Background conditions. During the PM Peak Hour, operations at Dowling Road improve to LOS E, and only the southbound approach operates with a failing level of service. At General Parkway, the westbound left-turn still operates with an unacceptable level of service (LOS E). Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 21 SCENARIO 3 FULL BUILD (2021) In Scenario 2, the main operational concerns are during the PM Peak Hour at Dowling Road and at General Parkway. For Scenario 3, the intersection at Dowling Road improves to an acceptable level of service (LOS D) during the PM Peak Hour, although the southbound movement continues to operate at LOS E. At General Parkway, the westbound left-turn movement improves to LOS D, with 33 seconds of delay. Deacon Drive continues to experience operational concerns in the AM and PM Peak Hours with failing of unacceptable levels of service in the Eastbound and Westbound directions. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 22 Table 12. AM Peak Hour Level of Service Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Market Street at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 E - A B C 61.9 - 5.7 14.7 21.5 Background 2021 E - A B C 70.5 - 6.4 16.4 20.9 Scenario 1 E - A B C 70.5 - 6.6 17.1 20.5 Scenario 2 E - A B C 70.5 - 6.5 16.5 20.7 Scenario 3 E - A B C 70.5 - 6.4 16.5 20.8 Dowling Road at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 B A B B B B 13.9 9.5 12.0 12.0 10.5 12.1 Background 2021 C B C B B C 19.0 11.2 22.6 14.2 14.7 19.2 Scenario 1 C B D B C C 21.4 12.1 31.8 14.4 18.1 24.8 Scenario 2 C B D B C C 19.5 11.4 24.3 14.3 15.4 20.3 Scenario 3 C B C B C C 19.4 11.3 23.7 14.3 15.2 19.9 General Parkway at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - C - B - A - - - 16.3 - 12.3 - 9.6 - - Background 2021 - C - C - B - - - 24.0 - 15.8 - 11.6 - - Scenario 1 - E - C - B - - - 40.8 - 19.2 - 13.6 - - Scenario 2 - D - C - B - - - 27.1 - 16.5 - 12.1 - - Scenario 3 D - B - B - - 26.0 - 16.3 - 11.9 - - Cain Road at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - B - A - - - 11.1 - 8.9 - - Background 2021 - B - B - - - 14.0 - 10.5 - - Scenario 1 - B - B - - - 14.5 - 10.8 - - Scenario 2 - B - B - - - 14.1 - 10.6 - - Scenario 3 B - B - - 14.0 - 10.6 - - Deacon Drive at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - B - B - A - - - 13.7 - 11.7 - 8.4 - - Background 2021 F C E C A - B - - 54.9 22.6 37.4 19.9 7.9 - 10.6 - - Scenario 1 F D E C A - B - - 80.4 25.3 45.2 22.8 7.9 - 10.8 - - Scenario 2 F C E C A - B - - 63.4 23.8 43.5 20.8 7.9 - 10.6 - - Scenario 3 F C E C A - B - - 61.6 23.6 43.1 20.5 7.9 - 10.6 - - Note: Letters are level of service, numbers are average seconds of delay per vehicle. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 23 Table 13. PM Peak Hour Level of Service Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Market Street at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 D - A B C 53.6 - 5.4 18.0 20.3 Background 2021 E - A C C 59.7 - 5.9 22.0 21.8 Scenario 1 E - A C C 59.7 - 5.7 29.2 26.5 Scenario 2 E - A C C 59.7 - 6.1 23.7 22.2 Scenario 3 E - A C C 59.7 - 6.0 23.1 22.0 Dowling Road at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 B B B A B B 12.8 10.1 11.6 8.9 14.5 13.3 Background 2021 C B C A D D 16.1 12.2 18.0 9.3 33.9 25.8 Scenario 1 C B E A F F 18.6 14.6 55.5 9.6 122 82.7 Scenario 2 C B C A F E 17.2 13.0 23.9 9.4 53.3 37.8 Scenario 3 C B C A E D 17.0 12.8 21.5 9.4 45.9 33.2 General Parkway at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - C - B - A - - - 15.0 - 10.1 - 8.6 - - Background 2021 - C - B - A - - - 20.3 - 11.4 - 9.6 - - Scenario 1 - F - D - B - - - >300 - 25.2 - 14.8 - - Scenario 2 - E - B - B - - - 46.1 - 13.2 - 10.7 - - Scenario 3 - D - B - B - - - 32.8 - 12.5 - 10.3 - - Cain Road at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - B - A - - - 10.2 - 7.9 - - Background 2021 - B - A - - - 12.3 - 8.8 - - Scenario 1 - B - A - - - 13.7 - 9.4 - - Scenario 2 - B - A - - - 12.7 - 9.0 - - Scenario 3 - B - A - - - 12.6 - 9.0 - - Deacon Drive at Holleman Drive Existing 2018 - B - A - A - - - 14.4 - 9.3 - 7.9 - - Background 2021 F D E C A - A - - 145 31.4 48.8 23.2 8.6 - 8.6 - - Scenario 1 F F F F A - A - - >300 57.3 130 61.7 8.9 - 9.8 - - Scenario 2 F E F D A - A - - 244 37.0 72.6 28.4 8.7 - 9.1 - - Scenario 3 F E F D A - A - - 235 37.0 71.5 28.2 8.6 - 9.2 - - Notes: Letters are level of service, numbers are average seconds of delay per vehicle. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 24 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The capacity analyses forecasted poor or failing operations at Deacon Drive during the Background (2021) period that occur regardless of the development of the Butler Tract. These failings can be mitigated with a traffic signal; however, a signal is not currently planned at that location. A pseudo-analysis for a signal warrant is shown below in Table 14. The analysis is based on Peak Hour volumes only, identifying the scenarios for which the AM or PM Peak Hour volumes exceed the stated threshold of the volume warrants. The Warrant 1 and Warrant 2 volumes are exceeded starting in the Background 2021 scenario. This does not substitute for a full signal warrant analysis but suggests that there may be warranted in the future and the location should be monitored for signalization. With Scenario 1, representing full development with General Commercial retail assumptions, there are significant operational failings at Dowling Road and at General Parkway. Mitigation with traffic signals was not pursued at these locations, but with less intense trip generation assumptions of Scenario 2. Scenario 2 evaluated the impact of a Big Shots golf facility with some commercial (retail) development. The impacts under Scenario 2 are much smaller than the impacts for Scenario 1, though there are still some undesirable levels of service. In Scenario 3, these issues are mitigated with the further reductions in trips generated. Table 14. Signal Warrant Analysis Using Peak Hour Volumes Summary Warrant 1 Warrant 2 Warrant 3 AM PM AM PM AM PM Existing 2018 No No No No No No Background 2021 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Scenario 1 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Scenario 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Scenario 3 Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Note: Warrant analysis based on Peak Hour volumes only, not the full 8-hour or 4-hour evaluations used for Warrant 1 and Warrant 2. RECOMMENDATIONS Unless further mitigations are pursued, such as signalization at General Parkway or at Dowling Road, and until General Parkway is extended to Deacon Drive, it is recommended that development be limited to generating no more trips than what are shown in Scenario 3. CONCLUSION The analyses conducted in this study were based upon assumptions for specific types and intensities of development to evaluate how intersections around the proposed development of the Butler Tract will operate under future conditions. It is likely that actual development along the Holleman Drive South corridor will differ from the assumptions of this TIA, causing the intersections to perform differently than shown in the report. If there are any questions concerning this report or its analyses, please contact our office. Traffic Impact Analysis – Butler Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 25 APPENDIX SITE SURVEY...................................................................................................................... 1 PAGE BIG SHOTS GOLF EXHIBIT ................................................................................................... 1 PAGE TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY SHEETS .................................................................................20 PAGES DIAGRAMS OF TRIP DISTRIBUTIONS FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENTS ........................................ 5 PAGES ITE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY AND LAND USE DETAILS ................................................ 5 PAGES SYNCHRO ANALYSIS OUTPUT Existing (2018) ................................................................................................................ 6 PAGES Background (2021) ......................................................................................................... 6 PAGES Scenario 1 Full Build (2021) ............................................................................................ 6 PAGES Scenario 2 Full Build (2021) ............................................................................................ 6 PAGES Scenario 3 Full Build (2021) ............................................................................................ 6 PAGES DESCRIPTIONS OF LEVELS OF SERVICE ............................................................................... 1 PAGE HOLLEMAN DRIVE SOUTHG E N E R A L P A R KW A Y CALLED OLD HIGHWAY 6 R.O.W.TBPE NO. 12327 911 SOUTHWEST PKWY E. College Station, Texas 77840 www (979) 764-3900 ENGINEER: ZONING MAP BUTLER TRACT COMMERCIAL 16.934 ACRES CRAWFORD BURNETT LEAGUE, A-7 COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS SURVEYOR: H. Curtis Strong, RPLS No. 4961 Strong Surveying, LLC 1722 Broadmoor Dr, Ste 105 Bryan, TX 77802 (979) 776-9836 SCALE: AS SHOWN APRIL 2018 OWNER/DEVELOPER: J&J BUTLER FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD 6010 Thoroughbred RDG College Station, TX 77845 VICINITY MAP HARVEY MITCHELL PKWY S.WE L L B O R N R D .HOLLEMAN DR . S . NOT TO SCALE GENERAL PARKWAY 1 2 3 7 6 9 8 40 YDS.80 YDS.125 YDS.160 YDS.225 YDS.105 YDS.180 YDS.4 5DNDN 10 11 BUTLER TRACT DEVELOPMENT HOLLEMAN DRIVE SOUTH COLLEGE STATION, TX 911 Southwest Pkwy E. College Station, TX 77840 979.764.3900 TBPE NO. 12327 SITE & ADJACENT PROPERTY EXHIBIT W/ AERIAL D Market St & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499661, Location: 30.58457, -96.336372 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr Holleman Dr Market St Direction Southbound Northbound Eastbound Time T R U App Ped*L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 7:00AM 52 4 0 56 6 2 100 0 102 2 48 2 0 50 0 208 7:15AM 49 7 0 56 1 2 118 0 120 5 74 6 0 80 0 256 7:30AM 51 5 0 56 7 2 150 0 152 1 68 3 0 71 0 279 7:45AM 77 6 0 83 0 1 98 0 99 0 24 2 0 26 0 208 Total 229 22 0 251 14 7 466 0 4 73 8 214 13 0 227 0 951 % Approach 91.2%8.8%0%--1.5%98.5%0%--94.3%5.7%0%--- % Total 24.1%2.3%0%26.4 %-0.7%49.0%0%4 9.7%-22.5%1.4%0%23.9%-- PHF 0.744 0.786 -0.756 -0.875 0.777 -0.778 -0.723 0.542 -0.709 -0.852 Lights 209 22 0 231 -7 455 0 4 62 -214 13 0 227 -920 % Lights 91.3%100%0%92.0%-100%97.6%0%97.7%-100%100%0%100%-96.7% Articulated Trucks 1 0 0 1 -0 1 0 1 -0 0 0 0 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0.4%0%0%0.4 %-0%0.2%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%-0.2% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 19 0 0 19 -0 10 0 10 -0 0 0 0 -29 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 8.3%0%0%7.6%-0%2.1%0%2.1%-0%0%0%0%-3.0% Pedestrians ----14 ----8 ----0 % Pedestrians ----100%----100%------ *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 3 of 6 Market St & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499661, Location: 30.58457, -96.336372 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [S] Holleman Dr[W] Market StTotal: 931 Total: 715Total: 256Out: 680 Out: 242Out: 29In: 251 In: 473In: 227 229 466 22 7 214 13 14 8 4 of 6 Market St & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499661, Location: 30.58457, -96.336372 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr Holleman Dr Market St Direction Southbound Northbound Eastbound Time T R U App Ped*L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 5:00PM 128 27 0 155 2 4 118 0 122 1 68 7 0 75 0 352 5:15PM 143 31 0 174 0 7 91 0 98 3 48 9 0 57 0 329 5:30PM 146 31 0 177 0 3 97 0 100 1 48 3 0 51 0 328 5:45PM 140 37 0 177 0 8 105 0 113 0 54 2 0 56 0 34 6 Total 557 126 0 683 2 22 411 0 4 33 5 218 21 0 239 0 1355 % Approach 81.6%18.4%0%--5.1%94.9%0%--91.2%8.8%0%--- % Total 41.1%9.3%0%50.4 %-1.6%30.3%0%32.0%-16.1%1.5%0%17.6%-- PHF 0.954 0.851 -0.965 -0.688 0.871 -0.887 -0.801 0.583 -0.797 -0.962 Lights 554 126 0 680 -22 406 0 4 28 -218 21 0 239 -1347 % Lights 99.5%100%0%99.6%-100%98.8%0%98.8%-100%100%0%100%-99.4% Articulated Trucks 1 0 0 1 -0 1 0 1 -0 0 0 0 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0.2%0%0%0.1%-0%0.2%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%-0.1% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 2 0 0 2 -0 4 0 4 -0 0 0 0 -6 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0.4%0%0%0.3%-0%1.0%0%0.9%-0%0%0%0%-0.4% Pedestrians ----2 ----5 ----0 % Pedestrians ----100%----100%------ *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 5 of 6 Market St & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499661, Location: 30.58457, -96.336372 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [S] Holleman Dr[W] Market StTotal: 1312 Total: 1011Total: 387Out: 629 Out: 578Out: 148In: 683 In: 433In: 239 557 411 126 22 218 21 2 5 6 of 6 Holleman Dr & N Dowling Rd - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on Crosswalk) All Movements ID: 499660, Location: 30.584237, -96.331858 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr N Dowling Rd Holleman Dr N Dowling Rd Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Time L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 7:00AM 4 36 18 0 58 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 8 69 55 0 132 0 28 10 4 0 4 2 0 233 7:15AM 4 32 22 0 58 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 10 90 132 0 232 0 28 33 5 0 66 0 357 7:30AM 4 31 15 0 50 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 7 92 135 0 234 0 49 28 8 0 85 0 371 7:45AM 4 54 21 0 79 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 11 60 67 0 138 0 30 22 9 0 61 0 279 Total 16 153 76 0 24 5 0 3 1 1 0 5 0 36 311 389 0 736 0 135 93 26 0 254 0 124 0 % Approach 6.5%62.4%31.0%0%--60.0%20.0%20.0%0%--4.9%42.3%52.9%0%--53.1%36.6%10.2%0%--- % Total 1.3%12.3%6.1%0%19.8%-0.2%0.1%0.1%0%0.4 %-2.9%25.1%31.4%0%59.4 %-10.9%7.5%2.1%0%20.5%-- PHF 1.000 0.708 0.864 -0.775 -0.750 0.250 0.250 -0.625 -0.818 0.845 0.720 -0.786 -0.689 0.705 0.722 -0.74 7 -0.836 Lights 16 139 69 0 224 -3 1 1 0 5 -36 301 389 0 726 -134 93 22 0 24 9 -1204 % Lights 100%90.8%90.8%0%91.4 %-100%100%100%0%100%-100%96.8%100%0%98.6%-99.3%100%84.6%0%98.0%-97.1% Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0%0.7%0%0%0.4 %-0%0%0%0%0%-0%0.3%0%0%0.1%-0%0%0%0%0%-0.2% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0 13 7 0 20 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 9 0 0 9 -1 0 4 0 5 -34 % Buses and Single- Unit Trucks 0%8.5%9.2%0%8.2%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%2.9%0%0%1.2%-0.7%0%15.4%0%2.0%-2.7% Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Pedestrians ------------------------- Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Bicycles on Crosswalk ------------------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 3 of 6 Holleman Dr & N Dowling Rd - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on Crosswalk) All Movements ID: 499660, Location: 30.584237, -96.331858 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] N Dowling Rd[S] Holleman Dr[W] N Dowling RdTotal: 692 Total: 918 Total: 503Total: 367Out: 447 Out: 182 Out: 498Out: 113In: 245 In: 736 In: 5In: 254 153 1 311 93 16 76 1 3 389 36 135 26 4 of 6 Holleman Dr & N Dowling Rd - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on Crosswalk) All Movements ID: 499660, Location: 30.584237, -96.331858 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr N Dowling Rd Holleman Dr N Dowling Rd Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Time L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 5:00PM 3 112 23 0 138 0 6 0 1 0 7 0 11 75 32 0 118 0 42 7 15 0 64 0 327 5:15PM 0 117 25 0 14 2 0 5 1 3 0 9 0 11 51 24 0 86 0 26 9 11 0 4 6 0 283 5:30PM 1 130 26 0 157 0 4 0 4 0 8 0 8 60 21 0 89 0 29 7 9 0 4 5 0 299 5:45PM 1 122 22 0 14 5 0 3 2 3 0 8 0 9 75 33 0 117 0 31 4 9 0 4 4 0 314 Total 5 481 96 0 582 0 18 3 11 0 32 0 39 261 110 0 4 10 0 128 27 44 0 199 0 1223 % Approach 0.9%82.6%16.5%0%--56.3%9.4%34.4%0%--9.5%63.7%26.8%0%--64.3%13.6%22.1%0%--- % Total 0.4%39.3%7.8%0%4 7.6%-1.5%0.2%0.9%0%2.6%-3.2%21.3%9.0%0%33.5%-10.5%2.2%3.6%0%16.3%-- PHF 0.417 0.925 0.923 -0.927 -0.750 0.375 0.688 -0.889 -0.886 0.870 0.833 -0.869 -0.762 0.750 0.733 -0.777 -0.935 Lights 5 480 95 0 580 -18 3 11 0 32 -39 256 110 0 4 05 -127 27 39 0 193 -1210 % Lights 100%99.8%99.0%0%99.7%-100%100%100%0%100%-100%98.1%100%0%98.8%-99.2%100%88.6%0%97.0%-98.9% Articulated Trucks 0 0 1 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0%0%1.0%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%-0.8%0%0%0%0.5%-0.2% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 5 0 0 5 -0 0 5 0 5 -11 % Buses and Single- Unit Trucks 0%0.2%0%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%1.9%0%0%1.2%-0%0%11.4%0%2.5%-0.9% Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Pedestrians ------------------------- Bicycles on Crosswalk -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Bicycles on Crosswalk ------------------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 5 of 6 Holleman Dr & N Dowling Rd - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians, Bicycles on Crosswalk) All Movements ID: 499660, Location: 30.584237, -96.331858 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] N Dowling Rd[S] Holleman Dr[W] N Dowling RdTotal: 982 Total: 953 Total: 174Total: 337Out: 400 Out: 543 Out: 142Out: 138In: 582 In: 410 In: 32In: 199 481 3 261 27 5 96 11 18 110 39 128 44 6 of 6 Holleman Dr at General Pkwy - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 500335, Location: 30.581067, -96.330254 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr General Pkwy Holleman Dr Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Time L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-06 7:00AM 2 39 0 4 1 0 1 13 0 14 0 99 2 0 101 0 156 7:15AM 4 41 0 4 5 0 2 25 0 27 0 214 1 0 215 0 287 7:30AM 1 39 0 4 0 0 2 22 0 24 0 224 3 0 227 0 291 7:45AM 8 54 0 62 0 2 21 0 23 0 142 1 0 14 3 0 228 Total 15 173 0 188 0 7 81 0 88 0 679 7 0 686 0 962 % Approach 8.0%92.0%0%--8.0%92.0%0%--99.0%1.0%0%--- % Total 1.6%18.0%0%19.5%-0.7%8.4%0%9.1%-70.6%0.7%0%71.3%-- PHF 0.469 0.801 -0.758 -0.875 0.810 -0.815 -0.758 0.583 -0.756 -0.826 Lights 15 162 0 177 -7 76 0 83 -675 2 0 677 -937 % Lights 100%93.6%0%94 .1%-100%93.8%0%94 .3%-99.4%28.6%0%98.7%-97.4% Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 1 -0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0%0.6%0%0.5%-0%0%0%0%-0.1%0%0%0.1%-0.2% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0 10 0 10 -0 5 0 5 -3 5 0 8 -23 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0%5.8%0%5.3%-0%6.2%0%5.7%-0.4%71.4%0%1.2%-2.4% Pedestrians ----0 ----0 ----0 % Pedestrians ---------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 3 of 6 Holleman Dr at General Pkwy - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 500335, Location: 30.581067, -96.330254 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] General Pkwy[S] Holleman Dr Total: 948 Total: 866 Total: 110Out: 760 Out: 180 Out: 22In: 188 In: 686 In: 88 173 679 15 81 7 74 of 6 Holleman Dr at General Pkwy - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 500335, Location: 30.581067, -96.330254 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr General Pkwy Holleman Dr Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Time L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-06 5:00PM 13 102 0 115 0 5 16 0 21 0 103 6 0 109 0 24 5 5:15PM 14 102 0 116 0 3 14 0 17 0 86 6 0 92 0 225 5:30PM 23 117 0 14 0 0 3 12 0 15 0 116 6 0 122 0 277 5:45PM 27 112 0 139 0 6 14 0 20 0 80 11 0 91 0 250 Total 77 433 0 510 0 17 56 0 73 0 385 29 0 4 14 0 997 % Approach 15.1%84.9%0%--23.3%76.7%0%--93.0%7.0%0%--- % Total 7.7%43.4%0%51.2%-1.7%5.6%0%7.3%-38.6%2.9%0%4 1.5%-- PHF 0.713 0.925 -0.911 -0.708 0.875 -0.869 -0.830 0.659 -0.84 8 -0.900 Lights 77 424 0 501 -17 52 0 69 -380 25 0 4 05 -975 % Lights 100%97.9%0%98.2%-100%92.9%0%94 .5%-98.7%86.2%0%97.8%-97.8% Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 1 -0 0 0 0 -2 0 0 2 -3 % Articulated Trucks 0%0.2%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%-0.5%0%0%0.5%-0.3% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0 8 0 8 -0 4 0 4 -3 4 0 7 -19 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 0%1.8%0%1.6%-0%7.1%0%5.5%-0.8%13.8%0%1.7%-1.9% Pedestrians ----0 ----0 ----0 % Pedestrians ---------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 5 of 6 Holleman Dr at General Pkwy - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 500335, Location: 30.581067, -96.330254 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] General Pkwy[S] Holleman Dr Total: 951 Total: 864 Total: 179Out: 441 Out: 450 Out: 106In: 510 In: 414 In: 73 433 385 77 56 17 296 of 6 Cain Rd & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499659, Location: 30.572342, -96.32662 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr Cain Rd Holleman Dr Cain Rd Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Time L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 7:00AM 8 37 0 0 4 5 0 1 0 9 0 10 0 0 94 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 9 7:15AM 5 32 0 0 37 0 1 0 16 0 17 0 0 170 1 0 171 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 225 7:30AM 8 36 0 0 4 4 0 1 0 13 0 14 0 0 154 3 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 7:45AM 6 57 0 0 63 0 2 0 9 0 11 0 0 95 3 0 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 Total 27 162 0 0 189 0 5 0 47 0 52 0 0 513 7 0 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 761 % Approach 14.3%85.7%0%0%--9.6%0%90.4%0%--0%98.7%1.3%0%--0%0%0%0%--- % Total 3.5%21.3%0%0%24 .8%-0.7%0%6.2%0%6.8%-0%67.4%0.9%0%68.3%-0%0%0%0%0%-- PHF 0.844 0.711 --0.750 -0.625 -0.734 -0.765 --0.754 0.583 -0.760 -------0.846 Lights 26 144 0 0 170 -4 0 46 0 50 -0 502 6 0 508 -0 0 0 0 0 -728 % Lights 96.3%88.9%0%0%89.9%-80.0%0%97.9%0%96.2%-0%97.9%85.7%0%97.7%-0%0%0%0%--95.7% Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 0 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0%0.6%0%0%0.5%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%0.2%0%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%--0.3% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 1 17 0 0 18 -1 0 1 0 2 -0 10 1 0 11 -0 0 0 0 0 -31 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 3.7%10.5%0%0%9.5%-20.0%0%2.1%0%3.8%-0%1.9%14.3%0%2.1%-0%0%0%0%--4.1% Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Pedestrians ------------------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 3 of 6 Cain Rd & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499659, Location: 30.572342, -96.32662 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] Cain Rd[S] Holleman Dr Total: 749 Total: 687 Total: 86Out: 560 Out: 167 Out: 34In: 189 In: 520 In: 52 162 513 27 47 5 74 of 6 Cain Rd & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499659, Location: 30.572342, -96.32662 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr Cain Rd Holleman Dr Cain Rd Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Time L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*L T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-01 5:00PM 10 101 0 0 111 0 3 0 27 0 30 0 0 68 1 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 5:15PM 12 107 0 0 119 0 2 0 36 0 38 0 0 49 4 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 5:30PM 12 97 0 0 109 0 2 0 30 0 32 0 0 59 0 0 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 5:45PM 9 102 0 0 111 0 3 0 34 0 37 0 0 67 1 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 216 Total 43 407 0 0 4 50 0 10 0 127 0 137 0 0 243 6 0 24 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 836 % Approach 9.6%90.4%0%0%--7.3%0%92.7%0%--0%97.6%2.4%0%--0%0%0%0%--- % Total 5.1%48.7%0%0%53.8%-1.2%0%15.2%0%16.4 %-0%29.1%0.7%0%29.8%-0%0%0%0%0%-- PHF 0.896 0.951 --0.94 5 -0.833 -0.882 -0.901 --0.893 0.375 -0.902 -------0.968 Lights 40 403 0 0 4 4 3 -10 0 127 0 137 -0 239 6 0 24 5 -0 0 0 0 0 -825 % Lights 93.0%99.0%0%0%98.4 %-100%0%100%0%100%-0%98.4%100%0%98.4 %-0%0%0%0%--98.7% Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 % Articulated Trucks 0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%--0% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 3 4 0 0 7 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 4 0 0 4 -0 0 0 0 0 -11 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 7.0%1.0%0%0%1.6%-0%0%0%0%0%-0%1.6%0%0%1.6%-0%0%0%0%--1.3% Pedestrians -----0 -----0 -----0 -----0 % Pedestrians ------------------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 5 of 6 Cain Rd & Holleman Dr - TMC Thu Mar 1, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499659, Location: 30.572342, -96.32662 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr [E] Cain Rd[S] Holleman Dr Total: 820 Total: 666 Total: 186Out: 370 Out: 417 Out: 49In: 450 In: 249 In: 137 407 243 43 127 10 66 of 6 Deacon W Dr & Holleman Dr - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499658, Location: 30.56875, -96.325107 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr S Deacon W Dr Holleman Dr S Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Time L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-06 7:00AM 1 30 0 31 0 1 25 0 26 0 65 1 0 66 0 123 7:15AM 8 23 1 32 0 1 66 0 67 0 117 2 0 119 0 218 7:30AM 10 25 0 35 0 3 68 0 71 0 103 2 0 105 0 211 7:45AM 11 35 0 4 6 0 1 36 0 37 0 77 6 0 83 0 166 Total 30 113 1 14 4 0 6 195 0 201 0 362 11 0 373 0 718 % Approach 20.8%78.5%0.7%--3.0%97.0%0%--97.1%2.9%0%--- % Total 4.2%15.7%0.1%20.1%-0.8%27.2%0%28.0%-50.4%1.5%0%51.9%-- PHF 0.682 0.807 0.250 0.783 -0.500 0.717 -0.708 -0.774 0.458 -0.784 -0.823 Lights 23 108 1 132 -4 189 0 193 -358 11 0 369 -694 % Lights 76.7%95.6%100%91.7%-66.7%96.9%0%96.0%-98.9%100%0%98.9%-96.7% Articulated Trucks 1 1 0 2 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -2 % Articulated Trucks 3.3%0.9%0%1.4 %-0%0%0%0%-0%0%0%0%-0.3% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 6 4 0 10 -2 6 0 8 -4 0 0 4 -22 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 20.0%3.5%0%6.9%-33.3%3.1%0%4 .0%-1.1%0%0%1.1%-3.1% Pedestrians ----0 ----0 ----0 % Pedestrians ---------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 3 of 6 Deacon W Dr & Holleman Dr - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 AM Peak (7AM - 8AM) - Overall Peak Hour All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499658, Location: 30.56875, -96.325107 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr S [E] Deacon W Dr[S] Holleman Dr S Total: 702 Total: 492 Total: 242Out: 558 Out: 119 Out: 41In: 144 In: 373 In: 201 113 362 1 30 195 6 114 of 6 Deacon W Dr & Holleman Dr - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499658, Location: 30.56875, -96.325107 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US Leg Holleman Dr S Deacon W Dr Holleman Dr S Direction Southbound Westbound Northbound Time L T U App Ped*L R U App Ped*T R U App Ped*Int 2018-03-06 5:00PM 28 73 0 101 0 2 30 0 32 0 49 1 0 50 0 183 5:15PM 18 73 0 91 0 4 22 0 26 0 39 1 0 4 0 0 157 5:30PM 36 73 0 109 0 4 26 0 30 0 46 2 0 4 8 0 187 5:45PM 30 71 0 101 0 3 19 0 22 0 40 2 0 4 2 0 165 Total 112 290 0 4 02 0 13 97 0 110 0 174 6 0 180 0 692 % Approach 27.9%72.1%0%--11.8%88.2%0%--96.7%3.3%0%--- % Total 16.2%41.9%0%58.1%-1.9%14.0%0%15.9%-25.1%0.9%0%26.0%-- PHF 0.778 0.993 -0.922 -0.813 0.808 -0.859 -0.888 0.750 -0.900 -0.925 Lights 107 284 0 391 -13 92 0 105 -170 6 0 176 -672 % Lights 95.5%97.9%0%97.3%-100%94.8%0%95.5%-97.7%100%0%97.8%-97.1% Articulated Trucks 1 0 0 1 -0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1 -2 % Articulated Trucks 0.9%0%0%0.2%-0%0%0%0%-0.6%0%0%0.6%-0.3% Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 4 6 0 10 -0 5 0 5 -3 0 0 3 -18 % Buses and Single-Unit Trucks 3.6%2.1%0%2.5%-0%5.2%0%4 .5%-1.7%0%0%1.7%-2.6% Pedestrians ----0 ----0 ----0 % Pedestrians ---------------- *Pedestrians and Bicycles on Crosswalk. L: Left, R: Right, T: Thru, U: U-Turn 5 of 6 Deacon W Dr & Holleman Dr - TMC Tue Mar 6, 2018 PM Peak (5PM - 6PM) All Classes (Lights, Articulated Trucks, Buses and Single-Unit Trucks, Pedestrians) All Movements ID: 499658, Location: 30.56875, -96.325107 Provided by: C. J. Hensch & Associates Inc. 5215 Sycamore Ave., Pasadena, TX, 77503, US [N] Holleman Dr S [E] Deacon W Dr[S] Holleman Dr S Total: 673 Total: 483 Total: 228Out: 271 Out: 303 Out: 118In: 402 In: 180 In: 110 290 174 112 97 13 66 of 6 TRIP DISTRIBUTION - MISSION RANCH BUTLER TRACT Mission Ranch Development TRIP DISTRIBUTION - PERSHING POINTE BUTLER TRACT Pershing Pointe Development TRIP DISTRIBUTION - AGGIELAND XPRESS BUTLER TRACT Aggieland Xpress TRIP DISTRIBUTION - UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS BUTLER TRACT University Heights SITE GENERATED TRIPS - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUTLER TRACT Land Use: 820 Shopping Center Description A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned, and managed as a unit. A shopping center’s composition is related to its market area in terms of size, location, and type of store. A shopping center also provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. Factory outlet center (Land Use 823) is a related use. Additional Data Shopping centers, including neighborhood centers, community centers, regional centers, and super regional centers, were surveyed for this land use. Some of these centers contained non-merchandising facilities, such as office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, post offices, banks, health clubs, and recreational facilities (for example, ice skating rinks or indoor miniature golf courses). Many shopping centers, in addition to the integrated unit of shops in one building or enclosed around a mall, include outparcels (peripheral buildings or pads located on the perimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points). These buildings are typically drive-in banks, retail stores, restaurants, or small offices. Although the data herein do not indicate which of the centers studied included peripheral buildings, it can be assumed that some of the data show their effect. The vehicle trips generated at a shopping center are based upon the total GLA of the center. In cases of smaller centers without an enclosed mall or peripheral buildings, the GLA could be the same as the gross floor area of the building. Time-of-day distribution data for this land use are presented in Appendix A. For the 10 general urban/ suburban sites with data, the overall highest vehicle volumes during the AM and PM on a weekday were counted between 11:45 a.m. and 12:45 