HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject 101 Draft Report Transportation Impact Analysis 10-03-2001Draft Report
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
for the
PROJECT 101
(South San Francisco, California)
Prepared for:
City of South San Francisco
Prepared by:
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
October 3, 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
Pale
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. iii
1 -INTRODUCTION ............................................................:...........................................1
2 -EXISTING CONDITIONS ..........................................................................................5
Roadway Network ............................................................'.......................................5
Existing Transit Service ...........................................................................................5
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .............
..................................................6
Level of Service Methodologies ..............................................................................6
Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations ............................7
Existing Intersection Levels of Service .................................................................12
Existing Freeway Segment Levels of Service ......................................................12
3 -BACKGROUND CONDITIONS ..............................................................................14
Background Intersection Improvements ................................................................14
Background Traffic Estimates ................................:..............................................14
Background Intersection Levels of Service ...........................................................14
Background Freeway Segments Levels of Service ............................................ 17
4 -PROJECT CONDITIONS .........................................................................................18
Project Traffic Estimates ........................................................................................18
Project Intersection Levels of Service ...................................................................20
Project Freeway Segments Levels of Service .........:..............................................24
Intersection Impact Significance Criteria ..............................................................24
Intersection Mitigation Measure ............................................................................25
Site Access ................................................. .....25
.......................................................
On-Site Circulation ................................................................................................26
Paz'lung .....................................................................:.............................................27
5 -TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN ..................................28
South San Francisco TDM Guidelines ..................................................................28
C/CAG TDM Guidelines ......................................................:................................28
Transportation Demarti~a Management Plan ...........................................................29
6 -CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS .....................................................31
Cumulative No Project Intersection Improvements ............................
...................31
Cumulative No Project Traffic Estimates .........:....................................................31
Cumulative No Project Intersection Levels of Service ..........................................31
7 -CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ................................................36
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Estimates ............................................................36
-Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service ........................................36
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Chapter
Pale
8 -CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................39
Technical Appendices
Appendix A - Driveway Counts
Appendix B - Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets
Appendix C -Driveway Level of Service Calculation Worksheets
Appendix D -List of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measures
Appendix E -Intersection LOS w/ Mitigation Measures
LIST OF TABLES
Table Ps~e
ES-l. Intersection Level of Service Summary ...................................:...............................v
ES-2. Freeway Level of Service Summary .................................................................... .. vi
ES-3.
.........................................................
Transportation Demand Management Plan
Vlil
1. Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections ................................... ....8
2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections ..................................... ....8
3. Level of Service Definitions for Freeway Segments ........................................... ....9
4. Existing Intersection Levels of Service .........................................:..................... ..12
5. Existing Freeway Segment Levels of Service ..................................................... ..13
6. Approved Developments in South -San Francisco ............................................... ..15
7. Background Intersection Levels of Service ......................................................... ..15
8. Background Freeway Segment Levels of Service ............................................... ..17
9. Project Trip Generation Rates and Estimates ...................................................... ..19
10. Background and Project Intersection Levels of Service ...................................... ..20
11. Background and Project Freeway Segment Levels of Service ............................ ..24
12. Background and Project Driveway Intersection Levels of Service ..................... ..26
13. Transportation Demand Management Plan ......................................................... ..30
14. Potential Development in South San Francisco ................................................... ..32
15. Potential Developments in Brisbane .................................................................... ..33
16. Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service ...........:.............................................. ..35
17. Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service ...................................... ..38
LIST OF FIGURES
Fi ure Pale
1. Site Location ............................................................................................................2
2. Site Plan ..............................................................................:....................................3
3. Existing Intersection Peak-Hour Volumes ............................................................. 10
4. Existing Intersection Lane Configuration ...............:.............................................. 11
5. Background Intersection Peak-Hour Intersection Volumes .................................. 16
6. .Trip Distribution Pattern ........................................................................................ 21
7. Project Trip Assignment ...............:........................................................................ 22
8. Background Plus Project Intersection Peak-Hour Volumes .................................. 23
9. Cumulative No Project Intersection Peak-Hour Volumes ..................................... 34
10. Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Peak-Hour Volumes ................................... 37
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of the transportation impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the
proposed conversion of a mixed-use facility into office space. The site is located on the east
side of Dubuque Avenue in South San Francisco, California. The proposed project would
convert approximately 125,000 s.f of mixed-use (warehouse, limited office, retail, and
fiuniture store) space into 114,000 s.f. of office space, 6,000 s.f. of retail space, 3,000 s.f. of
warehouse space, and a 2,000 s.f. deli. Direct access to the project site will be provided via
four full-access driveways on Dubuque Avenue.
The purpose of the analysis is to identify the likely impacts of the proposed development on
the surrounding roadway system and to identify improvements to mitigate significant
impacts. Project impacts were evaluated with intersection and freeway segment level of
service calculations. The operations of the key intersections were evaluated during the
morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak periods under Existing, Baclground, Project,
Cumulative No Project, and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions.
Project Trips
The amount of traffic generated by the proposed office conversion was estimated by
applying appropriate trip generation rates from Trip Generation (Sixth Edition, Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 1997). First, trip generation estimates were prepared for the new
office, warehouse, and retail space (the. new deli is assumed to attract internal trips and is not
projected to generate new vehicular trips during the peak hours). Next, net new trip estimates
were obtained by subtracting trips associated with the existing uses from trips estimated for
the proposed office conversion. A seven percent reduction was also applied to account for
transit use due to the adjacent CaiTrain station. The proposed office conversion is estimated
to generate approximately 50 net new daily trips, 124 net new AM peak-hour trips (116 in/8
out), and 82 net new PM peak-hour trips (0 in/82 out).
The proj ect-generated traffic was assigned to specific street segments, intersections, and
turning movements based on the trip distribution pattern contained in the East of 101 Area
Plan Environmental Impact Report (Brady and Associates with Barton-Aschman Associates,
January 1994).
Intersection Levels of Service
Using existing count data and -lane configurations, a list of approved and pending
developments supplied by City of South San Francisco staff, and project-generated trips,
level of service (LOS) calculations were conducted for Existing, Background, Project,
Cumulative No Project, and Cumulative Pius Project Conditions. Intersection levels of
service were calculated using the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. iii
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October '001
signalized intersections. The operations of the driveways were evaluated using the
methodology contained in the 1994 HighH+ay Capacity Manual for unsignalized
intersections. The results of the intersection LOS calculations are presented in Table ES-1.
The intersection of Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard is projected to operate at LOS
E during the PM peak hour under Project Conditions. Three key intersections are projected to
operate at unacceptable levels, LOS. E or F, under Cumulative No Project and Cumulative
Plus Project Conditions. The intersection of Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenue is projected
to operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios.
Project Intersection Impacts
According to the City of South San Francisco's level of service policy, LOS D is the
minimum acceptable level of service. A project is considered to have a significant impact if
traffic generated by the proposed project causes an intersection operating at LCSS D or better
under Background Conditions to operate at LOS E or F under Project Conditions. For those
intersections akeady operating at LOS E or F under Background Conditions, any increase in
traffic is considered a significant impact.
Based on the criteria listed above, the proposed project would have a significant impact on
the Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard.
Project Intersection Mitigation Measure
The addition of a second westbound right-turn lane is recommended to mitigate the impact at
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard. The intersection would operate at LOS C during
the PM peak hour with the improvement. This. improvement is also recommended in the
April 2001 Draft Supplemental Enviromental Impact Report (EIR) to the South San
Francisco General Plan Update EIR.
Freeway.Operations and Impacts
The freeway operations were evaluated by comparing the volume of vehicles on each
segment to the segment's capacity as shown in Table ES-2. An impact is identified if the
proposed project causes the freeway segment to exceed its Congestion Management
Program's (CMP) LOS standard or if the project adds greater than one percent of the
capacity of a deficient freeway segment.
The proposed office conversion is not projected to add traffic greater than one percent to any
of the freeway segments in the vicinity of the project site nor cause the level of service
ratings to exceed their CMP LOS E standard. Therefore, the proposed project is not
estimated to have a significant adverse impact on the freeway segments.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. iv
i
O ~
i
p., O A W i A f~ G~, .~ I Pa cs~
~a
w •
o
~, ~
c~iooio~ moo!
'
U A 1 N
M ~!' E M Mr!' ~ ~ i/
C
~
O i
!
A WfA fs, GTr GT, r~ W
~ O
°a
~ ~ N ~
M ~ !~ ~
~
~
U Z d i
?
N ~
N 00EC ~ ~~ O~
A M 7 ! M ~ ~ 00 ~ t11
>.
O
O
U UW W A A id d O
.~
CC
V
~ ~ - 3
[ G
~
•~ ~
` ~ ~
~
a
~ ;
00 O\ ! ~O N j
Da
y ~ ~ ! N N
o0 N~d' N i~ ~ ~
~ R
.~.............._ _.
~
i
._._.~___ :.......................:_._.__...._......s.-.__.__._.__
U
!
v~
~
p O '
D U F W A~ A A~ d d 3
x
~~
i Z'
C/~ ~ ~
O
s.
;
o~
~
W °j' ,y j ~
~ O
II ~ ~ q~ ~a
~ d ~
oo N ~ o~ ~c ~o ;
: .'~„
~
' rr y
A ~.,; d
~--~ N 1 ~-+ M N N
~.7
c ~
p
- -- -
._.._. _.__ ----- o
o
w
~
~
O ~
UUIwU'AAdd a
.TT.
~ ~ a ~ ~'
w
c ~'
~! y
' '!
- v a
~ ~ "
O C~ M O
V1 v1 j ~,
,
€ i
i r,
y
~ 'a
......._...... pp
i ~ ~
~ '
~a
a~a~~
a °
y
w .!
d
¢ ~
~
H
' ~
,~ v
b~~
G
G
~
U ~
~ ~ U
y 'b ~
"'~ ~ ~
-,. ~
': f0 6~.r R
~ 44
.• 00
a7
(~ € c0 ~
~ 00 C Fri
~ !
F[
~
~ d ~~
~
O
. ~ ( ~ ^~' i
Q~ i ~ ~ ^
y ~QI y ~ _y yt 4J y id ...
c o ~~d ~` ~ >! ~ > ~~, N
u p., k p p., ; b
~'
~ ~. I v' ~, + ~'. ~ i o"
C ,~.+ .y ~ j 0O+ r+~~ i ~~ ,r~
~
v ~ '~
iri
~
~ ~+ •~ i
y ~ v
d OiA O!'d WA W O
Z
w,U~A AA w',Aw
i
°
V ~ 1
M
O~ END ioo ~ W 1~ i~ ;01
~'~ i~ .N
M
~
~
~/ .
.
C O! O O iO O O ~O
~
~
~
U ~ i
i
.
70. ~
C ~O i0 IM ~O ~7 ivy C' !O
MiO~i~' !M ~\O itn~
QI ~ ~ !~ 100 id~~0 X00 j00 ;lam
01 I~ to0 ~[~ ~ 00 it` O
i
i
p a~ F
V ^~ ,O ;M
~ ~
~
M ch
M
H
O w ;U !A A !A w A .w
a
,ti
a o E p
O
~ ~ ~
, ~ O~ I~ ! op h !oo !Q\ ~ !D\
0100 000010
V ~ ~ i
~ 3
~. ~
~,~ i i
040;0 !O O!~ O;O
00
00 i
i~ iV'
0
'
~
-+
~
'~
~ ±
X
~
\ ir
1
:
m i~ i oo icn ~n ioo soo %`O ,L
O
~ ~ €~ oo" i(\ ~ `oo ;lam 1~ ~
a
~
i !
i
a
N
p i
wIU!A'A~A~w'U'w ~
a
i I ,
ti
y
U
~i ~ _
~ ~ ~ a>
V
;
W ~
bD
C
'~ ~ ! ~
~ ~
~ iN !N 'op ;op 'M i~p sop
oo ~~o too i~o t` rn :~O o0 X
~
>
_~
w ;~,
~
..,
~ ~
~
O<O~C NCO ~OO~C 0
~ O
c~ ~ ~
W ; ~
p
F'1 ~ a~ E
1 ~ ~ ' ~~
ar
~ ~ O 10 i 0 i0 IO iO O ~
'
` ~ ~
a
1
~, .~ M ~~ ch ~~ i
~ ~
l\ ~
O~~d' !mot iO i.-+ v'1 ~v1 i '
d ~+
,
d ~ .~
y. m
~
~
~
~ w
p, x a d a
.P, j
a ~ ~~ N
> ~,
~ ~
°
o .
" U "~
en
r,~
~ Iry
~ ~
i
N p
W
~~ ~ ^~ i •-+ O N ° z ~
~ 1 V ~ ~
~
z I
~
~,
V
N
~ •~
~ 1
M ~\ M
y.y ~ I"q ~Q W
7
J v
Y ~ ~V
~ r
F
~ f ~
O
A s
~ G .C
~ ~
'
`
~
°
"~ p 8 U°
b ai .
~ ,> ^d'y _ w
`' `~
i~
++ ~ O y a~i
~ ~ ~
~
~ ~
>
~O .
~ Q
r ^' ~ O A .
x o
~~ ~
a)!(~
!y
~o _~
1'-+ O j a-, p o
~d
~ y i ~ ~ ~ .,~ ~.b ~ p q i
~.' ~ ? ~ y ` ~ O p
d f w~ fly sr
~ p a~ `d ~'
O >y k" O
~c-~
~ Q ~ iO m ;~ +~. ~ O rv
~ N
ti ~
N
y F.
C/1 ~ ~ j~ ~ !~ O '~ ~ z [%
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service
As shown in Table ES-l, three of the key intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or F
under Cumulative No Project Conditions. The addition of project traffic exacerbates poor
intersection operations. "
Cumulative Intersection Mitigation Measures
To improve intersection operations .under Cumulative Conditions, the following
improvements are recommended:
Adding a .second eastbound left-turn .lane at Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point
Boulevard.
Adding a second westbound right-turn lane at Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point
Boulevard (recommended under Project Conditions).
Restriping the southbound right-turn lane to a shared through/right-turn lane and
widening of the eastbound approach to add an eastbound left-turn lane.
The improvements listed above were also recommended in the April 200 Draft
S° ;nplemental EIR to the South San Francisco General Plan Update .E1R to improve levels of
seiT~ice with buildout of the General Plan. It is recommended that the project sponsor provide
a "fair-share" contribution toward these intersection improvements.
Transportation Demand Management Measures
A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan was prepared to identify measures to
reduce the number ofsingle-occupant automobile trips generated by the proposed project and
thus reduce its traffic impacts. A TDM Plan is a set of strategies, measures and incentives to
encourage the, employees to walk, bicycle, use public transportation, carpool or .use other
alternatives to driving alone.
The TDM Plan was developed based on guidelines provided by the City of South San
Francisco and the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), the local Congestion
Management Agency for San Mateo County. City of South San Francisco draft guidelines for
TDM programs require that all projects obtain a goal. of 28 percent alternative mode use. for a
project that generates 100 or more trips. C/CAG guidelines require developments to
implement TDM measures that have the capacity to mitigate all new peak-hour trips. The
proposed TDM Plan is presented in Table ES-3.
Fehr 8t Peers Associates, Inc. vii
1 ~
~
i ~I
~~~ ~
~ ~ I ce ~
^ y
~~y1
~. ~' i c °
s~ f ,'~
Clot. 3.
i py
_._._....__.;.._.._._._.__._...._.__
1
w
~ ~
z~F
!
€
o
V'1
o
o
._._....
°
ip
fa
;.-r
'
'i
___.r_._..._.._.._.__~___..
~
!
I ~
i
' ~
j °
f O ~
~a °
a
1
~
.~_.___.._..._..
~
~
~
.__
\
o
f
~o
~ Vl
~_____.
~
I
3
i
i ~
.~C
cC
~'
'; y
' V]
___: __...._
~~
C
3
'~ '~
o o
_.. ;__....._.._ .._.
_..;
!
H
. d ~
~ cC
; ~ ~
,~
~
!C/1
_......._........_...._._._._...____ _...._._....._...._. _
~
in
_
°
M
_....._
CI
j
M
~ `~ a~
i0 ~ ~ ~ ,
4
f°
~ °
i`°°
a~
"°°
j
!
~ oN
~ ~
w
E+
"
° H Y ~ j CO N N H ~ ~+
~ ~ •~ ~ ~a
I o o ~
° . p, ~
.~ ~
. d , a ,~ ~ c ~
T
~ LL
~ ° ~ U cO ca i ! td ~
i
pdp ~ ^" ~~b O. ~ ~O f LS. i ~. J t]. ~
M
~ ~1
~G
~/'1 P._...____--------
'L7 y ~' - e
1 y i
i
m r.r
€ v~ F.
jai ~
'~ vi ~ `,''.
4y
i ~ !
O
~ V
~ ~
' °
~
-o a. ~ to
~ ~ irl
F" A `~ Y r~~'1
ion O f O
y {
~ V
'~" ~° '
"o :
i
i,^" ~~ a. " '~ .~
~ ~ !~ ,y~
O #~
.~-~
I ~ ~
~ p °
i 17 ~
~ C 3.V ..r i
j ~' ~ i"d .~- 0.Y. ...
~.
'd
~ f3. y
a~+
S. "l7
"" ~TJ ~
~ t7 'b j ~ ~ 0
pq ':~ Cq ~ ~ m i O ~
N~++
~ p 4~ G7 '~
•~ ~ ~.
o
o _
°°
A o ,
;
ff ~~ ~ o
r,~ p° ~ plo ~° '~ a°'i p °~' o
~ ao!
'~ rn ~ Or
'b j•O ~ «+ b ~ 1.. ~' b ' Lr p i O °~ `~ ` O
y
~,j~ ~ p ro ~~ ~
,~ i~ ~ N a I~ Q, ~ •~°~°~~ •°°-°j~ ~f~ ~ ~ Y •~l~, N
~ b ~ ~~ b ~ i~ E-~ iH p. ~ Q. i ~~ G.
~ ~ i ~ ~
~
` ° ~ ( ~
~ ''
i~ ~ •~ j ~ O
° O j
~ i
fn
'v' ¢, N ~
IV °
U f~
I~ iy
C7
~U scud ~ ~ f•~ N i ~ '+°i ;~ ~i~ ti
y U i.~ .~ O '..7 Lq 1 ~ !~ c° C"yiCC
w
CC !,
i ~ Q ~
j'
~ t. ~ 'O
E ~-+ Q~
i
~"
y
~
1 R7
.~
N ~ a1
i.y
~ f
d
° i M
1 °
V ~ ~
b
U ~ N .
~
y ~
y ~ji
A
F ~
GO sca, a~
j0 ~ ;~ i ~, ~
la ~ !
; °
P: ~~
a ~ ~~
;H d w ~
v~
Project 101 _''ransportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
CHAPTER 1 -INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the transportation impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the
proposed conversion of a mixed-use facility to office space. The project site is located at
600-790 Dubuque Avenue, just north of East Grand Avenue, in South San Francisco,
California. The site location and surrounding roadway network are presented on Figure 1.
The project site currently contains a total of 236,110 square feet (s.f.) of warehouse, limited
office, retail, and furniture store uses. The proposed project would convert approximately
125,000 s.f of mixed-use space into 114,000 s.f. of office space, 6,000 s.f. of retail space,
3,000 s.f. of .warehouse space, and a 2,000. s.f. deli. Four driveways on Dubuque Avenue will
provide direct access to the site. A preliminary site plan is shown on Figure 2.
The purpose of this analysis is to identify the potential impacts of the proposed development
on the transportation system in the vicinity of the site. Project impacts were evaluated at the
following lcey intersections and freeway segments:
Intersections
1. Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard
2. Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard
3. Airport Boulevard/E. Grand Avenue
4. Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenue
Freeway Segments
U.S. 101, from I-380 to Oyster Point Boulevard
The operations of these locations were evaluated during the morning (AM) and evening
(PM) peak periods for the following scenarios:
Scenario 1: Existing Conditions - Existing volumes obtained from counts,
representing peak one-hour traffic conditions during the morning and
evening commute periods.
Scenario 2: Background Conditions - Existing peak-hour volumes plus traffic from
approved but not yet constructed developments in the area.
Scenario 3: Project Conditions -Background peak-hour traffic volumes plus
traffic estimated for the proposed project.
Scenario 4: Cumulative No Project Conditions -Traffic volumes for Background
Conditions plus traffic associated with other potential developments in
the area.
Fehr c~. Feers Associates, Inc. 1
Project 101 Office TLS
Octoder ~ 001
Figure 1 SITE LOCATION
zn-++-o+
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
a Study Intersections O
Project Site N
~}~}~ CalTrain Station Not to Scale
o m
.~ ~
~ J
y N r1 I
~ :. ~Z o
~-o z
o C
.~
r
,,
~ ~
~ a
~~~ ~
4 i ~
~ ~ t F
1 t~t
! ~ a ~ 1 1 t
0 00 4 4 0
0
Z
Q
J
a
w
d
L
_~
V.
4
Ci
ti
h
U
O
h
y
l
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Scenario 5: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions -Traffic volumes for Cumulative
Conditions plus traffic estimated for the proposed project.
Other issues including site access, on-site circulation, and parking are also addressed in this
study.
The remainder of this report is divided into seven chapters. Chapter 2 presents Existing
Conditions and includes descriptions of the transportation system. components serving the
site and an evaluation of current roadway operations. Roadway operations under Background
Conditions with traffic from approved but not yet constructed developments are discussed in
Chapter. 3. Chapter 4 describes the methodology used to estimate the project traffic and its
impacts on the transportation system (key intersections and. freeway segments). Project
impacts and mitigation measures are addressed: This chapter includes a discussion of site
access, on-site circulation, and parking. The recommended Transportation Demand
Management Plan is contained in Chapter 5. Cumulative No Project Conditions with traffic
from future developments are analyzed in Chapter 6. Chapter 7 presents the results of
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. Chapter $ presents the study conclusions and
recommendations.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 4
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
CHAPTER 2 - EYISTING CONDITIONS
This chapter provides a description of Existing Conditions in terms of the roadway facilities,
transit service, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, traffic volumes, and intersection operations.
Roadway Network
Regional access to the project site is provided by U.S. 101, while local access is provided by
East Grand Avenue,- Airport Boulevard, and Dubuque Avenue:
U.S. 101, in the vicinity of the project site, is an eight-lane north-south freeway through the
City of South San Francisco. U.5. 101 extends northward through San Francisco and
southward through San Jose. Access to and from the project site is provided via a southbound
off-ramp at Airport Boulevard; southbound on-ramp and northbound off-ramp at Dubuque
Avenue, a northbound off ramp at Executive Drive, a northbound on-ramp at Grand Avenue,
and a southbound off-ramp at Miller Avenue. .
East Grand Avenue is the primary east-west roadway that provides access .between the east
and west areas of .South San Francisco. This roadway contains two lanes west of Airport
Boulevard, six lanes between Airport Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard, and four lanes east
of Harbor Way.
Airport Boulevard is a north-south four-lane roadway that extends from Oyster Point
Boulevard to Produce Avenue. This roadway continues in an easterly direction underneath
U.S. 101 near Gateway Boulevard, travels in a southerly direction; and terminates at San
Bruno Avenue.
Dubuque Avenue is a two-lane local collector street that extends in a northern direction from
E. Grand Avenue to the U.S. 101 northbound on-ramp at Oyster Point Boulevard. Access to
the project site is provided via driveways on Dubuque Avenue.
Existing Transit Service
San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) operates bus service in San Mateo County.
Commuter rail service (CalTrain) is provided from San Francisco to. Gilroy by the Peninsula
Corridor Joint Powers .Board. The existing transit facilities in the vicinity of the site are
described below:
CalTrain provides frequent passenger train service between San Jose and San Francisco
seven days a week. During commute hours, CalTrain provides extended service to Morgan
Hill and Gilroy. The South San Francisco station at Dubuque Avenue and Grand Avenue is
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. S
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
located adjacent to the project site. The following two CalTrain shuttle buses provide service
to office buildings nearby: Utah-Grand Area Shuttle and Gateway Area Shuttle.
SamTrans Route 292 provides bus service between the Hillsdale Shopping Center and the
Transbay Terminal in downtown San Francisco. This bus route operates along Airport
Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site. The hours of operation are 5:00 am to 1:00 am
on weekdays and weekends. Commute and midday headways are 30 minutes apart on
weekdays and weekends. Headways aze 60 minutes apart during the evenings.
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian facilities comprise sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals. Near the site,
sidewalks are located on the south side of E. Grand Avenue and the east side of Dubuque
Avenue. Crosswalks and pedestrian signals are provided at all of the signalized study
intersections.
Bicycle facilities comprise bike paths (Class I), bike lanes (Class II), and bike routes (Class
III). Bike paths are .paved trails that are separated from roadways. Bike lanes are lanes on
roadways designated for use by bicycles by striping, pavement legends, and signs. Bike
routes are roadways that are designated for bicycle use by signs only and may or may not
include additional pavement width for cyclists.
In -the vicinity of the site, a bike path is provided on the north side of E. Grand Avenue
between Gateway Boulevard and Grand Avenue Overcrossing and between Executive Drive
and Grand Avenue Overcrossing. A bike path is also provided along 'the east side of
Executive Drive.. Bicycle lanes are provided on E. Grand Avenue Overcrossing and along
Gateway Boulevard between East Grand Avenue and South Airport Boulevard. Bike lanes
aze also provided on Airport Boulevard and Sister Cities Boulevard.
Level of Service Methodologies
The operations of roadway facilities are described with the term "level of service." Level of
service is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on such factors as speed, travel time,
delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels of service are defined .ranging from Level A, the
best operating conditions, to Level F, the worst operating conditions. Level of Service (LOS)
E corresponds to "at-capacity" operations. When volumes exceed capacity, stop-and-go
conditions result and operations are designated as LOS F.
