Loading...
EDA Agenda 10-12-2011 (Workshop Meeting)EDA MEETING Wednesday, October 12, 2011 6:30 — 7:30 p.m. Mississippi Room - 505 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN Commissioners: President Bill Demeules, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Tracy Hinz, Matt Frie, Bruce Hamond, and Council members Tom Perrault and Brian Stumpf Staff: Executive Director Megan Barnett 1. Call to Order 2. Discuss Embracing Downtown study with the Monticello Downtown Business Association (MDBA) a. Attached to the agenda is the most recent Design Guidelines, proposed final document outline, and draft Transportation Study. b. The MDBA would like to openly discuss some of their recommendations and feedback regarding the concepts, design guidelines, and project in general. 3. Adjourn DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO FRAMEWORK PLAN The sub - districts of the downtown plan include areas of Flex Zones and Landmark Zones. Flex Zones are areas that need more flexibility for accommodating market driven factors such as vehicular access, visibility and service. Landmark Zones are key areas that will require more specific criteria for performance due to site forces, amenities, or a higher level of pedestrian experience. FLEX ZONES SHOPPING AREA WEST OF HWY 25: Area designated for downtown places to shop, work, and entertain that take advantage of the visibility, access and traffic from Hwy 25 and /or Broadway. Anchor type tenants such as department stores, hotels, general merchandise stores, financial institutions, theatres, office and restaurants are encouraged. Ct, CONVENIENCE/ SERVICES: Area fronting on Hwy 25 designated for uses that take advantage of the convenient access and visibility from Hwy 25. Uses that are more automobile oriented such as drive- thrus and quick sales are envisioned in these areas. Areas with less visibility from Hwy 25 and /or Broadway provide a good location for business and professional services. TRANSITIONS: Areas that are less intensive in nature such as office, service, higher density housing, and medical that create an appropriate buffer to existing single family neighborhoods are encouraged in these areas ■ .......... ,.. LANDMARK ZONES PUBLIC SPACES: The riverfront park to the north and cemetery open space to the south provide gateway opportunities that help define the Downtown area. "Welcome to Downtown Monticello" monuments or public sculpture and other amenities are encouraged for these areas. The southern public spaces offer opportunities for a visual connection to the Community Center- a high demand area for indoor gatherings. The northern park offers opportunities for recreation such as river boating, skating, sliding, picnics, amphitheatre, events, swan related activities, farmers markets and outdoor public gatherings. Active programming of the riverfront as outdoor space can complement active programming of the indoor civic center space. RIVER ORIENTED SHOPPING: Area fronting on Hwy 25 designated for uses that take advantage of the river and park amenities. Small shop tenants such as restaurants, boutique specialty shopping, hospitality, tourism, recreation and outdoor - oriented tenants that gather the community are encouraged. HIGHWAY 25 CORRIDOR: Area intended to capitalize on the intensity of traffic, yet make an immediate positive impression of Downtown Monticello. Structures are located away from the corridor to provide enough room for significant berming and landscaping. Bicycle trails and vehicular movement is the dominant action. Gateway features such as monuments, sculptures, or public kiosks to welcome residents, commuters, and travelers to the downtown at both the river crossing and the south end. I r-4 MIWL PUBLIC PARKING: Site areas designated to provide public parking stalls to meet high parking demand s due to events or existing shortages. Parking ramps should follow the architectural and streetscape guidelines. Structures should be placed close to the Walnut Street Corridor and provide a pleasant pedestrian atmosphere at the street level. W &I WALNUT STREET CORRIDOR: Area to accommodate both vehicular traffic as well as the major north -south pedestrian corridor from the river to the shopping center north of Hwy 94. This pedestrian corridor is to provide the alternative walking experience to Hwy 25. Storefronts should face the street and provide a human scale shopping experience with sidewalks of an appropriate depth in order to provide ample streetscaping and amenities. CARGILL SITE: Critical site in completing the urban pedestrian corridor along Walnut Street. Streetscape elements and architectural design should follow the architectural guidelines for Downtown. Parking demand is high in this vicinity and needs to be addressed during redevelopment. BROADWAY CORRIDOR: Area for redevelopment and reorientation of storefronts to have both front and back exposure to the street and parking field. Broadway sidewalks need specia attention to streetscape enhancements in order to temper the high volume of traffic and to accommodate pedestrian and outdoor seating areas. CIVIC: Sites that are owned by the city. The Community Center sets the tone for high architectural quality, materials and streetscape. The proximity of the liquor store, and FiberNet sites to Hwy 25 and Walnut Street offer opportunities for visual cues and anchors the south end of the Downtown district. FREEWAY RETAIL: Key anchor to the south of Downtown district. Freeway oriented shopping drives regional traffic to the area. Pedestrian and vehicular connections through Walnut Street is critical. Design guidelines should remain in the B -4 zoning criteria. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO DESIGN GUIDELINES The purpose of these standards is to define the character of new development and redevelopment within the various districts of downtown. It is intended to help create new development patterns that are consistent with the vision and recommendation of the City of Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The guidelines apply to all zones within the CCD. These guidelines have been written to define specific standards necessary towards the creation of a mixed -use, pedestrian oriented development. They have been intentionally designed to allow enough flexibility for creative building solutions, while being prescriptive in areas necessary to complete the downtown vision. Where the guidelines are less restrictive than the city code, the city code will prevail. While many of the historic buildings in the downtown no longer exist, visual cues can be taken as to proportion, character and rooflines. BUILDING ORIENTATION Shopping Area West Of Hwy 25 - Site planning concept: Multiple buildings with an emphasis on pedestrian connections through the site and in front of storefronts. - The orientation and placement of buildings should take advantage of available view sheds from Hwy 25 - Anchor tenants shall be encouraged on the west side of the site with good visibility from Hwy 25 - Fronts of buildings should orient toward major roadways where feasible and have a direct relation to parking - Service areas should be oriented to the rear of buildings - Buildings should be located adjacent to Broadway where feasible - Corner site at intersection of Hwy 25 and Broadway should incorporate groupings of small buildings near the roadways with site amenities such as plazas or open space to allow for traffic visibility a - � o k U River Oriented Shopping - Buildings should have a direct relationship to the intersection of Hwy 25 and Broadway as well as the river - Outdoor dining patios and exterior access shall be encouraged facing the River - Visibility from the intersection of Broadway and Hwy 25 to the storefronts Is encouraged P Q C ° � C Convenience /Services: - Buildings shall take advantage of visibility to Hwy 25 by fronting the highway - Drive thru and service activity shall not dominate the Hwy 25 visibility - Cross parking and access shall be encouraged between site developments _- S l s a © l Jf o, 0 G Transitions - Buildings shall orient toward major thoroughfares and have less active back of building toward residential - Service areas shall be buffered from residential or shall be oriented to the sides of buildings away from residential - Parks, ponds, and heavy vegetation are appropriate uses I 1� 1` BUILDING DESIGN - Building mass shall have a variety of scale that compliment the heights of anchor tenants and have a two -story appearance through the use of upper windows or taller tower features - Storefront glass shall dominate the pedestrian oriented facades - Varying rooflines shall be encouraged for skyline interest from highways - Large areas of blank wall surface facing street frontages must be interrupted a minimum of 40' for large scale buildings and 20' for small scale buildings with undulations or design features such as pilasters, change in material, streetscape elements such as light fixtures, planter beds or other architectural details - Building character shall be urban in nature with square geometries to reinforce a downtown flavor - A variety of storefront designs are encouraged in order to enhance the pedestrian experience - Individual buildings should take on unique detailing to be distinct from other neighboring buildings - Masonry detailing such as soldier coursing, or patterning shall be encouraged - Thematic brand identifications are limited to front entries or signage only - Dual front buildings, corner buildings, and facades that are visible from R.O.W.s should have the same high level of architecture as the main entry facades - The use of cornices, decorative light fixtures, and other architectural details are encouraged - Colorful and unique canopies, rooflines and accent details are encouraged Small tenant proportions 1,200 SF -6,000 SF L ko' 1. AD' 1 4.' 1 40' 1 ¢p, 1 4.1 1 Large tenant proportions 6,000 SF- 100,000 SF BUILDING MATERIALS - Materials shall be selected for suitability to the type of buildings and the design in which they are used. - Facades should be finished in aesthetically acceptable tones and colors that compliment and do not compete with neighboring buildings - Materials shall be of a durable quality - Exterior wall treatments such as brick, natural stone, decorative concrete block, stucco and or architectural metal panels are encouraged - All wood treatment shall be painted or stained for weatherproofing - A minimum of 25% of the facades shall be treated with the finished masonry building material or glass - Secondary materials such as decorative concrete block, precast panels, EIFS, or standing seam metal shall be allowed on the remaining 75% - Transparent glass shall be used at the majority of street level windows. Spandrel glass is acceptable for minor in -fill usage. Mirror glass is not allowed - Masonry walls shall have decorative variation in color, texture, or pattern - Rear of buildings not visible from public shall be consistent in color to the front facades - The natural brick and copper tones of the community center should give visual cues to the appropriate color palette selection Example of combination of acceptable materials Community Center DOORS AND WINDOWS - Windows and doors must be glazed in clear glass for retail establishments. The use of tinted glass is allowed for office type of uses for sun protection only. The use of mirrored glass is prohibited - Window frames shall be constructed of prefinished metal or other durable materials - Window frame, material and color must compliment architectural style of the building - Window openings may be modulated to scale and proportion complementary to the architectural proportions - Canopies, awnings or other creative overhangs shall be encouraged at entryways - A minimum of 8' clear shall be provided from sidewalk to lowest point of canopy or suspended sign - The use of upper windows to give a 2 -story appearance is encouraged - Spandrel glass or frosted glass is allowed where the appearance of storefront is desired but not feasible to be true, clear glazing Example of human scale proportions of storefront glass SCREENING - Loading areas, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, or other utility hardware on the ground, roof, or building shall be screened from the public view with materials similar to the building and landscaping FRANCHISE DESIGN Franchise design shall utilize materials, scale and size to complement the downtown atmosphere without losing corporate identity Example of acceptable franchise design SITE TREATMENTS - Landscaping is to be utilized with in the master plan as an aid to provide continuity within the areas and to provide a recognized definition of boundaries, entrances and other key features - Entry points to the areas are to have enhanced landscape design features with a common theme - Sidewalks in front of buildings should incorporate planting beds, or planters - Parkway like trees must be utilized along all external and internal roadways with placement as to not obstruct visibility of commercial signage, view of pedestrians and drivers - Unity of design shall be achieved by repetition of certain plant varieties and other streetscape materials consistent with the downtown theme Unity of design shall be achieved by repetition of certain plant varieties and other streetscape materials consistent with the downtown theme Plant material is to be utilized as a screening element for parking lot headlights and building utility areas Plant materials are to be utilized within parking lot islands with grouped massing of landscape encouraged in parking lots versus island planting to maximize landscape impact and allow functional snow removal and storage - Plant material shall be selected in regard to its interesting structure, texture, color, seasonal interest and its ultimate growth characteristics - Urban substitutes for planting shall include ornamental fencing, masonry walls, pavers and plaza features - Streetscape elements such as wrought iron benches, trash and ash receptacles shall be encouraged and should be of a color and style compatible with the architecture - Ornamental pedestrian light fixtures should be of a color and design compatible with established downtown streetscape elements Example of appropriate streetscape elements PARKING - Commercial areas shall incorporate identifiable motorcycle parking and bicycle parking with bike racks - Cross parking between sites is encouraged - Parking ratios shall be appropriate to market demands with emphasis on shared parking, peak/ off peak demand analysis and locations in order to maintain smaller parking fields where feasible - The inclusion of public parking ramp facilities shall be encouraged where appropriate - Parking stalls shall not exceed 9'x 18' with 24' dive aisles to encourage less asphalt and higher density - Parking lot layouts should include clear, direct traffic movement throughout the site - Pedestrian circulation areas shall incorporate elements designed to help protect the pedestrian from vehicular traffic. - Stormwater run off infiltration treatments such as rain gardens should be incorporated into parking lots where feasible. LIGHTING - Lighting should provide continuity and consistency throughout the downtown - Lighting styles shall be of a design and size that is compatible with the downtown theme - Exterior wall fixtures shall be encouraged to enhance the building design, and where feasible, eliminate the need for freestanding parking lot lights - Parking lot lights shall not exceed 30' in height and shall be full cut off to avoid glare - Parking lot fixtures shall be consistent in color and style - Safe pedestrian light levels shall be maintained - Excessive brightness shall be avoided - Energy efficient lighting shall be encouraged - Decorative pedestrian light fixtures shall be encouraged along pedestrian corridors. 16' height should be consistant. Example of night lighting building enhancements SIGNAGE - All signage must meet existing code standards - Signage not allowed includes rooftop signage, signs painted on buildings, flashing or moving signs, or pole signage - Freestanding signs must incorporate a masonry base that is compatible with the building architecture. Pylon signs are discouraged in the CCD - Building signage shall not overpower the architecture, but serve as identity - Wall signage is allowed on any facades facing public R.O.W. - Dual front buildings shall have signage above all entries - The use of projecting style signs mounted perpendicular to street front facades is encouraged - Wall signage shall not exceed 8% of building elevation SF - Way finding signage is encouraged and shall be consistent in architectural character and materials. - Downtown messaging monuments shall be encouraged in public plaza areas, and entry points to downtown Freestanding sign example Banner style signage r L� -- Appropriate wall signage STREETSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES —CORRIDORS Downtown Monticello owes its identity in part to the primary movement corridors along which it is most usually experienced by those who travel through it and those who live, shop, work, and play in the Downtown district. The design recommendations for the Downtown are extracted in part from the positive and negative features of the existing corridors and their existing strengths and shortcomings. The following descriptions attempt to isolate important elements for three primary corridors that must contribute to the overall image to be created as the downtown area redevelops and revitalizes. For each corridor a brief description of its contribution to the identity of the Downtown area is followed by design objectives for continuing, strengthening, and /or improving upon its contribution. THE HIGHWAY 25 CORRIDOR The identity of the Highway 25 corridor varies dramatically from the south end at Highway 94 where it is wide open and expansive, to the north end at Broadway where it is narrow and constrained by existing structures on either side of its 80 -foot wide right - of -way. Tight conditions and high traffic levels in the corridor make it an unpleasant location for pedestrian circulation, so the corridor is largely experienced from vehicles passing through it. The variation in spatial relationships and general lack of consistent design elements and landscaping detract from a positive identity within the downtown area. Design objectives to improve the identity for the Highway 25 corridor through the downtown area from Highway 94 to the river crossing include: • Provide for street trees to frame the corridor and enclose the unconfined southern end. • Provide "edge" elements from the ground plane to a height just below eye level for travelers along the corridor to define a boundary for the corridor while still allowing visibility to development beyond the new "edge ". • Include streetscape elements in repetitive fashion to establish continuity along the corridor. Streetscape elements used in this way should include consistent street lighting, signage, way- finding elements, and possibly larger structures marking entry points to the downtown at the northerly and southerly gateways to the downtown district. • Eliminate sidewalks along the Highway 25 corridor; encourage north -south pedestrian movements along Walnut Street and Cedar street to replace existing pedestrian facilities along Highway 25. • Provide for a bicycle trail along the west edge of the roadway, set back from the edge of the roadway and protected by a landscaped boulevard area. • Reserve up to 20 feet of lot area along the west side of the corridor, and up to 10 feet of lot area along the east side of the corridor from 