p.m. and 12:15 and 1:15 p.m., respectively. The average numbers of person trips per vehicle trip at the 27 general urban/suburban sites at which both person trip and vehicle trip data were collected were as follows: • 1.31 during Weekday, AM Peak Hour of Generator • 1.43 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m. • 1.46 during Weekday, PM Peak Hour of Generator The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alberta (CAN), British Columbia (CAN), California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Source Numbers 105, 110, 154, 156, 159, 186, 190, 198, 199, 202, 204, 211, 213, 239, 251, 259, 260, 269, 294, 295, 299, 300, 301, 304, 305, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 314, 315, 316, 317, 319, 358, 365, 376, 385, 390, 400, 404, 414, 420, 423, 428, 437, 440, 442, 444, 446, 507, 562, 580, 598, 629, 658, 702, 715, 728, 868, 870, 871, 880, 899, 908, 912, 915, 926, 936, 944, 946, 960, 961, 962, 973, 974, 978 137Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Retail (Land Uses 800–899) Shopping Center (820) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:84 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:351 Directional Distribution:62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.94 0.18 - 23.74 0.87 Data Plot and Equation T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.50(X) + 151.78 R²= 0.50 Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 500 1,000 1,5000 500 1,000 1,500 Shopping Center (820) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:261 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:327 Directional Distribution:48% entering, 52% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.81 0.74 - 18.69 2.04 Data Plot and Equation T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.74 Ln(X) + 2.89 R²= 0.82 Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,0000 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 Land Use: 435 Multipurpose Recreational Facility Description A multipurpose recreational facility contains two or more of the following land uses combined at one site: miniature golf, batting cages, video arcade, bumper boats, go-carts, and golf driving range. Refreshment areas may also be provided. Golf course (Land Use 430), miniature golf course (Land Use 431), golf driving range (Land Use 432), batting cages (Land Use 433), rock climbing gym (Land Use 434), and trampoline park (Land Use 436) are related uses. Additional Data The sites were surveyed in the 1990s and the 2000s in Oregon. Specialized Land Use Data A survey conducted in Pennsylvania in 1998 was submitted for an indoor race track facility containing a go-cart racing track, arcade, laser tag, restaurant, and party function rooms. The trip generation rates for this facility differ considerably from those contained in this land use. The site gross floor area was 118,000 square feet. The counted vehicle trips were as follows: • 235 on a weekday • 28 during the weekday, AM peak hour of the generator • 29 during the weekday, PM peak hour of the generator • 20 during the weekday, PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic • 277 on a Saturday • 34 during the Saturday peak hour of the generator Source Numbers 583, 611, 618 89Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Recreational (Land Uses 400–499) Multipurpose Recreational Facility (435) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:3 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:21 Directional Distribution:55% entering, 45% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.58 2.95 - 4.06 0.55 Data Plot and Equation Caution – Small Sample Size T = Trip EndsX = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 20 25 300 20 40 60 80 %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW/DQH*URXS (%/ (%5 1%/ 1%7 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROXPHYSK )XWXUH9ROXPHYSK 6DWG)ORZSURW )OW3HUPLWWHG 6DWG)ORZSHUP 6DWG)ORZ5725 /DQH*URXS)ORZYSK 7XUQ7\SH 3URW 3HUP SPSW 1$ 1$3URWHFWHG3KDVHV 3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV 7RWDO6SOLWV 7RWDO/RVW7LPHV $FW(IIFW*UHHQV $FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR YF5DWLR &RQWURO'HOD\ 4XHXH'HOD\ 7RWDO'HOD\ /26 (%$$%$SSURDFK'HOD\ $SSURDFK/26 ( $ %4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW 4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW ,QWHUQDO/LQN'LVWIW 7XUQ%D\/HQJWKIW %DVH&DSDFLW\YSK 6WDUYDWLRQ&DS5HGXFWQ6SLOOEDFN&DS5HGXFWQ6WRUDJH&DS5HGXFWQ5HGXFHGYF5DWLR ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\&\FOH/HQJWK$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK2IIVHW5HIHUHQFHGWRSKDVH6%7DQG1%7/6WDUWRI*UHHQ&RQWURO7\SH3UHWLPHG0D[LPXPYF5DWLR,QWHUVHFWLRQ6LJQDO'HOD\ ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26&,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH$$QDO\VLV3HULRGPLQWKSHUFHQWLOHYROXPHH[FHHGVFDSDFLW\TXHXHPD\EHORQJHU4XHXHVKRZQLVPD[LPXPDIWHUWZRF\FOHV6SOLWVDQG3KDVHV+ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'RZOLQJ5RDG([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\VYHK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 %0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 1XPEHURI/DQHV$SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%2SSRVLQJ$SSURDFK :% (% 6% 1%2SSRVLQJ/DQHV&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK/HIW 6% 1% (% :%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV/HIW&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK5LJKW 1% 6% :% (%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV5LJKW+&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/26%$%%/DQH 1%/Q 1%/Q (%/Q :%/Q 6%/Q 6%/Q9RO/HIW 9RO7KUX 9RO5LJKW 6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS7UDIILF9ROE\/DQH /79RO 7KURXJK9RO 579RO /DQH)ORZ5DWH *HRPHWU\*US'HJUHHRI8WLO; 'HSDUWXUH+HDGZD\+G &RQYHUJHQFH<1 <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV&DS 6HUYLFH7LPH +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/DQH/26 % % % $ % %+&0WKWLOH4 %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH *HQHUDO3DUNZD\([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 & % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH &DLQ5RDG([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'HDFRQ'ULYH([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ1%&KDQQHOL]HG5LJKW 'RZOLQJ5RDG([LVWLQJ$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 1%/ 1%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH 6WRS 6WRS57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH <LHOG6WRUDJH/HQJWK9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU 0LQRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH6WDJH&ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ )ROORZXS+GZ\3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU0RY&DS0DQHXYHU6WDJH6WDJH$SSURDFK (% :% 1%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/Q (%7 :%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW/DQH*URXS (%/ (%5 1%/ 1%7 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROXPHYSK )XWXUH9ROXPHYSK 6DWG)ORZSURW )OW3HUPLWWHG 6DWG)ORZSHUP 6DWG)ORZ5725 /DQH*URXS)ORZYSK 7XUQ7\SH 3URW 3HUP SPSW 1$ 1$3URWHFWHG3KDVHV 3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV 7RWDO6SOLWV 7RWDO/RVW7LPHV $FW(IIFW*UHHQV $FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR YF5DWLR &RQWURO'HOD\ 4XHXH'HOD\ 7RWDO'HOD\ /26 (%$$%$SSURDFK'HOD\ $SSURDFK/26 ' $ %4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW 4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW ,QWHUQDO/LQN'LVWIW 7XUQ%D\/HQJWKIW %DVH&DSDFLW\YSK 6WDUYDWLRQ&DS5HGXFWQ6SLOOEDFN&DS5HGXFWQ6WRUDJH&DS5HGXFWQ5HGXFHGYF5DWLR ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\&\FOH/HQJWK$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK2IIVHW5HIHUHQFHGWRSKDVH6%7DQG1%7/6WDUWRI*UHHQ&RQWURO7\SH3UHWLPHG0D[LPXPYF5DWLR,QWHUVHFWLRQ6LJQDO'HOD\ ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26&,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH$$QDO\VLV3HULRGPLQWKSHUFHQWLOHYROXPHH[FHHGVFDSDFLW\TXHXHPD\EHORQJHU4XHXHVKRZQLVPD[LPXPDIWHUWZRF\FOHV6SOLWVDQG3KDVHV+ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'RZOLQJ5RDG([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\VYHK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 %0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 1XPEHURI/DQHV$SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%2SSRVLQJ$SSURDFK :% (% 6% 1%2SSRVLQJ/DQHV&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK/HIW 6% 1% (% :%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV/HIW&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK5LJKW 1% 6% :% (%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV5LJKW+&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/26%%%%/DQH 1%/Q 1%/Q (%/Q :%/Q 6%/Q 6%/Q9RO/HIW 9RO7KUX 9RO5LJKW 6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS7UDIILF9ROE\/DQH /79RO 7KURXJK9RO 579RO /DQH)ORZ5DWH *HRPHWU\*US'HJUHHRI8WLO; 'HSDUWXUH+HDGZD\+G &RQYHUJHQFH<1 <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV&DS 6HUYLFH7LPH +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/DQH/26 % % % % % &+&0WKWLOH4 %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH *HQHUDO3DUNZD\([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 & % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH &DLQ5RDG([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'HDFRQ'ULYH([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 $0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % $ $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ1%&KDQQHOL]HG5LJKW 'RZOLQJ5RDG([LVWLQJ303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 1%/ 1%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH 6WRS 6WRS57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH <LHOG6WRUDJH/HQJWK9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU 0LQRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH6WDJH&ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ )ROORZXS+GZ\3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU0RY&DS0DQHXYHU6WDJH6WDJH$SSURDFK (% :% 1%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 $0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/Q (%7 :%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW/DQH*URXS (%/ (%5 1%/ 1%7 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROXPHYSK )XWXUH9ROXPHYSK 6DWG)ORZSURW )OW3HUPLWWHG 6DWG)ORZSHUP 6DWG)ORZ5725 /DQH*URXS)ORZYSK 7XUQ7\SH 3URW 3HUP SPSW 1$ 1$3URWHFWHG3KDVHV 3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV 7RWDO6SOLWV 7RWDO/RVW7LPHV $FW(IIFW*UHHQV $FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR YF5DWLR &RQWURO'HOD\ 4XHXH'HOD\ 7RWDO'HOD\ /26 (%$$%$SSURDFK'HOD\ $SSURDFK/26 ( $ %4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW 4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW ,QWHUQDO/LQN'LVWIW 7XUQ%D\/HQJWKIW %DVH&DSDFLW\YSK 6WDUYDWLRQ&DS5HGXFWQ6SLOOEDFN&DS5HGXFWQ6WRUDJH&DS5HGXFWQ5HGXFHGYF5DWLR ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\&\FOH/HQJWK$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK2IIVHW5HIHUHQFHGWRSKDVH6%7DQG1%7/6WDUWRI*UHHQ&RQWURO7\SH3UHWLPHG0D[LPXPYF5DWLR,QWHUVHFWLRQ6LJQDO'HOD\ ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26&,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH$$QDO\VLV3HULRGPLQWKSHUFHQWLOHYROXPHH[FHHGVFDSDFLW\TXHXHPD\EHORQJHU4XHXHVKRZQLVPD[LPXPDIWHUWZRF\FOHV6SOLWVDQG3KDVHV+ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'RZOLQJ5RDG%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\VYHK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 &0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 1XPEHURI/DQHV$SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%2SSRVLQJ$SSURDFK :% (% 6% 1%2SSRVLQJ/DQHV&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK/HIW 6% 1% (% :%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV/HIW&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK5LJKW 1% 6% :% (%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV5LJKW+&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/26&%&%/DQH 1%/Q 1%/Q (%/Q :%/Q 6%/Q 6%/Q9RO/HIW 9RO7KUX 9RO5LJKW 6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS7UDIILF9ROE\/DQH /79RO 7KURXJK9RO 579RO /DQH)ORZ5DWH *HRPHWU\*US'HJUHHRI8WLO; 'HSDUWXUH+HDGZD\+G &RQYHUJHQFH<1 <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV&DS 6HUYLFH7LPH +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/DQH/26 & ' & % % &+&0WKWLOH4 %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH *HQHUDO3DUNZD\%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 &0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 & & % +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH &DLQ5RDG%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % % +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'HDFRQ'ULYH%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%8 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%8 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 ( &0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/ 1%7 1%5 (%/Q (%/Q:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7 6%5&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 $ $ ) & ( & % +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ1%&KDQQHOL]HG5LJKW 'RZOLQJ5RDG%DFNJURXQG$03HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 1%/ 1%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH 6WRS 6WRS57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH <LHOG6WRUDJH/HQJWK9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU 0LQRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH6WDJH&ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ )ROORZXS+GZ\3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU0RY&DS0DQHXYHU6WDJH6WDJH$SSURDFK (% :% 1%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/Q (%7 :%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW/DQH*URXS (%/ (%5 1%/ 1%7 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROXPHYSK )XWXUH9ROXPHYSK 6DWG)ORZSURW )OW3HUPLWWHG 6DWG)ORZSHUP 6DWG)ORZ5725 /DQH*URXS)ORZYSK 7XUQ7\SH 3URW 3HUP SPSW 1$ 1$3URWHFWHG3KDVHV 3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV 7RWDO6SOLWV 7RWDO/RVW7LPHV $FW(IIFW*UHHQV $FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR YF5DWLR &RQWURO'HOD\ 4XHXH'HOD\ 7RWDO'HOD\ /26 (%$$&$SSURDFK'HOD\ $SSURDFK/26 ( $ &4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW 4XHXH/HQJWKWKIW ,QWHUQDO/LQN'LVWIW 7XUQ%D\/HQJWKIW %DVH&DSDFLW\YSK 6WDUYDWLRQ&DS5HGXFWQ6SLOOEDFN&DS5HGXFWQ6WRUDJH&DS5HGXFWQ5HGXFHGYF5DWLR ,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\&\FOH/HQJWK$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK2IIVHW5HIHUHQFHGWRSKDVH6%7DQG1%7/6WDUWRI*UHHQ&RQWURO7\SH3UHWLPHG0D[LPXPYF5DWLR,QWHUVHFWLRQ6LJQDO'HOD\ ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26&,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH$$QDO\VLV3HULRGPLQWKSHUFHQWLOHYROXPHH[FHHGVFDSDFLW\TXHXHPD\EHORQJHU4XHXHVKRZQLVPD[LPXPDIWHUWZRF\FOHV6SOLWVDQG3KDVHV+ROOHPDQ'ULYH 0DUNHW6WUHHW%XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'RZOLQJ5RDG%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QWHUVHFWLRQ'HOD\VYHK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ/26 '0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 1XPEHURI/DQHV$SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%2SSRVLQJ$SSURDFK :% (% 6% 1%2SSRVLQJ/DQHV&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK/HIW 6% 1% (% :%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV/HIW&RQIOLFWLQJ$SSURDFK5LJKW 1% 6% :% (%&RQIOLFWLQJ/DQHV5LJKW+&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/26 & % & '/DQH 1%/Q 1%/Q (%/Q :%/Q 6%/Q 6%/Q9RO/HIW 9RO7KUX 9RO5LJKW 6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS7UDIILF9ROE\/DQH /79RO 7KURXJK9RO 579RO /DQH)ORZ5DWH *HRPHWU\*US'HJUHHRI8WLO; 'HSDUWXUH+HDGZD\+G &RQYHUJHQFH<1 <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV <HV&DS 6HUYLFH7LPH +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\ +&0/DQH/26 % & & % & (+&0WKWLOH4 %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH *HQHUDO3DUNZD\%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 & % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH &DLQ5RDG%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 %0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%7 1%5:%/Q 6%/ 6%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 % $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ'ULYH 'HDFRQ'ULYH%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%8 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%8 6%/ 6%7 6%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH 1RQH6WRUDJH/HQJWK 9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0LQRU 0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH 6WDJH &ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ&ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ)ROORZXS+GZ\ 3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH $SSURDFK (% :% 1% 6%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 ) '0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/ 1%7 1%5 (%/Q (%/Q:%/Q:%/Q 6%/ 6%7 6%5&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 $ $ ) ' ( & $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK %XWOHU7UDFW7,$ +ROOHPDQ1%&KDQQHOL]HG5LJKW 'RZOLQJ5RDG%DFNJURXQG303HDN+RXU%%,6\QFKUR5HSRUW,QWHUVHFWLRQ,QW'HOD\VYHK 0RYHPHQW (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 1%/ 1%5/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV7UDIILF9ROYHKK )XWXUH9ROYHKK &RQIOLFWLQJ3HGVKU6LJQ&RQWURO )UHH )UHH )UHH )UHH 6WRS 6WRS57&KDQQHOL]HG 1RQH 1RQH <LHOG6WRUDJH/HQJWK9HKLQ0HGLDQ6WRUDJH *UDGH 3HDN+RXU)DFWRU +HDY\9HKLFOHV0YPW)ORZ 0DMRU0LQRU 0DMRU 0DMRU 0LQRU&RQIOLFWLQJ)ORZ$OO 6WDJH6WDJH&ULWLFDO+GZ\ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ &ULWLFDO+GZ\6WJ )ROORZXS+GZ\3RW&DS0DQHXYHU 6WDJH 6WDJH 3ODWRRQEORFNHG 0RY&DS0DQHXYHU0RY&DS0DQHXYHU6WDJH6WDJH$SSURDFK (% :% 1%+&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/26 $0LQRU/DQH0DMRU0YPW 1%/Q (%7 :%7&DSDFLW\YHKK +&0/DQH9&5DWLR +&0&RQWURO'HOD\V +&0/DQH/26 $ +&0WKWLOH4YHK Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 227 14 7 742 446 23Future Volume (vph) 227 14 7 742 446 23Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3514 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.345Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 643 3539 3514 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 16 8Lane Group Flow (vph) 267 16 8 873 552 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.37 0.38Control Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.6 17.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.6 17.1LOS EBAABApproach Delay 70.5 6.6 17.1Approach LOS E A BQueue Length 50th (ft) 133 0 1 88 96Queue Length 95th (ft) #250 15 5 110 126Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 270 609 2344 1454Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.37 0.38Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 20.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 44.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 24.8Intersection LOS CMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 23 1 1 38 578 0 17 365 81Future Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 23 1 1 38 578 0 17 365 81Peak Hour Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 170 118 40 27 1 1 45 688 0 20 435 96Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 21.4 12.1 31.8 18.1HCM LOS C B D CLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 16% 0% 52% 92% 9% 0%Vol Thru, % 84% 100% 36% 4% 91% 69%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 12% 4% 0% 31%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 231 385 276 25 200 264LT Vol 38 0 143 23 17 0Through Vol 193 385 99 1 183 183RT Vol 0 0 34 1 0 81Lane Flow Rate 275 459 329 30 238 314Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.53 0.874 0.637 0.069 0.472 0.601Departure Headway (Hd) 6.943 6.859 6.98 8.383 7.158 6.893Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 519 528 519 427 504 524Service Time 4.682 4.597 4.98 6.44 4.897 4.633HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.53 0.869 0.634 0.07 0.472 0.599HCM Control Delay 17.3 40.5 21.4 12.1 16.2 19.5HCM Lane LOS C E C B C CHCM 95th-tile Q 3.1 9.6 4.4 0.2 2.5 3.9 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3.3Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 36 139 1007 54 102 326Future Vol, veh/h 36 139 1007 54 102 326Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 43 167 1213 65 123 393Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1689 639 0 0 1278 0 Stage 1 1246 - - - - - Stage 2 443 - - - - -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 84 419 - - 539 - Stage 1 234 - - - - - Stage 2 614 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 65 419 - - 539 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 143 - - - - - Stage 1 181 - - - - - Stage 2 614 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 23.6 0 3.3HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 143 419 539 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.303 0.4 0.228 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 40.8 19.2 13.6 -HCM Lane LOS - - E C B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.2 1.9 0.9 -Butler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 0.8Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 5 50 898 7 29 348Future Vol, veh/h 5 50 898 7 29 348Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 6 59 1056 8 34 409Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1333 532 0 0 1064 0 Stage 1 1060----- Stage 2 273-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 145 492 - - 651 - Stage 1 294----- Stage 2 748-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 137 492 - - 651 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 229----- Stage 1 279----- Stage 2 748-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 14.5 0 0.8HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 445 651 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.145 0.052 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14.5 10.8 -HCM Lane LOS - - B B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 9.4Movement EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 35 12 274 4 621 26 6 62 251 9Future Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 35 12 274 4 621 26 6 62 251 9Conflicting Peds, #/hr 00000000000000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - - None - - None - - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - - 50 - - 250 - - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 82 92 82 92 82 82 92 82 82 92Heavy Vehicles, % 22222222222222Mvmt Flow 49 21 12 7 43 13 334 4 757 32 7 76 306 10Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 870 1274 158 0 1111 1263 395 316 0 0 789 789 0 0 Stage 1 477 477 - 0 781 781 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 393 797 - 0 330 482 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 6.44 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.52 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 246 166 859 0 164 168 604 1241 - - 453 827 - - Stage 1 538 554 - 0 354 403 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 603 397 - 0 657 552 - - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 93 146 859 0 131 148 604 1241 - - 698 698 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 93 146 - 0 131 148 - - - - - - - - Stage 1 536 489 - 0 353 402 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 260 396 - 0 548 487 - - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 58.4 25.3 0 2.2HCM LOS F DMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1241 - - 93 210 131 541 698 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - - 0.526 0.155 0.326 0.642 0.118 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 80.4 25.3 45.2 22.8 10.8 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F D E C B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 2.3 0.5 1.3 4.5 0.4 - -Butler Tract TIA 6: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 11.7Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 504Future Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 504Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 126 0 0 0 0 548Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----126 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 924 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----924Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------ Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 14.4HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 924 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.593 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 14.4 - -HCM Lane LOS B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 4 - - Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 231 22 23 537 1022 134Future Volume (vph) 231 22 23 537 1022 134Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3479 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.100Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 186 3539 3479 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 24 22Lane Group Flow (vph) 251 24 25 584 1257 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.07 0.25 0.87Control Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 5.8 29.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 5.8 29.2LOS EBAACApproach Delay 59.7 5.7 29.2Approach LOS E A CQueue Length 50th (ft) 124 0 4 53 289Queue Length 95th (ft) #253 20 11 75 #398Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 277 380 2344 1448Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.07 0.25 0.87Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.87Intersection Signal Delay: 26.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 57.0% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 82.7Intersection LOS FMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 86 3 12 41 678 0 5 942 102Future Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 86 3 12 41 678 0 5 942 102Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 148 32 61 93 3 13 45 737 0 5 1024 111Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 18.6 14.6 55.5 121.5HCM LOS C B F FLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 15% 0% 62% 85% 1% 0%Vol Thru, % 85% 100% 13% 3% 99% 82%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 25% 12% 0% 18%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 267 452 221 101 476 573LT Vol 41 0 136 86 5 0Through Vol 226 452 29 3 471 471RT Vol 0 0 56 12 0 102Lane Flow Rate 290 491 240 110 517 623Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.609 1.021 0.51 0.257 1.059 1.252Departure Headway (Hd) 7.866 7.788 7.799 8.612 7.37 7.237Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 461 472 466 419 492 504Service Time 5.566 5.488 5.799 6.612 5.14 5.007HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.629 1.04 0.515 0.263 1.051 1.236HCM Control Delay 22.1 75.2 18.6 14.6 84.4 152.3HCM Lane LOS C F C B F FHCM 95th-tile Q 4 13.9 2.8 1 15.8 24.8 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 6.2Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 176 353 627 177 353 695Future Vol, veh/h 176 353 627 177 353 695Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 196 392 697 197 392 772Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1966 447 0 0 894 0 Stage 1 796 - - - - - Stage 2 1170 - - - - -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 ~ 55 559 - - 755 - Stage 1 405 - - - - - Stage 2 257 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 26 559 - - 755 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver~ -3063 - - - - - Stage 1 ~ 195 - - - - - Stage 2 257 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 18.1 0 5HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - + 559 755 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.702 0.519 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 3.9 25.2 14.8 -HCM Lane LOS - - A D B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 5.6 3 -Notes~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoonButler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.4Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 11 135 669 6 46 884Future Vol, veh/h 11 135 669 6 46 884Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 12 147 727 7 50 961Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1312 367 0 0 734 0 Stage 1 731----- Stage 2 581-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 150 630 - - 867 - Stage 1 437----- Stage 2 522-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 141 630 - - 867 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 265----- Stage 1 412----- Stage 2 522-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 13.7 0 0.5HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 571 867 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.278 0.058 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.7 9.4 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.1 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 36.1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 9 34 30 237 13 408 20 9 278 562 30Future Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 9 34 30 237 13 408 20 9 278 562 30Conflicting Peds, #/hr 00000000000000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - - None - - None - - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - - 50 - - 250 - - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 22222222222222Mvmt Flow 48 13 8 10 37 33 258 14 443 22 10 302 611 33Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1518 1745 322 0 1418 1750 233 644 0 0 465 465 0 0 Stage 1 1252 1252 - 0 482 482 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 266 493 - 0 936 1268 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 6.44 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.52 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 82 85 674 0 97 85 769 937 - - 728 1093 - - Stage 1 182 242 - 0 534 552 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 716 545 - 0 285 238 - - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 24 59 674 0 61 59 769 937 - - 1054 1054 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 24 59 - 0 61 59 - - - - - - - - Stage 1 179 170 - 0 526 544 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 441 537 - 0 183 168 - - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s$ 581.5 69.4 0.3 3.2HCM LOS F FMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 937 - - 24 89 61 327 1054 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 - - 1.993 0.232 0.606 0.888 0.296 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - -$ 807.8 57.3 130.1 61.7 9.8 - -HCM Lane LOS A - -FFFFA - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 6 0.8 2.5 8.4 1.2 - -Notes~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoonButler Tract TIA 6: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 1 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/25/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8.3Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 227Future Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 227Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 37 0 0 0 0 247Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----37 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 1035 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----1035Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 9.6HCM LOS AMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 1035 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.238 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - -HCM Lane LOS A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - - Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 227 14 7 709 394 23Future Volume (vph) 227 14 7 709 394 23Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3511 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.380Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 708 3539 3511 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 16 9Lane Group Flow (vph) 267 16 8 834 491 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.36 0.34Control Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.5 16.