Different .criteria and methodologies were used to assess operating conditions for the
different types of facilities. The level of service criteria and methodologies for each are
described in the following sections.
Fehr & Peers Associates,
Project 101 Transportation Impact:~nalysis
October 2001
Signalized Intersections
Signalized intersections were evaluated using the "Operations" methodology from Chapter 9
of the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). This methodology is based on weighted
average stopped delay per vehicle. Table 1 presents the LOS descriptions and ranges of delay
for signalized intersections. LOS D is designated as the minimum acceptable level of service
for signalized intersections in the City of South San Francisco.
Unsignalized Intersections
The operations of the unsignalized project driveways were evaluated using the methodology
contained in Chapter 10 of the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. This methodology
calculates level of service based on the average total delay in seconds per vehicle. The ranges
of delay for each level of service designation for unsignalized intersections are presented in
Table 2.
Freeway Segments
The operations of the freeway segments along U.S. 101 were evaluated with volume-to-
capacity ratios. The capacity is based on the number of lanes and aper-lane capacity of 2,300
vehicles per hour. Descriptions of freeway operations and the corresponding ranges of V/C
ratios for each level of service designation are shown in Table 3. U.S. 101 is the only
Congestion Management Program (CMP) facility in the vicinity of the site. Its CMP Level of
Service Standard is LOS E.
Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes an-d LanE Con-figurations
The operations of the intersections were analyzed under weekday AM and PM peak-hour
traffic conditions. Peak conditions usually occur during the morning and evening commute
periods between 7:00 and' 9:00 am and between 4:00 and 6:00 pm, respectively. Intersection
operations were evaluated for the hour during each of these periods with the highest
measured traffic volumes. Existing peak-hour traffic counts were obtained from the Boston
Properties 611 and 681 Gateway Traffic Study (CCS Planning and Engineering, Inc., June
2000). New counts were conducted at the project driveways in July 2000 to supplement this
information. Driveway counts are included in Appendix A. Peak-hour traffic volumes at each
study intersection are shown on Figure 3. The intersection lane configurations are presented
on Figure 4.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. ~
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Table 1
Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions
Using Average Stopped Vehicular Delay
Average Stopped Delay
Level of Per Vehicle
Service Description (Seconds)
~' __ Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable
.
5.0
<
progression and/or short cycle length. _
B ;Operations with low delay occurring with good progression ~ 5.1 to 15.0
and/or short cycle lengths. i -
Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression
C _. and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to 15.1 to 25.0
t
~ appear.
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of
D ?unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. 25.1 to 40.0
Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.
~
w.
~~ ~ ~ Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression,
'
E ~ long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures 40.1 to 60.0
are frequent occurrences. __ _
~~
~~~
_
~~~ _
~ Operations with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring ~
F ;due to over-saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle ? _ > 60.0
µ lengths.
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, 1994.
Table 2
Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service
Description Average Total Delay
Per Vehicle (Seconds)
A Little or no delay. <_ 5
B Short traffic delays. S < delay <_ 10
C
D Average traffic delays.
Long traffic delays. 10 < delay <_ 20
20 < delay <_ 30
E Very long delays. 30 < delay <_ 45
F Stop-and-go conditions. > 45
Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Special Report 209, Transportafion Research Board, 1994)
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 8
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Table 3
Level of Service Definitions for Freeway Segments
Mazirnum
Level of i
~
Volume-to-Capacity
Service ! Description Ratio
Free flow operations with average operating speeds at, or above, the
A speed limit_Vehicles are unimpeded in their ability to maneuver______~ ._
" ___~____._........~_28.~....._.._..____.__.._._
_. _.__._ ................._._. _. .,
._._
Free flow operations with average operating speeds at the speed
B ;limit. Ability to maneuver is slightly restricted. Minor incidents
cause some local deterioration in operations. 0.45
Stable operations with average operating speeds near the speed
C ;limit. Freedom to maneuver is noticeably restricted. Minor incidents
cause substantial local deterioration in service. 0.67
Speeds begin to decline slightly with increasing flows. Freedom to
D ?maneuver is more noticeably restricted. Minor incidents create-;
queuing.
...____---.------..__....__._..__.._._.._. ..0.85
_.._.__....._......_._.._-. --__....__._..--..---...__._......___...
_._....._.._._-___.._._..__ ._.....e_...---...._.._._....__...._...----.--.._..---_._~._.._.__.-_._____.. ~ ~
Operations at capacity. Vehicle spacing causes .little room to
maneuver but speeds exceed 50 mph. Any disruption to the traffic
=stream can cause a wave of delay that propagates throughout the
E upstream traffic flow. Minor incidents cause serious breakdown of
service with extensive queuing. Maneuver ability is extremely
limited. 1.00
~ Operations with breakdowns in vehicle flow. Volumes exceed
F i capacity causing bottlenecks and queue formation. ' NA
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Third Edition.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 9
Project 101 Office TIA
October 2001
XX (XX) = AM (PM)
cn a d
inrn~o 0
°~~ r R-14(28)
o m ~--155 (794)
r 100(197)
Sister Cities *0 ster Pt.
85 (82)~ ~ I
1093 (241) co in rn
c~ ~-
~rnrn
.- v
r th
8-198 (965)
1-108 (508)
x-259 (730)
357
1302
698
o.=r~
m ~
r Ill
~~ ~
~^ ~c°vv
R-87 (65)
"N m ¢ 122 (265)
r~ v ~ x-270 (777)
Grand
185(137) ~ I
233(78)-- ^ m ~
.~
o
Mrn~
N
O
N
Not to Scale
m
w a o' ~ 42 (76)
J ~ ~ 632 (1587)
/~ Grand
51 (36)-~
1345 (375)---
Figure 3 EXISTING INTERSECTION
PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES
2nn<-o~
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Office TIA
October ?001
Traffic Signal
m
t
1
~~ m
11 ~
,~
Sister Cities 0 star Pt.
R
~
_~ c ' l
I
~~
~- 'a
o ~
m
z ~_
y
~~
Ol~star PL
~~I
~~
-~
~ o ~
~1~,~
Gram
~11~
O
N
Not to Scale
a
,~~.°
Grand
Figure 4 EXISTING INTERSECTION LANE
CONFIGURATIONS
zn_,~,
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
The existing volumes were -used with the existing lane configurations and signal
phasings/timings as inputs to the LOS calculations to evaluate the current operations of the
key intersections. The results of the intersection analysis are presented in Table 4. The level
of service calculation sheets are contained in Appendix B.
All of the intersections are currently operating at LOS D or better. Therefore, all of the
intersections are operating at acceptable levels.
Table 4
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Peak
Intersection ! Hour ~ Delay' LOSZ
Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard '; . AM ~ 20.1 C
PM _ ~
~~ 19.4
~~~ C
~
~
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard AM 13.4 B
PM ~ 20.3
~
v C
~-
Airport Boulevard/E. Grand Avenue ~ AM 25.6 D
PM ~ 25.3 D
Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenue
'
PM
I 4.1 A
Notes: Delay =Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
' LOS calculations performed using the TRAFFIX level of service analysis program and the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology.
Intersections operating at unacceptable levels are highlighted in bold type.
Existing Freeway Segment Levels of Service
Table 5 presents the existing freeway segment levels of service. The CMP level of service
standard for U.S. 101 in the vicinity of the project site is LOS E. The segment of northbound
U.S. 101 from Airport Boulevard to Grand Avenue is operating at LOS E during the AM
peak hour. The two southbound segments of U.S. 101, from Bayshore Boulevard to Oyster
Poia~t Boulevard and Produce Avenue to I-380, are operating at LOS E during t11e PM peak
hour.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 12
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Table 5
Existing Freeway Segment Levels of Service
CMP
LOS ' j Peak `. V/C
Segment $ Standards ~ Direction j Hour Volume RatioZ LOSS
US 101, Airport Boulevazd to Grand Avenue
j ,., ~ ~ f AM
~
[
~ ~ 8,930 ?
~~ 0.86 j E
~
~ PM
~ ; 6,410 ~ 0.62 C
~
LJS 101, Oyster Point to Bayshore Boulevard _____~
,
~ AM '~ 8,440 ~ 0.82 ~ D
~ E ( NB ~.~.
PM 7,060 0.68. D
US 101, Bayshore Boulevard to Oyster Point i ! AM 7,160 0.78 ~ D
Boulevard E ~ SB PM 8,540 ( 0.93 E
US 101, Produce Avenue to I-380 ( ~
j AM 7,570 0.66 s C
~ ~
E SB pM 10,090 0.88 ~ E
Notes: Level of Service Standazd from the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program.
Z Volume-to-capacity ratio based on the CMP's capacity of 2,300 vehicles per lane per ho ur. Capacity of auxiliary lanes is 1,150
vehicles per hour.
3 Level of Service.
Existing volumes estimated based on daily traffic volumes and peak hour and peak direction percentages reported in 2000 Traffic
Volumes on California State Highways (Caltrans, June 2001)
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 13
Project 101 Transportation ImpactAnalysis
October 2001
CHAPTER 3 -BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
This chapter discusses the operations of the key intersections under Background Conditions.
Background Conditions are defined as conditions prior to completion of the proposed office
conversion. Traffic volumes for Background Conditions comprise existing volumes from
counts plus traffic generated by approved developments in the area. The results of the level
of service analysis for Background Conditions are also presented.
Background Intersection Improvements
The following planned improvements are included in this scenario:
Flyover off-ramp from southbound U.S. 101 to Oyster Point Boulevard.
• Southbound hook on- and off-ramps at Bayshore Boulevard
Background Traffic Estimates
The traffic volumes for Background Conditions were estimated by adding existing volumes
and traffic generated by approved but not yet constructed projects in the study area. A list of
the approved developments, along with their trip generatiori estimates, is presented in Table
o. The trips associated with these projects were assigned to the roadway system and added to
existing traffic volumes. The resulting background traffic volumes are shown on Figure 5.
Background Intersection Levels of Service
Levels of service were calculated for the study intersections using the background traffic
volumes and the planned intersection improvements. Table 7 presents the LOS results and
the corresponding LOS calculation sheets are included in Appendix B. The four study
intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better, acceptable levels, during both peak
hours with the addition of traffic from approved developments.
Fehr c4c Peers Associates, Inc. 14
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Table 6
i
Approved Developments in South San Francisco
Project
Size
Land Use Peak-Hour
Trip Estimates
AM PM
Gateway (Tularik) 259,376 sf
389,506 sf R&D
_ Office_
~
~~' 169
409 156
374
~~
Genentech '~~' '~'~~~~ 407,444 sf ~ R&D
- 265
~
-'-^~ ' _ 245
~
__. ~
Terrabay Residential 62 Units
94 Units
135 Units
213 Units SF Housing
Townhomes
SF Housing
~ Condominiums
" 54
42
142
209
~ 72
'
51
191
281
Hilton Oyster Point ~ 325 Rooms Hotel
~
~
~ 98 68
Oyster Point (Trammel Crow) 81,229 sf
_ ~
~
R&D ~
. 53
~ 49
Oyster Point (Sierra Point) _ ~ 440,000 sf
152 Rooms Office
Hotel 462
46 422
32
East of 101 (Zymed) 36,000 sf R&D 23 22
East of 101 (PSI Net) 123,000 sf R&D 80 74
East of 101 (Clarion Inn) 106 Rooms Hotel 32 22
South Airport (Wingate Inn) 87 Rooms Hotel 26 18
East of 101 (Axys Pharmaceutical) 63,550 sf R&D 41 38
Total 2,151 ~ 2,115
Source: Draft Supplemental EIR to South San Francisco General Plan Update EIR (Apri12001).
Table 7
Background Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Peak Hour `; Delayt ~ LOSZ
Airport Boulevazd/Oyster Point Boulevard AM j 18.6 C
PM ' 22.8 C
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard AM 14.6 B
PM 39.1 D
Airport Boulevazd/E. Grand Avenue AM 26.4 D
' PM j _26.4
~
'^ D
T ~~ ~
Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenue AM ~ 3.1
~ A
PM 4.1 A
Notes: Delay =Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
s LOS calculations performed using the TRAFFIX level of service analysis program and th e 1994 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology.
Intersections operating at unacceptable levels are highlighted in bold type.
Fehr 8c Peers Associates, Inc. I S
Project 101 Office ' ~4
October 2001
XX (XX) = AM (PM)
.._~ ~ ~
°
~ vv m R-24 (64)
~ ~ ,a m ~- 211 (992)
1 I ~ ~C-, 00 (, 97>
Sister C•ities Oster Pt.
289(198)
1223 (312) r m m rn
87 (63)~ ~ N N
ao `-'
a NNE
r co
X237(1064)
x-121 (559)
~ 300 (881)
474
1057
365
-o -
C7 ~- f°
N ~
~~~
`~ ° A
~~ sa (7s>
c ~ ~ ¢ 125 (279)
d' ~ X270 (777)
l
~
• r
and
G
202 (182) ~
/
248 (82)-- ~ m ~
68 (64)"~ vey~
nor'
co
O
N
Not to Scale
vN a
N p R- 42 (76)
N ~ f- 660 (1712)
Grand
51 (38)-~
1480 (397)--
Figure 5 BACKGROUND INTERSECTION
PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October ?001
Background Freeway Segment Levels of Service
Traffic projections from the approved developments were added to the existing freeway
volumes and level of service calculations were conducted. Table 8 presents the LOS results
under Background Conditions. The addition of traffic associated with approved
developments is projected to cause the segment of U.S. 101 from Produce Avenue to I-380 to
degrade to LOS D during the AM peak hour. The remaining freeway segments are projected
to operate at the same level of service ratings as Existing.Conditions.
Table 8
Background Freeway Segment Levels of Service
CMP I
LOS ~ Peak i V/C
Segment ~ Standardt # Direction Hour Volume i RatioZ ~ LOS3
Airport Boulevard to Grand Avenue.
US 101 '
~ AM 380 f
9 0
91 ( E
, E
NB , .
~ j PM 6,690 ~ 0.65 j C
US 101, Oyster Point to Bayshore Boulevard j ~ ~ AM 8,810 0.85 D
E ~ ~ i ~--..PIvI-...._.~.._ ..---7 380 --- - ~
-0.71 __._--~.... --D --
_.._._..._-...__....._--------_____----___..-..._-___-------
US l O1, Bayshore Boulevard to Oyster Point ~--~...------x-_-___---F ------.___~._.
AM _.._- r
7,590 -----...._--_
0.83 -------
D
~ E ~ SB ( .W ~-
Boulevard i E PM 8,865 0.96 E
US 101, Produce Avenue to I-380 ~ E ` SB ( `~'M 7'8~----~_5~ ---~~ 0.68
~~ D
i € PM 10,670 j 0.93 E
Notes: Level of Service Standard from the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program.
Z Volume-to-capacity ratio based on the CMP's capacity of 2,300 vehicles per lane per hour. Capacity of auxiliary lanes is 1,150
vehicles per hour.
' Level of Service.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 17
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October ?001
CHAPTER 4 -PROJECT CONDITIONS
The impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding transportation system are
discussed in this chapter. First, the methodology used ±o estimate the amount of-traffic
generated by the proposed project is described. Then, results of the level of service
calculations for Project Conditions are presented. Project impacts are then identified by
comparing the LOS results under Project Conditions to those under Background Conditions.
Site access, on-site circulation, and parking issues are also addressed in this chapter.
Project Traffic Estimates
The amount of traffic associated with a project is estimated using athree-step process: (1)
trip generation, (2) trip distribution, and (3) trip assignment. In the first step, the amounts of
traffic entering and exiting the project site are estimated on a daily and peak-hour basis: In
the second step, the directions the trips use to approach and depart the site are estimated. The
trips are assigned to specific street segments and intersection turning movements in the third
step. The results of this process for this analysis are described in the following sections.
Trip Generation
The amount of traffic generated by the proposed project was estimated using trip generation
rates from Trip Generation (Sixth Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997). Net
new trip estimates were obtained by subtracting trips associated with the existing uses from
trips estimated for the proposed office conversion. A seven percent reduction was also
applied to account for transit use due to the adjacent CalTrain station. The proposed
conversion includes. a 2,000-s.f. deli, 3,060 s.f. of warehouse space, and 6,000 s.f. of retail
space. The deli is assumed to attract trips from the buildings on-site. and thus would not
generate new vehicular trips to the project site during the peak hours. The proposed office
conversion is estimated to generate 52 net new daily trips, 124 net new AM peak-hour trips
(116 in/8 out), and 82 net new PM peak-hour trips (0 in/82 out) as shown in Table 9.
Fehr cPc Peers Associates, Inc. Ig
.Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October ?001
Table 9
Project Trip Generation Rates and Estimates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates
Office 12.89 1.60 0.22 1.82 0.31 1.51 1.82
Retail 42.92 0.63 -0.40 1.03 1.80 1.94' 3.74
Industrial 6.97 0.81 0.11 0.92 0.12 0.86 0.98
Warehouse 4.96 0.37 0.08 0.45 0.12 0.39 0.51
Furniture Store 5.06 0.11 0.06 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.45
Trip Estimates
Proposed Uses
Office (113,870 s.f.) 1,466 182 25 207 35 172 207
Warehouse (3,060 s.f.) 15 1 0 1 0 2 2
Retail (6,000 s.£) 258 4 2 6 11 11 22
Subtotal 1,739 187 27 214 46 185 231
7% Reduction for Transit (122) (13) (2) (15) (3) (13) (16)
Subtotal Proposed Uses 1,617 174 25 .199 43 172 215
Existing Uses
Industrial (13,050 s.f.) 91 11 1 12 2 11 13
Office (800 s.f.) 9 1 0 1 0 1 1
Warehouse (75,265 s.f.) 373 28 6 34 9 29 38
Retail (23,810 s.f.) 1,022 15 10 25 43 46 89
Furniture (4,000 s.f.) 20 1 0 1 1 1 2
Shooting Range (8,000 s.£)1 50 2 0 2 10 2 12
Subtotal Existing Uses (1,565) (58) (17) (75) (65) (90) (155)
.Total Net New Trips 52 116 8 124 (22)Z 82 82
(Proposed Uses -Existing Uses)
Trips were estimated for indoor shooting range.
Z Negative net inbound trips were not included .
Source: Tiip Generation (Sixth Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997).
Fehr ~ Peers Associates, Inc. 19
?roject 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution pattern for the proposed development was based on the trip distribution
pattern contained in the East of 101 Area Plan Environmental Impact Report (Brady and
Associates with Barton-Aschman Associates, January 1994). The major directions of
approach and departure for the project are shown on Figure 6.
Trip Assignment
Trips generated by the proposed project were assigned to the roadway system based on the
directions of approach and departure described above. Figure 7 presents the peak-hour trip
assignments at the study intersections. Project trips were added to background traffic
volumes to estimate volumes under Project Conditions as shown on Figure 8.
Project Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection level of service calculations were conducted to evaluate intersection operations.
The results of the LOS analysis for Background and Project Conditions are summarized in.
Table 10. The corresponding LOS calculation sheets are included in Appendix B.
The intersection of Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard is projected to degrade to LOS
E during the PM peak hour with the. addition of project traffic. The remaining key
intersections are projected to operate at the same (acceptable) levels of services as
Background Conditions.
Table 10
Background and Project Intersection Levels of Service
Peak Bac round
'
~ Project
J
Intersection _
Hour ~ Delay _
_
~ LOSz ~ ~~ ~--~ _
--Delay
~ - LOS ~-
Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard ~ AM 18.6 C 18.8 ~ C
PM 22.8 C 22.9 ' C
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard ~ AM _
_
14.6 B 14.6 B
i PM 39;1 D 42.2 E
_....._.._..._._....._....._...._.....---.._...-_----._._.__.__._.._ ......................-.......__.._._.....-----~--.
__.
Airport Boulevard/E: Grand Avenue ~ _.. ~--._..__.___
..--
AM ~
_......---~
---.
--
26.4 .....
--....._._.._._.._ _. _....._... -
D I _ ._
- _._.._._..__... _....t._.
_--._......
26.4 ._
. ------ -...
D
PM 26.4 D ~ 26.4 ! D
___ _ _
_~~~
_--- ~ _ ~~-
~ ~~~ --
Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenu
e AM 3.1 A
~ 3.2
' A
PM 4.1 A 4.2 ? A
Notes: Delay =Average delay in seconds per vehicie.
s LOS calculations performed using the TRAFFIX level of service analysis program and the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology.
Intersections operating at unacceptable levels are highlighted in bold type.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 20
Project 101 Office TIA
October 2001
V /V
r 2%
E. Grand Ave.
Not to Scale
Figure 6 TRIP DISTRIBUTION PATTERN
xn•~i.a~
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Office TIA
October 2001
XX (XX) = AM (PM)
® ~
0
s t
m ~-- t (7)
Sister Cities 0 star P
9 (0)---
O
N
Not to Scale
a
m v ~
0 0 ~
1 ~ R-- 23 (0)
I~ Grand
3 (0)--~
Figure 7 PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
zn.ia-0~
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
nroject .'Ol Jff~ce TIA
October '001
XX (XX) = ANI (PM)
~~ ~ m
~~_~ o
--t+~ ~f7 H ~ 24 (64)
u°Di v v m 1-212 (999)
~~~ m~'1o0(197>
Sister Cities 0 star Pt.
269 (198)
1232 (312) 1_ ~ N c°n
87 (63)"~ ~ N N
Q N N C
~~
~.
~ 8-237 (1084)
0 121 (559)
~ x-300 (881)
0 stet Pt.
474 (273)-~
1057(155) ~ ~ ~ ti
416(173) ~ ~ ~ ~
o' v '" ~
N'
~~
~^.N'~*..,~ _
R-89(78)
o N ~ ¢ 125 (281)
*~ X270(781)
rend
G
202 (182)-~ ~/
251 (82)-- rr rn ~
N N T
M O ~
m
O
N
Not to Scale
m v
~ v
N ~ o
a
o'
R- 85 (78)
f-- 680 (1712)
54 (38)-
1480(397) Grand
~
Figure 8 PROJECT INTERSECTION
PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES
zn_,e.~,
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Project Freeway Segment Levels of Service
Table 11 presents she freeway segment levels of service under Background and Project
Conditions. The addition of project traffic is not projected to cause a degradation in the level
of service rating for the freeway segments.
Table 11
Background and Project Freeway Segment Levels of Service
I Background Project
: Added
Peak ~ V/C : Project V/C
Segment Direction Hour ~ Volume Ratio' LO5Z Trips Volume Ratio LOS
US i01, Airport Blvd ~ ~ AM i 9,380 0.91 E 56 9,436 0.91 E
to Grand Ave PM 6,690 0.65 C 0 6,690 0.65 C
US 101, Oyster Point NB AM {
._.-
~ 8,810
... 0.85
_._..
'..._.. D
---
____ 3 -
---._....
--- 8,8.13
._....
--- 0.85
-......
-- D
._...._..
-~--
to Bayshore Blvd PM
' j _
' 7,380 . 0.71 D
- 30 _7,410 0.72 D
US 101, Bayshore Blvd
AM ~7,590~-~ 0.83 D 44 7,634 0.83 D
to Oyster Point Blvd SB
PM 8,865 0.96 E 0 8,865 0.96 ~E
US 101, Produce Ave AM { 7,850 .0.68 D 4 7,854 0.68 D
to I-380 S PM € 10,670 0.93 E 39 10,709 0.93 E
otes: Volume-to-capacity ratio based on the CMP's capacity of 2,300 vehicles per lane per hour. Capacity of auxiliary lanes is 1,150
vehicles per hour.
x Level of Service.
Impact Significance-Criteria
TntarePrti nn c
Traffic impacts at the study intersections are defined to occur when the addition of project
traffic causes:
1. Intersection operations to deteriorate from an acceptable level (LOS D or better)
under Background Conditions to an unacceptable level; or
2. Any increase in traffic at a signalized intersection operating at LOS E or F under
Background Conditions.
Based on the project impact criteria listed above, the proposed project would have a
.significant adverse impact on the key intersection of Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point
Boulevard.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 24
Project 101 Transportation Impact.~lnalysis
October ..'001
Freeway Segrrients
Traffic impacts at the study freeway segments are defined to occur when the addition of
project traffic causes:
1. A CMP freeway segment to exceed its LOS standard from Background to Project
Conditions, or
2. An increase in traffic greater than one percent of the capacity of a deficient
freeway segment.
The proposed office conversion is not projected to add traffic greater than one percent to any
of the freeway segments in the vicinity of the project site. The addition of project traffic is
not projected to cause the freeway segments to exceed the LOS E standard. Therefore, the
proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on the freeway segments.
Intersection Mitigation Measure
The following intersection improvement is recommended to mitigate the impact at Dubuque
Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard:
• Restripe and shift median of westbound Oyster Point Boulevard to add a second
right-turn lane to northbound U.S. 101 on-ramp.
This intersection improvement is also proposed in the April 2001 Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report to the South San Francisco General Plan Update EIR. With
implementation of this intersection improvement, the level of service is projected to improve
from LOS F to LOS C during the PM peak hour (see Appendix E).
Site Access
Four existing full-access (left-turns and right-turns in and out) driveways on Dubuque
Avenue provide access to the project site. There are no changes to the design or number of
driveways with the proposed land use conversion.
