P a g e | 1

THE UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD

Department of Civil, Environmental and Biomedical Engineering

CE 452 Transportation Engineering I

Fall 2015

Traffic Study of

Central Business District Intersections

Prepared For;

Dr. Clara Fang

Prepared By:

Mikhail ThomasJasmine Tyson

Ibrahem AlshheMitchi Paul

Hussain Alzaqmanan

P a g e | 2

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

CE452 Transportation Design Team

College of Engineering, Architecture & Technology

University of Hartford

200 Bloomfield Ave., West Hartford CT 06117

December 13, 2015

Clara Fang, Ph.D.

Professor of Civil, Environmental, and Biomedical Engineering

College of Engineering, Architecture & Technology

University of Hartford

200 Bloomfield Ave., West Hartford CT 06117

Dear Dr. Fang:

We herewith submit this study of the City of Hartford, Connecticut’s central business district intersections, particularly the intersections of Main St. & S Chapel St, along with its directly consecutive intersection, Morgan St. & Market St.

Contained within this report are: the analysis and evaluation of the existing conditions within these intersections; how they interact and influence the performance of each other; the problems caused there in; and the proposal and evaluation of alternative designs.

This report is submitted with the hope that future improvements to the city’s road networks will use this study to assist in the amelioration of the said conditions that adversely affect intersections with this location.

Your consideration will be deeply appreciated.

Sincerely,

CE452 Transportation Design Team

Enclosed: Report

P a g e | 3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 1 ….. 10

Table 2 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 2 ...... 11

Table 3 - Summary of Results: HCS: S Chapel St. & Main St. ….. 16

Table 4 - Summary of Results: HCS: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 17

Table 5 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St ….. 18

Table 6 - Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 18

Table 7 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St. ….. 23

Table 8 - Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 23

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - USGS Quadrangle map of Areas of interest ….. 6

Figure 1 - Aerial view of the two intersections of interest. ….. 7

Figure 2 - Traffic Density of Morgan St. onto I-84 ….. 9

Figure 3 - Phase Plan: S Chapel & Main St. ….. 13

Figure 4 - Phase Signal Plan: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 14

P a g e | 4

Table of Contents1.0 Introduction and Problem Statement2.0 Site Location Map3.0 Data Collection

3.1 Overview3.2 Field Observations

4.0 Existing Conditions4.1 Geometric Layout and Phase Plan

5.0 Evaluation of Existing Conditions5.1

6.0 Literature Review6.1 Article 16.2 Article 2

7.0 Redesign and Recommendations8.0 Proposed Conditions Evaluation

APPENDICESA. Field dataB. HCS and Synchro Analyses (Existing)C. HCS and Synchro Analysis (ProposedD. Article 1E. Article 2

P a g e | 5

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT

Two intersections bordering a central business district and a major interstate located in Hartford, Connecticut, were analyzed for traffic operational performance. Level of Service (LOS) classifications were used as the primary evaluation criteria.

The S Chapel Street and Main Street intersection serves as a crucial route for downtown commuters entering and exiting from Interstate I-84. Chapel Street continues east were it becomes Morgan Street and serves as a ramp onto the Bulkeley Bridge section of Interstate I-84. Market Street runs parallel to Main St. intersecting Morgan St. downstream of the S Chapel St. & Main St. intersection.

Commuters travelling into the Downtown Hartford Area using Route 44, exiting the Downtown Hartford Area using Main St., and accessing Interstate I-84 using S Chapel St. experience traffic delays, heavy congestion, disorderly driving patterns, as well as safety hazards for pedestrians. The traffic study locations (Areas of Interests) are the intersections of Route 44 (Main St.) & S Chapel St., along with Morgan St. & Market St. Commuting business professionals, students, tourists, and residents would all benefit from improved traffic efficiency within the areas of interest.

