Capitola City Council
February 27, 2025

REVISED 2/27/2025 4:39 PM
City of Capitola
City Council Meeting Agenda
Thursday, February 27, 2025 – 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
Mayor: Joe Clarke
Vice Mayor: Alexander Pedersen
Council Members: Gerry Jensen, Margaux Morgan, Melinda Orbach Regular Meeting of the Capitola City Council – 6 PM
All correspondence received prior to 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding a Council Meeting will be distributed to Councilmembers to review prior to the meeting. Information submitted after 5 p.m. on that Wednesday may not have time to reach Councilmembers, nor be read by them prior to consideration of an item.

1. Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance
Council Members Gerry Jensen, Margaux Morgan, Melinda Orbach, Alexander Pedersen, and Mayor Joe Clarke

2. Additions and Deletions to the Agenda

3. Additional Materials
Additional information submitted to the City after distribution of the agenda packet.

A. Item 6B - Correspondence Received
B. Item 6C - Correspondence Received
C. Item 6D - Staff Memorandum and Updated Attachment
D. Item 7B - Correspondence Received
E. Item 7C - Correspondence Received

4. Oral Communications by Members of the Public
Oral Communications allows time for members of the Public to address the City Council on any “Consent Item” on tonight’s agenda, or on any topic within the jurisdiction of the City that is not on the “General Government/Public Hearings” section of the Agenda. Members of the public may speak for up to three minutes, unless otherwise specified by the Mayor. Individuals may not speak more than once during Oral Communications. All speakers must address the entire legislative body and will not be permitted to engage in dialogue. A maximum of 30 minutes is set aside for Oral Communications.

5. Staff / City Council Comments
Comments are limited to three minutes.

6. Consent Items
All items listed as “Consent Items” will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the time the Council votes on the action unless 1 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 27, 2025
City of Capitola Page 2
members of the City Council request specific items to be discussed for separate review. Items pulled for separate discussion will be considered following General Government. Note that all Ordinances which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.

A. City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the regular meeting on February 13, 2025, and the special meeting on February 19, 2025.

B. FY 2024-25 Pavement Maintenance Project
Recommended Action: Approve the plans, specifications, and construction budget of $589,000 for the FY 2024-25 Pavement Management Project; and authorize the Department of Public Works to advertise for construction bids.

C. Public Art Fund Allocation
Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution allocating $25,000 from the Public Art Fund as a matching contribution for an application for the National Endowment for the Arts Grant FY 2026 to support the creation of public art project at the Park at Rispin Mansion and amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget, as recommended by the Capitola Art and Cultural Commission.

D. MOU with the Capitola Police Officers Association
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to sign a side letter agreement with the Capitola Police Officers Association from March 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027.

7. General Government / Public Hearings
All items listed in “General Government / Public Hearings” are intended to provide an opportunity for public discussion of each item listed. The following procedure pertains to each General Government item: 1) Staff explanation; 2) Council questions; 3) Public comment; 4) Council deliberation; 5) Decision.

A. Appointment of Capitola Representative to Measure Q Oversight Advisory Board Recommended Action: Appoint a member of the public to serve as Capitola’s representative on the Measure Q Citizens Oversight Advisory Board.

B. Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the City Council 1) identify Alternative 2 as the preferred long-term improvement alternative for the Bay Avenue corridor; 2) authorize staff to proceed with public engagement and conceptual design refinement; and 3) direct staff to pursue grant funding opportunities for final design and construction.

C. Bay Avenue and Hill Street Traffic Safety Update
Recommended Action: Provide direction on short-term modifications to the Bay Avenue and Hill Street intersection.

D. FY 2024-25 Mid-Year Budget Report
Recommended Action: Receive the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Mid-Year Budget Report and adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget.

E. CDBG Program Income Funds
Recommended Action: 1) Conduct a public hearing and receive public comment regarding Program Income and its eligible uses; 2) adopt a resolution rescinding Resolution No. 4414 and allocating $170,000 of Program Income for the Community Center Rehabilitation Project; and 3) adopt a resolution amending the FY 2024-25 budget.

8. Adjournment - The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is on March 13, 2025, at 6:00 PM.
2 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 27, 2025
City of Capitola Page 3
_____________________________________________________
How to View the Meeting
Meetings are open to the public for in-person attendance at the Capitola City Council Chambers located at 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, California, 95010.

Other ways to Watch:

Spectrum Cable Television channel 8
City of Capitola, California YouTube Channel
To Join Zoom Application or Call in to Zoom:

Meeting
link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83328173113?pwd=aVRwcWN3RU03Zzc2dkNpQzRWVXAydz09 Or dial one of these phone numbers: 1 (669) 900 6833, 1 (408) 638 0968, 1 (346) 248 7799 Meeting ID: 833 2817 3113
Meeting Passcode: 678550
How to Provide Comments to the City Council
Members of the public may provide public comments to the City Council in-person during the meeting.

If you are unable to attend in-person, please email your comments to [email protected] and they will be included as a part of the record for the meeting. Please be aware that the City Council will not accept comments via Zoom.

Notice regarding City Council: The City Council meets on the 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola.

Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials: The City Council Agenda and the complete Agenda Packet are available for review on the City’s website and at Capitola City Hall prior to the meeting. Need more information? Contact the City Clerk’s office at 831-475-7300.

Agenda Materials Distributed after Distribution of the Agenda Packet: Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, materials related to an agenda item submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the Reception Office at City Hall, 420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, California, during normal business hours.

Americans with Disabilities Act: Disability-related aids or services are available to enable persons with a disability to participate in this meeting consistent with the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Assisted listening devices are available for individuals with hearing impairments at the meeting in the City Council Chambers. Should you require special accommodations to participate in the meeting due to a disability, please contact the City Clerk’s office at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting at 831-475-7300. In an effort to accommodate individuals with environmental sensitivities, attendees are requested to refrain from wearing perfumes and other scented products.

Si desea asistir a esta reunión pública y necesita ayuda - como un intérprete de lenguaje de señas americano, español u otro equipo especial - favor de llamar al Departamento de la Secretaría de la Ciudad al 831-475-7300 al menos tres días antes para que podamos coordinar dicha asistencia especial o envié un correo electrónico a [email protected].

Televised Meetings: City Council meetings are cablecast “Live” on Charter Communications Cable TV Channel 8 and are recorded to be rebroadcasted at 8:00 a.m. on the Wednesday following the meetings and at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday following the first rebroadcast on Community 3 City Council Meeting Agenda – February 27, 2025
City of Capitola Page 4
Television of Santa Cruz County (Charter Channel 71 and Comcast Channel 25). Meetings are streamed “Live” on the City’s website by clicking on the Home Page link “Meeting Agendas/Videos.” Archived meetings can be viewed from the website at any time. 4 1
Gautho, Julia
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 3:30 PM
To: City Council; Gautho, Julia
Subject: Item 6B
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello Neighbors
We can improve the bike lanes here too with flex posts and some lane right sizing. These lanes need not be so big.

Perceived and actual fricƟon greatly enhance all users safety.

Warmly JM
5 Item 3 A.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 3:19 PM
To: City Council; Gautho, Julia
Subject: Item 6C
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello Neighbors
25K is a lot of money for our small city. Such a budget change should be a public agenda item Imo.

Warmly JM
6 Item 3 B.

Memo
To: City Council
From: Chloé Woodmansee, Assistant to the City Manager
Date: February 26, 2025
Re: Item 6D: MOU with the Capitola Police Officers Association The proposed side letter, signed by the Capitola Police Officer Association President and Vice President is attached.

Attachment:

1. Side Letter
City Manager Department
7 Item 3 C.

SIDE LETTER

BETWEEN CITY OF CAPITOLA AND

CAPITOLA POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, the City of Capitola (City) and Capitola Police Officers Association (CPOA), have met and conferred in good faith regarding incentive pay; and WHEREAS, the City and the Union have previously agreed on an MOU with a term beginning on June 9, 2024, and expiring on June 30, 2027; and
WHEREAS It was determined that the changes to the language will maintain three separate Specialty Pay Paths while also incentivizing education; and WHEREAS All other provisions in the MOU remain unchanged and shall remain in effect.

IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: The following articles shall be amended to read:

14.01 EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE PAY
After successful completion of the probationary period, sworn police personnel and the Records Manager shall be eligible to have base pay increased by an additional two and one-half (2.5%) for completion of thirty (30) college units, five (5%) percent for completion of sixty (60) college units, and ten (10%) percent for completion of a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution. College units may include graduate level work. Courses and degrees must be work related as approved by the Department Head and City Manager.

To receive Educational Incentive, Pay, the Employee shall write a memo to his/her supervisor and include a copy of transcripts as evidence of the number of units required for the appropriate incentive pay. The supervisor will review the memo and send it to the Police Chief, who, in turn, will review it and send it to the City Manager for approval.

14.04 P.O.S.T. CERTIFICATE PAY - POLICE SERGEANTS
Sergeants shall be eligible to receive 2.5% increase in base pay for completion of the intermediate P.O.S.T. Certificate; an additional 2.5% for completion of the Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate; and an additional 2.5% for completion of the P.O.S.T. Supervisory Certificate provided the employee has an A.A., A.S. or equivalent Degree. This Certificate Pay may not be collected in addition to education incentive pay. This program became effective 7-1-85.

Officers receiving 2.5% P.O.S.T. certification pay for completion of the Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate as of February 21, 2025, may continue to receive it; no other Officers are eligible.

To receive P.O.S.T. pay, the employee shall write a memo to his/her supervisor including a copy of the appropriate P.O.S.T. Certificate. The Supervisor shall review the memo and send it to the Police Chief, who, in turn, shall review it and send it to the City Manager for review, and, if approved, it will be effective the first of the month after approval.

19.05 RECORDS MANAGER SPECIALTY PAY
Docusign Envelope ID: BDEAFE04-82F7-4531-B104-25CAB17C1ED5 8 Item 3 C.

Those members serving in the position of Police Records Manager shall receive an additional half (.5) percent specialty pay per year added to base pay (totaling 1.5%) for routinely and consistently supervising the handling of police records/evidence. This provision expires July 1, 2027.

All other provisions in the MOU remain unchanged and shall remain in effect.

Signed:

Capitola Police Officers Association City of Capitola
Aron Quolas, CPOA President Jamie Goldstein, City Manager Date: Date:

Noah Sherin, CPOA Vice President
Date:

Docusign Envelope ID: BDEAFE04-82F7-4531-B104-25CAB17C1ED5 2/26/2025
2/26/2025
9 Item 3 C.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 3:28 PM
To: City Council; Gautho, Julia
Subject: Item 7B
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello Neighbors
Please listen to staff. A roundabout is the only non flow interrupƟve type of controlled intersecƟon. It is safer for all users and greatly reduces traffic. It’s almost aestheƟcally pleasing.

Studies also show stops of more than 4 ways, that is a 6 way used as an 8 way someƟmes plus the Gayle’s entrance, are near impossible for older humans to process. Our city has one of the oldest average ages of any comparable city in CA.

We should build with our senior populaƟon in mind.

I recommend a protected separate bike lane and bollards everywhere, like Gayle’s has bollards all over its property.

Also that Gayle’s entrance is just so dangerous. It’s superfluous. MORE parking could be added to that lot and its flow could be significantly improved by closing it. Wider sidewalks ever please. Watching strollers being diverted into the street because the sidewalks can’t accommodate two way foot traffic makes me sad.

Warmly JM
10 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Kevin Maguire <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 4:17 PM
To: City Council
Subject: 2.27.2025 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 7b Based on the Bay Avenue Corridor Study, the roundabout option (Alternative 2) presents several negative impacts on side streets and other streets with stop signs: 1. Increased Traffic on Side Streets Traffi...

Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
I live on Monterey Ave, and traffic is backed up from about 445 pm till 5:45-6 pm down to Monterey Park, and NBMS on days with accidents or detours on the freeway.

Park Avenue is also backed up, and a lot of cut through traffic on Columbus, Sir Francis.

Right now we have a natural system that stops and then lets traffic flow. Stops and lets traffic flow.

By opening the flood gates at Bay/Hill, Bay and Capitola, Bay and Monterey. You will be impacting us down stream.

We need that data, and studied in the report. I know you are trying to make it better, but you also are making it worse for others.

It takes me 5-10 mins at times to turn into my driveway because traffic is at a standstill.

I found some flawed data, there might be more
11 Item 3 D.
2 My assistance ChatGPT 4.0 analyzed the 334 paged, Here are some of the major issues and some proposed resolutions. ( i dont think Traffic lights are it, but there was a time at Monterey and Kennedy there was no stop sign, same at Kennedy and Sir Francis.

Remove those, and put a roundabout at Park and Kennedy. You need to address the full flow of traffic at the bottle neck points we already have. .

The Bay Avenue Traffic Study was conducted to analyze the impact of proposed roadway modifications, including the introduction of a roundabout. However, several key flaws were identified in the study’s methodology and reported data, potentially affecting the accuracy and reliability of its conclusions. This report consolidates these issues and provides targeted recommendations for improvement.

Key Identified Flaws and Recommendations

1. Data Collection Limitations
 Flaw: Data was collected on a single day (May 16, 2024), failing to account for daily, weekly, or seasonal fluctuations.
 Recommendation: Conduct multi-day, multi-seasonal data collection, including school days, weekends, and holidays.
12 Item 3 D.
3 2. Inconsistent Peak Hour Selection
 Flaw: The PM peak (3:55 – 4:45 PM) does not align with standard peak congestion periods (typically 4:30 – 6:00 PM).
 Recommendation: Expand study periods to two-hour windows for AM and PM rush hours (7:00 – 9:00 AM, 4:00 – 6:00 PM), and include a late evening period (6:00 – 8:00 PM).

3. Drone-Based Data Collection Issues
 Flaw: Potential inaccuracies due to obstructions (tree cover, shadows), AI misinterpretation of vehicle stops, and lack of ground-truth validation.
 Recommendation: Cross-validate drone data with manual counting or ground sensors and integrate multiple data collection methods (loop detectors, radar, video analysis).

4. Lack of Side-Street Impact Analysis
 Flaw: The study primarily examines Bay Avenue and fails to assess congestion at side streets and key intersections (e.g., Monterey & Park, Monterey & Kennedy, Park & Kennedy).  Recommendation: Conduct a side-street traffic impact analysis using Synchro modeling to estimate increased wait times at stop signs.

5. Gaps in Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Assessment
 Flaw: No detailed evaluation of pedestrian wait times, bicycle conflict zones, or traffic rerouting risks.
 Recommendation: Implement a pedestrian delay study and bike lane conflict analysis to determine potential safety concerns and mitigate risks.

6. Inconsistent Level of Service (LOS) Reporting
 Flaw: The study uses different software models (Synchro for signals, Sidra for roundabouts, VISSIM for road diets), leading to inconsistency.
 Recommendation: Standardize LOS calculations using one traffic modeling software (Synchro or Sidra) for uniform comparisons.

Conclusion & Next Steps
While the Bay Avenue Traffic Study provides useful insights, these methodological flaws weaken its reliability. Addressing these issues through expanded data collection, improved modeling consistency, and additional safety analyses will lead to better-informed transportation planning decisions.

Next Steps:

1. Expand data collection across multiple days and seasons. 13 Item 3 D.
4 2. Standardize two-hour peak period analysis.

3. Validate AI-based traffic detection with manual/sensor-based cross-checking.

4. Conduct side-street congestion modeling to assess stop sign delays.

5. Enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety assessments.

6. Standardize LOS calculations across all traffic models.

Implementing these improvements will enhance the study’s accuracy and effectiveness in guiding future transportation policies.
- Kevin Maguire
Cliffwood Heights
Capitola, CA
14 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Michael routh <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2025 9:46 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Roundabouts: Mixed Results for Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety | Smart Cities Dive Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Please read the aƩached arƟcle. If the goal is to improve pedestrian / cyclist safety at the Bay/Hill and Bay/Cap Ave intersecƟons, a round-a-bout might not be the best configuraƟon. Why not just eliminate the quick build and restore the Bay/Hill intersecƟon to its previous configuraƟon? The accident history at that intersecƟon was nil and the fatality, to which the city over reacted, did not occur at that intersecƟon. Once again, the city seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Mick Routh
hƩps://www.smartciƟesdive.com/ex/sustainableciƟescollecƟve/roundabout-safety-mixed-results-pedestrianscyclists/122461/ Sent from my iPad
15 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2025 9:05 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Bay Ave - Overhead Solar LED Lighting
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Capitola City Council,
In pavement lighting fixtures help keep pedestrians safe at crosswalks - links. https://xwalk.com/?gclid=CjwKCAjw7rWKBhAtEiwAJ3CWLHUbm7CJm0OIe7bdvDDQTu-6TfHEQRviq5JTGCpd9AUsIo5Bka3uhoC1GoQAvD_BwE https://lanelight.com/products/pedestrian-crosswalk-lights/ Overhead crosswalk lighting - links;
https://carmanah.com/overhead-lighting-crosswalks/
https://www.traffictechnologytoday.com/news/vulnerable-road-users/crosswalk-night-time-safety-system-launched-atatssa-expo.html Thank you for your time
Michael Pisano – Soquel, CA
16 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Matt Miller <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2025 4:43 PM
To: City Council
Subject: [PDF] City Council Meeting 2/27, Item 7.B.

Attachments: City of Capitola - Letter of Support for Bay Avenue Corridor.pdf Hello City of Capitola team,
Please find the attached letter of support for staff recommendations on Item 7.B.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Matt Miller (he/him)
Director, Mobility Transformation

Office 831.515.1324 | Mobile 916.849.6220
877 Cedar St. Suite 240, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
letsmodo.org | vamosmodo.org
17 Item 3 D.
2/26/25
City of Capitola City Council
420 Capitola Avenue
Capitola, CA 95010
RE: Item 7.B. Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Dear Mayor Clarke and Capitola City Council,
Ecology Action, a California environmental non-profit headquartered in Santa Cruz, works to advance equitable community climate solutions in high greenhouse gas emitting sectors, including transportation. Our Modo Active Transportation team offers youth pedestrian and bike safety education at schools across the county, including Capitola, transportation planning like Complete Streets to School and Active Transportation Plans, and hosts community events like Walk and Roll to School Day, and Bike to Work Day, Bike Month, and Biketober. While bicycle and pedestrian safety and encouragement programs are an important part of the local effort to increase walking and biking, we also appreciate that the physical infrastructure community members must navigate needs to be safe, easy, and accessible to use for all modes of transportation. Today that picture is incomplete in Capitola.

We support Capitola staff recommendation to 1) identify Alternative 2 as the preferred long-term improvement alternative for the Bay Avenue corridor; 2) authorize staff to proceed with public engagement and conceptual design refinement; and 3) direct staff to pursue grant funding opportunities for final design and construction. four-lane road reduced to a
two-lane road and the traffic count remained approximately the same (23,000 vehicles per day before, 22,000 after), but walking, bicycling, transit use, on-street parking and retail sales all climbed to much higher levels, the accordingly to the City of San Diego. Retail sales rose 30 percent and noise levels dropped 77 percent. Because traffic moves slower, businesses report higher visibility. As a result of the roundabouts and traffic calming, speeds were reduced from 40 45 mph to 19 mph, according to city transportation engineers. Traffic crashes fell by 90 percent. Motorists understandably dreaded this change before it was made. But they found that instead of waiting 24 seconds for a pedestrian to cross 70 feet of road, they now only wait 3 ustomers
arriving in cars actually improved their trade. All those changes demonstrate that a traffic calmed street with roundabouts treatments can lead to improvements in safety, flow, emissions reduction, and more attractive spaces for to walk, bike, and roll which means higher quality of life for all.

When the Santa Cruz County Delegation traveled to the Netherlands for a study visit in June 2024, we studied roundabouts and learned they are a widely used Dutch strategy to reduce traffic casualties and serious injury, slow speed for all users, improve eye contact and interaction between road users, and once installed there is no operational cost.

Compared to a four-way intersection with 32 conflict points, roundabouts have 8 conflict points. We encourage the exploration of Dutch style roundabouts in Capitola to ensure dedicated spaces for cars, bikes, and pedestrians. 18 Item 3 D.

This concept can improve inequities by closing a gap in existing multimodal infrastructure and expanding travel options for those who do not or cannot travel by vehicle. It encourages a mode shift from single-occupancy vehicles to bicycling and walking and reduces VMT and GHG emissions by providing a safer, comfortable, and accessible alternative to driving.

For those who choose to or only have the option to drive, the experience for drivers will be improved with better flow and reduced likelihood of crashes. Residents and visitors will especially choose to bicycle and walk during periods of high automobile congestion to reduce travel times and provide reasonable alternatives.

Ecology Action strongly supports the implementation of the staff recommendation to proceed down this path of Alternative 2. If eventually implemented, it wi active transportation network, increase safety, and improve the livability, equity, and quality of life for residents and visitors alike.

Sincerely,
Matt Miller
Director, Mobility Transformation
19 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2025 9:27 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Roundabout at Bay Capitola
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
I cannot stress enough how bad traffic will be in a couple of years if we don’t put a roundabout there.

We have nearly bricked the city. VoƟng for anything but a roundabout there will be the nail in our coffin. Roundabouts are scary only to people who have never been outside Santa Cruz. If you have traveled roundabouts are ubiquitous because long term they save jurisdicƟons SO much money.

Our Calpers UAL is gonna be 15% of our total budget by 2025. We need to be smart with our money and think like elite educated worldly folks do. ROI ROI ROI
Warmly JM
20 Item 3 D.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: John <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 3:44 PM
To: City Council; Gautho, Julia
Subject: Item 7C
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello Neighbors
Let’s not spend 40K making everything more dangerous for all users for a perceived illusion of a problem that the data in the staff report shows isn’t even a real problem. The highway ramp might eventually reopen. Capitola Ave in theory will someday reopen too. That will greatly relieve traffic there.

I understand how much folks hate driving. Being chained in a steel cage you can’t leave or you’ll die sucks. Let’s be data driven. Build for wealth and the future. Raised crosswalks I am however into. Let’s add that feature if we want to spend 40K.

Those crosswalks are SIGNIFICANTLY safer compared to the old design especially at night.

Mayor Brown was damn close to right just before the November elecƟon when she said ‘We need to make it harder to own a car’. What we need to do is make it easier to walk and bike and exist without needing to drive everywhere. For all the reasons from the environment to health to budgets to wealth creaƟon but most of all for our kids.

The sheer mulƟtude of complainers about e-bikes. Build safe bike infrastructure is the soluƟon to that also not real problem. Kids deserve some freedom. When I was a lad I was walking to my friends’ houses and home and to school at 6 years old and that was commonplace. The cars are killing us folks.

Plus, and I’m going to say worse here because money moƟvates more than service as YveƩe Brooks shows us, the cars are making us poor.

How are we sƟll not paving Monterey into the village? Is the rail trail going to do it for us?

Warmly JM
21 Item 3 E.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Mick <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2025 11:57 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Item 7C
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Council membersHow much money has been spent on staff Ɵme, studies, and the poor decision to build the “quick build” at the Bay / Hill intersecƟon?
Keep in mind this all started with an over reacƟon by the council to an unfortunate fatal hit and run accident that didn’t even occur at this intersecƟon.

The most cost effecƟve and sensible soluƟon is to return the intersecƟon to the previous configuraƟon prior to the quick build changes.

Mick Routh
Sent from my iPhone
22 Item 3 E.
23 Item 3 E.
24 Item 3 E.
25 Item 3 E.
26 Item 3 E.
27 Item 3 E.
28 Item 3 E.
29 Item 3 E.
30 Item 3 E.
31 Item 3 E.
32 Item 3 E.
33 Item 3 E.
34 Item 3 E.
35 Item 3 E.
36 Item 3 E.
37 Item 3 E.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Teresa Maguire <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2025 5:08 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda item 7C - Please do more in-depth traffic analysis for us that are down stream that already have bad traffic issues!
Dear Capitola City Council,
I am writing to formally request a more in-depth traffic analysis regarding the negative downstream impacts of the Bay Avenue modifications, specifically the introduction of a roundabout and the resulting increased congestion on surrounding streets. As the owner and operator of a child care facility located in Capitola, I have observed significant traffic issues that have worsened during peak hours, particularly from 4:30 PM to 6:00 PM, coinciding with our busiest pickup time.

The increased congestion in front of my house has created hazardous conditions for families picking up their children, with vehicles frequently stopping in unsafe locations, longer queue times, and heightened risks for pedestrians. Additionally, emergency vehicle access is often obstructed, which poses a serious concern for the safety of the children and families in our care. Many families have expressed frustration over the growing delays, making it harder for them to navigate pickup logistics safely and efficiently.

I kindly urge the city to conduct a deeper traffic study on the impact these changes have on nearby streets, including Monterey Avenue, Park Avenue, Kennedy Drive, and other surrounding residential streets.

Maybe the answer is to put a roundabout at Kennedy and Park Avenue first so traffic can flow to the freeway, and work your way back to Bay/Porter.

It's ok to ask for more time, and to do this the proper way. Please dont create more issues while trying to solve a problem someone else in town.

Comparing Bay/Porter right off of HW1 to Bird Rock which is over 4 miles away from the freeway is not a very good comparison. La Jolla Boulevard is longer and straight, and doesnt have the freeway traffic being dumped there.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to your response and hope to see proactive steps taken to ensure the safety and well-being of Capitola residents, particularly young children and families.

Sincerely,
Teresa Maguire
38 Item 3 E.
2 Capitola, CA
39 Item 3 E.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: Team Wanderweggers <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2025 6:22 PM
To: City Council; Gautho, Julia
Subject: Bay Hill Intersection Mayor Ed Letter
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello Neighbors
Mayor Ed is enƟrely correct about needing more features like lighƟng at Bay/Hill. He’s wrong about the other stuff imo but we do share an interest...

As many of you know a crosswalk at center there across Bay Ave is a longƟme dream of mine. I see so many (oŌen older) folks run that intersecƟon there and at Oak Drive.

Center is a natural place for a crosswalk as Center connects to Peery Park, the Nob Hill Center, Rispin Park, the Library and is the obvious walking route to 41st and the Clares area.

A crosswalk there is a no brainer. Please add my voice to Mayor Ed’s.

Warmly JM
40 Item 3 E.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: City Manager Department
Subject: City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the regular meeting on February 13, 2025, and the special meeting on February 19, 2025.

Background: Attached for City Council review and approval are the draft minutes from the regular meeting on February 13th and the special meeting on February 19th.

Attachments:

1. Regular Meeting Minutes 2/13/2025

2. Special Meeting Minutes 2/19/2025
Report Prepared By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
41 Item 6 A.

City of Capitola
City Council Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 13, 2025 – 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
201 ʻŌhua Avenue, Honolulu, Hawaii 96815
Mayor: Joe Clarke
Vice Mayor: Alexander Pedersen
Council Members: Gerry Jensen, Margaux Morgan, Melinda Orbach Closed Session – 5 PM
i. CONERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6) Negotiator: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
Employee Organizations: Police Officers Association
ii. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Gov’t Code § 54956.8) Property: Esplanade Park (APN 035-26-209)
City Negotiator: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
Under Negotiation: Lease of Real Property
Regular Meeting of the Capitola City Council – 6 PM

1. Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance – The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM. In attendance: Council Members Jensen, Morgan, Orbach, Persen, and Mayor Clarke. Council Member Orbach attended the meeting remotely.

2. Additions and Deletions to the Agenda – Staff continued Items 9A and 9B to the February 27, 2025, meeting.

3. Presentations
A. Public Works Project Manager Mozumder provided a presentation on the project completion of the Monte Foundation Pump Track.

4. Report on Closed Session – The City Council met and discussed two items on the Closed Session agenda. No reportable action was taken.

5. Additional Materials
A. Item 6 – One email received after publication of the agenda packet.

B. Item 9A - Staff Memo continuing the item to February 27th meeting & one email received after publication of the agenda packet.

C. Item 9B - Staff Memo continuing the item to February 27th meeting & one email received after publication of the agenda packet.

D. Item 9C - 220 emails received after publication of the agenda packet.

E. Item 9D - One email received after publication of the agenda packet.

6. Oral Communications by Members of the Public
42 Item 6 A.

City Council Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2025
City of Capitola Page 2
 Goran Klepic
 Clark Cochran
 Christine McBroom

7. Staff / City Council Comments
 Community Service and Recreation Department Director invited the City Council and members of the public to attend the dedication of the Begonia Public Art installation.  Council Member Jensen thanked Public Works Department staff for their storm preparation work; he also shared that he had attended the Capitola Village and Wharf BIA meeting and discussed the fire incident in the Capitola Village.
 Mayor Clarke thanked the public for their attendance at an event held in the Sear’s shopping center at the Capitola Mall.

8. Consent Items
A. City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from the regular meeting on January 30, 2025, and the special meeting on February 4, 2025.

B. 2025 City Council Meeting Schedule
Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution amending the regular meeting schedule for 2025. (Resolution No. 4417)
Motion to approve the Consent Calendar: Council Member Morgan Second: Council Member Jensen
Voting Yea: Council Members Jensen, Morgan, Orbach, Vice Mayor Pedersen, Mayor Clarke

9. General Government / Public Hearings
A. Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the City Council 1) identify Alternative 2 as the preferred long-term improvement alternative for the Bay Avenue corridor; 2) authorize staff to proceed with public engagement and conceptual design refinement; and 3) direct staff to pursue grant funding opportunities for final design and construction. (Continued to February 27, 2025) B. Bay Avenue and Hill Street Traffic Safety Update
Recommended Action: Provide direction on short-term modifications to the Bay Avenue and Hill Street intersection. (Continued to February 27, 2025)
C. Park Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements with Coastal Rail Trail Options Recommended Action: Review options for Coastal Rail Trail improvements in the Park Avenue right-of-way and identify Option A (as described in the staff report) as the preferred alternative for further analysis.

Vice Mayor Pedersen recused himself from this item due to the proximity of the project to his leased residence.

Public Works Department Director Kahn and Public Works Project Manager Mozumder presented the staff report. Rob Tidmore and Grace Blakeslee presented on behalf of Santa Cruz County staff.

The City Council took a three-minute recess at 7:27 PM. The meeting resumed at 7:32 PM. 43 Item 6 A.

City Council Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2025
City of Capitola Page 3
Public Comments:
 Tory Del
Favero
 Jim Weller
 Carin Hanna
 Roxanne
 Debbie Hale
 Deb Molina
 Elizabeth
Bertrand
 James Duzak
 Leslie
Nielsen
 Lani Faulkner
 Michael
Morrissey
 Terre Thomas
 Brian
Peoples
 Keith
Cahalen
 Susan
Westman
 Sal Ideoseo
 Nels
Westman
 Connie Welch
 TJ Welch
 Ted Downing
 Kevin
Maguire
 Barry Scott
 Gia Colosi
 Samson
 Jacques
Bertrand
The City Council thanked the public for their comments. The Council weighed the benefits of postponing providing direction on this item to receive information from the County on the project budget and requested that staff conduct additional public outreach and host a town hall meeting to better inform the public. The Council requested further analysis from the City Attorney on potential litigation from violations of Measure L.

Motion to postpone a decision on this item and host a Town Hall Meeting where staff from the City and County will provide updates on the use of the Trestle, review long-term impacts of the project, review impacts of potential litigation from Measure L, and an overview of Rail Trail Project impacts in Capitola: Council Member Morgan Second: Council Member Jensen
Voting Yea: Council Members Jensen, Morgan, Mayor Clarke Voting Nay: Council Member Orbach
Abstain: Vice Mayor Pedersen
The Council took a brief recess. The meeting resumed at 9:01 PM.

D. Appointments to City and Regional Advisory Bodies
Recommended Action: Review City Council appointments to regional and multi-jurisdictional advisory bodies; review City Council appointments to City advisory bodies; and review appointments of members of the public to City advisory bodies.

City Clerk Gautho presented the staff report.

Public Comments:
 Keith Cahalen
Council Discussion:

Motion to make the appointments below to various regional and City advisory bodies:

Council Member Jensen
Second: Council Member Morgan
Voting Yea: Council Members Jensen, Morgan, Orbach, Vice Mayor Pedersen, Mayor Clarke
 AMBAG: Council Member Orbach, Council Member Morgan (Alternate)  COE: Mayor Clarke
44 Item 6 A.

City Council Meeting Minutes – February 13, 2025
City of Capitola Page 4
 FAC: Vice Mayor Pedersen, Council Member Morgan
 Arts Council Santa Cruz: Art and Cultural Commissioner Roy Holmberg

10. Adjournment – The meeting adjourned at 9:06 PM. The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is on February 27, 2025, at 6:00 PM.
____________________________
ATTEST: Joe Clarke, Mayor
____________________________
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
45 Item 6 A.

City of Capitola
Special City Council Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, February 19, 2025 – 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
420 Capitola Avenue, Capitola, CA 95010
Mayor: Joe Clarke
Vice Mayor: Alexander Pedersen
Council Members: Gerry Jensen, Margaux Morgan, Melinda Orbach Closed Session – 6 PM

1. Roll Call – The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM. In attendance: Council Members Jensen, Morgan, Orbach, and Mayor Clarke. Absent: Vice Mayor Pedersen.

2. Oral Communications by Members of the Public
A. Additional Materials - Item 3A – Three emails received after publication of the agenda packet.  TJ Welch
 Speaker
 Leslie Nielsen
 John Mulry
 Dean Cutter
 Speaker
 Kevin Maguire
 Gayle Ortiz
 Keith Cahalen
 Christine McBroom
 Susan Westman
 Tory Del Favero
 Elizabeth Bertrand
 Grace Gretzly

3. Closed Session Items
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Govt. Code § 54956.9(d)(2) One Case
The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:24 PM. The City Council reconvened at 8:07 PM.

4. Report on Closed Session – The City Council discussed one item on the Closed Session agenda. No reportable action was taken.

5. Adjournment - The meeting adjourned at 8:07 PM. The City Council will hold a special meeting on February 26, 2025, at 5:30 PM.
46 Item 6 A.

Special City Council Meeting Minutes – February 19, 2025 City of Capitola Page 2
____________________________
ATTEST: Joe Clarke, Mayor
____________________________
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
47 Item 6 A.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: Public Works Department
Subject: FY 2024-25 Pavement Maintenance Project
Recommended Action: Approve the plans, specifications, and construction budget of $589,000 for the FY 2024-25 Pavement Management Project; and authorize the Department of Public Works to advertise for construction bids.

Background: On June 9, 2022, the City Council approved the 2022 Pavement Management Project Update (PMP), which outlines specific streets scheduled for rehabilitation based on pavement conditions and long-term maintenance planning. The project list was amended in 2022, replacing Terrace Way and San Jose Avenue (originally scheduled for FY 2025-26) with Reposa Avenue and the southernmost portion of 41st Avenue in FY 2024-25, as directed by the Council.

The FY 2024-25 Pavement Management Project is funded exclusively by Measure D and SB1 revenues, estimated at $621,000 for this fiscal year. The planned streets for rehabilitation in FY 2024-25, per the 2022 PMP, include:

Adopted 2022 PMP FY 2024-25 Street List
Road Name Begin Location End Location
42ND AV CAPITOLA RD CLARES ST
47TH AV PORTOLA DR TOPAZ ST
ALMA LN ROSEDALE AV East End

BEVERLY AV RIVERVIEW DR CAPITOLA AVE
CARL LN ROSEDALE AV East End

CHERRY AV FANMAR WY PARK PL

CLIFF DR WHARF RD OPAL CLIFF DR

FRANCESCO CR FRANCESCO CR (S) FRANCESCO CR (N)

FRANCESCO CR FRANCESCO CR (N) CLARES ST
HILL ST BAY AV East End

OAK DR RIVERVIEW DR BAY AV
OPAL CLIFF DR CLIFF DR City Limit
PLUM ST ROSEDALE AV East End
PORTOLA DR OPAL CLIFF DR City Limit

RIVERVIEW AV TRESTLES BAY AV

ROSEDALE AV HILL ST PINE ST
ROSEDALE CT West End ROSEDALE AVE

SAN JOSE AV CAPITOLA AV TERRACE WY

STOCKTON AV CAPITOLA AV CLIFF DR

SUNSET DR RIVERVIEW DR CENTER ST

TERRACE WY SAN JOSE AV FANMAR WY
Most of these streets are scheduled for light maintenance treatments, such as slurry seal and isolated dig-outs as needed. The goal is to preserve streets in good condition following the PMP’s approach of maintaining roads before major deterioration occurs.

Discussion: Since the 2022 PMP’s approval, several additional roadway projects have required scope adjustments:
 Cliff Drive, Opal Cliffs, and Portola Drive will not be repaved this year due to their inclusion in the upcoming Cliff Drive Resiliency Project, a long-term infrastructure improvement effort. 48 Item 6 B.
 Stockton Avenue has been removed from the FY 2024-25 scope due to upcoming utility projects, which will require significant roadway work.
 San Jose Avenue was repaved ahead of winter 2025 due to its designation of “extremely poor” condition.

Reposa Avenue is proposed as an add alternate in the project scope for FY 2024-25, currently deferred to FY 2025-26 and can be added to the project if bids are received under budget.

