Alameda City Council
October 20, 2026

Technical Memorandum
6001 Shellmound Street, Suite 500 • Emeryville, CA 94608 | 510.343.6400 | Parametrix.com DATE: July 13, 2026
TO: Susie Hufstader; City of Alameda
FROM: Marisa Lee; Andrew Lee, PE; Parametrix
SUBJECT: Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis PROJECT NUMBER: 474-8939-006
PROJECT NAME: On-Call Transportation Engineering Services This memorandum presents the results of a safety and access study for the Wilma Chan Way and Pacific Avenue intersection in the City of Alameda (Figure 1). This intersection was identified as needing improvements based on its importance for the Neighborhood Greenway network as recommended in the 2022 Active Transportation Plan. The City initiated this analysis to study ways to improve multimodal safety, including converting the traffic control to a traffic signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) and / or restricting turns.

Figure 1 Project Location Map, Wilma Chan Way at Pacific Avenue Source: mymaps.google.com
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 4
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 2 July 13, 2026 Summary of Data & Analysis
 Volumes: Wilma Chan Way recorded more than 16,000 daily vehicle trips while street volumes along Pacific Avenue are low. Bicycle and pedestrian volumes experience AM and PM peaks, with volumes around 20 pedestrians and 10-15 bikes per hour during the peak hours. Most pedestrians and bicycles at this intersection cross Wilma Chan Way.  Collision History: There have been 9 reported injury collisions during the study period (2014- 2025), mostly broadside collisions between vehicles turning from Pacific Avenue and vehicles travelling through the intersection along Wilma Chan Way. There have been no reported bicycle or pedestrian injuries.
 Sight Distance: Sight distance is limited for vehicles approaching Wilma Chan Way from Pacific Avenue, particularly going westbound. Sight distance obstructions include private property walls, vegetation, and a utility pole In the northbound direction, the measured stopping sight distance satisfies up to 35 MPH (275 feet vs 250 feet).  Traffic Control Warrant – PHB: The warrant for a PHB was met when bicycles and pedestrians were counted together during the AM peak hour at 7:30am.  Traffic Control Warrant – Signal: There were six reported collisions at the study intersection from 2016-2018, which satisfies Warrant 7. Crash frequency has decreased since, and more recent years’ crash data do not meet the threshold for Warrant 7. Physical conditions of the intersection have not changed significantly since 2016-2018.  Lighting: Horizonal illuminance for the intersection meets criteria, while illuminance uniformity and vertical illuminance in crosswalks does not meet criteria. Two alternatives are analyzed for improved lighting.
 Median Diverter: A median diverter was designed to reduce conflicts, restricting side street access for vehicles and eliminating the vehicle movements that caused the prevailing collision type. The median diverter allows bicycles and pedestrians to pass through.  Traffic Operations Modeling: Various configurations of signalization and PHB traffic control were modeled for operational outcomes. PHB with Full Median Diverter and Signal with Full Median Diverter provided the most optimal outcomes, with operational efficiency and reduced conflicts.

This rest of this memo is organized into the following sections:

1. Existing Conditions: Setting, Multimodal Traffic Counts, Collision Analysis, Sight Distance Measurements, and Site Visit Observations,

2. Analysis: Traffic Control Warrant Analysis, Traffic Operations Modeling, Geometric Changes/Conceptual Design, Lighting

3. Appendix
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 3 July 13, 2026

1. Existing Conditions and Observations
This section presents multimodal traffic counts, collision analysis, and sight distance measurements.

These data are supplemented by notes on user behavior and infrastructure collected during a site visit performed by City staff and Consultants in March 2026.

1.1 Setting
Wilma Chan Way is a four-lane, north-south principal arterial roadway connecting the neighborhoods of West Alameda to Atlantic Avenue and the Webster Street Tube.1 The posted speed limit is 25 MPH.

Pacific Avenue is a two-lane east-west local street; the City designates Pacific as a planned Neighborhood Greenway.2 The prima facie speed limit for this residential street is 25 MPH.

The intersection operates as a minor-approach stop-controlled intersection at the Pacific Avenue approaches. North-south traffic at this intersection along Wilma Chan is uncontrolled, while eastwest traffic approaching from Pacific Avenue is two-way stop controlled. The crosswalks across Wilma Chan Way measure between 75 and 90 feet and approximately 60 feet across Pacific Avenue.

There are no marked bike route markings or bike route signs on Pacific Avenue.

There are marked high visibility “ladder” crosswalks on all four legs with crosswalk warning signs at the corners and in the median. The corners of the intersection are ‘blended transition’ curb treatments where the sidewalk becomes flush with the roadway; this corner curb treatment provides limited protection for people on foot waiting to cross the street, as there is no vertical separation to prevent turning vehicles from driving onto the sidewalk.

1.2 Multimodal Traffic Counts and Speeds
Parametrix collected on March 3, 2026, turning movement counts of people walking, biking, and driving for one weekday 12-hour period from7am to7pm (Table 1) and vehicle speed and volumes on Wilma Chan Way between Pacific and Lincoln avenues for one 24-hour period (Table 2).

Table 1 Multimodal Traffic Counts 12-Hours, Wilma Chan Way / Pacific Avenue Approach
Vehicles
Bikes

Left Through Right Xwalk Location Pedestrians
AM Peak Hour, 7:45-8:45AM
Northbound 29 703 3 0 South Leg 8
Southbound 3 466 20 0 North Leg 6
Eastbound 8 8 25 2 West Leg 5
Westbound 0 7 16 6 East Leg 3
PM Peak Hour, 5-6 PM
Northbound 32 607 3 1 South Leg 2
Southbound 9 975 34 0 North Leg 11
Eastbound 9 9 44 3 West Leg 3
1 Caltrans California Road Systems (CRS) Maps. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/research-innovation-systeminformation/office-of-highway-system-information-performance/functional-classification 2 https://www.alamedaca.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/departments/alameda/transportation/bikeped/2030_low_stress_backbone_network_alamedaatp_2022.pdf Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 4 July 13, 2026 Westbound 0 2 10 1 East Leg 5
12-hour total, 7AM-7PM
Northbound 367 6711 41 13 South Leg 42
Southbound 50 6966 262 16 North Leg 62
Eastbound 85 81 436 18 West Leg 57
Westbound 12 35 96 37 East Leg 30
Traffic Counts Plus and Parametrix, March 3, 2026
Wilma Chan Way recorded nearly 17,000 vehicle trips in one day in Spring 2026. Most trips are northbound during the AM peak hour and southbound during the PM peak hour. Across the day, northbound traffic volumes were highest during the AM peak hour and relatively constant after 10 AM, whereas southbound traffic volumes tended to increase and peak at 5 PM (Figure 2).

Among people traveling by bike, there were 8 people crossing Wilma Chan Way during the AM peak hour and four during the PM peak hour. There were 55 total bicyclists recorded crossing Wilma Chan Way across the sampled 12-hours. There were 14 pedestrians recorded crossing Wilma Chan Way during the AM peak hour, 13 during the PM peak hour, and a total of104 across 12 hours.

Table 2 Vehicle Speed and Volumes 24-Hours, Wilma Chan Way between Lincoln Avenue and Pacific Avenue Vehicle Speeds (MPH) % over 25
MPH
% of traffic
congested
Daily Traffic
Direction Volumes 15th %ile 50% %ile
(Median)
85%ile 95%ile
Northbound 22 MPH 27 MPH 31 MPH 34 MPH 69% 3% 8524
Southbound* 18 MPH 24 MPH 29 MPH 31 MPH 54% 8% 8334
Total 16,858
Traffic Counts Plus and Parametrix, March 3, 2026
*Adjusted to discount congested conditions, i.e. traffic speeds < 8 MPH Traffic speeds tended to be higher northbound (85%ile speed = 31 mph vs 29 mph), and the southbound direction was more likely to experience congested conditions (8% of traffic traveling at less than 8 MPH vs. 3%).

Figure 2 Hourly Vehicle Volumes, Wilma Chan Way at Pacific Avenue Traffic Counts Plus and Parametrix, March 3, 2026
A detailed table of multimodal traffic volumes is provided in Appendix A. 0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Hourly Vehicle Traffic Hour Starting
SB NB
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 5 July 13, 2026

1.3 Collision Analysis
There were 9 total reported injury crashes at the Wilma Chan Way / Pacific Avenue intersection recorded between 2014 and 2025 (Table 3).3 Seven out of nine recorded incidents were broadside collisions, and the predominant Primary Collision Factor (PCF) was Failure to Yield Right-of-Way (Automobile ROW). The at-fault party was the minor-street driver in seven out of nine cases and the opposing vehicle movement was southbound through vehicles on Wilma Chan Avenue. There was one reported bicycle-involved collision.

Table 3 Injury Collision Summary, 2014-2025
Accident
Year
Party 1
(Party At Fault)
Party 1 Movement Party 2 Party 2
Movement
Collision type Collision Severity
2016 Vehicle EB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain 2016 Bicyclist WB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Other Visible Injury 2016 Vehicle EB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain 2017 Vehicle WB Left Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain 2017 Vehicle NB Left Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain 2018 Vehicle WB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain 2022 Vehicle WB Left Vehicle SB Parked Sideswipe Complaint of Pain 2025 Vehicle SB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Rear end Other Visible Injury 2025 Vehicle WB Straight Vehicle SB Straight Broadside Complaint of Pain Abbreviations: Westbound WB, Eastbound EB, Northbound NB, Southbound SB

1.4 Sight Distance
At intersections there are two types of applicable sight distances: stopping sight distance (SSD) and intersection or corner sight distance (CSD). For non-State highway roadways like urban arterials, guidance from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) dictates that SSD is the required standard for the mainline street and CSD as a recommended standard for the side street approaches.4 Wilma Chan Way is not a State highway and the California Highway Design Manual (CA HDM, 2023) does not govern, although it represents best practices for some types of roadways.

The measured sight distances are presented for the Wilma Chan Way approaches (Figure 3, SSD) and Pacific Avenue approaches (Figure 4 and Figure 5, CSD). The measured stopping sight distances were compared to the required and recommended standards from the AASHTO Green Book and CA HDM (Table 4). 5
3 UC Berkeley (2026) Transportation Injury Mapping System. https://tims.berkeley.edu/ 4 AASHTO (2018) “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets” (AASHTO Green Book). Section 9.5.1 and 9.5.3.2.
5 CA HDM 405.1(2)(a); AASHTO (2018) “Green Book” Equation 9-1.

Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 6 July 13, 2026 Figure 3: Stopping Sight Distance, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue The SSD measured along Wilma Chan Way approaching Pacific Avenue satisfies AASHTO SSD standards for up to 35 MPH (250’, Table 4). North and southbound drivers have a clear line of sight approaching the intersection although adjacent walls, signs, and trees may obstruct drivers’ sight lines at times.

Measurement of the CSD is based on the departure sight triangle and depends largely on the assumed driver position.6 A driver stopped at the Pacific Avenue approaches could be initially positioned at the STOP bar but could encroach into crosswalk to improve their line of sight of the mainline traffic lanes. The exhibit below shows a westbound driver’s initial line of sight positioned at the STOP bar (dashed lines) and blocking the crosswalk (solid lines).

Figure 4: Westbound Pacific Avenue Sight Distance, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue 6 AASHTO (2018) Section 9.5.2.2
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 7 July 13, 2026 The westbound Pacific Avenue approach has more constrained corner sight lines due to the walls and landscaping to both the left and right and the horizontal curve of the road (Figure 4). A westbound driver could position themselves to have adequate CSD if they stop in the crosswalk; this behavior was observed during the site visit. These sight line issues are supported by collision records, with westbound movements making up five out of the nine crashes.

Figure 5: Eastbound Pacific Avenue Sight Distance, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue The eastbound approach does not have the same degree of sight line issues although a driver’s line of sight can be obstructed by the utility pole to the right and a low wall to the left. Eastbound crashes made up two out of the nine recorded crashes.

Table 4 Corner Sight Distance Measurements and Design Guidance, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Approach Measured Sight
Distance
Required Sight Distance
at 25 MPH*
Standard Met?
Northbound SSD >275’ SSD = 150’ at 25 MPH
SSD = 250’ at 35 MPH
Required Yes
Southbound SSD > 340’ Required Yes
Westbound Left CSD 350’ at Xwalk
Right CSD 225 at Xwalk
Left CSD 312’
(looking right)
Right CSD 238’
(looking left)
Recommended Yes if at Xwalk
No if at STOP bar
Eastbound Left CSD 334’ at STOP
Right CSD 347’ at STOP
Recommended Yes at STOP bar
Corner Sight Distance – CSD; Stopping Sight Distance – SSD *SSD Standard, AASHTO Table 3-1;
CSD Standard, AASHTO Equation 9-1. ISD/CSD = 1.47*Vmajor*Tg Left CSD Tg time gap = 7.5s + 0.5s (2nd lane) + 0.5s (median) Right CSD Tg time gap = 6.5s
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 8 July 13, 2026

2. Traffic Control Warrant and Operations Analysis
This section presents an analysis for two types of traffic control: a pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) and traffic signal. Vehicle delay was modeled for the existing minor stop control, a PHB with and without a traffic diverter, and a traffic signal with and without a traffic diverter, to assess the change in driver delay.

2.1 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Warrant
Based on the traffic volumes and crossing distance at this intersection, the threshold to warrant a PHB is 20 pedestrians per hour. There were 17 pedestrians and 8 bicyclists recorded crossing Wilma Chan Way at Pacific Avenue during the peak hours, which satisfies the PHB Warrant (Figure 6).

Whether bikes can be included as pedestrian volumes is not explicitly addressed in the CA MUTCD, however, both people walking and biking would be using the PHB in the proposed condition. The addition of a PHB and other improvements to create a more safe and comfortable crossing could induce higher walk and bike crossings at this location; some people may currently be avoiding this location and cross at alternate, but less direct, routes.

Figure 6: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Warrant, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue

Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 9 July 13, 2026

2.2 Signal Warrant
The CA MUTCD Section 4C.01 provides guidance on criteria for consideration in a traffic signal control study. The guidance is based on the following traffic signal warrants:

1. Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume

2. Four-Hour Vehicular Volume

3. Peak Hour

4. Pedestrian Volume

5. School Crossing

6. Coordinated Signal System

7. Crash Experience

8. Roadway Network

9. Intersection Near a Grade Crossing
In general, the installation of unwarranted traffic signals has multiple potential operational and safety ramifications including the potential of increasing main street delays, increasing rear-end collisions, and increasing cut-through traffic on local roads. Additionally, the CA MUTCD provides the following standard with regards to traffic signal warrant engineering studies:
“Delay, congestion, approach conditions, driver confusion, future land use or other evidence of the need for right of way assignment beyond that which could be provided by stop sign shall be demonstrated.”7
Based on the characteristics of the study intersection, Warrants 1, 2, 4, and 7 identified in the CA MUTCD are applicable to the study intersection. The intersection does not meet the criteria identified in Warrant 3 as an unusual condition, located in a land use context that produces peak-hour conditions where high-occupancy vehicle facilities attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time. The intersection does not meet the definition of a school crossing, so Warrant 5 does not apply. Warrant 6 does not apply since the resulting spacing of signalizing intersections along Wilma Chan Way would be less than 1000 feet. Warrant 8 does not apply since the intersection is not between two major roadways, as defined by CA MUTCD Section 4C.09(03).

Warrant 9 does not apply since there is no rail grade crossing at the intersection.

The six reported collisions at the study intersection from 2016-2018 satisfy Warrant 7. Crash frequency has decreased since, and more recent years’ crash data do not meet the threshold for Warrant 7. Physical conditions of the intersection have not changed significantly since 2016-2018.

The signal appears to be warranted based on a combination of the factors identified in this and previous sections: collision records, constrained sight distances, adjacent land uses, and City plans for Pacific Avenue as a neighborhood greenway.

See below for the results of each warrant analyzed. Appendix B contains the CA MUTCD Warrant Analysis Worksheet.
7 CA MUTCD 2026, Section 4C.01, Paragraph 19a
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 10 July 13, 2026 Warrant 1 – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume) is intended for applications at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to install a traffic control signal. Warrant 1 is satisfied if minimum volume requirements are met for any eight hours of a single day, based on two conditions and thresholds set by CA MUTCD Figure 4C-101. If either Condition A and Condition B are met, or if both conditions are met at 80 percent of the minimum volumes, then the warrant is satisfied.

Based on the urban area classification and 2 or more approach lanes, the minimum volume requirement for Condition A is 600 vehicles total on both approaches of the major street and 200 vehicles on the single highest minor street approach. The minimum volume requirement for Condition B is 900 vehicles total on both approaches of the major street and 100 vehicles on the single highest minor street approach.

While Wilma Chan Way vehicle traffic volumes satisfy the 600-vehicle minimum threshold set by the CA MUTCD for all eight hours, the minor approach volumes do not meet the threshold for any of the 8 hours and thus Warrant 1 is not satisfied.

Table 5. Warrant 1 (8-Hour Vehicular Volume), Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Wilma Chan Way/Pacific Ave Warrant 1
Hour
Starting
Wilma Chan Wy
Two-Way Total
Vehicle Volumes
(Major)
Pacific Ave
Vehicle
Volumes
(Minor)
100%
Condition A
Satisfied?
Min. 600 Major
& 200 Minor
100%
Condition B
Satisfied?
Min. 900 Major
& 100 Minor
80%
Condition A
Satisfied?
Min. 480 Major
& 160 Minor
80%
Condition B
Satisfied?
Min. 720 Major
& 80 Minor
9:45 AM 959 47 No No No No
11:15 AM 1046 61 No No No No
12:15 PM 1128 68 No No No No
1:45 PM 1092 60 No No No No
2:45 PM 1339 63 No No No No
3:45 PM 1470 66 No No No No
4:45 PM 1633 71 No No No No
5:45 PM 1571 55 No No No No
Warrant Satisfied?
Condition A:

No
Condition B:

No
Combination of A and B at 80%:

No
No
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 11 July 13, 2026 Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) is intended for applications at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to install a traffic control signal. Warrant 2 is satisfied if minimum traffic volume conditions are met for any four hours of a day, with the plotted point of minor street traffic volumes vs major street volumes falling above the curve in CA MUTCD Figure 4C-1. With major street traffic exceeding 1400 vehicles per hour, the minimum minor-street approach volume threshold is 115 vehicles per hour. The Pacific Avenue approach exceeds this threshold for only 1 out of 4 hours and thus Warrant 2 is not satisfied.

Figure 7: Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume), Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Table 6. Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume), Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Hour Starting
Wilma Chan Way
Two-Way Total Vehicle
Volumes (Major)
Pacific Avenue
Vehicle Volumes
(Minor)
Warrant 2
Plotted points fall above applicable
curve in CA MUTCD Figure 4C-1?
12:15 PM 1128 68 No
1:45 PM 1092 60 No
2:45 PM 1339 63 No
4:30 PM 1622 91 No
Warrant Satisfied? No
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 12 July 13, 2026 Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume
Warrant 4 (Pedestrian Volume) is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. As detailed in CA MUTCD Section 4C.05, recorded pedestrian volumes across four hours (Criteria A) or across one hour (Criteria B) must plot above the curves of CA MUTCD Figure 4C-5 and 4C-7, respectively, to satisfy the warrant. The minimum pedestrian volume threshold is 107 and 133 pedestrians per hour for Criteria A and Criteria B, respectively, crossing the major street only.

Pedestrian volumes at the study intersection, crossing in all directions, peak at 23 pedestrians per hour, with 17 of those crossing Wilma Chan Way. The recorded pedestrian volumes fail to meet the minimum threshold and thus Warrant 4 is not satisfied. The low number of people crossing on foot and bike here likely reflects the existing crossing challenges here.

Figure 8. Warrant 4 Four-Hour Volumes Threshold Curve from CA MUTCD Figure 4C-5, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue

Table 7. Warrant 4 (Pedestrian Volume), Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Hour Starting
Wilma Chan Way Two-Way Total
Vehicle Volumes (Major)
Pedestrians Crossing
WCW Part A: Four Hour Part B: One Hour
7:30 AM 1143 17 No No
3:15 PM 1420 13 No No
4:30 PM 1617 7 No No
5:30 PM 1585 11 No No
Part A/B Satisfied? No No
Satisfied? No
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 13 July 13, 2026 Warrant 7 – Crash Experience
Warrant 7 is intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic signal. The primary criteria for an intersection of this type to meet Warrant 7 is a minimum threshold of five crashes within a 12-month period, or six crashes in a three-year period, as outlined in CA MUTCD Section 4C.08 and Table 4C-3 Minimum Number of Reported Crashes in a Three-Year Period.