P a g e | 6

2.0 SITE LOCATION MAP

Figure 5 - USGS Quadrangle map of Areas of interest

P a g e | 7

Figure 6 - Aerial view of the two intersections of interest. This figure was obtained using Google map enabling the traffic layer. The colors depicted correspond to the typical rate of congestion relief along travel routes.

P a g e | 8

3.0 DATA COLLECTION

3.1 OVERVIEW

Based on preliminary research the 5:30-10:00 am and 3:00-7:00 pm were determined to be the peak traffic hours. Figure 2 below was taken from the Technical Memorandum I-84 Congestion Relief Study, prepared by CDM Smith, prepared for Connecticut Department of Transportation.

Figure 7 - Traffic Density of Morgan St. onto I-84

Traffic counts for both intersections were collected during the 6:00-7:00 pm hour. The traffic profile shows that the Morgan St. on ramp contributes an average of 9.3 % of the total eastbound volume on the Bulkeley Bridge section of I-84. The graph depicts an average of 4,000 vehicles during the 5-6 pm hour. This being said, the Morgan St on ramps conveys approximately 372 vehicles during the peak study hour.

To obtain traffic counts group members selected a station at each corner of the study intersection and tallied the volumes of turn and through movements of vehicles classified under four main categories; passenger cars, trucks and buses (heavy vehicles), bicycle, and pedestrians. Vehicular delays and queues on each approach were recording using devices such as stopwatches, tablets, and smart phones. Phase signal timings were also recorded using these devices.

P a g e | 9

3.2 Field Observations

Visual observations of traffic queuing and time delays were the primary factors initially used to analyzing the performance of the study intersections. The turn movements of each approach for a given intersection was monitored to determine which turn movement yielded the highest volumes, vehicle queue, and experienced the greatest delays.

The approach/turn movement that yielding the highest vehicle queue was used to determine a control time delay. The last vehicle in a group of vehicles that approached the study intersection during red time was used to establish field delay values. The control delay time was determined in the field based on the amount of time in seconds from when the last car in the group of vehicles stopped for the red light until the vehicle of interest passed through the study intersection.

During monitoring of S Chapel St. & Main St. Intersection (Intersection 1), large volumes of vehicles were observed on the Eastbound through movement and on the Southbound left turn movement relative to the other movements. Traffic from these two turn movements converged heading east bound, causing congestion within the study intersection.

During one period of field observations, it was observed that during a dense traffic congestion, the intersection became filled with cars during all red time and/or pedestrian phase, at which point pedestrians proceeding to cross the intersection through the cars. It was observed that S Chapel St. & Main St. intersection (downstream) played a crucial role in the congestion of the EB approach of the upstream intersection (Intersection 2 – Morgan St. & Market St.), which lead to the selection of the upstream intersection as a subsequent study intersection. The EB approach of the downstream intersection is a continuation of the EB approach of the upstream intersection and consists of a relatively steep grade of 5%.

During monitoring of Intersection 2, the largest volume of vehicles was observed on the EB through movement, followed by the southbound left turn movement. Similar to the conditions observed with Intersection 1, congestion was observed where the eastbound through and southbound left turn converged. These general observations on traffic congestion were anticipated due to the Intersection’s proximity to the I-84 entrance ramp.

Tabulated below are the quantitative data obtain during field observations on control delay time and vehicle queueing for the turn movements with the largest volumes for each intersection.

Intersection #1

Turn Movement Observed Vehicle Queue Control Delay Time

Eastbound Through 20 vehicles 44 seconds

Southbound Left 15 vehicles 57 seconds

Table 2 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 1

P a g e | 10

Intersection #2

Turn Movement Observed Vehicle Queue Control Delay Time

Eastbound Through 18 vehicles 30 seconds

Southbound Left 4 vehicles 25 seconds

Table 3 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 2

P a g e | 11

4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

Chapel/ Main St. intersection (Intersection 1) consists of three approaches Northbound (NB), Southbound (SB), and Eastbound (EB), which utilize three signal phase plans. The subsequent Morgan/Market St. (Intersection 2) also consists of three approaches and three signal plans. Unlike traditional three approach intersections the areas of interest are not simple “T” patterned intersections with only left and right turn movement available to the EB approach. Each EB approach consists of a through turn movement which convey traffic onto Interstate 84.

