wsp canada inc

Reeves

Nova

and In

WSP

Street S

DRAFT

Scotia Tr

nfrastruct

O

P Canada Inc.

Safety St

T FINAL RE

ransporta

ture Rene

October 2

tudy

PORT

ation

ewal

2014

1 SpectacleDartmouthB3B 1X7 Tel: 902‐83Fax: 902‐83www.wspg

e Lake Drive, NS

35‐9955 35‐1645 group.com

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

Chapter

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

nal Report: Rekesbury, Nova

Conten

Introdu

1.1

1.2 S

1.3

Descrip

2.1 T

2.2

Demog

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

Traffic V

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Collisio

5.1 T

5.2 C

eeves Street Sa Scotia

nts

uction ...........

Background .

Study Object

Key Issues ....

ption of Study

The Study Se

Existing Publi

graphics and L

History……. ..

Population Tr

New Dwelling

Land Use Plan

Future Develo

Volume Data

Historical Cou

Manual Turn

Heavy Trucks

Design Hourly

on Data and S

Type of Collis

Collision Loca

Safety Study

T

....................

.....................

ives ...............

.....................

y Area and Ex

ction of Reev

ic Concerns in

Land Use ......

.....................

rends ............

g Starts .........

nning ............

opment ........

a ...................

unt Data .......

ing Movemen

s ....................

y Volume Pro

Safety Review

sions .............

ations ............

Table of C

....................

......................

......................

......................

xisting Conce

ves Street ......

n the Study Se

....................

......................

......................

......................

......................

......................

....................

......................

nt Counts ......

......................

ojections .......

w ..................

......................

......................

Contents

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

erns ..............

.....................

ection ..........

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

P

Octobe

P

....................

......................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

......................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

Page ii

r 2014

Page

...... 1

....... 1

....... 1

....... 1

...... 2

....... 2

....... 5

...... 9

....... 9

....... 9

....... 9

..... 10

..... 10

.... 12

..... 12

..... 12

..... 13

..... 14

.... 15

..... 15

..... 15

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

AAAA

A

Prepared Greg O’BKen O’BriMike Con WSP Can1 SpectacDartmouthPhone: 90Fax: 902-


5.3 C

Access

6.1

6.2 C

6.3 A

Active T

7.1

7.2

Traffic O

8.1

Identifi

9.1

9.2

0 Summa

10.1 S

10.2 S

Appendix AAppendix Appendix Appendix

Appendix

d By:

rien, P.Eng. en, P.Eng. nors, P.Eng.

nada Inc. cle Lake Driveh, NS B3B 1X02-835-9955 835-1645


Collision Rate

Managemen

Background .

Conflict Point

Access Mana

Transportatio

Existing Chall

Potential Opp

Operational

Intersection L

ication and Ev

Road Diet. ....

Intersection U

ary and Recom

Summary. ....

Study Recom

A TermsB TrafficC PropeD Level

(Back

E Level (Impro

e X7

Safety Study

es ..................

nt ..................

.....................

ts ..................

gement Appl

on ................

enges ...........

portunities ...

Review .........

Level of Servi

valuation of

.....................

Upgrades ......

mmendation

.....................

mendations .

s of Referec Volume Derty Owner

of Servicekground Sc

of Serviceovement S

......................

....................

......................

......................

ications in th

....................

......................

......................

....................

ce (LOS) ........

Improvemen

......................

......................

s ..................

......................

......................

ence Data rship Informe Analysis cenarios)

e Analysis Scenarios)

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

e Study Area

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

nt Options ....

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

mation Results an

Results an

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

nd Summa

nd Summa

P

Octobe

......................

....................

......................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

....................

......................

....................

......................

......................

....................

......................

......................

aries

aries

age iii

r 2014

..... 17

.... 18

..... 18

..... 20

..... 21

.... 25

..... 25

..... 25

.... 27

..... 27

.... 30

..... 30

..... 36

.... 42

..... 42

..... 44

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

1.0 In

1.1 Ba

The Novthe Towstudy tofor the aInstitute The Reehighwayprimarilyspeed lieastern

1.2 Stu

The prim C

einimo

Rin

Ro

Rc

Pe

Pw

1.3 Ke

The key N

cRst

Samc


ntroducti

ackground

va Scotia Dwn of Port identify saapproximatto the east

eves Streety connectioy a four lanmits of 70 kend of the

udy Objecti

mary objectConduct a r

ast end ontersectionsmprovemenver the nex

Review all tncluding lefReview optio

f ROW planReview all hanges to t

Prepare funstimates, fo

Prepare recwill complem

ey Issues

y issues to bNSTIR and ost effectiv

Reeves Stretreet.

Since Trunknd since a

maintaining onsideratio


ion

Department Hawkesbu

afety concetely 2.5 kmt end of the

t study sectns from the

ne undividekm/h at thesection.

ves

ives of the road safety of the strs. The nt strategiesxt 20 years.the major ift turn lanesons to incluns to identifthe infrast

the roadwactional desor recommeommendat

ment and su

be aware ofTown offic

ve improveeet with co

k 4 is a pria by-pass

a high mon when pla

Safety Study

of Transpory have corns and to

m long secte street at th

tion is part e Canso Caed urban are west end a

study inclustudy for R

eet to asstudy ides that will p. ntersection

s, signalizatude AT corrfy areas whtructure play character

sign plans, ended imprions regardupport prop

f when comcials, and tements thansideration

mary highwhighway is

mobility funanning and

ortation andommissionerecommen

tion of Reehe Trunk 4

of Trunk 4 auseway torterial streeand 50 km/

de: Reeves Strssess the ntifies cosprovide acc

ns to determtion or consridor, bike lahere additioans to detristics and cincluding a

rovement stding future posed impro

mpleting thehe public,

at will provn to the hig

way connecs not expecnction on evaluating

d Infrastructed WSP Cad cost effe

eves Street(Industrial

that provido the Sydneet without a/h from eas

reet from thdeficiencie

st effectiveceptable le

mine if impstruction of anes and s

onal ROW itermine pocross sectioaccess matrategies. land use c

ovement str

e safety revwant both

vide accepgh number

cting the Scted to be the streetinfrastructu

ture Renewanada Inc.ctive safetyt from the Park Road

des one of ey area. Raccess contst of Granvi

he Nauticales of the e short avels of saf

provementsroundabou

sidewalks, is required.

otential impon.

anagement

controls in trategies.

view includeimmediatetable levelof heavy t

Strait of Cabuilt for m

t must beure improve

P

Octobe

wal (NSTIR) to compley improvemNSCC Nau) intersectio

the two primReeves Stretrol with poille Street to

l Institute toroadway

and long fety and se

s can be muts. ncluding re

pacts from

plans and

the corridor

e: e and long s of safetyrucks using

nso to Sydmany 20 yee an impoements.

Page 1

r 2014

) and ete a

ments utical on.

mary eet is osted o the

o the and

term rvice

made,

eview

any

cost

r that

term y on g the

dney, ears,

ortant

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

2.0 D

2.1 Th

The Stuextendineasterly

2.1.1 R

The firstStreet hgravel s2-2). AInstitute and GrakilometeIsland Reither si


Descriptio

e Study Sec

dy Sectionng from th

to the end

Rural Sectio

t kilometer as a poste

shoulders access in thDriveway

anville Streer of the StRoad east ide of the st

Photo 2-1: L

Photo


on of Stu

ction of Ree

of Reeveshe Nautical

of the stree

on of Street

of street frd 70 km/h

and some che 70 km/h / Embree I

eet. Whiletudy Sectiointersectiontreet betwe

Looking east o

2-2: Looking

Safety Study

dy Area a

eves Street

s Street (Fil Institute et at the sig

rom the Naspeed limit

curbed secsection is sland Road sight dista

on, sight din as illustraeen the Nau

on Reeves Str

east on Reeve

and Exist

gure 2-1) iDriveway /

gnalized Tru

autical Institt. The str

ctions on thlimited to s

d, Macmasances are stance to t

ated in Phoutical Institu

reet from Emb

es Street from

ting Conc

is approxim/ Embreeunk 4 inters

tute Drivewreet has fouhe south sistreet inter

ster Road, generally

the west isoto 2-3. Tute and Phil

bree Island Ro

m Granville Str

cerns

mately 2.5 kIsland Ro

section.

way to just wur travel lanide (Photo rsections wEmbree Islgood throu

s restricted here are nlpott Street

oad west inter

reet intersectio

P

Octobe

kilometers oad interse

west of Phnes with m2-1 and P

with the Nauland Road ughout theat the Em

no sidewalk.

rsection

on

Page 2

r 2014

long, ection

ilpott mostly Photo utical East first

mbree ks on

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

M

A

C

S

W

E

E

N

S

T

R

E

Y

N

O

L

D

S

S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

P

H

I

L

P

O

T

T

S

T

EMBR

EE ISLAN

D R

D

(EAST)

M

A

L

C

O

L

M

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

P

I

T

T

S

T

M

A

C

M

A

S

T

E

R

R

D

N

A

U

T

IC

A

L

IN

S

T

.

D

R

IV

E

W

A

Y

E

M

B

R

E

E

I

S

L

A

N

D

R

D

(

W

E

S

T

)

G

R

A

N

V

I

L

L

E

S

T

M

A

C

S

W

E

E

N

S

T

C

I

V

I

C

C

E

N

T

R

E

D

R

I

V

E

W

A

Y

R

E

Y

N

O

L

D

S

S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

Study Area

Drawn: MIC

Engineer: MIC

FIGURE 2-1: STUDY AREA

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

SCALE: 1:7000 NORTH

JULY 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\08_T

RA

FF

IC

\8.4_R

EP

OR

T_F

IG

UR

ES

\141-13284-T

RA

FF

IC

F

IG

UR

ES

.D

WG

Sheet:F

igure 2-1 S

tudy A

rea

LEGEND

1

Reeves Street @ NSCC Nautical Institute / Embree Island

Road (West)

Reeves Street @ Embrees Island Road (East) /

MacMaster Street

Reeves Street @ Granville Street

Reeves Street @ Philpott Street

Reeves Street @ MacSween Street

Reeves Street @ Pitt Street

Reeves Street @ Reynolds Street

Reeves Street @ Sydney Road

Reeves Street @ Tim Hortons Driveways

Reeves Street @ Shopping Centre Driveways

Signalized Intersection

Study Area Intersections

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

9

10

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

2.1.2 U

The appintersectspeed limto Trunksection to the TPhilpott STOP aintersectstreet as


Photo 2-3: L

Urban Sectio

proximatelytion has fomit. While k 4, the simissing frorunk 4 inteStreet and

at both Sydtion. Theres illustrated

Photo 2


Looking west

on of Street

y 1.5 kilomeour travel lathere is a sdewalk on

om Sydney rsection. T MacSweedney Roade are nume

d in Photo 2

2-4: Looking e

Safety Study

on Reeves St

t

eters of Reanes with sidewalk on

the north Road to th

This sectionn Street, tr

d off-set interous comm2-5 and Pho

east on Reeves

treet from Emb

eves Streecurb and g

n the south side whiche KIA deal

n of street hraffic signaltersections

mercial drivoto 2-6.

s Street towar

bree Island Ro

et from Philgutter on bside of the

h starts at er (Photo 2has STOP ls at Pitt St

s, and traffveways thro

rds Trunk 4 fro

oad east inter

lpott Streetboth sides e street from

MacSwee2-4) and frocontrolled

treet and Rfic signals oughout thi

om Sydney Ro

P

Octobe

rsection

t to the Truand a 50

m Philpott Sen Street hom Tim Horintersection

Reynolds Stat the Trus section o

oad

Page 4

r 2014

unk 4 km/h

Street as a rtons ns at treet, nk 4

of the

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

2.2 Ex

Many ofmeeting

2.2.1 V

Visibilityturns frothe westfaster thdistanceembank As discuRoad eaIsland R


Pho

Photo 2-

isting Publi

f the safety are illustra

Visibility at i

y at intersecom the Naut. While the

han the pose can poskment visibl

ussed in Seast intersec

Road to Ree


oto 2-5: Looki

-6: Looking ea

ic Concerns

y concerns ated on Figu

intersection

ctions was utical Instituere is adequsted speed ssibly be ae at the rig

ection 2.1, sction as illuseves Street

Safety Study

ng east on Re

ast on Reeves

s in the Stu

raised by ture 2-2 and

ns

of concernute drivewauate sight dlimit due t

achieved bht of Photo

sight distanstrated in Pand flashin

eeves Street fr

Street toward

dy Section

the public ad are summ

n at severaay were chdistance (Pto the rural by removin

2-7.

ce to the wPhoto 2-2. Lng warning

rom just east

ds Reynolds S

and discussmarized in th

al locations.allenged bhoto 2-7), vnature of

ng a few

west is restrLeft turns alights are s

of Pitt Street

Street intersec

sed at the phe following

. It was indy limited svehicles mathe road. trees and

ricted at there prohibitesuspended

P

Octobe

ction

project initig paragraph

dicated thaight distancany be travAdditional

d some of

e Embree Ised from Emover the st

Page 5

r 2014

ation hs.

at left ce to

veling sight f the

sland mbree treet.

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

M

A

C

S

W

E

E

N

S

T

R

E

Y

N

O

L

D

S

S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

P

H

I

L

P

O

T

T

S

T

EMBR

EE ISLAN

D R

D

(EAST)

M

A

L

C

O

L

M

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

P

I

T

T

S

T

M

A

C

M

A

S

T

E

R

R

D

N

A

U

T

IC

A

L

IN

S

T

.

D

R

IV

E

W

A

Y

E

M

B

R

E

E

I

S

L

A

N

D

R

D

(

W

E

S

T

)

G

R

A

N

V

I

L

L

E

S

T

M

A

C

S

W

E

E

N

S

T

C

I

V

I

C

C

E

N

T

R

E

D

R

I

V

E

W

A

Y

R

E

Y

N

O

L

D

S

S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

Study Area

Drawn: MIC

Engineer: MIC

FIGURE 2-2: STUDY AREA

EXISTING CONCERNS

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

SCALE: 1:7000 NORTH

LEGEND

JULY 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\08_T

RA

FF

IC

\8.4_R

EP

OR

T_F

IG

UR

ES

\141-13284-T

RA

FF

IC

F

IG

UR

ES

.D

WG

Sheet:F

igure 2-2 Issues

Access Management:

There are several driveway accesses to

commercial developments. Rationalization

of access into fewer driveways can

improve access management and

improve operation and safety.

Sight Lines:

Left turns from MacSween Street can be

challenging due to limited sight lines.

Truck Traffic:

High volume of trucks run along the

corridor. Noise and size can impact

pedestrian and cyclist traffic. Mixing with

vehicular traffic (both local and through)

can impact operational performance.

Sidewalk Gaps:

Gaps in sidewalk connectivity.

Sidewalk Gaps:

Gaps in sidewalk connectivity.

Change in Street Character:

Increased speed limit and limited land

uses west of Philpott Street result in a

more rural street character relative to the

more urban section in the east end of the

Study Area.

Driveway Grade Differential:

Several driveways along the corridor have

more grade differential between the street

and driveway than is desirable.

Movements in and out can be less

comfortable for drivers.

Four-Lane Undivided Street (throughout):

Conflicts and sight visibility limintations

for left turning vehicles

Sight Lines:

Left turns from NSCC Nautical Institute

can be challenging due to limited sight

lines.

School Zone:

Many student crossings. School zone

speed limit can create confusion near

transition zone.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

Photo 2-7:

The appmakes l(Photo 2

Photo 2-

Photo 2-9


: Looking wesim

proach gradleft turns d2-9) interse

-8: Looking ea

9: Looking eas


st on Reeves Smproved by re

de and credifficult fromctions.

ast on Reeves

st from the nois reduced

Safety Study

Street from theemoving smal

est on Reevm both Phil

Street from thcrest o

orth side of Reby power pole

e Nautical Insl trees and a p

ves Street lpott Street

he Philpott Stron Reeves Stre

eeves Street ates and the cre

titute drivewapart of the em

from the et (Photo 2-

reet intersectieet

t the MacSweeest on Reeves

ay. Visibility tombankment.

east reduce-8) and Ma

ion. Visibility

en Street intes Street

P

Octobe

o the west cou

es visibilityacSween S

is reduced by

rsection. Visi

Page 7

r 2014

uld be

y and Street

y the

ibility

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

2.2.2 S

While thintersectthe Nautto Tim H

2.2.3 A

There athrough also for 2-10) andrivewaycaused boulevaturning v

Photo

2.2.4 H

GypsumBio-Masarea.


Sidewalk Ga

here is a cotion to Philtical Institut

Hortons as w

Access Man

re many cotraffic, creapedestrian

nd other loy curb cutby the bumrd (Photo 2vehicles to

2-10: Looking

Photo 2-11: L

Heavy Truck

m trucks, asss Plant, cr


aps

ontinuous spott Streette. Also, thwell as betw

agement

ommercial date potentias walking o

ocations has is that tmp at the 2-11) causpotential co

g east on Reev

Looking east o

k Traffic

s well as hreate traffic

Safety Study

sidewalk ont, there is nhere is a gaween KIA a

driveways inal safety pron the sidewve multiplehe grade dedge of th

ses slow tuollision situa

ves Street at t

on Reeves Str

eavy trucksc congestio

n the southno sidewalkap in the sidand Sydney

n the urbanroblems eswalk. Some drivewaysdifference he curb cuturns by entations.

he very long c

reet at Gatewa

s that haulon and nois

h side of thk for the redewalk on thy Road (Pho

n section thspecially for

me driveways (Photo 2-between tht and the tering drive

curb cut by Le

ay Plaza which

wood fibese which is

he street froemaining kilhe north sidoto 2-4).

hat reduce pr left turnin

y cuts are v-11). Anothe street ashort ramp

ers which c

egion Branch

h has three dr

er to the Pus undesirab

P

Octobe

om the Trulometer wede from Tru

performancg vehicles,

very long (Pther conceand parkinp at the nacan expose

43 and A1 Piz

riveways

ulp Mill andble in an u

Page 8

r 2014

unk 4 est to unk 4

ce for , and

Photo rn at g lot

arrow e left

zza

d the urban

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

3.0 D

3.1 His

By 1860establishperhapsthe yearthoroughfree porPoint Tucentury.

3.2 Po

Today PStrait ofHawkes3-1). Be10 yearopportun(formally

3.3 Ne

Despite number dwellingsuggest

T

P

P


Demograp

story

0, when ‘Shed seafars the most sr the Canshfare betwert. Several upper, whic

opulation Tr

Port Hawkef Canso arbury experetween ther period. Tnities for ty New Page

ew Dwelling

the declineof dwelling

gs are consts investme

otal Population

opulation Chan

opulation Chan

Total Private

Private Dwellinby Usual R


phics and

Ship Harbouring town significant yso Causeween the Mamajor indu

ch would pr

rends

esbury remrea. Howevrienced a ra 2001 and

This populahe local ree Mill) has e

Starts

e in populags for the structed by tnt in the rea

n

nge (persons)

nge (%)

e Dwellings

ngs Occupied Residents

Safety Study

d Land Us

ur’ becamewith both

year in the ay was co

ainland and ustries soorovide the

mains the cver, the reapid decline2011 cens

ation declinesidents. Memployed f

Table 3-1:

ation, theresame 10 yethose that aal estate m

Table 3-2: Pr

2001

3701

-

-

2006

1492

1391

se

e Port Hawfishing an

developmempleted, wCape Bret

on situated economic e

ommercial,ecent statise in populaus, populatne is mostMost imporfar fewer pe

Population T

e has beenear period are not permarket for re

rivate Dwelling

2006

3517

-184

-5.0

2011

1562

1415

wkesbury, tnd shipbuiental historywhich not oon, but alsothemselve

engine to t

, industrial,stics suggeation betwetion declinetly due to rtantly, Poreople in rec

Trends

a slight in(Table 3-2manent res

ecreational

g Trends

6 2

7 3

4 -

0 -

1 5 Y

Ch

2

5

the town hlding indusy of Port Haonly alloweo created aes on land the town fo

, and sociaest that theeen 2001 ae reached 9

the lack rt Hawkesbcent years t

ncrease of 2). Over hasidences ofand season

2011

3366

151

-4.3

Year hange Ch

70

24

P

Octobe

had becomstries. 195awkesburyd uninterru

a year-rounin neighbo

or the next

al center oe Town of nd 2011 (T9.3 percentof employm

bury Paperthan before

5% in the alf of these f the Town. nal purpose

10-Year Change

-

-335

-9.3

5-Year hange (%)

5%

2%

Page 9

r 2014

e an 55 is . It is

upted d ice oring half-

f the Port

Table t in a ment r Mill e.

total new This

es.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

3.4 La

From a CommisLaw. Asalong Rbehind calong tharea.