The operations of the four unsignalized driveways were evaluated with level of service
calculations. Table 10 presents the level of service results for the four driveways under
Background and Project Conditions. The level of service calculation sheets are contained in
Appendix C. As shown in Table 12, all four driveways are projected to operate at LOS A
with the addition of project traffic. The number and design of the driveways are adequate to
serve the estimated project traffic.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 25
Project 101 Transportation Impaci Analysis
Ociober ~ 001
Table 12
Background and Project Driveway Intersection Levels of Service
Peak Average
Intersection Hour Delay LOSZ
Building G Driveway
Background Conditions AM 0.5 A
.._._---_...._._-.--- PM
~ 0.9
~ A
-_-___..__...---.__._.----.._._....._._.._--,-.-.---.._
Project Conditions _._.._._._.._.._.._.....__.__.__T..____......
._..__...
AM _...._......_.__._.._.._.._--.--..._.._..._...._._......_.
._.__...._.._.__.
0.6 _...----._.....__._..._.__._...
A
PM 1.1 A
Building L-K Driveway
Background Conditions AM 03 A
Project Conditions ~'_._.__.__.___._.___~._ _ AM 0.4 A
PM 0.4 ~ A
Building O-Q Driveway
Background Conditions AM 0.1~ A
PM 0.3 A
Project Conditions AM 0.2 A
_ _ _
_ ___~__ PM 0.4 A
Building P Driveway
~~-' ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~"~`~" ~"
Background Conditions AM ~ _.__ 0.9 ~~`~"~~ - A T
__ _ _
~~ ~.__._.______ PM 0.3 A
Project Conditions AM 1.1 ~~~~ ~ .. A
PM 0.5 A
Notes: Average total intersection delay for unsignalized intersections expressed in seconds per vehicle.
2 LOS calculations performed using TRAFFIX, and the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for two-way stop-
controlled intersections.
On-Site Circulation
The site plan shows three smaller buildings adjacent to Dubuque Avenue and one larger
building to the rear. Circulation aisles are provided between the buildings. The majority of
the parking spaces are located in the center of the site between the two rows of buildings and
north of Buildings A and G. The circulation aisles serve two-way traffic and have adjacent
perpendicular spaces. The proposed on Lite circulation system is considered adequate and no
modifications to the site plan. are recommended.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 26
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October '001
Parking
The site plan shows a total of 604 parking spaces. Applying the city parking requirements to
each of the individual buildings yields a requirement of 616 spaces. Therefore, the parking
supply is deficient by 12 spaces. The parking space deficiency can be mitigated with
implementation of recommended Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan as
discussed in the next chapter. Implementation of the TDM Plan would reduce the number of
vehicular trips to the site, thereby reducing the need for parking spaces.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 27
Project 101 Transportation Impact tinaiysis
October 2001
CHAPTER 5 -TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAiV
A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan was prepared to identify measures to
reduce the number of single-occupant automobile trips generated by the proposed project and
thus reduce its traffic impacts. A TDM Plan is a set of strategies, measures and incentives to
encourage the employees to walk, bicycle, use public transportation, carpool or use other
alternatives to driving alone. TDM measures produce more mobility on the existing
transportation systems, boost economic efficiency of the current transportation infrastructure,
improve air quality, save energy, and reduce traffic congestion.
The TDM plan was developed based on guidelines provided by the City of South San
Francisco and the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), the local Congestion
Management Agency for San Mateo County. City of South San Francisco draft guidelines for
TDM programs require that all projects that generate 100 or more trips obtain a goal of 28
percent alternative mode use. C/CAG guidelines require developments to implement TDM
measures that have the capacity to mitigate all new peak-hour trips.
City of South San Francisco TDM Guidelines
The City of South San Francisco is developing guidelines that. require new projects to
achieve a goal of 28 percent alternative mode use. Appendix D contains the standard base
TDM measures for the City of South San Francisco and their estimated percent mitigation, or
alternative mode use.
City/County Association of Government (C/CAG) TDM Guidelines
C/CAG is the Congestion Management Agency for San Mateo County that develops the
Congestion Management Program (CMP). As part of the land use element of the CMP, all
projects that generate 100 or more net new trips during the AM or PM peak hour are required
to mitigate the impacts of all new generated trips. One of the five possible ways to mitigate
these trips is to implement TDM programs that have the capacity to fully reduce the demand
for new peak-hour trips.
C/CAG has identified acceptable TDM measures-with equivalent numbers of peak-hour trips
that will be reduced with implementation of each measure. Measures. can be mixed and
matched so that the total number of mitigated trips is equal to or greater than the new peak-
hour trips generated by the project (124 AM peak-hour trips for the proposed project). These
programs, once implemented, must be on-going for the occupied life of the development.
Programs may be substituted, with prior approval of C/CAG, as long as the number of
reduced trips is not reduced.
Fehr c& Peers Associates, Inc:' 28
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
The C/CAG list of approved TDM measures, the number of mitigated peak-hour trips
associated with each, and the rationale used to determine the number of mitigated trips are
presented in Appendix D.
Transportation Demand Management Plan
The Transportation Demand Management Plan includes appropriate TDM measures that will
satisfy City of South San Francisco and C/CAG guidelines. Table 13 summarises the TDM
measures for the proposed project and identifies how they meet the City's 28 percent
alternative mode use goal and C/CAG's trip equivalent guidelines. The TDM measures
include:
• Providing storage for 15 bicycles
• Funding seats on BART shuttle bus to Glen Park BART station
• Providing preferential parking for carpools and vanpools
• Participating in the Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance's Guaranteed Ride
Home Program
• Providing promotional programs
• Subsidizing transit passes
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 29
Project 101 Ofj4ce TIA
October 2001
XX (XX) = AM (PM)
N ~ M ~
~~~ r
m ~ ,~ ~ 385 (579)
~ m ~ f--219 (1028)
~ ~c-1oa (z1e)
Sister Cities Oster Pt.
289 (217)-~
1438(490) ~ ~ m v
98 (85)~ °_~~
Q OJ~~
N N M
Z 8-514 (1872)
0 235(1045)
~ 395 (1248)
star Pt.
671(570)
1378 (258) ~ "~c m
545 (234)- ~ Cv`M,
~ ~ ~ N
s~~
,~'~..~N
R-109(167)
N ~ ~ a 151 (400)
N a ~ ~ 271 (779)
Grand
530 (441)-~ R
l
385 (119) ~ c~ r;
88 (84)~ ~ "°i
NrDO
M r N
M
O
N
Not to Scale
3
M a
~ ~ o R--44 (83)
t- 813 (2413)
Ir Grand
', 117 (54)~
2202 (583)--
Figure 9 CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT INTERSECTION
PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES
zn-zao~
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
i Table 16
Cumulative No Project Intersection Levels of Service
t
Intersection Peak Hour $
Delayt
LOSZ
Airport Boulevazd/Oyster Point Boulevard AM 32.2 D
__ ~___ PM
~ 48.9 ~ E
`
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard AM f 30.3 ~{~ D
__ _ PM 419.5 F
Airport Boulevazd/E. Grand Avenue AM y-~ 125.9 F
__
PM ( 80.5 F
_
Dubuque AvenueB. Grand Avenue ~ AM 5.5 ~~ B
PM 1 5.5 B
Notes: Delay =Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
Z LOS calculations performed using the TRAFFDC level of service analysis program and the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology.
Intersections operating at unacceptable levels are highlighted in bold type.
The addition of a second eastbound left-tum lane at Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point
Boulevard would not change the level of service rating, LOS E, during the PM peak hour.
However, the delay is projected to improve from 48.9 seconds to 40.8 seconds with the
second eastbound Left-turn lane (see Appendix E). This improvement is recommended in the
April 2001 Draft Supplemental Enviromental Impact Report (EIR) to the South San
Francisco General Plan Update EIR.
The addition of a second westbound right-turn lane at Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point
Boulevard is projected to improve the PM peak-hour delay from 419.5 seconds (LOS F) to
81.2 seconds (LOS F). This improvement was recommended under Project Conditions to
mitigate project impacts and is also identified in the April 2001- Draft Supplemental EIR to
the South San Francisco General Plan Update EIR.
To improve operations at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection, the southbound
right-turn lane should be restriped to a shared through/right-turn lane. In addition, the
eastbound approach should be widened to add an eastbound left-turn lane. These two
improvements were recommended. in the April 2001 Draft Supplemental EIR to the South
San Francisco General Plan Update EIR.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 3S
Project 101 Transportation ImpactAnalysis
October ?001
CHAPTER 7 -CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
This chapter presents- the results of the level of service calculations under Cumulative Plus
Project Conditions. Cumulative Plus Project Conditions are defined as existing volumes plus
traffic generated by approved but not yet constructed developments in the project study area,
plus traffic associated with potential developments in the study area, plus traffic generated
from the proposed project.
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Estimates
Traffic volumes under this scenario were estimated by adding project-generated traffic to
traffic volumes estimated for Cumulative No Project Conditions (see Figure 10).
Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service
Table 17 presents the level of ,service calculations for the study intersections and the
calculation worksheets are included in Appendix B. With the addition of project traffic, three
of the key intersections are still projected to operate at poor levels of service, LOS E or F.
Intersection improvements identified under Cumulative No Project Conditions are also
recommended for Cumulative plus Project Conditions. The level of service worksheets are
contained in Appendix E.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 36
Project i'01 Office TIA
October 2001
XX (XX) = AM (PM)
N ~ M ~
vvv L
m ~ 385 (578)
~ ~ ~ m ~--220 (1033)
j ~ ~ioa(z1s)
Sister Cities 0 star Pt.
289 (217)-~
1445 (490) ~ ~ so v
N N N
N M
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
Figure 10 INTERSECTION PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES
zn•zo-o~
8-514 (1872)
x-235 (1045)
~ 395' (1246)
671
1378
596
~ ~ N
~"
~,Ma..,N
R- 109 (167)
~ ,~ ~ a f-151 (402)
~
N d' ~ 271 (783)
Grand
530 (441)-~ R
1
388 (119)--
68 (84)~ "v ~-
N W O
M r N
M
O
N
Not to Scale
to .-.
v, a
~ ~ o' R- 67 (83)
°' d' f 813 (2413)
Grand
120 (54)~
2202 (563)--
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Project 101 Transportation ImpactAnalysis
October 2001
Table 17
Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection Peak Hour ` Delay' LOSZ
Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard AM 32.7 D
PM ~ _ _
~ 48.9 E
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard AM 30.4 D
PM ; _
~ 434.4 _ F
__._~__
Airport Boulevard/E. Grand Avenue AM 127.0 F
PM 80.9 F
Dubuque Avenue/E. Grand Avenue ~. AM ~~ 5.8 B
PM I 5.7 B
Notes: Delay =Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
z LOS calculations performed using the TRAFFIX level of service analysis program and the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology.
Intersections operating at unacceptable levels are highlighted in bold type.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 38
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
CHAPTER S -CONCLUSIONS
The proposed office conversion is estimated to generate 52 net new daily trips, 124 net new
AM peak-hour trips (116 in/8 out), and 82 net new PM peak-hour trips (0 in/82 out). The
impacts of this added traffic on the surrounding transportation system were evaluated with
level of service calculations for four key intersections and four freeway segments.
The results indicate that the proposed project would have an impact at the intersection of
Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard. The recommended mitigation measure is to add a
second westbound right-turn lane.
A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan was prepared to identify measures to
reduce the number of single-occupant automobile trips generated by the proposed project and
thus reduce its traffic impacts. The TDM Plan has been tailored to utilize the measures that
are most compatible for the project:
The project is located adjacent to the South San Francisco CalTrain Station,
providing convenient access to CalTrain. The TDM Plan promotes transit usage
by subsidizing transit passes and funding seats to a BART shuttle.
• The TDM Plan is proposing bicycle racks and designated carpool and vanpool
parking spaces. These physical attributes promote alternative commute options.
The project sponsor will participate in the local TDM association, Peninsula.
Congestion Relief Alliance, and participate in the Alliance's guaranteed- ride
home program. This will- maximize the effectiveness of this TDM plan.
Three key intersections are projected to operate at LOS F under Cumulative No Project and
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. To improve intersection operations under Cumulative
Conditions, the following improvements are recommended:
Adding a second eastbound left-turn lane at Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point
Boulevard.
Adding a second westbound right-turn lane at Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point
Boulevard (recommended under Project Conditions).
• Restriping the southbound right-tum lane to a shared through/right-turn lane and
widening of the eastbound approach to add an eastbound left-turn lane.
The improvements listed above. were also recommended in the April 2001 Draft
Supplemental EIR to the South San Francisco General Plan Update EIR. The proposed
project is not estimated to have a significant impact to freeway segments of U.S. 101.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 39
Project 101 Transportation Impact Analysis
October 2001
Four full-access driveways on Dubuque Avenue provide direct access to the site. The
driveways are projected to operate at acceptable levels. The site access and on-site
circulation is considered adequate.
The site plan shows a total of 604 parking spaces. Based on the city s parking code,. 616
spaces are required. Thus, the proposed supply would result in a deficiency of 12 spaces. The
recommended TDM measures would mitigate the parking deficiency.
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc. 40
Appendix A
Driveway Counts
=ROM Mietek ~ MTDS PHONE ~f0. 925 210 0625 Jul. 0r 2000 74:24PM P9
J i--~ --,~•---•..--iF--..~
..~ _ ~~
,
i
-_ .
1 i +
~
P !
f
~~ _
^OFP+GF
~ !
'~ ;?EPaT
~
j
f
f
r
~
iF
'+
,
~~
i
~ ~
'~ -~----
F°t..Kd +TUkE
1
!i
' F x PKb.SS
i
,~. ~_.~
~~ ~'
.. ,
3 UAY S~+r
' .9KO~Ce~
' ;•~ w~~~
,~aa~+~~
i _~~
.;
~ ~ ^~__._
r
FROM Mietek a MTDS
CITY OF SOUTH 5AN FRANCISCO
......7~..
1 .___ .
-__....
RUBUQUE AVE. ~ .. OvV'r 1
1
. Southitountl Westbound
>
•
J ~
~_
.:.....
RT {
...... i.
_ __
TH tT
~ aRP
Total .~._...
RT I
` . ..
_-T_
TN tT
i
~
1$:00
0 _
.._
23 4
2T _..
2 .._.
..
.. _
0 3
~~t£ ~ ii d iB 0 0
ts:ao o !B a z0 z a z
17:00 0 25 5 30 2 0 3
17:iS 0 !!~ 3 22 ! 0 2
17:30 0 2d 2 26 0 0 1
17:45 0 18 4 22 1 D D
Total 0 86 14 400 ~.._6.- _-'~"p t3
GnndTotal 0 164 28 192 !! 0 13
Apprch S6 D.0 85.a la.t3 ~ 45.a O.a s4.z
Totel9'. 0.0 37,1 6.3 43.4 2.5 0.0 2.9
ouBUaue avg. . ovv~r !
Southbound Westbound
aHONE N0. 925 210 0625 Jul. 07 2000 04:21PM F2
MARKS TRAFF'lC DATA SERVICE
File Name : dubuque_dwy!-p
Site Code :00000000
Start Date :071062000
Rage :1
ted: veRiaes orr_Iy_ .
OUBUOt1E AVE:.
Northbound Eastbound
P~
RT
TH : L,T __ __
.. _ R7
~
TM LT
~ ~ __
App. _
T-__..InL J
'
Total Tot21 Total
5 0 ! 9 0 19 .
.
~ ~Q .. , i
~~ ~-' 0 0 51
1 3 2d 6 29 0 0 0 0 ae
4 3 ?4 0 Z7 0 0 0 0 51
0 5 32 0 37 0 0 0 0 68
14 11 99 0 110 0 0 0 0 216
5' 1 28 0 30 0 0 D 0 85
3 2 30 0 32 0 0 0 0 $7
! ! !7 0 !B D 0 0 0 d5
t ! 35 0 38 0 0 0 0 59
10 ~ 1!1 0 !iS 0 0 0 0 226
z4 !e z!o a 22ts o a o o{ aaz
~ 7.1 az.9 D.o I a.o o.D o_o {
6.4 3.6 47.5 D.0 51.! D.0 0.0 0.0 t
0.0
~UBUQUEi4VE.
Stag Time _~..
RT ._~___
TN
r_..
t7
....,.......
._.
T ~
_....
Rl'
TH
LT
~~
RT
rH
LT
~~~
RT
TH
LT Tf~
~~_
.. _ ....._..
T~
........
Peale dour Front ! t3:00 to 17:a5 -Peak ! of !
lntersectlon 16:30 I I l
Volume 0 85 14 99 8 0 B ! B I 11 115 0 12ti 0 0 0 0` 241
Pt~reent 0.0 eS.9 !a.! 50.0 0.0 50.0 8.7 9t.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
High inL 17:00 17:00 l6:d5 8:45:00 PM i$:45
Voume 0 25 5 30 3 0 3 5 5 32 O 37 0 0 0 0~ 66
Peak Factor
0.825
0.800
0.65! Mortht-ound Eeatbound
0.8Bt3
Out !n Tai!
t
.~ --
~ l ~-
o~
~ J
~ o
c
O ~
`a~
~~_~
NeIIN
Vch~ebs only
T__. ~ ~~
0
~- z _ ~
o a
y ~
m a
lT TN RT
0 115 f115 i1
L ~~ ~~_'~ ~._}ais~
OYt in Total
ousuouE.vE.
FROM Mietek a"1 MTDS
CrTY OF SOUT}! SAN FRANCISCO
?HONE i~0. 925 210 0625
UTARI(S TY2AFFIG DATA SERVICE
' DUBUQUE AVE_ { ~ ~ - DVVY 2 DUBUQUE AVE. -`
i _ Southbound _
.. .
q ~
I . WCStbountl
_ _
. ~lorthbound
~
, _
SfertTime ~
I_._..... I. Fi7
.._,_._ TH LT
._,_
.~ '
pp'
Totai RT TH
CT i
t App'
Total RT
~ TH {
` ~T
I APP•
TOt~
16:D0 D _
23 p 23 1 ....
0 4 ,
.
5 1 21 0 ~ 2Z
18:15
1 0 18 1 19 3
' 0 0 3 1 2~ 0 23
$:30 0 19 1 ZO ( U 1 2 0 26 D 2fi
18;43
Total 0
0 25 2
85--, a' 27
89 2
7 0 1
0 S 3
' 2
.
_ 33 _. 0
._..i
2 ...o 35
_ -i0B
13 4 0
Jul. 07 2000 04:22PM °4
File Name : dutruqus cfwy2-p
Ste Code :00000000
Swart Date ~ 07/Ofi/7000
Page
- -..... . : t .
..._ .. ~astbouna
..
_ _.._ __
RT TH ~ ~T ~ App' - +
TOW( Total, j
f.
0 0 0 SQ
0 0 0 0 45
0 0 0 0 48
0 0 0 0 65
17:00 0 29 1 30 3 0 2 5 1 30 0 3i 0 0 0 0 88
97:15 0 20 7 21 3 0 2 5 1 2F! 0 30 0 0 0 0 SB
17:30 0 ZO 0 20 7 0 6 13 2 16 0 18 0 0 0 0 51
17:45 0 19 1 20 i 2 0 3 5 1 Z 3a 0 36 0 0 0 0 &1
-°- Totai _ . _ 4 88 3
C+rand'CtXd 0 173 7
Apprch 96 QA 96.1 3.8
Total °.6 0.0 39.1 1.6
180 2Z 0 19 d11 1D 211 0
53.7 0.0 46.3 ! 4.5 95.5 0.0
40.7 S.0 0.0 4.3 9.3 ~ Z.3 47.7 0.0
221 ~ p o 0 v ~ 44z
0.0 0.0 O.D
50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
WBllaUE AVE.
Our {n Twl
f ~~} ~ z ,
RT ~TH LT
~ ~
o
~ C
~ ...._~
'~ 1 I._.I° I~ _
I_~j~ .~
1 ~
m
= 3
m
0
1 ~
NOiM
Vehicles only
I~
~ ~ I f ~
lT TH RT
~- 109 6,
_ T~- .......__.
~,..^ _ _~ ~"" tt4 279
qui ~n iotel
DuauovE AvE.
Peter Hour From 18:~ tv 17;4,5 - Pealr 1 of 1
lnlerp 1g~45 I I f
Volume 0 94 4 98 16 0 11 2B I 6 108 D 11a 0 D 0 0 238
Percent 0.0 95.9 a.1 57,7 0.0 42.3 5.3 94.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
High Int 17:00 17:30 116:45 3:45.00 PIN 17:00
Volume 0 29 2 30 ~ 7 0 @ 13 I 2 33 4 35 D D 0 0 66
Peak Factor 0.817 , 0_SDO i 0.814 0.902
:ROM Mietek a~ i9TUS PHONE N0. 925 210 0625 Jul. 07 2000 04:23PM P6
MARKS TRA1=FiC DATA SER1f1CE
CITY OF SOUTH SRN FRRNCISCO
File Nan1e ; dubuque_dwy3-p
Site Code :00000000
Starr Date : 07~061loao
Page : ~
.. .. _
_ .. ~ _ --- .~~._- r-~--._ .. .. . _..__.._~,-..........e.~....~. ~.~~
DUBUQUE AVE.'-~ ..~..i [7VVY 3 DUBUQUE AVE.
-~_SOUtnbound _ Westbound Nor[hbound_. _. Eastbound
...T-__._ ._._.A _.... ...:. ___._..~ - 7-
--------
StaK Time ~ RT f TH LT ~ 11 RT 1I Trt ~ LT App' R7 TH LT App. RT TH~~ LT App' ~~
-____ i. _ ~_.~_ Tatak ` I --•--..._ _Totef ' ~ ... ~ Total ~..___. _ Totat...._._'ctsf .
1$:00 D 21 2 23 1 0 3 4 i _ 2D 0 22 0 0 0 0 38
16:15 0 16 c 18 1 0 2 3 0 25 0 25 0 0 0 0 d6
16:30 0 18 1 19 3 0 2 5 2 25 0 2T 0 0 0 0 51
18:45 0 25 0 25 ___,___ 2 ._.•_ U„_. 2 4 1 34 0 35 0 ,..._0.....,,,• 8 0 84
Tptel ~ 80 5 8 f 7 0 $ 16 5 104 0 10& 0 D~ ~ 0~..-• 0 210
17:00 0 29 1 30 4 0 1 5 1 32 0 33 0 0 0 0 68
17:15 0 ZO 0 20 7 0 1 8 1 3/ 0 32 0 0 0 0 60
17:30 0 18 1 19 a 0 2 6 0 23 0 Z3 0 0 a 0 48
17:45 0 18 p_...,_.. 16 4 0 2 6 1 35 0 __ __ 36 0 0 0 __ 0 60
Total 0 tl5 2 .,.87 18 ~ 0 6 25 3 121 0 _ .124. ~ ....-........0....'.'_--"0 . ~ 0 23fi
~~Al~rth % 0.0 95.9 d.1 172 { 63~d 0.0 3@.@ 41 3.4 [email protected]' 0.0 233 0 0 8.0 0.0 0 d4fi
Toter 9fi 0.0 37.0 1.6 38.6 I 5.8 0.0 3.4 9.2 I 1.8 50.d 0.0 52.2 ~ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
-. _' DUBUQUE AVE: DWY 3 ~ - ~ _ . _."DUBt1QU~VE.
. Southbound westbound Northbound `....._..,, ...., _-... _ Eastbound
~__.....1..,.._. ~---,•~. Ttl LT A>~' RT TH LT RT TH tT
Smrt tone RT TH LT RT ApD~ ~ ~~ APR ~~
~ Total ~ Total --- Total I f.__...._... Total Total
Peek Nouf F[Om 18100 to 17:d5 -Peak 1 of 1
Irri+eraection 713:30
Vofume 0 92 Z 94 1 fi 0 6 22 5 122 0 127 0 0 0 0 243
Percent 0.0 97.9 2.1 72.7 0,0 27.3 3.9 98.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
High tnt, 17:00 17:15 15'45 3:45:00 PSVI 17;OD
Voiu[[le 0 29 i 30 7 0 2 8 2 34 0 35 0 0 0 0 s8
Peak Factor 0.783 0.686 0.907 0.893
OeR in TeA~
~ .. a~ .. .~~.. al
RT TH I.T
~l ~-
e U
to ~ a
0
` ~ -; vies omy ~ ¢- _
4 _..
o a
~D ~..1 1 y~ ~I~
~--~ ~--
lT TM RT
-~ _.._..'? ~ ~T~
pvr In Tot.M
FR~JM Mietek ~ MTDS PHONE N0. 925 210 X625 .Jul. 77 ;000 J4:24PM P8
MARKS TRAFFIC DATA SERVICE
~)TY OF SOiJTli SAN FRANCISCO rile iVams . dutwque~dwg4-p
sae code :D000OOOD
Start Late ; 07!06/2000
Page :1
___
~ Groups Printed: VaMcies only
ti
~u9uaU
E AVE.
DWY 4 _
Du9UQt1E AVE. _
~
__.. __
Southb
ound
'Nestb
ound
Northbo
untl
Eastbound
SteR Time ~
L.._..___._....i ..
R7
...:....
TH
....----_
LT
~_...
ApP'
Tatai
RT ~
TH ~
~
~T
(
APP"
Tatel
RT
TH
LT
'~'~'
TOtAI
i
RT
~ .
TH LT App-
~ __
~ Total
~ fnL•]
Tota!'
19:OD 0 14 ' 29 17 0 8 _
19 `._.__
4 ....
17 0 Zi _ ...p. .
,..... -~--- Q 0 64
16:15 0 1$ 9 25 ' 12 0 3 75 3 Z3 0 d6 0 0 0 °7 58
78:3D 0 18 5 23 ~ 14 0 i i5 2 28 0 28 0 0 0 0 86
"6'45 0
._. 21., .
.
..