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.5 16.5LOS EBAABApproach Delay 70.5 6.5 16.5Approach LOS E A BQueue Length 50th (ft) 133 0 1 84 83Queue Length 95th (ft) #250 15 5 104 112Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 270 641 2344 1453Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.36 0.34Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 20.7 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 20.3Intersection LOS CMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 13 1 1 38 545 0 17 313 81Future Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 13 1 1 38 545 0 17 313 81Peak Hour Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 170 118 40 15 1 1 45 649 0 20 373 96Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 19.5 11.4 24.3 15.4HCM LOS C B C CLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 17% 0% 52% 87% 10% 0%Vol Thru, % 83% 100% 36% 7% 90% 66%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 12% 7% 0% 34%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 220 363 276 15 174 238LT Vol 38 0 143 13 17 0Through Vol 182 363 99 1 157 157RT Vol 0 0 34 1 0 81Lane Flow Rate 262 433 329 18 207 283Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.482 0.787 0.606 0.04 0.395 0.517Departure Headway (Hd) 6.637 6.548 6.645 8.053 6.877 6.583Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 539 549 542 447 518 543Service Time 4.426 4.337 4.72 6.053 4.673 4.378HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.486 0.789 0.607 0.04 0.4 0.521HCM Control Delay 15.5 29.6 19.5 11.4 14.2 16.3HCM Lane LOS C D C B B CHCM 95th-tile Q 2.6 7.3 4 0.1 1.9 2.9 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.7Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 15 100 1007 21 41 326Future Vol, veh/h 15 100 1007 21 41 326Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 18 120 1213 25 49 393Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1521 619 0 0 1238 0 Stage 1 1226 - - - - - Stage 2 295 - - - - -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 109 432 - - 558 - Stage 1 240 - - - - - Stage 2 730 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 99 432 - - 558 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 181 - - - - - Stage 1 219 - - - - - Stage 2 730 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 17.9 0 1.3HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 181 432 558 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.1 0.279 0.089 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 27.1 16.5 12.1 -HCM Lane LOS - - D C B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 1.1 0.3 -Butler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 0.9Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 5 50 865 7 29 327Future Vol, veh/h 5 50 865 7 29 327Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 6 59 1018 8 34 385Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1283 513 0 0 1026 0 Stage 1 1022----- Stage 2 261-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 157 506 - - 673 - Stage 1 308----- Stage 2 759-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 149 506 - - 673 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 241----- Stage 1 292----- Stage 2 759-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 14.1 0 0.9HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 460 673 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.141 0.051 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14.1 10.6 -HCM Lane LOS - - B B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8.6Movement EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 41 12 260 4 603 26 6 59 239 9Future Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 41 12 260 4 603 26 6 59 239 9Conflicting Peds, #/hr 00000000000000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - - None - - None - - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - - 50 - - 250 - - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 82 92 82 92 82 82 92 82 82 92Heavy Vehicles, % 22222222222222Mvmt Flow 49 21 12 7 50 13 317 4 735 32 7 72 291 10Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 836 1229 151 0 1073 1218 384 301 0 0 767 767 0 0 Stage 1 454 454 - 0 759 759 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 382 775 - 0 314 459 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 6.44 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.52 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 260 177 868 0 175 179 614 1257 - - 468 842 - - Stage 1 555 568 - 0 365 413 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 612 406 - 0 671 565 - - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 108 157 868 0 142 159 614 1257 - - 716 716 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 108 157 - 0 142 159 - - - - - - - - Stage 1 553 506 - 0 364 412 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 286 405 - 0 566 503 - - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 47.6 23.8 0 2.2HCM LOS E CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1257 - - 108 224 142 552 716 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - 0.453 0.146 0.352 0.598 0.11 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 63.4 23.8 43.5 20.8 10.6 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F C E C B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 2 0.5 1.4 3.9 0.4 - -Butler Tract TIA 6: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 11.6Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 498Future Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 498Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 126 0 0 0 0 541Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----126 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 924 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----924Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------ Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 14.3HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 924 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.586 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 14.3 - -HCM Lane LOS B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.9 - - Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 231 22 23 664 871 134Future Volume (vph) 231 22 23 664 871 134Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3468 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.117Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 218 3539 3468 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 24 26Lane Group Flow (vph) 251 24 25 722 1093 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.06 0.31 0.76Control Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 6.1 23.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 6.1 23.7LOS EBAACApproach Delay 59.7 6.1 23.7Approach LOS E A CQueue Length 50th (ft) 124 0 4 70 233Queue Length 95th (ft) #253 20 11 95 309Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 277 396 2344 1445Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.06 0.31 0.76Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.87Intersection Signal Delay: 22.2 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 52.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 37.8Intersection LOS EMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 58 3 12 41 505 0 5 790 102Future Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 58 3 12 41 505 0 5 790 102Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 148 32 61 63 3 13 45 549 0 5 859 111Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 17.2 13 23.9 53.3HCM LOS C B C FLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 20% 0% 62% 79% 1% 0%Vol Thru, % 80% 100% 13% 4% 99% 79%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 25% 16% 0% 21%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 209 337 221 73 400 497LT Vol 41 0 136 58 5 0Through Vol 168 337 29 3 395 395RT Vol 0 0 56 12 0 102Lane Flow Rate 228 366 240 79 435 540Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.463 0.745 0.486 0.178 0.833 1.012Departure Headway (Hd) 7.445 7.327 7.388 8.253 6.896 6.742Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 487 494 490 437 526 540Service Time 5.145 5.045 5.388 6.253 4.605 4.452HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.468 0.741 0.49 0.181 0.827 1HCM Control Delay 16.4 28.5 17.2 13 35.3 67.7HCM Lane LOS C D C B E FHCM 95th-tile Q 2.4 6.3 2.6 0.6 8.4 14.6 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3.8Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 66 149 627 80 174 695Future Vol, veh/h 66 149 627 80 174 695Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 73 166 697 89 193 772Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1514 393 0 0 786 0 Stage 1 742 - - - - - Stage 2 772 - - - - -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 110 606 - - 829 - Stage 1 432 - - - - - Stage 2 416 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 84 606 - - 829 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 158 - - - - - Stage 1 331 - - - - - Stage 2 416 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 23.3 0 2.1HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 158 606 829 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.464 0.273 0.233 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 46.1 13.2 10.7 -HCM Lane LOS - - E B B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.2 1.1 0.9 -Butler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.5Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 11 135 573 6 46 774Future Vol, veh/h 11 135 573 6 46 774Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 12 147 623 7 50 841Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1148 315 0 0 630 0 Stage 1 627----- Stage 2 521-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 192 681 - - 948 - Stage 1 495----- Stage 2 561-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 182 681 - - 948 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 306----- Stage 1 469----- Stage 2 561-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 12.7 0 0.5HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 623 948 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.255 0.053 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.7 9 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 15.6Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 43 30 196 13 353 20 240 499 30Future Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 43 30 196 13 353 20 240 499 30Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0000000 000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - 50 - - 250 - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2222222 222Mvmt Flow 48 13 8 47 33 213 14 384 22 261 542 33Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1318 1515 288 1223 1520 203 575 0 0 406 0 0 Stage 1 1081 1081 - 423 423 - - - - - - - Stage 2 237 434 - 800 1097 - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 115 118 709 135 118 804 994 - - 1149 - - Stage 1 232 292 - 579 586 - - - - - - - Stage 2 745 579 - 345 287 - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 50 90 709 97 90 804 994 - - 1149 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 50 90 - 97 90 - - - - - - - Stage 1 229 226 - 571 578 - - - - - - - Stage 2 509 571 - 249 222 - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 181.2 35.5 0.3 2.8HCM LOS F EMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 994 - - 50 133 97 392 1149 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.014 - - 0.957 0.155 0.482 0.627 0.227 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - 243.5 37 72.6 28.4 9.1 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F E F D A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 4.1 0.5 2.1 4.1 0.9 - -Butler Tract TIA 15: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 2 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 196Future Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 196Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 37 0 0 0 0 213Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----37 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 1035 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----1035Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 9.4HCM LOS AMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 1035 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.206 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - -HCM Lane LOS A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 - - Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 227 14 7 705 387 23Future Volume (vph) 227 14 7 705 387 23Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3511 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.385Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 717 3539 3511 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 16 9Lane Group Flow (vph) 267 16 8 829 482 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.35 0.33Control Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.5 16.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 73.9 14.4 4.7 6.5 16.5LOS EBAABApproach Delay 70.5 6.4 16.5Approach LOS E A BQueue Length 50th (ft) 133 0 1 83 82Queue Length 95th (ft) #250 15 5 103 110Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 270 646 2344 1453Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.06 0.01 0.35 0.33Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.93Intersection Signal Delay: 20.8 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 43.7% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 19.9Intersection LOS CMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 12 1 1 38 541 0 17 306 81Future Vol, veh/h 143 99 34 12 1 1 38 541 0 17 306 81Peak Hour Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 170 118 40 14 1 1 45 644 0 20 364 96Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 19.4 11.3 23.7 15.2HCM LOS C B C CLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 17% 0% 52% 86% 10% 0%Vol Thru, % 83% 100% 36% 7% 90% 65%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 12% 7% 0% 35%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 218 361 276 14 170 234LT Vol 38 0 143 12 17 0Through Vol 180 361 99 1 153 153RT Vol 0 0 34 1 0 81Lane Flow Rate 260 429 329 17 202 279Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.477 0.778 0.604 0.037 0.386 0.508Departure Headway (Hd) 6.613 6.524 6.618 8.01 6.858 6.559Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 541 550 542 450 520 546Service Time 4.401 4.312 4.691 6.01 4.653 4.353HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.481 0.78 0.607 0.038 0.388 0.511HCM Control Delay 15.4 28.7 19.4 11.3 14 16HCM Lane LOS C D C B B CHCM 95th-tile Q 2.6 7.1 4 0.1 1.8 2.9 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.5Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 12 95 1007 16 32 326Future Vol, veh/h 12 95 1007 16 32 326Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 14 114 1213 19 39 393Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1498 616 0 0 1232 0 Stage 1 1223 - - - - - Stage 2 275 - - - - -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 113 433 - - 561 - Stage 1 241 - - - - - Stage 2 747 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 105 433 - - 561 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 186 - - - - - Stage 1 224 - - - - - Stage 2 747 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 17.4 0 1.1HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 186 433 561 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.078 0.264 0.069 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 26 16.3 11.9 -HCM Lane LOS - - D C B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 1.1 0.2 -Butler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 0.9Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 5 50 860 7 29 324Future Vol, veh/h 5 50 860 7 29 324Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 85 85 85 85 85 85Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 6 59 1012 8 34 381Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1275 510 0 0 1020 0 Stage 1 1016----- Stage 2 259-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 159 509 - - 676 - Stage 1 310----- Stage 2 761-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 151 509 - - 676 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 243----- Stage 1 295----- Stage 2 761-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 14 0 0.9HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 463 676 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.14 0.05 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 14 10.6 -HCM Lane LOS - - B B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8.5Movement EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 41 12 258 4 600 26 6 58 237 9Future Vol, veh/h 45 19 11 6 41 12 258 4 600 26 6 58 237 9Conflicting Peds, #/hr 00000000000000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - - None - - None - - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - - 50 - - 250 - - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 82 92 82 92 82 82 92 82 82 92Heavy Vehicles, % 22222222222222Mvmt Flow 49 21 12 7 50 13 315 4 732 32 7 71 289 10Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 831 1222 150 0 1067 1211 382 299 0 0 763 764 0 0 Stage 1 450 450 - 0 756 756 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 381 772 - 0 311 455 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 6.44 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.52 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 262 178 870 0 176 181 616 1259 - - 471 845 - - Stage 1 558 570 - 0 366 414 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 613 407 - 0 674 567 - - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 110 158 870 0 143 161 616 1259 - - 719 719 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 110 158 - 0 143 161 - - - - - - - - Stage 1 556 509 - 0 365 413 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 290 406 - 0 569 506 - - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 46.4 23.5 0 2.2HCM LOS E CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1259 - - 110 226 143 554 719 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - 0.445 0.144 0.35 0.591 0.107 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 61.6 23.6 43.1 20.5 10.6 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F C E C B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 1.9 0.5 1.4 3.8 0.4 - -Butler Tract TIA 6: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 11.5Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 497Future Vol, veh/h 116 0 0 0 0 497Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 126 0 0 0 0 540Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----126 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 924 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----924Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------ Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 14.2HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 924 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.585 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 14.2 - -HCM Lane LOS B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.9 - - Butler Tract TIA 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 231 22 23 641 849 134Future Volume (vph) 231 22 23 641 849 134Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 3468 0Flt Permitted 0.950 0.125Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 233 3539 3468 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 24 27Lane Group Flow (vph) 251 24 25 697 1069 0Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt NA NAProtected Phases 4 1 6 2Permitted Phases 4 6Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 40.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Act Effct Green (s) 13.0 13.0 53.0 53.0 33.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.66 0.66 0.41v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.06 0.30 0.74Control Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 6.1 23.1Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 64.1 12.9 5.0 6.1 23.1LOS EBAACApproach Delay 59.7 6.0 23.1Approach LOS E A CQueue Length 50th (ft) 124 0 4 66 224Queue Length 95th (ft) #253 20 11 91 299Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 373 378Turn Bay Length (ft) 50Base Capacity (vph) 287 277 404 2344 1446Starvation Cap Reductn00000Spillback Cap Reductn00000Storage Cap Reductn00000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.09 0.06 0.30 0.74Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 20 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:SBT and 6:NBTL, Start of GreenControl Type: PretimedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.87Intersection Signal Delay: 22.0 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: Holleman Drive & Market StreetButler Tract TIA 2: Holleman Drive & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 33.2Intersection LOS DMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 54 3 12 41 481 0 5 769 102Future Vol, veh/h 136 29 56 54 3 12 41 481 0 5 769 102Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %111111111111Mvmt Flow 148 32 61 59 3 13 45 523 0 5 836 111Number of Lanes010010020020Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes1122Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left2211Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right2211HCM Control Delay 17 12.8 21.5 45.9HCM LOS C B C ELane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, % 20% 0% 62% 78% 1% 0%Vol Thru, % 80% 100% 13% 4% 99% 79%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 25% 17% 0% 21%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 201 321 221 69 390 487LT Vol 41 0 136 54 5 0Through Vol 160 321 29 3 385 385RT Vol 0 0 56 12 0 102Lane Flow Rate 219 349 240 75 423 529Geometry Grp772277Degree of Util (X) 0.445 0.699 0.486 0.169 0.797 0.973Departure Headway (Hd) 7.327 7.222 7.29 8.111 6.78 6.624Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 492 502 497 443 533 550Service Time 5.065 4.961 5.29 6.152 4.517 4.36HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.445 0.695 0.483 0.169 0.794 0.962HCM Control Delay 15.8 25.1 17 12.8 31.2 57.6HCM Lane LOS C D C B D FHCM 95th-tile Q 2.3 5.4 2.6 0.6 7.5 13.2 Butler Tract TIA 3: Holleman Drive & General ParkwayFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.7Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 51 121 627 67 149 695Future Vol, veh/h 51 121 627 67 149 695Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 0 - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 57 134 697 74 166 772Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1452 386 0 0 771 0 Stage 1 734 - - - - - Stage 2 718 - - - - -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 121 612 - - 840 - Stage 1 436 - - - - - Stage 2 444 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 97 612 - - 840 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 185 - - - - - Stage 1 350 - - - - - Stage 2 444 - - - - -Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 18.5 0 1.8HCM LOS CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 185 612 840 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.306 0.22 0.197 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 32.8 12.5 10.3 -HCM Lane LOS - - D B B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.2 0.8 0.7 -Butler Tract TIA 4: Holleman Drive & Cain RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.5Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 11 135 559 6 46 759Future Vol, veh/h 11 135 559 6 46 759Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - 50 -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 12 147 608 7 50 825Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1125 308 0 0 615 0 Stage 1 612----- Stage 2 513-----Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.84-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.84-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 199 688 - - 961 - Stage 1 504----- Stage 2 566-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 189 688 - - 961 -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 313----- Stage 1 478----- Stage 2 566-----Approach WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 12.6 0 0.5HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBTCapacity (veh/h) - - 631 961 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.251 0.052 -HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.6 9 -HCM Lane LOS - - B A -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.2 - Butler Tract TIA 5: Holleman Drive & Deacon DriveFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 15.6Movement EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 9 43 30 190 13 345 20 9 234 490 30Future Vol, veh/h 44 12 7 9 43 30 190 13 345 20 9 234 490 30Conflicting Peds, #/hr 00000000000000Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - - None - - None - - - NoneStorage Length 50 - - - 50 - - 250 - - - 50 - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 22222222222222Mvmt Flow 48 13 8 10 47 33 207 14 375 22 10 254 533 33Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1310 1503 283 0 1215 1508 199 566 0 0 397 397 0 0 Stage 1 1078 1078 - 0 414 414 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 232 425 - 0 801 1094 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 - 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 6.44 4.14 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 - 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.52 2.22 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 117 120 714 0 137 120 809 1002 - - 804 1158 - - Stage 1 233 293 - 0 586 591 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 750 585 - 0 344 288 - - - - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 51 90 714 0 98 90 809 1002 - - 1121 1121 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 51 90 - 0 98 90 - - - - - - - - Stage 1 230 224 - 0 578 583 - - - - - - - - Stage 2 520 577 - 0 245 220 - - - - - - - -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 175.1 35.3 0.3 2.9HCM LOS F EMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1002 - - 51 133 98 387 1121 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.014 - - 0.938 0.155 0.477 0.618 0.236 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - 234.7 37 71.5 28.2 9.2 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F E F D A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 4 0.5 2.1 4 0.9 - -Butler Tract TIA 15: Holleman NB Channelized Right & Dowling RoadFull Build - Option 3 - (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/23/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 192Future Vol, veh/h 34 0 0 0 0 192Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - YieldStorage Length -----0Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 37 0 0 0 0 209Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1Conflicting Flow All 0----37 Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Critical Hdwy -----6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------Follow-up Hdwy -----3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 0 - 0 1035 Stage 1 - 0 0 - 0 - Stage 2 - 0 0 - 0 -Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -----1035Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 ------ Stage 2 ------Approach EB WB NBHCM Control Delay, s 0 0 9.4HCM LOS AMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBTCapacity (veh/h) 1035 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.202 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 9.4 - -HCM Lane LOS A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 - - Traffic Analysis – Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service Descriptions Binkley & Barfield HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS) Average Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) Description A ≤ 10.0 Very low vehicle delays, free flow, signal progression extremely favorable, most vehicles arrive during given signal phase. B 10.1 - 20.0 Good signal progression, more vehicles stop and experience higher delays than for LOS A. C 20.1 - 35.0 Stable flow, fair signal progression, significant number of vehicles stop at signals. D 35.1 - 55.0 Congestion noticeable, longer delays and unfavorable signal progression, many vehicles stop at signals. E 55.1 - 80.0 Limit of acceptable delay, unstable flow, poor signal progression, traffic near roadway capacity, frequent cycle failures. F > 80.0 Unacceptable delays, extremely unstable flow and congestion, traffic exceeds roadway capacity, stop-and- go conditions. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS) Average Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) Description A ≤ 10.0 No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. B 10.1 - 15.0 No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. C 15.1 - 25.0 Moderate delays at intersections with satisfactory to good traffic flow. Light congestion; infrequent backups on critical approaches. D 25.1 - 35.0 Increased probability of delays along every approach. Significant congestion on critical approaches, but intersection functional. No standing long lines formed. E 35.1 - 50.0 Heavy traffic flow condition. Heavy delays probable. No available gaps for cross-street traffic or main street turning traffic. Limit of stable flow. F > 50.0 Unstable traffic flow. Heavy congestion. Traffic moves in forced flow condition. Average delays greater than one minute highly probable. Total breakdown. