Roudabout Study

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 1
Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................. 3
Intersection Volume Conditions ............................................................................................................ 5
Intersection Operations ......................................................................................................................... 9
Safety Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 16
Conceptual Geometric Design ............................................................................................................. 18
Benefit-Cost Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 25
Findings and Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 28
References
..................................................................................................................................... 29
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Exhibit 1: Intersection Layout and Site Vicinity ..................................................................................... 3
Exhibit 2: Existing Intersection Approach Conditions ............................................................................ 4
Exhibit 3: Historical Trends on SR 44 (0.1 miles east of Grand Ave) ...................................................... 6
Exhibit 4: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (North of SR 44) ............................................................ 6
Exhibit 5: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (South of SR 44) ............................................................ 6
Exhibit 6: Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes for Existing and 2035 Analysis ............................... 9
Exhibit 7: Crashes Types and Severities SR 44 at Grand Avenue ...................................................... 17
Exhibit 8: Drainage Areas at the Study Intersection ............................................................................ 19
Exhibit 9: Field Observed Utilities ........................................................................................................ 20
Exhibit 10: Approximate Location of Utilities (additional utilities may be present) ........................... 20
Exhibit 11: Conceptual Single-Lane Roundabout ................................................................................. 24
Exhibit 12: Conceptual Future Multilane Roundabout ........................................................................ 25
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Existing Intersection Characteristics ........................................................................................ 4
Table 2: Volusia County BEBR Population Growth Rates....................................................................... 7
Table 3: Adopted CFRPM Growth Rates ................................................................................................ 8
Table 4: Volume Projections for Year 2035 ........................................................................................... 9
Table 5: Two-Way Stop Control Results 2015................................................................................... 10
Table 6: Two-Way Stop Control Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth) ............................... 10
Table 7: Signal Control Results 2015 ................................................................................................. 11
Table 8: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth) ............................................. 11
Table 9: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth) ............................................. 12
Table 10: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2015 .............................................................................. 13
Table 11: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth) .......................... 13
Table 12: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth) ......................... 13
Table 13: Multilane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth) ............................. 14
Table 14 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2015 Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS ............. 15
Table 15 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2035 AM Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS ...... 15
Table 16 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2035 PM Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS ...... 15
Table 17. Crash Summary for SR 44 at Grand Avenue (January 2010 - June 2015) ............................ 16
Table 18. Expected Annual Crash Frequency by Traffic Control Alternative ....................................... 17
Table 19: Planning-Level Costs............................................................................................................. 26
Table 20: Monetized Life Cycle (2015-2035) Benefit (Roundabout Compared to Traffic Signal) ....... 26
iv
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Traffic Count Data and Historical Volume Trends
Appendix B BEBR Projections
Appendix C CFRMP Model Plots
Appendix D TWSC Operational Analyses
Appendix E Signal Operational Analyses
Appendix F Roundabout Operational Analyses
Appendix G Crash Data
Appendix H Roundabout Performance Checks for Design Vehicle and Speed Control
Appendix I ROW Maps
Appendix J Benefit/Cost Analysis
INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

An evaluation of the operational and geometric feasibility of a roundabout was conducted for the
intersection of SR 44 at Grand Avenue in Volusia County, Florida. The information contained in this
report is intended to aid in determining the feasibility of a roundabout based on potential benefits
and associated operations at the study intersection. The following represents key findings:
The existing two-way stop control (TWSC) currently provides acceptable operations; however,
a pattern of angle-crashes suggests a need for safety improvement. The TWSC is expected to
operate at LOS F prior to the 2035 design year.
The operational analysis indicates a single-lane roundabout will accommodate existing

volumes and growth of at least 5% per year through 2035. A roundabout is expected to
provide lower delays than the signal alternative during the peak hours, particularly for the
minor street approaches.
Of the 30 reported crashes from January 2010 June 2015, twenty-two (22) were angle
collisions (73 percent). Fifteen (15) of the 22 angle crashes resulted in injury, one (1) resulted
in a fatality, and six (6) resulted in property damage only. A roundabout is anticipated to serve
as a direct countermeasure for angle crashes, reducing total crashes by 71 percent and injury
crashes by up to 87%.
A roundabout concept with a 160-foot inscribed circle diameter was developed to facilitate
ease of expansion to a partial two-lane roundabout if SR 44 is widened in the future. The
concept will accommodate a WB-62FL tractor trailer truck for all turning movements. Due to
incomplete ROW information, potential ROW impacts on the south side of SR 44 require
further investigation. A smaller diameter roundabout (approximately 140 foot) could be
considered if ROW impacts are discovered with the current concept. However, the smaller
roundabout footprint would require full reconstruction if SR 44 was widened in the future.
A roundabout is expected to provide benefits for a possible future trail connection across SR
44 by reducing speeds and providing a raised median refuge for pedestrians.
A roundabout is expected to provide over $8 million in life-cycle safety benefit over the
existing TWSC. The roundabout is also expected to provide nearly $5 million in combined
operational and safety benefit compared to the signal alternative.
Based upon the various considerations described above, a single-lane roundabout is expected to be a
feasible alternative at the study intersection. The table below provides a brief comparison of the
preferred roundabout option to the signal control option.
Signal Control
Operations
Overall LOS C or better for single-lane roundabout

through year 2035. Single-lane roundabout can
Overall LOS C or better through the
accommodate at least 5% growth on all approaches
design year 2035 with addition of NB and before expansion to a partial two-lane roundabout is
SB left-turn lanes.
needed.
Minor Street LOS ranges from C to D
in 2015 and D in all future scenarios.
2.99 crashes per year expected

(1.02 fatal/injury and 1.97 PDO)
Safety
Intersection
Speeds
Multimodal
Connectivity
Aesthetics
Expected total crashes are 13% lower

than the existing TWSC. A 41% reduction
in injury crashes and 15% increase in PDO
crashes is expected from signal
implementation.
Possible reduction to 45 mph posted
speed associated with signal. However,
higher speeds are achievable while the
SR 44 through movements have a green
indication.
Provides opportunities for controlled
(signalized) crossings. However,
compared to a roundabout, pedestrians
have more lanes to cross (higher
exposure) and a higher-speed
environment (higher chance of fatality
should a crash occur).
No Change.
Truck
Accommodates WB-62FL design vehicle
Accommodation for all turn movements.
Property Access
ROW
Implications
Roundabout
No change.
LOS D or better provided for all individual approaches

through year 2035. Compared to the signalized option,
this generally results in lower delays, particularly for the
minor street entries.
0.99 crashes per year expected
(0.22 fatal/injury and 0.77 PDO)
Directly addresses the angle-crash pattern at the
existing TWSC intersection.
Net life-cycle safety benefit of ~$4.4 million over signal
alternative and ~$8.2 million over existing two-way stop
control (no-build).
Reduced speed. Roundabout designed for a maximum
(fastest path) speed of 25 mph through each entry.
Reduced speeds contribute to reduced crash severity
and improved conditions for pedestrians.
Improves multimodal safety and connectivity with
reduced vehicle speeds and marked crossings.
Maximum crossing distance reduced to one lane with
splitter islands providing refuge. Two-stage crossing
reduces pedestrian delay by allowing each direction of
SR 44 to be crossed independently.
Opportunities for enhanced aesthetics within the
roundabout central island.
Accommodates WB-62 for all vehicle turn movements.
Full access maintained at BP Driveway connection to
Grand Avenue. Driveway connection to SR 44 converted
to right-in/right-out.
Sufficient ROW (200 feet) is available along SR 44.
Further investigation of ROW along Grand Avenue is
required.
Potential need for ROW along Grand

Avenue, south of SR 44, to accommodate
a NB left-turn lane.
Corner clips could be needed on the south side of SR 44
depending upon the ROW available along Grand
Avenue
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The four-legged intersection is stop-controlled on the northbound and southbound approaches
(Grand Avenue) and uncontrolled along the SR 44 approaches. As illustrated in Exhibit 1, there are
exclusive left-turn lanes provided on SR 44. No turn lanes are provided on the stop-controlled Grand
Avenue approaches. The existing approach conditions are illustrated in Exhibit 2. A BP gas station
with convenience store and Subway restaurant is located in the northwest corner of the intersection.
Two access points serve the uses in the northwest quadrant: (1) an entrance on SR 44 approximately
300 feet west of Grand Avenue and (2) a driveway on Grand Avenue approximately 250 feet north of
the intersection. The remaining three quadrants of the intersection are currently undeveloped,
wooded parcels.
Grand Avenue
Although both SR 44 and Grand Avenue are classified as urban roadways by Volusia County, within
the immediate intersection vicinity the area type is currently rural and generally undeveloped. The
intersection is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the City of DeLand. There is potential for
additional future development in the site vicinity as the urbanized area surrounding DeLand expands
to the west. This includes a planned future SunRail transit station and surrounding transit-oriented
development to the south of the intersection along Grand Avenue. Table 1 summarizes key
intersection characteristics.
BP Gas Station
Exhibit 1: Intersection Layout and Site Vicinity
Grand Avenue South Approach (looking north)
Grand Avenue North Approach (looking south)
SR 44 East Approach (looking east)
CR 472 West Approach (looking west)
Exhibit 2: Existing Intersection Approach Conditions
Table 1. Existing Intersection Characteristics

Characteristic
Direction
Roadway Classification
Cross-Section
Turn Lanes
Lane Widths
Shoulder Widths
Speed Limit
SIS Facility
Sidewalks
Bike Lanes
Street Lighting
Roadway
SR 44
East/West
Principal Arterial - Urban
2-lane undivided
EB and WB left-turn lanes
12 ft lanes
4 ft paved shoulder
55 mph
No
None
None
None
Grand Ave
North/South
Major Collector - Urban
2-lane undivided
No turn lanes
10 ft lanes
No paved shoulder
35 mph (North), 30 mph (South)
No
None
None
None
INTERSECTION VOLUME CONDITIONS

Historic traffic volume data was reviewed to identify daily volume trends at the intersection. Future
growth projections from the regional travel demand model and Bureau of Economic and Business
Research (BEBR) were also considered to identify the potential for volume growth.
EXISTING VOLUMES
Data collected as part of a recent signal warrant analysis conducted for the intersection1 were used
for this assessment. Twenty-four hour directional counts were collected on November 12, 2014.
During this time period, five pedestrians and twelve bicyclists were observed crossing the
intersection. The morning (7:15-8:15 a.m.) and evening (4:45-5:45 p.m.) peak hours were identified
from turning movement counts collected at the intersection from 7:00-9:00 a.m., 12:00-3:00 p.m.,
and 4:00-7:00 p.m. on November 12, 2014. The existing count data is included in Appendix A.
HISTORICAL TRENDS
Historical Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes were obtained for FDOT count stations along
SR 44 near the study intersection. Historic count data for Grand Avenue was obtained from Volusia
County. FDOT count station 0290 is located on SR 44, approximately 0.1 miles east of Grand Avenue.
The historical AADT reports are included in Appendix A. The historical volume profile for the most
recent 15-year period from 1999 through 2014 is provided in Exhibit 3.
SR 44
Historical volumes along SR 44 near the study intersection remained relatively stable with minor yearto-year fluctuations in AADT between 1999 through 2014 (volumes ranged from 9,300 to 11,700
AADT). The historical volume trend between 1999 and 2014 results in a -0.71% linear annual growth
rate. Exhibit 3 illustrates the historical AADT on SR 44 between 1999 and 20142.
Grand Avenue
Historical volumes along Grand Avenue, north of SR 44 have ranged from 1,820 AADT (Year 2012) to
2,980 (Year 2007). The historical trend between 2005 and 2014 is a -3.07% annual decrease in
volume. South of SR 44, FDOT count station 7059 shows volumes, ranging from 900 AADT (Year 2012)
to 1,100 AADT (Year 2009) over the six-year period from 2009 to 2014. This results in a decreasing
annual trend of -2%. Historic volume data for Grand Avenue is illustrated in Exhibits 4 and 5.
1
2
Aspireon Consulting Group, Inc. Signal Warrant Analysis. SR 44 and Grand Avenue. April 1, 2015.
Traffic Trends. Florida Department of Transportation. 2014
5
14000
Average Daily Traffic

(Vehicles/Day)
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Year
Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day)
Exhibit 3: Historical Trends on SR 44 (0.1 miles east of Grand Ave)

3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
2011
2012
2013
2014
Exhibit 4: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (North of SR 44)
1000
800
No FDOT Count Data
1200
600
400
200
0
2009
2010
2011
Year
Exhibit 5: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (South of SR 44)

6
2012
2013
2014
BEBR POPULATION PROJECTIONS

The University of Floridas Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BEBR) projections were
obtained for Volusia County for 2015 to 2040. The low, medium, and high projections for 2035 are
summarized in Table 2. County-wide growth rates range from approximately -0.13% percent up to
1.65% percent. The BEBR population study data is provided in Appendix B.
Table 2: Volusia County BEBR Population Growth Rates

Estimation
2014
Estimate
Low
Medium
503,851
High
2035
Projection
Annual Growth Rate,

Growth/Year (%)
491,200
-633 (-0.13%)
578,800
3,747 (0.74%)
670,300
8,322 (1.65%)
MODEL GROWTH RATES

The Central Florida Regional Planning Model (CFRPM) with a base validation year of 2005 and horizon
year of 2035 was reviewed to support identification of intersection growth rates. No detailed subarea model validation and refinement was included as part of this roundabout feasibility study.
Therefore, model results reflect the results from the adopted CFRPM models.
Model AADT for the base year 2005 and horizon year 2035 are summarized in Table 3 along with
corresponding growth rates. In comparing the base year 2005 model AADTs against the actual 2005
counts along SR 44, the model is predicting nearly double the actual volume (22,815 in the model vs
11,700 actual counts). Along Grand Avenue, the 2005 base-year model is under-predicting volumes by
nearly 250% (750 AADT in the model vs 2,600 actual counts). This suggests that the adopted travel
demand model is not adequately calibrated within the sub-area. If a roundabout is further advanced
at this location, additional sub-area refinement to the model is suggested to further verify volume
estimates. This should include additional coordination with Volusia County regarding plans for the
future SunRail Area Activity Center. The model plots are provided in Appendix C.
Given the error in the predicted model volumes, only the relative change between the base year and
2035 models was considered.
Along SR 44, the model is estimating an annual growth rate of approximately 1% to 1.5% per
year. However, the model is projecting a growth of 7,000 to 10,000 AADT along SR 44, which
would equate to approximately a 70% to 100% increase when compared to existing volumes.
Along Grand Avenue, the results summarized in Table 3 are for informational purposes and
were not utilized in this study. The relatively low existing volumes have the potential to be
heavily influenced by the timing of future SunRail Activity Center development. Limited
volume growth along Grand Avenue (consistent with historical trends) is anticipated until the
SunRail station is constructed.
7
Table 3: Adopted CFRPM Growth Rates

2005 AADT
(FDOT
Count)
2014 AADT
(FDOT
Count)
2005 Model
1
AADT
2035 Model
1
AADT
Model Growth
Rate, AADT/year;
(% growth/year)
SR 44, east of Grand Ave
11,700
9,800
22,815
29,547
224 (0.98%)
SR 44, west of Grand Ave
NA
NA
23,180
33,525
344 (1.5%)
Grand Ave, north of SR 44
2,600
2,300
750
9,971
307 (40.98%)
Grand Ave, south of SR 44
NA
1,000
104
2,660
85 (81.92%)
Segment Description
Includes application of MOCF to convert model volumes to AADT
FUTURE VOLUMES
The historical volume trends, BEBR population projections, and the adopted travel demand model
were all considered in identifying a planning-level estimate of potential growth at the study
intersection. The data sources were used to identify a linear annual growth rate that was then applied
directly to the existing peak hour intersection turning movement volumes to develop a planning-level
estimate of AM and PM peak-hour volumes for year 2035. Table 4 summarizes existing volumes and
2035 AADT estimates. 2035 turning movement volumes are illustrated in Exhibit 6. Due to the
uncertainty in possible future development activity near the study intersection, two different
scenarios were evaluated:
The first scenario assumes an annual growth rate of 2% on all approaches. Historical AADTs
indicated a negative trend with relatively stable volumes over the past 15 years fluctuating
within a range of approximately 2,000 AADT. BEBR population projections also showed a 0%
to 1.65% annual growth. Therefore, a 2% annual growth rate may be conservative for
estimating regional background growth. This scenario assumes that the planned SunRail
station and surrounding TOD is not constructed, where regional background growth would
largely dictate future intersection volumes.
The second scenario assumes an annual growth rate of 5% on all approaches. Over a 20-year
period, this scenario reflects volumes doubling on all approaches. This scenario assumes the
addition of approximately 10,000 AADT along SR 44 (100% growth compared to existing
volumes) as predicted by the model between 2005 and 2035. While a 5% annual growth
reflects a relatively high rate, there is potential for the side streets to grow at an even higher
rate given the low existing volumes and potential for development around the future SunRail
station. The timing and intensity of the actual development of the SunRail station will have a
major impact on volumes along Grand Avenue, south of SR 44. The operations analysis
includes additional discussion of spare capacity for growth beyond the 5% per year assumed
in Scenario 2. The 5% annual growth is expected to result in volumes near Volusia Countys
adopted LOS D service volume threshold of 24,200 AADT (which reflects existing
uninterrupted flow conditions) where consideration may be given to a future widening to a
four-lane facility along SR 44.
8
Table 4: Volume Projections for Year 2035

Scenario 1
Segment Description
SR 44, East of Grand Ave
2014
AADT
9,800
SR 44, West of Grand Ave
Peak Hour
Entering Volume
Annual
Growth
Rate
489
2,300
138
Grand Avenue,
South of SR 44
1,000
38
Annual
Growth
Rate
13,720
452
Grand Avenue,
North of SR 44
2035
AADT
Estimate
Scenario 2
2%
3,200
1,400
Exhibit 6: Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes for Existing and 2035 Analysis
2035
AADT
Estimate
19,600
5%
4,600
2,000
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Operational analyses were performed for existing volumes with the existing two-way stop control, a
signal, and a roundabout. A planning-level assessment of future 2035 operations was also conducted
to evaluate the ability for a signal and roundabout to accommodate forecast growth. The volumes
used in the analysis are shown in Exhibit 6.
TWSC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

Operational analyses were performed for existing 2015 and future 2035 peak hour conditions with
the existing intersection layout and traffic control. The analysis was conducted based upon 2010
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, as implemented in the HCS 2010 software. Analysis
results for 2015 AM and PM peak hours are summarized in Table 5 and Table 6. The operational
results are included in Appendix D.
Table 5: Two-Way Stop Control Results 2015

Approach
(Results reflect
critical
movement)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
V/C Ratio
Average Delay
(seconds)
EB SR 44 (Left)
EB SR 44 (Thru)
WB SR 44 (Left)
WB SR 44 (Thru)
NB Grand Ave
0.04
7.9
0.01
8.6
0.13
21.7
SB Grand Ave
0.25
18.6
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
V/C Ratio
25
0.06
Uncontrolled (Free Flow) Movement
25
0.00
25
0.25
25
0.41
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
8.7
25
8.2
25
35.1
25
22.5
50
Assumes a length of 25 feet/vehicle
The stop-controlled southbound approach operates at a LOS C during the 2015 weekday AM and
PM peak hours. The northbound approach operates at an LOS C during the weekday AM peak hour
and LOS E during the weekday PM peak hour.
Table 6: Two-Way Stop Control Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth)
Approach
(Results reflect
critical
movement)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
V/C Ratio
Average Delay
(seconds)
EB SR 44 (Left)
EB SR 44 (Thru)
0.05
8.1
25
0.09
9.3
25
WB SR 44 (Left)
WB SR 44 (Thru)
NB Grand Ave
0.01
9.1
8.6
25
0.25
34.8
25
0.01
25
0.66
>50
100
SB Grand Ave
0.46
32.1
>50
175
75

10
V/C Ratio
0.81
As summarized in Table 6, if intersection volumes grow at two percent per year through 2035
(Scenario 1), the northbound and southbound approaches are forecast to operate with delays greater
than 50 seconds which results in an LOS F during the 2035 weekday PM peak hour. Therefore,
additional improvements are expected to be needed by 2035 regardless of the volume scenario
(Scenario 2 with 5% annual growth will have worse operations than those indicated in Table 6). Given
that a signal is currently warranted at the intersection, a conversion to signal or roundabout control in
the future is assumed to be necessary and therefore no additional TWSC scenarios were evaluated.
SIGNAL OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

