sr 315 southbound ramps at olentangy river road...the southbound sr 315 off ramp to olentangy river...

Interchange Operations Study

SR 315 Southbound Ramps at Olentangy River Road

Columbus, Ohio

Prepared for

Nationwide Realty Investors

By

Trans Associates Engineering Consultants, Inc.

February 11, 2016

NWRIN00 - 06292

Interchange Operations Study

SR 315 Southbound Ramps at Olentangy River Road

Columbus, Ohio

Prepared for

Nationwide Realty Investors

By

Trans Associates Engineering Consultants, Inc. 941 Chatham Lane, Suite 319

Columbus, Ohio 43221 (614) 459-7930

_____________________________________ _____________________________________

Mark I. Mann, P.E. Office Manager/Senior Manager

Angela M. Coates, P.E. 80846 Associate Analyst

February 11, 2016

NWRIN00 - 06292

ii

Trans Associates Engineering Consultants, Inc.

941 Chatham Lane, Suite 319 Columbus, Ohio 43221

614-459-7930 February 11, 2016 Ohio Department of Transportation, District 6 400 East William Street Delaware, Ohio 43015 Attention: Dirk B. Gross, P.E. Transportation Engineer Subject: SR 315 Southbound Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road – Interchange Operations Study Response to Traffic Study Comments

NWRIN00 - 06292 Dear Mr. Gross: Trans Associates submitted a revised Interchange Operations Study for the SR 315 Southbound Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road on November 20, 2015. This study was again reviewed by the Ohio Department of Transportation (District 6 and Central Office) and comments were provided to Trans Associates on January 22, 2016. These review comments were provided in the form of a PDF markup from Gary Harrington, ODOT Central Office. Our responses to these comments are as follows:

1) Page 1, Paragraph 4 – The 18%/16% increase is correct when comparing just the ramp volume; however, as per ODOT’s method, the increases should be about 3.9%/2.7% for AM/PM. Recalculate and revise text as needed.

The comparison of No Build and Build constrained traffic volumes has been changed to accurately reflect the methodology used by ODOT. Our calculations show an increase of 3.9% in the AM and 2.8% in the PM.

2) Page 4, Paragraph 3 – The listed Point #3 reads “Freeway Segment between point 3 and on ramp from ORR”. What is “point 3”?

This point has been updated to read “Freeway Segment between point #2 and on ramp from ORR” --- with point #2 referring to the upstream diverge point (SR 315 southbound off ramp to ORR).

3) Page 6, Paragraph 5 – Generally, the existing signal timing data is not included in an Interchange Study. I noticed the actual passage times were entered into HCS which seem to give better results than using the default of 2.0s. With the oversaturated conditions, it doesn’t seem to make a difference.

This point has been noted.

4) Figure 3 (Page 7)

a) The note at the bottom left of the figure reads “Turn Lane Lengths Do Not Include Diverging Taper”. Do they include deceleration?

The turn lane lengths shown in Figure 3 are the total length (storage and deceleration) excluding taper. To clarify, this point has been change to read “Turn Lane Lengths Include Storage and Deceleration Only (No Diverging Taper)”. Also, the asterisk and note referring to the existing off ramp length has been removed as it is now redundant.

iii

b) To improve this exhibit, consider making the revised improvements in red. Label the turn lane lengths of the off ramp. Add a center-to-center dimension between intersections. Comments apply to all similar exhibits.

As recommended, the proposed improvements have been shown in red. The proposed lengths of the off ramp lanes have also been added to the figure. A center-to-center dimension between intersections was added, as well. These adjustments were carried to other figures in the report as necessary.

5) Figure 4 (Page 8) – The level of service on the southbound through movement at Olentangy River Road and the SR 315 Southbound Ramps should be ‘B’, not ‘A’.

This level of service has been corrected in Figure 4.

6) Table 1 (Page 10) – The delay shown for the westbound right turning movement should be 18.3 sec/veh under the PM Peak Hour, Build condition.

This value has been corrected.

7) Page 11, Paragraph 2 – The appropriate method is to input the actual left and thru volumes. Go to the “Detailed Input Data” tab and change the “Percent Turns in Shared Lane” until the v/c ratios for the left/thru are about equal. The method that was used produces nearly the same results. Revise the AM/PM Build analyses.

The AM and PM Build analyses have been revised using the correct methodology. Figures 4 and 5, as well as Table 2, were updated accordingly. The referenced paragraph was removed from the text.

8) Table 3 (Page 13) – This table and the supporting text should be updated based on the corrected comparison of No Build/Build constrained traffic volumes. See comment #1.

Table 3 and the associated text have been updated based on the corrected comparison of constrained traffic volumes.

9) Page 16, Paragraph 2 – See comments #1 and #8. Revise text to state degradation does not occur for the AM since the downstream weave operates at LOS D/D for the No Build and Build using the demand volumes. Degradation does occur in the PM because the LOS is F/F for the No Build/Build and more than 2% traffic is added based on ODOT’s methodology. The constrained volumes were used to analyze the PM weave as they should be. The weave analyses should have “Constrained” added somewhere to indicate the constrained volumes were used. Also, add text stating that mitigation via a combination of ramp metering and/or geometric constraints are typically implemented, however, this is not an ideal location for ramp metering with the given geometry and downstream weave.

The text has been modified to reflect the corrected comparison of constrained traffic volumes. Text has also been added explaining why mitigative measures are not recommended. A note has been added to the relevant HCS reports indicating that constrained traffic volumes were used at the downstream weave section during the PM peak hour.

10) Appendix B is not needed and should be removed from the report.

Appendix B has been removed.

11) The diverge point was analyzed twice, considering influence from the upstream off ramp and the downstream on ramp separately. In my experience, adding upstream/downstream ramp data has little or no effect on results. Remove all analyses considering influence from the downstream on ramp.

These analyses have been removed from the Appendix.

12) Reanalyze the weave section using the demand volumes in the AM peak hour since possible degradation does not occur, i.e. the No Build/Build LOS is D/D using the demand traffic. No Build analysis should equal the Build.

The No Build AM peak analysis for the weave section has been modified to reflect demand volumes instead of constrained on ramp volumes. The results in Table 4 have also been updated.

iv

13) Typically, queuing/storage for the No Build condition is not calculated. This can either be removed or left here as the Build condition shows an improvement.

This point has been noted. The No Build queue length computations have been kept in the Appendix just to show that Build improvements do improve queues.

14) The label on the concept plan contained in the Appendix should be SR 315 instead of interstate 315.

The concept plan has been modified to show SR 315.

Additionally, there has been an ongoing discussion in regards to the calculation of the westbound right turn on red volume at the intersection of Olentangy and Goodale, as referenced on page 11 of the report. This issue has been addressed to the satisfaction of the reviewers. The study has been revised based on our responses to these comments. Should you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely,

Mark I. Mann, PE Office Manager/Senior Manager

v

Interchange Operations Study, SR 315 Southbound Ramps at Olentangy River Road

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1

Background ................................................................................................................................... 2

Previous Studies ....................................................................................................................... 2

Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................................ 4

Study Area .................................................................................................................................... 4

Analysis Years .............................................................................................................................. 4

Alternatives Considered ................................................................................................................ 4

Existing and Proposed Conditions ................................................................................................ 6

Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................. 6

Traffic Analyses ............................................................................................................................ 6

Olentangy River Road Corridor Analyses ................................................................................. 6

SR 315 Southbound Freeway Analyses .................................................................................. 12

Queuing Analyses ....................................................................................................................... 14

Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 16

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 17

vi


List of Tables

Table 1. 2037 Level of Service (Delay, sec/veh), Olentangy River Road at SR 315 Southbound Ramps ............................................................ 10

Table 2. 2037 Level of Service (Delay, sec/veh), Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard/Twin Rivers Drive ............................................. 11

Table 3. Comparison of 2037 Traffic Volumes, SR 315 Southbound, Downstream of Merge Point (veh) ......................................................... 12

Table 4. 2037 Capacity Analysis Results, SR 315 Southbound ................................................. 13

Table 5. Summary of 2037 Queue Lengths, ODOT L&D Manual ............................................... 14

Table 6. Summary of 2037 Off Ramp Storage Length Requirements, Build Condition .............. 15

List of Figures

Figure 1. Project Location ............................................................................................................. 3

Figure 2. Study Area Map ............................................................................................................. 5

Figure 3. Existing and Proposed Lane Usages ............................................................................. 7

Figure 4. 2037 AM Levels of Service ............................................................................................ 8

Figure 5. 2037 PM Levels of Service ............................................................................................ 9

Appendices

Appendix A. Certified Traffic Volumes

Appendix B. Capacity Analysis Results, Olentangy River Road

Appendix C. Capacity Analysis Results, SR 315 Southbound

Appendix D. Queuing Analysis Results

Appendix E. Concept Drawing

vii


Executive Summary

The Grandview Yard development is currently under construction, and its effects on the adjacent roadway system are being investigated. The development is located on the eastern edge of the City of Grandview Heights and adjacent to downtown Columbus, Ohio as shown in project location map found in Figure 1. A large portion of the trips made to this development will be served by the southbound SR 315 interchange at Olentangy River Road, which operates under signal control.

The existing off ramp consists of one shared left/right lane. Due to the expected volume increase, the potential for adding two lanes of storage to the off ramp has been considered. This “build” alternative would provide for dual left turns and an exclusive right turn lane at the off ramp. Additionally, the “build” alternative includes modified lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale, converting the exclusive through lane to a shared through/left turn lane. Along with a three-lane off ramp, this modification is expected to significantly improve operating conditions on the Olentangy River Road corridor.

The purpose of this study is to quantify the impacts of the proposed lane usages on queuing at the off ramp and on the total volume entering southbound SR 315. Additionally, the impacts of the proposed lane usages on the operations of southbound SR 315 as well as adjacent signals on Olentangy River Road were investigated.

Analyses performed at the signals on Olentangy River Road show that adding two lanes to the off ramp allows this signal to operate at a better level of service compared to the “no build” alternative. Even still, operating criteria cannot be met at the intersection. Calculation of constrained traffic volumes shows that the total volume on southbound SR 315 could increase by 3.9% during the AM peak hour and 2.8% during the PM peak hour as a result of these modifications. While this increase is slightly larger than what is typically deemed acceptable, the modifications do not adversely impact operations on SR 315 southbound or significantly degrade levels of service beyond “no build” conditions.

Simulation shows that the expected queues at the off ramp will consistently back up onto southbound SR 315 during both the AM and PM peak hours if the current lane usages are maintained. As expected, the proposed “build” modifications nearly eliminate queuing issues at the off ramp.

