Agenda packet — El Centro City Council, February 4, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

5.1 Analysis Scenarios
This section summarizes the traffic analysis results and other considerations for each intersection alternative. The following traffic control alternatives are evaluated, with detailed discussion of each alternative in this section:

1. Existing Conditions - Minor Street Stop Control (MSSC)

2. Existing Conditions (With Willow Bend Project traffic) a. MSSC
b. All-Way Stop Control (AWSC)
c. Traffic Signal
d. Roundabout
i. One-Lane
ii. Two-Lane

3. Year 2045 (Includes Willow Bend Project)
a. MSSC
b. AWSC
c. Traffic Signal
d. Roundabout
i. One-Lane
ii. Two-Lane
These alternatives were developed to establish what the intersection configuration requirements for operations to perform at LOS C or better during both peak periods. Per Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, “Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on State highway facilities”. Additionally, providing manageable queuing lengths is another goal of the design alternatives. As these are two very different types of control strategies, there are differences in the overall intersection footprint and lane geometry needs.

5.2 Intersection Analysis

5.2.1 Existing
Currently, the minor street left-turn movement at the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection is calculated to operate at LOS B during the AM and PM peak hours.

Appendix B contains the Existing peak hour intersection analysis worksheets.

Page 139 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 18 5.2.2 Existing With Willow Bend Traffic
With the Willow Bend Project, the fourth leg (west leg) of the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection will be built. Table 5–1 shows the intersection operations for each of the four (4) intersection controls.

As shown in Table 5–1, with the Willow Bend traffic, this intersection is calculated to operate at LOS C or better under all the traffic control alternatives listed in Section 5.1 during the AM and PM peak hours.

Appendix C contains the Existing With Willow Bend Traffic peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for all alternatives.

It was determined that up to 60 units can be built before improvements in the traffic control (AWSC) will be required.

5.2.3 Year 2045
As shown in Table 5–1, In the Year 2045 traffic, the subject intersection is calculated to operate at LOS D or better under all the traffic control alternatives listed in Section 5.1 during the AM and PM peak hours.

Appendix D contains the peak hour intersection analysis worksheets for all alternatives.

5.3 Queue Analysis
Table 5–2 summarizes the queues at the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection for all analysis scenarios. The longest queue between the AM and PM peak hours is shown for each alternative. For all alternatives, the 95th percentile queue lengths are calculated. Queue analysis worksheets are available for signalized intersections but not for unsignalized intersections. Queues for roundabouts are provided in the peak hour analysis worksheets.

5.3.1 Existing
As seen in Table 5–2, under Existing conditions, the queue in the southbound left-turn movement is within the available storage. Northbound and eastbound left-turn movements do not exist. In the westbound approach, the left and right movements are shared.

5.3.2 Existing With Willow Bend Project
With the Willow Bend Project, it is recommended that 75-foot-long left-turn lanes be provided in the westbound, northbound, and eastbound approaches. As seen in Table 5–2, with the Willow Bend Project, queues in all left-turn movements are calculated to be within the available storage.

Appendix C contains the Existing With Willow Bend queue analysis worksheets.

5.3.3 Year 2045
As seen in Table 5–2, in the Year 2045, queues in all left-turn movements are calculated to be within the available storage.

Appendix D contains the Year 2045 queue analysis worksheets.

Page 140 of 403 ends

INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
Scenario / Control Type Peak Hour Delay a LOS b
Existing
MSSC c AM 12.7 B
PM 11.0 B

Existing with Willow Bend Project
MSSC AM 18.6 C
PM 22.3 C

AWSC d AM 12.0 B
PM 12.3 B
Signal AM 23.4 C
PM 19.9 B
Single-Lane Roundabout AM 5.2 A
PM 5.7 A

Two-Lane Roundabout AM 4.9 A
PM 5.3 A

Year 2045 with Willow Bend Project
MSSC AM 26.6 D
PM 33.6 D

AWSC AM 16.1 C
PM 17.4 C
Signal AM 24.8 C
PM 20.6 C
Single-Lane Roundabout AM 6.2 A
PM 6.8 A
Two-Lane Roundabout AM 5.7 A
PM 6.3 A

Footnotes:
a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle.
b. Level of Service.
c. MSSC – Minor Street Stop Controlled intersection. Minor street left-turn delay, and LOS reported.
d. AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled intersection. Overall delay, and LOS reported.

SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED
Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B

20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C

35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D

55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E
≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F

Page 141 of 403 ends

QUEUE ANALYSIS
Scenario / Control
Type
Movement Storage
(feet)
95th Percentile
Queue
(feet) a
Adequate?
Existing
MSSC SBL 225 6 Yes

WBL - - NA

NBL DNE DNE NA

EBL DNE DNE NA
Existing With Willow Bend Project
MSSC SBL 225 6 Yes
WBL 75 13 Yes
NBL 100 0 Yes
EBL 100 22 Yes
AWSC SBL 225 b NA
WBL 75 b NA
NBL 100 b NA
EBL 100 b NA
Signal SBL 225 99 Yes
WBL 75 79 Yes
NBL 100 18 Yes
EBL 100 83 Yes
Single-Lane
Roundabout
SB >100 2 Yes
WB >100 1 Yes
NB >100 1 Yes
EB >100 1 Yes
Two-Lane
Roundabout
SB >100 2 Yes
WB >100 1 Yes
NB >100 1 Yes
EB >100 1 Yes

Page 142 of 403 ends

QUEUE ANALYSIS
Scenario / Control
Type
Movement Available Storage
(feet)
95th Percentile
Queue
(feet) a
Adequate?
Year 2045 With Willow Bend Project
MSSC SBL 225 3 Yes
WBL 75 25 Yes
NBL 100 1 Yes
EBL 100 37 Yes
AWSC SBL 225 b NA
WBL 75 b NA
NBL 100 b NA
EBL 100 b NA
Signal SBL 225 123 Yes
WBL 75 95 Yes
NBL 100 19 Yes
EBL 100 84 Yes
Single-Lane
Roundabout
SB >100 3 Yes
WB >100 1 Yes
NB >100 2 Yes
EB >100 1 Yes
Two-Lane
Roundabout
SB >100 3 Yes
WB >100 1 Yes
NB >100 1 Yes
EB >100 1 Yes
Footnotes:
a. 95th percentile queue length in feet (25 feet per vehicle). Longest of the AM and PM peak hour queue. b. Shared lane, queue not available.

General Notes:

MSSC – Minor Street Stop Controlled intersection
AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled intersection
DNE – Does not exist
NA – Not Applicable

Page 143 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 22 6.0 INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVES DISCUSSION
The following is a detailed discussion of each alternative traffic control for the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection.

6.1 Minor-Street Stop Control Alternative
The minor-street stop control alternative retains the existing Stop sign traffic control on westbound Countryside Drive and assumes a stop control on (the new) eastbound Countryside Drive. Analysis was completed using HCM 7 methodology and Synchro (version 12) software.

Figure 6–1 depicts the intersection geometry for the Minor-Street-Stop-Control (MSSC) alternative.

The following ultimate lane geometry with the second southbound through lane on SR 86 merging south of Countryside Drive is shown on Figure 6-1:
 Southbound: One left turn lane, one through lane and one shared through /right lane. As mentioned previously, the No. 2 SB may be a dedicated right turn lane for this project (future will be shared through/right lane)
 Westbound: One left turn lane and one shared through / right-turn lane  Northbound: One left turn lane, one through lane and one shared through /right lane  Eastbound: One left turn lane and one shared through / right-turn lane (new west leg) The eastbound and westbound lane assignment match and the second southbound through lane matches the 2 northbound through lanes.

Currently there is a fire hydrant at the southeast corner of the SR 86 / Countryside Drive intersection and two driveways immediately adjacent. Hence there is no opportunity for parking along the south curb of Countryside Drive, east of SR 86, for a distance of approximately 110 feet east of SR 86 and the provision of two (2) westbound lanes will not impede curbside parking. Currently, the volume in the westbound direction during the AM peak hour is approximately 56 in the left-turn movement and 114 in the right-turn movement. Therefore, having a dedicated left-turn lane will provide better operations at this intersection.

The critical minor-street left-turn delay in the westbound left-turn movement is reported in Table 5–1. As seen, the westbound left movement is calculated to operate at an acceptable LOS C during the AM and PM peak hours with delays of 20.2 seconds and 22.8 seconds during the AM & PM peak hours respectively, with the MSSC. The calculated overall average delay for the intersection is less than five seconds, as traffic on the major street (SR-86) does not stop.

The maximum calculated queue in the left-turn movements on all approaches is approximately one (1) vehicle or less during the AM and PM peak hours. The storage provided in the left-turn movements on all approaches can accommodate the calculated queues.

Appendix C contains the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic Minor-Street Stop Control Alternative queue analysis worksheets and Appendix D contains the same for Year 2045 with Willow Bend traffic.

Page 144 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 23 6.1.1 Safety Considerations
The most significant pedestrian conflict for MSSC intersections is pedestrians crossing the major street who have potential conflicts with through vehicles on the major street. Pedestrians crossing the minor street will encounter drivers turning into the minor street with drivers being processed through the stop sign. These drivers are focused primarily on looking for gaps in the major street traffic and may not see pedestrians.

6.1.2 Right-of-Way Easement Impacts
Within the intersection improvement limits and from available record information, there is not any recorded highway right of way along the west side SR-86, therefore it is assumed that prescriptive rights would be approximately 34 feet west of the highway centerline. Due to the required pavement widening to accommodate second southbound through lane, shoulder and drainage improvements, this alternative would require a minimum of 26 ft of additional right of way, along the west side of SR-86 from Willow Bend Drive to approximately 1,680 lineal feet south of Countryside Drive. The proposed right-of-way acquisition area would impact the existing agricultural field south of Countryside Drive.

However, this will only be required when the area south of Countryside drive is developed in the future.

The land north of Countryside Drive is the proposed single family home subdivision, requiring access onto SR-86 at Countryside Drive. The widening of SR 86 is necessary only along the frontage of the Willow Bend Project and does not need to extend to McCabe Road.

Due to the proposed southbound widening, this option would require the relocation of the power poles for the length of the widening. The poles carry both electrical distribution and communications facilities; therefore, both would be impacted by the pole relocation. The anticipated relocation length would be approximately 1,900 lineal feet. The construction estimate provided in Table 9-1, includes known estimated utility relocation costs.

6.1.3 Environmental Impacts
Due to the proposed development, a westbound leg of Countryside Drive extended would be constructed west of SR-86, thus creating a four-way intersection. No impacts to native habitat or visual resources are expected to occur with implementation of this proposed SR-86/Countryside Drive MSSC alternative.

6.2 All-Way Stop Control Alternative
The All-Way-Stop-Control (AWSC) alternative assumes stop control on all four approaches. Analysis was completed using HCM 7 methodology and Synchro (version 12) software.

Figure 6–2 depicts recommended lane geometry proposed for the AWSC alternative. As shown on Figure 6-2, a flashing R1-1 is recommended on the SR 86 median in both the north and south approaches to Countryside Drive. In addition, an advanced flashing W3-1 should be provided on SR 86 in both the north and south approaches to Countryside to alert drivers approaching the intersection

Page 145 of 403 ends

The overall intersection delay and LOS is reported in Table 5–1. As seen in Table 5–1, this intersection is calculated to operate at an overall LOS B during the AM and PM peak hours with delays of 12.0 seconds and 12.2 seconds during the AM & PM peak hours respectively, with AWSC.

The calculated queues in the left-turn movements on all approaches are one (1) vehicle or less during the AM and PM peak hours. The storage provided in the left-turn movements on all approaches can accommodate the calculated queues.

Appendix C the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic contains the All-Way Stop Control Alternative intersection and queue analysis worksheets and Appendix D Contains the same for the Year 2045 With Willow Bend traffic.

6.2.1 Safety Considerations
With the All-Way-Stop Control alternative, vehicles on all approaches will stop and proceed when clear. Pedestrian crosswalks will be provided on all approaches. This will eliminate vehicle / pedestrian conflicts since every vehicle has to stop before proceeding through the intersection. As described previously, development of the Willow Bend project is not anticipated to generate any substantial increase in pedestrian crossing demand at this location.

6.2.2 Right-of-Way Easement Impacts
The amount of widening on SR-86 for the AWSC alternative is the same as for the MSSC alternative and no additional right-of-way impacts are anticipated outside of what was discussed above. Please see the description in Section 6.1.2 above.

In addition, this alternative will have the same impacts and associated costs for the overhead utility relocations as noted in Section 6.1.2.

6.2.3 Environmental Impacts
The amount of widening on SR-86 for the AWSC alternative is the same as for the MSSC alternative and no additional environmental impacts are anticipated with this alternative. Please see the description in Section 6.1.3 above.

6.3 Traffic Signal Alternative
The traffic signal alternative assumes installation of a traffic signal with protected left-turn phasing for all approaches. Analysis was completed using HCM 7 methodology and Synchro (version 12) software.

Figure 6–3 depicts the intersection geometry for the Traffic Signal (Signal) alternative. As shown in Figure 6–3, it is proposed to provide the lane geometry proposed for the TWSC alternative, with the second southbound through lane merging south of Countryside Drive.

Page 146 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 25 The overall intersection delay and LOS is reported in Table 5–1. As seen in Table 5–1, this intersection is calculated to operate at an overall LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours with delays of 22.9 seconds and 19.2 seconds during the AM & PM peak hours respectively, with signal control.

The calculated queues in the left-turn movements on all approaches are five (5) vehicles or less during the AM and PM peak hours. The storage provided in the left-turn movements on all approaches can accommodate the calculated queues.

Appendix C contains the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic Signal Alternative intersection analysis and queue analysis worksheets and Appendix D contains the same for Year 2045 with Willow Bend traffic.

6.3.1 Safety Considerations
Traffic signals can reduce the likelihood of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts by providing visual and audible pedestrian signal indications in coordination with compatible vehicular traffic phases.

However, pedestrian conflicts can still occur due to red light running (illegal), right turns on green, left turns on green, and right turns on red (legal). The greatest left-turn volume is 10 vehicles on southbound approach for this project.

6.3.2 Right-of-Way Easement Impacts
The amount of widening on SR-86 for the Signal alternative is the same as for the MSSC alternative and no additional right-of-way impacts are anticipated outside of what was discussed above. Please see the description in Section 6.1.2 above.

6.3.3 Environmental Impacts
The amount of widening on SR-86 for the Signal alternative is the same as for the MSSC alternative and no additional environmental impacts are anticipated with this alternative. Please see the description in Section 6.1.3 above.

6.4 Roundabout Alternative
The following two roundabout options were studied:

Option 1
One-lane roundabout with one circulating lane, 140-foot outer diameter and 112 feet diameter of the central island. Single-lane approaches are proposed on all legs on SR-86 and Countryside Drive.

Figure 6–4 depicts the intersection geometry for the one-lane Roundabout Alternative Option 2
Two-lane roundabout with two circulating lanes, 150-foot outer diameter and 86 feet diameter of the central island. Two-lane approaches on SR-86, and single lane approaches on Countryside Drive are proposed.

Page 147 of 403 ends

As seen in Figures 6-4 and 6-5, the existing curvature at the south leg has been maintained to prevent improvements from exceeding the eastern right-of-way. A curve approach has been introduced for the north leg to enhance traffic calming as vehicles approach the roundabout. Additionally, tighter exit radii have been implemented at the east leg on Countryside Drive to avoid encroaching on existing properties. The shared path meets the minimum width requirement of 8 feet in both instances, while the single-lane roundabout provides a preferred width of 10 feet.

Analysis was completed using HCM 7 methodology and Synchro (version 12) software.

The overall intersection delay and LOS is reported in Table 5–1. As shown in Table 5–1, this intersection is calculated to operate at an overall LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours with delays of 5.2 seconds and 5.6 seconds during the AM & PM peak hours respectively, with Roundabout control.

The calculated queues in all approaches are one (1) vehicle or less during the AM and PM peak hours.

The storage provided in the left-turn movements on all approaches can accommodate the calculated queues.

In general, the performance of roundabouts during off-peak periods is good compared with other intersection improvement options, requiring fewer vehicles to stop or slow, though no off-peak analysis was completed at this intersection.

Appendix C contains the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic Signal Alternative intersection analysis worksheets and Appendix D contains the same for Year 2045 with Willow Bend traffic. The roundabout analysis worksheets also including the queues.

6.4.1 Safety Considerations
A roundabout is one of the options contemplated for this intersection. It may be noted that per Exhibit

10.3 Common Inscribed Circle Diameter Ranges in the Roundabout Guide, shown below, the diameter for a two-lane roundabout that accommodates STAA trucks, or equivalent of WB-62 or WB-67 trucks ranges between 140 to 180 feet.

Ideally, the entry speed for a single-lane roundabout should be no more than 20 mph and for a duallane roundabout should be no more than 25 mph, as indicated in Table 6-3 in the Roundabout Guide.

Hence the approach speed on SR 86 needs to be reduced from 50 mph to no more than 20 or 25 mph as described above. The circulatory speed within the roundabout should be 20 mph or less for both single and dual-lane roundabouts.

The diameter assumed for a roundabout at this intersection is 165 feet, approximately in the middle of the prescribed range. The purpose and result of a roundabout is to reduce the speed of traffic on the intersecting streets. In the northbound direction, due to the existing homes on the east curb of SR 86,

Page 148 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 27 the center of the roundabout has to be located to the west of the intersection, providing minimum deflection at the northbound entry into the roundabout. The following conditions prevail:
 Traffic entering the roundabout from the south does not have to reduce speed since they enter and exit the roundabout at almost 900.
 The entry angle cannot be increased as there is not sufficient Caltrans ROW. Increasing it would require major realignment of SR 86 through Countryside Drive with acquisition of a large amount of right-of way, new easements to the IID for the relocation of the undergrounded Dogwood Lateral 2 canal and necessary eminent domain for ROW acquisition and relocation of multiple single-family homes, which would result in additional environmental impacts.

ROW needs are from both the east and west of SR 86.
 Traffic entering the roundabout from the east at speeds of 15 mph or lower, has to merge with traffic traveling at almost 50 mph.
 Reducing the diameter is not ideal since, as a result, trucks will have to use the center island to negotiate the roundabout.
 A residential project is proposed at the northwest corner of the SR 86 / Countryside Drive intersection with two southbound lanes on SR 86 per the city’s mobility element. This will require the two southbound lanes to merge into one lane prior to entering the one lane roundabout option. This will also require new easements to the IID for the relocation of the undergrounded Dogwood Lateral 2 canal and necessary eminent domain for ROW acquisition and relocation of multiple single-family homes, which would result in additional environmental impacts.
 Roundabouts result in an increase in single-vehicle and fixed-object crashes compared to other intersection treatments.
 Multilane roundabouts present more difficulties for individuals with blindness or low vision due to challenges in detecting gaps and determining that vehicles have yielded at crosswalks.

Exhibit 10.3. Common Inscribed Circle Diameter Ranges
Roundabout Configuration Typical AASHTO Design Vehicle Common ICD Rangea Mini-roundabout SU-30 45 ft to 90 ft (14 m to 27 m)
Compact roundabout BUS-40 WB-40
WB-62 or WB-67b
65 ft to 120 ft (20 m to 37 m)
Single-lane roundabout
(non-traversable central island)
BUS-40 WB-40
WB-62 or WB-67
90 ft to 120 ft (27 m to 37 m)
100 ft to 130 ft (30 m to 40 m)
120 ft to 180 ft (37 m to 55 m)
Multilane roundabout (2 lanes circulating)c WB-40
WB-62 or WB-67
135 ft to 160 ft (41 m to 49 m)
140 ft to 180 ft (43 m to 55 m)
Multilane roundabout (3 lanes circulating)c WB-62 or WB-67 190 ft to 240 ft (58 m to 73 m) Footnotes:

Page 149 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 28 a. Assumes 90-degree angles between entries and no more than four legs. List of possible design vehicles is not comprehensive. b. Serving WB-62 or larger vehicles as through movements. Right turning may require other special considerations for approach and splitter island design.
c. Common ICD ranges depend on whether the design vehicle will straddle or stay in-lane. Does not account for special vehicles or OSOWs.  Trucks may also have to straddle the two lanes, thus disrupting the path of other vehicles through the roundabout, which is not desirable.
 The posted speed limit on SR 86 is 50 mph. The needs to slow down to 20-25 mph on the approaches to the roundabout. The reduction in speed can only be achieved by the introduction of a curve on the approaches to slow traffic speeds that would result in requiring additional right-of-way. This large reduction in the speed is not desirable and hence, a roundabout is not appropriate traffic control at this intersection.
 The center of the Roundabout is offset to the west from the SR 86 center line because of existing homes along the eastern curb of SR 86 and due to right-of-way constraints. Therefore, sufficient deflection is not provided at the entry to the roundabout from the south.

For the reasons stated above, a roundabout is not the ideal traffic control type for this intersection.

The following roundabout description of roundabouts and their functioning provided in the Roundabout Guide for, 2023 is provided for information:

Multilane roundabouts include at least two circulating lanes in at least a portion of the circulatory roadway. They include roundabouts with entries on one or more approaches that flare from one to two or more lanes that circulate through the roundabout. In some cases, the roundabout may have a different number of lanes on one or more approaches (e.g., two-lane entries on the major street and one-lane entries on the minor street). The geometric design includes raised splitter islands, a truck apron, a non-traversable central island, and appropriate entry path deflection.

