1. P a g e | 1
THE UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD
Department of Civil, Environmental and Biomedical Engineering
CE 452 Transportation Engineering I
Fall 2015
Traffic Study of
Central Business District Intersections
Prepared For;
Dr. Clara Fang
Prepared By:
Mikhail Thomas
Jasmine Tyson
Ibrahem Alshhe
Mitchi Paul
Hussain Alzaqmanan

2. P a g e | 2
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
CE452 Transportation Design Team
College of Engineering, Architecture & Technology
University of Hartford
200 Bloomfield Ave., West Hartford CT 06117
December 13, 2015
Clara Fang, Ph.D.
Professor of Civil, Environmental, and Biomedical Engineering
College of Engineering, Architecture & Technology
University of Hartford
200 Bloomfield Ave., West Hartford CT 06117
Dear Dr. Fang:
We herewith submit this study of the City of Hartford, Connecticut’s central business district
intersections, particularly the intersections of Main St. & S Chapel St, along with its directly
consecutive intersection, Morgan St. & Market St.
Contained within this report are: the analysis and evaluation of the existing conditions within
these intersections; how they interact and influence the performance of each other; the problems
caused there in; and the proposal and evaluation of alternative designs.
This report is submitted with the hope that future improvements to the city’s road networks will
use this study to assist in the amelioration of the said conditions that adversely affect
intersections with this location.
Your consideration will be deeply appreciated.
Sincerely,
CE452 Transportation Design Team
Enclosed: Report

3. P a g e | 3
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 1 ….. 10
Table 2 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 2 ...... 11
Table 3 - Summary of Results: HCS: S Chapel St. & Main St. ….. 16
Table 4 - Summary of Results: HCS: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 17
Table 5 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St ….. 18
Table 6 - Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 18
Table 7 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St. ….. 23
Table 8 - Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - USGS Quadrangle map of Areas of interest ….. 6
Figure 1 - Aerial view of the two intersections of interest. ….. 7
Figure 2 - Traffic Density of Morgan St. onto I-84 ….. 9
Figure 3 - Phase Plan: S Chapel & Main St. ….. 13
Figure 4 - Phase Signal Plan: Morgan St. & Market St. ….. 14

4. P a g e | 4
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction and Problem Statement
2.0 Site Location Map
3.0 Data Collection
3.1 Overview
3.2 Field Observations
4.0 Existing Conditions
4.1 Geometric Layout and Phase Plan
5.0 Evaluation of Existing Conditions
5.1
6.0 Literature Review
6.1 Article 1
6.2 Article 2
7.0 Redesign and Recommendations
8.0 Proposed Conditions Evaluation
APPENDICES
A. Field data
B. HCS and Synchro Analyses (Existing)
C. HCS and Synchro Analysis (Proposed
D. Article 1
E. Article 2

5. P a g e | 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT
Two intersections bordering a central business district and a major interstate located in
Hartford, Connecticut, were analyzed for traffic operational performance. Level of
Service (LOS) classifications were used as the primary evaluation criteria.
The S Chapel Street and Main Street intersection serves as a crucial route for downtown
commuters entering and exiting from Interstate I-84. Chapel Street continues east were it
becomes Morgan Street and serves as a ramp onto the Bulkeley Bridge section of
Interstate I-84. Market Street runs parallel to Main St. intersecting Morgan St.
downstream of the S Chapel St. & Main St. intersection.
Commuters travelling into the Downtown Hartford Area using Route 44, exiting the
Downtown Hartford Area using Main St., and accessing Interstate I-84 using S Chapel St.
experience traffic delays, heavy congestion, disorderly driving patterns, as well as safety
hazards for pedestrians. The traffic study locations (Areas of Interests) are the
intersections of Route 44 (Main St.) & S Chapel St., along with Morgan St. & Market St.
Commuting business professionals, students, tourists, and residents would all benefit
from improved traffic efficiency within the areas of interest.