Operational analyses were performed for existing 2015 and future 2035 AM and PM peak hour
conditions with signal control at the intersection. No additional turn lanes were assumed for the 2015
analysis; however, left-turn lanes were assumed on the northbound and southbound approaches
under 2035 forecast conditions. The analysis was conducted based upon 2010 Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM) methodologies, as implemented in the HCS 2010 software. Analysis results for 2015
and 2035 AM and PM peak hour scenarios are summarized in Tables 7, 8 and 9, respectively. The
operational worksheets are provided in Appendix E.
Table 7: Signal Control Results 2015

AM Peak Hour
Approach
V/C Ratio
PM Peak Hour
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
V/C Ratio
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand Ave
0.43
0.22
0.46
6.4
6.1
39.5
75
50
25
0.37
0.50
0.50
7.6
11.2
39.1
75
125
25
SB Grand Ave
0.78
41.4
50
0.82
49.2
100
Intersection
0.42
10.6
0.48
15.4
Reflects critical movement

2
Table 8: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth)

AM Peak Hour
Approach
V/C Ratio
PM Peak Hour
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
V/C Ratio
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
0.50
0.25
4.5
4.1
75
50
0.43
0.56
5.7
9.2
75
125
NB Grand Ave
SB Grand Ave
0.16
0.61
37.0
37.6
25
50
0.20
0.82
34.7
37.6
25
100
Intersection
0.43
8.5
0.54
12.2

11
Table 9: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth)

AM Peak Hour
Approach
V/C Ratio
PM Peak Hour
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
V/C Ratio
th
Average
Delay
(seconds)
50
Percentile
2
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand Ave
SB Grand Ave
0.73
0.37
0.23
0.68
8.7
5.8
36.3
37.1
125
50
25
50
0.65
0.87
0.30
0.87
11.1
22.3
33.5
46.9
150
325
25
150
Intersection
0.56
11.5
0.74
21.2

2
The analysis results identify that signal control would result in LOS B operations based upon 2015
AM and PM peak hour volumes. All movements operate at a LOS D or better. With 2% annual
growth, the intersection is projected to operate at a LOS A during the 2035 AM peak hour and LOS
B during the 2035 PM peak hour. All movements operate under capacity with a LOS D or better.
With 5% annual growth, the intersection is projected to operate at a LOS B during the 2035 AM
peak hour and LOS C during the 2035 PM peak hour. All movements operate at a LOS D or better.
ROUNDABOUT OPERATIONAL ANALYSES

Operational analyses were performed for existing 2015 and future 2035 weekday AM and PM peak
hour volume scenarios. Given the uncertainty regarding future traffic volumes, a single-lane
roundabout was evaluated for both volume scenarios (with 2% and 5% annual growth). A partial
multilane roundabout was also evaluated for 2035 Scenario 2 (5% annual growth) to demonstrate
how a roundabout would operate assuming the widening of SR 44 to four lanes by 2035. The
multilane roundabout included two-lane approaches on SR 44 (left/through lane and through/right
lane) with single-lane entries and exits maintained on the Grand Avenue approaches.
FHWA recently commissioned a study (TOPR 34) to collect new U.S. roundabout capacity data to
update the capacity equations contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010. The FHWA TOPR 34
project has yet to be published; however, the field data collection has been concluded and new
capacity models have been developed based upon the field-observed data. The new TOPR 34 capacity
models were adopted in June 2015 by the Transportation Research Board Committee on Highway
Capacity and Quality of Service for inclusion in a major update to the Highway Capacity Manual
expected to be released in late 2015/early 2016. The TOPR 34 capacity models reflect the most recent
data on US roundabout capacities and were utilized for the roundabout operations analysis
summarized in this report. The study site also has very low minor street volumes, which is a case
where the TOPR 34 model is preferred in order to avoid under-estimating the potential capacity of
the major street entries.
Analysis results for 2015 and 2035 AM and PM peak hour scenarios are summarized in Tables 10, 11
12, and 13, respectively. The operational worksheets are provided in Appendix F.
12
Table 10: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2015

AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand
0.47
0.21
0.04
7.7
4.8
5.4
SB Grand
0.08
-
Approach
Intersection
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
75
25
25
0.39
0.45
0.05
6.6
7.6
4.9
50
75
25
4.2
25
0.19
6.6
25
6.5
7.0
The analysis results identify a LOS A for the intersection with a roundabout during the 2015 AM and
PM peak hours. All movements operate with a v/c ratio of 0.47 or better, indicating ample spare
capacity for future growth.
Table 11: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand
0.61
0.28
0.07
10.4
5.5
6.7
SB Grand
0.12
-
Approach
Intersection
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
125
50
25
0.51
0.58
0.07
8.3
10.2
5.9
75
100
25
4.8
25
0.29
8.9
50
8.4
9.2
As summarized in Table 11, a single-lane roundabout is expected continue to provide acceptable

operations through year 2035 with a 2% annual growth for all movements. The single-lane
roundabout is expected to operate at an overall LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours. All
individual movements operate at a v/c ratio of 0.61 or better and a LOS A or B.
Table 12: Single-Lane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand
0.90
0.42
0.14
26.6
7.4
10.5
SB Grand
0.20
-
Approach
Intersection
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
350
50
25
0.74
0.88
0.14
14.7
26.1
8.6
200
325
25
6.5
25
0.56
18.8
100
19.1
20.0
13
With a 5% annual growth rate applied to all turning movements, a single-lane roundabout continues
to provide acceptable operations with an overall LOS of C during both the AM and PM peak hours.
However, the EB and WB approaches begin to near the desirable v/c thresholds for a single-lane
roundabout as summarized in Table 12. In the AM peak hour, the EB SR 44 approach is estimated to
have a v/c ratio of 0.9 and operate at an LOS D. In the 2035 PM peak, the direction reverses and the
WB approach is estimated to have a v/c ratio of 0.88 with an LOS D. Both the NB and SB Grand
Avenue approaches continue to provide ample spare capacity to accommodate additional growth
(beyond the 5% annual growth included in the Scenario 2 projections) from a future SunRail station or
associated development. The NB Grand Avenue approach operates with a 0.14 v/c ratio in both the
2035 AM and PM peak hours.
As summarized in Table 4, the 5% annual growth assumed in Scenario 2 results in close to 20,000
AADT along SR 44. Volusia County currently identifies an LOS D service volume threshold of 24,200
AADT along SR 44. However, this reflects existing uninterrupted flow conditions and therefore the
service volume for the existing two-lane facility is expected to decrease as the mainline becomes
interrupted at key intersection such as SR 44/Grand Avenue. Therefore, the potential exists for
consideration of widening to a four-lane facility by the time SR 44 reaches volumes similar to those
assumed for Scenario 2.
A roundabout would be compatible with a future four-lane SR 44 by adding an additional through
lane entering, circulating, and exiting in the EB and WB directions. This would result in a partial twolane configuration with single-lane entries and exits remaining on the Grand Avenue approaches. The
operations associated with this scenario are summarized in Table 13. Future conversion to a partial
multilane roundabout configuration would result in all approaches operating with a v/c ratio of 0.46
or better. This compares to v/c ratios of 0.9 on the EB approach and 0.88 on the WB approach with a
single-lane roundabout configuration.
Table 13: Multilane Roundabout Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth)
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
EB SR 44
WB SR 44
NB Grand
0.46
0.21
0.11
7.6
4.8
8.1
NB Grand
0.17
-
Approach
Intersection
th
V/C Ratio
Average
Delay
(seconds)
95
Percentile
1
Queue (ft)
75
25
25
0.38
0.45
0.12
6.5
7.8
6.9
50
75
25
5.6
25
0.46
13.2
75
6.5
7.7
The roundabout analysis results show that a single-lane roundabout is expected to provide adequate
capacity for intersection volumes to at least double (5% annual growth over 20 years) before
expansion to a multilane roundabout might be needed. With appropriate design features, the
roundabout can easily be expanded in the future to tie into a future four-lane SR 44, which would
provide spare capacity for additional future growth.
14
OPERATIONAL COMPARISON
Tables 14, 15, and 16 provide a side-by-side comparison of the operational performance of the signal
alternative versus the roundabout alterative. In most cases the roundabout reduces delays compared
to the signal alternative, particularly for the minor street.
Table 14 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2015 Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS
2015 AM Peak Hour
Approach
2015 PM Peak Hour
Signal
Roundabout
EB SR 44
6.4(A)
WB SR 44
Signal
Roundabout
7.7(A)
7.6(A)
6.6(A)
6.1(A)
4.8(A)
11.2(B)
7.6(A)
NB Grand Ave.
39.5(D)
5.4(A)
39.1(D)
4.9(A)
SB Grand Ave.
41.4(D)
4.2(A)
49.2(D)
6.6(A)
Intersection Avg.
10.6(B)
6.5(A)
15.4(B)
7.0(A)
Notes: Level-of-Service values are shown in brackets (#).
Table 15 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2035 AM Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS
Signal
Scenario 1
Signal
Scenario 2
Single-Lane
Roundabout
Scenario 1
Single-Lane
Roundabout
Scenario 2
Multilane
Roundabout
Scenario 2
EB SR 44
4.5(A)
8.7(A)
10.4(B)
26.6(D)
7.6(A)
WB SR 44
4.1(A)
5.8(A)
5.5(A)
7.4(A)
4.8(A)
NB Grand Ave.
37.0(D)
36.3(D)
6.7(A)
10.5(B)
8.1(A)
SB Grand Ave.
37.6(D)
37.1(D)
4.8(A)
6.5(A)
5.6(A)
Intersection Avg.
8.5(A)
11.5(B)
8.4(A)
19.1(C)
6.5(A)
Approach
Note: Level-of-Service values are shown in brackets (#)
Table 16 Comparison of Signal and Roundabout 2035 PM Peak Hour Average Delay and LOS
Signal
Scenario 1
Signal
Scenario 2
Single-Lane
Roundabout
Scenario 1
Single-Lane
Roundabout
Scenario 2
Multilane
Roundabout
Scenario 2
EB SR 44
5.7(A)
11.1(B)
8.3(A)
14.7(B)
6.5(A)
WB SR 44
9.2(A)
22.3(C)
10.2(B)
26.1(D)
7.8(A)
NB Grand Ave.
34.7(C)
33.5(C)
5.9(A)
8.6(A)
6.9(A)
SB Grand Ave.
37.6(D)
46.9(D)
8.9(A)
18.8(C)
13.2(B)
Intersection Avg.
12.2(B)
21.2(C)
9.2(A)
20.0 (C)
7.7(A)
Approach
Note: Level-of-Service values are shown in brackets (#)
15
SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
In addition to the traffic operations, safety is an important consideration in evaluating possible
intersection improvement alternatives. Roundabouts have proven to be an effective intersection
treatment for improving safety particularly for reducing severe and fatal crashes. Compared to
other intersection control alternatives, roundabouts typically operate with slower operating speeds
that increase time for drivers to react and reduce the likelihood of an injury should a crash occur. The
number of potential conflict points is also reduced when converting from a stop-controlled
intersection to a roundabout. Historical crash data for the study intersection was obtained from the
FDOT CARS Database and Signal Four Analytics for the 5.5-year period from January 2010 through
June 2015.
Table 17. Crash Summary for SR 44 at Grand Avenue (January 2010-June 2015)
Collision Type
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015*
Total
Rear End
Angle
22
Left-Turn
Sideswipe
Fixed Object/ Run Off Road
Other
Total
30
Fatal Crashes
Injury Crashes
18
Property Damage Only
11
Day
21
Night
Wet
Dry
29
*Partial year data- Reflects first 6 months from January through June 2015.
As shown in Table 17, a total of 30 crashes were reported in the period from January 2010 through
June 2015. Eighteen (18) of these crashes (60 percent) resulted in injury and eleven (11) crashes (37
percent) resulted in property-damage-only. One fatal angle crash occurred at this intersection in 2013
and involved a southbound vehicle that failed to yield the right-of-way to an eastbound motorcycle.
The most common crash type reported at this intersection was the angle crash. Of the 30 reported
crashes, twenty-two (22) were angle collisions (73 percent). Fifteen (15) of the angle crashes resulted
in injury, one (1) resulted in a fatality, and six (6) resulted in property damage only. Roundabouts
have been shown to reduce angle crashes and the injuries associated with them. Therefore, a
roundabout is expected to be an effective countermeasure for addressing angle crash patterns at the
study intersection.
16
Number of Crashes
25
20
Fatal
15
Injury
10
PDO
5
0
Exhibit 7: Crashes Types and Severities SR 44 at Grand Avenue
Using crash prediction models identified in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) (Reference 3), the
expected annual number of crashes was predicted for the intersection under stop, signal, and
roundabout control. These calculations are summarized in Table 18. To estimate the number of
crashes per year that could be expected under roundabout control, a crash modification factor (CMF)
from the HSM for the conversion of a stop-controlled intersection into a rural single-lane roundabout
was applied to the prediction for a two-way stop controlled intersection; these predictions are
summarized in Table 18.
Table 18. Expected Annual Crash Frequency by Traffic Control Alternative

Expected Fatal
and Injury
Crashes
Expected Property
Damage Only
Crashes
Total Expected
Crashes per Year
1.72
1.71
3.43
Signal Control
1.02
(41% decrease)
1.97
(15% increase)
2.99
(13% decrease)
Single-Lane Roundabout
0.22
(87% decrease)
0.77
(55% decrease)
0.99
(71% decrease)
Traffic Control Alternative

Existing Traffic Control
(Two-Way Stop-Control)
The use of roundabout control to replace the existing two-way stop controlled intersection has the
potential to reduce the predicted number of total crashes by 71 percent and injury crashes by 87
percent (Reference 3). This results in a reduction of 2.44 total crashes per year, the majority of which
are severe injury or fatal crashes.
Estimates for expected crashes under signal control assume addition of NB and SB left-turn lanes on
Grand Avenue as well as the addition of intersection lighting.
17
CONCEPTUAL GEOMETRIC DESIGN

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The following discussion lists important features that may impact roundabout concept development:
Right-of-Way: A Right-Of-Way (ROW) map was provided by FDOT. The ROW map is dated
from 1939 and indicates a total of 200 feet of ROW along SR 44. Originally, SR 44 was
constructed such that the ROW line was positioned 75 feet to the north and 125 feet to the
south of the roadway centerline. However, a previous bridge reconstruction over the railroad
tracks west of the study intersection resulted in a re-alignment of SR 44 on the west leg of the
study intersection. Therefore, the original centerline is no longer available for use in
determining the position of the ROW lines. The ROW positioning was estimated based upon
available information; however, more detailed ROW verification is needed prior to a project
being further advanced. No ROW information was available for Grand Avenue.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Considerations: There are no sidewalks or marked pedestrian

crossings near the intersection. However, 5 pedestrian crossing movements and 12 bicycle
crossing movements were recorded during the latest 8 hour turning movement counts. This
indicates the presence of multimodal activity.
Transit Considerations: There are no fixed transit routes serving the intersection.
Adjacent Property Access: Roundabout placement will need to consider potential impacts to
the access of the BP gas station located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection. There
are existing driveway openings to the property along SR 44 (300 feet west of the intersection)
and Grand Avenue (250 feet north of the intersection).
Vertical Geometry and Drainage Considerations: The following list outlines observations
from a field review conducted in June 2015.
o SR 44 is relatively flat through the study intersection at Grand Avenue, with a slope
towards the east. A crest vertical curve is located approximately 1000 feet west of the
study intersection.
o Swales were identified on both sides of SR 44 and Grand Avenue, shown in Exhibit 8.
No drainage culverts under the SR 44 or Grand Avenue approaches were identified in
the field.
18
Northwest Intersection Quadrant
Northeast Intersection Quadrant
Southwest Intersection Quadrant
Southeast Intersection Quadrant
Exhibit 8: Drainage Areas at the Study Intersection
Adjacent Utilities: A preliminary review of above ground utilities was completed during the
June 2015 field review. Photos of selected utilities are illustrated in Exhibit 9. The
approximate utility locations are illustrated in Exhibit 10. Utilities that were identified include:
o Underground AT&T and Bellsouth markers are located in the northwest quadrant of
the study intersection (Top right image in Exhibit 9).
o A fire hydrant is located in front of the gas station on the north side of SR 44, as
shown in the top right image in Exhibit 9.
o Above ground water valves and/or backflow devices are also present in front of the
gas station, illustrated in the bottom left image of Exhibit 9.
o Above ground utility lines were observed along the west side of the Grand Avenue
approaches and the south side of the eastbound SR 44 approach, shown in bottom
right image of Exhibit 9.
o Utility poles are located in the northwest and southeast intersection quadrants.
19
Grand Avenue
Exhibit 9: Field Observed Utilities
Underground
Utility Pole
Water Valves
AT & T Cable
Marker
and Fire Hydrant
Above Ground Utility Lines
Utility Pole
Exhibit 10: Approximate Location of Utilities (additional utilities may be present)

20
ROUNDABOUT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

In order to assess the geometric feasibility of a roundabout at the study intersection, a conceptual
roundabout design was developed in Microstation to a level that would allow initial screening and
discussion of potential impacts. The concept was developed in accordance with the design principles
outlined in the NCHRP Report 672, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide 2nd Edition (Reference 4).
The concepts presented in this memorandum represent one possible option for the roundabout
horizontal geometry. Roundabout design is based upon a set of fundamental principles which guide
the design process. These principles include: (1) achieving speed control at entry, (2) providing
appropriate lane numbers and arrangements, (3) appropriately aligning the natural path of vehicles,
(4) accommodating the design vehicle, (5) accommodating non-motorized users, and (6) providing
adequate sight distance and visibility. Alternative sizes, shapes, placement, and approach alignments
may also be acceptable provided that they result in a design that meets these fundamental principles.
The following bullet-point discussion summarizes the key considerations in the development of the
conceptual designs. The features shown in the concept designs, and discussed below, were developed
based upon an iterative process to balance the various roundabout design principles with impacts to
adjacent properties. Consideration was also given to allowing flexibility for future expansion from a
single-lane configuration to a partial multilane configuration with future widening of SR 44.
Design Environment and Context
Rural high-speed environment that is expected to transition into more of a suburban

environment in the future as development expands to the west of DeLand.
Emphasis on maximizing safety performance of the intersection.
o Distinct pattern of angle crashes resulting in injury due to high mainline speeds.
Intersection is in the vicinity of a future Sunrail commuter rail station. Planned Transit
Oriented Development around the station may increase local area traffic long-term.
Potential for a future trail along Grand Avenue that would cross SR 44 at the study
intersection. Design features to accommodate the future trail crossing were incorporated.
Speed Control
Posted speed of 55 mph along SR 44. Nearest signal is approximately 1.4 miles to east.
Grand Avenue has a 35 mph posted speed north of the intersection and 30 mph posted speed
to the south of SR 44.
Reduced vehicle speeds entering the intersection is one of the fundamental design criteria for
roundabouts. The designs were developed based upon the fastest path criteria from NCHRP
Report 672. The design concepts were developed to maintain fastest path speeds entering the
roundabout of 25 mph or less for each of the single-lane approaches.
21
Design Vehicle Considerations
The roundabout design concepts are assumed to require accommodation of a WB-62FL design
vehicle for all movements at the intersection. Each of the roundabout concepts developed
were checked using the AutoTurn software to verify accommodation of a WB-62FL design
vehicle.
Along Grand Avenue, north of SR 44, trucks are prohibited. However, access for deliveries to
the BP Gas Station in the NE quadrant is assumed to continue to require WB-62FL
accommodation at the north entry and exit of the roundabout. Additional coordination with
the gas station owner and/or collection of additional vehicle class data along Grand Avenue is
recommended to verify design vehicle needs to and from Grand Avenue. If a smaller design
vehicle can be determined to be appropriate for Grand Avenue, then it may be possible to
further adjust the roundabout geometry to minimize impacts in the corners of the
intersection.
Adjacent Property Access
Roundabout placement considered potential impacts to the access points of the gas station in
the NW quadrant of the intersection. The concepts were developed to maintain full access
onto Grand Avenue while converting the SR 44 access to right-in/right-out.
Non-Motorized Users
Pedestrian crossings are generally positioned one car length (20 to 25 feet) behind the yield
line. Splitter island lengths and widths are designed to provide sufficient space for an
appropriately sized pedestrian refuge.
A future trail planned along Grand Avenue would cross SR 44 at the study intersection. The
location of the crossing is currently unknown. However, the splitter islands on both the east
and west legs of the intersection have been designed to accommodate connection to the
future trail. The reduced roundabout speeds and crossings distances improve safety for
existing pedestrians and a future trail connection. The wide splitter islands also provide a
refuge for pedestrians in order to cross each direction of SR 44 traffic independently. While
not required, supplemental devices such as rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) could
also be considered as an optional treatment to enhance visibility of the future trail crossing.
Given the high speeds and limited shoulder width, bicyclists riding on SR 44 are expected to
be more experienced riders. Bicycle ramps are sometimes considered at roundabouts to
allow riders to exit onto an adjacent multiuse path to navigate around the roundabout. These
ramps are generally considered optional at single-lane roundabouts. Given the expected rider
experience level, relatively simple navigation through a single-lane roundabout, and the
reduction in vehicle speeds (which are close to the speeds of a bicyclist) no bicycle ramps
were included in these initial concepts. However, ramps could be further considered if desired
by FDOT or Volusia County.
22
Geometric Design Features