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A “UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE,” ARTICLE 4 “ZONING DISTRICTS,” SECTION 4.2, “OFFICIAL ZONING MAP” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FROM R RURAL AND GS GENERAL SUBURBAN TO GC GENERAL COMMERCIAL AFFECTING APPROXIMATELY 16.9 ACRES BEING ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND LYING AND BEING SITUATED IN THE CRAWFORD BURNETT LEAGUE, ABSTRACT NO. 7, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID TRACT BEING THE REMAINDER OF A CALLED 69.37 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO J & J BUTLER FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD. RECORDED IN VOLUME 7551, PAGE 41 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART 1: That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B” and “Exhibit C” attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. PART 2: If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity or unconstitutionality does not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance or the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, that can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. PART 3: That any person, corporation, organization, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association and any other legal entity violating any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than twenty five dollars ($25.00) and not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a violation of fire safety, zoning, or public health and sanitation ordinances, other than the dumping of refuse. Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. PART 4: This Ordinance is a penal ordinance and becomes effective ten (10) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by City of College Station Charter Section 35. ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 2 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 PASSED, ADOPTED, and APPROVED this 23rd day of August, 2018. ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _____________________________ City Secretary Mayor APPROVED: _______________________________ City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 3 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit A That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following property is rezoned from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial: Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 4 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 5 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit C Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A “UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE,” ARTICLE 4 “ZONING DISTRICTS,” SECTION 4.2, “OFFICIAL ZONING MAP” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FROM R RURAL AND GS GENERAL SUBURBAN TO GC GENERAL COMMERCIAL AFFECTING APPROXIMATELY 16.9 ACRES BEING ALL THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND LYING AND BEING SITUATED IN THE CRAWFORD BURNETT LEAGUE, ABSTRACT NO. 7, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID TRACT BEING THE REMAINDER OF A CALLED 69.37 ACRE TRACT AS DESCRIBED BY A DEED TO J & J BUTLER FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD. RECORDED IN VOLUME 7551, PAGE 41 OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORDS OF BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART 1: That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B” and “Exhibit C” attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. PART 2: If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity or unconstitutionality does not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance or the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, that can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. PART 3: That any person, corporation, organization, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association and any other legal entity violating any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than twenty five dollars ($25.00) and not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a violation of fire safety, zoning, or public health and sanitation ordinances, other than the dumping of refuse. Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. PART 4: This Ordinance is a penal ordinance and becomes effective ten (10) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by City of College Station Charter Section 35. ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 2 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 PASSED, ADOPTED, and APPROVED this 23rd day of August, 2018. ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _____________________________ City Secretary Mayor APPROVED: _______________________________ City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 3 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit A That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following property is rezoned from R Rural and GS General Suburban to GC General Commercial: Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 4 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 5 of 5 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit C City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:118-0540 Name:Loveless Tract CPA Status:Type:Comprehensive Plan Agenda Ready File created:In control:8/9/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use & Character Map from Suburban Commercial to Urban for approximately 11.1 acres generally located in the City on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. Sponsors:Alaina Helton Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Loveless background Vicinity & Aerial Map Future Land Use and Character Map Ordinance Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use & Character Map from Suburban Commercial to Urban for approximately 11.1 acres generally located in the City on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Good Governance ·Core Services and Infrastructure ·Neighborhood Integrity ·Diverse Growing Economy Recommendation(s):The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item on August 2,2018 and voted 7-0 to recommend approval. Summary:The applicant is requesting the proposed future land use amendment from Suburban Commercial to Urban.This development is intended to serve the nearby BioCorridor Planned Development District and to provide supplemental uses that add to the efforts made in that area. The subject property and properties to the south are designated as Suburban Commercial. Properties to the north,east and west are designated Business Park on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map. REVIEW CRITERIA 1.Changed or changing conditions in the subject area or the City:The City of College Station’s Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2009.In 2010,through the coordination of the College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0540,Version:1 Station’s Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2009.In 2010,through the coordination of the Research Valley Partnership,the Research Valley BioCorridor Concept Master Plan was developed,consisting of a conceptual area of approximately 3,500 acres,spanning the jurisdictions of College Station and Bryan and including property owned by the Texas A&M University System.In 2012,approximately 200 acres west of Turkey Creek Road were zoned BioCorridor Planned Development District (PDD)to encourage research and development, manufacturing,and warehousing for biomedical and other emerging technology industries in the area.The area surrounding this PDD is anticipated to serve as a secondary or supplementary region that would provide supportive land uses enhancing the development occurring within the BioCorridor District.The BioCorridor Concept Master Plan envisioned a mix of uses in the subject area; thus prompting the request to amend the Future Land Use map to Urban. Development pressure in this area has increased since the conception of the BioCorridor Master Plan,and the City of College Station has made significant agreements and infrastructure investments in the nearby area (e.g.,roadway and electric improvements and changes in sewer certificated areas)to support the success of business development in the region.In addition, three properties in the vicinity of the BioCorridor PDD have had their land use designations changed to Urban in the past couple of years to accommodate the development of supporting uses to the BioCorridor and in anticipation of land use demands related to the RELLIS campus in Bryan. 2.Compatibility with the existing uses,development patterns,and character of the immediate area concerned,the general area,and the City as a whole:Currently,the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map designates the area west of Turkey Creek Road and north of Raymond Stotzer Parkway to be approximately 37 acres of Suburban Commercial,11 acres of Urban and 198 acre of Business Park,the majority of which is zoned BioCorridor Planned Development District. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map designates the area to the east of Turkey Creek Road and west of Harvey Mitchell Parkway to be approximately 23 acres of Suburban Commercial (property already zoned for commercial uses along Harvey Mitchell),17 acres of Urban,6 acres of General Commercial,39 acres to be Texas A&M University (property owned by Texas A&M),29 acres of Public/Institutional (the City’s cemetery),and the largest designation to be 54 acres of Business Park. The proposal is to convert approximately 11 acres from Suburban Commercial to Urban on the west side of Turkey Creek Road,approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway.The proposed amendment would allow for a very intense level of residential development activities being townhouse, duplexes, and high-density apartments. The existing adjacent land uses to the east and south are large lot single-family and unimproved rural tracts varying in size from four to seven acres.The property to the north and west is currently undeveloped and is located within the BioCorridor Planned Development District.These existing rural developments are less dense than the Business Park designation prescribes.An Urban development will provide a different character than these existing properties currently provide. Land located north,east and west of the subject property is anticipated for future Business Park, and property to the south,Suburban Commercial land uses.The proposed amendment,while not consistent with the planned future development pattern in the area,is compatible as a supporting College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0540,Version:1 consistent with the planned future development pattern in the area,is compatible as a supporting land use for the Business Park uses that have begun to develop in the BioCorridor PDD. 3.Impact on environmentally sensitive and natural areas:A small pond is located on the property,but this area is not recognized as environmentally sensitive,nor is there any FEMA regulated floodplain onsite. 4.Impacts on infrastructure,including water,wastewater,drainage,and the transportation network:The Urban designation allows for future development of high-density residential uses such as townhomes,duplexes and multi-family.Water service is provided to properties in this area by the City of College Station and Wellborn Special Utility District (SUD),but additional infrastructure improvements may be needed with further site development to meet minimum fire flow requirements.With future development of the site there will be an offsite extension of waterline required to connect to the existing 18-inch water main on the south side of HSC Pkwy.The extension will be a 12-inch water line constructed with the extension of Atlas Pear Drive that will serve the tract for the portion of the property served by the City of College Station. Sanitary sewer for the property will be provided by the City of Bryan,and extensions to provide service to the property may be needed with further site development.Sanitary sewer lines will be required to be extended to serve this property at the time of site development. Drainage is generally to the south within the Whites Creek Drainage Basin. Currently, there is no FEMA regulated flood plain on site, however, detention will be required with site development. Drainage and other public infrastructure required with the site shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines. The subject tract has frontage to Turkey Creek Road which is designated as a future Major Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan.Turkey Creek Road is currently constructed as two-lane rural section roadway and is under TxDOT jurisdiction as FM 2513.The applicant also anticipates driveway access to Atlas Pear Drive which would be extended with development south from HSC Parkway and be designed as Minor Collector. 5.Consistency with the goals and strategies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan:The existing Future Land Use and Character designation on the property is Suburban Commercial, which is defined as a land use designation “generally for concentrations of commercial activities that cater primarily to nearby residents versus the larger community or region.Generally,these areas tend to be small in size and located adjacent to major roads (arterials and collectors).Design of these structures is compatible in size,roof type and pitch,architecture,and lot coverage with the surrounding single-family residential uses”. While the land use designation is still valid and could support the growth of a research and development and manufacturing district,none of the surrounding properties are zoned or designated for single-family development,except for the adjacent properties that are zoned Rural, which are also designated as Suburban Commercial and Business Park on the Future Land Use and Character Map,and are anticipated to develop as such in the future.The proposed Urban land use also encourages growth,by providing workforce housing needed to support commercial uses in the area. Urban is described as: Generally for areas that should have a very intense level of development activities.These areas College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0540,Version:1 Generally for areas that should have a very intense level of development activities.These areas will tend to consist of townhomes,duplexes,and high-density apartments.General commercial and office uses,business parks,and vertical mixed-use may also be permitted within growth and redevelopment areas. The Urban land use designation,when not in a Growth Area,is typically characterized by more dense residential developments in the form of duplexes, townhomes or apartments. The subject tract has frontage to Turkey Creek Road which is designated as a future Major Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan.Turkey Creek Road is currently constructed as two-lane rural section roadway.The applicant anticipates driveway access to Atlas Pear Drive which would be extended with development south from HSC Parkway and be designed as Minor Collector. The proposal is consistent with the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan.The goal for College Station’s Future Land Use and Character is to create a community with strong,unique neighborhoods,protected rural areas,special districts,distinct corridors,and a protected and enhanced natural environment.The subject property and surrounding area are identified in the Comprehensive Plan Concept Map as one of the City’s distinct districts-the Presidential Corridor Gateway District-which seeks to attract business (research and development,office,and light industrial)and preserve and build upon the existing assets in the area enhancing this important gateway into the city.The proposed amendment from Suburban Commercial to Urban on just over 11 acres does not limit the general goals of the Comprehensive Plan.The Urban land use encourages growth, by providing workforce housing needed to support business uses in the area. Budget & Financial Summary: N/A Legal Review: Yes Attachments: 1.Background Information 2.Vicinity & Aerial Map 3.Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map 4.Ordinance College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: August 2, 2018 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: August 23, 2018 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: None Contacts in support: None Contacts in opposition: None Inquiry contacts: One at the time of staff report. ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use North Business Park Planned Development District (BioCorridor) Rural South Suburban Commercial Rural Rural East (across Turkey Creek Road) Business Park Rural Single-Family Residential West Business Park Planned Development District (BioCorridor) Rural DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: June 21, 1995 Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open upon annexation A-O Agricultural Open renamed to R Rural in 2013 Final Plat: Property is not platted Site development: Property is generally undeveloped. It is the site of a former horse stable. ORDINANCE NO. _____________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COLLEGE STATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – FUTURE LAND USE & CHARACTER MAP FROM SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL TO URBAN FOR APPROXIMATLEY 11.1 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE CITY ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 500-FEET SOUTH OF HSC PARKWAY; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART 1: That the “Comprehensive Plan of the City of College Station” is hereby amended by adding new Subsections C.2.ii of Exhibit “A” thereto as set out in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof; and by amending the “Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map,” as set out in Exhibit “B” attached hereto and made a part hereof for the identified area. PART 2: That if any provisions of any section of this Ordinance shall be held to be void or unconstitutional, such holding shall in no way affect the validity of the remaining provisions or sections of this Ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect. PART 3: That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED this 23rd day of August, 2018. ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _________________________________ City Secretary Mayor APPROVED: ___________________________ City Attorney ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 2 of 7 EXHIBIT A That ordinance no. 3186 adopting the “Comprehensive Plan of the City of College Station” as amended, is hereby amended by adding new subsections C.2.ii. to Exhibit “A” of said plan for Exhibit “A” to read in its entirety as follows: “EXHIBIT ‘A’ A. Comprehensive Plan The College Station Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance 3186) is hereby adopted and consists of the following: 1. Introduction; 2. Community Character; 3. Neighborhood Integrity; 4. Economic Development; 5. Parks, Greenways & the Arts; 6. Transportation; 7. Municipal Services & Community Facilities; 8. Growth Management and Capacity; and 9. Implementation and Administration. B. Master Plans The following Master Plans are hereby adopted and made a part of the College Station Comprehensive Plan: 1. The Northgate Redevelopment Plan dated November 1996; 2. The Revised Wolf Pen Creek Master Plan dated 1998; 3. Northgate Redevelopment Implementation Plan dated July 2003; 4. East College Station Transportation Study dated May 2005; 5. Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan dated January 2010; 6. Central College Station Neighborhood Plan dated June 2010; 7. Eastgate Neighborhood Plan dated June 2011; 8. Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Master Plan dated July 2011; 9. Southside Area Neighborhood Plan dated August 2012; 10. Medical District Master Plan dated October 2012; 11. Wellborn Community Plan dated April 2013; 12. Economic Development Master Plan dated September 2013; 13. South Knoll Area Neighborhood Plan dated September 2013; 14. The Water System Master Plan dated April 2017; and 15. The Wastewater System Master Plan dated April 2017. C. Miscellaneous Amendments The following miscellaneous amendments to the College Station Comprehensive Plan are as follows: 1. Text Amendments: ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 3 of 7 a. Chapter 2 “Community Character,” “Growth Areas” by amending the text regarding Growth Area IV and Growth Area V – Ordinance 3376, dated October 2011. b. Chapter 6 “Transportation” by amending the text regarding Complete Streets, Context Sensitive Solutions, Minimum Length and Additional Right-of-Way for Turn Lanes at Intersections, and Right-of-Way for Utilities – Ordinance 3729, dated December 10, 2015. c. Chapter 2 “Community Character,” Chapter 3 “Neighborhood Integrity,” Chapter 4 “Economic Development,” Chapter 5 “Parks, Greenways, and the Arts,” and Chapter 7 “Municipal Services and Community Facilities” by amending the text based on the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan Five-Year Evaluation & Appraisal Report – Ordinance 3730 dated December 10, 2015. d. Chapter 8 “Growth Management & Capacity” by amending the text based on recommendations from the Annexation Task Force – Ordinance 3766, dated April 28, 2016. e. Chapter 1, Section 10; Chapter 5, Section 1; Chapter 5, Section 4; Chapter 8, Section 17; and Chapter 9, Section 3; by amending the text – Ordinance 3951, dated October 12, 2017. 2. Future Land Use and Character Map Amendment: a. 301 Southwest Parkway – Ordinance 3255, dated July 2010. b. Richards Subdivision – Ordinance 3376, dated October 2011. c. Earl Rudder Freeway at University Oaks – Ordinance 3465, dated November 19, 2012 d. 1600 University Drive East – Ordinance 3535, dated November 14, 2013. e. 2560 Earl Rudder Freeway S. – Ordinance 3541, dated December 12, 2013. f. 13913 FM 2154. – Ordinance 3546, dated January 9, 2014. g. 2021 Harvey Mitchell Parkway – Ordinance 3549, dated January 23, 2014. h. 1201 Norton Lane – Ordinance 3555, dated February 27, 2014. i. 3715 Rock Prairie Road West – Ordinance 3596, dated August 25, 2014. j. 4201 Rock Prairie Road – Ordinance 3670, dated July 9, 2015. k. The approximately 40 acres of land generally located east of FM 2154 (aka Wellborn Road), south of the Southern Trace Subdivision, west of State Highway 40 (aka William D. Fitch Parkway), and north of Westminster Subdivision – Ordinance 3731, dated December 10, 2015. l. The approximately 120 acres of land generally located south of Barron Cut-Off Road, west of WS Phillips Parkway, north of the Castlegate II Subdivision, and east of the Wellborn Community – Ordinance 3732, dated December 10, 2015. m. The approximately 900 acres of land generally located south of Greens Prairie Road West, east of the Sweetwater Subdivision, and north of Arrington Road – Ordinance 3733, dated December 10, 2015. n. The approximately 17.788 acres of land generally located at the corner of Turkey Creek Road and Raymond Stotzer Parkway frontage road.– Ordinance 3752, dated March 10, 2016. ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 4 of 7 o. The approximately 9 acres of land generally located north of the Crossroad Woods Subdivision near the intersection of Wellborn Road (FM 2154) and Greens Prairie Trail – Ordinance 3779, dated June 9, 2016 p. The approximately 16 acres located at 8607 Rock Prairie Road, generally located at the north of Rock Prairie Road and west of William D. Fitch Parkway – Ordinance 3794, dated August 11, 2016. q. The approximately 14.25 acres of land located at 2501 Earl Rudder Freeway South, generally located north of North Forest Parkway and south of Raintree Drive, along the east side of Earl Rudder Freeway South – Ordinance 3799, dated August 25, 2016. r. The approximately 7 acres of land located along the south side of State Highway 30, south of Veterans Memorial Park – Ordinance 3828, dated October 27, 2016. s. The approximately 58 acres of land generally located along the e ast side of State Highway 6 South, north of W.D. Fitch parkway and south of the future Pebble Creek Parkway extension –Ordinance 3830, dated October 27, 2016. t. The approximately 2 acres of land generally located on Corsair Circle north of Pavilion Avenue – Ordinance 3846, dated December 8, 2016. u. The approximately 18 acres of land generally located at the southeast corner of Sebesta Road and Earl Rudder Freeway frontage road – Ordinance 3848, dated December 8, 2016. v. The approximately 6 acres of land being situated in the Pooh’s Park Subdivision, Block 1, Lots 6-14 recorded in Volume 314, Page 618 of the deed records of Brazos County, Texas, located at 204, 206, 208, 210, 212, 214, 216, 218, and 220 Holleman Drive east, more generally southwest of the intersection of Holleman Drive East and Lassie Lane by – Ordinance 3850, dated January 12, 2017. w. The approximately 6.3 acres of land generally located northeast intersection of Copperfield Parkway and Crescent Pointe Parkway - Ordinance 3859, dated February 9, 2017. x. The approximately 11.3 acres of land generally located at the southeast intersection of Earl Rudder Freeway South and Emerald Parkway – Ordinance 3875, dated April 27, 2017. y. The approximately 232 acres of land generally located south of Rock Prairie Road - Ordinance 3877, dated April 27, 2017. z. The approximately 5.96 acres of land generally located in the nor theast corner of Associates Avenue and Harvey Road intersection. – Ordinance 3879, dated April 27, 2017. aa. The approximately 4.74 acres of land generally located at the corner of Harvey Mitchell Parkway South and Raymond Stotzer Parkway – Ordinance 3882, dated May 11, 2017. bb. The approximately 3.2 acres of land generally located east of Copperfield Parkway and south of Harvey Road. – Ordinance 3884, dated May 11, 2017. cc. The approximately 3.34 acres of land generally located north of Raintree Drive along Earl Rudder Freeway South – Ordinance 3901, dated July 27, 2017. ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 5 of 7 dd. The approximately 12.5 acres generally located west of Earl Rudder Freeway South along Harvey Mitchell Parkway – Ordinance 3903, dated July 27, 2017. ee. Approximately 100 acres located along the east side of State Highway 6, south of The Business Park at College Station and north of the Texas World Speedway property- Ordinance 3906, dated July 27, 2017. ff. Approximately 1.7 acres of land being generally located at 12055 FM 2154 - Ordinance 3921, dated August 24, 2017. gg. Approximately 11 acres of land being generally located at 8822 Burgess Lane and near the east intersection of State Highway 47 and Raymond Stotzer Parkway – Ordinance 3965, dated December 14, 2017. hh. Approximately 35 acres of land being generally located at the west intersection of William D Fitch Parkway and Rock Prairie Road – Ordinance 3989, dated January 25, 2018. ii. Approximately 11.1 acres of land being generally located on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500 feet south of HSC Parkway- by this Ordinance, dated August 23, 2018. 3. Concept Map Amendment: a. Growth Area IV – Ordinance 3376, dated October 2011. b. Growth Area V – Ordinance 3376, dated October 2011. 4. Thoroughfare Map Amendment: a. Raintree Drive – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. b. Birkdale Drive – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. c. Corsair Circle – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. d. Deacon Drive – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. e. Dartmouth Drive – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. f. Farm to Market 60 – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. g. Southwest Parkway – Ordinance 3375, dated October 2011. h. Cain Road extension –Ordinance 3639, dated February 26, 2015. i. Update to Chapter 6 Maps- Ordinance 3729, dated December 10, 2015. j. South College Station Mobility Study – Ordinance 3827, dated October 27, 2016. k. Pavilion Avenue extension --Ordinance 3885, dated May 11, 2017. l. Future Minor Collector realigned to Harpers Ferry Road along Arrington Road – Ordinance 3949, dated October 12, 2017. m. 2017 Thoroughfare Plan update to Map 6.6 – Ordinance 3962, dated November 20, 2017. 5. Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Master Plan Amendment: a. Cain Road extension – Ordinance 3639, dated February 26, 2015 b. Update to Maps 5.4 and 5.5-- Ordinance 3729, dated December 10, 2015. c. South College Station Mobility Study – Ordinance 3827, dated October 27, 2016. d. Update to Maps 5.4 and 5.5 – Ordinance 3877, dated April 27, 2017. e. 2017 Thoroughfare Plan update to Maps 5.4 and 5.5 – Ordinance 3962, dated November 20, 2017. ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 6 of 7 f. 2018 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan Update to Maps 5.4, 5.5, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 –Ordinance 4009, dated May 14, 2018. 6. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Amendment: a. Update to Map B/College Station Neighborhood Park Zone, to Map C/College Station Community Park Zone Map and to the text of Section 2 “Current Conditions and Trends,” subsection “Park Land,” paragraph five relating to said maps- Ordinance 3951, dated October 12, 2017. 7. Community and Neighborhood Plan Amendment: a. Eastgate Neighborhood Plan, Chapter 1 - Community Character, “Site Development Area 1 – Lincoln Avenue” – Ordinance 3956, dated November 9, 2017. D. General 1. Conflict. All parts of the College Station Comprehensive Plan and any amendments thereto shall be harmonized where possible to give effect to all. Only in the event of an irreconcilable conflict shall the later adopted ordinance prevail and then only to the extent necessary to avoid such conflict. Ordinances adopted at the same city council meeting without reference to another such ordinance shall be harmonized, if possible, so that effect may be given to each. 2. Purpose. The Comprehensive Plan is to be used as a guide for growth and development for the entire City and its extra-territorial jurisdiction (“ETJ”). The College Station Comprehensive Plan depicts generalized locations of proposed future land-uses, including thoroughfares, bikeways, pedestrian ways, parks, greenways, and waterlines that are subject to modification by the City to fit local conditions and budget constraints. 