Bridgewater - County of Lincoln, NC

Traffic Impact Analysis

BridgewaterLincoln & Catawba County,

North Carolina

Prepared for:Crosland, LLC

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2008

This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument ofservice, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of andimproper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Hornand Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Impact Analysis forBridgewater

Lincoln & Catawba County, North Carolina

Prepared for:Crosland, LLC

Charlotte, North Carolina

Prepared by:Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

3169 Holcomb Bridge Road, Suite 600Norcross, Georgia 30071

(770) 825-0744

August 2008015245012

i

TABLE OF CONTENTSPage No.

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

2.0 INTRODUCTION 4

3.0 INVENTORY 5

3.1 STUDY AREA 5

3.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5

3.3 FUTURE CONDITIONS 6

4.0 TRAFFIC GENERATION 11

5.0 SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION 13

6.0 TRAFFIC VOLUMES 15

6.1 2011 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 15

6.2 HISTORICAL GROWTH TRAFFIC 15

6.3 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 16

6.4 SITE TRAFFIC 16

6.5 2011 PROJECTED TRAFFIC 16

6.6 2013 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 16

6.7 2013 BUILD-OUT TRAFFIC 17

7.0 CAPACITY ANALYSIS 23

7.1 NC 150 & NC 16 26

7.2 NC 150 & EAST MAIDEN ROAD 27

7.3 NC 150 & NC 16 BYPASS (FUTURE) NORTHBOUND RAMP 29

7.4 NC 150 & NC 16 BYPASS (FUTURE) SOUTHBOUND RAMP 30

7.5 NC 150 & HENRY DELLINGER ROAD/LEBANON CHURCH ROAD 32

7.6 PROJECT ACCESS DRIVEWAYS 34

8.0 AUXILIARY TURN LANE WARRANTS 36

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 37

APPENDIX

ii

LIST OF FIGURESFigure No. Title Page No.

3.1 Location Map 7

3.2 Conceptual Site Plan 8

3.3 Existing Roadway Laneage 9

3.4 Background Roadway Laneage 10

5.1 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment 14

6.1 2011 Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 18

6.2 2013 Background AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 19

6.3 2013 Background PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 20

6.4 2013 Build-Out AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 21

6.5 2013 Build-Out PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 22

9.1 Recommended Roadway Laneage 39

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page No.

4.0 Trip Generation 12

7.0-A Level-of-Service Control Delay Thresholds for Signalized Intersections 24

7.0-B Level-of-Service Control Delay Thresholds for Unsignalized Intersections 24

7.1 Level of Service: NC 150 & NC 16 27

7.2 Level of Service: NC 150 & East Maiden Road 28

7.3 Level of Service: NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Northbound Ramp 30

7.4 Level of Service: NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Southbound Ramp 31

7.5 Level of Service: NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road 33

7.6 Level of Service: Project Driveways 34

Bridgewater Executive SummaryTraffic Impact Analysis

1

1.0 Executive Summary

The proposed Bridgewater development is located in the southeast quadrant of the future NC 16Bypass and NC 150 interchange. The Lincoln County/Catawba County line crosses the northernportion of the project. The proposed development is assumed to ultimately consist of thefollowing land uses and intensities:

462,900 square feet (SF) Retail (Shopping Center)60,000 SF General Office182,000 SF Flex Office (Light Industrial Use)

For the purposes of this Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), the development is assumed to becompleted (built-out) by 2013.

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. was retained to determine the potential traffic impacts of thisdevelopment (in accordance with the traffic study guidelines in the NCDOT Policy on Street andDriveway Access to North Carolina Highways) and the transportation improvements that may berequired to accommodate these impacts. This report presents trip generation, distribution, trafficanalyses, and recommendations for transportation improvements required to meet anticipatedtraffic demands.

Recommendations for improvements to intersection lane geometry for intersections in the studyarea in 2013 beyond those already committed to by NCDOT and the Lowes development aresummarized in the following listing.

The following improvements are recommended to accommodate 2013 build-out conditions:

NC 150 & NC 16:Construction of an additional northbound left-turn lane on NC 16.Construction of an additional receiving lane on westbound NC 150 departing theintersection.Construction of an exclusive eastbound right-turn lane on NC 150.

It should be noted that the analysis assumes no change in traffic patterns after the completion ofthe NC 16 Bypass. The NCDOT travel demand projections for the NC 16 Bypass TIP project donot include prospective changes to the approach and turning movement volumes at thisintersection. The completion of the NC 16 Bypass is likely to reduce the through volumes onexisting NC 16 and has the potential to change turning movement patterns on NC 150 at thisintersection. For the purposes of this TIA, existing patterns at NC 150 & NC 16 were assumed inorder to remain consistent with the recently completed traffic study for the Lowes development.


2

NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass Northbound Ramp:Installation of a signal.

NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass Southbound Ramp:Installation of a signal.

NC 150 at Driveway 1 (Full Movement):Installation of a signal.Construction of an additional eastbound through lane on NC 150.Construction of an additional westbound through lane on NC 150.Construction of an exclusive westbound left-turn lane on NC 150.Provide two egress lanes on Driveway 1.

NC 150 at Driveway 2 (Right-in/Right-out):Construction of an additional eastbound through lane on NC 150.Construction of an exclusive eastbound right-turn lane on NC 150.Construction of an additional westbound through lane on NC 150.Provide one egress lane on Driveway 2.