Looking ahead, 41st Avenue rehabilitation between Clares Street and the northern city limits is being advanced to FY 2025-26 from its original FY 2027-28 schedule, due to additional funding awarded in the 2023 Consolidated Grant Program from the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC). On September 12, 2024, the Council approved a budget amendment to obtain a Caltrans permit for this project. Staff is currently working on securing the permit, with construction planned for FY 2025-26. Additionally, the FY 2025-26 street list may be adjusted, pushing certain Village area streets to FY 2027-28 due to expected utility work.

Recommended PMP FY 2024-25 Street List
Road Name Begin Location End Location
42ND AV CAPITOLA RD CLARES ST
47TH AV PORTOLA DR TOPAZ ST
ALMA LN ROSEDALE AV East End

BEVERLY AV RIVERVIEW DR CAPITOLA AVE
CARL LN ROSEDALE AV East End

CHERRY AV FANMAR WY PARK PL

FRANCESCO CR FRANCESCO CR (S) FRANCESCO CR (N)

FRANCESCO CR FRANCESCO CR (N) CLARES ST
HILL ST BAY AV East End

OAK DR RIVERVIEW DR BAY AV
PLUM ST ROSEDALE AV East End

RIVERVIEW AV TRESTLES BAY AV
REPOSA AV (ADD ALT) 38TH AV 41ST AV

ROSEDALE AV HILL ST PINE ST
ROSEDALE CT West End ROSEDALE AVE

SUNSET DR RIVERVIEW DR CENTER ST

TERRACE WY SAN JOSE AV FANMAR WY
Fiscal Impact: The FY 2024-25 budget includes $621,161 for general pavement maintenance. Of this amount, $32,380 was spent earlier in the fiscal year on San Jose Avenue, leaving approximately $589,000 available for the PMP. The engineer’s estimate for this project is $589,546 (Attachment 2).

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This project is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c) for the maintenance, repair, or minor alteration of existing facilities, as it consists of repair and maintenance of existing public infrastructure with negligible or no expansion of use.

Attachments:

1. Project Plans

2. Engineer’s Estimate
Report Prepared By: Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director; Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
49 Item 6 B.

Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_TITLE SHEET.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM Know what's below. Callbefore you dig. CITY OF CAPITOLA 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT DPW PROJECT NO. CS0095 GENERAL NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL NECESSARY PERMITS TO COMPLETE WORK. 2. FOR AREAS TO BE REMOVED & REPLACED, CONTRACTOR SHALL ONLY REMOVE MATERIAL QUANTITIES THAT CAN BE REPLACED DURING THE SAME WORK DAY. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRING DAMAGE TO ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITIES AND/OR STRUCTURES SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE DUE PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT UTILITIES OR STRUCTURES FOUND AT THE SITE. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE OWNERS OF THE UTILITIES OR STRUCTURES BEFORE STARTING WORK (2 BUSINESS DAYS ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIRED). 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT AT 811 AT LEAST TWO (2) WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION TO ALLOW UTILITY OWNERS TO MARK THE LOCATION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES/UTILITIES, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (CAL-OSHA) SAFETY STANDARDS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 7-10.4 OF THE SSPWC. IF REQUESTED BY THE INSPECTOR, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PROOF OF A PERMIT FROM CAL-OSHA. 6. PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK, EXISTING GRASS AND WEEDS IN THE PROJECT ROADWAYS SHALL BE DESTROYED BY APPLICATION OF WEED KILLER. (SEE ROADWAY PREPARATION IN TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.) 7. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TRIMMING ALL VEGETATION WITHIN WORK ZONE THAT WILL INTERFERE WITH WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL DEBRIS. 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN A LEGAL MANNER. 9. STATIONING SHOWN ON PLANS IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. LOCATION MAP NTS 1 of 13 TITLE SHEET UTILITY CONTACT LIST UTILITY CONTACT PHONE NUMBER AT&T CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT SHEET INDEX STREET NAME LIMITS SHEET TITLE SHEET - 1 42ND AVENUE CLARES STREET TO CAPITOLA ROAD 2 47TH AVENUE PORTOLA DRIVE TO TOPAZ STREET 3 BEVERLY AVENUE CAPITOLA AVENUE TO RIVERVIEW DRIVE 4 CHERRY AVENUE FANMAR WAY TO PARK PLACE 5 FRANCESCO CIRCLE FRANCESCO CIRCLE TO CLARES STREET 6 HILL STREET BAY AVENUE TO END 7 OAK DRIVE BAY AVENUE TO RIVERVIEW DRIVE 8 RIVERVIEW AVENUE TRESTLES TO RIVERVIEW DRIVE 9 ROSEDALE AVENUE BAY AVENUE TO NORTH END 10 CARL LANE ROSEDALE AVENUE TO END 10 ALMA LANE ROSEDALE AVENUE TO END 10 ROSEDALE COURT ROSEDALE AVENUE TO END 10 PLUM STREET ROSEDALE AVENUE TO END 10 SUNSET DRIVE RIVERVIEW DRIVE TO CENTER STREET 11 TERRACE WAY/ SAN JOSE AVENUE FANMAR WAY TO CHERRY AVENUE 12 ALLEY TERRACE WAY TO FANMAR WAY 12 REPOSA AVENUE 38TH AVENUE TO 3825 REPOSA AVENUE 13 030201 04050607080910111213141516 CITY ENGINEER DATE

CITY OF CAPITOLA

DEPARTMENT

PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION RECEIVED BY: ORIGINAL SIGNED DATE 17 N/A 50 Item 6 B.

CAPITOLA ROAD GRACE STREET PEARSON COURT S S S REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~12'X44') (TYP.) (~15'X15') (~6'X18') R (~6'X7') WLL
WLL
WLL 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 (~6'X6') VIGA COURT SEA PINES COURT CLARES STREET S 42ND AVENUE SCO SCO S (~6'X12') (~6'X36') (~6'X18') (~6'X30') (~6'X6') SEA PINES COURT 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00 26+00 WL 42ND AVENUE
Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_42ND AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS MATCHLINE STA 21+00 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT
MATCHLINE STA 21+00 - SEE BELOW LEFT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE SCO SEWER CLEANOUT (EX.) CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) 2 of 13 GV 42ND AVENUE 1" = 40' LADDER CROSSWALK DETAILNTS12" TYP. 10' 12" WHITE LINES (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" 24" WHITE LINES TYP. (THERMOPLASTIC) WL WHITE LADDER CROSSWALK (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" TYP. NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL SHARED LANE MARKING GREEN PAINT DETAILNTS SHARED LANE MARKING (SHARROW) PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24C GREEN PAINT 1.00' 1.00' 1.00' 1.00'NOTES: 1. SHARED LANE MARKINGS SHALL BE SPACED APPROX. 225'. ENGINEER OR CITY SHALL CONFIRM LOCATIONS PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONS. 51 Item 6 B.
47TH AVENUE APPROXIMATE CITY LIMIT BRPM APPROXIMATE UPRR RIGHT OF WAY SEE ENLARGEMENT BELOW 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00

TOPAZ STREET
WLL PORTOLA DRIVE 1 WLL B/40
8' 20' EXISTING CURB RAMP 4" WHITE LINE @ 3' O.C. NO PARKING 4" BLUE LINE BORDER 10' 2 Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_47TH AVE.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) 3 of 13 CATCH BASIN 47TH AVENUE 1" = 40' ACCESSIBLE ON-STREET PARKING ENLARGEMENT 1" = 5' X/YY CURB PAINT LENGTH "YY" (LF) 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY SLURRY SEAL ON EX. SPEED HUMP, THEN INSTALL SPEED HUMP PAVEMENT MARKINGS PER CA MUTCD (2014 EDITION), FIGURE 3B-29, "PAVEMENT MARKINGS FOR SPEED HUMPS WITHOUT CROSSWALKS," OPTION C. ACCESSIBLE ON-STREET PARKING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER 2018 CALTRANS STANDARD DETAIL A90B. 2 CURB PAINT COLOR "X" (B=BLUE) / BIKE LANE SYMBOL WITH PERSON & ARROW GREEN PAINT DETAILNTS

BIKE LANE
WIDTH VARIES (EQ.) VARIES (EQ.) GREEN PAINT 1.00' 1.00' BIKE LANE ARROW PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24A BIKE LANE SYMBOL WITH PERSON PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24C NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 52 Item 6 B.

RIVERVIEW DRIVESUNSET DRIVE GILROY DRIVE OAK DRIVE CAPITOLA AVENUE BRPM S S S BRPM BRPM GV GV REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~30'X15') (TYP.) (~6'X6') (~6'X8') (~6'X18') (~6'X6') (~8'X8') (~6'X6') (~16'X22') (~6'X6') 1 R R R R 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 1 D SEE SHEET 11 FOR WORK ON SUNSET DRIVE SEE SHEET 8 FOR WORK ON OAK DRIVE

WL BEVERLY AVENUE
Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_BEVERLY AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: LOWER UTILITY COVER PRIOR TO COLD PLANE. R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER GV GAS VALVE CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" 4 of 13 WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) WLL BEVERLY AVENUE 1" = 40' LADDER CROSSWALK DETAILNTS12" TYP. 10' 12" WHITE LINES (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" 24" WHITE LINES TYP. (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" TYP. WL WHITE LADDER CROSSWALK (THERMOPLASTIC) NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 53 Item 6 B.

FANMAR WAY CHERRY AVENUE PARK PLACE
MONTEREY AVE S S S S REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~6'X6') (TYP.) (~6'X15') (~8'X20') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') R WLL R CALIFORNIA AVE STOCKTON AVE SAN JOSE AVE 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 GVGV BRPM TV SEE SHEET 12 FOR WORK ON SAN JOSE AVENUE Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_CHERRY AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER GV GAS VALVE WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) 5 of 13 SURVEY MONUMENT TV TV CABLE BOX CHERRY AVENUE 1" = 40' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 54 Item 6 B.

FRANCESCO CIRCLE CLARES STREET BRPM BRPM BRPM D S S S REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~6'X9') (TYP.) (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') BRPM

DO NOT ENTER S
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00
16+00 19+00 18+00 17+00
20+00 WLL
WLL
Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_FRANCESCO CIRCLE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) 6 of 13 SURVEY MONUMENT CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" FRANCESCO CIRCLE 1" = 40' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 55 Item 6 B.

BAY AVENUE S SCO REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~6'X6') (TYP.) (~6'X6') R REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB & GUTTER (~10LF) (~6'X22') (~6'X7') R WLL
CROSSROADS LOOP (~10'X6') (~6'X10') 1 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 LAURENCE AVENUE CAPITOLA AVENUE TURNER LANE HILL STREET S S S S GV BRPM S (~6'X7') (~6'X10') (~6'X10') WLL S (~6'X10') (~18'X10') R (~6'X45') R 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00 26+00 ROSEDALE AVENUE S BRPM BRPM (~6'X6') (~6'X6') R R WLL
WLL D S BRPM S ROSEDALE AVENUE SEE SHEET 10 FOR WORK ON ROSEDALE AVENUE 26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 HILL STREET HILL STREET Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_HILL STREET_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:46 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM SURVEY MONUMENT LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" W 12" WHITE CROSSWALK LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB & GUTTER WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) MATCHLINE STA 16+00 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT MATCHLINE STA 16+00 - SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE STA 26+00 - SEE BELOW LEFT
MATCHLINE STA 26+00 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT 7 of 13
HILL STREET 1" = 40' BIKE LANE SYMBOL WITH PERSON & ARROW GREEN PAINT DETAILNTS

BIKE LANE
WIDTH VARIES (EQ.) VARIES (EQ.) GREEN PAINT 1.00' 1.00' BIKE LANE ARROW PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24A BIKE LANE SYMBOL WITH PERSON PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24C SHARED LANE MARKING GREEN PAINT DETAILNTS SHARED LANE MARKING (SHARROW) PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24C GREEN PAINT 1.00' 1.00' 1.00' 1.00' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB & GUTTER PER CITY OF CAPITOLA STANDARD DRAWING CAP - 003. NOTES: 1. SHARED LANE MARKINGS SHALL BE SPACED APPROX. 225'. ENGINEER OR CITY SHALL CONFIRM LOCATIONS PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONS. 56 Item 6 B.

RIVERVIEW DRIVE OAK DRIVE BEVERLY AVENUE S S GV BRPM
WLL
WLL REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~18'X6') (TYP.) (~18'X10') (~6'X8') R (~6'X8') 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 WLL DI SEE SHEET 4 FOR WORK ON BEVERLY AVENUE BAY AVENUE S SCO (~6'X14') REMOVE & REPLACE PCC SIDEWALK (~60SF) REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~6'X6')(TYP.) REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB & GUTTER (~10LF) R (~6'X18') R 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 WL 1 1 Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_OAK DRIVE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) REMOVE & REPLACE PCC SIDEWALK REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB & GUTTER MATCHLINE STA 20+00 - SEE BELOW LEFT
MATCHLINE STA 20+00 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT OAK DRIVE 8 of 13 DI DRAIN INLET OAK DRIVE 1" = 40' WL WHITE LADDER CROSSWALK (THERMOPLASTIC) LADDER CROSSWALK DETAILNTS12" TYP. 10' 12" WHITE LINES (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" 24" WHITE LINES TYP. (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" TYP. NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: REMOVE & REPLACE PCC CURB, GUTTER & SIDEWALK PER CITY OF CAPITOLA STANDARD DRAWING CAP - 003. 57 Item 6 B.

RIVERVIEW AVENUE RIVERVIEW DRIVE S S BLUE GUM AVENUE WM DI WM REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~9'X9') WM DI DI DI REMOVE & RESET EX. DRAIN INLET WLL 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 S DI DI 16+00 17+00 S TRESTLE Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_RIVERVIEW AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM E MATCHLINE STA 15+50 - SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE STA 15+50 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" DI DRAIN INLET WM WATER METER 9 of 13 BRPM RIVERVIEW AVENUE 1" = 20' FIRE HYDRANT (EX.) WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 58 Item 6 B.
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 ROSEDALE AVENUE 40+00 41+00 42+00
50+00 51+00
60+00 61+00

BAY AVENUE
PLUM STREET S SS S S GV SCO S SS GV GVGV 1 1 2 REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~6'X6') (TYP.) (~6'X7') (~6'X6') (~8'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X20') (~6'X6') (~8'X6') (~6'X9') (~8'X14') (~6'X6') R WLL
WLL (~6'X6')
70+00 71+00 WLL BRPM BRPM BRPM S S

ROSEDALE COURT

CARL LANE

ALMA LANE

PLUM STREET
WLL WL 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00 ROSEDALE AVENUE S S WLL 2 (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~8'X11') PINE STREET BRPM SEE SHEET 7 FOR WORK ON HILL STREET HILL STREET ROSEDALE AVENUE WLL 26+00 27+00 28+00 PRIVATE PROPERTY (~10'X88') (~50SF) (~8'X32') Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_ROSEDALE AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM MATCHLINE STA 21+00 - SEE BELOW LEFT MATCHLINE STA 21+00 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: RESET CONCRETE COLLAR AROUND UTILITY COVER. LOWER UTILITY COVER PRIOR TO COLD PLANE. GV GAS VALVE 2 10 of 13 SURVEY MONUMENT

ROSEDALE AVENUE, CARL LANE, ROSEDALE COURT,
ALMA LANE, & PLUM STREET 1" = 40' WL WHITE LADDER CROSSWALK (THERMOPLASTIC) LADDER CROSSWALK DETAILNTS12" TYP. 10' 12" WHITE LINES (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" 24" WHITE LINES TYP. (THERMOPLASTIC) 24" TYP. SHARED LANE MARKING GREEN PAINT DETAILNTS SHARED LANE MARKING (SHARROW) PER CALTRANS 2018 STANDARD PLAN A24C GREEN PAINT 1.00' 1.00' 1.00' 1.00' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL NOTES: 1. SHARED LANE MARKINGS SHALL BE SPACED APPROX. 225'. ENGINEER OR CITY SHALL CONFIRM LOCATIONS PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONS. 59 Item 6 B.

SUNSET DRIVE RIVERVIEW DRIVE BEVERLY AVENUE CENTER STREET BRPM GV REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA (~18'X8')(TYP.) (~8'X16') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') (~6'X6') R R WLL WLL 10+00 11+00 12+00
WLL 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00
21+00
22+00 SEE SHEET 4 FOR WORK ON BEVERLY AVENUE
Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_SUNSET DRIVE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA CRACK SEAL & SLURRY SEAL (TYPE II) R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) GV GAS VALVE 11 of 13 SUNSET DRIVE 1" = 40' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL 60 Item 6 B.

TERRACE WAY (~18'X8') (~6'X19') (~9'X33') REMOVE & REPLACE 0.42' HMA (~12'X372') (TYP.) 6' WM WM WM WM 12' FANMAR WAY WLL (~6'X110') PROTECT DECORATIVE PAVEMENT IN PLACE WM

SAN JOSE AVENUE S S S R WLL
14+00
15+00 18+00 17+00 16+00 FANMAR WAY ALLEY GV 17+25/ 43+50 41+00 42+00 43+00 (~10'X25') WM DI WM (~17'X31') (~19'X100') (~18'X35') WM INSTALL SHOULDER BACKING (58' LF) PROTECT EX. DRAIN INLET IN PLACE 6' (~6'X110')

SAN JOSE AVENUES
14+00 SEE SHEET 5 FOR WORK ON CHERRY AVENUE CHERRY AVENUE Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_TERRACE WAY_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM 12 of 13
TERRACE WAY / ALLEY / SAN JOSE AVENUE 1" = 20' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.42' HMA REMOVE 0.42' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. 2. HMA MAY BE REPLACED IN A SINGLE 0.33' LIFT IF REPAIR IS LOCATED UNDER AN OVERLAY. PLACE 0.25' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL NTS SHOULDER BACKING DETAIL PLACE SHOULDER BACKING AFTER COMPLETION OF HMA SURFACING 4.00' 3.00' 2.00' 1.00' 0.25'-0.33' 0.17'-0.25' 0.08'-0.17' 0.00'-0.08' H Y DIMENSION SCHEDULE H Y NEW HMA OVERLAY EXIST. SURFACE SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SHOULDER BACKING MATERIAL LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 0.42' HMA CAPE SEAL R PRUNE & REMOVE TREE ROOTS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S WATER VALVE WLL WWM WATER METER LIGHT STANDARD (EX.) DECORATIVE PAVEMENT (EX.) SURVEY MONUMENT WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMOPLASTIC) CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" GV GAS VALVE DI DRAIN INLET INSTALL SHOULDER BACKING SCO SEWER CLEANOUT (EX.) 61 Item 6 B.

REPOSA AVENUE
38TH AVENUE S B1 B2 REMOVE & REPLACE 4" HMA 2 (~36'X47') REMOVE & REPLACE PCC APRONS & VALLEY GUTTER DI 1 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 3 41ST AVENUE REPOSA AVENUE BRPM S 16+00

REPOSA AVENUE
Path: Z:\SHARED\R DRIVE\ACTIVE PROJECTS\CAPITOLA, CITY OF\230180\TASK 01\DRAWINGS\230180-01_SITE01_REPOSA AVENUE_BASE MAPS.DWG Plot Date: 2/20/2025 11:47 AM SHEET NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY:

Pavement Engineering Inc.

You can ride on our reputation
Corporate Office:
3485 Sacramento Drive, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.781.2265 VERIFY SCALE BAR REPRESENTS 1" ON ORIGINAL 2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT
CITY OF CAPITOLA FEBRUARY 2025 230180-01 CM BRPM BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKER LEGEND REMOVE & REPLACE 4" HMA 1CONSTRUCTION NOTES: LOWER UTILITY PRIOR TO COLD PLANE. ADJUST DRAIN INLET TO FINISH GRADE. REMOVE & REPLACE PCC APRONS & VALLEY GUTTER PER CITY OF CAPITOLA STANDARD DRAWINGS CAP - 004 & CAP - 005. WATER VALVE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE S BORING LOG NO. AC AB R-VALUE FABRIC (Y/N) B1 1-1/2" 5-1/2" - N B2 2" 4-1/2" 10 N *CORING DATA IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. EXISTING SECTION MAY VARY FROM SECTION(S) FOUND AT CORING LOCATION(S). FABRIC MAY BE PRESENT IN SECTIONS EVEN IF NOT FOUND AT CORING LOCATION(S). BORING LOCATION XX 2 DI DRAIN INLET REMOVE & REPLACE PCC APRONS & VALLEY GUTTER CALTRANS STRIPING DETAIL "XX" 3 13 of 13 1" = 20' NTS REMOVE & REPLACE 0.33' HMA REMOVE 0.33' PAVEMENT NOTES: 1. RECOMPACT LOOSENED MATERIAL AT SURFACE. IF CONTRACTOR DISTURBS MORE THAN 1-1/2" OF MATERIAL, SUBGRADE SHALL BE RECOMPACTED TO 95% R.C. PLACE 0.17' HMA BASE COURSE & 0.17' HMA SURFACE COURSE SEE NOTE 1 TACK COAT ALL VERTICAL EDGES PRIOR TO PAVING EX. PAVEMENT, GUTTER LIP OR SPANDREL MATCHLINE STA 15+50 - SEE BELOW LEFT
MATCHLINE STA 15+50 - SEE ABOVE RIGHT
WLL WLL 12" WHITE LIMIT LINE (THERMO) 62
Item 6 B.

CITY OF CAPITOLA
2025 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECT

ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE

STREET QUANTITY STREET COST
1 Mobilization, Bonds & Insurance LS 1 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 1 382.85 $ 2 Notification of Residents, Businesses & Agencies LS 1 3,997.75 $ 3,997.75 $ 1 25.39 $ 3 Bicycle, Pedestrian & Traffic Control LS 1 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 1 342.55 $ 4 Storm Water Pollution Control Program LS 1 9,518.44 $ 9,518.44 $ 1 60.45 $ 5 Remove & Replace 0.33' HMA SF 7,824 10.00 $ 78,240.00 $ 1,777 17,766.00 $ 6 Remove & Replace 0.42' HMA SF 9,368 12.50 $ 117,100.00 $ 7 0.50' Deep Lift Stabilization (Allowance) SF 948 17.50 $ 16,590.00 $ 89 1,554.53 $ 8 Crack Seal & Slurry Seal TN 347 400.00 $ 138,600.00 $ 9 Cape Seal SF 18,445 1.25 $ 23,056.25 $
10 Prune & Remove Tree Roots under HMA Repair SF 1,683 15.00 $ 25,245.00 $ 11 Install Shoulder Backing LF 58 40.00 $ 2,320.00 $
12 Remove & Replace PCC Curb & Gutter LF 20 100.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 13 Remove & Replace PCC Sidewalk SF 60 30.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 14 Remove & Replace PCC Apron SF 0 20.00 $ - $ 644 12,880.00 $ 15 Remove & Replace PCC Valley Gutter SF 0 20.00 $ - $ 144 2,880.00 $ 16 Lower & Adjust Manhole Cover to Finish Grade EA 3 1,500.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 17 Lower & Adjust Water Valve Cover to Finish Grade EA 1 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1 1,000.00 $ 18 Reset Concrete Collar Around Utility EA 2 1,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 19 Remove & Reset Drain Inlet EA 1 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1 1,500.00 $ 20 Install Blue RPM @ Hydrant EA 18 20.00 $ 360.00 $
21 Red Curb Paint LF 2,550 5.00 $ 12,750.00 $
22 Gray Curb Paint LF 18 5.00 $ 90.00 $
23 Blue Curb Paint LF 40 5.00 $ 200.00 $
24 4" White Line (Thermoplastic) LF 40 3.00 $ 120.00 $
25 4" Blue Line (Thermoplastic) LF 27 3.00 $ 81.00 $
26 12" White Crosswalk/Limit Line (Thermoplastic) LF 984 5.00 $ 4,920.00 $ 25 125.00 $ 27 24" White Crosswalk Line (Thermoplastic) LF 514 10.00 $ 5,140.00 $ 28 6" Chevron Line (Thermoplastic) LF 90 4.00 $ 360.00 $ 29 Striping Detail #2 (Thermoplastic) LF 1,176 3.50 $ 4,116.00 $ 30 Striping Detail #21 (Thermoplastic) LF 0 3.50 $ - $ 50 175.00 $ 31 Striping Detail #22 (Thermoplastic) LF 1,804 3.50 $ 6,314.00 $ 32 Striping Detail #27B (Thermoplastic) LF 1,873 3.50 $ 6,555.50 $ 33 Striping Detail #38A (Thermoplastic) LF 0 3.50 $ - $ 100 350.00 $ 34 Striping Detail #39 (Thermoplastic) LF 2,067 3.50 $ 7,234.50 $ 35 Striping Detail #39A (Thermoplastic) LF 448 3.50 $ 1,568.00 $ 36 Install "STOP" Legend (Thermoplastic) EA 25 150.00 $ 3,750.00 $ 1 150.00 $ 37 Install "BUMP" Legend (Thermoplastic) EA 2 150.00 $ 300.00 $ 38 Install "DO NOT ENTER" Legend (Thermoplastic) EA 1 150.00 $ 150.00 $ 39 Install "NO PARKING" Legend (Thermoplastic) EA 1 150.00 $ 150.00 $ 40 Install Speed Hump Pavement Markings (Thermoplastic) EA 1 300.00 $ 300.00 $ 41 Install Parking Stall Pavement Markings (Thermoplastic) EA 38 15.00 $ 570.00 $ 42 Install Internation Symbol of Accessiblity Marking (Thermoplastic) EA 1 150.00 $ 150.00 $ 43 Install Railroad Crossing Symbol (Thermoplastic) EA 1 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 44 Install Shared Roadway Bicycle Marking (Thermoplastic) with Green Paint Backing EA 38 225.00 $ 8,550.00 $ 45 Install Bike Lane Symbol w/ Person (Thermoplastic) with Green Paint Backing EA 9 200.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 46 Install Bike Lane Arrow (Thermoplastic) with Green Paint Backing EA 9 150.00 $ 1,350.00 $ GRAND TOTAL $ AD ALT $39,191.75 589,546.44
Reposa Avenue
EXTENSION 38th Avenue to 3825 Reposa Avenue
BID
ITEM
NO.

BID ITEM UNIT
TOTAL

ESTIMATED

QUANTITY

APPROXIMATE

UNIT COST
63 Item 6 B.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: Community Services and Recreation Department
Subject: Public Art Fund Allocation
Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution allocating $25,000 from the Public Art Fund as a matching contribution for an application for the National Endowment for the Arts Grant FY 2026 to support the creation of public art project at the Park at Rispin Mansion and amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget, as recommended by the Capitola Art and Cultural Commission.

Background: Chapter 2.58 of the Capitola Municipal Code (Funding the Public Art Program) establishes a Public Art Fund to enrich the City’s cultural and aesthetic environment through public art initiatives. This fund is supported by commercial construction projects exceeding $250,000, where developers contribute either 2% of the project cost for on-site public art or 1% directly to the Public Art Fund.

The Art and Cultural Commission, established by Capitola Municipal Code Chapter 2.56, advises the City Council on public art fund allocations and presents annual recommendations for cultural and artistic goals. The Commission has identified the Park at Rispin Mansion as a site for a public art project, prioritizing the Fountain Project as one of their goals for this year.

The Public Works Department seeks to apply for a National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) FY 2026 Grants for Arts Projects (GAP) to fund the enhancement of the historic fountain at the Park at Rispin Mansion. This project will transform the 800-square-foot historic fountain into a vibrant artist-designed mosaic, celebrating Capitola’s cultural heritage, natural beauty, and community identity through historical themes, regional landscapes, and environmental motifs inspired by Soquel Creek.

Discussion: The NEA grant requires a 1:1 funding match, with $50,000 provided through City in-kind staff time and resources. The Art and Cultural Commission recommends that the City Council allocate $25,000 from the Public Art Fund to support this match. The total project budget is $150,000, with $75,000 coming from the NEA grant and $75,000 in matched City funds ($50,000 in-kind and $25,000 from the Public Art Fund).

Proposed Grant In-Kind Costs:
 Mosaic Design & Installation: $100,000 (Grant and Public Art Fund)  Community Workshops & Outreach: $11,000
 Project Management: $10,000
 Grant Administration: $9,000
 Interpretive Signage & Accessibility Features: $5,000  Public Works Staff & Materials: $15,000
While the NEA GAP grant allows up to $100,000 in funding requests, any additional match beyond $50,000 would require other funding sources. Approval of this recommendation ensures $75,000 in matching funds for the grant application. The $25,000 from the Public Art Fund and the $75,000 NEA award would cover all art-related expenses, excluding staff time provided by the City.

This 18-month project will involve artist selection, community workshops, design approval, fabrication, installation, and a public dedication event. It aligns with Capitola’s cultural objectives by fostering community engagement. Should the grant application be unsuccessful, the $25,000 Public Art Fund allocation will remain available for future projects.
64 Item 6 C.

Fiscal Impact: The current balance of the Public Art Fund is $95,850, with $50,000 committed to existing projects. Allocating $25,000 for this grant match leaves $20,850 for other public art initiatives. There are sufficient funds to support the recommended action.

Attachments:

1. Resolution Amending the FY 2024-25 Budget
Report Prepared By: Nikki Bryant; Community Services and Recreation Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Jim Malberg, Finance Director, Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
65 Item 6 C.

RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPITOLA
AMENDING THE 2024-25 FISCAL YEAR CITY BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM BUDGET
WHEREAS, it is necessary to adopt the 2024-25 Fiscal Year Budget for all City funds and Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted budget study sessions, heard and considered public comments, had modified and proposed a budget accordingly, and on June 27, 2024, adopted such budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025; and WHAREAS, the City Council previously amended the FY 2024-25 Fiscal Year Budget on September 24, 2024, and January 30, 2025; and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the budget Art & Cultural Commission is recommending allocating $25,000 from the Public Art Fund as matching funds for the National Endowment for the Arts FY2026 grant application; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget to allocate $25,000 as matching funds for the National Endowment for the Arts FY2026 grant application; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Capitola that the 2024-25 Fiscal Year Budget is hereby amended, including Exhibit A (Budget Amendment) to this Resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is directed to enter the budget into the City's accounting records in accordance with appropriate accounting practices, and the City Manager, with the Finance Director's assistance, shall assure compliance therewith.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Capitola on the 27th day of February 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________
Joe Clarke, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ ___
Julia Gautho, City Clerk
66 Item 6 C.

Budget Adjustment Request
Date
02/18/2025
Requesting Department *
Community Services & Recreation
Type of Adjustment
Administrative
Council
Item #
Council Date
2/27/25
Council Approval
Revenues
Account Number Account Description Increase/Decrease
+ Add
Search
$
Total Revenues
$ 0.00
Expenditures
Account Number Account Description Increase/Decrease
+ Add
Search
1315-00-00-000-4305.900 Admin Contracts - general $ 25,000.00 Total Expenditures
$ 25,000.00
Net Impact
$ -25,000.00
Purpose
To provide matching funds for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) FY26 grant application. 2/20/25, 3:33 PM Laserfiche | Process Form
https://app.laserfiche.com/tasks/Approval/b2890179-7b40-40e4-8c06-c544d3d3dbd9 1/2 67 Item 6 C.

Comments:

Department Head Approval
Finance Director Approval
City Manager Approval
Submit
2/20/25, 3:33 PM Laserfiche | Process Form
https://app.laserfiche.com/tasks/Approval/b2890179-7b40-40e4-8c06-c544d3d3dbd9 2/2 68 Item 6 C.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: City Manager Department
Subject: MOU with the Capitola Police Officers Association Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to sign a side letter agreement with the Capitola Police Officers Association from March 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027.

Background/Discussion: On May 30, 2024, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Capitola Police Officers Association (POA). Changes outlined within the MOU went into effect the next pay period and included a 3% percent Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for most positions represented by the bargaining unit. Consistent with other MOUs, the agreement with the POA included several other economic benefits contingent on the passage of Measure Y in November 2024, effective the first full pay period after the Council certified election results.

These economic benefits were referred to as contingencies throughout negotiations, and all five labor units and associated agreements included contingencies.

With the passage of Measure Y in November, and certification of election results on December 12, 2024, most economic benefits became effective in the pay period that began December 29 and were reflected in January 10, 2025, employee paychecks.

The current POA MOU includes the following three independent incentive pays in Article 14: Educational Programs:
● Education Incentive Pay (Officers and Sergeants)
o 30 units: 2.5%
o 60 units: 5%
o BA/BS: 7.5%
● P.O.S.T. Certification Pay (traditionally, only Sergeants) o Intermediate: 2.5%
o Advanced: 5%
o Supervisory: 7.5%
● Career Officer Pay (Officers only)
o Senior Officer: 2.5%
o Senior Officer II: 5%
o Corporal: 7.5%
The 2024 MOU allowed for Police Officers with Advanced P.O.S.T. Certifications to qualify for 2.5% P.O.S.T. Certification Pay; however, only if the Officer was currently not receiving any level of Education Incentive Pay (ie: qualifying educational credits/degrees). In January, upon implementation of the new MOU, it became clear that no language prohibits Officers receiving Career Officer Incentive Pay to also receive the Advanced P.O.S.T. Certification Pay; increasing their overall incentive pay by 2.5% (for a total of 10%), which is higher than the maximum potential education incentive pay.

After meeting with the POA, City staff analyzed potential options to rectify the situation. Staff then negotiated with the POA to come to this proposed solution:
 Increasing Education Incentive Pay at the Bachelor’s Degree level by 2.5%  Ending the new 2.5% Advanced P.O.S.T. Certification incentive but allowing the two officers currently receiving the benefit to continue to do so.
69 Item 6 D.

A side letting with language reflecting this solution will be included as additional materials before the Thursday, February 27, City Council meeting.

Fiscal Impact: Increasing Education Incentive Pay (at the bachelor’s degree level) by 2.5% will impact seven City employees and will cost an estimated $23,000 each fiscal year. A similar cost of $24,000 was estimated when projecting the FY 2024-25 Budget based on negotiations at that time.

Report Prepared By: Chloe Woodmansee, Assistant to the City Manager Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
70 Item 6 D.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: City Manager Department
Subject: Appointment of Capitola Representative to Measure Q Oversight Advisory Board
Recommended Action: Appoint a member of the public to serve as Capitola’s representative on the Measure Q Citizens Oversight Advisory Board.

Background: Approved by Santa Cruz County voters in November 2024, the Santa Cruz County Safe Drinking Water, Clean Beaches, Wildfire Risk Reduction, and Wildlife Protection Initiative (Measure Q) is a transformative local effort aimed at protecting and enhancing the county’s precious natural resources.

This initiative prioritizes water quality, wildfire prevention, habitat restoration, and the creation of resilient ecosystems to ensure the health and well-being of Santa Cruz County’s environment and its residents for generations to come.

Measure Q is funded through a modest annual parcel tax of $87 and is expected to generate more than $7 million annually.

Discussion: Measure Q establishes a nine-member Citizens Oversight Advisory Board (COAB) to ensure transparency and alignment with community goals. The COAB also engages with the community, helps develop Vision Plans to guide awards and provides annual reporting to the Board of Supervisors. All meetings are open to the public.

The composition of the COAB is as follows:
 Nine subject-matter experts – five appointed by the County’s Board of Supervisors and four appointed by the cities with one selection per city
 Members are required to have expertise in water quality or flood protection, wildfire reduction or forest management, parks or natural resources management, working lands, environmental justice or park equity, or knowledge of evaluating financial transactions  Members are not required to live in any specific area  Members cannot hold an elected office
The COAB’s responsibilities include the following:
 Choose land stewardship implementation partner
 May provide recommendations to the Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience (OR3) and County Parks on the development of the Vision Plan.
 Approve the 5-Year Vision Plan prepared by OR3 and County Parks, synthesizing local climate, recreation, and resource management strategies to support grant criteria and awards  Receive reports on projects funded and provide annual reports to the County’s Board of Supervisors on project outcomes and leveraging of Measure Q funds As of Friday, February 21st, the City received one application to serve as a representative of Capitola on the COAB from Jed Wilson (Attachment 1). Interested members of the public may apply through the County website:
(https://www.santacruzcountyca.gov/Government/Commissions,CommitteesAdvisoryBodies/Commissio nsAppointmentApplication.aspx) until February 26th.

Fiscal Impact: None.
71 Item 7 A.

Attachments:

1. Application
Report Prepared By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk
Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
72 Item 7 A.
1 Gautho, Julia
From: bdscc <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 12:00 PM
To: Gautho, Julia
Subject: [PDF] FW: Commissions Appointment Application - from Jed Wilson Attachments: Wilson - Resume.docx.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Julia,
I don’t know if your aware of the County’s new WWWPA Citizen’s Oversight Board (aka Measure Q). Our office has received the attached application. Jed Wilson is interested in being the Capitola City Representative on this Board.

If you’d like to move forward in appointing Mr. Wilson, he will need to be nominated at your next City Council meeting. Once I receive confirmation of his nomination, the Board will approve nomination at our March 11th, Board meeting.

If our office receives more application for the Capitola City rep position, I will send them your way for review.