5th street north to Broadway. Reserved areas should be acquired for MnDOT right -of -way to expand the width available for corridor improvements from 80 to 110 feet. Build - to /setback lines should be established twenty feet to the west of the existing right -of -way line and ten feet to the east of the east right -of -way line to prevent redevelopment within the reserved area until the right -of -way can be dedicated or acquired. • Pedestrian interaction with the Highway 25 corridor should be limited to the establishment of safe pedestrian crossings at Broadway, 4th Street, and 7th Street. Gathering places should be located a safe distance from this corridor. THE WALNUT STREET CORRIDOR The identity for the Walnut Street Corridor is currently established primarily by its design elements and adjacent development in the segment between 5th Street and 7th Street. The street corridor in this two -block segment is reinforced by buildings located near the street, and by design elements for sidewalks, lighting, and landscape details such as fencing, raised planters, and stamped colored concrete utilized along its length. Design objectives to reinforce and expand the identity of the Walnut Street corridor include: • Provide street trees in boulevard and sidewalk areas to reinforce the corridor spatially and to emphasize the street grid and "block" structure of the downtown area. • Promote infill development near the street edge between 5th Street and 4th Street on both sides of the corridor. • Promote retail development along the west side of the corridor for the two -block segment from 4th street to Broadway. This approach will contribute to defining an edge for Walnut Street while providing visibility from Highway 25. • Promote retail development adjacent to Walnut Street from Broadway north to River Street and the river-front park area to promote pedestrian movement from Broadway to the park and its potential public parking and activities. • Work with the owners of the retail development on the south side of 7th Street to extend pedestrian- oriented design features along the private entry drive from 7th and Walnut to the storefront area. Repeat street lighting, pedestrian scale lighting, and site furnishings consistently along the Walnut Street corridor to provide design continuity leading to a recognizable identity for the downtown district. • If building placement, street trees, and site furnishings can provide consistent visual cues along Walnut Street to reinforce its identity as a major downtown corridor, then it may not be necessary to provide absolute design consistency or uniformity in the application of materials used for hard - surfaced walk areas. There is currently an interesting variety in the application of pavement materials and finishing techniques through the downtown area that is eclectic, but part of the identity of the existing downtown. Infill hardscape material should be consistent with, but need not be identical to existing walking surfaces in this corridor. • Consideration should be given to providing distinct and highly visible pedestrian crosswalk designs to enhance pedestrian movement at local street intersections along Walnut Street from 4th Street south to 7th Street. This approach would create a recognizable design feature that could be replicated at Broadway, and at a plaza terminus at the north end of Walnut. These features would strenqthen the identity of Walnut Street as a pedestrian - friendly corridor. • Promote the provision of pedestrian byways and gathering spots along the corridor, especially at or near pedestrian street crossings. THE BROADWAY STREET CORRIDOR The Broadway Street identity through downtown Monticello is largely created by continuous, varied storefronts along the edge of relatively narrow sidewalks in a mostly hard - surfaced environment. In this respect, Broadway Street and its historic remnants represent the closest model for traditional Downtown Monticello. Visual diversity in this corridor is provided mostly by variations in building architecture. Although the land use recommendations envision partial replacement of existing structures with new buildings in a similar relationship to the street, there will also be necessary open edges created along Broadway to promote visibility to retail development set back from the street. To recapture definition of edges along Broadway, the following streetscape design objectives should apply: • Establish a Build -to line /setback for new structures 10 feet from the existing right - of -way line. The additional corridor width will: o allow expansion of the sidewalk zone with sufficient distance between storefront and curb line to allow for continuous new street tree plantings along both sides of the corridor. 3 o allow for future widening of the roadway lanes to reasonable minimum lane widths while also preserving on- street parking critical to adjacent businesses. o provide additional space for other streetscape elements including outdoor seating area, bicycle parking, signage, and way- finding features. • Reinforce the streetscape identity with consistent street lighting, pedestrian -scale lighting, and other street furnishings as used elsewhere throughout the downtown area as unifying design elements. Encourage the continued and expanded use of ornamental fencing with design origins in the old river bridge for Highway 25. • Street trees should be provided along the Broadway corridor with the same density of spacing as used elsewhere throughout the downtown district to reinforce the grid street pattern and "block" structure of the downtown area. • Where corridor edges are not completed by structures, provide vertical "edge" elements to reinforce the separation of the street corridor and pedestrian sidewalk zones from adjacent open areas. "Edge" features could include walls, fencing, columns, bollards, or landscape hedges that relate to the back side or edge of the sidewalks. • As suggested for the Walnut Street corridor, allow the evolution of sidewalk materials and finishing techniques as sites develop and redevelop along the corridor. • Promote the provision of pedestrian byways and gathering spots along the corridor, especially at or near pedestrian street crossings. • If possible, continue the utilization of medians in this corridor with uniform landscape /streetscape applications to calm traffic and reinforce corridor aesthetics and continuity through the downtown area. 4 TRANSPORTATION STUDY Monticello CBD Revitalization City of Monticello, Minnesota August 30, 2011 Prepared For: Prepared By: W Wu ► ,� 000ENEENEENE Westwood TRANSPORTATION STUDY Monticello CBD Revitalization City of Monticello, Minnesota August 30, 2011 Prepared for City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 Prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Project No. 2010 -1228 TRANSPORTATION STUDY Monticello CBD Revitalization City of Monticello, Minnesota REPORT CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. DRAFT Nicholas J. Erpelding, P.E., PTOE Date License No. 44582 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page ii August 30, 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Traffic Impacts associated with the proposed CBD Revitalization Plan are expected to be minor. In total, the Revitalization Plan is anticipated to result in a net increase of 9,000 ADT. Of this total, the largest increase to any one street is expected to be around 2,000 ADT. Compared with existing traffic volumes of 30,000 (TH 25) and 12,000 (Broadway), and anticipated background growth between today and 2030 of between 20% and 60 %, additional traffic generated by the Revitalization will be minimal. Under both existing and future conditions, the intersection most critical to traffic flow in and around the Monticello CBD is the intersection of TH 25 and Broadway Street. Because of high east /west traffic volumes and turning volumes (especially eastbound to northbound and southbound to eastbound), little spare green time is available for heavy through traffic volumes on TH 25. Current plans for the intersection of TH 25, as identified in the City's recently published Transportation Plan, call for the addition of roadway capacity at this intersection. Plans include dual left turn lanes for the two heavy movements noted, as well as the addition of dual right turn lanes for the westbound to northbound movement. With this improved geometric layout, the intersection is anticipated to function acceptably through 2030, under one important condition. The condition required for acceptable operations at TH 25/Broadway is that a second river crossing over the Mississippi River must be constructed to provide an alternate route for trips between Monticello and Big Lake. This second crossing, as noted in the City's Transportation Plan, is the difference between 20% growth in background traffic and 60% growth in background traffic. Without this vital second connection, no set of other minor geometric fixes to TH 25 /Broadway will be able to bring the intersection up to acceptable performance thresholds. As noted, the proposed CBD Revitalization plan will bring a modest amount of additional traffic to the CBD, spread among the many roads and intersections within the downtown core. In order to provide for adequate access to the proposed retail facilities, creation of an additional signalized access point at 4th Street is proposed. This intersection will not only be capable of providing the additional access needed by the new retail facilities, but will also provide a much - needed alternate route for local east /west through traffic in the downtown core, improving operations at the critical TH 25 /Broadway intersection, and in turn, operations along the TH 25 arterial corridor. In order to maximize the benefit of the traffic signal at 4th Street and offset the impact of the addition of signalized access points, access restriction at the Monticello CBD Revitalization Page iii August 30, 2011 intersection of TH 25/3rd Street is proposed. Conversion to right - in/right -out access is recommended. In addition to the benefit to vehicular traffic generated by the signal at 4th Street, pedestrians will also benefit. Currently, a 5 -block separation exists between signalized crossing points of the high traffic volume TH 25 corridor. The addition of a traffic signal at 4th Street will limit the distance a pedestrian must go out of his /her way to cross TH 25 to one and a half blocks. Improved traffic operations at TH 25/Broadway as a result of the 4th Street traffic signal will also be of benefit by limiting the potential for queues on Broadway to extend upstream to both Walnut Street to the west and Cedar Street to the East. Analysis of post - redevelopment traffic operations at these intersections shows levels of service above acceptable thresholds with little queuing impacts from the critical TH 25 /Broadway intersection. Other geometric improvements recommended to improve traffic operations (whether or not the Proposed Revitalization Plan proceeds) include an additional westbound approach lane at TH 25 /7th Street and revised signal phasing and extension of the westbound storage bay at the I -94 North Ramp intersection. Lastly, to improve north/south pedestrian connectivity at Broadway Avenue, consideration for future installation of a Ped Hawk signal at Locust Street is recommended if and when warranted. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page iv August 30, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................ ..............................1 Background........................................................................ ..............................1 Purpose.............................................................................. ..............................4 VEHICULAR OPERATIONS ............................................ ..............................5 Turning Movement Vol umes .............................................. ..............................5 2030 Transportation Plan ................................................... ..............................5 CBD Revitalization Trip Generation ................................. .............................12 Trip Distribution / Assignment .......................................... .............................14 Operational Analysis ......................................................... .............................21 PARKING........................................................................... .............................29 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ......................................... .............................31 East /West Ped Crossing of TH 25 ...................................... .............................31 North/South Ped Crossing of Broadway Street .................. .............................32 Bicycle Circulation and Facilities ...................................... .............................33 APPENDIX........................................................................ ............................... 34 TABLES 1. Preferred Revitalization Plan Comparison .................. ..............................1 2. Trip Generation Estimates — Land Uses to be Eliminated ........................13 3. Trip Generation Estimates — Land Uses to be Added .. .............................13 4. Trip Generation Estimates — Net ................................ .............................14 5. Operational Analysis Results — 2010 Existing ............ .............................22 6. Operational Analysis Results — 2030 No -Build .......... .............................23 7. Operational Analysis Results — 2030 No -Build with 2nd Bridge ...............24 8. Operational Analysis Results — 2030 Build with 2nd Bridge ....................25 9. Parking Count Details ................................................ .............................30 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page v August 30, 2011 FIGURES 1. Study Area ................................................................. ............................... 2 2. Preferred CBD Revitalization Concept Plan ................ ..............................3 3. Existing AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Counts .. ............................... 6 4. Existing PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Counts .... ..............................7 5. 2030 No -Build AM Peak Hour TMCs ........................ ............................... 8 6. 2030 No -Build PM Peak Hour TMCs ......................... ..............................9 7. 2030 No -Build with 2nd Bridge AM Peak Hour TMCs ............................10 8. 2030 No -Build with 2nd Bridge PM Peak Hour TMCs ............................11 9. Trip Distribution ........................................................ .............................15 10. AM Peak Hour Trip Assignment ................................ .............................16 11. PM Peak Hour Trip Assignment ................................ .............................17 12. 2030 Build with 2nd Bridge AM Peak Hour TMCs ..... .............................18 13.2030 Build with 2nd Bridge PM Peak Hour TMCs ..... .............................19 14. Existing and 2030 ADTs ............................................ .............................20 15. Parking Study Area .................................................... .............................29 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page vi August 30, 2011 INTRODUCTION Background In 2010, the City of Monticello hired Westwood to complete a Downtown Revitalization Plan. This Transportation Study is a component of that effort. The Downtown Revitalization Plan outlines a preferred scenario for revitalization of the Central Business District (CBD). This transportation plan looks at the future infrastructure improvements that will be required to implement this preferred scenario development scenarios. Much of the study of the future infrastructure needs for the CBD has already been completed as part of Monticello's recently completed 2030 Transportation plan. To the extent that the Revitalization Plan and the 2030 Comp plan are alike, the transportation needs will also remain aligned. To address the transportation needs specific to the Revitalization Plan, the 2030 Transportation Plan traffic forecasts were used as a starting point in development forecasts post - revitalization. A majority of the effort associated with this transportation plan focused on Trunk Highway 25, a primary arterial roadway running north /south through the CBD. As noted in the City's Transportation Plan, congestion caused by traffic on TH 25 in the CBD is currently the cause of a majority of the City's traffic- related issues. Figure 1 shows the intersections studied as part of this transportation plan. Intersections studied as part of this report are highlighted. Table 1 compares the Preferred Revitalization Plan to the 2030 Transportation plan. Figure 2 provides a plan view concept of the Preferred Revitalization Plan. Table 1 Preferred Revitalization Plan Comparison to Transportation Plan 2030 TAZ Forecasts Component Difference from 2030 Transportation Plan Residential 32 fewer residential units Retail 77,000 s.f. increase in retail space Non - Retail (Office) 41,000 s.f. increase in non - retail space Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 1 August 30, 2011 Figure 1 Study Area egend 4 f / ♦ ` �l}f 49y� fyR tiny Intce Bridge Par#, Easi 8rdge / F4rk m rr` ♦ Far..�ii F,�ir -k m $Y h 7t , SI'N 9'F.) Hillside *` erneaeryr �� [ F�ath _ W; St Street Park x C "z fr _ - - e fray£ inn Monticello Tharn-V U Source: Google Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 2 August 30, 2011 IZ m 71iLj'd�4rk�' d w i X' • j w,, xass E� K 7 s 1 e- S• 16 1 WtA 4 T+ s W L �J 4b u. ss �j °t rrr� yz t: i l P Pi a� - °, 9 a? L4 0 - N�6_ pu� r LT li K +fir Caw. ° 1 Location Key N r -- _� - -� 2 11 8 4 Iw BROADWAY STREETI X10 7 3 9 6 W 2 I 5w1N a o I 1 -94 Development SF Summary Block Existing Proposed Change 1 19,000 26,000 +7,000 2 12,000 36,000 +24,000 3 27,000 37,000 +10,000 4 35,400 47,400 +12,000 5 8,800 88,800 0 6 21,000 26,000 +5,000 7 37,500 13,000 - 24,500 8 39,000 28,000 - 11,000 9 36,500 64,000 +27,500 10 27,000 24,000 -3,000 11 14,000 14,000 0 TOTAL 277,200 324,200 +47,000 REFINED SCHEME A Purpose The purpose of this report is to identify needed transportation infrastructure improvements for the future CBD Revitalization Plan. Potential infrastructure improvements in three general areas were analyzed: • Vehicular • Parking • Pedestrian/Bicycle The remainder of this report is laid out to cover three areas in turn. The first area covered is vehicular operations. To assess infrastructure needs in this area, a traditional Synchro /SimTraffic operational analysis was completed. Three scenarios were analyzed: • 2011 Existing. Analysis of existing conditions is undertaken primarily to calibrate the computer traffic model used. Review of the results of this scenario can be helpful in gaining a feel for how Level of Service correlates to real life conditions. • 2030 No- Build. This is a baseline scenario that establishes which improvements will be required regardless of whether the Revitalization Plan proceeds, and; • 2030 Build. This scenario will be studied to identify additional improvements needed due to the Revitalization Plan. Initially both the AM and PM peak periods were analyzed. As noted below, review of the initial analysis results indicated that the PM peak hour was the critical peak hour in terms of traffic capacity. This result is typical of areas with a mix of residential, office, and retail land uses. Because the PM peak hour will primarily controls the design of any added roadway capacity, it will be the focus of this report. Areas where capacity limitations are observed in the AM peak are noted. Analysis of Parking and Ped /Bike needs was completed by reviewing existing infrastructure in light of the results of the vehicular analysis and looking too see where improvements could be made. More detail on the process used for these areas is provided under the respective sections of the report. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 4 August 30, 2011 VEHICULAR OPERATIONS Turning Movement Volumes Manual turning movement traffic counts were conducted at the TH 25 intersection in September 2009 by Westwood. Additional counts were collected throughout 2009 and 2010 by the City of Monticello. Additional PM peak hour counts were collected in March, 2011 at the intersection of TH 25 and Broadway, and in August, 2011 at the following intersections by Westwood: • Locust Street /Broadway Street • Locust Street / 3rd Street • Locust Street / 4th Street • Walnut Street / 3rd Street • Walnut Street / 4th Street Based on the count data, the peak hours of traffic occur from 6:45 to 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. The AM and PM peak hour volumes for the study area intersections are shown on Figures 3 and 4. The volumes shown are primarily from Westwood count data where available. The intersection of TH 25 and Broadway Avenue is a compilation of the three counts available. 2030 Transportation Plan Review of Monticello's 2030 Transportation Plan indicates that background traffic volumes are anticipated to grow by 60% between today and 2030. Based on this information, 2030 No -Build peak hour volumes were developed by factoring existing volumes up by 60 %. The 2030 Transportation Plan notes traffic growth of 60% between now and 2030 will likely lead to a breakdown of traffic flow in the CBD. In order to limit the growth in background traffic volumes in the CBD, the Transportation Plan recommends that an additional bridge crossing the Mississippi River be constructed. This bridge would relieve traffic volumes on the TH 25 bridge, lowering background growth in the CBD to 20 %. A 2nd set of 2030 background peak hour traffic volumes were developed with the assumption that a 2nd Mississippi River crossing is constructed in a method similar to that used for the baseline assumptions. Figures 5 and 6 detail the No -Build volume estimates without an additional river crossing. Figures 7 and 8 provide the No -Build volume estimates with a second bridge in place. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 5 August 30, 2011 Figure 3 2010 Existing AM Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v 7 7S ryo 0 X770 m W N ^ M 2 77y Ri�erS f�- 3? 33j 3 7 ?g 4 7�' w 7 T � ^M ^�^`b ��ry� X70 0 29 3 -(9 � S S 76, y S o% y S ? 77Sy N �,�� �"� N ..^ �70 j22 �7 7 3 70 7 7 ? 404. Csgy cof- 4 ? 7 4th Not to Scale 0� h M ^h r-, 7 7 7 3 �> 6 X03 s �9Q So4fh41 n c� n 1 -94 EB Ramps Westwood 8/26/2011 Figure 4 2010 Existing PM Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ t vR S O 4 43 356 c'`'' ��i� ,70 y � �Ov 330 7 S 7 6, y O O y M O 46, ^wry L �7 7 73 o 0 7 7 0 ---4 y ^ 78 y 7 3 70 1 y 4th s Not to Scale Sq� Oh t ^ b� �o 2 8 2 19 t 7 8g 7�3 79, % nth St �b 4 4 s �9 A sO4t -AZ 1-94 ES Ramps h41 ^ N m s Westwood 8/26/2011 Figure 5 2030 No -Build AM Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v C ^(0 ry 16 O ^�O 445 �3o 6 c'� � � ,76 V. `3 ?y River �' Mry � 34 2319 2� ti�Try St 7 0� 3�7 743 3 4y N N% o 0 ICb M �� ,��'�� X7760 p. 4, cb 8 76 6 S 7 8 6 2665 s 8 7 3 4y Cry �' (,V ti �2 �76 23SS ti -D �2 64 C 66 2 2 3r 32 y ^0 IV Sgti 1S 0 CbT�Al 2 6 3 2y 4th S Not to Scale 6(� ^ ^� ��' t O 0� 2 7 ? 6 "J Cb X60 ,> 706 �OS� ^ry5��� nth St 09 �6S Cp 4 �9Q S °4fh41 0O� 1.94 ES Ramps Westwood 8/26/2011 Figure 6 Volumes Not to Scale rel l y U/ O v 0 V i o Y v CV ry`bc5 3? 8 �0 t< �3 3y ^� X229 3�6� c T rh Sr ^� 76 494 19 �So4fhR 1-9468 Ramps 2030 No -Build PM Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� ^� �76 73 y D ,, Ri�erst ry�b b� C O ry ry� ^ �o "4> 33 7>> 9y�� odob a ? 3�d Dry � ^-v 79 ? S 76 th 4 y^�, C6 S, ^ Zs st N ?4 678 2 �16 ^�ocVTo%'cs�ti�s Westwood 8/26/2011 Figure 7 Volumes 2030 No -Build AM with Bridge Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v cp ry 33 8 24� c'`� `� �p p Ir- 7? m p�Cb ^ 7 X77 �php 7 70 3q S 7 94 pp ?0 '-6 ry��` �` 7 � �ry � 19 � 3S 4 `�' 8 8 67 y pry , sy ?3 y p � � �p X66 ^ry 4 h ^ a 76. ^ ^cb S ? 1 y 4th s Not to Scale ^�o�� t h p p 4p 7 > 7 sth sr ro ro pp ^pry "I 9V h ^� /94tio �,O �hRa �9 A So4fh 41- 194 68 Ramps Westwood 8/26/2011 Figure 8 2030 No -Build PM with Bridge Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v 5678 �2 s m � N L 2 7(�7y W T R��erS 36 2s74 ^ .1 `� m 6 6 12 707 a7 7 60 6y �• cp ro° C6 0 _Cb 7 4 72 1 y 4th s Not to Scale 65� 0� ^ ^ O h 2 7 2 J6 7J 70 208 22 �2 86 4 4 ah � s �9 A So4fh41 n O��o 1_94 ES Ramps Westwood 8/26/2011 CBD Revitalization Trip Generation Trip generation estimates for the CBD Revitalization land uses were based on rates documented in Trip Generation, 8th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). For land uses anticipated to be removed as part of the revitalization, a rate equal to one -half of the ITE rate was used to estimate the amount of traffic to be eliminated. The use of a rate equal to half of the ITE rate provides for a conservative estimate of future traffic volumes with the revitalization. Pass -by trips and internal /shared trips were neglected both due to the small total volume of added trips anticipated, and to provide for conservative forecasts. The tables below provide a summary of the trip generation estimates. Table 2 summarizes the trips to be eliminated. Table 3 summarizes the trips to be added. The total net trip generation associated with the Revitalization Plan (Table 3 totals less Table 2 totals) is provided in Table 4. A column noting the TAZ, or Traffic Analysis Zone, for each land use is included in each of the trip generation Tables. The TAZ for each land use corresponds to its location within downtown. Further description of how this data is used is provided under Trip Distribution/Trip Assignment below. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 12 August 30, 2011 Table 2 Trip Generation Estimates Land Uses to be Eliminated and Land Uses Included in 2030 Comp Plan but not Anticipated to be Part of CBD Revitalization 50% of ITE Rates Land Use TAZ ITE Code Size AM Trips Enter / Exit PM Trips Enter / Exit Daily Trips Enter / Exit Retail 28 820 9,000 s.f. 3/2 8 / 9 97/97 Gen. Office 29 710 8,000 s.f. 5/1 1 / 5 22/22 Retail 30 820 26,000 s.f. 8/5 24 / 25 279/279 Retail 37 820 5,000 s.f. 2/1 5 / 5 54/54 Gen. Office 37 710 6,000 s.f. 4/1 1 / 4 17/17 Condo 38 230 5 units 0/1 1/0 7/7 Retail 38 820 21,000 s.f. 6/4 19 / 20 225/225 Gen. Office 38 710 6,000 s.f. 4/1 1 / 4 17/17 Retail 10 820 13,000 s.f. 4/3 12 / 12 140/140 Condo 43 230 3 units 0/1 1/0 4/4 Retail 43 820 9,000 s.f. 3/2 8 / 9 97/97 Condo 44 230 16 units 1/3 3 / 1 23/23 Retail 44 820 21,000 s.f. 6/4 19 / 20 225/225 Gen. Office 44 710 1,000 s.f. 1/0 0 / 1 3/3 Single Family 45 210 6 units 1/2 2 / 1 14/14 Retail 46 820 7,000 s.f. 2/1 6 / 7 75/75 Gen. Office 50 710 5,000 s.f. 3/0 1 / 3 14/14 Single Family 21 210 1 298 / 165 1/0 5 / 5 Totals 1 53133 113/126 1,318 / 1,318 Table 3 Trip Generation Estimates CBD Revitalization Land Uses not Included in 2030 Transportation Plan (100% of ITE Rates) Land Use TAZ ITE Code Size AM Trips Enter / Exit PM Trips Enter / Exit Daily Trips Enter / Exit City Park 27 411 6,000 s.f. 2/2 6 / 6 30/30 Retail 28 820 14,000 s.f. 9/5 26 / 27 301/301 Restaurant 29 932 4,000 s.f. 24/22 26/18 254/254 Retail 29 820 6,000 s.f. 4/2 11 / 11 129/129 Dept. Store 30 815 64,000 s.f. 46/22 160/160 1,832 / 1,832 Restaurant 37 932 8,000 s.f. 48/44 53/37 509/509 Retail 37 820 20,000 s.f. 12/8 37/38 429/429 Retail 39 820 9,000 s.f. 5/4 16 / 17 193/193 Wal reen's 43 881 13,000 s.f. 20/15 67/67 573/573 Medical Office 43 720 8,000 s.f. 15/4 7/20 145 / 145 Gen. Office 43 710 9,000 s.f. 12/2 2/11 50 / 50 Retail 44 820 30,000 s.f. 18/12 55/57 644/644 Retail 45 820 20,000 s.f. 12/8 37/38 429/429 Gen. Office 46 710 21,000 s.f. 29/4 5/26 116 / 116 Medical Office 49 720 12,000 s.f. 22/6 11/30 217/217 Medical Office 50 720 7,000 s.f. 13/3 7/18 126 / 126 Medical Office 51 720 4,000 s.f. 7/2 4 / 10 72/72 Totals 298 / 165 530 1591 6,049 / 6,049 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 13 August 30, 2011 Table 4 Trip Generation Estimates CBD Revitalization Plan Net Totals above 2030 Transportation Plan TAZ AM Trips Enter / Exit PM Trips Enter / Exit Daily Trips Enter / Exit 27 2/2 6/6 30/30 28 6/3 18/18 204/204 29 23/23 36/24 361 /361 30 38/17 136/135 1,553 / 1,553 37 54/50 84/66 867/867 38 (10)/(6) (21)/(24) (249)/(249) 39 5/4 16/17 193/193 40 (4)/(3) (12) / (12) (140)/(140) 43 44/18 67/89 667/667 44 10/5 33/35 393/393 45 11 /6 35/37 415/415 46 27/3 (1)/19 41/41 49 22/6 11 /30 217/217 50 10/3 6/15 112/112 51 7/1 3/10 67/67 Totals 245/132 417/465 4,731 / 4,731 Trip Distribution / Assignment Trip distribution for site - generated traffic was based on the market surveys completed by McComb. Figure 9 provides an illustration of the anticipated trip distribution pattern. Using this trip distribution pattern, site - generated trips were assigned to the study area roadways. The exact path through the study area is determined by the TAZ the trip is destined to (or originating from). Routing was accomplished separately for each TAZ. The resulting totals were then summed to provide overall trip assignment totals. Figures 10 and 11 provide this summary for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Adding the site - generated trips to the No -Build trips results in the estimates of Build trips. As will be noted in the next section of the report, forecasts of 2030 traffic operations without a second river crossing in place show extreme congestion, even without the proposed CBD revitalization. Accordingly, operational analysis of post -CBD revitalization conditions focused on the scenario with a 2nd river crossing. Figures 12 and 13 depict the 2030 Build scenario volume estimates with this 2nd bridge in place. Figure 14 provides a look at traffic volumes on a daily basis. Existing volumes are shown along with 2030 No -Build (with bridge) and 2030 Build scenario volumes at locations throughout the study area where existing ADT count data is available. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 14 August 30, 2011 Figure 9 Trip Distribution R 7� 5 °1 0 � O X. °ad 4� C r4 a rry� � 25 Co / 61 �� r0 � h'3 V K. °Sf S. Park �in *East Endge Course Rd Co Hvry aB {{ jv144 Sr if ar � Park ,110 C �. �pnCicekloa R„� uu nt ry � Club Park fay S W "ry TS m E sys` 5r� df Ce M 7-00 ' � v �:q 25 Q y3r Ellison Par 5/0 7 RV ` Cern.te+y Faunh 41 a 52 n Street Park c ery a - _ in p sg�' a r0h 9t Savahnah Ave Chvwg Rat Chelsea Rd 44 S" 4% Rdk sago +D �ra� 25 0 0 a ebb Gv+rMas Rd [w des Rd >. Dundas Rd — F e ,a'' hay,varn Ct 5 fi Eagle Ridge$ a a m m 'd o m v\ Cat 9a 4 m 3Clraet Bh+d Sohoal Blvd Jv %rn -n ti Pent+lenrook Or rrrarcin Or Cahill r H is P: I, St SOprh :Sf Starling Dr 700th St 25 a '^ gf & Pianezr far W611 Gaagle� Map eoita d201 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 15 August 30, 2011 Figure 10 Volumes Net AM Trip Assignment (Difference From 2030 Transp. Plan) Monticello CBD Revitalization y UJ 577 O v ^ �G 3(30) 0 3Sy ^ �c 19 N� 7 7 �(3g) 22 ^ ry D� t �S3 7p 34 y 2 UJ V 7q 7 70y Not to Scale Numbers in Parentheses Are Negative N y- /7 (6,` —srh Sr ^ lS3 S h _T �4rh Sr ry� 1-5, 5 0y Z f R�Le r 4�"/, 2� �,30) ?� cs a\ m Westwood 8/29/2011 577 0 0� r\077 0 4 ps 19 A R 1'94 EB Ramps ^ lS3 S h _T �4rh Sr ry� 1-5, 5 0y Z f R�Le r 4�"/, 2� �,30) ?� cs a\ m Westwood 8/29/2011 Figure 11 Net PM Trip Assignment (Difference From 2030 Transp. Plan) Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v �ry ? �5 84) ^O (40 s �� 73 Or �� � pommy hry �� 3) y Q, 7 �. ^ (6� ^ 3 4 % X778 S ?8 3 77� 4th Not to Scale St Numbers in Parentheses ^ Are Negative Q h 0 Nry N� 1027 0 oh � s �9 A So4fh41 ^ �� 1-94 ES Ramps Westwood 8/29/2011 Figure 12 Volumes 2030 Build AM with Bridge Monticello CBD Revitalization ry� UJ O v CpI CID m 2q 4-j 33 V- 21 214 9 90 6 9� mac° �% �' 72 h ,� M^ ?I 00 �0 ^ p` ryO 28 2�6 UJ� �76 2�2y `� T �cs�tis 4�v ^Cb 0 3QQ6�' �` 4rh Sr Not to Scale 0 00 7 )2 9 �9q 19V 94 R 0 Ramp,, S °4fh M o n� EB m Westwood 8/29/2011 Figure 13 2030 Build PM with Bridge Volumes Monticello CBD Revitalization Westwood 8/26/2011 UJ ry� do O ^� 16 t ry�� 15 2q SS6 3S N D ^ ^ S03 cp ^ IVI/��"' 22 �>� �26s �4 �27� ^`4 ^T h 43y Cb ^ 66 ryry� w j��n ^`�� �36 40, y ^ 2 30 7S¢ ^� �cS�q ^ 4--/ �3 6 4 777, S4 0 4th S t 86. Not to Scale ^� 4� ^0 N O 1 2 c° ^ (b 7J CO CI) � N T �9 4 a � �9 4SO4fh41 Ch �o o 1-94 ES Ramps Westwood 8/26/2011 7 02011 Westwood Profeedond Services. Iflc °!s of, T_ ; � - •ter _ � , t�M r tft 4*0: / %01 -, Legend 7, 40 , w, ' OQ� kOO Existing ADT ' 43,500 2030 No-Build A DT 2030 Build ADT (0,800 • j 13,000 , : ,( r z "` 1 •'i'. 14,000 t �: Note: 2030 scenarios assume 2nd river VJ crossing is in place. 1� 1 • CIO 1500 •' • � 3 50 2,000 '= Q 1 �;/� `! x,300 • , 4,500 f 3,000 - r �1'YIt ' � � `�� - .t 18,500 t '� ` • 3 Co 1,550 ', •/ �� , ® r - ►h • 2 000 w� -'f am •`i/ 1..: �' 1550 e�.�% •� r ' 3 000 2, 000 • ., , v 3,500 `nth S ' ; %� f r 6 +a Z • , = 4 f �- 1,500 t „� • c. r �. t ' - , �+ ,. 2,000 - 2,800 2,500' wr le 30500 � , �, ,4 � i � ti � �, �" ,► . - � . . jlljr 5,00a .4 it - • .�. ± .�'% `'`� / ! �r � � `�' ""� • _ -• R - fit. +ki :t'rRr 5.00 0;500 — 9,000 — * yr 8;500 9,500 `+ '�!•" 34Q00 s t 41,000 I i 44,000 • .!1 .. "' '" FRI, a f ��- ., I 4f. - Oft. T. `f '`a, " 71 Wastmod Prafindonal Services. Ox. 7699 Anagram DrIve Eden M Prairie, N 59341 PHONE 992 -937 -9190 FAX 952 -937 -9872 TOLL FREE 1- 88&937 -5150 www.wedt dps.com City of Monticello CBD Revitalization Average Daily Traffic EXU* 3� Figure 14 w - 300' 450' ADT, ­g Operational Analysis Using the roadway geometric and traffic volume data described above as input, traffic operational analysis was performed per the standards set out in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board. The industry- current Synchro /SimTraffic 7 package was used to complete the analysis. Two fundamental outputs from the model are typically used to characterize traffic flow. The first is Level of Service (LOS), a letter grade ranging from "A" (free flow) to "F" (over - saturated forced flow). Generally, Level of Service D represents the threshold for acceptable overall intersection operating conditions during a peak hour in an urban area such as Monticello. On an individual movement basis, LOS E is typically considered the lowest acceptable LOS. Movement LOS F can sometimes be considered acceptable for a side street movement at a two -way stop controlled intersection under peak hour conditions that does not meet warrants for installation of a traffic signal. For movements operating at a low LOS, the second important output to consider from the model is queuing. A queue is a line of vehicles waiting to pass through an intersection. While an intersection may be reported as operating at an acceptable level of service, queues from the intersection extending to upstream intersections or driveways could create a potential safety issue. The 95th percentile queue is typically considered the standard for design purposes. The microsimulation component of the model, SimTraffic, is best suited for reporting queuing between closely- spaced intersections. Analyses were conducted for the AM and PM peak hour conditions for the 2010 Existing and 2030 Build scenarios. Results of the operational analyses are summarized below, by scenario: 2010 Existing Analysis of 2011 Existing conditions was performed in order to properly calibrate the model to match observed "real- world" conditions. Results of the analysis are summarized in Table 5. Detailed results are available in the appendix. The operational analysis of existing conditions assumes completion of a Mn/DOT project currently under construction at the first TH 25 intersection north of the river, County Road 11/14. This project involves the addition of dual northbound left and dual eastbound right turn lanes along with modifications to signal phasing. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 21 August 30, 2011 Table 5 Operational Analysis Results — 2010 Existing Intersection LOS AM PM Cty. Rd. 11 -14 / TH 25 C C / F River Street/ TH 25 A A Broadway / Locust A A Broadway / Walnut A A Broadway / TH 25 B D Broadway Cedar A A 3r Street / Locust A A 3r Street / Walnut A A 3r Street / TH 25 A A / F 4 Street / Locust A A 4 Street / Walnut A A 4 Street / TH 25 A A 6 Street/ TH 25 A A 7 Street / TH 25 B C 1 -94 North Ramps / TH 25 B B 1 -94 South Ramp / TH 25 B B " Signalized Intersections in Bold. V F" Indicates one or more movements at LOS F. Existing traffic operations in the AM peak hour are very good, with all intersections and movements meeting or exceeding acceptable LOS thresholds. Operations in the PM peak hour are good, with all intersections operating at acceptable overall LOS. LOS F movements are observed at two of the studied intersections (Cty. Rd. 11 -14, 3rd Street). The intersection with the most significant capacity issues is the intersection of TH 25 and Broadway. This intersection operates at LOS D overall. 95th percentile queuing reported by the model extends beyond available storage bays for the eastbound and southbound lefts for 12% and 6% of the peak hour, respectively. 95th percentile Jueuing on the northbound through movement is the most critical, extending to 3Street 33% of the peak hour. These queues are based on the existing signal timing plan in place, and vary from day to day based on actual traffic conditions'. The levels of service and 95th percentile queues reported are intended to represent typical midweek (Tuesday - Thursday conditions). Conditions on Friday afternoons during the summer are likely to be worse. Observation of the model suggests that the queuing experienced is typically of a short duration. Few, if any, cycle failures (vehicles waiting several cycles to move through an intersection) are likely to be experienced in the field. ' As of August, 2011, the intersection of TH 25 and County Road 11/14, located north of the River, is currently under construction. Delays to northbound TH 25 traffic in the PM peak period are severe, with queues often spilling back to south of I -94. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 22 August 30, 2011 2030 No -Build Table 6 Operational Analysis Results — 2030 No -Build Intersection LOS AM PM Cty. Rd. 11 -14 / TH 25 F / F E / F River Street / TH 25 E / F A / F Broadway / Locust A A / F Broadway / Walnut A A Broadway / TH 25 D / F E / F Broadway / Cedar A F / F 3 rd Street / Locust A A 3' Street / Walnut B A 3' d Street / TH 25 D / F D / F 4 1h Street / Locust F / F A 4 1h Street / Walnut F / F A 4 1h Street / TH 25 E/ F E/ F 6 Street/ TH 25 F/ F C/ F 7,n Street / TH 25 D E / F 1 -94 North Ramps / TH 25 C / F F / F 1 -94 South Ramp / TH 25 B D / F " Signalized Intersections in Bold. V F" Indicates one or more movements at LOS F. The results reported above for 2030 Build conditions assume optimized signal timing. Operations also assume additional capacity improvements at the intersection of TH 25/Broadway. The ultimate intersection configuration of dual southbound lefts, dual eastbound lefts, and dual westbound rights is assumed for this intersection. With the 60% growth in traffic anticipated between today and 2030, traffic operations become extremely congested in the study area. Half of the study intersections are forecast to experience LOS F movements in the AM peak hour, and all but five will have LOS F movements in the PM peak hour. In order to restore operations to acceptable levels of service, significant capacity upgrades will be required. The main constraint to expanding capacity is the existing 4 -lane TH 25 bridge over the Mississippi River. With this limitation, adding capacity via additional lanes on TH 25 in the CBD will provide little, if any, benefit. To effectively add capacity, the better solution, as noted in the City's transportation plan, is to construct an additional river crossing. Beyond the second river crossing, other recommended improvements include 1) the addition of a third approach lane (to provide left, through, and right turn lanes) on the westbound approach at 7th Street and 2) extension of storage bay for westbound off -ramp at the I -94 North Ramp intersection from 225 to 400 feet (or longer). A conceptual design plan for the 7th Street improvements is provided in the appendix. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 23 August 30, 2011 Operations with these improvements in place were accordingly analyzed to determine the potential impact on traffic operations in the CBD. 2030 No -Build with 2nd River Crossing Table 7 Operational Analysis Results — 2030 No -Build with 2nd Bridge Intersection LOS AM PM Cty. Rd. 11 -14 / TH 25 D / F C River Street/ TH 25 A A Broadway / Locust A A Broadway / Walnut A A Broadway / TH 25 C D / F Broadway Cedar A A 3r Street / Locust A A 3r Street / Walnut A A 3" Street / TH 25 A A 4 Street / Locust A A 4 Street / Walnut A A 4 Street / TH 25 A A / F 6 Street/ TH 25 A/ F A/ F 7 in Street / TH 25 B C 1 -94 North Ramps / TH 25 B C 1 -94 South Ramp / TH 25 B B * Signalized Intersections in Bold. V F Indicates one or more movements at LOS F. The addition of a 2nd river crossing improves traffic operations within the CBD substantially. The additional capacity at 7th Street and the I -94 North Ramps provides improved operations at these intersections as well. For the AM peak hour, all intersections return to acceptable overall intersection LOS. Three intersections (3rd Street, 4th Street, 6th Street) experience movements at LOS F. In the PM peak hour, all intersections again operate at overall LOS D or better. Three intersections have movements operating at LOS F. They include TH 25 /Broadway, TH 25 /4th Street, and TH 25 /6th Street. The primary capacity constraint at the critical intersection of TH 25 and Broadway is the single lane westbound through movement. The lack of available westbound capacity at this intersection is the reason for LOS F operations on the westbound approach. Observation of the model indicates that westbound queues frequently extend to Cedar (reported at 34% of the time during the PM peak hour), preventing egress to Broadway from the side street at that intersection. Though notable, this magnitude of queuing does not result in degraded LOS at the Broadway /Cedar intersection). Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 24 August 30, 2011 Other than the westbound approach to TH 25/Broadway, queuing does not present a major issue throughout the network. Queues are short in duration with few, if any, cycle failures observed. 2030 Build with 2nd River Crossing The addition of traffic associated with the proposed Revitalization Plan will drive the need for some capacity improvements along TH 25 in the heart of the Monticello CBD. In order to provide for adequate access opportunities to the proposed retail land uses west of TH 25, installation of a traffic signal at 4th Street is needed. Without a traffic signal in place, retail operations are likely to be less than optimal. To offset the addition of a controlled full access point onto TH 25, conversion of 3rd Street to right - in/right -out (RIRO) access only is recommended. Results of traffic operations for 2030 Build conditions with these modifications in place are summarized in Table 8: Table 8 Operational Analysis Results — 2030 Build with 2nd Bridge Intersection LOS AM PM Cty. Rd. 11 -14 / TH 25 C C River Street/ TH 25 B A Broadway / Locust A A Broadway / Walnut A A Broadway / TH 25 C C Broadway Cedar A A 3r Street / Locust A A 3r Street / Walnut A A 3r Street / TH 25 A A 4 Street / Locust A A 4 Street / Walnut A A 4 Street / TH 25 A B 6 Street/ TH 25 B/ F A/ F 7 in Street / TH 25 C C 1 -94 North Ramps / TH 25 B C 1 -94 South Ramp / TH 25 B B " Signalized Intersections in Bold. V F" Indicates one or more movements at LOS F. Traffic operations post- redevelopment show little change from those pre - redevelopment. One notable improvement is operations at the intersection of TH 25/Broadway. This improvement is due to the diversion of some east /west through traffic to the new traffic signal at 4th Street. It is anticipated that up to one -third of the east /west through traffic (100 - 150 vph in each direction during peak times) may Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 25 August 30, 2011 divert to 4th Street. Trips making this diversion are anticipated to be very local in nature (origins /destinations within 5 -6 blocks) as opposed to more regional trips originating from or destined to the perimeter of Monticello and beyond. The improvement at TH 25/Broadway also helps to improve operations at Broadway /Cedar. Queuing from TH 25 /Broadway is not expected to impede operations at the Broadway intersections located one block in either direction (Cedar and Walnut). One critical issue involved with the addition of a traffic signal on TH 25 will be whether the traffic signal will result in increased delay and/or stops for mainline traffic. The current cycle length for the traffic signals on TH 25 (in both the AM and PM peak hours) is 130 seconds. At the intersection with Broadway, north/south through traffic receives 76 -78 seconds of green time during the AM peak hour and 55 -65 seconds during the PM peak hour. At the intersection with 4th, with the proposed traffic signal, north/south through traffic would receive 94 -95 seconds during the AM peak hour and 78 -85 seconds during the PM peak hour. In simple terms, the amount of green time is 20 -40% greater for north/south traffic at 4th Street, depending on the direction and peak period. The availability of extra green time will provide extra flexibility when developing optimized signal coordination timing plans for the TH 25 corridor. This added flexibility will offset the loss in flexibility inherent with the addition of another signalized intersection to the corridor. Walnut and Locust Street non - Arterial Intersections Analysis was performed at the non - arterial intersections along Walnut and Locust Streets to determine if the addition of revitalization - related traffic would result in traffic capacity issues. Under existing conditions, field observations conducted in 2011 suggest that some northbound vehicles divert to Walnut Street to bypass queuing on TH 25 caused by construction of the intersection of TH 25 /County Road 11 -14 north of the river. Some of the vehicles using Walnut Street as an alternate route are west along Broadway Street, although a majority of the cut - through traffic appears destined to the TH 25 river bridge. Although spare capacity exists at the Walnut Street intersections, the cut - through traffic eventually reaches the TH 25 /Broadway Street intersection, where little spare capacity is available. The cut - through vehicles add to the volume of eastbound lefts at this intersection, taking away green time from the northbound through movement. Despite this additional cut - through traffic, operations on Walnut Street as observed in the field were quite good, with no queues in excess of two vehicles observed. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 26 August 30, 2011 Under the proposed CBD Revitalization plan, Walnut Street would be designed to serve not only local through traffic, but also as a primary "drive aisle" for retail traffic. As such, pedestrian volumes would likely increase to reflect increased store -to- parking -lot foot traffic. The existence of increased vehicle - pedestrian conflict has the potential to lessen Walnut Street's role as a desirable alternate route to TH 25 under times of high traffic congestion. Because of Locust Street's location one block immediately west, it was included in operational analysis of post - revitalization conditions to determine if adequate capacity was available to handle any traffic diversion that might occur. The operational analysis conducted for 2030 post - redevelopment conditions assumed a high volume of pedestrian crossing traffic at the intersection of Walnut Street and 3rd Street. 160 peds per hour were assumed to be crossing each of the legs of this intersection, equal to the peak hour traffic volume expected for the primary retail generator planned for the southwest corner of the intersection. Even with the significant volume of ped traffic assumed, results of the operational analysis post - revitalization (summarized in Tables 8) indicate that reserve capacity is likely to remain available along Walnut Street. Overall intersection operations remain at LOS A Walnut Street intersections. Accordingly, the amount of traffic to be diverted to Locust Street would be expected to be small. If this conclusion proves to be incorrect and a significant portion of existing traffic does divert to Locust Street, the analysis shows that the necessary roadway capacity does exist to be able to handle the extra traffic, while still performing at LOS A. The intersection of Walnut /7th Street and intersections along Cedar Street were not included in this supplemental analysis because the amount of added traffic is expected to be small (less than 50 vph / 500 ADT). Accordingly, no change in LOS would be exptected. Any operational issues identified at these intersections in the future are not likely to be appreciably impacted by the proposed Revitalization Plan. Operational Analysis Conclusions • The addition of a 2nd Mississippi River crossing will be essential to providing acceptable level of service along TH 25 by the year 2030. Without a 2nd River crossing, traffic volumes are anticipated to increase by as much as 60% per the City's Transportation Plan, resulting in demand exceeding capacity along the entire TH 25 corridor from the River to I -94. • Assuming a second river crossing is implemented as recommended in the City's Transportation Plan, the intersection of TH 25 and Broadway is forecast to operate at LOS D through 2030. This intersection is the critical intersection in terms of north/south capacity on TH 25 through downtown Monticello. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 27 August 30, 2011 • The addition of traffic related to the proposed Revitalization Plan will result in addition traffic demand at and around the TH 25/13roadway intersection. The addition of a traffic signal at 4th Street will provide an alternate route for local east /west traffic, resulting in additional green time for TH 25 traffic and improved operations for all traffic along TH 25. • Post - Revitalization, acceptable LOS D is forecasted to remain for the TH 25 /Broadway intersection. Queues are expected to remain short and result in minimal upstream intersection interference at the intersections of Broadway /Walnut and Broadway /Cedar. These two intersections are expected to operate at acceptable overall LOS with all movements at acceptable LOS. • The non - arterial intersections along Locust Street and Walnut Street are expected to be able to handle the anticipated post- Revitalization traffic demands at with reserve capacity. No diversion to Locust Street from Walnut Street is required to achieve LOS A, even with significant pedestrian activity that is likely to be present along Walnut Street between Broadway Street and 4th Street. Spare capacity is available along Walnut Street is available to handle traffic that may choose to divert. • Capacity improvements are likely to be needed by 2030 at the TH 25 intersections of 7th Street and the I -94 North Ramp intersection, regardless of whether the proposed CBD Revitalization Plan proceeds. The recommended Improvements are as follows: 0 7th Street: Add 3rd westbound approach lane by widening road to south. Add protected/permitted eastbound/westbound left turn phasing. o I -94 North Ramps: Extend westbound left turn lane storage bay from 225 feet to 400+ feet. Modify signal phasing to incorporate a westbound right turn overlap phase that is able to run concurrent with southbound throughs or northbound lefts. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 28 August 30, 2011 PARKING A parking study was conducted within the Monticello CBD to assess the quantity of public parking available on a typical weekday. Counts were conducted in December, 2010. In general, the area studied is region bounded by River Street on the north, Locust Street on the West, Cedar Street on the east, and 4th Street on the South. Figure 15 depicts this area: Figure 15 Parkina Studv Area r f ; r E ti st E rdge 52 * Pe. rk 6 ' 53 3 f 3 CO 18 33 LN Legend ; 00 Block Number Hillside AL Cemelery 'F= 7#n t Street Park ... KU Source: Google All of the public parking spaces (both on- street and off - street) within this region were counted at the following times: • 8:30 AM, 10:30 AM, and 12:30 PM on Thursday, December 9, 2010. • 3:30 and 5:00 PM on Wednesday, August 24, 2011 • 7:00 and 8:30 AM on Thursday, August 25, 2011 Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 29 August 30, 2011 The counts showed that of the roughly 600 public spaces available within this 12 square block area, approximately 80% are available on a typical weekday. Detailed count data is summarized in Table 9, below. Table 9 Parking Count Details Block Number Total Spaces Spaces Available 7:30 AM 8:30 AM 10:30 AM 12:30 PM 3:30 PM 5:00 PM 16 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 17 20 15 5 2 2 5 18 18 23 0 0 0 2 8 20 31 40 29 29 26 24 25 29 32 30 28 28 26 26 27 28 33 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 34 99 87 86 83 85 87 90 35 134 123 119 105 108 102 105 36 43 42 36 34 27 35 38 51 30 28 26 19 19 22 24 52 84 80 78 63 63 64 64 53 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 Overall 573 496 471 420 418 435 477 87% 83% 74% 74% 77% 84% Based on the findings in this parking study, public parking is generally in ample supply within the 12- square -block study area. Between 70% and 90% of the public parking spaces are available throughout an average day. The one exception to this general trend is within the vicinity of the existing Cargill facility at 4th and Walnut (Block 18). Parking on this and nearby blocks is in short supply during working hours, forcing employees to park up to a block or two away. Employees are also observed parking in adjacent land use parking lots, including the Wells Fargo Bank parking lot across Walnut Street. Although a parking deficiency exists in the immediate vicinity of the Cargill facility, the availability of a significant amount of reserve parking capacity elsewhere in the CBD suggests that no additional parking capacity is needed within the CBD to support existing demand. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 30 August 30, 2011 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE East /West Ped Crossing of TH 25 One of the primary issues facing pedestrians in downtown Monticello is how to cross TH 25. Currently, pedestrian crossing is available at the following locations: • Pedestrian underpass north of River Street o 1.5 -block separation • Signalized crossing at Broadway Street o 5 -block separation • Signalized crossing at 7th Street The 5 -block separation between available crossing opportunities at Broadway and 7th Streets presents the biggest barrier to pedestrians. The proposed traffic signal at 4th Street would provide an additional signalized crossing opportunity for pedestrians. This signal would be located roughly midway between Broadway and 7th Streets, reducing the maximum separation between signalized crossing opportunities for pedestrians from 5 blocks to 3. The recommended signal phasing for east /west movements at the proposed 4th Street traffic signal is permitted only, similar to existing operation at 7th Street. The minimum required time for the east /west phase to accommodate ped crossing will be approximately 26 seconds.2 Based on the operational analysis conducted and discussed earlier, a signal cycle length of 130 seconds is anticipated for 2030 conditions. In the PM peak hour, the side street (east /west) phase is projected to receive 30 seconds of green time, sufficient to meet the ped minimum. In the AM peak hour, when peds are less likely to be present, the amount of time projected for the side street is 20 seconds. If and when a ped call occurs during the AM peak hour, the signals would pause coordinated operations for one cycle to fully serve the pedestrian minimum time, returning to coordination in one cycle by shortening time on the mainline TH 25 phase. During off peak times, when cycle lengths would likely be less than 130 seconds, operation similar to the AM peak hour would occur if the side street phase were shorter than the required ped minimum. Coordination would be paused while the ped phase is service, then reinstated. The amount of time necessary to return to 2 Assumes 4- second Walk, 22- second Flashing Don't Walk (5 travel lanes @ 12 ft. wide + 6 ft median + four 2 -ft shoulders @ 3.5 ft /sec.) Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 31 August 30, 2011 coordinated operation would vary depending on the cycle length and total number of phases. As flashing yellow arrow signal indications become more prevalent, the potential to eliminate unnecessary phases by time of day (such as north/south protected lefts during off peak times) expands, decreasing the likelihood that a ped call would require the signal to temporarily pause coordinated operations to serve the ped call. North /South Ped Crossing of Broadway Street The other issue facing pedestrians is north/south crossing of Broadway Street in the vicinity of the CBD. Currently, only one signalized crossing opportunity exists —at TH 25. Under existing conditions, low traffic volumes on Broadway permit crossing at the unsignalized intersections to the west and east (Walnut, Locust, Cedar, etc.) However, as traffic volumes on Broadway continue to grow, crossing at these unsignalized locations will become more problematic. One solution for this problem would be to add a traffic signal at one of the nearby unsignalized intersections. The mostly likely candidate for signalization is likely to be Locust Street. Although Walnut Street and Cedar Street experience higher daily and peak hour traffic volumes, their separation from TH 25 (one block/approximately 330 feet) suggests that operations could become problematic at some point in the future due to queuing. Locust Street, at two blocks separation to the west would be the next best option in terms of proximity to the heart of the CBD, traffic volumes, and separation from TH 25. Neither the intersection of Walnut Street nor Cedar Street currently meets peak hour vehicular volume warrants for signalization. Noting that traffic volumes are slightly lower on Locust Street indicates that this intersection currently would not meet peak hour signal warrants as well. In order to meet pedestrian warrants for signalization, the intersection would at a minimum need to experience over 190 pedestrians in the peak hour. Based on field observation of minimal ped activity, this threshold is far from being met. An alternative to full signalization would be the installation of a Ped Hawk signal, similar to that installed on TH 23 at 17th Avenue in St. Cloud. A Ped Hawk signalized intersection functions similar to a two -way stop until activated by a ped. When activated, the ped is given priority to cross. Vehicles on the mainline may proceed after stopping. After the ped clearance phase, the signal returns to the off state. Based on the latest federal MUTCD (yet to be formally adopted by MnDOT), the minimum pedestrian volume threshold is 20 peds per hour. If the CBD revitalization plan moves forward as proposed, it is possible that this threshold Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 32 August 30, 2011 will be met. Accordingly, if and when warranted, a Ped Hawk signal is the recommended solution for providing an additional north/south crossing point for pedestrians across Broadway Street in the CBD. Bicycle Circulation and Facilities The major issues confronting bicyclists in the CBD include high traffic volumes on TH 25 and lack of dedicated facilities. In large part, as shown on the City's Existing Parks and Pathways Plan, bicyclists must share lanes with automobile traffic in the CBD. No dedicated bicycle facilities, other than trails located within Bridge Park adjacent to the Mississippi River exist within the CBD. In order to improve service for bicyclists, implementation of a comprehensive dedicate network of bicycle facilities is needed. Such a plan has been developed by the City and published as the Parks and Trails System Plan. The Parks and Trails Systems Plan identifies two corridors within the CBD as bicycle corridors: • Broadway Street is identified as a Primary Pathway Route • TH 25 is identified as a Secondary Pathway Route While bicycle use of these two facilities within the CBD is not prohibited, the current geometric design of these two facilities does not facilitate use by bicycles. To the extent possible, as improvements are made to both Broadway and TH 25, a prudent action would be to design the improvements mindful of bicyclists as users in addition to automobiles. Due to right -of -way constraints within the CBD, the bicycle facilities developed for these roadways will likely need to be of the on- street variety (wide shoulders or dedicated bike lanes), as opposed to dedicate off - street trail facilities. The implementation of bicycle facilities on TH 25, while recommended in the City's Park and Trail System Plan, runs contrary to the functional classification of TH 25 as an arterial roadway, the primary purpose of which is to carry regional vehicular traffic. As preliminary -level design of bicycle - related improvements on this corridor is undertaken, consultation with Mn/DOT should take place to ensure that the functional integrity of the corridor will not be impacted. Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 33 August 30, 2011 APPENDIX A. Traffic Count Data September, 2010 turning movement counts March, 2011 turning movement count at TH 25 /Broadway B. Operational Analysis Results • 2010 Existing AM & PM • 2030 No -Build AM & PM • 2030 No -Build with Bridge AM & PM • 2030 Build with Bridge AM & PM C. Monticello Trail Plans • Existing Trail Plan (2011) • Proposed Trail Plan D. Concept Roadway Improvement Plan • Recommended 7th Street Capacity Improvements Monticello CBD Revitalization Page 34 August 30, 2011 W Westwood Highway 25 and River St Monticello Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Solutions for your Success Grauna Printed- Total File Name : 18 - 25 and River St Site Code : 15497182 Start Date : 9/15/09 Page No : 1 06:30 AM River St River St Highway 25 Highway 25 0 EB WB NB SB Start Time Left Thru Right App' Left Thm Right 1 0 0 0 Right 0 Left Thru Right 0 0 0 07:15 AM 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 Tot al 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 07:45 AM Total 06:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * ** BREAK * ** 557 0 0 166 0 166 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * ** BREAK * ** 0 1516 58 1574 2201 0 1 11:00 AM 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 11:15 AM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 11:30 AM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 11:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 0 0 12 12 0 0 0 12:00 PM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 12:15 PM 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 12:30 PM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 12:45 PM 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 Total 0 0 20 20 0 0 0 * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 03:15 PM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 03:30 PM 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 03:45 PM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 Total 0 0 21 21 0 0 0 04:00 PM 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 04:15 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 04:30 PM 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 04:45 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 0 0 15 15 0 0 0 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 05:30 PM 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 05:45 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 Total 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 Grand Total 0 0 78 78 0 0 0 Apprch % 0 0 100 0 0 0 Total % 0 0 0.5 1 .5 0 0 0 Left Thru 0 2631 0 496 18 514 777 0 1 149 0 150 0 152 4 156 Total 0 1 147 0 148 0 378 19 397 545 0 0 137 0 137 0 419 17 436 574 0 1 284 0 285 0 797 36 833 1119 0 0 148 0 148 0 395 22 417 565 0 0 149 0 149 0 395 18 413 562 0 0 163 0 163 0 384 10 394 557 0 0 166 0 166 0 342 8 350 517 0 0 626 0 626 0 1516 58 1574 2201 0 1 130 0 131 0 251 11 262 393 0 1 131 0 132 0 245 7 252 384 0 2 261 0 2631 0 496 18 514 777 0 1 149 0 150 0 152 4 156 311 0 2 153 0 155 0 0 189 6 195 354 0 0 164 0 164 258 0 206 8 214 380 0 1 186 0 187 68 0 198 13 211 399 0 4 652 0 656 7766 0 745 31 776 1444 0 2 220 0 222 0 199 6 205 431 0 1 216 0 217 0 206 10 216 436 0 3 205 0 208 0 184 3 187 399 0 0 211 0 211 0 225 11 236 456 0 6 852 0 858 0 814 30 844 1722 0 2 326 0 328 0 225 17 242 576 0 0 362 0 362 0 225 15 240 606 0 1 403 0 404 0 267 13 280 691 0 1 405 0 406 0 258 23 281 691 0 4 1496 0 1500 0 975 68 1043 2564 0 1 449 0 450 0 229 14 243 700 0 1 473 0 474 0 264 15 279 755 0 1 490 0 491 0 224 13 237 733 0 1 445 0 446 0 298 24 322 769 0 4 1857 0 1861 0 1015 66 1081 2957 0 0 471 0 471 0 294 28 322 793 0 2 454 0 456 0 258 18 276 734 0 0 397 0 397 0 242 14 256 657 0 0 414 0 414 0 236 11 247 663 0 2 1736 0 1738 0 1030 71 1101 2847 0 23 7764 0 7787 0 7388 378 7766 15631 0.3 99.7 0 0 95.1 4.9 0 0.1 49.7 0 49.8 0 47.3 2.4 49.7 W Printed By: Westwood Professional Services Westwood 7699 Anagram Drive MN 553 . Hwy 25 and Broadway (CSAH 75) Eden Prairie, i e Name : 17 - 25 and Broadway (CSAH 75) Monticello Site Code : 16497172 Start Date : 9/16/2009 Page No : 1 Grnnnc Printed_ TntA BREAK * ** Broadway (CSAH 75) Broadway (CSAH 75) Highway 25 Highway 25 Eastbound Total Westbound 59 26 Northbound 20 36 33 Southbound 22 167 Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru I Right App. Total Left Thru I Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 06:30 AM 29 29 13 71 4 18 25 47 11 89 1 101 36 285 26 347 566 06:45 AM 25 41 11 77 2 21 28 51 19 116 5 140 49 318 29 396 664 139 Total 54 70 24 148 6 39 53 98 30 205 6 241 85 603 55 743 1230 07:00 AM 24 48 10 82 7 13 22 42 10 81 6 97 65 319 26 410 631 07:15 AM 30 67 16 113 11 19 34 64 13 106 6 125 62 347 21 430 732 07:30 AM 31 24 14 69 9 30 36 75 10 110 12 132 50 311 21 382 658 07:45 AM 34 36 13 83 20 19 35 74 13 110 11 134 60 263 17 340 631 33 Total 119 175 53 347 47 81 127 255 46 407 35 488 237 1240 85 1562 2652 08:00 AM 23 28 17 68 10 14 13 37 12 83 8 103 46 202 10 258 466 08:15 AM 26 31 9 66 10 22 20 52 10 84 12 106 41 203 14 258 482 BREAK * ** Total 49 59 26 134 1 20 36 33 89 1 22 167 20 209 87 405 24 516 948 * ** BREAK * ** 11:00 AM 17 25 26 68 22 22 30 74 18 77 10 105 35 157 16 208 455 11:15 AM 42 36 16 94 16 23 36 75 19 127 10 156 31 139 12 182 507 11:30 AM 33 37 25 95 21 25 40 86 18 119 9 146 30 157 13 200 527 11:45 AM 46 33 21 100 27 37 37 101 23 121 13 157 27 131 14 172 530 Total 138 131 88 357 86 107 143 336 78 444 42 564 123 584 55 762 2019 12:00 PM 24 36 18 78 15 32 48 95 17 126 9 152 30 158 15 203 528 12:15 PM 40 35 21 96 17 36 45 98 19 118 14 151 36 162 28 226 571 12:30 PM 33 24 19 76 11 19 32 62 17 139 13 169 28 142 9 179 486 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 13 22 38 73 26 133 12 171 0 0 0 0 244 Total 97 95 58 250 56 109 163 328 79 516 48 643 94 462 52 608 1829 * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 63 34 30 127 22 42 77 141 13 203 8 224 34 160 25 219 711 03:15 PM 53 30 13 96 18 45 79 142 17 220 5 242 35 175 28 238 718 03:30 PM 86 65 24 175 20 45 98 163 14 219 4 237 32 161 23 216 791 03:45 PM 72 51 18 141 26 40 89 155 21 229 9 259 32 160 19 211 766 Total 274 180 85 539 86 172 343 601 65 871 26 962 133 656 95 884 2986 04:00 PM 72 58 17 147 25 48 101 174 21 237 6 264 42 178 20 240 825 04:15 PM 73 65 17 155 25 56 113 194 21 244 3 268 52 196 20 268 885 04:30 PM 73 72 16 161 24 64 125 213 19 251 1 271 61 213 21 295 940 04:45 PM 84 44 8 136 20 57 111 188 18 301 1 320 57 240 24 321 965 Total 302 239 58 599 94 225 450 769 79 1033 11 1123 212 827 85 1124 3615 05:00 PM 95 51 18 164 21 59 121 201 17 323 1 341 53 193 19 265 971 05:15 PM 89 43 20 152 8 37 108 153 16 295 2 313 58 208 21 287 905 05:30 PM 84 39 12 135 17 51 123 191 16 263 8 287 47 166 14 227 840 05:45 PM 57 35 16 108 19 43 122 184 16 256 6 278 40 196 21 257 827 Total 325 168 66 559 65 190 474 729 65 1137 17 1219 198 763 75 1036 3543 Grand Total 1358 1117 458 2933 460 959 1786 3205 464 4780 205 5449 1169 5540 526 7235 18822 Apprch % 46.3 38.1 15.6 14.4 29.9 55.7 8.5 87.7 3.8 16.2 76.6 7.3 Total % 7.2 5.9 2.4 15.6 2.4 5.1 9.5 17 2.5 25.4 1.1 29 6.2 29.4 2.8 38.4 W Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Hwy 25 and 7th St Solutions for your Success Monticello Grnnna Printed- Total File Name : 16 - 25 and 7th St Site Code : 15225162 Start Date : 9/15/09 Page No : 1 06:30 AM 7th Street 7th Street Highway 25 Highway 25 6 EB WB NB SB Start Time Left Thru Right 13 51 07:15 AM 5 23 43 07:30 AM 4 12 38 07:45 AM 7 13 59 Total 17 61 191 08:00 AM 7 8 30 08:15 AM 4 10 17 * ** BREAK * ** 06:30 AM 5 6 33 06:45 AM 6 4 47 Total 11 10 80 07:00 AM 1 13 51 07:15 AM 5 23 43 07:30 AM 4 12 38 07:45 AM 7 13 59 Total 17 61 191 08:00 AM 7 8 30 08:15 AM 4 10 17 * ** BREAK * ** Total 11 18 47 * ** BREAK * ** 11:00 AM 12 22 27 11:15 AM 10 12 39 11:30 AM 9 19 30 11:45 AM 14 24 40 Total 45 77 136 12:00 PM 9 19 35 12:15 PM 18 22 32 12:30 PM 14 23 33 12:45 PM 16 26 23 Total 57 90 123 * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 15 23 36 03:15 PM 16 17 37 03:30 PM 24 28 59 03:45 PM 17 26 43 Total 72 94 175 04:00 PM 25 19 45 04:15 PM 24 30 44 04:30 PM 20 24 38 04:45 PM 21 28 48 Total 90 101 175 05:00 PM 23 28 61 05:15 PM 18 29 38 05:30 PM 15 39 45 05:45 PM 24 27 46 Total 80 123 190 Grand Total 383 574 1117 Apprch % 18.5 27.7 53.9 Total % 2.1 3.1 6 App' Left Thru Right App' Left Thru Right App' Left Thru Right App. Int. Total Total Total Total Total 44 12 5 4 21 17 137 10 164 3 279 13 295 524 57 17 19 7 43 11 135 17 163 6 309 17 332 595 101 29 24 11 64 28 272 27 327 9 588 30 627 1119 65 19 11 7 37 12 135 29 176 10 270 13 293 571 71 14 17 7 38 19 137 38 194 11 285 15 311 614 54 17 9 9 35 26 156 35 217 6 282 13 301 607 79 16 6 8 30 27 153 42 222 5 250 13 268 599 269 66 43 31 140 84 581 144 809 32 1087 54 1173 2391 45 15 8 4 27 27 137 18 182 13 169 16 198 452 31 25 8 9 42 16 119 40 175 11 190 7 208 456 76 40 16 13 69 43 256 58 357 24 359 23 406 908 61 24 17 12 53 21 127 41 189 9 132 12 153 456 61 25 27 25 77 21 133 32 186 26 156 17 199 523 58 36 27 20 83 35 146 32 213 13 141 20 174 528 78 37 33 20 90 38 164 46 248 15 184 17 216 632 258 122 104 77 303 115 570 151 836 63 613 66 742 2139 63 29 36 26 91 33 183 40 256 16 164 19 199 609 72 37 29 29 95 38 198 38 274 13 160 15 188 629 70 37 30 23 90 36 204 40 280 23 152 21 196 636 65 40 33 22 95 54 178 43 275 13 179 7 199 634 270 143 128 100 371 161 763 161 1085 65 655 62 782 2508 74 36 31 19 86 41 241 31 313 10 172 14 196 669 70 34 34 19 87 44 264 32 340 12 195 10 217 714 111 45 38 19 102 72 262 35 369 8 187 3 198 780 86 33 39 23 95 78 293 35 406 12 197 9 218 805 341 148 142 80 370 235 1060 133 1428 42 751 36 829 2968 89 46 37 20 103 60 305 32 397 13 199 15 227 816 98 36 34 30 100 56 350 32 438 13 194 11 218 854 82 39 37 14 90 61 323 38 422 13 173 17 203 797 97 49 42 14 105 65 297 49 411 15 180 12 207 820 366 170 150 78 398 242 1275 151 1668 54 746 55 855 3287 112 49 30 10 89 58 379 45 482 8 187 17 212 895 85 30 41 14 85 68 290 30 388 19 187 16 222 780 99 50 45 22 117 56 331 44 431 17 162 17 196 843 97 31 27 26 84 43 297 31 371 12 177 16 205 757 393 160 143 72 375 225 1297 150 1672 56 713 66 835 3275 2074 878 750 462 2090 1133 6074 975 8182 345 5512 392 6249 18595 42 35.9 22.1 13.8 74.2 11.9 5.5 88.2 6.3 11.2 4.7 4 2.5 11.2 6.1 32.7 5.2 44 1.9 29.6 2.1 33.6 61 24 17 12 53 21 127 41 189 9 132 12 153 456 61 25 27 25 77 21 133 32 186 26 156 17 199 523 58 36 27 20 83 35 146 32 213 13 141 20 174 528 78 37 33 20 90 38 164 46 248 15 184 17 216 632 258 122 104 77 303 115 570 151 836 63 613 66 742 2139 63 29 36 26 91 33 183 40 256 16 164 19 199 609 72 37 29 29 95 38 198 38 274 13 160 15 188 629 70 37 30 23 90 36 204 40 280 23 152 21 196 636 65 40 33 22 95 54 178 43 275 13 179 7 199 634 270 143 128 100 371 161 763 161 1085 65 655 62 782 2508 74 36 31 19 86 41 241 31 313 10 172 14 196 669 70 34 34 19 87 44 264 32 340 12 195 10 217 714 111 45 38 19 102 72 262 35 369 8 187 3 198 780 86 33 39 23 95 78 293 35 406 12 197 9 218 805 341 148 142 80 370 235 1060 133 1428 42 751 36 829 2968 89 46 37 20 103 60 305 32 397 13 199 15 227 816 98 36 34 30 100 56 350 32 438 13 194 11 218 854 82 39 37 14 90 61 323 38 422 13 173 17 203 797 97 49 42 14 105 65 297 49 411 15 180 12 207 820 366 170 150 78 398 242 1275 151 1668 54 746 55 855 3287 112 49 30 10 89 58 379 45 482 8 187 17 212 895 85 30 41 14 85 68 290 30 388 19 187 16 222 780 99 50 45 22 117 56 331 44 431 17 162 17 196 843 97 31 27 26 84 43 297 31 371 12 177 16 205 757 393 160 143 72 375 225 1297 150 1672 56 713 66 835 3275 2074 878 750 462 2090 1133 6074 975 8182 345 5512 392 6249 18595 42 35.9 22.1 13.8 74.2 11.9 5.5 88.2 6.3 11.2 4.7 4 2.5 11.2 6.1 32.7 5.2 44 1.9 29.6 2.1 33.6 W Hwy 25 and I -94 WB Ramps Monticello Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Solutions for your Success Grnnna Printed- Total File Name : 15 - 25 and I94 WB Site Code : 17497152 Start Date : 9/17/09 Page No : 1 06:30 AM 06:45 AM Total 07:00 AM 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM Total 08:00 AM 08:15 AM * ** BREAK * ** Total * ** BREAK * ** 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM Total 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM Total * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 03:15 PM 03:30 PM 03:45 PM Total 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Total 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 05:45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % ft Thrtx I -94 WB Ramp I -94 WB Ramp Highway 25 0 Highway 25 1331 Left EB 2 WB 0 NB 36 SB Int. Start Time Le Total Right App' Left Thru Right App. 0 Thru Right App' Left Thru Right App. 0 0 21 0 64 85 16 94 0 110 0 342 13 355 550 0 0 0 06:30 AM 06:45 AM Total 07:00 AM 07:15 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM Total 08:00 AM 08:15 AM * ** BREAK * ** Total * ** BREAK * ** 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM Total 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM Total * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 03:15 PM 03:30 PM 03:45 PM Total 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Total 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 05:45 PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % ft Thrtx 0 0 38 0 95 1331 Left 238 2 3041 0 456 36 492 Int. 0 0 0 Total 38 0 44 Total 23 139 0 Total 0 227 19 Total Total 0 0 0 0 21 0 64 85 16 94 0 110 0 342 13 355 550 0 0 0 0 31 0 58 89 20 116 0 136 0 347 21 368 593 0 0 0 0 52 0 122 174 36 210 0 246 0 689 34 723 1143 0 0 0 0 25 0 55 80 28 112 0 140 0 295 24 319 539 0 0 0 0 22 0 56 78 44 148 0 192 0 321 24 345 615 0 0 0 0 29 0 61 90 49 135 0 184 0 331 22 353 627 0 0 0 0 27 1 73 101 25 156 0 181 0 293 21 314 596 0 0 0 0 103 1 245 349 146 551 0 697 0 1240 91 1331 2377 0 0 0 0 18 0 49 67 30 105 2 137 0 221 19 240 444 0 0 0 0 20 0 46 66 34 133 0 167 0 235 17 252 485 0 0 0 0 38 0 95 1331 64 238 2 3041 0 456 36 492 929 0 0 0 0 38 0 44 82 23 139 0 162 0 227 19 246 490 0 0 0 0 25 0 42 67 17 136 0 153 0 225 17 242 462 0 0 0 0 28 0 75 103 31 159 0 190 0 208 12 220 513 0 0 0 0 26 0 59 85 19 196 0 215 0 232 23 255 555 0 0 0 0 117 0 220 337 90 630 0 720 0 892 71 963 2020 0 0 0 0 30 0 62 92 30 201 0 231 0 238 35 273 596 0 0 0 0 40 0 54 94 23 202 0 225 0 232 24 256 575 0 0 0 0 34 0 73 107 21 187 0 208 0 218 24 242 557 0 0 0 0 34 0 56 90 29 170 2 201 0 246 13 259 550 0 0 0 0 138 0 245 383 103 760 2 865 0 934 96 1030 2278 0 0 0 0 47 0 86 133 36 209 1 246 0 239 30 269 648 0 0 0 0 38 0 92 130 26 217 0 243 0 236 31 267 640 0 0 0 0 44 2 115 161 23 239 0 262 0 276 27 303 726 0 0 0 0 52 0 124 176 27 249 0 276 0 269 28 297 749 0 0 0 0 181 2 417 600 112 914 1 1027 0 1020 116 1136 2763 0 0 0 0 50 1 119 170 31 229 0 260 0 307 28 335 765 0 0 0 0 53 0 140 193 29 265 0 294 0 263 31 294 781 0 0 0 0 52 1 110 163 37 323 0 360 0 286 22 308 831 0 0 0 0 54 1 105 160 31 306 0 337 0 277 35 312 809 0 0 0 0 209 3 474 686 128 1123 0 1251 0 1133 116 1249 3186 0 0 0 0 47 0 101 148 41 248 0 289 0 250 35 285 722 0 0 0 0 61 1 120 182 23 260 0 283 0 259 25 284 749 0 0 0 0 51 1 134 186 26 227 0 253 0 279 30 309 748 0 0 0 0 50 0 126 176 20 251 0 271 0 258 24 282 729 0 0 0 0 209 2 481 692 110 986 0 1096 0 1046 114 1160 2948 0 0 0 0 1047 8 2299 3354 789 5412 5 6206 0 7410 674 8084 17644 0 0 0 31.2 0.2 68.5 12.7 87.2 0.1 0 91.7 8.3 0 0 0 0 5.9 0 13 19 4.5 30.7 0 35.2 0 42 3.8 45.8 W Hwy 25 and I -94 EB Off Ramp /CR117 Monticello Westwood Professional Services 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Solutions for your Success Grauna Printed- Total File Name : 14 - 25 and I94 EB Site Code : 16225142 Start Date : 9/16/09 Page No : 1 06:30 AM I -94 EB Ramp CR 117 Hwy 25 Hwy 25 17 EB WB NB SB Start Time Left Thru Right App' Left Thru Right App. 30 07:30 AM Right App' Left Thru Right App. 20 Total 84 50 89 08:00 AM 7 9 13 08:15 AM 9 10 16 * ** BREAK * ** 06:30 AM 12 13 18 06:45 AM 17 8 23 Total 29 21 41 07:00 AM 15 20 16 07:15 AM 29 9 30 07:30 AM 20 12 23 07:45 AM 20 9 20 Total 84 50 89 08:00 AM 7 9 13 08:15 AM 9 10 16 * ** BREAK * ** Total 16 19 29 * ** BREAK * ** 11:00 AM 5 12 18 11:15 AM 12 9 18 11:30 AM 14 3 16 11:45 AM 8 9 14 Total 39 33 66 12:00 PM 8 9 16 12:15 PM 10 7 14 12:30 PM 19 4 21 12:45 PM 17 11 19 Total 54 31 70 * ** BREAK * ** 03:00 PM 21 7 24 03:15 PM 20 10 18 03:30 PM 15 13 19 03:45 PM 17 9 32 Total 73 39 93 04:00 PM 20 12 24 04:15 PM 28 10 30 04:30 PM 24 10 29 04:45 PM 22 11 26 Total 94 43 109 05:00 PM 29 1 16 05:15 PM 25 6 37 05:30 PM 15 15 20 05:45 PM 26 9 22 Total 95 31 95 Grand Total 484 267 592 Apprch % 36 19.9 44.1 Total % 3.3 1.8 4 Total Total Total Total Total 43 9 0 44 53 0 139 16 155 32 127 0 159 410 48 6 0 38 44 0 150 21 171 26 123 0 149 412 91 15 0 82 97 0 289 37 326 58 250 0 308 822 51 9 0 47 56 0 156 16 172 24 131 0 155 434 68 9 0 58 67 0 183 27 210 26 166 0 192 537 55 11 0 60 71 0 185 32 217 27 182 0 209 552 49 10 0 37 47 0 168 16 184 23 159 0 182 462 223 39 0 202 241 0 692 91 783 100 