3. General nature of Future Land Use and Character. The College Station Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Future Land Use and Character Map found in A.3 above and any adopted amendments thereto, shall not be nor considered a zoning map, shall not constitute zoning regulations or establish zoning boundaries and shall not be site or parcel specific but shall be used to illustrate generalized locations. 4. General nature of College Station Comprehensive Plan. The College Station Comprehensive Plan, including the Thoroughfare Plan, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan, Central College Station Neighborhood Plan, Water System Master Plan and any additions, amendments, master plans and subcategories thereto depict same in generalized terms including future locations; and are subject to modifications by the City to fit local conditions, budget constraints, cost participation, and right-of-way availability that warrant further refinement as development occurs. Linear routes such as bikeways, greenways, thoroughfares, pedestrian ways, waterlines and sewer lines that are a part of the College Station Comprehensive Plan may be relocated by the City 1,000 feet from the locations shown in the Plan without being considered an amendment thereto. 5. Reference. The term College Station Comprehensive Plan includes all of the above in its entirety as if presented in full herein, and as same may from time to time be amended.” ORDINANCE NO.__________________ Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT B That the “Comprehensive Plan of the City of College Station” is hereby amended by amending a portion of the map titled “Map 2.2-Future Land Use & Character” of Chapter 2 –Community Character” from Suburban Commercial to Urban shown as follows: City Hall 1101 Texas Ave College Station, TX 77840 College Station, TX Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:218-0542 Name:Loveless Tract REZ Status:Type:Rezoning Agenda Ready File created:In control:8/9/2018 City Council Regular On agenda:Final action:8/23/2018 Title:Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix “A”, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from Rural to Multi-Family on approximately 11.1 acres located on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. Sponsors:Alaina Helton Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Loveless background Vicinity, Aerial & Small Area Map Rezoning Map TIA Loveless Rezoning Ordinance Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Public Hearing, presentation, possible action, and discussion regarding an ordinance amending Appendix “A”, “Unified Development Ordinance,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map,” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas by changing the zoning district boundaries from Rural to Multi-Family on approximately 11.1 acres located on the west side of Turkey Creek Road, approximately 500-feet south of HSC Parkway. Relationship to Strategic Goals: ·Good Governance ·Financially Sustainable City ·Core Services and Infrastructure ·Diverse Growing Economy Recommendation:The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this item on August 2,2018 and voted 5-2 to recommend approval.Dissenting votes were based on the lack of adequate road infrastructure to support the rezoning at this time. Summary:This request is to rezone approximately 11.1 acres from R Rural to MF Multi-Family. This rezoning is in conjunction with a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map by changing the designation of this property from Suburban Commercial to Urban. College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ NOTIFICATIONS Advertised Commission Hearing Date: August 2, 2018 Advertised Council Hearing Dates: August 23, 2018 The following neighborhood organizations that are registered with the City of College Station’s Neighborhood Services have received a courtesy letter of notification of this public hearing: None Contacts in support: None Contacts in opposition: None Inquiry contacts: One at the time of staff report. ADJACENT LAND USES Direction Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use North Business Park Planned Development District (BioCorridor) Rural South Suburban Commercial Rural Rural East (across Turkey Creek Road) Business Park Rural Single-Family Residential West Business Park Planned Development District (BioCorridor) Rural DEVELOPMENT HISTORY Annexation: June 21, 1995 Zoning: A-O Agricultural Open upon annexation A-O Agricultural Open renamed to R Rural in 2013 Final Plat: Property is not platted Site development: Property is generally undeveloped. It is the site of a former horse stable. File #:18-0542,Version:2 REZONING REVIEW CRITERIA 1.Whether the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan:This request is in conjunction with a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map by changing the designation of this property from Suburban Commercial to Urban. The City of College Station’s Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2009.In 2010,through the coordination of the Research Valley Partnership,the Research Valley BioCorridor Concept Master Plan was developed,consisting of a conceptual area of approximately 3,500 acres,spanning the jurisdictions of College Station and Bryan and including property owned by the Texas A&M University System.In 2012,approximately 200 acres west of Turkey Creek Road were zoned BioCorridor Planned Development District (PDD)to encourage research and development, manufacturing,and warehousing for biomedical and other emerging technology industries in the area.The area surrounding this PDD is anticipated to serve as a secondary or supplementary region that would provide supportive land uses enhancing the development occurring within the BioCorridor District.The BioCorridor Concept Master Plan envisioned a mix of uses in the subject area;thus prompting the request to amend the Future Land Use map to Urban and the zoning to Multi-Family. Currently,the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map designates the area west of Turkey Creek Road and north of Raymond Stotzer Parkway to be approximately 37 acres of Suburban Commercial,11 acres of Urban and 198 acre of Business Park,the majority of which is zoned BioCorridor Planned Development District. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use and Character Map designates the area to the east of Turkey Creek Road and west of Harvey Mitchell Parkway to be approximately 23 acres of Suburban Commercial (property already zoned for commercial uses along Harvey Mitchell),17 acres of Urban,6 acres of General Commercial,39 acres to be Texas A&M University (property owned by Texas A&M),29 acres of Public/Institutional (the City’s cemetery),and the largest designation to be 54 acres of Business Park. The proposed zoning complements and is consistent with the allowable land uses for the Presidential Corridor Gateway District and with the surrounding future land use designations. 2.Whether the uses permitted by the proposed zoning district will be appropriate in the context of the surrounding area:The existing R Rural zoning allows for large lot residential and/or agricultural uses,which is not compatible or supportive of more intense development that is anticipated for the area.Given the property’s close proximity to the BioCorridor Planned Development District,this area is expected to contain uses that support the investment plan that has been set in this District. An R Rural designation does not support the planned growth. The adjacent land uses to the east and south are large lot single-family and unimproved rural tracts varying in size from four to seven acres.The property to the north and west is currently undeveloped and is located within the BioCorridor Planned Development District.The existing rural developments are less dense than the Multi-Family designation prescribes.A Multi-Family development will provide a different character than these existing properties currently provide. However,this is the third rezoning for more intense land uses requested in the area outside of the BioCorridor PDD.The proposed zoning change,while not compatible with the land uses located immediately to the east and south,is compatible as supporting land uses for the Business Park College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0542,Version:2 uses that are anticipated to develop. 3.Whether the property to be rezoned is physically suitable for the proposed zoning district:The proposed land uses permitted through this request are those allowed in MF Multi- Family.The uses are appropriate as they support the uses planned in the BioCorridor PDD and because of the property’s proximity to HSC Parkway and Raymond Stotzer Parkway.The property is relatively flat,naturally vegetated,with a small pond.There is no FEMA regulated floodplain onsite. 4.Whether there is available water,wastewater,stormwater,and transportation facilities generally suitable and adequate for uses permitted by the proposed zoning district:Water service is provided to properties in this area by the City of College Station and Wellborn Special Utility District (SUD),but additional infrastructure improvements may be needed with further site development to meet minimum fire flow requirements.With future development of the site there will be an offsite extension of waterline required to connect to the existing 18-inch water main on the south side of HSC Pkwy.The extension will be a 12-inch water line constructed with the extension of Atlas Pear Drive that will serve the tract for the portion of the property served by the City of College Station. Drainage is generally to the south within the Whites Creek Drainage Basin.Currently,there is no FEMA regulated flood plain on site,however,detention will be required with site development. Drainage and other public infrastructure required with the site shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the B/CS Unified Design Guidelines. The subject tract has frontage to Turkey Creek Road which is designated as a future Major Collector on the Thoroughfare Plan.Turkey Creek Road is currently constructed as two-lane rural section roadway and is under TxDOT jurisdiction as FM 2513.The applicant also anticipates driveway access to Atlas Pear Drive which would be extended with development south from HSC Parkway and be designed as Minor Collector. A traffic impact analysis (TIA)was performed for the rezoning request and assumed the maximum multi-family density which would allow up to 334 units.The applicant intends to develop over 300 units with construction to be complete in 2021.All intersections studied in the TIA performed at an acceptable level of service except F&B Road at FM 2818 (Harvey Mitchell Parkway)which becomes a failing intersection in the background condition.The intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818 is built out except for the eastbound approach of F&B Road which constrains the capacity of the intersection by having only a single lane.As FM 2818 is a major roadway,the proposed development contributes less than 2%of the traffic to the overall intersection though would provide roughly 20%of the traffic on single-lane eastbound approach in the AM peak hour and about 5%of the eastbound traffic in the PM peak hour.Funding to improve the intersection or widen F&B Road to a future Minor Arterial has not yet been identified. 5.The marketability of the property:The property can currently be marketed under the existing R Rural zoning district.However,the applicant has stated that the use is not appropriate or feasible for this property knowing the current development happening on nearby property and the anticipated change in the development pattern for the area. Legal Review: Yes College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:18-0542,Version:2 SUPPORTING MATERIALS 1.Background Information 2.Vicinity Map, Aerial, and Small Area Map 3.Rezoning Map 4.Ordinance College Station, TX Printed on 8/17/2018Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc i TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for Rezoning of Loveless Tract on Turkey Creek Road In College Station, Texas EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) evaluates the vehicular impact of the development of 11.14 acres of land (the Loveless Tract) located on Turkey Creek Road in College Station, Texas. The land is currently zoned Rural. The proposed zoning is Multi-family (MF). This report analyzed the expected access points to the site and the surrounding intersections under the following conditions: • Existing (2018) • Background (2021) • Full Build Proposed (2021) • Full Build Alternative (2021) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development is expected to have two access points. The primary access will be from an extension of Atlas Pear Drive south of Health Science Center Parkway. A secondary access is expected to provide exit-only access to Turkey Creek Road. A background growth rate of 5.0% was used to forecast traffic volumes to future years. The existing traffic volumes and regional development were utilized to determine trip distributions to and from the site. CAPACITY ANALYSIS The analyses for the existing conditions indicate that all intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service. The analyses for the Background 2021 conditions identified some capacity deficiencies at the intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818. These continue with the Full Build scenarios. All other intersections in the Full Build conditions operate at an acceptable level of service. RIGHT-TURN LANE ANALYSIS Based on conditions in the City’s General Development Standards, a right-turn deceleration lane is not required at either access as the projected turn volumes do not exceed the City’s thresholds. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that a left-turn lane from HSC Parkway to Atlas Pear Drive be constructed with the proposed development that mirrors the existing eastbound left-turn lane. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... i Proposed Development ........................................................................................................................... i Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................................................... i Right-Turn Lane Analysis ........................................................................................................................ i Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... i Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Existing Study Area .................................................................................................................... 1 Streets and Intersections ........................................................................................................................ 1 Area Development .................................................................................................................................. 2 Proposed Development .............................................................................................................. 8 Land Uses ............................................................................................................................................... 8 Trip Distribution .......................................................................................................................... 8 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................................... 8 Projected Traffic Volumes .......................................................................................................... 8 Site Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................... 8 Background Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................ 13 Total Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................ 13 Intersection Capacity Analysis ..................................................................................................17 2018 Existing ........................................................................................................................................ 17 2021 Background.................................................................................................................................. 17 2021 Full Build Proposed ..................................................................................................................... 17 2021 Full Build Alternative .................................................................................................................... 17 Right-Turn Lane Analysis ..........................................................................................................22 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................22 Capacity Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 22 Right-Turn Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 22 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................22 Closing ......................................................................................................................................23 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................24 Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Site Location ............................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Peak Hour Volumes – Existing (2018) ......................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Trip Distribution for ViaSat .......................................................................................... 5 Figure 4. Peak Hour Volumes – ViaSat ...................................................................................... 6 Figure 5. Peak Hour Volumes – Total Existing (2018) ................................................................ 7 Figure 6. Trip Distribution (Proposed) ........................................................................................ 9 Figure 7. Trip Distribution (Alternative) ......................................................................................10 Figure 8. Peak Hour Volumes – Site Generated (Proposed) .....................................................11 Figure 9. Peak Hour Volumes – Site Generated (Alternative) ....................................................12 Figure 10. Peak Hour Volumes – Background (2021) ...............................................................14 Figure 11. Peak Hour Volumes – Full Build Proposed (2021) ....................................................15 Figure 12. Peak Hour Volumes – Full Build Alternative (2021) ..................................................16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Land Use Data: Recent Developments ......................................................................... 2 Table 2. Trip Generation Data: Recent Developments ............................................................... 2 Table 3. Land Use Data: Proposed Development ...................................................................... 8 Table 4. Trip Generation Data: Proposed Development ............................................................. 8 Table 5. Proportion of Peak Hour Traffic Generated by the Development .................................13 Table 6. AM Peak Hour Level of Service ...................................................................................18 Table 7. PM Peak Hour Level of Service ...................................................................................20 Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 1 INTRODUCTION This Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) evaluates the vehicular impact of the development of 11.14 acres of land (the Loveless Tract) located on Turkey Creek Road in College Station, Texas. The land is currently zoned Rural. The proposed zoning is Multi-family (MF). This report analyzed the expected access points to the site and the surrounding intersections under the following conditions: • Existing (2018) • Background (2021) • Full Build Proposed (2021) • Full Build Alternative (2021) EXISTING STUDY AREA A summary of the existing streets and intersections which encompass the study area and the nearby developments are described below. STREETS AND INTERSECTIONS The following streets and the intersections they form are included in the analyses of this report. Health Science Center Parkway (HSC Parkway) and F&B Road connects SH 47 with FM 2818. To the west of Turkey Creek Road, HSC Parkway is a four-lane divided road with a 35- mph speed limit. To the east of Turkey Creek Road, F&B Road is a two-lane undivided road with a 40-mph speed limit. HSC Parkway and F&B Road are identified as a proposed Minor Arterial in the City’s Thoroughfare Plan. FM 60 (Raymond Stotzer Parkway) is a four-lane divided roadway with a two-lane two-way frontage road on the north side and a one-way frontage road on the south side (near the airport). FM 60 is classified in the City’s Thoroughfare Plan as a Freeway/Expressway. Turkey Creek Road is a two-lane undivided road, identified as a Major Collector in the City’s Thoroughfare Plan. Atlas Pear Drive extends north of HSC Parkway, providing access to some of the Traditions development, and specifically to the Hawthorn at Traditions apartments. With the proposed multi-family development, Atlas Pear Drive is to be extended south of HSC Parkway. Figure 1 provides an aerial photograph of the area, highlighting the subject roads, the location of the proposed development, and the location of ViaSat, a recently completed office complex. The existing and proposed intersections evaluated in this study are as follows: • FM 2818 at F&B Road • Turkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway/F&B Road • Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 WB • Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 EB • HSC Parkway at Traditions Drive • HSC Parkway at Atlas Pear Drive Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 2 Traffic volumes were counted at each study intersection in March 2018 on a weekday from 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM. The raw traffic count data are provided in the Appendix. The resultant AM and PM Peak Hour volumes for existing weekday traffic are illustrated in Figure 2. AREA DEVELOPMENT Regionally, the oldest developments in the area include the Easterwood Airport to the south of the area of interest and the Traditions Club to the north. There are multiple existing and planned developments along the Bryan/College Station Biomedical Corridor. Recently completed developments include the Stella Hotel, the MatureWell Lifestyle Center, the Fujifilm/Diosynth laboratories, the iBio complex, and ViaSat. The ViaSat development opened in April 2018, which occurred after existing traffic counts were obtained for this report. Traffic generated by ViaSat is added to the Existing (2018) traffic as the complex is now open. Trips generated by ViaSat were determined from appropriate land uses and rates in the Trip Generation manual shown in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. Table 1. Land Use Data: Recent Developments Development ITE Code Number of Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Trips Rate/Unit Trips ViaSat 710 200 Employees 0.48 96 0.46 92 Table 2. Trip Generation Data: Recent Developments Development AM Peak (vph) PM Peak (vph) Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit ViaSat 96 88% 84 12% 12 92 17% 16 83% 76 The trips generated by ViaSat were distributed to and from the complex to be added to the Existing 2018 traffic and used in the capacity analyses. Figure 3 depicts the trip distribution for ViaSat. Figure 4 shows the site-generated trips for ViaSat, combining the trip generation and distribution assumptions. Figure 5 shows the resultant Existing 2018 Peak Hour volumes after the addition of the Viasat traffic. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 8 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This report addresses the rezoning of 11.14 acres for Multi-Family use. An exhibit showing the proposed accesses with an estimate for the number of units is provided in the Appendix. The development is expected to have two access points. The primary access will be from a proposed extension of Atlas Pear Drive south from HSC Parkway. The second access will be on Turkey Creek Road, which is intended to be restricted to exiting vehicles. LAND USES The Full Build conditions were analyzed for the year 2021. Table 1 identifies the relevant Land Use data for the proposed use. The exhibit in the Appendix shows that the development is planned to have 307 apartment units, a density of 27.5 units per acre. The City ordinance permits a density of 30 units per acre for Multi-Family zoning. The analyses of this study will assume a density of 30 units per acre to provide a conservative finding. Table 3. Land Use Data: Proposed Development Land Use ITE Code Acres Units/ Acre Number of Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Rate/Unit Trips Rate/Unit Trips Multi-family 220 11.14 30 DU 334 DU 0.46 154 0.56 187 TRIP DISTRIBUTION The trip ends generated by the proposed land use addressed in this study were distributed to and from the site based on its location with respect to area development, nearby roadways, and existing traffic patterns. Two trip distributions are shown. The first is consistent with the exhibit in the Appendix that shows the main access on Atlas Pear Drive and an exit-only access on Turkey Creek Road. Figure 6 illustrates this proposed trip distribution. The second distribution shows full access to Turkey Creek Road in addition to the proposed access on Atlas Pear Drive. This alternative distribution is shown in Figure 7. TRIP GENERATION For this site, the AM and PM Peak Hour trips are determined from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) 10th edition Trip Generation Manual. Table 2 summarizes the associated trip generation data and the calculated trips that are anticipated to be generated by the proposed development. Information about the ITE data used to develop Table 2 is included in the Appendix. Table 4. Trip Generation Data: Proposed Development Land Use AM Peak (vph) PM Peak (vph) Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Total % Enter Enter % Exit Exit Multi-family 154 23% 35 77% 118 187 63% 118 37% 69 PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES SITE TRAFFIC VOLUMES For this study, “site volumes” represent the traffic expected to be generated by the proposed site. Figure 8 depicts the site volumes distributed to and from the site during the AM and PM Peak Hours of a typical weekday consistent with the Figure 6 intended distribution. Figure 9 depicts the site volumes for the alternative access scenario. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 13 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES For this study, “background volumes” represent the traffic expected to occur along the area streets and roadways because of the increase in traffic volumes due to normal growth in the area. This study applied an annual growth factor of 5%, consistent with rates seen for similar locations with undeveloped land in the area and determined by evaluating historic traffic volumes from the Texas Department of Transportation’s (TxDOT) Statewide Planning Map. Figure 10 depicts the background traffic determined by increasing the existing traffic at a 5% growth factor to the year 2021. TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES Figure 11 displays the proposed “total volumes” anticipated to occur within the study area for the Full Build 2021 conditions. The total proposed volumes depicted combine the site generated volumes in Figure 8 and the background volumes in Figure 10. Figure 12 displays the total volumes for the alternative scenario, combining the alternative site- generated volumes of Figure 9 with the background volumes in Figure 10. The city’s Unified Development Ordinance (Section 7.13) states that developments that contribute 5% or more of the traffic at locations failing to meet level of service “D” should be mitigated by the applicant (developer). Table 5 indicates the proportion of Peak Hour traffic in the full build conditions that is the attributed to the proposed development. The information in Table 5 is based on the traffic volumes shown in Figure 8 and Figure 11 for the Proposed condition and Figure 9 and Figure 12 for the Alternative scenario. Table 5. Proportion of Peak Hour Traffic Generated by the Development Location Proposed Alternative Access AM PM AM PM FM 2818 at F&B Road 1.6% 1.5% 1.6% 1.5% Turkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway/F&B Road 8.6% 9.4% 6.0% 4.9% Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 WB 16.4% 13.3% 16.4% 13.3% Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 EB 19.0% 8.5% 19.0% 8.5% HSC Parkway at Traditions Drive 6.2% 6.8% 6.2% 6.8% HSC Parkway at Atlas Pear Drive 9.7% 15.7% 6.1% 6.9% Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 17 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Level of Service (LOS) analyses of the traffic operations were performed at the existing intersections and the proposed access points. Analyses of the intersections were conducted utilizing Synchro software. The results of the capacity analyses for the intersections with the resulting delay and levels of service values are summarized by approach in the following tables: • Table 6. AM Peak Hour Level of Service • Table 7. PM Peak Hour Level of Service Copies of the Synchro computer printouts and a description of the various levels of service have been included in the Appendix. Typically, the desirable levels of service are "A" through "D." Levels of Service "E" and "F" are undesirable. In the analyses, it was assumed that a westbound left-turn lane from HSC Parkway onto Atlas Pear Drive is constructed to match the eastbound left-turn lane. 2018 EXISTING With the current traffic on the existing lane configurations, all intersections operate at an acceptable level of service. The eastbound approach of F&B Road at FM 2818 operates at LOS E during the PM Peak Period. No mitigation is proposed as the intersection operates at LOS D with an average delay of 45 seconds per vehicle. 2021 BACKGROUND The 2021 Background analysis assumed a 5.0% background growth per year and additional traffic from ViaSat. The only intersection with operational concerns is F&B Road at FM 2818, which is forecasted to operate at LOS E during the PM Peak Hour. It is apparent that the eastbound approach, with only one lane, is what limits capacity most at this intersection. 