Thank you,
Jesseka
Jesseka Rodriguez
Office Assistant III
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors
701 Ocean Street, Room 500, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Office: 831-454-2200
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 9:38 AM
To: bdscc <[email protected]>
Subject: Commissions Appointment Application - from Jed Wilson Appointment to a County Advisory Body
Commission, Committee, or Board:

WWWPA Citizen’s Oversight Advisory Board (aka Measure Q) If applicable, please indicate the seat or category of representation for which you are seeking appointment:

Capitola City
73 Item 7 A.
2 APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name:

Jed Wilson
Street:

City:

Capitola
State:

CA
Zip Code:
95010
Email Address:
[email protected]
Phone:

Preferred Correspondence:

Email
Supervisorial District:
5 Do you currently hold elected office?
No

CURRENT/PREVIOUS COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE SERVICE
List your current or previous service on any advisory bodies and state where you served. Previous service is not required.

Advisory Body Region/County Term
Statewide Training Group (CALFIRE) State 2006-2017
CA

EDUCATION AND/OR TRAINING
Include any education and/or training related to the advisory body for which you are applying for. This is optional information but beneficial.
74 Item 7 A.
3 Institution/Program Major/Field Degree/Certificate Year College of the Siskyious Fire Science AS 2002
Please select all fields in which you have relevant, demonstrable expertise:

Wildfire or forest management,Wildlife, parks or natural resources stewardship,Working lands or agriculture,Financial and/or program analysis

WORK/VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE
Include your current or most recent employer as well as any previous employment, volunteer, and community activities you’ve participated in which are related to the advisory body for which you are applying for.

Organization Address Position Years
CALFIRE 6059 Highway 9, Felton
CA 95018 Unit Chief 18
FEEJAYS Swift St, Santa Cruz, CA CEO 4

STATEMENT OF INTEREST/QUALIFICATIONS
Complete a brief statement indicating why you are interested in serving on the advisory body in question and why you are qualified through personal, lived, and/or professional experience(s) for the appointment. What do you hope to contribute or gain from your participation in the commission? I am writing to express my interest in being considered for the upcoming appointment to the Measure Q Board. With my extensive experience in both operational and administrative roles within the fire service, I believe I would bring a unique perspective to the board. In particular, I offer a strong understanding of fuel management practices, forest regulations, and prescribed fire—areas in which I work daily as part of my professional responsibilities.

I am deeply committed to collaboration and would aim to work cohesively with fellow board members to maximize the effectiveness of Measure Q funds, ensuring that they are used in line with the intentions outlined to the public.

This measure specifically addresses fire safety and watershed protection—two critical issues for our community. I am passionate about making sure the funds are directed toward maintaining public safety, protecting our natural resources, and ensuring clean water for future generations.

Please upload your CV or resume:

Wilson - Resume.docx.pdf

REASONABLE ACCOMODATIONS
Please identify any reasonable accommodations needed for equal participation. This information is not a consideration nor a factor in any possible appointment and is used only for planning and technology purposes.

None

COMMISSIONS POLICY ORDINANCE OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
75 Item 7 A.
4 Please review Santa Cruz County Code (SCCC) Chapter 2.38, also known as the “Commissions Policy Ordinance of Santa Cruz County” available at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruzCounty/ which applies to any advisory board, commission, committee or department advisory group over which the County has appointing authority or jurisdiction.

In accordance with SCCC Chapter 2.38 and Santa Cruz County Conflict of Interest Code, I agree to:

Initials: jw Attend meetings regularly and devote the time necessary to fulfill my duties as a member Initials: jw Comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act and California Public Records Act Initials: jw If required under state and local conflict of interest laws, file a public statement (Form 700) disclosing certain types of economic information

CERTIFICATION
By checking this box and entering the date and my initials, I certify that the above information is true and correct and authorize the verification of the information in the application in the event I am a finalist for the appointment.

Certified Date: 2025-01-27 Initials:jw
76 Item 7 A.

Jedidiah A. Wilson
• • [email protected] •
EDUCATION:
2001-2016
Cabrillo College • Aptos, CA • Part Time Student
2000-2003
College of the Siskiyous • Weed, CA • AS Fire Science
1999-2000
Columbia College • Sonora, CA • Part Time Student
1996-2000
Mariposa County High School • Mariposa, CA • Full Time Student WORK EXPERIENCE:
8/2024-Current
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • TAU Unit Chief
As a Unit Chief of CZU, I am responsible for overseeing the operations and management of a specific geographic unit within California. My role involves ensuring that fire protection services, emergency response efforts, and prevention programs are effectively carried out in our area. I lead a team of dedicated fire personnel, coordinate resources during large incidents, and work closely with local governments, agencies, and communities to reduce wildfire risks. Additionally, I play a key role in strategic planning, budgeting, and implementing CAL FIRE's policies and objectives to ensure public safety while supporting environmental stewardship and resource management.

Assistant Region Chief, Jeff Veik, wk. (707)217-9001
6/2022-8/2024
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Deputy Chief
Unit operations, I assure that emergency resources, personnel, and equipment are trained, available, and ready to respond to fires and other emergencies; establish incident objectives and ensure the effective management and mitigation of emergencies; coordinate, develop, and implement the unit's Emergency Resource Directory, County Emergency Response Plan, Local Government Mutual Aid Plans, Local Government Automatic Aid Plans, and Interagency Operational Plans. I oversee both Santa Cruz County Fire Department and Pajaro Valley Fire District contracts with CAL FIRE. This includes budgeting, staffing, LG-1 creation and approval.

Unit Chief, Nate Armstrong, wk. (831)254-1700
2/2022-6/2022
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Battalion Chief (Santa Cruz County Fire) As a Battalion Chief my job entails providing program management and managing all personnel assigned to Santa Cruz County Fire. I am involved in resolving many different type incidents that fall under the department’s ALL RISK mission and providing field battalion coverage. As the Santa Cruz County Fire Battalion Chief, I work in close cooperation with Unit Management, Santa Cruz County and Local Departments .

Unit Chief, Nate Armstrong, wk. (831)254-1700
2016-2022
Feejays • CEO
As CEO I was responsible for managing the companies’ overall operations. This includes delegating and directing agendas, driving the company’s profitability, managing the company’s organizational structure, strategies and communicating directly with the owners.

Owner, TJ Moran, (831)425-1292
2013-2016
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Battalion Chief (Training) 77 Item 7 A.

As a Battalion Chief my job entailed providing program management and managing all personnel assigned to the Training Department. I was involved in resolving many different type incidents that fall under the department’s ALL RISK mission and providing field battalion coverage. As the Unit’s Training Officer, I worked in close cooperation with Management, Region Training and Local Departments to provide the mandated and career enhancement courses. I was the Santa Cruz County Training Officers Secretary/Treasurer and the Unit Instructor of Record for the JAC program.

Assignments: CZU Training Battalion – (July 2013 – May 2016) Retired Unit Chief, Ian Larkin, wk. (831)254-1700
2012-2013
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Fire Captain (Training) As the Santa Cruz County Training Officer, I conducted weekly/monthly/annual training for all paid staff along with conducting the volunteer academy. I oversaw the Training Battalion operations during this period of a vacant position of Battalion Chief. I was the Units Instructor of Record for the JAC Program. I was the Santa Cruz County Training Officers Secretary/Treasurer for the 2012/2013 calendar year.

Assignments: CZU Training Battalion – Fire Captain (Feb 2012 –July 2013) Retired Unit Chief, Ian Larkin, wk. (831)254-1700
2011-2012
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • TAU Battalion Chief (Training) As a Battalion Chief my job entailed providing program management and managing all personnel assigned to the Training Department. I was involved in resolving many different type incidents that fall under the department’s ALL RISK mission and providing field battalion coverage. As the Unit’s Training Officer, I worked in close cooperation Management, Region Training and Local Departments to provide the mandated and career enhancement courses. I was also assigned the Unit Safety Officer Position.

Assignments: CZU Training Battalion – (July 2011-Feb 2012) Retired Unit Chief, Scott Jalbert, wk. (831)254-1700
2008-2011
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Fire Captain
As a Fire Captain my job entailed providing station management and managing all personnel assigned to the station. I was involved in resolving many different type incidents that fall under the department’s ALL RISK mission. I also took part in letting the local community know of the fire danger by conducting LE-100 inspections and putting on fire prevention programs. As the Santa Cruz County Training Officer, I conduct weekly/monthly/annual training for all paid staff. I was the JAC Coordinator and Units Instructor of Record for the JAC Program. Implemented a County wide Volunteer Academy for Multi-Agency participation.

Assignments: Battalion 4 Relief Captain (June 2008 – May 2009) CZU Training Battalion – Fire Captain (May 2009 – July 2011) Retired Assistant Region Chief, Jake Hess, wk. (707)217-9001 2003-2008
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Fire Apparatus Engineer As a Fire Apparatus Engineer my job entailed current upkeep of the department’s apparatus and to provide station management. I was involved in resolving many different type incidents that fall under the department’s ALL RISK mission. I also took part in letting the local community know of the fire danger by conducting LE-100 inspections and putting on fire prevention programs.

Assignments: Pajaro Valley FS Sch. “A”, Saratoga Summit FS Sch. “B”, Belmont FS Sch. “A”, Ben Lomond Camp CYA “In-Camp Crew/VMP Projects” Corralitos FS Sch. “B”.

Retired Captain Scott Agnelli, wk. (831)722-6122
2001-2002 Fire Seasons
CAL-FIRE • San Mateo - Santa Cruz • Firefighter I
As an Amador Firefighter One my job entailed assisting in the upkeep of department apparatus and station maintenance. I was involved in carrying out tasks that were delegated to me from my supervisor. These ranged from fire suppression tactics to duties around the station.

Assignments: Big Creek FS Sch. “B”/Amador
Retired Captain Michael Brunson, wk. (831)722-7179
2000-2001
Hammond Ranch Fire Company • Weed, CA • Firefighter/EMT As a firefighter/EMT (Sleeper), my job entailed current upkeep of the station maintenance and department equipment. I was involved in resolving incidents including medical aids, structure fires, vehicle accidents, wildland fires, and public assist. I was also part of many committees such as:
78 Item 7 A.

Grant Committee, Fund-raising Committee, Sleeper Program, and Rescue Team (Snowmobile Captain).

Ed Littizzette, wk.
(530)938-4200
CERTIFICATES AND LICENSES:

STATE FIRE TRAINING
● Firefighter One
● Firefighter Two
● Fire Officer
● Fire Investigator One
● Fire Instructor One
● Fire Command 1A
● Fire Command 1B
● Fire Command 1C
● Fire Prevention 1A
● Fire Prevention 1B
● Fire Management 1
● Fire Investigation 1A
● Fire Investigation 1B
● Fire Instructor 1A
● Fire Instructor 1B
● Auto Extrication
● Basic Pump Operations
● Emergency Vehicle Operations
● Rapid Intervention Crew Tactics (RIC)
● Firefighter Survival
● Ethical Leadership in the Classroom
● Region Instructor Orientation (RIO)
● ICS-200
● Mandated Instructor Update (2012)
FEMA
● I-700
● I-800
CSTI
● HAZMAT 1A
● HAZMAT 1B
● HAZMAT 1C
● HAZMAT 1D

CALFIRE/NWCG
● Supervision 2
● Supervision 3
● Incident Management 2
● Incident Management 3
● C-234 & S-234 Firing Operations
● Confined Space Awareness
● Confined Space Entry & Rescue
● S-290
● Basic 67 Hour Academy
● ICS-100
● Basic Firing Operations
● Commanding the Initial Response
● CALCARD – Certified Purchasing
● Defensive Driver Train-the-Trainer
● Chipper Orientation & Safety
● GPS/Basic Land Navigation
● Helicopter Rescue Awareness
● Module 2A
● Module 2B
● CALFIRE FFA
● S-212 “Level B”
● I-300
● I-400
● Certified Purchaser
● FI-110
● FI-210
● S-130
● SA-130
● S-190
● S-203 Introduction to Information Officer
● S-244 Field Observer
● S-245 Display Processor
● S-330 Task Force/Strike Team Leader
● S-339 Division/Group Supervisor
● S-404 Safety Officer
● AREP/LOFR
● SITL
OTHER
● Member of 4300 TAWG 2006-2016
● Member of BFC TAWG 2009-2016
● Swift Water Awareness
● Swift Water Technician 1
● PC 832 Reserve Officer Training w/ Firearms
● Commanding the Mayday and RIC Operation
● California Vocational Teaching Credential
● Santa Cruz County Training Officers S/T
● Unit Instructor of Record (JAC Program)
● Registered State Fire Marshall Instructor
IROC)
● DIVS (Q)
● STEN (Q)
● LOFR(T)
● FOBS (T)
● SOF2 (T)
● PIOF (T)
Member of the following:
2005-2016 Training Advisory Working Group (TAWG)
2023-Current 7700 Working Group

OTHER CERTIFICATES AND LICENSES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
REFERENCES:
• Retired Unit Chief Ian Larkin, wk. (831)254-1700
• Retired Assistant Region Chief Jake Hess, wk. (707)217-9001 • Retired Battalion Chief Greg Estrada, wk. (831)601-1007 79 Item 7 A.

Capitola City Council
Agenda Report
Meeting: February 27, 2025
From: Public Works Department
Subject: Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the City Council 1) identify Alternative 2 as the preferred longterm improvement alternative for the Bay Avenue corridor; 2) authorize staff to proceed with public engagement and conceptual design refinement; and 3) direct staff to pursue grant funding opportunities for final design and construction.

Background: This item was originally scheduled for the February 13 City Council meeting; the item was not heard at that meeting and was continued to February 27. The Bay Avenue Corridor Study was initiated to evaluate potential long-term improvements along Bay Avenue, from Highway 1 to Monterey Avenue.

The study examines multimodal safety, traffic operations, and community livability. The corridor is a key arterial that supports local businesses, residential neighborhoods, and regional traffic, with existing challenges related to congestion, multimodal safety, and access.

In 2024, a “quick-build” project at the Bay Avenue and Hill Street intersection was implemented to test a road diet and gather feedback. This interim project involved reducing travel lanes, modifying striping, and adding pedestrian safety measures. The feedback from this project, combined with detailed traffic analysis and engineering assessments, has informed the alternatives considered in this study. The study aligns with Capitola’s General Plan goals to enhance mobility and economic development along Bay Avenue while improving safety for all users.

The study also includes traffic projections for 2045, indicating that several intersections will exceed acceptable congestion thresholds under current conditions. Without improvements, key intersections, such as Bay Avenue at Hill Street and Capitola Avenue, are projected to operate at LOS E or worse, leading to increased delays and longer vehicle queues.

Discussion: The Bay Avenue Corridor Study evaluates three primary alternatives, each with distinct benefits and trade-offs.

The study utilized multiple data sources and analytical methods to assess current and future traffic conditions. Existing conditions were analyzed using traffic count data from 2024, including peak-hour intersection movements and roadway classifications. Data collection included automated and manual counts at key intersections, as well as pedestrian and bicycle counts. The analysis also incorporated projected growth rates, future development impacts, and traffic simulation models to estimate how corridor operations would evolve under each alternative. Traffic operations were analyzed using Synchro, Sidra, and VISSIM software to model vehicle delay, intersection queuing, and multimodal interactions under different scenarios. A detailed breakdown of methodology is included in Attachment 1 (Bay Avenue Corridor Study Report).

Alternative 1: Stop Control & Road Diet
 Converts current quick build configuration into permanent improvements, implementing a "road diet" to calm traffic and improve bicycle and pedestrian access.  Includes concrete curb bulb-outs to shorten pedestrian crossing distances and enhanced striping for improved visibility.
 Buffered bike lanes provide a dedicated space for cyclists, improving safety and encouraging multimodal travel.
 Trade-offs include increased vehicle travel times and longer queues at intersections. This alternative is the most cost-effective but does not improve vehicle congestion. 80 Item 7 B.

Alternative 2: Roundabout Control
 Converts key intersections at Bay/Hill and Bay/Capitola into single-lane roundabouts to reduce vehicle delay and conflict points.
 Provides a continuous flow of traffic, improving efficiency and reducing emissions by minimizing idling.
 Enhances pedestrian and bicycle safety through protected crossings and designated bike facilities.
 Requires higher upfront capital investment and potential right-of-way acquisition.  High potential for grant funding
 Similar projects, such as the La Jolla Boulevard corridor redesign in San Diego, have shown significant safety and operational benefits from roundabouts.

Alternative 3: Signal Control
 Installs new traffic signals with designated pedestrian crossing phases at key intersections.  Provides clear right-of-way assignments to improve traffic efficiency and multimodal safety.  Increases vehicle queuing at signals, leading to higher vehicle idling and emissions.  Higher ongoing maintenance costs due to required signal equipment upkeep.  Less impact on existing right-of-way but may require upgrades to sidewalk and crossing infrastructure.
 Highest potential for high severity collisions.

The alternatives were analyzed based on multiple performance metrics. The staff report simplifies this into a summary table; however, the full analysis (see Table ES-1 in the study) also includes right-of-way impacts, economic effects, and aesthetic considerations.

Table 1. Operations Summary Comparison
Criteria Alternative 1
Stop Control & Road Diet
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal Control
Vehicle Delay High Low Moderate
Pedestrian Safety Moderate Good Moderate
Bicycle Safety Moderate Good Moderate
Capital Cost Low High High
Maintenance Cost Low Moderate High
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Moderate Low Moderate
Based on the analysis, Alternative 2 (Roundabout Control) provides the greatest safety benefits and operational efficiency but comes with the highest capital cost (grant funding may potentially offset some costs) and potential right-of-way impacts. Alternative 1 (Stop Control & Road Diet) offers an incremental improvement at a lower cost but does not significantly enhance traffic flow. Alternative 3 (Signal Control) improves operations but introduces maintenance, potential safety and aesthetic challenges.

Public Engagement Plan
The Bay Avenue corridor serves as a key regional connector, linking Highway 1 to multiple destinations, including the Capitola Village, local schools, and surrounding neighborhoods. Given its broader impact beyond the immediate area, staff recommends an engagement strategy that reaches a wider community audience while maintaining targeted outreach to directly affected properties.

Pending Council direction, to gather broad input, staff will conduct an online survey, which has proven to be an effective engagement tool in recent traffic projects to reach a broader audience. This approach ensures accessibility and allows for participation from residents, business owners, and commuters who regularly use the corridor.
81 Item 7 B.

Additionally, staff has held stakeholder meetings with property owners at the Hill St. and Bay Ave. intersection, and has scheduled a stakeholder meeting for the Bay Ave. and Capitola Ave. intersection prior to this meeting. Pending Council direction, staff will continue outreach with intersections potentially affected by the Corridor Plan.

Regular updates will also be provided at City Council meetings, ensuring ongoing opportunities for public comment.

Following Council direction, staff will refine the conceptual layouts and incorporate public feedback, and stakeholder input before advancing to preliminary engineering and funding identification.

Fiscal Impact: The cost to finalize the conceptual design will depend on the preferred alternative selected.

Staff is coordinating with consultants to develop more precise cost estimates. Preliminary cost estimates from the study indicate that roundabout installations could range from $3 million to $5 million per intersection, while traffic signals would require an estimated $1.2 million per intersection, with additional long-term maintenance expenses.

Potential funding sources include:
 State and Federal Grants – Opportunities such as the Active Transportation Program (ATP) and Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP).
 Regional Transportation Funds – Allocations from the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC).
 Local Capital Improvement Budget – Consideration for phased implementation as funding becomes available.

No immediate budget allocation is requested at this time. Staff will return with detailed cost estimates and funding strategies based on Council direction.

Attachments:

1. Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Report Prepared By: Jessica Kahn, Public Works Director Reviewed By: Julia Gautho, City Clerk; Samantha Zutler, City Attorney Approved By: Jamie Goldstein, City Manager
82 Item 7 B.
1 Bay Avenue Corridor Study
Transportation Analysis
February 2025
Prepared for
Prepared by
10 South Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250
San Jose, CA 95113
83 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 4

1. Project Description and Corridor Study Scope.......................................................................................... 8

1.1 Corridor Study Scenarios..................................................................................................................... 8

1.2 Proposed Corridor Alternatives .......................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Capitola General Plan Consistency ................................................................................................... 13

1.4 Level-of-Service Criteria and Thresholds .......................................................................................... 14

1.5 Traffic Analysis Methodology............................................................................................................ 16

2. Existing Transportation Conditions......................................................................................................... 18

2.1 Study Intersections ........................................................................................................................... 18

2.2 Roadway Network............................................................................................................................. 18

2.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ....................................................................................................... 19

2.4 Transit Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 19

2.5 Roadway Cross Section ..................................................................................................................... 20

3. Traffic Data Collection............................................................................................................................. 22

3.1 Year 2024 Existing Intersection Volumes.......................................................................................... 22

3.2 Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Volumes.................................................................................... 22

3.3 Roadway Daily Traffic and Speed Data ............................................................................................. 23

3.4 Collision Data .................................................................................................................................... 24

3.5 Signal Warrant Analysis..................................................................................................................... 27

4. Corridor Operations and Intersection Control Evaluation Results ......................................................... 29

4.1 Year 2024 Existing ICE Operations.................................................................................................... 29

4.2 Year 2045 Cumulative ICE Operations.............................................................................................. 31

4.3 Intersection Queuing Analysis .......................................................................................................... 34

4.4 Corridor Travel Time Summary ......................................................................................................... 36

4.5 Driver Behavior & Drone Video Analysis at Bay/Capitola Intersection ............................................40

4.6 Multimodal Safety and Access Improvements ................................................................................. 40

5. Corridor Study Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................................... 44

6. Appendix ................................................................................................................................................. 47 84 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
3 TABLES
Table 1: Intersection Operation Standards at Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections .........................15 Table 2: Year 2024 Existing Intersection Volumes...................................................................................... 22 Table 3: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Volumes................................................................................ 23 Table 4: Bay Avenue ADT & Vehicle Speed Summary................................................................................. 23 Table 5: Bay Avenue Collision Data (2013 to 2024).................................................................................... 26 Table 6: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant #3 Assumptions – Year 2024 Existing Conditions..............................28 Table 7: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant #3 Assumptions – Year 2045 Cumulative Conditions........................28 Table 8: Year 2024 Existing Intersection LOS – AM Peak............................................................................ 30 Table 9: Year 2024 Existing Intersection LOS – PM Peak............................................................................ 30 Table 10: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection LOS – AM Peak.................................................................... 33 Table 11: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection LOS – PM Peak.................................................................... 33 Table 12: Year 2024 Existing Intersection Queue Summary....................................................................... 34 Table 13: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Queue Summary................................................................. 35 Table 14: Year 2024 Existing Corridor Travel Times ................................................................................... 37 Table 15: Year 2045 Cumulative Corridor Travel Times ............................................................................. 39 Table 16: Qualitative Corridor Operations Summary Comparison............................................................. 45

FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Site Map............................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 2: Corridor Alternatives Summary ................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: Illustrative VISSIM Model for Project Study Area ........................................................................ 16 Figure 4: Existing Section – Highway 1 to Center St (80-ft ROW)............................................................... 20 Figure 5: Existing Section – Center St to Capitola Ave (65-ft ROW)............................................................ 20 Figure 6: Existing Section – Capitola Ave to Burlingame Ave (56-ft ROW).................................................21 Figure 7: Existing Section – Burlingame Ave to Monterey Ave (56-ft ROW) ..............................................21 Figure 8: Existing Section – Monterey Ave to Park Ave (38-ft ROW).......................................................... 21 Figure 9: Bay Avenue Collision Heat Map (2013 to 2024) .......................................................................... 24 Figure 10: Bay Avenue Collision Types (2013 to 2024)............................................................................... 25 Figure 11: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant 3...................................................................................................... 27 Figure 12: Year 2024 Existing Corridor Average Travel Times.................................................................... 36 Figure 13: Year 2045 Cumulative Corridor Average Travel Times.............................................................. 38 85 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
4 Executive Summary
Project Overview:

The Bay Avenue Corridor Study, conducted by Kimley-Horn in partnership with the City of Capitola, aims to analyze and propose improvements for the Bay Avenue corridor stretching from Highway 1 to Park Avenue. The primary objectives are to enhance mobility, economic development, traffic operations, and multimodal safety through long-term roadway and intersection modifications. It is intended that the proposed corridor improvements would be funded through grant opportunities.

Study Scope and Methodology:

A traffic operations analysis for existing (Year 2024) and cumulative (Year 2045) conditions was conducted to assess the feasibility of multiple alternative configurations:
• Alternative 0 – No Build: Maintain current traffic control and roadway geometry. • Alternative 1 – Stop Control and Road Diet: Convert a portion of Bay Avenue from a four-lane to a two-lane road with enhanced multimodal crossings at the existing all-way stop intersections. • Alternative 2 – Roundabout: Implement single-lane roundabouts at key intersections. • Alternative 3 – Signal: Implement traffic signals at key intersections.

Traffic data, including intersection volumes, daily traffic, speed, and collision statistics, were collected and analyzed using Synchro, Sidra, and VISSIM software.

Existing Conditions (Year 2024) Analysis Results:
• Most intersections operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS). • The roundabout alternative (Alt 2) demonstrates better LOS operations compared to the stop control (Alt 1) and signal (Alt 3) configurations.
• Significant vehicle queues were observed at some intersections, particularly the Bay Avenue/Highway 1 ramps and Hill Street.

Cumulative Conditions (Year 2045) Analysis Results:
• Several intersections are anticipated to exceed acceptable LOS thresholds. • The roundabout alternative (Alt 2) consistently provides the best performance in terms of vehicle delay and travel times.
• Signalized intersections (Alt 3) yields acceptable LOS but with increased vehicle queues compared to roundabouts.

Multimodal Access and Safety Improvements
The proposed improvements for each alternative configuration would aim to enhance safety for pedestrians and cyclists through various measures:
• General Multimodal Enhancements:
o Traffic Calming Features: All alternatives incorporate traffic calming features like narrower lanes and improved intersection design, which inherently enhance safety for all road users.
o Visibility Improvements: Enhanced lighting, signage, and marked crosswalks improve visibility for pedestrians and cyclists, especially at night or during adverse weather conditions.
86 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
5 o Collision Mitigation: Historical collision data and near-miss analysis inform the design to specifically address risky driver behaviors and common collision types, further ensuring pedestrian and cyclist safety.
• Summary of Multimodal Safety Benefits:
o Reduced Vehicle Speeds: Slower travel speeds generally lead to decreased collision severity for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians.
o Clear Right-of-Way: Signal and roundabout controls provide structured and predictable movement patterns.
o Protected Space: Buffered and clearly marked spaces for pedestrians and cyclists reduce the risk of conflicts with vehicles.
o Improved Crossings: Shorter and more visible crossing areas make it safer and easier for pedestrians to navigate intersections.
o Enhanced Visibility and Lighting: Increased visibility through better lighting and clear signage reduces the risk of accidents.

Conclusion and Recommendations:

The roundabout configuration (Alternative 2) offers the most optimal solution for minimizing vehicle delays, enhancing traffic safety, and improving multimodal access. This option, however, requires significant infrastructure investment and potential right-of-way acquisition.

The stop control and road diet alternative (Alternative 1) would improve pedestrian and cyclist safety with minimal initial capital costs but result in poor corridor operations and long vehicle delay.

The signalized intersection configuration (Alternative 3) presents an intermediate solution, providing moderate operation and multimodal improvements at the expense of infrastructure investment and high ongoing maintenance costs.

Based on the analysis results, the study recommends pursuing the roundabout configuration at key intersections for long-term benefits in traffic operations, safety, economic development, and multimodal accessibility. Compared to the no-build alternative, the stop control and signal control alternatives could also be considered feasible based on budgetary constraints and immediate needs. 87 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
6 ES-1: Qualitative Corridor Operations Summary Comparison Criteria
Alternative 0 –
No Build
Alternative 1 –
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2 –
Roundabout
Alternative 3 -
Signal
Operations
Vehicle Delay
High
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
High
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Low
Yield control reduces
average delay
Moderate
Signal control
reduces average
delay
Vehicle
Travel Time
Long
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Long
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Short
Yield control reduces
average delay
Moderate
Signal control
reduces average
delay
Vehicle
Queue
Length
Long
Long queues and
spillback into
adjacent intersection
Long
Long queues and
spillback into
adjacent intersection
Moderate
Yield control
generates average
queues
Moderate
Signal control
generates average
queues
Transit and
Emergency
Vehicle
Access
Improvement
Poor
Slower average travel
times and higher VHT
Poor
Slower average travel
times and higher VHT
Moderate
Faster average travel
times and lower VHT
Moderate
Opportunity for
emergency vehicle
preemption
Driver
Adaptation
Time
Low
Existing conditions
on corridor
Low
Existing conditions
on corridor
High
New traffic control in
City for users
Moderate
Existing conditions
on corridor
Safety
Collision
Severity
Potential
Moderate
Numerous conflict
points with stop
control at
intersection
Moderate
Numerous conflict
points with stop
control at
intersection
Low
Fewer conflict points
and controlled lower
speeds at
intersection
High
Higher vehicle
speeds and
numerous conflict
points at intersection
Bicycle
Access
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Buffered bike lanes
and markings
Good
Buffered bike lanes
and markings.

Shorter and
protected crossings
Moderate
Buffered bike lanes
and markings.

Designated crossing
phases
Pedestrian
Access
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Shorter crossings
with traffic calming
Good
Shorter and
protected crossings
Moderate
Designated crossing
phases
Economic
Capital
Construction
Cost
Low
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Low
Updates to existing
infrastructure
High
New infrastructure
and utility
coordination
High
New infrastructure
and signal equipment
Right of Way
Impact
Low Low High Moderate
88 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
7 Criteria
Alternative 0 –
No Build
Alternative 1 –
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2 –
Roundabout
Alternative 3 -
Signal
No change to existing
conditions
Updates to existing
infrastructure
Property impacts to
accommodate design
New infrastructure
and signal equipment
Operation &
Maintenance
Costs
Low
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Low
Landscaping
Moderate
Landscaping
High
Signal equipment,
electricity
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
Moderate
Vehicle idling with
stop traffic control
Moderate
Vehicle idling with
stop traffic control
Low
Less vehicle idling
with yield traffic
control
Moderate
Higher speeds &
vehicle idling with
signal traffic control
Aesthetics &
Community
Character
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Opportunities for art
and landscaping with
traffic calming
Good
Opportunities for art
and landscaping at
intersection
Moderate
Requires signal poles
and cabinets
Grant
Funding
Opportunity
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Multimodal safety
improvement
Good
Multimodal safety
improvement, traffic
congestion
reduction,
environmental
impact
Moderate
Traffic congestion
reduction
General
Benefits
• Lower initial
capital cost and
ongoing
maintenance
• Improved driver
certainty
• Lower initial
capital cost
• Improved bike &
ped safety
• Reduction
collision severity
• Improved bike &
ped safety
• Improved
operations
• Reduced GHG
emissions
• Improved
operations &
capacity
• Provides
designated
crossing times
and driver
certainty
General
Challenges
• Decreased
operations
• Increased queues
• Decreased
operations
• Increased queues
• High initial capital
cost and potential
ROW impact
• Driver adaptation
to new traffic
operations
• High capital and
maintenance
costs
• Increased queues
and collision
severity potential
89 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
8 1. Project Description and Corridor Study Scope
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is working with the City of Capitola (City) to conduct a traffic operations analysis and corridor study along Bay Avenue from Highway 1 to Park Avenue. This planning study was prepared to assess current and future needs of the Bay Avenue corridor to improve mobility, safety, operations, and economic development for all users.

The study investigates feasible long-term roadway and intersection improvements that could enhance traffic operations and safety for vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians through a traffic analysis and intersection control evaluation (ICE) for the Bay Avenue corridor. The overall recommendations of the corridor study are consistent with the Bay Avenue Vision, mobility, and economic goals in the Capitola General Plan. It is anticipated these long-term future improvements would consist of permanent hardscape and geometric roadway changes that would be funded through grant opportunities.

Figure 1 presents an overview map of the Bay Avenue corridor study area.

Figure 1: Project Site Map

1.1 Corridor Study Scenarios
Traffic conditions for Bay Avenue was analyzed during the 7:00 – 9:00 AM and 4:00 – 6:00 PM peak hours of traffic which represent the most heavily congested traffic on a typical weekday. The study area was assessed under the following study scenarios.
• Existing Scenario: Existing AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes from Year 2024 traffic count data and utilizing roadway geometry and intersection traffic control from proposed corridor alternatives aimed to enhance multimodal operations. Hill St Study Intersection
Study Roadway
Crossroads
90 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
9 • Cumulative Scenario: Peak-hour traffic volumes based on the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) Travel Demand Model for Year 2045 and utilizing roadway geometry and intersection traffic control from proposed corridor alternatives aimed to enhance multimodal operations.

1.2 Proposed Corridor Alternatives
The corridor operations and intersection control evaluation (ICE) analysis investigated potential improvements that could improve access and safety for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. Based on internal discussion and direction from City staff, the lane intersection improvement and lane configuration alternatives were evaluated under the Existing Year 2024 and Cumulative Year 2045 study scenarios. Exhibits and tables detailing the general operations, traffic control, and roadway geometry of the conceptual Bay Avenue corridor alternatives are included in Figure 2.

Alternative 0 – No Build
• All study intersections and roadways segments are analyzed with its existing traffic control and lane geometry to provide a comparison with the proposed corridor alternatives.