1


Background

The southbound SR 315 off ramp to Olentangy River Road has slightly more than 1,000 feet of deceleration and storage. This single-lane off ramp intersects Olentangy River Road about 580 feet north of Goodale Street and about 1,300 feet south of an access drive serving Time Warner and the OSU Eye and Ear Institute. All three intersections on Olentangy River Road are currently under traffic signal control.

With only a single lane on the ramp, traffic signal operations at its intersection with Olentangy River Road are somewhat inefficient – and queues begin to form on the ramp. As traffic volumes continue to increase, it is possible that queues could extend back to the mainline of SR 315. In order to better accommodate these queues, it is suggested that consideration be given to widening the off ramp to create more storage capacities.

Since widening the off ramp could allow more green time to be allocated to traffic entering the freeway, an interchange operations study has been requested by ODOT District 6 and the City of Columbus to ensure that the proposed modification does not degrade operations on SR 315 southbound. Certified traffic volumes were requested and provided by ODOT District 6 to assist in the completion of the analyses presented herein.

The purpose of this study is to prove that the proposed modification is essential to preventing queue spill back onto the freeway and to improving operating conditions at the traffic signals located on Olentangy River Road. Additionally, the goal is to demonstrate that potential signal timing modifications accompanying the widening do not allow a significantly larger volume of traffic to enter the freeway at this location, effectively maintaining the safety and operation of SR 315 southbound.

Previous Studies

Some of the traffic volume increases likely to take place on the area roadway system can be attributed to development at Grandview Yard. The development, which is currently under construction, is located on the eastern edge of the City of Grandview Heights and adjacent to downtown Columbus, Ohio (see Figure 1). As planning for the development has taken place over the past several years, traffic studies have been performed to help define a long-range roadway system that best accommodates potential development on the site. These studies have addressed potential build-out of Grandview Yard – with assumed development packages likely exceeding what actually may be ultimately constructed. The certified traffic volumes utilized in this study are based upon the material established in prior traffic studies completed for Grandview Yard.

2


Purpose and Need

The purpose of this project is to enhance the safety of the SR 315 southbound interchange at Olentangy River Road. Excessive off ramp queuing is potentially dangerous as the required deceleration distance may not be available to vehicles exiting the freeway. What’s more, queues spilling back into freeway lanes could result in high speed rear-end crashes. Widening the off ramp should effectively decrease queue lengths, providing enough distance for vehicles to safely decelerate and preventing spill back into freeway lanes.

Traffic flow along the Olentangy River Road corridor is also inhibited due to the signal operations at the location of the off ramp. In particular, southbound left turn queues regularly exceed the available storage length and block adjacent through lanes. Northbound queues may also back up to the upstream intersection at Goodale Boulevard. This project will improve the capacity of the off ramp intersection, allowing more green time to be provided to the approaches of Olentangy River Road and improving the progression of northbound and southbound through traffic.

Study Area

The study area for this project was defined by ODOT District 6 and is shown in Figure 2. It includes the following locations on mainline SR 315 southbound:

1. Freeway Segment upstream of off ramp to Olentangy River Road 2. Diverge (off ramp to Olentangy River Road (ORR)) 3. Freeway Segment between point #2 and on ramp from ORR 4. Weave (between entrance ramp from ORR to I-670 WB exit)

Additionally, the following signalized intersections will be analyzed:

1. Olentangy River Road at OSU Eye & Ear Institute/Time Warner 2. Olentangy River Road at SR-315 SB Ramps 3. Olentangy River Road at Goodale Blvd

Analysis Years

The expected opening year for this project is 2017. The design year has been defined as 2037, twenty years beyond project opening. Consideration will be given to both the AM and PM peak hours for the design year of 2037.

Alternatives Considered

Both “no build” and “build” alternatives were considered in this study. The “no build” scenario assumes that the existing SR 315 southbound off ramp to Olentangy River Road is maintained in its current condition and that no other changes are made throughout the study area. The preferred “build” condition includes widening the off-ramp to three lanes, providing for dual left turns and an exclusive right turn lane. Additionally, the “build” alternative includes changing the lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard by converting the exclusive through lane to a shared through/left turn lane.

4


Existing and Proposed Conditions

The existing lane usages and traffic control throughout the study area are shown in Figure 3. This figure also shows the “build” alternative at the intersections of Olentangy River Road with the SR 315 southbound ramps and Goodale Boulevard.

Traffic Volumes

Current and projected traffic volumes throughout the study area were submitted to ODOT on November 4, 2014 along with a request for certification. In an email dated February 25, 2015, 2017/2037 AM and PM Design Hour Volumes were received from ODOT. A copy of the request for certified traffic volumes along with email correspondence from ODOT is contained in Appendix A.

Two sets of traffic volumes were provided by ODOT, both with and without site generated traffic from the Grandview Yard development. For the purposes of this study, the traffic volumes with site trip generation were applied to both (“no build” and “build”) alternatives. The 2017 certified traffic volumes include only current development on the Grandview Yard property, while 2037 volumes include the traffic generated by the total build-out of the development.

Traffic Analyses

The alternatives were first evaluated at the signalized intersections in order to identify conditions along the Olentangy River Road corridor. Then, the alternatives were tested at the specified locations on SR 315 southbound to determine the potential impacts (if any) on freeway operations, particularly at the on ramp/weave section.

Olentangy River Road Corridor Analyses

At signalized intersections, capacity analyses were performed using HCS 2010 (streets module). For both the “no build” and “build” alternatives, each signalized intersection was considered isolated and thus uncoordinated. Cycle lengths were optimized, and phase splits were adjusted so that critical approach delays were balanced within 3 seconds. A cycle length of 120 seconds was used at all intersections for AM and PM peak hour analyses.

Design year capacity analysis results for the Olentangy River Road corridor can be found in Appendix B. 2037 AM and PM peak hour capacity analysis results are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. Additionally, Table 1 provides the levels of service and average delay at the intersection of Olentangy River Road and the SR 315 Ramps for both alternatives.

6


Table 1. 2037 Level of Service (Delay, sec/veh), Olentangy River Road at SR 315 Southbound Ramps

Approach Lane Group

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

No Build Build No Build Build

Westbound

Left F (119.2)

E (56.2) F (128.5)

F (84.3)

Right B (17.2) B (18.3)

Overall F (119.2) D (43.2) F (128.5) E (68.2)

Northbound

Through F (99.6) D (41.9) F (103.0) E (56.4)

Through/Right F (138.7) D (47.3) F (153.5) F (84.8)

Overall F (118.4) D (44.5) F (127.5) E (70.2)

Southbound

Left F (140.3) D (47.9) F (152.9) F (84.7)

Through B (11.5) A (3.7) A (5.8) A (2.0)

Overall E (71.0) C (24.1) E (77.3) D (42.2)

Intersection F (98.0) D (35.4) F (105.7) E (57.7)

These results show that the intersection of Olentangy River Road at the SR 315 southbound ramps operates at an exceptionally poor level of service in the future if the existing single-lane off ramp is retained. In both the AM and PM, all movements will be over capacity with v/c ratios of greater than 1.0 except for the southbound through movement. Intersection delays hover around 100 seconds per vehicle during both time frames. Adding two lanes to the off ramp decreases overall delay by 64% in the AM and allows the intersection to operate at an acceptable level of service. While overall delay decreases by 45% in the PM, the intersection will still operate poorly even with a three-lane off ramp. In this instance, the northbound through/right and southbound left turn movements are over capacity.

The intersection of Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard/Twin Rivers Drive was also looked at more closely given the proposed lane usage modifications. The northbound and southbound approaches of this intersection operate under a split phasing configuration, and right turn overlap phases are provided on the westbound and southbound approaches. However, the current version of HCS does not allow for a right turn overlap phase with a split phase approach. This particular caveat affects the westbound right turn only. With a projected demand of over 700 vehicles during both the AM and PM peak hours, it was essential that an adjustment be made to account for the additional green time that is provided to this movement during the southbound approach phase.

10


This limitation was addressed by assigning some of the westbound right turn volume to the right turn on red volume. The right turn on red volume is discounted in capacity analysis calculations since it does not operate under the control of the traffic signal. The right turn on red volume was estimated using the following steps:

1) Multiply the green split of the southbound through phase by the saturation flow rate of the westbound right turn to determine the capacity that is added to this movement during the overlap phase.

2) Calculate the total capacity of the westbound right turn by summing the westbound through phase capacity and the overlap phase capacity.

3) Calculate the actual volume to capacity ratio of the westbound right turn by dividing the (adjusted) demand flow rate by the total movement capacity.

4) Calculate by how much the westbound right turn volume should be reduced (input westbound right turn on red volume) to achieve the correct volume to capacity ratio.

Table 2 provides the final capacity analysis results for the intersection of Olentangy River Road and Goodale Boulevard/Twin Rivers Drive. For the “no build” alternative, the intersection will operate at a failing level of service with exceptionally high delay on the southbound left turn movement and in the eastbound shared through/right lane. During the AM peak hour, the modified lane usages result in a decrease in totally intersection delay of over 31%, though the signal still operates poorly with a level of service of E. The southbound left turn movement still has a level of service of F, though its delay is reduced by nearly 54%.

Table 2. 2037 Level of Service (Delay, sec/veh), Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard/Twin Rivers Drive

Approach Lane Group



Eastbound

Left D (46.2) C (34.1) F (139.0) F (112.9)

Through/Right F (146.0) F (95.3) F (104.8) F (75.6)

Overall F (119.3) E (78.9) F (118.0) F (90.0)

Westbound

Left C (30.3) C (28.3) C (32.6) C (31.9)

Through D (46.2) C (33.7) F (138.6) F (111.4)

Right E (61.4) D (48.6) F (124.8) F (135.9)

Overall D (50.6) D (38.7) F (131.3) F (116.5)

Northbound

Left D (55.0) D (55.0) E (59.8) E (59.8)

Through E (58.1) E (58.1) F (86.6) F (86.6)

Right A (0.0) D (54.9) A (0.0) E (60.1)

Overall E (56.8) E (56.3) E (75.9) E (71.8)

Southbound

Left F (212.1) F (98.1) F (256.5) F (181.0)

Through D (39.2) F (99.8) D (51.3) F (174.2)

Right D (37.8) E (56.8) C (27.4) C (29.3)

Overall F (119.5) F (80.8) F (130.7) F (120.9)

Intersection F (92.9) E (64.0) F (123.9) F (105.7)

11


During the PM peak hour, the benefits of implementing the modified lane usage are less drastic from a level of service standpoint. The intersection will still have a failing level of service and will only experience a near 15% decrease in delay. The average delays for the southbound left turn movement and the shared eastbound through/right movement may each decrease by about 28%.