The geometric features of the roundabout were developed based upon the design considerations
outlined above. The single-lane roundabout concept is illustrated in Exhibit 11. Due to uncertainty
regarding future growth, consideration was given to making the roundabout compatible with a future
four-lane widening of SR 44. Exhibit 12 illustrates a roundabout concept with future outside widening
to a partial two-lane configuration.
A 160 foot inscribed circle diameter (ICD) was selected for the single-lane roundabout. This is
larger than required for the single-lane configuration. However, it is sized to provide an
appropriately sized central island and other design features for a future 180-foot diameter
partial two-lane configuration. The ultimate partial two-lane roundabout concept was initially
developed. Lanes were then taken away to achieve the opening-year single-lane
configuration. By developing the concepts in this manner, the roundabout geometry in the
opening year is set up for ease of future expansion with minimal reconstruction.
The roundabout was centered within the ROW to minimize the need for additional corner
clips. No ROW is expected to be needed on the north side of SR 44 for the initial single-lane
roundabout. Along Grand Avenue to the south of SR 44, ROW widths appear to be relatively
narrow and may require corner clips. However, ROW information is incomplete along Grand
Avenue and additional investigation is required.
Centering the roundabout within the ROW creates a natural offset-left approach alignment on
the EB entry. Realignment of the WB SR 44 approach, as illustrated in Exhibit 11, is needed to
provide adequate speed control. The roundabout is centered on the existing NB and SB Grand
Avenue Centerline.
Along SR 44, splitter islands approximately 500 feet in length were utilized. Longer splitter
islands are desirable in higher speed environments to change the cross-section and alert
drivers in advance of the upcoming intersection. A minimum length of 200 feet long is
recommended in a higher speed environment. The 500-foot islands shown in Exhibits 11 and
12 provide additional length due to the vertical curve to the west and horizontal curve to the
east. 500 feet is approximately equivalent to the stopping sight distance needed for a 55 mph
condition. On the east leg, the splitter island length could be reduced to approximately 350
feet to avoid impacts to the residential driveway on the north side of SR 44.
Along Grand Avenue, 110-foot splitter islands were utilized for the initial single-lane
roundabout in order to maintain 100 foot long splitter islands in the future when the
roundabout is expanded to a partial two-lane configuration. The 110 foot islands meet the
desirable length identified in NCHRP Report 672 based upon the lower posted 30 and 35
mph posted speeds. Full access to the BP gas station is maintained to the north of the
intersection with the splitter island taper ending prior to the BP driveway.
A 20-foot circulating width is provided for the single-lane configuration. 16 to 20 feet is the
typical range of circulating width for a single-lane roundabout. Lane widths flare through the
entries and exits to match the 12-foot approach lanes to the circulatory roadway width.
23
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
EXISTING 200' R/W

(APPROX.)
SR
44
BP GAS
ON
STATI
SR
44
G RAND AVE
EXISTING 200' R/W

(APPROX.)
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Page 24
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
FINANCIAL PROJECT ID
EXHIBIT
SR 44 AT GRAND AVENUE
CONCEPTUAL ROUNDABOUT
SINGLE LANE CONFIGURATION
NO.
11
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
EXISTING 200' R/W

(APPROX.)
SR
44
BP GAS
ON
STATI
SR
44
G RAND AVE
EXISTING 200' R/W

(APPROX.)
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
Page 25
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
CONCEPTUAL ROUNDABOUT
TWO LANE CONFIGURATION
NO.
12
BENEFIT-COST EVALUATION
An Opinion of Probable Cost was developed for the roundabout alternative based upon current FDOT
unit costs. Concept-level costs for design and construction of the single-lane roundabout
configuration (illustrated in Exhibit 11) are approximately $1.42 million, as summarized in Table 19. A
traffic signal with additional NB and SB left-turn lanes and intersection lighting was assumed to cost
approximately $700,000 for design, ROW, and construction.
No survey information was available for use in this study and therefore all costs for vertical design
elements and drainage are preliminary, with contingency applied for unknowns. Possible sub-surface
utility impacts are unknown and no utility relocations were included in the cost estimate. Professional
services for design plan preparation and CEI were assumed to represent 20% of the overall
construction estimate. No cost was included for a PD&E phase at this location. No ROW information
was available along Grand Avenue for this study. However, possible ROW impacts are anticipated.
Additional details and documentation of assumptions are provided in Appendix J.
Table 19: Planning-Level Costs

Project Engineering and CEI
Right-of-Way
Construction
Total
Roundabout Alternative
$220,000
$100,000
$1,100,000
$1,420,000
Signal Alternative
$100,000
$100,000
$500,000
$700,000
As part of Step 2 of the FDOT roundabout feasibility study process, estimates of the life cycle benefits
was completed for the roundabout compared to the existing stop control and a signal alternatives.
The results are summarized in Table 20. Detailed calculations are provided in Appendix J.
Table 20: Monetized Life Cycle (2015-2035) Benefit (Roundabout Compared to Traffic Signal)
Performance Measure
Safety Benefit of a Roundabout
Delay Reduction Benefit of a Roundabout
Total Benefits
Added Operations & Maintenance
Costs of a Roundabout
Added Capital Costs of a Roundabout
Total Costs
Roundabout Compared to
Existing Stop Control
$8,178,512
$(101,368)
$8,077,144
Roundabout Compared to
Signal Control
$4,425,275
$286,887
$4,712,162
$40,913
(41,161)
$1,420,000
$1,460,913
$720,000
$678,839
5.5
6.9
Life Cycle Benefit/Cost Ratio
26
The safety analysis assumed the lower 2% annual growth through 2035. This yields a lower overall
volume exposure at the intersection and thus a more conservative (low) estimate of the roundabout
safety benefits versus the signal option. The roundabout is anticipated to provide $8.18 million in lifecycle safety benefit versus the existing two-way stop control. Given that there was a recent fatality at
the study intersection, this estimate is again conservative (low) due to the fact that the FDOT
benefit/cost tool uses a combined cost for severe (fatal and injury) crashes and therefore elimination
of the higher cost of the recent fatal crash is not explicitly included in the benefit calculations.
Compared to the signal option (which includes intersection lighting and construction of NB and SB
left-turn lanes), the roundabout is expected to provide approximately $4.43 million in safety benefit.
The roundabout is anticipated to result in a slight dis-benefit in overall intersection delay compared
to the existing two-way stop control given that the mainline movement is currently uncontrolled.
However, given that the TWSC is not expected to provide sufficient operations through the design
year 2035, some form of change in traffic control will be needed. Compared to the signal option, the
single-lane roundabout provides a lower peak-hour delay. Additional off-peak delay benefits, not
quantified as part of the analysis, would also be expected with the roundabout alternative.
The net benefit from the roundabout alternative compared to the stop controlled alternative is
estimated to be $8.1 million and $4.7 million compared to the signal control alternative over the 20year lifespan. Overall, the roundabout alternative results in a life-cycle benefit/cost of 5.5 compared
to the existing two-way stop control (no-build) and 6.9 compared to the traffic signal alternative. This
suggests that long-term benefits of a roundabout outweigh the higher initial capital costs of a signal
alternative and justifies the cost of a roundabout improvement compared to the no-build alternative.
27
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based upon the various operational, safety, and geometric considerations documented in this report,
a single-lane roundabout is expected to be a feasible alternative at the study intersection. A
roundabout serves as a countermeasure to specifically address the pattern of angle crashes, which
includes a recent fatal crash. A roundabout is anticipated to reduce total crashes by 71% and injury
crashes by 87% compared to the existing two-way stop control. It is also expected to provide better
safety performance than the signalized alternative.
A single-lane roundabout is anticipated to operate at LOS A based upon existing volumes and
provide capacity for volumes to at least double prior to needing expansion to a partial two lane
configuration. The roundabout results in a slight increase in overall average delay compared to the
existing TWSC, given that the mainline SR 44 is currently uncontrolled. However, the roundabout
provides generally lower delays than the signal alternative.
Over a 20-year period, a roundabout is expected to provide over $8 million in safety benefit over the
existing TWSC. The roundabout is also expected to provide nearly $5 million in combined operational
and safety benefit compared to the signal alternative. A roundabout is expected to result in a lifecycle benefit/cost ratio of 6.9 compared to the signal alternative and 5.5 compared to the existing
two-way stop control.
Based upon the various considerations documented in this report, a roundabout is recommended as
the preferred alternative to be advanced for further consideration.
28
REFERENCES
1. Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 2010.
2. Transportation Research Board, NCHRP Report 572, Roundabouts in the United States, 2007.
3. American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, Highway Safety Manual,
2010.
4. Transportation Research Board, NCHRP Report 672, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide
2nd Edition, 2010.
29
Appendix A Traffic Count Data and

Historical Volume Trends
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUMMARY OF VEHICLE MOVEMENTS

Location:
North/South Street:
East/West Street:
Observer(s):
Weather:
Road Conditions:
Remarks:
Section:
MP:
City:
County:
Date:
SR 44 & Grand Avenue

Grand Avenue
SR 44
DG
Sunny
Dry
SB Street Name:
R
79070
2.45
DeLand
Volusia
11/12/2014
Grand Avenue
L
T
R
1
1
1
1
R
T
L
EB Street Name:
WB Street Name:
SR 44
SR 44
1
NB Street Name:
Time
Northbound
Grand Avenue
Total
Southbound
Eastbound
Total
Westbound
Begin/End
Total
Total
N/S
Total
Total
E/W
7-8
13
10
25
29
17
41
87
112
38
446
12
496
239
10
254
750
8-9
12
14
30
24
19
38
81
111
39
389
12
440
224
13
242
682
12-1
12
13
29
12
14
48
74
103
34
302
15
351
337
24
361
712
1-2
10
19
18
23
51
92
111
33
277
10
320
312
20
335
655
2-3
14
10
25
21
18
41
80
105
38
277
14
329
300
19
320
649
4-5
13
16
33
23
19
86
128
161
47
347
15
409
397
17
417
826
5-6
15
19
35
13
23
86
122
157
53
381
15
449
463
27
493
942
6-7
17
28
14
12
42
68
96
30
251
289
321
17
338
627
Total
105
100
19
224
154
145
433
732
956
312
2670
101
3083
20
2593
147
2760
5843
PEDESTRIAN VOLUME SHEET

Location:
North/South Street:
East/West Street:
Observer(s):
Weather:
Road Conditions:
Remarks:
Section:
MP:
City:
County:
Date:

Grand Avenue
SR 44
DG
Sunny
Good
SB Street Name:
79070
2.454
DeLand
Volusia
11/12/2014
Grand Avenue
78
89
121
12
23
45
56
67
Total
78
78
89
89
121
121
12
12
23
EB Street Name:
45
SR 44
5-6
6-7
Total
23
WB Street Name:
45
SR 44
5-6
6-7
Total
78
89
121
12
23
45
56
67
Total
NB Street Name: Grand Avenue
BICYCLE VOLUME SHEET

Location:
North/South Street:
East/West Street:
Observer(s):
Weather:
Road Conditions:
Remarks:
Section:
MP:
City:
County:
Date:

Grand Avenue
SR 44
DG
Sunny
Good
SB Street Name:
79070
2.454
DeLand
Volusia
11/12/2014
Grand Avenue
78
89
121
12
23
45
56
67
Total
78
78
89
89
121
121
12
12
23
EB Street Name:
45
SR 44
5-6
6-7
Total
23
WB Street Name:
45
SR 44
5-6
6-7
Total
78
89
121
12
23
45
56
67
Total
NB Street Name: Grand Avenue
AspireonConsultingGroup,Inc.
821PalmettoTerrace
Oviedo,FL32765
Date:
November12,2014(Wednesday)
City:
DeLand
Location:
SR44&GrandAvenue
County:
Volusia
AutosTrucksTurns
GrandAvenue
SR44
Northbound
Southbound
L
Peds
TOT
N/S
TOTAL
15
23
26
10
16
21
18
24
Peds
TOT
7:00AM
7:15AM
7:30AM
StartTime
Eastbound
L
Westbound
TOT
Peds
TOT
E/W
TOTAL
Grand
Total
99
64
66
165
191
132
64
67
199
220
120
58
61
181
205
246
Peds
90
13
116
110
7:45AM
11
14
30
41
10
130
145
53
60
205
Total
13
10
25
29
17
41
87
112
38
446
12
496
239
10
254
750
862
8:00AM
16
23
13
125
144
48
53
197
220
8:15AM
11
10
18
29
13
75
90
57
59
149
178
8:30AM
19
24
96
105
66
72
177
201
194
8:45AM
10
12
28
35
93
101
53
58
159
Total
12
14
30
24
19
38
81
111
39
389
12
440
224
13
242
682
793
12:00PM
13
13
18
31
78
91
88
96
187
218
12:15PM
10
17
20
12
76
89
85
91
180
200
12:30PM
12
20
26
88
99
85
92
191
217
180
12:45PM
13
19
26
60
72
79
82
154
Total
12
13
29
12
14
48
74
103
34
302
15
351
337
24
361
712
815
1:00PM
18
30
37
12
79
96
79
82
178
215
1:15PM
13
26
29
62
73
78
82
155
184
1:30PM
16
20
76
81
76
83
164
184
183
1:45PM
11
20
25
60
70
79
88
158
Total
10
19
18
23
51
92
111
33
277
10
320
312
20
335
655
766
2:00PM
17
25
30
67
80
70
72
152
182
2:15PM
12
10
20
32
12
65
80
80
86
166
198
2:30PM
18
22
77
89
75
83
172
194
180
2:45PM
10
17
21
10
68
80
75
79
159
Total
14
10
25
21
18
41
80
105
38
277
14
329
300
19
320
649
754
4:00PM
22
29
38
12
73
85
104
108
193
231
4:15PM
17
26
31
82
92
102
106
198
229
4:30PM
10
18
29
39
14
105
127
93
101
228
267
4:45PM
10
29
44
53
13
87
105
98
102
207
260
987
Total
13
16
33
23
19
86
128
161
47
347
15
409
397
17
417
826
5:00PM
10
29
42
52
14
101
123
121
11
132
255
307
5:15PM
22
31
40
11
90
105
120
126
231
271
5:30PM
10
15
21
31
18
99
119
122
129
248
279
5:45PM
20
28
34
10
91
102
100
106
208
242
1099
Total
15
19
35
13
23
86
122
157
53
381
15
449
463
27
493
942
6:00PM
18
25
76
85
87
93
178
203
6:15PM
11
18
23
70
79
84
85
164
187
6:30PM
15
20
27
57
65
76
81
146
173
6:45PM
12
21
11
48
60
74
79
139
160
Total
17
28
14
12
42
68
96
30
251
289
321
17
338
627
723
GrandTotal
Approach%
Total%
105
46.9
1.5
100
44.6
1.5
19
8.5
0.3
224
154
0
2.3
145
0
2.1
433
0
6.4
732
956
2670
86.6
39.3
101
3.3
1.5
2593
93.9
38.1
147
5.3
2.2
5843
6799
45.3
20
0.7
0.3
2760
10.8
312
10.1
4.6
3083
3.3
Autos
%Autos
105
100
100
0
18
94.7
223
99.6
151
0
144
0
424
0
719
0
310
99.4
2564
96
101
100
2975
96.5
19
95
2525
97.4
143
0
2687
97.4
5843
6604
97.1
Trucks
%Trucks
0
0
0
0
1
5.3
1
0.4
3
0
1
0
9
0
13
0
2
0.6
106
4
0
0
108
3.5
1
5
68
2.6
4
0
73
2.6
956
40.6
195
2.9
TwentyFour(24)HourCountSummaryforSR44andGrandAvenue
SR44
TimeBegin
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00PM
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00AM
1:00
2:00
Total
Directional
Split
EBDirection
0
30
88
276
480
533
441
355
390
346
355
335
338
380
425
409
250
113
90
54
48
28
12
12
5,788
WBDirection
8
11
33
116
224
202
210
182
260
244
287
357
290
374
383
391
249
169
131
111
57
35
17
16
4,357
57%
43%
GrandAvenue
E/WTotal
8
41
121
392
704
735
651
537
650
590
642
692
628
754
808
800
499
282
221
165
105
63
29
28
NBDirection
2
1
3
11
26
34
8
6
7
7
2
16
8
9
4
4
4
0
10
4
1
0
0
0
167
SBDirection
2
3
10
41
85
83
59
60
66
75
85
112
91
106
134
90
51
32
33
23
16
10
7
3
1277
13%
88%
10,145
GrandTotal
N/STotal
4
4
13
52
111
117
67
66
73
82
87
128
99
115
138
94
55
32
43
27
17
10
7
3
12
45
134
444
815
852
718
603
723
672
729
820
727
869
946
894
554
314
264
192
122
73
36
31
1444
11,589
Volusia County 2014 Average Annual Daily Traffic & Historical Counts
Road Name
SR A1A - Ocean Shore Blvd.
SR A1A - Atlantic Ave. North
SR A1A - Atlantic Ave. South
SR A1A - Dunlawton Ave.
Limits (From - To)

Westmayer Pl. to N. 17th St.
N. 17th St. to SR 100
SR 100 to S. 23rd St.
S. 23rd St. to Volusia Co. Line
Flagler Co Line to High Bridge Rd
High Bridge Rd to Ormond Mall
Ormond Mall to Neptune Ave
Neptune Ave to SR 40 (Granada Blvd.)
SR 40 to Harvard Dr.
Harvard Dr. to SR430/Seabreeze Blvd.)
SR 430/Seabreeze Blvd. to SR430/Oakr
SR 430/Oakridge Blvd. to US 92/ISB
US 92 to Silver Beach Ave.
Silver Beach Ave. to Florida Shores
Florida Shores to Van Ave.
Van Ave. to SRA1A/Dunlawton Ave.
SR A1A/Atlantic Ave. to US 1
Count
Station
Number
0246-F
1002-F
1001-F
0010-F
368
368
174
5125
5124
5121
5117
5115
5112
436
5179
477
427
2014
SIS
Facility
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
SR 5A - Nova Rd.
US 1 to Wilmette Ave.
Wilmette Ave. to SR 40
SR 40 to Hand Ave.
Hand Ave. to LPGA Blvd.
LPGA Blvd. to SR 430/Mason Blvd
SR 430/Mason Ave. to US 92/ISB
US 92/ISB to Bellevue Ave.
Bellevue Ave. to SR 400/Beville Rd.
SR 400/Beville Rd. to Big Tree
Big Tree to Madeline Ave.
Madeline Ave to SR 421/Dunlawton Ave.
SR 421/Dunlawton Ave. to Spruce Creek
Spruce Creek Rd. to US 1
459
518
510
528
366
5088
5090
348
363
363
1017
1016
458
SR 11
SR 11
SR 11
CR 304 (in Flagler Co.) to SR 40

SR 40 to CR 15A
CR 15A to US 17
SR 15A
SR 15A
SR 15A
SR 15A
SR 15A
SR 15A
SR 15A
US 17 to Glenwood Rd.
Glenwood Rd. to CR 92
CR 92 to Plymouth Ave.
Plymouth Ave. to SR 44/New York Ave.
SR 44/New York Ave. to Beresford Ave.
Beresford Ave. to New Hampshire Ave.
New Hampshire Ave. to US 17/92
466
465
537
463
474
6
1005
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
SR 40
W. of the St. Johns River

Lake County to Emporia Rd.
Emporia Rd. to US 17
US 17 to SR 11
SR 11 to Pinto Lane
Pinto Lane to Rima Ridge Rd (urban bou
Rima Ridge Rd to Tymber Creek Rd.
Tymber Creek Rd. to I-95
I-95 to Clyde Morris Blvd.
Clyde Morris Blvd. to SR 5A/Nova Rd.
SR5A/Nova Rd. to US 1
US 1 to Halifax Ave.
Halifax Ave. to SR A1A
0050-L
533
344
530
530
523
499
499
522
489
1020
171
5128
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44
SR 44/SR A1A/S Causeway
SR 44/SR A1A/S Causeway
SR 44/SR A1A/3rd Ave/Atlantic
W. of the St. Johns River

Lake Co. to Shell Rd.
Shell Rd. to Grand Ave.
Grand Ave. to Old New York/Hazen Rd.
Old New York/Hazen Rd. to SR 15A/Spr
SR 15A/Spring Garden Ave. to Stone St.
Stone St. to Clara Ave.
Clara Ave. to Amelia Ave.
Amelia Ave. to Hill Ave.
Hill Ave. to Blue Lake Ave.
Blue Lake Ave. to Kepler Rd.
Kepler Rd. to Summit Ave.
Summit Ave. to I-4
I-4 to Prevatt Ave.
Prevatt Ave. to Pioneer Tr.
Pioneer Tr. to SR 415/CR 415
SR 415/CR 415 to Samsula Dr.
Samsula Dr. to Airport Rd
Airport Rd. to I-95
I-95 to Mission Dr
Mission Dr. to Live Oak
Live Oak to Peninsula Ave.
Peninsula Ave. to Saxon Dr.
Saxon Dr. to 6th Ave
0010-L
1007
1007
290
274
447
5012
5015
5019
80
19
259
538
480
41
1011
1012
423
423
515
514
207
5180
5043
SR 44 (Business) - Canal St.