3.5 Fu

As part Town Swhich isMacSweAnother Extensioundertak


nd Use Plan

planning pession througs shown on Reeves Strecommerciahe Water’s

ture Develo

of this projetaff. The ms located oeen Street

site considon near Reking a study


nning

erspective, gh a Town Figure 3-1

eet are idenl uses alonedge, in an

opment

ect, potentimost notableon the nortand has b

dered for fuynolds Strey for façade

Safety Study

Port Hawkspecific M (Property ntified for c

ng Reeves n industrial

al future dee future deth side of

been identifuture develoeet that is ce improvem

kesbury is reunicipal PlaOwnership

commerciaStreet. Ind park east

evelopmentevelopmentReeves Stfied as an opment is pconsidered ments along

egulated byanning Strap and Zoninl uses. Resustrial usesof Trunk 4

t sites weret site is partreet betweassisted livproperty 19for senior h

g Reeves S

y Eastern Dategy and ang), most osidential uss are most

4, and in th

e identified rt of propereen the Civing comp94 along Mhousing. Thtreet.

Pa

Octobe

District Plana Land Useof the propeses are loctly concentrhe Point Tu

with the herty numbervic Centre lex opportuacquarrie Dhe Town is

age 10

r 2014

nning e By-erties cated rated upper

elp of r 200

and unity. Drive also

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

4.0 T

4.1 His

HistoricaInstitutewere obresults oFigures variation1.5% pegrowth r

Canso Ca

Trunk 4 W

Reeves St

Highway 1

NOTES: 1

2

4.2 Ma

Manual commersummarSummarareas.


Traffic Vo

storical Cou

al traffic v, Reeves S

btained fromof regressioB-1 to B-

ns did not per year wasrates of 1.1

Road S

useway

West of Nautica

treet East of P

104 East of Tru

1. Figures are

2. AADT is An

anual Turnin

turning morcial drivewrizes the turrize count d


olume Dat

unt Data

olumes onStreet east m NSTIR ton analysis4, Append

provide a grs assumed % to 1.6%

Table 4-1: R

Section

al Institute

Pitt Street

unk 4

from Append

nnual Average

ng Moveme

ovement coways durinrning movedata are pro

Safety Study

ta

n the Cansof Pitt Stre

to use in ds completeix B and arowth rate fto be reasdetermined

Review of Hist

ix B

e Daily Traffic V

ent Counts

ounts were ng peak pement data ovided in A

so Causeweet, and Higdeterminingd using theare summafor Reeves

sonable for d for the oth

torical Volume

Figure

B-1

B-2

B-3

B-4

Volume

obtained aperiods oncollected in

Appendix B

way, Trunkghway 104

g traffic vole historicalarized in Ts Street (Fig

use in voluher location

es and Growth

Growth Rate

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.6

at Study An a typicancluding cowith peak h

k 4 west o4 east of Polume growt volumes a

Table 4-1. gure B-3); aume projec

ns.

h Rates AADT Vo

2014

9000

9400

12000

4250

Area interseal weekdayount date anhours indic

Pa

Octobe

of the Nauort Hawkesth trends. are recorde While vo

a growth ractions base

lume Project

2024 2

10000 1

10800 1

13800 1

4950 5

ections andy. Table nd time percated by sha

age 12

r 2014

utical sbury

The ed in lume

ate of ed on

ions

2034

11000

11800

15600

5650

d key 4-2

riods. aded

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

4.3 He

There aStreet:

SH

WP

G While thwood fibthe streeindicate travelingWhile wbetween


Inters

Reeves StreeNautical Instit Embree IslanReeves StreeEmbree IslanMacmaster R

Reeves StreeGranville Stre

Reeves StreePhilpott Stree

Reeves StreeMacSween St

Reeves StreePitt Street

Reeves StreeReynolds Stre

Reeves StreeSydney Road

Reeves StreeTim Hortons D

Reeves StreeCanadian TireShopping Cen

eavy Trucks

re generall

Semi-trailer HawkesburyWood fiber Port HawkesGypsum truc

here are cuber trucks aet. Informathat on a t

g eastbounwood is han 9:00 AM a


Table

ection

et @ tute Driveway nd Road (Weset @ d Road (East)

Road

et @ eet

et @ et

et @ treet

et @

et @ eet

et @ d

et @ Driveways

et @ e and Sobeys ntre Driveways

s

y three typ

trucks thay to points etrucks formsbury Papecks from Hi

urrently a limare the moation providtypical 24 h

nd and 250uled 24 hoand 4:00 PM

Safety Study

e 4-2: Manual

/ st)

Thurs

) / Thurs

Wedne

Tues

Tuesd

Tuesd

Tuesd

Frida

Wedne

s

Frid(PM P

pes of heav

at are makeast or wesm the Mainer and the Nighway 105

mited numbst numerouded by offihour weekd0 empty trours per dM with up to

Turning Move

Count Date

sday, June 5, 2

sday, June 5, 2

esday, May 7,

sday, May 6, 2

day, April 22, 2

day, April 22, 2

day, April 15, 2

ay, April 11, 20

sday, April 16

ay April 25, 20Peak Period O

vy trucks th

king local st; nland or weNSPI Bio-Pl5 to Point T

ber of gypsus, and as cials from

day in Junerucks trave

day, the higo 20 trucks

ement Counts

Cou

2014 7:03:3

2014 7:03:3

2014 7:03:3

2014 7:0

11:303:3

2014 7:0

11:303:3

2014 7:03:3

2014 7:03:3

014 7:03:3

6, 2014 7:0

014 Only)

3:3

hat use the

deliveries

estern Caplant, and thupper and

sum truckssuch the mPort Hawk

e 2014 thereling westbgher truck

s per hour tr

s

nt Period(s)

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 0AM-1:30 PM 30-5:30 PM 00-9:00 AM 0AM-1:30 PM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM 30-5:30 PM

00-9:00 AM

30-5:30 PM

e Study Sec

or travelin

e Breton hhen returninthen return

using Reemost noticekesbury Pare were 25bound on

volumes gravelling in

Pa

Octobe

Appendix BTable

Table B-1

Table B-2

Table B-3

Table B-4

Table B-5

Table B-6

Table B-7

Table B-8

Table B-9

Table B-10

ction of Re

g through

hauling woong empty; ning empty.

eves Streeteable trucksper (Table 0 loaded trReeves Stgenerally oeach direc

age 13

r 2014

B

eves

Port

od to

t, the s, on 4-3)

rucks treet. occur tion.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

Tab

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednes

Thursda

Friday

Saturda

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednes

Thursda

Friday

Saturda

Day oWee

Day oWee

NOTES

4.4 De

Since it volumesvolume year. Sseasonaobtainedhave beestimateAppendi

4.4.1 2

The 2012024 DH

4.4.2 2

The 2012034 DH


ble 4-3: Truck T

1

0

1

y 1

sday 1

ay 1

2

y 0

13

2

18

y 19

sday 17

ay 18

17

y 6

2. The datand the Bio

of k

of k

1. Data foS:

esign Hourly

is not feass up to the(DHV) that

Since volumal adjustmed at Reeveseen increased 2014 AMix B.

024 Design

14 DHVs hHVs which a

034 Design

14 DHVs hHVs which a


Traffic to Poin

2 3

0 0

1 1

1 2

1 2

1 2

1 1

0 0

14 15

2 2

18 18

19 19

17 17

19 18

16 16

6 5

ta include all loado-Mass Plant. It

Loaded Woo

Loaded Woo

r a typical w eek

y Volume P

sible to dese study hort typically r

mes of thatent factors ws Street intesed by 5%M and PM

n Hourly Vol

have been are shown

n Hourly Vol

have been are shown

Safety Study

nt Tupper: Fib

4 5

0 0

2 3

3 5

3 5

3 5

3 5

1 1

16 17

2 1

17 15

19 17

17 16

18 17

14 12

4 3

ded w ood f iber tcan be assumed

od Fiber Truck

od Fiber Truck

k in June 2014 w

rojections

sign roads trizon year, represents t magnitudewere used tersections

% and PM DHVs wh

lumes

increased diagramma

lumes

increased diagramma

bre Deliveries

6 7

1 1

6 10

8 13

8 12

9 12

9 13

2 4

18 19

1 0

12 8

13 9

12 8

13 9

8 5

2 1

trucks traveling ed that empty truc

ks on Reeves S

ks on Reeves S

ere provided by

to accommtransportathe 30th o

e are usuato estimateduring Apripeak hour

ich are sho

by 15% (1atically in F

by 30% (1atically in F

through Port

8 9

2 3

15 16

16 19

16 18

16 18

16 18

6 7

20 21

0 0

6 4

5 3

5 3

6 3

3 2

1 1

eastbound on Recks w ill return w

Street - Midnig

Street - Noon to

y off icials from P

modate the ation enginor 50th highally experiee 2014 DHVil and May.rly volumesown diagra

1.5% per yigure B-7, A

1.5% per yigure B-8, A

Hawkesbury

10 11

3 3

17 19

20 20

19 19

19 20

19 19

8 7

22 23

1 1

2 2

3 2

2 2

3 2

1 1

0 0

Reeves Street to w estbound in the

ght to Noon

o Midnight

Port Haw kesbury

maximum eers use ahest hourlynced durin

Vs from the AM peak s by 10%

ammatically

year) to proAppendix B

year) to proAppendix B

Pa

Octobe

Paper Scales

12

3

19

19

18

18

18

7

24

1 31

1 230

1 258

1 239

1 249

1 219

1 74

both the Pulp Mie follow ing hour.

DailyTota

y Paper.

projected ta design hy volume ong mid-sume manual co

hourly voluto provide

y in Figure

ovide projeB.

ovide projeB.

age 14

r 2014

0

8

9

9

9

4

ll

y al

raffic ourly

of the mmer, ounts umes e the

B-6,

ected

ected

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

5.0 CNSTIR pthe Studreport wThe tabuidentifiedat unide

5.1 Ty

The numabout 2collisioncollision

Year

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

TOTALS NOTES:

5.2 Co

The numlocationsfor 44%each int11.


Collision provided sudy Section was revieweulated datad at intersentified loca

pe of Collis

mbers of co0 collisionss, there ws.

Table

Single Not

0

1

0

1

0

2

4 1. Data are for

report forms

2. This is a Sum

ollision Loca

mbers of cos – MacSw of all collisersection h


Data andummary sheof Reeves

ed and whea which are ections or dtions.

sions

ollisions bys per year ere 21 rea

e 5-1: Summar

Defined Rea

8

7

12

0

6

5

38 2collisions in the Sto determine loc

mmary obtained f

ations

ollisions by ween Streetsions on R

have been e

Safety Study

d Safety Reets for 17Street dur

ere possiblincluded inriveways, a

y year and on Reeves

ar end colli

ry of Intersecti

Num

r End T-Bone

1 3

7 3

3 1

1 0

2 3

7 1

21 11 Study Section of

cations and collis

from data include

identified lot (11), Reyn

Reeves Streexamined i

Review 0 collisions

ring the six le collision n Table B-1and 68 colli

by type ars Street. Wisions, 11

ion and Drivew

mber of Collision

e Sideswipe

0

1

2

4

4

4

15 f Reeves Street wion types.

ed in Table B-11

ocations arnolds Streeeet during tn more det

s that have years 200locations a1, Appendiisions that

re includedWhile type T-bone co

way Collisions

ns by Type

Left Turn In

2

1

0

1

0

0

4 where sufficient i

, Appendix B

re included et (19), and the six yeatail utilizing

been repo07 to 2012. and types ix B, includoccurred in

d in Table 5 was not id

ollisions and

s (2007 – 2012

Left Turn Out

2

1

1

1

3

0

8 information was

in Table 5Trunk 4 (1

ar period, cdata recor

Pa

Octobe

orted throug Each collwere idente 102 collis

n parking lo

5-1. Theredentified fod 15 sides

2)

Pedestrian

0

0

0

0

0

1

1 provided on colli

-2. Since t15) – accouollision dat

rded in Tab

age 15

r 2014

ghout lision tified. sions ots or

e are or 38 swipe

Totals

16

21

19

8

18

20

102 ision

three unted ta for ble B-

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

5.2.1 M

While thbone, ocollisionnoted asthe signMacSwe

5.2.2 R

While nthree recontrolleReynoldfactor in

5.2.3 T

While twtypes, thThis is a


NOTE

Reyno

KFC

Cause

Trunk

Carria

Sydne

Maritim

Embre

McSw

Subw

TDBan

Philpo

Granv

Sobey

Canad

Tim Ho

Pitt St

Macm

McDo

Gatew

MacSween S

hree collisioone side-sws may havs having innalized inteeen Street i

Reynolds St

ine (47%) ear end, foued by trafficds Street ne collisions a

Trunk 4 Inter

wo collisionshere were twa signalized


Table 5-2: R

ES: 1.

2.

olds Street

ew ay Centre

k 4

age House Loun

ey Road

me Inn

ee Island Road

w een Street

ay Access

nk Access

ott Street

ville Street

ys

dian Tire

ortons

reet

master Road

nalds

w ay Centre

Street Inters

ons had no wipe, and ve involved volved a veersection aintersection

treet Interse

of the 19 cur T-bone c signals, tear the inteattributed to

rsection

s involved owo rear endd T-intersec

Safety Study

Reeves Street

Total

nge

Location

Data are forStreet w herecollision report

This is a Summ11, Appendix B

section

defined coone left tuleft turning

ehicle turniat Pitt Stren with the p

ection

collisions dand three here are b

ersection who the Reyno

only single d, four sidection betwe

t Collision Loc

collisions in the suff icient int forms to detem

mary obtainedB.

ollision typeurn in collig vehicles, ing left out eet would otential to r

id not havesideswipe usinesses hich may holds Street

vehicles aeswipe and een two fou

cations (2007

Number o

he Study Secnformation w amine locations a

from data inclu

e, there werisions repothere wereof the intereduce tu

reduce coll

e defined ccollisions. with drivewave been tintersectio

nd four didthree left tu

ur lane stre

- 2012)

of Collisions

4

1

3

2

5

2

11

8

4

6

1

2

2

19

1

4

2

8

2

15

102

tion of Reeves provided oand collision

uded in Table B

re three reaorted. Whe no collisi

ersection. Aurning movisions at th

collision typ While the

ways on Rethe locationn.

not have durn out colleets where

Pa

Octobe

eson

B-

ar-end, threhile the T-bons specifiA connectiovements atat location.

pes, there we intersectioeeves Stren or contrib

defined collisions repoReeves St

age 16

r 2014

ee T-bone ically on to t the

were on is et or uting

lision orted. treet,

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

which isintersecteast turnsuspecteas a divleft turnicollision

5.3 Co

The signthe colliother secompari(HMVK)daily traeach yeannual rvehicle k

Historicacollisionroads, iSection since thepublisherate on Rof 189.7the colliWhile thof this R


s the stem tion also hans to becomed that lac

viding line ong vehicless. (See Fig

ollision Rate

nificance ofsion rate o

ections of rson is the, obtained ffic volumear and the rates variedkilometers.

NOTES: 1.

2.

3.

Year

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

ally NSTIR rates for vncluding a of Reeves

ere have noed average Reeves Str

7 collisions sion exper

he collision Report are e


of the ‘T’as a right tume the rightk of pavemon Reeves s from Trungure 9-7).

es

f collision eon the sectroad with se number oby multiply by 365 daoverall ave

d from 76 to

Table 5-3

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

Estimated dail

Collision rates

HMVK is '100 travel in the s

Length

Totals and Av

published various road

class for s Street. Wot been sigrate has b

reet of 163.per HMVK ience on Rrate is norm

expected to

Safety Study

, has a duurn channet hand lane

ment markinStreet imm

nk 4, was a

experience tion being imilar deignof collisionsing the secys in a yea

erage rate fo 219 and t

3: Reeves Stre

13,000

13,000

12,000

11,500

9,000

10,000

y volume as An

s are expressed

million vehicle kection

AADT1

verage Rate

collision rad classes frfour lane u

While averagnificant chabeen used 0 collisionsfor all four

Reeves Stremal, recom

o result in fe

ual left turnel where thee of Reevesngs to sepamediately w

contributin

on a sectiostudied to n and roads per yearction lengthar and dividfor 2007 to he average

eet Collision R

0.1186

0.1190

0.1095

0.1049

0.0821

0.0915

0.6256

nnual Average

d as 'collisions

kilometers w hic

HMVK2 Co

ates for earom four lanundivided Tage rates hanges in thin this eva

s per HMVKlane undiv

eet is consmmended imewer collisio

n towards Te right hands Street wesarate the d

west of Trung factor to

on of streetthe averag

dside develr per 100 h in kilometeing by 100 2012 are in

e rate is 163

Rates (2007 - 2

16

21

19

8

18

20

102

Daily Traff ic

per 100 million

ch is the annua

ollisions

ach road sene divided Trunk Highhave not behis road clasaluation. SK is less thaided Trunk idered to n

mprovemenons in future

Trunk 4 ead lane of Tst of the intual left turnnk 4 to septhe sidesw

t is qualifiedge collisionopment. Tmillion vehers by the amillion. Co

ncluded in 3 collisions

2012)

Collision Ra

(per HMVK

134.9

176.5

173.5

76.2

219.2

218.6

163.0

vehicle kilomet

al vehicle kilome

ection as wfreeways to

hways, suceen availabss in recen

Since the avan the 2004Highways

normal for tnts includede years.

Pa

Octobe

astbound. Trunk 4 fromtersection. n lanes, asparate rightipe and left

d by compan rate for mThe standahicle kilomeannual aveollision rateTable 5-3.

s per 100 m

ate

K)3

ers'

etes of

well as aveo two lane h as the Sble since 2t years, theverage coll4 publishedin Nova Scthat road cd in Chapte

age 17

r 2014

The m the It is

s well t and t turn

aring many rd of eters

erage es for The

million

erage local

Study 2004, e last lision

d rate cotia, class. er 9.0

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6.0 AServing drivewayrestauraprovidincritical to

6.1 Ba

Access movemeaccess mneeds requirem Roads ocaused Roadsidincreasinresidentmanagepreventi Some be

1. Im2. R3. T4. T5. F

6.1.1 B

Benefits6-1 doebeneficia


Access Mas the pr

ys providinants to grocg an effecto the corrid

ackground

management on a pumanagemeof adjacen

ments of the

often requiby high p

de developmng collisiontial develoement princng or delay

enefits of e

mproved saRoadway caThe life of thTravel timesFuel consum

Benefits of A

s of good aces not conaries (stake


Managemeimary routeg access tocery storesive balance

dor.

ent is theublic road aent is to pront land ane roadway.

ire upgradipeak hour ment directn potential. pment witiples for all

ying the nee

ffective acc

afety; accesapacity can he roadways and unnecmption and

Access Man

ccess manatain a comeholders) a

Safety Study

ent e through o a wide ras. Access e between t

e process and land aovide safe and is con

ing or replvolumes

ly impacts Unregula

th numero streets anded for expe

cess manag

ss related cbe increas

y section wicessary delvehicle em

nagement

agement armplete list, nd the bene

Port Hawkange of devmanagemetraffic flow

of balanciccess to adand efficiennsistent wi

lacement band unacthis problemted develo

ous drivewd roads, sa

ensive majo

gement inc

collisions cased by 25%ll be increalays will be issions will

re realized bit should

efits realize

kesbury, Revelopmentsent is an imand land a

ng the codjacent pro

nt access thith the fu

because ofcceptably hm by reducpment resu

ways. By afety and caor upgrading

lude:

an be reduc to almost 5sed; reduced; be reduce

by many dibe sufficie

ed by each

eeves Stres from smamportant coaccess – bo

ompeting noperties. That meets tnctional a

f functionahigh collisiocing roadwaults in strip

adopting apacity cang or recons

ced by 50%50%;

d.

verse grouent to illusgroup.

Pa

Octobe

eet has sevll businesseonsideratiooth of which

needs of tThe objectivthe accessi

and operat

l obsolescon experieay capacity

p commercibasic ac

be maintastruction.

%;

ps. While Tstrate the

age 18

r 2014

veral es to n for h are

raffic ve of ibility tional

ence ence. y and ial or ccess ined,

Table main

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

Govern

Pedes

Comm

Drivers

Cyclist

Busine

6.1.2 S

Substanconductto have notable (Transpostudy. Safety design, conflictsdriveway

6.1.3 O

Studies effects omaintainaccess p

6.1.4 E

Fewer aProper l


Ta

Beneficiar

nments of Tow

trians

munity

s

ts

esses

Safety Issue

ntial reseaed in the paconcentratstudy was

ortation Re

benefits offewer traffi

s. The numys and inte

Operational

of the effecof access n desired spoints and

Environmen

access connandscaping


able 6-1 - Bene

ry Group

wns & Cities

es

rch conceast few deced on high

s NCHRP Rsearch Boa

f good accic conflict lmber of colrsections.