2021 FULL BUILD PROPOSED The 2021 Full Build scenario analyzed traffic conditions with the 11.14-acre Multi-Family development added to the background traffic. During the PM Peak Hour, the intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818 continues to operate at LOS E. Additionally, the westbound approach of F&B Road/ HSC Parkway at Turkey Creek Road operates at LOS E; however, the intersection overall operates at LOS C. As this intersection is all-way stop controlled, the poor level of service on that one approach is not a safety concern. There is spare capacity at the intersection and the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio for the westbound approach is 0.88. As shown in Table 5, the proposed development contributes less than 2% of the total Peak Hour traffic at the intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818. Mitigation for level of service lower than “D” is required by ordinance only when the development’s traffic exceeds 5% of the total traffic. Therefore, mitigation at the intersection is not required. It is worth noting that, as a proposed Minor Arterial, the future eastbound lane configuration when F&B Road is widened will add capacity and significantly improve the intersection’s performance. There is not a known time when F&B Road will be widened. 2021 FULL BUILD ALTERNATIVE For the Alternative scenario, multiple intersections experience the same traffic volumes and therefore the same delay and level of service. The most notable difference is Turkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway, which improves in the Alternative scenario because the full-access driveway on Turkey Creek Road allows vehicles to bypass the all-way stop on HSC Parkway. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 18 Table 6. AM Peak Hour Level of Service Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT F&B Road at FM 2818 Existing 2018 D D B C C 50.4 47.4 14.3 20.0 20.5 Background 2021 E E C C C 76.9 69.2 24.0 30.5 32.1 Full Build Proposed 2021 F E C C D 81.6 69.8 27.6 34.1 36.1 Full Build Alternative 2021 F E C C D 81.6 69.8 27.6 34.1 36.1 Turkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway Existing 2018 A B - A - B 8.5 12.2 - 9.4 - 10.6 Background 2021 A B - A - B 8.9 14.5 - 9.9 - 12.1 Full Build Proposed 2021 A C - B - B 9.3 16.0 - 10.7 - 13.0 Full Build Alternative 2021 A C - B - B 9.2 15.7 - 10.3 - 12.8 HSC Parkway at Atlas Pear Drive Existing 2018 A - - - - B - 8.2 - - - - 14.8 - Background 2021 A - - - - C - 8.4 - - - - 17.5 - Full Build Proposed 2021 A - - A - B C - 8.4 - - 7.6 - 12.2 19.8 - Full Build Alternative 2021 A - - A - B C - 8.4 - - 7.5 - 11.9 17.8 - Traditions Drive at HSC Parkway Existing 2018 A A A A A 8.1 8.7 8.0 9.5 8.7 Background 2021 A A A A A 8.3 9.1 8.2 9.9 9.1 Full Build Proposed 2021 A A A B A 8.4 9.2 8.3 10.0 9.2 Full Build Alternative 2021 A A A B A 8.4 9.2 8.3 10.0 9.2 Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 19 Table 6. AM Peak Hour Level of Service (Continued) Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 EBFR Existing 2018 A - A A A 8.6 - 7.3 8.8 8.6 Background 2021 A - A A A 8.8 - 7.4 9.0 8.8 Full Build Proposed 2021 A - A B A 9.0 - 7.6 10.1 9.7 Full Build Alternative 2021 A - A B A 9.0 - 7.6 10.1 9.7 Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 WBFR Existing 2018 A A A A A 7.4 7.8 8.1 8.4 8.1 Background 2021 A A A A A 7.5 8.1 8.2 8.8 8.5 Full Build Proposed 2021 A A A A A 7.7 8.4 8.4 9.7 9.1 Full Build Alternative 2021 A A A A A 7.7 8.4 8.4 9.7 9.1 Turkey Creek Road at Proposed Driveway Full Build Proposed 2021 B - - - - 10.3 - - - - Full Build Alternative 2021 B - A - - - 10.4 - 7.7 - - - Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 20 Table 7. PM Peak Hour Level of Service Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT F&B Road at FM 2818 Existing 2018 F D D D D 81.1 52.1 41.4 44.9 48.1 Background 2021 F E E E E 115.5 77.6 56.5 58.6 66.0 Full Build Proposed 2021 F E E E E 120.5 77.5 62.7 59.2 69.8 Full Build Alternative 2021 F E E E E 120.5 77.5 62.7 59.2 69.8 Turkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway Existing 2018 B C - A - B 11.5 16.4 - 10.4 - 13.5 Background 2021 B C - B - C 13.6 23.9 - 11.4 - 17.8 Full Build Proposed 2021 C E - B - C 16.0 37.5 - 13.9 - 24.7 Full Build Alternative 2021 B D - B - C 14.4 30.6 - 11.9 - 21.2 HSC Parkway at Atlas Pear Drive Existing 2018 A - - - - B - 8.0 - - - - 14.4 - Background 2021 A - - - - C - 8.2 - - - - 16.5 - Full Build Proposed 2021 A - - A - C D - 8.2 - - 8.5 - 17.9 26.1 - Full Build Alternative 2021 A - - A - B C - 8.2 - - 8.2 - 14.7 17.0 - Traditions Drive at HSC Parkway Existing 2018 A A A A A 8.7 8.7 8.7 10.2 9.0 Background 2021 A A A B A 9.1 9.1 9.1 10.8 9.5 Full Build Proposed 2021 A A A B A 9.4 9.3 9.4 11.1 9.7 Full Build Alternative 2021 A A A B A 9.4 9.3 9.4 11.1 9.7 Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 21 Table 7. PM Peak Hour Level of Service (Continued) Scenario Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound INT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 EBFR Existing 2018 A - A A A 8.7 - 7.6 8.7 8.5 Background 2021 A - A A A 9.0 - 7.7 9.1 8.9 Full Build Proposed 2021 A - A A A 9.1 - 7.8 9.7 9.3 Full Build Alternative 2021 A - A A A 9.1 - 7.8 9.7 9.3 Turkey Creek Road at FM 60 WBFR Existing 2018 A A A A A 7.7 8.7 8.2 9.5 9.1 Background 2021 A A A B A 7.9 9.2 8.4 10.4 9.8 Full Build Proposed 2021 A A A B B 8.1 9.9 8.7 11.5 10.7 Full Build Alternative 2021 A A A B B 8.1 9.9 8.7 11.5 10.7 Turkey Creek Road at Proposed Driveway Full Build Proposed 2021 B - - - - 11.5 - - - - Full Build Alternative 2021 B - A - - - 12.0 - 8.2 - - - Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 22 RIGHT-TURN LANE ANALYSIS The City of College Station’s General Development Standards states the following: “A right-turn deceleration lane with storage length plus taper may be required for any access with a projected peak hour right-turn ingress turning volume greater than 50 vehicles per hour (vph). If the posted speed is greater than 40 mph, a right-turn deceleration lane and taper may be required for any access with a projected peak hour ingress turning volume greater than 25 vph.” – Article 7 Section 7.3.l Based on the City’s General Development Standards, a right-turn deceleration lane from HSC Parkway (or from Turkey Creek Road in the Alternative Scenario) is required as the projected right turn volumes are below the City’s threshold. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The traffic impact analysis results are summarized in the following paragraphs. CAPACITY ANALYSIS The capacity analyses for the existing conditions indicate that all intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service. The analyses for the Background 2021 conditions identified some capacity deficiencies at the intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818. These continue to exist with the Full Build scenarios. Because the traffic added to the intersection in the Full Build scenarios is less than 2% of the total traffic at the intersection, no mitigation is required. Given the current geometry of the F&B Road/FM 2818 intersection, with one eastbound lane that serves all three movements (left, through, and right), the most basic mitigation is an eastbound dedicated right-turn lane. Additional improvements can be achieved with a dedicated left-turn lane. Though the time when F&B Road will be widened is unknown at this time, it can be expected to occur in the future as the road is listed as a Minor Arterial. If these possible mitigations do not occur before then, they can be expected at least with the widening. The analyses of the full build conditions indicate that all other intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service. RIGHT-TURN ANALYSIS Based on the City’s General Development Standards, a right-turn deceleration lane is not necessary at either of the proposed access points, as the projected right turn volumes are below the City’s right-turn lane thresholds. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that a left-turn lane from HSC Parkway to Atlas Pear Drive be constructed with the proposed development to correspond with the existing eastbound left-turn lane. Operations at the intersection of F&B Road at FM 2818 should be monitored to determine when future improvements will be necessary to bring the performance of the intersection to an acceptable level. The undeveloped land along the Biomedical Corridor will lead to high growth rates in the area. This will necessitate improvements at the F&B Road/FM 2818 intersection, and possibly along the existing two-lane portion of F&B Road. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 23 CLOSING The findings of this TIA are based on evaluations of information available about the potential development of the site and various assumptions as discussed in this study. If the actual future conditions are different than the forecasts of this study, the true performance of the intersections will be different and may justify further analysis. Should any questions arise concerning this report or its analyses, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Traffic Impact Analysis – Rezoning of Loveless Tract Binkley & Barfield, Inc. 24 APPENDIX SITE EXHIBIT ...................................................................................................................... 1 PAGE TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS .................................................................................................. 6 PAGES TRIP GENERATION DATA SHEETS ...................................................................................... 4 PAGES SYNCHRO OUTPUT SHEETS Existing – 2018 ............................................................................................................... 6 PAGES Background – 2021 ......................................................................................................... 6 PAGES Full Build Proposed – 2021 ............................................................................................. 7 PAGES Full Build Alternative – 2021............................................................................................ 7 PAGES DESCRIPTION OF LEVELS OF SERVICE ................................................................................. 1 PAGE ATLAS PEAR EXTENSION TURKEY CREEK ROAD HSC PARKWAYLOVELESS TRACT REZONING LOVELESS TRACT 11.14 ACRES 307 UNITS 577 BEDROOMS Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM 13 8 2 0 12 10 6 0 37 168 15 0 14 201 12 04987:15 AM 10 9 7 1 27 18 2 1 34 241 40 0 31 221 23 06657:30 AM 13 16 14 0 19 13 4 0 45 257 58 0 74 211 35 07597:45 AM 11 10 13 0 10 11 4 0 49 218 50 0 49 210 42 1678 2600 1 0.856398:00 AM6290191520418034133185210448 2550 2 0.8399218:15 AM5590209702713733023202260503 2388 3 0.7865618:30 AM57911318903213012322164300455 2084 4 0.7684378:45 AM 8 12 4 1 10 18 3 0 16 173 27 0 15 153 19 0459 1865 5 0.9269384:00 PM 13 11 24 0 42 17 12 0 29 215 11 0 11 203 18 06064:15 PM 18 11 22 0 27 14 16 0 34 195 12 0 14 204 25 05924:30 PM 15 10 23 0 46 16 17 0 43 198 30 0 9 196 32 06354:45 PM 21 13 16 0 33 14 12 0 50 214 17 0 8 167 35 0600 2433 5 0.9578745:00 PM 33 22 39 0 75 24 36 0 46 267 29 0 13 202 41 0827 2654 4 0.8022975:15 PM 29 23 34 0 35 12 28 0 48 312 29 0 12 228 36 0826 2888 3 0.8730355:30 PM 17 13 16 0 33 17 24 0 41 312 33 0 9 203 34 0752 3005 2 0.9084045:45 PM 20 39 24 0 24 15 16 0 30 253 30 0 11 155 25 0642 3047 1 0.921115-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFFM 2818 at F&B Road3/21/2018StartTimeEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM91000000012014400317:15 AM90000000011011500277:30 AM101000000004018700407:45 AM18300000001203540063 161 5 0.6388898:00 AM6020000001201990039 169 3 0.6706358:15 AM3040000002602760048 190 1 0.7539688:30 AM60100000026011100036 186 2 0.7380958:45 AM11000000038012140039 162 4 0.843754:00 PM8390000001140211000664:15 PM22000000018024700444:30 PM90000000021109700384:45 PM82100000017022120053 201 5 0.7613645:00 PM1300000000111035160076 211 4 0.6940795:15 PM421000000312023140059 226 3 0.7434215:30 PM922000000210020170062 250 1 0.8223685:45 PM61300000019016160052 249 2 0.819079SouthboundTurkey Creek at FM 60 EB3/22/2018StartTime15-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFEastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM30107170280001030427:15 AM100031502800011120437:30 AM101074107300017160577:45 AM002041708120003215081 223 4 0.6882728:00 AM101032120060002412061 242 3 0.7469148:15 AM101061110420001913058 257 1 0.793218:30 AM20009113062000145052 252 2 0.7777788:45 AM000012212040000135048 219 5 0.8975414:00 PM3010120300900014320744:15 PM1010141902100019120604:30 PM100063903700011300704:45 PM0000140120150001932083 287 5 0.8644585:00 PM000024012031400021450119 332 4 0.6974795:15 PM00001601202600023530112 384 3 0.8067235:30 PM202017219011000019340106 420 2 0.8823535:45 PM0010181140160001732090 427 1 0.897059SouthboundTurkey Creek at FM 60 WB3/22/2018StartTime15-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFEastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM0140 0517 000 1305907:15 AM0180 04310 000 1604917:30 AM0210 06010 000 27061247:45 AM1280 0746 000 3603148 453 5 0.7652038:00 AM1260 07913 000 2406149 512 2 0.859068:15 AM2260 0612 000 1306110 531 1 0.890948:30 AM0160 0599 000 1007101 508 3 0.8523498:45 AM3170 0515 000 120896 456 4 0.7651014:00 PM4550 0326 000 5011034:15 PM3450 03923 000 6041204:30 PM2510 04016 000 11021224:45 PM 10 68 0 0 43 25 0 0 0 23 0 4173 518 4 0.7485555:00 PM4470 04423 000 1605139 554 3 0.8005785:15 PM4470 04724 000 1501138 572 2 0.826595:30 PM4480 03025 000 1702126 576 1 0.832375:45 PM4220 02718 000 140590 493 5 0.88669115-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFHSC at Atlas Pear Drive3/22/2018StartTimeEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM04004416000004010607:15 AM05106387000308030717:30 AM02301122160100012010687:45 AM021032714000101002060 259 5 0.9119728:00 AM0100023817000201312085 284 4 0.8352948:15 AM01010345200102014230101 314 3 0.7772288:30 AM01200261220000013070117 363 2 0.7756418:45 AM01200245230001014240103 406 1 0.8675214:00 PM128001162611010272101054:15 PM0180038210012035020904:30 PM220001122611140330101024:45 PM62340216230721021321111 408 5 0.9189195:00 PM53700025151000034040121 424 4 0.8760335:15 PM02100215393007023120113 447 2 0.9235545:30 PM12600012413102027011115 460 1 0.9504135:45 PM3150001221000903410095 444 3 0.917355SouthboundHSC Parkway at South Traditions Drive3/22/2018StartTime15-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFEastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn7:00 AM01690641001101200000957:15 AM016160174800708000001127:30 AM029260105400805000001327:45 AM03722020640070600000156 495 3 0.7932698:00 AM0239013780060700000136 536 1 0.8589748:15 AM01961144500130200000100 524 2 0.8397448:30 AM01713094800100500000102 494 4 0.7916678:45 AM01519075800100100000110 448 5 0.8235294:00 PM029805390060600000934:15 PM046901442001009000001304:30 PM0391202467001405000001614:45 PM039200404400100700000160 544 5 0.844725:00 PM0712304764001502300000243 694 4 0.7139925:15 PM066280694200130600000224 788 3 0.81075:30 PM048230276300130700000181 808 2 0.8312765:45 PM073270226500180300000208 856 1 0.880658SouthboundTurkey Creek Road at HSC Parkway/F&B Road3/21/2018StartTime15-min TotalHourly TotalHourly Rank PHFEastbound Westbound Northbound Land Use: 220 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Description Low-rise multifamily housing includes apartments, townhouses, and condominiums located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units and that have one or two levels (floors). Multifamily housing (mid-rise) (Land Use 221), multifamily housing (high-rise) (Land Use 222), and off-campus student apartment (Land Use 225) are related land uses. Additional Data In prior editions of Trip Generation Manual, the low-rise multifamily housing sites were further divided into rental and condominium categories. An investigation of vehicle trip data found no clear differences in trip making patterns between the rental and condominium sites within the ITE database. As more data are compiled for future editions, this land use classification can be reinvestigated. For the three sites for which both the number of residents and the number of occupied dwelling units were available, there were an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit. For the two sites for which the numbers of both total dwelling units and occupied dwelling units were available, an average of 96.2 percent of the total dwelling units were occupied. This land use included data from a wide variety of units with different sizes, price ranges, locations, and ages. Consequently, there was a wide variation in trips generated within this category. Other factors, such as geographic location and type of adjacent and nearby development, may also have had an effect on the site trip generation. Time-of-day distribution data for this land use are presented in Appendix A. For the 10 general urban/suburban sites with data, the overall highest vehicle volumes during the AM and PM on a weekday were counted between 7:15 and 8:15 a.m. and 4:45 and 5:45 p.m., respectively. For the one site with Saturday data, the overall highest vehicle volume was counted between 9:45 and 10:45 a.m. For the one site with Sunday data, the overall highest vehicle volume was counted between 11:45 a.m. and 12:45 p.m. For the one dense multi-use urban site with 24-hour count data, the overall highest vehicle volumes during the AM and PM on a weekday were counted between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. and 6:15 and 7:15 p.m., respectively. For the three sites for which data were provided for both occupied dwelling units and residents, there was an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit. The average numbers of person trips per vehicle trip at the five general urban/suburban sites at which both person trip and vehicle trip data were collected were as follows: • 1.13 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 7 and 9 a.m. • 1.21 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m. 29Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Residential (Land Uses 200–299) The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in British Columbia (CAN), California, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ontario, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington. It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the number of trips generated by a residential site. Many of the studies included in this land use did not indicate the total number of bedrooms. To assist in the future analysis of this land use, it is important that this information be collected and included in trip generation data submissions. Source Numbers 168, 187, 188, 204, 211, 300, 305, 306, 319, 320, 321, 357, 390, 412, 418, 525, 530, 571, 579, 583, 864, 868, 869, 870, 896, 903, 918, 946, 947, 948, 951 30 Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Residential (Land Uses 200–299) Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) (220) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 42 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 199 Directional Distribution: 23% entering, 77% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.46 0.18 - 0.74 0.12 Data Plot and Equation T = Trip EndsX = Number of Dwelling Units Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.95 Ln(X) - 0.51 Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 200 400 6000 100 200 300 R²= 0.90 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) (220) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 50 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 187 Directional Distribution: 63% entering, 37% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.56 0.18 - 1.25 0.16 Data Plot and Equation T = Trip EndsX = Number of Dwelling Units Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.89 Ln(X) - 0.02 R²= 0.86 Trip Generation Manual,10th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 200 400 6000 100 200 300 400 500 Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 39 33 46 68 48 17 170 692 175 179 808 150Future Volume (vph) 39 33 46 68 48 17 170 692 175 179 808 150Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1736 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3458 0Flt Permitted 0.984 0.950 0.160 0.284Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1736 0 1770 1863 1583 298 3539 1583 529 3458 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 131 203 21Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 136 0 79 56 20 198 805 203 208 1114 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 22.6 22.6 22.6 22.6 23.2 59.3 20.5 56.6Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Act Effct Green (s) 12.3 10.2 10.2 104.8 67.6 55.8 104.8 66.0 55.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.10 0.10 1.00 0.65 0.53 1.00 0.63 0.52v/c Ratio 0.61 0.46 0.31 0.01 0.55 0.43 0.13 0.45 0.61Control Delay 50.4 56.4 51.5 0.0 14.2 17.8 0.2 11.3 21.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 50.4 56.4 51.5 0.0 14.2 17.8 0.2 11.3 21.7LOS D EDABBABCApproach Delay 50.4 47.4 14.3 20.0Approach LOS D D B CQueue Length 50th (ft) 74 52 36 0 47 173 0 49 270Queue Length 95th (ft) 140 104 79 0 93 270 0 97 427Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 322 310 327 1583 469 1884 1583 543 1825Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.25 0.17 0.01 0.42 0.43 0.13 0.38 0.61Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 104.8Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.61Intersection Signal Delay: 20.5 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 10.6Intersection LOS BMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 110 79 60 278 70 26Future Vol, veh/h 110 79 60 278 70 26Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 128 92 70 323 81 30Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.5 12.2 9.4HCM LOS A B ALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 73% 0% 0% 18%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 82%Vol Right, % 27% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 96 110 79 338LT Vol 70 0 0 60Through Vol 0 110 0 278RT Vol 26 0 79 0Lane Flow Rate 112 128 92 393Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.164 0.183 0.113 0.503Departure Headway (Hd) 5.279 5.149 4.444 4.607Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 676 696 804 782Service Time 3.331 2.89 2.185 2.642HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.166 0.184 0.114 0.503HCM Control Delay 9.4 9 7.8 12.2HCM Lane LOSAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.7 0.4 2.9 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 4 112 0 0 350 31 0 0 0 100 0 21Future Vol, veh/h 4 112 0 0 350 31 0 0 0 100 0 21Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 150 - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 126 0 0 393 35 0 0 0 112 0 24Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 428 0 0 126 0 0 331 562 63 482 545 214 Stage 1 - - - - - - 134 134 - 411 411 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 197 428 - 71 134 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1128 - - 1458 - - 599 434 988 467 444 791 Stage 1 - - - - - - 855 785 - 589 593 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 786 583 - 931 785 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1128 - - 1458 - - 580 432 988 466 442 791Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 580 432 - 466 442 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 852 782 - 587 593 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 763 583 - 928 782 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 0 14.8HCM LOS A BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) - 1128 - - 1458 - - 502HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.004-----0.271HCM Control Delay (s) 0 8.2 - - 0 - - 14.8HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 - - 0 - - 1.1Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.7Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 44 9 85 189 82 2 0 16 54 5 16Future Vol, veh/h 0 44 9 85 189 82 2 0 16 54 5 16Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 0 51 10 98 217 94 2 0 18 62 6 18Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 8.1 8.7 8 9.5HCM LOSAAAALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 11% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 72%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 100% 62% 0% 100% 43% 7%Vol Right, % 89% 0% 0% 38% 0% 0% 57% 21%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 18 0 29 24 85 126 145 75LT Vol 2000850054Through Vol 0 0 29 15 0 126 63 5RT Vol 16009008216Lane Flow Rate 21 0 34 27 98 145 167 86Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.029 0 0.049 0.037 0.147 0.197 0.208 0.139Departure Headway (Hd) 5.107 5.214 5.214 4.946 5.4 4.898 4.501 5.791Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 700 0 686 723 665 734 798 620Service Time 2.847 2.949 2.949 2.681 3.124 2.622 2.224 3.524HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 0 0.05 0.037 0.147 0.198 0.209 0.139HCM Control Delay 8 7.9 8.2 7.9 9.1 8.8 8.4 9.5HCM Lane LOS A NAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.5 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.6Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 37460000414105260Future Vol, veh/h 37460000414105260Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 49580000519140350Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.6 7.3 8.8HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 79% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 9% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 13% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 4 14 47 105 13 13LT Vol 0 0 37 105 0 0Through Vol40401313RT Vol 0146000Lane Flow Rate 5 19 63 140 17 17Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.008 0.023 0.093 0.201 0.022 0.014Departure Headway (Hd) 5.084 4.382 5.317 5.159 4.658 2.922Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 707 821 677 689 760 1200Service Time 2.791 2.089 3.021 2.94 2.438 0.701HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.023 0.093 0.203 0.022 0.014HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.2 8.6 9.3 7.5 5.7HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.1 0Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRExisting (2018)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.1Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 5 20 8 73 19 23 0 0 98 56Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 5 20 8 73 19 23 0 0 98 56Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 0 6 25 10 92 24 29 0 0 124 71Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.4 7.8 8.1 8.4HCM LOS A A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 38% 20% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 8% 64%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 62% 72% 36%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 19 23 8 101 154LT Vol 19 0 3 20 0Through Vol 0 23 0 8 98RT Vol 0057356Lane Flow Rate 24 29 10 128 195Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.037 0.04 0.012 0.146 0.222Departure Headway (Hd) 5.492 4.99 4.334 4.113 4.098Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 656 722 829 877 862Service Time 3.192 2.69 2.341 2.115 2.193HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.037 0.04 0.012 0.146 0.226HCM Control Delay 8.4 7.9 7.4 7.8 8.4HCM Lane LOSAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.1 0 0.5 0.8 Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 121 97 121 167 68 104 167 1144 121 45 788 140Future Volume (vph) 121 97 121 167 68 104 167 1144 121 45 788 140Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1741 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3458 0Flt Permitted 0.982 0.950 0.100 0.092Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1741 0 1770 1863 1583 186 3539 1583 171 3458 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 20 236 236 17Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 369 0 182 74 113 182 1243 132 49 1009 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 23.0 23.0 18.0 55.0 13.0 50.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 26.5 15.2 15.2 123.7 57.6 49.7 123.7 47.0 42.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.12 0.12 1.00 0.47 0.40 1.00 0.38 0.34v/c Ratio 0.95 0.84 0.32 0.07 0.85 0.87 0.08 0.38 0.85Control Delay 81.1 83.7 53.8 0.1 57.9 43.4 0.1 27.1 45.