Multilane roundabouts have some key differences from single-lane roundabouts. They typically have higher circulating and exiting speeds than single-lane roundabouts. This is a result of their larger ICD and wider entry and exit configurations that allow vehicles to navigate larger curve radii on their travel paths through the roundabout. Circulatory roadway widths may also vary, depending on the number of lanes and the design vehicle turning requirements. A constant width is not required throughout the entire circulatory roadway, and it is desirable to provide the minimum width necessary to serve the required lane configurations within that specific portion of the roundabout.

A multilane entry or exit also increases pedestrian crossing exposure compared with a singlelane entry or exit. Research into accessible pedestrian design has concluded that in many circumstances, additional geometric treatments, traffic control treatments, or both are needed to make the crossing accessible to all pedestrians.

Page 150 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 29 Multilane roundabouts have more conflict points (16) than single-lane roundabouts (4) because of additional lanes and the associated width between curbs, as with any larger intersection.

Multilane roundabouts often do not achieve the same levels of crash reduction as their singlelane counterparts. Multilane roundabouts serve higher traffic volumes over more lanes compared with single-lane configurations. However, the severity of crashes is generally comparable at multilane and single-lane roundabouts (5, 6). The low speeds present in roundabouts compared with those of non-roundabout intersections reduce the frequency of severe crashes.

6.4.2 Right-of-Way Easement Impacts
Option 1: One-Lane Roundabout
See Section 6.1.2 for a discussion on the existing right of way along with the required highway widening outside of the roundabout footprint at SR-86 and Countryside Drive. If the proposed onelane roundabout were implemented at the subject location, right of way would be required at the northwest and southwest quadrants of the intersection. The roundabout design concept, depicting a 140-foot inscribed diameter, will accommodate a STAA 53 design vehicle.

Since the design of the roundabout footprint would push most of the improvements to the west side of SR 86, into the proposed subdivision boundary, the developer would be required to dedicate approximately 35 feet from the edge of pavement to accommodate the roundabout improvements and necessary drainage features.

Like the prior noted alternatives, the overhead utility facilities along the west side of SR 86 will be impacted by the single lane roundabout. However, the limits of impact will be less than the other options, as the roundabout option does not require an auxiliary merge lane south of Countryside Drive.

The anticipated relocation length would be approximately 900 lineal feet. The construction estimates provided in Table 7-1 include known estimated utility relocation costs.

Option 2: Two-Lane Roundabout
See Section 6.1.2 for a discussion on the existing right of way along with the required highway widening outside of the roundabout footprint at SR-86 and Countryside Drive. If the proposed twolane roundabout were implemented at the subject location, right of way would be required at the northwest and southwest quadrants of the intersection. The roundabout design concept, depicting a 150-foot inscribed diameter, will accommodate a STAA 53 design vehicle.

Similar to the one-lane roundabout option, since the design of the roundabout footprint would push most of the improvements to the west side of SR 86, into the proposed subdivision boundary, the developer would be required to dedicate approximately 65 feet from the edge of pavement to accommodate the roundabout improvements and necessary drainage features.

Page 151 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 30 In addition, this alternative will have the same impacts and associated costs for the overhead utility relocations as noted in Option 1 above.

6.4.3 Environmental Impacts
Option 1: One-Lane Roundabout
The One-Lane Roundabout intersection improvements will require additional right of way beyond what is described in Section 6.1.3, however, all additional roundabout right of way would take away from any onsite development potential. The project does not foresee any impacts to native habitat or visual resources are expected to occur with implementation of the SR-86/Countryside Drive one-lane Roundabout option.

Option 2: Two-Lane Roundabout
The Two-Lane roundabout intersection improvements will require additional right of way beyond what is described in Section 6.1.3, however, all additional roundabout right of way would take away from any onsite development potential. The project does not foresee any impacts to native habitat or visual resources are expected to occur with implementation of the SR-86/Countryside Drive two-lane Roundabout option.

Page 152 of 403 ends

SCALE: 1" = 60' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N Conceptual Plan - Two-Way Stop Control Willow Bend Figure 6-1 SR-86 SR-86 SR-86 PROJECT DRWY COUNTRYSIDE DR 14' 12' 14' 14' 12' 14' 12' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED

MATCHLINE B

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE A

SEE UPPER RIGHT

MATCHLINE B
SEE UPPER RIGHT MERGE TAPER 660'

MATCHLINE C

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE C
SEE UPPER RIGHT EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED MERGE TAPER 660'

MATCHLINE A
SEE LOWER LEFT SR-86 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 5' RAISED MEDIAN RAISED MEDIAN

Page 153 of 403 ends

SCALE: 1" = 60' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N Conceptual Plan - All-Way Stop Control Willow Bend Figure 6-2

MATCHLINE A

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE B

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE A

SEE UPPER RIGHT

MATCHLINE B
SEE UPPER RIGHT SR-86 SR-86 SR-86 PROJECT DRWY COUNTRYSIDE DR 14' 12' 14' 14' 12' 14' 12' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' MERGE TAPER 660' EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED

MATCHLINE C

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE C
SEE UPPER RIGHT SR-86 EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED MERGE TAPER 660' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 5' RAISED MEDIAN RAISED MEDIAN FLASHING R1-1 FLASHING W3-1

Page 154 of 403 ends

SCALE: 1" = 60' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N Conceptual Plan - Signal Control Willow Bend Figure 6-3 SR-86 SR-86 SR-86 PROJECT DRWY COUNTRYSIDE DR 14' 12' 14' 14' 12' 14' 12' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED

MATCHLINE B

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE A

SEE UPPER RIGHT

MATCHLINE B
SEE UPPER RIGHT MERGE TAPER 660'

MATCHLINE C

SEE LOWER LEFT

MATCHLINE C
SEE UPPER RIGHT EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED MERGE TAPER 660'

MATCHLINE A
SEE LOWER LEFT SR-86 12' 12' 6' 12' 12' 6' 12' 5' RAISED MEDIAN 12' RAISED MEDIAN

Page 155 of 403 ends

SCALE: 1" = 60'

MATCHLINE A

SEE LOWER LEFT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N Single-Lane Roundabout Concept Plan Willow Bend Figure 6-4

MATCHLINE A
SEE UPPER RIGHT SR-86 SR-86

PROJECT DRWY

COUNTRYSIDE DR
6'
12'
12' 12' 12' 14' 14' 4' 10' 10' 13' 11' 5' 13' 11' 5' WILLOW BEND DR 18' 18' 13' 13' 12' 12' 8' 8' 10' 4' 14' 4' 12' 20' 12' 4' 10' 14' 14' 14' 14' ISD = 140' 13' 11' 5' 18' 13' 12' 8'

CENTRAL ISLAND
DIAMETER = 112'

Page 156 of 403 ends

SCALE: 1" = 60' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N 2X1 Roundabout Concept Plan Willow Bend Figure 6-5

MATCHLINE B
SEE LOWER RIGHT SR-86 SR-86
PROJECT DRWY COUNTRYSIDE DR14' 14' 12'12'4' 8' 8' 8'4' 14' 4' 12' 12' 4' 8' 16' 16' 16' ICD = 150' 16'16' 14' 14' 12' 12' 12' 16' 12'

MATCHLINE A

SEE UPPER LEFT

MATCHLINE A
SEE LOWER RIGHT 16' SR-8612' 12' 6' 6' 6' 6' 14' 12' 12'

MATCHLINE B

SEE UPPER LEFT

CENTRAL ISLAND
DIAMETER = 86' 8' 8' 8' 8' 4' 4' 4' 4' 6' 6' 24' 11' 5' 1.5' 24' 11' 5' 1.5'

Page 157 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 36 7.0 SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
The following is a discussion of the various signal warrants for the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection for the Near-Term.

Assumptions
The SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection is currently a three-leg intersection with no west leg. As explained in Section 3.0 Year 2045 Traffic Volumes, the Willow Bend Project will install the west leg and provide the following geometry on the Project Opening Day:
 Southbound: One left turn lane one through lane and one shared through /right lane. The No. 2 SB may be a dedicated right turn lane for this project (future will be shared through/right lane).
 Westbound: One left turn lane and one shared through / right-turn lane  Northbound: One left-turn lane, one through and one shared through / right-turn lane  Eastbound: One left turn lane and one shared through / right-turn lane (new west leg) The following assumptions are made in determining the conditions at the subject intersection:
 Approach Lanes – One right-turn lane and one left-turn lane will be provided in the eastbound and westbound directions on Countryside Drive.

Page 847 ends

Edition states “for an approach with one lane for through and right-turning traffic plus a left-turn lane, if engineering judgment indicates that it should be considered a one-lane approach because the traffic using the left-turn lane is minor, the total traffic volume approaching the intersection should be applied against the signal warrants as a one-lane approach. The approach should be considered two lanes if approximately half of the traffic on the approach turns left and the left-turn lane is of sufficient length to accommodate all left-turn vehicles.” At this location, the project access road is a two-lane road (one lane in each direction) with dedicated left-turn and a shared through/right lanes at the intersection and it is not considered to be possible for traffic to enter SR 86 with “minimal conflict”. The storage in the left-turn lane will not be sufficient to accommodate the entire left-turning traffic. Hence, this approach will function and is analyzed as a one lane approach.
 Approach Volumes – As stated in the MUTCD, “engineering judgment and rationale should be applied to a street approach with one left-turn lane plus a shared through/right lane. In this case, the degree of conflict of minor-street right-turn traffic with traffic on the major street should be considered. Thus, right-turn traffic should not be included in the minorstreet volume if the movement enters the major street with minimal conflict. The approach should be evaluated as a one-lane approach with only the traffic volume in the through/leftturn lane considered.”

Page 158 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 37 As described above, a shared through right lane and a left-turn lane is provided on the approach to SR 86, on countryside Drive. Based on the number of approach lanes and the MUTCD (previous bullet item), based on engineering judgement, a 25% reduction in right-turning traffic is assumed since this is considered a one-lane approach (see above) and right-turning traffic has to enter a 4- lane Major Road.

7.1 Near-Term Conditions
Near-Term traffic volumes include the traffic generated by the proposed Willow Bend Project.

Warrant 1 – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
Methodology
The need for a traffic signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of 8 hours of an average day:

A. The vehicles per hour given in both 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; or
B. The vehicles per hour given in both 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approaches, respectively, to the intersection.

In applying each condition, the major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours.

On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 8 hours. If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 70% columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 100 percent columns.

The subject intersection is located in an isolated community and the posted speed limit is 50 mph.

Therefore the 70% criterion was used for all warrants as applicable, in this study.

Table 7–1 shows the 70% volume thresholds for two-lane (or more) approaches on the major street and one-lane approach on the minor street.

TABLE 7–1
WARRANT 1: EIGHT - HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME: EXISTING
70% CRITERIA
Warrant 1 Vehicles Per Hour on Major Street
(Total of Both Approaches)
Vehicles Per Hour on Higher-Volume Minor-Street
(One Direction Only)

Condition A 420 105
Condition B 630 53

Page 159 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 38 Calculations
Table 7–2 compares the actual 24-hour volumes to the minimum volumes (Table 7–1) required to satisfy this warrant. As seen in Table 7–2, the Condition A warrant volumes are met for only one hour and hence Condition A is not satisfied. Condition B warrant volumes are met for only seven (7) hours on a typical day and hence Condition B is not satisfied.

Based on the above, Warrant 1 is not satisfied in the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

TABLE 7–2
WARRANT 1: TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA: EXISTING WITH WILLOW BEND TRAFFIC 70% CRITERIA
Hour Begin SR-86
(Major Street)
Countryside Drive
(Minor Street)
1-A 1-B
0:00 38 3 N N
1:00 22 2 N N
2:00 35 0 N N
3:00 53 3 N N
4:00 84 5 N N
5:00 208 50 N N
6:00 316 43 N N
7:00 619 217 Y Y
8:00 507 64 N N
9:00 420 42 N N
10:00 405 55 N N
11:00 497 39 N N
12:00 589 55 N Y
13:00 358 65 N N
14:00 611 59 N Y
15:00 756 78 N Y
16:00 723 68 N Y
17:00 819 85 N Y
18:00 559 63 N Y
19:00 375 26 N N
20:00 306 31 N N
21:00 234 18 N N
22:00 144 10 N N
23:00 61 5 N N

Total 8,739 1,086 1 7

Page 160 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 39 Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, for each of any 4 hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) all fall above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-1 for the existing combination of approach lanes, on the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 4 hours. If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-2 may be used in place of Figure 4C-1.

Calculations
As explained previously, the 70% criterion applies. Therefore, Figure 4C-2 applies. Table 7–3 summarizes the Warrant 2 calculations. As seen in Figure 4C-2 below, all hourly traffic volumes except two fall below the “2 Lane & 1 Lane” curve when plotted on Figure 4C-2 of the California MUTCD.

Based on the above, Warrant 2 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Subject Curve

Page 161 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 40 TABLE 7–3
WARRANT 2, FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR WARRANT: EXISTING WITH WILLOW BEND TRAFFIC Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Warrant Satisfied * Yes No  Approach Lanes One 2 or More
Both Approaches -Major Street X
Highest Approaches -Minor Street X
* All Plotted points fall above the curves in MUTCD Figure 4C-1 or 4C-2 Yes No  Warrant 3 – Peak Hour
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met:

A. If all of the three conditions exist for the same 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day:

1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds:4 Vehicles-hours for a one-lane approach; or 5 vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach, and

2. The volume on the same-minor street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, and

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

B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume on the minor – street approach (one direction only) for 1 hour (or any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes.

If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, Figure 4C-4 may be used in place of Figure 4C-3 to satisfy the criteria in the second category.

Calculations
None of the three conditions of Part A are satisfied and hence Part A is not satisfied. As explained previously, the 70% criterion applies for Part B. Therefore, the Figure 4C-4 is used in place of Figure 4C-3. Table 7–4 summarizes Warrant 3 calculations. As seen in Table 7–4, peak hour traffic volumes

Page 162 of 403 ends

The unsignalized Existing + Willow Bend peak hour intersection analysis indicates LOS C (22.9 seconds delay) during the AM peak hour and LOS B (19.2 seconds delay) during the PM peak hour.

The calculated 95th percentile queue in the eastbound left-turn lane is 99 feet or approximately 4 cars length in the AM peak hour and 25 feet or approximately 1 car length in the PM peak hour. The Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D.

Based on the above, and Table 7–4, Warrant 3 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Page 163 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 42 TABLE 7–4
WARRANT 3: PEAK - HOUR: EXISTING
Warrant 3 – Peak Hour Part A or Part B Satisfied Yes No  Part A
(All Parts 1, 2, and 3 below must be satisfied)
Satisfied Yes No 

1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor-street approach controlled by a STOP sign equal or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; AND
Yes No 

2. The volume on the same-minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND
Yes  No

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

Yes No 
Part B Satisfied Yes No 
Approach Lanes One 2 or More
Both Approaches -Major Street X
Highest Approaches -Minor Street X
The plotted points for vehicles per hour on Major streets (both approaches) and the corresponding per hour higher volume vehicle minor street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any consecutive 15-minute period) fall above the applicable curves in MUTCD Figure 4C-3 or 4C-4.

Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or midblock shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following criteria are met:

A. The pedestrian volume crossing the major street at an intersection or midblock location during an average day is 100 or more for each of any 4 hours or 190 or more during any 1 hour; and
B. There are fewer than 60 gaps per hour in the traffic stream of adequate length to allow pedestrians to cross during the same period when the pedestrian volume criterion is satisfied. Where there is a divided street having a median of sufficient width for pedestrians to wait, the requirement applies separately to each direction of vehicular traffic.

The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic signal along the major street is less than 300 feet unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. If this warrant is met and a traffic control

Page 164 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 43 signal is justified by an engineering study, the traffic control signal shall be equipped with pedestrian signal heads conforming to requirements set forth in Chapter 4E of the MUTCD.

Calculations
As explained previously, pedestrians are not a major factor at this intersection and therefore, Warrant 4 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Warrant 5 – School Crossing
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered when an engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number and size of groups of school children at an established school crossing across the major street shows that the number of adequate gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the children are using the crossing less than the number of minutes in the same period (see Section 7A.03) and there are a minimum of 20 students during the highest crossing hour. Before a decision is made to install a traffic control signal, consideration should be given to the implementation of other remedial measures, such as warning signs, flashers, school speed zones, school crossing guards, or a grade-separated crossing. The School Crossing signal warrant shall not be applied at locations where the distance to the nearest traffic control signal along the major street is less than 90 m (300 ft.) unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic.

Calculations
There are no schools in the vicinity of the proposed intersection and therefore this warrant does not apply. Thus, Warrant 5 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, one of the following criteria are met:

A. On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominantly in one direction, the adjacent traffic control signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicular platooning.

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

Calculations
The proposed intersection will not improve coordination along the SR-86 corridor and therefore, this warrant does not apply. Thus, Warrant 6 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Page 165 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 44 Warrant 7 – Crash Experience
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that, all of the following criteria are met:

A. Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency; and,
B. Five or more reported crashes of types susceptible to correction by a traffic control signal, have occurred within a 12-month period, each crash involving personal injury or property damage apparently exceeding the applicable requirements for a reportable crash; and C. For each of 8 hours of an average day, the vehicles per hour (vph) given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1, or the vph in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exists on the major-street and the higher-volume minor-street approach, respectively, to the intersection, or the volume of pedestrian traffic is not less than 80 percent of the requirements specified in the pedestrian Volume warrant. These major-street and minor-street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours.

If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the traffic volumes in the 56 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in place of the 80 percent columns.

Calculations
A total of one (1) collision occurred on SR-86 at Countryside Drive based on collision data provided by the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) over a six-year period from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2021. This collision involved a vehicle hitting an object, causing injury to one person. There are no fatalities reported at this location. Based on this discussion, Warrant 7 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Warrant 8 – Roadway Network
Methodology
The need for a traffic signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the common intersection of two or more major routes meets one or both of the following criteria:

A. The intersection has a total existing, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour of a typical weekday and has 5-year projected traffic volumes based on an engineering study, that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 during an average weekday, or,

Page 166 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 45 B. The intersection has a total existing or immediately projected entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours of a non-normal business day (Saturday or Sunday).

A major route as used in this signal warrant shall have one or more of the following characteristics.

A. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow; or
B. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, or traversing a City; or C. It appears as a major route on an official plan, such as a major street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study.

Calculations
The above thresholds are not met at this intersection. Therefore, Warrant 8 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

Warrant 9, Intersection Near a Grade Crossing
Methodology
The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following criteria are met:

A. A grade crossing exists on an approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign and the center of the track nearest to the intersection is within 140 feet of the stop line or yield line on the approach; and
B. During the highest traffic volume hour during which rail traffic uses the crossing, the plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the minor-street approach that crosses the track (one direction only, approaching the intersection) falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-9 or 4C-10 for the existing combination of approach lanes over the track and the distance D, which is the clear storage distance as defined in Section 1A.13.

Calculations
No grade crossing exists in the vicinity of this intersection. Therefore, Warrant 9 is not satisfied for the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic condition.

7.2 Long-Term (Year 2045) Conditions
Traffic counts cannot be counted at the SR 86 / Countryside Drive intersection in the Year 2045.

Hence, Figure 4C-103(CA) Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Average Traffic Estimate Form) based on Year 2045 ADT volumes was utilized to determine if Signal Warrants are satisfied in the Year 2045 with Willow Bend Traffic. The following three warrants are not satisfied:
 Condition A – Minimum vehicular Volume Warrant

Page 167 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 46  Condition B, Interruption of Continuous Traffic
 The combination of Conditions A & B
Therefore, signal warrants are not satisfied at the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection in the Existing With Willow Bend Traffic and the Year 2045 with Willow Bend Traffic conditions.

Figure 4C-103(CA) Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet (Average Traffic Estimate Form) based on Year 2045 ADT volumes is included in Appendix E.

7.3 Summary of Warrants Satisfied
Table 7–9 summarizes the warrants satisfied at the proposed SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection for the two analysis scenarios. As seen in Table 7–9, none of the warrants are satisfied in the NearTerm conditions. In the Long-Term (Year 2045) conditions, Warrant 1 (Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume), Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) and Warrant 3 (Peak Hour Volume) are also not satisfied.

TABLE 7–9

SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Warrant Near-Term
(With Willow Bend Traffic)
Long-Term
(With Willow Bend Traffic)

1. Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not satisfied Not satisfied per Figure 4C103(CA). See Appendix E. 2. Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Not satisfied

3. Peak hour Volume Not satisfied

4. Pedestrian Volume Not satisfied

5. School Crossing Not satisfied

6. Coordinated Signal System Not satisfied

7. Crash Experience Not satisfied

8. Roadway Network Not satisfied

9. Intersection Near a Grade Crossing Not satisfied

Page 168 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 47 8.0 PROJECT COSTS
This section will provide an analysis of the various costs associated with the four traffic control alternatives analyzed in this report.

8.1 Construction Cost
The construction cost for the four alternatives, including necessary widening to accommodate the required turn lanes, is summarized in Table 8–1. The project costs include costs for widening, traffic signals / stop signs, and also relocation of utilities such as gas, electric, water, sewer, stormwater, or streams of water.

There will be a cost saving in terms of right-of-way acquisition and construction for the widening of the portion of SR 86 south of Countryside Drive in the interim. However, when the area south of Countryside Drive is developed, this cost will be incurred. The cost shown accounts for the ultimate condition that includes widening for 1,680 feet south of Countryside Drive, that will occur in the future.