Issues

cts of accesspacing onpeeds and signals alo

tal Effects

nections incg also helps

Safety Study

eficiaries and

Lower co

Safer str

Less nee

Aesthetic

More effi

More pre

Safer str

Fewer de

Less con

Fewer de

More pre

Fewer an

erning the cades. Howspeed maj

Report 420ard, 1999).

cess manaocations, allisions alon

ss managemn travel tim

reduces dng a roadw

crease the s to provide

Benefits of Go

ost of deliverin

reets

ed for street w

cally pleasing

cient roadway

edictable and

reets

ecision points

ngestion and

ecision points

edictable moto

nd less freque

effects owever, muchjor collector

0: Impacts The follow

agement aand increasng a street

ment on roame indicate

elays; unsuway results i

area for lane a visual cu

ood Access M

Benefi

ng a safe and

widening

g streets

y system crea

consistent de

s and traffic co

delay

s and traffic co

orists’ behavi

ent vehicle ac

of access h of the stur and arteriof Access ing points a

re attributased driver rt section is

adway opee that acceurprisingly, in increase

ndscaping aue for drive

Management

ts

d efficient road

ates a broade

evelopment e

onflicts

onflicts

our

ccess points

managemudies and reial roads anManageme

are largely

able to imresponse tis related to

erations thaess manage increasingd delay.

at the margeway locatio

Pa

Octobe

d system

er market area

nvironment

ent has besearch apnd highwayent Technidrawn from

mproved acime to pote

o the numb

t addressedement help

g the numb

gin of the stons.

age 19

r 2014

a

been ppear ys. A iques

m this

ccess ential er of

d the ps to ber of

treet.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6.1.5 S

Access roadwayresult is as provimanage

1. Lab

2. Ss

3. Rdto

4. Ppfrp

6.2 Co

Conflict mergingconfrontsimultanhandle osafety. access confusio Some m

1. Cpinn

2. RbGs3cim

3. C

m


Summary Ac

managemeys, while p

a roadwayiding a mo

ement can b

Limiting the and have coby numerouSeparating cet of conflic

Reducing indecelerate oo complete

Providing aparking lot rom the st

parking spac

onflict Point

points occug and diveted with coneously. Tone probleSeparationdriveways,

on and limit

methods to r

Change inteoints, a 3-

ntersection umber of c

Reduce or e limited b

Guide for Cuggests th.2.9.2). Aombining e

mprove inte

Create crosmovement b


ccess Mana

ent programpromoting sy system thore attractivbe achieved

number ofollisions whs accessesconflict poicts before mnterferenceout of the tha turn. dequate onentrances reet withouces.

ts

ur at locatioerging manomplex situThe separam before f

n of drivewa and contrthe numbe

reduce the

ersection c-way intersis converteonflict poin

limit the nby design, anadian Roat the num

Also, if theexit with enersection op

ss connecbetween adj

Safety Study

agement Pri

ms seek tosupporting hat functionve corridor.d by:

f conflict pohen presens. nts - Drivermeeting anoe with throhrough lane

n-site traffiprovide su

ut interfere

ons where neuvers. Suations andtion of potfacing anotays from strrol of unlimer of conflic

number of

configuratsection hased to permts is reduce

number of policy or boads (Tranmber of driere is suffntrance driperations an

ctions betjacent sites

inciples

o limit andstreets ans safely an In summ

oints - Drivented with th

rs need sufother. ough traffice and wait i

c circulatioufficient cleence from v

vehicle patSometimes d are requiential confther will imreet interse

mited pavedts a driver m

conflict poi

tion. Whiles only nine

mit only righed to two.

drivewaysby zoning osportation Aiveways caficient exisveways wind reduce t

tween adjas without th

d consolidand on-site cnd efficientlymary, the b

ers are mohe complex

fficient time

c - Turningin a protect

on and stoear throat svehicles at

ths cross ocollisions

ired to addflict points

mprove bothections, mind road fronmust face a

nts include

e a 4-way ine conflict p

ht turns in a

s. The numordinancesAssociation

an be basesting or plill reduce ttraffic confl

acent bushe need to e

ate accessecirculation y for its usebasic princ

re likely to x driving sit

e to addres

g lanes ated area for

orage - Prospace for vttempting t

r meet oneoccur wh

dress too mwhich perm

h operationnimum spacntage are wat one time

e:

ntersectionpoints. Aland out of

mber of sites. The Gen of Canaded on lot fanned buithe numbeicts.

inesses. Tenter and e

Pa

Octobe

es along msystems. eful life, as

ciples of ac

make mistuations cre

ss one pote

llow driverr an opport

operly desigvehicles to to enter or

e another duen driversmany decismits a driven efficiencycing of propways to re.

n has 32 colso, if a 3a driveway

e entranceseometric Deda (TAC), 1frontage (Tilding set-br of drivew

This will peexit the stree

age 20

r 2014

major The

s well ccess

takes eated

ential

rs to tunity

gned turn

r exit

uring are sions er to

y and perty duce

onflict -way y the

s can esign 999)

Table back, ways,

ermit et.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6.3 Ac

While ththe folloconsider

6.3.1 T

Converssingle thas an obicycle conditionoption imodifica Traffic ofeasibilitResearchour (2-This, in case-spappropri Two-waySection

6.3.2 C

Three lomore eff

1. CSpinfo

2. Ds

3. Rin

1 GuidelineFacilities (I


ccess Manag

here are fewowing sectred for the

Two-Way Le

sion of the hrough laneption to imlanes usin

ns consides its cost-

ations to pa

operational ty of a ‘roach has indic-way)1 shoucombinatioecific factiateness of

y left turn la9.1.

Change Inter

ocations wficient traffic

Combine thStreet inters

roblem at ntersectionsor eastboun

Divert existinignalized P

Reconstructntersection.

es for the Convowa State Uni


gement App

w opportuntions descStudy Area

eft Turn Lan

existing 4-e in each diprove roadng the surrably relativ-effectivenevement ma

capacity d diet’, as cated that auld be conson with contors, formsf a road for

anes within

rsection Co

where changc flow are:

e Embree sections to fthe Embres, and provnd traffic. ng and futu

Pitt Street int the off-se.

ersion of Urbaversity Center

Safety Study

plications in

nities for a wribe acces

a.

ne (Road Die

-lane, undivrection and

d safety. Anrplus curb-ve to the eess – exisarkings wou

is an imporoad and i

an upper limsidered as

nsideration s the baconversion

n the Study

onfiguration

ges in inte

Island Roaform a roune Island R

vide a gatew

ure MacSwentersection.et Sydney

n Four‐lane Unfor Transporta

n the Study

wide rangess manage

et)

vided lane d a center twn added be-to-curb wxisting con

sting curbs uld be requi

ortant consintersectionmit of appro

a general of intersecsis for a

n.

Area on R

n

ersection c

ad (east), Mndabout. Th

Road interseway to the m

een Street

Road inte

ndivided Roadwation Research

y Area

e of access ement app

configuratiwo-way leftenefit of thi

width, whichfiguration. would reired.

straint to cn capacity aoximately 1guideline f

ction perforan effectiv

Reeves Stre

configuration

Macmasterhis would eection, commore urban

traffic exitin

ersection to

ways To Three‐h and Educatio

managemlications th

on on Reet turn lane ws option ish would imA major admain in p

consider in are reduce,500 to 1,7for feasibilimance anae determi

eet are disc

n may pro

r Road, andeliminate thembine four n section of

ng to Reev

o provide

‐Lane Two‐wayn (2001).

Pa

Octobe

ent techniqhat have b

eves Street was consid the additiomprove cydvantage ofplace, and

assessinged consider750 vehiclesity assessmalysis and oination of

ussed furth

ovide safer

d two Grane sight distclosely spf Reeves S

ves Street to

a single 4

y Left‐Turn Lan

age 21

r 2014

ques, been

to a dered on of ycling f this only

g the rably. s per ment. other

the

her in

and

nville ance aced

Street

o the

4-leg

ne

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6.3.3 R

Many lopotentiafor futuror by zocombininintersecteffectiveadjacent

Several (See Fig

1. Wsin

2. Ton

3. LMth

4. WSo

5. T

in


Reduce or C

cations betl to reducee developmoning ordinng exit withtion operat

e way to redt businesse

locations gure 6-2):

While the buite also has

ntersection.

The Legion,n Reeves Sarrowed to

ocal 972 CMacSween Shat one driv

While the RStreet is clos

nly with full

The Reeventersection.


Change Exis

tween the sthe numbe

ments. Thenances. If h entrance tions and reduce the nues to permit

Figure 6

where driv

uilding at 30s a gravel . The drive

A-1 Pizza Street just reduce con

CEO has tStreet and veway could

Reeves Stresed with a cl site acces

s Street d. That drive

Safety Study

sting and Fu

street sectioer of existine number ofthere is sudriveways

educe traffumber of drt movemen

6-1: Two Drive

veway chan

08 Philpott driveway o

eway access

and Kwik-east of Manfusion for

two drivewPitt Street. d be closed

eet drivewachain, the d

ss provided

driveway foeway shoul

uture Drivew

on west of ng drivewayf site entranufficient ex

will reduceic conflictsriveways is t without th

eway Vs. One

nges can b

Street hason Reeves Ss to Reeves

Way have acSween Stdrivers and

ways on the The buildi

d without af

ay for the Adriveway coat the Pitt S

or Tim Hod be restric

way Access

Philpott Stys and provnces can b

xisting or pe the numbas illustratto create c

he need to e

Driveway Acc

be conside

s two drivewStreet just s Street sh

approximatreet. The d improve p

e south siding is set bffecting site

Anglican Chould be restStreet drive

orton’s is cted to right

ses

reet and Trvide better be limited bplanned buber of driveted in Figu

cross conneenter and e

cess

ered includ

ways to Phieast of theould be clo

ately 50 medriveway w

pedestrian s

de of the ack well fro

e access.

hurch at thtricted to rigeway.

close to t-in / right-o

Pa

Octobe

runk 4 haveaccess cony design, pilding set-beways, impre 6-1. Ano

ections betwexit the stre

e the follo

lpott Streete Philpott Sosed.

eters of curbwidth shoulsafety.

street betwom the stre

e corner oght-in / righ

the Pitt Sout moveme

age 22

r 2014

e the ntrols policy back, prove other ween et.

owing

t, the Street

b cut ld be

ween et so

f Pitt ht-out

Street ents.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

6. CRC

7. SR

8. TSinad

9. T

T

10. G

11. To

12. S

sp

13. A

m


Consider to Reeves StreCanadian TiSCC Auto Reynolds St

The UltramaStreet. Thentersection.ccess fromriveway on

The MaritimThe east driv

Gateway Pla

Town Centren Sydney R

Shopping Ceparate enarking spac

As future dmanaged to


potential teet and Cire and KFCSales hastreet. The R

ar site hase westerly . That drivm the rem Reynolds

e Inn has twveway on R

aza has thr

e at 811 ReRoad. The w

Centre drivntering andces.

developmenlimit the nu

Safety Study

to construcChurch StreC which now a drivewaReeves Str

two drivewdriveway is

veway can aining widStreet.

wo drivewaReeves Stre

ree drivewa

eeves Streewest drivew

veways shod exiting tra

nt occurs oumber on d

ct a one bleet to provw has two day on Reereet drivewa

ways on Rs very closbe closed e driveway

ays on Reeveet could b

ays. One dr

et has two dway on Ree

ould be deaffic from v

on Reevesriveways o

lock sectiovide a secdriveways ieves Streeay could be

Reeves Strese to the s

and there y of Reev

ves Street e closed.

riveway cou

driveways oeves Street

esigned wvehicles at

s Street enon the stree

n of Bain condary strin Reeves Set and twoe closed.

eet and onignalized Rwill still be

ves Street

and one on

uld be close

on Reevescould be c

ith clear tttempting t

nsure that t.

Pa

Octobe

Street betwreet accessStreet. o driveways

ne on ReynReynolds Se adequateand the o

n Sydney R

ed.

Street andlosed.

throat areato enter or

site acces

age 23

r 2014

ween s for

s on

nolds Street e site other

Road.

d one

as to r exit

ss is

DRAFT FinPort Hawk


F


FIGURE TO BE

Figure

Safety Study

E PROVIDED A

e 6-2: Access

AT OCTOBER

Management

21 PROJECT

Consideration

MEETING

ns

Pa

Octobe

age 24

r 2014

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

7.0 AActive trurban ebecominpeople sactive lif Active trPedestriphysical As the pkey thorand soudestinatScotia Cindustria

7.1 Ex

Walkingfactors:

Ggfo

Llafodp

Ewhu

Ppc

7.2 Po

RecogniattemptsHawkes


Active Traransportatio

environmentng an increseek to redfestyle, and

ransportatioians and cylly protected

primary artroughfare auth with coions includ

Community al, and adm

isting Chall

and cyclin

Gaps in sideaps in the orced to waack of dedi

anes or muorced to ridangerous. uts pedestr

Existing Trawalking adja

eavy vehicsers.

Physical Carticularly hallenge fo

otential Opp

izing the pos to enhanbury area.


ansportaton (AT) refet primarily easingly imduce their d reduce the

on is an imyclists are d and more

erial roadwand access ommercial e the StraiCollege (N

ministrative l

lenges

g can be a

ewalk connconnectivi

alk on graveicated cyclilti-use path

de on-streetThis can ofrians at riskaffic Condiacent to ancles can be

onstraints: between G

or AT users

portunities

otential for nce the co

Safety Study

tion ers to transconsists o

mportant prireliance one impacts o

mportant eleconsidered

e exposed t

way in Port route in theareas, recit Area EduNSCC) Straland uses t

challenge

nectivity: Asty of sidew

el shouldersng infrastru

hs on or adjt in mixed tften result k. tions: In tnd cycling

e uncomfort

There arGranville S.

improving Aomfort and

sportation bof walking aority in co

n personal of transporta

ement to co to be ‘vuln

to injury risk

Hawkesbue area. It coreational fa

ucation andait Area Cahat serve a

along the R

s discussedwalks on Rs alongsideucture: Theacent to Retraffic, whicin cyclists i

he absencon a busy

table exper

re considetreet and

AT in the ad perceive

by non-motoand cyclingmmunities vehicles, p

ation on the

onsider in anerable roak than moto

ury, Reevesonnects resacilities, and Recreatioampus, andas employm

Reeves Str

d in SectioReeves Stree traffic. ere are preseeves Streech can be iillegally ridi

ce of appry corridor wrience that

erable graMacSween

area, there d safety o

orized meag. Active trthroughou

promote a e environm

a road safead users’, aor vehicle o

s Street sesidential arend institutioon Centre (d the vario

ment centres

eet corrido

n 2.2.2, theeet. Pedest

sently no deet. As a resntimidatinging on the s

ropriate ATwith a highdeters ma

ades on Rn Street, w

have beenof AT use

Pa

Octobe

ans, which ransportatiot the regiohealthier, ment.

ety assessmas they areoccupants.

erves both eas to the nonal uses. (SAERC), N

ous commes for the reg

r due to sev

ere are mutrians are o

edicated bicsult, cyclists and potensidewalk, w

T infrastruch percentagny potentia

Reeves Stwhich can

multiple reers in the

age 25

r 2014

in an on is

on as more

ment. less

as a north Key

Nova rcial, gion.

veral

ultiple often

cycle s are

ntially which

cture, ge of al AT

treet, be a

ecent Port

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

7.2.1 P

The Poconnectan enhathat the connectto the cStreet a

[Sourc

7.2.2 P

The TowTranspoprogramcompon


Port Hawkes

ort Hawkesing the NS

anced AT cprimary coing a pathw

conceptual long the no

Figure 7-1ce: Port Hawk

Port Hawkes

wn of Portortation Plamming for th

ent of this P


sbury Pathw

sbury PathCC Strait Acorridor. Puncern of us

way betweedesign lev

orth side an

: Pathway Cokesbury Pathw

sbury Active

t Hawkesban that whe Town asPlan. It is u

Safety Study

ways Projec

hways ProArea Campuublic consusers was saen the key dvel (illustratd comprise

oncept on Reevways Project C

e Transport

ury is currwill guide s a whole. Inderstood

ct

oject (Ekisus and the ltation com

afety. The pdestinationsted in Figued a combin

ves Street (CoCouncil Presen

tation Plan

rently in ththe develt is assumethat the Pla

stics, 2014Reeves St

mpleted as plan assesss. Of the twure 7-1), onnation of sid

oncept Plan / ntation (Ekisti

he processlopment oed that Reean was to b

4) assessetreet commpart of the

sed severalwo pathway ne ran pardewalk and

Preliminary Pcs Planning &

of compleof AT infreves Streetbe submitte

Pa

Octobe

es optionsmercial coree plan indic alternativeconcepts tallel to Re

d multi-use

rofile) & Design, 2014

eting an Aastructure t will form ad in 2014.

age 26

r 2014

s for e with cated es for aken eves trail.

4)]

Active and

a key

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

8.0 TAssessmperformaenhanceroads anidentify o

8.1 Int

The levedeterminterms oconsum LOS critincludesacceleralong thecapacityapproac A v/c ratcompareintersectthe amovolume ratios leusually suggestmitigativfuture ye


Traffic Opment of trafance and de safety. Itnd intersecopportunitie

ersection L

el or qualitned by a lof delay, ption, and i

teria (Tables initial deation delay.ey must way (v/c) ratich.

tio is a meaes to the tion approa

ount of greeon the thro

ess than 0.5associateds that the a

ve measureears.


perationaffic operatiodeterminingt is necessctions undees and cons

Level of Serv

ty of perforevel of serwhich is increased t

e 8-1) are sceleration . While driait at a redio and 95

asure of hocapacity o

ach at a sigen time, thugh street.50) usually

d with modapproach hes must be

Safety Study

l Reviewons is an img what cousary to devr current astraints tha

vice (LOS)

rmance of rvice (LOSa measurravel time.

stated in tedelay, quevers judge light or a

5% queue

w the peakof that integnalized inte capacity Approach

y have low derate conghas residua

considered

mportant sntermeasurvelop an und projecte

at may influe

an intersec) analysis. e of drive

rms of aveeue move-the qualityStop sign,to evalua

k hour volumersection atersection dof a Stop

hes with voor no conggestion. W

al capacity ad if higher v

tep in revieres may benderstandin

ed future traence upgra

ction in terLOS for i

er discomf

erage contro-up time, y of interse traffic eng

ate perform

me on an approach. W

depends onsign appro

olumes lessgestion, anWhile a v/cavailable, ivolumes ar

ewing existe feasible tng of the affic condit

ade options

ms of traffntersectionfort and f

ol delay pestopped dction perfogineers alsmance of

approach toWhile the n the numboach is dets than 50% d a v/c ratc ratio of t is also anre to be ac

Pa

Octobe

ting road sto implemeperformanctions in ord.

ic movemens is definefrustration,

er vehicle welay, and rmance by o use voluan interse

o an intersecapacity o

ber of lanestermined byof capacityio up to 0.7less than

n indicationcommodate

age 27

r 2014

afety ent to ce of er to

ent is ed in

fuel

which final how me / ction

ection of an s and y the y (v/c 75 is 0.85

n that ed in

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

LOS

A

B

C

D

E

F

Synchrointersect

1. 201sig

2. Prosig

3. Prosig

Level of Table 8-


SignalizedCont

(Seconds

Less

Between

Between 2

Between 3

Between 5

Greate

o 8.0 softwtions for the

14 Baselinegnal timing

ojected 202gnal timing

ojected 203gnal timing

f service (LO-2 provides


Table 8-1

d Intersectionsrol Delay

s per Vehicle)

than 10.0

10.0 and 20.0

20.0 and 35.0

35.0 and 55.0

55.0 and 80.0

r than 80.0

ware has e following

e AM and Pg

4 AM and Pg

4 AM and Pg

OS) analysan overvie

Safety Study

1: Intersection

Very low

Higher del

Higher levestopping is

through in

Congestionsometimes

man

Vehicles muslight; consider

This level is cdrivers; occu

capacity o

been usedscenarios:

PM peak ho

PM peak ho

PM peak ho

sis results aew of the LO

n Performance

LOS Descrip

delay; most veh(Excellen

ay; most vehicle

el of congestion; significant, althotersection witho

becomes noticewait through moy vehicles stop (

t often wait throured by many age

acceptable d

onsidered to be urs when arrival fof the intersectio

d for perfo

our volumes

our volume

our volume

and summaOS analysis

e Analysis Cri

ption

icles do not stopnt)

s stop (Very Goo

number of vehicough many still put stopping (Goo

eable; vehicles more than one red Satisfactory)

ugh more than onencies to be the ldelay

unacceptable toflow rates exceedn (Unacceptable

ormance e

s with exis

es with exis

es with exis

ry tables ars for each in

teria Two W

(TWSC

(Seco

p L

od) Betwe

cles pass od)

Betwe

must light; Betwe

ne red imit of Betwe

o most d the e)

Gr

evaluation

sting lane c

sting lane

sting lane

re includedntersection

Pa

Octobe

Way Stop ControlSC) IntersectionControl Delay onds per Vehicle

Less than 10.0

een 10.0 and 15

een 15.0 and 25

een 25.0 and 35

een 35.0 and 50

reater than 50.0

of Study

configurat

configurat

configurat

d in Append.

age 28

r 2014

lled ns

e)

.0

.0

.0

.0

Area

tion /

tion /

tion /

dix D.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

I

1.