_ ., 10 31 1B 0 4 20 4 31 0 35 0 0 0 0 88
Tote! _
0 _
.
r_
.
89 .
37
70f1 ~ _
3 ~
~D _
is
89
73
87
0
770
D
0 0 0
?79
17:00 0 2d 9 33 9d 0 6 1B 3 34 0 37 0 0 0 0 89
17:15 0 15 9 24 12 0 5 11 8 32 0 38 0 0 0 0 79
17:30 0 18 8 24 17 0 3 14 2 27 0 29 0 0 0 0 87
,....... 17:45 0. 72
~ ~ ~9 ~? 0 B 18 8 31 0 37 0 0 D 0 74
Taxd 0 _
B7 _ ..
...._
•33 _....
_..
700 __
_
A9 _~
0 T9 68 17 724 D 141 O 0 0 0 3D6
G ~8
~ 3 7 3 ~ 1
0 8 ~ ~
Totffi % 0.0 23. 0.9 34.0 f 9 OA 6.0 23.3 5.1 3
.6 0.0 2 7 OA 0.4 0.0 0.0
~ Start Timme k RT ~ Tlf ~ _ LT Tots! 1--T RT I TFt ~ ... ~~~.. Totes
E . ,. R7 1 - ~.~... . . LT L.... ~-~ --.._~. i . - T~~-- - L~~-- --TEL . _To#et
Peak Houe From 18:00 to 77:x5 -Peak 1 of 7 .
lnter6egion 18:45
Volume 0 76 38 172 53 0 17 70 75 124 0 139 0 0 0 0 321
P@toerrt 0.0 67.9 32-7 75.7 0.0 20.3 10.8 89.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Highlnt 17:00 76:45 17:9y 3:45:00 PM 17;00
Volume 0 24 10 33 i6 0 5 20 8 34 0 36 0 0 0 0 89
Peak Factor 0.848 0.875 0.814 0.802
ota in rodA
177 rt2 286
O 78 3e
RT TH f_T
~~1~
a
$~ o
J ~~
O ~
~~.1 0~~
fi
haM
,~~~~
~- T {-.-
lT TN RT
^~ p ~ 12~ `` 15
Gut In Tat7d
DUBUQtlE AYE.
9 N
~ ~°
-i
4- ~
o
Appendix B
Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets
S I ~= ~~ X X S <
N
a ~ Q U U N %
~ :< X ~
- U
j ~ ~ x
x x
N
M ~
~ X at X G
N
OI ~ U
% X X
Q p .'^.. '~ '~ '~ '~
m
Q
J
(`. N {~•
N
OI :^~ O
jp m
~ O N O
~ 0 0 0
¢~
s . ~ + +
U
m U m M [O
QUO V o ~ N ~i
~ °
0 0
U ~
U>
c o
0
o 0 0 0
U .
U + + + +
N
~
0I N
~'
~ j ~ (O M
vvi vii ~ r~i
0 0 0 0
~ ~ U
N m tD Q N
m
ms
Q^ e
- N M
m
y O
J U m p Q
_~
C m .C ~ V ~ f`') R ~
~
f0 QUp N ~ ~ N N
p
N
O d
~ ~
j
- C
~
Q
C
= U
U ~
M a ~ ~~{
i[I u) ~ th
O O O O
O^ ~
oa ~
O
m
~
N N d
j U
m 01 ~ U
4 p N fD l0 e~ ~
°J ~ N ^~
O j
O C
Q
_ d j Om>
~
N ~Cp y
W ~
y
F? 0 1i
C O U m p Q
R
C
~
Off' V
Up m
'- ~ O
°
~
i
Q
v ~
c~
N N
Z'
~ U
U j m umi N ~
o ~ ~ M
Q
N o 0 0 0
O1- U ~ V fD
Q ^ till
~. O T ~ (+1
N N
p
J U m p Q
C
~ a°
0
a. `m a
`m ~, v m
C~ O C7
O ~ C9 ~
n a a
°
~
W
o [
.
> >
¢ ^ ¢ ^
~
U ~
5
it ~ ~
u
;OMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:11 2001 'age ~-2
Project 101
eve erwce ompu ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Aitemative)
Background AM
Intersection #1: AirpordOyster Point
Signal=ProtecVRlghts=f nclude
Initial Vol: 58 493 423"'
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 Z
~~ ~~
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Val Cnt Date: n/a Rights=Include Lanes: Initial Vol:
~ Cycle Time (sec): 100 i
269 1 '!` 0 24
~ Loss Time (sec): 12
0 - _'Y.~ 1
1223"" 2 _~ Critigl VlC: 0.533 ~_ 1 211
1 ~ Avg Crit Del (seGveh): 16.4 p
87 0 Avg Delay (seGveh): 18.6 2 100"'
LOS: C
~~I ~ ~~
lanes: 1 0 1 0 2
Initial Vol: 28 123"" 349
Sf gnal=ProtecVRights=Overla p
Approach: No rth Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement :
----------- L
-~---- - T
------ - R
----- L
II---- - T
---- - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
6
-I----
10
------
10
-----
6
II---- --
10
------ -----
10 II----
6 -----
10 ------
10 II----
6 -----
10 --- I
10
volume Module: ----- II---- ----- ------ II---- ------ -----I
Base Vol: 13 119 349 379 481 15 85 1093 42 100 155 14
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse : 13 119 349 379 481 15 85 1093 42 100 155 14
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 15 4 0 44 12 43 184 130 45 0 56 10
Initial Fut : 28 123 349 423 493 58 269 1223 87 100 211 24
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 28 123 349 423 493 58 269 1223 87 100 211 24
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol : 28 123 349 423 493 58 269 1223 87 100 211 24
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.05
Final Vol.:
----------- 28
-~----- 123
----- 394
-----I 436
I---- 518
--- 58 269 1345 96 103 222 25
Saturation
Flow Module: --- -----I I---- ------ ----- II---- ------ -----~
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.99 0.95 0.99 0.99
Lanes: 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.80 0.20 2.00 1.80 0
20
Final Sat.:
---~-__----- 1805
-I----- 1900
----- 3230
-----~ 3610
I----- 3800
- 1615 1805 5267 376 3610 3381 .
381
Capacity Analysis
Module: ---- -----I I----- ----- -----I I-----. ._.-~._- -----i
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.04 0.15 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.07 0.07
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 6.0 12.0 18.0 22.5 28.5 28.5 43.5 47.5 47:5 6.0 10.0 10
0
Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.54 0.68 0.54 0.48 0.13 0.34 0.54 0.54 0.48 0.66 .
0
66
Delay/Veh: 29.3 28.7 26.9 22.7 19.4 17.1 12.2 12.1 12.1 30.6 30.9 .
30.9
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 29.3 28.7 26.9 22.7 19.4 17.1 12.2 12.1 12.1 30.6 30.9 30.9
DesignQueue: 1 6 18 19 21 2 9 42 3 5 11 1
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:11 2001 ?age 3.4
Project 101
eve ervice ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Exist AM
Intersection #Z: Dubuque/Oyster Point
Signal=Spiit/Rlghts=Include
Initial Val: 0 0 p
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
~ ~~ ~ i~
Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date: n/a Signal=Protect
Rights=Include Lanes: Initial Vol:
'~` CyGe Time (sec): 100
357 2 ~ 1 198
0 ~~ Loss Time (sec): 9
0
1302"' 1 _~ Cntipl V/C: 0.653 ~ 2 108
1 - ~ ~ Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 14.1 0
698
~
1 Avg Delay (seGveh): 13.4 ~ 2 25g••-
LOS: B
~~?t~a
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2
Initial Vol: 160 10 537"'
Signal=S pli t/Rights=Overla p
Approach: North Bound South Sound
Movement: L- T- R L- T- R
------------I---------------II---------------
Min. Green: 10 10 10 0 0 0
------------1---------------II---------------
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 160 10 537 0 0 0
Growth Adi: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: io"v 10 537 0 0 0
Added 'Vol; C 0 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 160 10 537 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 160 10 537 0 0 0
Redact Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 160 10 537 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final vol.: 168 11 607 0 0 0
------------I---------------11---------------
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.88 0.12 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 3032 198 3230 0 0 0
-----'-------I---------------I1---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.06 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: ****
Green Time: 17.5 17.5 28.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Volume/Cap: 0.32 0.32 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00
Delay/Veh: 23.4 23.4 21.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 23.4 23.4 21.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
DesignQueue: 8 1 25 0 0 0
East B
L - T
6 10
357 1302
1.00 1.00
357 1302
0 0
0 0
357 1302
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
357 1302
0 0
357 1302
1.00 1.00
1.03 1.10
368 1432
1900 1900
0.95 0.95
2.00 1.95
3610 3525
0.10 0.41
****
33.4 62.2
0.31 0.65
16.0 8.1
1.00 1.00
16.0 8.1
14 33
ound West Bound
- R L - T - R
------11---------------
10 6 10 10
------11---------------
698 259 108 198
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
698 259 108 198
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
698 259 108 198
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
698 259 108 198
0 0 0 0
698 259 108 198
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.10 1.03 1.05 1.00
768 267 113 198
-----11---------------
1900 1900 1900 1900
0.95 0.95 1.00 0.85
1.05 2.00 2.00 1.00
1890 3610 3800 1615
0.41 0.07 0.03 0.12
****
62.2 11.3 40.2 40.2
0.65 0.65 0.07 0.3 1
8.1 30.0 11.9 13.3
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
8.1 30.0 11.9 13.3
18 13 4 '7
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:11 2001 'aae 3-6
Project 101
eve erwce ompu ion ec
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Project AM
Intersection #2: Dubuque/Oyster Point
Signal=SpliURlghts=lndude
Initial Vol: 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
~~~
Signal=Proted Signal=Proted
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: n/a Rights=lndude Lanes: Initial Vol;
~. Cycle Time (sec): 100
474 2
1 2
37
,~, Lass Time (sec): 9 j
1057"' 1 _~ Critical V/C: 0.542 ~_ 2 121
1 ~~ Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 14.3 p
416 1 ~~ Avg Delay (sedveh): 14.6 ~ 2 300"'
LOS: B
~~
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2
Initial Vol: 214 13 576"'
Slgnaf=Split/Rlghts=Overlap
Approach: No rth Bound So uth Bound East B ound West Bound
Movement :
----------- L
-I---- - T
------ - R
----- L
II---- - T
------ - R
-- L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
10
-I----
10
------
10
-----
0
II----
0
----- ---
0 II----
6 -----
10 ------
10 II----
6 ------
10 -----I
10
Volume Module: - ----- II---- ----- ------ II---- ------ -----I
Base Vol: 160 10 537 0 0 0 357 1000 365 259 108 198
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse : 160 10 537 0 0 0 357 1000 365 259 108 198
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 54 3 39 0 0 0 117 57 51 41 13 39
Initial Fut : 214 13 576 0 0 0 474 1057 416 300 121 237
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00
PAF Volume: 214 13 576 0 0 0 474 1057 416 300 121 .
237
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol : 214 13 576 0 0 0 474 1057 416 300 121 237
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.03 1.05 1
00
Final Vol.:
----------- 225
-I----- 14
----- 651
-----I 0
I----- 0
----- 0 488 1110 416 309 127 .
237
Saturation
Flow Module: -----I I---- ------ -----I I----- ----- -----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0
85
Lanes: 1.88 0.12 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 1.00. 2.00 2.00 .
1
00
Final Sat.:
----------- 3041
-i----- 189
----- 3230
-----I 0
I----- 0
----__ 0
-=-= 3610 3800 1615 3610 3800 .
1615
Capacity Analysis
Module: -I I----- ----- -----I I----- ----- -----I
Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.29 0.26 0.09 0.03 0
15
Crit Moves: **** **** **** .
Green Time: 21.4 21.4 37.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.4 53.8 53.8 15.8 36
2 36
2
Volume/Cap: 0.35 0.35 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.54 0.48 0.54 .
0.09 .
0
40
Delay/Veh: 21.7 21.7 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 9.9 9.4 25.9 13.6 .
15
'7
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1
00
Adj Del/Veh: 21.7 21.7 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 9.9 9.4 25.9 13.6 .
15
'7
DesignQueue: 10 1 24 0 0 0 19 31 11 15 5 .
9
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS. SAN JOSE
;OMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:11 2001 ?aae 3
rrolect gut
eve ervice ompu a on epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Background AM
Intersection #t3: AirportlGrand
Initial Vol:
Lanes:
Signal=Split
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include
202 0 ...1
1 ~~
248'"' 0 _~
0 -~~
68 1
Lanes:
Initial Vol:
Slgnat=SpliVRights=loci ude
109 452 618"'
1 0 .~r 1
~~F # ~ 1
(~
Vol Cnt Date: n/a
CyGe Time (sec): 115
Loss Time (sec): 12
Critical V/C: 0.715
Avg Crit Del (seGveh): 27.4
Avg Delay (sedveh): 26.4
LOS: D
} ~~
1 0 2 0 1
32 302"' 196
Signal=SpIIt/Rlgh ls=Ovedap
Slgnat=Split
Rights=lnGude
~4
T
~,~r
7#
T
Lanes: Initial Vol:
1 89
0
1 125
0
2 270'"`
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------II-------------- I
-II---------------i~---------------
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
------------I---------------II--------------- I
II---------------II---------------
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 32 297 196 698 432 71 165 233 67 270 122 87
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 32 237 196 698 432 71 165 233 67 270 122 87
Added Vol: U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 0 5 0 120 20 38 37 15 1 0 3 2
Initial Fut: 32 302 196 818 452 109 202 248 68 270 125 89
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 32 302 196 818 452 109 202 248 68 270 125 89
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 32 302 196 818 452 109 202 248 68 270 125 89
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1:00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 32 317 196 859 452 109 202 248 68 278 125 89
------------I---------------II-------------
--II---------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 0.55 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 3610 1900 1615 836 1026 1615 3610 1900 1615
-II---------------II---------------
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.08 0.12 0.24 0.24 0.07 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.06
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 13.4 13.4 25.8 38.3 38.3 38.3 38.9 38.9 38.9 12.4 12.4 12.4
Volume/Cap: 0.15 0.71 0.54 0.71 0.71 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.12 0.71 0.61 0.5 1
Delay/Veh: 29.5 35.3 26.7 22.6 22.6 17.7 24.1 24.1 17.0 36.2 35.3 33.4
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Del/Veh: 29.5 35.3 26.7 22.6 22.6 17.7 24.1 24.i 17.0 36.2 35.3 33.4
DesignQueue: 2 18 10 39 21 5 9 11 3 16 7 5
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
;vMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:11 2001 'age 3-10
Project 101
eve ernce ompu ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Allemative)
Exist AM
Intersection #4: Dubuque/Grand
S ignal=Spl f t/Rlghts=Include
Initial Vol: 21 0 42~-
Lanes: 1 0 0. 0
~~ 1
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=lndude Vol Cn t Date: n/a Rights=lnGude Lanes: Initial Vol:
~ Cycle Time (sec): 90
51 1 J 0 42
Loss Time (sec): 9
0 -~. 1
1345"' 3 _~ Critical V/C: 0.314 ,~_ 2 632
0 - ~ ~ Avg Crit Del (seclveh): 2.4 0
-"
~
0 0 ' Avg Delay (seGveh): 3.2 0 0"'
LOS: A
~I ~ f
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Vol: 0 0 0
Signal=Split/Ri gh ts=lncf ude
Approach: North Bound South Bo und East Bound West Bound
Movement :
----------- L
-I---- - T
------ - R L
-----II---- - T
-- - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
0
-I----
0
------
0 10
-----II---- ----
0
----- -----
10 II----
6 -----
10 ------
0 II----
0 ------
10
--I
10
Volume Module: - ----- II---- ----- ------ II---- ------ -----I
Base Vol: 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
initial Bse : 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 G 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut : 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol : 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10
Final Vol.:
----------- 0
-i---- 0
------ 0 42
-----II----- 0
- 21 51 1480 0 0 695 46
Saturation Flow Module: ----- ----I I---- ------ -----I I----- ----- -----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.81 0.19
Final Sat.:
----------- 0
-I----- 0
----- 0 1805
-----II----- 0
---
- 1615
- 1805 5700 0 0 5293 350
Capacity Analysis
Module: -
-:- .-
--I I----- ----- -----I I----- ----- --
---I
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 6.0 71.0. 0.0 0.0 65.0 65
0
Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.12 0.42 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.18 .
0
18
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.6 0:0 23.3 27.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 2.6 .
2
6
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00
Adj Del/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.6 0.0 23.3 27.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 2.6 2
6
DesignQueue: 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 17 0 0 10 .
1
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE -ue Jul ~I O 11:31:11 2001 Page 3-12
Project 101
y v cNu~i
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
ProjeG AM
Intersection #4: Dubuque/Grand
Signal=Splif/Rlghts=Include
Initial Vol: 21 D ,12.«
Lanes: 1 0
D 0 1
I
~T T T
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date:
n/a Slgnal=Protect
Rights=Include
Lanes: Initial Vol:
~ Cycle Time (sec): 90
54 1
Loss Time (sec):
9 0 65
0 ~F 1
1460•"` 3 ~ Critical V/C: 0.343 ~ 2 660
0 ~ Avg Crlt Del (sedveh): 2.4 p
0 0 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 3.2 /
~r 0 0•••
LOS: A
Lanes: D 0 0 0 0
initial Val; 0 0 0
Signal=Splif/Rights=Include
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement :
----------- L - T
-I--------- - R L - T
------II------ - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
0 0
-I---------- ----
0 10 0
-----II-------- -----
10 II----
6 -----
10
------
0
II----
0
-=---
10
------I
10
Volume Modu
le: -- ----- II---- ----- ------ II---- ----- ------i
Base Vol: 0 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 632 42
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
Initial Bse : C 0 0 42 0 21 51 1345 0 0 .
632 .
42
Added Vol: 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ATI/Proj: 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 135 0 0 28 23
Initial Fut : 0 0 0 42 0 21 54 1480 0 0 660 65
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00
PHF Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1
00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 42 0 21 54 1480 0 0 660 .
65
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol : 0 0 0 42 0 21 54 1480 0 0 660 65
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 .
1
10 .
1
10
Final Vol.:
----------- 0 0
-I---------- 0 42 0
-----II------ 21 54 1628 0 0 .
726 .
72
Saturation Flow Module: ----- ----
I
I----
------
-----I
I----
------
-----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0
99
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2
73 .
0
27
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0
- 1615 1805 5700 0 0 .
5134 .
509
---
Capacity Analysis Module: ----I I----- ----- -----I I----- ----- ~_...~._I
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.29 0.00 0.00 0
14 0
14
Crit Moves: **** **** **** . .
Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 6.0 71.0 0.0 0
0 65
0 65
0
volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.12 0.45 0.36 0.00 .
0.00 .
0
20 .
0
2 0
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.6 0.0 23.3 27.9 1.8 0.0 0.0 .
2
6 .
2
6
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1
00 .
1
00
Adj Del/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.6 0.0 23.3 27.9 1.8 0.0 0,0 .
2
6 .
2
6
DesignQueue: 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 19 . .
0 0 10 1
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
OOMPARE rue Jul 10 11:31:59 2001 °age 3-1
eve ernce ompu ion epo _
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Exist PM
Intersection #1: Airport/Oyster Point
Signal=Protect/Ri ghts=Include
Initial Vol: 305 393 u46"'
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 2
~)
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Riohts=Include Vol Cnt Date: n/a Rights=lndude Lanes: Initial Vol:
~. Cycle Time (sec): 100
82"' 1 0 26
~, Loss Time (sec): 12
0 ~~ 1
241 2 _~ Critical V/C: 0.648 ~ 1 794"'
1 ~ Avg Cri! Del (sec/veh): 21.4 .~_ 0
~
'
35 0 ~,
T Avg Delay (sec/veh): 19.4- 2 1g7
LOS: C
~~
Lanes: 1 0 1 0 2
Initial Vol: 46 215"' 239
Si gnat=Protecf/Ri ghts=Overlap
Approach: North Bound
Movement: L - T - R
------------I------
Min. Green: 6 10 10
------------i---------------
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 215 239
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 46 215 239
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 46 215 239
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 46 215 239
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 215 239
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.13
Final Vol.: 46 215 270
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 1.00 2.00
Final Sat.: 1805 1900 3230
--------__---~---------------I
Capacity .~~alysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.11 0.08
Crit Moves: ****
Green Time: 6.0 17.5 33.2
Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.65 0.25
Uniform Del: 34.5 29.2 18.5
IncremntDel: 1.6 3.0 0.0
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 30.9 27.8 15.7
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 30.9 27.8 15.7
DesignQueue: 2 10 10
South B
L - T
6 10
648 393
1.00 1.00
648 393
0 0
0 0
648 393
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
648 393
0 0
648 393
1.00 1.00
1.03 1.05
667 413
1900 1900
0.95 1.00
2.00 2.00
3610 3800
0.18 0.11
****
28.5 40.0
0.65 0.27
23.8 15.3
1.0 0.0
0.85 0.85
21.3 13.1
1.00 1.00
21.3 13.1
28 14
ound
- R
10
305
1.00
305
0
0
305
1.00
1.00
305
0
305
1.00
1.00
305
1900
0.85
1.00
1615
-----I
0.19
40.0
0.47
16.9
0.4
0.85
14.8
1.00
14.8
11
East B
L - T
6 10
82 241
1.00 1.00
82 241
0 0
0 0
82 241
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
82 241
0 0
82 241
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.10
82 265
1900 1900
0.95 0.98
1.00 2.62
1805 4869
0.05 0.05
****
7.0 26.2
0.65 0.21
34.4 21.9
7.4 0.0
0.85 0.85
36.6 18.6
1.00 1.00
36.6 18.6
4 11
ound
- R
10
35
1.00
"i 5
0
0
35
1.00
1.00
35
0
35
1.00
1.10
39
1900
0.98
0.38
717
0..05
26.2
0.21
21.9
0.0
0.85
18.6
1.00
18.6
2
West Bound
L - T - R
I---------------
6 10 1 C
1---------------
197 794 2 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
197 794 2 6
0 0 0
0 0 0
197 794 2 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
197 794 2 6
0 0 0
197 794 2 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.03 1.05 1.05
203 834 2 7
---------------
1900 1900 1900
0.95 1.00 1.00
2.00 1.94 0.06
3610 3681 119
0.06 0.23 0.23
****
15.7 35.0 35.0
0.36 0.65 0.65
28.6 20.8 20.8
0.2 0.8 0.8
0.85 0.85 0.65
24.5 18.4 18.4
1.00 1.00 1.00
24.5 18.4 18.4
10 32. 1
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1996 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
~OMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:59 2001
Page 3-3
ave erwce ompu ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Project PM
Intersection #1: Airport/Oyster Point
Signal=Protect/Rights=lnGude
Initial Vol: 461'""' 396 6
Lanes: 0 2 0 2
~)
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date:
Na Signal=Pmtect
Rights=Include
Lanes: Init
ial Vol:
198,,,, 1 -~~ CyGe Time (sec): 100
0
~
Loss Time (sec):
12 '~ 0 64
. 1
312 2 _~ Crit(cal V/C: 0.848 ~ 1 999•"
1 -~.; ~ Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 28.7 0
63
0 ~ Avg Delay (seGveh): 22.9 ~ 2 1 97
LOS: C
I
Lanes: 1 0 1 p 2
Initial Vol: 98••• ,226 239
Signa I=Protect/Rlghts=Overlap
Approach:
Movement North B ound South B ound East B ound West Bound
:
----------- L - T
-I--------- - R L - T
------II------- - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
6 10
-I--------- --
10 6 10
------II------- ------
10 II---------
6 10 ------
10 II---------
6 10 ------I
10
Volume Modu
le: -- ------ II--------- -----
-
II----
-----
------I
Base Vol: 46 215 239 47 393 . 305 82 241 35 197 794 26
Growth Adj:
Initi
l B 1.00 1.00 7..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
a
se
Added Vol: : 46 215
0 239 47 393 305 82 241 35 197 794 26
PasserByVol 0
: 52 11 0 0 0
0 9 3 0
156 0 0
116 71 0
28 0 0 0
Initial Fut
: 98 226
239 56 396
461
198 312
63 0
197 ~OS
999 38
64
User Adj:
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00
1
00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: .
1.00
98 226 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Reduct Vol:
0 0 239 56 396 461 198 312 63 197 999 64
Reduced Vol:
98 226 0 0 0
239 56 396 0
461 0 0
198 312 0
63 0
197 0
999 0
PCE Adj:
MLF Adj:
1.00 1.00
1
00 1
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00 1,00
1.00
1.00
1.00 64
1.00
Final Vol
: .
.00
98 1.13 1.03 1.05 .1.00 1.00 1,10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.05
. 226 270 58 416
-----II--------- 461 198 343 69 203 1049 67
Saturation Flow Module: - -----I I---------- -----I I----- ----- -----I
Sat/Lane:
Adjustment 1900 1900
0
95 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
:
Lanes: .
1.00
1.00 1
00 0.85 0.95 1.00
2
00 2
00 2 0.85 0.95 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.99 0.99
Final Sat.: .
1805 1900 .
.
.00
3230 3610 3800 1.00
1615 .1.00 2.50
1805 4603 0.50 2.00 1.88 0.12
---II----------
- 926 3610 3536 226
Capacity Ana
lysis Modul
e: ----I I---------- -----
I
I ---
--~--
"~~~-- I
Vol/Sat:
Crit Mov 0.05 0.12
**** 0.08 0.02 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.30 0.30
es:
Green.Time:
6.4 34.1
52.0 6.0 33.7 ****
33,7 ****
12.9 30.0
30
0
18
0
****
35
0
3
Volume/Cap:
Unifor
D
l
0.85 0.35
0.16 0.27 0.33
0.85
0.85 0.25 .