TABLE 8–1

ALTERNATIVES CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Alternative Construction Cost
2-Way Stop Pavement Widening $1,140,000
4-Way Stop Pavement Widening $1,155,000
Traffic Signal w/ Pavement Widening $1,590,000
-Lane Roundabout w/ corners Widening $2,014,000
2-Lane Roundabout w/ corners Widening $2,478,000

For the above estimated construction costs, the overhead utility relocations for the 2-Way Stop, 4-Way Stop, and Traffic Signal were estimated at $160,000 and both roundabout alternatives were estimated at $70,000.

8.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost
Life cycle costs include the initial construction costs, user costs and benefits, maintenance costs and rehabilitation costs. The 20-year Stop-Control Condition, Traffic Signal Maintenance and Roundabout Costs are provided in Tables 8–2 through 8–4. It should be noted that the 20-year cost is determined assuming a 2% maintenance cost increase per year for 20 years.

Page 169 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 48 TABLE 8–2
20-YEAR STOP-CONTROL CONDITION MAINTENANCE COSTS (INTERSECTION LIGHTING) Cost Item Lifespan
(Years)
Replacement
Cost
Cost Per Year 20-Year Cost
Electrical Costs N/A N/A $1,750 $42,500
Maintenance N/A N/A $2,200 $53,500
Overheard Safety Lighting Luminaires (x4) 15 $15,000 a $1,000 $24,300 Street Light Poles (x4) 50 $14,000 a $280 $6,800
Total:

$127,100
Footnotes:
a. Denotes total cost
TABLE 8–3
20-YEAR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE COSTS
Cost Item Lifespan
(Years)
Replacement
Cost
Cost Per Year 20-Year Cost
Electrical Costs N/A N/A $1,750 $42,500
Maintenance N/A N/A $2,200 $53,500
Controller Cabinet & Equipment 20 $44,000 $2,200 $53,500 Video Detection Cameras 15 $16,500 $1,100 $26,700
Vehicle Detection Loops 10 $6,800 $680 $16,500
Vehicle LED Indications 10 $15,000 $1,500 $36,500
Pedestrian LED Indications 10 $9,500 $950 $23,100
Internally Illuminated Street Name
Signs (IISNS)
15 $4,050 a
$270 $6,600
Overhead Safety Lighting Luminaires 15 $15,000 a $1,000 $24,300 Wiring 30 $45,000 $1,500 $36,500
Signal Poles & Mast Arms 50 $370,000 a $7,400 $179,800
Total: $499,500
Footnotes:
a. Denotes total cost

Page 170 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 49 TABLE 8–4
20-YEAR ROUNDABOUT MAINTENANCE COSTS (INTERSECTION LIGHTING) Cost Item Lifespan
(Years)
Replacement
Cost
Cost Per Year 20-Year Cost
Electrical Costs N/A N/A $1,750 $42,500
Maintenance N/A N/A $2,200 $53,500
Overhead Safety Lighting Luminaires 15 $45,000 a $3,000 $72,900 Street Light Poles 50 $42,000 a $840 $20,400
Total: $189,300
Footnotes:
a. Denotes total cost

Page 171 of 403 ends

LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-23-3841 SR-86 / Countryside Drive ICE
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\ICE Report\Report\1. Dec 2024\Dec 3-2024 SR 86-Countryside Drive ICE Report - Clean.docx 50 9.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The purpose of the ICE process is to objectively evaluate and screen intersection control alternatives at the SR-86 / Countryside Drive intersection. As part of the screening process, three intersection control alternatives were evaluated and analyzed in addition to the existing MSSC condition, an AWSC alternative, a Traffic Signal alternative and a Dual-Lane yield controlled Roundabout alternative. The operations, safety, and right-of-way impacts were considered in each alternative.

According to the analysis results, all intersection control alternatives are forecast to operate at LOS D or better during the peak hours except with the MSSC alternative, which is calculated to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour in the long-term. The calculated 95th percentile queue lengths can be accommodated in all traffic control alternatives.

As described previously, signal warrants are not met in the Existing with Willow Bend Traffic or in the Year 2045 with Willow Bend Traffic condition and therefore, a traffic signal is not recommended.

Even though this intersection operates with the lowest delay and LOS with the roundabout alternative and the number of conflict points are the least, the roundabout traffic control alternative is not recommended for the following reasons:
 Traffic entering the roundabout from the south does not have to reduce speed since they enter and exit the roundabout at almost 900
. This would be considered a dangerous condition.
 To achieve a reduction in the approach speed, a curved approach needs to be introduced in the north leg to ensure traffic calming as vehicles approach the roundabout. This adjustment will require additional right-of-way on the east side, on the developer's property, requiring approximately 35 feet for the single-lane roundabout and 65 feet for the dual lane roundabout from the edge of pavement. Reducing the diameter is not recommended since, trucks would need to use the center island to negotiate the roundabout.  Trucks will have to straddle the two lanes, thus disrupting the path of other vehicles through the roundabout, which is not desirable.

The AWSC traffic control alternative adequately serves this intersection for the following reasons:
 The intersection operates at an adequate LOS C.
 All-Way-Stop-Control improvements can be made within the existing right-of-way.  This traffic control will eliminate vehicle / pedestrian conflicts since every vehicle has to stop before proceeding through the intersection.
 The cost of the AWSC alternative is between 50% to 60% of the cost of the traffic signal and the two roundabout alternatives.
 At a STOP sign, all traffic must stop and then proceed. Thus, traffic collisions occur at low speeds, resulting in lower impact collisions.

Page 172 of 403 ends

Table 9–1 is a comparison of the various parameters for each alternative.

It is recommended that the AWSC Alternative be implemented, based on the comparison of the ICE performance measures in Table 9–1 and the safety considerations listed above.

Page 173 of 403 ends

ALTERNATIVES PERFORMANCE SUMMARY TABLE
Performance Measure Minor- Street Stop
Control
All-Way Stop
Control
Traffic Signal Roundabout
(1-Lane)
Roundabout
(2-Lane)
Comments
Traffic Analysis Intersection Delay Analysis – All approaches LOS D or better (LOS A rated at a 5, LOS E rated at a 1).

Table 5–1
Queue Analysis – Adequate queue storage?
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Table 5–2
Traffic Safety Analysis Vehicle Conflicts a – The number of potential conflict points for all movements
based on intersection geometry.
40 40 40 8 14 -
Bicycle Conflicts a – The number of
potential conflict points for all movements
based on intersection geometry.
38 38 38 8 12 -
Pedestrian Conflicts a – The number of
potential conflict points for all movements
based on intersection geometry.
28 28 28 8 12 -
Design Right-of-Way (ROW) 26 ft of ROW for a
distance of 1.680 feet
along the west side of
SR-86 south of Willow
Bend Drive to 1,680
feet south of
Countryside Drive,
which is required only
in the future when the
area south of
Countryside Drive is
developed.
26 ft of ROW for a
distance of 1.680 feet
along the west side of
SR-86 south of Willow
Bend Drive to 1,680
feet south of
Countryside Drive,
which is required only
in the future when the
area south of
Countryside Drive is
developed.
26 ft of ROW for a
distance of 1.680 feet
along the west side of
SR-86 south of Willow
Bend Drive to 1,680
feet south of
Countryside Drive,
which is required only
in the future when the
area south of
Countryside Drive is
developed.
26 ft of ROW for a
distance of 1.680
feet along the west
side of SR-86 south
of Willow Bend
Drive to 1,680 feet
south of
Countryside Drive
and 35-foot rightof-way on the
developer's
property, from the
edge of pavement
26 ft of ROW for a
distance of 1.680
feet along the west
side of SR-86 south
of Willow Bend
Drive to 1,680 feet
south of
Countryside Drive
and 65-foot rightof-way on the
developer's
property, from the
edge of pavement
Section 6

CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE

Page 174 of 403 ends

TABLE 9–1 (CONTINUED)

ALTERNATIVES PERFORMANCE SUMMARY TABLE
Performance Measure Two-Way Stop
Control
All-Way Stop
Control
Traffic Signal
Alternative
Roundabout
(1-Lane)
Roundabout
(2-Lane)
Comments

CONTINUED FROM THE PREVIOUS PAGE
Non-Standard Features – Based on the Highway Design Manual (HDM). 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 6-1
through
Truck Accommodations – Serves design Figure 6-5 vehicle for all movements? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Project Costs Construction Cost $1.140,000 $1,155,000 $1,590,000 $2,014,400 $2,478,000 Tables 8-1 through 8–4 20-Year Operations & Maintenance Cost $127,200 $127,200 $499,500 $189,300 $189,300 TOTAL COST $1,267,200 $1,282,200 $2,089,500 $2,203,700 $2,667,300 Total Performance Measures Met No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Page 175 of 403 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx March 18, 2024
Mr. Angel Hernandez
City of El Centro
1275 Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243
LLG Reference: 3-23-3841
Subject: Willow Bend Project – Transportation Assessment City of El Centro
Dear Angel:

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) has prepared this letter report to conduct an analysis to determine which of the 2006 conditions of approval for the Willow Bend Project are still necessary, given the current transportation situation.

Specifically, this analysis focuses on whether the following ten (10) improvements are still necessary.

1. SR 86 between I-8 eastbound ramps and Wake Avenue – contribute a fairshare to widen to six lanes.

2. SR 86 / I-8 westbound ramp – contribute a fair-share to construct a westbound right-turn lane and a second northbound left-turn lane.

3. SR 86 / I-8 eastbound ramp – contribute a fair-share to construct two eastbound right-turn lanes and a second southbound left-turn lane.

4. SR 86 / Wake Avenue – contribute a fair-share to construct a second eastbound left-turn lane.

5. SR 86 / Horne Road – construct a raised median for full turning movement with southbound acceleration and deceleration lanes with a left turn in pocket and left turn at SR 86 and Horne Road. Subject to a credit from other traffic impact fees or reimbursement from other benefited projects in the area, at the City’s option.

6. SR 86 / Willow Bend Drive – contribute a fair-share to construct a rightin/right-out island from the Project driveway.

7. SR 86 / Countryside Drive – signalize the intersection.

8. SR 86 / McCabe Road – contribute a fair-share to signalize the intersection and construct dedicated eastbound and westbound left-turn pockets.

Page 176 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 2 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx

9. SR 86 between Project Access and McCabe Road – contribute a fair-share to widen to four lanes including along the Project frontage.

10. SR 86 between Wake Avenue and Danenberg Drive – contribute a fair-share to widen to four lanes.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 2006 conditions of approval originated from the Willow Bend Traffic Impact Study (dated March 2006) prepared by KOA. The Project proposed to construct 126 single-family homes on a vacant site located on the west side of State Route 86 (SR 86), south of Intersection 8 (I-8) between Horne Road and McCabe Road. The project was calculated to generate 1,286 daily trips with 98 AM peak hour trips and 132 PM peak hour trips but was not built.

The Project plans to construct 134 single-family homes which is the basis of this analysis to determine which portion of the conditions of approval are necessary. The latest Project trips are discussed in the Trip Generation / Trip Distribution section.

Access to the Project site would be provided from SR86 by two driveways, Willow Bend Drive and Countryside Drive.

Figure 1 shows the Project vicinity and Figure 2 illustrates, in more detail, the site location. Figure 3 shows the Project site plan.

3.0 TRAFFIC VOLUMES / EXISTING CONDITIONS

3.1 Existing Street Network
The following is a description of the existing street network in the study area.

SR-86 (4th Street) north / south facility and is classified as a 4-Lane Arterial in the City of El Centro Circulation Element. It is currently constructed as a four-lane divided roadway, providing two travel lanes per direction between the I-8 ramps and Wake Avenue. Between Wake Avenue and Countryside Drive, the roadway is constructed as a three-lane divided roadway, providing one southbound travel lane and two northbound travel lanes. From Countryside Drive to McCabe Road, it is constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway between the I-8 ramps and Wake Avenue. Sidewalks are provided on the east side between Wake Avenue and Danenberg Drive and between Willow Bend Drive and Countryside Drive. Curbside parking is not permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. The posted speed limit is 40 mph.

Wake Avenue is classified as a 2-lane Arterial in the City of El Centro Circulation Element. It is currently constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway with a two-way

Page 177 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 3 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx left turn lane, providing two travel lanes per direction, west of SR-86 (4th Street). East of SR-86 (4th Street), Wake Avenue is constructed as a four-lane undivided roadway.

This facility runs east-west. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway except for the south side, east of 6th Street. Curbside parking is not permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. The posted speed limit is 40 mph.

Horne Road is an unclassified roadway in the Imperial County Circulation Element.

It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. This facility runs eastwest. Sidewalks are not provided. Curbside parking is not permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. There is no posted speed limit.

Willow Bend Drive is an unclassified roadway in the City of El Centro Circulation Element. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway. This facility runs east-west. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway. Curbside parking is permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. There is no posted speed limit.

Countryside Drive is classified as a 2-lane Arterial in the City of El Centro Circulation Element. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway.

This facility runs east-west. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway.

Curbside parking is permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. There is no posted speed limit.

McCabe Road is classified as a 2-Lane Minor Collector in the Imperial County Circulation Element. It is currently constructed as a two-lane undivided roadway.

This facility runs east-west. Sidewalks are not provided. Curbside parking is not permitted. Bike lanes are not provided. There is no posted speed limit.

Figure 4 shows an existing conditions diagram.

3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes
The study area intersection peak hour volume counts were conducted on Thursday, March 7, 2022 with the exception of the SR 86 / Wake Avenue intersection, which was counted on Tuesday, December 14, 2021 for a traffic study recently prepared by LLG (Wake Avenue Affordable Housing). The study area street segment ADT volumes were obtained from the Wake Avenue Affordable Housing traffic study as well.

Figure 5 shows the Existing traffic volumes and Attachment 1 contains the Existing count sheets.

Page 178 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 4 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx

4.0 TRIP GENERATION / TRIP DISTRIBUTION

4.1 Trip Generation
Trip generation rates were obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. It should be noted that the original 2006 Project proposed 126 single-family homes and referred to the 7th Edition. The current study will analyze 134 singlefamily homes and is the basis of the analysis.

Table 1 summarizes the Project trip generation calculations. As shown in Table 1, the Project is calculated to generate 1,264 daily trips with 94 AM peak hour trips (24 inbound/ 70 outbound trips) and 126 PM peak hour trips (79 inbound/ 47 outbound trips).

4.2 Trip Distribution / Assignment
The Project traffic was distributed along SR 86 based on the site location, access to the I-8, existing traffic patterns in the area, anticipated traffic patterns to and from the site and a review of the previously submitted traffic study for the Willow Bend Project.

Figure 6 shows the Project traffic distribution. Figure 7 shows the Project traffic volumes. Figure 8 shows the Existing + Project traffic volumes.

5.0 NEAR-TERM ANALYSIS

5.1 Existing Operations

INTERSECTIONS
Table 2 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations under Existing conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 2, the study area intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours.

Attachment 2 contains the Existing intersection analysis worksheets.

STREET SEGMENTS
The street segment analysis prepared in this report reflects the roadway classification and LOS table contained in the Mobility Element adopted in Year 2021. Table 3 summarizes the daily street segment operations under Existing conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 3, the study area street segments are calculated to currently operate at LOS B or better.

5.2 Existing + Project Operations

INTERSECTIONS
Table 2 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations under Existing + Project conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 2, the study area intersections are

Page 179 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 5 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx calculated to continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours.

Attachment 3 contains the Existing + Project intersection analysis worksheets.

STREET SEGMENTS
Table 3 summarizes the daily street segment operations under Existing + Project conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 3, the study area street segments are calculated to continue to operate at LOS B or better.

5.3 Existing + Cumulative + Project Operations

INTERSECTIONS
Based on research and discussions with City staff, there are several cumulative projects within the project study area which would generate a relatively substantial amount of traffic between the date traffic counts were conducted and the Project’s opening year. Eleven (11) cumulative projects were determined to add traffic within the study area and were therefore included in the analysis. In addition, in order to account for ambient growth within the study area, LLG utilized the latest available Caltrans historical traffic volume data to calculate an appropriate growth factor.

Based on the growth rate calculations, an average yearly growth rate of 1.02% was obtained. To be conservative, a growth rate of 2% for three years was applied as ambient growth. These volumes were summed to obtain Cumulative projects traffic volumes. Project traffic volumes were then added to obtain Existing + Cumulative + Project traffic volumes. Table 4 shows the list of cumulative projects included in the analysis and their descriptions and locations. Attachment 1 contains the growth rate calculations.

Table 2 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations with the addition of cumulative projects and proposed Project traffic volumes (Existing + Cumulative + Project). As shown in Table 2, the study area intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the exception of the following intersection:
 SR 86 / Wake Avenue – LOS F during the PM peak hour

STREET SEGMENTS
Table 3 summarizes the daily street segment operations with the addition of cumulative projects and proposed Project traffic volumes (Existing + Cumulative + Project). As shown in Table 3, the study area street segments are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.

Page 180 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 6 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx Figure 9 shows the Cumulative projects traffic volumes. Figure 10 shows the Existing + Cumulative + Project traffic volumes. Attachment 4 contains the Existing + Cumulative + Project intersection analysis worksheets.

6.0 YEAR 2045 ANALYSIS
Per coordination with Caltrans, Year 2045 forecasted traffic volumes were analyzed in this report for informational purposes. In order to obtain future ADT and peak hour volumes for the Year 2045 conditions, a growth factor was applied to the existing traffic volumes. For the purposes of this report, a growth factor of 1.28 was obtained from the approved Circulation and Scenic Highways Element report (dated January 2008). The growth factor was calculated between the forecasted Year 2025 and Year 2050 ADT volumes. As a check for accuracy of the forecasted volumes, a comparison with the existing ADT traffic volume of 23,970 vehicles (see Figure 5) shows a reasonable Year 2025 ADT volume in the Circulation and Scenic Highways Element report of 24,890 vehicles. Therefore, it was deemed reasonable to use the calculated growth factor.

Attachment 5 contains excerpts from the Circulation and Scenic Highways Element report.

6.1 Year 2045 Operations

INTERSECTIONS
Table 5 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations under Year 2045 conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 5, the study area intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the exception of the following intersections:
 SR 86 / I-8 WB Ramps – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours  SR 86 / Wake Avenue – LOS E during the AM and LOS F during PM peak hour
 SR 86 / Horne Road – LOS E during the PM peak hour
 SR 86 / McCabe Road – LOS E during the AM and LOS F during the PM peak hour
Figure 11 shows the Year 2045 traffic volumes. Attachment 5 contains the Year 2045 intersection analysis worksheets.

STREET SEGMENTS
Table 6 summarizes the daily street segment operations under Year 2045 conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 6, the study area street segments are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.

Page 181 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 7 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx

6.2 Year 2045 + Project Operations

INTERSECTIONS
Table 5 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations under Year 2045 + Project conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 5, the study area intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the exception of the following intersections:
 SR 86 / I-8 WB Ramps – LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours  SR 86 / Wake Avenue – LOS E during the AM and LOS F during PM peak hour
 SR 86 / Horne Road – LOS F during the PM peak hour
 SR 86 / McCabe Road – LOS E during the AM and LOS F during the PM peak hour
Figure 12 shows the Year 2045 + Project traffic volumes. Attachment 6 contains the Year 2045 + Project intersection analysis worksheets.

STREET SEGMENTS
Table 6 summarizes the daily street segment operations under Year 2045 + Project conditions in the study area. As shown in Table 6, the study area street segments are calculated to operate at LOS D or better.

7.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The purpose of this letter report was to determine which of the 2006 conditions of approval for the Willow Bend Project are still necessary. The following conditions of approval were reviewed.

1. SR 86 between I-8 eastbound ramps and Wake Avenue – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the widening of SR 86 between I-8 and Wake Avenue to six lanes.

2. SR 86 / I-8 westbound ramp – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the provision of a westbound right-turn lane and a second northbound left-turn lane at the westbound ramp of SR 86 and I-8.

Page 182 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 8 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx It should be noted that this intersection already has a westbound right-turn lane. Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions.

Therefore, the remaining condition to construct a second northbound left-turn lane can be removed.

3. SR 86 / I-8 eastbound ramp – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the provision of two eastbound right-turn lanes and a second southbound left-turn lane at the eastbound ramp of SR 86 and I-8.

Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions.

Therefore, the condition to construct two eastbound right-turn lanes and a second southbound left-turn lane can be removed.

4. SR 86 / Wake Avenue – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the provision of a second eastbound leftturn lane at the intersection of SR 86 and Wake Avenue.

Based on the analysis for this intersection, an unacceptable level of service is calculated during the PM peak hour under near-term conditions. Therefore, the second eastbound left-turn lane at this intersection would improve the operation to an acceptable level of service under near-term conditions.

5. SR 86 / Horne Road – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall construct a raised median for full turning movement with southbound acceleration and deceleration lanes with a left turn in pocket and left turn at SR 86 and Horne Road. Subject to a credit for other traffic impact fees or reimbursement from other benefited projects in the area, at the City’s option.

Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions.

Therefore, the condition to construct a raised median and reconfigure the lane geometry at this intersection can be removed.

6. SR 86 / Willow Bend Drive – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the construction of a right turn in/right turn out island from Willow Bend Drive at SR 86.

It should be noted that this intersection currently has an island that allow for a southbound left-turn movement to enter Willow Bend Drive on the east leg.

Page 183 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 9 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions.

Since this intersection already has an island that only allows right-in/right-out at the Project driveway, the conditions for this intersection can be removed.

7. SR 86 / Countryside Drive – Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall signalize the SR 86 and Countryside Drive intersection.

Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions.