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 81.1 83.7 53.8 0.1 57.9 43.4 0.1 27.1 45.7LOS F F D A E D A C DApproach Delay 81.1 52.1 41.4 44.9Approach LOS F D D DQueue Length 50th (ft) 282 145 55 0 86 504 0 21 394Queue Length 95th (ft) #475 #265 104 0 #219 #649 0 43 483Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 395 228 241 1583 214 1422 1583 129 1185Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.80 0.31 0.07 0.85 0.87 0.08 0.38 0.85Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 123.7Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.95Intersection Signal Delay: 48.1 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 80.8% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 13.5Intersection LOS BMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 288 139 165 240 67 39Future Vol, veh/h 288 139 165 240 67 39Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 327 158 188 273 76 44Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 11.5 16.4 10.4HCM LOS B C BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 63% 0% 0% 41%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 59%Vol Right, % 37% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 106 288 139 405LT Vol 67 0 0 165Through Vol 0 288 0 240RT Vol 39 0 139 0Lane Flow Rate 120 327 158 460Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.199 0.48 0.201 0.635Departure Headway (Hd) 5.956 5.284 4.577 4.969Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 606 677 776 723Service Time 3.956 3.063 2.356 3.043HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.198 0.483 0.204 0.636HCM Control Delay 10.4 12.9 8.5 16.4HCM Lane LOS B B A CHCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 2.6 0.7 4.6 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.1Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 22 278 0 0 178 97 0 0 0 71 0 12Future Vol, veh/h 22 278 0 0 178 97 0 0 0 71 0 12Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 150 - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 27 335 0 0 214 117 0 0 0 86 0 14Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 331 0 0 335 0 0 496 720 168 495 662 166 Stage 1 - - - - - - 389 389 - 273 273 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 107 331 - 222 389 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1225 - - 1221 - - 457 352 847 457 381 849 Stage 1 - - - - - - 606 607 - 710 683 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 887 644 - 760 607 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1225 - - 1221 - - 441 344 847 449 373 849Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 441 344 - 449 373 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 593 594 - 694 683 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 872 644 - 743 594 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 0 14.4HCM LOS A BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) - 1225 - - 1221 - - 482HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.022-----0.207HCM Control Delay (s) 0 8 - - 0 - - 14.4HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.1 - - 0 - - 0.8Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 12 107 6 18 68 118 16 2 78 105 4 9Future Vol, veh/h 12 107 6 18 68 118 16 2 78 105 4 9Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 13 116 7 20 74 128 17 2 85 114 4 10Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.7 8.7 10.2HCM LOSAAABLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 17% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 89%Vol Thru, % 2% 0% 100% 86% 0% 100% 16% 3%Vol Right, % 81% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 84% 8%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 96 12 71 42 18 45 141 118LT Vol 16 12 0 0 18 0 0 105Through Vol 2 0 71 36 0 45 23 4RT Vol 78006001189Lane Flow Rate 104 13 78 45 20 49 153 128Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.146 0.021 0.116 0.067 0.032 0.073 0.201 0.208Departure Headway (Hd) 5.023 5.913 5.408 5.306 5.839 5.334 4.742 5.846Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 710 603 660 672 611 669 754 612Service Time 2.785 3.672 3.167 3.065 3.592 3.087 2.493 3.606HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.146 0.022 0.118 0.067 0.033 0.073 0.203 0.209HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.4 8.8 8.5 8.7 10.2HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.8 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.5Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 34640000740138590Future Vol, veh/h 34640000740138590Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 41750000949168720Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.7 7.6 8.7HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 77% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 14% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 9% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 7 40 44 138 30 30LT Vol 0 0 34 138 0 0Through Vol70603030RT Vol 0404000Lane Flow Rate 9 49 54 168 36 36Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.012 0.061 0.083 0.241 0.047 0.029Departure Headway (Hd) 5.17 4.468 5.539 5.159 4.659 2.922Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 695 805 650 688 759 1199Service Time 2.879 2.177 3.244 2.944 2.443 0.705HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 0.061 0.083 0.244 0.047 0.03HCM Control Delay 7.9 7.5 8.7 9.6 7.7 5.8HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.3 0.9 0.1 0.1Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRExisting (2018)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.1Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 75 3 65 7 36 0 0 118 164Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 75 3 65 7 36 0 0 118 164Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 0 3 83 3 72 8 40 0 0 131 182Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.7 8.7 8.2 9.5HCM LOS A A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 40% 52% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 2% 42%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 60% 45% 58%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 7 36 5 143 282LT Vol 7 0 2 75 0Through Vol 0 36 0 3 118RT Vol 00365164Lane Flow Rate 8 40 6 159 313Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.012 0.057 0.007 0.201 0.36Departure Headway (Hd) 5.672 5.169 4.645 4.563 4.141Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 632 694 770 788 871Service Time 3.396 2.892 2.676 2.586 2.156HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 0.058 0.008 0.202 0.359HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.2 7.7 8.7 9.5HCM Lane LOSAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0 0.7 1.6 Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 45 38 53 79 56 20 197 801 203 207 935 174Future Volume (vph) 45 38 53 79 56 20 197 801 203 207 935 174Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1736 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3454 0Flt Permitted 0.984 0.950 0.092 0.229Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1736 0 1770 1863 1583 171 3539 1583 427 3454 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 21 236 236 22Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 158 0 92 65 23 229 931 236 241 1289 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 20.0 20.0 16.0 16.0 25.0 63.0 26.0 64.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 12.3 8.7 8.7 121.4 71.9 57.7 121.4 68.7 56.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.59 0.48 1.00 0.57 0.46v/c Ratio 0.81 0.73 0.49 0.01 0.79 0.55 0.15 0.63 0.80Control Delay 76.9 87.2 68.2 0.0 45.4 24.8 0.2 17.9 32.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 76.9 87.2 68.2 0.0 45.4 24.8 0.2 17.9 32.8LOS E FEADCABCApproach Delay 76.9 69.2 24.0 30.5Approach LOS E E C CQueue Length 50th (ft) 109 74 51 0 105 270 0 74 457Queue Length 95th (ft) #205 #148 95 0 188 338 0 105 520Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 204 131 138 1583 329 1681 1583 459 1607Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.77 0.70 0.47 0.01 0.70 0.55 0.15 0.53 0.80Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 121.4Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.81Intersection Signal Delay: 32.1 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 75.9% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 12.1Intersection LOS BMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 127 91 69 322 81 30Future Vol, veh/h 127 91 69 322 81 30Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 148 106 80 374 94 35Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.9 14.5 9.9HCM LOS A B ALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 73% 0% 0% 18%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 82%Vol Right, % 27% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 111 127 91 391LT Vol 81 0 0 69Through Vol 0 127 0 322RT Vol 30 0 91 0Lane Flow Rate 129 148 106 455Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.197 0.216 0.134 0.594Departure Headway (Hd) 5.491 5.272 4.566 4.706Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 649 678 780 764Service Time 3.562 3.03 2.323 2.753HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.199 0.218 0.136 0.596HCM Control Delay 9.9 9.5 8 14.5HCM Lane LOSAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.8 0.5 4 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3.5Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 5 130 0 0 405 36 0 0 0 116 0 24Future Vol, veh/h 5 130 0 0 405 36 0 0 0 116 0 24Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - - - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 6 146 0 0 455 40 0 0 0 130 0 27Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 495 0 0 146 0 0 386 653 73 560 633 248 Stage 1 - - - - - - 158 158 - 475 475 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 228 495 - 85 158 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1065 - - 1434 - - 547 385 974 411 395 752 Stage 1 - - - - - - 828 766 - 539 556 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 754 544 - 913 766 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1065 - - 1434 - - 525 383 974 409 393 752Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 525 383 - 409 393 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 823 761 - 536 556 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 727 544 - 908 761 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 0 17.5HCM LOS A CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) - 1065 - - 1434 - - 444HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.005-----0.354HCM Control Delay (s) 0 8.4 - - 0 - - 17.5HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 - - 0 - - 1.6Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.1Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 51 10 98 219 95 2 0 19 63 6 19Future Vol, veh/h 0 51 10 98 219 95 2 0 19 63 6 19Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 0 59 11 113 252 109 2 0 22 72 7 22Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 8.3 9.1 8.2 9.9HCM LOSAAAALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 10% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 72%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 100% 63% 0% 100% 43% 7%Vol Right, % 90% 0% 0% 37% 0% 0% 57% 22%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 21 0 34 27 98 146 168 88LT Vol 2000980063Through Vol 0 0 34 17 0 146 73 6RT Vol 19 0 0 10 0 0 95 19Lane Flow Rate 24 0 39 31 113 168 193 101Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.035 0 0.058 0.044 0.171 0.232 0.245 0.167Departure Headway (Hd) 5.268 5.351 5.351 5.09 5.473 4.971 4.573 5.942Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 677 0 667 701 656 722 786 603Service Time 3.02 3.098 3.098 2.836 3.203 2.701 2.303 3.686HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 0 0.058 0.044 0.172 0.233 0.246 0.167HCM Control Delay 8.2 8.1 8.4 8.1 9.3 9.2 8.8 9.9HCM Lane LOS A NAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.9 1 0.6 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.8Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 43570000516122300Future Vol, veh/h 43570000516122300Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 57790000721163400Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.8 7.4 9HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 78% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 9% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 13% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 5 16 55 122 15 15LT Vol 0 0 43 122 0 0Through Vol50501515RT Vol 0167000Lane Flow Rate 7 21 73 163 20 20Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.01 0.027 0.11 0.234 0.026 0.016Departure Headway (Hd) 5.176 4.474 5.392 5.179 4.678 2.942Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 694 803 668 685 754 1185Service Time 2.886 2.183 3.097 2.978 2.477 0.738HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 0.026 0.109 0.238 0.027 0.017HCM Control Delay 7.9 7.3 8.8 9.6 7.6 5.8HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.1 0Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRBackground (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.5Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 6 23 9 85 22 27 0 0 113 65Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 6 23 9 85 22 27 0 0 113 65Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 0 8 29 11 108 28 34 0 0 143 82Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.5 8.1 8.2 8.8HCM LOS A A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 33% 20% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 8% 63%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 67% 73% 37%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 22 27 9 117 178LT Vol 22 0 3 23 0Through Vol 0 27 0 9 113RT Vol 0068565Lane Flow Rate 28 34 11 148 225Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.043 0.048 0.014 0.173 0.266Departure Headway (Hd) 5.562 5.059 4.422 4.204 4.245Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 645 709 810 855 847Service Time 3.284 2.781 2.446 2.221 2.262HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 0.048 0.014 0.173 0.266HCM Control Delay 8.5 8 7.5 8.1 8.8HCM Lane LOSAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.2 0 0.6 1.1 Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/F&B RoadBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 140 112 140 193 79 120 193 1324 140 52 912 162Future Volume (vph) 140 112 140 193 79 120 193 1324 140 52 912 162Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1741 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3458 0Flt Permitted 0.982 0.950 0.078 0.090Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1741 0 1770 1863 1583 145 3539 1583 168 3458 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 20 236 236 18Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 426 0 210 86 130 210 1439 152 57 1167 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 34.0 34.0 21.0 21.0 19.0 57.0 13.0 51.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 27.0 14.0 14.0 125.0 60.4 51.6 125.0 48.0 43.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.48 0.41 1.00 0.38 0.34v/c Ratio 1.09 1.06 0.41 0.08 0.99 0.98 0.10 0.45 0.97Control Delay 115.5 133.5 58.3 0.1 91.8 57.4 0.1 29.1 60.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 115.5 133.5 58.3 0.1 91.8 57.4 0.1 29.1 60.0LOS F F E A F E A C EApproach Delay 115.5 77.6 56.5 58.6Approach LOS F E E EQueue Length 50th (ft) ~374 ~186 66 0 123 ~659 0 23 481Queue Length 95th (ft) #581 #345 120 0 #286 #799 0 47 #634Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 391 198 208 1583 212 1461 1583 128 1201Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 1.09 1.06 0.41 0.08 0.99 0.98 0.10 0.45 0.97Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 125Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.09Intersection Signal Delay: 66.0 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 89.1% ICU Level of Service EAnalysis Period (min) 15~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/F&B RoadLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 17.8Intersection LOS CMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 333 161 191 278 78 45Future Vol, veh/h 333 161 191 278 78 45Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 378 183 217 316 89 51Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 13.6 23.9 11.4HCM LOS B C BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 63% 0% 0% 41%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 59%Vol Right, % 37% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 123 333 161 469LT Vol 78 0 0 191Through Vol 0 333 0 278RT Vol 45 0 161 0Lane Flow Rate 140 378 183 533Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.244 0.583 0.247 0.775Departure Headway (Hd) 6.28 5.546 4.852 5.237Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 572 651 743 693Service Time 4.322 3.273 2.565 3.239HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.245 0.581 0.246 0.769HCM Control Delay 11.4 15.8 9.2 23.9HCM Lane LOS B C A CHCM 95th-tile Q 1 3.8 1 7.5 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.4Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 25 322 0 0 206 112 0 0 0 82 0 14Future Vol, veh/h 25 322 0 0 206 112 0 0 0 82 0 14Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 150 - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 30 388 0 0 248 135 0 0 0 99 0 17Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 383 0 0 388 0 0 572 831 194 570 764 192 Stage 1 - - - - - - 448 448 - 316 316 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 124 383 - 254 448 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1167 - - 403 304 815 404 332 817 Stage 1 - - - - - - 560 571 - 670 654 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 867 610 - 728 571 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1167 - - 387 296 815 396 323 817Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 387 296 - 396 323 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 545 556 - 653 654 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 849 610 - 709 556 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 0 16.5HCM LOS A CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) - 1172 - - 1167 - - 428HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.026-----0.27HCM Control Delay (s) 0 8.2 - - 0 - - 16.5HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.1 - - 0 - - 1.1Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.5Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 14 124 7 21 79 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Future Vol, veh/h 14 124 7 21 79 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 15 135 8 23 86 149 21 2 98 133 5 11Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 9.1 9.1 9.1 10.8HCM LOSAAABLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 17% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 89%Vol Thru, % 2% 0% 100% 86% 0% 100% 16% 4%Vol Right, % 81% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 84% 7%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 111 14 83 48 21 53 163 137LT Vol 19 14 0 0 21 0 0 122Through Vol 2 0 83 41 0 53 26 5RT Vol 900070013710Lane Flow Rate 121 15 90 53 23 57 178 149Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.174 0.026 0.139 0.08 0.038 0.087 0.241 0.249Departure Headway (Hd) 5.206 6.085 5.579 5.476 5.993 5.487 4.893 6.016Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 682 584 637 648 594 648 728 593Service Time 2.994 3.868 3.361 3.259 3.767 3.261 2.667 3.799HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.177 0.026 0.141 0.082 0.039 0.088 0.245 0.251HCM Control Delay 9.1 9 9.3 8.7 9 8.8 9.2 10.8HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.9 1 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.9Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 39750000846160680Future Vol, veh/h 39750000846160680Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 489600001056195830Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 9 7.7 9.1HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 76% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 14% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 10% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 46 51 160 34 34LT Vol 0 0 39 160 0 0Through Vol80703434RT Vol 0465000Lane Flow Rate 10 56 62 195 41 41Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.014 0.071 0.097 0.286 0.055 0.034Departure Headway (Hd) 5.274 4.572 5.635 5.28 4.779 2.941Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 680 785 638 685 754 1185Service Time 2.992 2.289 3.351 2.98 2.479 0.74HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.071 0.097 0.285 0.054 0.035HCM Control Delay 8.1 7.6 9 10.1 7.8 5.8HCM Lane LOSAAABAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.3 1.2 0.2 0.1Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRBackground (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.8Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 75 8 42 0 0 137 190Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 75 8 42 0 0 137 190Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 0 3 97 3 83 9 47 0 0 152 211Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.9 9.2 8.4 10.4HCM LOS A A A BLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 40% 53% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 2% 42%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 60% 45% 58%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 42 5 165 327LT Vol 8 0 2 87 0Through Vol 0 42 0 3 137RT Vol 00375190Lane Flow Rate 9 47 6 183 363Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.014 0.069 0.007 0.239 0.426Departure Headway (Hd) 5.792 5.288 4.825 4.699 4.22Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 618 677 739 763 854Service Time 3.529 3.025 2.875 2.734 2.245HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.069 0.008 0.24 0.425HCM Control Delay 8.6 8.4 7.9 9.2 10.4HCM Lane LOSAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0 0.9 2.2 Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 74 44 53 78 57 19 196 801 202 207 935 182Future Volume (vph) 74 44 53 78 57 19 196 801 202 207 935 182Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1747 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3454 0Flt Permitted 0.979 0.950 0.078 0.217Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1747 0 1770 1863 1583 145 3539 1583 404 3454 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 15 236 236 23Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 199 0 91 66 22 228 931 235 241 1299 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 16.0 16.0 24.0 60.0 26.0 62.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 15.3 8.7 8.7 122.4 69.5 55.2 122.4 67.2 54.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.57 0.45 1.00 0.55 0.44v/c Ratio 0.86 0.72 0.50 0.01 0.84 0.58 0.15 0.65 0.84Control Delay 81.6 87.2 69.1 0.0 56.3 27.5 0.2 20.2 36.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 81.6 87.2 69.1 0.0 56.3 27.5 0.2 20.2 36.7LOS F FEAECACDApproach Delay 81.6 69.8 27.6 34.1Approach LOS F E C CQueue Length 50th (ft) 148 73 52 0 121 285 0 80 485Queue Length 95th (ft) #260 #147 97 0 #228 356 0 113 543Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 241 130 137 1583 296 1597 1583 438 1538Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.83 0.70 0.48 0.01 0.77 0.58 0.15 0.55 0.84Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 122.4Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.86Intersection Signal Delay: 36.1 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 78.0% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 13Intersection LOS BMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 133 97 69 332 96 59Future Vol, veh/h 133 97 69 332 96 59Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 155 113 80 386 112 69Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 9.3 16 10.7HCM LOS A C BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 62% 0% 0% 17%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 83%Vol Right, % 38% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 155 133 97 401LT Vol 96 0 0 69Through Vol 0 133 0 332RT Vol 59 0 97 0Lane Flow Rate 180 155 113 466Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.275 0.234 0.149 0.631Departure Headway (Hd) 5.483 5.458 4.751 4.871Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 649 651 746 737Service Time 3.578 3.246 2.538 2.944HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.277 0.238 0.151 0.632HCM Control Delay 10.7 9.9 8.4 16HCM Lane LOS B A A CHCM 95th-tile Q 1.1 0.9 0.5 4.5 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4.5Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 4 129 8 26 405 35 29 0 11 115 0 24Future Vol, veh/h 4 129 8 26 405 35 29 0 11 115 0 24Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - - - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 145 9 29 455 39 33 0 12 129 0 27Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 494 0 0 154 0 0 444 710 77 614 695 247 Stage 1 - - - - - - 158 158 - 533 533 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 286 552 - 81 162 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1066 - - 1424 - - 497 357 968 376 364 753 Stage 1 - - - - - - 828 766 - 498 523 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 697 513 - 918 763 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1066 - - 1424 - - 468 346 968 362 352 753Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 468 346 - 362 352 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 825 763 - 496 508 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 653 499 - 903 760 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0.5 12.2 19.8HCM LOS B CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 545 1066 - - 1424 - - 398HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 0.004 - - 0.021 - - 0.392HCM Control Delay (s) 12.2 8.4 - - 7.6 0.1 - 19.8HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 1.8Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.2Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 59 10 98 248 94 2 0 18 62 5 18Future Vol, veh/h 0 59 10 98 248 94 2 0 18 62 5 18Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 0 68 11 113 285 108 2 0 21 71 6 21Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 8.4 9.2 8.3 10HCM LOSAAAALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 10% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 73%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 100% 66% 0% 100% 47% 6%Vol Right, % 90% 0% 0% 34% 0% 0% 53% 21%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 20 0 39 30 98 165 177 85LT Vol 2000980062Through Vol 0 0 39 20 0 165 83 5RT Vol 18 0 0 10 0 0 94 18Lane Flow Rate 23 0 45 34 113 190 203 98Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.034 0 0.067 0.049 0.171 0.262 0.259 0.164Departure Headway (Hd) 5.35 5.37 5.37 5.133 5.471 4.969 4.595 6.028Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 666 0 665 695 656 722 782 594Service Time 3.108 3.121 3.121 2.884 3.205 2.703 2.328 3.777HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 0 0.068 0.049 0.172 0.263 0.26 0.165HCM Control Delay 8.3 8.1 8.5 8.2 9.3 9.5 8.9 10HCM Lane LOS A NAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0 0.2 0.2 0.6 1 1 0.6 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.7Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 42460000416174300Future Vol, veh/h 42460000416174300Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 56580000521232400Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 9 7.6 10.1HCM LOS A A BLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 81% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 8% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 12% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 4 16 52 174 15 15LT Vol 0 0 42 174 0 0Through Vol40401515RT Vol 0166000Lane Flow Rate 5 21 69 232 20 20Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.008 0.027 0.108 0.34 0.026 0.016Departure Headway (Hd) 5.314 4.612 5.588 5.273 4.672 2.935Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 675 777 643 687 755 1187Service Time 3.036 2.333 3.304 2.973 2.471 0.733HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.027 0.107 0.338 0.026 0.017HCM Control Delay 8.1 7.5 9 10.7 7.6 5.8HCM Lane LOSAAABAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.1 0.4 1.5 0.1 0Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.1Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 5 23 9 100 21 26 0 0 166 64Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 5 23 9 100 21 26 0 0 166 64Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 0 6 29 11 127 27 33 0 0 210 81Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.7 8.4 8.4 9.7HCM LOS A A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 38% 17% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 7% 72%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 62% 76% 28%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 21 26 8 132 230LT Vol 21 0 3 23 0Through Vol 0 26 0 9 166RT Vol 0 0 5 100 64Lane Flow Rate 27 33 10 167 291Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.042 0.047 0.013 0.201 0.351Departure Headway (Hd) 5.672 5.168 4.641 4.332 4.344Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 632 693 771 829 830Service Time 3.402 2.899 2.673 2.354 2.367HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 0.048 0.013 0.201 0.351HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.2 7.7 8.4 9.7HCM Lane LOSAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.1 0 0.7 1.6 Loveless Tract TIA 7: Turkey Creek Road & Proposed DrivewayFull Build (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/06/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 29 47 0 130 184 0Future Vol, veh/h 29 47 0 130 184 0Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 32 51 0 141 200 0Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 341 200 - 0 - 0 Stage 1 200 - - - - - Stage 2 141 - - - - -Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 655 841 0 - - 0 Stage 1 834 - 0 - - 0 Stage 2 886 - 0 - - 0Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 655 841 - - - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 655 - - - - - Stage 1 834 - - - - - Stage 2 886 - - - - -Approach EB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 10.3 0 0HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBTCapacity (veh/h) - 759 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.109 -HCM Control Delay (s) - 10.3 -HCM Lane LOS - B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.4 -Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F&B RoadFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 157 116 140 193 85 120 193 1324 140 52 912 192Future Volume (vph) 157 116 140 193 85 120 193 1324 140 52 912 192Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1743 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3447 0Flt Permitted 0.981 0.950 0.078 0.088Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1743 0 1770 1863 1583 145 3539 1583 164 3447 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 19 236 236 22Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 449 0 210 92 130 210 1439 152 57 1200 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 17.0 57.0 12.0 52.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 28.0 14.0 14.0 125.0 58.6 51.4 125.0 48.0 44.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.47 0.41 1.00 0.38 0.35v/c Ratio 1.11 1.06 0.44 0.08 1.14 0.99 0.10 0.50 0.98Control Delay 120.5 133.5 59.2 0.1 137.9 58.3 0.1 33.8 60.