Intersection 1 exists on a relatively flat grade, with each of the approaches exhibiting the typical roadway crown. The EB approach of Intersection 2 (Morgan St. S) utilizes of a vertical sag curve, with an initial grade of 5%. The geometric design of Intersection 2 is due to the intersection of Interstate I-91 and Interstate I-84, which creates overhead obstructions adjacent to Intersection 2. The SB and NB approaches of Intersection 2 maintain a consistent grade.

P a g e | 12

4.1 Geometric Layouts and Phase Plans

Figure 8 - Phase Plan: S Chapel & Main St.

P a g e | 13

Figure 9 - Phase Signal Plan: Morgan St. & Market St.

5.0 EVALUATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS

P a g e | 14

5.1 HCS ANALYSIS: MAIN ST. & S CHAPEL ST.

As can be seen from phasing diagrams from preceding sections and the HCS Report in the appendix, the eastern through lane going onto Morgan St and eventually into the upstream intersection (Morgan St. & market St.) had the highest volume, followed by the south bound left turn in the same direction. Thus, the majority of the traffic at this intersection is intended for the highway ramp just a few feet from the upstream intersection. The lowest demand was on the northbound approach away from the downtown area.

The greatest share of heavy vehicles, however, were recorded by the north and south through intersections, with only 1% and 3% of the eastern through and south bound left turn traffic were comprised of heavy vehicles. It is also worthy of note that about 80% of the heavy vehicles were CT Transit commuter buses, but were recorded as heavy vehicles because the field data collection officers did not record the distinction between the two. The reason for the high volume of buses is that the bus station is located just a few feet beyond the intersection on the northern approach.

The signal timings were split evenly between the phases, each recording about 53 seconds of green time, 3 seconds of yellow time and 2 seconds of all red time, except for the South bound left turn, which did not have an all red time separate from its entire approach. The SBL turn signal plan was of the protected and permitted.

During the recording period, there were only three pedestrian calls from the Pedestrian Button located on corner of the eastern and southbound approach, and one bike movement was recorded for the entire intersection. There were no bus or other passenger car parking maneuvers attempted. The grading was maintained constant at the 0% throughout the intersection. The widths of lanes were also constant at 11 ft. The majority of other inputs were kept as the program default. However, for the various lane groups that applied, their recall modes were set to max, and dual entry were permitted in order to obtain the desired results. However, separate PHFs were calculated for each approach in the intersection, but HCS only allows input for the intersection as a whole. Thus to give a more conservative result, the PHF was set to the lowest PHF calculated.

5.2 HCS ANAYSIS: MORGAN ST. & MARKET ST.

P a g e | 15

The above represents the main inputs into HCS for Morgan St. & Market St. The eastern approach contributed the most to this intersection followed by the south approach. The majority of traffic in each was directed to the Highway on ramp, thus the heaviest demand was recorded in the eastern though lanes and the south bound left lane. Again, the northern approach (away from CBD) recorded the least traffic.

Unlike the downstream intersection, the grade of the eastern approach was -5%, while the other approaches were constant at the 0%. No pedestrian, bike or parking maneuvers were recorded. There were, however, two lanes that were measured to be 10 ft. other settings were kept as mentioned in the previous intersection, and for the approach to PHFs.

It was also observed the on the southern approach, there were two lanes to accommodate the left turn movements, with one being shared with a through lane. It was observed that approximately 40% of the left turns were in the shared lane. However, there was no means to input this data into HCS. The phasing type at this intersection was split between the three phases recorded. This means that each approach was given its own exclusive movement time in sequence.

