Upload
belisario-h-romo
View
291
Download
4
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | I
2pi™ Evaluation Study - Findings & Conclusions.
In order to evaluate the 2pi™ Traffic System effectiveness and applicability, a series of comprehensive traffic operations and comparisons were performed utilizing as baseline data on previous studies. These base studies are the Traffic Impact Study (Draft) Version-1 of August 24, 2006 and the Priority Treatment Plan (Final) of August 24, 2006 prepared by: STV Incorporated in association with: City Works, Katz & Associates, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, Teshima Design Group and URS Corporation. Naturally, methodologies applied in the studies vary. Therefore, only final results were considered when performance and measures of effectiveness (MOEs) were compared. As explained in the methodology chapter of this study two main, among others, traffic operation analysis software was utilized: the Static: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and the Dynamic: VisSim™, a visual language for mathematical modeling and simulation. At the core of this study is the critical PM peak hour traffic, transit and pedestrian operations forecasted for the targeted year 2030. Ten intersections along the identified segment on Nobel Drive from Lombard Place (ID. #1) in the east end to Villa La Jolla Drive (ID. #10) on the west end of the Super Loop are included in this study.
Super Loop Transit Project 2pi™ Geometry, MOE’s & Applicability Study
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | II
2pi Geometry and Operative Characteristics:
The “typical” Intersection: In a typical four phase two way street intersection geometry, vehicles are queued in three phases, and move only in one. Left turns have a significant impact on the operation and performance of signalized intersections. The conflicts between left and through traffic movements yields low capacity and poor coordination, increasing delays and emissions. Pedestrian crossings further increase the points of conflicting, additional phases are required in order to provide pedestrian crossings with an acceptable level of safety. The Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™ System (2pi) The 2pi™ unique characteristic is the physical treatment and time management of vehicles and pedestrians. Conflicts of opposing left turn movements are eliminated by crossing the left queuing vehicles lanes on the left side of the road at all four approaches prior to the intersection. This is achieved when cross road traffic is moving, at that time vehicles turning left queue in four advance crossing points. Left turners are transited to the left side of the road, crossing the opposite through traffic lanes without conflicting traffic flow. Then vehicles proceed to travel parallel and simultaneously to opposite oncoming through traffic lanes. After queuing, during only one phase, vehicles complete the left turn connection unobstructed. Pedestrians, through traffic, and right-turn vehicles negotiate the intersection without left turn conflicts, which were previously diverted. The same replicates in all four approaches. These among others physical, geometric and operational characteristics define the differences between the “standard/typical” geometry at intersections and the “2pi™” traffic system. Improvements in performance, capacity and overall traffic management as well as environmental impacts are considerable.
This first assessment study in a build-up urban area like University City in La Jolla and in particular along the Super Loop Transit Project allows for the review the 2pi in a vast universe of space-geometric constrains and traffic operation conditions. Based on preliminary conceptual design it yielded valuable measurements of effectiveness and applicability in a specific studied project. The opportunity to compare the results of this 2pi™ study with recent and comprehensive studies like the Traffic Impact Study (Draft) Version-1 and the Priority Treatment Plan previously mentioned constitutes an added value. The following summarized findings, measures of effectiveness (MOEs,) LOS, Travel Time Savings, graphics and tables depict the results of this study and a comparison report with data from the previous studies as baseline.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | III
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry configuration 2pi™ Configuration
1.- Nobel Dr. @ Lombard Place
122
946
372 9 120 183
882
99271
20.9
5.5 10.617.4 45.5
25.2
5.818.7
18.8
02004006008001000
E‐N E‐W E‐W S‐E N‐W N‐W W‐E W‐S W‐N
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3004 11.3
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | IV
Measures of Effectiveness Results
1 Nobel Drive @ Lombard Place Direction EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBT
2 WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SBR
2
Lanes 1 <2> 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
Input Volume 280 830 69 12 900 345 135 7 1 7 43 2 138 137
Model Volume 271 882 99 0 946 372 122 0 0 9 0 0 120 183
Delay (sec) 18.8 5.8 18.7 0.0 5.5 10.6 20.9 0.0 0.0 17.4 0.0 0.0 45.5 25.2
Max. Queue (ft) 341.4 301.3 302.1 na 156.9 156.1 150.1 na na 22.4 na na 154.1 150.8
Ave. Queue (ft) 64.9 42 40.8 na 29.2 16.1 27.4 na na 0.8 na na 30.9 31.0
LOS B A B na A B C na A B na na D C
Approach Delay 9.6 6.9 17.4 45.5
Approach LOS A A B D
Total Delay = 9.0 Signalized? Y
Total LOS = A VisSim Average Delays: 11.3 seconds – LOS = “C”
1.- Nobel Dr. @ Lombard Place
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bard
Pl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | V
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry configuration 2pi™ Configuration W-W: “U” Turn
2.-Nobel Dr. @ Genesee Drive
142
1019
59
443
241343
1671
140 216
765
255 256 191
653
11.9 24.3 25.5 32 34.7 30.2 23.1 29.3 35.2 29.6 26.1 29.6 24.8 11.50
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
E‐N E‐W E‐E E‐S N‐E N‐W N‐S W‐WW‐N W‐E W‐S S‐W S‐E S‐N
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
01000200030004000500060007000
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 6394 25.1
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | VI
Measures of Effectiveness Results 2 Nobel Drive @ Genesee Avenue Direction EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Input Volume 221 719 217 427 1011 154 274 680 199 240 1668 336