ReeveNauticDrivew Embre(West)

2. ReeveEmbre(East)

3. ReeveGranv

4. ReevePhilpo

5. ReeveMacSw

6. ReevePitt St

7. ReeveReyno

8. ReeveSydne


Tab

Intersection

es Street @ cal Institute way / ee Island Ro)

es Street @ ee Island Roa/ Macmaster

es Street @ ille Street

es Street @ ott Street

es Street @ ween Street

es Street @ reet

es Street @ olds Street

es Street @ ey Road


le 8-2: Interse

Sum(A

oad

ad r Road

Safety Study

ction LOS An

mmary TableAppendix D)

Table D-1

Table D-2

Table D-3

Table D-4

Table D-5

Table D-6

Table D-7

Table D-8

alysis Overvie

e

Good lemovemeyear sce

Delays othe Nautdesired scenarioacceptab

Overall remain vaverage

Good lemovemehorizon y

Overall peak houAM peak

Good lemovemeyear sce

Delays obeyond dfuture scwithin ac

Overall remain vaverage

ew: Backgrou

LOS Ana

evels of perfents during thenarios. on the side stical Institute dlevels during

os. However, ble limits. intersection

very good fodelays.

evels of perfents during theyear scenaoriintersection

ur (LOS B) isk hour (LOS A

evels of perfents during thenarios. on the side sdesired levelcenarios. Hocceptable limi

intersection very good fodelays.

nd Scenarios

alysis Summ

formance arehe AM peak h

treet movemdriveway, ma

g the PM pev/c ratios r

performanceor all scenar

formance aree AM and PMios. performance

s slightly worA).

formance arehe AM peak h

treet movems during the

owever, v/c rts. performance

or all scenar

Pa

Octobe

mary

e expected fhour for all ho

ents, most noay increase beak hour for remain well

e is expecteios, with ver

e expected fM peak hours

e during therse than durin

e expected fhour for all ho

ents may incPM peak ho

ratios remain

e is expecteios, with ver

age 29

r 2014

for all orizon

otably eyond future within

ed to ry low

for all for all

e PM ng the

for all orizon

crease our for n well

ed to ry low

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.0 IdBased oprincipleusers, seach coprovide performaSection in AppenDHVs.

9.1 Ro

The concapacityspace fo Two opconvers

(i)


dentificaton a reviewes for improseveral optioncept, dis

functional ance analy8.1 – Levendix E. LOS

oad Diet

ncept of a y to improvor non-traffi

ptions for aion of the e

A single well as dThis optfrom flecomforta

Figure


tion and Ew of all asoving safetons were i

scuss the sketches

ysis has beeel of serviceS analyses

road diet,e safety anc uses (i.e.

application existing 4-la

through landedicated bion is morexible left

able on-stre

e 9-1: Concep

Safety Study

Evaluatiospects of thty, operatioidentified apotential afor illustraen complete (LOS) anfor improve

introducednd afford th. AT facilitie

of a roadane, undivid

ne in each bicycle lanee applicablturn stora

eet cycling e

tual Lane Lay

on of Imphe Study Aonal performnd evaluat

advantagesative purpoted in accoalysis resuement scen

d in Sectiohe opportunes, on-stree

d diet werded lane co

direction anes in each e to an ur

age lanes, environmen

yout – Road Di

provemenArea and amance, andted. The fos and disases. Wher

ordance witults and sumnarios were

on 6.3.1, innity to real

et parking, s

re consideonfiguration

nd a centerdirection (S

rban enviroand that

nt.

iet (Two-way L

nt Optionsapplication d functionallowing sec

advantagesre applicabh the princmmary table based on

nvolves redlocate undstreetscapin

red on Re to:

r two-way leSee layout

onment thawould pr

Left Turn Lane

Pa

Octobe

s of enginee

ality for allctions intros of each, ble, interseciples laid oes are incluprojected 2

duction in erutilized sng treatme

eeves Stre

eft turn lanet in Figure at would berovide a m

e)

age 30

r 2014

ering road duce and

ection out in uded 2034

lane street nts).

eet –

e, as 9-1).

enefit more

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

(ii)

Traffic othe Studwas evidsome fo Given tconsiderwell as requiredStreet, aurban ch The follconcept


A single one lane9-2). Thireduced AT enviruse pathboth sideacquisitio

Fig

operational dy Area. Badent that thrm may be

he fairly dration was based on

d loss in lana more ruraharacter, w

owing two ually laid ou


through lae downhill, ais option isturning dem

ronment. It way can eles of the son requirem

gure 9-2: Conc

capacity waased on there is excean option.

distinct secgiven to whthe ability

ne capacity.al street chaith increase

sections dut for the se

Safety Study

ane in eachand a mults more appmand and tis also beniminate the

street, and ments can b

ceptual Lane L

as a key pae backgrou

ess capacity

ctions of uhat type of y of the roa. For examaracter is ped developm

describe thections of R

h direction, i-use pathwplicable to that would bneficial in the need to a

where exibe minimal

Layout - Road

art of the asund traffic ay available

urban and applicationadway andple, on the

present. Eament densi

he conceptsReeves Stre

or two lanway on one

a more rubenefit in phat provisio pedestriansting streeif at all.

d Diet (Multi-Us

ssessment analysis coand that in

rural roadn may be sud intersectisection of

ast of Pitt Sty and acce

s that wereet west an

nes on uphe side of thural environparticular froon of an exn facility (i.eet space is

se Pathway)

of each roaompleted introduction

dway on Ruitable bothons to accReeves St

Street there ess deman

re developend east of P

Pa

Octobe

hill sectionse street (Fnment thatom an off-sxceptional me. sidewalks

used, prop

ad diet option Section 8of a road d

Reeves Sth functionalcommodatereet west ois an obviods.

ed, tested, Pitt Street.

age 31

r 2014

s and igure t has street multi-s) on perty

on in 8.0, it iet in

treet, ly as

e the of Pitt ously

and

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.1.1 P

The secapplicatisection (See Cousing ththat wou Intersecperformasignalizewithin ahour) maintersectapproacIt can aintersect


Pitt Street to

ction of Reion of the rto a single

oncept Laye surplus c

uld enhance

ction perforance baseed interseccceptable lay becometion at Syd

ch operationalso be astion is prob


o Trunk 4

eeves Streeroad diet ope through layout in Figucurb-to-curbe cycling co

rmance anaed on the ctions at Plimits, howe relatively ldney Roadnal capacityssumed thabable at key

Safety Study

et betweenption that inane in eachure 9-3). It b width wouonsiderably

alyses werproposed

Pitt Street aever, westbong (>200m

d may conty on the sidat operatioy commerci

n Pitt Streencludes coh direction was felt th

uld provide y in the area

re completlane configand Reynobound queum). Resultstinue to exde street monal performal driveway

et and Truonversion of

and a cenhat the intra valuable

a.

ed to assegurations.

olds Street ues (particus also indicaxperience rovements dmance simys along the

unk 4 was f the existin

nter two-waroduction o

e piece of A

ess expectResults inare expec

ularly durinate that therelatively loduring the P

milar to thee corridor.

Pa

Octobe

consideredng 4-lane cay left turn of bicycle lAT infrastruc

ted intersedicate that

cted to openg the PM e stop-controng delays PM peak ho

e Sydney R

age 32

r 2014

d for cross lane

anes cture

ection t the erate peak

rolled and

ours. Road

RE

YN

OLD

S S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

RE

YN

OLD

S S

T

REEVES STREET

PROPOSED 2-WAY LEFT

TURN CENTER LANE

PROPOSED 1.8m

WIDE BIKE LANES

Drawn: MIC, PSN

Engineer: MIC, GRO

FIGURE 9-3: CONCEPTUAL LANE LAYOUT

PITT STREET TO SYDNEY ROAD

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

SCALE: NTS

LEGEND

OCTOBER 15, 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\08_T

RA

FF

IC

\8.4_R

EP

OR

T_F

IG

UR

ES

\141-13284-T

RA

FF

IC

F

IG

UR

ES

- T

WLT

L.D

WG

Sheet:F

igure 9-3 T

WLT

L C

oncept

Notes:

1. All property boundaries shown are approximate only

and do not reflect changes made since 2007.

2. Proposed road layouts and pavement markings are

conceptual and representative only. Detailed design

required prior to finalizing layout.

3. Background aerial photography is for information

purposes only and does not necessarily reflect the

current existing condition.

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.1.2 N

West ofincludingon the nmuch deStreet, a The projust weswere colane conexpectethe PM operatio Althoughlane redunsignamany camodel g


NSCC to Pitt

f Pitt Streeg removal onorth side esired AT ca section th

posed lanest of Pitt Sompleted tonfigurationsd to operat

peak houonal capacit

h there appduction sclized intersases due toap accepta


t Street

et, Reevesof the outsiof the stre

connection at is notabl

e configurattreet) and

o assess exs. Results te within acur side strty.

pear to be scenarios, itsections is o the limita

ance and ar

Safety Study

s Street wde westbouet. The mubetween thly a conside

ions would two eastboxpected intindicate th

cceptable limreet movem

some capat is recogknown to

ations of thrrivals at ST

was consideund lane anulti-use pathe NSCC aerable gap

include onound lanestersection phat the intemits duringments exp

acity constranized that provide un

he softwareTOP contro

ered for and conversthway wouland the comin the sidew

ne westbous. Intersectiperformancersctions –g the AM peerience lon

raints for thLOS mo

reasonablye in terms oolled approa

pplication ion to a muld provide

mmercial cewalk netwo

nd lane (taion perform

ce based o– all stop-ceak hour. Hng delays

ese intersedeling usin

y poor leveof its abilityaches.

Pa

Octobe

of a road ulti-use patha valuable

entre of Reork.

pering frommance analn the prop

controlled –However, du

and appr

ection baseng Synchr

els of servicy to adequ

age 34

r 2014

diet hway

e and eves

m two lyses osed

– are uring oach

ed on ro at ce in ately

DRAFT FinPort Hawk


F


FIGURE TO BE

Figure 9-4:

Safety Study

E PROVIDED A

Conceptual L

AT OCTOBER

Lane Layout –

21 PROJECT

– NSCC to Pitt

MEETING

t Street

Pa

Octobe

age 35

r 2014

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.2 Int

9.2.1 R

The ReeEmbree modern on any provides

SpwcM

Troa

Gcru

The prowith twoeach sidaccess tonly.


ersection U

Reeves Stre

eves StreetIsland Roaroundabouone partic

s a number

Safety Beneroblem to t

well as theompared

Macmaster Traffic Opeoundabout s illustrated

Gateway Fommunicatural section

oposed Rouo approach de street ato MacLean


Upgrades

et @ Granv

t – Granvilad (East) aut. A roundacular aspec

of benefits

efits: The he west on

e usual sato the STRoad. rational Pecan be ad

d in the LOSFeature: Ptes to the dn to the wes

undabout Clanes on b

approach. n Crescent

Safety Study

ville Street

le Street inand Macmaabout at thct, but raths to the stre

safety ben Reeves St

afety benefTOP contr

erformancedded withouS analysis

Provides ariver that th

st from the

Concept (Fboth Reeves The conc

t, and restr

ntersection,ster Road, is location

her a poteeet and area

nefits includtreet at the fits attributrolled inter

e: While nout adverselresults (Arc

a break inhey are enturban secti

Figure 9-59s Street apcept includicting Embr

as well aswere consis not cons

entially wora as a whol

de eliminatEmbree Is

ted to roursections

ot requiredly affectingcady) in Apn road ctering a newion to the e

9-5) includepproaches ades relocatiree Island

s adjacent sidered for sidered a nrthwhile imle.

tion of thesland Road undabout inat Granvil

d based og intersectiopendix E.

character tw area. Thi

east.

es a two-laand one aping the MaRoad to rig

Pa

Octobe

intersectionconversion

necessity bprovement

sight distintersectio

ntersectionslle Street

on operatioon perform

that effectis will divide

ane roundapproach lanacmaster Rght-in / righ

age 36

r 2014

ns at n to a ased that

ance n, as s as and

on, a ance

tively e the

about ne for Road ht-out

E

M

B

R

E

E

IS

L

A

N

D

R

D

M

A

C

M

A

S

T

E

R

R

D

J

D

M

A

C

L

E

A

N

C

R

S

T

.

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

ICD=55m

G

R

A

N

V

I

L

L

E

S

T

.

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

B

O

U

N

D

A

R

Y

(

A

P

P

R

O

X

.

)

CONSIDER SHIFTING

REEVES ST. ACCESS

TO JD MACLEAN CRST.

REMOVE BRIDGE

UPGRADE AND CONVERT

TO 2-WAY TRAFFIC

MODIFY TO PROVIDE RIGHT-IN /

RIGHT-OUT ACCESS

CONSIDER 70 km/hr SPEED

LIMIT REDUCTION FOR

ROUNDABOUT APPROACH

CONSIDER ADDING

RIGHT-HAND TURN CHANNEL

POSSIBLE MULTI-USE TRAIL

PRELIMINARY CURB LAYOUT

FOR ROUNDABOUT

PROPOSED EXTENSION

TO ROUNDABOUT

TRANSITION TO 2

NORTHBOUND LANES

Drawn: PSN

Engineer: GRO, MIC

NORTH

OCTOBER 15, 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\11_ D

WG

\11.7_T

RA

FF

IC

\141-13284 - R

EE

VE

S S

T. R

OU

ND

AB

OU

T &

P

IT

TS

R

D. E

XT

. C

ON

CE

PT

S.D

WG

Sheet:F

ig. 9-5 R

oundabout

1 : 1,000

25 m051015

FIGURE 9-5: CONCEPTUAL LANE

LAYOUT - ROUNDABOUT

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

SCALE: 1:1000

LEGEND

Notes:









DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.2.2 P

This impStreet toStreet nprovide between The closthe probas addiproposeconfigurprovide


Pitt Street Ex

provement o close theorth side trefficient ac

n the Pitt St

sure of the blem areas tional vehi

ed change wrations (seeefficient tra


xtension

illustrated ie north sideraffic to the ccess to Retreet extens

north side of concerncle trips awill add moe Figure 9-6affic flow.

Safety Study

n Figure 9-e approachPitt Street

eeves Streesion and Re

of MacSwen and can bare generatore traffic to6), complete

-6 includes to Reevesintersectio

et for the peeves Stree

een Street be expectedted by theo the Pitt Se with signa

creating as Street ann. The Pitt

proposed aset.

at Reevesd to improve proposedStreet intersalized left tu

cul-de-sacnd divertingt Street Extssisted livin

s Street willve future sad developmsection, theurn phases

Pa

Octobe

c on MacSwg all MacSwtension willng developm

remove onafety in the ment. Whilee proposed s, is expecte

age 38

r 2014

ween ween also ment

ne of area

e the lane

ed to

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

ADD SOLID WHITE LINE TO

SEPARATE NORTHBOUND LANES

ADD RA-4 SIGNS

TO CROSSWALK

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

ADD LEFT TURN

GUIDE LINE

OVERHEAD LANE

DESIGNATION SIGNAGE

EXTEND SIDEWALK FROM

EXISTING SIDEWALK TO

HIGHWAY 4 INTERSECTION

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

B

O

U

N

D

A

R

Y

(

A

P

P

R

O

X

.

)

Drawn: PSN

Engineer: GRO, MIC

FIGURE 9-7: REEVES ST. @ TRUNK 4

INTERSECTION PROPOSED UPGRADES

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

NOT TO SCALE NORTH

LEGEND

OCTOBER 15, 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\11_ D

WG

\11.7_T

RA

FF

IC

\141-13284 - R

EE

VE

S S

T. R

OU

ND

AB

OU

T &

P

IT

TS

R

D. E

XT

. C

ON

CE

PT

S.D

WG

Sheet:F

ig. 9-7 R

eeves S

t. at T

runk 4

Notes:









DRAFT FinPort Hawk

9.2.3 R

This is awhich is9-7). Thfrom theintersectleft turn to separfactors tmarking The prop

1. Ee

2. Intotr

3. Inla

4. Cs

5. Ms

The prosafety of


Reeves Stre

a signalizeds the stem ohe intersecte east turntion. Sincelanes – as rate right ato several s and signin

posed imprErect overhe

xclusive rignstall a wido separate raffic from tnstall wide anes from RConstruct a idewalk gap

Mark the peigns.

posed signf this inters


et @ Trunk

d T-intersecof the ‘T’, htion also hans to becoe it is suspwell as a d

and left turnsideswipe ang is advisa

rovements ead lane deght turn lanee thermal pthe right tuhe Point Tuthermal pl

Reeves Stresection of p on the noedestrian c

ns, pavemeection for b

Safety Study

4

ction betweas a dual le

as a right tuome the rigected that dividing linening vehicleand left turnble.

(Figure 9-7esignation se and the dplastic whiteurning traffupper area astic left tueet to Trunksidewalk fr

orth side of rosswalk o

nt markingsboth motoris

een two foueft turn tow

urn channel ght hand llack of pav

e on Reevees from Trun collisions

7) include thsignage on dual left turne line on Ric from Truto Reeves

urn guide lik 4 eastbouom Trunk 4Reeves Strn the right

s and sidewsts and ped

ur lane strewards Trunk where the lane of Re

vement mares Street imunk 4 – main recent y

he followingthe eastbo

n lanes. Reeves Streunk 4 westbStreet wesines to sepund. 4 westerly treet; t turn chan

walk can bedestrians.

eets where k 4 eastbouright hand

eeves Strerkings to se

mmediately way have beyears, addit

g: ound approa

eet west of bound and stbound. parate the

to Tim Hort

nel with ap

e expected

Pa

Octobe

Reeves Stund (See Filane of Tru

eet west ofeparate the west of Tru

een contribtional pavem

ach to show

the intersethe left tur

two left tur

tons to fill in

ppropriate R

d to improve

age 40

r 2014

treet, igure unk 4 f the dual

unk 4 uting ment

w the

ction rning

rning

n the

RA-4

e the

Drawn: PSN

Engineer: GRO, MIC

NORTH

OCTOBER 15, 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\11_ D

WG

\11.7_T

RA

FF

IC

\141-13284 - R

EE

VE

S S

T. R

OU

ND

AB

OU

T &

P

IT

TS

R

D. E

XT

. C

ON

CE

PT

S.D

WG

Sheet:P

itt S

t. E

xt.

NOT TO SCALE

LEGEND

Notes:









FIGURE 9-6: CONCEPTUAL LANE

LAYOUT - PITT STREET EXTENSION

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

10.0 S

10.1 Su

Key IssReview

NcRst

Samc

Traffic Traffic (vehiclestrucks d2014, inincrease13,800 aPopulatsocial ceTown of2011. Ba 10 yeaCollisioper HMVall four Reeves Access needs obasic pr

Lab

Ss

Rdto

Pp


Summary

mmary

ues - The kincluded:

NSTIR and ost effectiv

Reeves Stretreet.

