Table of Contents

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 2

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 3
Chapter 1. The Problem and Its Background .................................................................................. 4
1.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 4
1.3. Site Location .................................................................................................................... 5
1.4. Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 7
1.5. Scope and Limitations.......................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 2. General Design Data ..................................................................................................... 8
2.1. General Intersection Data .................................................................................................... 8
2.2. Location of Pedestrian ......................................................................................................... 9
2.3. Location of Transit Facilities ............................................................................................... 9
Chapter 3. Analysis of the Existing Traffic Condition in the Intersection ................................... 11
3.1. Traffic Volume Count, Peak Hour Factor, and Travel Time Runs .................................... 11
3.2. Traffic Signal Timing Information .................................................................................... 12
3.3. Control Delay and Level of Service of the Intersections ................................................... 14
Chapter 4. Proposed Improvements of the Intersection ................................................................ 17
4.1. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection A ..................................................................... 17
4.2. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection B ..................................................................... 19
4.3. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection C ..................................................................... 20
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 22
5.1. Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 22
5.2. Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 22
 List of Tables
Table 1. Full Width of Roads in the Intersections .......................................................................... 8
Table 2. Lane Width of Intersections Separated by Lane Directions ............................................. 8
Table 3. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, Peak Hour Factors, and Travel Time Runs for the
Intersections .................................................................................................................................. 11
Table 4. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection A: Main Street and West Street ................ 13
Table 5. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection B: Main Street and Chain Bridge Road .... 13
Table 6. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection C: Main Street and University Drive ........ 13
Table 7. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection A: Main St and West St ... 14
Table 8. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection B: Main St and Chain Bridge
Rd .................................................................................................................................................. 15
Table 9. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection C: Main Street and University
Drive ............................................................................................................................................. 15
Table 10. Existing vs Proposed Lane Configurations for Intersection A ..................................... 17
Table 11. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection A ................................ 18
Table 12. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection A .................. 18
Table 13. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection B ................................ 19
Table 14. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection B................... 19
Table 15. Existing vs Proposed Lane Configurations for Intersection C ..................................... 20
Table 16. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection C ................................ 20
Table 17. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection C................... 21
 List of Figures
Figure 1. Map View of Main Street as the Chosen Arterial Road within Fairfax, Virginia ........... 5
Figure 2. Satellite View of Main Street as the Chosen Arterial Road within Fairfax, Virginia ..... 6
Figure 3. Signalized Intersections Considered in the Project ......................................................... 6
Figure 4. Location of Pedestrian Lanes in the Arterial Road ......................................................... 9
Figure 5. Transport Areas Near the Vicinity of the Arterial Road ............................................... 10
Figure 6. Peak Vehicle Volume in the Intersections..................................................................... 12
Figure 7. Control Delay with its Corresponding Level of Service ............................................... 14
 Chapter 1. The Problem and Its Background

1.1. Introduction

Traffic congestion is one of the major problems that every country is facing today which
is mainly caused by the unending growth of population or simply urbanization. This problem
affects the people of the country individually, and even the country as a whole, especially in its
economic growth. There have been many mitigation measures that have been studied and
implemented in order to lessen traffic congestion or improve the traffic condition within a certain
area. What makes it hard is that when analyzing a particular traffic system, the first thing to do is
to determine all the components of a particular roadway, and from there, the best strategy must be
developed because each component is relative to another as the change for a particular intersection
will definitely influence the current condition in all other intersections within the main road in
consideration. Therefore, a thorough study must be made which might take time if done manually.

Fortunately, as urbanization grows together with modern technology, software for analysis
that can be applied for any field of study are constantly being introduced and developed. And with
regards to traffic analysis, Synchro Studio is one of the widely used software. This project is
intended to analyze intersections within a chosen arterial road and to have a proposed mitigation
plan in order to improve the current situation in that area.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Fairfax, Virginia is a place wherein traffic congestion has been experienced by the citizens
day by day especially that it is a highly urbanized place. The level of service for most of the
intersections are almost at the lowest level as traffic condition worsens continuously. As a city
with people fond of traveling from place to place within and outside the city, traffic condition
would really affect their daily lives such as adjusting their wake up time and sleeping time, their
work period, and some even choose to stay at home rather than going to a particular place knowing
that traffic congestion will just waste their time. Thus, this study is created in order to enhance a
chosen arterial road, determining its current level of service and what are the mitigations that can
be done in order to improve the current condition within the area. The result of this study will bring
significant development to the current situation and would definitely benefit the people and the
city as a whole.
1.3. Site Location

The chosen arterial road the Main Street, which is one of the major roads in Fairfax,
Virginia. It contains many intersections leading to different subdivisions and other street roadways.
Since Main Street covers numerous intersections, only three of them were chosen and are
enumerated as follows:

 Intersection A: Main Street and West Street

 Intersection B: Main Street and Chain Bridge Road
 Intersection C. Main Street and University Drive

These are the intersections that will be analyzed in this project. the following figures shown
the map view, satellite view, and the location of intersections, respectively.