638 0 738 1985 29 6 0 36 42 0 167 20 187 27 150 0 177 435 35 7 0 47 54 0 176 22 198 16 99 0 115 402 64 13 0 83 96 0 343 42 3851 43 249 0 292 837 35 9 0 53 62 0 134 9 143 19 128 0 147 387 39 5 0 47 52 0 137 13 150 20 137 0 157 398 33 4 0 47 51 0 177 15 192 23 185 0 208 484 31 6 0 42 48 0 218 20 238 31 155 0 186 503 138 24 0 189 213 0 666 57 723 93 605 0 698 1772 33 13 0 56 69 0 190 23 213 28 172 0 200 515 31 11 0 41 52 0 184 18 202 29 164 0 193 478 44 6 0 59 65 0 175 13 188 20 147 0 167 464 47 7 0 54 61 0 197 15 212 16 158 0 174 494 155 37 0 210 247 0 746 69 815 93 641 0 734 1951 52 4 0 29 33 0 201 10 211 17 176 0 193 489 48 7 0 32 39 0 247 17 264 13 203 0 216 567 47 6 0 44 50 0 236 14 250 27 207 0 234 581 58 9 0 59 68 0 242 14 256 25 162 0 187 569 205 26 0 164 190 0 926 55 981 82 748 0 830 2206 56 10 0 61 71 0 280 15 295 28 176 0 204 626 68 7 0 38 45 0 296 19 315 21 164 0 185 613 63 20 0 69 89 0 294 14 308 29 174 0 203 663 59 9 0 63 72 0 259 13 272 17 226 0 243 646 246 46 0 231 277 0 1129 61 1190 95 740 0 835 2548 46 8 0 54 62 0 275 18 293 25 269 0 294 695 68 11 0 34 45 0 244 14 258 23 234 0 257 628 50 8 0 46 54 0 268 12 280 22 183 0 205 589 57 8 0 49 57 0 285 14 299 28 205 0 233 646 221 35 0 183 218 0 1072 58 1130 98 891 0 989 2558 1343 235 0 1344 1579 0 5863 470 6333 662 4762 0 5424 14679 14.9 0 85.1 0 92.6 7.4 12.2 87.8 0 9.1 1.6 0 9.2 10.8 0 39.9 3.2 43.1 4.5 32.4 0 37 Left T Thru I Int. 64 13 0 83 96 0 343 42 3851 43 249 0 292 837 35 9 0 53 62 0 134 9 143 19 128 0 147 387 39 5 0 47 52 0 137 13 150 20 137 0 157 398 33 4 0 47 51 0 177 15 192 23 185 0 208 484 31 6 0 42 48 0 218 20 238 31 155 0 186 503 138 24 0 189 213 0 666 57 723 93 605 0 698 1772 33 13 0 56 69 0 190 23 213 28 172 0 200 515 31 11 0 41 52 0 184 18 202 29 164 0 193 478 44 6 0 59 65 0 175 13 188 20 147 0 167 464 47 7 0 54 61 0 197 15 212 16 158 0 174 494 155 37 0 210 247 0 746 69 815 93 641 0 734 1951 52 4 0 29 33 0 201 10 211 17 176 0 193 489 48 7 0 32 39 0 247 17 264 13 203 0 216 567 47 6 0 44 50 0 236 14 250 27 207 0 234 581 58 9 0 59 68 0 242 14 256 25 162 0 187 569 205 26 0 164 190 0 926 55 981 82 748 0 830 2206 56 10 0 61 71 0 280 15 295 28 176 0 204 626 68 7 0 38 45 0 296 19 315 21 164 0 185 613 63 20 0 69 89 0 294 14 308 29 174 0 203 663 59 9 0 63 72 0 259 13 272 17 226 0 243 646 246 46 0 231 277 0 1129 61 1190 95 740 0 835 2548 46 8 0 54 62 0 275 18 293 25 269 0 294 695 68 11 0 34 45 0 244 14 258 23 234 0 257 628 50 8 0 46 54 0 268 12 280 22 183 0 205 589 57 8 0 49 57 0 285 14 299 28 205 0 233 646 221 35 0 183 218 0 1072 58 1130 98 891 0 989 2558 1343 235 0 1344 1579 0 5863 470 6333 662 4762 0 5424 14679 14.9 0 85.1 0 92.6 7.4 12.2 87.8 0 9.1 1.6 0 9.2 10.8 0 39.9 3.2 43.1 4.5 32.4 0 37 W Counted By: Westwood Professional Services Westwood 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 . Monticello File Name : TH 25 at Broadway 2011 -03 -24 TH 25 at Broadway Site Code : 22222222 Thurs, March 24, 2011 Start Date : 3/24/2011 Counted By: Westwood Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Unshifted Broadway Broadway TH 25 TH 25 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru F -Right Int. Total 03:00 PM 7 8 5 7 19 17 14 74 3 10 56 5 225 03:05 PM 14 13 5 3 10 27 13 60 4 13 41 5 208 03:10 PM 8 11 6 5 18 19 13 67 2 24 61 8 242 03:15 PM 18 11 4 10 20 30 8 59 2 16 64 8 250 03:20 PM 11 13 5 7 17 28 12 56 5 12 55 8 229 03:25 PM 18 17 5 6 20 25 2 69 2 14 56 9 243 03:30 PM 20 13 9 10 17 33 6 62 1 7 49 5 232 03:35 PM 24 14 7 9 12 20 8 74 4 8 84 5 269 03:40 PM 21 13 7 9 13 27 8 72 0 15 57 4 246 03:45 PM 14 24 7 5 20 27 5 77 2 14 43 7 245 03:50 PM 14 16 8 7 25 35 8 62 3 14 79 4 275 03:55 PM 27 21 7 6 27 31 5 64 3 19 44 4 258 Total 196 174 75 84 218 319 102 796 31 166 689 72 2922 04:00 PM 29 20 8 11 12 33 8 69 2 14 42 6 254 04:05 PM 28 18 2 8 18 29 4 70 1 10 57 8 253 04:10 PM 22 14 3 8 7 28 10 85 3 15 49 9 253 04:15 PM 13 8 1 9 14 28 7 81 3 16 58 9 247 04:20 PM 17 15 6 9 16 28 11 70 3 13 56 6 250 04:25 PM 15 13 5 9 16 26 11 91 11 11 64 17 289 04:30 PM 25 19 6 6 23 38 8 72 1 20 36 5 259 04:35 PM 23 10 2 3 11 23 12 112 5 9 66 13 289 04:40 PM 28 8 10 7 23 39 8 68 3 10 60 11 275 04:45 PM 14 11 6 10 9 32 8 100 3 13 77 12 295 04:50 PM 22 19 5 7 18 37 7 73 1 15 47 3 254 04:55 PM 23 9 5 7 11 20 7 108 2 20 90 12 314 Total 259 164 59 94 178 361 101 999 38 166 702 111 3232 05:00 PM 26 20 6 12 12 35 11 69 6 12 39 13 261 05:05 PM 14 10 6 6 19 29 9 82 3 13 71 9 271 05:10 PM 34 18 6 8 27 33 11 57 2 18 53 8 275 05:15 PM 19 5 9 2 19 31 6 99 2 10 72 12 286 05:20 PM 26 22 10 5 20 27 11 60 5 18 43 5 252 05:25 PM 16 10 12 6 17 33 4 110 4 13 70 7 302 05:30 PM 32 15 10 4 26 43 10 65 2 17 50 12 286 05:35 PM 30 9 22 1 11 24 11 84 5 5 56 11 269 05:40 PM 35 20 15 4 15 31 7 49 0 12 39 13 240 05:45 PM 18 9 9 3 11 18 6 91 3 12 64 18 262 05:50 PM 22 17 9 11 23 29 17 64 0 17 42 3 254 05:55 PM 12 11 7 3 15 30 10 73 3 14 72 13 263 Total 284 166 121 65 215 363 113 903 35 161 671 124 3221 Grand Total 739 504 255 243 611 10431 316 2698 104 493 2062 307 9375 Apprch % 49.3 33.6 17 12.8 32.2 55 10.1 86.5 3.3 17.2 72 10.7 Total % 7.9 5.4 2.7 2.6 6.5 11.1 3.4 28.8 1.1 5.3 22 3.3 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing AM Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) F I > Lanes <T 33 FF TT 4 F TT> Volume 7 9 750 200 10 1 255 255 99 3 750 6 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS D C E D B B A D D D SimTraffic LOS D C D C B A A E D C Storage / *Link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,645 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 45 240 226 26 85 77 26 11 342 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I 1 1 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes <T> Volume 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 598 1 33 1,600 67 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Synchro LOS C D C A A A A A SimTraffic LOS C A B A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *702 100 60 *332 200 *1,645 SimTraffic 95th Queue 12 29 9 28 33 146 Queue Block Time ( %) 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 15 278 25 35 206 F 10 15 5 15 20 10 5 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 14 3 26 42 34 49 23 Queue Block Time ( %) 28 CSAH 75 & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> F TT> <'(` 4 <'( Volume 4 290 19 13 237 2 13 1 18 3 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A C A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 100 80 *326 100 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 6 18 38 37 19 14 Queue Block Time ( %) 30 CSAH 75 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes Volume 100 160 51 29 103 100 52 400 40 225 1,280 97 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Prot Synchro LOS D D C C E B D B C SimTraffic LOS D D D D D B c B B Storage/ *Link Dist. 200 *343 200 *321 200 *331 220 *332 SimTraffic 95th Queue 119 130 57 147 90 127 248 355 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 1 2 32 CSAH 75 & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> F TT> <'h 4 <'( 4 Volume 1 404 F 20 13 222 1 9 1 25 1F 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 80 *321 100 *940 *418 100 *309 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 2 16 3 28 45 8 14 Queue Block Time ( %) 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t 4 <'r <0 4 Volume 7 20 1 9 33 21 8 7 1 20 42 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *367 25 *328 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 3 11 3 42 25 25 17 38 31 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 4 1 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing AM Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <t 4 < ( 4 <'r 4 < ( 4 Volume 7 15 19 5F 35 5 20 20 1 5 20 8 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *328 25 *330 25 *333 25 *326 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 33 43 40 25 40 15 35 32 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 2 2 1 4 1 1 5 1 3 1 1 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 1 1 19 1 1 10 11 481 F 12 11 1,316F 33 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS D B E A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *330 100 *315 100 130 70 *331 SimTraffic 95th Queue 11 42 11 28 26 9 2 Queue Block Time ( %) 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t> <t 4 <t> <t Volume 5 5 1 5 32 8 1 3 1 28F 3 21 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. *370 *339 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 5 6 26 20 35 47 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 2 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'( 4 <t 4 <'j` 4 <t Volume 1 20 13 47 35 10 9 30 6 10 =33 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 30 39 45 38 39 25 41 7 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 1 5 1 3 3 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 4 1 31 2 1 20 45 480 53 15 1,275 46 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C B E A B A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *332 100 *351 100 150 *745 150 *335 SimTraffic 95th Queue 23 49 21 42 41 1 21 2 Queue Block Time ( %) 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes 4 Volume 6 1 60 1 1 1 57 571 1 30 1,215 63 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F C E A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *760 100 *376 100 125 125 *745 SimTraffic 95th Queue 28 67 15 14 71 45 29 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes F T 4 F t> F TT> F TT> Volume 17 61 191 66 43 31 80 581 F 135 36 1,165 75 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Synchro LOS D D B E D E A D A B SimTraffic LOS D D C D D D A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 *365 *365 300 *438 125 *334 SimTraffic 95th Queue 38 88 165 103 102 111 115 69 228 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing AM Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes <T 4 Volume 103F 1 245 129 551 1,315 107 Phasing Perm Prot Synchro LOS D B D A A B SimTraffic LOS D A D A B B Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 131 87 161 81 387 Queue Block Time ( %) 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes .r,r 4 TTT 4 Volume 680 275 720 698 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 *729 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 6 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 TT 4 F TT Volume 76 39 86 36 191 688 80 100 620 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS C D B C B A A D A B SimTraffic LOS D D B D A A A D A B Storage/ *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 87 87 53 42 73 145 37 122 119 Queue Block Time ( %) 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes F TT> F TT> TT 4 Volume 175 102 49 12 65 53 36 540 28 85 552 105 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS C C C C D B A D B A C SimTraffic LOS C C D D D B A D A A I B Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 174 87 28 81 68 152 34 109 108 42 Queue Block Time ( %) 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 105) Lanes F T> F T --> F TT F TT 4 Volume 25 38 12 71 20 103 5 476 84 95 500 18 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS C D C D B D B A D B A B SimTraffic LOS C D D D A E A A D A A B Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 47 74 91 40 49 12 106 30 140 137 17 Queue Block Time N Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing PM Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 120) Lanes <T > FF TT F (T> Volume 8 F 12 400 190 14 1 700 850 230 7 554 9 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS D B E D C B A E D C SimTraffic LOS E B E D C B A F D C Storage / *link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,645 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 48 128 260 39 246 192 51 30 272 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 51 2 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) Lanes <t> <T 4 Volume 10 1 8 2 1 10 15 1,760 25 10 1,080 54 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Synchro LOS C D C A A A A A SimTraffic LOS E C C B A C A A Storage / *Link Dist. *702 *891 100 60 *332 200 *1,645 SimTraffic 95th Queue 45 13 33 35 105 25 129 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 1 3 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> F TT> <'(` <T 4 Volume 15 474 F 10 35 316 F 5 16 2 38 30F 5 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 14 6 40 36 46 54 40 Queue Block Time N 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F Volume 4 T T> T T> <T <T 519 19 24 345 2 10 1 50 3 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A C A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 60 *331 50 *343 *326 100 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 5 26 29 3 31 56 19 13 Queue Block Time ( %) 30 Broadway St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) Lanes F TT> F TT> F TT> F TT> Volume 300 210 62 73 217 400 74 1,100 5 210 800 80 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Prot Synchro LOS D C C D E D E B D SimTraffic LOS D C C D E D D B D Storage / *Link Dist. 200 *343 160 *321 200 *331 200 *332 SimTraffic 95th Queue 295 260 100 385 215 411 261 266 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 12 1 1 12 1 33 61 2 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 15 386 24 13 635 1 10 1 25 10 1 45 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A C E A Storage / *Link Dist. 70 *321 150 *940 *418 100 *309 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 27 4 18 125 35 48 75 76 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 1 4 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <'(` 4 <1% 4 <0 <t 4 <t 4 Volume 1 35 1 10 35 30 15 25 5 45 3 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 25 *328 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 10 6 47 38 38 29 43 15 Queue Block Time ( %) 3 3 1 4 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing PM Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) < ( Lanes 4 < ( 4 Volume 5 30 50 6F 20 20 45F 36 14 8 26 10 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A B A A A A Storage / *link Dist. *328 25 *330 25 *333 25 *326 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 38 56 34 47 52 43 44 33 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 4 6 1 3 1 3 11 1 2 5 1 1 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes < r 4 <T 4 Volume 1 1 50 1F 1 14 15 1,164 5 5 900 30 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS D A C F B B A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *330 100 *315 100 130 *335 70 SimTraffic 95th Queue 10 53 13 44 41 381 15 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 11 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T> <t 4 <t> <T Volume 10 25 1 84 30 1 5F 1 7F 2 5 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *370 *339 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 10 8 47 28 21 26 Queue Block Time (%) I I 1 1 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'r < <T < r 3 Volume 10 18 5 40 60 35 45 50 10 3OF 42 10 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 34 24 46 54 46 36 43 35 Queue Block Time N 2 7 3 7 1 5 1 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 3 F 1 54 10 1 12 45 1,169 F 10 30 832 F 89 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS E A E C A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *332 100 *351 100 150 *745 150 *335 SimTraffic 95th Queue 21 54 46 32 35 109 34 4 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 8 2 58 2 2 4 70 1,212 10 16 796 84 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS D B E B C A C A A Storage / *Link Dist. *760 100 *376 100 125 *334 125 *745 SimTraffic 95th Queue 31 56 17 18 82 6 43 18 Queue Block Time ( %) 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) Lanes F T Volume 88 110 191 173 143 F 66 240 Prot 1,138F 169 45 756 F 55 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Prot Synchro LOS F D A E D E B E B C SimTraffic LOS E D B E D D B D B C Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 *365 *365 300 *438 125 *334 SimTraffic 95th Queue 135 129 113 270 1 233 279 338 78 215 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 4 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2010 Existing PM Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) <T Lanes F T T (T> Volume 206 2 447 138 1,100 1,000 120 Phasing Perm Prot Synchro LOS C E E B C C SimTraffic LOS E C E A B B Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 242 304 174 269 347 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 1 4 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes TT TTT 4 Volume 1,238 170 875 331 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 *729 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 36 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I I I I I 1 1 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 TT 4 F TT Volume 100 28 108 48 236 1,072 59 94 781 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D B D B A A E A B SimTraffic LOS D E B D C A A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 101 101 59 53 162 166 29 117 183 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I I 1 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Lanes F Volume 170 Length: 120) 1111> F 70 90 62 113 146 83 815 33 81 638 218 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D B C C D B A E A A B SimTraffic LOS D D D D D B A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 95 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 196 78 131 117 187 30 117 140 50 Queue Block Time N 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 120) Lanes F t> F t 4 F TT 4 F TT Volume 80 65F 21 147 110 260 36 591 129 205 483 102 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D E B E C A D B A C SimTraffic LOS D D D D A E C A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 97 112 166 130 107 61 185 44 233 140 40 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <T > FF TT F (T> Volume 11F 14 1,200 320 16F 2 408 408 158 5 1,200 10 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E F F D C B A E F F SimTraffic LOS F F F JJU F D B A F F F Storage / *link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,643 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 979 797 1,386 1,539 175 117 41 164 1,944 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 6 1 73 311 12 11 1 64 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t> <t Volume 2 E 2 2 2F 2 16 2 957 2 53 2,560 107 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS D E C A A A F F SimTraffic LOS D E B E A F F E Storage / *Link Dist. *696 *885 100 60 *316 200 *1,643 SimTraffic 95th Queue 30 13 28 16 27 300 1,910 Queue Block Time ( %) I I 1 1 38 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> F TT> <T < Volume 24 445 40 56 330 16 24F 8 24 32 F 16 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. 