SR 44 (Business) - Canal St.
SR 44 (Old) - N Causeway
SR 44/Lytle St to Pioneer Trail

Pioneer Tr. to US 1
Riverside Dr to Peninsula
Cycle 10-2
2014
Evacuation
Route
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Roadway
Maintaining
Agency
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
2014
Roadway on
County's
Thoroughfare
2014
No. of
Lanes
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Posted
Speed
45
45
35
45
55
55
40
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
2005
AADT
6,700
8,500
10,100
7,300
10,500
10,500
17,600
17,400
19,700
21,000
17,700
16,000
14,600
16,000
15,600
17,400
28,500
2006
AADT
6,100
7,500
8,700
6,000
16,300
16,300
16,500
18,400
19,100
20,000
16,700
15,400
13,300
19,500
13,900
18,800
29,000
2007
AADT
5,600
6,800
7,800
5,500
17,100
17,100
16,600
18,100
19,800
24,000
24,300
21,500
15,400
18,900
14,900
13,000
29,500
2008
AADT
4,900
5,600
7,700
4,600
17,300
17,300
17,500
17,100
17,700
20,000
16,600
23,500
13,300
10,500
16,900
16,700
30,000
2009
AADT
6,000
6,400
9,200
6,000
15,100
15,100
16,400
17,900
19,500
18,500
17,900
17,400
12,800
11,400
11,800
15,800
27,000
2010
AADT
4,800
6,000
7,700
5,000
15,700
15,700
15,800
16,800
16,500
17,000
19,800
17,800
12,200
10,100
16,100
15,500
24,500
2011
AADT
5,000
6,200
7,600
4,700
15,500
15,500
18,500
15,600
16,600
17,100
20,800
15,200
11,200
10,700
13,800
13,700
27,000
2012
AADT
4,700
5,900
7,700
4,600
15,300
15,300
15,100
12,300
17,600
16,400
17,100
16,500
12,000
10,400
11,400
11,200
26,000
2013
AADT
5,200
6,500
8,800
5,100
15,800
15,800
15,400
14,000
16,400
17,800
15,200
17,300
12,700
12,500
12,800
12,500
26,000
2014
Vol. Co.
2014
Allowable
AADT*
LOS
5,700
D
6,200
D
8,900
D
5,400
D
15,500
D
15,500
D
15,700
D
16,600
D
15,600
D
18,200
D
16,300
D
15,300
D
11,900
D
11,900
D
13,200
D
11,800
D
28,000
D
DAILY
2014
LOS
Capacity
24,200
17,700
17,700
24,200
24,200
24,200
24,200
24,200
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
DAILY
2014
V/C
Ratio
0.24
0.35
0.50
0.22
0.64
0.64
0.65
0.69
0.39
0.46
0.41
0.38
0.30
0.30
0.33
0.30
0.70
DAILY
2014
LOS
B
C
D
B
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
D
C
C
C
C
D
PEAK 2Way
2014
LOS
Capacity
2,170
1,600
1,330
2,170
2,170
2,170
2,170
2,170
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
2,920
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.00
0.51
1.15
2.06
1.47
1.22
1.07
1.00
0.70
1.61
1.30
1.08
1.44
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
4
4
4
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
50
50
50
45
45
45
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_6L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_5L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
Principal Arterial - Other - Urban

11,800
21,500
23,500
25,000
32,500
36,000
41,000
40,000
30,000
30,000
25,000
23,500
16,400
15,900
24,500
29,000
31,000
31,500
35,000
38,500
39,000
30,000
30,000
26,000
25,500
17,400
14,700
26,000
29,500
31,000
31,000
35,000
38,000
38,000
28,500
28,500
26,000
24,500
16,900
14,000
24,500
29,000
30,500
32,500
32,000
38,000
37,000
29,000
29,000
26,500
24,500
17,100
13,400
23,000
27,500
29,000
30,000
33,500
34,500
34,500
27,500
27,500
26,500
25,000
16,700
12,800
23,000
26,500
29,000
29,500
32,000
35,000
35,000
28,500
28,500
27,000
25,500
16,900
12,800
24,000
24,000
28,000
27,500
30,000
32,500
34,000
27,000
27,000
26,500
23,500
16,800
12,300
23,500
28,500
28,500
27,000
30,000
32,000
33,000
25,500
25,500
25,500
25,000
16,300
12,400
23,500
27,500
26,000
25,500
31,000
33,000
33,000
26,500
26,500
26,000
24,500
16,800
13,100
23,500
25,500
26,500
26,500
31,500
32,500
34,500
26,500
26,500
27,000
26,000
17,900
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
39,800
59,900
59,900
59,900
59,900
59,900
59,900
59,900
59,900
49,850
39,800
39,800
39,800
0.33
0.39
0.43
0.44
0.44
0.53
0.54
0.58
0.44
0.53
0.68
0.65
0.45
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
3,580
5,390
5,390
5,390
5,390
5,390
5,390
5,390
5,390
4,490
3,580
3,580
3,580
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
2.42
9.19
2.45
2
2
2
60
60
55
N+S
N+S
N+S
RUA_UFH_2W_2L_U_0L
RUA_UFH_2W_2L_U_0L
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
Principal Arterial - Other - Rural

3,100
3,200
7,200
3,000
3,000
7,200
3,200
3,100
6,800
2,600
2,700
6,900
2,400
2,600
6,400
2,200
2,600
6,000
2,000
2,700
6,100
2,200
2,700
6,000
2,100
2,800
6,300
2,400
2,900
6,200
C
C
D
6,300
6,300
24,200
0.38
0.46
0.26
B
B
B
590
590
2,170
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.11
1.20
0.83
1.01
1.00
0.59
1.17
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
50
50
50
45
45
45
45
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL

11,600
15,000
24,000
26,000
25,500
22,500
22,000
10,900
13,700
23,000
27,000
24,500
24,000
22,500
11,400
15,100
23,500
26,000
24,500
22,000
22,000
10,600
13,800
22,500
26,500
23,500
21,000
21,000
10,800
14,000
22,000
25,500
22,500
20,000
21,000
10,700
13,800
22,000
23,500
22,500
19,200
19,100
10,300
13,800
22,500
21,900
21,500
21,000
19,700
10,200
13,100
18,900
23,000
21,000
20,500
19,000
10,600
13,600
21,500
23,000
22,000
21,000
20,500
10,500
13,400
20,800
25,000
22,000
20,100
21,000
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
37,900
37,900
37,900
37,900
37,900
37,900
37,900
0.28
0.35
0.55
0.66
0.58
0.53
0.55
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.86
5.58
6.69
6.83
1.25
4.36
0.79
1.58
1.06
1.33
1.11
0.37
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
45
55
55
60
60
60
60
50
50
50
45
35
35
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL

Principal Arterial - Other - Urban/Rural
8,800
7,300
6,900
5,600
5,600
13,000
28,500
28,500
38,500
37,000
31,500
39,500
23,000
8,700
7,600
7,500
5,800
5,800
13,500
28,000
28,000
36,500
36,000
33,000
35,500
23,000
8,300
8,700
8,300
6,000
6,000
11,200
28,500
28,500
38,000
36,000
32,500
34,500
25,000
7,200
7,600
7,200
5,800
5,800
10,800
26,500
26,500
37,500
35,000
32,000
36,500
24,000
7,500
7,700
7,000
5,700
5,700
10,800
29,000
29,000
35,500
33,500
32,000
34,500
22,000
7,100
6,800
6,500
6,000
6,000
10,000
27,000
27,000
36,000
33,000
29,500
34,000
19,500
6,800
7,000
6,500
4,800
4,800
10,600
27,000
27,000
36,000
33,000
30,000
34,000
20,500
6,400
6,800
6,600
5,400
5,400
9,400
26,500
26,500
33,000
33,000
30,000
33,500
18,000
7,300
6,300
5,900
5,500
5,500
9,400
27,000
27,000
33,500
32,000
30,000
34,000
18,900
8,000
6,800
6,200
5,600
5,600
10,000
27,000
27,000
34,500
33,000
30,000
31,500
19,500
C
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
16,400
16,400
16,400
16,400
16,400
37,900
37,900
37,900
39,800
39,800
39,800
32,400
32,400
0.49
0.41
0.38
0.34
0.34
0.26
0.71
0.71
0.87
0.83
0.75
0.97
0.60
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
D
D
1,550
1,550
1,550
1,550
1,550
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
2,920
2,920
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.19
1.26
0.70
0.71
0.50
0.51
0.50
1.00
0.51
0.94
1.18
0.98
0.74
5.93
3.56
1.14
1.70
2.05
2.83
1.35
1.30
0.35
0.50
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
45
55
45
55
40
40
35-40
25-35
35/40/45
45
45
45-50
45
55
65
65
65
65
65
55
45
50
40
40
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC2_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_4L_D_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_4L_D_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_4L_D_WL
RDA_UFH_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL

Principal Arterial - Other - Urban/Rural
7,700
11,300
11,300
11,700
14,400
13,400
13,100
10,600
14,700
13,200
16,400
16,100
16,200
17,200
17,200
10,300
14,200
14,300
14,300
22,000
18,200
26,000
23,000
13,500
7,500
11,400
11,400
11,600
14,300
13,300
12,900
10,000
15,300
14,600
17,700
18,000
16,800
14,700
14,700
9,400
14,000
18,200
18,200
23,000
19,000
25,500
21,500
13,200
7,200
12,000
12,000
11,500
13,600
12,500
12,300
9,800
13,200
15,600
15,000
17,200
17,200
15,300
12,200
12,200
14,900
18,800
18,800
25,500
20,200
31,000
27,500
16,700
6,500
10,600
10,600
10,500
12,700
12,000
12,200
9,900
15,900
12,600
15,800
17,300
15,100
16,700
13,100
10,900
15,100
15,700
15,700
23,500
19,300
28,000
25,000
16,800
6,200
10,400
10,400
10,800
10,600
12,000
12,200
9,700
13,600
14,500
15,100
17,300
16,300
17,600
15,100
12,000
16,400
18,200
18,200
25,500
22,000
30,000
26,000
18,300
5,600
9,400
9,400
10,400
12,500
11,400
10,900
9,900
13,700
12,300
14,600
17,800
16,800
17,700
15,100
12,400
17,300
17,700
17,700
22,500
22,500
29,500
25,000
17,000
5,900
9,000
9,000
9,700
11,800
11,300
11,100
9,200
13,300
13,300
16,400
18,300
16,800
16,400
13,600
10,500
15,800
16,200
16,200
25,000
17,800
24,000
21,000
14,000
6,200
9,400
9,400
9,300
11,500
11,300
10,900
9,400
13,000
13,000
15,600
17,800
17,500
17,200
14,900
9,900
13,500
14,400
14,400
27,500
18,700
26,500
22,500
15,300
5,500
9,200
9,200
9,700
11,700
10,600
10,600
8,700
14,100
12,600
15,900
18,000
17,000
19,900
16,700
12,200
15,700
18,300
18,300
30,000
19,600
26,500
23,000
14,200
5,600
9,600
9,600
9,800
11,600
10,800
10,300
8,600
12,200
11,900
14,300
16,700
15,200
18,700
16,400
12,500
17,000
17,400
17,400
27,500
18,300
27,000
22,000
14,000
C
C
D
D
D
E
E
E
E
DeLand
DeLand
DeLand
D
D
C
C
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
16,400
16,400
24,200
24,200
24,200
18,939
18,939
15,600
18,939
19,800
20,800
19,800
39,800
39,800
25,900
25,900
25,900
25,900
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
0.34
0.59
0.40
0.40
0.48
0.57
0.54
0.55
0.64
0.60
0.69
0.84
0.38
0.47
0.63
0.48
0.66
0.67
0.44
0.69
0.46
0.68
0.55
0.35
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
D
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
1,550
1,550
2,170
2,170
2,170
1,712
1,712
1,410
1,712
1,712
1,712
1,712
3,580
3,580
3,860
3,860
3,860
4,460
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.17
0.76
0.14
2
2
2
40
40
30
E+W
E+W
E+W
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_SSAC2_2W_2L_U_WL
Minor Arterial - Urban

12,800
13,700
10,000
13,100
13,600
9,000
14,800
14,900
8,900
12,500
13,000
9,600
12,200
12,500
9,200
11,200
11,500
8,600
11,400
11,700
9,000
10,800
11,100
9,300
11,300
11,600
10,200
10,500
11,500
8,400
D
D
D
17,700
17,700
14,800
0.59
0.65
0.57
C
C
D
1,600
1,600
1,330
FDOT
Yes
5.44
55
E+W
RUA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
6,000
5,700
5,500
8,500
5,200
5,600
6,000
5,600
5,300
8,400
0.63
790
0.50
0.70
4
4
35
35
E+W
E+W
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL

18,000
13,600
17,000
12,500
16,900
12,200
16,600
12,400
17,400
14,000
16,400
11,500
16,700
12,100
16,300
11,200
17,300
12,900
18,500
14,100
D
D
39,800
39,800
0.46
0.35
C
C
3,580
3,580
0009-F
527
4
Yes
Yes
516
111
421
2014
Direction
Facility Type
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC1_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
N+S
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
E+W
UA_SSAC2_2W_4L_D_WL
2010
Federal Functional
Classification
Distance
(in miles)
2.25
1.25
2.10
2.00
1.26
6.42
1.69
0.70
1.70
2.53
0.12
0.90
0.69
2.34
1.29
1.05
1.25
SR 46
Seminole Co. to Brevard Co.
0416-B
SR 100 - Flagler County

SR 100 - Flagler County
John Anderson Hwy (CR 201) to Lamber

Lambert Ave. (CR 201) to SR A1A
1000-F
5012-F
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
SR 400 - Beville Rd.

I-95 to Williamson Blvd.

Williamson Blvd. to SR 483/Clyde Morris
SR 483/Clyde Morris Blvd. to SR 5A/Nov
SR 5A/Nova Rd. to US 1
501
5189
511
502
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.28
1.91
0.68
1.34
4
4
4
4
55
55
45
45
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL
UA_SSAC1_2W_4L_D_WL

27,500
27,500
35,000
28,500
28,500
28,500
34,500
26,000
25,500
29,000
34,000
25,000
24,500
27,500
32,500
26,000
24,000
27,500
32,500
24,500
24,500
27,500
31,000
24,500
24,000
27,000
32,000
23,000
24,000
26,500
33,000
24,000
26,500
28,500
33,000
24,500
28,000
31,000
33,000
25,500
D
D
D
D
39,800
39,800
39,800
39,800
0.70
0.78
0.83
0.64
C
C
C
C
3,580
3,580
3,580
3,580
SR 415
SR 415
SR 415
SR 415
SR 415
SR 44 to Acorn Lake Rd
Acorn Lake Rd to Howland Blvd.
Howland Blvd. to Enterprise-Osteen Rd.
Enterprise-Osteen Rd. to Seminole Co.
Volusia Co. Line to SR 46
1009
321
437
25
0279-S
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
FDOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
10.49
0.88
1.83
4.39
0.90
2
2
2
2
2
55
55
55
55
55
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
RDA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
UA_UFH_2W_2L_U_WL
Minor Arterial - Rural

Minor Arterial - Urban/Rural
Minor Arterial - Rural
9,700
6,100
14,200
17,700
15,400
9,500
7,300
14,000
17,500
14,900
10,500
6,600
15,700
19,300
-
9,100
6,200
15,200
18,200
15,400
9,200
6,700
15,300
17,100
14,100
7,300
6,400
15,100
17,100
14,200
8,300
5,900
15,100
16,800
15,400
7,700
6,500
15,200
16,800
15,200
9,000
6,500
15,200
16,800
15,200
9,000
6,600
15,400
17,000
15,400
C
D
D
D
C
16,400
24,200
24,200
24,200
24,200
0.55
0.27
0.64
0.70
0.64
C
B
C
C
C
1,550
2,170
2,170
2,170
1,530
State Count
State Count
State Count
State Count
State Count
* 2014 AADT's for City of Deltona Port Orange are 2015 AADT's
Page 2
2014 AADTs Volusia County.xlsx
Volusia County 2014 Average Annual Daily Traffic & Historical Counts
Road Name
Dirksen/DeBary/Doyle
Limits (From - To)

US 17/92 to Sunrise Blvd.
Sunrise Blvd to WB I-4 Ramps
WB I-4 Ramps to EB I-4 Ramps
I-4 to Deltona Blvd.
Deltona Blvd. to Enterprise St.
Enterprise St. to Main St.
Main St. to Providence Blvd.
Providence Blvd. to Garfield Rd.
Garfield Rd. to Saxon Blvd.
Saxon Blvd. to Courtland Blvd.
Courtland Blvd. to SR 415
Count
Station
Number
520
521
522
480
481
482
484
485
530
531
533
2014
SIS
Facility
Cycle 10-2
2014
Evacuation
Route
Roadway
Maintaining
Agency
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
2014
Roadway on
County's
Thoroughfare
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Distance
(in miles)
1.75
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.65
0.15
0.80
1.20
1.50
2.55
1.50
2014
No. of
Lanes
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
Posted
Speed
45
45
35
35
35
35
35
40
40
45
40
2014
Direction
Facility Type
E+W
UA_NSSRC1_2W_2L_U_0L
E+W
E+W
UA_NSSRC2_2W_4L_D_WL
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
2010
Federal Functional
Classification
2005
AADT
7,750
13,370
21,200
29,800
20,040
19,650
21,940
13,910
10,260
9,380
5,770
2006
AADT
8,110
13,170
21,670
31,030
20,900
20,070
22,160
12,340
10,030
9,170
5,730
2007
AADT
8,950
16,300
22,930
31,210
20,510
19,980
21,930
13,250
10,760
9,020
6,700
2008
AADT
7,110
11,510
18,940
27,480
17,820
17,150
19,300
11,660
9,120
8,180
5,830
2009
AADT
6,330
10,980
18,470
26,450
17,680
16,970
18,560
11,570
9,670
8,870
6,370
2010
AADT
6,270
10,720
17,940
25,730
17,220
22,090
19,280
10,670
7,590
8,720
5,800
2011
AADT
6,910
11,180
18,660
26,830
17,190
23,180
20,230
11,700
9,420
7,880
6,020
2012
AADT
6,230
10,690
17,850
26,260
17,630
23,030
21,260
12,400
9,580
8,020
5,950
2013
AADT
6,190
9,980
17,380
25,480
17,240
22,400
20,460
11,890
9,220
7,800
5,680
6,140
12,430
11,410
11,790
5,500
6,220
5,360
6,150
12,740
11,590
12,090
5,670
6,710
5,870
1,220
5,910
11,350
10,550
10,430
5,570
6,980
6,010
1,660
6,530
11,530
10,400
10,310
5,060
6,330
5,700
1,800
6,760
11,350
10,150
10,230
5,380
6,560
5,540
7,500
6,130
10,080
9,930
10,530
6,900
480
690
1,280
720
1,230
2014
Vol. Co.
2014
Allowable
AADT*
LOS
6,680
E
10,660
E
17,850
E
24,950
E
17,240
E
24,130
E
20,600
E
11,950
E
9,240
E
7,670
E
5,450
E
DAILY
2014
V/C
Ratio
0.49
0.78
0.59
0.82
0.57
0.79
0.68
0.88
0.68
0.56
0.40
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
17,050
17,050
14,040
37,970
30,420
14,040
14,040
13,640
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
C
C
DAILY
2014
LOS
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
C
C
C
C
PEAK 2Way
2014
LOS
Capacity
1,230
1,230
2,740
2,740
2,740
2,740
2,740
1,230
1,230
1,230
1,230
0.14
0.41
0.86
0.28
0.36
0.36
0.44
0.38
C
C
D
C
C
C
C
C
1,540
1,540
1,270
3,410
2,740
1,270
1,270
1,020
10,660
10,660
10,660
10,660
13,990
10,660
10,660
0.74
0.59
0.95
0.96
0.77
0.67
0.05
D
D
D
D
D
D
C
960
960
960
960
1,260
960
960
6,300
6,300
0.10
0.17
B
B
590
590
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Tomoka Farms Rd. to Williamson Blvd.

Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Williamson Blvd. to Bill France Blvd.
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Bill France Blvd. to Clyde Morris Blvd.
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Clyde Morris Blvd. to Nova Rd.
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Nova Rd. to US 1
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma US 1 to Beach St
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Beach St. to Peninsula Dr.
Dunn/George Engram/Fairview/Ma Peninsula Dr. to SR A1A
716
717
718(DB-54)
719(DB-46)
720
631
1170
1171
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
County
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.75
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.20
0.40
0.60
0.35
2
2
2
4
4
2
2
2
40
40
35
40
35
30
30
30
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
UA_NSSRC1_2W_2L_U_WL

13,512
13,440
12,210
5,960
7,530
6,750
16,618
13,190
11,760
5,640
7,080
6,250
19,622
13,780
12,880
6,200
7,650
6,770
13,264
13,770
11,330
5,590
7,050
6,640
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)

Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Elkcam Blvd. (DEL)
Normandy Blvd. to Ft. Smith Blvd.

Ft. Smith Blvd. to Providence Blvd.
Providence Blvd. to Montecito Ave.
Montecito Ave. to Howland Blvd.
Howland Blvd. to Lake Helen-Osteen Rd
Lake Helen-Osteen Rd to Courtland Blvd
Courtland Blvd. to Riverhead Dr.
DLT-45.000
DLT-45.010
DLT-45.020
DLT-45.040
DLT-45.050
DLT-45.060
DLT-45.080
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1.50
1.00
1.05
1.00
0.15
0.70
0.50
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
35
35
35
35
35
35
30
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W

Minor Collector - Urban
n/c
12,570
8,890
13,360
12,590
13,980
11,960
680
10,153
7,158
11,751
5,591
6,068
4,736
592
5,142
4,805
11,772
10,554
13,766
8,571
943
Emporia Rd.
Emporia Rd.
SR 40 to Peterson/Blackburn
Peterson/Blackburn to US 17
560
564
County
County
Yes
Yes
3.00
1.45
2
2
40
40
N+S
E+W
RUA_UFH_2W_2L_U_0L
RUA_UFH_2W_2L_U_0L
Minor Collector - Rural

Minor Collector - Rural
790
1,330
1,030
1,640
800
1,210
Enterprise Ave. (NSB)
Pioneer Tr. to Halleck St.
570
County
Yes
0.10
35
E+W
7,480
7,400
7,110
7,500
7,210
7,640
7,460
7,000
7,740
7,900
13,640
0.58
1,020
Enterprise Rd.
Enterprise Rd.
Enterprise Rd.
Enterprise Rd.
Enterprise Rd.
US 17/92 to Harley Strickland Blvd.

Harley Strickland Blvd. to Saxon Blvd.
Saxon Blvd. to Highbanks Rd.
Highbanks Rd. to Deltona Blvd.
Deltona Blvd. to Main St.
586
585
584
582
581
County
County
County
County
County
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.50
0.50
1.55
0.50
1.10
4
4
4
4
2
35
45
45
35
35
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S

n/c
22,530
23,030
21,140
14,390
6,290
24,250
24,860
20,510
14,090
6,310
23,270
25,370
23,720
15,750
6,860
23,090
24,100
23,150
14,720
5,990
23,210
25,340
24,490
14,990
6,100
22,160
23,250
23,470
12,530
7,030
22,090
23,670
23,460
15,330
7,800
20,900
22,790
23,750
14,620
7,150
19,330
20,710
21,590
14,110
7,270
20,650
22,110
23,790
15,010
7,390
E
E
E
E
E
30,420
37,970
37,970
30,420
14,040
0.68
0.58
0.63
0.49
0.53
D
C
C
D
D
2,740
3,410
3,410
2,740
1,270
Enterprise-Osteen Rd.
Providence to Garfield Rd
Garfield Rd to Reed Ellis Rd.
Reed Ellis Rd. to SR 415
600
601
602
County
County
County
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.50
1.70
2.50
2
2
2
30
35
35
E+W
E+W
E+W

2,840
1,910
1,330
2,970
1,960
1,270
2,790
2,020
1,350
2,580
1,870
1,150
2,480
1,840
1,210
2,570
1,750
1,050
2,690
1,850
1,160
2,470
1,690
1,080
2,470
1,690
1,160
2,490
1,760
1,140
E
E
E
10,220
10,220
10,220
0.24
0.17
0.11
C
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,020
Euclid Ave.
Euclid Ave.
Euclid Ave.
Euclid Ave.
Euclid Ave.
Grand to Fatio Rd.

Fatio Rd. to Woodward Ave.
Woodward Ave. to SR 15A
SR 15A to Adelle Ave.
Adelle Ave. to US 17/92
610
611
612
613
614
County
County
County
County
County
No
No
No
No
No
0.25
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.50
2
2
2
2
2
35
30
30
30
30
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W

1,670
1,770
2,990
3,000
2,096
1,570
1,640
2,860
2,790
1,850
1,860
1,950
3,400
3,310
2,140
1,200
1,370
2,300
2,500
2,080
1,220
1,380
2,390
2,740
1,940
1,190
1,340
2,270
2,520
2,180
1,190
1,360
2,310
2,440
2,150
1,080
1,270
2,300
2,510
2,200
1,150
1,330
2,290
2,430
2,150
1,030
1,220
2,140
2,380
2,210
E
E
E
E
E
13,640
13,640
13,640
13,640
13,640
0.08
0.09
0.16
0.17
0.16
C
C
C
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,020
1,020
1,020
3,639
4,199
8,310
4,740
7,960
4,500
8,270
4,740
8,820
5,120
5,890
4,980
-
920
1,540
Eustace Ave. (DEL)
Catalina Blvd. to Providence Blvd
DLT-55.010
City
No
0.85
30
E+W
n/c
4,610
Flagler Ave. (NSB)

Flagler Ave. (NSB)
N. Causeway to Peninsula Ave.

Peninsula Ave. to Atlantic Ave.
640
641
FDOT
City
Yes
Yes
0.40
0.40
2
2
35
20
E+W
E+W

5,610
9,420
Flomich St.
Flomich St.
Derbyshire Rd. to SR 5A/Nova Rd.

SR 5A/Nova Rd. to US 1
650
County
City
Yes
No
0.30
1.40
2
2
30
25
E+W
E+W

5,520
-
Fort Florida Rd.

Fort Florida Rd.
Fort Florida Rd.
Highbanks Rd. to Ft. Florida Point Rd.

Ft. Florida Point Rd. to Barwick Rd.
Barwick Rd. to US 17/92
661
662
660
City
City
City
No
No
No
1.75
2.25
0.60
2
2
2
35
35
35
N+S
N+S & E+W UA_NSSRC2_2W_2L_U_0L
E+W

1,080
410
1,140
Fort Smith Blvd. (DEL)

Elkcam Blvd. to Providence Blvd

Providence Blvd. to Newmark Dr.
Newmark Dr. to Normandy Blvd
Normandy Blvd. to India Blvd
India Blvd. to Courtland Blvd
Courtland Blvd. to Howland Blvd
Howland Blvd. to SR 415
DLT-60.000
DLT-60.020
DLT-60.030
DLT-60.050
DLT-60.070
DLT-60.100
DLT-60.110
City
City
City
City
City
City
City
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
1.00
0.50
0.85
0.55
2.25
0.75
0.55
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
30
35
35
35
35
35
35
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
E+W
E+W

2,910
12,290
7,470
13,530
6,880
4,760
3,810
French Ave.
French Ave.
French Ave.
Beginning of road to Blue Springs Park

Blue Springs Park to Lawton Ave./Hamilt
Lawton Ave./Hamitlon to US 17/92
690
691
694
County
County
County
No
No
Yes
1.00
1.25
1.00
2
2
2
30
35
35
E+W
E+W
E+W

170
540
6,100
Garfield Ave.
Garfield Ave.
Garfield Ave.
US 92 to Plymouth Ave.
Plymouth Ave. to SR 44
SR 44 to Beresford Ave.
702
700
698
County
County
City
Yes
Yes
No
0.85
1.00
1.00
2
2
2
30
30
30
N+S
N+S
N+S
n/c
n/c
n/c
1,930
2,270
-
Garfield Rd.
Doyle Rd. to Enterprise-Osteen Rd
711
County
Yes
0.90
40
N+S
1,880
1,680
1,480
1,440
1,590
Glencoe Rd.
Glencoe Rd.
Glencoe Rd.
Pioneer Tr. to SR 44
SR 44 to Paige Ave.
Paige Ave. to Taylor Rd.
732
731
730
County
County
County
No
No
No
0.85
1.10
1.50
2
2
2
35
35
40
N+S
N+S
N+S

1,550
3,750
1,470
1,730
3,550
1,110
1,680
3,830
1,400
1,550
3,750
1,280
1,380
3,300
1,070
Glenwood Rd.
Glenwood Rd.
Grand Ave. to SR 15A

SR 15A to US 17
741
743
County
County
Yes
Yes
1.60
1.25
2
2
35
35
E+W
E+W

4,420
2,420
2,270
2,230
1,600
1,330
4,430
2,580
3,980
2,260
Grand Av/CR 4053

Grand Av/CR 4053
Grand Av/CR 4053
Grand Av/CR 4053
Grand Av/CR 4053
Grand Av/CR 4053
Retta St. to Lemon St.

Lemon St. to Glenwood Rd.
Glenwood Rd. to Plymouth Ave.
Plymouth Ave. to Minnesota Ave.
Minnesota Ave. to SR 44
SR 44 to Old New York Ave.
756
754
752
751
750
748
County
County
County
County
County
County
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
1.80
1.30
2.10
0.50
0.90
0.60
2
2
2
2
2
2
40
35
40
40
35
30
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S
N+S

2,250
4,360
2,770
1,570
2,600
-
1,990
4,180
2,750
1,500
2,800
2,130
4,330
2,960
1,540
2,980
1,830
4,060
2,610
1,570
2,870
1,770
3,790
2,250
1,280
2,600
-
Graves Av/CR 4145

Graves Av/CR 4145
Graves Av/CR 4145
Graves Av/CR 4145
US 17/92 to Leavitt Ave.

Leavitt Ave. to Veteran's Memorial Pkwy
Veteran's Memorial Pkwy. to Kentucky A
Kentucky Ave. to Howland Blvd.
770
772
775
900
County
County
County
County
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
0.50
1.20
0.30
0.90
2
2
2
2
30
30
45
45
E+W
E+W
E+W
E+W

7,780
8,250
18,040
12,970
6,610
6,450
16,590
12,660
Greens Dairy Rd.
SR 15A to Stone St.
780
County
No
0.50
30
E+W
n/c
Halifax Dr. (OB)

Halifax Dr. (OB)
John Anderson Dr. to Neptune Ave.

Neptune Ave. to SR 40
801
800
City
City
Yes
Yes
1.35
0.70
2
2
35
35
N+S
N+S

* 2014 AADT's for City of Deltona Port Orange are 2015 AADT's
Page 5
850
1,420
5,600
-
6,210
-
1,190
400
1,130
-
1,130
380
1,130
950
270
1,040
3,160
11,901
7,576
14,262
7,154
7,388
3,949
3,280
13,876
7,010
13,768
7,592
8,497
3,108
190
600
7,740
130
530
5,470
160
1,340
5,970
2,390
2,400
2,230
2,240
-
160
510
6,810
2,150
2,490
-
2,700
2,750
-
7,910
8,320
15,840
11,560
7,000
7,590
16,680
13,740
7,570
7,850
17,290
13,250
860
1,880
660
1,060
3,770
10,660
8,560
5,050
9,500
4,130
E
E
13,640
13,640
5,520
5,450
-
5,570
5,430
-
5,140
-
E
E
13,640
13,640
1,090
640
1,340
1,080
770
1,350
1,020
700
E
E
E
13,640
10,220
10,220
130
800
5,320
140
520
5,660
2,240
2,230
970
260
960
-
3,480
7,850
6,280
10,170
10,230
10,750
7,190
500
9,100
5,420
1,150
230
980
690
1,320
2,350
6,940
12,080
10,730
10,830
4,990
6,190
5,210
DAILY
2014
LOS
Capacity
13,640
13,640
30,420
30,420
30,420
30,420
30,420
13,640
13,640
13,640
13,640
1,170
730
1,260
0.35
960
1,020
1,020
0.38
C
-
1,020
0
0.07
0.07
C
C
-
1,020
1,020
1,020
2,250
10,500
8,610
11,570
6,260
8,460
2,840
3,140
11,260
8,160
11,990
6,610
9,410
3,030
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
10,660
13,990
13,990
13,990
13,990
13,990
10,660
0.29
0.80
0.58
0.86
0.47
0.67
0.28
C
D
D
D
C
D
C
960
1,260
1,260
1,260
1,260
1,260
960
180
670
5,240
130
480
4,480
270
1,260
4,870
E
E
E
13,640
13,640
13,640
0.02
0.09
0.36
C
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,020
2,310
2,350
2,330
2,220
2,280
2,140
2,100
1,980
2,100
2,280
1,910
2,300
E
E
E
13,640
13,640
13,640
0.17
0.14
0.17
C
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,020
1,530
1,860
1,680
1,530
1,550
13,640
0.11
1,230
1,370
3,380
1,120
1,670
3,710
1,310
1,820
3,780
1,300
1,930
3,820
1,410
1,870
3,720
1,510
E
E
E
13,640
13,640
13,640
0.14
0.27
0.11
C
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,230
3,980
2,190
4,210
2,140
4,170
2,140
4,030
2,050
4,040
2,000
E
E
13,640
13,640
0.30
0.15
C
C
1,020
1,020
1,750
3,720
2,270
1,290
2,570
1,740
3,700
1,910
1,240
2,250
810
1,720
3,630
2,010
1,270
1,820
860
1,700
3,550
2,080
1,260
2,190
830
1,740
3,550
1,990
1,240
2,280
940
E
E
E
E
E
E
13,640
14,740
12,300
13,640
13,640
13,640
0.13
0.24
0.16
0.09
0.17
0.07
C
C
C
C
C
C
1,230
1,330
1,230
1,230
1,020
1,020
6,110
6,770
16,840
11,530
6,680
6,780
17,570
13,790
6,470
6,520
17,140
11,840
5,550
6,510
16,750
12,970
5,880
7,060
17,160
13,640
E
E
E
E
14,740
13,640
17,900
17,900
0.40
0.52
0.96
0.76
C
D
E
C
1,330
1,020
1,620
1,620
120
13,640
0.01
1,020
E
E
13,640
13,640
1,020
1,020
140
180
190
60
120
100
120
90
3,890
6,760
3,930
7,310
4,460
7,720
3,770
6,610
3,330
6,220
3,850
5,900
3,620
6,080
3,560
5,790
100
-
2014 AADTs Volusia County.xlsx
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS OFFICE
2014 HISTORICAL AADT REPORT
COUNTY: 79 - VOLUSIA
SITE: 0290 - ON SR-44, 0.133 MI. E OF CR-4053 (GRAND AVE) (RVL)
YEAR
---2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
AADT
---------9800 C
9700 C
9300 C
9700 C
10400 C
10800 C
10500 C
11500 C
11600 C
11700 C
11000 C
11300 C
11300 C
11100 C
10500 C
9800 C
DIRECTION 1
-----------E
5000
E
5000
E
4800
E
4900
E
5300
E
5500
E
5400
E
5900
E
6100
E
6100
E
5600
E
5800
E
5800
E
5700
E
5300
E
4800
DIRECTION 2
-----------W
4800
W
4700
W
4500
W
4800
W
5100
W
5300
W
5100
W
5600
W
5500
W
5600
W
5400
W
5500
W
5500
W
5400
W
5200
W
5000
*K FACTOR
--------9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
10.39
10.54
10.88
11.05
10.68
10.70
10.40
10.20
8.90
10.60
10.00
10.30
D FACTOR
-------59.20
61.00
61.90
62.20
62.46
62.19
64.83
64.64
60.08
57.20
58.90
55.20
53.80
65.50
62.20
64.20
T FACTOR
-------6.10
5.90
6.50
6.90
5.00
7.40
8.10
9.50
11.10
4.80
10.70
9.30
6.40
4.40
4.60
8.10
AADT FLAGS: C = COMPUTED; E = MANUAL ESTIMATE; F = FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE

S = SECOND YEAR ESTIMATE; T = THIRD YEAR ESTIMATE; F = FOURTH YEAR ESTIMATE
V = FIFTH YEAR ESTIMATE; 6 = SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE; X = UNKNOWN
*K FACTOR: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STANDARDK, PRIOR YEARS ARE K30 VALUES
Traffic Trends - V3.0

SR 44 -- East of Grand Avenue
FIN#
County:
1234
Location
Station #:
0290
Highway:
SR 44
14000
Year
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Observed Count
Fitted Curve
12000
Volusia (79)
10000
8000
6000
4000
Traffic (ADT/AADT)
Count*
Trend**
9800
11200
10500
11200
11100
11100
11300
11000
11300
10900
11000
10800
11700
10700
11600
10700
11500
10600
10500
10500
10800
10400
10400
10300
9700
10300
9300
10200
9700
10100
9800
10000
2000
0
1999
2004
2009
2014
2019
2024
Year
** Annual Trend Increase:

Trend R-squared:
Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate:
Trend Growth Rate (2014 to Design Year):
Printed:
Straight Line Growth Option
-82
25.01%
-0.71%
-0.81%
2029
2034
2015 Opening Year Trend

2015
N/A
9900
2025 Mid-Year Trend
2025
N/A
9100
2035 Design Year Trend
2035
N/A
8300
TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends
26-Jul-15
*Axle-Adjusted

TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS OFFICE
2014 HISTORICAL AADT REPORT
COUNTY: 79 - VOLUSIA
SITE: 7059 - GRAND AVE, 0.13 MI S OF SR-44 (HPMS)
YEAR
---2014
2013
2012
2010
2009
AADT
---------1000 C
900 F
900 C
950 C
1100 C
DIRECTION 1
-----------N
500
N
450
N
450
E
450
E
550
DIRECTION 2
-----------S
500
S
450
S
450
W
500
W
550
*K FACTOR
--------9.00
9.00
9.00
10.39
10.54
D FACTOR
-------59.20
61.00
61.90
62.46
62.19
T FACTOR
-------6.70
6.80
6.80
2.40
3.30
AADT FLAGS: C = COMPUTED; E = MANUAL ESTIMATE; F = FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE

S = SECOND YEAR ESTIMATE; T = THIRD YEAR ESTIMATE; F = FOURTH YEAR ESTIMATE
V = FIFTH YEAR ESTIMATE; 6 = SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE; X = UNKNOWN
*K FACTOR: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STANDARDK, PRIOR YEARS ARE K30 VALUES

GRAND AVE -- South of SR 44
FIN#
County:
1234
Location
1200
1100
1000
1000
1000
900
900
900
2011
2012
2013
800
Volusia (79)
Station #:
Highway:
GRAND AVE
Year
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Traffic (ADT/AADT)
Count*
Trend**
1100
1000
1000
1000
900
1000
900
1000
900
900
1000
900
600
400
200
0
2009
2010
Year

Trend R-squared:
Printed:
-23
27.43%
-2.00%
-2.65%
2014

2015
N/A
900
2025 Mid-Year Trend
2025
N/A
700
2035
N/A
400
26-Jul-15
*Axle-Adjusted

GRAND AVE -- North of SR 44
FIN#
County:
1234
Location
Station #:
Highway:
GRAND AVE
3500
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
3000
Volusia (79)
2500
2000
Traffic (ADT/AADT)
Count*
Trend**
2600
2900
2800
2800
3000
2700
2900
2600
2600
2600
2600
2500
2300
2400
1800
2300
2200
2200
2300
2100
1500
1000
500
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Year

Trend R-squared:
Printed:
-89
55.07%
-3.07%
-4.31%
2013
2014

2015
N/A
2000
2025 Mid-Year Trend
2025
N/A
1100
2035
N/A
200
26-Jul-15
*Axle-Adjusted
Appendix B BEBR Projections
Projections of Florida Population by County, 20152040,

with Estimates for 2014 (continued)
County
and State
Estimates
April 1, 2014
Projections, April 1
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
SANTA ROSA
159,785
Low

158,300
166,700
173,900
179,700
184,100
188,000
Medium

163,300
178,300
192,300
205,300
217,400
229,300
High

169,700
189,800
210,200
230,700
251,300
272,800

SARASOTA
387,140
Low

378,600
386,800
392,900
397,000
398,100
397,100
Medium

390,500
412,900
433,600
452,800
469,500
484,300
High

405,900
440,300
474,900
509,800
543,300
576,200

SEMINOLE
437,086
Low

429,200
441,600
451,100
457,700
460,500
461,000
Medium

442,800
471,600
498,100
522,300
543,100
562,300
High

460,200
502,700
545,300
587,700
628,500
669,000

SUMTER

111,125
Low

112,100
128,700
141,800
152,700
159,100
162,700
Medium

117,100
141,400
165,200
188,200
210,800
232,500
High

122,600
152,500
185,900
221,600
261,600
304,500

SUWANNEE
44,168
Low

43,400
44,300
45,100
45,600
45,800
45,800
Medium

44,700
47,300
49,700
52,000
54,100
55,900
High

46,500
50,500
54,500
58,500
62,600
66,500

TAYLOR

22,932
Low

22,100
21,600
21,200
20,700
20,100
19,400
Medium

23,000
23,600
24,100
24,700
25,200
25,600
High

24,100
25,600
27,200
28,800
30,500
32,000

UNION

15,647
Low

15,200
15,000
14,800
14,600
14,300
13,900
Medium

15,900
16,400
16,900
17,400
17,900
18,300
High

16,700
17,800
19,000
20,300
21,600
22,800

VOLUSIA

503,851
Low

492,400
495,400
496,200
494,900
491,200
485,400
Medium

507,800
528,300
547,000
563,900
578,800
592,000
High

527,900
563,900
599,800
635,500
670,300
704,400

WAKULLA

31,285
Low

30,500
31,700
32,700
33,600
34,200
34,700
Medium

31,500
33,900
36,100
38,300
40,400
42,300
High

32,700
36,100
39,500
43,100
46,700
50,400

WALTON

59,793
Low

59,400
64,800
69,000
72,500
75,300
76,900
Medium

61,300
69,400
77,300
85,000
92,300
98,600
High

63,700
73,700
85,000
97,000
109,300
121,300

WASHINGTON
24,959
Low

24,200
24,100
23,800
23,500
23,000
22,500
Medium

25,200
26,200
27,200
28,000
28,900
29,600
High

26,500
28,500
30,600
32,700
34,900
37,000

FLORIDA

19,507,369
Low

19,555,500
20,487,400
21,358,900
22,146,100
22,815,200
23,391,900
Medium

19,789,600
21,236,700
22,600,300
23,872,600
25,027,300
26,081,400
High

20,116,000
21,947,100
23,723,400
25,429,800
27,029,400
28,529,000
Bureau of Economic and Business Research

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
720 SW 2nd Avenue, Suite 150, P.O. Box 117148
Gainesville, Florida 32611-7148
phone (352) 392-0171

fax (352) 392-4739
www.bebr.ufl.edu
Appendix C CFRPM Model Plots
SR 44 at Grand Avenue - CFRPM v501 AADT Plot - Year 2005
Legend
Centroid Connector
Number of Lanes = 2
Number of Lanes = 4
Number of Lanes = 6
Number of Lanes = 8
Number of Lanes > 8
MOCF=0.94
SR 44 at Grand Avenue - CFRPM v501 AADT Plot - Year 2035
Legend
Centroid Connector
Number of Lanes = 2
Number of Lanes = 4
Number of Lanes = 6
Number of Lanes = 8
Number of Lanes > 8
MOCF=0.94
Appendix D Two-Way Stop Control

Operational Analyses
Two-Way Stop Control
Page 1 of 1
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY

Site Information
General Information
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
Analysis Time Period
JXG
KAI
7/21/2015
AM Peak Hour
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
Project Description
East/West Street: SR 44
Intersection Orientation: East-West
2015
North/South Street: Grand Ave

Study Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments

Major Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal
Minor Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach
Storage
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
1
L
45
0.91
Eastbound
2
T
481
0.91
3
R
15
0.91
4
L
7
0.91
Westbound
5
T
223
0.91
6
R
11
0.91
49
528
16
245
12
--
--
--
--
1
L
0
0
TR
Undivided
1
L
0
0
TR
1
0
7
L
15
0.91
Northbound
8
T
12
0.91
9
R
2
0.91
10
L
30
0.91
Southbound
11
T
16
0.91
12
R
34
0.91
16
13
32
17
37
1
0
N
0
1
0
N
0
1
LTR
0
0
1
LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service

Approach
Eastbound
Westbound
Movement
Lane Configuration
v (veh/h)
Northbound
7
Southbound
9
LTR
0
0
10
11
49
31
86
C (m) (veh/h)
1302
1020
246
351
v/c
0.04
0.01
0.13
0.25
95% queue length
0.12
0.02
0.43
0.95
Control Delay (s/veh)
7.9
8.6
21.7
18.6
LOS
Approach Delay (s/veh)
--
--
21.7
18.6
Approach LOS
--
--
Copyright 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
HCS+TM
file:///C:/Users/cbergh/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k5D24.tmp
Version 5.6
12
LTR
Generated: 7/24/2015
10:59 AM
7/24/2015
Page 1 of 1

Site Information
General Information
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
7/21/2015
PM Peak Hour
Project Description
2015


Major Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Median Type
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal
Minor Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach
Storage
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
1
L
56
0.91
Eastbound
2
T
377
0.91
3
R
19
0.91
4
L
4
0.91
Westbound
5
T
461
0.91
6
R
24
0.91
61
414
20
506
26
--
--
--
--
1
L
0
0
TR
Undivided
1
L
0
0
TR
1
0
7
L
18
0.91
Northbound
8
T
19
0.91
9
R
1
0.91
10
L
15
0.91
Southbound
11
T
28
0.91
12
R
95
1.00
19
20
16
30
95
1
0
N
0
1
0
N
0
1
LTR
0
0
1
LTR

Approach
Eastbound
Westbound
Movement
Lane Configuration
v (veh/h)
Northbound
7
0
0
Southbound
9
10
11
LTR
LTR
61
40
141
C (m) (veh/h)
1030
1120
159
344
v/c
0.06
0.00
0.25
0.41
95% queue length
0.19
0.01
0.95
1.94
8.7
8.2
35.1
22.5
LOS
--
--
35.1
22.5
Approach LOS
--
--
HCS+TM
file:///C:/Users/cbergh/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k77D9.tmp
Version 5.6
12
11:01 AM
7/24/2015
Page 1 of 1

General Information
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
Site Information
JXG
KAI
7/24/2015
2035 2% Growth AM Peak
Hour
Project Description
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year


Major Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Median Type
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal
Minor Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach
Storage
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
1
L
63
1.00
Eastbound
2
T
673
1.00
3
R
21
1.00
4
L
10
1.00
Westbound
5
T
312
1.00
6
R
15
1.00
63
673
21
10
312
15
--
--
--
--
0
0
TR
Undivided
1
L
0
0
TR
1
L
7
L
21
1.00
Northbound
8
T
17
1.00
9
R
3
1.00
10
L
42
1.00
Southbound
11
T
22
1.00
12
R
48
1.00
21
17
42
22
48
1
0
N
0
1
0
N
0
1
LTR
0
0
1
LTR

Approach
Eastbound
Westbound
Movement
1
4
L
L
Lane Configuration
v (veh/h)
63
10
1227
897
C (m) (veh/h)
v/c
0.05
0.01
95% queue length
0.16
0.03
8.1
9.1
LOS
A
A
--Approach Delay (s/veh)
Approach LOS
--Copyright 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Northbound
8
LTR
41
161
0.25
0.96
34.8
D
34.8
D
HCS+TM Version 5.6
file:///C:/Users/cbergh/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k5F92.tmp
10
0
0
Southbound
11
LTR
112
242
0.46
2.27
32.1
D
32.1
D
12
11:10 AM
7/24/2015
Page 1 of 1

Site Information
General Information
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
JXG
KAI
7/24/2015
Weekday PM Peak Hr
Project Description 18036

Intersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
2035 w/2% growth


Major Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Median Type
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal
Minor Street
Movement
Volume (veh/h)
(veh/h)
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach
Storage
RT Channelized
Lanes
Configuration
1
L
78
1.00
Eastbound
2
T
528
1.00
3
R
27
1.00
4
L
6
1.00
Westbound
5
T
645
1.00
6
R
34
1.00
78
528
27
645
34
--
--
--
--
1
L
0
0
TR
Undivided
1
L
0
0
TR
1
0
7
L
25
1.00
Northbound
8
T
27
1.00
9
R
1
1.00
10
L
21
1.00
Southbound
11
T
40
1.00
12
R
133
1.00
25
27
21
40
133
1
0
N
0
1
0
N
0
1
LTR
0
0
1
LTR

Approach
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
7
0
0
Southbound
Movement
10
Lane Configuration
LTR
LTR
11
v (veh/h)
78
53
194
C (m) (veh/h)
908
1010
80
239
v/c
0.09
0.01
0.66
0.81
95% queue length
0.28
0.02
3.08
6.17
9.3
8.6
112.6
63.1
LOS
--
--
112.6
63.1
Approach LOS
--
--
HCS+TM
file:///C:/Users/cbergh/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kB4EB.tmp
Version 5.6
12
2:27 PM
7/24/2015
Appendix E Signal Operational Analyses
HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Intersection
File Name
Signal_existing_AM.xus
Project Description
AM Peak Hour
Analysis Date 7/22/2015

Time Period
Analysis Year 2015
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
45
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
EB
T
481
Green 0.9
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Change Period, (Y+Rc), s
Max Allow Headway (MAH), s
Queue Clearance Time (gs), s
Green Extension Time (ge), s
Phase Call Probability
Max Out Probability
Movement Group Results
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Adjusted Flow Rate (v), veh/h
Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate (s), veh/h/ln
Queue Service Time (gs), s
Cycle Queue Clearance Time (gc), s
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (X)
Available Capacity (ca), veh/h
Back of Queue (Q), veh/ln (50th percentile)
Queue Storage Ratio (RQ) (50th percentile)
Uniform Delay (d1), s/veh
Incremental Delay (d2), s/veh
Initial Queue Delay (d3), s/veh
Control Delay (d), s/veh
Level of Service (LOS)
Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS
Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS
Intersection Information
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
0.92
Analysis Period 1> 7:00
EBL
5
1.1
8.0
4.0
2.9
2.7
0.0
0.66
0.00
L
5
49
1757
0.7
0.7
0.71
833
0.059
1071
0.1
0.00
3.6
0.0
0.0
3.7
A
6.4
Multimodal Results
Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS
Bicycle LOS Score / LOS
Copyright 2015 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved.
R
15
3.0
0.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
58.9
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
T
2
539
1835
10.5
10.5
0.69
1259
0.428
1259
2.6
0.00
5.6
1.1
0.0
6.7
A
R
12
L
7
51.8
4.0
0.0
R
11
L
15
5.2
4.0
0.0
3.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
4.9
4.0
2.9
2.1
0.0
0.16
0.00
L
1
8
1757
0.1
0.1
0.66
563
0.014
868
0.0
0.00
5.2
0.0
0.0
5.2
A
6.1
10.6
EB
2.0
1.5
WB
T
223
WBT
6
4.0
55.8
4.0
0.0
NBL
WB
T
6
254
1829
4.5
4.5
0.65
1185
0.215
1185
1.3
0.00
5.8
0.4
0.0
6.2
A
R
16
L
3
2.1
0.9
R
2
L
30
NB
T
8
32
1812
1.4
1.4
0.04
68
0.461
268
0.6
0.00
37.7
1.8
0.0
39.5
D
39.5
SB
T
16
NBT
8
12.0
7.0
4.0
3.2
3.4
0.0
0.50
0.00
0.0
SBL
R
18
L
7
R
34
SBT
4
12.0
9.2
4.0
3.2
6.0
0.0
0.86
0.09
SB
T
4
87
1718
4.0
4.0
0.06
111
0.784
236
1.8
0.00
36.9
4.5
0.0
41.4
D
41.4
R
14
B
WB
B
A
NB
T
12
NB
B
A
HCS 2010 Streets Version 6.65
2.3
0.5
SB
B
A
2.3
0.6
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 6:53:10 AM

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Intersection
File Name
Signal_existing_PM.xus
Project Description
PM Peak Hour

Time Period
Analysis Year 2015
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
56
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
EB
T
377
Green 0.6
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Max Out Probability
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
0.91
EBL
5
1.1
8.5
4.0
2.9
3.0
0.0
0.75
0.00
L
5
62
1757
1.0
1.0
0.67
548
0.112
680
0.2
0.00
6.2
0.0
0.0
6.2
A
7.6
Multimodal Results
R
19
3.9
0.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
55.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
T
2
435
1829
9.1
9.1
0.64
1165
0.374
1165
2.6
0.00
6.9
0.9
0.0
7.8
A
R
12
L
4
47.0
4.0
0.0
R
24
L
18
8.9
4.0
0.0
3.6
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
4.6
4.0
2.9
2.1
0.0
0.09
0.00
WBT
6
4.0
51.0
4.0
0.0
NBL
L
3
2.1
1.4
R
1
L
15
NB
T
8
42
1829
1.8
1.8
0.05
83
0.503
186
0.8
0.00
37.3
1.8
0.0
39.1
D
SBL
R
18
L
7
R
95
SBT
4
12.0
12.9
4.0
3.3
9.1
0.1
0.97
1.00
SB
T
4
152
1666
7.1
7.1
0.11
184
0.822
229
3.5
0.00
34.8
14.4
0.0
49.2
D
49.2
R
14
B
NB
B
A
SB
T
28
NBT
8
12.0
7.6
4.0
3.1
3.8
0.0
0.60
0.12
39.1
WB
B
A
NB
T
19
0.0
WB
L
T
R
1
6
16
4
533
1757 1828
0.1
13.6
0.1
13.6
0.59 0.59
571 1075
0.008 0.496
790 1075
0.0
4.4
0.00 0.00
6.9
9.6
0.0
1.6
0.0
0.0
6.9
11.2
A
B
11.2
B
15.4
EB
2.1
1.3
WB
T
461
2.3
0.6
SB
B
A
2.3
0.7
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 12:11:11 PM

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Time Period
Intersection
Analysis Year 2015
File Name
Signal_2percent_AM.xus
Project Description
2035 2% Growth AM Peak Hour
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
63
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
Green 1.2
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Max Out Probability
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
EB
T
673
EBL
5
1.1
8.5
4.0
2.9
2.6
0.1
0.75
0.00
L
5
63
1757
0.6
0.6
0.80
880
0.072
1143
0.0
0.00
1.9
0.0
0.0
2.0
A
4.5
Multimodal Results
R
21
3.3
0.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
65.3
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
T
2
694
1835
11.4
11.4
0.77
1406
0.494
1406
1.8
0.00
3.5
1.2
0.0
4.8
A
R
12
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
1.00
L
10
58.0
4.0
0.0
R
15
L
21
5.5
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
5.2
4.0
2.9
2.1
0.0
0.20
0.00
L
1
10
1757
0.1
0.1
0.74
559
0.018
895
0.0
0.00
3.4
0.0
0.0
3.4
A
4.1
8.5
EB
2.2
1.7
WB
T
312
WBT
6
4.0
62.0
4.0
0.0
NBL
WB
T
6
327
1830
4.8
4.8
0.72
1326
0.247
1326
1.0
0.00
3.7
0.4
0.0
4.1
A
R
16
2.2
1.0
R
3
L
42
NB
L
T
R
3
8
18
21
20
1338 1832
1.2
0.8
4.5
0.8
0.07 0.07
128
126
0.164 0.159
303
366
0.4
0.4
0.00 0.00
38.4 35.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
38.6 35.3
D
D
37.0
D
SBL
L
7
42
1400
2.3
3.1
0.07
172
0.244
356
0.8
0.00
36.5
0.3
0.0
36.8
D
37.6
A
NB
B
A
2.3
0.6
SB
T
22
NBT
8
6.0
9.5
4.0
3.2
6.5
0.2
0.60
0.00
0.0
WB
B
A
NB
T
17
R
48
SBT
4
6.0
9.5
4.0
3.2
5.3
0.2
0.92
0.00
SB
T
4
70
1675
3.3
3.3
0.07
115
0.608
335
1.3
0.00
36.2
1.9
0.0
38.1
D
R
14
SB
B
A
2.3
0.7
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 1:42:09 PM

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Time Period
Intersection
Analysis Year 2015
File Name
Signal_2percent_PM.xus
Project Description
2035 2% Growth PM Peak Hour
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
78
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
Green 0.7
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Max Out Probability
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
EB
T
529
EBL
5
1.1
8.9
4.0
2.9
2.9
0.1
0.82
0.00
L
5
78
1757
0.9
0.9
0.75
543
0.144
692
0.1
0.00
5.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
A
5.7
Multimodal Results
R
27
0.2
4.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
61.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
T
2
556
1829
10.1
10.1
0.71
1302
0.427
1302
2.3
0.00
4.8
1.0
0.0
5.8
A
R
12
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
1.00
L
6
WB
T
645
R
34
L
25
52.8
4.0
0.0
10.3
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
4.7
4.0
2.9
2.1
0.0
0.12
0.00
L
1
6
1757
0.1
0.1
0.67
579
0.010
820
0.0
0.00
4.8
0.0
0.0
4.8
A
9.2
12.2
EB
2.2
1.5
WBT
6
4.0
56.8
4.0
0.0
NBL
WB
T
6
679
1828
16.1
16.1
0.66
1206
0.563
1206
4.5
0.00
7.4
1.9
0.0
9.3
A
R
16
2.2
1.6
R
1
L
21
NB
L
T
R
3
8
18
25
28
1219 1869
1.6
1.1
9.8
1.1
0.13 0.13
122
240
0.204 0.117
210
374
0.5
0.5
0.00 0.00
38.7 30.8
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
39.0 30.9
D
C
34.7
C
SBL
L
7
21
1390
1.1
2.1
0.13
250
0.084
350
0.4
0.00
31.8
0.1
0.0
31.9
C
37.6
B
NB
B
A
2.3
0.6
SB
T
40
NBT
8
6.0
14.3
4.0
3.3
11.8
0.2
0.69
0.45
0.0
WB
B
A
NB
T
27
R
133
SBT
4
6.0
14.3
4.0
3.3
10.2
0.3
0.99
0.11
SB
T
4
173
1653
8.2
8.2
0.13
212
0.815
331
3.4
0.00
33.9
4.4
0.0
38.3
D
R
14
SB
B
A
2.3
0.8
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 1:38:36 PM