Therefore, the condition to signalize this intersection can be removed.

However, it is recommended that a northbound left-turn pocket be provided to allow for an inbound access at this driveway from the south outside of the thru lanes.

8. SR 86 / McCabe Road – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the signalization of the SR 86 and west McCabe Road intersection as well as the provision of a dedicated eastbound and westbound left turn pockets.

It should be noted that this intersection is already signalized. Based on the analysis for this intersection, acceptable levels of service are calculated during the AM and PM peak hours under near-term conditions. Therefore, the condition to provide dedicated eastbound and westbound left-turn pockets can be removed.

9. SR 86 between Project Access and McCabe Road – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the widening of SR 86 between the Project site and McCabe Road to four lanes along the project frontage.

Based on the analysis for this street segment, acceptable levels of service are calculated under near-term conditions. Therefore, the condition to widen this street segment to four lanes can be removed between the Project Access at Countryside Drive and McCabe Road. However, the condition to widen should still be implemented between Willow Bend Drive and Countryside Drive fronting the Project site.

10. SR 86 between Wake Avenue and Danenberg Drive – Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share

Page 184 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 10 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the widening of SR 86 between Wake Avenue and Danenberg Drive to four lanes.

8.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the preceding analysis of the near-term scenarios for the Willow Bend Project, it was determined that only a portion of the 2006 conditions of approval is deemed necessary to be implemented. The following location is calculated to operate at unacceptable levels of service and would therefore require the previously mentioned improvement.
 SR 86 / Wake Avenue – the applicant shall pay the City a fair-share payment or provide the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee (TIF), towards the provision of a second eastbound left-turn lane.

As shown in Table 2, implementing the condition of approval at the above-listed location would enhance the operations to an acceptable level. Attachment 7 contains the Existing + Cumulative + Project with mitigation intersection analysis worksheets.

Please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers
John Boarman, P.E. Renald Espiritu
Principal Transportation Engineer III
cc: File

FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Project Area Map
Figure 3: Project Site Plan
Figure 4: Existing Conditions Diagram

Page 185 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024

Page 11 ends

N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx Figure 5: Existing Traffic Volumes
Figure 6: Project Trip Distribution
Figure 7: Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 8: Existing + Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 9: Cumulative Projects Location Map
Figure 10: Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes
Figure 11: Existing + Cumulative + Projects Traffic Volumes Figure 12: Year 2045 Traffic Volumes
Figure 13: Year 2045 + Projects Traffic Volumes
TABLES
Table 1: Project Trip Generation
Table 2: Near-Term Intersection Operations
Table 3: Near-Term Street Segment Operations
Table 4: Cumulative Projects Information
Table 5: Year 2045 Intersection Operations
Table 6: Year 2045 Street Segment Operations

ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1: Intersection and street segment count sheets; growth rate calculations Attachment 2: Existing intersection analysis worksheets Attachment 3: Existing + Project intersection analysis worksheets Attachment 4: Existing + Cumulative + Project intersection analysis worksheets Attachment 5: Circulation and Scenic Highways Element report excerpts and Year 2045 intersection analysis worksheets
Attachment 6: Year 2045 + Project intersection analysis worksheets Attachment 7: Existing + Cumulative + Project with mitigation intersection analysis worksheets

Page 186 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 12
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 1

PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Land Use Size
Daily Trip Ends
(ADTs) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate a Volume Rate a In:Out Split a
Volume
Rate a In:Out Split a
Volume
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing 134 DU 9.43 / DU b 1,264 0.70 / DU b 26:74 24 70 94 0.94 / DU b 63:37 79 47 126 Footnotes: a. Rates are based on the trip rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. b. Rates for Single-Family Detached Housing (Land Use 210) was used. General Notes: 1. DU – dwelling units

Page 187 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 13
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 2

NEAR-TERM INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour Existing Existing + Project Existing +
Cumulative +
Project
Existing +
Cumulative +
Project with
Improvements
Delaya LOSb Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. SR 86 / I-8 WB Ramps Signal AM 25.2 C 26.1 C 51.5 D – – PM 22.5 C 23.6 C 40.7 D – –2. SR 86 / I-8 EB Ramps Signal AM 20.9 C 21.3 C 37.1 D – – PM 20.8 C 21.8 C 38.2 D – –3. SR 86 / Wake Ave Signal AM 40.5 D 40.6 D 51.7 D – – PM 50.1 D 51.0 D 81.5 F 54.4 D 4. SR 86 / Horne Rd TWSC c AM 14.8 B 15.7 C 24.0 C – – PM 17.6 C 20.1 C 34.3 D – –5. SR 86 / Willow Bend Dr TWSC AM 9.4 A 10.9 B 11.4 B – – PM 9.5 A 11.5 B 12.1 B – –6. SR 86 / Countryside Dr TWSC AM 13.9 B 16.3 C 18.9 C – – PM 11.7 B 21.4 C 25.8 D – –

Page 188 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 14
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx

SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED

DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS
Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E ≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F
TABLE 2

7. SR 86 / McCabe Rd Signal AM 47.6 D 48.3 D 52.2 D – – PM 43.8 D 44.5 D 51.7 D – – Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. b. Level of Service. c. TWSC – Two-Way Stop Controlled intersection. Minor street left turn delay is reported.

Page 189 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 15
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 3

NEAR-TERM STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Segment Functional Classification LOS E Capacity a Existing Existing + Project Existing + Cumulative + Project ADT b LOS c V/C d ADT LOS V/C Volume LOS V/C
SR 86 I-8 EB Ramps to Wake Ave 4-Ln Divided Arterial 36,000 23,970 B 0.666 24,792 B 0.689 29,984 D 0.833 Wake Ave to Danenberg Dr 3-Ln Divided Arterial e 27,000 14,090 A 0.522 14,975 A 0.555 17,623 B 0.653 Project Drwy to McCabe Rd 2-ln Arterial 18,000 9,960 A 0.553 10,150 A 0.564 11,683 B 0.649 Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of El Centro Roadway Classification & LOS table contained in the Mobility Element adopted in Year 2021. b. Average Daily Traffic c. Level of Service
d. Volume to Capacity ratio e. This segment has three lanes, one in the southbound direction and two lanes in the northbound direction and a raised median. 75% of a 4-Lane Divided Arterial (with left-turn lane) capacity is assumed.

Page 190 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 16
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 4

CUMULATIVE PROJECTS INFORMATION
Name Description Location

1. Wake Avenue Affordable Housing 288 multi-family apartments Northeast corner of the 6th Street / Spears Avenue intersection 2. Parkview Residential Subdivision 114-lot single-family subdivision East side of 8th Street; 625 feet south of Horne Road 3. Spear & 6th Street Apartments 288 multi-family apartments Northeast corner of 6th Street and Spear Avenue 4. La Brucherie Apartments 177 multi-family apartments Southeast corner of La Brucherie Road and W Main Street 5. Residence Inn Hotel 104-room hotel 3409 S Dogwood 6. Jacaranda Gardens Apartments 96 multi-family apartments 1625 N Waterman Avenue 7. State Courthouse 46,810 SF State Courthouse building 650 Wake Avenue 8. California Highway Patrol Station 44,473 SF California Highway Patrol Station 2802 S 4th Street 9. Lotus Ranch 609-lot single family subdivision West of La Brucherie Avenue, south of I-8 10. Home 2 Suites IV Mall 79-room hotel 3105 S Dogwood Road 11. Maverik Gas Station 21-pump gas station and 5,951 SF convenience store 1402 S Dogwood Avenue

Page 191 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 17
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 5
YEAR 2045 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour Year 2045 Year 2045 + Project Delaya LOSb Delay LOS

1. SR 86 / I-8 WB Ramps Signal AM 77.6 E 78.5 E PM 64.4 E 65.7 E

2. SR 86 / I-8 EB Ramps Signal AM 43.6 D 44.3 D PM 43.7 D 46.2 D 3. SR 86 / Wake Ave Signal AM 69.6 E 69.7 E PM 99.4 F 107.1 F 4. SR 86 / Horne Rd TWSC c AM 28.2 D 32.4 D PM 47.2 E 67.1 F 5. SR 86 / Willow Bend Dr TWSC AM 9.8 A 11.9 B PM 9.8 A 12.8 B 6. SR 86 / Countryside Dr TWSC AM 21.4 C 23.8 C PM 15.4 C 31.7 D

Page 192 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 18
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx

SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED

DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS DELAY/LOS THRESHOLDS
Delay LOS Delay LOS

0.0 ≤ 10.0 A 0.0 ≤ 10.0 A

10.1 to 20.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 B 20.1 to 35.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 E ≥ 80.1 F ≥ 50.1 F
TABLE 5
YEAR 2045 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour Year 2045 Year 2045 + Project Delaya LOSb Delay LOS

7. SR 86 / McCabe Rd Signal AM 74.7 E 75.5 E PM 80.4 F 81.7 F Footnotes: a. Average delay expressed in seconds per
vehicle.
b. Level of Service. c. TWSC – Two-Way Stop Controlled
intersection. Minor street left turn delay is reported.

Page 193 of 403 ends

Mr. Angel Hernandez
March 18, 2024 Page 19
N:\3841 - Willow Bend\Report\Letter Report.3841 March 2024.docx TABLE 6
YEAR 2045 STREET SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Segment Functional Classification LOS E Capacity a Year 2045 Year 2045 + Project ADT b LOS c V/C d Volume LOS V/C
SR 86 I-8 EB Ramps to Wake Ave 4-Ln Divided Arterial 36,000 30,680 D 0.852 31,502 D 0.875 Wake Ave to Danenberg Dr 3-Ln Divided Arterial e 27,000 18,040 B 0.668 18,925 C 0.701 Project Drwy to McCabe Rd 2-ln Arterial 18,000 12,750 C 0.708 12,940 C 0.719 Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of El Centro Roadway Classification & LOS table contained in the Mobility Element adopted in Year 2021. b. Average Daily Traffic c. Level of Service
d. Volume to Capacity ratio e. This segment has three lanes, one in the southbound direction and two lanes in the northbound direction and a raised median. 75% of a 4-Lane Divided Arterial (with left-turn lane) capacity is assumed.

Page 194 of 403 ends

0 2.5
[5 Miles
Project Vicinity Map
Willow Bend Project
Figure 1 N:\3559\GIS
Date: 05/02/22
·|}111
§¨¦8 §¨¦8
·|}86
·|}78
·|}115
·|}111
·|}86 ·|}115
·|}98

PROJECT
^_
SITE
§¨¦10

Page 195 of 403 ends

Will Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
Project Area Map
Figure 2
Willow Bend Project
N:\3841\FiguresDate: 11/10/23
Project
Site

Page 196 of 403 ends

Site Plan
N:\3841\Figures Figure 3 Date: 11/10/23
San Marcos Bl
Grand Ave
Willow Bend Project

Page 197 of 403 ends

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 7:50 AM
Date: 11/10/2023
N:\3841\Figures
Existing Conditions Diagram
Figure 4
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
!"$
$!"$!"
Ê
e
e
e
Ê
e
e
e
Ê
e
e
e
Ê
e
e
e
Willow Bend Dr
I-8 EB Ramps
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86 SR-86
SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
SR-86SR-86
JK
FL

DJJ GJJL
DJJ
DJL
DJK
FK
DJK
H
K
DJJ
DK
JK
H
G
DJ DJ
JK
DK
L
G
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
4D 4D
4U+ 40mph 4U 40mph 3D 40mph 3D
2U
2U
2U
3D 2U
2U 2U 2U
Study Intersection
Traffic Signal
Stop Sign
Turning Movements
Number of Travel Lanes
Posted Speed Limit
Divided / Undivided Roadway
Two-Way Left-Turn Median
Future Road
#
2/4/6
35mph
DJL
STOP
U / D
+
Proj North Dwy
Proj South Dwy

Page 198 of 403 ends

14,0
9 0
2 3,9
7 0
9,9
6 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 7:50 AM
Date: 11/10/2023
N:\3841\Figures
Existing Traffic Volumes
Figure 5
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
L
LJ J D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
J D L
J L
J D
L
D
J L
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
Horne Rd
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Wake Ave
I-8 EB Ramps
SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
430 / 588
97 / 82
278 / 257
672 / 953
1 / 4
185 / 167
135 / 149
221 / 303
193 / 164
524 / 622
37 / 49
171 / 264
638 / 676
149 / 159305 / 461255 / 221
111 / 209
45 / 81
38 / 88 46 / 63
322 / 366
56 / 141
156 / 220
88 / 162
70 / 93
11 / 60
201 / 434
45 / 44
358 / 228
95 / 51
33 / 59
382 / 430
68 / 59
42 / 41
1 / 4
226 / 239
189 / 340
32 / 89
114 / 65
56 / 16
27 / 25
274 / 171
91 / 44
133 / 226
41 / 89
65 / 35
245 / 136
5 / 1 4 / 1
166 / 101
20 / 19
44 / 52
161 / 172
57 / 37
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Future Future
Future Project South Dwy
Future Project North Dwy

Page 199 of 403 ends

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 10:31 AM
Date: 3/1/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Project Trip Distribution
Figure 6
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
j
J D
d
J
j L
l
J
D
j l
J
j
LJ
j l
Lj
l
D d
j d L
J
Willow Bend Dr
I-8 WB Ramps I-8 EB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86 SR-86
SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
SR-86SR-86
1 2
3 4
7 5 6 10% 35%
45%20%
65%
5%
85%
85%
7%
7%
8%
85%
10%
5% 35%
20%
55%
10%
65%
5%
85%
43%42%42%
15%
5%
10%
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
65%
10% 20%
5%
85% 10%
5%
Study Intersection
Inbound Trip Distribution
Outbound Trip Distribution
Regional Trip Distribution
#
XX %
DJL
djl
35%
Project North Dwy
Project South Dwy

Page 200 of 403 ends

8 8
5 8
2 2 19
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 10:37 AM
Date: 3/1/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 7
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
J D
D
J
J LL
J D
J L
J
J
LJ
J L
LJ
L
D D
J D L
J
Willow Bend Dr
I-8 WB Ramps I-8 EB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86 SR-86
SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
SR-86SR-86
25 / 16
8 / 28
5 / 15
7 / 5
13 / 43
32 / 21
3 / 8
14 / 10
16 / 51
1 / 4
4 / 2
46 / 31
20 / 67
60 / 40
10 / 3410 / 33
60 / 40
5 / 3
10 / 33
5 / 3
4 / 12
5 / 4
60 / 40
7 / 53 / 2
2 / 4
2 / 8
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Project North Dwy
Project South Dwy

Page 201 of 403 ends

14,9
7 5
2 4,7
9 2 10,15
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 10:37 AM
Date: 3/1/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Existing + Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 8
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
L
LJ J D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
LJ D L
J L L
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
Horne Rd
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Wake Ave
I-8 EB Ramps
SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
455 / 604
97 / 82
278 / 257
680 / 981
1 / 4
190 / 182
142 / 154
221 / 303
196 / 172
556 / 643
37 / 49
185 / 274
651 / 719
149 / 159321 / 512255 / 221
111 / 209
45 / 81
39 / 92 50 / 65
368 / 397
56 / 141
156 / 220
88 / 162
70 / 93
11 / 60
221 / 501
45 / 44
418 / 268
95 / 51
33 / 59
10 / 34
392 / 463
68 / 59
42 / 41
1 / 4
286 / 279
5 / 3
10 / 33
194 / 343
32 / 89
114 / 65
5 / 5
56 / 16 27 / 25
274 / 171
4 / 12
5 / 4
5 / 5
60 / 40
91 / 44
140 / 231
44 / 91
67 / 39
245 / 136
5 / 1 4 / 1
168 / 109
20 / 19
44 / 52
161 / 172
57 / 37
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Project North Dwy
Project South Dwy

Page 202 of 403 ends

Page 203 of 403 ends

2,6
4 8
5,19
2 1,5
3 3
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 8:04 AM
Date: 2/15/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes
Figure 10
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
LJ
L
D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
J D L
J
J D
L
D
J L
LJ D
LJ D J
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
I-8 WB Ramps I-8 EB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86 SR-86
SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
SR-86SR-86
91 / 103
6 / 5
107 / 125
17 / 16
24 / 33
78 / 67
14 / 19
67 / 80
166 / 162
2 / 3
33 / 34
120 / 141
103 / 107
60 / 9316 / 14
7 / 13
4 / 7
2 / 5 3 / 4
20 / 4076 / 79
111 / 101
34 / 33
6 / 7
15 / 5245 / 57
45 / 30
45 / 50
8 / 8
7 / 7
61 / 59
4 / 4
3 / 3
39 / 56
50 / 54
2 / 5
7 / 4
3 / 1
2 / 2
42 / 51
6 / 3
46 / 47
3 / 5
4 / 2
26 / 44
35 / 47
1 / 1
3 / 3
42 / 32
3 / 2
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Future Future
Future Project North Dwy
Future Project South Dwy

Page 204 of 403 ends

17,6
2 3
2 9,9
8 4 11,6
8 3
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 10:38 AM
Date: 3/1/2024
N:\3559\Figures
Existing + Cumulative + Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 11
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
L
LJ J D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
LJ D L
J L L
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
Horne Rd
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Wake Ave
I-8 EB Ramps
SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
546 / 707
103 / 87
295 / 273
787 / 1,106
1 / 4
214 / 215
220 / 221
235 / 322
263 / 252
722 / 805
39 / 52
218 / 308
771 / 860
252 / 266381 / 605271 / 235
118 / 222
49 / 88
41 / 97 53 / 69
444 / 476
76 / 181
267 / 321
122 / 195
76 / 100
26 / 112
266 / 558
90 / 74
463 / 318
103 / 59
40 / 66
10 / 34
453 / 522
72 / 63
45 / 44
1 / 4
325 / 335
5 / 3
10 / 33
244 / 397
34 / 94
121 / 69
5 / 5
59 / 17 29 / 27
316 / 222
4 / 12
5 / 4
5 / 5
60 / 40
97 / 47
186 / 278
47 / 96
71 / 41
271 / 180
5 / 1 4 / 1
203 / 156
21 / 20
47 / 55
203 / 204
60 / 39
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Project North Dwy
Project South Dwy

Page 205 of 403 ends

18,0
4 0
3 0,6
8 0 12,7
5 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 8:05 AM
Date: 2/15/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Year 2045 Traffic Volumes
Figure 12
[
Willow Bend Project
? ? ? ?
J
L
LJ J D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
J D L
J L
J D
L
D
J L
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
Horne Rd
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Wake Ave
I-8 EB Ramps
SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
550 / 750 360 / 330
120 / 110
860 / 1,220
10 / 10
240 / 210
220 / 220
280 / 390
270 / 250
700 / 800
50 / 60
220 / 340
820 / 870
260 / 270390 / 590330 / 280
140 / 270
60 / 100
50 / 110 60 / 80
410 / 470
80 / 190
280 / 330
130 / 210
90 / 120
30 / 120
260 / 560
100 / 90
460 / 290
120 / 70
40 / 80
490 / 550
90 / 80
50 / 50
10 / 10
290 / 310
240 / 440
40 / 110
150 / 80
70 / 20
40 / 30
350 / 240
120 / 60
190 / 290
50 / 110
80 / 50
310 / 190
10 / 10 10 / 10
210 / 160
30 / 20
60 / 70
210 / 220
70 / 50
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Future Future
Future Project South Dwy
Future Project North Dwy

Page 206 of 403 ends

18,9
2 5
31,5
0 2 12,9
4 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
Ã
"86
Ã
"86
§¨8
Time: 10:39 AM
Date: 3/1/2024
N:\3841\Figures
Year 2045 + Project Traffic Volumes
Figure 13
[
Willow Bend Project
J
L
LJ J D
D
D
L
J DL
J
LJ D
LJ D

D J L D
LJ
LJ
D
L
D J
LJ D L
J L L
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
LJ D
LJ D
D J L
LJ D
Willow Bend Dr
Horne Rd
I-8 WB Ramps
McCabe Rd
Project South Dwy
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
SR-86SR-86
Wake Ave
I-8 EB Ramps
SR-86
Countryside Dr
Project North Dwy
575 / 766 360 / 330
120 / 110
868 / 1,248
10 / 10
245 / 225
227 / 225
280 / 390
273 / 258
732 / 821
50 / 60
234 / 350
833 / 913
260 / 270406 / 641330 / 280
140 / 270
60 / 100
51 / 114 64 / 82
456 / 501
80 / 190
280 / 330
130 / 210
90 / 120
30 / 120
280 / 627
100 / 90
520 / 330
120 / 70
40 / 80
10 / 34
500 / 583
90 / 80
50 / 50
10 / 10
350 / 350
5 / 3
10 / 33
245 / 443
40 / 110
150 / 80
5 / 5
70 / 20 40 / 30
350 / 240
4 / 12
5 / 4
5 / 5
60 / 40
120 / 60
197 / 295
53 / 112
82 / 54
310 / 190
10 / 10 10 / 10
212 / 168
30 / 20
60 / 70
210 / 220
70 / 50
1 2
3 4
7 5 6
Wake Ave
Horne Rd
Willow Bend Dr
Countryside Dr
McCabe Rd
Project
Site
Study Intersections
Intersection AM / PM Peak Hour Volumes
#
DJL
XX,XXX Street Segment ADT
Project South Dwy
Future Project North Dwy

Page 207 of 403 ends

1 01/2025/A25-0002/Reso/AdoptAddendumforEIR05-05
RESOLUTION NO. 25-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EL CENTRO ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO EIR 05-05
PROJECT: Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, consisting of approximately 38-acre site north of McCabe Road, generally located west of South 4th Street (Highway 86) and 630 feet south of Horne Road.