6. P a g e | 6
2.0 SITE LOCATION MAP
Figure 5 - USGS Quadrangle map of Areas of interest

7. P a g e | 7
Figure 6 - Aerial view of the two intersections of interest. This figure was obtained using Google map enabling the traffic layer.
The colors depicted correspond to the typical rate of congestion relief along travel routes.

8. P a g e | 8
3.0 DATA COLLECTION
3.1 OVERVIEW
Based on preliminary research the 5:30-10:00 am and 3:00-7:00 pm were determined to
be the peak traffic hours. Figure 2 below was taken from the Technical Memorandum I-
84 Congestion Relief Study, prepared by CDM Smith, prepared for Connecticut
Department of Transportation.
Figure 7 - Traffic Density of Morgan St. onto I-84
Traffic counts for both intersections were collected during the 6:00-7:00 pm hour. The
traffic profile shows that the Morgan St. on ramp contributes an average of 9.3 % of the
total eastbound volume on the Bulkeley Bridge section of I-84. The graph depicts an
average of 4,000 vehicles during the 5-6 pm hour. This being said, the Morgan St on
ramps conveys approximately 372 vehicles during the peak study hour.
To obtain traffic counts group members selected a station at each corner of the study
intersection and tallied the volumes of turn and through movements of vehicles classified
under four main categories; passenger cars, trucks and buses (heavy vehicles), bicycle,
and pedestrians. Vehicular delays and queues on each approach were recording using
devices such as stopwatches, tablets, and smart phones. Phase signal timings were also
recorded using these devices.

9. P a g e | 9
3.2 Field Observations
Visual observations of traffic queuing and time delays were the primary factors initially used
to analyzing the performance of the study intersections. The turn movements of each
approach for a given intersection was monitored to determine which turn movement yielded
the highest volumes, vehicle queue, and experienced the greatest delays.
The approach/turn movement that yielding the highest vehicle queue was used to determine a
control time delay. The last vehicle in a group of vehicles that approached the study
intersection during red time was used to establish field delay values. The control delay time
was determined in the field based on the amount of time in seconds from when the last car in
the group of vehicles stopped for the red light until the vehicle of interest passed through the
study intersection.
During monitoring of S Chapel St. & Main St. Intersection (Intersection 1), large volumes of
vehicles were observed on the Eastbound through movement and on the Southbound left turn
movement relative to the other movements. Traffic from these two turn movements
converged heading east bound, causing congestion within the study intersection.
During one period of field observations, it was observed that during a dense traffic
congestion, the intersection became filled with cars during all red time and/or pedestrian
phase, at which point pedestrians proceeding to cross the intersection through the cars. It
was observed that S Chapel St. & Main St. intersection (downstream) played a crucial role in
the congestion of the EB approach of the upstream intersection (Intersection 2 – Morgan St.
& Market St.), which lead to the selection of the upstream intersection as a subsequent study
intersection. The EB approach of the downstream intersection is a continuation of the EB
approach of the upstream intersection and consists of a relatively steep grade of 5%.
During monitoring of Intersection 2, the largest volume of vehicles was observed on the EB
through movement, followed by the southbound left turn movement. Similar to the
conditions observed with Intersection 1, congestion was observed where the eastbound
through and southbound left turn converged. These general observations on traffic congestion
were anticipated due to the Intersection’s proximity to the I-84 entrance ramp.
Tabulated below are the quantitative data obtain during field observations on control delay
time and vehicle queueing for the turn movements with the largest volumes for each
intersection.
Intersection #1
Turn Movement Observed Vehicle Queue Control Delay Time
Eastbound Through 20 vehicles 44 seconds
Southbound Left 15 vehicles 57 seconds
Table 2 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 1

10. P a g e | 10
Intersection #2
Turn Movement Observed Vehicle Queue Control Delay Time
Eastbound Through 18 vehicles 30 seconds
Southbound Left 4 vehicles 25 seconds
Table 3 - Field measured control delay and vehicle queues of Intersection 2