Alternative 1 – Stop Control and Road Diet
• Roadway between Crossroads Loop and Center Street
o Convert Bay Avenue from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition
• Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop Intersection
o Adjust Bay Avenue Major Approach (Southbound direction) for 2-lane road diet • Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection
o Install curb bulb-outs and enhanced pedestrian crossings with 2-lane road diet • Assumes improvements can fit within existing City intersection footprint and right-of-way. • All other study intersections are analyzed with its existing traffic control and lane geometry Alternative 2 – Roundabout
For the purposes of this study, a qualitative right-of-way evaluation for the Existing and Cumulative condition was conducted to determine if a roundabout is feasible for any of the existing Bay Avenue stopcontrolled study intersections. • Roadway between Crossroads Loop and Center Street
o Convert Bay Avenue from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition
• Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop Intersection
o Adjust Bay Avenue Major Approach (Southbound direction) for 2-lane road diet • Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection
o Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control with 2-lane road diet
• Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control • Bay Avenue / Monterey Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control 91 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
10 o It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the intersection has rightof-way constraints that impact the economic and construction feasibility for a roundabout; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as a roundabout for the Alternative 2 layout. • Monterey Avenue / Park Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control o It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the intersection has rightof-way constraints that impact the economic and construction feasibility for a roundabout; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as a roundabout for the Alternative 2 layout. • Assumes roundabout improvements would have minor impacts outside of City right-of-way. • All other study intersections are analyzed with its existing traffic control and lane geometry Alternative 3 – Signal
For the purposes of this study and based on the collected traffic volumes, MUTCD peak hour signal warrant #3 was evaluated for the Existing and Cumulative condition to determine if a signal is warranted for any of the existing Bay Avenue stop-controlled study intersections. See Section 3 for analysis. • Roadway between Crossroads Loop and Center Street
o Convert Bay Avenue from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition
• Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop Intersection
o Adjust Bay Avenue Major Approach (Southbound direction) for 2-lane road diet • Bay Avenue / Hill Street Intersection
o Convert intersection into signal control with 2-lane road diet • Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into signal control
o It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Capitola intersection does not meet the Warrant 3 volume criteria for a signal; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as signal for the Alternative 3 layout.
• Bay Avenue / Monterey Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into signal control
• Monterey Avenue / Park Avenue Intersection
o Convert intersection into signal control
• Assumes signal equipment can fit within existing City intersection footprint and right-of-way, no physical improvements needed.
• All other study intersections are analyzed with its existing traffic control and lane geometry It should be noted that a combination of the intersection control alternatives, such as an all-way stop at one location and a roundabout/signal at another location, may be considered along the Bay Avenue corridor pending City direction and public outreach. A detailed analysis of all the possible intersection control combinations is outside the scope of this planning study; however, , While I don’t think we need to run a detailed analysis on this, having a general answer prepared would be helpful. 92 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
11 Figure 2: Corridor Alternatives Summary
Intersection
# Intersection
Name
Alternative 0 - No Build Alternative 1 - Stop & Road Diet Alternative 2 - Roundabout Alternative 3 - Signal Traffic
Control
Intersection Geometry
and Operations
Traffic
Control
Intersection Geometry and
Operations
Traffic
Control Intersection Geometry and Operations Traffic Control Intersection Geometry and Operations 1 Bay Avenue /
Highway 1 NB
Ramps
Signal
No changes to current
condition (Intersection in
Caltrans right-of-way)
3 NB, 2 SB, 2 WB Lanes
Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Bay Avenue /
Highway 1 SB
Ramps
Signal
No changes to current
conditions (Intersection
in Caltrans right-of-way)
2 NB, 3 SB, 3 EB Lanes
Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build Signal Same as Alt 0 - No Build 3 Bay Avenue /
Crossroads Loop TWSC
No changes to current
condition (Minor street
access to private
driveways)
2 NB, 3 SB, 2 EB, 1 WB
Lanes
TWSC
Adjust Bay Avenue Major
Approach (Southbound
direction) for 2-lane road diet
-1 left lane, 1 through lane, 1
right lane
-Buffered Class II bike lanes
TWSC
Adjust Bay Avenue Major Approach (Southbound direction) for 2-lane road diet
-1 left lane, 1 through lane, 1 right lane
-Buffered Class II bike lanes
-It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Crossroads intersection has right-of-way constraints that impact the economic and construction feasibility for a roundabout
TWSC
Adjust Bay Avenue Major Approach (Southbound direction) for 2- lane road diet
-1 left lane, 1 through lane, 1 right lane
-Buffered Class II bike lanes
-It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Crossroads intersection does not meet the MUTCD Warrant 3 volume criteria for a signal
4 Bay Avenue / Hill
Street AWSC
No changes to current
condition
3 NB, 3 SB, 2 EB, 1 WB
Lanes
AWSC
Install curb bulb-outs and
enhanced pedestrian crossings
with 2-lane road diet
-Buffered Class II bike lanes
-Bay Avenue Major Approach
(Northbound and Southbound
directions)
--1 left lane, 1 shared throughright lane
-Hill Street Minor Approach
(Westbound direction)
--1 shared left-through-right lane
-Nob Hill Driveway Minor
Approach (Eastbound direction)
--1 shared left-through lane, 1
right lane
RDBT
Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control with 2-lane road diet
-Bay Avenue Major Approach (Northbound and Southbound directions) --1 shared left-through-right lane
--Lane drop transition prior to roundabout intersection --Bike lane transitions and curb ramps onto Class I shared bike/ped pathway prior to roundabout intersection
--Santa Cruz Metro bus stop and commercial driveway access is maintained along Bay Avenue corridor
-Hill Street Minor Approach (Westbound direction)
--1 shared left-through-right lane
--Pedestrian crossing relocated before roundabout intersection -Nob Hill Driveway Minor Approach (Eastbound direction) --1 shared left-through-right lane
--Pedestrian crossing and pathway relocated inside plaza parking lot before roundabout intersection
Signal
Convert intersection into signal control with 2-lane road diet -Bay Avenue Major Approach (Northbound and Southbound
directions)
--1 left lane, 1 shared through-right lane
--Protected left turn operations for Northbound and Southbound approaches
-Nob Hill Driveway and Hill Street Minor Approach (Eastbound and Westbound directions)
--Lane geometry same as existing condition
--Permissive yield left turn operations for Eastbound and Westbound approaches
5 Bay Avenue /
Capitola Avenue AWSC
No changes to current
condition
2 NB, 2 SB, 2 EB, 1 WB
Lanes
AWSC Same as Alt 0 - No Build RDBT
Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control -Bay Avenue Major Approach (Northbound and Southbound directions) --1 shared left-through-right lane
--Bike lane transitions and curb ramps onto Class I shared bike/ped pathway prior to roundabout intersection
-Capitola Avenue Minor Approach (Westbound and Eastbound directions) --1 shared left-through-right lane
--Pedestrian crossing relocated before roundabout intersection Signal
Convert intersection into signal control
-It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Capitola intersection does not meet the MUTCD Warrant 3 volume criteria for a signal; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as signal for the Alternative 3 layout.
-Lane geometry same as existing condition for all intersection leg approaches
--Permissive yield left turn operations for all approaches 93 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
12 Intersection
# Intersection
Name
Alternative 0 - No Build Alternative 1 - Stop & Road Diet Alternative 2 - Roundabout Alternative 3 - Signal Traffic
Control
Intersection Geometry
and Operations
Traffic
Control
Intersection Geometry and
Operations
Traffic
Control Intersection Geometry and Operations Traffic Control Intersection Geometry and Operations 6 Bay Avenue /
Monterey
Avenue
AWSC
No changes to current
condition
1 NB, 1 SB, 1 WB Lanes
AWSC Same as Alt 0 - No Build RDBT
Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control -It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Monterey intersection has right-of-way constraints that impact the economic and construction feasibility for a roundabout; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as a roundabout for the Alternative 2 layout.
-All roadway approaches
--1 shared left-through-right lane
--Bike lane transitions and curb ramps onto Class I shared bike/ped pathway prior to roundabout intersection
Signal
Convert intersection into signal control
-Lane geometry same as existing condition for all intersection leg approaches
--Permissive yield left turn operations for all approaches 7 Monterey
Avenue / Park
Avenue
AWSC
No changes to current
condition
2 NB, 2 SB, 1 EB, 1 WB
Lanes
AWSC Same as Alt 0 - No Build RDBT
Convert intersection into single lane roundabout layout with yield control -It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Monterey/Park intersection has right-of-way constraints that impact the economic and construction feasibility for a roundabout; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as a roundabout for the Alternative 2 layout.
-All roadway approaches
--1 shared left-through-right lane
--Bike lane transitions and curb ramps onto Class I shared bike/ped pathway prior to roundabout intersection
Signal
Convert intersection into signal control
-Lane geometry same as existing condition for all intersection leg approaches
--Permissive yield left turn operations for all approaches Roadway
# Roadway Segment
(Bay Avenue)
Alternative 0 - No Build Alternative 1 - Stop & Road Diet Alternative 2 - Roundabout Alternative 3 - Signal #
Travel
Lanes
Roadway Geometry and
Operations
# Travel
Lanes Roadway Geometry and Operations # Travel Lanes Roadway Geometry and Operations # Travel Lanes Roadway Geometry and Operations A Highway 1 to Crossroads
Loop 4 2 NB, 2 SB, Center left turn lane, Class II Bike 4 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 4 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 4 Same as Alt 0 - No Build B Crossroads Loop to Hill
Street 4 2 NB, 2 SB, Center left turn lane, Class II Bike 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition C Hill Street to Center Street 4 2 NB, 2 SB, Center left turn lane, Class II Bike 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition 2 Convert from a 4-lane roadway into a 2-lane roadway with road diet transition D Center Street to Capitola
Avenue 2 1 NB, 1 SB, Class II Bike, On-Street Parking 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build E Capitola Avenue to
Monterey Avenue 2 1 NB, 1 SB, Class II Bike, On-Street Parking 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build F Monterey Avenue to Park
Avenue 2 1 NB, 1 SB, Class II Bike 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 2 Same as Alt 0 - No Build 94 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
13 1.3 Capitola General Plan Consistency
The objectives of the Bay Avenue Corridor Study were prepared to be consistent with the following land use, mobility, and economic goals identified in the City’s latest General Plan. • Goal LU-10 Maintain and enhance Bay Avenue commercial district as a thriving destination with businesses that serve Capitola residents and visitors.
o Policy LU-10.2 Bay Avenue Streetscape. Enhance the Bay Avenue streetscape in a way that improves the appearance of Bay Avenue, increases safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, and stimulates private investment within the area. o Policy LU-10.3 Tree-Lined Boulevard. Encourage a tree-lined boulevard streetscape character along Bay Avenue north of the Capitola Produce property. Encourage installation of drought tolerant and non-invasive street trees and landscaping along the Bay Avenue property frontage in conjunction with capital improvement or redevelopment projects.
o Action LU-10.1 Medians. Explore opportunities to install medians on Bay Avenue in locations where left turn movements for vehicles would not be restricted. o Action LU-10.2 Roundabout. Conduct a public process to study the feasibility of installing a roundabout at the Bay Avenue/Capitola Avenue intersection. The study shall consider impacts on traffic speeds, delays, and air quality. o Action LU-10.3 Streetscape Master Plan. Prepare a streetscape master plan for Bay Avenue that presents a unified design theme for the corridors and identifies specific improvements needed to implement this vision.
• Goal MO-4 Provide a roadway system that enhances community aesthetics and promotes a high quality of life
o Action MO-4.1 Bay Avenue Roundabout. Prepare a study and conduct outreach with business stakeholders and the public to evaluate the feasibility of constructing a roundabout at the intersection of Bay Avenue and Capitola Avenue. • Goal ED-2 Provide businesses and jobs that create a healthy and stable local economy. o Policy ED-2.8 Major Bay Avenue Development Projects. Ensure that major development projects contribute to the vitality and enhance the function of Bay Avenue as a thriving commercial district.
95 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
14 Bay Avenue Vision in the Capitola General Plan

1.4 Level-of-Service Criteria and Thresholds
Analysis of potential adverse effects at roadway intersections is based on the concept of level-of-service (LOS). The LOS of an intersection is a qualitative measure used to describe operational conditions. LOS A (best) represents minimal delay, while LOS F (worst) represents heavy delay and a facility that is operating at or near its functional capacity.

This LOS analysis uses methods defined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Seventh Edition. HCM 7th Edition methodologies include procedures for analyzing side-street stop-controlled (“SSSC”), all-way stop-controlled (“AWSC”), and signalized intersections. The SSSC procedure defines LOS as a function of average control delay for each minor street approach movement. Conversely, the AWSC and signalized intersection procedures define LOS as a function of average control delay for the overall intersection.

Table 1 relates the operational characteristics associated with each LOS category for signalized and unsignalized intersections.
96 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
15 Table 1: Intersection Operation Standards at Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections City of Capitola LOS Threshold
The City of Capitola General Plan (adopted June 26, 2014, and updated March 13, 2019) (Policy MO-3.3) establishes a minimum LOS C traffic operation standard at intersections throughout the City, with the exception of the Village Area, Bay Avenue, and 41st Avenue where LOS D is the minimum acceptable standard.

Capitola General Plan Policy MP-3.4 permits a lower LOS and higher congestion at major regional intersections, if necessary, improvements are considered infeasible, as determined by the City’s Public Works Director, or result in significant, unacceptable environmental impacts. Any evaluation of the Project’s LOS impact on City of Capitola streets follows the City’s General Plan.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) LOS Threshold An LOS-based analysis of Caltrans facilities is provided using the previously applied LOS standard combined with the County v/c standard for significance criteria purposes. Deficiencies at Caltrans study intersections occur when:
• Cause operations to deteriorate from an acceptable level (LOS C or better) to an unacceptable level (LOS D or worse); or
• Causes the existing measure of effectiveness (average delay) to deteriorate at a State-operated intersection operating at LOS D or worse.
97 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
16 Roundabout Analysis – FHWA Requirements
Roundabouts: An Information Guide (June 2000) by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) was used for guidance. The FHWA recommends that no approach to a roundabout should handle more than 85% of its capacity, even if the level of service is still acceptable. This helps ensure that each entrance runs smoothly, preventing congestion and keeping traffic flowing efficiently. The analysis takes this design standard into account.

1.5 Traffic Analysis Methodology
For the Bay Avenue Corridor (Alternative 0 – No Build, Alternative 1 - Stop, Alternative 2 – Roundabout, and Alternative 3 – Signal), the LOS, vehicle delay, and critical vehicle queues were determined using Synchro 12 traffic analysis software. Sidra 9 traffic analysis software was also used to estimate the LOS, vehicle delay, and critical vehicle queues for the proposed roundabout geometry along Bay Avenue.

For the Alternative 1 – Stop and Alternative 2 – Roundabout layouts, a microsimulation analysis using VISSIM software was also conducted for operation comparison purposes. VISSIM was used because the software is the most appropriate tool to simulate the pedestrian, bicycle, vehicular traffic movements, and driver behavior through various traffic control devices. Figure 3 illustrates the VISSIM model used for the traffic analysis.

Figure 3: Illustrative VISSIM Model for Project Study Area 98 Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
17 99
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
18 2. Existing Transportation Conditions

2.1 Study Intersections
Study intersections for the project were selected in consultation with City staff. The intersections evaluated in this study are listed below.

1. Bay Avenue / Highway 1 NB Ramps

2. Bay Avenue / Highway 1 SB Ramps

3. Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop

4. Bay Avenue / Hill Street

5. Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue

6. Bay Avenue / Monterey Avenue

7. Monterey Avenue / Park Avenue

2.2 Roadway Network
The following local and regional roadways provide access to the project study area:

Highway 1 is 4-lane freeway (that connects with State Route 17 and State Route 156) in the north-south direction. Within Capitola, Highway 1 travels in an east-west direction. Access to and from the project study area is provided by ramp terminals at Porter Street / Bay Avenue.

Bay Avenue is an arterial in the northwest-southeast direction between Highway 1 and Monterey Avenue, and the road is classified as a minor arterial per the City’s General Plan. Class II bike lanes and sidewalks exist along both sides of the roadway. The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour and provides direct access to commercial and residential land uses. Between Highway 1 and Center Street, Bay Avenue is a four-lane facility with a center two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL), and on-street parking is prohibited along this section. Between Center Street and Park Avenue, Bay Avenue is a two-lane facility, and on-street parking is allowed in marked areas next to commercial and residential uses.

Crossroads Loop is a private two-lane street in the east-west direction that provides direct driveway access to commercial uses at the Nob Hill plaza on the westside and at the Crossroads center on the eastside. The roadway provides sidewalks for pedestrians and on-street parking on the private road east of Bay Avenue. Crossroads Loop is located approximately 175-feet north of Hill Street.

Hill Street is a two-lane local street in the east-west direction that provides access to some retail and mostly residential land uses east of Bay Avenue. The roadway provides sidewalks between Bay Avenue and Crossroads Loop. Class II bike lanes are provided in the eastbound direction and Class III shared bike sharrows are provided in the westbound direction from Bay Avenue to Capitola Avenue.

Capitola Avenue is a two-lane street in the north-south direction that provides access to the project study area as well as various commercial and residential land uses between Soquel Drive and Monterey Avenue. The roadway provides sidewalks and Class III shared bike sharrows on both sides of the street.

The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour. Per the General Plan, the road is classified as a minor arterial south of Bay Street and a collector street north of Bay Street. 100
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
19 Monterey Avenue is a two-lane street in the north-south direction that provides access to the project study area as well as various commercial and residential land uses between Kennedy Drive and Esplanade. The roadway provides sidewalks, Class II bike lanes, and Class III shared bike sharrows on both sides of the street. The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour. Per the General Plan, the road is classified as an arterial south of Bay Street and a collector street north of Bay Street.

Park Avenue is a two-lane street in the east-west direction that provides access to the project study area as well as residential land uses between Monterey Avenue and Soquel Drive. The roadway provides sidewalks and Class II bike lanes, and the posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour. Per the General Plan, the road is classified as an arterial.

2.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian and bicycle activity within project vicinity are active along Bay Avenue, Capitola Avenue, and Monterey Avenue with an established pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Connected sidewalks at least four (4) feet wide are available on at least one side of all roadways in the study area with adequate lighting and signing. At the Highway 1 ramp signalized intersections, marked crosswalks, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standard curb ramps, and count down pedestrian signals provide improved pedestrian visibility and safety.

Bicycle facilities in the area include Bay Avenue, Hill Street, and Monterey Avenue which consist of Class II bike lanes with buffered striping to separate the vehicle and bike travel way, and Capitola Avenue, which consists of Class III shared bike sharrows. Bay Avenue features green paint markings in potential conflict areas at the Highway 1 ramp signalized intersections. Bicycle parking in the area is limited to private commercial and industrial lots.

Overall, the existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities near the project have adequate connectivity and provide pedestrian and bicyclists with routes to the surrounding land uses. The City of Capitola Bicycle Transportation Plan 2011 does not indicate any future bicycle facilities planned within the study area.

A discussion of potential bike and pedestrian improvements along the Bay Avenue corridor are provided in Section 4.

2.4 Transit Facilities
Transit services in the study area include a bus route provided by the Santa Cruz Metro Transit District (SCMTD). Per the updated latest service schedule, the project study area is served by the following major transit route.
• Mid-County Bus Route 55
o Capitola Mall Transit Center – Seascape Blvd/Via Pacifica o Mid-county service approximately every 60-100 minutes on weekdays and approximately every 4 to 5 hours on weekends
o This bus route travels through the following study intersections:
 Bay Avenue / Highway 1 NB Ramps
 Bay Avenue / Highway 1 SB Ramps
 Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop
 Bay Avenue / Hill Street
101
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
20  Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue
Several bus stops with a bench are located along the Bay Avenue corridor which include the intersections of Bay Avenue / Hill Street and Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue.

2.5 Roadway Cross Section
The existing roadway cross section of Bay Avenue varies along the corridor with different lane configurations, widths, and multi-modal facilities. Figures 4-8 summarize the typical roadway crosssection along Bay Avenue.

Figure 4: Existing Section – Highway 1 to Center St (80-ft ROW) Figure 5: Existing Section – Center St to Capitola Ave (65-ft ROW) 102
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
21 Figure 6: Existing Section – Capitola Ave to Burlingame Ave (56-ft ROW) Figure 7: Existing Section – Burlingame Ave to Monterey Ave (56-ft ROW) Figure 8: Existing Section – Monterey Ave to Park Ave (38-ft ROW) 103
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
22 3. Traffic Data Collection

3.1 Year 2024 Existing Intersection Volumes
Year 2024 existing turning movement counts during the 7-9 AM peak, 2-4 PM Midday peak, and 4-6 PM peak hours at the project study intersections were collected by Retkor / All Traffic Data Service. These traffic counts were collected on 3/7/2024 when school was in session and during favorable weather conditions. The collected intersection traffic volume data is provided in Table 2 and Attachment A.

Table 2: Year 2024 Existing Intersection Volumes
It should be noted that the during the morning and mid-day afternoon school drop off times, the Bay Avenue corridor experiences a period of congestion in the northbound and southbound directions from the influx of vehicles accessing the Soquel Elementary School and New Brighton Middle School. Field observations cite that during these times, the average vehicle delay increases, and vehicle queues are longer at the existing stop control intersections at Hill Street and Capitola Avenue.

3.2 Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Volumes
Cumulative volumes in the study area were determined based on the SCCRTC Travel Demand Model, which was updated for 2019 “base year” conditions and 2045 “future year” condition. Land uses for the cumulative condition include reasonable growth consistent with the growth nodes in the Sustainable Santa Cruz County Plan (2014) and some major projects such as the proposed redevelopment of the Capitola Mall, the redevelopment of the Farmers Market site, and the expansion of the Dignity Healthcare Campus.
2045 future year condition roadway segment volumes from the SCCRTC Travel Demand Model were obtained for Cumulative traffic volume growth estimates. The same Model was used to plot bidirectional AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes on each segment along roadways within the Project study area. The 2019 base year (2019) and future year (2045) forecast volumes were compared to ID NB/SB Street WB/EB Street Peak
Hour

NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
1 Bay Ave Hwy 1 NB Ramps 7 AM 369 516 0 0 431 478 0 0 0 59 12 107 2 Bay Ave Hwy 1 SB Ramps 7 AM 0 572 111 176 314 0 313 0 296 0 0 0 3 Bay Ave Crossroads Loop 7 AM 1 616 9 39 462 109 53 0 21 0 1 14 4 Bay Ave Hill St 7 AM 57 441 10 75 377 31 43 19 39 9 28 142 5 Bay Ave Capitola Ave 7 AM 27 312 55 74 183 128 70 67 6 83 94 42 6 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 7 AM 0 162 61 219 84 0 0 0 0 87 0 282 7 Monterey Ave Park Ave 7 AM 1 123 225 41 126 4 0 9 1 418 3 100 1 Bay Ave Hwy 1 NB Ramps 5 PM 290 401 0 0 642 316 0 0 0 107 1 195 2 Bay Ave Hwy 1 SB Ramps 5 PM 0 457 91 276 473 0 234 208 347 0 0 0 3 Bay Ave Crossroads Loop 5 PM 4 462 9 50 658 112 49 2 38 4 1 37 4 Bay Ave Hill St 5 PM 46 307 21 146 505 49 92 45 84 18 33 76 5 Bay Ave Capitola Ave 5 PM 29 200 23 56 337 124 72 84 8 61 72 31 6 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 5 PM 0 124 85 304 141 0 0 0 0 35 0 104 7 Monterey Ave Park Ave 5 PM 1 165 498 92 83 1 5 3 3 203 3 39 104
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
23 determine the annual incremental growth in traffic volumes at study intersection approach and departure links. 2045 future year turning movement volumes were calculated by adding the growth increment to the base year traffic count volumes to calculate the final adjusted roadway link forecast volume. Final adjusted forecast volumes were then converted to Cumulative intersection turning movement volumes using a process commonly referred to as the Furness Method. The Furness Method uses an iterative process to derive future turning movement volumes based on future year roadway link volumes and an initial estimate of turning percentages (obtained from the existing intersection turning movement counts). The Cumulative traffic volumes are a conservative estimate of future vehicle traffic, and the cumulative scenario traffic volume data is provided in Table 3.

Table 3: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Volumes

3.3 Roadway Daily Traffic and Speed Data
Average daily traffic (ADT) and speed counts were collected along the Bay Avenue corridor and are summarized in Table 4 and Attachment A.

Table 4: Bay Avenue ADT & Vehicle Speed Summary
Traffic Criteria
From Hill St to
Capitola Ave
From Capitola Ave to
Montrey Ave
3/7/2024 3/7/2024
Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound
Average Daily Traffic 4,801 5,415 3,145 3,182
Posted Speed Limit (mph) 25 25 25 25
50th Percentile Speed (mph) 26 26.7 25.5 27
85th Percentile Speed (mph) 29.6 30.6 29.4 30.7
95th Percentile Speed (mph) 32.2 33.3 32.1 33.4
As shown in the table above, the posted speed limit on Bay Avenue is 25 mph, and the 85th percentile (critical) speed is about 30 mph in both the northbound and southbound directions.

ID NB/SB Street WB/EB Street Peak
Hour

NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
1 Bay Ave Hwy 1 NB Ramps 7 AM 321 392 0 0 436 536 0 0 0 161 12 379 2 Bay Ave Hwy 1 SB Ramps 7 AM 0 465 61 251 346 0 248 0 586 0 0 0 3 Bay Ave Crossroads Loop 7 AM 1 394 9 69 754 109 53 0 21 0 1 79 4 Bay Ave Hill St 7 AM 57 293 4 75 669 31 43 19 39 13 28 68 5 Bay Ave Capitola Ave 7 AM 27 312 55 74 183 128 78 67 6 83 94 42 6 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 7 AM 0 162 61 219 239 0 0 0 0 87 0 282 7 Monterey Ave Park Ave 7 AM 1 123 238 201 121 4 0 9 1 418 3 100 1 Bay Ave Hwy 1 NB Ramps 5 PM 683 726 0 0 644 149 0 0 0 77 1 406 2 Bay Ave Hwy 1 SB Ramps 5 PM 0 992 104 370 351 0 417 208 640 0 0 0 3 Bay Ave Crossroads Loop 5 PM 4 988 9 92 787 112 49 2 38 4 1 59 4 Bay Ave Hill St 5 PM 46 717 34 146 634 49 92 45 84 22 33 192 5 Bay Ave Capitola Ave 5 PM 29 200 23 61 337 171 190 63 8 17 65 73 6 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 5 PM 0 305 85 304 251 0 0 0 0 35 0 104 7 Monterey Ave Park Ave 5 PM 1 148 619 202 83 1 5 3 3 203 3 237 105
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
24 3.4 Collision Data
Collision data from 2013 to 2024 along Bay Avenue was obtained using the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS is a tool which geocodes, maps, and presents various types of statistical collision reports from the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) database. A heat map showing the location of the reported collisions is shown in Figure 9 and a summary of the collision types is shown in Figure 10. Table 5 and Attachment B summarizes the reported traffic collisions along the study corridor.

Figure 9: Bay Avenue Collision Heat Map (2013 to 2024)
Roadway Collisions
(10 years):
1 Collision
2-4 Collision
5-10 Collisions
Bay Avenue Study Area
106
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
25 Figure 10: Bay Avenue Collision Types (2013 to 2024) Between January 2013 and December 2024, there were 36 total reported collisions along the Bay Avenue study corridor which include ten (10) bicycle and eight (8) pedestrian recorded collisions. One (1) of the collisions was a fatal accident with a pedestrian and the remaining collisions resulted in injuries. Approximately ten (10) of the bike and pedestrian collisions along the Bay Avenue corridor occurred within an intersection. The most common primary crash factors (PCF) that caused the reported bike and pedestrian collisions include unsafe speed, improper turning, and right-of-way violation. 107
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
26 Table 5: Bay Avenue Collision Data (2013 to 2024)
Note: Bicycle Collision = Green, Pedestrian Collision = Yellow # Case ID Date Primary Road Secondary Rd
Distance &
Direction from
Intersection
Bike
Collision
Pedestrian
Collision Killed Injured
1 5737844 5/25/2012 Bay Ave Hill St 90ft South No No 0 1 2 5769463 7/30/2012 Capitola Ave Bay Ave 80ft West No No 0 1 3 5926906 2/2/2013 Highway 1 Bay Ave 200ft North No No 0 1 4 6483008 4/24/2014 Bay Ave Capitola Ave At Intersection No Yes 0 1 5 6494114 4/30/2014 Bay Ave Capitola Ave At Intersection No No 0 1 6 6487930 5/6/2014 Oak Dr Bay Ave 37ft South Yes No 0 1 7 6487941 5/9/2014 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No No 0 1 8 6511924 6/3/2014 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No Yes 0 1 9 6724062 11/17/2014 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 26ft South No No 0 1 10 6748318 12/3/2014 Monterey Ave Park Ave 18ft South No Yes 0 1 11 6864222 3/19/2015 Bay Ave Capitola Ave 83ft East No Yes 0 1 12 6870050 3/19/2015 Monterey Ave Park Ave At Intersection No No 0 1 13 6889427 4/4/2015 Bay Ave Bay Ave At Intersection Yes No 0 1 14 6940786 6/7/2015 Monterey Ave Bay Ave At Intersection No No 0 1 15 7063888 7/20/2015 Monterey Ave Park Ave At Intersection Yes No 0 1 16 7075959 9/9/2015 Monterey Ave Park Ave At Intersection No No 0 1 17 8152095 10/7/2016 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No Yes 0 1 18 8339317 3/26/2017 Bay Ave Burlingame Ave 90ft North Yes No 0 1 19 8373999 4/29/2017 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No No 0 1 20 8506493 11/25/2017 Bay Ave Hill St 40ft North No No 0 1 21 8593314 2/13/2018 Bay Ave Hill St 203ft North No No 0 1 22 90781844 7/21/2018 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 100ft North Yes No 0 1 23 8701088 8/13/2018 Bay Ave Hill St 213ft North Yes No 0 1 24 8648318 10/6/2018 Bay Ave Highway 1 218ft South No Yes 1 0 25 9007558 11/22/2019 Monterey Ave Park Ave At Intersection Yes No 0 1 26 9174869 10/8/2020 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No No 0 1 27 9355886 9/24/2021 Bay Ave Rosedale Ave 44ft North No No 0 1 28 9472209 5/5/2022 Bay Ave Oak Dr At Intersection Yes No 0 1 29 9472208 5/7/2022 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No No 0 1 30 9495729 8/1/2022 Monterey Ave Park Ave At Intersection No No 0 1 31 9495924 9/4/2022 Capitola Ave Bay Ave 58ft South Yes No 0 1 32 9534052 12/9/2022 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No Yes 0 1 33 9549472 2/1/2023 Bay Ave Burlingame Ave At Intersection Yes No 0 1 34 9625429 8/11/2023 Monterey Ave Park Ave 35ft South No No 0 1 35 9625425 8/24/2023 Bay Ave Hill St At Intersection No Yes 0 1 36 9646836 10/12/2023 Bay Ave Burlingame Ave 47ft North No No 0 1 Total 10 8 1 35
108
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
27 3.5 Signal Warrant Analysis
Chapter 4C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) states that an engineering study of traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of the location shall be performed to determine whether installation of a traffic control signal is justified at a particular location. The investigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of factors related to the existing operation and safety at the study location and the potential to improve these conditions using applicable factors contained in traffic signal warrants.

The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. On local streets and highways, the engineering study should include consideration of a roundabout (yield control). If a roundabout is determined to provide a viable and practical solution, it should be studied in lieu of, or in addition to a traffic control signal.

For the purposes of this study and based on the collected traffic volumes, peak hour signal warrant #3 was evaluated for the Existing and Cumulative condition to determine if a signal is warranted for any of the Bay Avenue stop-controlled study intersections. To be warranted under Warrant #3, peak hour traffic volumes must plot above the corresponding threshold provided in Figure 10. The AM and PM peak hour volumes were analyzed using the following assumptions as shown in Table 6 and Table 7.

Figure 11: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant 3
109
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
28 Table 6: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant #3 Assumptions – Year 2024 Existing Conditions Major Street Minor Street
Street Name #
Lanes
Volume
(Total of Both
Approaches)
Street Name #
Lanes
Volume (Higher
Volume
Approach)
Meets
MUTCD
Warrant 3
Criteria?
AM Peak
Bay Ave 2 1236 Crossroads Lp 1 109 No
Bay Ave 2 991 Hill St 1 179 No
Bay Ave 1 779 Capitola Ave 1 219 No
Bay Ave 1 526 Monterey Ave 1 369 No
Monterey Ave 1 520 Park Ave 1 521 Yes
PM Peak
Bay Ave 2 1295 Crossroads Lp 1 89 No
Bay Ave 2 1074 Hill St 1 221 No
Bay Ave 1 769 Capitola Ave 1 164 No
Bay Ave 1 654 Monterey Ave 1 139 No
Monterey Ave 1 840 Park Ave 1 245 No
Table 7: CA MUTCD Signal Warrant #3 Assumptions – Year 2045 Cumulative Conditions Major Street Minor Street
Street Name #
Lanes
Volume
(Total of Both
Approaches)
Street Name #
Lanes
Volume (Higher
Volume
Approach)
Meets
MUTCD
Warrant 3
Criteria?
AM Peak
Bay Ave 2 1336 Crossroads Lp 1 80 No
Bay Ave 2 1129 Hill St 1 109 No
Bay Ave 1 779 Capitola Ave 1 219 No
Bay Ave 1 681 Monterey Ave 1 369 Yes
Monterey Ave 1 688 Park Ave 1 521 Yes
PM Peak
Bay Ave 2 2002 Crossroads Lp 1 89 No
Bay Ave 2 1626 Hill St 1 247 Yes
Bay Ave 1 821 Capitola Ave 1 261 No
Bay Ave 1 945 Monterey Ave 1 139 No
Monterey Ave 1 1054 Park Ave 1 443 Yes
Under existing conditions, the Monterey/Park intersection would meet Warrant 3 volume criteria for the AM peak hour. Under cumulative conditions, the peak hour traffic volumes along Bay Avenue would meet the Warrant 3 volume criteria for the Bay/Hill, Bay/Monterey, and Monterey/Park intersections.

These intersections were analyzed as a signal for the Alternative 3 layout. It should be noted that for existing and cumulative conditions, the Bay/Capitola intersection does not meet the Warrant 3 volume criteria for a signal; however for consistency and ICE comparison purposes, this intersection was analyzed as signal for the Alternative 3 layout.
110
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
29 4. Corridor Operations and Intersection Control Evaluation Results

4.1 Year 2024 Existing ICE Operations
Traffic operations and ICE analysis were evaluated at the study intersections under Existing conditions based on Existing conditions and utilizing roadway geometry and intersection traffic control from developed corridor concepts to enhance multimodal operations. Traffic operations for the study intersections with Synchro software between the various corridor alternatives are shown below in Table 8 and Table 9. The LOS calculations are included in Attachment C and Attachment D.

Operations Summary
Under Existing conditions, most of the Bay Avenue corridor is anticipated to operate at acceptable LOS.

Compared to the Alt 0 no build and Alt 1 stop configuration, the Alt 2 roundabout option at the Bay/Hill and Bay/Capitola intersections would operate with better LOS and reduced overall intersection delay during the peak periods. The Alt 3 signal layout would also yield acceptable intersection LOS with reduced intersection delay compared to the Alt 1 stop; however, the Alt 3 signal operates at similar LOS to the Alt 2 roundabout layout for the Bay/Hill and Bay/Capitola intersections.

Deficient Operations
• Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop (Intersection #3)
o TWSC operates at LOS E during the PM peak.
o Alt 0 No Build, Alt 1 Stop, Alt 2 Roundabout, Alt 3 Signal  Vehicle queues spillback into the Crossroads Loop intersection and cause delay for the minor leg approach
• Bay Avenue / Hill Street (Intersection #4)
o AWSC operates at LOS E during the PM peak.
o Alt 1 Stop
 Vehicle queues and delay on southbound approach spillback into the Crossroads Loop intersection and cause delay for the intersection
111
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
30 Table 8: Year 2024 Existing Intersection LOS – AM Peak Note: TWSC delay is worst movement approach, AWSC, RAB, and Signal delay is overall average Table 9: Year 2024 Existing Intersection LOS – PM Peak
Note: TWSC delay is worst movement approach, AWSC, RAB, and Signal delay is overall average Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 NB Ramps Signal - 25.2 C Signal - 26.8 C Signal - 26.8 C Signal - 21.0 C 2 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 SB Ramps Signal - 17.0 B Signal - 17.1 B Signal - 17.1 B Signal - 30.7 C 3 Bay Ave & Crossroads Loop TWSC EB 26.9 D TWSC EB 24.0 C TWSC EB 24.0 C TWSC EB 23.3 C 4 Bay Ave & Hill St AWSC - 18.2 C AWSC - 28.5 D RAB 0.482 7.8 A Signal - 13.4 B 5 Bay Ave & Capitola Ave AWSC - 27.7 D AWSC - 27.7 D RAB 0.407 7.4 A Signal - 7.6 A 6 Bay Ave & Monterey Ave AWSC - 19.7 C AWSC - 19.6 C RAB 0.36 6.1 A Signal - 17.4 B 7 Monterey Ave & Park Ave AWSC - 25.1 D AWSC - 24.9 D RAB 0.488 7.2 A Signal - 10.1 B No. Intersection
Alternative 0
No Build
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 NB Ramps Signal - 28.7 C Signal - 23.1 C Signal - 28.7 C Signal - 28.7 C 2 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 SB Ramps Signal - 20.4 C Signal - 22.7 C Signal - 20.4 C Signal - 20.4 C 3 Bay Ave & Crossroads Loop TWSC EB 39.7 E TWSC EB 35.3 E TWSC EB 35.3 E TWSC EB 33.0 D 4 Bay Ave & Hill St AWSC - 22.5 C AWSC - 44.2 E RAB 0.634 10.1 B Signal - 14.1 B 5 Bay Ave & Capitola Ave AWSC - 20.5 C AWSC - 20.5 C RAB 0.505 7.5 A Signal - 6.7 A 6 Bay Ave & Monterey Ave AWSC - 12.1 B AWSC - 11.9 B RAB 0.376 5.9 A Signal - 6.4 A 7 Monterey Ave & Park Ave AWSC - 15.4 C AWSC - 15.4 C RAB 0.604 8.5 A Signal - 7.7 A Alternative 3
Signal
No. Intersection
Alternative 0
No Build
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2
Roundabout
112
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
31 4.2 Year 2045 Cumulative ICE Operations
Traffic operations and ICE analysis were evaluated at the study intersections under Cumulative conditions based on roadway geometry and intersection traffic control from developed corridor concepts to enhance multimodal operations. Traffic operations for the study intersections with Synchro software between the various corridor alternatives are shown below in Table 10 and Table 11. The LOS results are included in Attachment C and Attachment D.

Operations Summary
Under Cumulative conditions, several intersections along the Bay Avenue corridor are anticipated to operate at a level of service above the City’s LOS threshold. Compared to the Alt 0 no build and Alt 1 stop configuration, the Alt 2 roundabout option at the Bay/Hill and Bay/Capitola intersections would operate with better LOS and reduced overall intersection delay during the peak periods. The Alt 3 signal layout would also yield acceptable intersection LOS with reduced intersection delay compared to the Alt 1 stop; however, the Alt 3 signal operates at similar LOS to the Alt 2 roundabout layout for the Bay/Hill and Bay/Capitola intersections.