WHEREAS, on or about February 7, 2007, the City Council certified EIR 05-05 for the Willow Bend Subdivision project; and
WHEREAS pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines of 1970, as amended, an addendum to Environmental Impact Report 05-05 is appropriate for a project when changes to the project do not raise any environmental issues already addressed in the EIR; and
WHEREAS, on the basis of the whole record, including the Environmental Impact Report for the above- named project and comments received, the City Council has considered the Addendum along with the final EIR and determines that finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project as amended will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the Addendum to the original Environmental Impact Report along with that EIR reflect the City of El Centro, California’s independent judgment and analysis; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk and the Director of Community Development, both located at 1275 West Main Street, El Centro, California, are the custodians of the records of material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council’s decision is based in this matter.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the foregoing is true, correct and adopted.

2. That EIR 05-05 along with Addendum to Environmental Impact Report 05-05, a copy of which is on file at the Office of the City Clerk, on the above-named project is hereby adopted.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February.

CITY OF EL CENTRO
By
ATTEST: Tomás Oliva, Mayor

Page 208 of 403 ends

2 01/2025/A25-0002/Reso/AdoptAddendumforEIR05-05
By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
Office of the City Attorney
By
Elizabeth L. Martyn, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL ) ss

CITY OF EL CENTRO )
I, Norma Wyles, City Clerk of the City of El Centro, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25- was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk

Page 209 of 403 ends

City Council of the City of El Centro
1275 W. Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243

SUBMITTED
ACTION ITEM (ID # 2025-25)
Item: 5.

Meeting: 2/4/2025 4:00 PM
Department: Community Development
Category: Resolution
Prepared by: Andrea Montano,
Associate Planner
Department Head: Angel Hernandez
DOC ID: 2025-25
Public hearing to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission Amending Resolution 07-17 Revising and Updating Conditions for the Willow Bend Subdivision.

CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 25- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO AMENDING RESOLUTION 07-17 REVISING AND UPDATING CONDITIONS FOR THE WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION.

FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROGRAM 2022-2027 RELATION:

Environmental Sustainability & Infrastructure
DUE DILIGENCE CHECK FOR CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS: DID THE

DEPARTMENT VERIFY CURRENT EL CENTRO BUSINESS LICENSE,
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE, REFERENCE CHECKES, INSURANCE, ETC.:

N/A
BACKGROUND:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for background regarding this item.

DISCUSSION:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for discussion regarding this item.

A resolution amending Resolution 07-17 revising and updating conditions for the Willow Bend Subdivision is incorporated as Attachment A.

CONCLUSION:

Adopt Resolution No. 25- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO AMENDING RESOLUTION 07-17 REVISING AND UPDATING CONDITIONS FOR THE WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment A- Resolution

Page 210 of 403 ends

1 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
RESOLUTION NO. 25-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EL CENTRO AMENDING RESOLUTION 07-17 REVISING

AND UPDATING CONDITIONS FOR THE WILLOW BEND

SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, on February 7, 2007 the City Council of the City of El Centro via Resolution No. 07-17 approved the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, (hereinafter referred to as “the Project”) which proposed a subdivision of 38+ acres of land in order to create one hundred and thirty-four (134) single family residential lots on property generally located west of South 4th Street (Highway 86) and about 630 feet south of Horne Road, further described as APN 054-370- 011; and
WHEREAS, since that time, the property has been sold and the new property owner and applicant has requested amendments to the original conditions set out in Resolution No. 17-17; and
WHEREAS, an addendum to the 2007 Environmental Impact Report was prepared and considered for the proposal pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines of 1970, as amended; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of El Centro recommended for approval the proposed amendments as found in Exhibit A which includes a reduction to 120 lots; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing notice before the City Council was scheduled for February 4, 2025 and was mailed to property owners within 500-feet of the subject property as well as published on January 15, 2025 in the Imperial Valley Press, a newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, at that public hearing, the staff made a presentation regarding the revisions to the project, and any testimony for or against the revised resolution was heard; and WHEREAS, based upon the information at the public hearing and in the file for the project, the City Council resoles as follows:

The Addendum is appropriate and has been approved by separate resolution; and The proposed revised map is consistent with the City’s General Plan; and The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan; and
The site is physically suitable for the type of development; and The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; and

Page 211 of 403 ends

2 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the foregoing is true, correct and adopted.

2. Resolution No. 07-017 is repealed and readopted.

3. Resolution No. 25-_______ is approved and adopted effective immediately upon its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February 2025.

CITY OF EL CENTRO
By
ATTEST: Tomás Oliva, Mayor
By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney
By
Elizabeth L. Martyn, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL ) ss

CITY OF EL CENTRO )
I, Norma Wyles, City Clerk of the City of El Centro, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25- was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of

Page 212 of 403 ends

3 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk

Page 213 of 403 ends

4 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17

EXHIBIT A

1. The project shall include the development of a maximum of 120 single-family residential lots with an average minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet.

2. Building permits shall not be issued for any construction related to the project until verification from the elementary and high school districts is received, certifying that the State mandated school impact mitigation fees have been paid or addressed as otherwise provided or authorized by law.

3. Removed

4. Removed

5. Removed

6. Removed

7. Removed

8. Removed

9. Removed

10. Prior to the recording of the first final map, the applicant shall complete or provide security for the widening of Highway 86 (4th Street) to a four-lane right-of-way width along the project frontage prior to recording of the first final map.

The widening, including any required deceleration and acceleration lanes north and south of the development frontage, shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 60th certificate of occupancy, as determined by the approved Caltrans transportation study or other Caltrans requirements.

The No. 2 southbound lane shall merge into the No. 1 southbound lane such that the Countryside Drive and Highway 86 intersection transitions to a single southbound lane at the intersection.

11. Removed

12. Prior to the issuance of the 1st certificate of occupancy, and contingent upon approval by Caltrans, the applicant shall complete improvements to the intersection at Highway 86(4th Street) and Countryside Drive to provide full directional access to the development. Final intersection improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the results of the Caltrans transportation study and shall be completed

Page 214 of 403 ends

5 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
no later than the issuance of the 60th certificate of occupancy, or as determined by the approved Caltrans Transportation Study.

13. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide construction contracts to the Community Development Director that specify that all construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other suitable noise attenuation devices.

14. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall notify residents within 100 feet of the project’s site regarding the construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints.

15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall erect a sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet, posted at the construction site. The sign shall indicate the dates and durations of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints.

16. The applicant agrees to pay standard Police and Fire Impact fees as part of building permit issuance unless deferred as approved by the City of El Centro.

17. Access to the Date Drain by the public shall be secured with a four-foot high three rail wood fence along the western project site boundary. Fencing shall be installed prior to the completion of Grass Street/6th Street. The applicant shall coordinate with the Imperial Irrigation District for maintenance access requirements.

18. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, a trunk sewer line shall be installed on Carl Street to connect to the existing lift station at Highway 86 (4th Street) and Willow Bend Drive. The trunk sewer line may be constructed within the right-ofway within the development (Carl Street) or adjacent to Highway 86 (4th Street). The Countryside Drive sewer line shall be sized and placed to allow connection from the development at the west. The developer shall be reimbursed for any additional costs incurred due to upsizing by the development to the west.

19. A six (6) foot high solid decorative block/masonry wall shall be provided along the western Highway 86 right-of-way line (eastern boundary of lots 1-14) and along the property lines abutting the park (eastern boundary of lots 81 and 72 and western boundary of lots 82 and 71). A vinyl or composite fencing shall be installed along the southern project boundary (southern boundary of lots 14-32 and western boundary of lot 32).

20. The proposed stormwater retention basin for the project site shall be developed in accordance with the City’s design standard for retention basins. This requires a wrought

Page 215 of 403 ends

6 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
iron fence with pilasters along the perimeter of the basin abutting and visible from the public right of way.

21. Prior to the issuance of the thirteenth certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall establish a Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District (LLMD) for the project. The LLMD shall pay for the maintenance of any lighting, landscaping, park, and recreation facilities, including graffiti abatement, within the public right-of-way, IID easement, retention basin and the park.

22. Prior to the grading permit, the applicant and the City of El Centro shall be required to conduct a preconstruction survey no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbing activity to ensure that owl burrows have not become established within the impact area.

Should a burrowing owl move into the area prior to construction then mitigation should consist of passive relocation within a one-way door to avoid direct impacts to any burrowing owl on site. Passive relocation should be conducted during the non-breeding season (Sep.1-Jan.31) to ensure active nests are not lost as results of owl exclusion. The methodology for owl relocation should follow the guidelines set forth in the CDFG Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

23. In the event of the discovery of buried cultural resources, project activities in the vicinity of the resources shall be temporarily halted. A qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to access the significance of the resource and to provide proper management recommendations (e.g., resource avoidance or data recovery excavation).

24. Prior to issuance of building permit and during construction, if human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner shall notify the NAHC, which determine and notify and Most Likely Descendent (MLD). With the permission of the landowner of his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human and items associated with Native American burials.

25. The project shall be required to comply with regional rules, including the ICAPCD Rule VIII - Fugitive Dust Rules as well as ICAPCD CEQA Handbook Measures for Construction equipment and Fugitive PM10 control, that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Applicable dust suppression techniques are summarized below.

Implementation of these dust suppression technique will reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PM 10 component).

Page 216 of 403 ends

7 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17

26. The applicant shall be responsible for any costs associated with right-of-way acquisition for the purposes of ingress or egress to the project site along Willow Bend Drive and Countryside Drive, if necessary to accommodate required off-site improvements.

27. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, grading plan, or permit issuance, a site-specific retention basin design shall be conducted by a registered civil engineer and submitted for review and approval by the City.

28. The construction of Countryside Drive crossing over the IID Date Drain must be completed prior to the issuance of the 80th certificate of occupancy. The threshold for this condition may be extended prior to the issuance of the 100th certificate of occupancy if circumstances beyond the applicant’s control occur that delay this improvement, as approved by the City Engineer and the Community Development Director.

The road crossing shall consist of two travel lanes, with no parking lanes, and shall include curb, gutter, and sidewalks on each side. City participation on all costs related to the IID drain construction and Countryside Drive improvements will be three hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, through a reimbursement agreement between City and applicant.

29. The applicant shall construct or provide security for a 1.3-acre improved park. The park shall include a multi-use grass field, park lighting, hard surface court, multi-use path, picnic, and playground area. The park is to be completed prior to 50% of the certificates of occupancy are issued. The developer shall provide park renderings and construction plans and cost estimates to the City of El Centro for review prior to filing of the first final map. Park development impact fees shall be waived by the City if park costs are higher than the subdivisions’ park development impact fees to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

30. The project shall provide the minimum building setbacks in accordance with the R1- Single Family Residential Zone development standards.

31. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of each phase of development, all street dedications and off-site improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk, and paving) for each phase shall be provided in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.

32. Utilities shall be provided in accordance with the City’s Master Water/Sewer Plan. The applicant may enter into reimbursement agreement with the City for any oversizing of water or sewer lines that may be required.

33. Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy of each residence, the applicant shall provide a minimum of one tree within the parkway strip on Countryside Drive only and one tree within the front yard landscaped area per lot. Said trees shall be selected from

Page 217 of 403 ends

8 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17
the City’s list and consist of variety of trees. The remaining lots shall provide two trees in the front yard.

34. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay the appropriate development impact and sewer and water capacity fees unless deferred to prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy in compliance with Ordinance 21-03 and subject to the approval of the City Manager. Payment must clear prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

35. Fire hydrants markers and water mains shall be provided in accordance with the Fire Department’s specifications. Fire hydrants shall be on a looped water system. Any combustible construction shall not begin until a fire hydrant is in service within 150 feet of construction activity. Applicant shall provide a phasing plan to the Engineering Division showing compliance with this condition prior to the issuance of the certificate of compliance.

36. Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the approval of the final map.

37. The project shall comply with all applicable provisions of the California Code of Regulations Title 24 (ADA).

38. The developer shall work directly with IID to obtain an encroachment permit for project related improvements on IID system facilities.

39. Pursuant to Section 66474.9 of the California Government Code, the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of El Centro, its agents, officers and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the Planning Commission concerning the tentative subdivision map, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. However, the City of El Centro shall promptly notify the applicant/subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and that the City shall cooperate fully in defense.

40. Except as specified herein, all conditions applicable to a final map phase, as determined by the City Engineer, shall be met before its last certificate of occupancy is issued unless otherwise noted.

41. Applicable offsite improvements shall be completed or secured to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the recordation of each final map.

42. Removed

Page 218 of 403 ends

9 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/AmendReso07-17

43. Removed

44. Public landscaping improvements shall be installed along the northern side of Willow Bend Drive, West side of Carl Street, South of lot 13, North side of Lot 1, and West and East side of Grass (6th) Street in the side yards of the noted locations and homes. Public landscaping improvements shall be included in the lighting and landscape maintenance district.

45. A school bus loading area shall be installed in front of the park area, unless otherwise determined by the school districts that the location would be unfeasible for a school bus loading area.

Page 219 of 403 ends

City Council of the City of El Centro
1275 W. Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243

SUBMITTED
ACTION ITEM (ID # 2025-27)
Item: 6.

Meeting: 2/4/2025 4:00 PM
Department: Community Development
Category: Ordinance
Prepared by: Andrea Montano,
Associate Planner
Department Head: Angel Hernandez
DOC ID: 2025-27
Public hearing to consider amending the Zoning Map of the City of El Centro pertaining to Annexation EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation).

CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Ordinance NO. 25- ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL

CENTRO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO PERTAINING TO EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION).

FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROGRAM 2022-2027 RELATION:

Environmental Sustainability & Infrastructure
DUE DILIGENCE CHECK FOR CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS: DID THE

DEPARTMENT VERIFY CURRENT EL CENTRO BUSINESS LICENSE,
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE, REFERENCE CHECKES, INSURANCE, ETC.:

N/A
BACKGROUND:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for background regarding this item.

DISCUSSION:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for discussion regarding this item.

An ordinance amending the Zoning Map of the City of El Centro pertaining to EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation) is incorporated as Attachment A.

CONCLUSION:

Adopt Ordinance NO. 25- ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL

CENTRO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO PERTAINING TO EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION).

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment A- Ordinance

Page 220 of 403 ends

1 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Ord/AmendZoningMapWillow
BendSubdivision
ORDINANCE NO. 25-

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL

CENTRO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF EL
CENTRO PERTAINING TO EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND

SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Zoning Map of the City of El Centro, California is hereby amended to provide as follows:
“The following property which consists of an approximate 38+ is hereby pre-zoned to R1- Single Family Residential on property generally located west of South 4th Street (Highway 86) and about 630 feet south of Horne Road, further described as APN 054-370-011.” Section 2. This Amendment shall be given appropriate enumeration in the files of the City Clerk regarding the Zoning Map.

Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after its adoption.

Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, it shall be published once in a newspaper, published and circulated within the City of El Centro, California.

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February 2025.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the day of , 2025.

CITY OF EL CENTRO
By
ATTEST: Tomás Oliva, Mayor
By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
By
Elizabeth L. Martyn, City Attorney

Page 221 of 403 ends

2 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Ord/AmendZoningMapWillow
BendSubdivision

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL ) ss

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk

Page 222 of 403 ends

City Council of the City of El Centro
1275 W. Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243

SUBMITTED
ACTION ITEM (ID # 2025-26)
Item: 7.

Meeting: 2/4/2025 4:00 PM
Department: Community Development
Category: Resolution
Prepared by: Andrea Montano,
Associate Planner
Department Head:

DOC ID: 2025-26
Public hearing to consider a resolution approving Annexation EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation).

CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 25- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO APPROVING ANNEXATION EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION).

FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROGRAM 2022-2027 RELATION:

Environmental Sustainability & Infrastructure
DUE DILIGENCE CHECK FOR CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS: DID THE

DEPARTMENT VERIFY CURRENT EL CENTRO BUSINESS LICENSE,
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE, REFERENCE CHECKES, INSURANCE, ETC.:

N/A
BACKGROUND:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for background regarding this item.

DISCUSSION:

Please refer to Item no. 2024-234, regarding the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Willow Bend Tentative Subdivision Map, for discussion regarding this item.

A resolution approving Annexation EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision) is incorporated as Attachment A.

CONCLUSION:

Adopt Resolution No. 25- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO APPROVING ANNEXATION EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION).

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment A- Resolution

Page 223 of 403 ends

1 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/ApproveAnnexationEC1-24
RESOLUTION NO. 25-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF EL CENTRO APPROVING ANNEXATION
EC 1-24 (WILLOW BEND SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION)
WHEREAS, the property owner of approximately 38+ acres of property, known as the Willow Bend Subdivision, has petitioned for the annexation of the property, as described in Exhibit “A”, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission for the County of Imperial (hereinafter referred to as “LAFCO”) has requested that the City conduct its proceedings prior to LAFCO conducting its proceedings regarding said application and has designated the territory proposed to be annexed as Annexation EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation); and WHEREAS, the City Council finds based upon its review of EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation) that the territory to be annexed is adjacent to the City, is developing, is located in land designated as Farmland of Statewide Importance but meets criteria to be converted to urban use, is designate and /pre-zoned for urban growth by the City’s General Plan and is not within the sphere of influence of another City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CENTRO, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the foregoing is true, correct and adopted.

2. That the City Council does hereby approve EC 1-24 (Willow Bend Subdivision Annexation).

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of El Centro, California, held on the 4th day of February 2025.

CITY OF EL CENTRO
By
Tomás Oliva, Mayor
ATTEST:

By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
By
Elizabeth L. Martyn, City Attorney

Page 224 of 403 ends

2 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/ApproveAnnexationEC1-24

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL ) ss

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

By
Norma Wyles, City Clerk

Page 225 of 403 ends

3 01/2025/cdz/A25-0002/Reso/ApproveAnnexationEC1-24

Page 226 of 403 ends

City Council of the City of El Centro
1275 W. Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243

SUBMITTED
ACTION ITEM (ID # 2024-178)
Item: 8.

Meeting: 2/4/2025 4:00 PM
Department: Community Development
Category: Action Item
Prepared by: Angel Hernandez,
Community Development Director
Department Head: Angel Hernandez
DOC ID: 2024-178
Discussion and any necessary action regarding the Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan.

CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT:

N/A
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROGRAM 2022-2027 RELATION:

City Beautification, Engagement & Civic Pride
DUE DILIGENCE CHECK FOR CONTRACTORS/CONSULTANTS: DID THE

DEPARTMENT VERIFY CURRENT EL CENTRO BUSINESS LICENSE,
CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE, REFERENCE CHECKES, INSURANCE, ETC.:

N/A
BACKGROUND:

The City of El Centro applied for the SB1- Sustainable Communities Transportation Grant from Caltrans and was awarded $300,000 to develop a complete streets plan for Imperial Avenue. The project limits include the Caltrans owned corridor of Imperial Avenue which ranges from Adams Avenue to Treshill Road.

DISCUSSION:

The Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan (CSP) is a forward-looking initiative designed to address persistent infrastructure and accessibility challenges along a 1.5-mile stretch of Imperial Avenue, spanning from Adams Avenue to Treshill Road. This collaborative effort, undertaken by the City of El Centro in partnership with regional and state agencies, aligns with broader goals to enhance safety, accessibility, and connectivity for all modes of transportation. (Attachment A- Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan) Community Engagement
The CSP’s recommendations are informed by extensive public outreach and community involvement, which included:
• Three Community Workshops:
o Workshop #1: November 8, 2023, at the El Centro Library. o Workshop #2: August 8, 2024, at the El Centro Library. o Workshop #3: November 14, 2024, at the El Centro Library. Surveys: Over 400 surveys were completed between October 2023 and January 2024, highlighting concerns about speeding, lack of sidewalks, and insufficient transit amenities.

Page 227 of 403 ends

• Pop-Up Events and Field Surveys:
o Pop-Up #1 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (January 22, 2024). o Pop-Up #2 - Children’s Fair (April 13, 2024).
o Pop-Up #3 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (August 9, 2024). o Pop-Up #4 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (November 15, 2024). • Interactive GIS Survey: Enabled participants to identify areas of concern and suggest improvements through an online mapping tool.

Existing Conditions and Proposed Improvements
Key findings from the analysis of existing conditions include:
• Segment A (Adams to Scott Avenue): Includes sidewalks and bus shelters but features narrow medians and wide travel lanes that encourage high speeds. The following improvements are proposed:
o The addition of a Class IV separated bikeway on both the east and west sides from Adams Avenue north towards the railroad crossing. o Class I multi-use paths for use by pedestrians and bicyclists from the railroad crossing north towards Scott Avenue
o At the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Scott Avenue, a recommendation for a linear park with trees, landscaping, seating, wayfinding signage, public art, and more.
• Segment B (Scott to Lincoln Avenue): Characterized by frontage roads and a lack of continuous sidewalks, creating safety hazards for pedestrians. The following improvements are proposed:
o The addition of a two-way Class IV separated bikeway on the east side of the frontage road from Scott Avenue north towards Lincoln Avenue with urban trees/landscaping, signage, and stormwater treatments.
o Class I multi-use path on the east side including a tree-lined buffer adjacent to Imperial Avenue that provides separation for bicyclists and pedestrians and provides stormwater catchment opportunities.
o Recommendation to convert the frontage road to a one-way northbound travel lane. Further study is recommended to coordinate with businesses and to study traffic flow along the frontage road to determine special access considerations.
o Relocate the southbound bus stop to Imperial Avenue with improvements such as a bus pad, bus shelter with seating and lighting, and wayfinding signage.
• Segment C (Lincoln to Treshill Road): Features undeveloped shoulders, earthen drainage channels, and missing pedestrian infrastructure. The following improvements are proposed:
o The addition of Class I multi-use path facilities on both sides of Imperial Avenue.
o At the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Lincoln Avenue, a mini park is recommended with trees, landscaping and additional amenities. o Pedestrian/ bicycle bridges over the channelized flood control system to provide additional access to the businesses.