11. P a g e | 11
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Chapel/ Main St. intersection (Intersection 1) consists of three approaches Northbound
(NB), Southbound (SB), and Eastbound (EB), which utilize three signal phase plans. The
subsequent Morgan/Market St. (Intersection 2) also consists of three approaches and
three signal plans. Unlike traditional three approach intersections the areas of interest are
not simple “T” patterned intersections with only left and right turn movement available to
the EB approach. Each EB approach consists of a through turn movement which convey
traffic onto Interstate 84.
Intersection 1 exists on a relatively flat grade, with each of the approaches exhibiting the
typical roadway crown. The EB approach of Intersection 2 (Morgan St. S) utilizes of a
vertical sag curve, with an initial grade of 5%. The geometric design of Intersection 2 is
due to the intersection of Interstate I-91 and Interstate I-84, which creates overhead
obstructions adjacent to Intersection 2. The SB and NB approaches of Intersection 2
maintain a consistent grade.

12. P a g e | 12
4.1 Geometric Layouts and Phase Plans
Figure 8 - Phase Plan: S Chapel & Main St.

13. P a g e | 13
Figure 9 - Phase Signal Plan: Morgan St. & MarketSt.

14. P a g e | 14
5.0 EVALUATION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
5.1 HCS ANALYSIS: MAIN ST. & S CHAPEL ST.
As can be seen from phasing diagrams from preceding sections and the HCS Report
in the appendix, the eastern through lane going onto Morgan St and eventually into
the upstream intersection (Morgan St. & market St.) had the highest volume, followed
by the south bound left turn in the same direction. Thus, the majority of the traffic at
this intersection is intended for the highway ramp just a few feet from the upstream
intersection. The lowest demand was on the northbound approach away from the
downtown area.
The greatest share of heavy vehicles, however, were recorded by the north and south
through intersections, with only 1% and 3% of the eastern through and south bound
left turn traffic were comprised of heavy vehicles. It is also worthy of note that about
80% of the heavy vehicles were CT Transit commuter buses, but were recorded as
heavy vehicles because the field data collection officers did not record the distinction
between the two. The reason for the high volume of buses is that the bus station is
located just a few feet beyond the intersection on the northern approach.
The signal timings were split evenly between the phases, each recording about 53
seconds of green time, 3 seconds of yellow time and 2 seconds of all red time, except
for the South bound left turn, which did not have an all red time separate from its
entire approach. The SBL turn signal plan was of the protected and permitted.
During the recording period, there were only three pedestrian calls from the
Pedestrian Button located on corner of the eastern and southbound approach, and one
bike movement was recorded for the entire intersection. There were no bus or other
passenger car parking maneuvers attempted. The grading was maintained constant at
the 0% throughout the intersection. The widths of lanes were also constant at 11 ft.
The majority of other inputs were kept as the program default. However, for the
various lane groups that applied, their recall modes were set to max, and dual entry
were permitted in order to obtain the desired results. However, separate PHFs were
calculated for each approach in the intersection, but HCS only allows input for the
intersection as a whole. Thus to give a more conservative result, the PHF was set to
the lowest PHF calculated.

15. P a g e | 15
5.2 HCS ANAYSIS: MORGAN ST. & MARKET ST.
The above represents the main inputs into HCS for Morgan St. & Market St. The eastern
approach contributed the most to this intersection followed by the south approach. The
majority of traffic in each was directed to the Highway on ramp, thus the heaviest
demand was recorded in the eastern though lanes and the south bound left lane. Again,
the northern approach (away from CBD) recorded the least traffic.
Unlike the downstream intersection, the grade of the eastern approach was -5%, while the
other approaches were constant at the 0%. No pedestrian, bike or parking maneuvers
were recorded. There were, however, two lanes that were measured to be 10 ft. other
settings were kept as mentioned in the previous intersection, and for the approach to
PHFs.
It was also observed the on the southern approach, there were two lanes to accommodate
the left turn movements, with one being shared with a through lane. It was observed that
approximately 40% of the left turns were in the shared lane. However, there was no
means to input this data into HCS. The phasing type at this intersection was split between
the three phases recorded. This means that each approach was given its own exclusive
movement time in sequence.
Table 3 - Summary of Results:HCS: S Chapel St. & Main St.
The above table shows the summary of results produced by The HCS Traffic Analysis
Tool for S. Chapel St. & Main St. The results were fairly consistent with field
observations. The queue in the approach with the largest demand (EB) was found to be
15 vehicles, as opposed to 19 vehicles produced by the software, a difference of 26%. In
terms of delay, 69 seconds were recorded and average delay produced by HCS was about
69 seconds for the lane with the longest queue.
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capcity (
Veh/h) 586 1043 489 1033 449 535 984
v/c Ratio 0.426 0.44 0.102 0.22 0.238 0.816 0.364
Back of Queue
(veh/h) 9.2 8.3 1.6 3.8 3.7 19.9 6.4
Control Delay
(s/veh) 50.8 49.9 43.8 45.6 46.6 68.9 48.4
LOS D D D D D E D
Intersection
LOS D