Model Volume 216 765 255 443 1019 142 256 653 191 241 1671 343
Delay (sec) 35.2 29.6 27.6 32.0 24.3 11.9 29.6 11.5 24.8 34.7 23.1 30.2
Max. Queue (ft) 219.9 440.2 225.7 272.8 343.2 324.6 440.2 154.7 139.8 112.1 791.6 777.9
Ave. Queue (ft) 78.4 66.4 52.2 86.7 77.6 60.4 66.4 19.6 17.4 19.5 173.5 159.9
LOS D C C C C B C B C C C C
Approach Delay 30.2 25.3 18.0 25.4
Approach LOS C C B C
Total Delay = 25.0 Signalized? Y
Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 25.1 seconds / LOS = “C”
2.-Nobel Dr. @ Genesee Drive
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.933.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.331.929.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
01234567
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | VII
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration
3.-Nobel Dr. @ Costa Verde Boulevard
343 344
933
135301
120
1111
190 5 24 79 75 182 65
11.7 42.4 20.6 35.9 11 32.9 11.5 27.1 29 18.7 9.5 29.8 43.5 26.1
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
E‐N E‐NWE‐NW E‐S N‐NWNW‐SNW‐ENW‐NS‐NWS‐NW S‐E S‐N N‐E N‐S
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
0500
10001500200025003000350040004500
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
All 3907 20.7
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | VIII
Measures of Effectiveness Results
3 Nobel Drive @ Costa Verde Boulevard
Direction EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBT2 WBR NBL NBL2 NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Input Volume 320 897 108 132 631 630 197 40 40 70 68 182 88 297
Model Volume 190 1111 190 135 344 933 343 5 24 75 79 182 65 301
Delay (sec) 27.1 11.5 27.1 11.7 42.4 20.6 11.7 29.0 18.7 29.8 9.5 43.5 26.1 11.0
Max. Queue (ft) 255.9 177.9 255.9 186.0 369.4 369.4 341.1 87.2 87.2 109.2 108.5 194.5 194.5 163.2
Ave. Queue (ft) 62.9 27.0 62.9 25.2 83.7 83.7 67.7 5.2 5.2 13.7 7.1 38.5 38.5 17.3
LOS C B C B D C B C B C A D C B
Approach Delay 15.5 11.5 19.3 23.6
Approach LOS B B
B C
Total Delay = 20.5 Signalized? Y Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 20.7 seconds / LOS = “C”
3.-Nobel Dr. @ Costa Verde Boulevard
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | IX
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration
4.-Nobel Dr. @ Regents Road
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
1111
143345
253384
222 193
694
236 183 210 285 181
21.6 13.6 22.6 30.7 13.6 14.3 35.9 24.6 17.8 17.8 27 13.5 12.90
20040060080010001200
SE‐W SE‐N SE‐SW N‐SE N‐SW N‐W W‐SE W‐SE W‐SW W‐N SW‐W SW‐SE SW‐N
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
0500
100015002000250030003500400045005000
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 4440 21
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | X
Measures of Effectiveness Results 4 Nobel Drive @ Regents Road Direction EBL EBT EBT2 EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Input Volume 179 190 639 229 330 1080 171 214 175 260 235 414 203
Model Volume 183 193 694 236 345 1111 143 210 181 285 253 384 222
Delay (sec) 17.8 32.9 35.9 17.8 22.6 21.6 13.6 27.0 13.5 13.5 30.7 13.6 14.3
Max. Queue (ft) 175.0 425.4 455.6 434.7 382.4 344.3 243.2 193.7 63.2 200.3
217.0
247.5
234.9
Ave. Queue (ft) 17.8 72.6 72.6 63.9 104.9 74.2 12.0 28.2 17.8 17.9 39.9 28.8 18.5
LOS B C D B C C B C B B C B B
Approach Delay 32.3 21.1 17.7 18.8
Approach LOS C C B B
Total Delay = 23.1 Signalized? Y Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 21 seconds / LOS = “C”
4.-Nobel Dr. @ Regents Road
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoa
d
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XI
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration *W-W: “U” Turn.
5.-Nobel Dr. @ Lebon Drive
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
197 221 259131 86
240149
963
75 69 75
1225
245
26.5 13.3 18.7 26.3 13 14.6 7 16.1 28.9 31.6 21.2 28 23.9
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
S‐W S‐E S‐NE NE‐E NE‐WNE‐S W‐S W‐E W‐WW‐NE E‐NE E‐W E‐S
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3935 21.3
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XII
Measures of Effectiveness Results
5 Nobel Drive @ Lebon Drive Direction EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Input Volume 64 959 147 263 1169 78 194 240 192 103 296 90
Model Volume 69 963 149 245 1225 75 197 259 221 131 240 86
Delay (sec) 31.6 16.1 7.0 23.9 28.0 21.2 26.5 18.7 13.3 26.3 14.6 13.0
Max. Queue (ft) 184.8 267.9 251.6 256.4 357.0 341.0 176.1 88.2 153.8 170.0 86.7 92.8
Ave. Queue (ft) 25.2 47.3 35.2 26.9 109.6 98.7 24.1 13.3 14.5 16.1 11.8 5.3
LOS C B A C C C C B B C B B
Approach Delay 15.9 27.0 19.2 17.7
Approach LOS B C B B
Total Delay = 21.1 Signalized? Y
Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 20.3 seconds / LOS = “C”
5.-Nobel Dr. @ Lebon Drive
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XIII
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration
6.-Nobel Dr. @ Caminito Plaza Centro
1452
13725 0 11 4
67
1158
88 9155 7.5
37.8 0 31.1 35.89.9 14.7 53.6 43.5
50.2
0
500
1000
1500
2000
E‐W E‐N N‐W N‐W N‐E N‐S W‐S W‐E S‐E S‐W S‐N
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Forecasted Year: 2030 LOS: B Average Speed: 15.818 mph
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3038 12
0500100015002000250030003500
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XIV
Measures of Effectiveness Results 6 Nobel Drive @ Caminito Plaza Centro Direction EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR SBR2
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Input Volume 989 28 1252 48 104 8 82 15 4 18 18
Model Volume 1158 67 1452 137 91 5 88 11 4 0 25
Delay (sec) 14.7 9.9 5.0 7.5 43.5 43.5 53.6 31.1 35.8 0.0 37.8
Max. Queue (ft) 288.5 287.1 168.2 139.9 157.0 157.0 157.0 55.7 55.7 55.7 55.1
Ave. Queue (ft) 86.6 85.9 19.0 14.4 38.2 38.2 38.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0
LOS B A A A E E F D E A E
Approach Delay 9.3 5.0 47.0 37.5
Approach LOS A A E E
Total Delay = 10.5 Total LOS = B VisSim Average Delays: 12.0 seconds / LOS = “C”
6.-Nobel Dr. @ Caminito Plaza Centro
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
initoPlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XV
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration
2pi™ Geometry Configuration *E-E: “U” Turn.