150 100 *331 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 18 41 4 47 49 49 30 Queue Block Time ( %) 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F Volume 6 T T> T T> <T <T 464 30 21 379 3 21 2 29 5 2 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 60 *331 50 *325 100 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 9 30 27 53 47 18 18 Queue Block Time ( %) 30 CSAH 75 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes FF tt> > Volume 160 256 82 46 165 160 83 640 64 360 2,048 155 Phasing Prot pm +pt pm +ov Prot Prot Synchro LOS E F D F A E A D SimTraffic LOS E F E F A E A D C D Storage / *Link Dist. 190 *334 200 *312 200 200 *326 180 *316 SimTraffic 95th Queue 179 329 105 277 64 112 143 287 358 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 11 1 16 38 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 2 646 32 21 355 2 14 2 40 2 2 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A B A A B D A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 50 150 *418 100 *308 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 32 44 44 21 14 Queue Block Time ( %) 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t 4 <1% 4 <0 <t 4 <t 4 Volume 11 32 2 14 53 34 13 11 2 32F 67 13 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A E A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *367 25 *328 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 18 15 12 58 33 33 21 53 38 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 2 2 11 1 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes 4 <'( < ( 4 Volume 11 24 30 8 56 8 32F 32 2 8 32 13 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS E A A A B A B A B Storage / *link Dist. *328 25 *329 25 *333 25 *325 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 71 53 48 35 56 11 43 37 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 16 4 1 8 1 1 11 1 8 1 1 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes < r 4 <T 4 Volume 2 2 30 2F 2 16 18 7707 19 18 2,106 53 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F F B D A A C D Storage / *Link Dist. *329 100 *315 100 130 70 *326 SimTraffic 95th Queue 344 162 51 44 28 16 441 Queue Block Time ( %) 15 71 31 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T> <t 4 <t> <T 4 Volume 8 8 3 8 51 13 2 5F 2 45F 5 34 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F A A A F F Storage / *Link Dist. *370 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 36 36 27 312 57 Queue Block Time (%) 1 1 42 2 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'r <'r 4 < 4 <T 4 Volume 2 32 21 75 56 16 14 48 10 16F 53 2 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop n/a Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F A A A F F F F Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 426 42 48 39 43 40 252 21 Queue Block Time ( %) 61 1 10 1 4 41 55 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes > F ( ( > Volume 6 F 2 50 3 2 32 72 768 85 24 2,0407 74 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F B C A D D E Storage / *Link Dist. *332 100 100 150 150 *335 SimTraffic 95th Queue 458 157 40 66 103 503 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 59 76 1 1 1 36 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 10 2 96 2 2 2 91 914 2 48 1,944 101 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F A A E A F F F Storage / *Link Dist. *760 100 *376 100 125 125 *745 SimTraffic 95th Queue 1,018 145 77 14 108 97 1,022 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 61 90 1 42 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T Volume 27 98 306 106 69F 50 128 930 F 216 58 1,864F 120 Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt Prot Prot Synchro LOS D D F D D F B D D D SimTraffic LOS C D E D E E B E D D Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 *365 *365 300 *438 125 *334 SimTraffic 95th Queue 65 146 383 150 171 193 214 144 397 Queue Block Time ( %) 9 44 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes Volume 165 2 392 206 882 2,104 171 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS F D F B E E SimTraffic LOS F B E B C C Storage / *link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 274 287 332 273 600 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 3 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes TT 4 TTT 4 Volume 1,088 440 1,152 1,117 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 *729 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 13 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 TT 4 F TT Volume 122 62 138 58 306 1,101 128 160 992 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D C D C A A D A B SimTraffic LOS D D B D C B A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 124 124 84 42 181 216 48 154 97 Queue Block Time ( %) 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Lanes F Volume 280 Length: 130) tt> F 163 78 19 104 85 58 864 45 136 883 168 Phasing Synchro LOS pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm D C C D E C A E C A C SimTraffic LOS D C C E E C A D B A I C Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 131 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 284 31 108 112 267 31 186 237 46 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 1 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T> F t 4 F TT F Volume 40 61F 19 114 32 165 8 762 134 152 800 29 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D D B E C A E A A B SimTraffic LOS D E D D B F B A E A A C Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 248 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 66 139 139 45 81 21 38 184 76 9 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t > FF TT F TT> Volume 13F 19 640 304 22F 2 1,120 1,360 368 11 886 14 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E C E D E B A E F D SimTraffic LOS E C E D D B A F F E Storage / *link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,643 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 58 248 480 60 436 397 35 26 1,318 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 25 1 48 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t> <T 4 Volume 16 2 13 3 2 16 24 2,816 40 16 1,728 86 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS C E C A D A A C SimTraffic LOS F D D C A D B A Storage / *Link Dist. *696 *885 100 60 *316 200 *1,643 SimTraffic 95th Queue 63 22 46 60 301 30 260 Queue Block Time ( %) I I 1 11 1 1 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 24 758 16 56 506 8 26F 3 61 48F 8 24 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A F B C A A Storage / *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 20 4 43 52 57 66 40 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F Volume 6 T T> T T> <T <T 830 30 38 552 3 16 2 80 5 2 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A B A A C E B A Storage/ *Link Dist. 60 *331 50 *325 100 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 267 43 43 78 29 17 Queue Block Time ( %) 13 30 CSAH 75 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes FF tt> Volume 480 336 99 117 347 640 118 1,760 8 336 1,280 128 Phasing Prot pm +pt Perm Prot Prot Synchro LOS F E D F F E F F E F SimTraffic LOS F D F F E E D F C E Storage / *Link Dist. 190 *334 200 *312 200 200 *326 180 *316 SimTraffic 95th Queue 326 417 308 333 315 203 351 252 388 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 41 18 1 841 15 1 49 91 24 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T <T Volume 24 618 38 21 1,016 2 16 2 40 16 2 72 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A F F F F F F F Storage/ *Link Dist. 50 150 *940 *418 100 *308 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 37 150 1,147 558 49 413 149 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 83 87 1 82 1 94 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <'(` <'( 4 <0 < (` 4 <'( 4 Volume 2 56 2 16 56 48 24 40 8 72 5 3 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 25 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 15 48 42 42 24 46 11 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 5 5 5 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) < ( Lanes 4 <T 4 Volume 8 48 80 1OF 32 32 72F 58 22 13 42 16 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A B A A A A Storage / *link Dist. *328 25 *329 25 *333 25 *325 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 52 53 34 54 58 54 45 35 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 6 10 1 7 1 5 16 1 5 8 1 1 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes < r 4 <T 4 Volume 27 2 80 2F 2 22 24 1,862F 8 8 1,440 48 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C A F C E E A D Storage / *Link Dist. *329 100 *315 100 130 *335 70 SimTraffic 95th Queue 79 78 420 162 25 385 36 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 4 1 41 1 75 1 45 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t> <t 4 <t> <T Volume 16 40 2 134 48 2 8F 2 11F 3 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 51 36 29 34 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 1 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'r <'r 4 < < 3 Volume 16 29 8 64 96 56 72 80 16 48 67 16 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 44 27 56 59 48 43 42 43 Queue Block Time ( %) 4 1 12 4 11 1 10 1 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes <'( < ( F T'( > F (( > Volume 5 F 2 86 16 2 19 72 1,870F 16 48 1,331F 142 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS B C F F F F D A E Storage / *Link Dist. *332 100 *351 239 100 150 *745 150 *335 SimTraffic 95th Queue 25 78 156 100 967 78 19 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 48 1 38 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 13 3 93 3 3 6 112 1,939 16 26 1,274 134 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F F F D A D C C Storage / *Link Dist. *760 100 *376 100 125 *334 125 *745 SimTraffic 95th Queue 229 146 32 27 134 309 51 583 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 4 39 1 1 21 6 1 13 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F r Volume 141 176 306 277 229 106 384 Prot 270 72 Prot 1,21OF 88 Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt _1,821 Synchro LOS E F C F F F F E C SimTraffic LOS E F C F F E C F D E Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 *365 *365 300 *438 125 *334 SimTraffic 95th Queue 190 390 267 505 442 453 528 121 412 Queue Block Time ( %) 13 1 54 70 10 8 48 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes 221 1,760 Volume 330 3 715 1,600 192 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS F F F F D F SimTraffic LOS F F E E C F Storage / *link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 410 1,193 459 885 415 Queue Block Time ( %) 35 1 49 1 36 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes TT TTT 4 Volume 1,981 272 1,400 530 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *167 125 *729 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 240 111 268 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I I 1 1 8 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 TT 4 F TT Volume 160 45 173 77 378 1,715 94 150 1,250 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D D D F D A F A D SimTraffic LOS D E C D D F B E A D Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 133 128 99 100 386 953 338 193 121 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I 1 10 61 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Lanes F Volume 272 Length: 130) 1"1`> <_ 'r'r> F TT F '( 112 144 99 181 234 133 1,304 53 130 1,021 349 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS E B D E F E A E C A D SimTraffic LOS D D D E F F F D C A F Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 112 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 317 105 272 483 3,129 236 156 259 74 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 3 71 2 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F t> F t 4 F TT 4 F TT 4 Volume 128 104F 34 235 176 416 58 946 206 328 773 163 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E F E B E D A D A A C SimTraffic LOS D D E D C F F F E A A F Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 132 204 294 349 371 303 1,460 345 406 75 35 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 15 1 39 1 11 1 Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/26/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <T 44 F T> FF TT 4 306 306 119 F TT> 4 goo 7 Volume 81 11 900 240 121 1 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E D F D C A A E E D SimTraffic LOS F D E D C B A E D D Storage / *Link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,643 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 47 432 301 34 134 88 35 22 436 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 7 6 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t> Volume 1 11 1 11 11 12 1 7181 1 40 1,920 80 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS D E c A A A A A SimTraffic LOS D D A C A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. *696 *885 100 60 *316 200 *1,643 SimTraffic 95th Queue 13 8 31 10 49 33 171 Queue Block Time ( %) 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T <T Volume 18 334F 30 42 2471 12 18F 6 18 24F 12 6 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 150 100 *331 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 18 34 1 44 36 49 25 Queue Block Time ( %) 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T <T Volume 5 348F 23 16 2841 2 161 1 22 4F 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A B A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 60 50 *325 100 *306 100 7 24 38 40 19 14 30 CSAH 75 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes Volume 120 192 61 Phasing Prot 35 124 120 62 480 48 270 1,536 116 pm +pt pm +ov Prot Prot Synchro LOS E E D F A E B D B c SimTraffic LOS E D E E A E A D B c Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 190 *334 200 *312 200 200 *326 180 *316 94 166 69 197 50 102 142 183 329 2 2 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T 4 <T 4 Volume 1 485 24 16 2661 1 ill 1 30 1F 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 50 150 *418 100 *308 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 4 20 38 47 12 13 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T < r <0 <T 4 <'r 4 Volume 81 24 1 111 40 25 10 8 1 241 50 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *367 25 *328 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 4 8 9 51 31 31 17 42 38 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 6 1 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <T L> Volume 81 18 23 Sign Control Stop < ( 61 421 6 < r 4 < ( 4 6F 24 10 24 241 1 Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *328 25 *329 25 *333 25 *325 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 33 47 43 27 41 14 38 39 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 2 3 5 1 6 1 4 1 2 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 1 1 23 11 11 12 13 5771 14 13 1,5791 40 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C C D A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *329 100 *315 100 130 70 *326 SimTraffic 95th Queue 10 48 14 33 25 19 1 Queue Block Time ( %) 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T> <t 4 <t> <t 4 Volume 6j 61 1 61 38 10 11 41 1 341 4 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 4 34 25 38 54 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 3 2 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes < r 4 <'( 4 <( 4 <'( 4 Volume 11 24 16 561 42 12 111 36 7 12F 40 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 34 45 52 39 47 28 41 13 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 2 7 1 3 1 4 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes <T < r F TT> F r r> Volume 5 1 37 2F 1 24 54 5761 64 18 1,5301 55 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS B C B A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) *332 22 100 *351 100 150 150 *335 61 18 40 72 24 8 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes < ( Volume 7 1 72 11 11 1 68 6851 1 36 1,4581 76 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a F *760 59 n/a n/a n/a n/a I n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS D F B D A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 100 *376 100 100 *322 125 *745 91 17 11 108 3 3 40 191 1 3 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T 4 F T F TT 4 F TT> Volume 20 73 229 79 521 37 96 697 162 43 1,398F 90 Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS D E D D D B F B A D A B SimTraffic LOS D D D D D A D A A D B B Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 150 *354 *354 300 *438 300 150 *322 SimTraffic 95th Queue 53 113 245 117 81 331 134 1391 46 87 351 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 1 7 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized Lanes -- Cycle Length: 130) <t 1241 1 294 F ( ( ( ( > Volume 155 661 1,5781 128 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS E B E A A B SimTraffic LOS D A D A B B Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 199 122 205 139 418 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 1 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes ,l ,l 4 TTT 4 Volume 816 330 864 838 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 6 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 r r 4 F TT Volume 91 47 103 43 229 826 96 120 744 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D B D B A A D A B SimTraffic LOS D E B D B A A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 109 1091 60 51 114 170 39 163 79 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I I I 1 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F I 'I r> F 'r'r> F T T 4 F T T 4 Volume 2101 1221 59 14 781 64 43 648 34 102 662 126 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D C C C D B A D B A C SimTraffic LOS D D D D E B A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) *331 *331 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 238 116 31 95 77 206 28 137 163 48 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T> Volume 30 461 14 Phasing pm +pt F T 4 F TT 4 F TT 4 85 24 124 6 571 101 114 600 22 pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D D B E B A E A A B SimTraffic LOS D E D D A E B A E A A B Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 2001 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 55 113 118 44 51 21 148 29 163 101 14 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <T 44 F T> FF TT 4 F TT> Volume 101 14 480 228 171 1 840 1,020 276 8 665 F 11 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E C E D D A A E D c SimTraffic LOS E C E D D B A E D c Storage / *Link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,643 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 56 188 320 46 442 532 42 25 335 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 21 1 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <T> Volume 121 11 10 21 11 12 18 2,1121 30 12 1,296 65 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS c E c A A A A A SimTraffic LOS E B C B A D A A Storage / *Link Dist. *696 *885 100 60 *316 200 *1,643 SimTraffic 95th Queue 55 12 37 52 262 24 146 Queue Block Time ( %) 11 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F ((> F ((> <T <T Volume 18 5691 12 42 3791 6 19 2 46 361 6 18 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A C A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *324 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 25 3 37 44 47 58 39 Queue Block Time ( %) 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T 4 <T 4 Volume 5 6231 23 29 4141 2 12 1 60 41 1 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 60 *331 50 *325 100 *306 100 13 56 33 33 58 22 13 1 30 CSAH 75 & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes Volume 360 252 74 Phasing Prot 88 260 480 89 1,320 6 252 960 96 pm +pt Perm Prot Prot Synchro LOS F D D F C F c F c D SimTraffic LOS E D D F c E B E B D Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 190 *334 200 *312 200 200 *326 1801 *316 264 231 9 2 233 360 255 196 392 1911 318 34 3 11 21 4 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes F T T> F T T> <T 4 <T 4 Volume 18 4631 29 16 7621 1 12F 1 30 121 1 54 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A B A B C A Storage / *Link Dist. 50 *312 150 *940 *418 100 *308 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 32 6 1 24 159 36 45 37 62 3 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T < r <0 <T 4 <'r 4 Volume 11 42 1 121 42 36 18 30 6 54 4 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 25 25 *334 *334 25 *324 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 