16. P a g e | 16
The Level of Service (LOS) for the entire intersection was reported as D or unsatisfactory
performance, with the least performing movement being the SBL turn, which reported a
LOS of E (poor performance). These results seem to adhere to found empirically in the
field. There were long queues accumulated in the SBL lane, as traffic attempts to merge
onto the highway. At times, the green light time was not sufficient to accommodate the
number of vehicles making that left turn. As confirmation, HCS reported a volume-to-
capacity ratio (v/c) of 0.816 which is fairly close to the limit of 1, suggesting that the lane
was just about near capacity. The control delay reported was about 70 seconds, which
was significantly higher than any other approach.
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capcity (
Veh/h) 559 476 473 849 402 484 973
v/c Ratio 0.761 0.821 0.822 0.318 0.097 0.093 0.505
Back of
Queue
(veh/h) 9 8.8 8.8 2.3 0.6 0.7 4.4
Control
Delay 36.1 40.6 40.7 26.2 24.2 24 28.6
LOS D D D C C C C
Intersection
LOS C
Table 4 - Summary of Results:HCS: Morgan St. & Market St.
The above table shows the summary of results produced by the HCS Traffic Analysis
Tool for Morgan St. & Market St. The results were also consistent with empirically
obtained data. The queue of the approach with the highest demand was found to be 18
vehicles, as opposed to 27 vehicles (50% difference). The highest delay recorded was 46
seconds as opposed to 41 seconds reported by HCS, a difference of about 11%.
The poorest performing approach was the EB approach. This was consistent with field
observations as long queues were seen during the time of recording and from other daily
use. At times, queues can be observed that extend very near to the downstream
intersection, thus the reason for this study. This was also confirmed by the average v/c
ratio of about 0.8 for this approach, indicating an approach near capacity. The SBL,
however, did not meet expectations as for the majority of the observation time, the left
lanes were saturated. All other approaches performed intersection satisfactorily.

17. P a g e | 17
5.3 SYNCHRO 9 ANALYSIS
The input of existing conditions using the Synchro 9 Traffic Simulator was fairly the
same as for the HCS Traffic Analysis Tool. The most noteworthy difference was the
ability to input the PHF calculated from field data for each approach, and the percentage
traffic in shared lanes (specifically for the SBL turn on Morgan St. & market St.). This
made for a more accurate depiction of existing conditions generated by the software as
can be viewed below in the results summary:
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capacity (veh/h) 1836 402 455 1402
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.5 0.08 0.2 0.2 0.89 0.24
Back of Queue
(veh/h) 22 7 33 12
Control Delay 28.5 26.7 6.2 16.5 16.5 47 17
LOS C C A B B D B
IntersectionLOS C
Table 5 - Summary of results:Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St
Table 6 - Summary of Results:Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St.
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capacity (veh/h) 2295 597 356 885 495
v/c Ratio 1.06 0.32 0.08 0.79 0.31
Back of Queue
(veh/h) 24 9 0 8 13
Control Delay 19.3 29.8 0.5 14.6 18
LOS E C A D C
IntersectionLOS D