NC 150 at Driveway 3 (Full Movement):Convert the 3 Phase traffic signal proposed by the Lowes development into a 4 phasetraffic signal.Construction of an additional eastbound shared through/right-turn lane on NC 150.Construction of an additional westbound shared through/right-turn lane on NC 150.Construction of an exclusive westbound left-turn lane on NC 150.Provide three egress lanes on Driveway 3, including a shared through/right-turn lane anddual left-turn lanes.Restripe the southbound approach to provide an exclusive left-turn lane and a sharedthrough/right lane.


The installation of the additional through lanes on NC 150 is recommended in order to maintainan acceptable level of service at the main entrance of Driveway 3/Lowes Access 1 and the fullmovement access at Driveway 1. The additional eastbound through lane is recommended to


3

terminate east of Driveway 1. The additional westbound through lane is recommended toterminate as the westbound right-turn lane at the NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass NB On-Rampintersection.

Prior to decisions being made regarding potential improvements, consideration should be given tothe following:

Expected changes to traffic patterns at this intersection attributable to the completion ofthe NC 16 Bypass,Future surface street connections to be made in the next several years,The constrained right-of-way available along the NC 16 corridor.

The recommended lane geometry at the study intersections for 2013 traffic conditions is shownon Figure 9.1.

Bridgewater IntroductionTraffic Impact Analysis

4

2.0 Introduction

The proposed Bridgewater development is located in the southeast quadrant of the NC 16 Bypassand NC 150 interchange. The Lincoln County/Catawba County line crosses the northern portionof the project. The proposed development is assumed to ultimately consist of the following landuses and intensities:


For the purposes of this Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), the development is assumed to becompleted (built-out) by 2013.

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. was retained to determine the potential traffic impacts of thisdevelopment (in accordance with the traffic study guidelines in the NCDOT Policy on Street andDriveway Access to North Carolina Highways) and the transportation improvements that may berequired to accommodate these impacts. This report presents trip generation, distribution, trafficanalyses, and recommendations for transportation improvements required to meet anticipatedtraffic demands.

The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Lincoln County Office of Buildingand Land Development, and Catawba County Planning Department were contacted to obtainbackground information and to ascertain the elements to be covered in this Traffic ImpactAnalysis.

Bridgewater InventoryTraffic Impact Analysis

5

3.0 Inventory

3.1 Study Area

The study area for this TIA includes the following intersections:

NC 150 & NC 16NC 150 & East Maiden RoadNC 150 & NC 16 Bypass NB Ramps (future)NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass SB Ramps (future)NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church RoadNC 150 & Driveway 1 (proposed full movement access)NC 150 & Driveway 2 (proposed right in/right out access)NC 150 & Driveway 3 (proposed full movement access)NC 150 & Driveway 4 (proposed right in/right out access)

This study area was determined based on discussions with NCDOT staff. Figure 3.1 shows thesite location, and Figure 3.2 shows the conceptual site plan for the project.

3.2 Existing Conditions

The proposed Bridgewater development is located in Lincoln/Catawba County, North Carolina.The site is located in the southeast quadrant of the future NC 16 Bypass and NC 150 interchange.The existing major roadways in the project vicinity are NC 150, NC 16, East Maiden Road, andHenry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road. Existing roadway geometry is depicted on Figure3.3.

NC 150 is a two-lane roadway that will serve as the primary access roadway to the proposeddevelopment. The estimated 2005 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) was 12,000 vehicles per day(vpd) west of NC 16 and 10,000 vpd east of NC 16. The speed limit on NC 150 is 45 miles perhour (mph) east of the proposed development and 55 mph west of the proposed development.

NC 16 is a two-lane roadway with a speed limit of 45 mph within the vicinity of the site.

East Maiden Road is a two-lane roadway located east of the proposed site with an estimated 2005ADT of 2,900 vpd. The speed limit on East Maiden Road is 45 mph.

Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road is a two-lane roadway located west of NC 16Bypass (future). The speed limit on Lebanon Road/Henry Dillinger Road is 45 mph.

Bridgewater InventoryTraffic Impact Analysis

6

NC 150 is referenced in this study as having an east/west orientation, and NC 16, NC 16 Bypass(future), East Maiden Road, and Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road are referenced ashaving a north/south orientation.

3.3 Future Conditions

Based on the 2009-2015 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), NC 16 is beingwidened to four lanes west of the existing NC 16 alignment (identified as R-2206 CA in the TIP).This new roadway will create a bypass for the existing NC 16. Based on discussions withNCDOT, Lincoln County, and Catawba County, this TIA assumes that the NC 16 Bypass is inplace and operational by 2011. The background roadway laneage is shown in Figure 3.4.

Figure3.1Location Map

ProposedSite

BridgewaterTraffic Impact Analysis

NOT TOSCALE

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

STOP

Bridgewater Traffic GenerationTraffic Impact Analysis

11

4.0 Traffic Generation

The amount of traffic generated by a new development is a function of the size, type, and mix ofdevelopment. The traffic generation potential of the proposed development was determined usingthe trip generation rates published in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers,Seventh Edition, 2003) for all land uses. The Bridgewater development is assumed to include thefollowing land uses and intensities:


Table 4.0 summarizes the estimated traffic generation for the proposed development. As shown,the proposed development has the potential to generate 17,007 daily net new external trips, 642AM peak-hour new external trips and 1,634 PM peak-hour new external trips during a typicalweekday at total project build-out.

Internal capture trips are trips that begin and end within the project site and do not access theexternal roadway network. Internal capture was calculated for the proposed development usingthe rates and methodology published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) TripGeneration Handbook (2nd Edition, 2004). As discussed with NCDOT, Lincoln County, andCatawba County staff, in order to provide a conservative analysis, internal capture was notincluded for the AM peak hour. Detailed internal capture calculations are included in theAppendix.