7. -Nobel Dr. @ I-5 Northbound Exit Ramp
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: B Average Speed: 15.818 mph
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3393 12.9
05001000150020002500300035004000
39
866
629
34
703
468317
75 154 1087.3 10.8 3.5 21.8 18 13.3 19.4 19 17.4 18.2
0
200
400
600
800
1000
E‐E E‐W E‐W E‐N W‐E S‐E S‐W S‐N N‐W N‐W
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XVI
Measures of Effectiveness Results 7 Nobel Drive @ I-5 Northbound Direction EBT WBT WBT2 WBR NBL NBT NBR SBR SBR2 Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Input Volume 653 689 689 22 331 82 331 123 122 Model Volume 703 866 629 34 317 75 468 154 108 Delay (sec) 10.0 10.8 3.5 21.8 19.4 19.0 13.3 17.4 18.2 Max. Queue (ft) 135.9 325.8 89.7 3.7 133.5 133.5 40.3 107.4 107.4 Ave. Queue (ft) 23.8 47.2 5.7 68.6 24.8 24.8 257.7 17.5 17.5 LOS A B A C C C B C C Approach Delay 10.0 9.3 16.0 17.7 Approach LOS A A C C
Total Delay = 11.3 Total LOS = B VisSim Average Delays: 12.9 seconds / LOS = “C”
7.-Nobel Dr. @ I-5 Northbound Exit Ramp
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST
Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XVII
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration
8.-Nobel Dr. @ I-5 Southbound Merge Ramp
1104
716
236144
394
575
1.1 1.3 6.4 0.2 15.1 9.50
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
E‐W W‐E W‐S W‐S E‐W E‐S
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3169 4.8
0500100015002000250030003500
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: A Average Speed: 15.818 mph
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XVIII
Measures of Effectiveness Results 8 Nobel Drive @ I-5 Southbound Direction WBT WBT2 WBR EBT EBR EBR2 Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 Input Volume 1100 175 648 738 202 202 Model Volume 1104 394 575 716 236 144 Delay (sec) 1.1 15.1 9.5 1.3 6.4 0.2 Max. Queue (ft) 0.0 324.7 299.7 59.1 85.8 0.0 Ave. Queue (ft) 0.0 43.6 50.4 0.4 7.9 0.0 LOS A C A A A A Approach Delay 7.3 2.3 Approach LOS A A
Total Delay = 4.8 Total LOS = A VisSim Average Delays: 4.9 seconds / LOS = “A”
8.-Nobel Dr. @ I-5 Southbound Merge Ramp
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB
.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XIX
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements Actual Geometry Configuration 2pi™ Geometry Configuration
9.-Nobel Dr. @ La Jolla Village Square
0500
100015002000250030003500
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 3248 16.4
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: A Average Speed: 15.818 mph
396
144 161 40 83
448
659
30261
519
272 235
10.5 23.9 35 39.8 19.3 7.8 18.1 45.7 3.5 21.3 26.6 3.40
200
400
600
800
E‐S S‐E S‐E S‐N S‐W E‐N E‐W W‐N W‐S W‐E N‐E N‐W
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XX
Measures of Effectiveness Results 9 Nobel Drive @ La Jolla Village Square Driveway Direction EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR NBR2 SBL SBR
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Input Volume 35 583 210 439 543 374 85 48 140 234 283 148 Model Volume 30 519 261 396 659 448 83 40 144 161 272 235 Delay (sec) 45.7 21.3 3.5 10.5 18.1 7.8 19.3 39.8 23.9 35.0 26.6 3.4
Max. Queue (ft) 184.9 216.4 195.7 242.2 199.2 190.3 85.1 134.0 118.6 134.0 263.4 261.0
Ave. Queue (ft) 28.8 52.0 35.8 22.9 54.8 47.3 8.1 52.0 26.5 52.0 81.3 78.3
LOS E C A B C A C E C D D A Approach Delay 16.5 13.0 24.9 15.8 Approach LOS C B C C
Total Delay = 16.4 Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 16.4 seconds / LOS = “C”
9.-Nobel Dr. @ La Jolla Village Square
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSqua
re
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXI
2pi™ Physical Geometry Improvements
Actual Geometry Configuration
2pi™ Geometry Configuration
*E-E: “U” Turn.