Deficient Operations
• Bay Avenue / Highway 1 NB Ramps (Intersection #1)
o Signal operates at LOS E during the AM and PM peak.
o Alt 0 No Build, Alt 1 Stop, Alt 2 Roundabout, Alt 3 Signal  High traffic volumes from the Bay Avenue southbound approach creates delay and long queues with the signal control.
 Delay and long queues for southbound vehicles wanting to access the Caltrans freeway on-ramp.
• Bay Avenue / Crossroads Loop (Intersection #3)
o TWSC operates at LOS E during the AM and PM peak.
o Alt 0 No Build, Alt 1 Stop, Alt 2 Roundabout, Alt 3 Signal  Vehicle queues spillback into the Crossroads Loop intersection and cause delay for the minor leg approach
113
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
32 • Bay Avenue / Hill Street (Intersection #4)
o AWSC operates at LOS F during the AM and PM peak.
o Alt 0 No Build, Alt 1 Stop
 Vehicle queues and delay on southbound approach spillback into the Crossroads Loop intersection and cause delay for the intersection
• Montrey Avenue / Park Avenue (Intersection #7)
o AWSC operates at LOS F during the PM peak.
o Alt 0 No Build, Alt 1 Stop
 For the AM peak, high traffic volumes from the Park Avenue westbound approach creates delay and long vehicle queues with the stop control.  For the PM peak, high right-turn traffic volumes from the Monterey Avenue NB approach creates delay and long vehicle queues with the stop control. 114
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
33 Table 10: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection LOS – AM Peak Note: TWSC delay is worst movement approach, AWSC, RAB, and Signal delay is overall average Table 11: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection LOS – PM Peak Note: TWSC delay is worst movement approach, AWSC, RAB, and Signal delay is overall average Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 NB Ramps Signal - 71.2 E Signal - 71.2 E Signal - 71.2 E Signal - 71.2 E 2 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 SB Ramps Signal - 32.8 C Signal - 32.8 C Signal - 32.8 C Signal - 32.8 C 3 Bay Ave & Crossroads Loop TWSC EB 48.0 E TWSC EB 44.2 E TWSC EB 44.2 E TWSC EB 39.1 E 4 Bay Ave & Hill St AWSC - 22.2 C AWSC - 73.2 F RAB 0.703 10.5 B Signal - 12.8 B 5 Bay Ave & Capitola Ave AWSC - 18.4 C AWSC - 18.4 C RAB 0.41 7.4 A Signal - 6.9 A 6 Bay Ave & Monterey Ave AWSC - 18.2 C AWSC - 18.2 C RAB 0.41 6.7 A Signal - 10.7 B 7 Monterey Ave & Park Ave AWSC - 33.0 D AWSC - 33.0 D RAB 0.488 8.4 A Signal - 12.9 B Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
Alternative 0
No Build
No. Intersection
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Control
Type
Worst
Mvmt or
RDBT v/c
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 NB Ramps Signal - 71.1 E Signal - 64.7 E Signal - 76.0 E Signal - 71.1 E 2 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 SB Ramps Signal - 46.5 D Signal - 34.7 C Signal - 34.6 C Signal - 46.5 D 3 Bay Ave & Crossroads Loop TWSC EB 65.9 F TWSC EB 63.4 F TWSC EB 63.4 F TWSC EB 119.1 F 4 Bay Ave & Hill St AWSC - 98.7 F AWSC - 109.6 F RAB 0.893 21.0 C Signal - 26.5 C 5 Bay Ave & Capitola Ave AWSC - 21.7 C AWSC - 21.3 C RAB 0.524 8.1 A Signal - 7.3 A 6 Bay Ave & Monterey Ave AWSC - 20.3 C AWSC - 24.4 C RAB 0.469 7.8 A Signal - 7.1 A 7 Monterey Ave & Park Ave AWSC - 55.5 F AWSC - 60.8 F RAB 0.792 13.1 B Signal - 22.7 C No. Intersection
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
Alternative 0
No Build
115
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
34 4.3 Intersection Queuing Analysis
A queuing analysis with the VISSIM and Synchro software was also performed along the Bay Avenue roadway corridor to determine the queuing effect for each of the alternative layouts. The microsimulation was conducted to obtain the average and maximum vehicle queue on each approach during the AM and PM peak hour period. The results of the vehicles queues observed in the analysis for the existing and cumulative conditions are summarized in Table 12, Table 13, and Attachment C and Attachment D.

Table 12: Year 2024 Existing Intersection Queue Summary ID Intersection
Intersection Approaches with Max Queue that Exceeds
Storage Capacity
Control
Type
AM Peak
Alternative 1
Stop
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
1 Bay Ave / SR1 NB Ramps Signal NB, SB NB, SB NB, SB
2 Bay Ave / SR1 SB Ramps Signal
3 Bay Ave / Crossroads TWSC
4 Bay Ave / Hill St Varies SB SB SB, EB
5 Bay Ave / Capitola Ave Varies WB
6 Bay Ave / Monterey Ave Varies
7 Monterey Ave / Park Ave Varies WB WB NB, SB, WB
ID Intersection
Intersection Approaches with Max Queue that Exceeds
Storage Capacity
Control
Type
PM Peak
Alternative 1
Stop
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
1 Bay Ave / SR1 NB Ramps Signal NB, SB NB, SB NB, SB
2 Bay Ave / SR1 SB Ramps Signal
3 Bay Ave / Crossroads TWSC
4 Bay Ave / Hill St Varies SB SB SB, EB
5 Bay Ave / Capitola Ave Varies WB
6 Bay Ave / Monterey Ave Varies
7 Monterey Ave / Park Ave Varies WB WB NB, SB, WB
Note: NB=northbound, SB=southbound, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound Under existing conditions, each corridor layout option would generate maximum vehicle queues that exceed the storage capacity at several intersection approaches which include the SR1 Caltrans ramps, Hill Street, and Park Avenue. The Alternative 1 AWSC and Alternative 2 roundabout would have similar vehicle queues; however, the Alternative 3 signal would have additional queue impacts due to the nature of signal operations that generate longer queues for vehicles during the red signal phase. 116
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
35 Table 13: Year 2045 Cumulative Intersection Queue Summary ID Intersection
Intersection Approaches with Max Queue that Exceeds
Storage Capacity
Control
Type
AM Peak
Alternative 1
Stop
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
1 Bay Ave / SR1 NB Ramps Signal NB, SB NB, SB NB, SB
2 Bay Ave / SR1 SB Ramps Signal SB, EB SB EB
3 Bay Ave / Crossroads TWSC SB SB
4 Bay Ave / Hill St Varies SB SB SB, EB
5 Bay Ave / Capitola Ave Varies
6 Bay Ave / Monterey Ave Varies SB SB
7 Monterey Ave / Park Ave Varies WB NB, SB, WB
ID Intersection
Intersection Approaches with Max Queue that Exceeds
Storage Capacity
Control
Type
PM Peak
Alternative 1
Stop
Alternative 2
Roundabout
Alternative 3
Signal
1 Bay Ave / SR1 NB Ramps Signal NB, SB NB, SB NB, SB
2 Bay Ave / SR1 SB Ramps Signal NB, SB, EB NB, SB, EB NB, SB, EB 3 Bay Ave / Crossroads TWSC SB, WB NB, SB NB, SB, EB, WB 4 Bay Ave / Hill St Varies NB, SB, EB SB, EB NB, SB, EB 5 Bay Ave / Capitola Ave Varies SB SB NB, SB, EB, WB
6 Bay Ave / Monterey Ave Varies SB SB, WB
7 Monterey Ave / Park Ave Varies NB, WB NB NB, SB, WB
Note: NB=northbound, SB=southbound, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound Under cumulative conditions, each corridor layout option would generate maximum vehicle queues that exceed the storage capacity for at least one intersection approach for all the study intersections. The Alternative 1 AWSC and Alternative 2 roundabout would have similar vehicle queues; however, the Alternative 3 signal would have additional queue impacts due to the nature of signal operations that generate longer queues for vehicles during the red signal phase.

Overall, for the Existing and Cumulative scenarios, the Alternative 2 roundabout option would provide the most optimal intersection configuration to accommodate and minimize the anticipated peak hour vehicle queues along the Bay Avenue corridor.
117
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
36 4.4 Corridor Travel Time Summary
The VISSIM model (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2) and Synchro model (Alternative 3) performed an average travel time comparison for vehicles traveling through Bay Avenue between the Highway 1 SB Ramp and Park Avenue intersections. A summary of the average travel time, average speed, and annual vehicle hours traveled (VHT) results between the Alternative 1 AWSC and Alternative 2 Roundabout layouts is shown in Figure 12, Figure 13, Table 14, and Table 15.

Vehicle hours traveled (VHT) is a key metric in transportation planning that calculates the total travel time for all vehicles. Since time is a non-renewable resource and is the largest economic cost of traveling and shipping, VHT is used to measure the quality of travel service on a roadway facility. When comparing VHT results, a lower VHT indicates vehicles are traveling through the roadway facility more efficiently and the facility is experiencing less traffic congestion.

Figure 12: Year 2024 Existing Corridor Average Travel Times Existing Conditions
Vehicles traveling northbound on the Alternative 1 Stop layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 2 minutes 9 seconds, and the estimated annual VHT from Park Avenue to SR1 is 62,501 vehiclehours. The Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 1 minute 54 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 55,492 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 3 Signal layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 2 minute 50 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 82,726 vehicle-hours.

Similarly, vehicles traveling southbound on the Alternative 1 Stop layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 3 minutes 59 seconds, and the estimated annual VHT from SR1 to Park Avenue is 98,494 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 2 minute 4 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 68,188 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 3 Signal layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 3 minute 7 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 102,557 vehicle-hours.Hill St
2min 8sec (Alt 1 - Stop)
1min 54sec (Alt 2 - RDBT)
2min 50sec (Alt 3 - Signal)
2min 59sec (Alt 1 - Stop)
2min 4sec (Alt 2 - RDBT)
3min 7sec (Alt 3 - Signal)
118
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
37 For both travel directions, the Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would generate fewer VHT and provide a faster average travel time compared to the Alternative 1 Stop and Alternative 3 signal layout. This is because roundabouts are yield controlled and allow for faster continuous movement of vehicles compared to an all-way stop and signal control where vehicles are required to stop completely at the intersection approach.

Table 14: Year 2024 Existing Corridor Travel Times
Scenario Analysis Criteria
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
[VISSIM]
Alternative 2
Roundabout
[VISSIM]
Alternative 3
Signal
[Synchro]
NB - N. of Park Ave to S. of Highway 1 SB Ramps 0.62 Travel Distance (mi) Avg Travel Time (sec) 136.2 114.6 174.8
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 16 sec 1 min 55 sec 2 min 55 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 16.3 19.5 12.3
Avg Travel Time (sec) 120.6 113.4 165.1
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 1 sec 1 min 53 sec 2 min 45 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 18.4 19.7 13.4
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (sec) 128.4 114.0 170.0
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 8 sec 1 min 54 sec 2 min 50 sec Avg Daily Traffic (vehicles) 4801 4801 4801
Vehicle Hours Traveled (veh-hr/year) 62,501 55,492 82,726 Scenario Analysis Criteria
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
[VISSIM]
Alternative 2
Roundabout
[VISSIM]
Alternative 3
Signal
[Synchro]
SB - S. of Highway 1 SB Ramps to N. of Park Ave 0.62 Travel Distance (mi) Average Travel Time (sec) 126.6 113.4 191.2
Average Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 7 sec 1 min 53 sec 3 min 11 sec Average Travel Speed (mph) 17.7 20.0 10.9
Average Travel Time (sec) 232.2 135 182.4
Average Travel Time (min & sec) 3 min 52 sec 2 min 15 sec 3 min 2 sec Average Travel Speed (mph) 9.6 16.7 12.0
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (sec) 179.4 124.2 186.8
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 59 sec 2 min 4 sec 3 min 7 sec Avg Daily Traffic (vehicles) 5415 5415 5415
Vehicle Hours Traveled (veh-hr/year) 98,494 68,188 102,557 AM Peak
PM Peak
VHT Estimation
AM Peak
PM Peak
VHT Estimation
119
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
38 Figure 13: Year 2045 Cumulative Corridor Average Travel Times Cumulative Conditions
Vehicles traveling northbound on the Alternative 1 Stop layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 2 minutes 39 seconds, and the estimated annual VHT from Park Avenue to SR1 is 104,314 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 2 minute 35 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 101,948 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 3 Signal layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 3 minute 6 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 122,259 vehicle-hours.

For vehicles traveling southbound on the Alternative 1 Stop layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 5 minutes 35 seconds, and the estimated annual VHT from SR1 to Park Avenue is 271,317 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 3 minute 36 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 175,200 vehicle-hours. The Alternative 3 Signal layout would have an average peak hour travel time of 3 minute 4 seconds and would have an annual VHT of 149,285 vehicle-hours.

For vehicles traveling northbound on Bay Avenue, the Alternative 2 Roundabout layout would generate fewer VHT and provide a faster average travel time; however, for vehicles traveling southbound on Bay Avenue, the Alternative 3 Signal layout would generate fewer VHT and provide a faster average travel time.

Hill St
2min 39sec (Alt 1 - Stop)
2min 35sec (Alt 2 - RDBT)
3min 6sec (Alt 3 - Signal)
5min 35sec (Alt 1 - Stop)
3min 36sec (Alt 2 - RDBT)
3min 4sec (Alt 3 - Signal)
120
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
39 Table 15: Year 2045 Cumulative Corridor Travel Times Travel Time Impact to Driver Behavior, Transit Access, and Emergency Vehicle Response Optimizing the travel time along Bay Avenue provides several benefits to multimodal access and safety.

Long vehicle delays and queues at intersections typically increases driver frustration and increases risky driver behavior to rush towards their destination. This frustration and risky driver behavior can increase the likelihood and severity of a motor vehicle collision which can jeopardize the safety of vulnerable users such as bikes and pedestrians.

Roadway facilities with travel times optimized to the intended design speed also improves consistency and access of transit services and emergency vehicle response.

Scenario Analysis Criteria
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
[VISSIM]
Alternative 2
Roundabout
[VISSIM]
Alternative 3
Signal
[Synchro]
NB - N. of Park Ave to S. of Highway 1 SB Ramps 0.62 Travel Distance (mi) Avg Travel Time (sec) 125.4 112.8 162.4
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 5 sec 1 min 53 sec 2 min 42 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 17.6 19.8 15.6
Avg Travel Time (sec) 192 197.4 209.6
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 3 min 12 sec 3 min 17 sec 3 min 30 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 11.5 11.3 11.7
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (sec) 158.70 155.10 186.00
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (min & sec) 2 min 39 sec 2 min 35 sec 3 min 6 sec Avg Daily Traffic (vehicles) 6483 6483 6483
Vehicle Hours Traveled (veh-hr/year) 104,314 101,948 122,259 Scenario Analysis Criteria
Alternative 1
Stop & Road Diet
[VISSIM]
Alternative 2
Roundabout
[VISSIM]
Alternative 3
Signal
[Synchro]
SB - S. of Highway 1 SB Ramps to N. of Park Ave 0.62 Travel Distance (mi) Avg Travel Time (sec) 315.6 132.6 182.8
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 5 min 16 sec 2 min 13 sec 3 min 3 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 7.1 17.0 10.7
Avg Travel Time (sec) 353.4 299.4 185.3
Avg Travel Time (min & sec) 5 min 53 sec 4 min 59 sec 3 min 5 sec Avg Travel Speed (mph) 6.3 7.5 10.3
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (sec) 334.50 216.00 184.05
Avg Peak Hour Travel Time (min & sec) 5 min 35 sec 3 min 36 sec 3 min 4 sec Avg Daily Traffic (vehicles) 8000 8000 8000
Vehicle Hours Traveled (veh-hr/year) 271,317 175,200 149,285 AM Peak
AM Peak
PM Peak
PM Peak
VHT Estimation
VHT Estimation
121
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
40 4.5 Driver Behavior & Drone Video Analysis at Bay/Capitola Intersection The current all-way stop intersection of Bay Avenue / Capitola Avenue was evaluated using aerial video collection by drone and processed using video analytics to observe driver behavior and determine vehicle stopping rate, measured speeds, deceleration, and near miss collisions between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The drone video collection was conducted by Kimley-Horn on Thursday May 16, 2024, when school was in session and during favorable weather conditions, and the data is representative of the AM peak, school mid-day peak, and PM peak commute times. The technical memo and results of the drone video analysis is provided in Attachment E.

The near-miss collision analysis was conducted by calculating the post encroachment time (PET) between vehicles which is the critical or minimum gap between the intersection point of two or more objects on their intended trajectory. For the study, a near-miss collision at the Bay/Capitola is recorded when the PET is equal or less than 1.5 seconds from where objects would collide. A total of 35 near miss-collisions were observed at the Bay/Capitola all-way stop controlled intersection with the most common near miss occurring on Bay Avenue between vehicles making a southbound left turn to access Capitola Avenue and the Gayles driveway and vehicles making a northbound through movement towards Highway 1.

Based on the observed driver behavior and near-miss collisions at the existing all-way stop controlled intersection at Bay/Capitola, the recommended measures to address these intersection challenges may include:
• Convert the intersection into a roundabout. Vehicles entering a roundabout all travel in one direction around a raised center island at a controlled lower speed which reduces the number of conflict points and the severity of potential collisions between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
• Convert the intersection into a signal. Signal control provides clear right-of-way instructions to all users and improve driver certainty when traveling through the intersection.

4.6 Multimodal Safety and Access Improvements
This section provides an overview of the potential long-term roadway improvements that may be implemented along the Bay Avenue corridor to enhance multimodal safety and access. The intersection control investigated for each roadway alternative would introduce geometric changes that would benefit bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Alternative 1: Stop Control and Road Diet
• Road Diet Transition: Converting Bay Avenue from a four-lane to a two-lane roadway reduces vehicle speeds and minimizes the number of lanes pedestrians and cyclists must cross. • Enhanced Pedestrian Crossings: Installation of curb bulb-outs and enhanced pedestrian crossings shortens the crossing distance and increases visibility. • Buffered Class IV Bike Facilities: Adding buffered bike lanes separates cyclists from vehicular traffic, enhancing safety and comfort.
122
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
41 Example road diet and traffic calming features implemented at the existing all-way stop at Bay/Hill (Capitola) Alternative 2: Roundabout
• Reduced Conflict Points: Roundabouts reduce the number of conflict points compared to traditional intersections, lowering the likelihood of collisions. • Slower Vehicle Speeds: Vehicles travel at lower speeds through roundabouts, reducing the severity of any potential collisions.
• Bike and Pedestrian Pathways: The design includes bike lane transitions and curb ramps onto Class I shared bike/ped pathways, providing a safer and more direct route for cyclists and pedestrians.
• Shorter and Protected Crossings: Pedestrians benefit from shorter crossing distances and protected refuge areas within the roundabout design.

Example bike and pedestrian facilities at a roundabout approach (Lafayette) 123
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
42 Alternative 3: Signal
• Signal Control: Traffic signals provide clear right-of-way instructions, thereby improving driver predictability and reducing confusion at intersections. • Designated Crossing Times: Pedestrian signals provide designated crossing times, ensuring safe passage across intersections.
• Buffered Bike Lanes: Similar to Alternative 1, buffered bike lanes protect cyclists from the main traffic stream.
• Pedestrian Countdown Signals: These signals improve pedestrian safety by providing clear timing information for crossing.
• Protected Intersection Design: Installation of curb bulb-outs that separate travel areas and shorten the pedestrian and bicycle crossings improves multimodal safety and access.

Example protected intersection features for bikes and peds at a signalized intersection (Fremont) Other Roadway Considerations and Enhancements
• Class IV protected bikeways: Where possible, restripe the existing Class II bike lanes on Bay Avenue with buffered bike lanes via striping and/or raised bollards to increase the physical separation between the vehicle and bicycle travel lanes. The added comfort and visibility of the bikeway improves bicycle safety along the roadway.
• Mid-block crossings: Where feasible and warranted, install mid-block crossings to enhance pedestrian connectivity and safety. Crossing augmented with median refuge areas, flashing signs, and high contrast striping provides shorter crossing distance and improves visibility to pedestrians crossing the street.
• Landscaped medians: Where feasible, implement raised medians with opportunities for landscaping to enhance the Bay Avenue streetscape in a way that improves the appearance of Bay Avenue, increases safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, and stimulates private investment within the area per the Capitola General Plan.
124
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
43 Example of mid-block crosswalk and buffered bike lanes General Safety Enhancements:
• Traffic Calming Features: All alternatives incorporate traffic calming features like narrower lanes and improved intersection design, which inherently enhance safety for all road users. • Visibility Improvements: Enhanced lighting, signage, and marked crosswalks improve visibility for pedestrians and cyclists, especially at night or during adverse weather conditions. • Collision Mitigation: Historical collision data and near-miss analysis inform the design to specifically address risky driver behaviors and common collision types, further ensuring pedestrian and cyclist safety.

Summary of Safety Benefits:
• Reduced Vehicle Speeds: Slower travel speeds generally lead to decreased collision severity for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians.
• Clear Right-of-Way: Signal and roundabout controls provide structured and predictable movement patterns.
• Protected Space: Buffered and clearly marked spaces for pedestrians and cyclists reduce the risk of conflicts with vehicles.
• Improved Crossings: Shorter and more visible crossing areas make it safer and easier for pedestrians to navigate intersections.
• Enhanced Visibility and Lighting: Increased visibility through better lighting and clear signage reduces the risk of accidents.
125
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
44 5. Corridor Study Conclusions and Recommendations
Table 16 provides a qualitative comparison of the proposed corridor alternatives from an economic, operations, and safety assessment. Based on the analysis results, the study recommends pursuing the roundabout configuration at key intersections for long-term benefits in traffic operations, safety, economic development, and multi-modal accessibility.

Operations
From an intersection operations perspective, the Alternative 2 roundabout configuration would provide the lowest average vehicle LOS delay and shortest average travel time along the Bay Avenue corridor. As a result, improved intersection operations benefit transit and emergency vehicle access. The introduction of roundabouts as a new traffic control in the City would require a longer adjustment period for drivers to adapt to the new infrastructure compared to existing signals or stop control.

The Alternative 1 stop configuration with road diet would result in the worst LOS, longest travel times, and vehicle queues operating similar to the Alternative 0 no build scenario. Forecasted traffic growth from the county travel demand model would cause operation deficiencies with the stop control alternative. With keeping the existing road condition, there is little driver adaptation time.

The Alternative 3 signal configuration would provide acceptable operations for average vehicle delay, queues, and travel time but not to the same level as the roundabout option. It is worth noting that while the LOS would be improved with a signal-controlled intersection, the typical delay for a vehicle to traverse through the intersection would actually increase compared to a roundabout option.

Multimodal Safety
As discussed in Section 4, each potential corridor alternative would introduce geometric changes that would benefit bicycle and pedestrian facilities for safety improvement and access. The Alternative 2 roundabout configuration would have the fewest vehicle conflict points for bikes and pedestrians crossing the street as well as shorter and protected crossings with the roundabout layout introducing raised medians and separated pathways. These features plus slower overall vehicle speeds through the intersection generates the lowest collision severity potential compared to the other alternatives. Based on the observed driver behavior and near-miss collision analysis at the Bay/Capitola all-way stop controlled intersection, a roundabout layout would improve overall safety at the skewed roadway approaches.

The Alternative 1 stop configuration would introduce curb bulb-outs at the stop intersections and road diet traffic calming effects that reduce the crossing distances and enhance visibility of bikes and peds crossing the vehicle conflict areas. These features help reduce the number of vehicle conflict points and provide a moderate safety improvement compared to the roundabout and signal alternatives.

The Alternative 3 signal configuration helps facilitate designated crossing phases for all transportation modes and the infrastructure can be designed with a protected intersection layout to separate and shorten the bike and pedestrian crossings at the corners. These features improve bike and pedestrian access, but the number of vehicle conflict points remains similar with the existing stop layout. For a signal during a green light, vehicles will typically travel at higher speeds than the stop and roundabout alternatives which increases the collision severity potential with more vulnerable users. 126
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
45 Economic Development
For the Alternative 2 roundabout layout to be feasible, substantial infrastructure and construction improvements would be required to convert the existing stop control into a roundabout throughout the corridor. Compared to the other alternatives, the roundabout would have the highest upfront capital costs and potential right-of-way impacts to implement due to the larger geometric footprint needed for designing acceptable operations and the multimodal features. Typical rough order of magnitude (ROM) costs for a single lane roundabout range between $2 to $3.5 million per location. Once constructed however, the roundabout would have lower long-term maintenance costs and better environmental benefits than a signal option due to no electrical equipment, lower vehicle emissions, and opportunities for art and landscaping within the intersection. Grant funding opportunities with roundabouts are also advantageous since many state and federal grant programs are focused on active transportation and improving safety for cyclists and pedestrians which are elements that roundabouts provide.

The Alternative 1 stop layout would have the lowest capital costs, right-of-way impact, and ongoing maintenance compared to the roundabout and signal alternatives. Typical ROM costs for a road diet and traffic calming improvements range between $100,00 to $500,000 per location. Depending on the traffic calming design, aesthetics can also be improved along the streetscape corridor with landscaping and decorative art. Grant funding opportunities with Alternative 1 are also good with the safety benefits to pedestrians and cyclists from the potential road diet and traffic calming features.

The Alternative 3 signal layout would have high capital costs and high ongoing maintenance costs to support the electrical and signal infrastructure compared to the roundabout and stop alternatives.

Typical ROM costs for a signal varies based on the number of travel lanes and approaches and can range between $500,000 to $2 million per location.

Table 16: Qualitative Corridor Operations Summary Comparison Criteria
Alternative 0 –
No Build
Alternative 1 –
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2 –
Roundabout
Alternative 3 -
Signal
Operations
Vehicle Delay
High
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
High
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Low
Yield control reduces
average delay
Moderate
Signal control
reduces average
delay
Vehicle
Travel Time
Long
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Long
Stop control creates
delay for intersection
approaches
Short
Yield control reduces
average delay
Moderate
Signal control
reduces average
delay
Vehicle
Queue
Length
Long
Long queues and
spillback into
adjacent intersection
Long
Long queues and
spillback into
adjacent intersection
Moderate
Yield control
generates average
queues
Moderate
Signal control
generates average
queues
Transit and
Emergency
Vehicle
Access
Improvement
Poor
Slower average travel
times and higher VHT
Poor
Slower average travel
times and higher VHT
Moderate
Faster average travel
times and lower VHT
Moderate
Opportunity for
emergency vehicle
preemption
127
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
46 Criteria
Alternative 0 –
No Build
Alternative 1 –
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2 –
Roundabout
Alternative 3 -
Signal
Driver
Adaptation
Time
Low
Existing conditions
on corridor
Low
Existing conditions
on corridor
High
New traffic control in
City for users
Moderate
Existing conditions
on corridor
Safety
Collision
Severity
Potential
Moderate
Numerous conflict
points with stop
control at
intersection
Moderate
Numerous conflict
points with stop
control at
intersection
Low
Fewer conflict points
and controlled lower
speeds at
intersection
High
Higher vehicle
speeds and
numerous conflict
points at intersection
Bicycle
Access
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Buffered bike lanes
and markings
Good
Buffered bike lanes
and markings.

Shorter and
protected crossings
Moderate
Buffered bike lanes
and markings.

Designated crossing
phases
Pedestrian
Access
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Shorter crossings
with traffic calming
Good
Shorter and
protected crossings
Moderate
Designated crossing
phases
Economic
Capital
Construction
Cost
Low
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Low
Updates to existing
infrastructure
High
New infrastructure
and utility
coordination
High
New infrastructure
and signal equipment
Right of Way
Impact
Low
No change to existing
conditions
Low
Updates to existing
infrastructure
High
Property impacts to
accommodate design
Moderate
New infrastructure
and signal equipment
Operation &
Maintenance
Costs
Low
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Low
Landscaping
Moderate
Landscaping
High
Signal equipment,
electricity
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
Moderate
Vehicle idling with
stop traffic control
Moderate
Vehicle idling with
stop traffic control
Low
Less vehicle idling
with yield traffic
control
Moderate
Higher speeds &
vehicle idling with
signal traffic control
Aesthetics &
Community
Character
Improvement
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Opportunities for art
and landscaping with
traffic calming
Good
Opportunities for art
and landscaping at
intersection
Moderate
Requires signal poles
and cabinets
Grant
Funding
Opportunity
Poor
No Build scenario
would not improve
conditions
Moderate
Multimodal safety
improvement
Good
Multimodal safety
improvement, traffic
congestion
reduction,
environmental
impact
Moderate
Traffic congestion
reduction
128
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
47 Criteria
Alternative 0 –
No Build
Alternative 1 –
Stop & Road Diet
Alternative 2 –
Roundabout
Alternative 3 -
Signal
General
Benefits
• Lower initial
capital cost and
ongoing
maintenance
• Improved driver
certainty
• Lower initial
capital cost
• Improved bike &
ped safety
• Reduction
collision severity
• Improved bike &
ped safety
• Improved
operations
• Reduced GHG
emissions
• Improved
operations &
capacity
• Provides
designated
crossing times
and driver
certainty
General
Challenges
• Decreased
operations
• Increased queues
• Decreased
operations
• Increased queues
• High initial capital
cost and potential
ROW impact
• Driver adaptation
to new traffic
operations
• High capital and
maintenance
costs
• Increased queues
and collision
severity potential

6. Appendix
• Attachment A – Year 2024 Existing Traffic Count Data
• Attachment B – Bike and Pedestrian Collision Data
• Attachment C – VISSIM & SIDRA LOS Results (Stop and Roundabout Alternatives) • Attachment D – Synchro LOS Results (No Build, Stop, and Signal Alternatives) • Attachment E – Existing Intersection Observed Driver Behavior at Bay/Capitola Technical Memo 129
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
Attachment A – Year 2024 Existing Traffic Count Data
130
Item 7 B.

HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 1 BAY AVE & HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 901 623
178
0 482 885
0 859

0.91 N
S
EW

0.81 0.82

0.84 0.00
(1,467) (1,050)
(358)
()
(1,476)
()
(789) (1,490) 4780
0 107
12 59
0 0
0 0
0 423
0369 5160 HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 8
0 9 N
S
W E 4 4
0 0
0 0 8 1
200
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
00 0
2 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 25 0 43 56 0 0 0 52 38 234 1,351 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 40 0 69 68 0 0 0 52 87 331 1,639 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 30 0 91 77 0 0 0 80 99 394 1,848 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 21 0 91 110 0 0 0 64 94 392 1,892 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 23 0 105 158 0 0 0 104 114 522 1,964 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 4 24 0 90 132 0 0 0 147 131 540
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 33 0 87 102 0 0 0 89 113 438
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 20 3 27 0 87 124 0 0 0 83 120 464
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 118 17 223 0 663 827 0 0 0 671 3,315 796 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 59 12 107 0 369 516 0 0 0 423 1,964 478 HV% PHF

0.00 0.82

0.84 0.81

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.2%

0.1% 0.91
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 1 0 1 2
7:15 AM 0 1 1 0 2
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 1 2
8:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 1
Count Total 0 3 1 4 8
Peak Hour 0 0 0 2 2
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2
8:00 AM 0 2 0 4 6
8:15 AM 0 2 0 8 10
8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
Count Total 0 6 0 15 21
Peak Hour 0 6 0 12 18
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 2 0 1 0 3
7:15 AM 0 0 3 0 3
7:30 AM 3 0 0 0 3
7:45 AM 2 0 1 0 3
8:00 AM 4 0 1 0 5
8:15 AM 4 0 2 0 6
8:30 AM 1 0 4 0 5
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 1
Count Total 16 0 13 0 29
Peak Hour 9 0 8 0 17
131
Item 7 B.

HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 2 BAY AVE & HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:00 AM - 08:15 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 481 885
0 287
601 683
609
0 0.92
N
S
EW

0.75 0.00

0.85 0.93
(787) (1,491)
()
(518)
()
(1,001)
(957) (1,178)
00 176
0 0
0 296
0 313
0 0 305
00572 111 HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 7
0 7 N
S
W E 3 4
0 0
0 0 6 1
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 36 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 12 1 32 35 0 220 1,193 7:15 AM 0 50 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 18 0 34 35 0 278 1,455 7:30 AM 0 42 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 31 0 38 58 0 342 1,655 7:45 AM 0 71 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 28 0 38 35 0 353 1,713 8:00 AM 0 96 0 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 35 0 41 75 0 482 1,773 8:15 AM 0 81 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 21 0 56 104 0 478
8:30 AM 0 55 0 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 30 0 33 70 0 400
8:45 AM 0 81 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 125 25 0 46 56 0 413
Count Total 0 512 0 489 0 0 0 0 0 0 978 200 1 318 468 2,966 0 Peak Hour 0 313 0 296 0 0 0 0 0 0 572 111 0 176 305 1,773 0 HV% PHF

0.93 0.00

0.85 0.75

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.92
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1
7:15 AM 0 1 0 0 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 1 2 0 0 3
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2
8:00 AM 0 2 0 4 6
8:15 AM 0 2 0 8 10
8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
Count Total 0 6 0 15 21
Peak Hour 0 6 0 12 18
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 2 0 1 0 3
7:15 AM 1 0 1 0 2
7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 2
7:45 AM 2 0 1 0 3
8:00 AM 3 0 2 0 5
8:15 AM 4 0 2 0 6
8:30 AM 0 0 3 0 3
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 14 0 10 0 24
Peak Hour 7 0 7 0 14
132
Item 7 B.

CROSSROADS LOOP CROSSROADS LOOP BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 3 BAY AVE & CROSSROADS LOOP AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 610 642
15 48
483 585
74 111

0.91 N
S
EW

0.82 0.61

0.86 0.85
(946) (1,098)
(25)
(74)
(185)
(132)
(747) (1,001) 109039
14 1
0 21
0 53
0 0 462
015759 CROSSROADS LOOP CROSSROADS LOOP BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 6
0 5 N
S
W E 3 3
0 0
0 0 2 3
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 61 0 0 2 44 12 130 820
7:15 AM 0 8 0 6 0 1 0 3 0 0 90 1 0 10 60 18 197 1,033
7:30 AM 0 8 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 136 1 0 5 64 26 248 1,187
7:45 AM 0 15 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 1 122 1 0 6 75 14 245 1,248
8:00 AM 0 9 0 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 167 3 0 8 116 31 343 1,284
8:15 AM 0 13 0 10 0 0 0 2 0 0 137 2 0 6 155 26 351
8:30 AM 0 15 0 6 0 0 1 4 0 1 147 2 0 10 94 29 309
8:45 AM 0 16 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 124 2 0 15 97 23 281
Count Total 0 91 0 41 0 1 1 23 0 5 984 12 0 62 705 2,104 179 Peak Hour 0 53 0 21 0 0 1 14 0 1 575 9 0 39 462 1,284 109 HV% PHF

0.85 0.61

0.86 0.82

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.91
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 1 0 0 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 2 0 0 2
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2
8:00 AM 0 2 0 4 6
8:15 AM 0 2 0 8 10
8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
Count Total 0 6 0 15 21
Peak Hour 0 6 0 12 18
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 2 1 0 0 3
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1
7:45 AM 2 0 1 0 3
8:00 AM 1 0 1 0 2
8:15 AM 1 0 2 0 3
8:30 AM 1 0 3 0 4
8:45 AM 2 0 0 0 2
Count Total 10 1 7 0 18
Peak Hour 5 0 6 0 11
133
Item 7 B.

HILL ST HILL ST BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 4 BAY AVE & HILL ST AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 481 585
179
103
423 466
101
116

0.89 N
S
EW

0.73 0.87

0.89 0.87
(745) (1,001)
(318)
(163)
(202)
(170)
(638) (771) 31174
142
28 9
39 19
43 0
0 375
057399 10 HILL ST HILL ST BAY AVE

BAY AVE
8 5
13 8 N
S
W E 3 2
7 6
4 4 6 2
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 10 3 1 0 0 6 18 0 5 37 0 0 10 31 6 127 777
7:15 AM 0 7 2 5 0 2 6 28 0 6 56 0 0 14 42 11 179 976
7:30 AM 0 11 4 5 0 3 5 30 0 11 95 1 0 9 53 3 230 1,141
7:45 AM 0 11 2 8 0 1 7 33 0 12 80 2 0 13 64 8 241 1,209 8:00 AM 0 12 4 10 0 0 11 42 0 13 116 2 0 16 96 4 326 1,227 8:15 AM 0 12 6 9 0 3 5 34 0 15 92 4 1 19 137 7 344
8:30 AM 0 10 2 7 0 1 8 40 0 17 106 3 0 14 81 9 298
8:45 AM 0 9 7 13 0 5 4 26 0 12 85 1 0 25 61 11 259
Count Total 0 82 30 58 0 15 52 251 0 91 667 13 1 120 565 2,004 59 Peak Hour 0 43 19 39 0 9 28 142 0 57 399 10 1 74 375 1,227 31 HV% PHF

0.87 0.87

0.89 0.73

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.89
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 1 0 0 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 2 0 0 2
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 1 0 0 1 2
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2
8:00 AM 0 2 0 4 6
8:15 AM 1 1 0 8 10
8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 2
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 1
Count Total 2 4 2 15 23
Peak Hour 1 4 2 12 19
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 3 2 1 1 7
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1
7:45 AM 2 0 1 1 4
8:00 AM 3 2 0 2 7
8:15 AM 0 3 2 2 7
8:30 AM 1 4 1 3 9
8:45 AM 4 4 2 1 11
Count Total 13 16 7 10 46
Peak Hour 8 13 5 8 34
134
Item 7 B.

CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 5 BAY AVE & CAPITOLA AVE AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 385 424
219
196
272 394
143
249

0.83 N
S
EW

0.67 0.67

0.88 0.89
(581) (708)
(312)
(303)
(364)
(244)
(389) (627) 128074
42 94
83 6
67 70
0 0 183
027312 55 CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE BAY AVE

BAY AVE
8 3
9 6 N
S
W E 0 3
6 3
1 7 3 3
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 12 8 1 0 2 4 5 0 0 18 4 0 10 7 11 82 623
7:15 AM 0 17 10 1 0 2 7 4 0 4 37 8 0 7 24 12 133 821
7:30 AM 0 18 11 0 0 7 13 9 0 0 78 2 0 8 33 15 194 1,032 7:45 AM 0 10 12 1 0 6 24 10 0 6 66 10 0 17 33 19 214 1,118 8:00 AM 0 21 12 4 0 18 21 15 0 3 82 15 0 18 47 24 280 1,141 8:15 AM 0 12 15 1 0 45 26 12 0 5 71 12 0 17 85 43 344
8:30 AM 0 18 20 0 0 15 26 6 0 7 91 14 0 15 36 32 280
8:45 AM 0 19 20 1 0 5 21 9 0 12 68 14 0 24 15 29 237
Count Total 0 127 108 9 0 100 142 70 0 37 511 79 0 116 280 1,764 185 Peak Hour 0 70 67 6 0 83 94 42 0 27 312 55 0 74 183 1,141 128 HV% PHF

0.89 0.67

0.88 0.67

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.83
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 1 0 0 1
7:15 AM 0 0 1 1 2
7:30 AM 0 0 1 2 3
7:45 AM 0 0 0 4 4
8:00 AM 2 0 1 4 7
8:15 AM 1 2 1 12 16
8:30 AM 0 0 1 2 3
8:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1
Count Total 4 3 5 25 37
Peak Hour 4 2 3 18 27
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 1 0 0 1 2
7:15 AM 2 2 1 3 8
7:30 AM 0 1 0 1 2
7:45 AM 0 3 0 0 3
8:00 AM 1 3 0 1 5
8:15 AM 0 1 1 2 4
8:30 AM 3 4 1 4 12
8:45 AM 2 1 1 1 5
Count Total 9 15 4 13 41
Peak Hour 6 9 3 8 26
135
Item 7 B.

MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 6 MONTEREY AVE & MONTEREY AVE AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 07:45 AM - 08:45 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 303 440
369
280
171 219
0 0

0.76 N
S
EW

0.64 0.70

0.73 0.00
(413) (658)
(520)
(374)
()
()
(248) (347)
00 219
282
0 87
0 0
0 0
0 84
00158 61 MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE

BAY AVE
14 12
0 23
N
S
W E 6 6
0 0
4 10 11 12
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 8 0 0 16 5 0 5 5 0 45 412
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 28 0 0 22 4 0 18 5 0 85 560
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 43 0 0 26 7 0 34 10 0 137 768
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 45 0 0 38 6 0 23 17 0 145 891
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 65 0 0 38 9 0 45 24 0 193 868
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 74 0 0 45 31 0 97 21 0 293
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 98 0 0 37 15 0 54 22 0 260
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 33 0 0 42 6 0 15 18 0 122
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 394 0 0 264 83 0 291 122 1,280 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 282 0 0 158 61 0 219 84 0 891
HV% PHF

0.00 0.70

0.73 0.64

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.76
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:15 AM 0 1 2 0 3
7:30 AM 0 0 1 2 3
7:45 AM 0 2 1 5 8
8:00 AM 0 1 1 6 8
8:15 AM 0 3 3 15 21
8:30 AM 0 1 2 4 7
8:45 AM 0 0 1 1 2
Count Total 0 8 11 34 53
Peak Hour 0 7 7 30 44
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 3 0 1 1 5
7:15 AM 5 0 0 3 8
7:30 AM 2 0 2 0 4
7:45 AM 6 0 2 1 9
8:00 AM 6 0 2 5 13
8:15 AM 4 0 5 4 13
8:30 AM 7 0 3 4 14
8:45 AM 8 0 5 6 19
Count Total 41 0 20 24 85
Peak Hour 23 0 12 14 49
136
Item 7 B.

PARK AVE PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 7 MONTEREY AVE & PARK AVE AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 166 223
521
275
540 349
10 8

0.91 N
S
EW

0.75 0.94

0.81 0.63
(248) (347)
(816)
(416)
(12)
(14)
(846) (543)
4041
100
3 418
1 9
0 0
0 121
01123 225

PARK AVE PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE

MONTEREY AVE
3 18
4 29
N
S
W E 6 12
3 1
1 2 12 17
000
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
01 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 8 0 0 13 10 0 0 10 0 76 575
7:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 46 1 12 0 1 13 26 0 1 13 0 114 739
7:30 AM 0 0 1 1 0 71 1 14 0 0 19 34 0 2 24 0 167 912
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 83 1 23 0 0 20 58 0 9 23 0 218 1,028
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 94 2 27 0 1 22 57 0 11 25 1 240 1,046 8:15 AM 0 0 4 0 0 101 0 28 0 0 46 63 0 13 32 0 287
8:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 116 0 22 0 0 30 55 0 12 44 1 283
8:45 AM 0 0 2 1 0 107 1 23 0 0 25 50 0 5 20 2 236
Count Total 0 2 10 2 0 653 6 157 0 2 188 353 0 53 191 1,621 4 Peak Hour 0 0 9 1 0 418 3 100 0 1 123 225 0 41 121 1,046 4 HV% PHF

0.63 0.94

0.81 0.75

0.0%

0.2%

0.0%

0.0%

0.1% 0.91
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 1 0 1
Peak Hour 0 0 1 0 1
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 1 1 2
7:15 AM 0 0 2 1 3
7:30 AM 0 5 2 0 7
7:45 AM 0 2 2 1 5
8:00 AM 0 6 2 3 11
8:15 AM 0 4 6 1 11
8:30 AM 0 4 2 0 6
8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 1
Count Total 0 21 17 8 46
Peak Hour 0 14 10 5 29
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 5 1 1 0 7
7:15 AM 6 1 3 1 11
7:30 AM 3 1 4 2 10
7:45 AM 7 2 2 3 14
8:00 AM 7 2 2 0 11
8:15 AM 4 1 8 0 13
8:30 AM 8 0 4 2 14
8:45 AM 10 1 4 1 16
Count Total 50 9 28 9 96
Peak Hour 29 4 18 3 54
137
Item 7 B.

HILL ST HILL ST CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 8 CAPITOLA AVE & HILL ST AM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 08:00 AM - 09:00 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 08:15 AM - 08:30 AM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 284 184
109
41 199 134
84 187

0.77 N
S
EW

0.71 0.78

0.88 0.66
(439) (288)
(164)
(57)
(325)
(137)
(279) (209) 102013
44 54
11 19
23 42
0 0 169
031985 HILL ST HILL ST CAPITOLA AVE

CAPITOLA AVE
2 6
3 4 N
S
W E 3 3
1 2
1 1 3 1
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 7:00 AM 0 9 0 3 0 0 3 4 0 2 8 0 0 2 9 18 58 338
7:15 AM 0 10 3 1 0 0 11 3 0 6 14 1 0 2 13 19 83 428
7:30 AM 0 8 4 0 0 1 12 3 0 8 10 1 0 0 20 21 88 543
7:45 AM 0 12 2 1 0 1 13 4 0 6 19 0 0 1 31 19 109 605
8:00 AM 0 7 6 4 0 3 19 14 0 9 18 1 0 0 37 30 148 611
8:15 AM 0 13 12 7 0 5 9 13 0 11 27 0 0 10 75 16 198
8:30 AM 0 12 1 3 0 1 17 14 0 4 27 3 0 2 33 33 150
8:45 AM 0 10 4 5 0 2 9 3 0 7 26 1 0 1 24 23 115
Count Total 0 81 32 24 0 13 93 58 0 53 149 7 0 18 242 179 949 Peak Hour 0 42 23 19 0 11 54 44 0 31 98 5 0 13 169 102 611 HV% PHF

0.66 0.78

0.88 0.71

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.77
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 1
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 1 1 1 2 5
8:15 AM 1 1 0 4 6
8:30 AM 0 0 1 2 3
8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 1
Count Total 2 2 2 11 17
Peak Hour 2 2 2 9 15
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
7:00 AM 1 0 3 2 6
7:15 AM 0 2 2 1 5
7:30 AM 0 0 3 0 3
7:45 AM 0 0 7 0 7
8:00 AM 3 1 1 1 6
8:15 AM 0 2 3 1 6
8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 2 0 2
Count Total 5 5 21 5 36
Peak Hour 4 3 6 2 15
138
Item 7 B.

HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 1 BAY AVE & HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 958 594
303
0 749 689
0 607

0.95 N
S
EW

0.97 0.92

0.84 0.00
(1,819) (1,195)
(602)
()
(1,153)
()
(1,394) (1,321) 3160
0 195
1 107
0 0
0 0
0 642
0290 3990 HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 NB RAMPS BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 4
0 8 N
S
W E 1 3
0 0
0 0 5 3
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
10 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0010
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 51 0 88 116 0 0 0 154 70 511 1,950 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 1 48 0 69 100 0 0 0 169 84 494 1,948 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 43 0 64 82 0 0 0 157 83 452 1,935 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 53 0 69 101 0 0 0 162 79 493 1,883 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 58 0 73 103 0 0 0 167 83 509 1,792 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 68 0 50 102 0 0 0 170 72 481
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 47 0 65 83 0 0 0 117 68 400
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 43 0 59 97 0 0 0 108 76 402
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 190 1 411 0 537 784 0 0 0 1,204 3,742 615 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 107 1 195 0 290 399 0 0 0 642 1,950 316 HV% PHF

0.00 0.92

0.84 0.97

0.0%

0.0%

0.1%

0.0%

0.1% 0.95
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 1 0 1 2
Peak Hour 0 1 0 0 1
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 2 2
4:15 PM 0 1 0 2 3
4:30 PM 0 0 0 3 3
4:45 PM 0 3 0 1 4
5:00 PM 0 2 0 1 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 4 4
Count Total 0 6 0 15 21
Peak Hour 0 4 0 8 12
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 1 0 3 0 4
4:15 PM 5 0 0 0 5
4:30 PM 1 0 1 0 2
4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 3
5:15 PM 0 0 6 0 6
5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2
Count Total 10 0 14 0 24
Peak Hour 8 0 4 0 12
139
Item 7 B.

HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 2 BAY AVE & HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 747 691
0 575
818 548
789
0 0.92
N
S
EW

0.96 0.00

0.76 0.96
(1,394) (1,328)
()
(1,102)
()
(1,578)
(1,551) (1,009)
00 276
0 0
0 347
208
234
0 0 471
00457 91 HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS HIGHWAY 1 SB RAMPS BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 4
0 6 N
S
W E 1 3
0 0
0 0 3 3
000
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
11 1
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0010
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 56 57 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 30 0 58 132 0 567 2,084 4:15 PM 0 52 52 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 19 0 71 120 0 519 2,048 4:30 PM 0 53 57 82 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 25 0 74 109 0 488 2,034 4:45 PM 0 73 42 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 17 0 73 110 0 510 1,998 5:00 PM 0 60 53 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 114 27 0 72 125 0 531 1,897 5:15 PM 0 67 53 92 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 20 0 83 100 0 505
5:30 PM 0 49 56 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 13 0 52 91 0 452
5:45 PM 0 75 40 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 15 0 43 81 0 409
Count Total 0 485 410 683 0 0 0 0 0 0 843 166 0 526 868 3,981 0 Peak Hour 0 234 208 347 0 0 0 0 0 0 457 91 0 276 471 2,084 0 HV% PHF

0.96 0.00

0.76 0.96

0.1%

0.0%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1% 0.92
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 1 1 0 1 3
Peak Hour 1 1 0 0 2
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 2 2
4:15 PM 0 1 0 2 3
4:30 PM 0 0 0 3 3
4:45 PM 0 3 0 1 4
5:00 PM 0 2 0 1 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 4 4
Count Total 0 6 0 15 21
Peak Hour 0 4 0 8 12
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 2
4:15 PM 4 0 1 0 5
4:30 PM 1 0 1 0 2
4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 3
5:15 PM 0 0 5 0 5
5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2
Count Total 8 0 13 0 21
Peak Hour 6 0 4 0 10
140
Item 7 B.

CROSSROADS LOOP CROSSROADS LOOP BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 3 BAY AVE & CROSSROADS LOOP PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 791 498
42 61
671 425
89 117

0.87 N
S
EW

0.96 0.62

0.77 0.82
(1,524) (932)
(73)
(103)
(199)
(155)
(1,329) (811) 112050
37 1
4 38
2 49
0 0 629
044129 CROSSROADS LOOP CROSSROADS LOOP BAY AVE

BAY AVE
0 3
0 3 N
S
W E 0 3
0 0
0 0 0 3
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
11 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 1
0010
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 14 1 10 0 1 1 15 0 0 135 3 0 11 151 43 385 1,347 4:15 PM 0 15 1 11 0 2 0 8 0 1 91 0 0 13 165 25 332 1,306 4:30 PM 0 9 0 8 0 1 0 7 0 0 93 5 0 13 140 30 306 1,286
4:45 PM 0 11 0 9 0 0 0 7 0 3 93 1 0 13 173 14 324 1,287 5:00 PM 0 16 0 7 0 0 0 12 0 1 100 3 0 8 170 27 344 1,216 5:15 PM 0 11 0 8 0 3 0 3 0 1 87 2 0 10 175 12 312
5:30 PM 0 6 0 10 0 4 0 4 0 1 94 2 0 10 160 16 307
5:45 PM 0 7 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 2 91 2 0 5 119 21 253
Count Total 0 89 2 64 0 12 2 59 0 9 784 18 0 83 1,253 2,563 188 Peak Hour 0 49 2 38 0 4 1 37 0 4 412 9 0 50 629 1,347 112 HV% PHF

0.82 0.62

0.77 0.96

0.0%

0.0%

0.2%

0.1%

0.1% 0.87
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 0 1 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 1 0 1 2
Peak Hour 0 1 0 1 2
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 1 2 3
4:15 PM 1 0 0 2 3
4:30 PM 0 0 0 3 3
4:45 PM 0 4 0 1 5
5:00 PM 0 2 0 1 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 1 4 5
Count Total 1 6 2 15 24
Peak Hour 1 4 1 8 14
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 1
4:30 PM 2 0 1 0 3
4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:00 PM 0 0 3 0 3
5:15 PM 0 0 5 0 5
5:30 PM 3 0 0 0 3
5:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2
Count Total 6 0 13 0 19
Peak Hour 3 0 3 0 6
141
Item 7 B.

HILL ST HILL ST BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 4 BAY AVE & HILL ST PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 669 424
127
212
576 323
221
128

0.89 N
S
EW

0.98 0.84

0.75 0.79
(1,329) (810)
(231)
(404)
(246)
(390)
(1,120) (630) 490 146
76 33
18 84
45 92
0 0 474
046256 21 HILL ST HILL ST BAY AVE

BAY AVE
5 1
12 3 N
S
W E 1 0
4 8
3 2 2 1
010
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 1
10 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0010
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 30 12 28 0 5 11 22 0 16 85 7 0 35 113 12 376 1,340 4:15 PM 0 19 12 19 0 4 11 17 0 6 57 6 0 37 129 14 331 1,293 4:30 PM 0 20 11 20 0 5 7 25 0 12 52 4 0 35 101 12 304 1,278 4:45 PM 0 23 10 17 0 4 4 12 0 12 62 4 0 39 131 11 329 1,289 5:00 PM 0 24 7 18 0 2 6 15 0 10 69 0 0 43 122 13 329 1,240 5:15 PM 0 18 5 23 0 3 6 14 0 13 53 1 1 44 128 7 316
5:30 PM 0 11 10 12 0 2 7 19 0 13 68 2 0 35 127 9 315
5:45 PM 0 15 11 15 0 4 11 15 0 12 64 2 0 32 88 11 280
Count Total 0 160 78 152 0 29 63 139 0 94 510 26 1 300 939 2,580 89 Peak Hour 0 92 45 84 0 18 33 76 0 46 256 21 0 146 474 1,340 49 HV% PHF

0.79 0.84

0.75 0.98

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

0.1%

0.1% 0.89
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 0 1 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 1 0 1 2
Peak Hour 0 1 0 1 2
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 2 2
4:15 PM 0 0 0 2 2
4:30 PM 1 0 0 3 4
4:45 PM 2 2 2 1 7
5:00 PM 0 3 0 1 4
5:15 PM 1 0 0 2 3
5:30 PM 3 0 1 0 4
5:45 PM 0 0 0 4 4
Count Total 7 5 3 15 30
Peak Hour 3 2 2 8 15
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 6 0 2 8
4:15 PM 1 1 0 1 3
4:30 PM 1 2 1 2 6
4:45 PM 1 3 0 0 4
5:00 PM 0 4 7 0 11
5:15 PM 1 7 2 2 12
5:30 PM 1 0 1 2 4
5:45 PM 0 4 1 0 5
Count Total 5 27 12 9 53
Peak Hour 3 12 1 5 21
142
Item 7 B.

CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE BAY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 5 BAY AVE & CAPITOLA AVE PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 517 303
164
163
406 252
164
225

0.89 N
S
EW

0.94 0.91

0.82 0.90
(1,002) (584)
(311)
(335)
(447)
(337)
(775) (491) 124056
31 72
61 8
84 72
0 0 337
029200 23 CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE BAY AVE

BAY AVE
9 2
13 5 N
S
W E 2 0
6 7
5 4 3 2
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 28 23 4 0 19 14 12 0 6 66 5 0 18 80 34 309 1,097 4:15 PM 0 16 19 1 0 16 21 4 0 9 40 11 0 13 91 29 270 1,064 4:30 PM 0 11 19 1 0 13 21 10 0 6 45 2 0 13 71 29 241 1,063 4:45 PM 0 17 23 2 0 13 16 5 0 8 49 5 0 12 95 32 277 1,090 5:00 PM 0 22 14 6 0 14 26 5 0 7 47 11 0 19 74 31 276 1,044 5:15 PM 0 14 24 5 0 13 19 7 0 8 42 5 0 22 83 27 269
5:30 PM 0 19 18 3 0 12 18 6 0 6 51 5 0 12 86 32 268
5:45 PM 0 24 22 2 0 4 16 7 0 9 37 11 0 9 67 23 231
Count Total 0 151 162 24 0 104 151 56 0 59 377 55 0 118 647 2,141 237 Peak Hour 0 72 84 8 0 61 72 31 0 29 200 23 0 56 337 1,097 124 HV% PHF

0.90 0.91

0.82 0.94

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.89
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 2 5 0 1 8
4:15 PM 0 3 2 1 6
4:30 PM 0 0 1 4 5
4:45 PM 0 2 1 2 5
5:00 PM 0 2 1 2 5
5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 2
5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 1 5 6
Count Total 2 12 7 17 38
Peak Hour 2 10 4 8 24
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 3 2 4 9
4:15 PM 2 2 0 1 5
4:30 PM 2 7 0 2 11
4:45 PM 1 1 0 2 4
5:00 PM 4 4 2 2 12
5:15 PM 2 5 1 3 11
5:30 PM 2 2 2 2 8
5:45 PM 2 3 4 1 10
Count Total 15 27 11 17 70
Peak Hour 5 13 2 9 29
143
Item 7 B.

MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE BAY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 6 MONTEREY AVE & MONTEREY AVE PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 05:00 PM - 05:15 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 439 228
139
389
170 209
0 0

0.98 N
S
EW

0.96 0.71

0.93 0.00
(829) (444)
(274)
(723)
()
()
(331) (395)
00 304
104
0 35
0 0
0 0
0 135
00124 85 MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE

BAY AVE
21 19
0 24
N
S
W E 11 8
0 0
16 5 17 7
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 40 0 0 26 17 0 63 39 0 201 753
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 26 0 0 32 15 0 78 43 0 200 753
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 18 0 0 24 21 0 63 27 0 158 748
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 17 0 0 33 23 0 78 36 0 194 787
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 36 0 0 28 17 0 81 26 0 201 745
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 22 0 0 31 24 0 70 42 0 195
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 29 0 0 32 21 0 75 31 0 197
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 20 0 0 30 21 0 56 21 0 152
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 208 0 0 236 159 0 564 265 1,498 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 104 0 0 124 85 0 304 135 0 787 HV% PHF

0.00 0.71

0.93 0.96

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.98
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 7 2 9
4:15 PM 0 0 6 1 7
4:30 PM 0 1 0 4 5
4:45 PM 0 1 3 2 6
5:00 PM 0 1 1 1 3
5:15 PM 0 1 2 2 5
5:30 PM 0 0 3 1 4
5:45 PM 0 1 0 2 3
Count Total 0 5 22 15 42
Peak Hour 0 3 9 6 18
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 7 0 3 5 15
4:15 PM 3 0 6 2 11
4:30 PM 6 0 0 2 8
4:45 PM 3 0 5 3 11
5:00 PM 7 0 5 3 15
5:15 PM 10 0 8 11 29
5:30 PM 4 0 1 4 9
5:45 PM 7 1 1 4 13
Count Total 47 1 29 34 111
Peak Hour 24 0 19 21 64
144
Item 7 B.

PARK AVE PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE MONTEREY AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 7 MONTEREY AVE & PARK AVE PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:15 PM - 04:30 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 176 192
245
593
289 647
11 5

0.96 N
S
EW

0.81 0.94

0.97 0.44
(331) (396)
(466)
(1,142)
(6)
(43)
(541) (1,245)
1092
39 3
203
3 3
5 0
0 83
01148 498

PARK AVE PARK AVE MONTEREY AVE

MONTEREY AVE
19 29
7 34
N
S
W E 14 15
5 2
13 6 19 15
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 4 1 0 0 51 0 6 0 0 34 128 0 22 31 1 278 1,079 4:15 PM 0 0 0 3 0 57 0 10 0 0 37 122 0 27 24 0 280 1,063 4:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 47 3 7 0 0 37 130 0 20 11 0 257 1,040 4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 48 0 16 0 1 40 118 0 23 17 0 264 1,036 5:00 PM 0 7 9 2 0 53 0 10 0 0 27 116 0 19 19 0 262 1,006 5:15 PM 0 2 5 1 0 41 0 12 0 0 42 108 0 27 19 0 257
5:30 PM 0 0 5 0 0 40 0 10 0 0 42 114 0 21 20 1 253
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 42 0 13 0 0 39 110 0 14 15 0 234
Count Total 0 14 23 6 0 379 3 84 0 1 298 946 0 173 156 2,085 2 Peak Hour 0 5 3 3 0 203 3 39 0 1 148 498 0 92 83 1,079 1 HV% PHF

0.44 0.94

0.97 0.81

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.96
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 2 2 2 6
4:15 PM 0 1 1 2 4
4:30 PM 0 1 2 3 6
4:45 PM 0 6 0 3 9
5:00 PM 0 3 2 1 6
5:15 PM 0 2 5 1 8
5:30 PM 0 4 1 2 7
5:45 PM 1 1 1 0 3
Count Total 1 20 14 14 49
Peak Hour 0 10 5 10 25
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 7 1 4 2 14
4:15 PM 5 0 10 3 18
4:30 PM 12 6 7 7 32
4:45 PM 10 0 8 7 25
5:00 PM 6 2 16 2 26
5:15 PM 5 3 9 0 17
5:30 PM 11 1 0 7 19
5:45 PM 10 0 3 5 18
Count Total 66 13 57 33 169
Peak Hour 34 7 29 19 89
145
Item 7 B.

HILL ST HILL ST CAPITOLA AVE CAPITOLA AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 8 CAPITOLA AVE & HILL ST PM
Date: Thursday, March 7, 2024
Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Motorized Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour
Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 04:15 PM - 04:30 PM
Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles, Bicycles on Road, and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 186 238
55 73
140 120
198
108

0.94 N
S
EW

0.86 0.74

0.95 0.90
(360) (472)
(97)
(149)
(201)
(386)
(277) (256) 68020
19 25
11 31
42 125
0 0 98
0159411 HILL ST HILL ST CAPITOLA AVE

CAPITOLA AVE
1 5
4 2 N
S
W E 4 1
0 4
1 0 1 1
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 N
S
W E
0 0 0
0000
Interval
Start Time Left Thru Right Total
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
U-Turn
Rolling
U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Hour 4:00 PM 0 38 8 6 0 3 3 3 0 8 26 1 0 5 25 19 145 559
4:15 PM 0 29 11 11 0 0 9 6 0 1 24 4 0 4 29 21 149 551
4:30 PM 0 30 10 6 0 3 7 2 0 2 18 1 0 2 28 16 125 547
4:45 PM 0 28 13 8 0 5 6 8 0 4 26 5 0 9 16 12 140 559
5:00 PM 0 22 15 13 0 1 5 4 0 7 25 2 1 4 28 10 137 540
5:15 PM 0 35 17 4 0 2 6 2 0 4 28 2 0 5 29 11 145
5:30 PM 0 28 11 2 0 1 5 4 0 3 32 2 0 3 28 18 137
5:45 PM 0 23 12 6 0 3 7 2 0 1 28 2 0 1 20 16 121
Count Total 0 233 97 56 0 18 48 31 0 30 207 19 1 33 203 1,099 123 Peak Hour 0 125 42 31 0 11 25 19 0 15 94 11 0 20 98 68 559 HV% PHF

0.90 0.74

0.95 0.86

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0% 0.94
EB
WB
NB
SB
All
Interval Heavy Vehicles
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
Interval Bicycles on Roadway
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 0 0 1 1
4:15 PM 0 2 0 3 5
4:30 PM 0 1 0 1 2
4:45 PM 0 0 2 1 3
5:00 PM 0 2 0 2 4
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1
5:30 PM 3 0 0 2 5
5:45 PM 0 2 0 1 3
Count Total 4 7 2 11 24
Peak Hour 0 3 2 6 11
Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk
Start Time EB NB WB SB Total
4:00 PM 0 2 1 0 3
4:15 PM 0 0 2 0 2
4:30 PM 1 1 1 0 3
4:45 PM 1 1 1 1 4
5:00 PM 0 3 2 1 6
5:15 PM 0 4 4 2 10
5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 2 3 0 5
Count Total 2 15 14 4 35
Peak Hour 2 4 5 1 12
146
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave S.O Center St
Site Number: 14
Start Date:

End Date:
1 NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 9 6 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 1 4 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 2 8 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 5 8 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 6 7 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 44 35 79 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 123 60 183 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 286 207 493 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 440 414 854 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 352 325 677 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 343 368 711 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 383 400 783 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 399 406 805 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 358 409 767 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 340 457 797 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 448 435 883 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 307 548 855 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 279 498 777 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 275 344 619 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 169 190 359 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 121 143 264 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 66 90 156 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 32 30 62 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 13 23 36 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - 9:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 849 681 1530 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 1034 1481 2515 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 4333 4871 9204 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 4801 5415 10216 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - 47.0% 53.0% 100.0% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AM Peak - - - - - - 8:00 AM 9:00 AM - - - - - -
PM Peak - - - - - - 3:00 PM 4:00 PM - - - - - -
7 Day Avg
Vehicle Volume Report - Hourly
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Time
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 3 Day Avg 5 Day Avg 3/10/24 Tue-Thu Mon-Fri Mon-Sun 3/11/24 3/12/24 3/13/24 3/7/24 3/8/24 3/9/24 0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500 Northbound / Eastbound Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 0 100
200
300
400
500
600
Southbound / Westbound Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

147
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave S.O Center St
Site Number: 14 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:

Average Speed 25.9 mph 26.5 mph
50th Percentile 26.0 mph 26.7 mph
85th Percentile 29.6 mph 30.6 mph
95th Percentile 32.2 mph 33.3 mph
Total 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ Northbound 4801 22 52 183 1617 2314 544 60 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 0.5% 1.1% 3.8% 33.7% 48.2% 11.3% 1.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Southbound 5415 51 59 210 1446 2657 878 103 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 0.9% 1.1% 3.9% 26.7% 49.1% 16.2% 1.9% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Total 10216 73 111 393 3063 4971 1422 163 16 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 0.7% 1.1% 3.8% 30.0% 48.7% 13.9% 1.6% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Speed Range (MPH) - Total Study
Vehicle Speed Report - Hourly
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Total Study Speed Summary
Northbound Southbound

148
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave S.O Center St
Site Number: 14 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Thursday
3/7/24 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ 12:00 AM 9 1 0 1 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 AM 5 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 AM 6 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 AM 44 0 0 1 11 19 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM 123 0 0 2 41 55 23 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 286 1 2 6 86 161 27 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 440 1 4 12 157 225 38 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 AM 352 0 2 16 137 163 32 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 AM 343 1 1 5 77 156 77 20 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 AM 383 2 8 16 117 197 39 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 399 2 4 24 139 186 41 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 PM 358 3 6 11 138 165 32 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 PM 340 2 5 15 134 140 39 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM 448 0 5 20 178 205 39 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 307 1 4 18 80 159 40 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 279 2 4 9 79 148 36 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 275 1 4 16 105 126 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 169 1 0 5 67 84 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 PM 121 3 0 3 38 58 15 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 PM 66 1 1 1 18 35 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 PM 32 0 1 2 5 18 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 PM 13 0 1 0 4 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM - 9:00 AM 2 6 20 284 441 88 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 3 13 47 337 512 115 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM 16 49 170 1468 2086 486 51 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM 22 52 183 1617 2314 544 60 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 0.5% 1.1% 3.8% 33.7% 48.2% 11.3% 1.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50th Percentile 26.0 mph
85th Percentile 29.6 mph
95th Percentile 32.2 mph
4333
Vehicle Speed Report (Northbound - 03/07/2024)
Northbound
Total
849
1034
4801
100%

149
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave S.O Center St
Site Number: 14 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Thursday
3/7/24 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ 12:00 AM 6 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 AM 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 AM 8 0 0 0 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 AM 8 0 0 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 AM 7 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 AM 35 0 0 2 8 14 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM 60 0 0 0 7 34 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 207 0 1 5 47 98 51 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 414 4 9 43 124 186 44 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 AM 325 1 1 11 99 151 59 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 AM 368 0 1 14 52 150 116 29 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 AM 400 2 3 14 95 218 61 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 406 1 6 15 100 209 69 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 PM 409 2 2 6 85 232 73 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 PM 457 3 6 18 146 225 55 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM 435 2 2 15 109 244 62 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 548 10 11 29 172 257 64 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 498 22 9 23 162 213 61 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 344 2 2 4 100 181 48 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 190 1 1 4 52 103 27 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 PM 143 1 3 3 48 63 23 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 PM 90 0 0 4 27 43 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 PM 30 0 0 0 5 14 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 PM 23 0 2 0 2 10 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM - 9:00 AM 4 10 48 178 318 108 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 34 22 67 443 714 187 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM 49 53 197 1298 2398 776 90 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM 51 59 210 1446 2657 878 103 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 0.9% 1.1% 3.9% 26.7% 49.1% 16.2% 1.9% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50th Percentile 26.7 mph
85th Percentile 30.6 mph
95th Percentile 33.3 mph
1481
4871
5415
100%
Vehicle Speed Report (Southbound - 03/07/2024)
Southbound
Total
681

150
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave N.O Del Monte Ave
Site Number: 15
Start Date:

End Date:
1 NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 3 7 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 2 2 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 0 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 2 4 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 4 1 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 21 9 30 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 65 22 87 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 212 115 327 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 371 292 663 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 226 123 349 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 205 146 351 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 218 157 375 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 205 199 404 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 220 192 412 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 220 278 498 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 299 323 622 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 222 427 649 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 217 390 607 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 186 227 413 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 104 105 209 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 68 79 147 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 42 53 95 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 22 17 39 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 11 13 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - 9:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 648 429 1077 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 738 1140 1878 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM - - - - - - - - - 2866 2891 5757 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM - - - - - - - - - 3145 3182 6327 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - 49.7% 50.3% 100.0% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AM Peak - - - - - - 8:00 AM 9:00 AM - - - - - -
PM Peak - - - - - - 4:00 PM 5:00 PM - - - - - -
7 Day Avg
Vehicle Volume Report - Hourly
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Time
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 3 Day Avg 5 Day Avg 3/10/24 Tue-Thu Mon-Fri Mon-Sun 3/11/24 3/12/24 3/13/24 3/7/24 3/8/24 3/9/24 0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400 Northbound / Eastbound Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 0 50 100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Southbound / Westbound Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

151
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave N.O Del Monte Ave
Site Number: 15 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:

Average Speed 25.2 mph 26.7 mph
50th Percentile 25.5 mph 27.0 mph
85th Percentile 29.4 mph 30.7 mph
95th Percentile 32.1 mph 33.4 mph
Total 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ Northbound 3145 66 39 179 1108 1372 345 30 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 2.1% 1.2% 5.7% 35.2% 43.6% 11.0% 1.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Southbound 3182 39 35 100 759 1630 552 56 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 1.2% 1.1% 3.1% 23.9% 51.2% 17.3% 1.8% 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Total 6327 105 74 279 1867 3002 897 86 11 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 100.0% 1.7% 1.2% 4.4% 29.5% 47.4% 14.2% 1.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Speed Range (MPH) - Total Study
Vehicle Speed Report - Hourly
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Total Study Speed Summary
Northbound Southbound

152
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave N.O Del Monte Ave
Site Number: 15 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Thursday
3/7/24 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ 12:00 AM 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 AM 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 AM 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 AM 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 AM 21 0 0 0 1 9 7 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM 65 0 1 3 14 35 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 212 0 2 6 66 107 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 371 5 7 38 186 111 22 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 AM 226 0 1 10 101 94 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 AM 205 0 2 10 77 89 24 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 AM 218 0 2 11 92 91 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 205 0 4 24 76 87 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 PM 220 0 3 18 66 113 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 PM 220 1 1 6 82 105 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM 299 59 14 25 89 83 27 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 222 0 2 10 48 119 40 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 217 1 0 5 61 112 37 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 186 0 0 7 71 87 19 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 PM 104 0 0 3 38 51 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 PM 68 0 0 1 15 37 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 PM 42 0 0 0 15 22 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 PM 22 0 0 0 5 11 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 PM 11 0 0 0 2 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM - 9:00 AM 5 10 47 266 253 65 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 60 16 40 198 314 104 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM 66 39 173 1029 1233 304 17 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM 66 39 179 1108 1372 345 30 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 2.1% 1.2% 5.7% 35.2% 43.6% 11.0% 1.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50th Percentile 25.5 mph
85th Percentile 29.4 mph
95th Percentile 32.1 mph
2866
Vehicle Speed Report (Northbound - 03/07/2024)
Northbound
Total
648
738
3145
100%

153
Item 7 B.

Site Description: Bay Ave N.O Del Monte Ave
Site Number: 15 1 1
Start Date:

End Date:
03/07/2024
03/07/2024
Thursday
3/7/24 0-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85-90 90-95 95-100 100+ 12:00 AM 7 0 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1:00 AM 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:00 AM 4 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 AM 9 0 0 0 1 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM 22 0 0 1 3 11 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 115 0 2 2 19 64 26 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 292 32 10 22 75 132 17 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 AM 123 0 1 6 33 67 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 AM 146 1 1 2 36 84 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 AM 157 0 3 3 35 96 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 199 2 1 11 53 101 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 PM 192 0 1 6 41 103 34 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 PM 278 0 4 6 94 134 38 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM 323 4 4 13 91 144 61 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 427 0 2 9 76 230 100 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 390 0 3 6 71 209 81 16 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 PM 227 0 0 10 58 107 47 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 105 0 1 1 29 58 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 PM 79 0 0 0 24 37 15 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:00 PM 53 0 0 1 13 29 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10:00 PM 17 0 0 1 4 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:00 PM 13 0 0 0 1 6 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM - 9:00 AM 32 12 25 97 207 49 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 4 9 28 238 583 242 30 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 AM - 7:00 PM 39 32 97 685 1482 497 49 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 AM - 12:00 AM 39 35 100 759 1630 552 56 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent 1.2% 1.1% 3.1% 23.9% 51.2% 17.3% 1.8% 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50th Percentile 27.0 mph
85th Percentile 30.7 mph
95th Percentile 33.4 mph
1140
2891
3182
100%
Vehicle Speed Report (Southbound - 03/07/2024)
Southbound
Total
429

154
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
Attachment B – Bike and Pedestrian Collision Data
155
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
Overview
This report was created with the help of The Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS has been developed by UC Berkeley SafeTREC to provide quick, easy and free access to California crash data, the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), that has been geo-coded by SafeTREC to make it easy to map crashes.

Result
Query by Case ID(s)
User Entered SWITRS Case ID(s)
Total Crashes
Total Victims
State Highway
Ped Involved
Bike Involved
Motorcycle Involved
37 1 Killed & 38 Injured
1 (2.7%)
8 (21.6%)
11 (29.7%)
1 (2.7%)
37 of 37 (100%) Crashes are geocoded and mapped.