The six reported collisions at the study intersection from 2016-2018 satisfy Warrant 7 (Table 3 and Table 8). Crash frequency has decreased since, and more recent years’ crash data do not meet the threshold for Warrant 7. Physical conditions of the intersection have not changed significantly since 2016-2018.

The intersection has a history of primarily broadside collisions, a collision type that would be corrected by traffic control signals.

Table 8 Warrant 7 - Crash Summary, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Year Number of Collisions
2016 3
2017 2
2018 1
2019 0
2020 0
2021 0
2022 1
2023 0
2024 0
2025 2
Satisfied? Yes, 2016-2018
Table 9 CA MUTCD Warrant 7 Minimum Number of Reported Crashes Number of Through Lanes Total Crashes
Major Minor 1 Year 3 Year
2 or more 1 5 6
CA MUTCD 2026, Table 4C-2 and 4C-3
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 14 July 13, 2026

2.3 Lighting Analysis
The lighting analysis included evaluating existing conditions of the existing intersection and crosswalk illuminance levels. Analysis was then conducted to develop alternative recommendations to improve intersection and crosswalk light levels for user safety. Two alternative options were developed, reflecting options for light improvements or more robust improvements.

Model Parameters
The following design criteria were taken from the City of Alameda’s Street, Parking Lot, and Pathway Lighting Design Guide and supplemented by ANSI/IES RP-08-25,:

Table 10 Intersection Lighting Standards, City of Alameda The following parameters were incorporated into the lighting model:
 The luminaire used in the analysis was the Autobahn ATB0 Series P204-R3-3K (88 watts, ~11500 lumens) with loss factors as follows:
o Lamp lumen = 0.9 (from the fixture spec sheet)
o Dirt depreciation = 0.85 (from the City’s Lighting Design Guide) o Resulting total light loss factor (LLF) = 0.765
 All luminaires were modeled at a mounting height of 30 feet  Six-foot luminaire arms were used for existing lights. New lights used either 6’- or 12’-arms  Vertical illumination was evaluated for all crosswalks in both directions of traffic Model Results
In the existing condition, the intersection meets horizontal illuminance criteria but does not meet the uniformity ratio (UR) or vertical criteria for crosswalks. Vertical illuminance in the crosswalks was typically less than 1 fc.

After several iterations in the lighting model, two improvement options are provided.

Option 1: Minor Improvements
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 15 July 13, 2026  Retain two existing lights
 Replace two existing lights on longer mast arms
 Add two new streetlights
In this scenario, the intersection meets the desired UR and improves the light levels in the crosswalks, but not enough to satisfy criteria for all crosswalks in all directions.

Option 2: Robust Improvements
 Retain three existing lights
 Replace one existing light on a longer mast arm
 Add three new streetlights
This option further increases the crosswalk vertical illuminance to over 1 fc in all directions except one, and meets the minimum vertical illuminance in 6 out of 8 crosswalk/direction conditions. The table below indicates whether criteria were satisfied.

The next section presents conceptual designs that include the preliminary placement of the streetlights modeled here.

Table 11 Intersection Lighting Model Results, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue Parametrix, 2026.

Appendix D includes illuminance values and calculation summary tables for the three cases discussed above.

Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 16 July 13, 2026

2.4 Concept Design
Parametrix and the City developed conceptual designs for traffic operations modeling and preliminary layout plans. The design variables the team considered were:

1. Center median with turn restrictions: The center median would prohibit vehicles from making through and left turn movements from Pacific Avenue and left turns from Wilma Chan Way; people on bikes and foot would be permitted to cross Wilma Chan Way. Vehicles would be diverted to Buena Vista or Lincoln avenues. Because of the low vehicle volumes making these turns, as described in section 1.2, the evaluation concludes that Buena Vista and Lincoln Avenues can accommodate this diversion. The median diverter is intended to prohibit minor approach crossings which are most of the injury collisions recorded here.

2. Traffic control, traffic signal or PHB
a) The traffic signal would service vehicles approaching from Pacific Avenue and walk and bike actuations. Left turns from Pacific Avenue and Wilma Chan Way were assumed as permissive movements, i.e., not provided a dedicated left turn or protected phase. With a median diverter these left turns would be prohibited.
b) The PHB would activate to service walk and bike actuations crossing Wilma Chan Way.

Vehicle movements from Pacific Avenue would be permitted under minor street STOP control.

3. Bikeway alignment to the left or right of the Pacific Avenue approach. a) The traffic signal alternative includes left-side bike lanes at the approach to Wilma Chan Way, placing bicyclists waiting for their signal to cross where they will not conflict with turning vehicles as they proceed through the intersection. b) The PHB alternative includes right-side bike lanes at the approach to Wilma Chan Way, allowing bicyclists to access the push button and wait next to the curb for their signal to cross Wilma Chan Way.

Parametrix developed two conceptual plan layouts within these options:
 Concept A presents a traffic signal with median diverter and left side bikeway (Figure 9).  Concept B presents a PHB with median diverter and right-side bikeway (Figure 10).

Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 17 July 13, 2026 Figure 9: Concept A: Traffic Signal with Median Diverter and Left Side Bikeway Source: Parametrix 2026
Figure 10: Concept B: PHB with Median Diverter and Right-Side Bikeway Source: Parametrix 2026
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 18 July 13, 2026

2.5 Traffic Operations Analysis
Parametrix modeled the various intersection options as summarized below (Table 12). The signal was modeled to activate for vehicles detected at the minor approach and permissive left turns at all four approaches. The PHB was modeled to respond to only walk and bike actuations at a maximum of once per minute; minor approach vehicles would continue to operate with STOP control. The traffic model delay estimates and equivalent level of service (LOS) grades are based on the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 methodology.

Table 12 Intersection Operations Summary, Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Avenue AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
# Scenario Description Control Delay (s) / LOS Delay (s) / LOS 0 Existing TWSC 11.7 / B (Pacific) 16.8 / C (Pacific)
1A No Diverter Signal 5.7 / A (Average) 5.3 / A (Average) 1B Median Diverter Signal 6.2 / A (Average) 6.5 / A (Average) 2A No Diverter PHB 3.2 / A (Wilma Chan)

11.7 / B (Pacific)

2.6 / A (Wilma Chan)

16.8 / C (Pacific)
2B Median Diverter PHB 1.9 / A (Wilma Chan)

12.8 / B (Pacific)

3.3 / A (Wilma Chan)

15.0 / C (Pacific)
Source: Parametrix June 2026
The model results indicate that Pacific Avenue approaches currently operate at an estimated level of delay between 10 and 20 seconds, although the actual performance may be worse due to the sight distance constraints and interaction effects from the adjacent traffic signals.

The model for a full traffic signal (Scenarios 1A and 1B) forecasts that the overall vehicle delay would be less than 10 seconds (LOS A). The model for the PHB forecasts that the mainline vehicle delay would be less, as the signal would only activate for walk and bike activity. The PHB delay for the minor approach traffic would continue to be in the LOS B/C range over 10 seconds.

Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 19 July 13, 2026

4. Appendix
Appendix A: Multimodal Traffic Volumes
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 1

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 07:00 2 49 0 51 2 0 0 2 0 135 0 135 3 0 1 4 192
07:15 0 66 0 66 1 0 1 2 0 143 5 148 2 1 0 3 219
07:30 4 69 0 73 3 0 0 3 0 161 1 162 4 1 1 6 244
07:45 4 102 1 107 6 1 0 7 1 166 2 169 3 0 1 4 287
Total 10 286 1 297 12 1 1 14 1 605 8 614 12 2 3 17 942
08:00 5 106 0 111 6 3 0 9 0 191 4 195 7 3 0 10 325
08:15 6 145 0 151 2 1 0 3 0 167 8 175 6 3 3 12 341
08:30 5 113 2 120 2 2 0 4 2 179 15 196 9 2 4 15 335
08:45 2 97 2 101 3 1 0 4 1 165 8 174 2 0 2 4 283
Total 18 461 4 483 13 7 0 20 3 702 35 740 24 8 9 41 1284 09:00 2 99 3 104 4 1 0 5 1 175 2 178 2 1 1 4 291
09:15 4 99 0 103 1 0 1 2 2 142 6 150 9 1 0 10 265
09:30 0 78 0 78 2 1 0 3 1 136 6 143 4 1 1 6 230
09:45 2 105 1 108 5 0 1 6 0 135 8 143 5 0 3 8 265
Total 8 381 4 393 12 2 2 16 4 588 22 614 20 3 5 28 1051 10:00 5 91 2 98 2 0 0 2 0 115 4 119 10 3 0 13 232
10:15 5 98 1 104 1 2 0 3 0 149 6 155 6 2 5 13 275
10:30 4 98 0 102 1 0 0 1 1 124 3 128 5 3 3 11 242
10:45 4 98 1 103 1 0 1 2 1 119 7 127 1 2 3 6 238
Total 18 385 4 407 5 2 1 8 2 507 20 529 22 10 11 43 987 11:00 5 94 0 99 1 0 0 1 1 122 8 131 5 0 1 6 237
11:15 8 102 0 110 1 0 2 3 1 129 7 137 12 1 3 16 266
11:30 4 125 1 130 2 0 0 2 0 119 11 130 7 4 0 11 273
11:45 7 110 1 118 1 0 1 2 1 134 7 142 10 3 1 14 276
Total 24 431 2 457 5 0 3 8 3 504 33 540 34 8 5 47 1052
12:00 9 134 0 143 4 2 0 6 1 121 12 134 12 5 1 18 301
12:15 4 124 3 131 1 2 0 3 1 141 13 155 10 1 3 14 303
12:30 5 98 0 103 0 1 0 1 0 140 6 146 13 3 2 18 268
12:45 8 147 3 158 0 1 0 1 0 145 11 156 14 0 3 17 332
Total 26 503 6 535 5 6 0 11 2 547 42 591 49 9 9 67 1204 13:00 4 124 0 128 4 0 0 4 1 138 9 148 13 3 2 18 298
13:15 3 127 0 130 3 0 1 4 0 112 8 120 9 0 2 11 265
13:30 4 110 2 116 0 0 0 0 0 145 10 155 10 0 1 11 282
13:45 6 130 0 136 0 0 0 0 0 108 6 114 9 1 1 11 261
Total 17 491 2 510 7 0 1 8 1 503 33 537 41 4 6 51 1106
14:00 7 116 0 123 1 2 0 3 3 118 14 135 10 0 1 11 272
14:15 2 128 2 132 4 0 0 4 2 120 3 125 17 1 3 21 282
14:30 1 163 0 164 2 0 1 3 0 151 10 161 11 4 2 17 345
14:45 8 162 2 172 3 2 0 5 3 110 13 126 8 1 1 10 313
Total 18 569 4 591 10 4 1 15 8 499 40 547 46 6 7 59 1212 15:00 4 184 1 189 2 0 0 2 0 145 6 151 14 2 1 17 359
15:15 7 186 2 195 2 0 0 2 1 133 13 147 14 1 3 18 362
15:30 5 190 0 195 1 2 2 5 0 152 10 162 11 2 3 16 378
15:45 7 209 2 218 2 1 0 3 1 143 10 154 7 3 2 12 387
Total 23 769 5 797 7 3 2 12 2 573 39 614 46 8 9 63 1486 16:00 8 204 1 213 0 2 0 2 2 124 10 136 11 1 2 14 365
16:15 9 209 0 218 0 1 0 1 1 130 13 144 6 2 1 9 372
16:30 11 221 2 234 0 0 0 0 1 141 8 150 23 3 2 28 412
16:45 7 237 2 246 2 0 1 3 3 135 10 148 15 3 1 19 416
Total 35 871 5 911 2 3 1 6 7 530 41 578 55 9 6 70 1565
17:00 10 256 1 267 3 1 0 4 2 166 10 178 10 5 2 17 466
17:15 9 243 4 256 3 0 0 3 0 129 9 138 18 1 4 23 420
17:30 8 237 2 247 4 0 0 4 0 143 7 150 7 2 0 9 410
17:45 7 239 2 248 0 1 0 1 1 169 6 176 9 1 3 13 438
Total 34 975 9 1018 10 2 0 12 3 607 32 642 44 9 9 62 1734 18:00 6 225 0 231 2 1 0 3 1 131 5 137 10 0 2 12 383
18:15 9 215 1 225 3 2 0 5 2 163 6 171 11 0 0 11 412
18:30 8 229 2 239 2 2 0 4 1 134 5 140 13 3 2 18 401
18:45 8 175 1 184 1 0 0 1 1 118 6 125 9 2 2 13 323
Total 31 844 4 879 8 5 0 13 5 546 22 573 43 5 6 54 1519 Grand Total 262 6966 50 7278 96 35 12 143 41 6711 367 7119 436 81 85 602 15142 Apprch % 3.6 95.7 0.7 67.1 24.5 8.4 0.6 94.3 5.2 72.4 13.5 14.1 Total % 1.7 46 0.3 48.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.3 44.3 2.4 47 2.9 0.5 0.6 4