18. P a g e | 18
The reporting for Synchro 9 was somewhat different from HCS. For example, the Queues
as queue lengths in feet and not in vehicles per hour as in HCS. In addition, other
measures were reported as a single entity for approaches that had no protected turning
movements. To adjust the queue information in the same format, the length of the typical
design vehicle (5.8 ft) divided the queue lengths reporting in Synchro 9.
The results given in Synchro 9 may be considered more nuanced than those given by
HCS. For example, the SBL lane at Morgan St. & Market St. gave the expected results,
reporting a v/c ratio of 0.79. This is more consistent with empirical data as mentioned in
the previous subsection. In contrast, the queues and control delay information from HCS,
more closely matched field data. This may because were able to input PHF data for each
approach unlike in HCS, and also due to the methods utilized by the different softwares.
However, in general, the both show the same trends in performance of the approaches
and lanes relative to each other. The total LOS were generally the same. No intersection
received an LOS greater than C.

19. P a g e | 19
6.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
6.1 A MULTIAGENT SYSTEM FOR OPTIMIZING URBAN TRAFFIC
The need for more accurate analysis of road network performance is growing increasing
critical due to a number of factors. The most obvious is the rapid urbanization of much of
the planet due to expansion of urban areas and cities. Coupled with exponential global
population increases, the contribution of vehicular traffic to worldwide air pollution and
greenhouse gases is expected to grow exponentially as well. The delay experienced on
urban road networks also results incalculable financial losses due to general wastage of
time and productivity that could be applied to other more pressing avenues, such as work
and business transactions.
Most methods currently employed in the analysis of urban road networks are
deterministic. These methods are limited to unchanging parameters such as degree of
saturation, congestion level and occupancy levels. However, the performance of a road
way or intersection is based on a number of factors that themselves are subject to change
for a variety of causes. Thus, in reality the urban road networks are dynamic in nature and
may require more sophisticated methods of analysis.
One such method is the dubbed “the multiagent system for optimizing urban traffic”. The
system requires the development of a hierarchical multiagent system to manage traffic
systems. This is done by analyzing two scenarios for traffic flow – traffic accident and
morning rush hour. The system is designed to efficient manage the gradual congestion of
the network. In order to do this, the system requires the creation of CTAs (Coordinator
Traffic Agents) who monitor the network the network and reduce the duration of traffic
lights of neighboring intersections. If congestion continues to build, then the CTA will
halt and redirect all traffic heading in a similar direction thus allowing congested
roadways to decrease their density values. This redirection proves successful and results
in the achievement of a more global balance on all roads on the network. Although the
system may account for increased commuting times, the congestion on specific areas of
the network can be managed in a more organized and controlled manner.

20. P a g e | 20
6.2 DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT CLOSELY SPACED INTERSECTIONS IN
ILORIN, KWARA STATE, NIGERIA
This paper presents a study of two closely spaced intersection in the central urban area of
Ilorin, Kwara in the country of Nigeria. The study was done with the knowledge that
intersections are critical traffic conflict points, and the efficiency of the intersection is
dependent of its design. This can only be done by understanding the problems motorists
and pedestrian face moving through the intersection. The goal is to use this understanding
to resolve conflicts, provide maneuver areas, channeling and controlling traffic into clear
paths and permitting entry and exit to and from stream safety at correct speeds and
angles. Whatever decision is made by the designer requires comprise on a number of
factors that may affect the feasibility system improvements. This may include
environmental, economic, land use, traffic demands, etc.
The conclusion of the stated that the current system was inadequate in the number of
lanes provided on the downstream intersection. There was also no exclusive left turn on
either intersection. Thus the study conducted showed that the turning left movement
consumes more time than the through movement, resulting in delay to the through
movement and hence the performance of the intersection as a whole. There was also need
to provide pedestrian with means of safely traversing the intersections without delaying
traffic further. Thus, traffic islands were also introduced. However, the most effective
means of improving system performance was employing a good signal control scheme.