Map data ©2024 Google Report a map error
156
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
Crash Summary
By Crash Severity
By Crash Type
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Crash Severity
37 Crashes
11%
57% 30%
1 - Fatal 2 - Injury (Severe)
3 - Injury (Other Visible) 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain) Crash Severity
1 - Fatal 2 - Injury (Seve…3 - Injury (Othe…4 - Injury (Com… 0 5
10 15
20 25
Crash Severity Count %
1 - Fatal 1 2.70%
2 - Injury (Severe) 4 10.81%
3 - Injury (Other
Visible)
11 29.73%
4 - Injury (Complaint of
Pain)
21 56.76%
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Type of Crash
37 Crashes
11%
19%
27%
19%
16%
- - Not Stated A - Head-On B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End D - Broadside E - Hit Object
F - Overturned G - Vehicle/Pedestrian H - Other
Type of Crash
- - Not Stated
A - Head-On
B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End
D - Broadside
E - Hit Object
F - Overturned
G - Vehicle/Ped…
H - Other
0 10
5 15
Type of Crash Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - Head-On 2 5.41%
B - Sideswipe 4 10.81%
C - Rear End 7 18.92%
D - Broadside 10 27.03%
E - Hit Object 0 0.00%
F - Overturned 1 2.70%
G - Vehicle/Pedestrian 7 18.92%
H - Other 6 16.22%
157
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
By Day of Week and Time
By Primary Crash Factor (PCF) Violation
Number of Crashes per Day of Week per Time
37 Crashes
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 1 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 2 1 1 0
3 1 1 1 1 3 2
0 0 0 3 1 1 0
2 0 1 0 2 2 1
0 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
2 3
1 - Monday 2 - Tuesday 3 - Wednesday 4 - Thursday 5 - Friday 6 - Saturday 7 - Sunday 00:00~02:59
03:00~05:59
06:00~08:59
09:00~11:59
12:00~14:59
15:00~17:59
18:00~20:59
21:00~23:59
25:00 - Unknown
Number of Crashes by PCF Violation
34 Crashes
1 1 (2.94%)
9 9 (26.47%)
1 1 (2.94%)
1 1 (2.94%)
11 (2.94%)
1 1 (2.94%)
4 4 (11.76%)
55 (14.71%)
22 (5.88%)
1 1 (2.94%)
11 (2.94%)
22 (5.88%)
1 1 (2.94%)
22 (5.88%)
2 2 (5.88%) 01 - Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drug 03 - Unsafe Speed
04 - Following Too Closely
05 - Wrong Side of Road
06 - Improper Passing
07 - Unsafe Lane Change
08 - Improper Turning
09 - Automobile Right of Way
10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
11 - Pedestrian Violation
12 - Traffic Signals and Signs
17 - Other Hazardous Violation
18 - Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian)
21 - Unsafe Starting or Backing
22 - Other Improper Driving
PCF Violation
158
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
Victim Summary
By Victim Degree of Injury
By Victim Role
No. of Crashes
Number of Victims by Victim Degree of Injury
39 Victims
10%
28% 59%
1 - Killed 5 - Suspected Serious Injury
6 - Suspected Minor Injury 7 - Possible Injury
Victim Degree of Injury
1 - Killed 5 - Suspected S… 6 - Suspected … 7 - Possible Inj… 0 5
10 15
20 25
Victim Degree of
Injury Count %
1 - Killed 1 2.56%
5 - Suspected Serious
Injury
4 10.26%
6 - Suspected Minor
Injury
11 28.21%
7 - Possible Injury 23 58.97%
No. of Crashes
Number of Victims by Victim Role
39 Victims
33%
18% 21%
28%
1 - Driver 2 - Passenger 3 - Pedestrian
4 - Bicyclist 5 - Other 6 - Non-Injured Party
Victim Role
1 - Driver
2 - Passenger
3 - Pedestrian
4 - Bicyclist
5 - Other
6 - Non-Injured…
0 5
10 15
Victim Role Count %
1 - Driver 13 33.33%
2 - Passenger 7 17.95%
3 - Pedestrian 8 20.51%
4 - Bicyclist 11 28.21%
5 - Other 0 0.00%
6 - Non-Injured Party 0 0.00%
159
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
By Victim Safety Equipment 1
By Victim Gender and Age
Number of Victims by Victim Safety Equipment 1
39 Victims
13 13 (33.33%)
11 (2.56%)
14 14 (35.90%)
1 1 (2.56%)
1 1 (2.56%)
1 1 (2.56%)
22 (5.13%)
6 6 (15.38%)
- or blank - Not Stated
C - Lap Belt Used
G - Lap/Shoulder Harness Used
L - Air Bag Deployed
M - Air Bag Not Deployed
P - Not Required
V - Driver, Motorcycle Helmet Not Used
W - Driver, Motorcycle Helmet Used
Victim Safety Equipment 1
Age
No. of Victims
Number of Victims by Victim Gender and Age
39 Victims
46%
54%
Male Female Nonbinary Not Stated
Victim Gender
14 or younger
15 - 19
20 - 24
25 - 29
30 - 34
35 - 39
40 - 44
45 - 49
50 - 54
55 - 59
60 - 64
65 - 69
70 - 74
75 - 79
80 - 84
85 or older
Unknown
Fatal Fetus
0 2
4 6
8 10
160
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
Ped Crash Summary
By Type of Violation
Number of Crashes by Type of Violation
8 Crashes
21950:
2 (25.00%)
22107:
2 (25.00%)
Not Listed:
2 (25.00%)
Bicyclists
Driver
Other
Pedestrian
Unclear
Unknown
Not Listed
Party Violation Classification
Party Violation
Classification
Type of
Violation Description Count %
Driver 21950
Driver failure to yield right-of-way to pedestrians at a marked or unmarked crosswalk
2 25.00%
Unclear 22107
Unsafe turning or moving right or left on a roadway Turning without signaling
2 25.00%
Not Listed Not Listed Violation code was not included in the crash 2 25.00% Driver 22106 Unsafe starting or backing of a vehicle on a highway 1 12.50% Pedestrian 21954
Pedestrian failure to yield right-of-way to vehicles when crossing outside of a marked or unmarked crosswalk
1 12.50%
161
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
By Pedestrian Action
By Lighting
No. of
Crashes
Number of Crashes by Pedestrian Action
8 Crashes
75%
13%
13%
- - Not Stated
A - No Pedestrian Involved
B - Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection
C - Crossing in Crosswalk Not at Intersection
D - Crossing Not in Crosswalk
E - In Road, Including Shoulder
F - Not in Road
G - Approaching/Leaving School Bus
Pedestrian Action
- - Not Stated
A - No Pedestri…
B - Crossing in …
C - Crossing in …
D - Crossing N…
E - In Road, Incl…
F - Not in Road
G - Approachin…
0 8
Pedestrian
Action Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - No Pedestrian
Involved
0 0.00%
B - Crossing in
Crosswalk at
Intersection
6 75.00%
C - Crossing in
Crosswalk Not at
Intersection
0 0.00%
D - Crossing Not in
Crosswalk
1 12.50%
E - In Road, Including
Shoulder
0 0.00%
F - Not in Road 1 12.50%
G -
Approaching/Leaving
School Bus
0 0.00%
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Lighting
8 Crashes
13%
50%
25%
13%
- - Not Stated A - Daylight
B - Dusk - Dawn C - Dark - Street Lights
D - Dark - No Street Lights E - Dark - Street Lights Not Functioning Lighting
- - Not Stated
A - Daylight
B - Dusk - Dawn
C - Dark - Stree…
D - Dark - No S…
E - Dark - Stree…
0 2
4 6
Lighting Count %
- - Not Stated 1 12.50%
A - Daylight 4 50.00%
B - Dusk - Dawn 0 0.00%
C - Dark - Street
Lights
2 25.00%
D - Dark - No Street
Lights
1 12.50%
E - Dark - Street Lights
Not Functioning
0 0.00%
162
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
August 1, 2024
By Weather
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Weather
8 Crashes
75%
25%
- - Not Stated A - Clear B - Cloudy C - Raining
D - Snowing E - Fog F - Other G - Wind
Weather
- - Not Stated
A - Clear
B - Cloudy
C - Raining
D - Snowing
E - Fog
F - Other
G - Wind
0 2
4 6
8 Weather Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - Clear 6 75.00%
B - Cloudy 0 0.00%
C - Raining 2 25.00%
D - Snowing 0 0.00%
E - Fog 0 0.00%
F - Other 0 0.00%
G - Wind 0 0.00%
163
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 5737844
Crash Information
Parties: 1
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 05/25/2012 10:01
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

90.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9809602, -121.9553731
Type of Crash H - Other
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
J - Other Object
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 22 - Other Improper Driving
Weather B - Cloudy
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes - K - Parking Maneuver Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger F - Female 88 7 - Possible Injury
164
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 5769463
Crash Information
Parties: 3
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 07/30/2012 12:40
Location (Intersection) Capitola Av & Bay Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

80.00 ft West
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9784681, -121.9531876
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 01 - Driving or Bicycling Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drug
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved Yes
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck Yes East B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No East A - Stopped
3 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No - A - Stopped
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 1 - Driver F - Female 23 7 - Possible Injury
165
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 5926906
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 02/02/2013 14:01
Location (Intersection) Rt 1 & Bay Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
200.00 ft North
State Highway Info Route Number 1 Side of Hwy S
Postmile 13.230 Location Type H -
Highway
Geocoded Location 36.983175, -121.957233
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 04 - Following Too Closely
Weather B - Cloudy
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No South H - Slowing/Stopping Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 1 - Driver F - Female 23 7 - Possible Injury
166
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6487941
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 05/09/2014 20:40
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9811, -121.95551
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 12 - Traffic Signals and Signs
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No West E - Making Left Turn Victims: 2
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 20 7 - Possible Injury
2 2 - Passenger M - Male 6 7 - Possible Injury
167
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6494114
Crash Information
Parties: 3
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 04/30/2014 12:20
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Capitola Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.97867, -121.9531299
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 2 - Injury (Severe)
PCF Violation Category 18 - Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian) Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash Yes
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No East B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No East B - Proceeding Straight 3 3 - Parked Vehicle F - Truck or Truck Tractor No - O - Parked Victims: 2
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 1 - Driver M - Male 82 5 - Suspected Serious Injury
2 1 - Driver F - Female 36 7 - Possible Injury
168
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6940786
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 06/07/2015 12:39
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Bay Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.97634, -121.9502099
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 09 - Automobile Right of Way
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes West D - Making Right Turn 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 1 - Driver F - Female 82 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
169
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 7075959
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 09/09/2015 20:08
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.97564, -121.95022
Type of Crash A - Head-On
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 09 - Automobile Right of Way
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South E - Making Left Turn 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 1 - Driver F - Female 52 7 - Possible Injury
170
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8373999
Crash Information
Parties: 1
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 04/29/2017 18:10
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9811, -121.95551
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category - - Not Stated
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 18 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
171
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8506493
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 11/25/2017 12:01
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

40.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9811865, -121.9555946
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South H - Slowing/Stopping 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No South A - Stopped
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 1 - Driver F - Female 20 7 - Possible Injury
172
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8593314
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 02/13/2018 07:50
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
203.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9815369, -121.9559402
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 09 - Automobile Right of Way
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck Yes South L - Entering Traffic 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No South B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 1 - Driver F - Female 39 7 - Possible Injury
173
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9174869
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 10/08/2020 16:00
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9810982, -121.955513
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes West B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 2 - Passenger F - Female 32 7 - Possible Injury
174
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9355886
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 09/24/2021 22:16
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Rosedale Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

44.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9772072, -121.9512329
Type of Crash B - Sideswipe
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
E - Parked Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 07 - Unsafe Lane Change
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North M - Other Unsafe Turning
2 3 - Parked Vehicle A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No - O - Parked Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 28 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
175
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9472208
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 05/07/2022 10:04
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9810982, -121.9555054
Type of Crash B - Sideswipe
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 09 - Automobile Right of Way
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North E - Making Left Turn Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 1 - Driver F - Female 52 7 - Possible Injury
176
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9495729
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 08/01/2022 13:16
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9756355, -121.9502182
Type of Crash A - Head-On
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South E - Making Left Turn 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No North A - Stopped
Victims: 3
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 22 0 - No Injury
1 2 - Passenger F - Female 19 0 - No Injury
2 1 - Driver M - Male 59 7 - Possible Injury
177
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9625429
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 08/11/2023 15:10
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

35.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.975544, -121.9502335
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck Yes North B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North A - Stopped
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 1 - Driver F - Female 26 7 - Possible Injury
178
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/08/01 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9646836
Crash Information
Parties: 3
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 10/12/2023 15:11
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Burlingame Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

47.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.978157, -121.9524689
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
C - Other Motor Vehicle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 09 - Automobile Right of Way
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South E - Making Left Turn 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No South B - Proceeding Straight 3 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North A - Stopped
Victims: 7
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 1 0 - No Injury
179
Item 7 B.

Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 2 - Passenger M - Male 5 0 - No Injury
1 2 - Passenger F - Female 12 0 - No Injury
1 2 - Passenger M - Male 36 0 - No Injury
1 1 - Driver F - Female 37 7 - Possible Injury
2 2 - Passenger F - Female 6 0 - No Injury
3 2 - Passenger M - Male 13 0 - No Injury
180
Item 7 B.

Crash List
CASE ID Date Time Primary Rd Secondary Rd Dist & Dir
from Int.

Bike Ped Killed Injured
6483008 04/24/2014 11:00 Bay Av Capitola Av At Int No Yes 0 1 6487930 05/06/2014 07:21 Oak Dr Bay Av 37 ft South Yes No 0 1 6511924 06/03/2014 14:04 Bay Av Hill St At Int No Yes 0 1 6748318 12/03/2014 10:41 Monterey Av Park Av 18 ft South No Yes 0 1 6864222 03/19/2015 12:43 Bay Av Capitola Av 83 ft East No Yes 0 1 6889427 04/04/2015 12:50 Bay Av Bay Av 504 At Int Yes No 0 1 7063888 07/20/2015 19:19 Monterey Av Park Pl At Int Yes No 0 1 8152095 10/07/2016 21:28 Bay Av Hill St At Int No Yes 0 1 8339317 03/26/2017 12:07 Bay Av Burlingame Av 90 ft North Yes No 0 1 90781844 07/21/2018 16:05 Bay Ave Monterey Ave 100 ft North Yes No 0 1 8701088 08/13/2018 20:13 Bay Av Hill Av 213 ft North Yes No 0 1 8648318 10/06/2018 19:46 Bay Av Rt 1 218 ft South No Yes 1 0 9007558 11/22/2019 13:57 Monterey Av Park Av At Int Yes No 0 1 9472209 05/05/2022 17:48 Bay Av Oak Dr At Int Yes No 0 1 9495924 09/04/2022 20:42 Capitola Av Bay Av 58 ft South Yes No 0 1 9534052 12/09/2022 18:24 Bay Av Hill St At Int No Yes 0 1 9549472 02/01/2023 08:15 Bay Av Burlingame Av At Int Yes No 0 1 9625425 08/24/2023 08:40 Bay Av Hill St At Int No Yes 0 1 06/06/2024 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
https://tims.berkeley.edu/tools/atp/ 6/6
181
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
Overview
This report was created with the help of The Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS has been developed by UC Berkeley SafeTREC to provide quick, easy and free access to California crash data, the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), that has been geo-coded by SafeTREC to make it easy to map crashes.

Result
Query by Case ID(s)
User Entered SWITRS Case ID(s)
Total Crashes
18 Total Victims
1 Killed & 17 Injured
State Highway
None
Ped Involved
8 (44.4%)
Bike Involved
10 (55.6%)
Motorcycle Involved
None
18 of 18 (100%) Crashes are geocoded and mapped.

Map data ©2024 Google Report a map error
182
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
Crash Summary
By Crash Severity
By Crash Type
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Crash Severity
18 Crashes
17%
44%
33%
1 - Fatal 2 - Injury (Severe)
3 - Injury (Other Visible) 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain) Crash Severity
1 - Fatal 2 - Injury (Seve…3 - Injury (Othe…4 - Injury (Com… 0 2
4 6
8 10
Crash Severity Count %
1 - Fatal 1 5.56%
2 - Injury (Severe) 3 16.67%
3 - Injury (Other
Visible)
8 44.44%
4 - Injury (Complaint
of Pain)
6 33.33%
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Type of Crash
18 Crashes
11%
22%
33%
22%
- - Not Stated A - Head-On B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End D - Broadside E - Hit Object
F - Overturned G - Vehicle/Pedestrian H - Other
Type of Crash
- - Not Stated
A - Head-On
B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End
D - Broadside
E - Hit Object
F - Overturned
G - Vehicle/Ped…
H - Other
0 2
4 6
8 Type of Crash Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - Head-On 0 0.00%
B - Sideswipe 2 11.11%
C - Rear End 1 5.56%
D - Broadside 4 22.22%
E - Hit Object 0 0.00%
F - Overturned 1 5.56%
G - Vehicle/Pedestrian 6 33.33%
H - Other 4 22.22%
183
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
By Day of Week and Time
By Primary Crash Factor (PCF) Violation
Number of Crashes per Day of Week per Time
18 Crashes
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 0 1 0
2 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
2 1 - Monday 2 - Tuesday 3 - Wednesday 4 - Thursday 5 - Friday 6 - Saturday 7 - Sunday 00:00~02:59
03:00~05:59
06:00~08:59
09:00~11:59
12:00~14:59
15:00~17:59
18:00~20:59
21:00~23:59
25:00 - Unknown
Number of Crashes by PCF Violation
16 Crashes
4 4 (25.00%)
1 1 (6.25%)
4 4 (25.00%)
22 (12.50%)
1 1 (6.25%)
22 (12.50%)
1 1 (6.25%)
1 1 (6.25%)
03 - Unsafe Speed
06 - Improper Passing
08 - Improper Turning
10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
11 - Pedestrian Violation
17 - Other Hazardous Violation
21 - Unsafe Starting or Backing
22 - Other Improper Driving
PCF Violation
184
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
Victim Summary
By Victim Degree of Injury
By Victim Role
No. of Crashes
Number of Victims by Victim Degree of Injury
18 Victims
17%
44%
33%
1 - Killed 5 - Suspected Serious Injury
6 - Suspected Minor Injury 7 - Possible Injury
Victim Degree of Injury
1 - Killed 5 - Suspected S… 6 - Suspected … 7 - Possible Inj… 0 2
4 6
8 10
Victim Degree
of Injury Count %
1 - Killed 1 5.56%
5 - Suspected Serious
Injury
3 16.67%
6 - Suspected Minor
Injury
8 44.44%
7 - Possible Injury 6 33.33%
No. of Crashes
Number of Victims by Victim Role
18 Victims
44%
56%
1 - Driver 2 - Passenger 3 - Pedestrian
4 - Bicyclist 5 - Other 6 - Non-Injured Party
Victim Role
1 - Driver
2 - Passenger
3 - Pedestrian
4 - Bicyclist
5 - Other
6 - Non-Injured…
0 10
5 15
Victim Role Count %
1 - Driver 0 0.00%
2 - Passenger 0 0.00%
3 - Pedestrian 8 44.44%
4 - Bicyclist 10 55.56%
5 - Other 0 0.00%
6 - Non-Injured Party 0 0.00%
185
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
By Victim Safety Equipment 1
By Victim Gender and Age
Number of Victims by Victim Safety Equipment 1
18 Victims
9 9 (50.00%)
1 1 (5.56%)
1 1 (5.56%)
22 (11.11%)
55 (27.78%)
- or blank - Not Stated
G - Lap/Shoulder Harness Used
P - Not Required
V - Driver, Motorcycle Helmet Not Used
W - Driver, Motorcycle Helmet Used
Victim Safety Equipment 1
Age
No. of Victims
Number of Victims by Victim Gender and Age
18 Victims
61%
39%
Male Female Nonbinary Not Stated
Victim Gender
14 or younger
15 - 19
20 - 24
25 - 29
30 - 34
35 - 39
40 - 44
45 - 49
50 - 54
55 - 59
60 - 64
65 - 69
70 - 74
75 - 79
80 - 84
85 or older
Unknown
Fatal Fetus
0 1
2 3
4 186
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
Ped Crash Summary
By Type of Violation
Number of Crashes by Type of Violation
8 Crashes
21950:
2 (25.00%)
22107:
2 (25.00%)
Not Listed:
2 (25.00%)
Bicyclists
Driver
Other
Pedestrian
Unclear
Unknown
Not Listed
Party Violation Classification
Party Violation
Classification
Type of
Violation Description Count %
Driver 21950
Driver failure to yield right-of-way to pedestrians at a marked or unmarked crosswalk
2 25.00%
Unclear 22107
Unsafe turning or moving right or left on a roadway Turning without signaling
2 25.00%
Not Listed Not Listed Violation code was not included in the crash 2 25.00% Driver 22106 Unsafe starting or backing of a vehicle on a highway 1 12.50% Pedestrian 21954
Pedestrian failure to yield right-of-way to vehicles when crossing outside of a marked or unmarked crosswalk
1 12.50%
187
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
By Pedestrian Action
By Lighting
No. of
Crashes
Number of Crashes by Pedestrian Action
8 Crashes
75%
13%
13%
- - Not Stated
A - No Pedestrian Involved
B - Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection
C - Crossing in Crosswalk Not at Intersection
D - Crossing Not in Crosswalk
E - In Road, Including Shoulder
F - Not in Road
G - Approaching/Leaving School Bus
Pedestrian Action
- - Not Stated
A - No Pedestri…
B - Crossing in …
C - Crossing in …
D - Crossing N…
E - In Road, Incl…
F - Not in Road
G - Approachin…
0 8
Pedestrian
Action Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - No Pedestrian
Involved
0 0.00%
B - Crossing in
Crosswalk at
Intersection
6 75.00%
C - Crossing in
Crosswalk Not at
Intersection
0 0.00%
D - Crossing Not in
Crosswalk
1 12.50%
E - In Road, Including
Shoulder
0 0.00%
F - Not in Road 1 12.50%
G -
Approaching/Leaving
School Bus
0 0.00%
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Lighting
8 Crashes
13%
50%
25%
13%
- - Not Stated A - Daylight
B - Dusk - Dawn C - Dark - Street Lights
D - Dark - No Street Lights E - Dark - Street Lights Not Functioning Lighting
- - Not Stated
A - Daylight
B - Dusk - Dawn
C - Dark - Stree…
D - Dark - No S…
E - Dark - Stree…
0 2
4 6
Lighting Count %
- - Not Stated 1 12.50%
A - Daylight 4 50.00%
B - Dusk - Dawn 0 0.00%
C - Dark - Street
Lights
2 25.00%
D - Dark - No Street
Lights
1 12.50%
E - Dark - Street Lights
Not Functioning
0 0.00%
188
Item 7 B.

TIMS SWITRS Crash Summary & Map
June 6, 2024
By Weather
No. of Crashes
Number of Crashes by Weather
8 Crashes
75%
25%
- - Not Stated A - Clear B - Cloudy C - Raining
D - Snowing E - Fog F - Other G - Wind
Weather
- - Not Stated
A - Clear
B - Cloudy
C - Raining
D - Snowing
E - Fog
F - Other
G - Wind
0 2
4 6
8 Weather Count %
- - Not Stated 0 0.00%
A - Clear 6 75.00%
B - Cloudy 0 0.00%
C - Raining 2 25.00%
D - Snowing 0 0.00%
E - Fog 0 0.00%
F - Other 0 0.00%
G - Wind 0 0.00%
189
Item 7 B.

Date Created: 06/06/2024
Created by TIMS (https://tims.berkeley.edu) © UC Regents, 2014-2024 Crash Diagram
Straight Pedestrian
Left Turn Bicycle
Right Turn Object
U-Turn Fatal Crash
Overturned Injury Crash
Ran Off Road
Stopped
Parked
Primary Street:

Secondary Street:

Time Period:

Agency Name:

Fatal Crash 1
Injury Crash 15
Mapped 16
Not Drawn 2
Total 18
Mapping Summary:
190
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6483008
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 04/24/2014 11:00
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Capitola Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.97867, -121.9531299
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category - - Not Stated
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South E - Making Left Turn 2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No South R - Other
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 70 7 - Possible Injury
191
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6487930
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 05/06/2014 07:21
Location (Intersection) Oak Dr & Bay Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

37.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9793094, -121.9538479
Type of Crash B - Sideswipe
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 06 - Improper Passing
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North I - Passing Other Vehicle
2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 54 7 - Possible Injury
192
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6511924
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 06/03/2014 14:04
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9811, -121.95551
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category - - Not Stated
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North A - Stopped
2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No - - - Not Stated
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 36 7 - Possible Injury
193
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6748318
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 12/03/2014 10:41
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

18.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9755907, -121.9502255
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
Weather C - Raining
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North D - Making Right Turn 2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No - A - Stopped
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 53 6 - Suspected Minor Injury 194
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6864222
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 03/19/2015 12:43
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Capitola Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

83.00 ft East
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9785132, -121.9529236
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 21 - Unsafe Starting or Backing
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North G - Backing
2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No East B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian M - Male 62 7 - Possible Injury
195
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 6889427
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 04/04/2015 12:50
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Bay Av 504
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9784767, -121.9528824
Type of Crash H - Other
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 2 - Injury (Severe)
PCF Violation Category 17 - Other Hazardous Violation
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 3 - Parked Vehicle A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North O - Parked 2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 21 5 - Suspected Serious Injury 196
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 7063888
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 07/20/2015 19:19
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Pl
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.97564, -121.95022
Type of Crash H - Other
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 17 - Other Hazardous Violation
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 3 - Parked Vehicle A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes - O - Parked 2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No - B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 46 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
197
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8152095
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 10/07/2016 21:28
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9811, -121.95551
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 08 - Improper Turning
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North E - Making Left Turn 2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No West B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 53 7 - Possible Injury
198
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8339317
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 03/26/2017 12:07
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Burlingame Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

90.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9782415, -121.952572
Type of Crash H - Other
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 22 - Other Improper Driving
Weather B - Cloudy
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes East O - Parked
2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No East - - Not Stated
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 61 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
199
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 90781844
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 07/21/2018 16:05
Location (Intersection) Bay Ave & Monterey Ave
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
100.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9765549, -121.9504242
Type of Crash C - Rear End
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle Yes North B - Proceeding Straight 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North H - Slowing/Stopping Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 23 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
200
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8701088
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 08/13/2018 20:13
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
213.00 ft North
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9815598, -121.9559631
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 4 - Injury (Complaint of Pain)
PCF Violation Category 08 - Improper Turning
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes South D - Making Right Turn 2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No South B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 22 7 - Possible Injury
201
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 8648318
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 10/06/2018 19:46
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Rt 1
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
218.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9826889, -121.9569473
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 1 - Fatal
PCF Violation Category 11 - Pedestrian Violation
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved Yes
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian Yes - R - Other
2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon No North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 3 - Pedestrian M - Male 59 1 - Killed
202
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9007558
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 11/22/2019 13:57
Location (Intersection) Monterey Av & Park Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9756393, -121.9502182
Type of Crash B - Sideswipe
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 08 - Improper Turning
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle Yes South E - Making Left Turn 2 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck No South B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 2
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 77 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
2 2 - Passenger F - Female 0 0 - No Injury
203
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9472209
Crash Information
Parties: 1
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 05/05/2022 17:48
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Oak Dr
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9794083, -121.9538269
Type of Crash H - Other
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
- - Not Stated
Crash Severity 2 - Injury (Severe)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved Yes
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle Yes South B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 59 5 - Suspected Serious Injury 204
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9495924
Crash Information
Parties: 1
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 09/04/2022 20:42
Location (Intersection) Capitola Av & Bay Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection

58.00 ft South
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9785118, -121.9531555
Type of Crash F - Overturned
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
A - Non-Collision
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved Yes
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle Yes North B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 1 4 - Bicyclist F - Female 45 6 - Suspected Minor Injury 205
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9534052
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 12/09/2022 18:24
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9810982, -121.9555054
Type of Crash G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 2 - Injury (Severe)
PCF Violation Category 08 - Improper Turning
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
D - Pickup or Panel Truck Yes South D - Making Right Turn 2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No East B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 74 5 - Suspected Serious Injury 206
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9549472
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 02/01/2023 08:15
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Burlingame Av
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9780655, -121.9523468
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
G - Bicycle
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 03 - Unsafe Speed
Weather A - Clear
Alcohol Involved Yes
Pedestrian Crash No Bicycle Crash Yes
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes East D - Making Right Turn 2 4 - Bicyclist L - Bicycle No East B - Proceeding Straight Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 4 - Bicyclist M - Male 0 6 - Suspected Minor Injury
207
Item 7 B.
https://tims.berkeley.edu/
2024/06/06 TIMS - Transportation Injury Mapping System
Crash Details for: Case ID 9625425
Crash Information
Parties: 2
Map View
Street View
County Santa Cruz
City Capitola
Date & Time (M/D/Y) 08/24/2023 08:40
Location (Intersection) Bay Av & Hill St
Dist. & Dir. from
Intersection
At Intersection
State Highway No
Geocoded Location 36.9810982, -121.9555054
Type of Crash D - Broadside
Motor Vehicle Involved
With
B - Pedestrian
Crash Severity 3 - Injury (Other Visible)
PCF Violation Category 10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
Weather C - Raining
Alcohol Involved No
Pedestrian Crash Yes Bicycle Crash No
Motorcycle Crash No Truck Crash No
Party
Number
Party Type Statewide Vehicle Type At
Fault
Party
Direction
Movement Preceding
Collision
1 1 - Driver (including Hit and
Run)
A - Passenger Car/Station Wagon Yes North E - Making Left Turn 2 2 - Pedestrian N - Pedestrian No - - - Not Stated
Victims: 1
Party Number Victim Role Victim Gender Victim Age Victim Degree of Injury 2 3 - Pedestrian F - Female 86 6 - Suspected Minor Injury 208
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Study
February 2025
Attachment C – VISSIM and SIDRA LOS Results (Stop and Roundabout Alternatives) 209
Item 7 B.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 104 [Bay/Hill (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)]
Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Created: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:32:14 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 210
Item 7 B.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 105 [Bay/Capitola (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Created: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:32:14 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 211
Item 7 B.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 106 [Bay/Monterey (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Created: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:32:14 PM 212
Item 7 B.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 107 [Monterey/Park (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Created: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:32:14 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 213
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 104 [Bay/Hill (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)]
Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 57 3.0 62 3.0 0.482 8.4 LOS A 3.2 81.9 0.46 0.30 0.46 32.0 8 T1 441 3.0 479 3.0 0.482 8.4 LOS A 3.2 81.9 0.46 0.30 0.46 23.9 18 R2 10 3.0 11 3.0 0.482 8.4 LOS A 3.2 81.9 0.46 0.30 0.46 31.5 Approach 508 3.0 552 3.0 0.482 8.4 LOS A 3.2 81.9 0.46 0.30 0.46 25.3 East: Hill St
1 L2 9 3.0 10 3.0 0.269 8.2 LOS A 1.2 29.8 0.63 0.63 0.63 32.3 6 T1 28 3.0 30 3.0 0.269 8.2 LOS A 1.2 29.8 0.63 0.63 0.63 32.4 16 R2 142 3.0 154 3.0 0.269 8.2 LOS A 1.2 29.8 0.63 0.63 0.63 24.9 Approach 179 3.0 195 3.0 0.269 8.2 LOS A 1.2 29.8 0.63 0.63 0.63 26.9 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 75 3.0 82 3.0 0.436 7.5 LOS A 2.8 72.3 0.36 0.20 0.36 29.3 4 T1 377 3.0 410 3.0 0.436 7.5 LOS A 2.8 72.3 0.36 0.20 0.36 29.6 14 R2 31 3.0 34 3.0 0.436 7.5 LOS A 2.8 72.3 0.36 0.20 0.36 28.6 Approach 483 3.0 525 3.0 0.436 7.5 LOS A 2.8 72.3 0.36 0.20 0.36 29.5 West: Retail Dwy
5 L2 43 3.0 47 3.0 0.139 6.0 LOS A 0.6 14.5 0.55 0.49 0.55 24.2 2 T1 19 3.0 21 3.0 0.139 6.0 LOS A 0.6 14.5 0.55 0.49 0.55 32.7 12 R2 39 3.0 42 3.0 0.139 6.0 LOS A 0.6 14.5 0.55 0.49 0.55 32.0 Approach 101 3.0 110 3.0 0.139 6.0 LOS A 0.6 14.5 0.55 0.49 0.55 29.3 All Vehicles 1271 3.0 1382 3.0 0.482 7.8 LOS A 3.2 81.9 0.46 0.33 0.46 27.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:04:01 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 214
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 105 [Bay/Capitola (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 27 3.0 29 3.0 0.407 7.8 LOS A 2.3 59.4 0.51 0.38 0.51 32.4 8 T1 312 3.0 339 3.0 0.407 7.8 LOS A 2.3 59.4 0.51 0.38 0.51 32.5 18 R2 55 3.0 60 3.0 0.407 7.8 LOS A 2.3 59.4 0.51 0.38 0.51 31.9 Approach 394 3.0 428 3.0 0.407 7.8 LOS A 2.3 59.4 0.51 0.38 0.51 32.4 East: Capitola Ave
1 L2 83 3.0 90 3.0 0.283 7.4 LOS A 1.3 33.3 0.58 0.53 0.58 32.0 6 T1 94 3.0 102 3.0 0.283 7.4 LOS A 1.3 33.3 0.58 0.53 0.58 32.1 16 R2 42 3.0 46 3.0 0.283 7.4 LOS A 1.3 33.3 0.58 0.53 0.58 31.4 Approach 219 3.0 238 3.0 0.283 7.4 LOS A 1.3 33.3 0.58 0.53 0.58 31.9 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 74 3.0 80 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.3 4 T1 183 3.0 199 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.4 14 R2 128 3.0 139 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 31.7 Approach 385 3.0 418 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.1 West: Capitola Ave
5 L2 70 3.0 76 3.0 0.171 5.6 LOS A 0.7 19.0 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.6 2 T1 67 3.0 73 3.0 0.171 5.6 LOS A 0.7 19.0 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.7 12 R2 6 3.0 7 3.0 0.171 5.6 LOS A 0.7 19.0 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.0 Approach 143 3.0 155 3.0 0.171 5.6 LOS A 0.7 19.0 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.6 All Vehicles 1141 3.0 1240 3.0 0.407 7.4 LOS A 2.3 59.4 0.52 0.41 0.52 32.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:04:02 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 215
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 106 [Bay/Monterey (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
8 T1 162 3.0 176 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 31.2 18 R2 61 3.0 66 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 30.1 Approach 223 3.0 242 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 30.9 East: Monterey Ave
1 L2 87 3.0 95 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 27.2 16 R2 282 3.0 307 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 32.0 Approach 369 3.0 401 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 31.1 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 219 3.0 238 3.0 0.271 5.4 LOS A 1.4 36.7 0.28 0.15 0.28 32.2 4 T1 84 3.0 91 3.0 0.271 5.4 LOS A 1.4 36.7 0.28 0.15 0.28 27.6 Approach 303 3.0 329 3.0 0.271 5.4 LOS A 1.4 36.7 0.28 0.15 0.28 31.2 All Vehicles 895 3.0 973 3.0 0.360 6.1 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.38 0.25 0.38 31.1 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:21:26 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 216
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 107 [Monterey/Park (Site Folder: 2024 Existing AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
3 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.300 5.6 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.22 0.09 0.22 31.1 8 T1 123 3.0 134 3.0 0.300 5.6 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.22 0.09 0.22 12.9 18 R2 225 3.0 245 3.0 0.300 5.6 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.22 0.09 0.22 30.2 Approach 349 3.0 379 3.0 0.300 5.6 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.22 0.09 0.22 26.0 East: Park Ave
1 L2 418 3.0 454 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.2 6 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 30.9 16 R2 100 3.0 109 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.5 Approach 521 3.0 566 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.3 North: Monterey Ave
7 L2 41 3.0 45 3.0 0.225 6.7 LOS A 1.0 25.2 0.56 0.51 0.56 29.5 4 T1 126 3.0 137 3.0 0.225 6.7 LOS A 1.0 25.2 0.56 0.51 0.56 16.3 14 R2 4 3.0 4 3.0 0.225 6.7 LOS A 1.0 25.2 0.56 0.51 0.56 28.8 Approach 171 3.0 186 3.0 0.225 6.7 LOS A 1.0 25.2 0.56 0.51 0.56 21.9 West: Parking Dwy
5 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.017 5.4 LOS A 0.1 1.7 0.56 0.44 0.56 25.2 2 T1 9 3.0 10 3.0 0.017 5.4 LOS A 0.1 1.7 0.56 0.44 0.56 33.6 12 R2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.017 5.4 LOS A 0.1 1.7 0.56 0.44 0.56 28.9 Approach 11 3.0 12 3.0 0.017 5.4 LOS A 0.1 1.7 0.56 0.44 0.56 32.7 All Vehicles 1052 3.0 1143 3.0 0.488 7.2 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.39 0.26 0.39 25.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:21:34 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 217
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 104 [Bay/Hill (Site Folder: 2024 Existing PM)]
Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 46 3.0 50 3.0 0.419 8.5 LOS A 2.3 59.1 0.57 0.48 0.57 32.0 8 T1 307 3.0 334 3.0 0.419 8.5 LOS A 2.3 59.1 0.57 0.48 0.57 23.9 18 R2 21 3.0 23 3.0 0.419 8.5 LOS A 2.3 59.1 0.57 0.48 0.57 31.4 Approach 374 3.0 407 3.0 0.419 8.5 LOS A 2.3 59.1 0.57 0.48 0.57 25.7 East: Hill St
1 L2 18 3.0 20 3.0 0.171 6.2 LOS A 0.7 18.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 33.0 6 T1 33 3.0 36 3.0 0.171 6.2 LOS A 0.7 18.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 33.1 16 R2 76 3.0 83 3.0 0.171 6.2 LOS A 0.7 18.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 25.8 Approach 127 3.0 138 3.0 0.171 6.2 LOS A 0.7 18.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 29.3 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 146 3.0 159 3.0 0.634 11.2 LOS B 5.7 145.2 0.51 0.30 0.51 26.9 4 T1 505 3.0 549 3.0 0.634 11.2 LOS B 5.7 145.2 0.51 0.30 0.51 27.1 14 R2 49 3.0 53 3.0 0.634 11.2 LOS B 5.7 145.2 0.51 0.30 0.51 26.2 Approach 700 3.0 761 3.0 0.634 11.2 LOS B 5.7 145.2 0.51 0.30 0.51 27.0 West: Retail Dwy
5 L2 92 3.0 100 3.0 0.385 11.3 LOS B 1.9 49.0 0.71 0.76 0.88 22.0 2 T1 45 3.0 49 3.0 0.385 11.3 LOS B 1.9 49.0 0.71 0.76 0.88 30.4 12 R2 84 3.0 91 3.0 0.385 11.3 LOS B 1.9 49.0 0.71 0.76 0.88 29.8 Approach 221 3.0 240 3.0 0.385 11.3 LOS B 1.9 49.0 0.71 0.76 0.88 27.1 All Vehicles 1422 3.0 1546 3.0 0.634 10.1 LOS B 5.7 145.2 0.56 0.44 0.59 26.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:05:36 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 218
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 105 [Bay/Capitola (Site Folder: 2024 Existing PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 29 3.0 32 3.0 0.260 5.9 LOS A 1.3 32.7 0.44 0.31 0.44 33.2 8 T1 200 3.0 217 3.0 0.260 5.9 LOS A 1.3 32.7 0.44 0.31 0.44 33.3 18 R2 23 3.0 25 3.0 0.260 5.9 LOS A 1.3 32.7 0.44 0.31 0.44 32.6 Approach 252 3.0 274 3.0 0.260 5.9 LOS A 1.3 32.7 0.44 0.31 0.44 33.3 East: Capitola Ave
1 L2 61 3.0 66 3.0 0.188 5.6 LOS A 0.8 21.3 0.48 0.38 0.48 32.8 6 T1 72 3.0 78 3.0 0.188 5.6 LOS A 0.8 21.3 0.48 0.38 0.48 33.0 16 R2 31 3.0 34 3.0 0.188 5.6 LOS A 0.8 21.3 0.48 0.38 0.48 32.3 Approach 164 3.0 178 3.0 0.188 5.6 LOS A 0.8 21.3 0.48 0.38 0.48 32.8 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 56 3.0 61 3.0 0.505 9.0 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.51 0.36 0.51 31.8 4 T1 337 3.0 366 3.0 0.505 9.0 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.51 0.36 0.51 31.9 14 R2 124 3.0 135 3.0 0.505 9.0 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.51 0.36 0.51 31.2 Approach 517 3.0 562 3.0 0.505 9.0 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.51 0.36 0.51 31.7 West: Capitola Ave
5 L2 72 3.0 78 3.0 0.223 6.9 LOS A 1.0 24.7 0.58 0.54 0.58 32.1 2 T1 84 3.0 91 3.0 0.223 6.9 LOS A 1.0 24.7 0.58 0.54 0.58 32.2 12 R2 8 3.0 9 3.0 0.223 6.9 LOS A 1.0 24.7 0.58 0.54 0.58 31.5 Approach 164 3.0 178 3.0 0.223 6.9 LOS A 1.0 24.7 0.58 0.54 0.58 32.1 All Vehicles 1097 3.0 1192 3.0 0.505 7.5 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.50 0.38 0.50 32.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:06:34 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 219
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 106 [Bay/Monterey (Site Folder: 2024 Existing PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
8 T1 124 3.0 135 3.0 0.240 6.2 LOS A 1.1 28.4 0.50 0.41 0.50 30.8 18 R2 85 3.0 92 3.0 0.240 6.2 LOS A 1.1 28.4 0.50 0.41 0.50 29.7 Approach 209 3.0 227 3.0 0.240 6.2 LOS A 1.1 28.4 0.50 0.41 0.50 30.4 East: Monterey Ave
1 L2 35 3.0 38 3.0 0.130 4.2 LOS A 0.6 14.9 0.30 0.16 0.30 28.8 16 R2 104 3.0 113 3.0 0.130 4.2 LOS A 0.6 14.9 0.30 0.16 0.30 33.2 Approach 139 3.0 151 3.0 0.130 4.2 LOS A 0.6 14.9 0.30 0.16 0.30 32.4 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 304 3.0 330 3.0 0.376 6.3 LOS A 2.3 60.0 0.20 0.07 0.20 31.9 4 T1 141 3.0 153 3.0 0.376 6.3 LOS A 2.3 60.0 0.20 0.07 0.20 27.2 Approach 445 3.0 484 3.0 0.376 6.3 LOS A 2.3 60.0 0.20 0.07 0.20 30.7 All Vehicles 793 3.0 862 3.0 0.376 5.9 LOS A 2.3 60.0 0.29 0.18 0.29 31.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:30:21 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 220
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 107 [Monterey/Park (Site Folder: 2024 Existing PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Base Year
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
3 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.604 10.5 LOS B 5.1 129.9 0.49 0.29 0.49 27.7 8 T1 165 3.0 179 3.0 0.604 10.5 LOS B 5.1 129.9 0.49 0.29 0.49 10.6 18 R2 498 3.0 541 3.0 0.604 10.5 LOS B 5.1 129.9 0.49 0.29 0.49 27.0 Approach 664 3.0 722 3.0 0.604 10.5 LOS B 5.1 129.9 0.49 0.29 0.49 24.2 East: Park Ave
1 L2 203 3.0 221 3.0 0.242 5.5 LOS A 1.2 30.3 0.39 0.26 0.39 26.7 6 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.242 5.5 LOS A 1.2 30.3 0.39 0.26 0.39 32.1 16 R2 39 3.0 42 3.0 0.242 5.5 LOS A 1.2 30.3 0.39 0.26 0.39 27.0 Approach 245 3.0 266 3.0 0.242 5.5 LOS A 1.2 30.3 0.39 0.26 0.39 26.8 North: Monterey Ave
7 L2 92 3.0 100 3.0 0.181 5.1 LOS A 0.8 21.1 0.40 0.28 0.40 29.9 4 T1 83 3.0 90 3.0 0.181 5.1 LOS A 0.8 21.1 0.40 0.28 0.40 16.9 14 R2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.181 5.1 LOS A 0.8 21.1 0.40 0.28 0.40 29.1 Approach 176 3.0 191 3.0 0.181 5.1 LOS A 0.8 21.1 0.40 0.28 0.40 26.0 West: Parking Dwy
5 L2 5 3.0 5 3.0 0.014 4.3 LOS A 0.1 1.4 0.47 0.31 0.47 25.1 2 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.014 4.3 LOS A 0.1 1.4 0.47 0.31 0.47 33.5 12 R2 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.014 4.3 LOS A 0.1 1.4 0.47 0.31 0.47 28.6 Approach 11 3.0 12 3.0 0.014 4.3 LOS A 0.1 1.4 0.47 0.31 0.47 28.7 All Vehicles 1096 3.0 1191 3.0 0.604 8.5 LOS A 5.1 129.9 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:30:25 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 221
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 104 [Bay/Hill (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative AM)]
Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 57 3.0 62 3.0 0.336 6.4 LOS A 1.9 47.5 0.39 0.24 0.39 32.9 8 T1 293 3.0 318 3.0 0.336 6.4 LOS A 1.9 47.5 0.39 0.24 0.39 24.8 18 R2 4 3.0 4 3.0 0.336 6.4 LOS A 1.9 47.5 0.39 0.24 0.39 32.3 Approach 354 3.0 385 3.0 0.336 6.4 LOS A 1.9 47.5 0.39 0.24 0.39 26.5 East: Hill St
1 L2 13 3.0 14 3.0 0.139 5.6 LOS A 0.6 14.8 0.52 0.44 0.52 33.4 6 T1 28 3.0 30 3.0 0.139 5.6 LOS A 0.6 14.8 0.52 0.44 0.52 33.5 16 R2 68 3.0 74 3.0 0.139 5.6 LOS A 0.6 14.8 0.52 0.44 0.52 26.2 Approach 109 3.0 118 3.0 0.139 5.6 LOS A 0.6 14.8 0.52 0.44 0.52 29.5 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 75 3.0 82 3.0 0.703 13.3 LOS B 7.2 185.3 0.59 0.35 0.59 26.0 4 T1 669 3.0 727 3.0 0.703 13.3 LOS B 7.2 185.3 0.59 0.35 0.59 26.1 14 R2 31 3.0 34 3.0 0.703 13.3 LOS B 7.2 185.3 0.59 0.35 0.59 25.3 Approach 775 3.0 842 3.0 0.703 13.3 LOS B 7.2 185.3 0.59 0.35 0.59 26.1 West: Retail Dwy
5 L2 43 3.0 47 3.0 0.195 8.9 LOS A 0.8 19.3 0.66 0.66 0.66 22.9 2 T1 19 3.0 21 3.0 0.195 8.9 LOS A 0.8 19.3 0.66 0.66 0.66 31.4 12 R2 39 3.0 42 3.0 0.195 8.9 LOS A 0.8 19.3 0.66 0.66 0.66 30.7 Approach 101 3.0 110 3.0 0.195 8.9 LOS A 0.8 19.3 0.66 0.66 0.66 28.0 All Vehicles 1339 3.0 1455 3.0 0.703 10.5 LOS B 7.2 185.3 0.54 0.35 0.54 26.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:10:27 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 222
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 105 [Bay/Capitola (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 27 3.0 29 3.0 0.410 7.9 LOS A 2.3 59.8 0.52 0.39 0.52 32.3 8 T1 312 3.0 339 3.0 0.410 7.9 LOS A 2.3 59.8 0.52 0.39 0.52 32.5 18 R2 55 3.0 60 3.0 0.410 7.9 LOS A 2.3 59.8 0.52 0.39 0.52 31.8 Approach 394 3.0 428 3.0 0.410 7.9 LOS A 2.3 59.8 0.52 0.39 0.52 32.4 East: Capitola Ave
1 L2 83 3.0 90 3.0 0.286 7.5 LOS A 1.3 33.5 0.59 0.54 0.59 31.9 6 T1 94 3.0 102 3.0 0.286 7.5 LOS A 1.3 33.5 0.59 0.54 0.59 32.1 16 R2 42 3.0 46 3.0 0.286 7.5 LOS A 1.3 33.5 0.59 0.54 0.59 31.4 Approach 219 3.0 238 3.0 0.286 7.5 LOS A 1.3 33.5 0.59 0.54 0.59 31.9 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 74 3.0 80 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.3 4 T1 183 3.0 199 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.4 14 R2 128 3.0 139 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 31.7 Approach 385 3.0 418 3.0 0.394 7.6 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.49 0.36 0.49 32.1 West: Capitola Ave
5 L2 78 3.0 85 3.0 0.181 5.7 LOS A 0.8 20.2 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.5 2 T1 67 3.0 73 3.0 0.181 5.7 LOS A 0.8 20.2 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.6 12 R2 6 3.0 7 3.0 0.181 5.7 LOS A 0.8 20.2 0.50 0.41 0.50 31.9 Approach 151 3.0 164 3.0 0.181 5.7 LOS A 0.8 20.2 0.50 0.41 0.50 32.5 All Vehicles 1149 3.0 1249 3.0 0.410 7.4 LOS A 2.3 59.8 0.52 0.41 0.52 32.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:11:46 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 223
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 106 [Bay/Monterey (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
8 T1 162 3.0 176 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 31.2 18 R2 61 3.0 66 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 30.1 Approach 223 3.0 242 3.0 0.232 5.7 LOS A 1.1 28.3 0.43 0.31 0.43 30.9 East: Monterey Ave
1 L2 87 3.0 95 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 27.2 16 R2 282 3.0 307 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 32.0 Approach 369 3.0 401 3.0 0.360 6.8 LOS A 2.0 51.5 0.43 0.29 0.43 31.1 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 219 3.0 238 3.0 0.410 7.1 LOS A 2.6 66.0 0.34 0.18 0.34 31.9 4 T1 239 3.0 260 3.0 0.410 7.1 LOS A 2.6 66.0 0.34 0.18 0.34 27.2 Approach 458 3.0 498 3.0 0.410 7.1 LOS A 2.6 66.0 0.34 0.18 0.34 29.9 All Vehicles 1050 3.0 1141 3.0 0.410 6.7 LOS A 2.6 66.0 0.39 0.25 0.39 30.6 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:22:02 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 224
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 107 [Monterey/Park (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative AM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
3 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.374 7.3 LOS A 2.1 52.6 0.49 0.36 0.49 29.8 8 T1 123 3.0 134 3.0 0.374 7.3 LOS A 2.1 52.6 0.49 0.36 0.49 12.0 18 R2 238 3.0 259 3.0 0.374 7.3 LOS A 2.1 52.6 0.49 0.36 0.49 29.0 Approach 362 3.0 393 3.0 0.374 7.3 LOS A 2.1 52.6 0.49 0.36 0.49 25.0 East: Park Ave
1 L2 418 3.0 454 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.2 6 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 30.9 16 R2 100 3.0 109 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.5 Approach 521 3.0 566 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.45 0.28 0.45 25.3 North: Monterey Ave
7 L2 201 3.0 218 3.0 0.428 9.7 LOS A 2.5 63.3 0.66 0.67 0.76 26.8 4 T1 121 3.0 132 3.0 0.428 9.7 LOS A 2.5 63.3 0.66 0.67 0.76 13.7 14 R2 4 3.0 4 3.0 0.428 9.7 LOS A 2.5 63.3 0.66 0.67 0.76 26.2 Approach 326 3.0 354 3.0 0.428 9.7 LOS A 2.5 63.3 0.66 0.67 0.76 23.7 West: Parking Dwy
5 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.021 6.5 LOS A 0.1 1.9 0.61 0.52 0.61 24.7 2 T1 9 3.0 10 3.0 0.021 6.5 LOS A 0.1 1.9 0.61 0.52 0.61 33.1 12 R2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.021 6.5 LOS A 0.1 1.9 0.61 0.52 0.61 28.2 Approach 11 3.0 12 3.0 0.021 6.5 LOS A 0.1 1.9 0.61 0.52 0.61 32.2 All Vehicles 1220 3.0 1326 3.0 0.488 8.4 LOS A 3.3 84.5 0.52 0.41 0.55 24.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:22:09 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 225
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 104 [Bay/Hill (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative PM)]
Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 46 3.0 50 3.0 0.893 29.6 LOS D 28.3 725.6 1.00 1.60 2.56 24.6 8 T1 717 3.0 779 3.0 0.893 29.6 LOS D 28.3 725.6 1.00 1.60 2.56 17.1 18 R2 34 3.0 37 3.0 0.893 29.6 LOS D 28.3 725.6 1.00 1.60 2.56 24.3 Approach 797 3.0 866 3.0 0.893 29.6 LOS D 28.3 725.6 1.00 1.60 2.56 18.0 East: Hill St
1 L2 22 3.0 24 3.0 0.532 17.6 LOS C 3.0 77.9 0.79 0.93 1.26 28.3 6 T1 33 3.0 36 3.0 0.532 17.6 LOS C 3.0 77.9 0.79 0.93 1.26 28.4 16 R2 192 3.0 209 3.0 0.532 17.6 LOS C 3.0 77.9 0.79 0.93 1.26 20.9 Approach 247 3.0 268 3.0 0.532 17.6 LOS C 3.0 77.9 0.79 0.93 1.26 22.9 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 146 3.0 159 3.0 0.755 15.4 LOS C 8.7 223.1 0.68 0.41 0.68 24.7 4 T1 634 3.0 689 3.0 0.755 15.4 LOS C 8.7 223.1 0.68 0.41 0.68 24.9 14 R2 49 3.0 53 3.0 0.755 15.4 LOS C 8.7 223.1 0.68 0.41 0.68 24.2 Approach 829 3.0 901 3.0 0.755 15.4 LOS C 8.7 223.1 0.68 0.41 0.68 24.8 West: Retail Dwy
5 L2 92 3.0 100 3.0 0.448 14.3 LOS B 2.3 59.8 0.75 0.85 1.07 20.9 2 T1 45 3.0 49 3.0 0.448 14.3 LOS B 2.3 59.8 0.75 0.85 1.07 29.2 12 R2 84 3.0 91 3.0 0.448 14.3 LOS B 2.3 59.8 0.75 0.85 1.07 28.6 Approach 221 3.0 240 3.0 0.448 14.3 LOS B 2.3 59.8 0.75 0.85 1.07 26.0 All Vehicles 2094 3.0 2276 3.0 0.893 21.0 LOS C 28.3 725.6 0.82 0.97 1.50 21.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:14:47 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 226
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 105 [Bay/Capitola (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Bay Ave
3 L2 29 3.0 32 3.0 0.293 6.9 LOS A 1.4 36.1 0.53 0.45 0.53 32.7 8 T1 200 3.0 217 3.0 0.293 6.9 LOS A 1.4 36.1 0.53 0.45 0.53 32.9 18 R2 23 3.0 25 3.0 0.293 6.9 LOS A 1.4 36.1 0.53 0.45 0.53 32.2 Approach 252 3.0 274 3.0 0.293 6.9 LOS A 1.4 36.1 0.53 0.45 0.53 32.8 East: Capitola Ave
1 L2 17 3.0 18 3.0 0.203 6.5 LOS A 0.9 22.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 33.0 6 T1 65 3.0 71 3.0 0.203 6.5 LOS A 0.9 22.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 33.1 16 R2 73 3.0 79 3.0 0.203 6.5 LOS A 0.9 22.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 32.4 Approach 155 3.0 168 3.0 0.203 6.5 LOS A 0.9 22.4 0.55 0.50 0.55 32.7 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 61 3.0 66 3.0 0.524 9.0 LOS A 3.8 97.2 0.45 0.27 0.45 31.8 4 T1 337 3.0 366 3.0 0.524 9.0 LOS A 3.8 97.2 0.45 0.27 0.45 31.9 14 R2 171 3.0 186 3.0 0.524 9.0 LOS A 3.8 97.2 0.45 0.27 0.45 31.2 Approach 569 3.0 618 3.0 0.524 9.0 LOS A 3.8 97.2 0.45 0.27 0.45 31.7 West: Capitola Ave
5 L2 190 3.0 207 3.0 0.340 8.2 LOS A 1.6 41.6 0.61 0.57 0.61 31.0 2 T1 63 3.0 68 3.0 0.340 8.2 LOS A 1.6 41.6 0.61 0.57 0.61 31.1 12 R2 8 3.0 9 3.0 0.340 8.2 LOS A 1.6 41.6 0.61 0.57 0.61 30.5 Approach 261 3.0 284 3.0 0.340 8.2 LOS A 1.6 41.6 0.61 0.57 0.61 31.0 All Vehicles 1237 3.0 1345 3.0 0.524 8.1 LOS A 3.8 97.2 0.51 0.40 0.51 31.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:16:42 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 227
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 106 [Bay/Monterey (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
8 T1 305 3.0 332 3.0 0.448 9.1 LOS A 2.5 64.2 0.61 0.52 0.61 28.8 18 R2 85 3.0 92 3.0 0.448 9.1 LOS A 2.5 64.2 0.61 0.52 0.61 27.9 Approach 390 3.0 424 3.0 0.448 9.1 LOS A 2.5 64.2 0.61 0.52 0.61 28.6 East: Monterey Ave
1 L2 35 3.0 38 3.0 0.160 5.3 LOS A 0.7 17.8 0.47 0.37 0.47 28.1 16 R2 104 3.0 113 3.0 0.160 5.3 LOS A 0.7 17.8 0.47 0.37 0.47 32.6 Approach 139 3.0 151 3.0 0.160 5.3 LOS A 0.7 17.8 0.47 0.37 0.47 31.8 North: Bay Ave
7 L2 304 3.0 330 3.0 0.469 7.6 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.23 0.09 0.23 31.6 4 T1 251 3.0 273 3.0 0.469 7.6 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.23 0.09 0.23 26.8 Approach 555 3.0 603 3.0 0.469 7.6 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.23 0.09 0.23 29.8 All Vehicles 1084 3.0 1178 3.0 0.469 7.8 LOS A 3.4 86.4 0.39 0.28 0.40 29.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:22:17 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 228
Item 7 B.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 107 [Monterey/Park (Site Folder: 2045 Cumulative PM)] Alt 3 Roundabout
Site Category: Future Conditions 1
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Monterey Ave
3 L2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.792 18.9 LOS C 18.9 483.9 0.88 1.07 1.60 23.4 8 T1 148 3.0 161 3.0 0.792 18.9 LOS C 18.9 483.9 0.88 1.07 1.60 8.2 18 R2 619 3.0 673 3.0 0.792 18.9 LOS C 18.9 483.9 0.88 1.07 1.60 22.9 Approach 768 3.0 835 3.0 0.792 18.9 LOS C 18.9 483.9 0.88 1.07 1.60 20.8 East: Park Ave
1 L2 203 3.0 221 3.0 0.428 7.7 LOS A 2.6 66.9 0.45 0.31 0.45 26.2 6 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.428 7.7 LOS A 2.6 66.9 0.45 0.31 0.45 31.8 16 R2 237 3.0 258 3.0 0.428 7.7 LOS A 2.6 66.9 0.45 0.31 0.45 26.6 Approach 443 3.0 482 3.0 0.428 7.7 LOS A 2.6 66.9 0.45 0.31 0.45 26.5 North: Monterey Ave
7 L2 202 3.0 220 3.0 0.294 6.3 LOS A 1.5 38.2 0.45 0.32 0.45 28.6 4 T1 83 3.0 90 3.0 0.294 6.3 LOS A 1.5 38.2 0.45 0.32 0.45 15.7 14 R2 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.294 6.3 LOS A 1.5 38.2 0.45 0.32 0.45 27.9 Approach 286 3.0 311 3.0 0.294 6.3 LOS A 1.5 38.2 0.45 0.32 0.45 26.4 West: Parking Dwy
5 L2 5 3.0 5 3.0 0.016 4.8 LOS A 0.1 1.5 0.52 0.38 0.52 24.8 2 T1 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.016 4.8 LOS A 0.1 1.5 0.52 0.38 0.52 33.2 12 R2 3 3.0 3 3.0 0.016 4.8 LOS A 0.1 1.5 0.52 0.38 0.52 28.3 Approach 11 3.0 12 3.0 0.016 4.8 LOS A 0.1 1.5 0.52 0.38 0.52 28.4 All Vehicles 1508 3.0 1639 3.0 0.792 13.1 LOS B 18.9 483.9 0.67 0.70 1.04 23.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Monday, January 6, 2025 2:22:23 PM Project: K:\SJC_TPTO\City of Capitola\097763143 - Bay Avenue Corridor Study\03 Analysis\Sidra\Bay Corridor_20250102.sip9 229
Item 7 B.

Bay Avenue Corridor Improvement Project
Existing 2024 VISSIM Results: Bay Ave Peak Hour Intersection Results Count Count Count Count
NBL 369 377 2% 17.0 B 33 220 369 379 3% 17.9 B 35 218 290 291 0% 18.6 B 28 184 290 290 0% 18.7 B 29 200 NBT 516 518 0% 0.9 A 33 219 516 518 0% 1.0 A 35 218 401 407 1% 0.9 A 28 184 401 408 2% 1.0 A 29 200 SBT 431 435 1% 13.0 B 41 258 431 435 1% 13.0 B 41 264 642 646 1% 14.3 B 40 255 642 646 1% 14.2 B 40 252 SBR 478 478 0% 13.3 B 43 262 478 478 0% 13.2 B 43 268 316 315 0% 10.3 B 39 259 316 315 0% 10.1 B 39 256 WBL 59 59 0% 27.8 C 8 72 59 59 0% 27.9 C 8 72 107 108 1% 28.4 C 15 110 107 108 1% 28.1 C 15 108 WBT 12 13 8% 28.1 C 4 82 12 13 8% 28.1 C 4 84 1 1 0% 26.1 C 4 103 1 1 0% 26.5 C 4 97 WBR 107 108 1% 8.0 A 5 82 107 108 1% 7.9 A 5 84 195 197 1% 7.3 A 5 103 195 197 1% 7.3 A 5 97 Overall 1972 1988 1% 10.9 B 1972 1990 1% 11.1 B 1952 1965 1% 11.6 B 1952 1965 1% 11.5 B NBT 572 585 2% 17.4 B 45 252 572 586 2% 18.1 B 47 259 457 458 0% 18.0 B 36 201 457 457 0% 17.9 B 35 204 NBR 111 112 1% 7.4 A 46 255 111 113 2% 8.0 A 48 262 91 89 ‐2% 8.1 A 38 203 91 89 ‐2% 8.1 A 37 207 SBL 176 178 1% 34.6 C 36 170 176 177 1% 34.4 C 36 156 276 274 ‐1% 35.2 D 60 251 276 274 ‐1% 34.9 C 58 259 SBT 314 317 1% 8.9 A 36 171 314 316 1% 8.8 A 36 157 473 480 1% 13.6 B 60 250 473 480 1% 9.7 A 59 259 EBL 313 312 0% 26.4 C 29 139 313 311 ‐1% 26.7 C 29 135 234 239 2% 40.6 D 140 704 234 240 3% 29.7 C 66 385 EBT 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 29 139 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 29 135 208 206 ‐1% 55.6 E 140 704 208 208 0% 40.7 D 66 385 EBR 296 300 1% 10.4 B 29 139 296 299 1% 10.4 B 29 135 347 341 ‐2% 30.0 C 140 704 347 345 ‐1% 17.7 B 66 385 Overall 1782 1804 1% 17.4 B 1782 1802 1% 17.7 B 2086 2087 0% 27.1 C 2086 2093 0% 21.4 C NBL 1 1 0% 6.5 A 0 26 1 1 0% 3.5 A 0 23 4 3 ‐25% 16.5 C 1 57 4 4 0% 13.4 B 0 60 NBT 616 625 1% 0.1 A 0 14 616 625 1% 0.2 A 0 7 462 457 ‐1% 0.1 A 0 5 462 457 ‐1% 0.2 A 0 0 NBR 9 8 ‐11% 0.8 A 0 10 9 8 ‐11% 1.0 A 0 10 9 8 ‐11% 0.8 A 0 6 9 8 ‐11% 0.9 A 0 3 SBL 39 39 0% 5.7 A 1 36 39 39 0% 5.9 A 1 40 50 49 ‐2% 69.6 F 23 234 50 50 0% 4.4 A 1 40 SBT 462 469 2% 2.8 A 5 164 462 469 2% 0.9 A 0 35 658 654 ‐1% 79.6 F 289 547 658 665 1% 1.8 A 2 124 SBR 109 109 0% 1.2 A 4 162 109 109 0% 1.2 A 0 71 112 108 ‐4% 58.2 F 288 545 112 110 ‐2% 1.4 A 2 121 EBL 53 55 4% 11.1 B 0 41 53 55 4% 12.6 B 0 42 49 51 4% 11.3 B 1 43 49 51 4% 17.2 C 1 45 EBT 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 41 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 42 2 2 0% 13.8 B 1 43 2 2 0% 19.7 C 1 45 EBR 21 23 10% 9.3 A 0 27 21 23 10% 8.4 A 0 27 38 37 ‐3% 9.9 A 0 35 38 37 ‐3% 12.1 B 0 43 WBL 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 33 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 34 4 3 ‐25% 41.2 E 2 48 4 4 0% 17.2 C 1 44 WBT 1 1 0% 15.5 C 0 33 1 1 0% 23.9 C 0 34 1 1 0% 17.8 C 2 48 1 1 0% 20.9 C 1 44 WBR 14 17 21% 8.0 A 0 33 14 17 21% 8.0 A 0 34 37 37 0% 8.1 A 2 48 37 37 0% 7.8 A 1 43 Overall 1325 1347 2% 15.5 C 1325 1347 2% 23.9 C 1426 1410 ‐1% 79.6 F 1426 1426 0% 20.9 C NBL 57 59 4% 9.4 A 1 45 57 59 4% 2.1 A 4 148 46 50 9% 7.2 A 1 44 46 49 7% 3.2 A 6 150 NBT 441 446 1% 18.5 C 51 252 441 446 1% 2.2 A 4 148 307 302 ‐2% 10.5 B 13 129 307 302 ‐2% 3.5 A 6 150 NBR 10 10 0% 19.0 C 47 252 10 10 0% 1.8 A 4 148 21 20 ‐5% 9.3 A 9 129 21 21 0% 3.1 A 6 150 SBL 75 77 3% 8.9 A 2 83 75 77 3% 1.9 A 3 189 146 148 1% 17.1 C 7 210 146 150 3% 2.7 A 8 203 SBT 377 383 2% 15.9 C 36 216 377 383 2% 2.2 A 3 189 505 498 ‐1% 29.6 D 121 228 505 505 0% 2.8 A 8 203 SBR 31 31 0% 14.8 B 34 216 31 31 0% 1.8 A 3 189 49 48 ‐2% 27.7 D 120 228 49 49 0% 2.4 A 8 203 EBL 43 43 0% 10.2 B 2 61 43 43 0% 5.6 A 1 58 92 92 0% 12.1 B 7 102 92 92 0% 10.3 B 9 143 EBT 19 20 5% 12.2 B 1 62 19 20 5% 5.0 A 1 58 45 44 ‐2% 14.4 B 6 102 45 44 ‐2% 10.1 B 9 143 EBR 39 40 3% 9.5 A 1 62 39 40 3% 7.0 A 1 58 84 86 2% 11.4 B 7 102 84 86 2% 12.4 B 9 143 WBL 9 9 0% 13.2 B 3 95 9 9 0% 9.4 A 6 130 18 17 ‐6% 10.9 B 2 66 18 18 0% 6.6 A 2 83 WBT 28 27 ‐4% 12.9 B 3 95 28 27 ‐4% 8.4 A 6 130 33 34 3% 12.1 B 2 66 33 34 3% 5.3 A 2 83 WBR 142 145 2% 11.0 B 5 95 142 145 2% 8.4 A 6 130 76 75 ‐1% 10.4 B 2 66 76 75 ‐1% 6.0 A 2 83 Overall 1271 1290 1% 15.0 B 1271 1290 1% 9.4 A 1422 1414 ‐1% 18.7 C 1422 1425 0% 12.4 B NBL 27 27 0% 8.8 A 1 38 27 27 0% 2.7 A 1 62 29 30 3% 8.7 A 1 39 29 30 3% 2.3 A 0 36 NBT 312 311 0% 14.7 B 25 174 312 311 0% 2.9 A 1 62 200 196 ‐2% 9.5 A 6 84 200 196 ‐2% 2.1 A 0 36 NBR 55 56 2% 12.2 B 22 173 55 56 2% 2.6 A 1 62 23 24 4% 7.5 A 4 84 23 24 4% 2.4 A 0 36 SBL 74 78 5% 9.3 A 5 95 74 78 5% 2.6 A 3 167 56 56 0% 11.1 B 14 166 56 56 0% 2.3 A 4 168 SBT 183 179 ‐2% 9.3 A 6 95 183 180 ‐2% 2.7 A 3 167 337 333 ‐1% 11.8 B 18 166 337 337 0% 2.4 A 4 168 SBR 128 134 5% 6.3 A 2 68 128 134 5% 2.3 A 3 167 124 126 2% 6.6 A 2 53 124 129 4% 2.5 A 4 168 EBL 70 69 ‐1% 11.7 B 3 65 70 69 ‐1% 3.9 A 1 71 72 72 0% 12.2 B 4 80 72 72 0% 4.2 A 2 92 EBT 67 69 3% 11.7 B 3 65 67 69 3% 3.7 A 1 71 84 88 5% 12.2 B 4 80 84 88 5% 4.4 A 2 92 EBR 6 6 0% 8.0 A 0 28 6 6 0% 2.7 A 0 28 8 8 0% 8.2 A 0 22 8 8 0% 2.4 A 0 19 WBL 83 83 0% 13.0 B 7 105 83 82 ‐1% 4.2 A 2 94 61 60 ‐2% 11.9 B 4 89 61 60 ‐2% 2.9 A 1 68 WBT 94 96 2% 13.9 B 7 105 94 96 2% 4.1 A 2 94 72 77 7% 12.6 B 4 89 72 77 7% 2.7 A 1 68 WBR 42 45 7% 10.9 B 4 97 42 45 7% 3.2 A 0 70 31 31 0% 9.4 A 2 81 31 31 0% 2.5 A 0 52 Overall 1141 1153 1% 11.5 B 1141 1153 1% 4.2 A 1097 1101 0% 10.6 B 1097 1108 1% 4.4 A NBT 162 160 ‐1% 8.8 A 4 61 162 160 ‐1% 9.0 A 4 67 124 123 ‐1% 8.2 A 2 58 124 123 ‐1% 8.2 A 2 54 NBR 61 63 3% 2.2 A 3 61 61 64 5% 2.4 A 3 67 85 85 0% 1.6 A 2 58 85 85 0% 1.6 A 2 54 SBL 219 222 1% 11.6 B 16 151 219 223 2% 13.4 B 21 194 304 303 0% 24.2 C 68 270 304 305 0% 34.4 D 104 385 SBT 84 82 ‐2% 11.9 B 15 151 84 82 ‐2% 13.9 B 20 194 141 141 0% 25.0 C 67 270 141 141 0% 35.0 E 104 385 WBL 87 85 ‐2% 21.3 C 36 236 87 85 ‐2% 20.6 C 35 220 35 36 3% 11.5 B 3 71 35 36 3% 11.4 B 3 73 WBR 282 287 2% 18.1 C 37 236 282 286 1% 17.7 C 36 220 104 102 ‐2% 9.0 A 4 71 104 102 ‐2% 9.0 A 4 73 Overall 895 899 0% 13.5 B 895 900 1% 13.9 B 793 790 0% 16.8 C 793 792 0% 22.6 C NBL 1 1 0% 9.0 A 1 62 1 1 0% 8.0 A 1 68 1 1 0% 25.5 D 9 252 1 1 0% 23.9 C 16 280 NBT 123 127 3% 10.2 B 3 61 123 127 3% 10.1 B 3 68 165 167 1% 32.6 D 11 252 165 167 1% 33.1 D 18 279 NBR 225 221 ‐2% 8.5 A 7 154 225 221 ‐2% 8.6 A 7 156 498 503 1% 40.7 E 183 609 498 504 1% 41.8 E 186 626 SBL 41 41 0% 8.6 A 3 74 41 41 0% 8.4 A 3 78 92 93 1% 9.2 A 4 84 92 93 1% 9.4 A 5 98 SBT 126 123 ‐2% 8.7 A 4 71 126 123 ‐2% 8.5 A 4 81 83 83 0% 8.9 A 3 84 83 84 1% 9.3 A 4 97 SBR 4 3 ‐25% 5.2 A 0 18 4 3 ‐25% 5.3 A 0 18 1 1 0% 5.3 A 0 13 1 1 0% 7.0 A 0 15 EBL 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 10 0 0 ‐ 0.0 A 0 10 5 5 0% 9.4 A 0 26 5 5 0% 9.4 A 0 28 EBT 9 11 22% 12.4 B 0 26 9 11 22% 12.2 B 0 26 3 4 33% 12.3 B 0 28 3 4 33% 12.6 B 0 30 EBR 1 1 0% 8.7 A 0 8 1 1 0% 8.3 A 0 8 3 3 0% 8.1 A 0 12 3 3 0% 8.2 A 0 15 WBL 418 426 2% 60.6 F 222 518 418 426 2% 56.7 F 207 472 203 210 3% 10.2 B 9 114 203 210 3% 10.0 B 9 109 WBT 3 4 33% 61.5 F 222 518 3 4 33% 59.8 F 206 472 3 2 ‐33% 12.4 B 7 114 3 2 ‐33% 13.1 B 7 109 WBR 100 97 ‐3% 58.5 F 222 518 100 97 ‐3% 54.3 F 206 472 39 35 ‐10% 8.4 A 7 114 39 36 ‐8% 8.3 A 7 109 Overall 1051 1055 0% 34.6 D 1051 1055 0% 32.6 D 1096 1107 1% 27.2 D 1096 1110 1% 27.8 D Avg.

Delay
(sec)
LOS
Avg.

Queue
(ft)
Max.

Queue
(ft) Served Served
Avg.

Delay
(sec)
LOS
Avg.

Queue
(ft)
Max.

Queue
(ft)
Volume (vph) Volume (vph) Avg.

Delay
(sec)
LOS
Avg.

Queue
(ft)
Volume (vph) No.

Bay Ave & Hwy 1 NB
Ramps
Intersection Movement
1 Alternative 1 PM
AWSC
Alternative 2 PM
RAB
Bay Ave & Hill St
Bay Ave & Crossroads
Loop
Alternative 2 AM
RAB
Max.

Queue
(ft) Served Served
Alternative 1 AM
AWSC
Volume (vph) Avg.

Delay
(sec)
LOS
Avg.

Queue
(ft)
Max.

Queue
(ft)
6 Bay Ave & Monterey
Ave
345 Bay Ave & Capitola
Ave
2 Bay Ave & Hwy 1 SB
Ramps
7 Monterey Ave & Park
Ave
230
Item 7 B.