The intersection of Olentangy River Road with Time Warner should operate well with an intersection level of service of C in the AM and PM.

SR 315 Southbound Freeway Analyses

Capacity analyses at freeway locations were performed strictly using HCS 2010 (freeways, weaving, and ramps modules), and the results are contained in Appendix C. For this study, the effect of potential off ramp modifications was determined based on the constraints at the signal. Without any modifications to geometry or signal timing, the volume of demand traffic that can get onto the SR 315 southbound on ramp is constrained. Once geometric and signal timing modifications are considered, less green time is needed for the off ramp approach and more green time can be given to the southbound left turn movement and northbound through/right movement. As a result, a larger volume of vehicles may be able to reach the on ramp and enter the freeway.

As stipulated in section 550.3.2 of the ODOT Location and Design Manual, constrained on ramp volumes were determined by dividing the 2037 demand traffic volumes by the volume-to-capacity ratio for the southbound left and northbound through/right turn movements at the ramp signal. The resulting constrained traffic volumes were then compared on the basis of percent increase in total traffic volume on SR 315 southbound, downstream of the merge point. Table 3 provides a summary of the relevant traffic volumes.

Table 3. Comparison of 2037 Traffic Volumes, SR 315 Southbound, Downstream of Merge Point (veh)


No Build, Mainline 2760 4260

No Build, On Ramp* 735 885

Build, On Ramp* 870 1030

Increase 3.9% 2.8%

*Constrained volume

Volumes entering the downstream weave section may be expected to increase by 3.9% during the AM peak hour and 2.8% during the PM peak hour. Since there is no degradation in the level of service of the weave section during the AM peak hour (see Table 4), a volume increase of 3.9% is acceptable. In the PM, however, the weave section already operates at a level of service of F for “no build” conditions. The total traffic entering the weave section further increases by 2.8% with the proposed “build” improvements, which is typically not acceptable in this situation. While the ODOT Location and Design Manual requires that mitigative measures be taken for volume increases of greater than 2%, representatives of ODOT have indicated that ramp metering is not a viable option in this location due to the geometry of the on ramp and the downstream weave section. It is further believed that the potential reduction in queues formed at the off ramp is a suitable trade-off for the potentially degraded operation of the weave section.

12


Since the total increase during the PM peak hour does not greatly exceed 2%, ODOT has indicated that a volume increase of 2.8% is permissible at this location without any mitigative measures.

Each of the SR 315 southbound locations were analyzed for “no build” and “build” alternatives. Constrained volumes from the on ramp were considered during the PM peak hour only; the weave section operates at a level of service of D using (unconstrained) demand volumes for the AM. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. 2037 Capacity Analysis Results, SR 315 Southbound

SR 315 Southbound Locations

HCM 2010 Level of Service (Density, pc/mi/ln)



Freeway Segment (I-670 EB to Off Ramp) D (33.0) D (33.0) F (60.0) F (60.0)

Diverge (Off Ramp) D (30.7) D (30.7) F (42.9) F (42.9)

Freeway Segment (Off Ramp to On Ramp) D (27.4) D (27.4) F (48.1) F (48.1)

Weave (On Ramp to I-670 WB) D (34.4) D (34.4) F (N/A)1 F (N/A)1 1Volume-to-capacity ratio > 1.0

During the AM peak hour, there is no degradation expected with the proposed improvements in place. All freeway locations are expected to operate at a level of service of D for the “no build” and “build” alternatives.

PM peak hour results are less favorable and show expected levels of service of F at all SR 315 southbound locations. Again, the “build” alternative results in an increased density downstream of the on ramp location. There is a slight impact noted when comparing the volume-to-capacity ratios obtained at the SR 315 southbound/I-670 westbound weave section. Considering the “no build” alternative, the weave section has a level of service of F and a volume-to-capacity ratio of 1.009. The “build” alternative increases the volume-to-capacity ratio to 1.044, or by 3.5%.

These results show that while the increase in the on ramp volume for the “build” alternative is higher than typically accepted, there is no impact on freeway operations at the weave section between SR 315 southbound and I-670 westbound during the AM peak hour. The exact impacts on the weave segment during the PM peak hour are difficult to quantify since this location will be over capacity for either alternative.

13


Queuing Analyses

In addition to the level of service analyses, queueing analyses were also conducted to determine the impact of potential modifications on off ramp queues and at key locations on Olentangy River Road. Results are contained in Appendix D.

Off ramp queues were first determined according to Figure 401-9E of the ODOT L&D Manual (Vol. 1). The intersection on Olentangy at Goodale is only about 580’ south of the ramp signal. For the “build” alternative, vehicles will likely queue in the appropriate off ramp lane so that they do not have to quickly change lanes before the intersection at Goodale. The amount of traffic using each left turn lane was estimated based on the proportion of turning movement volumes on the southbound approach of Olentangy at Goodale, and knowing that all site-generated traffic will be turning right onto Goodale to Grandview Yard.

The off ramp queue lengths as determined using the methodology of the ODOT L&D Manual are provided in Table 5. These results are based on a 120 second cycle length.

Considering these results alone, there does not seem to be a major concern of off ramp queues spilling back onto mainline SR 315 even with a single-lane off ramp. Without any ramp modifications, queues may spill back slightly into the deceleration portion of the lane during the AM peak hour only. However, the results presented below are misleading as they do not take into account potential blocking from queues on Olentangy River Road.

Also included in Table 5 are possible queue lengths on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale. There is about 460’ of storage available between Goodale and the ramp signal, and the existing southbound left turn lane is striped for 380’ of storage. Queues calculated for both alternatives are larger than the provided storage, indicating a possible blocking issue.

Table 5. Summary of 2037 Queue Lengths, ODOT L&D Manual

Intersection Approach Lane Number

Queue Length (ft)



Olentangy River Road at SR 315 Southbound Ramps

Westbound (Off Ramp)

1 650 175 475 175

2 - 350 - 250

3 - 275 - 150

Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard/Twin Rivers Drive

Southbound

1 600 400 525 400

2 175 400 275 400

3 550 550 475 475

14


To verify this point, conditions on the Olentangy River Road corridor were also simulated using SimTraffic 8. For 2037 conditions, simulation showed that queues in the southbound left turn lane from Olentangy onto Goodale will consistently back up into the adjacent through lane and to the ramp signal during both peak hours. Vehicles attempting to exit the off ramp may then be blocked from doing so, resulting in excessive queues that backup onto the freeway.

During the AM peak hour when the off ramp volume is highest, queues could back up onto the freeway almost 90% of the time with no ramp modifications. In the PM, this could still occur over 70% of the time even with lower off ramp volumes. It is therefore essential that lanes be added to the off ramp so that vehicles planning to turn right onto Goodale can proceed past and turn into the outside southbound lane on Olentangy River Road.

The “build” alternative was shown to nearly eliminate the potential for queue spill back into freeway lanes. Changing the lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale is the largest benefactor when considering the reduction in off ramp queues. Since this approach already operates as split phase, it is suggested the exclusive through lane be converted to a shared through/left turn lane. The second eastbound through lane on the bridge over SR 315 would need to be extended to the intersection at Olentangy River Road (± 80’ of additional pavement). The existing channelized right turn lane on the northbound approach (currently free flowing) could then operate as a yield condition or under signal control if desired by the City of Columbus. A three-lane off ramp would still be required in order to contain queues within the storage area. In this case, off ramp queues should not reach the deceleration lane or the freeway lanes a majority of the time in the AM. In the PM, queues are not likely to ever reach the deceleration portion of the lane.

The amount of storage required for the proposed turn lanes was calculated using the methodology in the ODOT L&D Manual with AM peak hour demand volumes (see Table 6 below). In order to optimize the utilization of all three storage lanes, at least 350 feet of storage should be provided in each additional lane. With the modified lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy at Goodale, blocking on Olentangy River Road should not be an issue and these storage lengths should be sufficient.

Table 6. Summary of 2037 Off Ramp Storage Length Requirements, Build Condition

Lane ODOT L&D

Westbound Left

Required Storage (ft) 175

Through Queue Backup (ft) 350

Recommended Storage (ft) 350

Westbound Right

Required Storage (ft) 275

Through Queue Backup (ft) 350

Recommended Storage (ft) 350

15


Conclusions

This study was undertaken in order to verify the need for modifications at the SR 315 southbound off ramp to Olentangy River Road, which will serve a large portion of the trips made to the Grandview Yard development. Capacity analysis results show that the signal will operate at a failing levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours if no modifications are made. The “build” alternative produces a 64% reduction in delay for the AM peak hour, allowing the intersection to operate with acceptable levels of service on all approaches and raising the overall level of service to ‘D’. In the PM peak hour, “build” conditions reduce overall intersection delay by 45% although most movements still operate poorly.

In the AM, all freeway locations are expected to operate at a level of service of D. PM peak hour results are less favorable and show expected levels of service of F at all SR 315 southbound locations.

Calculation of constrained traffic volumes shows that the total volume on SR 315 southbound, downstream of the merge location, could increase by 3.9% in the AM and 2.8% in the PM. Degradation of the downstream weave section does not occur in the AM peak hour, as a level of service of D is expected for both “no build” and “build” conditions. However, a slight degradation does occur in the PM peak hour; the “no build” level of service for the weave section is already F, and the total volume increases by over 2% for proposed “build” conditions. While migitation through geometric constrains and/or ramp metering would typically be implemented, the location in question is not suitable for ramp metering due to the geometry of the on ramp and the downstream weave section.

Queuing analyses were then undertaken to determine storage requirements at the off ramp. Using the methodology outlined in the ODOT L&D Manual, two additional lanes of storage, each 350 feet in length, could be sufficient at the off ramp. However, these results do not take into account potential blocking from queues on Olentangy River Road.

Conditions on the Olentangy River Road corridor were also simulated to consider the effects of blocking. Simulation showed that queues in the southbound left turn lane from Olentangy onto Goodale will consistently back up into the adjacent through lane and to the ramp signal during both peak hours. Vehicles attempting to exit the off ramp may then be blocked from doing so, resulting in excessive queues that backup onto the freeway. It is therefore essential that at least one lane be added to the off ramp so that vehicles planning to turn right onto Goodale can proceed past and turn into the outside southbound lane on Olentangy River Road. The “build” alternative, with a combination of modified lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale and widening on the SR 315 southbound off ramp, was shown to nearly eliminate the potential for queue spill back into freeway lanes.