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 2

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 08:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45
07:45 4 102 1 107 6 1 0 7 1 166 2 169 3 0 1 4 287
08:00 5 106 0 111 6 3 0 9 0 191 4 195 7 3 0 10 325
08:15 6 145 0 151 2 1 0 3 0 167 8 175 6 3 3 12 341
08:30 5 113 2 120 2 2 0 4 2 179 15 196 9 2 4 15 335
Total Volume 20 466 3 489 16 7 0 23 3 703 29 735 25 8 8 41 1288 % App. Total 4.1 95.3 0.6 69.6 30.4 0 0.4 95.6 3.9 61 19.5 19.5 PHF .833 .803 .375 .810 .667 .583 .000 .639 .375 .920 .483 .938 .694 .667 .500 .683 .944

WILMA CHAN WAY

PACIFIC AVE

PACIFIC AVE

WILMA CHAN WAY
RT
20 TH
466
LT
3 Out In Total
727 489 1216
RT
16 TH
7 LT
0 Out Total In
14 23 37
LT
29 TH
703
RT
3 Out In Total
491 735 1226
LT
8 TH
8 RT
25 Total Out In
56 41 97
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 3

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 to 13:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 12:00
12:00 9 134 0 143 4 2 0 6 1 121 12 134 12 5 1 18 301
12:15 4 124 3 131 1 2 0 3 1 141 13 155 10 1 3 14 303
12:30 5 98 0 103 0 1 0 1 0 140 6 146 13 3 2 18 268
12:45 8 147 3 158 0 1 0 1 0 145 11 156 14 0 3 17 332
Total Volume 26 503 6 535 5 6 0 11 2 547 42 591 49 9 9 67 1204 % App. Total 4.9 94 1.1 45.5 54.5 0 0.3 92.6 7.1 73.1 13.4 13.4 PHF .722 .855 .500 .847 .313 .750 .000 .458 .500 .943 .808 .947 .875 .450 .750 .931 .907

WILMA CHAN WAY

PACIFIC AVE

PACIFIC AVE

WILMA CHAN WAY
RT
26 TH
503
LT
6 Out In Total
561 535 1096
RT
5 TH
6 LT
0 Out Total In
17 11 28
LT
42 TH
547
RT
2 Out In Total
552 591 1143
LT
9 TH
9 RT
49 Total Out In
74 67 141
Peak Hour Begins at 12:00
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 4

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 16:00 to 18:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 17:00
17:00 10 256 1 267 3 1 0 4 2 166 10 178 10 5 2 17 466
17:15 9 243 4 256 3 0 0 3 0 129 9 138 18 1 4 23 420
17:30 8 237 2 247 4 0 0 4 0 143 7 150 7 2 0 9 410
17:45 7 239 2 248 0 1 0 1 1 169 6 176 9 1 3 13 438
Total Volume 34 975 9 1018 10 2 0 12 3 607 32 642 44 9 9 62 1734 % App. Total 3.3 95.8 0.9 83.3 16.7 0 0.5 94.5 5 71 14.5 14.5 PHF .850 .952 .563 .953 .625 .500 .000 .750 .375 .898 .800 .902 .611 .450 .563 .674 .930

WILMA CHAN WAY

PACIFIC AVE

PACIFIC AVE

WILMA CHAN WAY
RT
34 TH
975
LT
9 Out In Total
626 1018 1644
RT
10 TH
2 LT
0 Out Total In
21 12 33
LT
32 TH
607
RT
3 Out In Total
1019 642 1661
LT
9 TH
9 RT
44 Total Out In
68 62 130
Peak Hour Begins at 17:00
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 1

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144
Groups Printed- Bikes + Peds

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total Int. Total 07:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 3
07:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
07:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 5
07:45 0 0 0 3 3 1 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 2 11
Total 0 0 0 5 5 1 1 0 2 4 0 1 0 7 8 0 0 0 3 3 20
08:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 4 0 2 0 2 4 11
08:15 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
08:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4
08:45 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4
Total 0 0 0 4 4 0 5 0 3 8 0 0 0 5 5 0 2 0 4 6 23
09:00 0 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 7
09:15 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 4 7
09:30 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 6
09:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
Total 0 2 0 4 6 0 4 0 1 5 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 6 8 21
10:00 0 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 6
10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 3 3 8
10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0 3 4 0 2 0 0 2 9
10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 3 5
Total 0 0 0 3 3 1 2 0 4 7 0 2 0 7 9 0 2 0 7 9 28
11:00 0 1 1 3 5 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 10
11:15 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5
11:30 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 7
11:45 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 7
Total 0 1 1 8 10 0 5 0 3 8 0 1 1 2 4 0 1 0 6 7 29
12:00 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 5
12:15 0 1 0 5 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
12:30 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 5
12:45 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 6
Total 1 3 0 9 13 0 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 3 23
13:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
13:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 5
13:30 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 6
13:45 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 7
Total 0 1 0 4 5 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 20
14:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
14:15 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4
14:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 3
14:45 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3
Total 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 6 11
15:00 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 3 8
15:15 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 4
15:30 0 0 0 4 4 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 9
15:45 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5
Total 0 0 0 11 11 0 1 0 5 6 0 0 1 2 3 0 3 0 3 6 26
16:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 3 7
16:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3
16:30 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 7
16:45 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 3 4 9
Total 1 1 0 1 3 0 6 0 1 7 0 1 1 5 7 0 3 0 6 9 26
17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 4
17:15 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 3 8
17:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3
17:45 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 7
Total 0 0 0 6 6 0 2 0 2 4 0 1 1 3 5 0 2 0 5 7 22
18:00 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 6
18:15 0 1 0 5 6 0 1 0 4 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 12
18:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
18:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 4 7
Total 0 2 1 7 10 0 2 0 6 8 0 0 1 2 3 0 1 0 4 5 26
Grand Total 2 12 2 62 78 2 35 0 30 67 0 6 7 42 55 1 16 1 57 75 275 Apprch % 2.6 15.4 2.6 79.5 3 52.2 0 44.8 0 10.9 12.7 76.4 1.3 21.3 1.3 76 Total % 0.7 4.4 0.7 22.5 28.4 0.7 12.7 0 10.9 24.4 0 2.2 2.5 15.3 20 0.4 5.8 0.4 20.7 27.3

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358
File Name : wilma chan-pacific-12
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 3/3/2026
Page No : 2

CITY OF ALAMEDA
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave.

Latitude: 37.776198
Longitude: -122.274144

WILMA CHAN WAY
Southbound

PACIFIC AVE
Westbound

WILMA CHAN WAY
Northbound

PACIFIC AVE
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total RT TH LT Ped App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 18:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 10:15
10:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 3 3 8
10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0 3 4 0 2 0 0 2 9
10:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 3 5
11:00 0 1 1 3 5 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 10
Total Volume 0 1 1 3 5 0 3 0 4 7 0 3 0 6 9 0 2 0 9 11 32 % App. Total 0 20 20 60 0 42.9 0 57.1 0 33.3 0 66.7 0 18.2 0 81.8 PHF .000 .250 .250 .250 .250 .000 .750 .000 .500 .583 .000 .750 .000 .500 .563 .000 .250 .000 .750 .917 .800

WILMA CHAN WAY

PACIFIC AVE

PACIFIC AVE

WILMA CHAN WAY
RT
0 TH
1 LT
1 Ped
3 Out In Total
3 5 8
RT
0 TH
3 LT
0 Ped
4 Out Total In
3 7 10
LT
0 TH
3 RT
0 Ped
6 Out In Total
1 9 10
LT
0 TH
2 RT
0 Ped
9 Total Out In
3 11 14
Peak Hour Begins at 10:15
Bikes + Peds
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

CITY OF ALAMEDA
WILMA CHAN WAY - PACIFIC AVE. to LINCOLN AVE.
wilma chan-1n
Site Code: 1n