Table 3 - Summary of Results: HCS: S Chapel St. & Main St.

The above table shows the summary of results produced by The HCS Traffic Analysis Tool for S. Chapel St. & Main St. The results were fairly consistent with field observations. The queue in the approach with the largest demand (EB) was found to be 15 vehicles, as opposed to 19 vehicles produced by the software, a difference of 26%. In terms of delay, 69 seconds were recorded and average delay produced by HCS was about 69 seconds for the lane with the longest queue.

The Level of Service (LOS) for the entire intersection was reported as D or unsatisfactory performance, with the least performing movement being the SBL turn, which reported a LOS of E (poor performance). These results seem to adhere to found empirically in the

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L TCapcity ( Veh/h) 586 1043 489 1033 449 535 984

v/c Ratio 0.426 0.44 0.102 0.22 0.2380.81

6 0.364Back of Queue (veh/h) 9.2 8.3 1.6 3.8 3.7 19.9 6.4Control Delay (s/veh) 50.8 49.9 43.8 45.6 46.6 68.9 48.4LOS D D D D D E DIntersection LOS D

P a g e | 16

field. There were long queues accumulated in the SBL lane, as traffic attempts to merge onto the highway. At times, the green light time was not sufficient to accommodate the number of vehicles making that left turn. As confirmation, HCS reported a volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c) of 0.816 which is fairly close to the limit of 1, suggesting that the lane was just about near capacity. The control delay reported was about 70 seconds, which was significantly higher than any other approach.

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L TCapcity ( Veh/h) 559 476 473 849 402 484 973v/c Ratio 0.761 0.821 0.822 0.318 0.097 0.093 0.505Back of Queue (veh/h) 9 8.8 8.8 2.3 0.6 0.7 4.4Control Delay 36.1 40.6 40.7 26.2 24.2 24 28.6LOS D D D C C C CIntersection LOS C

Table 4 - Summary of Results: HCS: Morgan St. & Market St.

The above table shows the summary of results produced by the HCS Traffic Analysis Tool for Morgan St. & Market St. The results were also consistent with empirically obtained data. The queue of the approach with the highest demand was found to be 18 vehicles, as opposed to 27 vehicles (50% difference). The highest delay recorded was 46 seconds as opposed to 41 seconds reported by HCS, a difference of about 11%.

The poorest performing approach was the EB approach. This was consistent with field observations as long queues were seen during the time of recording and from other daily use. At times, queues can be observed that extend very near to the downstream intersection, thus the reason for this study. This was also confirmed by the average v/c ratio of about 0.8 for this approach, indicating an approach near capacity. The SBL, however, did not meet expectations as for the majority of the observation time, the left lanes were saturated. All other approaches performed intersection satisfactorily.

5.3 SYNCHRO 9 ANALYSIS

The input of existing conditions using the Synchro 9 Traffic Simulator was fairly the same as for the HCS Traffic Analysis Tool. The most noteworthy difference was the

P a g e | 17

ability to input the PHF calculated from field data for each approach, and the percentage traffic in shared lanes (specifically for the SBL turn on Morgan St. & market St.). This made for a more accurate depiction of existing conditions generated by the software as can be viewed below in the results summary:

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L T

Capacity (veh/h) 1836 402 455 1402

v/c Ratio 0.03 0.5 0.08 0.2 0.2 0.89 0.24Back of Queue (veh/h) 22 7 33 12

Control Delay 28.5 26.7 6.2 16.5 16.5 47 17

LOS C C A B B D B

Intersection LOS C Table 5 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St

Table 6 - Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St.

& Market St.