10.-Nobel Dr. @ Villa La Jolla Drive
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Veh(All) AveDelay(Secs)
All 2528 17
255
10
404470
20
479
25 83
385
1
396
15.834.5
14.5 27 10.6 6.3 23.6 13.2 24.715
14.5
0
200
400
600
S‐E S‐W S‐N N‐E W‐S E‐N E‐W E‐E E‐S N‐W N‐S
Veh(All) Delay(Secs)
Forecasted year: 2030 LOS: C Average Speed: 15.818 mph
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXII
Measures of Effectiveness Results 10 Nobel Drive @ Villa La Jolla Drive Direction EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Input Volume 20 325 25 441 8 475 242 475 420 3 Model Volume 20 382 25 385 10 402 255 470 396 1 Delay (sec) 10.6 25.0 23.6 24.7 34.5 17.7 15.8 27.0 14.5 15.0 Max. Queue (ft) 22.8 347.5 320.0 320.0 46.9 109.9 183.4 191.1 112.0 112.0 Ave. Queue (ft) 0.9 41.0 40.8 40.8 1.0 15.7 21.5 22.8 16.6 16.6 LOS B C C C D C C D B B Approach Delay 10.6 24.8 17.2 21.3 Approach LOS B C C C
Total Delay = 21.2 Total LOS = C VisSim Average Delays: 17 seconds / LOS = “C”
10.-Nobel Dr. @ Villa La Jolla Drive
19.2
27.526.4
25.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.9 33.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.3 31.9 29.429.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.D.T.(1000'S)DIRECTION:EASTTOWEST Year2005 Year2010 Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoad
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
inito
PlazaCtr.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSquare
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXIII
Super Loop – 2pi™ Travel Time Savings Analysis
Nobel Drive Intersections 1-10 Segment
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
19.2
27.526.425.1
26.6
25.7
27.1
33.933.1
29.4
29.5
26.7
27.331.929.4
29.6
26.1
28.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
01234567
A.D.T.(1000'S)
Year2005
Year2010
Year2030
1.‐Nob
elDrive@
Lom
bardPl.
2.‐Nob
elDrive@
Gen
eseeDr.
3.‐Nob
elDrive@
CostaVerde
Blvd.
4.‐Nob
elDrive@
Regen
tsRoa
d
5.‐Nob
elDrive@
Leb
onDr.
6.‐Nob
elDrive@
Cam
initoPlazaCtre.
7.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5NB.
8.‐Nob
elDrive@
I‐5SB.
9.‐Nob
elDrive@
LaJollaVillageSqre.
10.‐N
obelDrive@
VillaLaJo
llaDr.
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXIV
2pi™ Traffic System Operation Data
Totalaveragedelaysperintersection:2pi™: 162.5 sec. 41.66% Standard: 390.1 sec. 100% The 2pi ™ reduces delays by 58.34%
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
1.‐NobelDr.@LombardPl.
8
2.‐NobelDr.@GeneseeAvenue1
3.‐NobelDr.@CostaVerde
Blvd.4
4.‐NobelDr.@RegentsRoad2
6.‐NobelDr.@CaminitoPlazaCentro9
7.‐NobelDr.@I‐5
Northbound5
8.‐NobelDr.@I5
Southbound7
9.‐NobelDr.@LaJollaVillageSquare6
10.‐NobelDr.@VillaLaJolla
Drive10
1,39
0
3,36
7
915
1,49
8
1,08
8
177
104
1,05
2
1,19
81,61
0
1,57
7
1,04
9
58791
2
579
237
1,01
9
0
799
717
2917
1,73
02,15
8
1,90
9
2,12
8
2,24
1
2,03
0
2,01
3
1,12
6
2,35
5
VehiclesExi\ng VehiclesEntering VolumeonNetwork
01020304050607080
123456789102pi 11.325.120.72121.31212.94.816.417
Strd. 23.966.644.971.344.81428.811.640.543.7
Second
s
AverageIntersec\onDelaysByGeometricConfigura\on
2pivs.Standard
2pi
Strd.
0
20,000
40,000
12,399 7,476
20,607
35,188
Year2030PM/VehiclesinNetwork
VehiclesExi\ng VehiclesEntering VolumeonNetwork TotalTrafficVolume
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXV
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
446600
935833
1829
704
575399
339
598438.9
610.9
547.4413.3
515.6
741.1
570.5371.7
458.9347.8
156.9
343.2369.4344.3357
168.2325.8324.7
199.2320
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
024681012
AlongNobelDriveSegmentWestboundQueuingLengths
PhysicalQueueLength[e] "Standard"maxQueue[e] "2pi"maxQueue[e]
1933
4780
237528742982
16392127
168815381675
2917
6146
36604319
3795
2655315330653123
2355
01000200030004000500060007000
2.‐NobelDr.@GeneseeAvenue1
3.‐NobelDr.@CostaVerde
Blvd.4
4.‐NobelDr.@RegentsRoad2
6.‐NobelDr.@CaminitoPlaza
Centro9
7.‐NobelDr.@I‐5Northbound5
8.‐NobelDr.@I5Southbound7
9.‐NobelDr.@LaJollaVillage
Square6
10.‐NobelDr.@VillaLaJollaDrive10
2030AM/PMIntersec\onsForecastedTrafficVolumes
2030AMTotalTrafficVolume 2030PMTotalTrafficVolumes
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXVI
“Standard” Available westbound physical queue lengths vs. 2030 forecasted traffic required queue lengths: “2pi™”Available westbound physical queue lengths vs. 2030 forecasted traffic required queue lengths:
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
446
600
935833
1829
704
575399
339
598
438.9
610.9547.4
413.3515.6
741.1
570.5371.7
458.9
347.80200400600800100012001400160018002000
024681012
AlongNobelDriveSegmentWestboundQueuingLengths
PhysicalQueueLength[e] "Standard"maxQueue[e]
446600
935833
1829
704575
399339
598
156.9343.2369.4344.3357
168.2325.8324.7
199.2320
0200400600800100012001400160018002000
024681012
AlongNobelDriveSegmentWestboundQueuingLengths
PhysicalQueueLength[e] "2pi"maxQueue[e]
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXVII
“Standard” Available eastbound physical queue lengths vs. 2030 PM forecasted traffic required queue lengths:
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
1933
4780
237528742982
16392127
168815381675
2917
6146
36604319
3795
2655315330653123
2355
01000200030004000500060007000
2.‐NobelDr.@GeneseeAvenue1
3.‐NobelDr.@CostaVerde
Blvd.4
4.‐NobelDr.@RegentsRoad2
6.‐NobelDr.@CaminitoPlaza
Centro9
7.‐NobelDr.@I‐5Northbound5
8.‐NobelDr.@I5Southbound7
9.‐NobelDr.@LaJollaVillage
Square6
10.‐NobelDr.@VillaLaJollaDrive10
2030AM/PMIntersec\onsForecastedTrafficVolumes
2030AMTotalTrafficVolume 2030PMTotalTrafficVolumes
446e
600e
935e833e
1829e
704e575e
399e339e
598e
438.9
610.9547.4
482.3
515.6
741.1
570.5
371.7458.9
347.8 301.3440.2
177.9
455.6
267.9288.5
135.959.1
216.4105.6
PhysicalQueueLength[V] "Standard"maxQueue[V] "2pi"maxQueue[V]
AlongNobelDriveSegmentEastboundQueuingLengths
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXVIII
“Standard” Available eastbound physical queue lengths vs. 2030 PM forecasted traffic required queue lengths: “2pi™”Available westbound physical queue lengths vs. 2030 PM forecasted traffic required queue lengths:
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
446e
600e
935e833e
1829e
704e
575e
399e
339e
598e
438.9
610.9
547.4
482.3
515.6
741.1
570.5
371.7
458.9
347.8
PhysicalQueueLength[e] "Standard"maxQueue[e]
AlongNobelDriveSegmentEastboundQueuingLengths
446e600e
935e833e
1829e
704e575e
399e339e
598e
301.3440.2
177.9
455.6
267.9288.5135.9
59.1216.4
105.6
PhysicalQueueLength[e] "2pi"maxQueue[e]
AlongNobelDriveSegmentEastboundQueuingLengths
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXIX
2030 PM / Directional movements in network Trough traffic represent 63%, left turns (19%) and right turns (18%) all together directional movements represent 37% of vehicular traffic in the network Novel Drive Segment 1 to 10.
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
LeVTurns RightTurns ThroughTraffic AllVehicles
6,616 6,450
22,122
35,188
839
2068
13441811
1131
402
10191052
18571511
2078
4078
231624982664225321122013
1266844
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
024681012
LeV+RigthMovements ThroughTraffic
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXX
2030 Traffic Volumes by Movement:
Nobel Dr. 2pi™ Segment Study
353
1162
674
948
624
208
331
648842
816
486906
670
863
507
194
688
404
1015
695
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
024681012
LeVTurns RightTurns
353
1162674
958624
208
331
648
842
816486
906670863
507194
710
404
1015
695
2078
4078
231624982664225321122013
1266844
050010001500200025003000350040004500
024681012
LeVTurns RightTurns ThroughTraffic
2078
4078
231624982664225321122013
1266844
2917
6146
36604319
3795
2655315330653123
2355
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
024681012
ThroughTraffic AllVehicles
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXI
Green lines indicate segments of the Super Loop were the 2pi™ Traffic System is required.
Length in ft.
Novel Dr. 2pi ™ South Green Loop Segment A.- 8132.50 2pi ™ North Green Loop Segments B.-11,690.50
Brown Loop Segments C.- 18,727.00 Total Super Loop : 38,550 ft.
A
B
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXII
SUPER LOOP TRAVEL TIMES
Time Travel Comparison Analysis "Standard" Configuration vs. 2pi™ Traffic System
Super Loop Intersections 1 to 10 along Nobel Dr. Segment VisSim Analysis
STANDARD CONFIGURATION EASTBOUND (CCW) VS. "2PI" TRAFFIC SYSTEM EASTBOUND (CCW)
TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS DISTANCE 8132.5 FT DISTANCE 8132.5 FT
TRANSIT SPEED* 6.22 MPH (Base Speed 7.793 mph) TRANSIT SPEED* 9.377 MPH (Base
Speed 13.48 mph) TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 891.52 seconds 2pi Time Savings
= 300.22 sec TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 591.3 seconds
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING* 180 SEC (2 x 21.15 secs * 2x 68.86 secs) BOARDING AND ALIGHTING* 180 SEC (2 x 21.15 secs
* 2 x 68.86 secs) *FACTORING BOARDING AND ALIGHTING
14.858 MINUTES / 14'51.2"
*FACTORING BOARDING AND ALIGHTING 9.855 MIN / 9'51.3"
ALL VEHICLES ALL VEHICLES AVERAGE SPEED 7.793 MPH (Base
Speed 18.51 MPH) AVERAGE SPEED 15.818 MPH (Base
Speed 29.49 MPH)
ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME 711.52 seconds / 11.429 ft/sec
2pi Time Savings = 360.97 sec ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME 350.543 seconds
Eastbound Average Delays 412 seconds 11.858 MIN Eastbound Average Delays 153.8
seconds 5.842 Min
11'51.5" 5'50"
STANDARD CONFIGURATION" WESTBOUND (CW) VS. "2PI" TRAFFIC SYSTEM WESTBOUND (CW)
TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS DISTANCE 8259.8 FT DISTANCE 8259.8 FT
TRANSIT SPEED 6.497 MPH (Base Speed 12.32 mph) TRANSIT SPEED 10.797 MPH (Base
Speed 16.48 mph) TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 866.79 seconds 2pi Time Saving =
345.19 sec TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 521.6 SEC
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING*
180 SEC (2 x 21.15 secs * 2 x 68.86 secs)
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING*
180 SEC (2 x 21.15 secs * 2 x 68.86 secs)
Eastbound Average Delays 409.8 seconds
14.446 MINUTES / 14'26.7"
Westbound Average Delays 153 seconds 8.69 MIN / 8'41.6"
ALL VEHICLES ALL VEHICLES AVERAGE SPEED 8.20 MPH (Base
Speed 20.33 mph) AVERAGE SPEED 16.486 MPH (Base
Speed 29.86 mph) ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME 686.79 2pi Time Saving =
345.19sec ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME 341.6 Westbound Average Delays 409.8 seconds 11.446 MIN Westbound Average Delays 153
seconds 5.903 MIN
11' 26.8" 5' 54" *.- BOARDING AND ALIGHTING: Two bus stations were considered with lift (68.86 secs. - 137.72 secs.) Two bus stations were considered without lift (21.15 secs - 42.3 secs) 137.72 + 42.3 = 180.02 secs. / direction
(CCW) Posted Speed 35 MPH / 5:30:00 PM Posted Speed 35 MPH / 5:30:00 PM (CW) Average speed July 18, 2007- All vehicles = 13.25 MPH Average speed July 18, 2007- All vehicles = 13.40 MPH Average =19.43 ft / sec Travel Time = 418.44 secs. Average = 19.66 ft/sec Travel Time = 420 secs. Westbound Average Delays 260.01 Westbound Average Delays 259.09
Super Loop 2pi™ Applicability Study
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXIII
SUPER LOOP TRAVEL TIMES
Time Travel Comparison Analysis "Standard" Configuration vs. 2pi™ Traffic System
Super Loop Additional Segments 11,690.5 ft. (11 Stdrd. & 2pi™ configuration on intersections: #13, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29,31,33,38 and 40)
STANDARD CONFIGURATION VS. "2PI" TRAFFIC SYSTEM TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS
DISTANCE 11,690.5 FT DISTANCE 11,690.5 FT
TRANSIT OPERATING SPEED* 5.33 MPH TRANSIT OPERATING SPEED* 10.72 MPH
TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 1,495.68 secs
2pi Time Savings = 752.6 secs.
TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 743.08 secs
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING (6 sta.)* 270 SEC (3 x 21.15 secs - 3x 68.86 secs)
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING (6 sta.)*
270 SEC (3 x 21.15 secs - 3 x 68.86 secs)
*FACTORING BOARDING AND ALIGHTING
25.17 MINUTES *FACTORING BOARDING AND
ALIGHTING 12.38 MIN
ALL VEHICLES ALL VEHICLES AVERAGE OPERATING SPEED 6.50 MPH AVERAGE OPERATING SPEED 16.848 MPH ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME + DELAYS 1,225.68 SEC
2pi Time Savings = 752.6 secs.
ALL TRAFFIC TRAVEL TIME + DELAYS 473.08 SEC
Average Delays 960 seconds 20.67 MIN. Average Delays 207.4 seconds 7.88 MIN.
2PI CONFIGURATION TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS: 752.6 SEC / 12 ' 32 "
*.- BOARDING AND ALIGHTING: Three bus stations were consider with lift 68.86 secs or 206.58 secs. Three bus stations were consider without lift 21.15 secs or 63.45 secs 206.58 + 63.45 = 270.03 secs.
Super Loop North Segment
Super Loop 2pi™ Applicability Study
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXIV
SUPER LOOP TRAVEL TIMES
Time Travel Comparison Analysis (Year 2030) "Standard" Configuration no 2pi™ intersections in these segments
Super Loop Additional Segments 17,677 ft. (19 Standard configuration intersections: #11, 12, 14, 15,16,17,18,19,22,24,25,27,30,32,34,35,36,37 and 39)
"STANDARD CONFIGURATION" (TYPICAL) "STANDARD CONFIGURATION" (TYPICAL)
TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS (30 MPH) ALL VEHICLES (30 MPH)
DISTANCE 18,727 FT DISTANCE 18,727 FT
AVERAGE OPERATING SPEED* 13.15 MPH AVERAGE OPERATING SPEED 16.595 MPH
TOTAL TRANSIT TRAVEL TIME 769.413 secs ALL VEHICLES TIME + DELAYS 769.413 secs
BOARDING AND ALIGHTING (5 sta.)* 3 x 21.15 secs - 2 x 137.72 secs = 201.17 SEC Travel Time 425.613 *FACTORING BOARDING AND ALIGHTING Average Delays: 970.58 seconds Average Delays: 343.8 secs
Transit Travel Time = 16.176 MINUTES / 16'10.5" All Vehicles Travel Time = 12.823 MINUTES / 12'49.4" *.- BOARDING AND ALIGHTING: Two bus stations were consider with lift 68.86 secs or 137.72 secs. Three bus stations were consider
without lift 21.15 secs or 63.45 secs:137.72 + 63.45 = 201.17 secs. Brown lines indicate segments of the Super Loop were traffic operations and travel times are the same for both 2pi & standard configurations.
Super Loop 2pi™ Applicability Study
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXV
SUPER LOOP TRAVEL TIMES SUMMARY
Super Loop 2pi™ Applicability Study
Super Loop Time Travel Comparison 2030 PM Forecasted Volumes 2pi Transit Travel Time Length 2pi All Vehicles Travel Time
#1 to #10 9.377 MPH 591.3 8132.5 15.818 MPH 350.543
2pi North Segment 10.72 MPH 743.08 11,690.50 16.848 MPH 473.08
Standard Segments 13.15 MPH 970.58 18,727 16.595 MPH 769.413
11.40 MPH 2304.96 38550 16.50 MPH 1593.036
Total Travel Times (2pi) 38.416 min 38'24.9" Total Travel Times (2pi) 26.55 min 26'33"
Standard Transit Travel Time Length Standard All Vehicles
6.22 MPH 891.52 8132.5 7.793 MPH 711.52
5.33 MPH 1,495.68 11,690.50 6.60 MPH 1,225.68
13.15 MPH 970.58 18,727 16.76 MPH 769.413
7.827 MPH 3357.78 38550 9.71 MPH 2706.613
Total Travel Times: 55.963 min 55'57.7" Total Travel Times: 45.11 min 45'6.6"
Time savings Super Loop 2pi
Configuration Average Speed difference 2pi vs. Stdrd.