Pass-by capture trips are trips already on the roadway network that will make a trip to the projectsite as they pass-by on the adjacent street. Pass-by traffic was calculated only for the PM peakhour for retail uses within the project site using rates and equations published in the ITE TripGeneration Handbook. Pass-by trips accessing the site were capped at 10% of the anticipatedadjacent street through traffic on NC 150.

Table 4.0 - Trip Generation

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Total In Out Total In Out

General Light Industrial (110) 182,000 SF 1,258 125 110 15 97 12 85

General Office (710) 60,000 SF 900 125 110 15 146 25 121

Shopping Center (820) 462,900 SF 18,387 392 239 153 1,721 826 895

Subtotal 20,545 642 459 183 1,964 863 1,101

Internal Capture: 4% Daily; 0% AM; 3% PM 798 0 0 0 56 28 28

Driveway Volumes 19,747 642 459 183 1,908 835 1,073

ITE 820 Pass-By - 0% AM / 25% PM 4,060 0 0 0 406 203 203

ITE Pass-By 4,060 0 0 0 406 203 203

Adjacent Street Traffic 1,369

10% Adjacent Street Traffic 2,740 0 0 0 274 137 137

Pass-By 2,740 0 0 0 274 137 137

Net New External Trips 17,007 642 459 183 1,634 698 936

Note: Trip generation was calculated using the following data:

Daily Traffic Generation

General Light Industrial (110) [ITE 110] = T = 7.47 (X) - 101.92

General Office (710) [ITE 710] = Ln(T) = 0.77 Ln(X) + 3.65

Shopping Center (820) [ITE 820] = Ln(T) = 0.65 Ln(X) + 5.83

AM Peak-Hour Traffic Generation

General Light Industrial (110) [ITE 110] = T = 1.18 (X) - 89.28; (88% in, 12% out)

General Office (710) [ITE 710] = Ln(T) = 0.80 Ln(X) + 1.55; (88% in, 12% out)

Shopping Center (820) [ITE 820] = Ln(T) = 0.60 Ln(X) + 2.29; (61% in, 39% out)

PM Peak-Hour Traffic Generation

General Light Industrial (110) [ITE 110] = T = 1.43 (X) - 163.42; (12% in, 88% out)

General Office (710) [ITE 710] = (T) = 1.12(X) + 78.81; (17% in, 83% out)

Shopping Center (820) [ITE 820] = Ln(T) = 0.66 Ln(X) + 3.40; (48% in, 52% out)

Land Use Intensity Daily

Bridgewater Site Traffic DistributionTraffic Impact Analysis

13

5.0 Site Traffic Distribution

The proposed development’s trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network. Thedirectional distribution and assignment was based on existing peak-hour turning movements andprevious traffic studies done in the vicinity. The following overall distribution was used for theproposed development as approved by NCDOT, Lincoln County, and Catawba County staff:

20 percent to/from the north on NC 16 Bypass10 percent to/from the south on NC 16 Bypass17 percent to/from the west on NC 15025 percent to/from the east on NC 1501 percent to/from the north on Lebanon Church Road2 percent to/from the south on Henry Dellinger Road1 percent to/from the north on East Maiden Road4 percent to/from the north on NC 1620 percent to/from the south on NC 16

Detailed site traffic distribution and assignment are shown on Figure 5.1.

Figu

re5.

1

Site

Tra

ffic

Dis

trib

utio

n an

dAs

sign

men

t

Brid

gew

ater

Traf

fic Im

pact

Ana

lysi

s

NOT TOSCALE

ProposedSite

(4%)(25%)(20%)

25%

1%

(1%)(49%)

49%

1%

2%

17%

(1%)(17%)(2%)

20%

20%

(20%)(10%)

10%

40%

(20%)(30%)

4%

20%

Driv

eway

#4

Driv

eway

#3

Driv

eway

#2

Driv

eway

#1

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

NC 150

XX In Assignment(XX) Out Assignment

LEGEND

Overall Distribution

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

29%21%

(14%

)

(6%

)

(41%

)(2

7%)

(9%

)(3

%)

(50%)

(14%) 9%20%

(41%) 3%6%

(47%)3%

41% (9%)(9%)41%

41%9%

17%

1%

2%

20%

10%

20%

25%

4%

1%

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

xx%

Bridgewater Traffic VolumesTraffic Impact Analysis

15

6.0 Traffic Volumes

6.1 2011 Existing Traffic Conditions

Peak-hour intersection turning-movement counts were performed by Martin/Alexiou/Bryson,PLLC from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM at the following intersections:

NC 16 & NC 150 Wednesday, December 5, 2007NC 150 & East Maiden Road Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Peak-hour intersection turning-movement counts were performed by Carolina Traffic Servicesfrom 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM at the following intersections:

NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road Tuesday, July 15, 2008NC 16 & NC 150 Tuesday, July 15, 2008

The December and July traffic counts at the NC 16 and NC 150 intersection were compared inorder to determine the volume differences in the area when local schools are not in session.Based on the two traffic counts, AM peak hour counts are approximately 18% lower in thesummer compared with the December count, and the PM peak hour is 3% higher.

For the purposes of this TIA, based on the methodology agreed to with the reviewing agencies,the July AM peak hour count performed at the NC 150 and Henry Dillinger / Lebanon Churchintersection were increased by 20% to represent non-summer volumes. The PM peak hourvolumes were not modified since the 3% increase indicated by the NC 16 / NC 150 comparisoncorresponds to the anticipated non-specific growth in the area.

Turning movement count data included in the Appendix.