The reporting for Synchro 9 was somewhat different from HCS. For example, the Queues as queue lengths in feet and not in vehicles per hour as in HCS. In addition, other measures were reported as a single entity for approaches that had no protected turning

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L T

Capacity (veh/h) 2295 597 356 885 495

v/c Ratio 1.06 0.32 0.08 0.79 0.31Back of Queue (veh/h) 24 9 0 8 13

Control Delay 19.3 29.8 0.5 14.6 18

LOS E C A D C

Intersection LOS D

P a g e | 18

movements. To adjust the queue information in the same format, the length of the typical design vehicle (5.8 ft) divided the queue lengths reporting in Synchro 9.

The results given in Synchro 9 may be considered more nuanced than those given by HCS. For example, the SBL lane at Morgan St. & Market St. gave the expected results, reporting a v/c ratio of 0.79. This is more consistent with empirical data as mentioned in the previous subsection. In contrast, the queues and control delay information from HCS, more closely matched field data. This may because were able to input PHF data for each approach unlike in HCS, and also due to the methods utilized by the different softwares.

However, in general, the both show the same trends in performance of the approaches and lanes relative to each other. The total LOS were generally the same. No intersection received an LOS greater than C.

6.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

P a g e | 19

6.1 A MULTIAGENT SYSTEM FOR OPTIMIZING URBAN TRAFFIC

The need for more accurate analysis of road network performance is growing increasing critical due to a number of factors. The most obvious is the rapid urbanization of much of the planet due to expansion of urban areas and cities. Coupled with exponential global population increases, the contribution of vehicular traffic to worldwide air pollution and greenhouse gases is expected to grow exponentially as well. The delay experienced on urban road networks also results incalculable financial losses due to general wastage of time and productivity that could be applied to other more pressing avenues, such as work and business transactions.

Most methods currently employed in the analysis of urban road networks are deterministic. These methods are limited to unchanging parameters such as degree of saturation, congestion level and occupancy levels. However, the performance of a road way or intersection is based on a number of factors that themselves are subject to change for a variety of causes. Thus, in reality the urban road networks are dynamic in nature and may require more sophisticated methods of analysis.

One such method is the dubbed “the multiagent system for optimizing urban traffic”. The system requires the development of a hierarchical multiagent system to manage traffic systems. This is done by analyzing two scenarios for traffic flow – traffic accident and morning rush hour. The system is designed to efficient manage the gradual congestion of the network. In order to do this, the system requires the creation of CTAs (Coordinator Traffic Agents) who monitor the network the network and reduce the duration of traffic lights of neighboring intersections. If congestion continues to build, then the CTA will halt and redirect all traffic heading in a similar direction thus allowing congested roadways to decrease their density values. This redirection proves successful and results in the achievement of a more global balance on all roads on the network. Although the system may account for increased commuting times, the congestion on specific areas of the network can be managed in a more organized and controlled manner.

6.2 DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT CLOSELY SPACED INTERSECTIONS IN

P a g e | 20

ILORIN, KWARA STATE, NIGERIA

This paper presents a study of two closely spaced intersection in the central urban area of Ilorin, Kwara in the country of Nigeria. The study was done with the knowledge that intersections are critical traffic conflict points, and the efficiency of the intersection is dependent of its design. This can only be done by understanding the problems motorists and pedestrian face moving through the intersection. The goal is to use this understanding to resolve conflicts, provide maneuver areas, channeling and controlling traffic into clear paths and permitting entry and exit to and from stream safety at correct speeds and angles. Whatever decision is made by the designer requires comprise on a number of factors that may affect the feasibility system improvements. This may include environmental, economic, land use, traffic demands, etc.

The conclusion of the stated that the current system was inadequate in the number of lanes provided on the downstream intersection. There was also no exclusive left turn on either intersection. Thus the study conducted showed that the turning left movement consumes more time than the through movement, resulting in delay to the through movement and hence the performance of the intersection as a whole. There was also need to provide pedestrian with means of safely traversing the intersections without delaying traffic further. Thus, traffic islands were also introduced. However, the most effective means of improving system performance was employing a good signal control scheme.