Page 228 of 403 ends

CONCLUSION:

Adopt the Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment A- Complete Streets Plan

Page 229 of 403 ends

Imperial Avenue
Complete Streets Plan
January 2025 Draft

Page 230 of 403 ends

The Plan was funded in FY 2022-23
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grant Program under the grant category
Sustainable Communities Competitive.

Thank you to all who participated and supported
the development of the City of El Centro Imperial
Avenue Complete Streets Plan and a special thank
you to Susan Chasang on behalf of the Sister
Evelyn Mourey Center and volunteers.

Page 231 of 403 ends

Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan III
Acknowledgements
City of El Centro
Andrea Montaño, Project Manager
Angel Hernandez, Community Development Director
Felix De Leon Jr., Principal Engineer
Abraham Campos, City Engineer/Public Works Director
KTUA
Joe Punsalan, Principal
Jacob Leon, Senior Associate
Morgen Ruby, Senior Planner
Isabel Pérez, Planner and Designer
Katherine Padilla & Associates, Inc. (KPA)
Katherine Padilla Otanez, Principal
Jessica Padilla Bowen, Senior Associate
Xavier Sibaja, Project Manager
Michael Baker
Ryan Zellers, Senior Transportation Planner
Jacob Swim, Senior Transportation Planner
Caltrans
Virginia Mendoza, Associate Transportation Planner
Omar Flores, Regional Grant Coordinator/Associate Transportation Planner Alexander Araiza, Grant Manager/Associate Transportation Planner Jacob Burkholder, Associate Transportation Planner
City Council
Tomás Oliva
Sonia Carter
Sylvia Marroquin
Claudia Camarena
John ‘Marty” Ellett
Planning Commission
Jorge Perez
Ashley Bertussi
Sergio Lopez
Aaron Popejoy
Andy Alvarez
Ramiro Urias
Jeffrey Chan
Project Advisory Committee
Ashley Bertussi
John Beltran
Lourdes Cienfuegos
Gustavo Gomez
Carlos Juarez
Sylvia Marroquin
Susana Simo
Natalie Torres

Page 232 of 403 ends

IV Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Introduction 2

1.1 Study Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

1.2 What are Complete Streets?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

1.3 Purpose and Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Table of Contents
01 02
03 Existing Conditions..............................12

2.1 Existing Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.2 Community Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.3 Land Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

2.4 Walk Audit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

2.5 Transportation Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Public Engagement 32

3.1 Outreach Strategy Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

3.2 Surveys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

3.3 Community Workshops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

3.4 Project Advisory Committee (PAC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.5 Pop-Up Events. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.6 Public Engagement Overarching Themes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Page 233 of 403 ends

Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan V
04 05
Recommendations 50

4.1 Complete Streets Toolkit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.2 Goals, Objectives, and Actions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

4.3 Imperial Avenue Preferred Concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 A
Implementation 86

5.1 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

5.2 Potential Funding Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Appendix 102
A.1 Caltrans Comments for City to Consider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .103 A.2 Safety Assessment Memo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 A.3 Survey #1 Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 A.4 Survey #2 Results (English & Spanish). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 A.5 Imperial Avenue Preferred Concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .157 A.6 Planning-Level Cost Estimates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

Page 234 of 403 ends

VI Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Figure 1-1: City of El Centro Map...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1-2: Study Area Segments...................................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2-1: El Centro Citywide General Plan Land Use Map .................................................................................... 20 Figure 2-2: Land Use and Community Destinations/Attractions............................................................................21 Figure 2-3: Bus Stops on Imperial Avenue ............................................................................................................................25 Figure 2-4: Missing Sidewalks on Imperial Avenue.........................................................................................................27 Figure 2-5: Existing Bicycle Facilities........................................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 2-6: Proposed Bicycle Facilities from 2021 General Plan.............................................................................29 Figure 2-7: Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Automobile Collisions...................................................................................... 30 Figure 4-1: Segment A Preferred Concept.............................................................................................................................72 Figure 4-2: Segment A Preferred Concept Sections ......................................................................................................73 Figure 4-3: Segment B Preferred Concept ...........................................................................................................................76 Figure 4-4: Segment B Preferred Concept Sections .....................................................................................................77 Figure 4-5: Segment C Preferred Concept (1 of 2)...........................................................................................................80 Figure 4-6: Segment C Preferred Concept (2 of 2) .......................................................................................................... 81 Figure 4-7: Segment B Preferred Concept Sections..................................................................................................... 82 Figures

Page 235 of 403 ends

Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan VII
Table 1-1: Study Area Segment Extents....................................................................................................................................4 Table 2-1: Commute to Work Travel Modes........................................................................................................................26 Table 5-1: Federal Funding Matrix.............................................................................................................................................88 Table 5-2: State Funding Matrix.................................................................................................................................................94 Tables

Page 236 of 403 ends

Page 237 of 403 ends

Introduction 1

Page 238 of 403 ends

3 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

1.1 Study Area
Located in Southern California, El Centro is the
largest city in Imperial County. It is located just
over 100 miles east of San Diego and 20 miles
north of the Mexican city of Mexicali, the closest border crossing, and 30 miles south of the Salton Sea. El Centro is conveniently located
near rail lines and Interstate 8 (I-8) providing
an east-to-west connection to neighboring cities while State Route 111 (SR 111) provides a north-to-south connection.

This Complete Streets Plan (CSP) focuses on
a portion of Imperial Avenue, which is prioritized as a major highway and it is the backbone of El Centro’s transportation network as it bisects El Centro and creates a primary northto-south connection. Imperial Avenue serves as a primary commercial corridor while also
connecting the community to public facilities,
places of cultural significance, employment opportunities, and medical care. It is important to note the significance of El Centro’s core urban
and metropolitan area within the Southern California Border Region as it is a major resource to El Centro and neighboring communities. The
study area is highlighted in Figure 1-1.

El Centro
Imperial Avenue
86 86
86 N
Figure 1-1: City of El Centro Map
City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks

Page 239 of 403 ends

Introduction
4 SEGMENT FROM TO A Adams Avenue Scott Avenue B Scott Avenue Lincoln Avenue C Lincoln Avenue Treshill Road N
Table 1-1: Study Area Segment Extents
The study area consists of a 1.5 mile stretch
of Imperial Avenue, or State Route 86 (SR 86)
from Treshill Road to Adams Avenue.

The study area for the CSP was broken down
into three segments which are shown in Figure
1-2 and described in Table 1-1. Each segment
has unique roadway conditions: Segment A has existing sidewalks, bus shel -
ters, raised narrow medians, wide travel
lanes, and a railroad crossing.

Segment B is characterized by a frontage
road on the west side, a mixture of raised
and earthen medians, and a lack of side-
walks.

Segment C is characterized by wide earth-
en medians, a lack of sidewalks, and unde-
veloped shoulders with an earthen drainage
channel on the east side and a channelized
flood control system on the west side.

Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Fraizer
Field
Carlos
Aguilar
Park
Lincoln
Elementary
Adams Park
Sunflower
Park
McKinley
Elementary
Kennedy
Middle School
Town Square
Park
86 86
Figure 1-2: Study Area Segments
City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
Schools
Parks
Study Area Future Relinquishment
This CSP acknowledges that Caltrans has own-
ership of the study area at the time of its devel-
opment. Implementation of the CSP is recom-
mended once the study area is relinquished to
El Centro. While El Centro anticipates gaining
control of the study area in the future, Caltrans
reviewed and provided guidance — included in
Appendix A.1.

Page 240 of 403 ends

5 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

1.2 What are
Complete Streets?
Complete Streets are planned, designed, and
constructed to be safer, to improve access, and
to strengthen community connections for all us-
ers and all modes of transportation.
1 Complete
Streets prioritize space for all pedestrians, bicy-
clists, transit users, and motor vehicle drivers of
all ages and abilities within the public right-of-way.

Complete Streets may also include components
that increase comfort and attractiveness for road-
way users through the addition of urban greening,
public art, and gathering spaces.
2 Special emphasis is placed on underserved and
underinvested areas which are low-income and
vulnerable communities facing often outdat-
ed street treatments. Complete Streets can be
achieved through investment into traffic calm-
ing treatments, amenities for all road users, and
maintenance to achieve a safe, comfortable, and
welcoming street environment.

The Imperial Avenue CSP aligns efforts with the
Caltrans Design Information Bulletin Number 94
(DIB-94): Complete Streets Contextual Design
Guidance.
3 The DIB-94 identifies and provides
Complete Streets design guidance, best practic-
es, and standards for the development of Com-
plete Streets on the state-controlled road network
— along with supporting policies and procedures.

Mobility for all modes of
transportation

Page 241 of 403 ends

Mobility for people of all
ages and abilities
Sustainable and green
infrastructure
Safe, comfortable, and
attractive spaces

Page 242 of 403 ends

7 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

1.2.1 Complete Streets Benefits
Creating Complete Streets has numerous
benefits for pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers,
and transit riders of all ages and abilities.

Benefits are not exclusive to transportation
users and can be experienced by adjacent
homes, businesses, and key destinations.

Safety
A key benefit of planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining Complete Streets is the enhancement of safety for all roadway users.

This CSP is the first step in planning for and
designing Complete Streets that include traffic calming measures such as high-visibility sidewalks, bicycle lanes, pedestrian signals,
among other measures. Construction and
maintenance of Complete Streets help encourage good driver behavior and awareness while simultaneously increasing compliance
with traffic regulations to aid in the reduction
of pedestrian and vehicular collisions.4, 5
Equitable Access
The U.S. transportation network and infrastructure has been historically built with motor vehicles at the forefront and it has led to the present day grid network seen today
in most cities. Highways have often divided
neighborhoods physically, limiting access
and connectivity. Complete Streets is an approach that can help close the gaps formerly created and result in increased safety, more
accessible, and healthier transportation networks for all people regardless of race, ethnicity, identity, or income level.6 Additionally, a
Complete Street makes streets and the public
realm more attractive and aids in increased
equitable access for people who may not own
a motor vehicle making transportation more
affordable without the need for maintenance,
gas costs, and other associated costs.

Safety
Equitable Access
Environmental
Health and Wellness
Economic Prosperity

Page 243 of 403 ends

Introduction 8
Environmental
The U.S. is one of the largest contributors of
greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) through
the use of on-road transportation.7,8 Increasing non-vehicular modes of transportation like walking, bicycling, and public transit, can help
decrease the use and dependency on motor
vehicles.9 Complete Streets also incorporates
urban greening elements, such as trees, that
provide shade for pedestrians and mitigate
air pollution to make positive impacts towards
reaching state greenhouse gas emission and
reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) goals.10
Health and Wellness
El Centro is a predominantly LatinX/Hispanic community and like many others, it lacks gathering spaces — such as along Imperial
Avenue — for physical activity which often
leads to increased health issues.11 Over half
of neighborhoods surrounding Imperial Avenue are classified as disadvantaged communities, according to SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities data and they are often underinvested areas.12 This CSP strives to create a more comfortable and welcoming street environment for increased use by people walking and bicycling.

Economic Prosperity
A Complete Street encourages a more active
lifestyle for pedestrians and bicyclists while
creating a street environment that promotes
safer driving. However, when improvements
are made, it’s important to acknowledge the
potential for displacement and gentrification.

Thoughtful planning ensures that existing
residents and businesses are protected and
able to benefit from a Complete Street. Complete Streets are an opportunity to increase foot traffic for businesses along the corridor
and result in economic growth. Elements and
measures to achieve Complete Streets are
often of low cost but can yield impactful results by decreasing pedestrian and vehicular collisions and activate the street environment
for safer access to businesses and facilities
along the corridor.13

Page 244 of 403 ends

9 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

1.3 Purpose and Vision Before
After
The purpose of the CSP is to provide El Centro
with a guide to enhance and transform the study
area into a corridor that supports all modes of travel such as walking, bicycling, and taking public transit while maintaining vehicle throughput. The
result will be a welcoming Complete Street for all
Imperial Avenue users. The adoption of the CSP
will assist El Centro to reclaim the autocentric corridor and encourage multimodal transportation that improves safety, access, and connectivity while
preserving and strengthening the community character and rich history.

Page 245 of 403 ends

Introduction 10
Endnotes
1 California Department of Transportation. (2021, December 7). Complete Streets. Caltrans. Retrieved February 6, 2024. 2 Active Transportation Alliance. (n.d.). Complete Streets, Complete Networks. Retrieved June 26, 2024. 3 Caltrans. (2024, January 16). Retrieved June 26, 2024. 4 American Planning Association. (2015). The Benefits of Street Scale Features. 5 Smart Growth America. (n.d.).
6 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. (2022). Complete Streets in FHWA. 7 California Air Resources Board. (April 24, 2024). California to Propose New Greenhouse Gas Reductions from Passenger Vehicles. 8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (July 8, 2024). Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 9 Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. (n.d.). Environment. 10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2024). The State of California’s Draft Priority Climate Action Plan. 11 Salud America. (May 14, 2019). The State of Latino Housing, Transportation, and Green Space: A Research Review. 12 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2022). SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities. 13 Smart Growth America. (2015). Safer Streets, Stronger Economies: Complete Streets Project outcomes from Across the Country.

Page 246 of 403 ends

Page 247 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 2

Page 248 of 403 ends

13 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.1 Existing Conditions
The section of Imperial Avenue between Adams Avenue and Treshill Road was constructed in the 1960s as SR 86, and therefore prioritized vehicle speed and throughput at the cost of convenience and safety of non-vehicular users. Existing conditions along this segment include lack of sidewalks, open drainage channels on both sides of the corridor, limited crossings, lack of bicycle facilities, and high driving speeds. Over the last 60 years, the area around Imperial Avenue has developed with a mix of land uses such as housing, commercial destinations, offices, and community facilities. An assessment of the barriers and opportunity areas to improve all modes of transportation is made possible through an extensive and comprehensive analysis of the existing conditions as outlined in this chapter.

2.1.1 Guiding Documents
A review of existing planning documents at the local and regional level was completed to ensure alignment between the proposed recommendations of this CSP and previous efforts. Previous planning studies provide guidance on past and current street developments as well as room for improvement for the future. The following are a list of the documents reviewed and analyzed.

The Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan (ICTC) (2024) Imperial County Active Transportation Plan (2022)
Caltrans District 11 Active Transportation Plan (2022)
El Centro General Plan Update 2040 (2021)
City of El Centro the Heart of the Valley Strategic Plan 2022-2027 (2021)
The City of El Centro Active Transportation & Safe Routes to School Plan (2019)
El Centro Vision 2050 Strategic Plan (2015)
Drainage Master Plan (2009)

Page 249 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 14
The Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan (2024)
The Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan addresses the future needs and growth of residents and commuters throughout Imperial County. High priority projects within the region were identified as
opportunities for potential funding
with support from community members who participated throughout the community outreach process.

Prioritized transportation projects
include the widening of Imperial Avenue from four to six lanes, installation of Class I multi-use paths in both directions from northern city limits to Adams Avenue, and pedestrian improvements, such as pedestrian countdown timers, ADA curb ramps, continental high-visibility crosswalks, and pedestrian refuge islands.

The Imperial County Transportation Commission Regional
Active Transportation Plan (2022)
The Imperial County Transportation Commission Regional Active Transportation Plan identifies the
City of El Centro as being one of
two regional priority projects that
have the potential of connecting
with surrounding cities to create
safer and more accessible connections. Imperial Avenue falls within one of two priority projects
identified within the prioritization
process of the Plan with recommendation of a Class I bicycle lane.

January 2024 FINAL

OUR IMPERIAL VALLEY,
OUR FUTURE, OUR GROWTH.

The Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan
Imperial County Transportation Commission
February 2022 Final
Regional Active
Transportation Plan

Page 250 of 403 ends

15 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Caltrans District 11 Active Transportation Plan (2022)
The Caltrans District 11 Active
Transportation Plan is a comprehensive document identifying gaps and barriers faced by pedestrians
and bicyclists. High priority locations and segments for future planning, construction, and improvements were identified in an effort to create a walkable and bikeable
community. The CSP is accompanied by an interactive online map which demonstrates location-based needs for people walking or bicycling along highways. Imperial Avenue prioritized as Tier 1, representing the highest intensity of need.

El Centro General Plan Update 2040 (2021)
El Centro General Plan is a comprehensive document that includes the City’s incorporated areas and land within its sphere of influence. General
Plans are required to include eight elements but
for the purposes of the CSP the applicable chapters reviewed covers Land Use, Circulation, and Environmental Justice. Opportunity Area (OA-1)
overlaps with one intersection of the CSP study
area, at Imperial Avenue and Adams Avenue.

Adams Avenue is to be planned as a four-lane
arterial with Class IV cycle tracks on both sides
per Policy OA-1.9 of the General Plan’s Land Use element and shows high-visibility crosswalks and conflict striping at the Imperial Avenue intersection. The Circulation Element samples pedestrian and bicycle treatments to use within the opportunity areas and throughout the City. These treatments as well as relevant policies from the General Plan were applied to this CSP, as found in Chapter 4.

City of El Centro the Heart of the Valley Strategic Plan (2021) The City of El Centro the Heart of the Valley
Strategic Plan creates a roadmap for the planning period of 2022-2027 and it is meant to include goals and objectives of the Vision 2050 Plan which still serves as a guiding document
for the City. The short planning period of this
plan is meant to address the more immediate
goals and actions for the pursuit of funding.

The City of El Centro Active Transportation & Safe Routes to School Plan (SRTS) (2019)
This plan presents recommendations and programs to promote more bicycling and walking throughout the City with the objective of improving non-motorized transportation, promoting public health, and promoting transportation equity. Identified recommendations for schools
within proximity of the Imperial Avenue study
area are Lincoln Elementary, McKinley Elementary School, Kennedy Middle School and Martin Luther King Elementary School. A recommendation applicable to Imperial Avenue identified for Lincoln Elementary school is the installation
of buffered bicycle lanes, separated bikeways,
and bicycle lanes along corridors such as Adams Avenue and Imperial Avenue. Additionally, the removal of the free-right turn located on the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Adams Avenue is proposed within this plan.

SUMMARY REPORT
ACTIVE

PLAN TRANSPORTATION

DISTRICT
2022 11
July 2022
City of El Centro
FINAL
General Plan
Table of Contents T
City of El Centro
Active Transportation &
Safe Routes to School Plan
Adopted February 19, 2019

Page 251 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 16
City of El Centro Master Plan of Drainage (2009)
The City of El Centro Master Plan of Drainage
outlines design criteria and identifies drainage
deficiencies in addition to recommendations
for drainage improvements. Imperial Avenue’s existing drainage facilities are owned and operated by Caltrans and require careful
consideration to provide a safe environment
to prevent flooding during wet seasons. The
existing drainage facilities flow into Imperial
Irrigation District (IDD) Facilities which are
owned and operated by the City of El Centro. A proposed solution is the upsizing of the existing system and the addition of catch basins. Imperial Avenue from Scott Avenue to the railroad track is identified as needing an upgrade to the existing storm drain and additional catch basins. The same upgrades were recommended west of Imperial Avenue along the Northgate Shopping Center and east of the corridor along the Town Center shopping Center. From Villa Avenue to Imperial Avenue to Scott Avenue flooding occurs along the street and this plan recommends that the existing storm drain is extended.

Upon future planned relinquishment of the Imperial Avenue drainage facilities from Caltrans to El Centro, the City will be responsible for any future studies, maintenance, and planned improvements.

El Centro Vision 2050 Strategic Plan (2015)
The El Centro Vision 2050 Strategic Plan
identifies goals and objectives to help guide
the pursuit of creating a prosperous future for
the City. Five vision elements within the document to help achieve the vision of the City of El Centro by 2050 are:

Safety and Community Preservation
Quality of Life Amenities
Economic Development
Development and Mobility
Community Pride and Spirit
Relevant strategies to the Imperial Avenue study area include the improvement of thoroughfare by the incorporation of landscaping and lighting for pedestrians, the relocation of utilities for improved visual quality, and the enhancement of crossings for connectivity and safety.

City of El Centro
Master Plan of
Drainage
Project No. PW 837-8030.2
April 2009
2401 East Katella Avenue, Suite 450
Anaheim, CA 92806
T 714.978.8200 • F 714.978.8299
www.willdan.com
Prepared For:

City of El Centro
Public Works Department
1275 Main Street
El Centro, CA 92243
Prepared By:

VISI N2050 STRATEGIC PLAN
ADOPTED DECEMBER 1, 2015
FINAL
El Centro

Page 252 of 403 ends

Total Population Population Age
Occupation

33.2%

13.9%

52.9%
44,184
Under 19 years
20 to 64 years
Over 65 years
Management, business, science and arts
Service
Sales and office
Production, transportation, and material moving
Natural resources, construction, and maintenance

26.7%

26.1%

17.9%

15.9%

13.4%

2.2 Community Demographics
within an area of 11.1 square miles

Page 253 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 18
Race Ethnicity

27.2% 11.8%

46.0%

20.9%

3.6%

0.8%

1.5%

0.1%

88.2%
White
Black or African American
American Indian & Alaska Native
Asian
Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander
Some other race
Two or more races
Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
Not Hispanic or Latino
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables DP05, S0101, S0801, S2405.