Since Trunknd since a

maintaining onsideratio

Volumes –(AADT) vol

s per day (uring at lea

ndicated aned using a and 2034 Ation Trendenter of thef Port HawkBetween thear period. on Rates - VK is less tlane undivStreet is co

Managemof traffic moinciples of a

imiting the nd have coy numerou

Separating cet of conflic

Reducing inecelerate oo complete

Providing adarking lot


y and Rec

key issues

Town officve improveeet with co

k 4 is a pria by-pass

a high mon when pla

– Traffic coumes were

(vpd), possast part of thn estimated

1.5% per AADT of 15,ds - Today e Strait of Ckesbury expe 2001 and

Since the athan the lavided Trunkonsidered t

ment - Acceovement onaccess ma

number ofollisions whs accessesconflict poicts before mnterferenceout of the tha turn. dequate onentrances

Safety Study

commend

considered

cials, and tements thansideration

mary highwhighway is

mobility funanning and

ounts from e declining sibly becauhat time. H

d AADT of year grow

,600 vpd. Port Hawk

Canso areaperienced a

d 2011 cens

average cost NSTIR pk Highwayo be norma

ss manage a public ronagement c

f conflict pohen presens. nts - Drivermeeting anoe with throhrough lane

n-site traffiprovide su

dations

d when com

he public, at will provn to the hig

way connecs not expecnction on evaluating

2008 to 20significantlyse of the p

However, a 12,000 veh

wth factor t

esbury rem. However, a rapid decsus, popula

llision rate published ras in Nova al for that ro

ement is theoad and lancan be ach

oints - Driveted with th

rs need sufother. ough traffice and wait i

c circulatioufficient cle

mpleting the

want both vide accepgh number

cting the Scted to be the streetinfrastructu

011 indicaty with a 20pulp mill clcount on R

hicles per dto provide

mains the c the recent

cline in popation decline

on Reevesate of 189.Scotia, th

oad class.

e process ond access tieved by:

ers are morhe complex

fficient time

c - Turningin a protect

on and stoear throat s

e Reeves St

immediatetable levelof heavy t

Strait of Cabuilt for m

t must beure improve

ted Annual011 AADT vloser and l

Reeves Streday. Volumprojected

commercialt statistics spulation betwe has reac

s Street of .7 collisionse collision

of balancingto adjacent

re likely to driving sit

e to addres

g lanes ated area for

rage - Prospace for v

Pa

Octobe

treet Safety

e and long s of safetyrucks using

nso to Sydmany 20 yee an impoements.

l Average Dvolume of 8lack of gypeet during Jmes have b2024 AAD

, industrial,suggest thaween 2001h 9.3 perce

163.0 colliss per HMV

experienc

g the compt properties

make mistuations cre

ss one pote

llow driverr an opport

operly desigvehicles to

age 42

r 2014

y

term y on g the

dney, ears,

ortant

Daily 8,800 psum June, been

DT of

, and at the and

ent in

sions K for e on

eting s. the

takes eated

ential

rs to tunity

gned turn

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

frp

Active motorizecycling. assessmthey areoccupandue to s

Gg

Llafodp

Ewhu

Ppc

Traffic evaluatiobaseline2034 (20

Ltoha


rom the strarking spac

Transportaed means,

Active trament. Pedee less physnts. Walkineveral facto

Gaps in sideaps in the cack of dedi

anes or muorced to ridangerous. uts pedestr

Existing Trawalking adja

eavy vehicsers.

Physical Carticularly hallenge fo

Operationaon of Stu

e AM / PM 0-year horiz

evel of Sero be adequorizon. Thnalysis:

o Overaslight

o At unpeak desireindicais expdelay

o At sigare eyear adequ


reet withouces.

ation - Acwhich in

nsportationstrians and

sically proteng and cycors:

ewalk connconnectivityicated cyclilti-use path

de on-streetThis can ofrians at riskaffic Condiacent to ancles can be

onstraints: between G

or AT users

al Review dy Area ipeak hour zon) AM / P

rvice Analyuate throughe following

all intersectly worse thnsignalized

hour, delaed levels. ating that thpected to r

ys. gnalized intexpected fo

backgrounuately serv

Safety Study

ut interfere

ctive transpan urban e

n is an imd cyclists aected and mcling can be

nectivity: Asy of sidewang infrastru

hs on or adjt in mixed tften result k. tions: In tnd cycling

e uncomfort

There arGranville S.

- Synchrointersectionvolumes, a

PM peak ho

ysis Resultsghout the Rg key poi

ction perforan during tintersection

ays on the However, vhere is excremain very

tersections or all movemnd scenarie demand o

nce from v

portation (Aenvironmenportant elere considermore expose a challen

s discussedalks on Reeucture: Theacent to Retraffic, whicin cyclists i

he absencon a busy

table exper

re considetreet and

8.0 softwans for bacas well as pour volumes

s: Overall, iReeves Strnts summ

rmance duhe AM peans in the Stside stree

v/c ratios rcess capacy good for

in the Studments durinios. Existinon both Re

vehicles at

AT) refers nt primarilyement to cred to be ‘vsed to inju

nge along th

d in Sectioves Street.

ere are preseeves Streech can be iillegally ridi

ce of appry corridor wrience that

erable graMacSween

are has beckground sprojected 2s.

intersectionreet corridoarize the

ring the Pak hour (LOtudy Area,

et movemeremain welcity. Overall

all scenario

dy Area, gong the AMng signal

eeves Stree

ttempting t

to transpoy consists consider invulnerable ry risk thanhe Reeves

n 2.2.2, the Pedestrian

sently no deet. As a resntimidatinging on the s

ropriate ATwith a highdeters ma

ades on Rn Street, w

een used foscenarios 024 (10-ye

n performanor over theintersectio

M peak hoOS A).

particularlynts may inll within acl intersectioos, with ve

ood levels peak hourtiming pla

et and the s

Pa

Octobe

to enter or

rtation by of walking a road sroad usersn motor ve

s Street cor

ere are muns edicated bicsult, cyclists and potensidewalk, w

T infrastruch percentagny potentia

Reeves Stwhich can

or performincluding 2

ear horizon)

nce is expee 20-year son perform

our (LOS B

y during thencrease beycceptable lion performery low ave

of performr for all hoans appeaside streets.

age 43

r 2014

r exit

non-and

afety s’, as ehicle rridor

ultiple

cycle s are

ntially which

cture, ge of al AT

treet, be a

ance 2014 ) and

ected study ance

B) is

e PM yond mits, ance

erage

ance rizon

ar to .

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

SRc

10.2 Stu

Study re

InterseSaf


Summary ofReeves Streorridor will

udy Recom

ecommenda

ection fety

1

2

3

4


f Results: Geet, it is nrequire any

mendations

ations are s

T

Reco

1. Install It is reGranvil(See cimprovedistancgatewathe urb

2. Road DIt is recReevesa) Ch

oneStr50

b) Chdirewe

3. Pitt StrCoincidupgradconcep Th

lan Th

lan

4. Pitt StrIt is resouthboproposFigure

Safety Study

Given the enot expecty significant

s

summarized

Table 10-1: St

ommenda

Gateway Rcommendedle Street / E

concept skee traffic con

ce concernsay for Port Han area to th

Diet and Twcommendeds Street fromhange from ae westbounreet and conkm/h (See F

hange from aection and a

est of Trunk 4reet Interseding with Rees be made

pt sketch in Fe westboun

ne, a throughe east boun

ne, a through

reet Extensecommendeound approaed Pitt Stree9-6.

excess caped that typt upgrades.

d in Table 1

udy Recomme

ation

oundaboutd that a rouEmbree Islaetch in Figuntrol, at the to the wes

Hawkesbury he east.

wo-Way Left that the fol

m Granville Sa four lane d lane betwnsider reducFigure 9-2);a four lane a two-way le4 (See Figurction Upgra

ecommendate at the ReeFigure 9-6):nd approachh lane, and and approachh lane, and a

ion: ed MacSweach to Reevet Extension

pacity at Stpical backg.

10-1 and illu

endations

: undabout beand Road / ure 9-5). Tintersection

st at Embreto separate

t Turn Lanelowing cross

Street to Trucross sectio

ween Granvicing the pos

cross sectioeft turn lanere 9-1). ades: tion 2, it is reeves Street

h to Pitt Stra right turn lah to Pitt Sta through / r

een Street ves Street ann north from

tudy Area iground gro

ustrated on

e installed inMacmaster

The proposens, eliminateee Island Re the rural a

: s section chnk 4:

on to two eaille Street a

sted speed li

on to one the from east o

ecommendet - Pitt Stree

reet should ane; reet should

right lane.

end at a nd that trafficReeves Stre

Pa

Octobe

ntersectionowth along

n Figure 10-

n the vicinityRoad inters

ed roundabe the existin

Road, and capproach are

hanges be m

astbound lannd just wesimit from 70

hrough lane of Pitt Stree

ed that the foet intersectio

include a l

include a l

cul-de-sac c be redireceet as illustr

age 44

r 2014

ns on g the

-1.

y of the sections out will ng sight create a ea from

made for

nes and st of Pitt 0km/h to

in each et to just

ollowing on (See

left turn

left turn

on the cted to a rated on

DRAFT FinPort Hawk

ActTranspo

AccManag

SigninMark


tive ortation

5

6

cess gement

7

ng and king

8

9

1


5. SidewaIt is recto fill in KIA Tim

6. Multi-UIt is recto prov Co

adjto

Cobewidfou

Cofro

7. Access

The fol Dri

Ma Re

a cpa

Re

8. PedestSign asigning

9. Trunk 4It is recReeveslanes fmark tStreet w

10. Speed Install followincontrol Ea We

Safety Study

alk Upgradecommended existing gapA dealer to Sm Hortons toUse Trails:commendedide key AT c

onstruct a mjacent to theMacSween

onstruct a mtween MacSdth that will ur lanes to thonstruct a mm Granville

s Managemlowing acceiveway closanagement, econstruct thclear throat rking lot and

estrict future

trian Crosswnd mark all

g practices.

4 Intersecticommendeds Street / Trfrom Reeveshe dividing westerly from

Control: radar contro

ng locations:

astbound jusestbound jus

es: that the follps on the noSydney Roao Trunk 4 (ap

that the folconnections multi-use trae Civic CentStreet; multi-use traSween Strebe available

hree lanes (Rmulti-use trai

Street to the

ment: ss managemures and acSection 6.3.

he entrancesseparation

d the actual pdevelopmen

walks: l pedestrian

on: that thermarunk 4 interss Street to line betwee

m the Trunk

olled speed to provide

t west of Phst west of Tr

lowing sectiorth side of Rd (approximpproximately

lowing sectiin the Studyail on the tre and thro

ail on the eet and Grae when the Refer to Recil on the noe Nautical In

ment changeccess restric.3 (See Figus to shoppinbetween veparking spacnts on Reev

n crosswalks

al plastic pavsection to cTrunk 4 eaen the two 4 right turn

feedback sinformation

ilpott Streetrunk 4.

ons of sidewReeves Stre

mately 120m)y 190m)

ions of multy Area (See north side

ough the Pitt

north side anville Streecross sectio

commendatiorth side of nstitute.

es are recomctions as di

ure 6-2); ng plaza parehicles enterces.

ves Street to

s in accorda

vement marlearly identif

astbound, aswestbound

channel (Se

signs on Ren to drivers

;

Pa

Octobe

walk be conset: )

i-use trail beFigure 9-2):of Reeves

t Street inte

of Reeveset using theon is changeon #2); the Reeves

mmended: iscussed in

rking lots to ring and exi

one drivewa

ance with s

rking be usefy the dual s well as tod lanes on ee Figure 9-7

eeves Streeto assist in

age 45

r 2014

structed

e added : s Street rsection

s Street e street ed from

s Street

Access

provide ting the

ay.

standard

ed at the left turn

o clearly Reeves 7).

t at the n speed

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

P

H

I

L

P

O

T

T

S

T

H

I

G

H

W

A

Y

4

R

E

Y

N

O

L

D

S

S

T

S

Y

D

N

E

Y

R

D

G

R

A

N

V

I

L

L

E

S

T

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

JD

M

AC

LE

AN

C

R

ST

INSTALL GATEWAY

ROUNDABOUT (SEE FIGURE 9-5)

R

E

E

V

E

S

S

T

R

E

E

T

TRUNK 4 INTERSECTION

UPGRADES (SEE FIGURE 9-7)

SIDEWALK

UPGRADES

PITT STREET EXTENSION

(SEE FIGURE 9-6)

MULTI-USE TRAIL

M

A

C

S

W

E

E

N

S

T

R

E

E

T

MULTI-USE TRAIL

INTERSECTION UPGRADES

(SEE FIGURE 9-6)

ACCESS MANAGEMENT

(SEE FIGURE 6-1)

CHANGE FROM 4 LANE SECTION

TO 2 EASTBOUND LANES AND 1

WESTBOUND LANE

CHANGE FROM 4 LANE SECTION TO

1 THROUGH LANE IN EACH DIRECTION WITH

2-WAY LEFT TURN LANE (SEE FIGURE 9-1)

Drawn: PSN

Engineer: MIC

FIGURE 10-1: SUMMARY OF KEY

RECOMMENDATIONS

PORT HAWKESBURY, NS

NOT TO SCALE NORTH

LEGEND

OCTOBER 15, 2014

FILE

: K

:\D

AR

TM

OU

TH

\2014\141-13284 N

ST

IR

_R

EE

VE

S S

T_P

OR

T H

AW

KE

SB

UR

Y\11_ D

WG

\11.7_T

RA

FF

IC

\141-13284 - F

IG

UR

E 10-1.D

WG

Sheet:F

ig. 10-1 K

ey R

ecom

mendations

Notes:









SCALE: 1:7000

Appen Terms

ndix A

s of Refeerence

October 2014

Appen

Traffic

ndix B

c Volumee Data

October 2014

Appendix B - Traffic Volume Data Page B-1

A B C D E F G H I J K L

07:00 07:15 0 0 1 0 50 3 0 0 0 0 42 0 96

07:15 07:30 0 0 1 0 53 5 2 0 0 0 59 0 120

07:30 07:45 0 1 0 0 82 3 1 0 0 1 93 0 181

07:45 08:00 1 0 2 2 67 13 3 0 0 1 123 0 212

08:00 08:15 0 0 0 0 69 18 2 0 0 2 99 0 190

08:15 08:30 0 2 2 0 88 25 6 0 1 4 112 0 240

08:30 08:45 0 0 0 0 111 22 1 0 0 0 119 0 253

08:45 09:00 1 0 0 1 87 21 4 0 1 0 96 1 212

1 2 4 2 335 78 12 0 1 7 453 0 895

0 0 1 1 24 0 1 0 1 0 28 0 -

-


03:30 03:45 1 3 1 0 156 2 10 2 4 0 101 0 280

03:45 04:00 0 0 0 2 125 1 5 0 6 1 85 0 225

04:00 04:15 1 0 2 2 176 0 7 2 3 0 100 0 293

04:15 04:30 1 0 1 0 161 1 9 0 0 0 99 0 272

04:30 04:45 1 0 1 0 185 2 7 0 1 0 108 2 307

04:45 05:00 1 0 0 0 177 0 0 0 1 0 104 1 284

05:00 05:15 0 0 0 1 218 1 1 0 0 0 92 1 314

05:15 05:30 1 0 2 0 173 2 1 0 0 0 109 1 289

3 0 3 1 753 5 9 0 2 0 413 5 1194

0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 -

-

Total

VehiclesNorthbound Approach

Reeves Street

Embree Island Road / Nautical Institute

@

Friday, May, 02, 2014

Port Hawkesbury, NS

AM Peak Period Volume Data

Time Westbound Approach

Nautical Institute Reeves Street

Southbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Reeves Street

Table B-1

Reeves Street

6%14%

Embree Island Road

AM Peak Total

PM Peak Period Volume Data

AM Peak Hour Data

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 6%15%

Westbound Approach

Nautical Institute

PM Peak Hour Data

Heavy Vehicles

PM Peak Hour

Total

VehiclesEastbound Approach

Embree Island Road

Northbound ApproachTime

Reeves Street

Southbound Approach

% Heavy 0% 2% 0% 3%

WSP Canada Inc. June 2014


A B C D* E* F G* H I J K L*

07:00 07:15 0 1 2 - - 2 - 2 0 0 0 - 7

07:15 07:30 0 1 1 - - 0 - 0 0 0 0 - 2

07:30 07:45 0 2 1 - - 0 - 0 3 1 0 - 7

07:45 08:00 0 2 0 - - 0 - 2 1 2 0 - 7

08:00 08:15 0 0 0 - - 0 - 0 4 1 0 - 5

08:15 08:30 0 3 2 - - 0 - 2 2 1 0 - 10

08:30 08:45 2 0 0 - - 0 - 0 0 2 1 - 5

08:45 09:00 2 1 0 - - 0 - 0 0 1 1 - 5

2 5 2 441 745 0 409 4 7 6 1 468 27

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 -

-

A B C D* E* F G* H I J K L*

03:30 03:45 0 0 1 - - 2 - 2 0 0 3 - 8

03:45 04:00 0 0 0 - - 1 - 3 0 0 1 - 5

04:00 04:15 0 0 0 - - 3 - 3 0 0 0 - 6

04:15 04:30 0 0 0 - - 3 - 5 0 0 0 - 8

04:30 04:45 0 0 0 - - 3 - 7 0 0 0 - 10

04:45 05:00 0 0 0 - - 1 - 5 0 0 0 - 6

05:00 05:15 0 0 0 - - 7 - 13 0 0 0 - 20

05:15 05:30 0 0 0 - - 9 - 12 0 0 0 - 21

0 0 0 796 394 20 759 37 0 0 0 425 57

0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 -

-

* Movement not counted. Estimated from adjacent intersection.

0% 0% 0%

PM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 0% 0%

PM Peak Hour Data


Time

Embree Island Road Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Macmaster Road Reeves StreetTotal

VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound Approach Westbound Approach Southbound Approach Eastbound Approach

AM Peak Hour Data

AM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 0%


Macmaster Road Reeves StreetTotal

VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound Approach Westbound Approach Southbound Approach Eastbound ApproachTime

Embree Island Road Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street

Table B-2

Reeves Street

@

Embree Island Road (East)

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Thursday, June 5, 2014



A C D E* K* L

07:00 07:15 3 1 0 - - 17 21

07:15 07:30 4 0 1 - - 13 18

07:30 07:45 8 0 0 - - 11 19

07:45 08:00 6 1 1 - - 20 28

08:00 08:15 13 2 2 - - 18 35

08:15 08:30 6 3 1 - - 9 19

08:30 08:45 7 0 0 - - 12 19

08:45 09:00 6 0 1 - - 10 17

32 6 4 383 410 59 101

0 0 0 - - 1 -

-

A C D E* K* L

03:30 03:45 15 10 0 - - 68 93

03:45 04:00 55 33 0 - - 72 160

04:00 04:15 25 6 3 - - 71 105

04:15 04:30 37 25 0 - - 83 145

04:30 04:45 15 5 2 - - 30 52

04:45 05:00 28 3 3 - - 0 34

05:00 05:15 6 1 1 - - 0 8

05:15 05:30 20 1 3 - - 26 50

69 10 9 - - 56 144

0 0 0 0 - 2 -

-

* Movement not counted. Estimated from adjacent intersection.