6.2 Historical Growth Traffic

Historical growth traffic is the increase in existing traffic volumes due to usage increases andnon-specific growth throughout the area. Historical growth traffic is calculated using an annualgrowth rate, which is applied to the existing traffic volumes up to the future horizon years. Asdirected by NCDOT, Lincoln County, and Catawba County staff, an annual growth rate of 3.0percent was used in this study.

The NC 16 Bypass TIP project was included in the 2011 and 2013 roadway networks. The 2007and 2030 ADT traffic projections for this project were obtained from the NCDOT RoadwayDesign Unit. 2011 and 2013 turning movement volumes for the interchange ramps weredeveloped from this data for the AM and PM peak hours. The NCDOT ADT traffic projectionsand turning movement calculations are included in the Appendix.


16

6.3 Approved Development Traffic

Approved development traffic is traffic generated by approved, but not yet constructed,developments within the study area. Based on discussions with NCDOT, Lincoln County, andCatawba County staff, there is one approved development that will have an impact on the studyarea intersections. Traffic associated with the following approved developments was specificallytaken into account in this TIA:

Lowe’s Home Improvement located in the northeast quadrant of the future NC 16 Bypass andNC 150 interchange.

Trip generation, distribution, and assignment for this development, was obtained from the trafficimpact analysis report listed below:

Lowe’s Home Improvement Store Development: Traffic Impact Analysis(Martin/Alexiou/Bryson, PLLC, January 15, 2008).

Details regarding trip generation, distribution, and assignment for these developments areincluded in the Appendix.

6.4 Site Traffic

The proposed site traffic was generated, distributed, and assigned for each access scenario to theadjacent roadway network as discussed previously in Sections 4.0 and 5.0.

6.5 2011 Projected Traffic

At the request of Lincoln County and Catawba County staff, the 2008 existing conditions analysiswas replaced by a 2011 projected conditions scenario including the traffic associated with the NC16 Bypass.

The 2011 projected traffic volumes include existing traffic, historical growth traffic, andapproved development traffic. The 2011 AM and PM peak hour projected traffic volumes areshown in Figure 6.1.

6.6 2013 Background Traffic

The 2013 background traffic volumes include existing traffic, historical growth traffic, andapproved development traffic. The 2013 AM and PM peak-hour background traffic volumes areshown in Figures 6.2 and 6.3, respectively.


17

6.7 2013 Build-out Traffic

The 2013 build-out traffic volumes include the 2013 background traffic and the proposeddevelopment traffic. The 2013 AM and PM peak-hour build-out traffic volumes are shown inFigures 6.4 and 6.5, respectively.

Brid

gew

ater

Traf

fic Im

pact

Ana

lysi

s

NOT TOSCALE

LEGEND

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

NC 150

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

XX AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes(XX) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

(255

) 233

(321

) 222

(95)

105

71 (77)224 (360)101 (113)

16 (4

7)32

2 (3

13)

75 (1

00)

(80) 41(276) 306(127) 278

95 (167)374 (626)7

(2)

135

(92)

(6) 2(474) 526

(122

) 95

(0) 0

(117

) 92

(49) 75(382) 533

99 (116)420 (492)

(330) 497(87) 130

418 (501)97 (113)

66 (5

9)0

(0)

111

(101

)

(64)

22

(47)

14

(38)

29

(9) 3(373) 460

(19) 46

0 (0)346 (505)16 (27)

7 (1

0)25

(7)

0 (1

)

Figu

re6.

1

2011

Pro

ject

edPe

ak H

our

Traf

fic V

olum

es

Figu

re6.

2

2013

Bac

kgro

und

AM V

olum

es

Brid

gew

ater

Traf

fic Im

pact

Ana

lysi

s

NOT TOSCALE

[51] {8} 43[373] {48} 325[333] {38} 295

75 {0} [75]238 {55} [293]107 {0} [107]

7 {2

} [9]

143

{0} [

143]

[4] {2} 2[652] {94} 558

100 {0} [100]396 {108} [504]

7 {0

} [7]

26 {0

} [26

]0

{0} [

0]

[24]

{0}

24

[15]

{0}

15

[31]

{0}

31

[3] {0} 3[533] {45} 488

[49] {0} 49

0 {0} [0]367 {39} [406]17 {0} [17]

70 {0

} [70

]0

{0} [

0]11

1 {4

4} [1

55]

[562] {45} 517[137] {0} 137

436 {39} [475]102 {19} [121]

[101

] {0}

101

[0] {

0} 0

[120

] {22

} 98

[80] {0} 80[637] {89} 548

101 {39} [140]437 {58} [495]

17 {9

} [26

]34

1 {0

} [34

1]80

{0} [

80]

[291

] {44

} 247

[235

] {0}

235

[111

] {0}

111

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

NC 150

XX Historical Growth Traffic{XX} Approved Development Traffic

LEGEND

[XX] Background Traffic

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

0 {69} [69]538 {41} [579]

[129] {129} 0[628] {-18} 646

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#1

0 {5

3} [5

3]0

{114

} [1

14]

0 {69} [69]538 {25} [563]

[757] {111} 646

0 {7

2} [7

2]0

{0} [

0]Lo

we’

s D

rivew

ay #

2

NC 150

Figu

re6.