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

NORTHBOUND
Start 1 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 Time 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 9999 Total 03/04/2
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 12 3 5 6 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 34
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 4 2 3 5 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 25
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 27
04:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 3 11 7 10 7 3 2 0 1 0 0 49
05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 9 32 59 35 29 10 4 1 2 0 0 187
06:00 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 18 30 75 82 61 35 12 8 3 0 0 0 341 07:00 18 3 0 0 1 1 7 10 57 88 136 101 111 53 18 11 2 1 1 0 619 08:00 36 0 3 0 3 10 20 43 74 128 136 115 76 40 16 6 0 1 1 0 708 09:00 23 1 1 1 3 5 10 30 65 95 129 114 64 19 11 8 1 0 0 0 580 10:00 20 0 1 1 2 8 16 37 38 105 92 79 53 29 15 2 1 0 0 1 500 11:00 9 0 0 0 4 5 12 24 67 97 94 84 53 29 18 4 2 0 1 0 503 12 PM 31 0 0 2 2 1 9 33 75 122 113 100 55 27 14 7 0 2 0 1 594 13:00 18 0 0 0 0 2 9 28 86 106 115 85 49 26 6 4 4 0 0 0 538 14:00 16 0 0 2 2 6 14 44 72 113 128 92 49 28 22 8 2 0 0 0 598 15:00 19 0 1 0 0 10 6 28 73 107 114 103 57 24 9 6 2 0 0 0 559 16:00 15 0 2 1 0 2 15 38 79 72 112 83 57 15 8 3 0 0 0 0 502 17:00 22 0 1 0 2 6 14 44 80 111 110 64 45 18 8 3 3 0 0 0 531 18:00 16 0 2 2 2 4 11 42 83 138 109 86 39 25 7 4 0 1 0 0 571 19:00 7 0 0 0 1 3 7 17 59 68 92 58 51 19 12 5 0 1 0 0 400 20:00 3 0 0 0 0 2 5 10 31 57 75 57 27 13 4 1 2 1 1 0 289 21:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 8 23 51 39 37 8 7 1 1 0 0 0 182
22:00 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 6 24 17 28 15 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 108
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 11 12 13 11 5 1 2 3 0 0 0 68
Total 263 4 11 9 23 69 161 452 990 1531 1766 1464 974 460 211 92 27 10 5 2 8524 Grand
Total 263 4 11 9 23 69 161 452 990 1531 1766 1464 974 460 211 92 27 10 5 2 8524 Stats 15th Percentile : 22 MPH
50th Percentile : 27 MPH
85th Percentile : 31 MPH
95th Percentile : 34 MPH
Mean Speed(Average) : 26 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed : 23-32 MPH
Number in Pace : 6301
Percent in Pace : 73.9%
Number of Vehicles > 25 MPH : 5882
Percent of Vehicles > 25 MPH : 69.0%

CITY OF ALAMEDA
WILMA CHAN WAY - PACIFIC AVE. to LINCOLN AVE.
wilma chan-2s
Site Code: 2s

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

SOUTHBOUND
Start 1 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 Time 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 9999 Total 03/04/2
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 16 11 11 17 3 1 2 0 0 1 0 69
01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 5 9 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 28
02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 8 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 24
03:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 5 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 17
04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 13
05:00 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 5 4 15 14 6 5 3 1 0 1 0 0 63
06:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 13 25 38 26 9 7 2 0 0 1 0 0 132
07:00 9 0 0 0 1 5 13 34 50 71 60 37 33 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 320 08:00 36 0 4 6 11 26 34 61 71 101 65 35 18 6 5 1 0 0 0 0 480 09:00 19 2 4 4 9 7 15 40 64 76 64 35 13 11 4 0 0 0 0 0 367 10:00 18 0 1 5 3 6 22 31 55 86 76 44 27 16 3 2 0 0 0 0 395 11:00 26 1 5 8 6 16 15 35 66 94 80 60 28 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 454 12 PM 35 2 5 4 3 17 43 46 81 83 79 54 32 14 4 3 0 0 1 0 506 13:00 36 1 1 3 3 18 32 51 102 75 100 68 26 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 529 14:00 43 2 3 6 6 27 36 54 93 103 85 47 26 6 2 1 1 0 0 0 541 15:00 81 5 2 18 22 23 48 100 109 80 76 44 16 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 635 16:00 135 6 20 31 41 51 75 111 109 98 69 28 12 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 796 17:00 133 10 16 34 57 59 76 109 132 105 61 29 9 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 837 18:00 67 4 10 15 21 31 54 79 119 99 86 31 8 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 631 19:00 22 1 1 3 7 14 29 63 100 91 74 42 21 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 482 20:00 7 0 1 0 2 7 24 59 58 81 88 46 25 2 6 2 0 1 0 2 411 21:00 3 0 1 1 0 4 11 26 34 62 79 53 28 13 5 1 0 1 0 0 322 22:00 2 0 0 0 1 0 6 6 16 37 38 33 19 6 1 3 1 1 0 0 170
23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 11 14 27 25 15 10 2 2 1 0 0 0 112 Total 674 35 74 138 193 313 542 922 1300 1416 1293 779 396 167 59 20 4 5 2 2 8334 Grand
Total 674 35 74 138 193 313 542 922 1300 1416 1293 779 396 167 59 20 4 5 2 2 8334 Stats 15th Percentile : 6 MPH
50th Percentile : 23 MPH
85th Percentile : 28 MPH
95th Percentile : 31 MPH
Mean Speed(Average) : 21 MPH
10 MPH Pace Speed : 21-30 MPH
Number in Pace : 5021
Percent in Pace : 60.3%
Number of Vehicles > 25 MPH : 3364
Percent of Vehicles > 25 MPH : 40.4%
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 20 July 13, 2026 Appendix B: CA MUTCD Warrant Analysis Worksheet
Wilma Chan Way / Pacific Avenue Traffic Signal Warrant & PHB Analysis - DRAFT Alameda, CA
CA MUTCD 2026 Traffic Signal Warrants
# Warrant Met?
1 Eight Hour
Vehicular
Volume
No
2 Four Hour
Vehiclular
Volume
No
3 Peak Hour No
4 Pedestrian
Volume No
5 School Crossing No
6 Coordinated
Signal System No
7 Crash
Experience
Warrant
No, close
8 Roadway
Network No
9 Intersection
Near a Grade
Crossing
No
CA MUTCD 2026 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) Guidelines Met?
Yes
Wilma Chan Way / Pacific Ave is not near a grade crossing.

Meets pedestrian thresholds crossing Wilma Chan at 7:30am if peds and bikes are counted (not explicitly stated in CA MUTCD). Barely misses threshold if only peds are counted (17; threshold is 20).

Notes
Notes
Guideline
Figure 4J-1.

Guidelines for
Installation of
Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacons on LowSpeed Roadways
Highest approach minor street vehicle volumes do not meet threshold for any of the 8 hours.

Highest approach minor street vehicle volumes meet threshold for only 1 out of 4 hours.

CA MUTCD Section 4C.04: Warrant 3 "should only be applied in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time." Nearby land uses do not match these descriptions.

Ped volumes peak at 25 peds/hr and do not meet thresholds (4 hr - 107 peds/hr; 1 hr - 133 peds/hr).

The crosswalks are not marked as a school crossing.

Total ped volumes crossing Wilma Chan peak at 25 at 7:30am, and volumes average 12 for the rest of the day. It is unlikely that there are 20 schoolchildren during the highest crossing hour.

Nearest signals are under 1,000 feet away.

Meets thresholds from 2016-2018, and crash frequency has diminished since. Crash mitigation may have happened, but conditions do not seem to have changed on Streetview.

Warrant 1 Condition B 80% thresholds are met for 6 out of 8 required hours. Remaining hours are close, within 5-13 vehicles on the highest approach of the minor street.

Pacific Ave is not classified as a major route.

Figure 4C-101(CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Sheet 1 of 5)

REQUIREMENT FULFILLED

TWO CONDITIONS
SATISFIED 80%
A. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
AND,
B. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC

CONDITION
Yes No
Combination of Conditions A & B SATISFIED YES NO
WARRANT 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
URUR

APPROACH
LANES
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
Minor Street
1 2 or More
750
(600)
525
(420)
900
(720)
630
(504)
75 (60)
53 (42)
100
(80)
70 (56)
Hour
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
URUR

APPROACH
LANES
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
Minor Street
1 2 or More
500
(400)
350
(280)
600
(480)
420
(336)
150
(120)
105
(84)
200
(160)
140
(112)
Hour
Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume 100% SATISFIED YES NO 80% SATISFIED YES NO
100% SATISFIED YES NO
80% SATISFIED YES NO

DIST CO RTE PM
DATE

CHK DATE
Major St:

Minor St:

Critical Approach Speed
Critical Approach Speed
mph
mph
Speed limit or critical speed on major street traffic > 40 mph.........................

In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population....................... or RURAL (R)

URBAN (U)
CALC

COUNT DATE

SATISFIED YES NO
(Condition A or Condition B or combination of A and B must be satisfied)

AND, AN ADEQUATE TRIAL OF OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT COULD

CAUSE LESS DELAY AND INCONVENIENCE TO TRAFFIC HAS FAILED

TO SOLVE THE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS
Yes No
Major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours for each condition; however, the 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B.

The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.

Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

3/3/26 Tuesday JZAL Wilma Chan Way Pacific Avenue 11:15 AM 1:45 PM
2:45 PM
3:45 PM
4:45 PM
1046 1128 1092 1339 1470 1633 61 68 60 63 66 71
50th %ile: 23-27
85th %ile: 28-31
12:15 AM
11:15 AM
1:45 PM
2:45 PM
3:45 PM
4:45 PM
1046 1128 1092 1339 1470 1633 61 68 60 63 66 71 12:15 AM 9:45 AM
5:45 PM
959 47 1571 55 9:45 AM 959 47 5:45 PM 1571 55
Figure 4C-101(CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Sheet 2 of 5) Record hourly vehicular volumes for any four hours of an average day.

WARRANT 2 - Four Hour Vehicular Volume

APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches - Major Street
Higher Approach - Minor Street
One
2 or
More Hour
*All plotted points fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1. (URBAN AREAS) Yes No SATISFIED* YES NO
WARRANT 3 - Peak Hour
(Part A or Part B must be satisfied)

1. The total delay experienced by traffic on one minor street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach, or five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; AND

2. The volume on the same minor street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND

3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches.