TimeTotal

Vehicles

0%0%0%

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Wednesday, May, 07, 2014

Reeves Street

@

Granville Street

Total

VehiclesTime Eastbound Approach

Reeves Street

Westbound Approach

Reeves Street

Northbound Approach

Granville Street


Table B-3

PM Peak Hour Data


% Heavy

Heavy Vehicles

AM Peak Total

AM Peak Hour Data

Eastbound Approach

Reeves Street

Westbound Approach

Reeves Street

Northbound Approach

Granville Street

4%% Heavy

Heavy Vehicles

PM Peak Total

0% 0%



A C D E K L

07:00 07:15 2 1 3 32 53 0 91

07:15 07:30 2 5 1 39 58 0 105

07:30 07:45 0 2 2 42 162 0 208

07:45 08:00 1 11 9 62 147 1 231

08:00 08:15 1 1 8 61 139 3 213

08:15 08:30 2 7 5 92 158 3 267

08:30 08:45 0 5 6 63 146 6 226

08:45 09:00 1 2 3 64 96 1 167

4 24 28 278 590 13 937

0 0 1 22 49 0 -

-

A C D E K L

11:30 11:45 3 10 2 90 105 3 213

11:45 12:00 3 45 6 113 89 13 269

12:00 12:15 83 14 11 138 131 11 388

12:15 12:30 4 8 10 132 128 116 398

12:30 12:45 2 8 6 143 156 18 333

12:45 13:00 80 7 12 130 152 0 381

13:00 13:15 4 10 21 42 242 0 319

13:15 13:30 2 3 10 147 156 0 318

90 33 49 447 678 134 1431

0 0 0 46 51 0 -

-

A C D E K L

03:30 03:45 7 10 4 115 105 3 244

03:45 04:00 5 90 5 144 134 2 380

04:00 04:15 4 14 3 98 126 3 248

04:15 04:30 8 15 7 127 100 0 257

04:30 04:45 4 5 8 131 113 2 263

04:45 05:00 2 8 10 98 100 0 218

05:00 05:15 9 4 0 125 123 4 265

05:15 05:30 4 3 5 114 95 0 221

21 124 23 500 473 7 1148

0 0 0 31 21 0 -

-


Northbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Table B-4

Reeves Street

@

Philpott Street

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Tuesday, May, 06, 2014

Eastbound Approach


Time

Philpott Street Reeves Street Reeves StreetTotal

Vehicles

AM Peak Hour Data

AM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 8% 8%

Noon Peak Hour Data

Noon Peak Hour

Northbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound ApproachTime


Vehicles

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 9% 6%

Noon Peak Period Volume Data

Time


VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach

PM Peak Hour Data

PM Peak Hour

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 6% 4%




07:00 07:15 4 0 8 0 34 0 0 0 3 0 43 4 96

07:15 07:30 6 1 9 1 43 0 1 0 1 0 50 5 117

07:30 07:45 7 0 7 0 54 0 0 0 3 0 92 9 172

07:45 08:00 9 2 16 0 69 0 0 1 0 0 105 3 205

08:00 08:15 16 1 30 0 65 0 1 1 1 0 135 6 256

08:15 08:30 1 2 18 0 71 0 1 1 1 0 123 4 222

08:30 08:45 17 2 31 0 66 0 0 0 2 0 112 6 236

08:45 09:00 1 0 39 0 70 0 1 0 0 0 68 4 183

43 7 95 0 271 0 2 3 4 0 475 19 919

0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 -

-


11:30 11:45 3 0 18 1 97 32 8 1 3 3 75 0 241

11:45 12:00 3 1 12 5 115 12 11 4 11 5 81 0 260

12:00 12:15 3 2 3 11 121 21 9 2 11 7 94 3 287

12:15 12:30 6 5 15 17 153 20 8 3 8 7 95 2 339

12:30 12:45 3 2 12 8 121 11 3 1 11 8 112 0 292

12:45 13:00 3 6 12 7 112 27 4 6 6 6 82 0 271

13:00 13:15 3 3 7 12 114 18 8 2 8 7 92 0 274

13:15 13:30 1 3 8 3 92 7 5 1 6 10 77 2 215

15 15 42 43 507 79 24 12 36 28 383 5 1189

0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 -

-


03:30 03:45 5 2 8 6 112 6 5 1 15 6 82 0 248

03:45 04:00 3 6 7 7 115 16 1 0 5 7 88 0 255

04:00 04:15 5 3 2 1 143 11 5 4 13 9 100 3 299

04:15 04:30 0 7 11 10 146 6 5 2 9 3 80 0 279

04:30 04:45 5 2 6 0 175 12 3 3 18 5 86 1 316

04:45 05:00 1 2 8 11 126 12 7 1 12 12 85 2 279

05:00 05:15 6 3 3 11 170 16 5 2 7 4 85 1 313

05:15 05:30 1 3 5 5 136 15 6 1 10 7 74 0 263

12 14 28 32 617 46 20 8 46 24 336 4 1187

0 0 0 0 23 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 -

-

Table B-5

Reeves Street

@

MacSween Street

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Tuesday, April, 22, 2014


Time

MacSween Street Reeves Street MacSween Street Reeves StreetTotal

VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach Southbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Total

Vehicles

Noon Peak Period Volume Data

Time

MacSween Street Reeves Street MacSween Street

Northbound Approach Westbound Approach Southbound Approach

Noon Peak Hour Data

Noon Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 5% 0%

Reeves StreetTotal


AM Peak Hour Data

AM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 11% 0% 0% 4%

4%

PM Peak Hour Data

PM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 3% 24% 0%

Eastbound Approach


Time

MacSween Street Reeves Street MacSween Street Reeves Street




07:00 07:15 4 0 5 6 25 4 3 2 7 0 38 6 100

07:15 07:30 5 1 4 11 39 1 0 2 1 5 48 18 135

07:30 07:45 5 1 2 6 44 2 3 5 3 5 87 17 180

07:45 08:00 5 1 13 14 72 8 7 2 0 3 85 30 240

08:00 08:15 13 8 12 4 68 12 7 7 4 4 116 33 288

08:15 08:30 19 15 8 11 66 14 13 16 10 22 83 41 318

08:30 08:45 14 8 13 22 62 14 26 10 17 7 71 30 294

08:45 09:00 10 3 12 15 73 10 13 5 12 11 77 25 266

56 34 45 52 269 50 59 38 43 44 347 129 1166

0 0 0 0 25 3 1 1 1 6 9 0 -

-


03:30 03:45 18 6 13 15 84 9 11 10 8 21 76 22 293

03:45 04:00 10 4 13 16 86 13 18 17 35 19 73 27 331

04:00 04:15 15 2 17 22 124 14 18 12 22 10 93 32 381

04:15 04:30 18 4 27 11 150 5 11 18 20 12 67 27 370

04:30 04:45 18 4 13 20 115 9 30 8 13 25 96 16 367

04:45 05:00 12 1 9 14 120 7 23 18 10 28 99 17 358

05:00 05:15 13 7 15 20 133 6 12 11 5 32 107 17 378

05:15 05:30 11 6 8 10 133 9 15 10 22 26 78 21 349

63 11 66 67 509 35 82 56 65 75 355 92 1476

2 1 0 0 27 0 1 0 0 2 18 0 -

-

DIAGRAM

Table B-6

Reeves Street

@

Pitt Street

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

AM Peak Hour Data

AM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles


Time

Pitt Street Reeves Street Pitt Street Reeves StreetTotal



Time

Pitt Street Reeves Street Pitt Street Reeves StreetTotal


% Heavy 0% 8% 2% 3%

PM Peak Hour Data

PM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 2% 4% 0% 4%




07:00 07:15 2 2 1 0 43 0 3 0 3 1 53 0 108

07:15 07:30 6 0 3 1 51 3 2 0 1 1 47 0 115

07:30 07:45 11 1 4 1 63 1 3 4 1 1 56 9 155

07:45 08:00 8 1 10 0 133 2 5 4 2 1 97 4 267

08:00 08:15 8 2 6 0 91 0 7 1 1 1 92 6 215

08:15 08:30 4 6 18 2 56 2 4 0 0 2 102 9 205

08:30 08:45 7 0 4 6 77 3 2 1 1 5 109 9 224

08:45 09:00 12 3 9 1 100 3 6 1 3 5 107 9 259

31 11 37 9 324 8 19 3 5 13 410 33 903

3 0 2 1 33 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 -

-


03:30 03:45 7 5 7 6 111 17 17 7 6 1 104 4 292

03:45 04:00 13 8 2 0 133 8 19 2 8 2 98 5 298

04:00 04:15 6 7 2 0 156 17 29 4 8 0 117 4 350

04:15 04:30 5 7 6 0 132 13 26 5 7 3 89 7 300

04:30 04:45 10 5 6 2 168 22 30 1 12 3 101 9 369

04:45 05:00 6 6 1 1 104 15 23 4 7 1 103 7 278

05:00 05:15 7 6 8 0 203 16 28 7 10 0 101 4 390

05:15 05:30 2 7 3 1 200 7 12 6 6 2 87 4 337

27 25 15 3 560 67 108 14 34 7 410 27 1297

0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 1 16 0 -

-

DIAGRAM

Table B-7

Reeves Street

@

Reymonds Street

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Tuesday, April, 15, 2014

AM Peak Hour Data

AM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles


Time

Reynolds Street Reeves Street Reynolds Street Reeves StreetTotal



Time

Reynolds Street Reeves Street Reynolds Street Reeves StreetTotal


% Heavy 6% 10% 0% 5%

PM Peak Hour Data

PM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 3% 0% 4%




07:00 07:15 0 0 3 38 55 1 40 0 3 1 0 55 196

07:15 07:30 1 2 14 61 46 1 66 9 3 9 0 48 260

07:30 07:45 2 2 12 72 67 0 77 6 3 7 0 69 317

07:45 08:00 3 2 9 84 74 0 88 2 2 5 1 75 345

08:00 08:15 3 3 5 82 96 4 79 3 3 8 2 97 385

08:15 08:30 2 2 23 82 126 0 95 7 1 10 5 123 476

08:30 08:45 3 4 16 92 118 2 96 6 6 12 7 115 477

08:45 09:00 4 4 20 87 111 2 96 7 4 11 3 112 461

12 13 64 343 451 8 366 23 14 41 17 447 1799

0 0 0 0 17 0 21 1 1 1 0 0 -

-


03:30 03:45 4 4 26 105 114 3 122 8 10 9 3 115 523

03:45 04:00 4 3 20 125 116 4 138 6 6 7 4 115 548

04:00 04:15 2 2 10 163 146 4 162 10 6 11 9 139 664

04:15 04:30 1 7 11 162 110 6 160 9 7 13 4 113 603

04:30 04:45 3 11 28 135 144 5 156 6 11 7 6 149 661

04:45 05:00 0 8 21 134 118 6 145 11 11 10 4 122 590

05:00 05:15 4 9 18 148 145 0 160 5 6 6 14 140 655

05:15 05:30 1 1 20 69 100 0 82 4 3 7 3 98 388

6 28 70 594 518 21 623 36 35 41 23 523 2518

0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 -

-0% 4% 0% 0%

PM Peak Total

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 0%

PM Peak Hour Data


Time

Sydney Road (South) Reeves Street Reeves StreetTotal

VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Reeves Street Sydney Road (North) Reeves Street

Westbound Approach Southbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Friday, April, 11, 2014

AM Peak Hour Data

Sydney Road

Table B-8

Reeves Street

@


Total

VehiclesNorthbound Approach Westbound Approach Eastbound Approach

Reeves Street

Westbound Approach

Sydney Road (North)

Southbound Approach

Reeves Street

Eastbound ApproachTime

Sydney Road (South) Reeves Street Reeves Street

AM Peak Total

6% 4% 0%

Heavy Vehicles

% Heavy 0% 0% 4%



Reeves St Reeves St Total

WB Approach EB Approach Vehicles

A B C D E F G H I J

07:00 07:15 3 7 6 0 2 2 1 8 1 0 30

07:15 07:30 8 26 0 5 5 3 3 17 0 11 78

07:30 07:45 2 21 0 7 2 2 0 21 2 7 64

07:45 08:00 10 27 1 10 3 11 7 21 0 14 104

08:00 08:15 3 7 0 12 11 11 1 27 3 11 86

08:15 08:30 6 6 1 5 6 16 8 16 0 17 81

08:30 08:45 3 26 0 6 12 13 8 20 1 8 97

08:45 09:00 0 13 0 7 11 8 1 26 1 5 72

22 66 2 33 32 51 24 84 4 50 368

Total Total Vehicles

Entering Exiting Using

Drive Throu

07:00 07:15 6 10 10 4 16 14 10

07:15 07:30 5 31 34 8 36 42 22

07:30 07:45 7 30 23 4 37 27 22

07:45 08:00 11 42 37 14 53 51 32

08:00 08:15 12 42 10 22 54 32 32

08:15 08:30 6 41 12 22 47 34 28

08:30 08:45 6 37 29 25 43 54 26

08:45 09:00 7 33 13 19 40 32 24

35 162 88 83 197 171 118368

Reeves St Pitt St Reeves St Pitt St

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Wednesday, April, 16, 2014

AM Peak Hour


Time

Tim Hortons Driveway Pitt Street

NB Approach

Pitt Street

NB ApproachSB Approach

Tim Hortons Driveway

WB Approach

Pitt Street / Tim Hortons Driveway

Table B-9

Reeves Street

@

60%

Entering Exiting

72

97

81

86

104

64

78

30

PM Peak Tim Hortons Trip Generation

Time

AM Peak Hour

Total

Enering &

Exiting

% Using Drive Thru

60%

60%

60%

60%

60%

60%

60%



Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street Reeves Street

WB Approach EB Approach WB Approach EB Approach WB Approach EB Approach WB Approach EB Approach

B C D F H I J K N O P Q S V W X

03:30 03:45 1 0 1 1 23 7 11 6 15 16 21 2 10 10 5 129

03:45 04:00 3 3 5 3 30 8 18 4 61 20 20 23 5 12 20 235

04:00 04:15 3 4 5 4 23 12 22 7 40 26 37 21 9 25 23 261

04:15 04:30 3 3 5 2 26 13 11 3 52 31 40 15 18 16 40 278

04:30 04:45 5 3 5 2 24 12 11 8 50 41 51 Column C 18 15 25 16 286

04:45 05:00 4 5 7 7 21 9 14 4 41 43 46 16 26 11 15 269

05:00 05:15 2 0 4 2 30 8 13 5 28 27 30 16 12 27 22 226

05:15 05:30 1 1 3 3 13 12 18 4 27 11 22 11 11 5 11 153

15 15 22 15 94 46 58 22 183 141 174 0 70 68 77 94 1094

Port Hawkesbury, NS

Table B-10

Sobeys, Gas Bar, and Canadian Tire Driveway

@

Reeves Street

PM Peak Hour

SB Approach SB Approach NB Approach


Time

Gas Bar

Driveway

Sobeys Middle

Driveway

Canadian Tire

Driveway Total

Vehicles

Sobeys North

Driveway

SB Approach

Friday, April, 25, 2014


.

.Table B-11E - Eastbound Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014 Table B-11 - Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014

(West of Shopping Centre Driveway) (West of Shopping Centre Driveway)

Hour Days of the Week Hourly Averages Hour Days of the Week Hourly AveragesMon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday Mon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday

0 01 13 24 20 14 20 41 30 23 18 1 27 52 50 34 47 86 59 51 422 17 16 15 7 16 33 20 18 14 2 23 26 25 20 28 52 62 34 243 18 20 9 21 16 17 9 16 17 3 24 34 13 28 29 36 22 27 264 16 17 27 11 29 24 7 19 20 4 30 43 36 27 45 43 19 35 36

WSP Canada Inc. July 2014 .

4 16 17 27 11 29 24 7 19 20 4 30 43 36 27 45 43 19 35 365 44 45 22 32 33 22 15 30 35 5 72 62 42 52 61 37 26 50 586 97 96 82 111 91 52 43 82 95 6 188 192 163 217 173 109 79 160 1877 216 258 238 203 210 92 48 181 225 7 365 392 377 354 366 167 110 304 3718 365 360 354 352 344 158 72 286 355 8 603 649 619 611 589 298 148 502 6149 449 476 410 423 418 245 82 358 435 9 840 890 794 846 812 473 209 695 836

10 397 417 397 430 421 310 168 363 412 10 766 800 747 822 800 585 331 693 78711 461 473 464 503 543 389 228 437 489 11 928 888 882 944 1008 766 455 839 93012 478 505 501 507 526 413 342 467 503 12 979 1002 1035 1003 1107 800 660 941 102513 561 597 540 580 645 442 376 534 585 13 1102 1202 1140 1191 1312 900 752 1086 118914 500 537 494 545 574 412 430 499 530 14 986 1084 1009 1074 1180 872 834 1006 106714 500 537 494 545 574 412 430 499 530 14 986 1084 1009 1074 1180 872 834 1006 106715 517 536 477 551 579 401 424 498 532 15 1023 1029 1006 1080 1165 767 857 990 106116 508 555 501 586 593 346 421 501 549 16 1037 1124 1019 1184 1256 755 808 1026 112417 532 542 543 615 653 346 401 519 577 17 1111 1156 1156 1278 1337 762 804 1086 120818 385 524 464 578 534 338 362 455 497 18 940 1162 1082 1191 1169 729 715 998 110919 346 353 331 402 440 286 305 352 374 19 704 755 700 805 948 607 588 730 78220 313 296 338 370 398 243 269 318 343 20 594 617 637 728 793 478 507 622 67421 250 214 274 250 246 194 175 229 247 21 497 419 541 542 527 459 340 475 50522 165 177 139 184 259 170 159 179 185 22 344 345 313 399 461 373 257 356 37223 111 87 109 110 210 108 78 116 125 23 216 170 198 204 339 239 138 215 22524 54 41 35 41 63 57 32 46 47 24 104 69 68 76 118 111 61 87 8724 54 41 35 41 63 57 32 46 47 24 104 69 68 76 118 111 61 87 87

TOTALS 6813 7166 6784 7426 7861 5139 4496 6526 7210 TOTALS 13503 14162 13652 14710 15670 10504 8841 13006 14339Source: NSTIR Estimated 2014 AADT is 12,000 vpd

NOTE: Counts were obtained by directional road tubes. Recorded volumes are counted axles and divided by two

Table B-11W - Westbound Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014(West of Shopping Centre Driveway)

Hour Days of the Week Hourly AveragesMon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday

0Figure B-5 - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury

Average Weekday Hourly Volumes - June 201401 14 28 30 20 27 45 29 28 242 6 10 10 13 12 19 42 16 103 6 14 4 7 13 19 13 11 94 14 26 9 16 16 19 12 16 165 28 17 20 20 28 15 11 20 236 91 96 81 106 82 57 36 78 917 149 134 139 151 156 75 62 124 1468 238 289 265 259 245 140 76 216 2599 391 414 384 423 394 228 127 337 401

800

1000

1200

1400

lum

es

Figure B-5 - Reeves Street, Port HawkesburyAverage Weekday Hourly Volumes - June 2014

Average Weekday Hourly VolumesWest of Shopping Centre Driveway

June 3 to 10, 2014

10 369 383 350 392 379 275 163 330 37511 467 415 418 441 465 377 227 401 44112 501 497 534 496 581 387 318 473 52213 541 605 600 611 667 458 376 551 60514 486 547 515 529 606 460 404 507 53715 506 493 529 529 586 366 433 492 52916 529 569 518 598 663 409 387 525 57517 579 614 613 663 684 416 403 567 63118 555 638 618 613 635 391 353 543 61219 358 402 369 403 508 321 283 378 408

200

400

600

800

Ho

url

y V

olu

mes

19 358 402 369 403 508 321 283 378 40820 281 321 299 358 395 235 238 304 33121 247 205 267 292 281 265 165 246 25822 179 168 174 215 202 203 98 177 18823 105 83 89 94 129 131 60 99 10024 50 28 33 35 55 54 29 41 40

TOTALS 6690 6996 6868 7284 7809 5365 4345 6480 7129

0

200

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Hours of the Day

Eastbound Westbound Two-Way



.

.Table B-11E - Eastbound Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014 Table B-11 - Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014

(West of Shopping Centre Driveway) (West of Shopping Centre Driveway)

Hour Days of the Week Hourly Averages Hour Days of the Week Hourly AveragesMon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday Mon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday

0 01 13 24 20 14 20 41 30 23 18 1 27 52 50 34 47 86 59 51 422 17 16 15 7 16 33 20 18 14 2 23 26 25 20 28 52 62 34 243 18 20 9 21 16 17 9 16 17 3 24 34 13 28 29 36 22 27 264 16 17 27 11 29 24 7 19 20 4 30 43 36 27 45 43 19 35 36


4 16 17 27 11 29 24 7 19 20 4 30 43 36 27 45 43 19 35 365 44 45 22 32 33 22 15 30 35 5 72 62 42 52 61 37 26 50 586 97 96 82 111 91 52 43 82 95 6 188 192 163 217 173 109 79 160 1877 216 258 238 203 210 92 48 181 225 7 365 392 377 354 366 167 110 304 3718 365 360 354 352 344 158 72 286 355 8 603 649 619 611 589 298 148 502 6149 449 476 410 423 418 245 82 358 435 9 840 890 794 846 812 473 209 695 836

10 397 417 397 430 421 310 168 363 412 10 766 800 747 822 800 585 331 693 78711 461 473 464 503 543 389 228 437 489 11 928 888 882 944 1008 766 455 839 93012 478 505 501 507 526 413 342 467 503 12 979 1002 1035 1003 1107 800 660 941 102513 561 597 540 580 645 442 376 534 585 13 1102 1202 1140 1191 1312 900 752 1086 118914 500 537 494 545 574 412 430 499 530 14 986 1084 1009 1074 1180 872 834 1006 106714 500 537 494 545 574 412 430 499 530 14 986 1084 1009 1074 1180 872 834 1006 106715 517 536 477 551 579 401 424 498 532 15 1023 1029 1006 1080 1165 767 857 990 106116 508 555 501 586 593 346 421 501 549 16 1037 1124 1019 1184 1256 755 808 1026 112417 532 542 543 615 653 346 401 519 577 17 1111 1156 1156 1278 1337 762 804 1086 120818 385 524 464 578 534 338 362 455 497 18 940 1162 1082 1191 1169 729 715 998 110919 346 353 331 402 440 286 305 352 374 19 704 755 700 805 948 607 588 730 78220 313 296 338 370 398 243 269 318 343 20 594 617 637 728 793 478 507 622 67421 250 214 274 250 246 194 175 229 247 21 497 419 541 542 527 459 340 475 50522 165 177 139 184 259 170 159 179 185 22 344 345 313 399 461 373 257 356 37223 111 87 109 110 210 108 78 116 125 23 216 170 198 204 339 239 138 215 22524 54 41 35 41 63 57 32 46 47 24 104 69 68 76 118 111 61 87 8724 54 41 35 41 63 57 32 46 47 24 104 69 68 76 118 111 61 87 87

TOTALS 6813 7166 6784 7426 7861 5139 4496 6526 7210 TOTALS 13503 14162 13652 14710 15670 10504 8841 13006 14339Source: NSTIR Estimated 2007 AADT is 1980 vpd

NOTE: Counts were obtained by directional road tubes. Recorded volumes are counted axles and divide by two

Table B-11W - Westbound Hourly Volumes - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury - June 3 to 10, 2014(West of Shopping Centre Driveway)

Hour Days of the Week Hourly AveragesMon-09 Tue-03 Wed-04 Thu-05 Fri-06 Sat-07 Sun-08 Week Weekday