0.25 .
0.31 .
0.85 5.0
0
85
m
e
:
IncremntDel: 35.2 18.7
27
7 0
1 9.5 34.1 18.8
0
0 23.4 32.4 20.1 20.1 27.1 22.8 .
22.8
.Delay Adj: .
.
0.85 0.85 .
0.2 0.1
0.85 0.85 0.85 8,4
0.85 16.5 0.0
0
85 0
85 0.0
0
85 0.1
8 3.8 3.8
Delay/Veh:
57.6 16.1
8.1 29.2 16,0
28.2 .
.
44.0 17.1 .
17.1 0.
5
23
1 0.85
23
2 0,85
23
2
User DelAdj:
AdjDel/Veh: 1.00 1.00
57
6 16
1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00
DesignQueue: .
.
5 9 8.1 29.2 16.0 -
7 28.2 44.0 17.1 17.1 23.1 23.2 23.2
3 16 18 10 14 3 9 41 3
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling AssoGates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
JOMPARE Tue Jul 10 11:31:59 2001
Page 3-5
eve ervlce ompu on epa
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Aftemative)
Background PM
Intersection #2: DubuquelOyster Point
Signa I=S pli t/Rlghts=l nclude
Initial Vol: 0 p
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ l,~
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date:
Na Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Lanes: In
itial V
l
273,,, 2
v'~
Cycle Time (sec):
100 o
:
0
~
Loss Time (sec):
9 1 1 064"'
155 . 0
1 _y~
T
T Critical V/C: 1.069 ~ 2 559
1 ^~
' Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 64.2 p
173 '#{
~
1 ~
T Avg Delay (sedveh): 39.1
2
881
LOS: D
~)
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2
Initial Vol: 689 39"' 173
Signal=Split/Rights=Overla p
Approach:
Movement North B ound South B ound East Bound West B ound
:
----------- L - T
-I--------- - R L - T
------II-------- - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green:
10 10 -
10 0 0 ------
0 II---------
6 10 ------
10 II--------- ------I
-----------
-I---------
------il-------- 6 10 10
Volume Module: - ------
II---------
------
II----
-----
------I
Base Vol:
Growth .Adj: 504 39
1.00 1.00 158 0 0
1
00 1
00 1
00 0 207 141 173 730 508 965
Initial Bse:
504 39 .
.
.
158 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
'added Vol:
0 0 0
0 0 0 207 141 173 730 508 965
PasserByVol:
185 0 0
15 0 0 0
0 0 0 U G 0 0
Initial Fut:
689 39 ,
173 0 0 66 14 0 151 51 99
User Adj:
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 0
1.00 273 155
1.00 1.00 173
1
00 881
1
00 559
1
00 1064
PHF Adj:
PHF Volume:
1.00 1.00
689
1.D0 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 1.00
1
00
Reduct Vol: 39
0 0 173 0 0
0 0 273 155 173 881 559 .
1064
Reduced Vol:
689 39 0 0
173 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PCE Adj;
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 273 155
1.00 1.00 173
1
00 881
1
00 559
1
00 1064
MLF Adj:
Final V
l
1.05 1.05
1.13 1.OD 1.00
1.00
1.03 1.10 .
1.10 ..
1.03 .
1
05 1.00
1
00
o
.:
------------ 723 41
I---------- 195 0 0
-----II-------- 0 281 171 190 907 .
587 .
1064
Saturation F
low Module: -- -----I I---------- -----I I----- ----- -----I
Sat/Lane:
Adjustment: 1900 1900
0
85 0
85 1900 1900 1900
0 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Lanes: .
.
1.89 0.11 .85 1.00 1.00
2
00 0
00 0
00 1.00
0 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.00 0.85
Final Sat.:
3057 173 .
.
.
3230 0 ~ 0 .00 2.00 1.42 1.58 2.00 2.00 1.00
- I I-------- 0
- 3610 2484 2760 3610 3800 1615
--
P Y y
Ca acit Anal sis Module: _ ... ;.
--. ----------- ----- I I----- ----- ----- I
Vol/Sat:
Crit Moves 0.24 0.24
**** 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.25 0.15 0
66
:
Green Time:
22.1 22.1
81.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 ****
7
3 10
0
10
0 .
*
Volume/Cap;
Uniform Del:
1.07 1.07
29
6 29
0.07 0.00 0.00
0.00 .
.
1.07 0.69 .
0.69 58.9
0.43 61.6
0.25 61
6
1
0'7
IncremntDel: .
.6
47.3 47
3 1.5 0.0 0.0
0
0 0
0 0.0 35.2 33.1 33.1 8.6 6.6 ..
14.6
Delay Adj: .
0.85 0.85 .
.
0.0
0.85 0.00 0.00 0.0
0.00 66.1 2.6
0
85 0
85 2.6
0
85 0.1 0.0 43.1
Delay/Veh:
72.5 72.5
1.2 0.0 0.0
0.0 .
.
96
0 30
7 .
30
7 0.85
7 0.85 0.85
User DelAdj:
AdjDel/Veh:
1.00 1.00
72
5 72
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 .
.
1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .4 5.6
1.00 1.00 55.5
1
00
DesignQueue: .
.5
33 2 1.2 0.0 0.0
2 0.0 96.0 30.7 30.7 7.4 5.6 .
55.5
0 0 0 15 9 10 22 13 27
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PE ERS, SAN JOSE
.. NrArct ~~"ue Jul 10 11:31:59 2001
Page 3-7
eve ervice ~ ompu on epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Exist PM
Intersection #3: Airport/Grand
Sig nal=5pl iURights=l nG ude
Initial Vol: 16 411"' 206
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 1
~~~~
Signal=Split
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include
137"• 0
1 ~,
79 0 _~
0 ..~.~,.
84 1
Vol Cnt Date: n/a
Cycle Time (sec): 115
Loss Time (sec): 12
Critical V/C: 0.661
Avg Crit Dei (sedveh): 26.3
Avg Delay (sedveh): 25.3
LOS: D
~, ~ ~
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Initial Vol: 117 q7g»~ 95
Signal=Split/Rights=Overla p
Signal=Split
Rights=Include Lanes: Initial Vol:
*#*# 1 65
4 0
.~_ 1 265
0
2 777"`
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------
II-------------- II---------------II----=----------I
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
------------I---------------
Volume Module: II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 117 476 95 20F 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Added Vol: 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVOl: 0 p 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 117 .500 95 227 452 116 137 79 84 800 265 65
------------I----------
-----II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.97 0.97 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes; 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.63 0.37 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 1867 3719 1615 1169 674 1615 3610 1900 1615
------------I---------------
II------------...,s.1---------------il---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.13 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.12 0.12 0.05 0.22 0.14 0.04
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 22.9 22.9 61.5 21.2 21.2 21.2 20.4 20.4 20.4 38*6 38.6 38.6
Volume/Cap: 0.33 0.66 0.11 0,66 0.66 0.39 0.66 0.66 0.29 0.66 0.42 0.12
Uniform Del: 30.0 32.3 1.0.1 33.1 33.1 31.4 33.5 33.5 31.2 24.8 22.4 20.1
IncremntDel: 0,2 1,5 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.4 3.4 3.4 0.2 1.0 0.3 0.0
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 25.7 28.9 8.6 29.3 29.3 27.1 31.9 31.9 26'.7 22.0 19.3 17.1
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Del/Veh: 25.7 28.9 8.6 29.3 29.3 27.1 31.9 31.9 26.7 22.0 19.3 17.1
DesignQueue: 6 27 3 12 24 6 7 4
4 36 12 3
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copydght (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
:OMPARE
Tue Jul 10 11;31:59 2001
eve ervice ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Aitemative)
Protect PM
Intersection #3: Airport/Grand
Sigoal=Split/Rights=Include
Initial Vol: 161 423"' 225
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 1
~~ ~ ~ (~
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Split
Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date: n/a Signal=Split
Rights=Include
Lanes: Init
ial Vol:
182 0 ~ Cycle Time (sec): 115
1
Loss Tlme (sec): 12
1 1 76
"' ~~ # 0
62
0 ~
l~" Critical V/C: 0.702 ~
'A
- 1 281
0 -T~'
# Avg Crit Del (seGveh): 27.q .~._,_. p
84 !
'
1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 26.4 2 781"'
LOS: D
~41
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Initial Val: 117 489"" g5
Sig na I=SpI it/Rights=Overlap
Approach: North Bound South Bound East B ound West B ound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
-----------
-I----
-----
------II------- L - T - R
in. Green:
-----------
0
-I----
0
----- --
------
10 10 10 10
------II---------
II----
10
-----
10
------
10
II---------
10 10
-- I
----
10
Volume Modu
le: ------ II---- ----- ------ II---- ----- ------I
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
Initial Bse : 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 .
265 .
65
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVolc 0
13
0 19 12 45
45
3
0 0
4 0
16 0
Initial Fut: 117
489
95 225 423 161
182
82
84
781
281 11
76
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00 1
00
PHF Adj:
PHF Volume: 1.00
117 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00
Reduct Vol:
0 489
0 95 225 423 161
0 182 82 84 781 281 76
Reduced Vol:
117
489 0 0 0
95 225 423 161 0
182 0
82 0
84 0
781 0
281 0
76
PCE Adj:
MLF Adj: 1.00
1
00 1.00
1
05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol
: .
117 .
513 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
.
------------
I-----
----- 95 248 465 161
-----II-------- 182 82 84 804 281 76
Saturation Flow Module: -------I I----- ----- -----I I---- ------ -----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.97 0.97 0.85 0.95 1
00 0
85
Lanes:
Fi
l 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.04 1.96 1.00 0.69 0.31 1.00 2.00 .
1.00 .
1
00
na
Sat.:
------------ 1805
I----- 3800
----- 1615 1943 3643 1615
-----II------ 1271 572 1615 3610 1900 .
1615
Capacity Ana
lysis
Modul ----___._~l
..
e:
I-----
-----
-----I
I-----
-----
-----I
Vol/Sat:
Crit Moves 0.06 0.14
**** 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.22 0.15 0.05
:
Green Time:
22.1
22.1 ****
58.6 20.9 20.9 20.9
23.5 ****
23.5
23.5 ****
36
5
36
5
36
5
Volume/Cap:
Uniform Del 0.34
30
5 0.70 0.12 0.70 0.70 0.55 0.70 0.70 0.25 .
0.70 .
0.47 .
0.15
:
IncremntDel: .
0
2 33.0
2
1 11.2 33.5 33.5 32.5
0
0 32.3 32.3 29.2 26.2 23.9 21.4
Delay Adj: .
0.85 .
0.85 .
1.5 1.5 1.7
0.85 0.85 0.85 0
85 4.0
0
85 4.0
0
85 0.1
0
85 1.4 0.4 0.0
Delay/Veh:
26.1
30.1 .
9.5 30.0 30.0 29.3 .
31.4 .
31.4 .
24.9 0.85
23
6 0.85
20
7 0.85
18
2
User DelAdj:
AdjDel/Veh: 1.00
26
1 1.00
30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00
DesignQueue: .
6 .1
27 9.5 30.0 30.0 29.3 31.4 31.4 24.9 23.6 20.7 18.2
3 13 25 9 10 4 4 37 13 3
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c)1998~Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue Jul 10 1131:59 2001 Page 3-N
eve ervice ompu ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Background PM
Intersection #4: Dubuque/Grand
Signal=SpfiURights=lncl ude
Initial Vol: 32 0 20'«
Lanes: 1 0 0 0
~
~ 1
I~
~
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Initial Val: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: nia Rights=Include Lanes: Initial Vol:
~, Cycle Time (sec): 90 j
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
1
397 3 _~ Critigl V/C: 0.422 ~_ 2 1712•«
0 -.--~t.~ Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 4.1 0
~
0 0 "w, _ Avg Delay (seGveh): 4.1 0 0
LOS: A
~ '` ~` -
Lanes: 0 D 0 0 0
Initial Vol: 0 0 0
Signal=SpliURights=l nclude
Approach: North Bound South Bound
Movement: L- T- R L- T- R
------------I---------------II---------------
Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 0 10
------------I---------------II---------------
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 20 0 62
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 20 0 62
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 0 0 20 0 62
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 20 0 62
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 20 0 62
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 20 0 62
------------I---------------II---------------
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.0.0 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615-
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04
Crit Moves: ****
Green. Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0
Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.35
Uniform Del: 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.3 0.0 28.1
IncremntDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
Delay Adj: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.85
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2 0.0 24.4
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDe1/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2 0.0 24.4
DesignQueue: 0 0 0 1 0 3
East B
L - T
6 10
36 375
1.00 1.00
36 375
0 0
0 22
36 397
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
36 397
0 0
36 397
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.10
36 437
1900 1900
0.95 1.00
1.00 3.00
1805 5700
0.02 0.08
****
6.0 71.0
0.30 0.10
30.4 1.7
0.4 0.0
0.85 0.85
26.3 1.4
1.00 1.00
26.3 1.4
2 5
ound
- R
0
0
1.00
0
0
0
0
1.00
1.00
0
0
0
1.00
1.00
0
1900
1.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.0
1.00
0.0
0
West Bound
L - T - R
I---------------I
0 10 10
I---------------I
0 1587 7 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
0 1587 7 6
0 0 0
0 125 0
0 1712 7 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
0 1712 7 6
0 0 0
0 1712 7 6
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.10 1.10
0 1883 8 4
---------------I
1900 1900 1900
1.00 0.99 0.99
0.00 2.87 0.13
0 5402 241
0.00 0.35 0.35
****
0.0 65.0 65.0
0.00 0.48 0.48
0.0 4.1 4. 1
0.0 0.1 0. 1
0.00 0.85 0.85
0.0 3.5 3. 5
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.0 3.5 3. 5
0 29 1
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1996 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
y I Ol ~ '~ r tT N in
d QUmv~ ~ ~ si
a
.p CJ ; o ~ ~
a` .- ~ o
m
m a v ~ rn ? rn
C Q 0 .N. ~ ~ m N
:.)
n
Q W LL LL m
n
m ~ ° r ~? m
~n
i (V
QUmLV ~ u
U
vi . u ~ ni 'n
QUA V,Na. ~ ~ N
~ ~
~C U ~ N ~ O O
a U> r o 0 c o
+ U ~ +
m
m ~c U_ uNi ~ m a
~ a0 a0 N N
~ U ~ o c .= o
U
m
y 0 0 D LL m
J
W O
~ Q U D N m m O N
tO
a
r r p
N
s C
v Z
TJ
m a
01 ~
E _
~ ~ N V ~ ~ ~ N
~ ' p °' oo °' o
N O C~ E ¢ .~: R ~ (O N
~ a ~>
m m~
c
~ ~~
ELL.
° m
O w u. u. m
c
C
~ - N y ~ N ~ a0
QUO m .a mj co N
a
~ 'o .~ U roi n o 0
a U) m aD N N
~ G O .- O
Z
> _
~ O1 v U N t+I ~ N
E ¢' o w ~ ~°,~ ~ ui
U
m
04 o LL m
! .:_ ...
c
~ a°
a° `w v
Y a v m
c
O ~ C`9
O ~ (7 ~
°
'
~ o
W ~
n ~
o Q ~ ¢ O
~
a -
y
U 5 ~ ~ ~
C
C
;OMPARE Tue Jut 10 11:34:34 2001 ?age ::•2
Project 10
r--1 t sx e n >-
• I Illl.ru ~a uUll nCNUII
1994 HCM Operallons (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative No Proj PM
Intersection #1: Airport/Oyster Point
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Initial Vol: ,'24"' 510 333
Lanes: 1
0
2
0
2
f
y~
}~
I#
'~'yT
#,
7"
T T
Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include T
Vol Cnt Date: n/a Signal=Protect
Rights=lndude Lanes: Initial Vol:
217"' 1 ~ Cyde Time (sec): 150
0
Loss Time (sec): 12 1 579"`
0
490 2 _~ Critipl V/C: 1.071 ~_ 2 1026
1 ~[~
~ Avg Crit Dei (seGveh): 89,1 ~--~ 0
~ ~ ~
65 0 Avg Delay (sedveh): 48.9 1 216
LOS: E
1} I##
f'~
I I I
Lanes: 1 0 1 0 2
Initial VoI: 105"' 346 244
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overla p
Approach: North Bound South Bound East B
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T
------------I---------------II---------------II---------
Min. Green: 6 10 10 6 10 10 6 10
------------I---------------II---------------II---------
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 -215 239 648 393 305 82 241
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
.Initial Bse: 46 215 239 648 393 305 82 241
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 59 131 5 -315 117 419 135 249
Initial Fut: 105 346 244 333 510 724 217 490
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 105 346 244 333. 510 724 217 490
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 105 346 244 333 510 724 217 490
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1..00 1.00 1.13 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.10
Final Vol.: 105 346 276 343 536 724 217 539
------------I---------------II---------------II----------
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.98
Lanes: 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00.2.65
Final Sat.: 1805 1900 3230 3610 3800 1615 1805 4928
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.0.6 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.45 0.12 0.11
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 8.1 46.6 81.7 24.3 62.6 62.8 16.8 32.0
Volume/Cap: 1.07 0.59 0.16 0.59 0.34 1.07 1.07 0.51
Uniform Del: 53.9 33.1 12.9 44.2 22.4 33.1 50.6 39.6
IncremntDel: 98.2 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 48.6 73.4 0.3
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 144.0 29.3 11.0 38.7 19.1 76.8 116.4 34.0
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Del/Veh: 144.0 29.3 11.0 36.7 19.1 76.8 116.4 34.0
DesignQueue: 8 21 11 25 27 39 17 36
ound West Bound
- R L - T - R
------II---------------
10 6 10 10
------11---------------
35 197 794 2 6
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
35 197 794 26
0 0 0 0
30 19 232 553
65 216 1026 579
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
65 216 1026 579
0 0 0 0
65 216 1026 579
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.10 1.00 1.05 1.00
72 .216 1077 579
-----II---------------
1900 1900 1900 1900
0.98 0.95 1.00 0.85
0.35 1.00 2.00 1.00
658 1805 3800 1.615
----- I I -------------_.., _~
0.11 0.12 0.28 0.36
***
32.0 35.0 50.2 50.2
0.51 0.51 0.85 1.07
39.6 38.0 35.2 37.9
0.3 0.9 3.9 52.1
0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
34.0 33.2 33.8 84.3
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
34.0 33.2 33.8 84.3
5 14 65 3 5
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copydght (c)1998 DowBng Assodates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE
"ue Jul 10 11:34:34 2001
. Project 101
_. .
_eve ernce ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative + Proj PM
Intersection #1: Airport/Oyster Point
Signal=Proted/Rights=ln dude
Inidal Vol: 724"' 510 333
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 2
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect
Rights=lncfude
Val Cnt Date:
n/a Signal=Protect
Rights=lndude
Lanes: Initial Vol:
217"' 1 ~ Cycle Time (sec): 150
,~
Loss Time (sec):
12 1 579"'
0 ~~' 0
490 2 _~ Critical V/C: 1.071 ~ 2 1 033
1 -'~ Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 89.1 ~_ 0
^
65 0 `+
'~ Avg Delay (sedveh): 46.9
1 216
LOS: E
I I
Lanes: 1 0 1 p 2
Initial Vol: 105"' 346 244
Signa I=Proted/Ri gh ts=Overla p
Approach: North B ound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T
-----------
-I----
-----
------
II----
--- R
Min. Green:
-----------
6 10
-I---------
10
------
6
II---- ---
10
--- --
---
10
II---------
6 10
------
10
II----
6
-----
10
------I
10
Volume Module: --- ----- fl---- ----- ------ II---- ----- ------I
Base Vol: 46 215 239 648 393 305 82 241 35 197 794 26
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 (10
1 1
00
Lnitial Bye ; 46 215 239 648 393 305 82 241 35 197 .
794 .
26
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0
PasserByVol
: 59
131
5
-315
117
419
135
249
30
19
239 0
553
Initial Fut : 105 346 244 333 510 724 217 490 65 216 1033 579
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 , 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1
00 .
1
00
PHF Volume: 105 346 244 333 510 724 217 490 65 216 .
1033 .
579
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol
: 105
346
244
333
510
724
217
490
65
216
1033 0
579
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.13 1.03 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 .
1
05 .
1
00
Final Vol.:
----------- 105
-I---- 346
------ 276
-----I 343
I----- 536
--- 724 217 539 72 216 .
1085 .
579
Saturation Flow Module: -
-
-----I
I----
------
-----I
I-----
-----
-----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.95 1
00 0
85
Lanes: 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.65 0.35 1.00 .
2
00 .
1
00
Final Sat.:
------------ 1805
;----- 1900
----- 3230
-----I 3610
I----- 3800
---- 1615 1805 4928 658 1805 .
3800 .
1615
Capacity Analysis
Modul
e: -- ----
-I
I _ ____
-I
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.45 0.12 0.11 0.11 0
12 0
29 0
36
Crit Moves: **** **** **** . . .
Green Time:
8.1
46.6
81.7
24.3
62.8
62.8
16.8
32.0
32.0
35
0
50
2 ***
50
2
Volume/Cap: 1.07 0.59 0.16 0.59 0.34 1.07 1.07 0.51 0.51. .
0
51 .
0
85 .
1
07
Uniform Del: 53.9 33.1 12.9 44.2 22.4 33.1 50.6 39.6 39.6 .
38.0 .
35
3 .
37
9
IncremntDel: 98.2 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.1 48.6 73.4 0.3 0.3 0
9 .
4
1 .
52
1
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 .
0
85 .
0
85 .
0
85
Delay/Veh: 144.0 29.3 11.0 38.7 19.1 76.8 116.4 34.0 34.0 .
33.2 .
34
1 .
84
3
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 .
1
00 .
1
00
Adj Del/Veh: 144.0 29.3 11.0 38.7 19.1 76.8 116.4 34.0 34.0 .
33.2 .
34
1 .
84
3
DesignQueue: 8 21 11 25 27 39 17 36 . .
5 14 65 35
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Assodates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue .iul 10 11:34:34 2001 Page 3-6
Project 101
eve ervice ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative No Proj PM
Intersection #2: Dubuque/Oyster Point
Signal=Split/Rlghts=Include
Initial Vol: 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
~~~
Slgnal=Proted
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include
570"' 2
0 ~~
256 1 -~
1 -~
234 1
Vol Cnt Date: Na
Cycle Time (sec): 150
Loss Time (sec): 9
Critical VlC: 1.734
Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 800.9
Avg Delay (sedveh): 419.5
LOS: F
~;`t~
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2
Initial Vol: 771 176"' 326
Slgnal=SplitlRlghts=0veha p
Signal=Proted
Rights=lndude Lanes: Initial Vol:
~`i 1 1872»'
0
2 1045
+~-r,- 0
~`- 2 1246
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Min. Green: 10 10 10 0 0 0 6 10 10 6 10 10
------------~---------------II---------------II---------------II--------
-------i
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 504 39 158 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 504 39 15H 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 267 137 168 0 0 0 363 3 -428 516 537 907
Initial Fut: 771 176 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1672
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 771 176 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 771 176 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.00
Final Vol.: 810 185 368 0 0 0 587 282 257 1283 1097 1872
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II----------
---- - I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.63 0.37 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.57 1.43 2.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 2629 601 3230 0 0 0 3F10 2773 2528 3610 3800 1615
------------i---------------II--------------- I
II._:.:_~..----------II---------------
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.36 0.29 1.16
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Timer 26.7 26.7 115.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14:1 25.4 25.4 88.9 100 100.3
Volume/Cap: 1.73 1.73 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.73 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.43 1.73
Uniform Del: 46.9 46.9 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.7 43.8 43.8 14.7 8.8 18.9
IncremntDe1:780.0 780 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 791.3 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.1 772.3
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 819.9 820 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 835.2 38.0 38.0 12.8 7.6 788.3
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 819.9 820 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 835.2 38.0 38.0 12.8 7.6 788.3
DesignQueue: 60 14 7 0 0 0 46 20 18 48 33 70
TrafFlx 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Assodates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue ..ui 10 11:34:34 2001
Page 3-8
°rojed 101
eve ervice ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative + proj PM
intersection #2: Dubuque/Oyster Point
Signal=SpliURights=Include
I nitial Vol: 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
~~
Initial Vof: Lanes Signal=Protect
: Rights=Include
Vol Cnt Date:
n/a Signal=Protect
Rights=lnGude
Lanes: Init
ial Vol
570'•• 2
Cycle Tlme (sec):
150 :
0
,~.
Loss Time (sec):
9 1 1672'•'
256 _I'"
~ ~ 0
1 _~ Critipl V/C: 1.746 ~- 2 1 045
1 '~'
# Avg Crlt Del (sedveh): 828.9 .,~T. p
234 TTT
~
1
"~' Avg Delay (sec/veh): 434.4
2 1246
LOS: F
I
Lanes: 1 1 0 .0 2
Initial Vol: 778'•' 206 326
S i g nal=SptiURights=Overlap
Approach:
Movement North Bound South Bound East B ound West B ound
:
---------- L
--I---- - T
----- - R L - T
-
-----II--------- - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green
: 10 10 -
10 0 0 -----
0 II----
6 -----
10 ------
10 II----
6 ----- ------I
----------
--I----
-----
------II-------- 10 10
Volume Module: -- ----- II---- ----
-
II----
-----
------I
Base Vol:
Growth Adj: 504
1.00 39
1.00 158 0 0
1
00 1
00 1
00 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Initial Bse: :,04
39 .
.
.