Transit - 17'32.8" 1,052.82 secs Transit + 45.6% 3.573 MPH
All Vehicles - 18'33.5" 1,113.57 secs All Vehicles +70% 6.79 MPH
Transit Time Savings due to improvements : Standard 2pi.
without improvements 3357.78 without improvements 2304.96
with improvements -349.7 with improvements -254.81
Total Transit Travel Time 3008.08 Total Transit Travel Time 2050.15
Ave. Speed = 8.737 mph Ave. Speed = 12.82 mph
2pi Transit Speed Travel Increase 4.08 mph 47% 2pi Transit Travel Time Savings 957.93 seconds 15' 57.9"
All vehicles Time Savings due to improvements : Standard 2pi.
without improvements 2706.613 without improvements 1593.036
with improvements -223.6 with improvements -158.71
Total All Vehicles Travel Time 2483.01 Total All Vehicles Travel Time 1434.33
Ave. Speed = 10.585 mph Ave. Speed = 18.32 mph
2pi All Vehicles Speed Travel Increase 7.735 mph 73%
2pi All Vehicles Travel Time Savings 1,048.68 seconds 17' 28.6"
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXVI
Conclusions:
Super Loop 2pi™ Applicability Study
‐100
0
100
200
300
400
500
AverageDelaysinSecon
ds
Standard 2pi 2per.mediamóvil(Standard) 2per.mediamóvil(2pi)
SuperLoopAverageDelaysComparison
Standardvs.2piGeometryConfigura\ons40trafficintersec\onsAllVehicles:
StandardAverageDelays=2,483.01seconds2piAverageDelays=1,434.33seconds
AverageDelaysDifference=‐1,048.68seconds2piAverageDelaysSaving=17'28"
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXVII
Table 2.2 2005 Intersection Level of Service Analysis
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID # Intersection Avg Delay
(sec) LOS Avg Delay (sec) LOS
1 Nobel Drive/ Lombard Place 2 44.9% A 50.6% A 2 Nobel Drive/ Genesee Avenue 48.4 D 63.3 E 3 Nobel Drive/ Costa Verde Boulevard 29.2 C 36.9 D 4 Nobel Drive/ Regents Road 32.4 C 58.9 E 5 Nobel Drive/ Lebon Drive 24.5 C 43.6 D 6 Nobel Drive/ Caminito Plaza Centro 7.5 A 9.3 A 7 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Northbound 24.9 C 23.9 C 8 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Southbound 8.6 A 11.1 B 9 Nobel Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 19.4 B 41.1 D 10 Nobel Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive 34.5 C 39.2 D 11 Villa La Jolla Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 14.7 B 19.2 B 12 Villa La Jolla Drive/ Via Mallorca 11.5 B 13.5 B 13 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (South) 13.7 B 29.3 C 14 Gilman/ La Jolla Village Drive Ramps 2 43.6% A 55.2% B 15 Gilman Drive/ Scholars Drive-Osler Lane 2 50.2% A 88.4% E 16 Gilman Drive/Eucalyptus Grove Lane 2 33.6% A 35.8% A 17 Gilman Drive/ Mandeville Road 2 21.1% A 35.2% A 18 Gilman Drive/ Myers Drive 2 27.5% A 38.7% A 19 Gilman Drive/ Russell Lane 2 37.4% A 45.0% A 20 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (North) 24.8 C 70.0 E 21 Gilman Drive/ Parking Lot 406 1 8.3 A 20.3 C 22 Gilman Drive/ Voigt Drive 2 38.2% A 70.1% C 23 Voigt Drive/ Campus Point Drive 41.3 D 42.7 D 24 Campus Point Drive/ Medical Center Drive 2 36.8% A 39.1% A 25 Medical Center Drive/Health Sciences Drive 1 8.3 A 8.2 A 26 Voigt Drive/ Health Sciences Drive 1 32.0 D 9.9 A 27 Regents Road/ Health Sciences Drive 26.0 C 22.6 C 28 Regents Road/ Eastgate Mall 9.8 A 11.3 B 29 Regents Road/ Executive Drive 11.3 B 25.9 C 30 Executive Drive/ Regents Park Row 2 22.5% A 22.3% A 31 Executive Drive/ Genesee Avenue 16.7 B 28.4 C 32 Executive Drive/ Executive Way 23.7 C 15.1 B 33 Executive Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 11.9 B 19.6 B 34 Executive Drive/ Judicial Drive 7.3 A 6.6 A 35 Judicial Drive/ Golden Haven Drive 27.0 C 31.8 C 36 Judicial Drive/ Sydney Court 9.7 A 6.7 A 37 Judicial Drive/ Research Place 3.8 A 13.2 B 38 Nobel Drive/ Judicial Drive 5.7 A 7.4 A 39 Nobel Drive/ Shoreline Drive 51.7 D 22.8 C 40 Nobel Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 27.7 C 33.1 C
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXVIII
Table 3.4. 2010 Intersection Level of Service Analysis (STV)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID # Intersection Avg
Delay (sec)
LOS Avg
Delay (sec)
LOS