21. P a g e | 21
7.0 REDESIGN & RECOMMENDATIONS
The first alternative considered involves adjustment of the signal timings at both the
upstream and downstream intersections; addition of lanes; and some adjustment to the
eastern approach of Morgan St. & Market St.
7.1 S CHAPEL & MAIN ST.
 One of the SBT lanes will be changed into a shared left and through turn. This will be
down to ease congestion in the left lane, and reduce its volume to capacity ratio. This
should not affect through traffic significantly since its capacity is underutilized, and
an exclusive through lane remains.
 The SB approach’s signal timing was increased by 5 seconds, i.e., an increase from
10 seconds to 15 seconds for the SBL, and from 53 seconds to 58 seconds, to reduce
queues and delays in the left lane.
 The signal timing for the EB approach was reduced by 5 seconds, i.e., a decrease
from 53 seconds to 48 seconds. The reasoning behind this measure is to allow more
clearance time of the upstream intersection’s EB approach.
 The NB approach’s signal timing was decreased from 53 seconds to 43 seconds to
accommodate the changes in the other signal timings of the other phases.
7.2 MORGAN ST. & MARKET ST.
 An additional 10ft through lane on the EB approach to accommodate to increase its
capacity and accommodate the number of traffic on the approach.
 The shared left and right lanes will be reduce from 9ft to 10ft to accommodate the
increase in number of lanes.
 The sidewalk of the left side of the approach must be removed. This should not affect
pedestrian traffic as no pedestrian movements were observed during data collection.
This change should be continued past the intersection to allow for better movement
on the on ramp. The curb lines of the right should also be removed to accommodate
the increase in number of lanes on the EB approach. However, the fourth lane will be
gradual phased off after the intersection.
 The signal timing of the eastern approach will be increased from 25 seconds to 40
seconds to allow better clearance of the approach and synching with oncoming traffic
from the downstream intersection.
 The signal phasing type of the SBL will be changed from split timing to permitted
and protected to allowing left turning traffic on the SB approach to find gaps in the
NB approach as there is relatively much lower traffic on the NB approach.
 The NB phase will also be reduced to 20 seconds because of this reason also.

22. P a g e | 22
8.0 Evaluation of Alternative
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capacity (veh/h) 1801 1455 444 1044
v/c Ratio 0.39 0.23 0.51 0.50
Back of Queue
(veh/h) 22 7 33 12
Control Delay 22.6 18.2 19.7 18.5
LOS C B B B
Intersection LOS B
Table 7 - Summary of results: Synchro 9: S Chapel St. & Main St.
Results
EB NB SB
L T R T R L T
Capacity (veh/h) 2295 597 356 885 495
v/c Ratio 0.56 0.37 0.10 0.56 0.21
Back of Queue
(veh/h) 24 9 0 16 6
Control Delay 19.3 29.8 2.6 18.9 13.9
LOS B C A B B
Intersection LOS B
Table 8- Summary of Results: Synchro 9: Morgan St. & Market St.
There were significant improvements in the LOS of both intersections. S Chapel St. &
Main St. Improved from an LOS of D to an LOS of B. Morgan St. & Market St. showed
even better improvement from an LOS of D to an Los of B.
The most significant changes were as follows:
 The EB approach of the upstream intersection improved from an LOS E to an
LOS B. The addition of the lane decreased it’s from 1.06 (overcapacity) to 0.56.
The control delay remained the same due to the increase in the green time for the
SB approach, hence could be reduced by adjusting the SB’s green time
accordingly.
 The upstream SBL lane showed marked improvement, moving from LOS D to
LOS B. Again, it was possible to reduce the volume-to-capacity ratio from 0.79 to
0.56, in this instance, by adjusting increasing its green time, and allowing
permitted movements.

23. P a g e | 23
 The downstream SBL lane also showed marked improvement moving from an
LOS D to Los B. The control delay was reduced from 47 to 19.7 s/veh, and a
reduction in the v/c ratio from 0.89 to 0.51.
Through Synchro’s simulation capabilities, it was observed that pile-ups in the
downstream intersection’s SBL lane and the EB approach of the upstream intersection
was significantly improve. The more synchronized timing to the signals at both
intersection accounted for an increase synchronized flow times between the intersections.
The significant increase in the green time of the upstream intersection’ EB approach did
not significantly impact the SBL lane as the new permitted signal timing allowed enough
left turn traffic to find gaps and reduce the queue.