3B

ridge

wat

erTr

affic

Impa

ct A

naly

sis

NOT TOSCALE

[93] {8} 85[345] {52} 293[177] {42} 135

81 {0} [81]382 {51} [433]119 {0} [119]

2 {2

} [4]

98 {0

} [98

]

[8] {2} 6[605] {102} 503

177 {0} [177]664 {100} [764]

10 {0

} [10

]7

{0} [

7]1

{0} [

1]

[68]

{0}

68

[50]

{0}

50

[41]

{0}

41

[9] {0} 9[436] {41} 395

[20] {0} 20

0 {0} [0]536 {42} [578]29 {0} [29]

63 {0

} [63

]0

{0} [

0]10

3 {4

0} [1

43]

[386] {41} 345[92] {0} 92

522 {42} [564]120 {21} [141]

[129

] {0}

129

[0] {

0} 0

[144

] {20

} 124

[53] {0} 53[476] {81} 395

118 {42} [160]513 {63} [576]

50 {8

} [58

]33

2 {0

} [33

2]10

6 {0

} [10

6]

[312

] {41

} 271

[340

] {0}

340

[100

] {0}

100

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

2013

Bac

kgro

und

PM V

olum

es

NC 150

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#1

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#2

0 {107} [107]631 {-5} [626]

[177] {177} 0[443] {-76} 519

0 {9

8} [9

8]0

{180

} [1

80]

0 {107} [107]631 {-14} [617]

[620] {101} 519

0 {1

19}

[119

]

XX Historical Growth Traffic{XX} Approved Development Traffic

LEGEND

[XX] Background Traffic

NC 150

Figu

re6.

4B

ridge

wat

erTr

affic

Impa

ct A

naly

sis

NOT TOSCALE

ProposedSite

[58] {7} 51[419] {46} 373[369] {36} 333

75 {0} [75]293 {115} [408]107 {0} [107]

9 {4

} [13

]14

3 {0

} [14

3]

[6] {2} 4[741] {89} 652

100 {0} [100]504 {225} [729]

7 {0

} [7]

26 {0

} [26

]0

{5} [

5]

[24]

{0}

24

[15]

{0}

15

[40]

{9}

31

[3] {0} 3[611] {78} 533

[49] {0} 49

0 {2} [2]406 {31} [437]17 {4} [21]

70 {0

} [70

]0

{0} [

0]15

5 {9

2} [2

47]

[654] {92} 562[137] {0} 137

475 {37} [512]121 {18} [139]

[101

] {0}

101

[0] {

0} 0

[166

] {46

} 120

[80] {0} 80[821] {184} 637

140 {37} [177]495 {55} [550]

26 {1

8} [4

4]34

1 {0

} [34

1]80

{0} [

80]

[383

] {92

} 291

[235

] {0}

235

[111

] {0}

111

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

2013

Bui

ld-O

utAM

Vol

umes

NC 150

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#4

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#3

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#2

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#1

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#1

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#2

648 {188} [836]0 {41} [41]

[828] {86} 742[14] {14} 0

69 {0} [69]579 {17} [596]0 {188} [188]

[129] {0} 129[696] {68} 628

[92] {92} 0

53 {0

} [53

]11

4 {0

} [11

4]

69 {0} [69]563 {92} [655]

[891] {134} 757[96] {96} 0

72 {0

} [72

]

648 {205} [853]

[831] {89} 742[28] {28} 0

XX Background Traffic{XX} Site Traffic

LEGEND

[XX] Total Traffic

[26]

{26

} 0

[75]

{75

} 0[4

9] {

49} 0

[11]

{11

} 0

[17]

{17

} 0[5

] {5}

0

Figu

re6.

5B

ridge

wat

erTr

affic

Impa

ct A

naly

sis

NOT TOSCALE

ProposedSite

[131] {38} 93[579] {234} 345[364] {187} 177

81 {0} [81]433 {174} [607]119 {0} [119]

4 {7

} [11

]98

{0} [

98]

[17] {9} 8[1,064] {459} 605

177 {0} [177]764 {342} [1,106]

10 {0

} [10

]7

{0} [

7]1

{7} [

8]

[68]

{0}

68

[50]

{0}

50

[55]

{14

} 41

[9] {0} 9[555] {119} 436

[20] {0} 20

0 {9} [9]578 {159} [737]29 {19} [48]

63 {0

} [63

]0

{0} [

0]14

3 {1

39}

[282

]

[526] {140} 386[92] {0} 92

564 {187} [751]141 {94} [235]

[129

] {0}

129

[0] {

0} 0

[214

] {70

} 144

[53] {0} 53[755] {279} 476

160 {187} [347]576 {281} [857]

58 {2

8} [8

6]33

2 {0

} [33

2]10

6 {0

} [10

6]

[452

] {14

0} 3

12[3

40] {

0} 3

40[1

00] {

0} 1

00

NC

16

Byp

ass

NC

16

2013

Bui

ld-O

utPM

Vol

umes

NC 150

Hen

ry D

ellin

ger R

oad

Leba

non

Chu

rch

Roa

d

East

Mai

den

Roa

d

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#4

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#3

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#2

Prop

osed

Driv

eway

#1

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#1

Low

e’s

Driv

eway

#2

XX Background Traffic{XX} Site Traffic

LEGEND

[XX] Total Traffic<XX> Pass-By Traffic

733 {286}<-13>[1,006]0 {63}<13>[76]

[1,059]<-4>{440} 623[25]<4>{21} 0

107 {0}<0>[107]626 {84}<-61>[649]0 {286}<61>[347]

[177]<0>{0} 177[612]<-25>{194} 443

[164]<25>{139} 0

98 {0

}<0>

[98]

180

{0}<

0>[1

80]

107 {0}<0>[107]617 {468}<0>[1,085]

[796]<-26>{202} 620[173]<26>{147} 0

119

{0}<

0>[1

19]

733 {370}<0>[1,103]

[1,020]<-8>{405} 623[50]<8>{42} 0

[157

]<26

>{13

1} 0

[445

]<61

>{38

4} 0

[278

]<25

>{25

3} 0

[64]

<8>

{56}

0

[97]

<13>

{84}

0[3

2]<4

>{28

} 0

Bridgewater Capacity AnalysisTraffic Impact Analysis

23

7.0 Capacity Analysis

Capacity analyses were performed for the AM and PM peak hours using the Synchro Version 7software to determine the operating characteristics of the adjacent road network and the impactsof the proposed project. The North Carolina Department of Transportation CongestionManagement Group evaluates intersection operating conditions by using Synchro Level-of-Service reports.