158 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Added Vol:
0
0
0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
PasserByVol: 274
167 0
168 0 0 0
0 0
363 0 0 0 p 0
Initial Fut: 778
206
326 0 0
0 3 -428 516 537 907
User Adj:
P
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 570
1.00 256
1.00 234
1.00 1246
1
00 1045
1
00 1872
1
00
HF Adj:
PHF Volume: 1.00
778 1.00
206 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00 .
1.00
Reduct Vol:
0
0 326 0 0
0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
Reduced Vol
: 778
206 0 0
326 0 0 0
0 0
570 0
256 0
234 0 0 0
PCE Adj:
MLF Adj:
1.00
1
05
1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00 1246
1.00 1045
1.00 1872
1.00
Final Vol
: .
817 1.05
216 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.00
.
-----------
-I----
------ 368 0 0
-----II-------- 0 587 282 257 1283 1097 1872
Saturation
Flow Module:
---
----I
I----- __
--- ____
-I _____
I
-----
-----I
Sat/Lane:
Adjustment: 1900
0
85 1900
0 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Lanes: .
1
58 .85
0
42 0.85 1.00 1.00
2
00 1.00 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85
Final Sat.: .
2555 .
675 .
0.00 0.00
3230 0 0.00 2.00 1.57 1.43 2.00 2.00 1.00
-----------
-I-----
----- 0
--
--- I I -------- 0 3610
+ 2773 2528 3610 3800 1615
Capacity Analysis
Modul ---
e: ---- r .~
~..,-.e.-- ----- -
----I
I-----
-----
-----I
Vol/Sat:
Crit Moves: 0.32
**** 0.32 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.36 0.29 1.16
Green Timer
27.5
27.5
115.7 0.0 0.0
0.0 ****
14.0
25.E
25.3
88
3
99
6
****
99
6
Volume/Cap:
Uniform Del: 1.75
46
6 1.75
46
6 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.75 0.60 0.60 .
0.60 .
0.43 .
1.75
IncremntDe1: .
803.9 .
804 3.4 0.0 0.0
0
0 0
0 0.0 51.7 43.9 43.9 15.0 9.1 19.2
Delay Adj:
0.85
0.85 .
.
0.0 0.0 815.9
0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
85 0.8
0
85 0.8
0
85 0.4 0.1 796.6
Delay/Veh:
843.5
843
2.9 0.0 0.0 .
.
0.0 859.8 38.1 .
38
1 0.85
13
1 0.85 0.85
7
8 8
User DelAdj:
Adj Del/Veh:
1.00
843
5
1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 .
1.00 .
.
1.00 1.00 12.9
1.00
DesignQueue: .
60 843
16 2.9 0.0 0.0
7 0.0 8 59.8 38.1 38.1 13.1 7,8 812.9
0 0 0 46 20 18 48 33 71
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE
Mon Sep 2413:43:16 2001
?roject 101
,. ...
..eve ernce u ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume AltemaUve)
Cumulative No Proj PM
Intersection #3: Airport/Grand
Initial Vol:
Lanes:
Signal=Split
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include
441 0
1 ~~
119"' 0 _~
0 ~.~
84 1
Signal=Split/Rights=lndude
570""' 436 371
1 0 1 1 1
~~
Vol Cnt Date: n/a
Cyde Time (sec): 115
Loss Time (sec): 12
Cntical V/C: 1.137
Avg Crit Del (seGveh): 110.6
Avg Delay (sedveh): 60.5
LOS: F
Signal=Split
Rights=Include
Lanes: Initial Vol:
1 167
0
1 400
0
2 779"'
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Initial Vol: 117 492'"' 97
Signa I=SpIiURights=Overlap
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 16 2 165 25 454 304 40 0 2 135 102
Initial Fut: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PAF Adj: 1.00 1.0'0 1.00 1.00 I.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 117 517 97 408 480 570 441 119 84 802 400 167
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95`1.;00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.38 1.62 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 2567 3019 1615 1436 388 1615 3610 1900 1615
------------ ---------
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.14 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.22 0.21 0.10
Crit Moves: **** ****
**** ****
Green Time: 13.8 13.8 .~6.2 35.7 35.7 35.7 31.1 31.1 31.1 22.5 22.5 22.5
Volume/Cap: 0.54 1.14 0.19 0.51 0.51 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.19 1.14 1.08 0.53
Uniform Del: 36.2 38.5 21.8 24.7 24.7 30.1 31.9 31.9 24.6 35.2 35.2 31.6
IncremntDel: 2.1 84.8 0.0 0.2 0.2 83.0 83.3 83.3 0.0 77.7 61.5 1.3
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 32.9 117 18.6 21.2 21.2 108.6 110.4 110 20.9 107.6 91.3 28.2
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 32.9 117 18.6 21..2 21.2 108.6 110.4 110 20.9 107.6 91.3 28.2
DesignQueue: 7 30 4 19 22 27 22 6 4 44 22 9
Trefflx 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1996 Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE Tue Jul ^ 11:34:°4 2001 Paoe 3-12
'roject 101
eve ervice ompu a ion epo
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Aftemative)
Cumulative + Proj PM
Intersection #3: Airport/Grand
Signal=Split/Rights=Include
Initial Val: 570"' 438 371
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 1
"#''j ~~''~ ~ , "~
Signal=Split
Initial Vol: Lanes: Righfs=lnGude
441 0 _
1
119"' 0 _~
0 ~
~
84 1
Vol Cnt Date: n/a
Cycle Time (sec): 115
Loss Time (sec): 12
Critical V/C: 1.138 ~
Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 111.2
Avg Delay (sedveh): 80.9
LOS: F
t~
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Initial Vot: 117 492"' 97
Signa I=SpIIURights=Overlap
Signal=Split
Rights=lnGude
~-
.' "'
Lanes: Initial Vol:
1 167
0
1 402
0
2 783"'
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
------------I---------------II---------------
II---------------II---------------I
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 255 65
Added Vol: U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVo1: 0 16 2 165 25 454 304 40 0 6 137 102
Initial Fut: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 167
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 167
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 167
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 117 517 97 408 480 570 441 119 84 806 402 167
------------I---------------II--------------- I
II---------------II---------------
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.38 1.62 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 2.G0 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 2567 3019 1615 1436 388 1615 3610 1900 1615
II---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.14 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.22 0.21 0.10
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 13.7 13.7 36.3 35.7 35.7 35.7 31.0 31.0 31.0 22.6 22.6 22.6
Volume/Cap: 0.54 1.14 0.19 0.51 0.51 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.19 1.14 1.08 0.53
Uniform Del: 36.2 38.5 21.8 24.7 24.7 30.1 '31.9 31.9 24.6 35.1 35.1 31.5
IncremntDel: 2.1 85.4 0.0 0.2 0.2 83.7 84.0 84.0 0.0 78.3 61.9 1.3
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.65
Delay/Veh: 32.9 118 18.5 21.2 21.2 109.3 111.1 111 20.9 108.2 91.7 28.1
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Del/Veh: 32.9 118 18.5 21.2 21.2 109.3 111.1 111 20.9 108.2 91.7 28.1
DesignQueue: 7 30 4 19 22 27 22 6 4 44 22 9
Traffix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c)1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
COMPARE
Tue Jul 10 11:34:34 2001
Project 101
„ompu ~ on epo ,.
1994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative No Proj PM
Intersection #4: Dubuque/Grand
Signal=Split/Rights=lndude
Initial Vol: 119 0 39•"
Lanes: 1 00
0 0 1
n#I
~ l~
fi ~
Initial Vol: Lanes: Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Voi Cnt Date:
n/a Signal=Protect
Rights=Include
Lanes: Initial Vol:
54"' 1 ~ Cyde Time (sec): 90
~,
Loss Time (sec):
9 '~ 0 83
0 --`~- 1
563 3 --~ Critical V/C: 0.592 ,~- 2 24 1g•••
0 T-~ Avg Crit Del (sedveh): 5.4 p
0 0 ~~ Avg Delay (seGveh): 5.5 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Vol: 0 0 0
Signal=SpliVRights=Include
Approach: North B ound South Bound East B ound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L -
-----------
-I----
-----
------~I-------- T - R
Min. Green:
-----------
0
-~----
0
----- -
-
0 10 0
------II--------
-----
10
II----
6
-----
10
------
0
il---------
0 10
------I
10
Volume Modu
le: -- -----
II----
-----
------
II---------
------I
Base Vol: 0 0 0 20 0 62 36 375 0 0 1587 76
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
Initial Bse : 0 0 0 20 0 62 .36 375 0 .
0 1587 .
76
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol
: 0
0
0 19 0
57
18
188
0 0
0 826 0
7
Initial Fut : 0 0 0 39 0 119 54 563 0 0 2413 83
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1.00 1
00 .
'1
00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 39 0 119 54 563 0 .
0 2413 .
83
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol
: 0
0
0 39 0
119
54
563
0
0 2413 0
83
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 .
1
00 1
10 .
1
10
Final Vol.:
------------ 0
I----- 0
----- 0 39 0
-----II----------- 119 54 619 0 .
.
0 2654 .
91
Saturation Flow Module: ----
I
I-----
-----
-----I
I----------
-----I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00
Lanes:
Fi
l 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 .
0.00 2.90 .
0.10
na
Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 5700 0 0 5511 189
Capacity Analysis modul e:
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.03 0:11 0.00 0.00 0
48 0
48
Crit Moves: **** **** .
**** .
Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 6.0 71.0 0.0 0.0 65
0 65
0
Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.66 0.45 0.14 0.00 .
0
00 0
67 .
0
67
Uniform Del: 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.6 0.0 29.2 30.7 1.7 0.0 .
.
0.0 5
1 .
5
1
IncremntDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 6.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 .
0.0 0
3 .
0
3
Delay Adj: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 .
0
00 0
85 .
0
85
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 0.0 30.8 27.9 1.5 0.0 .
.
0.0 4
6 .
4
6
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .
1
00 1
00 .
1
00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 0.0 30.8 27.•9 1.5 0.0 .
.
0
0 4
6 .
4
6
DesignQueue: 0 0 0 2 0 5 3 .
. .
7 0 0 42 1
TrafFlx 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc.
Licensed to FEHR 8 PEERS, SAN JOSE
:;OMPARE ?ue Jul 10 11::4:34 2001 ?age ~-16
Project 101
eve ernce ompu on epo
994 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Cumulative + proj PM
Intersection #4: Dubuque/Grand
Signal=Protect
Initial Vol: Lanes: Rights=tnciude
54"' 1
0 ~~
563 3
0 T~.
0 0
Signal=Spl IURights=ln ciude
Initial Vol: 125 0 43"'
Lanes: 1 0 0 0 1
~~~~~.
Lanes:
Initial Vol:
Signal=Protect
Vol Cnt Date: Na Rlghts=lnGude Lanes: Initial Vol:
Cycle Time (sec): 90
0 83
Loss Time (sec): 9
1
Critipl V/C: 0.595 ~_ 2 2413"'°
Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 5.5 0
Avg Delay (serJveh): 5.7 0 0
LOS: B
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
Signa I=SpI IURights=Include
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound west Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------~I---------------
II---------------II---------------I
Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 0 10 6 10 0 0 10 10
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------i
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 20 0 62 36 375 0 0 1587 76
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 ~ 0 20 0 62 36 375 0 0 1587 76
Added Vol: U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 23 0 63 18 188 0 0 826 7
Initial Fut: 0 0 0 43 0 125 54 563 0 0 2413 83
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 43 0 125 54 563 0 0 2413 83
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 43 0 125 54 563 0 0 2413 83
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 43 0 125 54 619 0 0 2654 91
------------I---------------il---------------
II---------------il---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.90 0.10
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 5700 0 0 5511 189
------------I------------
--- I I--------------- I I-----_~;._~._...------ I I--------------- I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.48
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 0.0 10.4 6.0 70.6 0.0 0.0 64.6 64.6
Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.67 0.45 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67
Uniform Del: 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.4 0.0 29.0 30.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 5.2 5.2
IncremntDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 6.1 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3
Delay Adj: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.4 0.0 30.7 27.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 4.8 4.8
User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.4 0.0 30.7 27.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 4.8 4.8
DesignQueue: 0 0 0 2 0 6 3 7 0 0 43 1
Traftix 7.5.1015 Copyright (c) 1998 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
Appendix C
Driveway Level of Service Calculation Worksheets
O
N
h
O
N
N
a
m
U
a
a
U
a ~II
~=
Q U D u .- ~ v .n
`1 ~ O O O
O O O O
= U o 0 0 0
~ j] o 0 0 0
a o 0 0 0
O
1
~ d y ~ ? V In
¢ ~ v ~ p p p
y
~ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
rn
o 0 o
¢ U ~
t
c
+ +
U
O/ ~' U
¢ U ~ y o o c o
_ °~ ° 0 0
a ~c U ~ 0 4 °o 00
U > ~ o o
c
~ U + + + +
0
a
m U j 4 0 og °o
m o c o 0
a v w m ~ ~ m
¢ O v c o 0 0
4
~ 'C N ~ t0 ? N
u
A
1 ¢UO wo c o .-
'>
! ~ ~c _U o 0
0 0
o
¢ U >
'N .
o
O O
U
Q ~
O
E
~
a ~-y ~ ro v
N
~ ¢ ~ v c o o
0
~
iy U
O ¢ ¢ m m
rn
¢ U ~ N o p o c
° °
Q
o
o
'c U $
o
.o U > 0 0 0
c o 0 0 0
0
m
U
~p j~ N h C1 r p~
(~ ¢~ N O O O O
0 ¢ ¢ m ¢
''y.=, '!
a ~
m '~
~ ~ 3
'o '~ >
Y d v
-~ O a
o v O1
a
m m m
0
1
.ti
y
b
~ N
41
L57Qyyy
I ~1
j
va
.H
ay
y U i
O
ro +"
v p'
N
.~
N
q
rn
.N
0
7
x
a
M
ro.
~, ~ °
.'{ ; r
~ M N
++I
i [ o
t b
o -1
o O
7
f14`''~~^
~1i ~
~
O
~
_
O O N N O O Ul O !A
a. I(
O
b 1I1 i r v c
m -
[
N" l
T
1
•tl
1(1 N r O O r r a i N x F ~(
N o0 d' N O N ~ l5
l2
y
,
y
y
NI(1 ~
1 u
~ ~ ~+ .i .i u
~
mm m ~ a a
,~
~
~
$
x
7
~
m
m y
~~ O
O O
y F i ° °0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u
~
5
j
5
j
$
,5. o^
~
°
I
I
o 0 ~~
~
f
m m
j %t
0
•a
~ F
~ ~
~
m a y v, ~ ...a I
m
?~
Q
Q
,~ a a ~
% I X
fC
~
v
~
3 r o r o N o o° o 0 0
a~ N O M N O O N N Q
XXX
%
O~~ N w N~ m N~ v~ r
N N U1 r m 1t1 i u y
• F
ril ~ i
'd
7 b \ O O
C `^ °
C ti O
p
~ ~
a
~f
~ N
b
ti '-/ N N
o
0 °°o
o° aN 1t1 N ' b a 1/5x(!
~
O
o .
r1 °
C 0
u
c o
a ti o
~
n
~ ~
•-~ ,-1 N
~
~ a
~
«
~
~~
~ ~ .-, ..
U
.. .. y
~ ~
y
ti
a0 ° o O° o O G G O O O
y F i ° ~ ~
X x 7i % % ~ X %
% X
yx
, ~
O O O ~
~(
{ }
~~
(~
5f
ti
«
~* ~
~
a 7
5
7
5
7
5
7~
O
~%
~~
X i %
X
~
,y ~ o ~
r
.-i
\ \
~
m a
o
W 00000000000
I F
Xo o '
y~
%%
5~ i x ' % ~(
U 8 6
~ -.°a m ra `~ N ti
a ~
~
j
{ y
j r F ~. t
a
i
o ti F F
° ~ U p ti
U~ n
ro
A ~ q
[ .~ N
-
~a i °~ o ooo~ ~ o0 0
o #
#
.a -
- a
e
~~! _
k~
° o
$
fSy
u
y
x
+
o ~
k
¢
yx
~
G
}
(
y
~
% X X
~
°° U 4 a o q
m .& F i r o r r~~ r r o
u
+ y~
0 r
!
$
d
~~~
~
~~ 5~ ~
~
m
~
N
.
O' b O N 0 010
i
.1
a
~~Y
(. !
~
~
%.
~
~~
O O 10 O lD
W a i t+lorf MO oe•1 r1 O y,
O e-I O ~ y
.~ V m b OHO i N aF
i
~ +
O N 7 - ~ N `~ S
QI
N
I
n =
,y
ii =
r
l .7
r
~
r
.
1 .•
~/ {7 O~ rl
~ a ,°i H W ..1
01 O
N 'J N ~ I(1 O O U1 ~ ~ 1l1 O II1
b a i N O N N 0 0 .•I N Y
y
Y~
r~u
y
Y
j
y]
y~
{
u
[
]
[
O ~
O ~
m m
,i n n
a ~
ro
~ ~(
]j
^
^
(
]
]
?~j~
:[
] ~
~
ryry
[ry
ry ry
]
}
~
~
bU
L
~ i7G5 PFY
X Ti iG Ti '• ii
a
~ ~
~ ~
H mm
~
~
H aowo Nm OO mOm v.p
m 7
AF ~ ti°ti NMH~,~•, mvo ~G
O
m S~S~ S~~S QS ' v Q~i m f~eC
*
~f ~
+a~
~!
~
~
m a
~ ~ ^~ x
~„~
o
vX
X
•°
%
%~
~
0 0 0 0
i o 0
o 0
0 0 o g
x Q
%
f%C ~ '
' E
'
S(
X
m 0 0 0
°
0
a
~ .a ~
o o ..
y55~~~
Q~j Yxx !xk(
'i ~ °
ro
a
~-+ .7i IfCC SC
m .~ w w a - •°o - ~ ..
~ o •• ~ m .i ° ~' .. v ~'' • > m o a a c~ a ~' ~ s° o w •• ~ w v > a v vi v
•"
-i m~~bv•".oi~>w
mw~
° s[ua°a.~
a\i.\x•r.m"~.;mFm~u
u
iro~o
,
"o ° ° 0 v>
.c
of E y.tivv-.ia•Oa'>u,-~m m a,
b
c
ou•ou ouau ~-., u mu
~
`ro
H,
H W ~ 7 N 3 y N m yi H 7 m 7 •o
W O ~ O N N
I°
m
~ a\\> +i ] .•i i U •.1 q U
.1
a.a ew
wo
~ F M U U •
y
>
y
i y w ~
> i
O
I
"
~ •
p
q m CC x' W •ti 9 M
as ~>wc~ aaHaaaamac~ n •
i
-,
j
•n
>
m > b
N
m a
°roo ~ vy o.cn~a
m.au
'
auEU ~ uu
~
.
c
a
a~'am
as~yma
3
C7
al
m
N
ii
a~
v a
~~ a
0
u.
x
N ~
•.~
.i
N
£5
5
M
ro
N
>
U'
.,
ro
•" ~
M ; m
N °
N
C
m
N
O O _•
r~l
O
o
a
v
lh
o, ~
o U
yl C
y
~ ~
y~~~•~
^~ -
mo Noonf oomo m
b a i morn m o out m
~ _ _
o
,y ~ 1D v? r 000 m
~
m ~
n n
~ N
.a .~ .~
~ F +
' a
rv woad
y
N10
i ~ m i N a
~y
7
5
qro '~ O
~ F ' 000 0 000 000 0 o d. ~
5
o ~
ti ~
~
ma v .•i
v -1 ama w
~
k x
~~
~
S ~ p~ o o r o o r o r
%
~ ~
%o %
m
~ '•loo,ti .y
a .5 ti o .imm i ` F
m
~
~
~ ~ - ~ o
°
m
m
b
-
~ ~ ~ ~
a .o u, ~ ., a
~
oo
'i
q `~ ° G ,y
°
o
0
o a
o ti ti
_
a 000 0000
0 00 ,
0 o
k
k
k
k
f
~
H
~~
C ~
~ _ yy
y
~
y5
~~
Xuk
~~ y
~
~
~ a
~M
~
y _
-
'
4 .a m o ,
%
~
y
f
(
X X %% x %
i X
~
~~
.. ..
o ~ .
.
~~~ ~
T m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o do
F i o o
o
a
i u
a A m
u ~
m ~
A
>
yyo
.C
~7
F
y
~ ^°,1 0
~ a
~ff ~ ~
~ } "F~ ~ ~7`~.a:; j..
f i ~ ~ ~ ~
.\+ ~ ° ---~.
r
p
•-~
\ >
\
u
~ \
m a
° ro i
W 00°00 0 00000
~
o 00
a QQ
i
Q
~
%o ~ xo
,.~ }~
~'
U E
L
6 ti
w
w
N H
_ .•~ .a ,-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !
* a
P
$
q ~ F
o~ ~ U F •yi
o U
A
~ +'
~
a o~oooo~~ooo xQ
N -
° o
*
M
>. a u q ° ?
~ F
a
,y O X %
$~
q o o
m N
U b~
> N
o o p ~ Icolcoo5oo0~00 ~ a.
F i r o r noon r o o ^ ^ k x % % k ~
u
u
o
tf
~
,Q
a
~
.~
y A
+' N ti ti
o ~ loolnoolnoo
5n o m y
VJ 7
r ~~ i ~~
k x
~5 i Q '~ a%% x .i
N
xQ Q SSii x xx
~
~ ~o
ao ~
°
a; N O N t+l O N ~
'
m }}(( 55~~
Q O N O N i ~ ~y 5~
a
N
~
N r•1 ri ~
N
1
NI M N i N
( 5
a 1
O v 7
ro N H
> -
moom oomo In
a i Ho xu
x
e -
f
m
5
e f
e
ti .
7 ~ F
ti o
b
'a
,
,O
.y o o .r .y fS
e~
5
~
ti
u~~
~ 55
5y
~~
y5
°
y
~
~
*
n
m
o ~}{ y
X~
1
~
k
x
%
a
~ ~
C ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ N F i ~ o n ° ~ mm o o m o m ~ a. % %
N N N N
y ~
° X % X X % •• %
°
i w °
m
N
~
~ ~
M ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
~
N ti
z O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~
i o 0 ~( iG
i £ y
!
O
v
x 77«
i SjsCJJ u u
i
~~~ O~
a
"~ •' ~
o v
o 0 0 0 0 ~+ 7 ,y
~
~
f
a
ti ^ .. v .-1 11 .. - .. p N E
p..~p^m:ia°O~- eo
ia v
° S2
R
U U N Ul b .. ..
aa
c~EC~~goo
••~mw> awwv
"
~ ~y
r
u
°a..pw.aRi•';.°i~>°w m
\
mw -
.
~ w°s°yuc
~
~m
°
;mF
~ u..~
.
+~ O°
.N
~
O
0 a
e
v
0 6 ~ 'G ro u ro a '° O L u .. ,-~ u
7 N 3 J~i W m a~J a D 7 N 7 b ° w
w ,
.
C
•
a
~.
m ~ u
b U o u G U i ..a u aJ b U ~~ W >, W •O m b N
a\\ p •~ D •w i U •N C U i
a
> ~ .. m o•..
ao ~ omwrsvm•emm°`m•.°iroH~i'F
as ~>
~ .