P a g e | 21

7.0 REDESIGN & RECOMMENDATIONS

The first alternative considered involves adjustment of the signal timings at both the upstream and downstream intersections; addition of lanes; and some adjustment to the eastern approach of Morgan St. & Market St.

7.1 S CHAPEL & MAIN ST.

One of the SBT lanes will be changed into a shared left and through turn. This will be down to ease congestion in the left lane, and reduce its volume to capacity ratio. This should not affect through traffic significantly since its capacity is underutilized, and an exclusive through lane remains.

The SB approach’s signal timing was increased by 5 seconds, i.e., an increase from 10 seconds to 15 seconds for the SBL, and from 53 seconds to 58 seconds, to reduce queues and delays in the left lane.

The signal timing for the EB approach was reduced by 5 seconds, i.e., a decrease from 53 seconds to 48 seconds. The reasoning behind this measure is to allow more clearance time of the upstream intersection’s EB approach.

The NB approach’s signal timing was decreased from 53 seconds to 43 seconds to accommodate the changes in the other signal timings of the other phases.

7.2 MORGAN ST. & MARKET ST.

An additional 10ft through lane on the EB approach to accommodate to increase its capacity and accommodate the number of traffic on the approach.

The shared left and right lanes will be reduce from 9ft to 10ft to accommodate the increase in number of lanes.

The sidewalk of the left side of the approach must be removed. This should not affect pedestrian traffic as no pedestrian movements were observed during data collection. This change should be continued past the intersection to allow for better movement on the on ramp. The curb lines of the right should also be removed to accommodate the increase in number of lanes on the EB approach. However, the fourth lane will be gradual phased off after the intersection.

The signal timing of the eastern approach will be increased from 25 seconds to 40 seconds to allow better clearance of the approach and synching with oncoming traffic from the downstream intersection.

The signal phasing type of the SBL will be changed from split timing to permitted and protected to allowing left turning traffic on the SB approach to find gaps in the NB approach as there is relatively much lower traffic on the NB approach.

The NB phase will also be reduced to 20 seconds because of this reason also.

P a g e | 22

8.0 Evaluation of Alternative

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L TCapacity (veh/h) 1801 1455 444 1044v/c Ratio 0.39 0.23 0.51 0.50Back of Queue (veh/h) 22 7 33 12Control Delay 22.6 18.2 19.7 18.5LOS C B B BIntersection LOS B

Table 7 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St.

ResultsEB NB SB

L T R T R L TCapacity (veh/h) 2295 597 356 885 495v/c Ratio 0.56 0.37 0.10 0.56 0.21Back of Queue (veh/h) 24 9 0 16 6Control Delay 19.3 29.8 2.6 18.9 13.9LOS B C A B BIntersection LOS B

Table 8- Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St.

There were significant improvements in the LOS of both intersections. S Chapel St. & Main St. Improved from an LOS of D to an LOS of B. Morgan St. & Market St. showed even better improvement from an LOS of D to an Los of B.

The most significant changes were as follows: The EB approach of the upstream intersection improved from an LOS E to an

LOS B. The addition of the lane decreased it’s from 1.06 (overcapacity) to 0.56. The control delay remained the same due to the increase in the green time for the SB approach, hence could be reduced by adjusting the SB’s green time accordingly.

The upstream SBL lane showed marked improvement, moving from LOS D to LOS B. Again, it was possible to reduce the volume-to-capacity ratio from 0.79 to 0.56, in this instance, by adjusting increasing its green time, and allowing permitted movements.

P a g e | 23

The downstream SBL lane also showed marked improvement moving from an LOS D to Los B. The control delay was reduced from 47 to 19.7 s/veh, and a reduction in the v/c ratio from 0.89 to 0.51.