Figure 1. Map View of Main Street as the Chosen Arterial Road within Fairfax, Virginia
Figure 2. Satellite View of Main Street as the Chosen Arterial Road within Fairfax, Virginia

LEGEND

----- Intersection A
Main St and West St Intersection

----- Intersection B
Main St and Chain Bridge Rd Intersection

----- Intersection C
Main St and University Dr Intersection

Figure 3. Signalized Intersections Considered in the Project

1.4. Objectives

As the general objective of the study has been introduced in the preceding sections which
is to analyze the existing traffic condition and propose a mitigation plan for the three intersections
in Main Street, the specific objectives are then derived.

 Gather the intersection data such as lane widths, lane drops, turn lanes, and shoulder
widths in the intersections;
 Determine the traffic volume count within the turning and through movements for all
intersections for a 1-hour peak period;
 Analyze the present traffic condition by determining the level of service within the
intersections;
 Make a Traffic Mitigation Plan for the intersections and provide the analysis and output
results.

1.5. Scope and Limitations

Since the study will be conducted in a limited time interval, certain scopes and limitations
has been established by the author, and one of these is that only three intersections considered in
this study and these were already named in the latter sections. Additionally, technological methods
were used instead of manual analysis were applied, in which Synchro studio 10 was utilized as the
software. Also, in analyzing the level of service for the intersections, the author has focused its
discussion on the total delay which has a corresponding level of service. Lastly, in creating the
mitigation plan, expansion of a particular lane or construction of a new lane were not considered
as a choice because of the economic and constructability.
 Chapter 2. General Design Data

For the general intersection data, a site visit and investigation in the location were
conducted and necessary data were collected. The recorded data are summarized in this section of
the paper.

2.1. General Intersection Data

The first thing considered is the measurement of the width of the road intersections, which
is summarized in Table 1. The full widths of intersections were tabulated, considering the approach
and departure lanes of the two-way roads. In Table 2, the width of each lanes for the movement
going to the intersection is tabulated. This table also shows the current lane configurations within
each directional component of the intersection. It also shows how many lanes are there for each
intersection approach.

Table 1. Full Width of Roads in the Intersections

Width (ft)
Intersection
Northbound (ft) Southbound (ft) Eastbound (ft) Westbound (ft)

A. Main St and West St 36 36 65 65

B. Main St and Chain Bridge Rd 43 43 36 36

C. Main St with University Dr 36 36 36 36

Table 2. Lane Width of Intersections Separated by Lane Directions

Width (ft)

Intersection North Bound South Bound East Bound Westbound

T L T+R T+L T R T+R T+L T L R T+L T L T+R T+L

A. Main St and
- 9 11 - - 26 - 11 9 21 9 - - 9 11 -
West St

B. Main St and
9 - 11 - - - 11 10 - 8 9 - - 9 18 -
Chain Bridge Rd

C. Main St with
- - 8 9 - - 9 8 - 9 9 - - 10 16 -
University Dr
2.2. Location of Pedestrian

Within the span of the arterial road chosen, there are also pedestrian lanes that are present
within the identified intersections. The pedestrians are also important in traffic analysis given that
it is necessary for them to use the roads given that there is no pedestrian overpass. Thus, pedestrian
stops are also considered in a signalized intersection. Figure 4 shows the location of the pedestrian
lanes in the arterial road, highlighted in yellow.

Figure 4. Location of Pedestrian Lanes in the Arterial Road

2.3. Location of Transit Facilities

The nearest transport facilities and passenger waiting areas were also identified during the
site investigation. Based on the data gathered, the transport facilities in the arterial road are mostly
within the northbound and southbound of the intersection just a few meters distant from the
intersection. Since they are not within the, they are not covered in the traffic study. Figure 5 shows
the location of the transport areas.
Figure 5. Transport Areas Near the Vicinity of the Arterial Road
 Chapter 3. Analysis of the Existing Traffic Condition in the Intersection

In this chapter, the existing condition in the chosen arterial road and the identified
intersections were analyzed. These data were taken at 10th of November, and are discussed in the
following sections.