W A E W N O
wuc''~i-n•yi>-yi ~ aw ~-n> ~ >om> mromoa
"
°
mc~ aa..pw
hawac~.... aue
.aus
u ~ uu a°a~ ~ aw°a~'~ioi na
tp
I
I W ~ ~
M ~ W
~ " u
v
roa
W
rl
b
m
-H
C
b
w
m
m
^I
W
H
W
J
a W
L
Ua
. W
a
~ D £
I W°i
Ny ~
O
M
.1~
N ~
.,1
C
b
a fi
m
m
N l
V
ro
;gip p
.,, ~ n m
W
U O O ~-
~y O O
n
a
a .~
N ~C. ~~~~ '1 [L' NO riOr~IM OON OM N ~ blll bl~ O!~ m
N M ~f iG ~ ~G ~ N I(1 i l+f O~1 ~ T ~ M # a U U #
it W 7 1 ~ ~f i!piY i(^GI
IE L O f! ~(
[n (X W ~ F i O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G ~ O }~ ~( ; ~~ y~ ! ~# a N a y~
•.I aA • ° ° 7YX.5 i7XC5 Yy., u
3 b O b O N m C C m O m nl rl O N 1 e-I
O enN i ~ +
v ~ "~ Nooo i # F
a W O ~ ~ W ~ r•I N N ~ nl b l .p b i b b t7
\ O O p O ~~ ~ _
q N o q ,y o 0 0 '¢ o~ .ai a op o 000000 0 0 0 o - -
n } ~f
x L .. .. ~ S y ~ y ~ 000000000000 c ti xx X i ~ X~ i ~# a~ ~# o
a WW ~ a m ~ ~ ~
.-I ~ o ---~ y ~ \ \ n a w 00000000000 ' ~ ~ ~ ; fe
u U E E ..Ui W v ~ ° rroi O "~ ~ °. °o ~ o = #.7~ }5#
[ ti H F •yi W m U - ti .a .~ iY, yX~ j}~5~j `~SxxP(QdS
C ~ v W U N~ b O [>: O °0 0 0 0 0 OO O o O O ~j ~~ % X O iG # a y, #
5 'i W O .-I U b O i7iG5
O >~ a y W O ~ C ~ N H
C.1 Q II a '
qN o-0 1~i of m ~ o Nominooln oul ,w N
Ot U ~ 0 0 C F~ mom m o o n m o I'7u~5( }7~5f( 0° 77~~5( ~xk( '.ly~~~
t ~ a N Oa i NO NOON 00 OONON if Y.~ % ~N ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i y, # " x%~ ~~C # O
l _ roIn . ~ mom I ~aa ~ %#
1 N W 'O .. .. "l NN N NNN iRf
I > C FL .ai W .-I _ - -_
Ill 00 Ill O O N O O Ul O Ill O N ~ ,f$Y~~~~uYl3
W y r•I r1
I '.I II II :Cy ~ ri
i .i .W] a0i H a ~ ,O C ' ° o ? - !~ # a Y, #
1 L .i W L o'
M ~ a ~ ~~ ~~ F! N O N O O M p 0 rl O M N k O~~ n ~~j(j ]NfS~ ,~~xfj '~/~yj~ I W
N V N N N M ~ ~ l+l rl a O O• N'y ~ ~ ! iG iG F lG i ~ ,~ # a X ~ ; O
i
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.. '
u l ~ E ~~~ k~X o a % X
W z .a i °, o o ~ yxu~Qf ~xuG yxk,
m ~ a, ~ g .-i 4 m o ~ ~ ••• •• ~ > o v ~ ~ .. u w .. c7 -fi cal ' £ 9 m '; ~ w o O qqG v m wwq
NO ° ° 0 O6 i E>L.,Wjbww`t •d ou>avi .. .Wi u'nm ~.~~Fm i .>"i l.luam i p,OE ~U C,au
a> u,-I W W u abuu o u au ~ .N u .l m u l v >.W•ovly ro
~> - M W I a W 3 y W W L W a m a b H a .\-I \> •M ",~ M I U •N G U ~ .-1 (y,q E W W O
ao~omu°C'~ONgwxw'Dq-nW~i"Hwuo•n•yi>.yl~q,wv wva W11'041i1
of I >mc7..aw.. - > > oln> W w m ca
awaaWwac"~~.~,a~'E".auECi ~ uWUaas° ~ a"u, a°Emm~na
.,
W
y .-i b
,~ ; rl ° `°
W
~ o o ~y o 0
W
a
a
m [ ~~~ ,O a N o.b~l-l OOrI oo.b-I o obi ~ m to ul mom n
N W a I ~ e-I N ~~~ (~j ii N Ill i N T m i N pl
'l!fY7 H
b L D
~~ m H i o c o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o m o- o ~~%~ 1
M ~r1 y O O xkk ~ ~ if I y#j ~# F N rl rI
ya v W ~ ., .y 'a o X ~~ ~ %n 1ji~ amw'Qw
~. b0oboob oO OO loom m mow
a l p N l n '
W NI O M I
7 b ° o M N W - "•I rl ~ r-1 M b i nl b b I 1I1 # lE-l ~ #
.y N o \ o 0 0 b _ _ .-1
C '~ 0 0 o a o an .y C~ 0 0000000000 0 0
U .O o o ~x%5 N ~Qj Qf
~ ~ ~ .. .. .. ~ - .. 'a ~ ~ ~ooo0 00000 ^ ~F X % ~f ~f ~ ~f ,~j # a #
a N A m ~ ~ > •. :~~-; -:a ~ W F ' 0 ~ .-1 N o ~ ~ N ~ ~ o % % ! ~ % ~ ~ ~ % # .E7 ~ ~-
O m 0~ y N U U ~ ~\ W o 0 0000 000 D 0 ~%$ j}$5 ~Q~Qff I x~~~•+/,•
L U E E .Ui m v o lm`l 0 a i 0 0 0 ~ 0 4 q= ~ X~~ 1 # .7 %#
q ~ F •ti y ~° u _- F 'i ~ Y SZ _ _ ffCC ffCC
U D v W U .i >, ~ 0 000 0 0 00000 ~f fxL ?f ¢f
a ~ U .W7 A O 0 ] 7[k ~ o 00 ¢ %~ ~ X o X # ~i #
n
~ 0 0 CJ > o o W m E ~ m o m O O N O N o N ,l. ¢xf o ?Qf Q~j N 7~y5$ yxt ~XC
y ~ ~ a '~ m ~a ~ NOONOON ooNO N o ~ yj~ X %N ~ i ~ ~ ~ ^ i ~# a X %# o
'-V W b .i NN ~--~ Nul 1 N N Ory ~ Naa ~%%#
> W a N W N ~ ~xf ,~kj - (~ryff ~•1 }(r~j~{l e~ryxfi 1 I~ryxk
~ a ~ 1Ui N N a ai ; N 00 N O O Ifl C A N O N iG ~i ~ N yu~ fi xi T. •• # a iG k
-.i W L •N O ~?YRSj ~}5(f ?~5(j ~~yfj ~}5Gf I]%~5
1-I ~ a ~~ ~~ ~ O H I N~ N O b m~~ N O N ~ O 'ryf~j~ O, N W%% I X~ iG ii i O~# ~ •~ X# O
-N .N T 1Ci y~"j M M r~l N ~ ~ ~G O iG F O a
Il 11 I J
z O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~Q$ ~Q$ ?Q$ i y^
ro o 0 0 0 0 - W "-I .~ .-I 7 .. '~ .. .. £ i. ti ~ -.Ui .7
~ H
' Rxj
m .c ,J ~ ~.i ~ w o>>. ~`••' 6 0.a> vu° a °' _ ~ ~ c~' ~ ~ o w •• ~ m v > av rn v
_-uoo ° c mw ~ v>°JCm»mavoy>°y'..,~ e•~ro~.;roFm ~_i,, uwm ~ obEi;cWiaa°~
N> w v i y v ygg i v m u w a> u .-I W W u U q~\ j .N ; r ~ u •° ~ u u ~ ,y u >. w •o m v m
~ N m N
O• b W •H N Rl y b b a 'O >. ~ .-I ,M a+ v u I m .•I v v l v w'Q W N b M N
~. v M b u U H w U u •n -rl > •N I f4 W lJ •n > I> O m > W N W W
R S' O W N M a W^ W ??,, q o
~ >IL C9 1-I '~~p Kp.aU' dr a. wUFa US U ~ UU w°a S i IvlN.7S myvi lS 1
i
I
~N .
[
I
.~ .
N o o
N O O
I b
I
~
N LO [
y ~
~
bC ~ .~iotio ula ooro oN _
ro ~~ ~ mmom i m
.
> n n ~
~ i
NIlf i
..
u
.. m
m a, ~
~ti
o ~~~ ~~
N01 m "' a
.,
N ~ ~ o E! ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
a. o o '
u • ~ o 0
.1 0 '1 o r1 w O o w o w
i tior~ .aooti
win i .-l0 0
°
7 7
~ o o
~
d' ? N
a
b _ ~ ti ..I y ~
'
m o
O N O N i « (y y y
~ r1 1u i w 10 ~ 1o i 1o a
p^
j O w o
G ~ '~ ~
o ° 0 ~ o
e,7y C ~ o0 0000 00000 i(
GI
° 0 - -
~ «
~
~ ~ ~
~? U m
aNi -u U ~ v1 ~ ~ F ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 ?i f~
^
~~ n a A rNn tvn ~ ~ ~
~ > > a 0
'~ b i "~ ti .•~ 0
~$ ~j
.1 a o
~ ~« F'~~• o
~
~~ I
W N N O ~~ F.' N
~ U ~ ~ O m a P7 OC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X %
%
~
~~o ~%o
N m
.N q. ~ F' F ~
ti y - .a N N ~~ X~ i
q
01
m q p y m
~? °~ ti m
~
i ~ U y N
q .i
N o O a' °o aoaoooooo
v .p ~ o o
~
' o o
$
j
$ '- }j55
o
{
¢~
~¢
¢
« E e
~. .
7
. u .a .a
?
1 j(
5$
~
S
j
Q
y
~
y
~
~~ ~ x
~ q o o
.m H 01 T
u > o o ~ om0
woo wo v~moom om ,
^ F~ m m moom m X i X%,
9
7d
w
' "'
o
~y VI ~ T ~
Q O1 y
1 1
~
y
~ y ~ ~
a ~ ~ « O
iG ~ if ~ 1
«
~~~
~
w W
w o w o o w o o w O w
i °
° o Y.
GGG
A iG
X iG w H Q ;
o
m .,>1 .. ..
'"'1 m b
. ,
a
~ M N p
i o rf o rl ~ ~C
N 111 i r+l N
~' a
N 11
•o > ~ a ~-oi
a .~ a ~N . ..
m .~
o p° -
-
a 1nooloo olcoo ooln°~ ~
N i N
- ti .•~ ~
o ~ - -
_+~ ~ m
b j
N q.d ~1
~ m
m"1~ i ,a ~E ~ 0000 nut oolnoin Nan
c
Nro°
°
° o 1n ' N
•
r I M ,
H .•~
•
•n roa o
~j "~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I o~
~~
~ ..
2 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E "~
Q
°
g ~
o '~
v a ~ ° ° ~ 'n
g ~~~
rl
v ti •• ~ o •• v m .-i > w .. v .•~ . > m o w a ~ °~ t~' ~ go o y v ti w' •: ,~ .. ,~
v ioo o >°v
N7F'1iN>
cm~Nroavo u..a~w°~,iu°o
m.~x7;m~.;mEro~i
°a
~C
a ~y ° .
,~
'~'abimiluQ~~m~v
~ °
mo
"
N .
.
.,
u..u. cu" ~
a
°Na~x~LV
""
y
.
n
>
ao ~ omu "cromcmwmv a•.~m
N
+'o va
~mbmo
,
,
~i'F.muu•r,,. >.,, ro'a v v
"
u
RE ~>wc~..Ra.,aaa
amac~ u~,u•ouou ~ be o~oo ~ y,o,N>m"ma
.w.aau[-~
°
~¢uau ~ uuw~Cx ~ ama
syoi~ia
ti
m ,
~ ~
ti ~ ti
~
°
q ~
m
N ~.
m ° ° '~
° °
a
7
~
~ ~
,
~ ~
T
m r •
T
cK tic~ooulooulo ut
b .100N N
- -
,°~ ~ 101n ~ 1n mo
~ m
ti~ n
m L
q .i .-+~r
p ~ o
Q~j n oo m« ~ «
N1n i N o o
.i .i .~ i
~~ ~
F~ ° 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ae
o a %
o o
ti C N q
0
~ ...r ~ ~f ~f ~f
~ « F m 1n u1
'~
~~
Q
Q
S
~
v ~
o
S tiotiooN OO
~
`i
~
w
Z iC a '"
i
i S
S
i
~ o ~ S
i
N ~ ,
i
ti
a. N wof
w rloti i n % ~C
N
~ ti
n wow i . F X x«
~, ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~
[ ~
a ~
1n a ~f $~tf
° ° °
° ~ ~ ~a °o°°°°oo°°° ~ ° - -
•
i ~ y
• ••
m y y ~
o •• ••
m \
u W o0 00 000 00 0 0-
u F ' c o o ~~~'%
~ j
Qf Q~j Qf ~ ~Q$ ~
~
« o
~~
~«
E
o
m ~#- a, ~ n
u W 0000000000
~ Q
X i
% %~
'
'~ X%
'
~
~
,", ue a -ti N m ~ °roo 0
a ~~ o
o
«
«
~
~~~~
o > •~ m u
n
U A ti V ,d a' 00000000000 a~
~
=
- _ ~'
o
~•, a
u v ° a
A ~j
c .. .i .~
7 r ~j
~
«
«
o Q
0 Q
~
i
~
~
~
C
o u 4 0 o q m X
~F ~ m°omoom°o°om°w aP
~ 0 %
X
%
o w
K
x
y
,
x
%
%
m
W ~
D1 ~
' ~' X
~
x
xkx
~
u( X
%
$~~f
~ % X X X i %
wo w oo X
'
b
~ ~ M N ~ b O N i A «
~ N Ill= N
N~ '~
p
'~d ' C a
~ a y M m e-1
N r7 D a i b ~ b 0 o N °O 00 N O V) rl N N t
C ~ -
~ u a m '' Hti
~ «
«
~ .a m ~
~~
m ~~~ ~ k ~
~
w ~
~
~~ ~r'~'
" `°~mou,MOOMONU;aa
~E ~
°
n oo
0
°
m ..
.. .
.~
~na~ ~
I f ~
'
N N
.
i ~
i N
O
J.1 N N 'O
~$
N i Q$ ??{{
~~« o
~$
N
«
~
n ~ ~ ~
m
C
~
O
0 0 0 0 0 00
0 0 0 0
z°
~% v
.•1
'a
o
~
% ~ o
SSii
,
O~ ~£
o ~ %
N 0
o
a XX
N 0 0 0
d o
o .r ~.~
- H ~
~ •. o • F
«
'~
~ ~ ~ ~ -
N+ '-7 ~
-
v .
7
.i .. ..
....~o•.vm.:ipo~_ Nti~> m~'o fC
}.~
.. .. 0. % X
y
wa rova~o.: ~ W..IYJ ': .a .. ..
v uQO ° oa9~Na
~x
em~Nm~
>°v v
vo ,-
m
iroFm~
u..°'~w°s°uua
°
Q
~
b
~~ e ,
.
u
a
.1 u~~am ab NN
a> ~ ~mo ,
~.•
c
a
.
,
i„
"~ ~ ow~
°'" a
V
y
a~
~•
"
-:1vm
^w~i'F'
ao ~ oro"crorogmmxm
~i: u
E
w
x
i
Iwi
wo
~u~%
Ni
bw
> ~ >o
•
>b
•
p
.
RE ~wc~1.1~aH paax ~a U' w an .
-r,
o
uo
brtm
w ~
om
a~Fau
u
°a
N
F
EU ~ u
a
E ~ aoi r7 •E
Nf
'9 W~
.H
u
m
1 M
iv
i a1
~~
ro
v
N
.N
ti
q
01
.,,
U
x
w
N
.ti
.~
i~
Iva
p >a
ay
y C
v a•
a
ro ~
v °'
N
M
rl
q
m
•M
a
V
S.
a
ti
-M
al
C
1 H
ii
4H
1 ~
y ~
o
N
X
N ~
M
.-I
c
O1
.N
0
7
S
m
~ 0
N
i
y O
L ~ N
~ O O
~
~
0
v
m o °
a
_.
•~ ' °
'
v
~
~
y C ~ ro
a moo morym oo° °.°.1
m 0 n b u1- Ip~ o - n
m
qq
I ~ .•Iti N
In i t~am~m ~ `^ *
~~
+
b.~ o ~ % %
X
X
-„ ~ F i °~ 0 0000000000
' o
j
c
~$
~j
N
cn rY v
.•I rl ~
X ~ ~ ~ ~
!
a
`r a~
Q
+ H m
m
Syd
Q
°
j 3 mo0m oNO o000o
~ f
i
% % ~ % ~
d,m ~ r~ n m m ~ m
ri ~n ~ n ~ °~ ~ ~
`
F
~ *
~ c ro °
\ 0 0
U~° G'+ ~ .a
o
In In T
"~ v -_
o ro
o 0 4 o ti ,1 00°00000000 In
,
j
ti
_ x
°
-
-
-
H o u ~' ° 0 0 0
o
x
y
~
N
I
1 ~
(
x
xG
1
+
+
U ri . ~ '
r
tl O I ~
%
~~jj
X
}
~
I
x
M ~ ~ I %
.G F ~ •• ••
my v •' •• ••
rn
7
\ N W O C 0000 000 0 0
Hi °O
m X
i
~G
.p ?$
° ti 0
+
~
+~
~
6i q ..N. v
.~ m o ~ y
~
N 41 r•7
> >
"-I \ \ o
~ v
~ ° ~
.M ~ •'I N N
a W ° o0 000 00000
o o
' ° o
k
~~
~
~~k~ ~
~ ~ O iG iG O
tiff '
'
?f
fC
U E ~ ,
v
ro O .7 ~ ~ ~ ~ i
r1
« a Y Y«
O E .a - -
PG o ~ .~i rNn
U A N
~ roK i 00000000°00000 _
- -
o °
G o o
O1 N Ot
U > ° o m W molno minoor+lom
^
F ' om moom m „~ ~f
c
o
4
A
W
~ ~m fQ~ %X
~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~+ a %%* o
~ ~
.0
i
j
w y N0N °ON o Oe~1 °.~-I
.•7 ~ o
ul N o i ri bOb i a1 ~
.y .y m w o m I ,y Er
*
~
ro
O C
y
.. ..
~+ ~ _
~+ ,rte ~
~ N~
NN NI N a
~~., .
I
?
GL .
~ .i .~1 u M
b >
p -
.-IONOO~-1°o.aoN
LK i rl o ,-I rl o o .a .y -
-
}
$
N
~
b W
i -.I n n ] ~
.
ro
.-I .~ .+ ~ ~
+
i$~
~~5
j
j
« x
~
~
Q
N O N O 111 0 0 0 0 0 0
i i
o ~
%
% X ••
SY.~
I v
~
i q~
~~
~
W ~.s
AF
~o~ bm°om m.-lo
M r-1 N N N N S
N N m
Q$ x
(
~Y
j~ ~
f( •• ~ ~ K ~ %~
,
~j
* o
~ ~+ a ~
~
..
z O p0 O O O O O O O O O p
'
' O O i
~
j
%
j
S
X
•~ ' I
T. if ~
]( O
a
ly
v
a .. v ~
~C
.. ~ ~ ~+ F X +
~
a
~ pro' ..N .:iu .. .. ..o
•d m .-i p° w .. E O
i '~
; i E
C
- ~~ uu mw ro'.. ..
-~i•• - ..
U U a t1
[! E C7 ~ ~ o o, •
~ m v >
ui
~
~
y
1
.N
yoo .
r
.
.
i
U G I O R .i > ~ .i 'O •n.-ai > o ro
m a,a
cm
~u _
,
i
a a
i
aO
\ \ .. tl F .-1 i >. ~ U .• CL i w G E 11 U a .07 .G
m~.,m
y
~~ ? o ° .
Nm4roow
..
p~ I- E a.l .N ro v •N a> u .•a m v
N v i a N 3 y N m u y ,
~;o
o.mloro G ., u
u a v o u o. u. ''' v ,_r ro U . v >. v ro m ro m
Q\\> +I b •H I U
a
l
W O i O N N G b N q m Lt. W b g r t% +
>>..
G U ~ •-I W A E W v 0
O F W
u
U •n N> -yi i P. w u •n > i> O
> A ro
N W
ES.' > Wc91•. ,~a..5aaawR~ ?,,
m
I
>
aa °I°aU HQUF U ~ UU a°ro o . v„ o.c .cA W
.G £ I am ~£mU
'
I W ry
.-1
b
.'{ ~ m
y O °
m
..I ,
I G
m
G ° ° _•
A ~
° o
a
ro
~
N A ~> roa moo mo om 0000 mom ti m bin- b N -
II Ol ^yu
7 i ~ .i r-1
O N Vl I N O~ ~ T I m « ~
x~j
~
+
pb L
Ina !t
FFFiii
o0 00°°00000 c
F i ° if
F
% JG
o
M •H
W
~
~
L
H N
~
Qf
n
`~
~*
~ ~
~ ~ ~
H
~
m
3 omo omo
Om om r
7
aa
w
~ X
i
~ O ~ T
iiGG
~
v .+~
ro J O
O
a ~
°
~ N N p 111 I
In y.m b i m u
kk
~ m (~1 01 N ~ 5yk~~
*
n1 b I r•1 b
b I
+ a
a d' N O O
\ O O O
~° nl m ~ b - ~
h
%
O
x
G '"~ O O O ~ O N .-I ~ 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _
-
Y
y
y
~
y
%
~
' {
]
f
1
J] [{
¢~
^]~
[([
]]~
(^
~7
f~
^ry
Q
~ ~ .. .. a
~
o ~ m
.. .. .. ~ y
b
x c o
W o 0 0 0 0 000 00 0 o c. t'.?; ~;
F I o ry
1
~
~
y
~
j
~
(
y
~
x
7C
..~':~ ~ ~ 0 x % ~ % %
, \
~~ m w a
o m
y O
«
~
'• I m O~
"' I
\ \ ~
W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
° X X%
O O
^ y
H U E E -.ui ro O
m m o m .y
o °
1.7 i
'I [' [] [] [ J
+
~
[
]
ry
p
^
+
C -H N al
•~ H F •rl :~ M
++ 'I ri
- " I
H
% - i
M1G
i!
if R
i!
fY a ~
u >N N U
a ° i~ ~ m ~ ~ a
a ~ u w' 00000000000
ro oo -
°
b "
-H
O
~ ~
«
~~
y 0 0 ti
'1 o O b
~ ~ F ~ m C N o 0 aND O o m° N k
A m
0 °
N
a
m
~
~ ;
~ b a
~ ~
~
~~iCCC ~~~CC *
i R iG ~~, %« ~
'
°
~
~ ~
~ v
°
° °tioo
o
~
°
~
W ii ,
f
I
o
i
-I
i
.
.
i
.
~I
.7 i . ~ ti o
.i 100 b ~ m
%% ~(
rl
_ N N N In I N C O N ; N Q a X '{• M
y
7
{
''~ G W? W H
0/ O
N O N O O N %{
% '
_ ri ry 'i I
-
,-I a aui ~
b W ~ D p0 O N O ,-I
ro a ~ .i o .-I rl 0 .-I rl O ri
~
•M II II
L N
a ~
~ , '•I N N
~~ ~
* C «
N .~
. O
W Ul O If1 O N O O O o 0 0 W *p
F i % ..
I v I
O ~~ O
rl ~~ I ~~ ~
•rl -•1 ~
fq C. ~
M ~
Q O M b m O O m N a°
y ~ N N N ro
~(
rl N
u C m
?~5(j ?}~5~(7~5f( 7~Xf5
1( N
!
+~~~« O
~
~
5
(
~
'k
C
I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
z 0 W X X
%
X
I O if
%u
a ' '£ I
O
w 0
.7 o a o
~ ro '
v X ~ ~ % ~ ~5 + F x % +
rj
Q
a #
.-I
°
W
i~ v
•• E o
~ S
i
Q
- ~i
°'°'
c~ ec°i' s o
i
~
°
iw>
'~
m
''
-+ r
u
.cu ~ ~.-ia
o>I
•
.. a> oro \\
v
mw
>
row`
°
'
v ..
c
•:
r
r
avom a
i
•• N •N Eti > ro a ~ wQE uuQ
••
~~
Q
'
o
,
° °
G~
~
o v
.c
>•
mavo,,
,..,_
,
,u
470.•Iww
u
a
u W 1 7N 3y N
V
•
~ ,]
•nm
~m m„~
„
E
amlov y u u
R~\>
u
u
5
u
i u
quU
b
I
i O
i
.I w
a
?
,
Ga, o~ o ro N C b m~ IUU °i R' 'd G -rai rt U F
R£ I
n •.
i
•.
i
•.
i
i.•i PaAEW
mo
W u u •n•yi > .yy i p, w aUi •n >~ j p lq > b u
N
w
U
p W C7 «+'Q plbo
a acua~a. ae I
e
iU Fro M O i.l I N G Oro O I vy0 OAAA CL
o
'CU£
U I UU dQ£ I r7masmrnNR
Appendix D
List of South San Francisco and C/CAG
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measures
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO - FAST QF siIGHWA`t T01
Additional TDM Options/Aggressive Mitigation Measures
transit
on
X
Percent;<.,..,
Mitigation
1.0% to 5.0%
5.0% to 5.0%
2.0% to 2.0%
1.5% to 5.0%
Mentor Grou 2.0% to 5.0%
Alternative commute subsidies X X
X X
X X 1.0% to 3.0%
Mentor Grou 2.0% to 5.0%
Altemative commute subsidies X X
_ )( x
1.0% to 10.0%
stations
~g -park and
out
5.0% to 10.0%
Altemative commute subsidies 2.0% to 5.0%
X X
Com limenta bikes (recreational use) X 0.5% to 5.0%
Cam us bikes X
., X X -
Bi cle riders 'de )( x
mmmute
f ~~~ r
Lr11 1'/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GrOVZ;~IVTS
or sArvMA~o Coviv~
~~ "~w~
Atherton • 1~elmrnrr ~ Brisbane • Burlntgame + Ca1nm • Daly City • c"oar Palo Ito ~ :Oster Crry • Fla fMoai P • .
Pac~ca • Ponola Craiiey • AedwanA ~~, • 5rnt Bruno • Smi Cariat ~ 5an Margie • San Margie C •
ay' Hillsborough • Mcr~lo Park • Mr7i6
aratty Sauk San Frnuctsce a Woodside
TQ: ..All City Managers and plannir{g I?xrectors
FROM; Walter Martone
DATE: October l1, 2000
~: ~~~ C/CA,G GUIDELINES FOR. THE ~1'LEMENTATTON O
LANB USE COIVIlSO~NT OF TI3E lggg CONGESTION MANAGEME
PROGRAlV.t
At tl~.e C/CAG meeting on August 70, 2000, the Board adopted revised guidelines for the land
use component of the Congestion Management rrogram, The pur,~ose of the revision is to
increase the options for reducing the impacts of tree traffic created as a result of new
development. The clew options include trip credits for transportation demand rnana ernes
Programs that increase the 'access and availability of child care services so that parents cans, rel
less on the automobile to utilize these services, The char es to the Y
BOLD CAPITAL, LETTERS. The revisions to the g guidelines are noted in
a reminder, the Congestion Management .program ~de~s will ~~ effect immediately, As
all projects that meet the follow P Y guidelines must be followed for
mg criteria: ~ .
x.. the project will generate a net 100 ox more peak period trips on the Cong~stian
Management Program netwozlt, and
2. the .project is subject to CEQA review, and
3. the project will not have completed the scoping and initial study process prior to Ma
25x 2000. ~ y
~. ~.