Through Synchro’s simulation capabilities, it was observed that pile-ups in the downstream intersection’s SBL lane and the EB approach of the upstream intersection was significantly improve. The more synchronized timing to the signals at both intersection accounted for an increase synchronized flow times between the intersections. The significant increase in the green time of the upstream intersection’ EB approach did not significantly impact the SBL lane as the new permitted signal timing allowed enough left turn traffic to find gaps and reduce the queue.

P a g e | 24

APPENDICES

A. Field Data

S Chapel & Morgan

PM  NBL NBT NBR Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15 0 0 23 8 20 0 516:15 - 6:30 0 0 54 8 12 2 766:30 - 6:45 0 0 44 7 12 0 636:45 - 7:00 0 0 48 0 13 3 64Volume 0 0 169 23 57 5 254Total Volume 0 192 62  %HV 0 12 8  V15-max 76PHF 0.84

PM  SBL SBT SBR Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15 47 1 31 8 0 0 876:15 - 6:30 74 4 82 6 0 0 1666:30 - 6:45 113 4 69 14 0 0 2006:45 - 7:00 87 2 58 4 0 0 151Volume 321 11 240 32 0 0 604Total Volume 332 272 0  %HV 3 12 0  

V15-max 200PHF 0.76

PM

P a g e | 25

  EBL EBT EBR Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15 4 0 114 1 11 0 1306:15 - 6:30 2 0 157 4 13 0 1766:30 - 6:45 7 0 141 0 9 0 1576:45 - 7:00 3 0 105 0 5 0 113Volume 16 0 517 5 38 0 576Total Volume 16 522 38  %HV 0 1 0  V15max 176PHF 0.82

SB NB EBAR 1.83                

Y 2.83 Cycal LengthCycal Length  AR 1.97 cycal length   

GTL 9.52 58.66   57.49 Y 2.93 57.45 AR 1.93G.T. 44.48       G 52.59   Y 2.93

        G 52.59     

Morgan St. & Market St.

P a g e | 26

PM  NBL NBT NBR

Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15     50 3 8 2 636:15 - 6:30     37 7 11 0 556:30 - 6:45     40 11 5 0 566:45 - 7:00     45 7 3 0 55Volume 0 0 172 28 27 2 229Total Volume 0 200 29  %HV 0 14 7  

V15-max                           63PHF                                    0.91

PM  SBL SBT SBR Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15 96 3 25 1 0 0 1256:15 - 6:30 77 12 6 0 0 0 956:30 - 6:45 75 1 19 0 0 0 956:45 - 7:00 67 3 12 0 0 0 82Volume 315 19 62 1 0 0 397Total Volume 334 63 0  %HV 0 2 0  V15-max 125PHF 0.79

PM  EBL EBT EBR

Volume  PC T PC T PC T

6:00 - 6:15 8 2 307 3 3 0 3236:15 - 6:30 11 0 236 7 2 0 2566:30 - 6:45 5 0 184 11 3 0 2036:45 - 7:00 3 0 160 7 1 0 171Volume 27 2 887 28 9 0 953Total Volume 29 915 9  %HV 7 3 0  

V15max       323PHF 0.74

EB Signal Light  

P a g e | 27

Green  25.19 Sycal LYellow 2.95 30.07Red 1.93SB Signal Light  Green  22.82 Sycal LYellow 2.93 27.74Red 1.99NB Signal Light  Green  22.87 Cycal LYellow 2.95 27.79Red 1.97

B. HCS and Synchro Analyses (Existing)

P a g e | 28

Refer to reports on the following pages….

C. Synchro Analysis (Proposed)

P a g e | 29

Refer to reports on the following pages…

D. Article 1 - A Multiagent System For Optimizing Urban Traffic

P a g e | 30

http://www.cs.unb.ca/~ghorbani/ali/papers/traffic_wi03.pdf

E. Article 2 - Design Of Traffic Signals At Closely Spaced Intersections In Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria

http://rrpjournals.org/wjepas/en_wjepas_vol_1_iss_2_pg_29_39.pdf