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 120.5 133.5 59.2 0.1 137.9 58.3 0.1 33.8 60.4LOS F F E A F E A C EApproach Delay 120.5 77.5 62.7 59.2Approach LOS F E E EQueue Length 50th (ft) ~403 ~186 71 0 ~150 ~659 0 24 494Queue Length 95th (ft) #613 #345 127 0 #310 #799 0 48 #651Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 405 198 208 1583 185 1455 1583 114 1227Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 1.11 1.06 0.44 0.08 1.14 0.99 0.10 0.50 0.98Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 125Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.14Intersection Signal Delay: 69.8 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 91.2% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F&B Road Loveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F&B RoadFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 24.7Intersection LOS CMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 337 164 191 313 131 62Future Vol, veh/h 337 164 191 313 131 62Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 383 186 217 356 149 70Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 16 37.5 13.9HCM LOS C E BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 68% 0% 0% 38%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 62%Vol Right, % 32% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 193 337 164 504LT Vol 131 0 0 191Through Vol 0 337 0 313RT Vol 62 0 164 0Lane Flow Rate 219 383 186 573Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.398 0.639 0.274 0.89Departure Headway (Hd) 6.538 6.008 5.297 5.594Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 548 601 677 647Service Time 4.601 3.761 3.049 3.639HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.4 0.637 0.275 0.886HCM Control Delay 13.9 18.9 10.1 37.5HCM Lane LOS B C B EHCM 95th-tile Q 1.9 4.5 1.1 10.9Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4.3Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 25 322 29 88 206 112 17 0 7 82 0 14Future Vol, veh/h 25 322 29 88 206 112 17 0 7 82 0 14Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 00000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 150--------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 22222222Mvmt Flow 30 388 35 106 248 135 20 0 8 99 0 17Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 383 0 0 423 0 0 802 1061 212 782 1011 192 Stage 1 ------466466-528528- Stage 2 ------336595-254483-Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.545.54-6.545.54-Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.545.54-6.545.54-Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1133 - - 275 222 793 284 238 817 Stage 1 ------546561-502526- Stage 2 ------652491-728551-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1133 - - 245 196 793 256 210 817Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------245196-256210- Stage 1 ------532546-489477- Stage 2 ------579445-702537-Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.5 1.8 17.9 26.1HCM LOS C DMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 307 1172 - - 1133 - - 284HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 0.026 - - 0.094 - - 0.407HCM Control Delay (s) 17.9 8.2 - - 8.5 - - 26.1HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - DHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0.1 - - 0.3 - - 1.9 Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.7Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 14 153 7 21 96 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Future Vol, veh/h 14 153 7 21 96 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 15 166 8 23 104 149 21 2 98 133 5 11Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 9.4 9.3 9.4 11.1HCM LOSAAABLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 17% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 89%Vol Thru, % 2% 0% 100% 88% 0% 100% 19% 4%Vol Right, % 81% 0% 0% 12% 0% 0% 81% 7%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 111 14 102 58 21 64 169 137LT Vol 19 14 0 0 21 0 0 122Through Vol 2 0 102 51 0 64 32 5RT Vol 900070013710Lane Flow Rate 121 15 111 63 23 70 184 149Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.182 0.026 0.176 0.099 0.039 0.109 0.258 0.258Departure Headway (Hd) 5.433 6.231 5.724 5.638 6.145 5.639 5.064 6.234Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 661 577 630 639 586 639 713 578Service Time 3.158 3.938 3.431 3.345 3.849 3.343 2.768 3.958HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.183 0.026 0.176 0.099 0.039 0.11 0.258 0.258HCM Control Delay 9.4 9.1 9.7 9 9.1 9 9.5 11.1HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.4 1 1Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.3Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 39750000846191680Future Vol, veh/h 39750000846191680Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 489600001056233830Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 9.1 7.8 9.7HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 76% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 14% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 10% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 46 51 191 34 34LT Vol 0 0 39 191 0 0Through Vol80703434RT Vol 0465000Lane Flow Rate 10 56 62 233 41 41Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.015 0.072 0.099 0.342 0.055 0.035Departure Headway (Hd) 5.354 4.651 5.729 5.286 4.784 3.046Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 670 771 627 685 753 1183Service Time 3.078 2.375 3.452 2.986 2.484 0.746HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.073 0.099 0.34 0.054 0.035HCM Control Delay 8.2 7.7 9.1 10.7 7.8 5.9HCM Lane LOSAAABAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.3 1.5 0.2 0.1 Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 10.7Intersection LOS BMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 128 8 42 0 0 168 190Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 128 8 42 0 0 168 190Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 0 3 97 3 142 9 47 0 0 187 211Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 8.1 9.9 8.7 11.5HCM LOS A A A BLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 40% 40% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 1% 47%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 60% 59% 53%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 42 5 218 358LT Vol 8 0 2 87 0Through Vol 0 42 0 3 168RT Vol 0 0 3 128 190Lane Flow Rate 9 47 6 242 398Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.015 0.071 0.008 0.316 0.485Departure Headway (Hd) 5.993 5.488 5.013 4.696 4.392Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 595 650 708 763 819Service Time 3.754 3.248 3.085 2.745 2.434HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.072 0.008 0.317 0.486HCM Control Delay 8.8 8.7 8.1 9.9 11.5HCM Lane LOSAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0 1.4 2.7Loveless Tract TIA 7: Turkey Creek Road & Proposed DrivewayFull Build (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 0.9Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 17 28 0 172 330 0Future Vol, veh/h 17 28 0 172 330 0Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0-----Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 18 30 0 187 359 0Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 546 359 - 0 - 0 Stage 1 359----- Stage 2 187-----Critical Hdwy 6.426.22----Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318----Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 499 685 0 - - 0 Stage 1 707 - 0 - - 0 Stage 2 845 - 0 - - 0Platoon blocked, % - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 499 685----Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 499----- Stage 1 707----- Stage 2 845-----Approach EB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 11.5 0 0HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBTCapacity (veh/h) - 600 -HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.082 -HCM Control Delay (s) - 11.5 -HCM Lane LOS - B -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.3 - Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 74 44 53 78 57 19 196 801 202 207 935 182Future Volume (vph) 74 44 53 78 57 19 196 801 202 207 935 182Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1747 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3454 0Flt Permitted 0.979 0.950 0.078 0.217Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1747 0 1770 1863 1583 145 3539 1583 404 3454 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 15 236 236 23Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 199 0 91 66 22 228 931 235 241 1299 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 16.0 16.0 24.0 60.0 26.0 62.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 15.3 8.7 8.7 122.4 69.5 55.2 122.4 67.2 54.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.57 0.45 1.00 0.55 0.44v/c Ratio 0.86 0.72 0.50 0.01 0.84 0.58 0.15 0.65 0.84Control Delay 81.6 87.2 69.1 0.0 56.3 27.5 0.2 20.2 36.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 81.6 87.2 69.1 0.0 56.3 27.5 0.2 20.2 36.7LOS F FEAECACDApproach Delay 81.6 69.8 27.6 34.1Approach LOS F E C CQueue Length 50th (ft) 148 73 52 0 121 285 0 80 485Queue Length 95th (ft) #260 #147 97 0 #228 356 0 113 543Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 241 130 137 1583 296 1597 1583 438 1538Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 0.83 0.70 0.48 0.01 0.77 0.58 0.15 0.55 0.84Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 122.4Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.86Intersection Signal Delay: 36.1 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 78.0% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F and B Road/HSC ParkwayLoveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F and B RoadFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 12.8Intersection LOS BMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 133 91 78 324 81 60Future Vol, veh/h 133 91 78 324 81 60Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 155 106 91 377 94 70Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 9.2 15.7 10.3HCM LOS A C BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 57% 0% 0% 19%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 81%Vol Right, % 43% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 141 133 91 402LT Vol 81 0 0 78Through Vol 0 133 0 324RT Vol 60 0 91 0Lane Flow Rate 164 155 106 467Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.247 0.232 0.138 0.625Departure Headway (Hd) 5.431 5.399 4.692 4.817Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 656 660 757 743Service Time 3.516 3.173 2.465 2.879HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.25 0.235 0.14 0.629HCM Control Delay 10.3 9.8 8.2 15.7HCM Lane LOS B A A CHCM 95th-tile Q 1 0.9 0.5 4.4 Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3.9Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 5 130 9 2 405 36 30 0 6 116 0 24Future Vol, veh/h 5 130 9 2 405 36 30 0 6 116 0 24Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - - - - - - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222Mvmt Flow 6 146 10 2 455 40 34 0 7 130 0 27Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 495 0 0 156 0 0 395 662 78 564 647 248 Stage 1 - - - - - - 163 163 - 479 479 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 232 499 - 85 168 -Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1065 - - 1422 - - 539 381 967 408 388 752 Stage 1 - - - - - - 823 762 - 537 553 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 750 542 - 913 758 -Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1065 - - 1422 - - 517 378 967 403 385 752Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 517 378 - 403 385 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 818 757 - 534 552 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 722 541 - 902 753 -Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 11.9 17.8HCM LOS B CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 560 1065 - - 1422 - - 438HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 0.005 - - 0.002 - - 0.359HCM Control Delay (s) 11.9 8.4 - - 7.5 0 - 17.8HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 1.6Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.2Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 59 10 98 248 94 2 0 18 62 5 18Future Vol, veh/h 0 59 10 98 248 94 2 0 18 62 5 18Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 0 68 11 113 285 108 2 0 21 71 6 21Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 8.4 9.2 8.3 10HCM LOSAAAALane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 10% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 73%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 100% 66% 0% 100% 47% 6%Vol Right, % 90% 0% 0% 34% 0% 0% 53% 21%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 20 0 39 30 98 165 177 85LT Vol 2000980062Through Vol 0 0 39 20 0 165 83 5RT Vol 18 0 0 10 0 0 94 18Lane Flow Rate 23 0 45 34 113 190 203 98Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.034 0 0.067 0.049 0.171 0.262 0.259 0.164Departure Headway (Hd) 5.35 5.37 5.37 5.133 5.471 4.969 4.595 6.028Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 666 0 665 695 656 722 782 594Service Time 3.108 3.121 3.121 2.884 3.205 2.703 2.328 3.777HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 0 0.068 0.049 0.172 0.263 0.26 0.165HCM Control Delay 8.3 8.1 8.5 8.2 9.3 9.5 8.9 10HCM Lane LOS A NAAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0 0.2 0.2 0.6 1 1 0.6 Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.7Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 42460000416174300Future Vol, veh/h 42460000416174300Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 56580000521232400Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 9 7.6 10.1HCM LOS A A BLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 81% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 8% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 12% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 4 16 52 174 15 15LT Vol 0 0 42 174 0 0Through Vol40401515RT Vol 0166000Lane Flow Rate 5 21 69 232 20 20Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.008 0.027 0.108 0.34 0.026 0.016Departure Headway (Hd) 5.314 4.612 5.588 5.273 4.672 2.935Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 675 777 643 687 755 1187Service Time 3.036 2.333 3.304 2.973 2.471 0.733HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.027 0.107 0.338 0.026 0.017HCM Control Delay 8.1 7.5 9 10.7 7.6 5.8HCM Lane LOSAAABAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.1 0.4 1.5 0.1 0Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.1Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 6 23 9 100 21 26 0 0 166 64Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 6 23 9 100 21 26 0 0 166 64Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 4 0 8 29 11 127 27 33 0 0 210 81Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 7.7 8.5 8.4 9.7HCM LOS A A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 33% 17% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 7% 72%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 67% 76% 28%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 21 26 9 132 230LT Vol 21 0 3 23 0Through Vol 0 26 0 9 166RT Vol 0 0 6 100 64Lane Flow Rate 27 33 11 167 291Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.042 0.047 0.015 0.201 0.352Departure Headway (Hd) 5.676 5.172 4.608 4.335 4.347Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 631 692 776 829 827Service Time 3.407 2.903 2.641 2.358 2.371HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 0.048 0.014 0.201 0.352HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.2 7.7 8.5 9.7HCM Lane LOSAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0.1 0 0.7 1.6 Loveless Tract TIA 7: Turkey Creek Road & Proposed DrivewayFull Build Alternative (2021)AM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.4Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 30 53 16 115 178 9Future Vol, veh/h 30 53 16 115 178 9Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0 - - - - -Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 222222Mvmt Flow 33 58 17 125 193 10Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 357 198 203 0 - 0 Stage 1 198 - - - - - Stage 2 159 - - - - -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 641 843 1369 - - - Stage 1 835 - - - - - Stage 2 870 - - - - -Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 633 843 1369 - - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 633 - - - - - Stage 1 824 - - - - - Stage 2 870 - - - - -Approach EB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 10.4 0.9 0HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1369 - 753 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - 0.12 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 10.4 - -HCM Lane LOS A A B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.4 - -Loveless Tract TIA 1: FM 2818 & F&B RoadFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 157 116 140 193 85 120 193 1324 140 52 912 192Future Volume (vph) 157 116 140 193 85 120 193 1324 140 52 912 192Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1743 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3539 1583 1770 3447 0Flt Permitted 0.981 0.950 0.078 0.088Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1743 0 1770 1863 1583 145 3539 1583 164 3447 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 19 236 236 22Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 449 0 210 92 130 210 1439 152 57 1200 0Turn Type Split NA Split NA Free pm+pt NA Free pm+pt NAProtected Phases 3 3 4 4 1 6 5 2Permitted Phases Free 6 Free 2Total Split (s) 35.0 35.0 21.0 21.0 17.0 57.0 12.0 52.0Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0Act Effct Green (s) 28.0 14.0 14.0 125.0 58.6 51.4 125.0 48.0 44.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.47 0.41 1.00 0.38 0.35v/c Ratio 1.11 1.06 0.44 0.08 1.14 0.99 0.10 0.50 0.98Control Delay 120.5 133.5 59.2 0.1 137.9 58.3 0.1 33.8 60.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 120.5 133.5 59.2 0.1 137.9 58.3 0.1 33.8 60.4LOS F F E A F E A C EApproach Delay 120.5 77.5 62.7 59.2Approach LOS F E E EQueue Length 50th (ft) ~403 ~186 71 0 ~150 ~659 0 24 494Queue Length 95th (ft) #613 #345 127 0 #310 #799 0 48 #651Internal Link Dist (ft) 2234 595 1612 403Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 300 200 500 200Base Capacity (vph) 405 198 208 1583 185 1455 1583 114 1227Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000Storage Cap Reductn 000000000Reduced v/c Ratio 1.11 1.06 0.44 0.08 1.14 0.99 0.10 0.50 0.98Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 125Actuated Cycle Length: 125Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 1.14Intersection Signal Delay: 69.8 Intersection LOS: EIntersection Capacity Utilization 91.2% ICU Level of Service FAnalysis Period (min) 15~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.Splits and Phases: 1: FM 2818 & F&B Road Loveless Tract TIA 2: Turkey Creek Road & HSC Parkway/F&B RoadFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 21.2Intersection LOS CMovement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 337 161 220 284 78 62Future Vol, veh/h 337 161 220 284 78 62Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 383 183 250 323 89 70Number of Lanes110110Approach EB WB NBOpposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 1 2 0Conflicting Approach Left NB EBConflicting Lanes Left 0 1 2Conflicting Approach Right NB WBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 14.4 30.6 11.9HCM LOS B D BLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1Vol Left, % 56% 0% 0% 44%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 56%Vol Right, % 44% 0% 100% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 140 337 161 504LT Vol 78 0 0 220Through Vol 0 337 0 284RT Vol 62 0 161 0Lane Flow Rate 159 383 183 573Geometry Grp2775Degree of Util (X) 0.28 0.605 0.253 0.846Departure Headway (Hd) 6.346 5.686 4.977 5.317Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes YesCap 566 636 721 682Service Time 4.391 3.418 2.708 3.346HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.281 0.602 0.254 0.84HCM Control Delay 11.9 16.8 9.4 30.6HCM Lane LOS B C A DHCM 95th-tile Q 1.1 4.1 1 9.5Loveless Tract TIA 3: Atlas Pear Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.7Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 25 322 29 6 206 112 17 0 3 82 0 14Future Vol, veh/h 25 322 29 6 206 112 17 0 3 82 0 14Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 00000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 150--------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 22222222Mvmt Flow 30 388 35 7 248 135 20 0 4 99 0 17Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 383 0 0 423 0 0 604 863 212 584 813 192 Stage 1 ------466466-330330- Stage 2 ------138397-254483-Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.545.54-6.545.54-Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.545.54-6.545.54-Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1133 - - 382 291 793 395 311 817 Stage 1 ------546561-657644- Stage 2 ------851602-728551-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1133 - - 365 282 793 384 301 817Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------365282-384301- Stage 1 ------532546-640640- Stage 2 ------828598-706537-Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0.2 14.7 17HCM LOS B CMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h) 397 1172 - - 1133 - - 416HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.026 - - 0.006 - - 0.278HCM Control Delay (s) 14.7 8.2 - - 8.2 - - 17HCM Lane LOS B A - - A - - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0.1 - - 0 - - 1.1 Loveless Tract TIA 4: South Traditions Drive & HSC ParkwayFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.7Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 14 153 7 21 96 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Future Vol, veh/h 14 153 7 21 96 137 19 2 90 122 5 10Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 15 166 8 23 104 149 21 2 98 133 5 11Number of Lanes120120010010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes3311Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left1133Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right1133HCM Control Delay 9.4 9.3 9.4 11.1HCM LOSAAABLane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1Vol Left, % 17% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 89%Vol Thru, % 2% 0% 100% 88% 0% 100% 19% 4%Vol Right, % 81% 0% 0% 12% 0% 0% 81% 7%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 111 14 102 58 21 64 169 137LT Vol 19 14 0 0 21 0 0 122Through Vol 2 0 102 51 0 64 32 5RT Vol 900070013710Lane Flow Rate 121 15 111 63 23 70 184 149Geometry Grp77777777Degree of Util (X) 0.182 0.026 0.176 0.099 0.039 0.109 0.258 0.258Departure Headway (Hd) 5.433 6.231 5.724 5.638 6.145 5.639 5.064 6.234Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 661 577 630 639 586 639 713 578Service Time 3.158 3.938 3.431 3.345 3.849 3.343 2.768 3.958HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.183 0.026 0.176 0.099 0.039 0.11 0.258 0.258HCM Control Delay 9.4 9.1 9.7 9 9.1 9 9.5 11.1HCM Lane LOSAAAAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.4 1 1Loveless Tract TIA 5: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 EBFRFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.3Intersection LOS AMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 39750000846191680Future Vol, veh/h 39750000846191680Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 489600001056233830Number of Lanes010000011120Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 3 2Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 3 1 0Conflicting Approach Right NB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 0 1HCM Control Delay 9.1 7.8 9.7HCM LOS A A ALane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2 SBLn3Vol Left, % 0% 0% 76% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 14% 0% 100% 100%Vol Right, % 0% 100% 10% 0% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 46 51 191 34 34LT Vol 0 0 39 191 0 0Through Vol80703434RT Vol 0465000Lane Flow Rate 10 56 62 233 41 41Geometry Grp887777Degree of Util (X) 0.015 0.072 0.099 0.342 0.055 0.035Departure Headway (Hd) 5.354 4.651 5.729 5.286 4.784 3.046Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 670 771 627 685 753 1183Service Time 3.078 2.375 3.452 2.986 2.484 0.746HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.073 0.099 0.34 0.054 0.035HCM Control Delay 8.2 7.7 9.1 10.7 7.8 5.9HCM Lane LOSAAABAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.3 1.5 0.2 0.1 Loveless Tract TIA 6: Turkey Creek Road & FM 60 WBFRFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 10.7Intersection LOS BMovement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 128 8 42 0 0 168 190Future Vol, veh/h 2 0 3 87 3 128 8 42 0 0 168 190Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 0 3 97 3 142 9 47 0 0 187 211Number of Lanes010010110010Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 2 1 1 1HCM Control Delay 8.1 9.9 8.7 11.5HCM LOS A A A BLane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, % 100% 0% 40% 40% 0%Vol Thru, % 0% 100% 0% 1% 47%Vol Right, % 0% 0% 60% 59% 53%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 8 42 5 218 358LT Vol 8 0 2 87 0Through Vol 0 42 0 3 168RT Vol 0 0 3 128 190Lane Flow Rate 9 47 6 242 398Geometry Grp77225Degree of Util (X) 0.015 0.071 0.008 0.316 0.485Departure Headway (Hd) 5.993 5.488 5.013 4.696 4.392Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap 595 650 708 763 819Service Time 3.754 3.248 3.085 2.745 2.434HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.015 0.072 0.008 0.317 0.486HCM Control Delay 8.8 8.7 8.1 9.9 11.5HCM Lane LOSAAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0 1.4 2.7Loveless Tract TIA 7: Turkey Creek Road & Proposed DrivewayFull Build Alternative (2021)PM Peak HourBBISynchro 10 Report06/07/2018IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.7Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 17 31 53 119 326 29Future Vol, veh/h 17 31 53 119 326 29Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 0-----Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2Mvmt Flow 18 34 58 129 354 32Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 615 370 386 0 - 0 Stage 1 370----- Stage 2 245-----Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -Critical Hdwy Stg 15.42-----Critical Hdwy Stg 25.42-----Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 455 676 1172 - - - Stage 1 699----- Stage 2 796-----Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 431 676 1172 - - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 431----- Stage 1 662----- Stage 2 796-----Approach EB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 12 2.5 0HCM LOS BMinor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h) 1172 - 563 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.049 - 0.093 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 0 12 - -HCM Lane LOS A A B - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.3 - - Traffic Analysis – Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service Descriptions Binkley & Barfield HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS) Average Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) Description A ≤ 10.0 Very low vehicle delays, free flow, signal progression extremely favorable, most vehicles arrive during given signal phase. B 10.1 - 20.0 Good signal progression, more vehicles stop and experience higher delays than for LOS A. C 20.1 - 35.0 Stable flow, fair signal progression, significant number of vehicles stop at signals. D 35.1 - 55.0 Congestion noticeable, longer delays and unfavorable signal progression, many vehicles stop at signals. E 55.1 - 80.0 Limit of acceptable delay, unstable flow, poor signal progression, traffic near roadway capacity, frequent cycle failures. F > 80.0 Unacceptable delays, extremely unstable flow and congestion, traffic exceeds roadway capacity, stop-and- go conditions. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS) Average Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) Description A ≤ 10.0 No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. B 10.1 - 15.0 No delays at intersections with continuous flow of traffic. Uncongested operations: high frequency of long gaps available for all left and right turning traffic. No observable queues. C 15.1 - 25.0 Moderate delays at intersections with satisfactory to good traffic flow. Light congestion; infrequent backups on critical approaches. D 25.1 - 35.0 Increased probability of delays along every approach. Significant congestion on critical approaches, but intersection functional. No standing long lines formed. E 35.1 - 50.0 Heavy traffic flow condition. Heavy delays probable. No available gaps for cross-street traffic or main street turning traffic. Limit of stable flow. F > 50.0 Unstable traffic flow. Heavy congestion. Traffic moves in forced flow condition. Average delays greater than one minute highly probable. Total breakdown. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 2010, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A “UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE,” ARTICLE 4 “ZONING DISTRICTS,” SECTION 4.2, “OFFICIAL ZONING MAP” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FROM R RURAL TO MF MULTI-FAMILY FOR APPROXIMATLEY 11.1 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE CITY ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURKEY CREEK ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 500-FEET SOUTH OF HSC PARKWAY; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A PENALTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART 1: That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2 “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, be amended as set out in Exhibit “A,” Exhibit “B” and Exhibit “C” attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance for all purposes. PART 2: If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, the invalidity or unconstitutionality does not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance or the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, that can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. PART 3: That any person, corporation, organization, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association and any other legal entity violating any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than twenty five dollars ($25.00) and not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more than two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a violation of fire safety, zoning, or public health and sanitation ordinances, other than the dumping of refuse. Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. PART 4: This Ordinance is a penal ordinance and becomes effective ten (10) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by City of College Station Charter Section 35. ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 2 of 6 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 PASSED, ADOPTED, and APPROVED this 23rd day of August, 2018. ATTEST: APPROVED: _____________________________ _____________________________ City Secretary Mayor APPROVED: _______________________________ City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 3 of 6 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit A That Appendix A “Unified Development Ordinance,” Article 4 “Zoning Districts,” Section 4.2, “Official Zoning Map” of the Code of Ordinances of the City of College Station, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: The following property is rezoned from R Rural to MF Multi-Family: ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 4 of 6 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 5 of 6 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit B ORDINANCE NO. ____________ Page 6 of 6 Ordinance Form 8-14-17 Exhibit C