Yes No
Yes No
Yes No

SATISFIED YES NO

PART A SATISFIED YES NO

PART B SATISFIED YES NO

APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches - Major Street
Higher Approach - Minor Street
One
2 or
More Hour
(All parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied for the same one hour, for any four consecutive 15-minute periods)
OR, All plotted points fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-2. (RURAL AREAS) Yes No The plotted point falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3. (URBAN AREAS) Yes No OR, The plotted point falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-4. (RURAL AREAS) Yes No The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.

Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

4 PM
1489 7012:15 AM
1:45 PM
2:45 PM4:30 PM
1128 68 1092 60 1339 63 1622 91
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE MAJOR-STREET LANES
& 1 MINOR-STREET LANE
1 MAJOR-STREET LANE &
2 OR MORE MINOR-STREET LANES
1 LANE & 1 LANE
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
100
200
300
400
500
MINOR
STREET
MORE

CRITICAL

APPROACH -
VPH
115*
80*
MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—

VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
*Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026 California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

2:45PM
12:15PM
1:45PM
2PM-3PM 4:30PM
Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour
150*
100 100*
200
300
400
500
MINOR
STREET
MORE

CRITICAL

APPROACH -
VPH
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—

VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
*Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE MAJOR-STREET LANES
& 1 MINOR-STREET LANE
1 MAJOR-STREET LANE &
2 OR MORE MINOR-STREET LANES
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026 California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

4:30PM
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Sheet 3 of 5) The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.

Part B
WARRANT 5 - School Crossing
(Parts A and B Must Be Satisfied)
Part A
Gap/Minutes and # of Children

SATISFIED YES NO
Gaps < Minutes
School Age Pedestrians Crossing Street / hr AND Children > 20/hr Minutes Children Using Crossing
Number of Adequate Gaps
Gaps
vs
Minutes
YES NO
YES NO

SATISFIED YES NO
Vehicles per hour for
any 4 hours
Figure 4C-5 or Figure 4C-6
AND, The distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 ft
OR, The proposed traffic signal will not restrict progressive traffic flow along the major street.

Yes No
Yes No
Hours >
WARRANT 4 - Pedestrian Volume
(Parts 1 and 2 Must Be Satisfied)
Part 1 (Parts A or B must be satisfied)
A.

Part 2

SATISFIED YES NO
AND, Consideration has been given to less restrictive remedial measures. Yes No

SATISFIED YES NO
The distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 ft
OR, The proposed signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic.

Yes No
Yes No

SATISFIED YES NO
Figure 4C-7 or Figure 4C-8

SATISFIED YES NO

SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
Vehicles per hour for
any 1 hour
Hours >
B.

Pedestrians per hour for
any 4 hours
Pedestrians per hour for
any 1 hour
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

7:30 AM
3:15 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
1143 1420 1617 1585 25 18 15 16 <20 7:30 AM
3:15 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
1143 1420 1617 1585 25 18 15 16
Figure 4C-5. Warrant 4, Pedestrian Four-Hour Volume
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
100
200
300
400
500

TOTAL OF ALL

PEDESTRIANS

CROSSING
MAJOR STREETPEDESTRIANS

PER HOUR (PPH)
15th-percentile
crossing speed is
less than 3.5 feet
per second.
107*
53**
MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—

VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
* 107 pph applies as the lower threshold volume
** 53 pph applies as the lower threshold volume if
the 15th-percentile crossing speed is less than

3.5 feet per second
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026 California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

7:30AM
3:15PM
4:30PM
5:30PM
Figure 4C-6. Warrant 4, Pedestrian Peak Hour
300 1800
100
200
300
400
500
600
700

TOTAL OF ALL

PEDESTRIANS

CROSSING
MAJOR STREETPEDESTRIANS

PER HOUR (PPH)
133*
MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES—

VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 15th-percentile
crossing speed is
less than 3.5 feet
per second.
66**
* 133 pph applies as the lower threshold volume
** 66 pph applies as the lower threshold volume if
the 15th-percentile crossing speed is less than

3.5 feet per second
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026 California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

7:30AM
Figure 4C-101(CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Sheet 4 of 5) The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.

WARRANT 7 - Crash Experience Warrant
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)
Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency.

Yes No

SATISFIED YES NO
WARRANT 6 - Coordinated Signal System
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL
> 1000 ft N ______ ft, S ______ ft, E ______ ft, W ______ ft Yes No On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominantly in one direction, the adjacent traffic control signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicular platooning.

OR, On a two-way street, adjacent traffic control signals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning and the proposed and adjacent traffic control signals will collectively provide a progressive operation.

SATISFIED YES NO
WARRANT 8 - Roadway Network
(All Parts Must Be Satisfied)

MINIMUM VOLUME

REQUIREMENTS ENTERING VOLUMES - ALL APPROACHES FULFILLED 1000 Veh/Hr
During Typical Weekday Peak Hour ______________ Veh/Hr
and has 5-year projected traffic volumes that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday. Yes No OR
During Each of Any 5 Hrs. of a Sat. or Sun ______ Veh/Hr

CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES
Hwy. System Serving as Principal Network for Through Traffic Rural or
Suburban Highway Outside Of, Entering, or Traversing a City Any Major Route Characteristics Met, Both Streets
MAJOR

ROUTE A
Appears as Major Route on an Official Plan

SATISFIED YES NO
MAJOR

ROUTE B
Yes No

REQUIREMENTS
Yes No
Number of crashes reported within a 12 month period
susceptible to correction by a traffic signal, and involving injury or damage exceeding the requirements for a reportable crash. 5 OR MORE

REQUIREMENTS CONDITIONS
ONE CONDITION Yes No

SATISFIED

MINIMUM

REPORTED CRASHES
Table 4C-2, Angle crashes and pedestrian crashes
OR, Table 4C-2, Fatal-and-injury angle crashes and
pedestrian crashes
OR, Table 4C-3, Angle crashes and pedestrian crashes
Yes No
Warrant 1, Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume
OR, Warrant 1, Condition B -
Interruption of Continuous Traffic
OR, Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume Condition
Ped Vol > 80% of Figure 4C-5 through Figure 4C-8
OR, Table 4C-3, Fatal-and-injury angle crashes and
pedestrian crashes

ONE CONDITION
SATISFIED 80%
Yes No
Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

370 525 >1,000 730 1,734
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Sheet 5 of 5) WARRANT 9 - Intersection Near a Grade Crossing
(Both Parts A and B Must Be Satisfied)
Yes No
PART B
There is one minor street approach lane at the track crossing - During the highest traffic volume hour during which rail traffic uses the crossing, the plotted point falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-9.

Major Street - Total of both approaches: ______ VPH
Minor Street - Crosses the track (one direction only, approaching the intersection):
______ VPH X AF (Use Tables 4C-2, 3, & 4 below to calculate AF) = ______ VPH

SATISFIED YES NO
Yes No
PART A
A grade crossing exists on an approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign and the center of the track nearest to the intersection is within 140 feet of the stop line or yield line on the approach. Track Center Line to Limit Line ______ ft The minor street approach volume may be multiplied by up to three following adjustment factors (AF) as described in Section 4C.10.
1- Number of Rail Traffic per Day________________________________ Adjustment factor from table 4C-2____ 2- Percentage of High-Occupancy Buses on Minor Street Approach_____ Adjustment factor from table 4C-3____ 3- Percentage of Tractor-Trailer Trucks on Minor Street Approach_______ Adjustment factor from table 4C-4____ NOTE: If no data is availale or known, then use AF = 1 (no adjustment) OR, There are two or more minor street approach lanes at the track crossing - During the highest traffic volume hour during which rail traffic uses the crossing, the plotted point falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-10.

Major Street - Total of both approaches : ______ VPH
Minor Street - Crosses the track (one direction only, approaching the intersection):
______ VPH X AF (Use Tables 4C-2, 3, & 4 below to calcualte AF) = ______ VPH Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Figures) Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Tables) January 18, 2026 Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
Table 4C-1. Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Condition A—Minimum Vehicular Volume
Number of lanes for moving traffic
on each approach
Vehicles per hour on major street
(total of both approaches)
Vehicles per hour on more critical
minor-street approach (one direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 1 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84
2 or more 1 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84
2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112
1 2 or more 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112
*
Number of lanes for moving traffic
on each approach
Vehicles per hour on major street
(total of both approaches)
Vehicles per hour on more critical
minor-street approach (one direction only)
Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 1 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42
2 or more 1 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42
2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56
1 2 or more 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56
a Basic minimum hourly volume
b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures c May be used when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000
d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 * Refer to FHWA’s List of Known Errors for error above the second sub-table. Refer to Section 1A.04 for more details.

Table 4C-2. Minimum Number of Reported Crashes in a One-Year Period Number of through lanes on
each approach
Total of angle and pedestrian
crashes (all severities)a
Total of fatal-and-injury angle
and pedestrian crashesa
Major Street Minor Street Four Legs Three Legs Four Legs Three Legs 1 1 5 4 3 3
2 or more 1 5 4 3 3
2 or more 2 or more 5 4 3 3
1 2 or more 5 4 3 3
a Angle crashes include all crashes that occur at an angle and involve one or more vehicles on the major street and one or more vehicles on the minor street
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Tables) January 18, 2026 Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
Table 4C-3. Minimum Number of Reported Crashes in a Three-Year Period Number of through lanes
on each approach
Total of angle and pedestrian
crashes (all severities)a
Total of fatal-and-injury angle
and pedestrian crashesa
Major Street Minor Street Four Legs Three Legs Four Legs Three Legs 1 1 6 5 4 4
2 or more 1 6 5 4 4
2 or more 2 or more 6 5 4 4
1 2 or more 6 5 4 4
a Angle crashes include all crashes that occur at an angle and involve one or more vehicles on the major street and one or more vehicles on the minor street
Table 4C-4. Minimum Number of Reported Crashes in a One-Year Period Community less than 10,000 population or above 40 mph on major street Number of through lanes
on each approach
Total of angle and pedestrian
crashes (all severities)a
Total of fatal-and-injury angle
and pedestrian crashesa
Major Street Minor Street Four Legs Three Legs Four Legs Three Legs 1 1 4 3 3 3
2 or more 1 1
0 9 6 6
2 or more 2 or more 1
0 9 6 6
1 2 or more 4 3 3 3
a Angle crashes include all crashes that occur at an angle and involve one or more vehicles on the major street and one or more vehicles on the minor street
Table 4C-5. Minimum Number of Reported Crashes in a Three-Year Period Community less than 10,000 population or above 40 mph on major street Number of through lanes
on each approach
Total of angle and pedestrian
crashes (all severities)a
Total of fatal-and-injury angle
and pedestrian crashesa
Major Street Minor Street Four Legs Three Legs Four Legs Three Legs 1 1 6 5 4 4
2 or more 1 1
6 13 9 9
2 or more 2 or more 1
6 13 9 9
1 2 or more 6 5 4 4
a Angle crashes include all crashes that occur at an angle and involve one or more vehicles on the major street and one or more vehicles on the minor street
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies (Tables) January 18, 2026 Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
Table 4C-6. Warrant 9,
Adjustment Factor for Daily
Frequency of Rail Traffic
Rail traffic per day Adjustment factor
1 0.67
2 0.91
3 to 5 1.00
6 to 8 1.18
9 to 11 1.25
12 or more 1.33
Table 4C-7. Warrant 9, Adjustment Factor for
Percentage of High-Occupancy Buses
% of high-occupancy buses*
on minor-street approach
Adjustment factor
0% 1.00
2% 1.09
4% 1.19
6% or more 1.32
* A high-occupancy bus is defined as a bus occupied by at least 20 people.

