07/2398 - Request for information response [As Published] · 132007.2398

 

 

2.2 2010 Comparative Analysis

A comparative assessment using the parameters adopted in the initial traffic report and
the parameters recommended by DMR has been undertaken for the 2010 base and
2010 design traffic volumes. The 2010 base and design traffic volumes have been
extracted from the submitted traffic report (Ref 1). The results are depicted in Tables 1
and 2 below. The Movement Summary for each assessment are attached to this letter.

From the addition assessment:

N The Elm Street / Diamond Street intersection would theoretically operate within
acceptable limits in 2010 when adopting the two scenarios of gap acceptance
parameters (MRC adopted and DMR), with and without the subject
development;

N Average delays of up to 33.8s and 40.3s could be expected during the base
and design cases, respectively. These delays correspond to a Level of Service
of D during the base case and E during the design case.

te

N The right-turn movement would provide more capacity when adopting DMR’s
recommended gap acceptance parameters;

NM The left-turn movement would provide slightly less capacity when adopting ;
DMR’s recommended gap acceptance parameters- though this is not a critical -"““""~
movement;

NA maximum average increased delay, if adopting MRC’s gap acceptance
parameters, between the base and design cases would be 6.5s (i.e. from 33.8s
to 40.3s). This increased delay would reduce to just 3.5s if adopting DMR’s
recommended gap acceptance parameters for the same movement. This delay
would occur for right-turning traffic from Diamond Street. The average increase
in delay for all other movements and for both gap acceptance scenarios would
be equal to or less than 1s, which is considered insignificant;

The degree of saturation for the critical right-turn movement would increase by
between 7% and 10% with the traffic likely to be generated by the
development. The degree of saturation would increase by no more than 3% for
all other movements.

Overall, the SIDRA results indicate that the impact of the traffic likely to be generated by
the development is relatively consistent for the two gap acceptance scenarios (i.e. those
adopted by MRC and those recommended by DMR) assessed herein. Further, by
2010, the average delay for the right-turn movement from Diamond Street onto Elm
Street would be above 30s without the subject development, which provides some
acknowledgement to Council's comment in its information request dated 4 October
2008 that “..delay problems are occurring at this intersection now.”

 

3427-002(1) - RFl.doc