0Figure B-5 - Reeves Street, Port Hawkesbury

Average Weekday Hourly Volumes - June 201401 14 28 30 20 27 45 29 28 242 6 10 10 13 12 19 42 16 103 6 14 4 7 13 19 13 11 94 14 26 9 16 16 19 12 16 165 28 17 20 20 28 15 11 20 236 91 96 81 106 82 57 36 78 917 149 134 139 151 156 75 62 124 1468 238 289 265 259 245 140 76 216 2599 391 414 384 423 394 228 127 337 401

800

1000

1200

1400

lum

es

Figure B-5 - Reeves Street, Port HawkesburyAverage Weekday Hourly Volumes - June 2014

Average Weekday Hourly VolumesWest of Shopping Centre Driveway

June 3 to 10, 2014

10 369 383 350 392 379 275 163 330 37511 467 415 418 441 465 377 227 401 44112 501 497 534 496 581 387 318 473 52213 541 605 600 611 667 458 376 551 60514 486 547 515 529 606 460 404 507 53715 506 493 529 529 586 366 433 492 52916 529 569 518 598 663 409 387 525 57517 579 614 613 663 684 416 403 567 63118 555 638 618 613 635 391 353 543 61219 358 402 369 403 508 321 283 378 408

200

400

600

800

Ho

url

y V

olu

mes

19 358 402 369 403 508 321 283 378 40820 281 321 299 358 395 235 238 304 33121 247 205 267 292 281 265 165 246 25822 179 168 174 215 202 203 98 177 18823 105 83 89 94 129 131 60 99 10024 50 28 33 35 55 54 29 41 40

TOTALS 6690 6996 6868 7284 7809 5365 4345 6480 7129

0

200

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Hours of the Day

Eastbound Westbound Two-Way



Appen

PropeInform

ndix C

rty Ownmation

nership

October 2014

Appendix C: Property Ownership Information Page C‐1

Map Reference Property Number Registered Owners

1 50156512 NS SUPPLY & SERVICE

2 50175439 LEO ROBERTS

3 50064617 NSTIR

4 50153709 NSTIR

5 50201805 KIMBERLY MACDONALD

6 50153576 BRIAN & KIMBERLY MACDONALD

7 50153543 PHONSIE MACEACHERN WHOLESALE LTD

8 50153600 ALPHONSUS & RITA MACEACHERN

9 50153303 IRVING OIL COMPANY LTD

10 50299577 IRVING OIL COMPANY LTD

11 50153329 WAYNE HUGHES

12 50156843 WAYNE HUGHES

13 50175207 TRACY & SHANE SCOTT

14 50297548 WILLIAM & LESLIE FRACHE

15 50313584 NEIL & SARALYNN BRYANT

16 50313592 NEIL & SARALYNN BRYANT

17 50154343 ERNEST LANGLEY

18 50154301 JEANNETTE RIZZUTO

19 50154269 MICHAEL RIZZUTO

20 50154236 MAURINA BERT LEWIS

21 50154228 RALSTON & PATRICIA MOORING

22 50154194 MICHEL & RHODENA FOURNIER

23 50154152 DIANE &GORDON SNOOK

24 50154111 MARY ANN & GARRY LIVELY

25 50154053 NATASHA KEEFE, JOHN MACKENZIE

26 50308162 CAPE BRETON AND CENTRAL NOVA SCOTIA RAILWAY LTD

27 50155514 TOWN OF PORT HAWKESBURY

28 50154822 TRUSTEES PORT HAWKESBURY UNITED BAPTIST CHURCH

29 50154749 ALLAN & DUNCAN CAMERON, ALEEN MACDONALD

30 50154707 MICHAEL FORBRIGGER

31 50154731 MICHAEL FORBRIGGER

32 50175140 JEREMY & FLORA GILLIS



35 50154657 SUSAN & WILLIAM BUTTS

36 50154632 RODERICK & SANDY MACKENZIE

37 50154590 JAMES SANDERSON

38 50154582 JAMES SANDERSON

39 50201797 RODGER & KATHLEEN GOODICK

40 50154491 GERARD HEARN, KIMBERLY RICHARDS

41 50154442 LYNN & CYRIL GILLIS

42 50154434 RONNIE & CATHERINE WARNER

43 50154418 PAUL MACINNIS

44 50273705 MICHAEL & RENEE REPKO

45 50273713 EVAN RYAN

46 50155563 NJ MACLEAN

47 50157155EMMA MCINTYRE, TD TRUST CO, BAYSHORE TRUST CO, G ORMOND FORSYTH

48 50115542 NOVA SCOTIA POWER INC


50 50305945 THE REGIONAL OCCUPATIONAL CENTRE SOCIETY

51 50156132 THE REGIONAL OCCUPATIONAL CENTRE SOCIETY

52 50112606 JAMES CODY

53 50148105 CAROLINE & SHANNON HENNESSEY



56 50119353 BRIDGET WHITE

57 50175405 KATHERINE JENKINS

58 50230689 DENIS HAVERSTOCK FUNERAL HOME LTD

59 50155951 3214452 NOVA SCOTIA LIMITED*

60 50148022 3214452 NOVA SCOTIA LIMITED*

61 50230697 DOUGLAS & WENDY BEATON

62 50275536 DONALD MACINNIS

63 50275510 KAITLYN HARB, FONATHAN NICHOLSON

Table C-1 - Property Ownership (See Figure 3-1)

WSP Canada Inc. October 2014




64 50148139 JOANNE & ROBERT RYAN

65 50148527 BASSAM & BERNADETTE HAYDAR

66 50036987 BASSAM & BERNADETTE HAYDAR

67 50115666 DONALD & MARLENE WAECHITER

68 50148600 DONALD & MARLENE WAECHITER

69 50148576 MARGARET & PAUL MOREAU

70 50124270 WILLIAM MACINNIS

71 50118488 ANDREW & JANE PALMER

72 50116557 DAVID & MARY JOHNSTON

73 50054659 BERNADETTE KENNEDY

74 50054626 JOHN & EDITH CLUETT

75 50054584 JOSEPH & CARMEL BENOIT

76 50049626 KELLY & NATALIE MACISAAC

77 50048800 EDMUND & DORIS MACLEAN

78 50116300 JOHN GILLIS, VIRGINIA POIRIER

79 50221829 AUDREY MCNAMARA

80 50221837 SYLVIA MCNAMARA, GEORGE BREWER

81 50124205 DIRK ROSE

82 50124080 TRACEY FOX, DARREN CUMMINGS

83 50155621 SAMUEL & JUNE STIRLING

84 50123884 SAMUEL & JUNE STIRLING

85 50124064 GLENDA & WILLIAM CH


87 50219278 JEFFERY & DEBORAH VOSSEN

88 50156165 BROWNE & HEISLER HOLDINGS, BARBARA CORKUM, PAULA NEMEC

89 50155472 WOODY CHEDIAC

90 50155068 3074889 NOVA SCOTIA LTD

91 50221811 EAST COAST CREDIT UNION LTD

92 50124288 RICHARD MACDONALD, ROBERT DIGOUT, GEORGE MALCOLM

93 50147313 EDWARD & MARY MARSHALL

94 50154061 LINDA LITTLE


96 50050467 LLOYD & SHIRLEY GRANT

97 50175009 LLOYD & SHIRLEY GRANT

98 50052711 LLOYD & IMELDA MACDONALD

99 50054535 PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLIES OF CANADA

100 50054667 CHARLES & KATHLEEN GREEN


102 50121813 BOUDROT RODGERS LAW INC

103 50230812 DAVID CANDOW, CAROLL BOONE

104 50275015 JAMES DUNN

105 50291707 STEPHEN & TRACEY SAMPSON

106 50174564 MARIE & TROY DAVIS

107 50097724 VALERIE POTTIE

108 50097740 ALLAN MACKAY


110 50015924 BASSAM INVESTMENTS LTD

111 50117597 J-CAT ENTERPRISES LTD

112 50275049 COMMUNICATIONS & PAERWORKERS UNION

113 50156090 HOLY TRINITY ANGLICAN CHURCH

114 50156579 TIM DONUT (NS) LTD

115 50151414 3235789 NOVA SCOTIA LTD

116 50151547 BARRIE SABDHAM

117 50151034 JOB STRATEGY LTD

118 50151091 HUGH & CONNIE MACEACHEN

119 50151133 ANGUS & ANGELA MACKINNON

120 50151539 CANADIAN TIRE PROPERTIES LTD


122 50156611 KINGMAC PROPERTIES LTD

123 50155886 KINGMAC PROPERTIES LTD

124 50166768 ISLAND PROPERTIES LTD

125 50151893 WILLIAM & WENDY MACRAE

126 50163633 WILLIAM & WENDY MACRAE





127 50154772 MONIER & JOEY CHEDIAC

128 50151646 WADAIH & WOODY CHEDIAC

129 50151679 JOHN LANDRY

130 50151695 LOWELL RONALDS

131 50151752 GERARD & JEAN DEVEAUX

132 50151505 DAVID RYAN

133 50151513 WILLIAM & MARILYN TURNER

134 50233444 CAR-MAC HOLDINGS LTD

135 50155217 SCOTT'S TRUSTEE CORP

136 50151448 WAYNE RANKIN

137 50166859 WAYNE RANKIN

138 50151497 LEGEND INVESTMENTS LTD

139 50153402 CST CANADA CORP

140 50153345 CAPE BRETON REALTY INC

141 50153410 MARITIMES INNS & RESORTS INC

142 50153055 EDDY MACKAY BUILDING CO LTD

143 50153089 MICHAEL & MARGARET TRAINOR

144 50153113 MICHAEL & MARGARET TRAINOR

145 50153196 ANTHONY NEWMAN AMANDA ETTINGER

146 50153147 MICHAEL PAULA NEMAC


148 50155464 3272907 NOVA SCOTIA LTD

149 50186923 TERRENCE CASHIN


151 50152107 MARGARET JOHNSON

152 50175660 KENNETH MACRAE, GWEN RUSSELL

153 50152123 JOHN MACDONALD

154 50152149 DONALD & MARION MACDONALD

155 50151935 PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLIES OF CANADA

156 50151984 WILLIAM & GLENDA MACLEAN

157 50152024 DORIS REYNOLDS

158 50152507 DANIEL & MARGARET MACINTYRE

159 50154756 MARY WEBB-LEMBO

160 50017011 ACTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC

161 50054683 ACTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC

162 50155936 BLUENOSE ENTERPRISE LTD


164 50151901 GEORGE & LORRAINE STUBBARD

165 50151869 HUGH BEATON

166 50151786 JAMES & MELISSA CAHILL

167 50174390 KILLIAM INVESTMENTS INC




171 500447810 NS TRANSPORTATION & PUBLIC WORKS

172 50155084 NS HOUSING AND MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS










182 50229889 CAR-MAC HOLDINGS LTD

183 50174341 LRMCJ INVESTMENTS LTD

184 50174325 NOVA SCOTIA POWER INC

185 50007368 RE/MAX PARK PLACE INC

186 50054709 NIMA VANI ENTERPRISES LTD

187 50000942 NIMA VANI ENTERPRISES LTD


189 50156942 PEARL REALTY COMPANY LTD

190 50001049 MCDONALDS RESTAURANTS OF CANADA LTD





191 50315985 CAUSEWAY SHOPPING CENTRE LTD








199 50175330 REG OCCUPATIONAL CENTRE SOCIETY

200 50106368HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN THE RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA

201 50321959 THE PORT HAWKESBURY VETERAN'S MEMORIAL PARK SOCIETY

202 50311166 THE PORT HAWKESBURY VETERAN'S MEMORIAL PARK SOCIETY


204 50083336 RAYMOND & KATHLEEN BRITTEN

205 50123132 BRIAN & CATHERINE BOWMAN

206 50119437 GERALD & JANE TREMBLAY

207 50084847 TAMMY & ALBERT BENNETT

208 50083385 JOHN & MARILYN MERCER

209 50083328 WAYNE MACMILLAN

210 50188127 DONALD MACKAY


212 50117316 JOHN MCKINNON

213 50155712 JOSEPH & ANNE GOSSE

214 50156470 MS HOUSING AND MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS


Appen

InterseAnalysTables(Backg

ndix D

ection Psis Resus ground

Performaults and

Scenari

Octobe

ance Summa

os)

r 2014

ary

Appendix D ‐ Intersection Performance Analysis (Background Scenarios) Page D-1

EB-LT EB-TR WB-LT WB-TR NB-LTR SB-LTR Delay LOS

Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 16.8

LOS A A A A A C

v/c 0.24 0.15 0.18 0.16 0.01 0.05

Queue 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2

Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 19.1

LOS A A A A B C

v/c 0.29 0.17 0.23 0.18 0.01 0.06

Queue 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.5

Delay 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 22.0

LOS A A A A B C

v/c 0.35 0.20 0.28 0.20 0.01 0.07

Queue 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.7

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 30.8

LOS A A A A C D

v/c 0.33 0.15 0.43 0.27 0.03 0.07

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.8

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.7 40.3

LOS A A A A C E

v/c 0.43 0.17 0.52 0.31 0.04 0.10

Queue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.9 2.4

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.6 52.1

LOS A A A A C F

v/c 0.53 0.19 0.61 0.34 0.05 0.13

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.1

A0.4

2034 PM Peak (Page D-63)


0.4 A

Table D-1: LOS for Embree Island Road / Nautical Institute @ Reeves Street


0.4 A

LOS Criteria

Control Delay (sec/veh), v/c Ratio, and 95% Queue (m) by Intersection Movement

Overall Intersection

2014 AM Peak (Page D-13)

0.40 A


0.4 A


0.4 A



EB-T EB-TR WB-TL WB-T NB-LR Delay LOS

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.21 0.11 0.15 0.19 0.01

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.24 0.12 0.19 0.21 0.01

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.27 0.14 0.22 0.24 0.01

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.19 0.11 0.30 0.35 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.22 0.12 0.37 0.42 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.00 0.1 0.0 0.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.25 0.14 0.43 0.47 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0


0.0 A


0.0 A


0.0 A

Table D-2a: LOS for Embree Island Road (East) @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




0.1 A



0.0 A

0.0 A



EB-TL EB-T WB-T WB-TR SB-LR Delay LOS

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.6

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.16 0.21 0.18 0.09 0.02

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.6

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.20 0.24 0.21 0.11 0.03

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.20 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.03

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.24 0.20 0.36 0.20 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.31 0.23 0.41 0.23 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

LOS A A A A A

v/c 0.37 0.26 0.45 0.25 0.00

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


0.0 A


0.0 A

0.1 A


0.1 A

Table D-2b: LOS for Macmaster Road @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




0.0 A

0.1 A






Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 15.9

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.19 0.13 0.15 0.17 0.12

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 17.9

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.22 0.15 0.18 0.20 0.13

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.5

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 20.5

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.25 0.16 0.22 0.22 0.16

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 4.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 23.2

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.17 0.12 0.28 0.34 0.32

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 10.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 29.5

LOS A A A A D

v/c 0.20 0.14 0.34 0.39 0.39

Queue 0.0 0.00 0.2 0.0 13.3

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 37.8

LOS A A A A E

v/c 0.22 0.15 0.40 0.44 0.46

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 16.9


1.7 A


2.0 A


1.5 A

Table D-3 - LOS for Granville Street @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria



2014 AM Peak (Page B-16)

0.7 A


0.7 A


0.7 A




Delay 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 11.0

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.19 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.05

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 11.7

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.21 0.12 0.20 0.20 0.06

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.4

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 12.4

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.24 0.13 0.23 0.22 0.06

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.5

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 13.3

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.16 0.09 0.28 0.33 0.29

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 9.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 14.5

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.19 0.10 0.33 0.39 0.32

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 10.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 16.0

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.21 0.11 0.38 0.43 0.35

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 11.7


1.7 B


1.7 B


1.8 A

Table D-4: LOS for Philpott Street @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




0.7 A


0.6 A


0.6 A



EB-TL EB-TR WB-TL WB-TR NB-LTR SB-LTR Delay LOS

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 13.9

LOS A A A A C B

v/c 0.22 0.16 0.17 0.11 0.33 0.03

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 0.6

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.5 15.0

LOS A A A A C C

v/c 0.25 0.19 0.20 0.12 0.36 0.03

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4 0.7

Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.2 17.5

LOS A A A A C C

v/c 0.32 0.21 0.28 0.15 0.43 0.04

Queue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.9

Delay 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 31.8 31.5

LOS A A A A D D

v/c 0.39 0.17 0.43 0.26 0.33 0.39

Queue 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 10.3 13.4

Delay 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.0 41.6 41.1

LOS A A A A E E

v/c 0.48 0.20 0.53 0.29 0.40 0.47

Queue 0.8 0.00 1.0 0.0 13.4 17.3

Delay 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 48.3 49.6

LOS A A A A E E

v/c 0.52 0.21 0.61 0.33 0.45 0.53

Queue 0.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 15.4 20.2


3.4 B


3.8 B


3.0 A

Table D-5: LOS for MacSween Street @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




2.5 A


2.6 A


2.7 A



EB-LTR WB-LTR NB-LTR SB-LTR Delay LOS

Delay 7.2 7.2 12.3 12.4

LOS A A B B

v/c 0.37 0.27 0.39 0.41

Queue 21.5 15.3 17.3 18.7

Delay 7.6 7.3 13.0 13.1

LOS A A B B

v/c 0.40 0.29 0.39 0.42

Queue 25.5 17.4 18.2 19.5

Delay 7.7 7.3 13.7 13.9

LOS A A B B

v/c 0.42 0.31 0.40 0.43

Queue 28.4 19.4 19.2 20.7

Delay 10.4 12.0 13.0 19.5

LOS B B B B

v/c 0.53 0.61 0.40 0.57

Queue 33.8 46.1 22.5 38.0

Delay 10.8 12.4 14.3 21.0

LOS B B B C

v/c 0.56 0.64 0.41 0.58

Queue 40.3 56.20 24.6 41.3

Delay 11.4 13.2 15.7 22.9

LOS B B B C

v/c 0.59 0.69 0.43 0.59

Queue 46.6 69.0 26.0 43.9


13.1 B


13.9 B

A8.9


12.5 B


Table D-6: LOS for Pitt Street @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




8.5 A


8.7 A



EB-LTR WB-LTR NB-LTR SB-LTR Delay LOS

Delay 6.5 6.3 9.1 10.6

LOS A A A B

v/c 0.31 0.25 0.26 0.11

Queue 19.0 15.4 9.2 5.2

Delay 6.6 6.3 9.5 11.0

LOS A A A B

v/c 0.34 0.28 0.26 0.11

Queue 22.1 18.0 9.6 5.4

Delay 6.6 6.2 10.2 11.9

LOS A A B B

v/c 0.36 0.30 0.27 0.11

Queue 25.5 20.4 10.5 5.9

.