16


Recommendations

With no degradation of the downstream weave section on SR 315 southbound during the AM peak hour and minimal degradation in the PM, it is recommended that the off ramp to Olentangy River Road be widened to three lanes, providing for dual lefts and an exclusive right turn lane. This alternative provides the best level of service at the ramp signal, though conditions are still not ideal. According to the ODOT L&D Manual methodology, 350’ of storage should be provided in the left and right turn lanes in order to accommodate AM peak hour queues and prevent storage blocking. This condition represents maximized storage without any change to the deceleration lane, and a concept drawing is contained in Appendix E.

Furthermore, it is recommended that the lane usages on the southbound approach of Olentangy River Road at Goodale Boulevard be modified, converting the exclusive through lane to a shared through/left turn lane. The second eastbound through lane on the bridge over SR 315 would need to be extended to the intersection at Olentangy River Road (± 80’ of additional pavement). The existing channelized right turn lane on the northbound approach (currently free flowing) should then operate as a yield condition or under signal control if desired by the City of Columbus. Lastly, signal timings on the corridor should be optimized to reflect the new traffic patterns and lane usages.

17

Appendices

Appendix A. Certified Traffic Volumes

INTER‐OFFICE COMMUNICATION

TO: David Carlin, P.E., District 6 FROM: Joshua Kieselbach, P.E., Transportation Engineer, Office of Statewide Planning &

Research, Modeling & Forecasting Section SUBJECT: FRA‐315‐2.11, No PID DATE: February 25, 2015 In reply to a request dated November 7, 2014, the subject request has been completed. During the review of the consultant’s report no issues were found. As requested the peak hour forecast from the consultant was updated to 2017/2037 DHV with the inclusion SR‐315 southbound mainline, ramps, and weaving section. The consultant’s trip generation numbers were added to the DHV forecast as well. Four plates have been attached showing the 2017/2037 AM and PM DHV, both with and without the site generated traffic. The site generated traffic was only added to the design year. If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or (614) 752‐5747. c: M. Byram, OSPR – G. Giaimo, OSPR – File

315

670

5550/6080

2760/3010

315

PLATE 1 OF 4

NO PID

FRA-315-2.11

FEBRUARY 25, 2015 NOT TO SCALE

OFFICE OF STATEWIDE PLANNING & RESEARCH

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

2017/2037 AM DHV

FRA-315-2.11 NO PID

2790/3070

660/720

2560/2810

3220/3530

30/30

20/30

640/700

190/210

520/

580

510/

570

180/

190

750/

820

240/250

700/770

20/20

680/750

210/230

40/50

80/80

20/20

30/30

310/340

640/700

390/430

90/100

190/200

110/130

590/640

550/590

1970/2170

1000/1120

60/70

160/160

80/90

N

GOODALE ST.

OLE

NT

AN

GY RIV

ER

RD.

TWIN

RIV

ERS

DR.

TO I-670

WB

FR

OM I-670 E

B

315

670

5850/6440

4060/4470

315

PLATE 2 OF 4

NO PID

FRA-315-2.11




2017/2037 PM DHV

FRA-315-2.11 NO PID

1790/1970

1070/1180

3580/3930

4650/5110

120/13

080/

90

1080/1170

20/20

610/

670

590/

630

130/160

50/50

160/

180

860/

950

180/210

770/850

20/30

420/460

270/300

70/70

100/110

60/60

40/50

770/850

650/720

350/380

160/180

210/230

130/150

940/1030

2940/3230

640/700

890/980

20/20

N

GOODALE ST.

OLE

NT

AN

GY RIV

ER

RD.

TWIN

RIV

ERS

DR.

TO I-670

WB

FR

OM I-670 E

B

315

670

5550/6400

2760/3330

315

PLATE 3 OF 4

NO PID

FRA-315-2.11

2790/3070

660/750

2560/2980

3220/3730

30/30

20/30

640/870

190/210

520/

610

510/

710

180/

260

750/

890

240/570

700/970

20/30

680/900

210/340

40/50

80/80

20/60

30/30

310/900

640/730

390/510

90/110

190/470

110/160

590/810

550/590

1970/2170

1000/1290

60/70

160/380

80/190




2017/2037 AM DHV WITH TRIP-GEN

FRA-315-2.11 NO PID

N

GOODALE ST.

OLE

NT

AN

GY RIV

ER

RD.

TWIN

RIV

ERS

DR.

TO I-670

WB

FR

OM I-670 E

B

315

670

5850/6600

4060/4630

315

PLATE 4 OF 4

NO PID

FRA-315-2.11

1790/1970

1070/1220

3580/4130

4650/5350

120/13

080/

90

1080/1310

20/20

610/

700

590/

740

130/280

50/90

160/

390

860/

1090

180/370

770/1090

20/70

420/870

270/590

70/70

100/120

60/80

40/50

770/1090

650/770

350/440

160/190

210/390

130/190

940/1030

2940/3230

640/900

890/1160

20/20




2017/2037 PM DHV WITH TRIP-GEN

FRA-315-2.11 NO PID

N

GOODALE ST.

OLE

NT

AN

GY RIV

ER

RD.

TWIN

RIV

ERS

DR.

TO I-670

WB

FR

OM I-670 E

B

Appendix B. Capacity Analysis Results, Olentangy River Road

HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary

General Information Intersection Information

Agency Trans Associates Duration, h 0.25

Analyst AMC Analysis Date Jul 30, 2015 Area Type Other

Jurisdiction City of Columbus Time Period AM Peak Hour PHF 0.92

Intersection Time Warner Cable Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

File Name (1) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ Time Warner - No Build.xus

Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS

Demand Information EB WB NB SB

Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R

Demand (v), veh/h 30 30 210 870 1290 70

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

13.0 57.3 35.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.01.0 0.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

6 7 8

Cycle, s 120.0 Reference Phase 2

Offset, s 0 Reference Point Begin

Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On

Force Mode Float Simult. Gap N/S On

Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT

Assigned Phase 4 5 2 6

Case Number 9.0 1.0 4.0 8.3

Phase Duration, s 39.7 17.6 80.3 62.7

Change Period, (Y+Rc), s 4.7 4.6 5.4 5.4

Max Allow Headway (MAH), s 4.5 4.2 4.1 4.1

Queue Clearance Time (gs), s 3.8 8.6 16.8 41.1

Green Extension Time (ge), s 0.2 0.3 18.7 10.4

Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Max Out Probability 0.00 0.88 0.13 0.63

Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB


Assigned Movement 7 14 5 2 6 16

Adjusted Flow Rate (v), veh/h 33 33 228 946 744 734

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate (s), veh/h/ln 1774 1579 1774 1773 1863 1829

Queue Service Time (gs), s 1.6 1.8 6.6 14.8 38.8 39.1

Cycle Queue Clearance Time (gc), s 1.6 1.8 6.6 14.8 38.8 39.1

Green Ratio (g/C) 0.30 0.30 0.63 0.66 0.52 0.52

Capacity (c), veh/h 540 480 333 2347 959 896

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (X) 0.060 0.068 0.686 0.403 0.776 0.819

Available Capacity (ca), veh/h 540 480 333 2347 959 896

Back of Queue (Q), veh/ln (50th percentile) 0.7 0.7 7.0 5.0 16.7 17.1

Queue Storage Ratio (RQ) (50th percentile) 0.25 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00

Uniform Delay (d1), s/veh 29.6 29.7 22.4 10.2 24.6 23.7

Incremental Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.1 6.1 0.1 4.2 6.2

Initial Queue Delay (d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay (d), s/veh 29.7 29.7 28.5 10.3 28.7 29.9

Level of Service (LOS) C C C B C C

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 29.7 C 0.0 13.9 B 29.3 C

Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 22.6 C

Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB

Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.9 C 2.8 C 0.7 A 2.3 B

Bicycle LOS Score / LOS F 1.5 A 1.7 A

Copyright © 2015 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.65 Generated: 7/30/2015 4:00:14 PM






Intersection SR 315 SB Ramps Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

File Name (2) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ SR 315 SB - No Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 380 0 190 890 260 610 710

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

32.0 34.3 37.2 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.8 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

5 6 7 8







Case Number 12.0 8.3 1.0 4.0

Phase Duration, s 42.6 40.0 37.4 77.4









Assigned Movement 3 8 18 2 12 1 6

Adjusted Flow Rate (v), veh/h 620 648 602 663 772

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate (s), veh/h/ln 1704 1863 1718 1774 1773

Queue Service Time (gs), s 38.7 42.7 38.8 33.5 12.2

Cycle Queue Clearance Time (gc), s 38.7 42.7 38.8 33.5 12.2

Green Ratio (g/C) 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.59 0.63

Capacity (c), veh/h 549 602 512 555 2252

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (X) 1.128 1.077 1.174 1.194 0.343

Available Capacity (ca), veh/h 528 602 512 555 2252

Back of Queue (Q), veh/ln (50th percentile) 27.8 26.8 29.6 31.7 4.4

Queue Storage Ratio (RQ) (50th percentile) 0.67 1.48 1.64 1.13 0.09

Uniform Delay (d1), s/veh 40.7 40.6 41.3 36.2 11.1

Incremental Delay (d2), s/veh 78.6 59.0 97.4 104.1 0.4

Initial Queue Delay (d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay (d), s/veh 119.2 99.6 138.7 140.3 11.5

Level of Service (LOS) F F F F B

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 0.0 119.2 F 118.4 F 71.0 E

Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 98.0 F


Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.8 C 2.9 C 2.1 B 1.9 A

Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.5 A 1.5 A 1.7 A







Urban Street Olentangy River Road Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

Intersection Goodale Boulevard File Name (3) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ Goodale - No Build.xus




Demand ( v ), veh/h 340 900 30 30 900 730 60 80 510 110 470

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 10.6 38.1 28.1 10.0 0.03.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 3.6 0.01.4 1.1 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.0

1 2 3 4

5 6 7


Offset, s 0 Reference Point End


Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On


Assigned Phase 5 2 1 6 8 4

Case Number 1.1 4.0 1.1 3.0 10.0 9.0

Phase Duration, s 27.3 58.7 12.0 43.4 15.2 34.1

Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 4.7 5.3 5.0 5.3 5.2 6.0

Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.3 4.2 3.3 4.2 4.5 4.8

Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 19.7 55.4 3.4 35.7 7.4 30.1

Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.1 0.0

Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Max Out Probability 1.00 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00



Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 7 4 14

Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 370 1011 33 978 460 65 87 554 120 511

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1774 1852 1774 1773 1579 1774 1863 1774 1863 1579

Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 17.7 53.4 1.4 31.2 33.7 4.2 5.4 28.1 6.3 28.1

Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 17.7 53.4 1.4 31.2 33.7 4.2 5.4 28.1 6.3 28.1

Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.52 0.45 0.38 0.32 0.32 0.08 0.08 0.23 0.23 0.42

Capacity ( c ), veh/h 427 824 163 1126 501 148 155 415 436 667

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X ) 0.865 1.227 0.199 0.869 0.917 0.441 0.560 1.334 0.274 0.766

Available Capacity ( c a ), veh/h 427 824 163 1126 501 148 155 415 436 667

Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile) 12.8 48.7 1.0 14.4 15.8 2.0 2.8 31.1 3.0 13.4

Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.69 2.63 0.14 0.35 0.89 0.14 0.00 2.08 0.17 0.74

Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 29.8 33.3 29.9 38.6 39.4 52.3 52.9 46.0 37.6 29.6

Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 16.5 112.7 0.4 7.6 22.0 2.6 5.3 166.1 1.6 8.2

Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 46.2 146.0 30.3 46.2 61.4 55.0 58.1 212.1 39.2 37.8

Level of Service (LOS) D F C D E D E F D D

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 119.3 F 50.6 D 56.8 E 119.5 F



Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.4 B 3.1 C 2.7 B

Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 2.8 C 1.7 A 0.7 A 2.4 B

Copyright © 2016 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Signals Version 6.70 Generated: 2/5/2016 11:59:22 AM






Intersection Time Warner Cable Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

File Name (1) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ Time Warner - Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 30 30 210 870 1290 70

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

13.0 57.3 35.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.01.0 0.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

6 7 8







Case Number 9.0 1.0 4.0 8.3

Phase Duration, s 39.7 17.6 80.3 62.7














Green Ratio (g/C) 0.30 0.30 0.63 0.66 0.52 0.52

Capacity (c), veh/h 540 480 333 2347 959 896









Level of Service (LOS) C C C B C C












Intersection SR 315 SB Ramps Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

File Name (2) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ SR 315 SB - Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 380 190 890 260 610 710

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

40.5 46.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.8 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

5 6 7 8







Case Number 9.0 8.3 1.0 4.0

Phase Duration, s 22.4 51.7 45.9 97.6














Green Ratio (g/C) 0.15 0.50 0.42 0.42 0.76 0.80

Capacity (c), veh/h 531 796 784 680 717 2849









Level of Service (LOS) E B D D D A

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 0.0 43.2 D 44.5 D 24.1 C

Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 35.4 D










Urban Street Olentangy River Road Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 7:00

Intersection Goodale Boulevard File Name (3) 2037 AM - Olentangy @ Goodale - Build.xus




Demand ( v ), veh/h 340 900 30 30 900 730 60 80 50 510 110 470

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 8.5 45.8 22.5 10.0 0.03.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 3.6 0.01.4 1.1 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.0

1 2 3 4

5 6 7







Case Number 1.1 4.0 1.1 3.0 9.0 9.0

Phase Duration, s 25.2 64.3 12.0 51.1 15.2 28.5









Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14

Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 370 1011 33 978 529 65 87 54 333 341 511

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1774 1852 1774 1773 1579 1774 1863 1579 1774 1805 1579

Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 13.9 59.0 1.3 28.3 37.4 4.2 5.4 3.9 22.5 22.5 22.5

Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 13.9 59.0 1.3 28.3 37.4 4.2 5.4 3.9 22.5 22.5 22.5

Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.57 0.49 0.44 0.38 0.38 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.36

Capacity ( c ), veh/h 447 911 163 1354 602 148 155 132 333 338 566

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X ) 0.827 1.110 0.199 0.723 0.879 0.441 0.560 0.413 1.000 1.008 0.903

Available Capacity ( c a ), veh/h 447 911 163 1354 602 148 155 132 333 338 566

Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile) 12.2 41.2 1.0 12.2 16.3 2.0 2.8 1.7 14.2 14.6 16.6

Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile) 0.66 2.22 0.14 0.29 0.92 0.14 0.00 0.28 0.95 0.81 0.92

Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 22.2 30.5 27.9 31.7 34.5 52.3 52.9 52.2 48.7 48.8 36.5

Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 11.9 64.8 0.4 2.0 14.1 2.6 5.3 2.7 49.3 51.1 20.3

Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 34.1 95.3 28.3 33.7 48.6 55.0 58.1 54.9 98.1 99.8 56.8

Level of Service (LOS) C F C C D D E D F F E

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 78.9 E 38.7 D 56.3 E 80.8 F

Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 64.0 E




Copyright © 2016 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Signals Version 6.70 Generated: 2/5/2016 11:52:35 AM





Jurisdiction City of Columbus Time Period PM Peak Hour PHF 0.92

Intersection Time Warner Cable Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

File Name (1) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ Time Warner - No Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 90 130 20 1160 1310 20

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 57.8 40.5 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.01.0 0.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

6 7 8







Case Number 9.0 1.0 4.0 8.3

Phase Duration, s 45.2 11.6 74.8 63.2














Green Ratio (g/C) 0.35 0.35 0.58 0.62 0.52 0.52

Capacity (c), veh/h 621 553 254 2184 967 916









Level of Service (LOS) C C B B C C












Intersection SR 315 SB Ramps Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

File Name (2) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ SR 315 SB - No Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 280 0 90 1090 390 700 740

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

36.3 43.5 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.8 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

5 6 7 8







Case Number 12.0 8.3 1.0 4.0

Phase Duration, s 29.1 49.2 41.7 90.9









Assigned Movement 3 8 18 2 12 1 6

Adjusted Flow Rate (v), veh/h 402 826 782 761 804

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate (s), veh/h/ln 1722 1863 1697 1774 1773

Queue Service Time (gs), s 25.2 57.5 48.0 37.8 8.9

Cycle Queue Clearance Time (gc), s 25.2 57.5 48.0 37.8 8.9

Green Ratio (g/C) 0.21 0.40 0.40 0.71 0.75

Capacity (c), veh/h 362 745 636 619 2651

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (X) 1.112 1.109 1.229 1.230 0.303

Available Capacity (ca), veh/h 340 745 636 619 2651

Back of Queue (Q), veh/ln (50th percentile) 18.8 34.3 39.4 37.4 2.6

Queue Storage Ratio (RQ) (50th percentile) 0.45 1.89 2.18 1.34 0.06

Uniform Delay (d1), s/veh 47.4 36.0 36.8 35.9 5.5

Incremental Delay (d2), s/veh 81.1 67.0 116.6 117.0 0.3

Initial Queue Delay (d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay (d), s/veh 128.5 103.0 153.5 152.9 5.8

Level of Service (LOS) F F F F A

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 0.0 128.5 F 127.5 F 77.3 E




Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.8 A 1.8 A







Urban Street Olentangy River Road Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

Intersection Goodale Boulevard File Name (3) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ Goodale - No Build.xus




Demand ( v ), veh/h 590 870 70 50 1090 770 80 120 440 190 390

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 20.4 33.7 22.7 10.0 0.03.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 3.6 0.01.4 1.1 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.0

1 2 3 4

5 6 7







Case Number 1.1 4.0 1.1 3.0 10.0 9.0

Phase Duration, s 37.1 64.1 12.0 39.0 15.2 28.7









Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 7 4 14

Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 641 1022 54 1185 499 87 130 478 207 424

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1774 1838 1774 1773 1579 1774 1863 1774 1863 1579

Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 32.4 58.8 2.5 33.7 33.7 5.7 8.3 22.7 12.1 22.7

Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 32.4 58.8 2.5 33.7 33.7 5.7 8.3 22.7 12.1 22.7

Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.57 0.49 0.34 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.46

Capacity ( c ), veh/h 539 901 163 996 443 148 155 336 352 725

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X ) 1.190 1.134 0.332 1.190 1.125 0.588 0.840 1.425 0.586 0.585

Available Capacity ( c a ), veh/h 539 901 163 996 443 148 155 336 352 725

Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile) 26.1 43.1 1.1 27.6 22.9 2.8 5.3 29.1 6.1 9.1

Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile) 1.41 2.33 0.15 0.67 1.29 0.21 0.00 1.94 0.34 0.50

Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 36.2 30.6 31.8 43.2 43.2 53.0 54.2 48.7 44.4 24.0

Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 102.8 74.2 0.9 95.4 81.6 6.8 32.4 207.9 7.0 3.4

Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 139.0 104.8 32.6 138.6 124.8 59.8 86.6 256.5 51.3 27.4

Level of Service (LOS) F F C F F E F F D C

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 118.0 F 131.3 F 75.9 E 130.7 F





Copyright © 2016 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Signals Version 6.70 Generated: 2/5/2016 12:18:36 PM






Intersection Time Warner Cable Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

File Name (1) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ Time Warner - Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 90 130 20 1160 1310 20

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 57.8 40.5 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.01.0 0.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

6 7 8







Case Number 9.0 1.0 4.0 8.3

Phase Duration, s 45.2 11.6 74.8 63.2














Green Ratio (g/C) 0.35 0.35 0.58 0.62 0.52 0.52

Capacity (c), veh/h 621 553 254 2184 967 916









Level of Service (LOS) C C B B C C












Intersection SR 315 SB Ramps Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

File Name (2) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ SR 315 SB - Build.xus




Demand (v), veh/h 280 90 1090 390 700 740

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

43.0 50.5 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.03.6 4.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.01.8 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 3 4

5 6 7 8







Case Number 9.0 8.3 1.0 4.0

Phase Duration, s 15.4 56.2 48.4 104.6














Green Ratio (g/C) 0.10 0.47 0.46 0.46 0.82 0.86

Capacity (c), veh/h 330 737 854 735 718 3056









Level of Service (LOS) F B E F F A

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 0.0 68.2 E 70.2 E 42.2 D

Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 57.7 E










Urban Street Olentangy River Road Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Analysis Period 1> 5:00

Intersection Goodale Boulevard File Name (3) 2037 PM - Olentangy @ Goodale - Build.xus




Demand ( v ), veh/h 590 870 70 50 1090 770 80 120 70 440 190 390

Signal Information

GreenYellowRed

7.0 22.5 35.6 18.7 10.0 0.03.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 3.6 0.01.4 1.1 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.0

1 2 3 4

5 6 7







Case Number 1.1 4.0 1.1 3.0 9.0 9.0

Phase Duration, s 39.2 68.1 12.0 40.9 15.2 24.7









Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14

Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 641 1022 54 1185 543 87 130 76 340 345 424

Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1774 1838 1774 1773 1579 1774 1863 1579 1774 1827 1579

Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 34.5 62.8 2.4 35.6 35.6 5.7 8.3 5.6 18.7 18.7 18.7

Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 34.5 62.8 2.4 35.6 35.6 5.7 8.3 5.6 18.7 18.7 18.7

Green Ratio ( g/C ) 0.60 0.52 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.44

Capacity ( c ), veh/h 570 962 163 1052 468 148 155 132 276 285 700

Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X ) 1.125 1.062 0.332 1.126 1.160 0.588 0.840 0.578 1.228 1.212 0.606

Available Capacity ( c a ), veh/h 570 962 163 1052 468 148 155 132 276 285 700

Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile) 29.4 38.4 1.6 25.3 25.7 2.8 5.3 2.5 18.0 18.1 9.4

Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile) 1.59 2.08 0.23 0.61 1.45 0.21 0.00 0.42 1.21 1.00 0.52

Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 35.9 28.6 31.0 42.2 42.2 53.0 54.2 53.0 50.7 50.7 25.4

Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 77.0 47.0 0.9 69.2 93.7 6.8 32.4 7.1 130.3 123.5 3.9

Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 112.9 75.6 31.9 111.4 135.9 59.8 86.6 60.1 181.0 174.2 29.3

Level of Service (LOS) F F C F F E F E F F C

Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 90.0 F 116.5 F 71.8 E 120.9 F





Copyright © 2016 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Signals Version 6.70 Generated: 2/5/2016 12:12:11 PM

Appendix C. Capacity Analysis Results, SR 315 Southbound

BASIC FREEWAY SEGMENTS WORKSHEET

General Information Site Information Analyst AMC Highway/Direction of Travel SR 315/Southbound

Agency or Company Trans Associates From/To I-670 EB Diverge/ORR Off Ramp

Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS

Oper.(LOS) Des.(N) Planning Data Flow InputsVolume, V 3330 veh/h Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 AADT veh/day %Trucks and Buses, PT 5

Peak-Hr Prop. of AADT, K %RVs, PR 0 Peak-Hr Direction Prop, D General Terrain: Level DDHV = AADT x K x D veh/h Grade % Length mi

Up/Down %

Calculate Flow Adjustmentsfp 1.00 ER 1.2 ET 1.5 fHV = 1/[1+PT(ET - 1) + PR(ER - 1)] 0.976

Speed Inputs Calc Speed Adj and FFSLane Width ft Rt-Side Lat. Clearance ft Number of Lanes, N 2 Total Ramp Density, TRD ramps/mi FFS (measured) 55.0 mph Base free-flow Speed, BFFS mph

fLW mph fLC mph TRD Adjustment mph

FFS 55.0 mph

LOS and Performance Measures Design (N)

Operational (LOS)vp = (V or DDHV) / (PHF x N x fHVx fp)

1816 pc/h/ln

S 55.0 mph D = vp / S 33.0 pc/mi/ln LOS D

Design (N) Design LOSvp = (V or DDHV) / (PHF x N x fHVx fp)

pc/h/ln

S mph D = vp / S pc/mi/ln Required Number of Lanes, N

Glossary Factor LocationN - Number of lanes S - SpeedV - Hourly volume D - Densityvp - Flow rate FFS - Free-flow speedLOS - Level of service BFFS - Base free-flow speedDDHV - Directional design hour volume

ER - Exhibits 11-10, 11-12 fLW - Exhibit 11-8ET - Exhibits 11-10, 11-11, 11-13 fLC - Exhibit 11-9fp - Page 11-18 TRD - Page 11-11LOS, S, FFS, vp - Exhibits 11-2, 11-3

Copyright © 2014 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS 2010TM Version 6.65 Generated: 7/30/2015 11:33 AM

Page 1 of 1BASIC FREEWAY WORKSHEET

7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2k7658.tmp

RAMPS AND RAMP JUNCTIONS WORKSHEETGeneral Information Site Information Analyst AMC Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/SouthboundAgency or Company Trans Associates Junction Olentangy River Road Off RampDate Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build)Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs

Upstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Lup = 885 ft

Vu = 3070 veh/h

Freeway Number of Lanes, N 2 Ramp Number of Lanes, N 1 Acceleration Lane Length, LADeceleration Lane Length LD 530 Freeway Volume, VF 3330 Ramp Volume, VR 570 Freeway Free-Flow Speed, SFF 55.0 Ramp Free-Flow Speed, SFR 35.0

Downstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Ldown = ft

VD = veh/h

Conversion to pc/h Under Base Conditions (pc/h) V

(Veh/hr) PHF Terrain %Truck %Rv fHV fp v = V/PHF x fHV x fpFreeway 3330 0.94 Level 5 0 0.976 1.00 3631Ramp 570 0.94 Level 2 0 0.990 1.00 612UpStream 3070 0.94 Level 5 0 0.976 1.00 3348DownStream

Merge Areas Diverge AreasEstimation of v12 Estimation of v12

V12 = VF ( PFM )LEQ = (Equation 13-6 or 13-7)PFM = using Equation (Exhibit 13-6) V12 = pc/h V3 or Vav34 pc/h (Equation 13-14 or 13-17)Is V3 or Vav34 > 2,700 pc/h? Yes NoIs V3 or Vav34 > 1.5 * V12/2 Yes No

If Yes,V12a = pc/h (Equation 13-16, 13-18, or 13-19)

V12 = VR + (VF - VR)PFDLEQ = (Equation 13-12 or 13-13) PFD = 1.000 using Equation (Exhibit 13-7) V12 = 3631 pc/h V3 or Vav34 0 pc/h (Equation 13-14 or 13-17)Is V3 or Vav34 > 2,700 pc/h? Yes No

Is V3 or Vav34 > 1.5 * V12/2 Yes No


Capacity Checks Capacity ChecksActual Capacity LOS F? Actual Capacity LOS F?

VFO Exhibit 13-8

VF 3631 Exhibit 13-8 4500 NoVFO = VF - VR 3019 Exhibit 13-8 4500 No

VR 612 Exhibit 13-10 2000 No

Flow Entering Merge Influence Area Flow Entering Diverge Influence AreaActual Max Desirable Violation? Actual Max Desirable Violation?

VR12 Exhibit 13-8 V12 3631 Exhibit 13-8 4400:All NoLevel of Service Determination (if not F) Level of Service Determination (if not F)

DR = 5.475 + 0.00734 v R + 0.0078 V12 - 0.00627 LADR = (pc/mi/ln)LOS = (Exhibit 13-2)

DR = 4.252 + 0.0086 V12 - 0.009 LDDR = 30.7 (pc/mi/ln)LOS = D (Exhibit 13-2)

Speed Determination Speed DeterminationMS = (Exibit 13-11) SR= mph (Exhibit 13-11) S0= mph (Exhibit 13-11) S = mph (Exhibit 13-13)

Ds = 0.483 (Exhibit 13-12) SR= 48.7 mph (Exhibit 13-12) S0= N/A mph (Exhibit 13-12) S = 48.7 mph (Exhibit 13-13)

Copyright © 2014 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS2010TM Version 6.65 Generated: 7/30/2015 11:34 AM

Page 1 of 1RAMPS AND RAMP JUNCTIONS WORKSHEET

7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/r2k1BD9.tmp



Agency or Company Trans Associates From/To ORR Off Ramp/ORR On Ramp

Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



1505 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln






7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2kBFE5.tmp

FREEWAY WEAVING WORKSHEETGeneral Information Site Information

Analyst AMC Agency/Company Trans Associates Date Performed 7/30/2015 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour

Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/Southbound Weaving Segment Location ORR On Ramp/I-670W Diverge Analysis Year 2037 (No Build)

Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs

Weaving configuration One-Sided Weaving number of lanes, N 3 Weaving segment length, LS 840ftFreeway free-flow speed, FFS 55 mph

Segment type FreewayFreeway minimum speed, SMIN 15Freeway maximum capacity, CIFL 2250Terrain type Level

Conversions to pc/h Under Base ConditionsV (veh/h) PHF Truck (%) RV (%) E T E R fHV fp v (pc/h)

VFF 2170 0.94 5 0 1.5 1.2 0.976 1.00 2366 VRF 810 0.94 2 0 1.5 1.2 0.990 1.00 870 VFR 590 0.94 5 0 1.5 1.2 0.976 1.00 643 VRR 160 0.94 2 0 1.5 1.2 0.990 1.00 172 VNW 2538 V = 4051 VW 1513 VR 0.373 Configuration CharacteristicsMinimum maneuver lanes, NWL 2 lcInterchange density, ID 1.3 int/miMinimum RF lane changes, LCRF 1 lc/pcMinimum FR lane changes, LCFR 1 lc/pcMinimum RR lane changes, LCRR lc/pc

Minimum weaving lane changes, LCMIN 1513 lc/hWeaving lane changes, LCW 1672 lc/hNon-weaving lane changes, LCNW 400 lc/hTotal lane changes, LCALL 2072 lc/hNon-weaving vehicle index, INW 277

Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service, and CapacityWeaving segment flow rate, v 3969 veh/hWeaving segment capacity, cw 5344 veh/hWeaving segment v/c ratio 0.743 Weaving segment density, D 34.4 pc/mi/lnLevel of Service, LOS D

Weaving intensity factor, W 0.461 Weaving segment speed, S 39.3 mphAverage weaving speed, SW 42.4 mphAverage non-weaving speed, SNW 37.6 mphMaximum weaving length, LMAX 6385 ft

Notesa. Weaving segments longer than the calculated maximum length should be treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 13, "Freeway Merge and Diverge Segments". b. For volumes that exceed the weaving segment capacity, the level of service is "F".