Page 254 of 403 ends

19 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.3 Land Use
El Centro prioritizes maintaining a balanced and diverse mix of land uses all of which are necessary for maintaining a healthy community.

The City is comprised of mostly Low Density Residential land use but with a mix of General Commercial, General Industrial, Light Industrial, and Public Use, as shown in Figure 2-1.

Land use along Imperial Avenue consists of mainly General Commercial and Heavy Commercial use. Other uses facing the corridor are Low Density Residential Use, Mixed Use 1, Tourist Commercial Use, Neighborhood Commercial Use, and Public Use. Adjacent uses to Imperial Avenue include High-Medium Density Residential Use. A small portion at the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Adams Avenue also falls within the Adams Avenue Opportunity Area (OA-1).

Study Area Land Use Descriptions
“Wow, Imperial
Avenue has a diverse
range of land use!”
Low Density Residential Use
Development in this category is characterized by single-family detached dwelling units, ADUs, and accessory buildings.

Mixed Use 1
Development in this category is characterized by multiple-family residential, live/work, and retail and service-oriented uses serving the needs of local neighborhoods; allowing mixed use, stand-alone residential, standalone commercial developments.

General Commercial
Development in this category is characterized by Retail, light service, and general business, as well as large-scale planned shopping districts serving the local and regional area; where appropriate, motel/hotel & public assembly uses.

Heavy Commercial Use
Development in this category is characterized by general commercial uses, business and consumer services, and light manufacturing.

Tourist Commercial Use
Development in this category is characterized by motels, resort hotels, related commercial and tourist oriented uses, retail and freeway oriented uses; multiple-family residential may be permitted.

Neighborhood Commercial Use
Development in this category is characterized by retail and service-oriented uses serving the needs of local neighborhoods.

Public Use
Development in this category is characterized by parcels owned by the City of El Centro, Imperial Irrigation District, school districts, or El Centro Regional Medical Center containing police and fire departments, libraries, sewer facilities, flood control basins, parks and recreation facilities, cemeteries, museums, etc.

Page 255 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 20
GeneralPlan
LandUse
!"_$
!"_$
AÙAÙ
A¿
A¿
AdamsAve
S 4th St
Parker Rd
S Dogwood Rd
E
V
i
l
l
a
A
v
e
W
O
r
a
n
g
e
A
v
e
CruickshankDr
G el nwood Rd
S 8th St
E
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
A
v
e
nI dustry Way
W
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
A
v
e
S Fairf ei dl Dr
E
H
e
i
l
A
v
e
W
H
o
r
n
e
R
d
R
o
s
s
A
v
e
N 4th St
E
R
o
s
s
A
v
e
W
a
k
e
A
v
e
N
u
f
f
e
r
R
d
S mI per ai l Ave
S 23rd St
V
i
l
l
a
A
v
e
S
c
o
t
t
A
v
e
S 2nd St
N 1st St
D
a
n
e
n
b
e
r
g
D
r
W
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
A
v
e
S 3rd St
Farnsworth Ln
S 1st St
S Wate mr an Ave
W
O
r
a
n
g
e
A
v
e
B
r
a
d
s
h
a
w
D
r
H
e
w
e
s
H
w
y
B
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
S
t
E
C
h
i
c
k
R
d
N La Brucher ei Rd
Dogwood Rd
N 3rd St
E
V
i
l
l
a
A
v
e
WPicoAve
T
r
e
s
h
i
l
l
R
d
S 4th St/State Route 86
W
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
E
M
a
i
n
S
t
Pitzer Rd
o
s
s
R
d
E
Evan
Hewes
Hwy
O
c
o
t
i
l
l
o
D
r
N 6th St Vin
eSt
N mI per ai l Ave/State Route 86
C
r
u
i
c
k
s
h
a
n
k
R
d
Cross Rd
W
E
u
c
l
i
d
A
v
e
A
u
r
o
r
a
D
r
N 12th St
E
G
i
l
l
e
t
t
S
t
S Dogwood Rd
Lotus Ave
R
o
s
s
A
v
e
Cannon Rd
S 8th St
McCabeRd
Coo el y Rd
E
M
c
C
a
b
e
R
d
S C al rk Rd
S La Brucher ei Rd
N 8th St
W
M
a
i
n
S
t
Aust ni Rd
StateRoute86
OA-5
OA-4O
A-3
OA-2
OA-1
CityLimits
SphereofInfluence
OpportunityArea(OA)
LandUseR
uralResidential
LowDensityResidential
MediumDensityResidential
High-MediumDensityResidential
MasterPlannedMixedUse
MixedUse1
GeneralCommercial
HeavyCommercial
TouristCommercial
DowntownCommercial
NeighborhoodCommercial
OfficeCommercial
GeneralIndustrial
LightIndustrial
Civic
Public
OverlaysM
ixedUse2Overlay
SingleFamilyOverlay
MedicalOfficeOverlay
ElCentroRegional
MedicalCenterOverlay
01,5003,000
ZNORTH
Feet
FIGURELUE-2
Figure 2-1: El Centro City-
wide General Plan Land
Use Map
Study Area Boundary

Page 256 of 403 ends

21 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.3.1 Community Destinations
Attractions
The portion of Imperial Avenue within the study area provides access to commercial areas, two parks, Carlos Aguilar Park and First Responders Park, grocery stores, vacant lots with planned commercial development, and residential areas ranging from mobile home parks to single family homes. The nearest schools are about a half-mile away from the corridor. Future developments on Imperial Avenue include an array of commercial uses ranging from cafes, eateries, medical centers and offices, and a gas station.

Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) along Imperial Avenue include the Valley Centerpoint Demolition near the northwest corner of Imperial Avenue and Scott Avenue. Because of the desert climate, residents have year-round extreme heat days which make for an uncomfortable walk, ride a bike, or wait for public transit to and from popular and everyday destinations. Understanding the most traveled areas, as shown in Figure 2-2, helps guide the recommendations of the CSP to make modes of transportation not only more safe, but also more comfortable and accessible to and from attractions.

Imperial Avenue
Figure 2-2: Land Use and Community Destinations/Attractions Adams Ave
El Centro Ave
Euclid Ave
Woodward Ave
Railroad
Date Canal
Stacy Ave
Scott Ave
Scott Ave
Villa Ave
14th St
Frontage Rd
Study Area Boundary
Low Density Residential
Mixed Use 1
General Commercial
Grocery Stores SCHOOL
Dining
Medical
Parks
Schools
Library
86 Heavy Commercial
Tourist Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Public

Page 257 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 22
El Dorado Ave
la Ave
Pico Ave
Lincoln Ave
Bradshaw Ave
Ford Dr
Treshill Dr
Cottonwood Dr
Frontage Rd Frontage Rd
N
Cruickshank Dr
86 SCHOOL
Central Drain

Page 258 of 403 ends

23 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.4 Walk Audit
Walk audits are an integral part of the CSP. They offered the opportunity for the Project Team to walk in the shoes of residents to better understand and assess the existing conditions, needs, and barriers.

Walk Audits (November 8, 2023 )
During the initial walk audit on November 8, 2023, the Project Team and El Centro City staff walked along Imperial Avenue.

They documented areas of interest on a site map, supported by photographs, and noted the following observations along the corridor:

Drainage constraints
Changes in topography along different stretches of the corridor Missing curb ramps and truncated domes at some crossing points Missing sidewalks
Lack of shelter
Long distances for pedestrian crossings
Speeding cars (varied posted 35 to 55 miles per hour speed limit along the segments)

Page 259 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 24
Frontage roads
Grade changes and drainage channels
Slip lanes pose pedestrian conflict areas No pedestrian access at railroad crossing Wide with high traffic volumes and noise Missing sidewalks Existing tree canopy with room for more Bus shelters need maintenance Existing high-visibility crosswalks
Segment A Segment B Segment C

Page 260 of 403 ends

25 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.5 Transportation Characteristics

2.5.1 Transit Routes and Stops
Public transportation for El Centro is available to residents through a fixed public bus service by Imperial Valley Transit (IVT), servicing Imperial County since 1989. Bus services provided by IVT include fixed routes, deviated fixed routes, and remote zone routes. Lines 2, 3, and the Green Line run along Imperial Avenue:
2N - El Centro to Niland
2S - Niland to El Centro
3E - El Centro to Holtville
3W - Holtville to El Centro
Green Line
Some transit stops along the corridor have bus shelters with seating and others only display signage. Bus stops along and near the corridor are shown in Figure 2-3.

Martin
Luther King
Elementary
N
Figure 2-3: Bus Stops on Imperial Avenue
McKinley
Elementary
City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks
Bus Stops
Carlos
Aguilar
Park
Adams
Park

Page 261 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 26
Table 2-1: Commute to Work Travel Modes
TRAVEL MODE ESTIMATE (%)
Car, truck, or van 91.8%
Drove alone 79.1%
Carpooled 12.7%
Workers per car, truck, or van 1.08%
Bicycle 0%
Public transportation (excluding taxicab) 0.4%
Walked 1.7%
Taxican, motorcycle, or other means 1.7%
Worked from home 4.4%

2.5.2 Commuting Mode Share
As a major north-south connection, Imperial Avenue is heavily used for daily commuting within the City and surrounding areas. Table 2-1 depicts the estimated travel modes utilized by people 16 years and over who work in El Centro according to the U.S. Census 2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (ACS).1 The majority of people working travel alone by automobile followed by people carpooling and have an average travel time of 21.6 minutes to their destination. Active modes of transportation are below two percent, demonstrating the need for Complete Streets improvements such as sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and shade.

Bicycling Mode Share
Similar to the walking mode share, bicycling mode share measures the percentage of resident workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by bicycle. Throughout El Centro, there is no reported bicycle use when commuting to work according to the ACS data.

However, this does not mean there is no need or interest in commuting by bicycle within the city.

Public Transit Mode Share
Transit mode share measures the percentage of workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by transit. This mode share reflects how well the mobility infrastructure, transit routes, and land-use patterns support travel to work by transit.

Walking Mode Share
The walking mode share measures the percentage of workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by foot and it reflects how well infrastructure and land use patterns support travel to work by foot. In the city, walking mode share patterns are connected to the relative proximity of housing to employment centers.

Page 262 of 403 ends

27 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

2.5.4 Sidewalk Network Evaluation
Complete Street improvements encourage pedestrians to walk more as they make streets more appealing to pedestrians due to increased safety and walkability. Identifying deficiencies in the pedestrian network is critical using data provided by El Centro. Figure 2-4 shows missing sidewalks along large portions of Imperial Avenue on both sides of the corridor. Missing sidewalks are concentrated on the northern portion of Imperial Avenue. Frontage roads on the west side of the corridor have existing sidewalks and create access to commercial uses and public facilities. However, the lack of sidewalks on both sides of the corridor create a disconnection across destinations.

N
Figure 2-4: Missing Sidewalks on Imperial Avenue
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Adams
Park
El Centro
Library
McKinley
Elementary
City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks
Bus Stops
Missing Sidewalks
Data Source: City of El Centro Community Development Department Carlos
Aguilar
Park

Page 263 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 28

2.5.3 Bicycle Facilities
In the development of this CSP, the existing and planned bicycle facilities were analyzed to align to the greatest extent possible recommendations with past and future planning efforts.

Existing Bicycle Facilities
Imperial Avenue existing bicycle facilities as shown in Figure 2-5, consist of Class III along the majority of the corridor. Intersecting bicycle facilities for east-to-west connections include Class II, Class III, and some Class I.

Planned Bicycle Facilities
According to El Centro’s General Plan Circulation Element, Figure 2-6, shows the planned expansion of bicycle facilities along Imperial Avenue include upgrading from the existing Class III bike routes to Class IV cycle tracks with intersecting Class I, Class II, and Class III bike facilities. Additionally, the Project Team during walk audits and traffic counts recorded bicycle ridership, observing the need for facilities to protect existing and attract new riders.

City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks
Class I - Multi Use Path
Class II - Bicycle Lanes
Class III - Bicycle Routes
N
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Adams
Park
McKinley
Elementary
Data Source: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Figure 2-5: Existing Bicycle Facilities
Carlos
Aguilar
Park

Page 264 of 403 ends

29 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Figure 2-6: Proposed Bicycle Facilities from 2021 General Plan City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks
Class I - Multi Use Path
Class II - Bicycle Lanes
Class III - Bicycle Routes
Class IV - Separated
N
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Adams
Park
McKinley
Elementary
Bikeways
Data Source: El Centro General Plan 2021 (Mobility Element) Carlos
Aguilar
Park

Page 265 of 403 ends

Existing Conditions 30
Endnotes
1 United States Census Bureau. (2022). S0801 Commuting
Characteristics.

Bicycle & Pedestrian Crash/Collisions Analysis
A comprehensive crash analysis was conducted using Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) data to track bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle collisions along Imperial Avenue. Figure 2-7 depicts six of the intersections with a high number of crashes, ranging by collision type - pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle collision.

Traffic Count Analysis
Traffic counts were conducted on October 24, 2023 at AM and PM peak times for cars, pedestrians, and bicyclists to understand how people are currently using and moving through the study area. Despite the lack of pedestrian and bicycle amenities, users were recorded using these modes. Pedestrian and bicycle counts were higher in the southern portion of the corridor, Segment A, likely due to the presence of existing sidewalks for protection.

Refer to Appendix A.2 for detailed Existing Lane Geometry and Existing AM/PM Hour Volume exhibits.

N
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Adams
Park
El Centro
Library
McKinley
Elementary
City Boundary
Study Area Boundary
Schools
Parks
Pedestrian Collision
Bicycle Collision
Vehicle Collision
Figure 2-7: Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Automobile Collisions Data Source: SWITRS
Carlos
Aguilar
Park

Page 266 of 403 ends

31 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

Page 267 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 3

Page 268 of 403 ends

33 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

3.1 Outreach Strategy Overview
Input from the public provided the CSP planning process with valuable information while strengthening trust and support of the project.

Community members have firsthand experience with the strengths and areas needing improvement on Imperial Avenue and public outreach is a key component of project recommendations.

The outreach strategy consisted of the following events and all materials were provided in English and Spanish throughout the engagement process:

A project website
E-newsletters and social media posts
Postcards to businesses on Imperial Avenue
An online and paper survey for field interviews/intercept surveys along Imperial Avenue
A Geographical Information System (GIS) based interactive online map survey
Three (3) community workshops
Four (4) project advisory committee (PAC) meetings
Four (4) pop-up events

3.1.1 Project Branding
To engage, inform, and educate the public, project branding was established to provide digestible informative material for the community.

El Centro does not have adopted design guidelines and it allowed for the development of a logo, color palette, typography, and infographics that were representative of Imperial Avenue.

3.1.2 Project Website
A project website was generated to be a bank of information as the CSP was developed with the inclusion of the project description, project timeline, project milestones, and public engagement opportunities such as the GIS-based interactive online mapping survey which allowed the public to drop icons representing a topic with a comment of any area of concern along Imperial Avenue.
#196775 #ed6129 #f09723

Page 269 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 34

3.1.3 Newsletters & Social Media
Bilingual e-newsletters were sent to the project database at key milestones. The database grew throughout the project due to participation in the survey and sign-ups at the various public engagement events.

E-newsletters were sent to over 500 community members.

Articles were also used as a way to engage the community as articles were drafted by the Project Team and City Staff and were posted on El Centro’s Community Newsletter for the Summer of 2023 and 2024.

Additionally, social media posts were made on the City’s social media platforms throughout all stages of the CSP.

3.1.4 Postcards
A bilingual postcard was mailed to El
Centro businesses along Imperial Avenue
to inform business owners and operators
of the CSP to obtain additional information
through the project website prior to
Workshop #3 held on November 14, 2024.

El Centro staff provided a list of 169 active
businesses, and the postcard were mailed
to all on October 21, 2024, with an arrival
date and in mailboxes by October 25, 2024.

Page 270 of 403 ends

35 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

3.2 Surveys
To better understand the challenges, barriers, and opportunities for Imperial Avenue, the Project Team developed a GIS-based interactive online mapping survey and conducted intercept surveys with a traditional community survey.

The traditional survey was made available online through a Quick Response (QR) Code and website link as well as a physical survey distributed during public engagement events. The survey material was made available from October of 2023 to January of 2024.The survey was promoted on the City’s various social media platforms, at city events, and a large banner displayed at Carlos Aguilar Park.

Opportunity drawings were also provided by the City to incentivize survey participation.

3.2.1 GIS Interactive Survey
A GIS interactive survey was posted at the start of the project along with the project website where a range of comment
points/categories were available for participants to note areas of concern. The option to include any other concern or comment was also made available.

Concerns noted on the interactive survey included:

Driving concerns on Bradshaw Avenue and Villa Avenue where intersecting with Imperial Avenue Traffic calming needed on El Dorado Avenue and
Imperial Avenue intersection
Bicycle concerns on Scott Avenue and Imperial Avenue intersection and parking lots Missing sidewalks approaching the railroad
Grocery store (Vons) as a common destination

Page 271 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 36

3.2.2 Intercept Surveys
Although most people have access to the technology required to complete the digital survey, it was important to ensure the survey was accessible to everyone, including those without the necessary tech- nology or those who may experience discomfort with digital tools. For this reason, the Project Team also offered a physical survey option and conducted field interviews/intercept surveys.

Intercept Survey #1 (December 13, 2023)
On December 13, 2023, with permission from the El Centro School District, the Project Team visited McKinley Elementary and Kennedy Middle School during after-school pickup to conduct CSP surveys to parents and caregivers. Those waiting to pick-up their students were happy to participate in the survey, and Kennedy Principal Richard Sanchez offered extra credit to the students whose parents partici- pated. Additionally, the Project Team visited the library as well as tran- sit stops near Costco and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

Overall, participants were enthusiastic about the project to improve the nearby neighborhood.

Intercept Surveys September 17 & 18, 2024
On September 17, 2024, the Project Team visited Lincoln Elementary and Martin Luther King Elementary Schools during after-school pickup to speak with parents about the project, sharing information about the second survey from Workshop #2 about the draft concept recom- mendations. A station was set-up outside Cardenas, with permission from the store manager.

Additionally, to reach transit users, the team visited four transit stops along the corridor on September 18, one outside Costco, and three further south. The team also stopped at the library to speak with pa- trons about the project and encourage survey participation.

Over the two days, residents responded positively to the improve- ments, with many sharing stories of near collisions along Imperial Avenue. Some expressed concern about the addition of three stop- lights from their perspective as drivers. Those who used the library were especially enthusiastic about a new traffic signal allowing easier pedestrian access to the library.

Page 272 of 403 ends

37 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

3.2.3 Survey Results Key Findings and Takeaways
Key findings and takeaways from participants who completed the online and physical surveys at CSP events or during fieldwork have been summarized. The complete survey results can be found in the Appendix A.3. 448
Total
Surveys

79.9%

94.1%
Relationship of survey participants with El Centro
Most popular mode of travel on Imperial Avenue
Frequency of survey participants using the following modes of travel along Imperial Avenue Residents
Driving

2.3%

2.0%

14.7%

10.5%

1.4%

3.4%

0.9%

2.0%

0.9%

71.2%

14.8%

47.7%

18.6%

3.6%

12.1%

18.0%

2.7%

7.7%

2.6%

2.5%

79.0%

83.2%

92.9%
Never
Few times per year
Monthly
Weekly
Daily

Page 273 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 38
Major attractions/what draws survey participants to Imperial Avenue Concerned about enhancing safety for the
following modes of travel
Top concerns about walking, bicycling, and the
use of transit along Imperial Avenue
Top things that would make people walk/ride,
bike, and use transit along Imperial Avenue

73.1%
Shopping Medical Visits

46.0%
Speeding Cars
Landscaping and attractive public spaces such as
benches, art, and plazas
Lack of dedicated or protected bike lanes
Separated/protected bicycle facilities
Survey respondents do not use the bus
Bus shelter with seating, shade, and lighting

62.6%
Dining

47.2%
Work
WORK

23.5%
Library

33.0%
School
SCHOOL

21.4%
Parks
Walk/Ride
Not at all
Somewhat
A lot
Not at all
Somewhat
A lot
Bike
Not at all
Somewhat
A lot
Transit

11.8%

54.2% 34.1%

14.9%

49.4% 35.7%

33.1%

35.3%

31.6%

71.1%

61.6%

31.8%

56.9%

58.9%

53.8%

Page 274 of 403 ends

39 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

3.3 Community Workshops
The City of El Centro is
developing a Complete Streets
Plan that will assess opportunities for
complete street improvements for Imperial
Avenue. The Plan will serve as a guide to help
implement a safe and comfortable experience
that caters to various modes of travel.

La Ciudad de El Centro esta desarrollando un
Plan de Calles Completas que
evaluara las oportunidades para
mejoramientos para Imperial Avenue.

El plan servira como un guía para la
implementación de una experiencia
cómoda y segura que adaptara
varios modos de viaje.

WORKSHOP/ TALLER
WORKSHOP TODAY!
¡TALLER HOY!
Wednesday, November 8 Time: 6:00– 7:30 PM
El Centro Library
1198 N. Imperial Ave., El Centro, CA 91942
Miercoles, Noviembre 8 Horario: 6:00– 7:30 PM
Librería de El Centro
1198 N. Imperial Ave., El Centro, CA 91942
Possible Bicycle and Transit Improvements for Imperial Avenue Mejoramientos Posibles de Bicicleta y Transporte Público en Imperial Avenue Class 1 or 4: Protected Bikeways
Clase 1 o 4: Carriles de Bici Protegidos
Class 2: Bicycle Lane
Clase 2: Carril de Bicicleta
Bike Parking
Estacionamiento de Bicicleta
Class 3: Bicycle Routes
Clase 3: Rutas de Bicicleta
* Place a dot on the improvements that you’d like to see. * Coloque una pegatina/estampilla en los mejoramientos que le gustaría ver.