24. P a g e | 24
APPENDICES
A. Field Data
S Chapel & Morgan
PM
NBL NBT NBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 0 0 23 8 20 0 51
6:15 - 6:30 0 0 54 8 12 2 76
6:30 - 6:45 0 0 44 7 12 0 63
6:45 - 7:00 0 0 48 0 13 3 64
Volume 0 0 169 23 57 5 254
Total Volume 0 192 62
%HV 0 12 8
V15-max 76
PHF 0.84
PM
SBL SBT SBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 47 1 31 8 0 0 87
6:15 - 6:30 74 4 82 6 0 0 166
6:30 - 6:45 113 4 69 14 0 0 200
6:45 - 7:00 87 2 58 4 0 0 151
Volume 321 11 240 32 0 0 604
Total Volume 332 272 0
%HV 3 12 0
V15-max 200
PHF 0.76

25. P a g e | 25
PM
EBL EBT EBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 4 0 114 1 11 0 130
6:15 - 6:30 2 0 157 4 13 0 176
6:30 - 6:45 7 0 141 0 9 0 157
6:45 - 7:00 3 0 105 0 5 0 113
Volume 16 0 517 5 38 0 576
Total Volume 16 522 38
%HV 0 1 0
V15max 176
PHF 0.82
SB NB EB
AR 1.83
Y 2.83 Cycal Length
Cycal
Length AR 1.97 cycal length
GTL 9.52 58.66 57.49 Y 2.93 57.45 AR 1.93
G.T. 44.48 G 52.59 Y 2.93
G 52.59

26. P a g e | 26
Morgan St. & Market St.
PM
NBL NBT NBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 50 3 8 2 63
6:15 - 6:30 37 7 11 0 55
6:30 - 6:45 40 11 5 0 56
6:45 - 7:00 45 7 3 0 55
Volume 0 0 172 28 27 2 229
Total Volume 0 200 29
%HV 0 14 7
V15-max 63
PHF 0.91
PM
SBL SBT SBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 96 3 25 1 0 0 125
6:15 - 6:30 77 12 6 0 0 0 95
6:30 - 6:45 75 1 19 0 0 0 95
6:45 - 7:00 67 3 12 0 0 0 82
Volume 315 19 62 1 0 0 397
Total Volume 334 63 0
%HV 0 2 0
V15-max 125
PHF 0.79
PM
EBL EBT EBR
Volume
PC T PC T PC T
6:00 - 6:15 8 2 307 3 3 0 323
6:15 - 6:30 11 0 236 7 2 0 256
6:30 - 6:45 5 0 184 11 3 0 203
6:45 - 7:00 3 0 160 7 1 0 171
Volume 27 2 887 28 9 0 953
Total Volume 29 915 9
%HV 7 3 0
V15max 323
PHF 0.74

27. P a g e | 27
EB Signal
Light
Green 25.19 Sycal L
Yellow 2.95 30.07
Red 1.93
SB Signal
Light
Green 22.82 Sycal L
Yellow 2.93 27.74
Red 1.99
NB Signal
Light
Green 22.87 Cycal L
Yellow 2.95 27.79
Red 1.97

28. P a g e | 28
B. HCS and Synchro Analyses (Existing)
Refer to reports on the following pages….

29. P a g e | 29
C. Synchro Analysis (Proposed)
Refer to reports on the following pages…

30. P a g e | 30
D. Article 1 - A Multiagent System For Optimizing Urban Traffic
http://www.cs.unb.ca/~ghorbani/ali/papers/traffic_wi03.pdf
E. Article 2 - Design Of Traffic Signals At Closely Spaced Intersections In Ilorin, Kwara
State, Nigeria
http://rrpjournals.org/wjepas/en_wjepas_vol_1_iss_2_pg_29_39.pdf