My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02880
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2800
>
pf_02880
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:19:15 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 1:23:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2880
Planning Files - Type
Planned Unit Development
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
TWIN LAKES
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
844
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Dennis \\'elsch <br />\hrch 24, 1997 <br />Page 19 <br /> <br />The minimum acceptable le"el of congestion for design rurposes \"aries by <br />municipality size and dri\'€r expectations. For larger metropolitan areas, the <br />minimum acceptable level of congestion is usua11y LOS "D." In smal1er, more <br />rural communities ,,"here drivers tend to be less aggressi\'e, the minimum <br />acceptable le\'el of ser,ice is typica11y LOS "C" For the purposes ot this <br />analysis, the minimum acceptable le\'el of seI\'ice was assumed as LOS "D." <br /> <br />Capacity analyses i\'ere conducted for each of the nine key dri"€"say and <br />intersection ]OCCit10ns. The analyse:::- \\'ere conducted by using the pocedures <br />c)uthned in tne 1994 Hi~ni\'a\' Caracitv Manual Crdate and tne e\.istir:s <br />intersection t;eome;ics and ';;'aHic control. The results of tne anal:~-2s ?re <br />doct;:-;-,ented in 1":':-1,,, :" <br /> <br />The data indicate that the existing P\1 peak nour conditions at eacn of the nine <br />key intersections is currently acceptable (LOS D or better) and that the <br />conditions at each of tne intersections would be expected to remain acceFt2.ble <br />if the de\'€lopment did not occur (i,e" under the Year 2001 Background <br />conditions,). <br /> <br />The data also indicate that se\'en of the nine intersections should operate <br />acceptably ti:,dc?r the l'ear 2001 Post-Development P~1 peak hour conditions. <br />The t-,,"O e>,.::eption5 ',,'ould be the C]e\'eland Asenue intersections with ),'orth <br />Centre Pomte Dri\'e and Lydia A\'enue where the side street left tuming <br />mo\'ements onto Cleveland Avenue are expected to operate under congested <br />conditions during the Year 2001 Post-Development PM peak hour, <br /> <br />Signal Warrant Analyses <br /> <br />Traffic signal \\'arrant ana1y::.es were conducted for each of the four <br />unsigna1ized key inten;€'ctions for the existing, Year 2001 Backgrou.I'ld and Year <br />2001 Post-Development time periods. <br /> <br />The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices specifies 11 traffic signal <br />warrants with various threshold or requirement values. Most of the warrants <br />are based on satisfying various minimum combinations of major and minor <br />street volume. The minimum threshold values are reduced to 70 percent of <br />their requirement values when the 85th percentile speed on the major street is <br />above 40 mph and/or the intersection is located within a community of 10,000 <br />persons or less. <br /> <br />If and when an intersection's traffic demands meet or exceed the-threshold <br />requirements, it is an indication that a traffic signal may be installed. A traffic <br />signal is not required just because an intersection meets one or more of the <br />specified signal warrants. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.