3.1. Traffic Volume Count, Peak Hour Factor, and Travel Time Runs

The traffic count for the existing traffic condition within the area are gathered and the peak
hour factors for each approach were also calculated. In order to arrive with the traffic volume, all
the vehicles going to the intersection in all turns were counted in a span of an hour. The time that
the data were taken is during the morning peak hour, which is 6:30 AM to 9:30 am, and during the
afternoon peak hour, which is in between 4:00 PM and 7:00 PM. A particular count every 15
minutes were gathered in order to have another set of data for a 15-minute period. These counts
were then added to complete the hourly traffic counts.

Additionally, the travel time were calculated in each intersection roadway based on the
length of the road and a standard travel speed of 30 mph. The data are summarized in Table 3 and
are supplemented by Figure 6, which is taken from the Synchro studio software. The whole data
are shown in Appendix A.

Table 3. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, Peak Hour Factors, and Travel Time Runs for the
Intersections

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

Intersection Data Movement Movement Movement Movement

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Volume (vph) 156 165 95 322 461 163 127 290 113 65 465 193
A. Main St and
West St PHF 0.94 0.91 0.83 0.87
Travel Time (s) 4.7 6.9 5.3 2.7
Volume (vph) 60 0 120 144 285 28 0 468 96 45 548 60
B. Main St and
PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Chain Bridge Rd
Travel Time (s) 6.9 7.1 4.3 4.6
Volume (vph) 962 844 619 173 230 86 127 303 115 29 142 115
C. Main St and
PHF 0.91 0.87 0.88 0.84
University Dr
Travel Time (s) 7.1 3.5 1.9 4.8
 Figure 6. Peak Vehicle Volume in the Intersections

Based on the traffic counts, it can be seen that the most critical turning movement for
intersection A is the westbound through movement and southbound through movement, with a
traffic count of 465 and 461, respectively. In intersection B, the most critical is the southbound
through movement with a traffic count of 548. And for the intersection C, the most critical is the
eastbound left turn movement with a traffic count of 962. In this, critical means it has the highest
traffic volume. Although traffic count is one of the factors that are considered in traffic analysis,
there are also other significant factors that could affect the study thus we cannot say that the highest
volume would incur the lowest level of service.

3.2. Traffic Signal Timing Information

Aside from the inputs above, the traffic signal timing was also taken and is summarized in
Table 4. The turn types, stoplight intervals, and intersection cycle lengths were taken which is
most likely the basis of a certain traffic condition within an area. Tables 4, 5, and 6 shows these
data in each intersection for this project. Traffic signal timing plays a very important role in traffic
analysis because each phase could affect the mobility of the other. In all intersections, a cycle
length of 140 seconds was determined.
 Table 4. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection A: Main Street and West Street

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configuration - -

Turn type Prot - Perm Prot - - - - - Prot - -

Minimum Split (s) 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 - - 9.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 -
Total Split (s) 16.0 45.5 45.5 29.5 59.0 - - 9.5 55.0 9.5 55.5 -
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 - - 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -
Cycle Length (s) 140

Table 5. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection B: Main Street and Chain Bridge Road

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane configuration - - - - -
Turn type Prot - Perm Prot - - - - - Prot - -
Minimum Split (s) 9.5 - 9.5 9.5 22.5 - - 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 -
Total Split (s) 23.0 - 23.0 74.0 51.0 - - 56.5 - 9.5 66.0 -
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 - 3.5 3.5 3.5 - - 3.5 - 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 -
Cycle Length (s) 140

Table 6. Traffic Signal Timing Data for Intersection C: Main Street and University Drive

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configuration
Turn type Prot - - Prot - - Prot - - Prot - -
Minimum Split (s) 9.5 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 -
Total Split (s) 67.0 91.0 - 13.0 37.0 - 9.5 26.5 - 9.5 26.5 -
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 - 3.5 3.5 3.5 - - 3.5 - 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 -
Cycle Length (s) 140
3.3. Control Delay and Level of Service of the Intersections

For the analysis of the existing condition, the control delay was calculated for an
intersection which is the main basis of level of service for that intersection. In the following tables
below, the control delays for each of the through and turning movements were tabulated together
with the total delay in the whole approach. Based on this, the level of service for each through and
turning movements and approaches were determined. And finally, the level service of the whole
intersection was derived, which is most likely the lowest LOS of the approaches. Figure 7 shows
the corresponding level of service of time control delays based on Higher Capacity Manual 2000.