Capacity is defined as the maximum number of vehicles that can pass over a particular roadsegment or through a particular intersection within a set time duration. Capacity is described byLevel-of-Service (LOS) for the operating characteristics of a road segment or intersection. LOSis defined as a qualitative measure that describes operational conditions and motorist perceptionswithin a traffic stream. The Highway Capacity Manual defines six levels of service, LOS Athrough LOS F, with A being the best and F being the worst. LOS D is the typically acceptedstandard for signalized intersections in urban and suburban areas. For signalized intersections,LOS is defined for the overall intersection operation.

LOS for a two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersection is determined by the control delay and isdefined for the minor movements. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. With respect to field measurements, controldelay is defined as the total elapsed time from the time a vehicle stops at the end of the queue tothe time the vehicle departs from the stop line. LOS is not defined for a TWSC intersection as awhole. For descriptive purposes, results between LOS A and LOS C for the side street approachare assumed to represent short delays. Results between LOS D and LOS E for the side streetapproach are assumed to represent moderate delays, and LOS F for the side street approach isassumed to represent long delays. It is typical for stop sign controlled side streets and drivewaysintersecting major streets to experience long delays during peak hours, particularly for left-turnmovements. The majority of the traffic moving through the intersection on the major streetexperiences little or no delay.

Table 7.0-A lists the LOS control delay thresholds published in the Highway Capacity Manual(HCM) for signalized intersections. Synchro Version 7 software uses the same LOS thresholds asthose published in the HCM.


24

Table 7.0-ALevel-of-Service Control Delay Thresholds for

Signalized Intersections

Level-of-ServiceControl Delay per Vehicle

[sec/veh]A 10B > 10 – 20C > 20 – 35D > 35 – 55E > 55 – 80F > 80

Table 7.0-B lists the LOS control delay thresholds published in the HCM for unsignalizedintersections, as well as the unsignalized operational descriptions assumed herein.

Table 7.0-BLevel-of-Service Control Delay Thresholds for

Unsignalized Intersections

Level-of-ServiceAverage Control Delay per

Vehicle [sec/veh]A 10

Short DelaysB > 10 – 15C > 15 – 25D > 25 – 35 Moderate

DelaysE > 35 – 50F > 50 Long Delays

Capacity analyses were performed for the 2011 projected traffic conditions, 2013 backgroundtraffic conditions, and 2013 build-out traffic conditions using the LOS reports generated bySynchro Version 7 software for the following intersections:

NC 150 & NC 16NC 150 & East Maiden RoadNC 150 & NC 16 Bypass NB Ramps (future)NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass SB Ramps (future)NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church RoadNC 150 & Driveway 1 (proposed full movement access)NC 150 & Driveway 2 (proposed right in/right out access)NC 150 & Driveway 3 (proposed full movement access)NC 150 & Driveway 4 (proposed right in/right out access)


25

Capacity analysis reports generated by Synchro Version 7 software are included in the Appendixand are briefly summarized in the following sub-sections. Intersection volume developmentworksheets are included in the Appendix.

The NCDOT Policy On Street And Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways (July 2003)indicates that mitigation improvements to the roadway network be identified if at least one of thefollowing conditions exist when comparing 2013 background conditions to 2013 build-outconditions:

Total average delay at an intersection or individual approach increases by 25% or greater,while maintaining the same LOS,LOS for the overall intersection or individual approach degrades by at least one level,LOS for the overall intersection or individual approach is “F”.

LOS and control delay capacity analysis results are summarized in the tables in the followingsub-sections by intersection.


26

7.1 NC 150 & NC 16

Table 7.1 summarizes the LOS and control delay (seconds per vehicle) at the signalizedintersection of NC 150 & NC 16 under 2011 projected conditions, 2013 background conditions,and 2013 build-out conditions.

Based on the 2011 projected capacity analyses, the signalized intersection of NC 150 & NC 16 isexpected to operate at LOS C during both the AM and PM peak hours. Under 2013 backgroundconditions, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS D during both the AM and PM peakhours.

Under 2013 build-out conditions, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS E during the AMpeak hour and LOS F during the PM peak hour.


The following improvements are recommended for this intersection for 2013 build-outconditions:

Construction of an additional northbound left-turn lane on NC 16.Construction of an additional receiving lane on westbound NC 150 departing theintersection.Construction of an exclusive eastbound right-turn lane on NC 150.

With the recommended improvements in place, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS Dduring the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour assuming that the traffic patternsdo not change.

Prior to decisions being made regarding potential improvements at this intersection, considerationshould be given to the following:



27

Table 7.1

Level of Service

NC 150 & NC 16

Condition

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

NorthboundNC 16

SouthboundNC 16

OverallIntersection

AM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedC C C D C

27.5 34.7 21.9 39.3 29.6

2013 BackgroundD D D D D

45.0 51.6 46.3 51.1 47.9

2013 Build-OutF D F E E

80.8 53.0 93.3 62.0 74.72013 Build-Out(with Improvements)

C C D E D28.1 32.0 47.6 60.3 40.1

PM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedC C B C C

30.7 34.6 12.0 27.1 25.1

2013 BackgroundC C C D D

29.0 34.6 33.5 46.6 35.3

2013 Build-OutF F F F F

123.8 84.1 142.1 110.9 117.0

2013 Build-Out(with Improvements)

D E E F E39.5 55.0 79.2 96.6 63.1

7.2 NC 150 & East Maiden Road

Table 7.2 summarizes the LOS and control delay (seconds per vehicle) at the intersection of NC150 & East Maiden Road under 2011 projected conditions, 2013 background conditions, and2013 build-out conditions.