Table 4C-8. Warrant 9, Adjustment Factor for
Percentage of Tractor-Trailer Trucks
% of tractor-trailer trucks
on minor-street approach
Adjustment factor
D less than 70 feet D of 70 feet or more
0% to 2.5% 0.50 0.50

2.6% to 7.5% 0.75 0.75

7.6% to 12.5% 1.00 1.00

12.6% to 17.5% 2.30 1.15

17.6% to 22.5% 2.70 1.35

22.6% to 27.5% 3.28 1.64
More than 27.5% 4.18 2.09
California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

Figure 4J-1. Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons on Low-Speed Roadways
MAJOR STREET — TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES —

VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
L = crosswalk length
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000
100
200
300
400
500

TOTAL OF ALL

PEDESTRIANS CROSSING

THE MAJOR STREET - PEDESTRIANS

PER HOUR (PPH)
* Note: 20 pph applies as the lower threshold volume
L = 34 ft
L = 72 ft
L = 50 ft
L = 100 ft
20*
Speeds of 35 mph or less
Chapter 4J – Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (Figures)
Part 4 Highway Traffic Signals
January 18, 2026 California MUTCD 2026 Edition
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2023 Edition, as amended for use in California)

Ped + Bike
7:30AM
(1143, 25)
L = 80-90 ft
Ped Only
7:30AM
(1143, 17)
PHB Warrant
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 21 July 13, 2026 Appendix C: Traffic Operations Modeling
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Existing AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Future Volume (Veh/h) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 9 27 0 8 17 32 764 3 3 507 22
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 563 373
pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.87 0.90 0.87 vC, conflicting volume 991 1355 265 1121 1365 384 529 767 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 332 729 0 473 740 0 266 424
tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 98 97 97 100 97 98 97 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 514 309 980 403 304 940 1170 981
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2
Volume Total 45 25 414 385 257 276
Volume Left 9 0 32 0 3 0
Volume Right 27 17 0 3 0 22
cSH 606 564 1170 1700 981 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.23 0.00* 0.16
Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 3 2 0 0 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 11.4 11.7 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.0
Lane LOS B B A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 11.4 11.7 0.5 0.1
Approach LOS B B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Existing PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Synchro 12 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Future Volume (Veh/h) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 10 10 48 0 2 11 35 660 3 10 1060 37 Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 563 373
pX, platoon unblocked 0.93 0.93 0.88 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.88 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 1511 1832 549 1335 1849 332 1097 663 vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 891 1234 217 702 1253 12 839 383
tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2
p0 queue free % 95 94 93 100 99 99 95 99
cM capacity (veh/h) 207 154 694 256 150 951 697 1046
Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2
Volume Total 68 13 365 333 540 567
Volume Left 10 0 35 0 10 0
Volume Right 48 11 0 3 0 37
cSH 373 522 697 1700 1046 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.18 0.02 0.05 0.20 0.00* 0.33
Queue Length 95th (ft) 16 2 4 0 1 0
Control Delay (s/veh) 16.8 12.1 1.6 0.0 0.3 0.0
Lane LOS C B A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 16.8 12.1 0.8 0.1
Approach LOS C B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
* Value less than 0.01.