1 Nobel Drive/ Lombard Place 11.2 B 30.2 C 2 Nobel Drive/ Genesee Avenue 89.8 F 83.6 F 3 Nobel Drive/ Costa Verde Boulevard 47.1 D 50.9 E 4 Nobel Drive/ Regents Road 32.6 C 67.9 F 5 Nobel Drive/ Lebon Drive 24.8 C 45.4 D 6 Nobel Drive/ Caminito Plaza Centro 7.7 A 11.5 B 7 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Northbound 24.8 C 29.2 C 8 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Southbound 10.3 B 11.7 B 9 Nobel Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 19.1 B 40.8 D 10 Nobel Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive 35.1 D 40.5 D 11 Villa La Jolla Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 14.4 B 19.2 B 12 Villa La Jolla Drive/ Via Mallorca 12.7 B 13.4 B 13 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (South) 14.0 B 31.0 C 14 Gilman Drive/ La Jolla Village Drive Ramps 8.8 A 12.3 B 15 Gilman Drive/ Scholars Drive-Osler Lane 12.3 B 13.5 B 16 Gilman Drive/Eucalyptus Grove Lane 2 38.3% A 49.0% A 17 Gilman Drive/ Mandeville Road 2 27.1% A 35.9% A 18 Gilman Drive/ Myers Drive 45.0% A 79.6% D 19 Gilman Drive/ Russell Lane 2 53.8% A 70.5% C 20 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (North) 26.2 C 64.6 E 21 Gilman Drive/ Parking Lot 406 1 9.2 A 33.9 D 22 Gilman Drive/ Voigt Drive 2 44.7% A 78.3% D 23 Voigt Drive/ Campus Point Drive 51.4 D 48.9 D 24 Campus Point Drive/ Medical Center Drive 2 56.8% B 59.4% B 25 Medical Center Drive/Health Sciences Drive 1 10.1 B 9.3 A 26 Voigt Drive/ Health Sciences Drive 1 62.4 F 16.3 C 27 Regents Road/ Health Sciences Drive 31.4 C 37.5 D 28 Regents Road/ Eastgate Mall 64.0 E 118.4 F 29 Regents Road/ Executive Drive 17.6 B 49.0 D 30 Executive Drive/ Regents Park Row 2 26.2% A 23.6% A 31 Executive Drive/ Genesee Avenue 24.0 C 42.2 D 32 Executive Drive/ Executive Way 19.6 B 15.4 B 33 Executive Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 45.2 D 79.6 E 34 Executive Drive/ Judicial Drive 30.6 C 28.7 C 35 Judicial Drive/ Golden Haven Drive 20.8 C 23.5 C 36 Judicial Drive/ Sydney Court 4.2 A 2.7 A 37 Judicial Drive/ Research Place 7.8 A 8.7 A 38 Nobel Drive/ Judicial Drive 8.5 A 11.9 B 39 Nobel Drive/ Shoreline Drive 31.7 C 20.8 C 40 Nobel Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 28.9 C 34.2 C
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XXXIX
Table 3.7. 2030 Intersection Level of Service Analysis (STV)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ID # Intersection Avg Delay
(sec) LOS Avg Delay (sec) LOS
1 Nobel Drive/ Lombard Place 12.3 B 26.7 C 2 Nobel Drive/ Genesee Avenue 101.6 F 65.1 E 3 Nobel Drive/ Costa Verde Boulevard 44.3 D 48.4 D 4 Nobel Drive/ Regents Road 32.2 C 73.2 E 5 Nobel Drive/ Lebon Drive 29.3 C 44.8 D 6 Nobel Drive/ Caminito Plaza Centro 8.3 A 14.0 B 7 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Northbound 25.2 C 28.8 C 8 Nobel Drive/ I-5 Southbound 9.9 A 11.6 B 9 Nobel Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 21.5 C 45.6 D 10 Nobel Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive 38.4 D 44.0 D 11 Villa La Jolla Drive/ La Jolla Village Square Driveway 14.4 B 19.3 B 12 Villa La Jolla Drive/ Via Mallorca 11.0 B 13.4 B 13 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (South) 16.1 B 37.2 D 14 Gilman Drive/ La Jolla Village Drive Ramps 8.0 A 11.6 B 15 Gilman Drive/ Scholars Drive-Osler Lane 12.8 B 13.6 B 16 Gilman Drive/Eucalyptus Grove Lane 2 39.7% A 52.6% A 17 Gilman Drive/ Mandeville Road 2 27.2% A 44.6% A 18 Gilman Drive/ Myers Drive 23.5 C 26.3 C 19 Gilman Drive/ Russell Lane 2 59.2% A 66.3% C 20 Gilman Drive/ Villa La Jolla Drive (North) 28.6 C 80.2 F 21 Gilman Drive/ Parking Lot 406 1 10.8 B 54.6 F 22 Gilman Drive/ Voigt Drive 2 44.2% A 76.7% D 23 Voigt Drive/ Campus Point Drive 48.3 D 45.4 D 24 Campus Point Drive/ Medical Center Drive 2 60.5% B 57.8% B 25 Medical Center Drive/ Health Sciences Drive 1 10.6 B 9.2 A 26 Voigt Drive/ Health Sciences Drive 1 63.8 F 16.8 C 27 Regents Road/ Health Sciences Drive 31.3 C 35.3 D 28 Regents Road/ Eastgate Mall 88.6 F 459.1 F 29 Regents Road/ Executive Drive 34.7 C 81.4 F 30 Executive Drive/ Regents Park Row 2 25.4% A 23.9% A 31 Executive Drive/ Genesee Avenue 28.3 C 45.9 D 32 Executive Drive/ Executive Way 19.6 B 15.1 B 33 Executive Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 52.4 D 92.8 F 34 Executive Drive/ Judicial Drive 35.9 D 30.1 C 35 Judicial Drive/ Golden Haven Drive 20.5 C 24.4 C 36 Judicial Drive/ Sydney Court 4.1 A 2.7 A 37 Judicial Drive/ Research Place 7.8 A 8.7 A 38 Nobel Drive/ Judicial Drive 8.7 A 12.2 B 39 Nobel Drive/ Shoreline Drive 31.7 C 21.3 C 40 Nobel Drive/ Towne Centre Drive 29.0 C 34.4 C
DRAFT 2pi™ Traffic System Feasibility Study© Two Phase Enhanced At-Grade Intersection™
June 15, 2007 © ™ Page | XL
Standardgeometryvs.2piconfigurationLOScomparisonyear:2030 LaJollaSuperLoop2piReport