Delay 9.5 10.4 12.3 17.8

LOS A B B B

v/c 0.44 0.54 0.21 0.50

Queue 34.1 44.0 12.9 27.7

Delay 9.5 10.6 13.6 19.6

LOS A B B B

v/c 0.47 0.57 0.21 0.52

Queue 38.8 50.40 14.0 30.3

Delay 9.5 10.7 15.0 21.7

LOS A B B C

v/c 0.49 0.60 0.22 0.54

Queue 43.4 57.4 15.2 32.8


11.1 B


11.3 B


10.9 B

Table D-7: LOS for Reynolds Street @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




6.7 A


6.8 A


6.8 A




Delay 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 13.1

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.18 0.09 0.15 0.14 0.05

Queue 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.1

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 14.1

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.21 0.11 0.18 0.16 0.05

Queue 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.3

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 15.4

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.24 0.12 0.21 0.18 0.06

Queue 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.4

Delay 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 13.3

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.24 0.14 0.35 0.29 0.08

Queue 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 2.0

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 14.0

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.28 0.15 0.41 0.33 0.09

Queue 0.0 0.00 2.3 0.0 2.2

Delay 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 14.6

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.31 0.17 0.47 0.37 0.09

Queue 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 2.3


0.9 B


0.0 B


1.0 A

Table D-8a: LOS for Sydney Road S @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




0.8 A


0.8 A


0.7 A



EB-TL EB-T WB-T WB-TR SB-LR Delay LOS

Delay 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.15 0.18 0.14 0.08 0.07

Queue 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6

Delay 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.09 0.07

Queue 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8

Delay 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0

LOS A A A A B

v/c 0.20 0.23 0.19 0.10 0.08

Queue 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9

Delay 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5

LOS A A A A C

v/c 0.29 0.25 0.30 0.18 0.32

Queue 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3

Delay 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.6

LOS A A A A D

v/c 0.36 0.28 0.35 0.20 0.39

Queue 0.9 0.00 0.0 0.0 13.3

Delay 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.3

LOS A A A A E

v/c 0.43 0.31 0.39 0.22 0.46

Queue 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.1


1.8 A


2.0 B


1.6 A

Table D-8b: LOS for Sydney Road N @ Reeves Street

LOS Criteria




0.6 A


0.6 A


0.6 A


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-1115: Pitt Street & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes

WSP Canada Inc. Synchro 8 ReportJune 2014

Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 45 365 135 55 255 55 60 35 45 60 40 55Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3432 0 0 3472 0 0 1763 0 0 1759 0Flt Permitted 0.889 0.806 0.784 0.808Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3064 0 0 2818 0 0 1412 0 0 1449 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 89 40 33 38Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 593 0 0 397 0 0 152 0 0 168 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 17.1 17.1 8.9 8.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.51 0.51 0.26 0.26v/c Ratio 0.37 0.27 0.39 0.41Control Delay 7.2 7.2 12.3 12.4Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 7.2 7.2 12.3 12.4LOS A A B BApproach Delay 7.2 7.2 12.3 12.4Approach LOS A A B BQueue Length 50th (m) 9.6 6.4 4.8 5.3Queue Length 95th (m) 21.5 15.3 17.3 18.7Internal Link Dist (m) 200.7 373.6 244.1 203.5Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 3022 2779 1033 1061Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.14 0.15 0.16

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 76Actuated Cycle Length: 33.8Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.41Intersection Signal Delay: 8.5 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 52.0% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Splits and Phases: 15: Pitt Street & Reeves Street

Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-1219: Reynolds Street & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 15 485 35 10 415 10 35 10 40 20 5 5Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3539 0 0 3564 0 0 1729 0 0 1783 0Flt Permitted 0.937 0.938 0.851 0.738Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3320 0 0 3347 0 0 1502 0 0 1361 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 11 4 43 5Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 581 0 0 473 0 0 92 0 0 32 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 20.2 20.2 7.6 7.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.57 0.22 0.22v/c Ratio 0.31 0.25 0.26 0.11Control Delay 6.5 6.3 9.1 10.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 6.5 6.3 9.1 10.6LOS A A A BApproach Delay 6.5 6.3 9.1 10.6Approach LOS A A A BQueue Length 50th (m) 10.0 7.8 2.3 1.3Queue Length 95th (m) 19.0 15.4 9.2 5.2Internal Link Dist (m) 373.6 158.5 223.1 199.3Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 3146 3172 1425 1290Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.15 0.06 0.02


Splits and Phases: 19: Reynolds Street & Reeves Street

Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-132: Embree Island Road (West)/Nautical Institute & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 5 475 0 0 355 80 0 0 5 15 0 0Sign Control Free Free Stop StopGrade 0% 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 516 0 0 386 87 0 0 5 16 0 0PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m)pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 473 516 720 1000 258 704 957 236vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 473 516 720 1000 258 704 957 236tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3p0 queue free % 99 100 100 100 99 95 100 100cM capacity (veh/h) 1085 1046 314 240 741 320 255 765

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 264 258 193 280 5 16Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 16Volume Right 0 0 0 87 5 0cSH 1085 1700 1046 1700 741 320Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.16 0.01 0.05Queue Length 95th (m) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2Control Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 16.8Lane LOS A A CApproach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 9.9 16.8Approach LOS A C

Intersection SummaryAverage Delay 0.4Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.8% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15

Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-145: Reeves Street & Macmaster Road 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 0 490 430 5 5 5Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 533 467 5 5 5PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m)pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 473 736 236vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 473 736 236tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 100 98 99cM capacity (veh/h) 1085 354 765

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 178 355 312 161 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 5Volume Right 0 0 0 5 5cSH 1085 1700 1700 1700 484Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.21 0.18 0.09 0.02Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.6Lane LOS BApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 12.6Approach LOS B


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-157: Embree Island Road (East) & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 500 0 0 435 0 5Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 543 0 0 473 0 5PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m)pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 543 780 272vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 543 780 272tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 100 100 99cM capacity (veh/h) 1022 332 726

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 362 181 158 315 5Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0Volume Right 0 0 0 0 5cSH 1700 1700 1022 1700 726Volume to Capacity 0.21 0.11 0.00 0.19 0.01Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0Lane LOS AApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.0Approach LOS A


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-169: Granville Street & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 322 226 150 290 43Volume Left 0 0 5 0 38Volume Right 0 65 0 0 5cSH 1700 1700 1017 1700 372Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.13 0.01 0.17 0.12Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.0Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 15.9Lane LOS A CApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 15.9Approach LOS C


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-1711: Philpott Street & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 315 174 154 243 33Volume Left 0 0 33 0 5Volume Right 0 16 0 0 27cSH 1700 1700 1070 1700 632Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.10 0.03 0.14 0.05Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.2Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 11.0Lane LOS A BApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.8 11.0Approach LOS B


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-1813: MacSween Street & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 0 475 20 0 330 0 45 5 100 0 5 5Sign Control Free Free Stop StopGrade 0% 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 516 22 0 359 0 49 5 109 0 5 5PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 225pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 359 538 715 886 269 728 897 179vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 359 538 715 886 269 728 897 179tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3p0 queue free % 100 100 84 98 85 100 98 99cM capacity (veh/h) 1197 1026 311 282 729 261 278 833

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 258 280 179 179 163 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 49 0Volume Right 0 22 0 0 109 5cSH 1197 1700 1026 1700 501 417Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.11 0.33 0.03Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 0.6Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 13.9Lane LOS C BApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 15.6 13.9Approach LOS C B


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-1922: Sydney Road S & Reeves Street 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 430 5 45 325 10 10Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 467 5 49 353 11 11PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 183pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 473 745 236vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 473 745 236tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 95 97 99cM capacity (veh/h) 1085 334 765



Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2024: Reeves Street & Sydney Road N 2014 AM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 15 425 340 15 10 30Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 462 370 16 11 33PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 219pX, platoon unblockedvC, conflicting volume 386 641 193vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 386 641 193tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 99 97 96cM capacity (veh/h) 1169 401 816

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 170 308 246 139 43Volume Left 16 0 0 0 11Volume Right 0 0 0 16 33cSH 1169 1700 1700 1700 649Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.18 0.14 0.08 0.07Queue Length 95th (m) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6Control Delay (s) 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9Lane LOS A BApproach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 10.9Approach LOS B


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2115: Pitt Street & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 85 390 100 75 620 40 70 10 75 90 60 70Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3461 0 0 3532 0 0 1720 0 0 1766 0Flt Permitted 0.740 0.820 0.785 0.801Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2579 0 0 2911 0 0 1381 0 0 1444 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 50 11 65 32Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 625 0 0 799 0 0 169 0 0 239 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 20.2 20.2 12.3 12.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.45 0.27 0.27v/c Ratio 0.53 0.61 0.40 0.57Control Delay 10.4 12.0 13.0 19.5Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 10.4 12.0 13.0 19.5LOS B B B BApproach Delay 10.4 12.0 13.0 19.5Approach LOS B B B BQueue Length 50th (m) 14.6 21.4 6.1 13.0Queue Length 95th (m) 33.8 46.1 22.5 38.0Internal Link Dist (m) 200.7 373.6 244.1 203.5Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 2244 2526 806 827Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.32 0.21 0.29

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 76Actuated Cycle Length: 45.3Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.61Intersection Signal Delay: 12.5 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 67.3% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2219: Reynolds Street & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 10 585 30 5 700 75 30 30 15 120 15 35Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3550 0 0 3525 0 0 1798 0 0 1768 0Flt Permitted 0.937 0.951 0.809 0.739Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3330 0 0 3352 0 0 1484 0 0 1353 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 8 17 16 20Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 680 0 0 848 0 0 82 0 0 184 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 21.0 21.0 11.7 11.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.26 0.26v/c Ratio 0.44 0.54 0.21 0.50Control Delay 9.5 10.4 12.3 17.8Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 9.5 10.4 12.3 17.8LOS A B B BApproach Delay 9.5 10.4 12.3 17.8Approach LOS A B B BQueue Length 50th (m) 15.9 20.8 3.4 9.2Queue Length 95th (m) 34.1 44.0 12.9 27.7Internal Link Dist (m) 373.6 158.5 223.1 199.3Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 2660 2680 1188 1084Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.26 0.32 0.07 0.17

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 82Actuated Cycle Length: 45Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.54Intersection Signal Delay: 10.9 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-232: Embree Island Road (West)/Nautical Institute & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 247 253 451 457 11 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 5 11Volume Right 0 5 0 5 5 0cSH 746 1700 1060 1700 335 150Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.27 0.03 0.07Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.8Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 30.8Lane LOS C DApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 16.1 30.8Approach LOS C D


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-245: Reeves Street & Macmaster Road 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 172 344 605 346 0Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0Volume Right 0 0 0 43 0cSH 718 1700 1700 1700 1700Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.20 0.36 0.20 0.00Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Lane LOS AApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0Approach LOS A


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-257: Embree Island Road (East) & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 330 187 310 598 0Volume Left 0 0 11 0 0Volume Right 0 22 0 0 0cSH 1700 1700 1046 1700 1700Volume to Capacity 0.19 0.11 0.01 0.35 0.00Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0Lane LOS A AApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 0.0Approach LOS A


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-269: Granville Street & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes





Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2711: Philpott Street & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes





Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2813: MacSween Street & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes


Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 25 535 5 35 705 50 15 15 30 20 10 50Sign Control Free Free Stop StopGrade 0% 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 582 5 38 766 54 16 16 33 22 11 54PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 225pX, platoon unblocked 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99vC, conflicting volume 821 587 1158 1535 293 1255 1511 410vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 796 587 1136 1519 293 1235 1494 381tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3p0 queue free % 97 96 87 85 95 79 90 91cM capacity (veh/h) 812 984 124 108 703 105 112 610

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 318 296 421 438 65 87Volume Left 27 0 38 0 16 22Volume Right 0 5 0 54 33 54cSH 812 1700 984 1700 198 221Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.17 0.04 0.26 0.33 0.39Queue Length 95th (m) 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 10.3 13.4Control Delay (s) 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 31.8 31.5Lane LOS A A D DApproach Delay (s) 0.6 0.6 31.8 31.5Approach LOS D D


Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-2922: Sydney Road S & Reeves Street 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes





Appendix D - Intersection Performance Analysis Page D-3024: Reeves Street & Sydney Road N 2014 PM Peak Design Hourly Volumes



Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 236 417 518 303 92Volume Left 27 0 0 0 43Volume Right 0 0 0 43 49cSH 804 1700 1700 1700 286Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.25 0.30 0.18 0.32Queue Length 95th (m) 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3Control Delay (s) 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5Lane LOS A CApproach Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 23.5Approach LOS C




Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 15 550 35 10 475 10 35 10 40 20 5 5Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3543 0 0 3564 0 0 1729 0 0 1783 0Flt Permitted 0.937 0.938 0.851 0.738Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3323 0 0 3347 0 0 1502 0 0 1361 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 10 3 43 5Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 652 0 0 538 0 0 92 0 0 32 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 21.0 21.0 7.7 7.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.21 0.21v/c Ratio 0.34 0.28 0.26 0.11Control Delay 6.6 6.3 9.5 11.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 6.6 6.3 9.5 11.0LOS A A A BApproach Delay 6.6 6.3 9.5 11.0Approach LOS A A A BQueue Length 50th (m) 11.5 9.2 2.5 1.4Queue Length 95th (m) 22.1 18.0 9.6 5.4Internal Link Dist (m) 373.6 158.5 223.1 199.3Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 3099 3120 1403 1269Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.17 0.07 0.03






Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 299 293 226 312 5 16Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 16Volume Right 0 0 0 87 5 0cSH 1026 1700 984 1700 703 271Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.18 0.01 0.06Queue Length 95th (m) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.5Control Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.2 19.1Lane LOS A B CApproach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 10.2 19.1Approach LOS B C





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 409 205 179 359 5Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0Volume Right 0 0 0 0 5cSH 1700 1700 961 1700 689Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.12 0.00 0.21 0.01Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3Lane LOS BApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.3Approach LOS B





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 293 315 198 198 163 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 49 0Volume Right 0 22 0 0 109 5cSH 1158 1700 966 1700 450 370Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.12 0.36 0.03Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4 0.7Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.5 15.0Lane LOS C CApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 17.5 15.0Approach LOS C C




Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 85 445 100 75 710 40 70 10 75 90 60 70Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3468 0 0 3536 0 0 1720 0 0 1766 0Flt Permitted 0.727 0.821 0.777 0.818Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2539 0 0 2917 0 0 1367 0 0 1474 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 43 10 65 32Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 685 0 0 897 0 0 169 0 0 239 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 23.4 23.4 13.0 13.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.26 0.26v/c Ratio 0.56 0.64 0.41 0.58Control Delay 10.8 12.4 14.3 21.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 10.8 12.4 14.3 21.0LOS B B B CApproach Delay 10.8 12.4 14.3 21.0Approach LOS B B B CQueue Length 50th (m) 17.6 26.3 6.8 14.5Queue Length 95th (m) 40.3 56.2 24.6 41.3Internal Link Dist (m) 200.7 373.6 244.1 203.5Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 2109 2416 741 781Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.37 0.23 0.31

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 76Actuated Cycle Length: 49.3Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.64Intersection Signal Delay: 13.1 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service CAnalysis Period (min) 15




Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 10 665 30 5 795 75 30 30 15 120 15 35Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3554 0 0 3532 0 0 1798 0 0 1768 0Flt Permitted 0.937 0.951 0.809 0.739Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3333 0 0 3359 0 0 1484 0 0 1353 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 7 15 16 20Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 767 0 0 951 0 0 82 0 0 184 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 23.7 23.7 12.0 12.0Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.25 0.25v/c Ratio 0.47 0.57 0.21 0.52Control Delay 9.5 10.6 13.6 19.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 9.5 10.6 13.6 19.6LOS A B B BApproach Delay 9.5 10.6 13.6 19.6Approach LOS A B B BQueue Length 50th (m) 19.1 25.3 3.8 10.2Queue Length 95th (m) 38.8 50.4 14.0 30.3Internal Link Dist (m) 373.6 158.5 223.1 199.3Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 2496 2517 1114 1017Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.31 0.38 0.07 0.18

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 82Actuated Cycle Length: 48Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.57Intersection Signal Delay: 11.1 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 54.1% ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 285 291 516 522 11 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 5 11Volume Right 0 5 0 5 5 0cSH 665 1700 993 1700 274 113Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.31 0.04 0.10Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.4Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.7 40.3Lane LOS C EApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 18.7 40.3Approach LOS C E





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 333 232 346 670 92Volume Left 0 0 11 0 82Volume Right 0 65 0 0 11cSH 1700 1700 1003 1700 237Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.14 0.01 0.39 0.39Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 13.3Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 29.5Lane LOS A DApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 29.5Approach LOS D






Intersection SummaryAverage Delay 1.7Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15




Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 364 342 484 500 65 87Volume Left 27 0 38 0 16 22Volume Right 0 5 0 54 33 54cSH 765 1700 909 1700 162 184Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.20 0.04 0.29 0.40 0.47Queue Length 95th (m) 0.8 0.0 1.0 0.0 13.4 17.3Control Delay (s) 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.0 41.6 41.1Lane LOS A A E EApproach Delay (s) 0.6 0.6 41.6 41.1Approach LOS E E




Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 650 25 75 780 5 30Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 707 27 82 848 5 33PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 183pX, platoon unblocked 0.99 0.99 0.99vC, conflicting volume 734 1307 367vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 703 1284 331tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 91 96 95cM capacity (veh/h) 879 140 656






Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 264 475 587 337 92Volume Left 27 0 0 0 43Volume Right 0 0 0 43 49cSH 735 1700 1700 1700 237Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.28 0.35 0.20 0.39Queue Length 95th (m) 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.3Control Delay (s) 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.6Lane LOS A DApproach Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 29.6Approach LOS D





Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 76Actuated Cycle Length: 36.8Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.43Intersection Signal Delay: 8.9 Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 56.9% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 337 332 258 345 5 16Volume Left 5 0 0 0 0 16Volume Right 0 0 0 87 5 0cSH 970 1700 922 1700 664 228Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.07Queue Length 95th (m) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.7Control Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 22.0Lane LOS A B CApproach Delay (s) 0.1 0.0 10.5 22.0Approach LOS B C





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 460 230 201 402 5Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0Volume Right 0 0 0 0 5cSH 1700 1700 900 1700 651Volume to Capacity 0.27 0.14 0.00 0.24 0.01Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6Lane LOS BApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 10.6Approach LOS B





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 334 356 250 250 163 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 49 0Volume Right 0 22 0 0 109 5cSH 1060 1700 900 1700 383 298Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.15 0.43 0.04Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.9Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.2 17.5Lane LOS C CApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 21.2 17.5Approach LOS C C




Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 85 495 100 75 825 40 70 10 75 90 60 70Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3479 0 0 3543 0 0 1720 0 0 1766 0Flt Permitted 0.699 0.824 0.767 0.823Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2446 0 0 2931 0 0 1349 0 0 1483 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 39 9 65 32Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 739 0 0 1022 0 0 169 0 0 239 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 26.7 26.7 13.7 13.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.50 0.50 0.26 0.26v/c Ratio 0.59 0.69 0.43 0.59Control Delay 11.4 13.2 15.7 22.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 11.4 13.2 15.7 22.9LOS B B B CApproach Delay 11.4 13.2 15.7 22.9Approach LOS B B B CQueue Length 50th (m) 21.1 33.2 7.7 16.4Queue Length 95th (m) 46.6 69.0 26.0 43.9Internal Link Dist (m) 200.7 373.6 244.1 203.5Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 1907 2276 684 732Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.45 0.25 0.33

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 76Actuated Cycle Length: 53.2Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.69Intersection Signal Delay: 13.9 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 75.8% ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15




Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (vph) 10 740 30 5 890 75 30 30 15 120 15 35Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3554 0 0 3536 0 0 1798 0 0 1768 0Flt Permitted 0.937 0.951 0.828 0.739Satd. Flow (perm) 0 3333 0 0 3362 0 0 1519 0 0 1353 0Satd. Flow (RTOR) 6 13 16 20Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 848 0 0 1054 0 0 82 0 0 184 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4 8 2 6Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6Total Split (s) 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0Total Lost Time (s) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Act Effct Green (s) 26.5 26.5 12.3 12.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.52 0.24 0.24v/c Ratio 0.49 0.60 0.22 0.54Control Delay 9.5 10.7 15.0 21.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Delay 9.5 10.7 15.0 21.7LOS A B B CApproach Delay 9.5 10.7 15.0 21.7Approach LOS A B B CQueue Length 50th (m) 22.6 30.4 4.2 11.3Queue Length 95th (m) 43.4 57.4 15.2 32.8Internal Link Dist (m) 373.6 158.5 223.1 199.3Turn Bay Length (m)Base Capacity (vph) 2342 2364 1071 956Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.45 0.08 0.19

Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 82Actuated Cycle Length: 51.1Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.60Intersection Signal Delay: 11.3 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 56.8% ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 321 326 573 579 11 11Volume Left 0 0 0 0 5 11Volume Right 0 5 0 5 5 0cSH 602 1700 935 1700 227 87Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.34 0.05 0.12Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 3.1Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.6 52.1Lane LOS C FApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 21.6 52.1Approach LOS C F





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1Volume Total 377 254 382 743 92Volume Left 0 0 11 0 82Volume Right 0 65 0 0 11cSH 1700 1700 948 1700 199Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.15 0.01 0.44 0.46Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 16.9Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 37.8Lane LOS A EApproach Delay (s) 0.0 0.1 37.8Approach LOS E





Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1Volume Total 380 359 538 554 65 87Volume Left 27 0 38 0 16 22Volume Right 0 5 0 54 33 54cSH 731 1700 884 1700 146 164Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.33 0.45 0.53Queue Length 95th (m) 0.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 15.4 20.2Control Delay (s) 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 48.3 49.6Lane LOS A A E EApproach Delay (s) 0.6 0.6 48.3 49.6Approach LOS E E




Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 725 25 75 875 5 30Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 788 27 82 951 5 33PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 183pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95vC, conflicting volume 815 1440 408vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 700 1358 270tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 90 95 95cM capacity (veh/h) 848 120 691





Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsVolume (veh/h) 25 730 905 40 40 45Sign Control Free Free StopGrade 0% 0% 0%Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Hourly flow rate (vph) 27 793 984 43 43 49PedestriansLane Width (m)Walking Speed (m/s)Percent BlockageRight turn flare (veh)Median type None NoneMedian storage veh)Upstream signal (m) 219pX, platoon unblocked 1.00vC, conflicting volume 1027 1457 514vC1, stage 1 conf volvC2, stage 2 conf volvCu, unblocked vol 1027 1453 514tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9tC, 2 stage (s)tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3p0 queue free % 96 63 90cM capacity (veh/h) 672 116 506

Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 SB 1Volume Total 292 529 656 371 92Volume Left 27 0 0 0 43Volume Right 0 0 0 43 49cSH 672 1700 1700 1700 196Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.31 0.39 0.22 0.47Queue Length 95th (m) 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.3Control Delay (s) 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.8Lane LOS A EApproach Delay (s) 0.5 0.0 38.8Approach LOS E


Appen

InterseAnalysTables(Impro

ndix E

ection Psis Resus ovement

Performaults and

t Scenar

Octobe

ance Summa

rios)

r 2014

ary

wsp canada inc

Documents