If 1 ou have u pzcject that meets these ~cr~tct ~ ,., ~yo4~ ;;hoLld follow
1. review the Guidelines with the ro'ect these~sieps:
P J , applicant and determine if a combination of the
acceptable options/measures will frilly reduce the net number of trips that this project is
anticipated to generate on fihe CMP roadway network.
2. if yes, include txiis information €ts part of ~ ~tvironmental documents that: are
circulated and adopted by the local jurisdictiozi $O~i;
3. if no; ox if new ar revised measures are being proposed, contact Waiter Marione for
C/CAG review and~approval as early in the process as possible so that the agreed upon
plan can be included iri the envuonmentaI documents placed in eirculatioii,
4. if agreement is not reached with C/CAG staff on the plan.. an immediate review by floe
C/CAG Board wall be scheduled so that the Local juxisdict~.ozt project'appro~ral process
will sat be delayed. ,
.Althoutrh the C/CAG policy must be folowed when a project generates 1.00 ar mare peak hour
trips, local jurisdictions may want to consider implementing the policy at Lower thresholds
(Tess than I00 tries) in order to manage the traffic impacts mare effectively, AIT Cruy Aetorneys
will be receiving further clariFcation on this item from C/CAG Counsel.
F:\DSERS\WALTSRM\WpDA3'A\CMn,990\LDIAP\T,AND~'INL-revised 810'-OO.nOC
SSS CouN7r CEN7ER, I~EOwoon CITY, CA 94063 PHONS: 650.99.1406 fax; 650.36I.B227
^IJIDELXI~ES FGR INlPLEMLNTING T'F.fE LAND tTSE GC}MPQNENT nP TflE
CnNGESTI4R7 MANAGEMENT PI~GGR~'~11~I
All land use changes or new developments that require a negative declaration or an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and that axe projected to generate a net (subtracting
existuig uses that are currently active) 100 or more trips per hour at any time during the a.m,
or p.m, peak period, must be reported to C/CAG within. ten days of completion of the initial
. study prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQAA). Peale period includes
6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a,m. and 3:00 p.m, to 7:04 p,m:~Although projects that generate less than
100 peak Hour trips are not subject to these guidelines, local jurisdictions are strongly
encouraged to apply them to.all projects, particularly. where the jurisdiction has determined
that the impacts of the project will have an adverse effect on traffic in that jurisdiction.
These gUi~eiincs aze not intended.to establish a Countywide level of sigxaifcance~ of 100 peak
hour trips for CEQA puxpases. The determination of what level of traffic results in a
significant impact is left in the first instance to the local jurisdiction. These guide=lines do
contezuplafie, however, that all trips resulting from projects that are reviewed'by C!C}1G and
fall under these guidelines will. be nvtigated, whether or not it rises to a level of signincazice
under CEQA,
Local jurisdictions must ensure thax the developer and/or tenants will reduce the demand for
aII new peaI~ boor trips. (including the first 100 yips) projected to be generated by the
development. Tlie Iocal jurisdiction can. select one or more of the options that follow ox may
propose other methods for .mitigating the trips, It is up'to the local jurisdiction working
together with the project sponsor to choose the method(s) that will be compatible with the
. intended purpose of the project and the community that itwill sexve; The options identified in
these guidelines are not intended to lunit choices. Local jurisdictions are encouraged to be
creative- in developing options that. meet local needs whilo accomplishi~pg the goal of mitigating
neRi peak hour trips. The additional measures tluat are not specifically ,included in. these
guidelines should be offered for review by C/CAG staff in advance of approving tthe project.
Apgeala to t~,ie decisions 'oy L/C;AC7 staff wi11 be taken to the full C/CAtr Board for .
consideration,
aVhen considering land use projects, local. jurisdictions may either require fhat mitigation .for
impacts to the Congestion Management Program roadway network be finaIIy determined and
-'~~ imposed as a condition of approval of the project, or may -~~~iditionalIy approve such project;
conditioned on compliance with the requirements to mitigate the impacts to the Congestion
Management Program roadway net~+ork. In those instances where conditional approval is
given, a building permit may not be issued for the project until the required Jnitigatiort is
_ deteranined and subsequently imposed on the project.
Some of the choices far local jurisdictions include;
1. Reduce the scope of the project so that it will generate less than 100 net peals hover trips,
Trans ortation' Number of Trips Credifed
Demand _
Manaaemen.t
I1~S- easuro
Bicycle lockers anal One peak boor trip .will be credited
raclcs• `for every 3 new bike lockers/,racks
installed and maintained,
Shovers and changing
rooms.
`Operation of a _
dedicarted shuttle
service during the peak
period to a rail station .
or an urban residential
*ea.
~.. _ r
vu~u.biug c,.lz~pioyees
fox parking.
Subsiding fransit
tickets for employees.
~a-- ~°nale
Experience has shown that
bicycle eommtizters wiII
average using this mode. one-
third of the time, especially
during wanner summer
months.
Two pear hour trips will be Tvvo bicyclists can.sequentially
credited for each new combination use one shower/changing room
shower and changing zoom during fhe peak commute tixn.e:
installed.
FIVR ADDYZ'ION,AL TItI~S
'UAL BE CRED1TEl7 ~ 'g'am
S:T~gTTTLE STOPS AT A
clllYlLy7 CA1~E FAC~'TY
aR;rrROYrTE ro~ROly~
~o~srTE.
One peak hour trip will be credited
for each peak-hour rottncl trip .seat
oz~ `the shuttle, Fncreases to two
trips if a Cr~uaranteed Ride Home
Program is also iu place.
Wields a one-ta-one ratio (one
seat in a~shuttle equals one auto
trip reduced); utilization
increases when, a guaranteed
ride home program is also
made available; _
• One pear hour trip will be •arcdited~ ' _ ~Y'ielcls a o ~ ~' • : ~ .
for each parking spot charged, out ne-to-one ratio (one
P~'~g spot char~ed~out
at $20 pera~onth for one.year. .equals one atrto.trip reduced.
..One peak houz• trip will be credited ~''~eIds a one-to-one ratio (one
;~ -ihr each_transit pass that is transit pass equals one auto trip
subsidized at least $20 per month reduced),
for one year,
ol~ AD~rrxolvAL rear .
~.L ~E CREDITRD IF TTIE
SvB51'~YyS ETC ' +ASE~ ~'4
$75 FOR ~'~1~ENTS ~1S>ClVO
'T12ANSIT ~'O T~~ A CI~L&.9
TO CCA&~ EIdROiTT)~
transit or vanpool).
Impiementatior~ of a
p~IUng cash out.
program. "
rmplcrnentati.on of
ramp metering.
Znsta]Iation of
;highband width
connections iii
employees' homes to
the Internet to
facilitate home
telecammttting,~
Installation of video
confesencing centers
that are available for
use by tha tenants of
the facility,
dne peak hour trip wiII be credited
for each parking spot where the
employee is offered a cash
payment in return for not using
parking at The employment sate.
Three hundred peak haux trips will
be credited if the IocaI jurisdiction
in cooperation with CalTrans,
installs and_turas on ramp
metering lights during the peak
hours at the highway entrance
ramp closest to the development.
One peals hoax trip will be credited
for each connection installed:
Twenty peak hour trips will be
credited fox a center installed at
tl~te facility,
Zniplcmentation .of a One peak hour trig will be credited
compressed workweek for every ~ employees that are
program, offered t6.e opportunity to work
four compressed days per week,
I'rovasion of assistance
to employees So they.
can live close to work.
If an employer develops and offers
a program to lzelp employees find
acceptable residences within five
miles of the employment site, a
credit of one trip will be given for
each slot in the prograril.
Yields none-to-one ratio (one
cashed out parlciug spot equals .
one auto trip reduced.
This is a vEry difficult. and
costly measure to implerrieut
and the reward rr~ust be
significant.
Yields aone-to-one ratio,
Assumes that there will be one
teleconference per day that
includes Twenty p~ople.
The workweelc will be
compressed unto ~ days;
Therefore the individual wilk
aoT Le commuting on'the 5'-'
day,
This assumes that afive-mile
trip will generally not involve
travel on the freeways.
OR MAY PROVIDE
'T'HIS SEP VICE
IlV'DEPEIVI9ENTL~'
,~ Join the AlliaACe's
guaranteed ride home
program.
Combine any ten of
these elements and
receive an .additional
credit for five peak
hour trips,
Work with the
.Alliance to develop/
?mplement a
Transportation Action
Plan.
The developer can
provide a cash Iegacy
after the development
is complete and
designate an entity to
implement any (or
more thaa one) of the
.previous measures
before -day one of
occupancy. .
. ~ . encourage inf~Il
deve] opment.
JEYEZ:GPED WITH ~i~.
DIEVELUPER/PROPERTY
fl`4VNER THAT MANS T]f~E
CHII,~ CARE ACCESSIBLE
T(J TIC WORKERS AT TIME
DEVELOPMENT.
One Beak hour trip will be
credited for. every 2 slots
purchased in the program.
Five poak hour trips will be
credited.
Five peak hour trips will be
credited,
;Peak hour trip reduction czedits
will accrue as if the developer
vas directly implementing.the
items.
~vvo percent of all peak hour trips
will becredited for each infi11
development.,
Experience has shown that
when a Guaranteed Rido
-Tome. Program is added to an
over-all TDM program,. the
average ridership increases by
about SO %.
Experiience has shown that
offering multiple and , ,
complementary 7CD11~
components can ~.ma,~nify the
impact of the overall program.
This is based on staff's best
estimate.
Credits accrue depending oa
what the fixnds are used for.
r
Generally acceptable 'I'DM
practices (based on reseazeh of
TDM practices azovnd the
nation and reported on the
Internet).
encourage shared Five pear hour trips will be ~ Generally acceptable TDM
parking, - credited for an agreement with an
existing development to share TDM pm~~Sd otind ~e h of
{ AR$ ~' ~'Z25IT
CENTER
-Make roads and
streets more Five peak hour trips will be
credited for each facility
pedestrian and bicycle included
'
friendly, .
.
Ravise zoning to Iimit . Five peak hour trips will be
undesirable im
pacts
(noise, smells, and , credited,
traffic) instead of
limiting- broad ' .
categories of
activities.
Create connections for Five peak hour trips will be
non-motorized travel, credited for each connectYOn
such as trails that Iink
dead-end streets, ~~.
Create alternative
txansportation modes Qne peak hour trip will be
for travel witlxin ~ credited far each oh going
~
development and to
d o ortuni
PP ty created (i.e, fvc .
-bicycles%scooterslwa
ons = ~
owntown areas -
bic
cl g
,Ve
trips, two seat carts
=two trips
y
es, s~;-:,,:,tc~~
electric carts ~
,wagons, ,
s;.'v~.t j~~S,:u~C:i 5.uuiiic . 'sev~]1
fps),
shuttles, etc. ..
Design streets/roads
th Five trips wiII be credited for
at ~nc~ra e
- g
gedeslxian.and bicycle,
each desi~ element.
access and discourage
automobile access,
Install and maintain
alteznative Five (rips wiIl ba credited for
~'~portation kiosks. each kiosk,
~~maintain safety Five trips will be credited f
and security systems or
each measure implemented.
T~ _01VE TRIP I:~'pIZ ACH .
SZ•OT ZF' THE C.HII.D CASE
SER~CE ACC.-PTS
MULTIPLE AGE C•120UPS
(ANTS, FRESCbTOCL, .
SCHaaL.AGE),
~~-. .
This .is based on staffs best..
estimate,
This is based on staffs bcst
estimate.
This is based on staffs best
estimate.
This is based on staff's best
estimate, .
Tlss is based on, aca~#'s best
asthnate. .
This is based on staff's best
estimate,
This is based on staff s best
estimate,
Appendix E
Intersection T1eve1 of Service
With Mitigation Measures
MITIGB -.Project PM Tue Se 25, 2001 13.01:58
---------------------------------p--- Page 1-1
evel Of Service ----------------------
Computation Report -----------
--------
1994 HCM Operations Method
*****************,r*,r*** (Future Volume Alternative)
****~r****,r***************x~*****~**,rx******~xx~,~*,r,r***x~***
Intersection #2 DubuquejO
ster P
i
y
o
nt
********~~r,~*~r*~r***~x~x~********,r*****,~*********~**************
r
Cycle (sec): 100 ~ *****~**:~***~******
Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y+R Critical Vol./Cap. (X) :
0.768
= 4 sec)
Optimal Cycle: 62 Avera a Dela
g Y (sec/veh ): 17.0 P~,d1~
Approach: North Bound ~°~
South Bound East Bound
Movement: L- T West Bound
- R L- T
--------
----I---
---------
-- R L- T
- R
L - T - R
p
II---------
Control: S lit Phase Split P __
----
--~I------------
hase
______________
-II
-I
Rights: Ovl Protected Protected ~-
Incl
Min. Green: 10 10 ude Include Include ~
~
10 0 0
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2 0
6 10 10 6 10 10 ,
0 0 0
II-------- 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 2
-
Volume Module: ------II--------------- II---------------I
Base Vol: 504 39 158 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1
00 207 141 173
1
00 730 508 965
.
Initial Bse: 504 39 158 0 .
1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 207 141 173 730 508 965
0 0
PasserByVol: 192 30 15
0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0
Initial Fut: 696 69 173 0 0 66 14 0 151 51 99
0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 0 273 155 173
1
00 881 559 1064
.
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00 .
1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00
.
.
PHF Volume: 696 69 173 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0 0
Reduct Vol: p p 0 0 273 155 173 881 559 1064
`
0 0
Reduced Vol: 696 69 173
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O
0
PCE Adj: 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 0 273 155 173
1
00 881 559 1064
.
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1
00 .
1.00 1.00 1.00
1
00 1.00 1.00 1.00
.
Final Vol.: 731 72~ 195 0 .
1.03 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.13
0
------------I---------------II-------- 0 281 171 190 907 587 1202
--
Saturation Flow Module: -----II---------------
I
I----"--'-------I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0
85 0
85 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
.
.
0.85 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.82 0.18 2
00 0
00 0 1..00 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.00 0.85
.
.
.00
Final Sat.: 2940 290 3230 0.00 2.00 1.42 1.58 2.00 2.00 2.00
0 0
---I~------- 0 3610 2484 2760 3610 3800 3230
----
Capacity Analysis Module: ----II-
--------------I
I---------'-----~
Vol/Sat: 0.25 0.25 0.06 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: *~** 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.25 0
15 0
37
Green Time: 32.4 32.4 B1.0 0.0 0
0 ****
0
0 .
.
*
.
Volume/Cap: 0.77 0.77 0.07 0
00 0
00 .
10.1 10.0 10.0
~ 48.6 48.5 48
5
.
.
Uniform Del: 23.1 23.1 1
5 0.00 0.77 0.69
i,o",~ 0.52 0.32 0.77
.
0.0 0.0
IncremntDel: 2.4 2
4 0
0 0.0 33.3 33.1 33.1 13.4 11.9 16.1
.
.
0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 2.6 2.6
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0
00 0
00 0.2 0.0 1.7
.
.
Delay/Veh: 22.1 22.1 1
2 0
0 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
.
.
0.0
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
00 1
00 0.0 34.8 30.7 30.7 11.6 10.2 15.3
.
.
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 22.1 22.1 1
2 0
0 1.00 1.00 1.00
.
.
0.0
DesignQueue: 29 3 2 0.0 34.8 30.7 30.7 11.6 10.2 15.3
0 0
***~***x~****,r*x**,~~**********:r***~:x*****
O
9
0
8
****
****:~***,r*
****x~
~* *x~*
***~rs,r*,r**8*
Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
~ ~.
MITIG8 - Cumulative No ProjTue Sep 25, 2001 16:25:10
--------------------------- Page 1-1
---------------------
------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
*~*~**v~***,r*,r,t*,r**x*,r******,r*~r****,r****,t**,t**********~r*+******x~***************~r*
Intersection #2 Dubuque/Oyster Point
****,t,r*,t******,r*,t*****~r************,~**************************,r***,t********~c****
Cycle (sec): 150 Critical Vol./Cap. (X):
Loss Time 1.197
(sec): 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) 81.2
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service:
**************x**********,rx~*************,t*x*******~,t************,r**************,r
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound
Movement: L - T - R _ West Bound
L T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I--------------
--~~---p-----------~~---- ________
Control: Split 'Phase S lit Phase Protected -I
Rights: Ovl Protected
Include Include Include
Min. Green: 10 10 10 0 0 0 6 10 10 6 10 10
Lanes : 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 2 0 2 0 2
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 504 39 158 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 504 39 158 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 267 137 168 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 363 3 -428 516 537 907
Initial Fut: 771 176 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 771 176 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
Reduct Vol: 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 771 176 326 0 0 0 0 O
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1500 1?00 1?00 1?00 1000 1800
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.13
Final Vol.: 810 -185 368 0 0 0 587 282 257 1283 1097 2115
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.63 0.37 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.57 1.43 2.00 2.00 2.00
Final Sat.: 2629 601 3230 0 0 0 3610 2773 2528 3610 3800 3230
------------
-------------
Capacity Analysis Module: -----------~
Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.36 0.29 0.65
Crit Moves: ***,r
**** ***~
Green Time: 38.6 38.6 118.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4 22.8 22.8 79.6 82.0 82.0
'', ~= Volume/Cap: 1.20. 1.20 0.14 0.000.00 0.00 1.20 0. 6'r =~J'`-67 0.67 .0.53 1.20
Uniform Del: 42.3 42.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.3 45.6 45.6 19.5 16.5 25.8
IncremntDe1:110.7 111 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 118.2 1.5 1.5 0.6 0.2 104.3
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.B5
Delay/Veh: 146.6 147 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.1 40.3 40.3 17.2 14,2 126 2
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
- AdjDel/Veh: 146.6 147 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.1 40.3 40.3 17.2 14.2 126.2
DesignQueue: 54 12 7 0 0 0
:r*x~x*,tx~*,tv~*********,r**,r,t**x~,r,r~r***x~*,t,t,r*+*********,t,t****O,t,r*,t*~*,~****x~~r*,r*,r~**9~t*
Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
~,'~YC{ i ~Z.. ~7 ~ ~~ '~ ~ ~jL2.ee ~ '( fit- f~ ~, y
~.,.uv~~u.. ~o fay '~~ ~,J;,,+~,o,M, ~~, G~~,..r~ ~ . ~~C,,j o~...~i ~~cJ.G3~.. ~..~~_taQQz.,
MITIGB - Cumulative No ProjTue Sep 25, 2001 16:26:35 ~~ ~ ~i.~cv~..a--d" ~--~r~"~~
--------------------- Page 1-1
-----------------
-----------------------
Level Of Service Computation 2eport
1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
~******************,r****+*******~*****:r*,r***********+*********,r*,rat,~**:r*******,~**
Intersection #3 Airport/Grand
**v~**,r**,~******,t**,r****x**~**:~***:rx,r**********:r****,r*,r,r******rr**~r*~r**,r*,~*,r*x~x~t~*
Cycle (sec): 115 Critical Vol./Ca
Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Avera a Dela p (%). 0.974
Optimal Cycle: 179 g Y (sec/veh): 39.0
Level Of Service: D
*:rre*********~t*****,t*,t**,r*****,r****,t************r~***,rat,r*,r,r*********~*************
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound
Movement: L - T - R L _ _ West Bound
T R L - T - R L - T - R
------------~---p----------
Control: _ S lit Phase Split Phase Split Phase Split Phase
Rights: Ovl Include Include
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 In10ude 10
Lanes : 1 0 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 1
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 16 2 0 0 0 0 O
165 25 454 304 40 0 2 135 102
Initial Fut: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
User Adj: 1.00 1.0U 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 779 400 167
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 I.10 1.10 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 117 517 97 408 480 570 463 125 84 802 400 167
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.38 1.62 1.00 1.57 0.43 1.00 2.00.1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 2567 3019 1615 2872 776 1615 3610 1900 1615
------------
------------
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.14 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.22 0.21 0.10
Crit Moves: ~**~ ****
Green Time: 16.1 16.1 42.3 41.7 41.7 41.7 19.0 19.0 19.0 26.2 26.2 26.2
Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.97 0.16 0.44 0.44 0.97 0.97 0.97 •:J:31 0.97 0.92 0.45
Uniform Del: 34.6 37.4 18.6 21.1 21.1 27.5 36.3 36.3 32.1 33.5 33.0 29.0
IncremntDel: 1.0 24.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 13.0 22.4 22.4 0.2 18.7 18.1 0.6
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 30.4 56.0 15.8 18.0 18.0 36.3 53.3 53.3 27.5 47.2 46.2 25.3
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 30.4 56.0 15.8 18.0 18.0 36.3 53.3 53.3 27.5 47.2 46.2 25.3
DesignQueue: 7 29 4 17 20 25 26
*~****~,r*,r*********x~~r*x~*******,r,r*:t*******x~**vc****,t***,t*:r*,t*,r*******,t,t******,~~t*8*
Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
~~
MITIG8 - Cumulative + Proj Tue Jul 10, 2001 13:29:35
------------------------------------------------------ Page 1-1
--------------------
-------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Dubuque/Oyster Point
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 150 Critical Vol./Cap.
Loss Time (sec): 9 Y+R = 4 sec Avera e Dela (X)~ 1.210
( ) g y (sec/veh): 86.1
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service:
********************************************************************************
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound
Movement: L - T _ R L _ T - West Bound
------------I--------------- ----- R L- T- R L- T- R
Control: Split Phase II Split Phase -II Protected -II Protected -i
Rights: Ovl Include Include
Min. Green: 10 10 10 p 0 Include
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 00 2 60 10 1 10 6 10 10
------------I--------------- 2 0 2 0 2
Volume Module: II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Base Vol: 504 39 158 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 504 39 158 0 0 0 207 253 662 730 508 965
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 274 167 168 p 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 363 3 -428 516 537 907
Initial Fut: 778 206 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
User Adj: 1.00 1'.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 778 206 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 1872
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 778 206 326 0 0 0 570 256 234 1246 1045 18720
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.03 1.05 1.13
Final Vol.: 87.7 216 368 0 0 0 587 282 257 1283 1097 2115
------------I----------
-----li---------------II---------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.85 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.58 0.42 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.57 1.43 2.00 2.00 2.00
Final Sat.: 2555 675 3230 0 0 0 3610 2773 2528 3610 3800 3230
------------I---------------
fl---------------II---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.32 0.32 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.36 0.29 0.65
Crit Moves: ****
**** ***~
Green Time: 39.7 39.7 118.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.2 22.5 22.5 78.g g1,2 81.2
Volume/Cap: 1.21 1.21. 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.21 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.53 1.21
Uniform Del: 41.9 41.9 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.3 45.8 45.8 19.9 16.9 26.1
IncremntDe1:118.5 119 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 126.5 1.6 1.6 0.7 0.2 112.6
Delay Adj: 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 154.2 154 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 168.4 40.6 40.6 17.6 14.6 134.8
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 154.2 154 - ~;':~ 0.0 0.0 0.0 168.4 40.6 40:6 17.6 14.6 134.8
DesignQueue: 54 14 7 0 0 0
*************************************************4*****~*****9*****6***4*****9~*
~d
~"d w~
~~
Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE
'~ t ,~ ~ `
~'~ add Eg (~'~ ~ nzs~c,~ ,mi ~o~ ~o S~a~ L~ ~-C
MITIG8 - Cumulative + proj Tue Jul 10, X001 13:58:29
--------------- g
---------------------------------------- ~ 1
---------------a-e _-
------------------- ________
----------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
1994 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Airport/Grand
Cycle (sec): .15 Critical Vol./Cap. (X);
Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh 0.975
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: )~ 39.1
********************:r*~***************************************************D*****
Approach: North Bound South Bound
Movement: L _ T _ R - East Bound West Bound
L T - R- L - T - R L - T
------------I------------- - R
--II------------- II---------------It---------------I
Control: Split Phase Split Phase Split Phase S lit Phase
Rightsr Ovl Include p
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 Include 10 10 Include
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 10 10 0 10
1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 1
------------I---------------II---------------
Volume Module: II---------------II---------------
I
Base Vol: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 117 476 95 206 411 116 137 79 84 777 265 65
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 16 2 165 25 454 304 40 0 0 0 p
Initial Fut: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 167
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 167
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 492 97 371 436 570 441 119 84 783 402 l6~
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 117 517 97 408 480 570 463 125 84 806 402 167
------------I---------- _____ ________
Saturation Flow Module: -II -II -------II--------------_
I
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85
Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.38 1.62 1.00 1.57 0.43 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1805 3800 1615 2567 3019 1615 2872 776 1615 3610 1900 1615
------------I------------
Capacity Analysis Module:---II---------------II-------------__
II---------------I
Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.14 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.22 0.21 0.10
Crit Moves: **** ****
Green Time: 16.0 16.0 42.4 41.6 41.6 41.6 19.0 19*0 19.0 26*3 26.3 26.3
Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.98 0.16 0.44 0.44 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.31 0.98 0.92 0.45
Uniform Del: 34.6 37.5 18.5 21.2 21.2 27.5 36.3 36.3 32.1 33.4 33.0 29.0
IncremntDel: 1.0 24.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 13.2 22.7 22.7 0.2 18.9 18.2 0.6
Delay Adj': 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85
Delay/Veh: 30.4 56.3 15.8 18.0 18.0 36.6 53.6 53.6 27.5 47.3 46.3 25.2
User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 30.4 56.3 1~?.€; 18.0 18.0 36.6 53.6 53.6 27.5 47.3 46.3 25.2
DesignQueue: 7 29
***************************4**********~***********6***************************8*
Traffix 7.5.1015 (c) 2000 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS, SAN JOSE