Figure 7. Control Delay with its Corresponding Level of Service

For intersection A, the highest travel delay is on eastbound left turn movement which is
247 seconds, while the highest travel delay for an approach is 117 seconds in eastbound approach.
Based on the HCM 2000, both of these are considered to have the lowest level of service which is
F. It is also necessary to consider those that have level of service from D to F because those are
critical measures especially during rush hours. For the whole intersection, the level of service is F.

Table 7. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection A: Main St and West St

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

Movement Movement Movement Movement

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
247 39 36 201 67 - - 41 - - 61 31
(s)
Total Delay –
117 113 41 53
Approach (s)
Level of Service
F D D F E - - D - - E C
(Turn)
Level of Service
F F D D
(Approach)
Level of Service
F
(Intersection)
 For intersection B, the critical turning movement is the eastbound right movement with a
traffic delay of 231 second and a level of service of F, and the critical approach is the eastbound
with a total delay of 180 second and a level of service of F also. For the whole intersection, the
level of service is taken to be D.

Table 8. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection B: Main St and Chain
Bridge Rd

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

Movement Movement Movement Movement

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
78 - 231 28 42 - - 35 - - 29 -
(s)
Total Delay –
180 38 35 29
Approach (s)
Level of Service
E - F C D - - D - - C -
(Turn)
Level of Service
F D D C
(Approach)
Level of Service
D
(Intersection)

For intersection C, the critical turning movement is the westbound left turn movement with
a traffic delay of 532 second and a level of service of F, and the critical approach is almost all of
the approaches except the southbound movement which has a level of service of D. For the whole
intersection, the level of service is taken to be D.

Table 9. Current Control Delay and Level of Service in Intersection C: Main Street and
University Drive

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

Movement Movement Movement Movement

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
127 312 - 532 69 - - 125 - - 53 -
(s)
Total Delay –
239 233 125 53
Approach (s)
Level of Service
F F - F E - - F - - D -
(Turn)
Level of Service
F F F D
(Approach)
Level of Service
F
(Intersection)
 All in all, it can be seen that there is really a need to give a concrete solution for the traffic
congestion as most of the movements, approaches, and intersections have a level of service of F.
By applying conventional techniques and strategies in optimizing the utilization of intersection, a
proposed mitigation plan was created and is presented in the next chapter.
 Chapter 4. Proposed Improvements of the Intersection

In this chapter, the whole mitigation plan in order to improve the current traffic condition
is presented. This mainly consists of two processes which is the change of lane configurations and
optimization of cycle lengths.

4.1. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection A

By comparing results of trials and errors, the most appropriate mitigation plan for the
existing traffic condition was developed. The first thing that was done is that the critical turning
movements were determined and from there, the possible changes for that particular approach was
created. Table 10 shows the proposed change in the lane configurations within the intersections.
This is the result of all trial changes as it gives the least value of control delay for the movements.
The changes are focused on the eastbound movement as it was considered to be the most critical
part of the intersection. The individual movements are merged so that vehicles for a through
movement can have more spaces as it is the most in demand movement.

Table 10. Existing vs Proposed Lane Configurations for Intersection A

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

SB
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBR
T

Existing - -

Proposed - -

After working out with the lane configurations, some intersections still need to be improved
because some of them are still at a level of service of F. Thus, the second strategy was applied
wherein the cycle length and time splits for the movements were changed. Table 11 shows the
changes of the existing and proposed changes on split and cycle lengths.
 Table 11. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection A

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Existing Total Split 16.0 45.5 45.5 29.5 59.0 - - 9.5 55.0 9.5 55.5 -

Existing Cycle
140
Length

Proposed Total Split 26.5 - 30.4 47.4 - 43.6 - 43.6 -

Proposed Cycle
110
Length

After making the necessary optimizations, the total delay and level of service for the
intersection were gathered and are summarized in Table 12. Based on the result, the highest turn
movement delay is 65.3 which is for westbound through movement. That value is very farm form
the existing highest total delay for a particular turn in the intersection which is 247. For the
approaches, the highest total delay is in westbound with a value of 51.3, compare to previous when
it had 117 seconds in the eastbound approach. Overall, the level of service was improved from F
to D.