6 50 40 40 27 46 19 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 4 4 1 5 Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/30/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'( Volume 61 36 60 Sign Control Stop < ( 71 24 24 < r 4 <'( 4 541 43 17 10 31 12 Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *328 25 *329 25 *333 25 *325 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 38 51 34 46 39 42 38 37 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 3 5 2 2 6 1 1 3 1 1 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes <T 4 Volume 1 1 60 1 1 17 18 1,3971 6 6 1,0801 36 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C B E C B A C A A Storage / *Link Dist. *329 100 *315 100 130 *335 70 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 57 13 38 44 236 14 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 3 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <T> <t <t> <t 4 Volume 121 30 11 101 36 11 61 1 8F 2 6 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *370 *339 25 *141 *334 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 6 11 50 25 28 29 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 1 1 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes < r 4 <'( 4 <( 4 <'( 4 Volume 12 22 6 48 72 42 54 60 12 36 50 12 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *332 25 *344 25 *333 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 36 32 45 54 52 40 38 37 Queue Block Time ( %) 3 1 9 3 8 1 6 1 50 4th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes <T < r F TT> F r r> Volume 4 1 65 12 1 14 54 1,4031 12 36 9981 107 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F B E C B A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) *332 100 *351 100 39 150 49 *745 78 150 43 *335 6 34 56 45 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes <T 4 Volume 1OF 2 70 <'( F T T> F T T> 21 21 5 84 1,4541 12 19 955 101 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F *760 39 B F C B A C A A Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) 100 *376 100 100 *322 125 *745 64 25 25 81 5 34 52 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T 4 F T -> F TT 4 F TT> Volume 1061 132 229 208 1721 79 288 1,366 203 54 9071 66 Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E F B E F B D B A E C C SimTraffic LOS D E B E E B D B A E B C Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 150 *354 *354 300 *438 300 150 *322 SimTraffic 95th Queue 157 207 176 277 319 74 12 346 3391 58 110 309 Queue Block Time ( %) 201 3 11 6 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/30/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 No -Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized Lanes -- Cycle Length: 130) <T 247 2, 536 F ( ( ( ( > Volume 166 1,320 1,2001 144 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS E E D C A C SimTraffic LOS E C D B B C Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 344 440 239 353 254 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 11 1 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes ,l ,l 4 TTT 4 Volume 1,486 204 1,050 397 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <T 4 F 4 f f 4 F TT Volume 120 34 130 58 283 1,286 71 113 937 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D B D D A A E A B SimTraffic LOS D E B D C B A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 112 1121 75 63 207 253 33 163 76 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I I I 1 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F I 'I r> F 'r'r> F TT 4 F (( 4 Volume 2041 841 108 74 1361 175 100 978 40 97 766 262 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D B D C F B A D B A C SimTraffic LOS D D D E E C A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. SimTraffic 95th Queue Queue Block Time ( %) *331 *331 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 225 98 89 163 151 299 35 125 207 61 I I 1 1 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T> Volume 96 781 25 Phasing pm +pt F T 4 F TT F TT 4 176 132 312 43 709 155 246 580 122 pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D E B E C A D A A C SimTraffic LOS D E D D B E C B E A A C Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 122 136 218 175 145 77 257 63 310 77 32 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/30/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <T -> -> <— T> <— <— Volume 81 11 923 245 121 1 319 325 121 4 9341 7 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E D F D C A A E E D SimTraffic LOS E C E D D A A E D D Storage / *Link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,644 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 46 343 364 32 138 82 35 12 441 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 2 7 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t> Volume 1 'F--' <'j` F - 1 1 15 1 749 12 40 1,9821 80 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS D E C A A A A A SimTraffic LOS C A A A A B B B Storage / *Link Dist. *699 *888 100 60 *316 200 *1,644 SimTraffic 95th Queue 16 4 34 7 60 61 473 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 2 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 19 3691 33 45 217T 14 211 6 28 251 12 7 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *332 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 18 2 33 44 44 54 24 Queue Block Time ( %) 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> 11T> Volume 16 3701 27 23 2461 7 171 1 33 471 1 12 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. 100 *331 20 *344 250 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 12 3 24 36 46 57 32 Queue Block Time ( %) I I 1 1 30 Broadway St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F<- TT> F 11 Volume 144 2101 95 49 86 124 96 494 68 291 1,557T 122 Phasing Prot pm +pt pm +ov Prot Prot Synchro LOS E E E E A E A D C C SimTraffic LOS E D D E A E A D B C Storage / *Link Dist. 190 *328 200 *306 200 *338 *338 180 *316 SimTraffic 95th Queue 118 197 82 144 53 147 147 240 400 Queue Block Time ( %) 7 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes F 1`11> Volume 28 5121 24 21 2361 4 13F 1 31 4F 1 8 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 60 *306 100 *935 *370 100 *309 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 19 1 24 2 36 48 18 27 Queue Block Time ( %) 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <- I -> <0 <t t Volume 11 25 34 33 74 10 Sign Control Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall Storage / *Link Dist. *368 1 25 1 1 *340 *340 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 26 1 53 18 18 33 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 2 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <—> 0 Volume 16 01 30 251 30 7F 48 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *345 *339 *344 SimTraffic 95th Queue 50 55 50 Queue Block Time ( %) 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 28 16 641 F 18 131 1,637F 51 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *345 *292 *338 SimTraffic 95th Queue 62 36 115 Queue Block Time ( %) 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t> Volume 141 12 1 <t 4 <t> <t 4 61 90 33 11 41 1 811 4 25 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *370 *339 25 *144 *340 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 8 4 49 25 49 52 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 1 7 2 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes <'j` 4 <'(` 4 <t 4 <T 4 Volume 15 34 39 55 103 35 241 32 6 241 40 2 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *329 100 *344 25 *339 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 40 52 74 35 52 32 40 7 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 4 3 4 1 50 4th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T 4 F T F TT> F TT> Volume 11 6 39 7 54 28 89 62OF 70 36 1,5711 59 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Synchro LOS E D B E E C E A E A A SimTraffic LOS E C C D D A D A E A A Storage / *Link Dist. *329 *329 150 *356 *356 1001 200 *738 200 *338 SimTraffic 95th Queue 35 25 68 21 87 64 125 126 76 194 Queue Block Time (%) I 1 1 2 2 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 7 1 72 1 F 1 1 68 7711 1 36 1,5061 76 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS F F D A E A B B B Storage / *Link Dist. *760 *760 *376 *376 100 200 *738 SimTraffic 95th Queue 198 277 10 11 113 62 532 Queue Block Time ( %) 31 4 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T F T 4 'j"f 4 Volume 20 73 229 79 52 48 96 7721 162 491 1,4401 90 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build AM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS D E D D D B F B A D A B SimTraffic LOS D E D D D A E B A D C C Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 150 *354 *354 300 *438 300 150 *322 SimTraffic 95th Queue 51 129 2601 115 84 42 173 177 48 107 410 Queue Block Time ( %) I I 1 1 15 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes Volume 1241 1 305 155 725 1,6141 135 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS E C E B A B SimTraffic LOS D A D A B B Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 202 126 224 176 488 Queue Block Time ( %) 2 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 880 330 893 844 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <T 3 <— -> TT F TT Volume 103 47 103 43 229 878 96 120 773 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D B D B A A D A B SimTraffic LOS D E B D B B A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 110 110 53 55 144 175 36 154 90 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F t11> T�f`> TT E TT Volume 219 1221 59 14 781 73 43 682 34 107 682 131 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D C C C D C A D B A C SimTraffic LOS D D D D E B A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 251 121 34 106 78 221 34 144 165 49 Queue Block Time ( %) 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F T> F T -> F Volume 30 461 14 85 24 135 6 594 101 120 613 22 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D D B E B A E A A B SimTraffic LOS D E D E A E B A E A A B Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 58 110 135 40 66 17 156 291 194 74 13 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 10 CR 11 & TH 25 (Signalized Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t > FF TT F I T> Volume 1OF 14 521 236 17F 1 884 1,086 285 8 726 11 Phasing pm +ov Split Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E B E D D B A E D C SimTraffic LOS E B E D D B A E D C Storage / *link Dist. *776 300 *1,191 *1,191 200 *1,644 170 300 *1,578 SimTraffic 95th Queue 60 136 291 42 448 519 41 28 378 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 201 11 1 3 20 River St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes <t> <T 4 Volume 12 1 10 2 1 25 18 2,217 47 12 1,406 65 Phasing Perm Perm pm +pt Synchro LOS C E C A A A A A SimTraffic LOS D E C C A D A A Storage / *Link Dist. *699 *888 100 60 *316 200 *1,644 SimTraffic 95th Queue 58 15 53 49 297 26 122 Queue Block Time ( %) I I 1 10 26 Broadway St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F TT> F TT> <T <T Volume 20 529 16 47 295 11 22F 2 48 41F 6 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage / *Link Dist. 150 *803 100 *332 100 *341 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 2 38 43 48 60 44 Queue Block Time N 28 Broadway St & Walnut St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 24 556 38 35 311 16 25 1 64 70 1 17 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A B A A Storage/ *Link Dist. 100 *331 6 20 *328 *344 250 *306 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 22 34 2 49 55 75 40 Queue Block Time ( %) 21 1 1 30 Broadway St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes FF tt> Volume 393 177 1 ?1 152 150 503 151 1,387 41 282 1,007 107 Phasing Prot pm +pt pm +ov Prot Prot Synchro LOS E D D F D F C F C D SimTraffic LOS E D D E D E C E C D Storage / *Link Dist. 190 *328 200 *306 200 *338 *338 180 *316 SimTraffic 95th Queue 246 200 187 232 269 209 412 210 334 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 61 1 31 4 1 5 11 10 32 Broadway St & Cedar St (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 58 400 29 24 668 6 27 1 35 25 1 85 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A B A A B A Storage/ *Link Dist. 60 *306 100 *935 *370 100 *309 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 54 7 20 30 51 50 52 66 Queue Block Time ( %) 36 3rd St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes F 4 <0 < (` T 4 Volume 5 1 50 79 56 2 Sign Control Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *368 25 *340 *340 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 18 18 20 20 16 Queue Block Time ( %) Westwood Professional Services Page 1 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 38 3rd St & Walnut St (All-way stop) 1 > Lanes F> 0 < Volume 74 0 22 87 84 35 44 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *link Dist. *345 *339 *344 SimTraffic 95th Queue 59 81 55 Queue Block Time ( %) 40 3rd St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 87 36 1,541 19 1,205 75 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C D A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *345 *292 *338 *338 SimTraffic 95th Queue 90 67 320 4 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I 1 1 4 46 4th St & Locust St (Unsignalized) Lanes <t> <t 4 <t> <t 4 Volume 12 143 1 1 265 89 1 6 F 1 61F 2 6 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *370 *339 25 *144 *340 25 SimTraffic 95th Queue 17 10 50 27 50 31 Queue Block Time (%) 1 1 2 9 1 1 48 4th St & Walnut St (All-way stop) Lanes 4 < 3 Volume 20 154 50 43 240 124 90 63 7 69F 53 22 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A B A A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. *339 25 *329 100 *344 25 *339 100 SimTraffic 95th Queue 66 58 139 81 66 26 49 28 Queue Block Time N 17 5 3 15 50 4th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F '( Volume 54 111 86 40 164 32 125 1,475F 24 59 1,114 119 Phasing Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Synchro LOS F E B E E B E A D A B SimTraffic LOS E D B E D C E B D B B Storage / *Link Dist. *329 *329 150 *356 *356 100 200 *738 200 *338 SimTraffic 95th Queue 99 144 79 81 246 99 182 294 96 228 Queue Block Time ( %) 1 1 1 20 11 2 1 1 70 6th St & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes Volume 10 2 70 2 2 5 84 1,609F 12 19 1,121F 101 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS C F C B A C A A Storage / *Link Dist. *760 *760 *376 *376 100 200 *738 SimTraffic 95th Queue 61 79 27 27 80 33 261 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I 1 1 80 7th St & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F t F T F TT F TT> Volume 106 132 229 208 172 99 288 1,500 203 75 1,052 66 Phasing pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Synchro LOS E F B E F B D B A E C C SimTraffic LOS D E C E E B D B A E C C Storage / *Link Dist. *304 *304 *304 150 *354 *354 300 *438 300 150 *322 SimTraffic 95th Queue 155 196 205 275 1 327 96 319 381 104 172 383 Queue Block Time ( %) 18 14 1 2 1 16 Westwood Professional Services Page 2 of 3 8/29/2011 Operational Analysis Results Monticello CBD Revitalization 2030 Build PM with Bridge Node Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound Northbound Southbound Overall 90 1 -94 North Ramps & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) < r Lanes F T f ( ( > Volume 247 2 557 166 1,434 1,323 166 Phasing custom Prot Synchro LOS E E D D A C SimTraffic LOS E D D B B C Storage / *Link Dist. *1,159 400 *729 *438 SimTraffic 95th Queue 335 498 213 369 363 Queue Block Time ( %) 3 95 1 -94 EB Ramps & TH 25 (Unsignalized) Lanes TT TTT 4 Volume 1,600 204 1,151 419 Sign Control Free Free Synchro LOS n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a SimTraffic LOS A A A A A Storage / *Link Dist. 125 5 SimTraffic 95th Queue 9 Queue Block Time ( %) 100 1 -94 South Ramp & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F <t 4 F 4 TT 4 F TT Volume 140 34 130 58 283 1,380 71 113 1,038 Phasing pm +pt Perm custom custom Perm Prot Synchro LOS D D B D D B A E A B SimTraffic LOS D D B D C B A D A B Storage / *Link Dist. 175 *1,084 175 *443 *443 *771 300 *167 *167 SimTraffic 95th Queue 118 118 83 66 211 257 36 161 101 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I I 1 1 110 Chelsea Rd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Lanes F Volume 220 Length: 130) tt> 84 108 74 136 192 100 1,039 40 115 832 279 Phasing Synchro LOS pm +pt pm +pt Prot Perm Prot Perm D B D D F C A E B A C SimTraffic LOS D D D E E C A D B A C Storage / *Link Dist. *331 *331 116 200 *314 300 *2,646 300 400 *771 250 SimTraffic 95th Queue 231 92 164 133 303 39 156 211 58 Queue Block Time ( %) I 1 1 120 School Blvd & TH 25 (Signalized -- Cycle Length: 130) Lanes F t> F t 4 F TT 4 F TT Volume 96 78F 25 176 132 332 43 750 155 268 624 122 Phasing pm +pt pm +pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Perm Synchro LOS D E D E B E C A D A A C SimTraffic LOS D E D D B E C B E A A C Storage / *Link Dist. *318 *318 300 *392 200 300 *1,245 300 400 *2,646 300 SimTraffic 95th Queue 136 139 195 164 194 75 289 66 339 93 32 Queue Block Time ( %) I I I 1 1 1 1 Westwood Professional Services Page 3 of 3 8/29/2011 6 OD f�r- WW— "-�r OK Z41 ork ■ I'Se ,SHEPBUR'NE COUNTY rN Ir ii WRiGHT COUNTY Parks and Pathways Existing Parks & Pathways kL Parks Golf Co u rses School Property Cltv-Owned Property Bike Pathway Sidewalk Lakes CityBoundary Parcels N 2,250 4,500 9,000 Feet Sources: C ly of MGMk-Zel I D,Wright County, WSS, ,'D NiDrV-ejest Associarted ' rrsultants, Inc. m3c-Date: 03PM,2011. HUMINUMOt filikMCHNISW -C43Mb1JLrami b iNc ti ,SHEPBUR'NE COUNTY rN Ir ii WRiGHT COUNTY Parks and Pathways Existing Parks & Pathways kL Parks Golf Co u rses School Property Cltv-Owned Property Bike Pathway Sidewalk Lakes CityBoundary Parcels N 2,250 4,500 9,000 Feet Sources: C ly of MGMk-Zel I D,Wright County, WSS, ,'D NiDrV-ejest Associarted ' rrsultants, Inc. m3c-Date: 03PM,2011. HUMINUMOt filikMCHNISW -C43Mb1JLrami b iNc y �y ♦• tissippi County Pa C tXA Ifiel• '�.,�.♦ j Hi Park SHERBURNE COUNTY J if Balboul N42rW t Park ♦i, Silver Springs Golf Course , ♦♦ Otter sC'► k ' ♦� IV ♦♦ ♦� '♦ ticello Country Clu ♦� ♦ ♦Na..�■ • . , Pinewood E • - , St • • County Road 39 NE � _ ,'`■ A t ��\ � � Bridge Park ■ten+ ♦ ♦' ; ♦_,ntrub P J rs ' •'�''� ♦��,♦ Corry�nunityLJ 011� sr L � opt v His y 1`L4th Park �♦` Bertram Chain of Lakes Regi wui �♦ • ♦w�I Fallb Park ♦�.r d . � ■�■ ■.rte '/ l Mis ri 1* � , J ♦ '� - TH STF ♦m o_ ' cHF <SFq�D Bertram Lake+ s� 51- +♦ o ng L �� w Fre w ■ ■�.�` �O - Little Mou olsi / - Me, t■ ■ter I s ark _ ' Pio eer P ions Park) Cardinal Hill T■ • Feattr tone ll • f` �S.u�p *` Ro li g Ve Off Hit ■ ssing j ♦ �■�.e�n�u�u� ■ ■� 7E�u�u�u� Nor& Lake �f2 t ch P nd �� z LL nnam C,�a Lake WRIGHT COUNTY log r s ;♦ (f Edmonso Clarch Area Holke s ugh Pelicanii? 41 1 1 3ya ■.�� "I'm seem rk W ii Park Ditilh 33 CommunS Palk Search �i ♦,. Rik ■� �.; ido arR►, N �m Par P any od old *4 �N/ • 'tee • ■ i • J { ea `h ♦♦ Pelican Lake M11l ),N 1 1%, f' C R t t Park and Trail Plan Draft System Plan Potential Trail Routes 1n♦6 Primary Pathway Routes i Secondary Pathway Routes A-' Community Park Search Areas iParks Golf Courses - School Property - City -Owned Property Bike Pathway Sidewalk Lakes CityBoundary Parcels N 0 2,250 4,500 9,000 Feet Sources: City of Monticello, Wright County, WSB, Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Map Date: 05/06/2011. NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC, x900 4teon Menwnel Wlvhwey. Suite 202- Golden Vellrty. MN 56422 Te6egrtlane'. 7fi3.231.2555 F- 1-0e.: ]53.231.2561 p4- ..erp—plenrnrq.tom