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Future Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.92 0.91 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1669 1667 3530 3510
Flt Permitted 0.93 1.00 0.92 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1567 1667 3269 3344
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 9 27 0 8 17 32 764 3 3 507 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 21 0 0 10 0 0 799 0 0 530 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 4 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.4 6.4 32.9 32.9
Effective Green, g (s) 6.4 6.4 32.9 32.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.62 0.62
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 189 201 2033 2079
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 c0.24 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.11 0.05 0.39 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 20.7 20.6 5.0 4.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
Delay (s) 21.0 20.7 5.1 4.6
Level of Service C C A A
Approach Delay (s) 21.0 20.7 5.1 4.6
Approach LOS C C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 5.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.9 Sum of lost time (s) 13.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4 9 10
Movement NBSB EBWB Ped Ped
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize
Recall Mode Min None None None
Maximum Split (s) 30 37 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 39.0% 48.1% 6.5% 6.5%
Minimum Split (s) 30 37 3 3
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7 7 0 0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 18 25 0 0
Dual Entry Yes Yes No Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 5 40 0 35
End Time (s) 35 0 5 40
Yield/Force Off (s) 30.5 72.5 3 38
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 30.5 47.5 3 38
Local Start Time (s) 0 35 72 30
Local Yield (s) 25.5 67.5 75 33
Local Yield 170(s) 25.5 42.5 75 33
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 77
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 75
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1A1 PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Future Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.90 0.89 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1643 1620 3528 3515
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.87 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1579 1620 3088 3338
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 10 48 0 2 11 35 660 3 10 1060 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 42 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 26 0 0 3 0 0 698 0 0 1105 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm NA NA Perm NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 4 4 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.4 7.4 37.9 37.9
Effective Green, g (s) 7.4 7.4 37.9 37.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.67 0.67
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 206 211 2064 2231
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00
v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.23 c0.33
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.02 0.34 0.50
Uniform Delay, d1 21.8 21.5 4.0 4.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2
Delay (s) 22.1 21.5 4.1 4.8
Level of Service C C A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 22.1 21.5 4.1 4.8
Approach LOS C C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 5.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 56.7 Sum of lost time (s) 13.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1A1 PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4 9 10
Movement NBSB EBWB Ped Ped
Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode Min None None None
Maximum Split (s) 30 37 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 39.0% 48.1% 6.5% 6.5%
Minimum Split (s) 30 37 3 3
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7 7 0 0
Flash Don't Walk (s) 18 25 0 0
Dual Entry Yes Yes No Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 5 40 0 35
End Time (s) 35 0 5 40
Yield/Force Off (s) 30.5 72.5 3 38
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 30.5 47.5 3 38
Local Start Time (s) 0 35 72 30
Local Yield (s) 25.5 67.5 75 33
Local Yield 170(s) 25.5 42.5 75 33
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 77
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 75
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Future Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.92 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1669 1668 1770 3537 1768 3512
Flt Permitted 0.92 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1557 1668 1770 3537 1768 3512
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 9 27 0 8 17 32 764 3 3 507 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 21 0 0 10 0 32 767 0 3 526 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 6 12 8 3 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6
Turn Type Perm NA NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 1! 2! 5! 6!
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.4 5.4 0.6 19.2 0.6 19.2
Effective Green, g (s) 5.4 5.4 0.6 19.2 0.6 19.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.45 0.01 0.45
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 195 208 24 1575 24 1564
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.02 c0.22 0.00 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01
v/c Ratio 0.11 0.05 1.33 0.49 0.12 0.34
Uniform Delay, d1 16.7 16.6 21.2 8.5 21.0 7.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.1 300.0 0.2 2.3 0.1
Delay (s) 17.0 16.7 321.2 8.7 23.3 7.9
Level of Service B B F A C A
Approach Delay (s) 17.0 16.7 21.2 8.0
Approach LOS B B C A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 43.1 Sum of lost time (s) 17.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
! Phase conflict between lane groups.
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12
Movement NBL NBT EBTL SBL SBT WBTL Ped Ped Ped Hold
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None None None None None Maximum Split (s) 12.5 31 36.5 12.5 31 36.5 5 5 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 13.9% 34.4% 40.6% 13.9% 34.4% 40.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% Minimum Split (s) 12.5 29.5 36.5 12.5 29.5 36.5 4 3 3 3 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2 2 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 8 5 5 8 5 5 1 1 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 18 25 18 25 0 0 0 0
Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 17.5 53.5 0 17.5 53.5 12.5 12.5 48.5 48.5 End Time (s) 12.5 48.5 0 12.5 48.5 0 17.5 17.5 53.5 53.5 Yield/Force Off (s) 8 44 85.5 8 44 85.5 15.5 15.5 51.5 51.5 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 8 26 60.5 8 26 60.5 15.5 15.5 51.5 51.5 Local Start Time (s) 72.5 0 36 72.5 0 36 85 85 31 31
Local Yield (s) 80.5 26.5 68 80.5 26.5 68 88 88 34 34
Local Yield 170(s) 80.5 8.5 43 80.5 8.5 43 88 88 34 34
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 90
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 90
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1A2 PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Future Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.90 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1641 1619 1770 3536 1770 3517
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1566 1619 1770 3536 1770 3517
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 10 48 0 2 11 35 660 3 10 1060 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 43 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 25 0 0 3 0 35 663 0 10 1095 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 3 6 12 3 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6
Turn Type Perm NA NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 8 1! 2! 5! 6!
Permitted Phases 4 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.2 6.2 2.5 28.6 0.8 30.3
Effective Green, g (s) 6.2 6.2 2.5 28.6 0.8 30.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.05 0.52 0.01 0.55
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 175 181 79 1825 25 1923
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.02 0.19 0.01 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm c0.02
v/c Ratio 0.14 0.02 0.44 0.36 0.40 0.57
Uniform Delay, d1 22.2 21.9 25.8 8.0 27.1 8.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 3.9 0.1 10.2 0.4
Delay (s) 22.6 21.9 29.7 8.1 37.2 8.6
Level of Service C C C A D A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 22.6 21.9 9.2 8.9
Approach LOS C C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 9.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.4 Sum of lost time (s) 17.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
! Phase conflict between lane groups.
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1A2 PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12
Movement NBL NBT EBTL SBL SBT WBTL Ped Ped Ped Hold
Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None None None None None Maximum Split (s) 12.5 31 36.5 12.5 31 36.5 5 5 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 13.9% 34.4% 40.6% 13.9% 34.4% 40.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% Minimum Split (s) 12.5 29.5 36.5 12.5 29.5 36.5 4 3 3 3 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 2 2 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 8 5 5 8 5 5 1 1 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 3 3 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0
Flash Don't Walk (s) 18 25 18 25 0 0 0 0
Dual Entry No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 17.5 53.5 0 17.5 53.5 12.5 12.5 48.5 48.5 End Time (s) 12.5 48.5 0 12.5 48.5 0 17.5 17.5 53.5 53.5 Yield/Force Off (s) 8 44 85.5 8 44 85.5 15.5 15.5 51.5 51.5 Yield/Force Off 170(s) 8 26 60.5 8 26 60.5 15.5 15.5 51.5 51.5 Local Start Time (s) 72.5 0 36 72.5 0 36 85 85 31 31
Local Yield (s) 80.5 26.5 68 80.5 26.5 68 88 88 34 34
Local Yield 170(s) 80.5 8.5 43 80.5 8.5 43 88 88 34 34
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 90
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 90
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 41 0 0 23 0 717 3 0 466 20
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 41 0 0 23 0 717 3 0 466 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1571 1579 3537 3512
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1571 1579 3537 3512
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 45 0 0 25 0 779 3 0 507 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 39 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 6 0 0 3 0 782 0 0 526 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm Perm NA NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.0 5.0 20.3 20.3
Effective Green, g (s) 5.0 5.0 20.3 20.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.52 0.52
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 200 201 1836 1823
v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm c0.00 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.29
Uniform Delay, d1 14.9 14.9 5.8 5.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1
Delay (s) 15.0 14.9 6.0 5.4
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s) 15.0 14.9 6.0 5.4
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 6.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.34
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.1 Sum of lost time (s) 13.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4 10 11
Movement NBSB WBR Ped Ped
Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None
Maximum Split (s) 27 34 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 38.0% 47.9% 7.0% 7.0%
Minimum Split (s) 26.6 33.6 3 3
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1.1 1.1 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 4 4 0 0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 18 25 0 0
Dual Entry Yes Yes Yes No
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 5 37 0 32
End Time (s) 32 0 5 37
Yield/Force Off (s) 27.4 66.4 3 35
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 9.4 41.4 3 35
Local Start Time (s) 0 32 66 27
Local Yield (s) 22.4 61.4 69 30
Local Yield 170(s) 4.4 36.4 69 30
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 71
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 70
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1B PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 53 0 0 12 0 639 3 0 975 34
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 53 0 0 12 0 639 3 0 975 34
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.87 0.87 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1571 1578 3536 3517
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1571 1578 3536 3517
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 58 0 0 13 0 695 3 0 1060 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 51 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 2 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 7 0 0 2 0 698 0 0 1095 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm Perm NA NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.6 5.6 25.2 25.2
Effective Green, g (s) 5.6 5.6 25.2 25.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.57 0.57
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 197 198 1997 1987
v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm c0.00 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.04 0.01 0.35 0.55
Uniform Delay, d1 17.1 17.1 5.3 6.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3
Delay (s) 17.2 17.1 5.4 6.5
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 17.2 17.1 5.4 6.5
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 6.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 44.6 Sum of lost time (s) 13.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 1B PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4 10 11
Movement NBSB WBR Ped Ped
Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None
Maximum Split (s) 27 34 5 5
Maximum Split (%) 38.0% 47.9% 7.0% 7.0%
Minimum Split (s) 26.6 33.6 3 3
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 2 2
All-Red Time (s) 1.1 1.1 0 0
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5 1 1
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3 0.2 0.2
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0 0 0
Walk Time (s) 4 4 0 0
Flash Don't Walk (s) 18 25 0 0
Dual Entry Yes Yes Yes No
Inhibit Max Yes Yes Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 5 37 0 32
End Time (s) 32 0 5 37
Yield/Force Off (s) 27.4 66.4 3 35
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 9.4 41.4 3 35
Local Start Time (s) 0 32 66 27
Local Yield (s) 22.4 61.4 69 30
Local Yield 170(s) 4.4 36.4 69 30
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 71
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 70
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Future Volume (vph) 8 8 25 0 7 16 29 703 3 3 466 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.92 0.91 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1668 1666 3530 3512
Flt Permitted 0.94 1.00 0.93 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1591 1666 3276 3345
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 9 27 0 8 17 32 764 3 3 507 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 24 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 21 0 0 10 0 0 799 0 0 529 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6
Turn Type custom NA NA Perm NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.6 5.6 32.8 32.8
Effective Green, g (s) 5.6 5.6 32.8 32.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.71 0.71
Clearance Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 194 203 2341 2390
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.01 c0.24 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.11 0.05 0.34 0.22
Uniform Delay, d1 17.9 17.8 2.5 2.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s) 18.2 17.9 2.6 2.3
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s) 18.2 17.9 2.6 2.3
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 3.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 45.9 Sum of lost time (s) 7.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4
Movement NBSB EBWB
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize
Recall Mode Min None
Maximum Split (s) 34 26
Maximum Split (%) 56.7% 43.3%
Minimum Split (s) 9.5 26
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7
Flash Dont Walk (s) 16
Dual Entry Yes Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 34
End Time (s) 34 0
Yield/Force Off (s) 29.5 57
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 29.5 41
Local Start Time (s) 0 34
Local Yield (s) 29.5 57
Local Yield 170(s) 29.5 41
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 60
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 45
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 2B PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Future Volume (vph) 9 9 44 0 2 10 32 607 3 9 975 34
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.90 0.89 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1643 1620 3528 3516
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.88 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 1586 1620 3115 3339
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 10 10 48 0 2 11 35 660 3 10 1060 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 42 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 26 0 0 3 0 0 698 0 0 1104 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type custom NA NA Perm NA Perm NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.2 5.2 26.5 26.5
Effective Green, g (s) 5.2 5.2 26.5 26.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 210 214 2105 2257
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.00 0.22 c0.33
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.02 0.33 0.49
Uniform Delay, d1 15.0 14.8 2.7 3.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2
Delay (s) 15.3 14.8 2.7 3.2
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 15.3 14.8 2.7 3.2
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 3.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.2 Sum of lost time (s) 7.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 2B PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4
Movement NBSB EBWB
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize
Recall Mode None None
Maximum Split (s) 34 26
Maximum Split (%) 56.7% 43.3%
Minimum Split (s) 9.5 26
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7
Flash Don't Walk (s) 16
Dual Entry Yes Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 34
End Time (s) 34 0
Yield/Force Off (s) 29.5 57
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 29.5 41
Local Start Time (s) 30.5 4.5
Local Yield (s) 0 27.5
Local Yield 170(s) 0 11.5
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 60
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 55
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 41 0 0 23 0 717 3 0 466 20
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 41 0 0 23 0 717 3 0 466 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.86 0.86 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1548 1572 3537 3512
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1548 1572 3537 3512
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 45 0 0 25 0 779 3 0 507 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 43 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 782 0 0 526 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm Perm NA NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 1.5 1.5 19.1 19.1
Effective Green, g (s) 1.5 1.5 19.1 19.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.05 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 82 83 2404 2387
v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.15
v/s Ratio Perm c0.00 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.03 0.02 0.33 0.22
Uniform Delay, d1 12.6 12.6 1.9 1.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s) 12.8 12.7 1.9 1.7
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s) 12.8 12.7 1.9 1.7
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 2.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.30
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 28.1 Sum of lost time (s) 7.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 04/22/2026
AM 1:06 am 03/20/2026 Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4
Movement NBSB WBR
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize
Recall Mode None None
Maximum Split (s) 34 26
Maximum Split (%) 56.7% 43.3%
Minimum Split (s) 22.5 26
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7
Flash Dont Walk (s) 16
Dual Entry Yes Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 34
End Time (s) 34 0
Yield/Force Off (s) 29.5 57
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 29.5 41
Local Start Time (s) 0 34
Local Yield (s) 29.5 57
Local Yield 170(s) 29.5 41
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 60
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 50
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 2A PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 0 53 0 0 12 0 639 3 0 975 34
Future Volume (vph) 0 0 53 0 0 12 0 639 3 0 975 34
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Frpb, ped/bikes 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.87 0.87 1.00 0.99
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1571 1577 3536 3517
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1571 1577 3536 3517
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 0 58 0 0 13 0 695 3 0 1060 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 48 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 3 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 10 0 0 2 0 698 0 0 1094 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 6 12 8 18
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 6 2 6 4
Turn Type Perm Perm NA NA
Protected Phases 2 2
Permitted Phases 4 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.0 5.0 26.4 26.4
Effective Green, g (s) 5.0 5.0 26.4 26.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s) 3.0 3.0 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 201 202 2399 2386
v/s Ratio Prot 0.20 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.05 0.01 0.29 0.46
Uniform Delay, d1 14.9 14.8 2.5 2.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1
Delay (s) 15.0 14.8 2.6 3.1
Level of Service B B A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 15.0 14.8 2.6 3.1
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh) 3.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 38.9 Sum of lost time (s) 7.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Timing Report, Sorted By Phase
2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way 07/06/2026
Alt 2A PM 7:45 pm 03/06/2026 Baseline Synchro 11 Report

Phase Number 2 4
Movement NBSB WBR
Lead/Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize
Recall Mode None None
Maximum Split (s) 34 26
Maximum Split (%) 56.7% 43.3%
Minimum Split (s) 9.5 26
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 2
All-Red Time (s) 1 1
Minimum Initial (s) 5 5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3 3
Minimum Gap (s) 3 3
Time Before Reduce (s) 0 0
Time To Reduce (s) 0 0
Walk Time (s) 7
Flash Don't Walk (s) 16
Dual Entry Yes Yes
Inhibit Max Yes Yes
Start Time (s) 0 34
End Time (s) 34 0
Yield/Force Off (s) 29.5 57
Yield/Force Off 170(s) 29.5 41
Local Start Time (s) 30.5 4.5
Local Yield (s) 0 27.5
Local Yield 170(s) 0 11.5
Intersection Summary
Cycle Length 60
Control Type Actuated-Uncoordinated
Natural Cycle 55
Splits and Phases: 2: Pacific Ave & Wilma Chan Way
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 22 July 13, 2026 Appendix D: Lighting Analysis
Technical Memorandum
City of Alameda 474-8939-006
Wilma Chan Way & Pacific Ave Intersection Analysis 23 July 13, 2026