Table 12. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection A

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
- 35.6 - 24.2 65.3 - - 34.4 - - 59.8 24.3
(s)
Total Delay –
35.6 51.3 34.4 50.3
Approach (s)
Level of Service
- D - C E - - C - - E C
(Turn)
Level of Service
D D C D
(Approach)
Level of Service
D
(Intersection)
4.2. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection B

Since the levels of service for intersection are quite reasonable, altering the lane
configurations done. The process of optimizing the cycle lengths was the only method considered
just to further improve the situation in this area although it is currently not too congested. Table
13 shows the changes of the existing and proposed changes on split and cycle lengths.

Table 13. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection B

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Existing Total Split 23.0 - 23.0 74.0 51.0 - - 56.5 - 9.5 66.0 -

Existing Cycle
140
Length

Proposed Total Split 12 - 12 37 25 - - 33.5 - 9.5 43 -

Proposed Cycle
80
Length

The resulting total delay and level of service for the intersection were gathered and are
summarized in Table 14. Based on the result, the highest turn delay is 38.9 which is for eastbound
left turn movement. That value is very farm form the existing highest total delay for a particular
turn in the intersection which is 231. For the approaches, the highest total delay is in westbound
with a value of 36, compare to previous when it had 180 seconds in the eastbound approach.
Overall, the level of service was improved from D to C.

Table 14. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection B

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
38.9 - 34.5 16.5 37.5 - - 21.2 - - 14.2 -
(s)
Total Delay –
36 30.9 21.2 14.2
Approach (s)
Level of Service
D - C B D - - C - - B -
(Turn)
Level of Service
D D C B
(Approach)
Level of Service
C
(Intersection)
4.3. Proposed Mitigation Plan for Intersection C

For the last intersection, the main change for both the eastbound and westbound approaches
is that the turn movements were merged so that all lanes will contain a through movement, which
is the most critical in the study of the existing condition. The cycle lengths were also changed from
140 to 130 seconds. The summary of values is shown in tables 15 and 16.

Table 15. Existing vs Proposed Lane Configurations for Intersection C

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Existing

Proposed - -

Table 16. Existing vs Proposed Split and Cycle Lengths for Intersection C

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Existing Total Split 16.0 45.5 45.5 29.5 59.0 - - 9.5 55.0 9.5 55.5 -

Existing Cycle
140
Length

Proposed Total Split 9.5 71 - 9.5 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 - 9.5 22.5 -

Proposed Cycle
130
Length

The resulting total delay and level of service for the intersection were gathered and are
summarized in Table 17. Based on the result, the highest turn delay is 74.4 which is for eastbound
left turn movement. That value is very farm form the existing highest total delay for a particular
turn in the intersection which is 539. For the approaches, the highest total delay is in westbound
with a value of 74.4, compared to previous when it had 239 seconds in the eastbound approach.
Overall, the level of service was improved from D to C.
 Table 17. Total Delay and Level of Service of Proposed Changes in Intersection C

East Bound West Bound North Bound South Bound

EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Total Delay – Turn
- 74.4 - - 24.3 - - 44.1 - - 34.2 -
(s)
Total Delay –
74.4 24.3 44.1 34.2
Approach (s)
Level of Service
- E - - C - - D - - C -
(Turn)
Level of Service
E C D C
(Approach)
Level of Service
D
(Intersection)
 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusions

The main purpose of the project study which is to analyze the existing condition of Main
Street as the main road and its connecting streets, and propose a mitigation plan in order to improve
the current traffic condition, has been answered and solved through the combination of different
methods starting from data gathering, software application, and thorough evaluation and
discussions. The traffic enhancement strategies applied for the project has shown positive results
at the end, thus, they are proven to be methods that can enhance a traffic congestion within a set
of intersections. These methods are changing of lane configuration and optimization of traffic
cycle lengths. All in all, this project demonstrates a very good example on how to deal with such
traffic congestion problem, and knowing this process is very important for aspiring engineers.

5.2. Recommendations

For this traffic study, there are some factors that have been skipped or were not considered
in performing some activities such as pedestrian movement and the effect of other intersections.
The movement of people crossing the intersection is also needed to be part of the study since
sometimes it requires an additional time for a particular movement depending on how heavy the
number of pedestrians are. Also, the effect of other intersections which is connected to the whole
road or network would really affect the situation on the location considered. In this study, only
three intersections were considered, but then, if the larger scope is considered, it might cover larger
number of intersections and if analyzed, it would most likely deliver better results.