Copyright © 2015 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS 2010TM Version 6.70 Generated: 2/5/2016 12:40 PM

Page 1 of 1FREEWAY WEAVING WORKSHEET

2/5/2016file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/s2k89DE.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



1816 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln






7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2k8CE4.tmp

RAMPS AND RAMP JUNCTIONS WORKSHEETGeneral Information Site Information Analyst AMC Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/SouthboundAgency or Company Trans Associates Junction Olentangy River Road Off RampDate Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build)Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs

Upstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Lup = 885 ft

Vu = 3070 veh/h


Downstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Ldown = ft

VD = veh/h










VFO Exhibit 13-8

VF 3631 Exhibit 13-8 4500 NoVFO = VF - VR 3019 Exhibit 13-8 4500 No

VR 612 Exhibit 13-10 2000 No


VR12 Exhibit 13-8 V12 3631 Exhibit 13-8 4400:All NoLevel of Service Determination (if not F) Level of Service Determination (if not F)


DR = 4.252 + 0.0086 V12 - 0.009 LDDR = 30.7 (pc/mi/ln)LOS = D (Exhibit 13-2)





7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/r2k3801.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



1505 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln






7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2kF9A.tmp


Analyst AMC Agency/Company Trans Associates Date Performed 7/30/2015 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour

Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/Southbound Weaving Segment Location ORR On Ramp/I-670W Diverge Analysis Year 2037 (Build)

Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs





Minimum weaving lane changes, LCMIN 1513 lc/hWeaving lane changes, LCW 1672 lc/hNon-weaving lane changes, LCNW 400 lc/hTotal lane changes, LCALL 2072 lc/hNon-weaving vehicle index, INW 277

Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service, and CapacityWeaving segment flow rate, v 3969 veh/hWeaving segment capacity, cw 5344 veh/hWeaving segment v/c ratio 0.743 Weaving segment density, D 34.4 pc/mi/lnLevel of Service, LOS D

Weaving intensity factor, W 0.461 Weaving segment speed, S 39.3 mphAverage weaving speed, SW 42.4 mphAverage non-weaving speed, SNW 37.6 mphMaximum weaving length, LMAX 6385 ft

Notesa. Weaving segments longer than the calculated maximum length should be treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures of Chapter 13, "Freeway Merge and Diverge Segments". b. For volumes that exceed the weaving segment capacity, the level of service is "F".



7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kE485.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



2524 pc/h/ln

S 42.1 mph D = vp / S 60.0 pc/mi/ln LOS F


pc/h/ln






7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2kACC2.tmp

RAMPS AND RAMP JUNCTIONS WORKSHEETGeneral Information Site Information Analyst AMC Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/SouthboundAgency or Company Trans Associates Junction Olentangy River Road Off RampDate Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build)Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs

Upstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Lup = 885 ft

Vu = 1970 veh/h


Downstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Ldown = ft

VD = veh/h










VFO Exhibit 13-8

VF 5049 Exhibit 13-8 4500 YesVFO = VF - VR 4651 Exhibit 13-8 4500 Yes

VR 398 Exhibit 13-10 2000 No


VR12 Exhibit 13-8 V12 5049 Exhibit 13-8 4400:All YesLevel of Service Determination (if not F) Level of Service Determination (if not F)


DR = 4.252 + 0.0086 V12 - 0.009 LDDR = 42.9 (pc/mi/ln)LOS = F (Exhibit 13-2)





7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/r2k8517.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (No Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



2323 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln






7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2k261.tmp


Analyst AMC Agency/Company Trans Associates Date Performed 7/30/2015 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour

Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/Southbound Weaving Segment Location ORR On Ramp/I-670W Diverge Analysis Year 2037 (No Build)

Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS *Constrained AnalysisInputs





Minimum weaving lane changes, LCMIN lc/hWeaving lane changes, LCW lc/hNon-weaving lane changes, LCNW lc/hTotal lane changes, LCALL lc/hNon-weaving vehicle index, INW

Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service, and CapacityWeaving segment flow rate, v 5474 veh/hWeaving segment capacity, cw 5423 veh/hWeaving segment v/c ratio 1.009 Weaving segment density, D pc/mi/lnLevel of Service, LOS F

Weaving intensity factor, W Weaving segment speed, S mphAverage weaving speed, SW mphAverage non-weaving speed, SNW mphMaximum weaving length, LMAX 6025 ft

Notesa. Weaving segments longer than the calculated maximum length should be treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures ofChapter 13, "Freeway Merge and Diverge Segments". b. For volumes that exceed the weaving segment capacity, the level of service is "F".



7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/s2k7F4D.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



2524 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln

S mphD = vp / S pc/mi/ln Required Number of Lanes, N





7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2kD855.tmp

RAMPS AND RAMP JUNCTIONS WORKSHEETGeneral Information Site Information Analyst AMC Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/SouthboundAgency or Company Trans Associates Junction Olentangy River Road Off RampDate Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build)Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS Inputs

Upstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Lup = 885 ft

Vu = 1970 veh/h


Downstream Adj Ramp

Yes On

No Off

Ldown = ft

VD = veh/h










VFO Exhibit 13-8

VF 5049 Exhibit 13-8 4500 YesVFO = VF - VR 4651 Exhibit 13-8 4500 Yes

VR 398 Exhibit 13-10 2000 No


VR12 Exhibit 13-8 V12 5049 Exhibit 13-8 4400:All YesLevel of Service Determination (if not F) Level of Service Determination (if not F)


DR = 4.252 + 0.0086 V12 - 0.009 LDDR = 42.9 (pc/mi/ln)LOS = F (Exhibit 13-2)

Speed Determination Speed DeterminationMS = (Exibit 13-11)SR= mph (Exhibit 13-11)S0= mph (Exhibit 13-11)S = mph (Exhibit 13-13)

Ds = 0.464 (Exhibit 13-12)SR= 49.0 mph (Exhibit 13-12)S0= N/A mph (Exhibit 13-12)S = 49.0 mph (Exhibit 13-13)



7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/r2k8FE0.tmp




Date Performed 7/30/2015 Jurisdiction ODOT D6 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2037 (Build) Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS



Up/Down %




FFS 55.0 mph



2323 pc/h/ln



pc/h/ln

S mphD = vp / S pc/mi/ln Required Number of Lanes, N





7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/f2k755E.tmp


Analyst AMC Agency/Company Trans Associates Date Performed 7/30/2015 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour

Freeway/Dir of Travel SR 315/Southbound Weaving Segment Location ORR On Ramp/I-670W Diverge Analysis Year 2037 (Build)

Project Description SR 315 SB Off-Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS *Constrained AnalysisInputs





Minimum weaving lane changes, LCMIN lc/hWeaving lane changes, LCW lc/hNon-weaving lane changes, LCNW lc/hTotal lane changes, LCALL lc/hNon-weaving vehicle index, INW

Weaving Segment Speed, Density, Level of Service, and CapacityWeaving segment flow rate, v 5628 veh/hWeaving segment capacity, cw 5391 veh/hWeaving segment v/c ratio 1.044 Weaving segment density, D pc/mi/lnLevel of Service, LOS F

Weaving intensity factor, W Weaving segment speed, S mphAverage weaving speed, SW mphAverage non-weaving speed, SNW mphMaximum weaving length, LMAX 6171 ft

Notesa. Weaving segments longer than the calculated maximum length should be treated as isolated merge and diverge areas using the procedures ofChapter 13, "Freeway Merge and Diverge Segments". b. For volumes that exceed the weaving segment capacity, the level of service is "F".



7/30/2015file:///C:/Users/coatesa/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kE5CC.tmp

Appendix D. Queuing Analysis Results

Through Lane Backup Computation Worksheet(Based on ODOT's Location Design Manual)

Project Name:

Project Number:

Compiled By: Condition:

Note: EB - Eastbound, WB - Westbound, NB - Northbound, SB - Southbound

Source: January 2006 ODOT L& D Manual-Volume I: 401 - 9E, 401 -10E

Left Thru Thru/Right

Average Number of Vehicles/Cycle 1 39 45

PM Peak Hour:

Volume (vph) 20 1160

Cycles/Hour 30 30

Cycle Length (sec) 120

Average Number of Vehicles/Cycle/Lane 1 20

Queue Length (ft) 50 675

120

Average Number of Vehicles/Cycle 7

Average Number of Vehicles/Cycle/Lane 7

Queue Length (ft) 275

Cycles/Hour 30

Number of Lanes 1

Volume (vph) 210

AM Peak Hour:

AMC - Trans Associates No Build/Build

General Information:

Approach

120

SBNB NB

2

870


2

Movement

120

1360

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IMS Intersection: Olentangy River Road @ Time Warner

NWRIN00 - 06292 Year: 2037

30 30

29

15

525

46

23

775

1330

120

30

23

775

AMC - Trans Associates5/19/2015

(1) ORR @ Time Warner.xlsx1 of 1

Queue Length Computation Worksheet(Based on ODOT's Location Design Manual)

Project Name:

Project Number:




30

13

13

475

WB

Left/Right

1

570

120

740

120

30

13

475

30 30

21

21

725

24

12

450

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IMS Intersection: Olentangy River Road @ SR 315 SB Ramps

NWRIN00 - 06292 Year: 2037

AMC - Trans Associates No Build


Approach

120

SBNB SB

1

610


2

Movement

120

710

Cycles/Hour 30

Number of Lanes 2

Volume (vph) 1150

AM Peak Hour:

30

120




19

19

650

370

120



Thru/Right Left Thru


PM Peak Hour:


Cycles/Hour 30 30



(2) ORR @ 315 - No Build.xlsx1 of 1


Project Name:

Project Number:




250

30

9

9

350

170

120

30

6

6

3

3

150

WB

Right

1

190

120

30

7

7

275

90

120

3030

4

4

175

WB

Left

1

110

120

30

110

120

740

120

30

13

475

30 30

21

21

725

24

12

450

120

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IMS Intersection: Olentangy River Road @ SR 315 SB Ramps

NWRIN00 - 06292 Year: 2037

AMC - Trans Associates Build


Approach

120

SBNB SB

1

610


2

Movement

120

710

Number of Lanes 2

Volume (vph) 1150

AM Peak Hour:

WB

Left

1

270

120




4

4

175



Thru/Right Left Thru


PM Peak Hour:


Cycles/Hour 30 30


Cycles/Hour 30


(2) ORR @ 315 - Build, 3 lanes.xlsx1 of 1


Project Name:

Project Number:




3 4

3 4

150 175

80 120

120 120

30 30

WB

Right

1

730

120

NB NB

Left Thru

1 1

60 80

120 120

37

19

650

30

30

15

525

1090

26

855

30

25

25

825

770

120

30

26

30

30 30 30

12 31 1

EB

120

30

475

30 30

4

4

175

16

16

550

120

390

120

30

13

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IMS Intersection: Olentangy River Road @ Goodale Boulevard

NWRIN00 - 06292 Year:

AMC - Trans Associates

2037

No Build


Approach

120

SBSB SB

1

110


1

Movement

120

470

Left Thru Right

EB WB

Left Thru/Right Left

WB

Thru

2

Cycles/Hour 30

Number of Lanes 1

Volume (vph) 510

AM Peak Hour:

1 1 1

340 930 30

120 120 120

900

120

30 30




12 31 1

450 1005 50

2 3

2 3

100 150


Queue Length (ft) 525 275675 1035 100

20 32 2


PM Peak Hour:


Cycles/Hour 30 30


590 940 50

20 32 2

120 120 120

30 30


(3) ORR @ Goodale.xlsx1 of 1


Project Name:

Project Number:





PM Peak Hour:


Cycles/Hour 30 30


590 940 50

20 32 2

120 120 120

30 30


Queue Length (ft) 400 400675 1035 100

20 32 2




12 31 1

450 1005 50

2 3

2 3

100 150

Cycles/Hour 30

Number of Lanes 1

Volume (vph) 310

AM Peak Hour:

1 1 1

340 930 30

120 120 120

900

120

30 30

Approach

120

SBSB SB

1

310


1

Movement

120

470

Left Left/Thru Right

EB WB

Left Thru/Right Left

WB

Thru

2

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IMS Intersection: Olentangy River Road @ Goodale Boulevard

NWRIN00 - 06292 Year: 2037

AMC - Trans Associates Build


475

30 30

11

11

400

16

16

550

120

390

120

30

13

30

30 30 30

12 31 1

EB

120

30

37

19

650

30

30

15

525

1090

26

855

30

25

25

825

770

120

30

26

WB

Right

1

730

120

NB NB

Left Thru

1 1

60 80

120 120

3 4

3 4

150 175

80 120

120 120

30 30


(3) ORR @ Goodale - Build.xlsx1 of 1

Turn Lane Length Computation Worksheet(Based on ODOT's Location Design Manual)

Project Name:

Project Number:


Design Method



Left

Total

Condition C (Moderate Speed

Deceleration & Storage)

Condition B (High Speed Decel Only)

Condition A (Storage Only)

50

175

225

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

4

175

Taper

Storage

19%

HIGH

A

120

30

NO

35

110

570

Signalized

Unsignalized Stopped Crossroad

Olentangy River Road @ SR 315 SB Ramps

2037

Build

Westbound

AM

YES

NO


Peak Hour

Type of Traffic Control

Approach

SR 315 SB Off Ramp to Olentangy River Road - IOS

NWRIN00 - 06292

AMC - Trans Associates

Intersection:

Year:

Westbound

Right

AM

YES

NO

Movement

Decel Length

Total

Taper

Unsignalized Through Road

Applicable Design Condition (A, B or C)

Cycles/Hour

Storage Length (ft)

Approach Volume (vph)

High or Low

Design Parameters

Design Speed

Average Number of Vehicles/Cycle

Cycle Length (sec)

Turn Volume (vph)

NO

35

190

570

33%

HIGH

Decel Length

Storage

175

225

-

-

-

275

325

Turn Percentage

Required Turn Lane Length, including 50' taper (ft/lane) =

Required Storage and/or Decel Length (ft/lane) =

Total

Taper

A

120

30

7

275

50

275

325

-

-

-

-


ODOT L&D - Turn Lane Lengths - Off Ramp.xlsx1 of 1

2037 AM - No Build (Optimized Timing)Queuing and Blocking Report Grandview Yard (NWRIN00 - 06292)

AMC - Trans Associates SimTraffic Report5/15/2015 Page 4

Intersection: 1: Olentangy River Rd & Time Warner Dr

Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SBDirections Served L R L T T T TRMaximum Queue (ft) 66 82 210 111 134 1004 939Average Queue (ft) 29 24 103 25 37 432 33395th Queue (ft) 63 61 177 83 113 1083 1003Link Distance (ft) 190 1268 1268 1199 1199Upstream Blk Time (%) 5 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0Storage Bay Dist (ft) 70 400Storage Blk Time (%) 2 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0

Intersection: 2: Olentangy River Rd & SR 315 Ramp

Movement WB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served LR T T> L T TMaximum Queue (ft) 1109 589 586 760 1269 1108Average Queue (ft) 1053 466 496 585 803 20395th Queue (ft) 1209 650 667 938 1656 779Link Distance (ft) 1072 516 516 1268 1268Upstream Blk Time (%) 87 8 32 14 0Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 45 183 91 1Storage Bay Dist (ft) 710Storage Blk Time (%) 29 8Queuing Penalty (veh) 103 49

Intersection: 3: Twin Rivers Dr/Olentangy River Rd & Goodale Blvd

Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L TR L T T R L T R L T RMaximum Queue (ft) 528 536 230 620 680 500 286 682 119 430 564 194Average Queue (ft) 488 512 50 368 476 366 42 309 8 415 478 4495th Queue (ft) 613 526 175 588 821 641 156 757 75 491 759 88Link Distance (ft) 495 495 641 641 677 516 516Upstream Blk Time (%) 28 61 0 36 30 51Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 0 279Storage Bay Dist (ft) 180 450 350 150 380Storage Blk Time (%) 43 0 40 52 68 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 13 1 179 56 75 3

Zone SummaryZone wide Queuing Penalty: 1080

2037 AM - Build, 3 Lanes (Dual SBLT)Queuing and Blocking Report Grandview Yard (NWRIN00 - 06292)



Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SBDirections Served L R L T T T TRMaximum Queue (ft) 82 78 245 25 51 374 296Average Queue (ft) 25 24 114 2 11 127 6895th Queue (ft) 62 59 209 15 36 294 202Link Distance (ft) 190 1252 1252 1199 1199Upstream Blk Time (%)Queuing Penalty (veh)Storage Bay Dist (ft) 70 400Storage Blk Time (%) 3 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0


Movement WB WB WB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L L R T T> L T TMaximum Queue (ft) 468 532 266 573 583 594 433 272Average Queue (ft) 173 309 74 439 460 332 115 4595th Queue (ft) 442 532 231 647 666 547 282 172Link Distance (ft) 1402 516 516 1252 1252Upstream Blk Time (%) 9 13Queuing Penalty (veh) 49 74Storage Bay Dist (ft) 650 650 710Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 0Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 1


Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L TR L T T R L T L LT RMaximum Queue (ft) 520 536 230 546 566 440 126 129 430 530 212Average Queue (ft) 371 451 67 352 347 269 49 63 331 378 12895th Queue (ft) 634 619 209 551 637 534 99 121 466 560 180Link Distance (ft) 495 495 641 641 672 516 516Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 28 1 12 7Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 36Storage Bay Dist (ft) 180 450 350 380Storage Blk Time (%) 41 2 17 0 7 22Queuing Penalty (veh) 12 14 74 0 26 55


2037 PM - No Build (Optimized Timing)Queuing and Blocking Report Grandview Yard (NWRIN00 - 06292)



Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SBDirections Served L R L T T T TRMaximum Queue (ft) 120 208 55 163 191 1065 1039Average Queue (ft) 68 97 14 56 78 659 58995th Queue (ft) 124 188 41 146 191 1479 1482Link Distance (ft) 190 1268 1268 1199 1199Upstream Blk Time (%) 5 30 12Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0Storage Bay Dist (ft) 70 400Storage Blk Time (%) 17 20Queuing Penalty (veh) 22 18


Movement WB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served LR T T> L T TMaximum Queue (ft) 1121 595 577 760 1356 1303Average Queue (ft) 998 496 520 712 1016 38195th Queue (ft) 1299 632 637 879 1786 1217Link Distance (ft) 1072 516 516 1268 1268Upstream Blk Time (%) 73 6 20 25 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 41 144 183 5Storage Bay Dist (ft) 710Storage Blk Time (%) 48 3Queuing Penalty (veh) 176 24


Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L TR L T T R L T R L T RMaximum Queue (ft) 543 541 230 695 683 500 355 611 200 430 551 194Average Queue (ft) 511 506 106 629 631 466 117 309 64 381 381 6895th Queue (ft) 529 581 267 746 758 636 338 696 217 524 732 141Link Distance (ft) 495 495 641 641 677 516 516Upstream Blk Time (%) 64 42 35 40 18 30Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 0 153Storage Bay Dist (ft) 180 450 350 150 380Storage Blk Time (%) 71 35 16 51 0 48 2Queuing Penalty (veh) 36 269 86 77 0 92 9


2037 PM - Build, 3 Lanes (Dual SBLT)Queuing and Blocking Report Grandview Yard (NWRIN00 - 06292)



Movement EB EB NB NB NB SB SBDirections Served L R L T T T TRMaximum Queue (ft) 120 199 56 163 175 1244 1225Average Queue (ft) 67 91 13 50 74 692 64195th Queue (ft) 125 178 42 132 166 1479 1470Link Distance (ft) 190 1252 1252 1199 1199Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 23 7Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0Storage Bay Dist (ft) 70 400Storage Blk Time (%) 16 18Queuing Penalty (veh) 21 16


Movement WB WB WB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L L R T T> L T TMaximum Queue (ft) 587 450 226 611 590 760 1345 1305Average Queue (ft) 206 190 35 526 540 700 1020 61095th Queue (ft) 554 447 71 635 638 913 1823 1524Link Distance (ft) 1402 516 516 1252 1252Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 10 31 32 1Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 78 227 233 8Storage Bay Dist (ft) 650 650 710Storage Blk Time (%) 4 2 50 4Queuing Penalty (veh) 8 2 186 26


Movement EB EB WB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SBDirections Served L TR L T T R L T R L LT RMaximum Queue (ft) 540 537 230 682 691 500 400 704 200 430 560 292Average Queue (ft) 505 502 102 575 613 471 179 450 108 369 455 14295th Queue (ft) 577 588 257 760 787 610 451 829 271 508 638 255Link Distance (ft) 495 495 641 641 672 516 516Upstream Blk Time (%) 66 39 19 36 27 21Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 0 105Storage Bay Dist (ft) 180 450 350 150 380Storage Blk Time (%) 0 65 21 30 0 75 0 12 42Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 33 162 167 1 113 0 49 91


Appendix E. Concept Drawing

1

1

SR

315/

OL

EN

TA

NG

YS

R315

SB

OF

F

RA

MP

RE

ALIG

NM

EN

T

AN

D

TU

RN

LA

NE

AD

DITIO

N

DL

R

AC

J:\

2013

15

05\

Dgn\

DL

R_

Ra

mp_

Layout\

Proposed

Ra

mp

Base

map.d

gn

2/5/2

016 1:5

8:0

4

PM drein

ke

HO

RIZ

ON

TA

L

SC

AL

E IN F

EE

T

075

150

CA

LC

UL

AT

ED

CH

EC

KE

D

N

OLENTANGY RIVER RD

315

- DRAFT -

820' DECEL L

ENGTH

100'

CS

PC

23'

100'

(60MPH)

DIVERGING ¬=2°15'

Dc=4°47'

R=1,198'

350' STORAGE EACH)

(3 x 14' LANES -

42' WIDE

SC

Dc=2°32'

R=2,257'

Dc=18°00'

R=318'

sr 315 southbound ramps at olentangy river road...the southbound sr 315 off ramp to olentangy river...

Documents