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Intersection
File Name
Signal_5percent_AM.xus
Project Description
AM Peak Hour

Time Period
Analysis Year 2015
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
90
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
EB
T
962
Green 1.6
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Max Out Probability
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
1.00
EBL
5
1.1
9.2
4.0
2.9
2.9
0.1
0.86
0.00
L
5
90
1757
0.9
0.9
0.78
745
0.121
960
0.1
0.00
2.7
0.0
0.0
2.7
A
8.7
Multimodal Results
R
30
3.6
0.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
63.4
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
T
2
992
1835
24.3
24.3
0.74
1361
0.729
1361
5.1
0.00
5.8
3.5
0.0
9.3
A
R
12
L
14
55.8
4.0
0.0
R
22
L
30
7.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
5.6
4.0
2.9
2.2
0.0
0.27
0.00
L
1
14
1757
0.2
0.2
0.72
357
0.039
650
0.0
0.00
6.5
0.0
0.0
6.5
A
5.8
11.5
EB
2.2
2.3
WB
T
446
WBT
6
4.0
59.8
4.0
0.0
NBL
WB
T
6
468
1829
8.3
8.3
0.70
1275
0.367
1275
2.0
0.00
4.9
0.8
0.0
5.7
A
R
16
2.2
1.3
R
4
L
60
NB
L
T
R
3
8
18
30
38
1302 1846
1.8
1.5
6.5
1.5
0.09 0.09
129
162
0.233 0.234
275
369
0.6
0.7
0.00 0.00
38.5 34.0
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
38.9 34.2
D
C
36.3
D
SBL
L
7
60
1378
3.4
4.9
0.09
185
0.325
339
1.1
0.00
36.3
0.4
0.0
36.7
D
37.1
B
NB
B
A
2.3
0.6
SB
T
32
NBT
8
6.0
11.0
4.0
3.2
8.5
0.3
0.78
0.02
0.0
WB
B
B
NB
T
34
R
68
SBT
4
6.0
11.0
4.0
3.2
6.9
0.3
0.97
0.00
SB
T
4
100
1676
4.6
4.6
0.09
147
0.678
335
1.9
0.00
35.4
2.0
0.0
37.4
D
R
14
SB
B
A
2.3
0.8
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 6:51:14 AM

General Information
Agency
Analyst
Jurisdiction
Intersection
File Name
Signal_5percent_PM.xus
Project Description
PM Peak Hour

Time Period
Analysis Year 2015
Demand Information
Approach Movement
Demand (v), veh/h
Signal Information
Cycle, s
80.0
Offset, s
0
Uncoordinated No
Force Mode
Fixed
L
112
Reference Phase
Reference Point
Simult. Gap E/W
Simult. Gap N/S
2
End
On
On
EB
T
754
Green 1.0
Yellow 4.0
Red
0.0
Timer Results
Assigned Phase
Case Number
Phase Duration, s
Max Out Probability
Approach Movement
Assigned Movement
Green Ratio (g/C)
Capacity (c), veh/h
Duration, h
0.25
Area Type
Other
PHF
1.00
EBL
5
1.1
9.5
4.0
2.9
3.6
0.1
0.92
0.10
R
38
0.5
4.0
0.0
EBT
2
4.0
57.2
4.0
0.0
0.0
EB
L
T
R
5
2
12
112
792
1757 1829
1.6
20.4
1.6
20.4
0.70 0.67
306 1217
0.366 0.651
366 1217
0.9
5.7
0.00 0.00
14.6
7.9
0.3
2.7
0.0
0.0
14.9 10.6
B
B
11.1
B
Multimodal Results
L
8
WB
T
922
R
48
L
36
48.7
4.0
0.0
13.8
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
WBL
1
1.1
5.0
4.0
2.9
2.1
0.0
0.16
0.00
NBL
2.2
2.1
L
30
SBL
L
7
30
1375
1.5
3.0
0.17
302
0.099
340
0.5
0.00
29.3
0.1
0.0
29.3
C
46.9
C
NB
B
B
2.3
0.6
SB
T
56
NB
L
T
R
3
8
18
36
40
1140 1864
2.2
1.5
13.8
1.5
0.17 0.17
121
321
0.297 0.125
153
373
0.7
0.6
0.00 0.00
39.1 28.0
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.0
39.6 28.1
D
C
33.5
C
WB
B
A
R
2
NBT
8
6.0
17.8
4.0
3.3
15.8
0.0
0.82
1.00
0.0
WB
L
T
R
1
6
16
8
970
1757 1828
0.1
35.3
0.1
35.3
0.62 0.61
372 1114
0.022 0.871
531 1114
0.0
12.6
0.00 0.00
7.8
13.0
0.0
9.4
0.0
0.0
7.8
22.4
A
C
22.3
C
21.2
EB
2.2
2.0
WBT
6
4.0
52.7
4.0
0.0
NB
T
38
R
190
SBT
4
6.0
17.8
4.0
3.3
13.6
0.2
1.00
1.00
SB
T
4
246
1652
11.6
11.6
0.17
284
0.865
330
5.8
0.00
32.2
16.8
0.0
49.0
D
R
14
SB
B
A
2.3
0.9
B
A
Generated: 7/24/2015 6:52:05 AM
Appendix F Roundabout Operational

Analyses
Roundabout Operations Analysis - 2015 AM Peak Hour

Approach
EB (West Leg)
Parameter
WB (East Leg)
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Entry Lane(s) Configuration
(Note: This assumes 4 legs.)
Case:
RT bypass configuration
(Note: This is in addition to the entry lane(s))
Case:
Number of conflicting circ lanes

Number of conflicting exit lanes for bypass lane (if used)
Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
Pedestrian Volumes (crossing leg)
n_p
Case:
3
0.91
L (v1)
45
3
0.91
T (v2)
481
3
0.91
0.25
2
SUMMARY
Entry lane volume (veh/h)
Entry lane capacity (veh/h)
x (v/c ratio)
Lane control delay (s/veh)
Lane LOS
Approach control delay (s/veh)
Approach LOS
Intersection control delay (s/veh)
Intersection LOS
95th percentile queue (veh)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.7
A
6.5
A
N/A
R (v3)
15
3
0.91
U (v4U)
3
0.91
L (v4)
7
3
0.91
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
223
3
0.91
R (v6)
11
3
0.91
U (v7U)
1
0.91
L (v7)
15
1
0.91
Case:
L (v10)
30
1
0.91
T (v11)
16
1
0.91
R (v12)
34
1
0.91
T (v8)
12
1
0.91
R (v9)
2
1
0.91
U (v10U)
1
0.91
593
1261
0.47
7.7
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.8
A
264
1236
0.21
4.8
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.4
A
31
720
0.04
5.4
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.2
A
87
1031
0.08
4.2
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2.6
N/A
N/A
0.8
N/A
N/A
0.1
N/A
N/A
0.3
N/A
Notes:
*Anaysis results reflect use of draft capacity models developed as part of FHWA Project TOPR 34.
Roundabout Operations Analysis - 2015 PM Peak Hour

Approach
EB (West Leg)
Parameter
WB (East Leg)
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Case:

Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
0.91
L (v1)
56
3
0.91
T (v2)
377
3
0.91
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.6
A
7.0
A
N/A
R (v3)
19
3
0.91
U (v4U)
3
0.91
L (v4)
4
3
0.91
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
461
3
0.91
R (v6)
24
3
0.91
U (v7U)
1
0.91
L (v7)
18
1
0.91
Case:
L (v10)
15
1
0.91
T (v11)
28
1
0.91
R (v12)
95
1
0.91
T (v8)
19
1
0.91
R (v9)
1
1
0.91
U (v10U)
1
0.91
497
1272
0.39
6.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.6
A
537
1204
0.45
7.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.9
A
42
816
0.05
4.9
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.6
A
150
783
0.19
6.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.9
N/A
N/A
2.3
N/A
N/A
0.2
N/A
N/A
0.7
N/A
Notes:
Roundabout Operations Analysis - 2035 AM Peak Hour (Scenario 1 - 2% Annual Growth)

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Case:

Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
1
L (v1)
63
3
1
T (v2)
673
3
1
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10.4
B
8.4
A
N/A
R (v3)
21
3
1
U (v4U)
3
1
L (v4)
10
3
1
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
312
3
1
R (v6)
15
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
21
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
42
1
1
T (v11)
22
1
1
R (v12)
48
1
1
T (v8)
17
1
1
R (v9)
3
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
757
1243
0.61
10.4
B
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.5
A
336
1206
0.28
5.5
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.7
A
41
604
0.07
6.7
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.8
A
111
954
0.12
4.8
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.4
N/A
N/A
1.1
N/A
N/A
0.2
N/A
N/A
0.4
N/A
Notes:
Roundabout Operations Analysis - 2035 PM Peak Hour (Scenario 1 - 2% Annual Growth)

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Case:

Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
1
L (v1)
78
3
1
T (v2)
529
3
1
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8.3
A
9.2
A
N/A
R (v3)
27
3
1
U (v4U)
3
1
L (v4)
6
3
1
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
645
3
1
R (v6)
34
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
25
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
21
1
1
T (v11)
40
1
1
R (v12)
133
1
1
T (v8)
27
1
1
R (v9)
1
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
634
1251
0.51
8.3
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10.2
B
684
1171
0.58
10.2
B
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.9
A
52
707
0.07
5.9
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8.9
A
193
672
0.29
8.9
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.0
N/A
N/A
4.0
N/A
N/A
0.2
N/A
N/A
1.2
N/A
Notes:

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Case:

Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
1
L (v1)
90
3
1
T (v2)
962
3
1
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
26.6
D
19.1
C
N/A
R (v3)
30
3
1
U (v4U)
3
1
L (v4)
14
3
1
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
446
3
1
R (v6)
22
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
30
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
60
1
1
T (v11)
32
1
1
R (v12)
68
1
1
T (v8)
24
1
1
R (v9)
4
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
1083
1201
0.90
26.6
D
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.4
A
482
1153
0.42
7.4
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10.5
B
57
425
0.14
10.5
B
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.5
A
160
818
0.20
6.5
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
14.1
N/A
N/A
2.1
N/A
N/A
0.5
N/A
N/A
0.7
N/A
Notes:

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Case:

Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
1
L (v1)
112
3
1
T (v2)
754
3
1
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
14.7
B
20.0
C
N/A
R (v3)
38
3
1
U (v4U)
3
1
L (v4)
8
3
1
Case:
Case:
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
Case:
Case:
U (v1U)
T (v5)
922
3
1
R (v6)
48
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
36
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
30
1
1
T (v11)
56
1
1
R (v12)
190
1
1
T (v8)
38
1
1
R (v9)
2
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
904
1217
0.74
14.7
B
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
26.1
D
978
1105
0.88
26.1
D
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8.6
A
75
534
0.14
8.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18.8
C
276
496
0.56
18.8
C
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.3
N/A
N/A
12.8
N/A
N/A
0.5
N/A
N/A
3.4
N/A
Notes:

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
Case:
1
U (v1U)
L (v1)
90
3
1
3
1
T (v2)
962
3
1
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
509
1250
0.41
6.9
A
7.3
A
6.5
A
2.0
R (v3)
30
3
1
Case:
Case:
1
U (v4U)
L (v4)
14
3
1
3
1
Case:
Case:
T (v5)
446
3
1
R (v6)
22
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
30
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
60
1
1
T (v11)
32
1
1
R (v12)
68
1
1
T (v8)
24
1
1
R (v9)
4
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
574
1250
0.46
7.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
226
1206
0.19
4.6
A
4.7
A
255
1206
0.21
4.8
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8.1
A
57
532
0.11
8.1
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.6
A
160
917
0.17
5.6
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2.5
N/A
0.7
0.8
N/A
N/A
0.4
N/A
N/A
0.6
N/A
Notes:

Approach
EB (West Leg)
WB (East Leg)
Parameter
NB (South Leg)
SB (North Leg)
INPUTS
Lane Configuration
Case:
U (v1U)
L (v1)
112
3
1
Vehicular Volumes
Flow (veh/h)
% HV
PHF
n_p
Case:
3
1
T (v2)
754
3
1
Constants
Time period, T (h)
PCE for HV
0.25
2
SUMMARY
x (v/c ratio)
Lane LOS
Approach LOS
Intersection LOS
425
1264
0.34
6.0
A
6.2
A
7.7
A
1.5
Case:
U (v4U)
L (v4)
8
3
1
R (v3)
38
3
1
Case:
Case:
3
1
Case:
Case:
T (v5)
922
3
1
R (v6)
48
3
1
U (v7U)
1
1
L (v7)
36
1
1
Case:
L (v10)
30
1
1
T (v11)
56
1
1
R (v12)
190
1
1
T (v8)
38
1
1
R (v9)
2
1
1
U (v10U)
1
1
479
1264
0.38
6.5
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
459
1161
0.40
7.1
A
7.5
A
518
1161
0.45
7.8
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.9
A
75
643
0.12
6.9
A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
13.2
B
276
604
0.46
13.2
B
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.8
N/A
1.9
2.4
N/A
N/A
0.4
N/A
N/A
2.4
N/A
Notes:
Appendix G Crash Data
1.244
2.454
44
44
9200
9400
13
10
1
9
28
16
6
9
0
0
3
3
1
1
1
1
1 S
1 N
22
61
1 W
1 W
0
0
52
73
2
4
0
0
1
3
819972690 79070000
819650590 79070000
2.454
2.454
44
44
9400
9400
11
11
1
6
7
7
19
12
0
0
3
3
5
1
1
1
1 N
1 S
16
23
1 W
1 W
0
0
46
43
2
2
0
0
2
2
822759050
828818440
820050030
831501780
832204800
832669250
833100250
836793700
836690910
832597560
833233680
832436100
828465140
833357980
837447770
837794240
838035450
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070000
79070005
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.454
2.457
2.463
1.204
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9300
9700
9200
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
22
22
3
1
3
4
3
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
5
1
5
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
51
17
45
64
30
43
36
43
16
51
0
0
0
0
0
10
19
12
23
11
14
18
18
14
18
18
21
15
16
13
22
15
21
21
17
19
15
12
17
8
11
44
44
44
19
24
20
3
20
4
26
9
15
31
23
17
9
25
5
5
10
5
5
20
8
23
31
29
27
14
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2.454
2.454
2.454
1
4
6
7
1
3
4
10
11
12
6
3
12
7
2
7
8
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
6
81
0
63
33
24
82
31
78
27
73
28
0
79070000
79070000
79070000
12
12
12
12
13
13
13
13
13
12
13
13
11
13
14
14
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
3
3
1
3
3
3
1
3
5
5
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 1/19/2012 10:00 AM
0 4/24/2012 7:00 PM
2 6/20/2012 12:00 PM
4
7/3/2012 11:00 PM
1 1/20/2013 11:00 AM
2
3/4/2013 2:00 PM
1 4/26/2013 6:00 PM
0 10/9/2013 6:00 PM
3 11/15/2013 2:00 PM
2 12/31/2012 6:00 PM
0 6/23/2013 6:00 PM
0 3/17/2013 9:00 PM
0 12/9/2011 3:25 PM
0 7/25/2013 4:30 PM
1
2/5/2014 1:00 PM
2
7/5/2014 10:00 PM
0 8/10/2014 3:00 PM
0
2/5/2015 9:27 PM
2
2/5/2015 9:10 PM
0 2/20/2015 5:11 PM
1
3/8/2015 7:30 PM
0 3/23/2015 3:29 PM
1 3/31/2015 12:32 PM
2 4/29/2015 5:45 PM
1 5/27/2015 8:20 AM
0 6/14/2015 11:30 AM
847438380
845689960
845285680
848600710
845561380
845051060
848981660
820484430
848982070
E
N
S
N
S
N
S
N
E
W
S
S
N
3
13
3
E
E
W
W
W
W
E
W
W
E
66 W
61 E
64 W
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
48
37
50
1/28/2013
9/16/2010
DAY OF WEEK
TIME
DATE
#_OF_INJURED
#_OF_KILLED
#_OF_VEHICLES
DRIV/PED_AGE2
CONTRIB_CAUSE2
VEH_DIR2
DRIV/PED_AGE1
CONTRIB_CAUSE1
VEH_DIR1
RD_SURF
WEATHER
LIGHTING
HARMFUL_EVENT1
ALC_INV
HOUR
DAY
MONTH
YEAR
ADT
STATE_ROAD
MILEPOST
ROADWAYID
CRASH_NUMBER
832611710 79070005
806310760 79070000
6:00 AM Monday
9:00 AM Thursday
1/7/2011 7:00 PM Friday

6/7/2011 12:00 PM Tuesday
Thursday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Tuesday
Sunday
Monday
Friday
Wednesday
Friday
Monday
Sunday
Sunday
Friday
Thursday
Wednesday
Saturday
Sunday
Thursday
Thursday
Friday
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Sunday
Appendix H Roundabout Performance

Checks for Design Vehicle and
Speed Control
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
SR
R=125 ft
V=22 mph
R=175 ft
V=25 mph
44
R=155 ft
V=24 mph
R=175 ft
V=25 mph
R=105 ft
V=19 mph
R=80 ft
R=80 ft
V=17 mph V=17 mph
R=90 ft
V=18 mph
R=165 ft
V=25 mph
R=135 ft
V=23 mph
SR
R=175 ft
V=25 mph
44
G RAND AVE
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
FASTEST PATH DESIGN CHECKS
SINGLE LANE RDBT CONCEPT
NO.
H-1
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
SR
44
L
2F )
-6 (US
WBG 2007
c)
(
5
1
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
I
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
.
ed
v
er
es
r
D
I
FL
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
I
FL
L
2F )
-67 (US
WBG 200
FL)
62 (US
B- 007
W IDG 2
c)
(
5
1
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
I
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
.
ed
v
er
es
r
D
I
FL
L
WB-62F
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
FL
FL
62 (US)
B- 007
W IDG 2
FL
L
2F
-6 US)
WBG 2007 (
D
I
FL
L
2F
-6 (US)
WBG 2007
5
1
20
c)
(
t
of
s
an
Tr
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
,I
s
on
i
ut
l
So
.
ed
v
er
es
r
D
I
FL
WB-6
2F
L
20
FL I
DG
07 (
US)
L
2F
-6 US)
WBG 2007 (
5
1
20
c)
(
t
of
s
an
Tr
.
ed
v
er
es
sr
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
,I
s
on
i
ut
l
So
D
I
FL
SR
44
G RAND AVE
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
WB62FL TRUCK PATH CHECKS
NO.
H-2
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
(c) 2015 Transoft Sol

uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
W B- 62FL
44
FL I
DG 2007 (US)
SR
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
c)
(
5
1
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
.
nc
I
s
t
gh
i
lr
Al
.
ed
v
er
es
r
I
FL
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
W B-
62FL
FL I
DG
200
7 (U
S)
I
FL
t
of
s
an
Tr
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
,I
s
on
i
ut
l
So
.
ed
v
er
es
r
DG
FL I
5
1
20
c)
(
FL
2 )
6 (US
- 07
B 20
W IDG
FL
62FL
(US)
2007
D
I
FL
W B-
L
2F
-6 (US)
WBG 2007
W B- 62FL
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
G RAND AVE
FL I
DG 2007 (US)
44
W B- 62FL
SR
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
NO.
H-3

uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
G RAND AVE
ghts reserved.
l ri
nc. Al
ons, I
uti
soft Sol
(c) 2015 Tran
DG 2007 (US)
FL I
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (US)
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
D
I
FL
FL
62 US)
(
W B007
G 2
W B- 62FL
20 2F
07
L
(US
)
B-
I
DG
FL
20 2F
07
L
(U
S)
B-
I
DG
I
FL
2FL)
- 6 7 (US
W BDG 200
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
ghts reserved.
l ri
nc. A l
ons, I
uti
W B- 62FL
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
FL
G RAND AVE
uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
44
SR
100
20
0
H-4
VOLUSIA
COUNTY
ROAD NO.
EXHIBIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
REVISIONS
NO.
DESCRIPTION
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
44
SR
Feet
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
ghts reserved.
l ri
nc. A l
ons, I
uti
Sol
(c) 2015 Transoft
DG 2007 (US)
FL I
W B- 62FL
DG
FL I
44
62FL
(US)
2007
W B- 62FL
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
W B-
SR
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
c)
(
15
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
.
nc
I
s
t
gh
i
lr
Al
.
ed
v
er
es
r
I
FL
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
c)
(
5
1
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
.
nc
I
s
t
gh
i
lr
Al
.
ed
v
er
es
r
I
FL
L
WB-62F
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
FL)
62 (US
- 7
B 200
W IDG
FL
L
2F
-6 (US)
WBG 2007
.
ed
v
er
es
r
S)
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
,I
s
on
i
ut
l
So
6
2
F
(U L
t
of
s
an
Tr
B
-
I
DG
FL
20
07
5
1
20
c)
(
D
I
FL
2L
-6 S)
WB 2013 (U
PPM
FL
.
ed
v
er
es
sr
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
,I
s
on
i
ut
l
So
W B- 62FL
reserved.
44
ghts
l ri
nc. Al
ons, I
uti
Sol
Transoft
(c) 2015
W B- 62L
13 (US)
FL PPM 20
SR
t
of
s
an
Tr
FL I
DG 2007 (
US)
5
1
20
c)
(

uti
ons, I
nc. Al
l ri
ghts reserved.
W B- 62FL
FL I
DG 2007 (US)
G RAND AVE
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
NO.
H-5
G RAND AVE
N
0
20
100
Feet
ghts reserved.
l ri
nc. Al
ons, I
uti
W B- 62FL
DG 2007 (US)
FL I
W B- 62FL
S)
DG 2007 (U
FL I
SR
44
L
2F )
-607 (US
20
WB
DG
c)
(
5
1
20
t
f
so
an
Tr
s,
on
i
ut
l
So
s
t
gh
i
lr
l
.A
nc
I
.
ed
v
er
es
r
I
FL
WB-62FL
FL IDG 2007 (US)
L
2F
-6 (US)
WBG 2007
D
I
FL
D
I
FL
W B- 62FL
US)
DG 2007 (
FL I
L
2F
-6 (US)
WBG 2007
WB
FL
L
2F )
- 607 (US
W BIDG 20
-6
FL
I
DG
2F
20
L
07
(US
)
L
2F
-6 US)
WB 2007 (
5
1
20
c)
(
t
of
s
an
Tr
,
s
on
i
ut
l
So
ed.
v
er
es
sr
t
gh
i
lr
Al
nc.
I
DG
I
FL
SR
44
DG 2007 (US)
FL I
W B- 62FL
G RAND AVE
ghts reserved.
l ri
nc. A l
ons, I
uti
Sol
(c) 2015 Transoft
DG 2007 (US)
FL I
W B- 62FL
REVISIONS
DATE
DESCRIPTION
DATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
DESCRIPTION
ROAD NO.
COUNTY
VOLUSIA
EXHIBIT
NO.
H-6
Appendix I ROW Maps
Appendix J Benefit/Cost Analysis
FDOT Level 2 Roundabout b/c Evaluation

Annual Costs
Safety
Roundabout
Predicted Annual Crashes

Predicted Fatal/Injury Crashes
Predicted PDO Crashes
Delay
Safety Cost
0.22
$
0.77
$
Annual Costs of Predicted Crashes $
Annual Intersection Delay (person-hrs)

Average Annual Person (in Vehicle) Delay
Operation and Maintenance
2210
Delay Cost
$
Initial Capital Costs
Cost
$
$
$
Total Discounted Life Cycle Costs

(2015 - 2035)
Delay
4.46
15.39
1,206,237
87,018
1,293,255
Delay Cost
$
O&M Cost
$
Intersection Illumination
$
Landscaping Costs
$
Total Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs $
Cost
$
$
$
Total Initial Capital Costs $
Total Life Cycle Costs (Opening Year $)
Net Present Value $
*Delay cost is based upon a 2 hour analysis period.

*Costs shown are Preliminary Values for Initial Screening Purposes Detailed Cost Estimates Under Development.
*Assumes Single-Lane Roundabout with Lighting
Cost
Total Predicted Crashes
39138
$
$
$
$
$
$
9,278,747
193,021
9,471,768
Delay Cost
$
Signal Retiming Every 3 Years

Signal Maintenance Costs (power outage, detection, etc.)
Total Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs
469,230
O&M Cost
$
$
$
$
Total Capital Costs
Cost
220,000
100,000
1,100,000
1,420,000
$
$
$
3,324,767
Net Present Value $
9,940,998
Safety Cost
34.32
$
34.14
$
Total Costs of Predicted Crashes $
Roundabout

Total Benefits
Added Operations&Maintenance Costs of a Roundabout
Total Costs
$
$
$
11,158
29,755
40,913
Total Capital Costs
Preliminary Engineering
Right-of-way and Utilities
Construction
22,344
O&M Cost
$
$
$
$
Total Intersection Delay (person-hrs)
570,598

Annualized Cost of Signal Retiming
Annual Cost of Illumination
Annual Cost of Maintenance

$
$
46412
Delay Cost
Total Capital Costs
Safety Cost

Total Person (in Vehicle) Delay
623,678
12,974
636,652
220,000
100,000
1,100,000
Roundabout

1864

750
2,000
2,750
Total Capital Costs
Construction
Safety
O&M Cost
$
$
Landscaping Costs
$
Safety Cost
1.72
$
$
1.71
27,171

81,078
5,849
86,927
8,178,512
(101,368)
8,077,144
40,913
1,420,000
1,460,913
5.5
Roundabout Preferred
Roundabout Compared to Two-Way Stop Control
STEP 2 - b/c EVALUATION

Prepared by:
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Date Prepared:
7/26/2015
Financial Project ID:
Project Name:
79070 - MP 2.454
FAP No.:
County:
State Road:
Intersecting Rd:
SR 44
Grand Avenue
Volusia
ANNUAL COSTS
Safety Cost (Crashes)
Delay Cost
O & M Cost
Roundabout
$
86,927
$
27,171
$
2,750

$
636,652
$
22,344
$
-
Initial Capital Cost

Construction
$ 220,000
$ 100,000
$ 1,100,000
$
$
$
TOTAL DISCOUNTED LIFE CYCLE COSTS (OPENING YEAR)

Delay Cost
O & M Cost
Total Life Cycle Costs
Roundabout
$ 1,293,255
$ 570,598
$
40,913
$ 1,420,000
$ 3,324,767

$ 9,471,768
$
469,230
$
$
$ 9,940,998
LIFECYCLE BENEFIT/COST RATIO

Total Benefit
Added O & M Costs of a Rondabout
Total Cost
$
$
$
$
$
$
5.5
Advance to Level 3 Geometric and Operational Analysis:
YES
Approved by:
DDE
Signature:________________________________________
8,178,512
(101,368)
8,077,144
40,913
1,420,000
1,460,913
NO
or
DTOE
Date:___________________________
FDOT Level 2 Roundabout b/c Evaluation

Annual Costs
Roundabout
Safety
Traffic Signal

Delay
Safety Cost
0.22
$
0.77
$

Average Annual Person (in Vehicle) Delay
2210
Delay Cost
$

O&M Cost
Total Capital Costs
Total Discounted Life Cycle Costs

(2015 - 2035)
Delay

Delay Cost
O&M Cost
Total Capital Costs
Net Present Value $

*Costs shown are Preliminary Values for Initial Screening Purposes.
*Assumes Single-Lane Roundabout with Lighting
Cost
67945
11,158
29,755
40,913

Delay Cost
857,485
O&M Cost
$
$
$
$
Total Capital Costs
24,796
11,158
46,120
82,074
Cost
220,000
100,000
1,100,000
1,420,000
$
$
$
3,324,285
Net Present Value $
100,000
100,000
500,000
700,000
7,357,608
Traffic Signal

$
$
$
$
$
$
5,495,010
223,038
5,718,048
*Assumes Traffic Signal with NB and SB Left-Turn Lanes and Lighting
100,000
100,000
500,000
Safety Cost
20.32
$
39.45
$
Roundabout

Total Benefits
Added Operations&Maintenance Costs of a Roundabout
Total Costs
1,667
750
3,100
5,517
$
$
$
Cost
$
$
$
Total Life Cycle Costs (Opening Year $)
$
$
$
$
570,598
$
$
Landscaping Costs
$
Construction
40,833
O&M Cost
Total Capital Costs
1,205,786
86,988
1,292,773

Delay Cost
Traffic Signal
4.46
$
15.39
$
46412
369,351
14,992
384,343
220,000
100,000
1,100,000
Safety Cost

Total Person (in Vehicle) Delay
750
2,000
2,750
Roundabout

3235
Cost
$
$
$
Safety Cost
1.02
$
1.97
$
27,171
$
$
Landscaping Costs
$
Construction
Safety
81,048
5,847
86,895
4,425,275
286,887
4,712,162
(41,161)
720,000
678,839
6.9
Roundabout Preferred
Roundabout Compared to Traffic Signal
STEP 2 - b/c EVALUATION

Prepared by:
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Date Prepared:
7/26/2015
Financial Project ID:
Project Name:
79070 - MP 2.454
FAP No.:
County:
State Road:
Intersecting Rd:
SR 44
Grand Avenue
Volusia
ANNUAL COSTS
Delay Cost
O & M Cost
Roundabout
$
86,895
$
27,171
$
2,750
Traffic Signal
$
384,343
$
40,833
$
5,517

Construction
$ 220,000
$ 100,000
$ 1,100,000
$
$
$
100,000
100,000
500,000
TOTAL DISCOUNTED LIFE CYCLE COSTS (OPENING YEAR)

Delay Cost
O & M Cost
Total Life Cycle Costs
Roundabout
$ 1,292,773
$ 570,598
$
40,913
$ 1,420,000
$ 3,324,285
Traffic Signal
$ 5,718,048
$
857,485
$
82,074
$
700,000
$ 7,357,608
LIFECYCLE BENEFIT/COST RATIO

Total Benefit
Added O & M Costs of a Rondabout
Total Cost
$
$
$
$
$
$
Advance to Level 3 Geometric and Operational Analysis:
Approved by:
Signature:________________________________________
4,425,275
286,887
4,712,162
(41,161)
720,000
678,839
6.9
YES
NO
DDE
DTOE
or
Date:___________________________
Conceptual Cost Estimate

SR 44 at Grand Ave
Roundabout Conceptual Level Construction Costs

Description:
This sheet reflects a planning-level opinion of probable cost for the construction of
the single-lane roundabout illustrated in the project report.
Total Project Cost:

Total Construction Cost:
Total Right of Way Cost:
Total Capital Support Cost:
$
$
$
$
1,424,000
1,103,000
100,000
221,000
ROADWAY ITEMS
110-4
Section 1: Earthwork
Remove Exist Roadway
Description
Assumed 24"
Quantity Unit
2500 CY $
Unit Price
21.46
Amount
53,650
Subtotal Earthwork
285709
327-70-4
334-1-13
160-4
285-709
520-1-7
520-1-10
350-3-5
522-1
527-1
Section 2: Pavement
AB Truck Apron - 6"
Milling Existing Asphalt
AC
Type B Stabilization
Optional Base, Base Group 9
Minor Concrete
Minor Concrete
PCC Truck Apron
Sidewalk (4")
Detectable Pedestrian Warnings
Description
6" AB
Average Depth of 3"
Superpave AC, Traffic C, 4"
New Section
New Section
Curb / Curb & Gutter Type E
Curb / Curb & Gutter Type F
Plain Cement Concrete Pavement, 8"
PCC Sidewalk
Quantity
500
4300
1000
2500
2500
3200
1400
500
1800
320
Unit
SY
SY
TON
SY
SY
LF
LF
SY
SY
SF
Unit Price
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
13.51
1.91
99.57
2.92
13.51
10.74
33.15
61.62
25.12
20.32
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Description
Inlets, pipe, etc. (see "quantity breakout" tab)
Quantity Unit
1 LS $
Unit Price
118,000.00
654-2-21
700-1-11
711-15111
711-15201
711-11125
711-11160
711-11151
711-11170
Quantity Unit
0 LS $
1 LS $
0 LS $
16 AS $
Unit Price
49,100.00
74,000.00
325.00
$
$
$
$
Amount
74,000
5,200
1 GM
4,500.00
4,500
1 GM
4,500.00
4,500
350 LF
0 EA
200 LF
0 EA
$
$
$
$
2.25
150.00
1.25
75.00
$
$
$
$
788
250
-
Subtotal Traffic Items
570-1-2
Section 5: Planting-Irrigation
Performance Turf, Sod
Description
Complete
Quantity Unit
49300 SF $
Unit Price
1.88
89,300
Section Cost
92,700
Section Cost
Subtotal Sections 1-5: $

672,700
Minor Items (5 to 10%):
10%
Total Minor Items $
Section 7: Roadway Mobilization
67,300
Section Cost

740,000
Mobilization (5 to 10%):
10%
Total Roadway Mobilization $
Section 8: Roadway Maintenance of Traffic (MOT)
74,000
Section Cost

740,000
MOT (10 to 15%):
10%
Total Roadway MOT $
Contingencies
118,000
Section Cost
Section 6: Minor Items
Section 9: Roadway Additions

Supplemental Work
319,000
Section Cost
Amount
$
92,684
Subtotal Planting-Irrigation
53,700
Section Cost
Amount
$ 118,000.00
Subtotal Drainage
Section 4: Traffic Items
Description
Traffic Items
Removal of Pole, Mast arms, Signals
Lighting
(Refer to "Quantity Breakout" Tab)
Solar RRFB Pedestrian Signals
Signs
THERMOPLASTIC, STANDARDOP,
WHITE, SOLID, 6"
THERMOPLASTIC, STANDARDOP,
YELLOW, SOLID, 6"
THERMOPLASTIC, STANDARD, WHITE,
SOLID, 24" FOR STOP LINE AND
CROSSWALK
Thermoplastic, standard, white, Message
Thermoplastic, standard, white, dot guide 6"
Thermoplastic, standard, white, Arrow
Amount
6,755
8,213
99,570
7,300
33,775
34,368
46,410
30,810
45,216
6,502
Subtotal Pavement
Section 3: Drainage
Misc Drainage Adjustments
Section Cost
74,000
Section Cost

Supplemental Work Items (5 to 10%):
Total Supplemental Work Items $
740,000
5%
37,000

Contingencies (5 to 40%):
Total Contingencies $
740,000
20%
148,000
Total Roadway Additions
Section 10: Stormwater Quality / Pollution Prevention
185,000
Section Cost

999,000
Stormwater Quality (1.5 to 3%):
3%
Total Stormwater Quality $
30,000
Conceptual Cost Estimate

SR 44 at Grand Ave
Section 1-8: Summary

Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Section 5
Section 6
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9
Section 10
Subtotal Earthwork
Subtotal Pavement
Subtotal Drainage
Subtotal Traffic Items
Subtotal Planting-Irrigation
Total Minor Items
Total Roadway Mobilization
Total Roadway MOT
Total Roadway Additions
Total Stormwater Quality
Total Sections 1-10
Total Estimated Roadway Items
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Section Cost
53,700
319,000
118,000
89,300
92,700
67,300
74,000
74,000
185,000
30,000
1,103,000
1,103,000
Structure Items
Structure Items
Description
Quantity Unit
SF $
SF $
Contingency for Structure Items:
Unit Price
-
$
$
Amount
-
Section Cost
Subtotal Structure Items $

Contingency Cost: $
40%
Total Estimated Structure Items
Capital Support Costs

Total Constrcution Costs (Roadway + Structure Items): $
Description
Projecet Initiation
Project Engineering
Construction Support / Construction Management
Right of Way Support
% of Total Construction Cost

0%
15%
5%
0%
1,103,000
Cost
$
$
$
$
165,450
55,150
-
Professional Services Cost:
220,600
Total Estimated Capital Support Costs
221,000
Right of Way Items
Description
ROW
Description
Corner Clips
Contingency for Right of Way Items:
Quantity Unit
1 AC $
AC $
0%
Unit Price
100,000.00
-
$
$
Amount
100,000
-
Section Cost
Subtotal Right of Way Items $

Contingency Cost: $
Total Estimated Right of Way Items
100,000
100,000
Lighting Pay Items
Item No.
Description
Unit
Quantity
Unit Price
Cost
0630 2 11
0630 2 12
0635 2 11
0715 1 13
0715 4111
0715 7 11
CONDUIT, FURNISH & INSTALL, OPEN TRENCH

CONDUIT, FURNISH & INSTALL, DIRECTIONAL BORE
PULL & SPLICE BOX, F&I, 13" x 24" COVER SIZE
LIGHTING CONDUCTORS, F&I, INSULATED, NO 4 TO NO 2
LIGHT POLE COMPLETE, F&I, WIND SPEED 150, POLE - 40'
LOAD CENTER, F&I, SECONDARY VOLTAGE
LF
LF
EA
LF
EA
EA
600
400
9
3000
8
1
$
4.54
$
13.42
$ 499.24
$
1.06
$ 6,014.26
$ 9,724.43
$ 2,724.00
$ 5,368.00
$ 4,493.16
$ 3,180.00
$ 48,114.08
$ 9,724.43
TOTAL
$ 73,603.67
Notes
Rough estimate of new conduit needed
Assume crossings of streets will need to be bored (3)
Assume new pull box for each new pole plus relocated poles
Assume 3 wires per conduit run (2 conductors plus ground)
Assume 2 per quadrant to light ped crossings
Assume new service cabinet needed
Drainage Pay Items -
Item No.
Description
Unit
Quantity
Unit Price
425 1411
430174118
430174230
430984633
INLETS, CURB TYPE J1, <10'

PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD
PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, OTHER SHAPE - ELLIP/ARCH, 30"SD
MITERED END SECT, OPTIONAL /ELLIP/ARCH, 30" SD
EA
LF
LF
EA
8
400
300
4
$ 6,850.00
$
62.76
$
91.55
$ 2,530.00
TOTAL
Cost
$
$
$
$
$
$
54,800.00
25,104.00
27,465.00
10,120.00
-
$ 117,489.00
Notes
Assume 2 new per quadrant plus 2 additional new inlets for new cublines at roundabout
Assume 50 ft of pipe for each new inlet

Roudabout Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Roudabout Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The operational analysis indicates a single-lane roundabout will accommodate existing

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Overall LOS C or better for single-lane roundabout

2.99 crashes per year expected

Expected total crashes are 13% lower

LOS D or better provided for all individual approaches

Potential need for ROW along Grand

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Exhibit 1: Intersection Layout and Site Vicinity

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Grand Avenue South Approach (looking north)

Grand Avenue North Approach (looking south)

SR 44 East Approach (looking east)

CR 472 West Approach (looking west)

Exhibit 2: Existing Intersection Approach Conditions

Table 1. Existing Intersection Characteristics

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

INTERSECTION VOLUME CONDITIONS

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Average Daily Traffic

Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day)

Exhibit 3: Historical Trends on SR 44 (0.1 miles east of Grand Ave)

Exhibit 4: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (North of SR 44)

Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day)

Exhibit 5: Historical Trends on Grand Avenue (South of SR 44)

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

BEBR POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Table 2: Volusia County BEBR Population Growth Rates

Annual Growth Rate,

MODEL GROWTH RATES

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Table 3: Adopted CFRPM Growth Rates

SR 44, east of Grand Ave

SR 44, west of Grand Ave

Grand Ave, north of SR 44

Grand Ave, south of SR 44

Includes application of MOCF to convert model volumes to AADT

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Table 4: Volume Projections for Year 2035

SR 44, East of Grand Ave

SR 44, West of Grand Ave

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

TWSC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

Table 5: Two-Way Stop Control Results 2015

Assumes a length of 25 feet/vehicle

Assumes a length of 25 feet/vehicle

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

SIGNAL OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

Table 7: Signal Control Results 2015

Reflects critical movement

Table 8: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 1 (2% Annual Growth)

Reflects critical movement

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue

Table 9: Signal Control Results 2035 Scenario 2 (5% Annual Growth)

Reflects critical movement

ROUNDABOUT OPERATIONAL ANALYSES

Roundabout Feasibility Study SR 44 at Grand Avenue