Based on the 2011 projected conditions analyses, the unsignalized intersection of NC 150 & EastMaiden Road currently operates with moderate delays during the AM peak hour and long delaysduring the PM peak hour on the East Maiden Road approach. Under 2013 background conditionsand 2013 build-out conditions, the intersection is expected to operate with long delays on theminor street approach during both the AM and PM peak hours.


28

Based on the recommendations for the adjacent intersection of NC 16 as described in Section 7.1,the side street delay on East Maiden Road shows improvement during the AM peak hour.

Table 7.2

Level of Service

NC 150 & East Maiden Road

Condition

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

SouthboundEast

MaidenRoad

OverallIntersection

AM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedA A E N/A

0.1 0.0 44.0 -

2013 BackgroundA A F N/A

0.1 0.0 199.4 -

2013 Build-OutA A F N/A

0.3 0.0 1004.7 -

2013 Build-Out(w/ Improvements)

A A F N/A0.3 0.0 551.4 -

PM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedA A F N/A

0.3 0.0 84.9 -


0.5 0.0 476.1 -

2013 Build-Out(Stop Controlled)

A A F N/A

6.1 0.0 Err* -

2013 Build-Outw/ Improvements

A A F N/A1.9 0.0 Err* -

* – Volume exceeds capacity and delay cannot be calculated.

It should be noted that the analysis assumes no change in traffic patterns after the completion ofthe NC 16 Bypass. The NCDOT travel demand projections for the NC 16 Bypass TIP project donot include prospective changes to the approach and turning movement volumes at thisintersection. The completion of the NC 16 Bypass is likely to reduce the through volumes onexisting NC 16 and has the potential to change turning movement patterns on NC 150.


29

No additional improvements are recommended for this intersection. The installation of a trafficsignal to reduce side street delay is not recommended due to the short distance between NC 16and East Maiden Road (approximately 600 feet). Also, based on 60 minute simulations inSimTraffic 7, queues on East Maiden Road are potentially manageable during the peak hours ifthe assumption is made that eastbound traffic on NC 150 on approach to NC 16 does not blockthe intersection allowing East Maiden Road traffic to enter the traffic stream. Finally, if a two-stage delay calculation is assumed for East Maiden Road traffic, the 2013 build-out conditionsside street delay would be reduced to 75 seconds.

7.3 NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Northbound Ramp

Table 7.3 summarizes the LOS and control delay (seconds per vehicle) at the future unsignalizedintersection of NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Northbound Ramp under 2011 projectedconditions, 2013 background conditions, and 2013 build-out conditions.

Based on the 2011 projected conditions analysis, the intersection is anticipated to operate withmoderate delays on the side street during both the AM and PM peak hours.

Under 2013 background conditions and 2013 build-out conditions, the intersection is expected tooperate with long delays on the minor street approach during both the AM and PM peak hours.

Based on the approach LOS and overall LOS criteria for mitigation, the following improvementsare recommended:

Installation of a traffic signal

With the recommended improvements in place, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS Aduring the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM peak hour.


30

Table 7.3

Level of Service

NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Northbound Ramp

Condition

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

NorthboundNC 16

Bypass NBRamp

OverallIntersection

AM Peak Hour


1.1 0.0 45.9 -


1.1 0.0 97.5 -


0.9 0.0 194.9 -2013 Build-Outw/ Improvements

A A C A2.9 5.3 24.1 6.8

PM Peak Hour


1.0 0.0 38.2 -


1.0 0.0 85.2 -



A B C B2.8 11.9 22.0 10.3

7.4 NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Southbound Ramp

Table 7.4 summarizes the LOS and control delay (seconds per vehicle) at the unsignalizedintersection of NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Southbound Ramp under 2011 projectedconditions, 2013 background conditions, and 2013 build-out conditions.

Based on the 2011 projected conditions analysis, the intersection is anticipated to operate withlong delays during both the AM and PM peak hours.


31

Under 2013 background conditions and 2013 build-out conditions, the intersection is expected tocontinue to operate with long delays during both the AM and PM peak hours on the rampapproach.

Based on the approach LOS and overall LOS criteria for mitigation, the following improvementsare recommended:

Installation of a traffic signal

With the recommended improvements in place, the intersection is expected to operate at LOS Bduring the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM peak hour.

Table 7.4

Level of Service

NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass (Future) Southbound Ramp

Condition

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

SouthboundNC 16

Bypass SBRamp

OverallIntersection

AM Peak Hour


0.0 1.8 72.7 -


0.0 2.1 305.2 -



B A D B18.5 6.2 40.8 18.0

PM Peak Hour


0.0 1.6 51.6 -


0.0 1.8 224.9 -



B A D B19.5 6.0 35.3 15.5


32

7.5 NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road

Table 7.5 summarizes the LOS and control delay (seconds per vehicle) at the intersection of NC150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road under 2011 projected conditions, 2013background conditions, and 2013 build-out conditions.

Based on the 2011 projected conditions analyses, the unsignalized intersection of NC 150 &Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road currently operates with short delays on the HenryDellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road approach during the AM peak hour and with short to longdelays during the PM peak hour. Under 2013 background conditions, the intersection is expectedto continue to operate with short to moderate delays on the Henry Dellinger Road/LebanonChurch Road approach during the AM peak hour and short to long delays during the PM peakhour.

Under 2013 build-out conditions, the intersection is expected to operate with moderate side streetdelay during the AM peak hour and long delays during the PM peak hour. Based on apreliminary peak hour signal warrant, the intersection meets the peak-hour warrant (Warrant 3)for the PM peak hour only during both 2013 background and 2013 build-out conditions. Noimprovements are recommended for this intersection.


33

Table 7.5

Level of Service

NC 150 & Henry Dellinger Road/Lebanon Church Road

Condition

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

NorthboundHenry

DellingerRoad

SouthboundLebanonChurchRoad

OverallIntersection

AM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedA A C C N/A

0.1 0.6 20.9 19.7 -

2013 BackgroundA A D C N/A

0.1 0.6 27.2 23.7 -

2013 Build-OutA A D D N/A

0.1 0.8 34.3 31.9 -PM Peak Hour

2011 ProjectedA A F C N/A

0.3 0.7 50.1 17.8 -

2013 BackgroundA A F C N/A

0.3 0.8 102.9 20.9 -

2013 Build-OutA A F F N/A

0.3 1.5 409.5 74.0 -


34

7.6 Project Access Driveways

Table 7.6 summarizes the 2013 build-out operation of the two full-movement and two restrictedmovement access driveways (all driveways located along NC 150) for the proposed development.

Table 7.6

Level of Service

Project Driveways

Intersection

LOS (Delay)

EastboundNC 150

WestboundNC 150

NorthboundDriveways

SouthboundOverall

Intersection

AM Peak Hour

NC 150 &Driveway 1 (Full)

A A D N/A A2.0 1.5 41.5 - 2.2

NC 150 &Driveway 2 (RIRO)

A A A N/A N/A0.0 0.0 9.3 - -


A B C C B8.9 12.8 29.1 30.9 13.5


A A B A N/A0.0 0.0 13.0 9.6 -

PM Peak HourNC 150 &Driveway 1 (Full)

A A C N/A A4.7 4.8 31.7 - 6.3


A A A N/A N/A0.0 0.0 9.7 - -


C C C C C23.4 29.3 32.7 22.6 27.6


A A C B N/A0.0 0.0 16.4 10.9 -


35

The proposed configuration and laneage for each driveway are listed below:


NC 150 at Driveway 2 (Right-in/Right-out):Construction of an additional eastbound shared through/right-turn lane on NC 150.Construction of an additional westbound through lane on NC 150.Provide one egress lane on Driveway 2.


NC 150 at Driveway 4 (Right-in/Right-out):Construction of an additional eastbound shared through/right-turn lane on NC 150.Construction of an additional westbound shared through/right-turn lane on NC 150.Provide one egress lane on Driveway 4.

The installation of the additional through lanes on NC 150 is recommended in order to maintainan acceptable level of service at the main entrance of Driveway 3/Lowes Access 1 and the fullmovement access at Driveway 1. The additional eastbound through lane is recommended toterminate east of Driveway 1. The additional westbound through lane is recommended toterminate as the westbound right-turn lane at the NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass NB On-Rampintersection.

Bridgewater Auxiliary Turn Lane WarrantsTraffic Impact Analysis

36

8.0 Auxiliary Turn Lane Warrants

Additional turn lane improvements beyond those necessary for capacity were determined basedon a review of the figure titled ‘Warrant for Left and Right-Turn Lanes’ found on page 80 in theNCDOT Policy On Street And Driveway Access To North Carolina Highways. The results of thewarrant analysis for left- and right-turn lanes are included in the Appendix and are summarizedby intersection below:

NC 150 & Driveway 2

Under 2013 build-out conditions, the following turn lanes are warranted:An eastbound right-turn lane with 25 feet of storage.

NC 150 & Driveway 4

Under 2013 build-out conditions, the following turn lane is warranted:An eastbound right-turn lane with 125 feet of storage.A westbound right-turn lane with 75 feet of storage.

Bridgewater RecommendationsTraffic Impact Analysis

37

9.0 Recommendations

At build-out of the project in 2013, all of the study intersections will operate within reasonabletolerances with the construction of the recommendations as outlined in Sections 7.0 and 8.0 ofthis Traffic Impact Analysis. The recommended lane geometry listed in Section 7.0 is based oncapacity requirements for each individual intersection. Final storage lengths for auxiliary turnlane improvements are to be determined based on NCDOT requirements.

Recommendations for improvements to intersection lane geometry for intersections in the studyarea in 2013 beyond those already committed to by NCDOT and the Lowes development aresummarized in the following listing.

The following improvements are recommended to accommodate 2013 build-out conditions:

NC 150 & NC 16:Construction of an additional northbound left-turn lane on NC 16.Construction of an additional receiving lane on westbound NC 150 departing theintersection.Construction of an exclusive eastbound right-turn lane on NC 150.


NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass Northbound Ramp:Installation of a signal.

NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass Southbound Ramp:Installation of a signal.


Bridgewater RecommendationsTraffic Impact Analysis

38




The installation of the additional through lanes on NC 150 is recommended in order to maintainan acceptable level of service at the main entrance of Driveway 3/Lowes Access 1 and the fullmovement access at Driveway 1. The additional eastbound through lane is recommended toterminate east of Driveway 1. The additional westbound through lane is recommended toterminate as the westbound right-turn lane at the NC 150 & NC 16 Bypass NB On-Rampintersection.

Prior to decisions being made regarding potential improvement, consideration should be given tothe following:


The recommended lane geometry at the study intersections for 2013 traffic conditions is shownon Figure 9.1.

SITE

STOP

STOP

STOP

Documents

Bridgewater - County of Lincoln, NC