Bus Shelters with Protection from Weather
Paradas de Autobús con Protección Contra el Clima
Improved ADA Access at Bus Stops
Acceso Mejorado de ADA
More Bike Rack Capacity on the Front of Buses
Más Capacidad de Portabicicletas al Frente de Autobuses Bus Services:

Servicios de Autobús:

Earlier in the day
Temprano en el día
Later in the day
Más tarde en el día
More Direct Routes
Más Rutas Directas
Bicycle Improvements / Mejoramientos para Bicicleta
Transit Improvements / Mejoramientos de Transporte Público Three interactive community workshops were conducted throughout various dates during the CSP planning process. All workshops were family-friendly events with bilingual staff available to facilitate participation and capture valuable feedback. The purpose of the community workshops was to identify what community members enjoy and would like to see improved on Imperial Avenue to help highlight priority areas in the advancement of the project vision of creating a vibrant corridor that connects all people to the City of El Centro.

Workshop #1 - City Library (November 8, 2023)
The team conducted the first community workshop on Wednesday, November 8 at the City Library located at the intersection of Villa Avenue and Imperial Avenue. A brief presentation was given by the Project Team and City Staff to introduce the CSP project. Later residents had the opportunity to review and comment on various exhibits provided which included input boards and maps to help gather comments. The feedback the team collected on existing concerns, opportunity areas, and overarching wishes for Imperial Avenue was used to develop design alternatives for residents to review at future community workshops.

Page 275 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 40
Workshop #2 - City Library (August 8, 2024)
Similarly to the first workshop, the second workshop took place on Friday, August 8 at the City Library. The workshop was an open house style format where community members were encouraged to walk around and learn, comment, and participate in the various activities available.

A complete streets remote control car course served as an interactive and educational activity that demonstrated traffic calming treatments to help guide pedestrians and bicyclists safely and comfortably as well as incentivize drivers to be more mindful of their surroundings to encourage safer driving. A display of boards provided a synopsis of the survey results which guided the draft recommendations that were the main focus of the workshop. The draft recommendations were shown to the public in a comprehensive but digestible format as the Imperial Avenue corridor was broken down into small portions of Seg- ment A, B, and C. Existing and proposed three-dimensional sections of the corresponding segment accompanied the site plans and com- munity members were asked to complete a report card for each of the segments to help gauge where further improvements were desired.

Additionally, a board displaying the three locations for new proposed traffic signals was also provided for comments.

Overall, participants expressed satisfaction with the draft recommen- dations for all segments and previous comments made about the need for more shade, shelter, lighting, and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists still were primary areas of concern.

Draft Recommendation Survey
Following this workshop, a second survey
was made available to the public for all whom
were unable to attend to provide their feed-
back on the draft recommendations and a
total of 71 surveys were completed. Overall,
people were supportive of the presented rec-
ommendations for all segments and the new
proposed traffic signal at the intersection of
Imperial Avenue and Villa Avenue. Complete
results can be found in Appendix A.4.

Possible Improvements for Imperial Avenue - Segment A / Mejoramientos Posibles Para Imperial Avenue - Segmento A The complete extent of Segment A is from Adams Avenue to Scott Avenue. Depicted below is a section of Segment A from El Centro Avenue to the Railroad.

DESIGN CONCEPT
960
958.5
958.4
957.7
957.5
958.1
958.2
957.2 958.2
958.6
958.8
957.5
958.4
958.2
957.8
958.7
957.9
958.3
958.4
959.5
956.5
958.8
958.5
958.4
958.3
958.7
958.2
957.3
957.1
958.5
957.7
956.6
957.4
956.7
956.7
956.7
957.6
956.5
959.6
958.3
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured

KEY MAP
Treshill Rd
Villa Ave
Lincoln Ave
Scott Ave
Euclid Ave
Imperial Avenue Imperial Avenue
Adams Ave
Pico Ave
North
Park
El Centro
Library
Lincoln
Elementary
School
Bradshaw Ave
Cruickshank Dr
86 86
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
Imperial Avenue
Travel Lanes
Green Conflict Striping
Travel Lanes
86 Woodward Avenue
Days Inn
Jack in
the Box
Metro by
T-Mobile
Dutch Bros Coffee
(In Building Permit Review)
VONS
Pizza Hut Sizzler Paul’s
Photography
Romeo’s
Car Wash
N
N
Varies Sidewalk Shoulder Sidewalk Varies Sidewalk Sidewalk Class IV Green Conflict Striping Class IV
Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Varies Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Varies N N
1 Class IV Separated Bikeway
4 Pedestrian Lighting
3 Urban Greening
2 Curb Extensions

PROPOSED ELEMENTS
Euclid Avenue
Enhanced Bus Shelter
11 11
1 1
22 34
34 444
34 PROPOSED

CONDITIONS

EXISTING

CONDITIONS
Wayfinding Signage
ADA Improvements
el Centro Avenue
Railroad

KEY MAP DESIGN CONCEPT
The complete extent of Segment B is from Scott Avenue to Lincoln Avenue. Depicted below is a section of Segment B from Scott Avenue to Villa Avenue.

Treshill Rd
Villa Ave
Lincoln Ave
Scott Ave
Euclid Ave
Imperial Avenue Imperial Avenue
Adams Ave
Pico Ave
North
Park
El Centro
Library
Lincoln
Elementary
School
Bradshaw Ave
Cruickshank Dr
86 86
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
Imperial Avenue
Frontage Rd
El Centro
Library
Center Median
ACE Hardware U.S. Immigration &
Customs Enforcement
Travel Lanes
Street Parking
Northbound
One-way Street
ADA Improvements
Proposed New
Bus Stop
Travel Lanes
Wayfinding
Signage
Conflict Striping
86 Scott Avenue
Villa Avenue
Jersey Mike’s/
UPS Store
N
N
141414
4 4
4 2
3 3
Library Sidewalk Frontage Rd Drainage Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Varies Library Sidewalk Frontage Rd Drainage Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Class I Street Parking Class IV
Northbound One-way Street
N
N
1 Class I Multi-Use Path
4 Pedestrian/Bicycle-Scale Lighting 3
Urban Greening
2 Class IV Separated Bikeway

PROPOSED ELEMENTS
Possible Improvements for Imperial Avenue - Segment B / Mejoramientos Posibles Para Imperial Avenue - Segmento B 3 3 3 3

PROPOSED

CONDITIONS

EXISTING

CONDITIONS
Flood Control Channel
The complete extent of Segment C is from Lincoln Avenue to Treshill Road. Depicted below is a section of Segment C from Bradshaw Avenue to Cruickshank Drive.

Possible Improvements for Imperial Avenue - Segment C / Mejoramientos Posibles Para Imperial Avenue - Segmento C

KEY MAP DESIGN CONCEPT
Treshill Rd
Villa Ave
Lincoln Ave
Scott Ave
Euclid Ave
Imperial Avenue Imperial Avenue
Adams Ave
Pico Ave
North
Park
El Centro
Library
Lincoln
Elementary
School
Bradshaw Ave
Cruickshank Dr
86 86
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
Imperial Avenue
Flood Control Channel
Flood Control Channel
Sidewalk
Center Median
Travel Lanes
Travel Lanes
86 Bradshaw Avenue
Cruickshank Drive
Armed Forces
Career Center
All Valley
Urgent Care
Del Taco Cold Stone/
Game Stop
Starbucks
N
N
Varies Drainage Shoulder Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Shoulder Varies Varies Drainage Class I Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Class I Varies N N
1 1
1 1
Class I Multi-Use Path
3 3
3 3
Pedestrian Lighting
2 2
2 2 Urban Greening

PROPOSED ELEMENTS

PROPOSED

CONDITIONS

EXISTING

CONDITIONS
Cottonwood
D
r
i
v
e
Wayfinding Signage
Wayfinding Signage
SEGMENTA REPORT CARD Pass/Needs Improvement
The Imperial Avenue corridor’s proposed improvements have been guided by the feedback obtained through community outreach and survey responses.

Please place a check mark ( ) in the ‘Pass’ or ‘Need Improvement’ column.

Ideas & Concerns Addressed Comments
Pedestrian
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Improved shade
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for people walking?
Bicycle
Class IV: Separated bikeway
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for bicyclists?
Transit
Improved bus stops (i.e., shelter,
seating, and lighting)
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for transit riders?
Corridor Enhancements
Placemaking (i.e., art, gathering
spaces, wayfinding signage, etc.)
Urban greening (i.e., street trees
and landscaping)
Stormwater
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety,
comfort, and beautification for
Imperial Avenue?
/
Any other comments you would like to share?
Thank you for taking the time to complete the Segment A Report Card! Project Team Use Only
SEGMENTB REPORT CARD Pass/Needs Improvement
The Imperial Avenue corridor’s proposed improvements have been guided by the feedback obtained through community outreach and survey responses.

Please place a check mark ( ) in the ‘Pass’ or ‘Need Improvement’ column.

Ideas & Concerns Addressed Comments
Pedestrian
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Improved shade
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for people walking?
Bicycle
Class I: Multi-use path
Class IV: Separated Bikeway
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for bicyclists?
Transit
Improved bus stops (i.e., shelter,
seating, and lighting)
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for transit riders?
Corridor Enhancements
Placemaking (i.e., art, gathering
spaces, wayfinding signage, etc.)
Urban greening (i.e., street trees
and landscaping)
Stormwater
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety,
comfort, and beautification for
Imperial Avenue?
/
Any other comments you would like to share?
Thank you for taking the time to complete the Segment B Report Card! Project Team Use Only
SEGMENTC REPORT CARD Pass/Needs Improvement
The Imperial Avenue corridor’s proposed improvements have been guided by the feedback obtained through community outreach and survey responses.

Please place a check mark ( ) in the ‘Pass’ or ‘Need Improvement’ column.

Ideas & Concerns Addressed Comments
Pedestrian
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Improved shade
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for people walking?
Bicycle
Class I: Multi-use path
Pedestrian/bicycle-scale lighting
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for bicyclists?
Transit
Improved bus stops (i.e., shelter,
seating, and lighting)
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety and
comfort for transit riders?
Corridor Enhancements
Placemaking (i.e., art, gathering
spaces, wayfinding signage, etc.)
Urban greening (i.e., street trees
and landscaping)
Stormwater
Pass Needs Improvement
Would this enhance safety,
comfort, and beautification for
Imperial Avenue?
/
Any other comments you would like to share?
Thank you for taking the time to complete the Segment C Report Card! Project Team Use Only

Page 276 of 403 ends

41 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Workshop #3 - City Library (November 14, 2024)
The third and last workshop was an open house style event held on November, 14, 2024 at the City Library. The workshop began with a presentation that revisited each stage of the project from the existing conditions analysis and community engagement through preliminary concept design. After the presentation, the remainder of the workshop was treated as an open house, where participants assessed the draft concept design for the entire corridor, printed at nearly 20’ in length and 14” in height. The enlarged printout, paired with a legend and photos of treatments, allowed community members to more easily understand the recommendations proposed. Attendees took their time reviewing the concept and shared their feedback in writing.

Common themes involved increasing pedestrian and bicycle access to businesses, adding clear zones along frontage roads, and adding enhanced pedestrian amenities at the railroad crossing.

Page 277 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 42

3.4 Project Advisory
Committee (PAC)
A project advisory committee (PAC) was formed to be an advisory body and provide ongoing feedback throughout the project. Four PAC meetings were held throughout the planning process and all were held virtually to accommodate members’ schedules. Representatives from stakeholder organizations, community representatives, and City Staff who experience Imperial Avenue on a regular basis participated.

A summary of each meeting is described below.

Participating organizations included:

Caltrans
El Centro Elementary School District
Imperial County Transportation Commission
Lotus Living
Mayor
Planning Commission
PAC Meeting #1 (October 19,2023)
The first PAC meeting was held on October 19, 2023. Attendees were introduced to the project via a presentation and open discussion. A presentation shared an overview of community engagement, expectations for members, and project milestones. Members were asked to share their impressions of and experiences with Imperial Avenue.

Their comments are summarized below.

There are long crossing distances across Imperial Avenue, short crossing times, and far distances between crossings.

Local commuters will use La Brucherie Road to avoid congestion.

Pedestrians walk on the dirt and in the irrigation channels.

Concerning driver behavior: running red lights, not yielding to pedestrians, and speeding.

Project Advisory Committee (PAC)
The purpose of the PAC is to be an advisory body. They will assist with community engagement awareness, review preliminary concepts, and provide input on the draft plan .

PAC #1
PAC #2
PAC #3
Introduce the project, discuss outreach
strategies, identify key issues
Report back on community feedback,
discuss preliminary findings
Review conceptual designs and provide
update on community engagement
PAC #4 Review preferred design concept

Page 278 of 403 ends

43 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
PAC Meeting #2 (March 7, 2024)
The second PAC meeting was held on March 7, 2024. At this meeting, there was a project update that included findings from outreach efforts, highlights from the project survey results, and data findings from the existing conditions analysis. The project update was followed by an open discussion about the possibilities for the project, summarized below.

First-last mile connections
Increased bus frequency
Additional pedestrian crossings
ADA compliance
Design considerations such as topography and ICTC’s concurrent Comprehensive Operational Analysis
PAC Meeting #3 (August 22, 2024)
The third PAC meeting was held on August 22, 2024. The meeting consisted of a project update presentation summarizing community feedback and field observations and how they applied to the draft recommendations in the form of before-and-after 3D renderings.

Attendees were able to see preliminary recommendations to digest treatments at each of the three segments. Additionally, three potential intersections were proposed to address the request for additional pedestrian crossings. Stakeholders were supportive of the draft recommendations and any questions they had were answered.

PAC #4 (December 4, 2024)
On December 4th, the final PAC meeting was held which provided and opportunity to summarize the project analysis and public outreach conducted and share how this informed the proposed recommendations. The Project Team shared how community and stakeholder feedback has been incorporated into the Plan and attendees shared their appreciation. The group discussed how this Plan will position the City for diverse funding sources and emphasized how it will have both a local and regional impact on residents, visitors, and frequenters. “Imperial Avenue
experiences high pedestrian
activity during peak hours.”
“The varying topography of
Imperial Avenue presents
accessibility challenges.”
“Imperial Avenue is a high
speed corridor with few
pedestrian crossings.”

Page 279 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 44

3.5 Pop-Up Events
Pop-Up #1 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (January 22,
2024)
The first pop-up event was hosted at the Sister Evelyn Mourey Center on January 22, 2024, to talk with residents about their safety concerns along the corridor. Despite the inclement weather, nearly 40 people came out to share input. Some key takeaways were concerns about the nearby Imperial Avenue and Pico Avenue intersection crossing times being too short to safely cross. Residents shared that crossings generally feel unsafe along Imperial Avenue, especially for vulnerable populations such as seniors and people with mobility aids or disabilities.

Pop-Up #2 - Children’s Fair (April 13, 2024)
On Saturday, April 13, a second pop-up was held during the Children’s Fair, a family-friendly day with live music, games, animals, and food. To attract community members to participate, a booth was set up along with games and activities such as corn hole and a spin the prize wheel. The goal of the pop-up event was to inform the public about the results from the existing conditions analysis and capture feedback from residents to help guide the project team through the preliminary design phase.

Upon engaging with the public, some key takeaways were the barriers transit riders face, where people feel the most safe crossing Imperial Avenue on bicycles, and insight on the challenges of walking along Imperial Avenue.

Street trees
Curb extensions
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB),
Class I Multi-use Path
Class IV Separated Bikeways
Bike Parking
Bus shelters with protection
from weather
Improved ADA access at
bus stops
More bike rack capacity on
the front of buses
Top 3 Desired Improvements by Mode
#1 #1 #1
#2 #2
#2
#3 #3
#3
sidewalks, and curb ramps/
speed displays

Page 280 of 403 ends

45 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Pop-Up #3 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (August 9, 2024) Pop-up three was hosted at the Sister Evelyn Mourey Center a day after Workshop #2 to continue gathering input on the draft recommendations for Segments A, B, and C. All material provided during the pop-up were the same as Workshop #2. Approximately 30 attendees shared suggestions for all three segments of the Imperial Avenue study area as well as three locations for new traffic signals.

All attendees left with bags of food and other goodies as a thank you for participating.

Common themes were interest in drought tolerant street trees for shade, pedestrian-scale lighting, and increased crossing times for pedestrians.

Pop-Up #4 - Sister Evelyn Mourey Center (November 15,
2024)
A final pop-up was hosted at the Sister Evelyn Mourey Center a day after Workshop #3 where approximately 53 participants received a voucher for a free turkey as Thanksgiving Day approached. Due to space constraints, the corridor was shared similarly to Workshop #3 but at a smaller scale.

Participants expressed their overall satisfaction with the recommendations and gratitude for the proposed sidewalks and crosswalks as some of their concerns remained for sidewalks, crosswalks, lighting, and enhanced safety for people of all abilities. Participants emphasized the continued need for improved visibility for pedestrians, as well as level and continuous sidewalks to accommodate people with mobility aids.

Page 281 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 46
It’s intimidating
crossing the
street, even
when there are
crosswalks.
“
”
A lo largo de
Imperial Avenue
faltan sombras
en las paradas
de camión.
“
”
There are long
stretches between
crossings.”
“
Participant Quotes
Los
automovilistas
no respetan a los
peatones.
“
”

Page 282 of 403 ends

47 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

3.6 Public Engagement Overarching Themes
Maintain existing lanes
for automobiles.

Explore opportunities for
pedestrian-scale lighting.

Coordinate opportunities for
more bus stops and enhanced
shelters with ICTC.

Community members shared a range of comments and concerns throughout the public engagement process. The following are some of the overarching themes and ideas desired that influenced the proposed design for Imperial Avenue.

Page 283 of 403 ends

Public Engagement 48
Urban greening for shade
during hot weather.

Explore protected space
for bicyclists.

Continuous sidewalks for
connectivity and accessibility.

Pedestrian crossings for
improved east-west connections.

Page 284 of 403 ends

49 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

Page 285 of 403 ends

Recommendations 4

Page 286 of 403 ends

51 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

4.1 Complete Streets Toolkit
A wide range of infrastructure elements exist that can be incorporated in the development of Complete Streets. Each potential improvement will need to be evaluated further on a case by case basis during the final design and implementation phase. The following section outlines a ‘toolkit’ which includes different categories and types of street treatments that are often found or can be incorporated in the development of Complete Streets. Several of these elements can be found in the Imperial Avenue Preferred Concept described later in this chapter. The corresponding regulations, policies, guidelines, and standards should be further analyzed and followed upon implementation.

Pedestrians Bicyclists
Automobiles
Placemaking Transit/New Mobility
Green Infrastructure

Page 287 of 403 ends

Recommendations 52

4.1.1 Pedestrian Facility
Enhancements
Imperial Avenue is an auto-centric corridor and
main truck route. Therefore, pedestrians often
opt for the use of motor vehicles as a safer
mode of travel to, from, and throughout the corridor. Pedestrian facility enhancements can be incorporated throughout Imperial Avenue for a safer and more accessible environment.

Pedestrian Refuge Islands (Median Refuge Islands)
Pedestrian refuge islands or median refuge islands are raised protected spaces in the center of the streets, creating a safe space for pedestrians and bicyclists to wait as they cross one direction of the street to another.1 This is beneficial to pedestrians and bicyclists when they have to cross major streets.

Mid-Block Crossings
Mid-block crossings provide a convenient location for pedestrians to cross the street where intersection crossings are far apart, preventing out-of-route travel for pedestrians. These types of crossings are typically developed where common use occurs such as schools, parks, and everyday uses.2
Curb Extensions (Bulb-outs or Neck-downs)
Curb extensions are also referred to as bulb-outs or neck-downs and shorten the distance needed for pedestrians to travel when crossing the street. This is due to the offset of the curb into the street that increases the pedestrian area and encourages drivers to make slower turns. Curb extensions can also be used along streets, supplementing on-street parking space and an opportunity for increased street furnishings and landscaping.3
Pedestrian-Scale Lighting
Pedestrian-scale lighting provides many practical and safety benefits, such as illuminating the path and making crossing walkers and bicyclists more visible to drivers. Lighting can also be designed to be fun, artistic, and interactive.

Pedestrian Refuge Island
Mid-block crossing with Pedestrian Refuge Island
Curb Extension

Page 288 of 403 ends

53 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

4.1.2 Conventional Bicycle Facility
Types
In the state of California, four conventional bicycle facility types are recognized by the California Department of Transportation and guidance on
standards and specifications are found in the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD)4 and CA Highway Design Manual (HDM)5. The numerical designation of bicycle facility types does not represent a hierarchy and application of each should be considered where deemed appropriate.

According to the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO)6, the benefits of conventional bike lanes are:

The increase of bicyclist comfort and confidence on busy streets.

The creation of separation between bicyclists and automobiles.

Increased predictability of bicyclist and motorist positioning and interaction.

Increased capacity of streets carrying mixed bicycle and motor vehicle traffic.

Visually reminds motorists of bicyclists’ right to the street.

Class I Multi-Use Paths (Bicycle Path)
Class I multi-use paths, frequently referred to as “bicycle paths”, are two-way facilities physically separated from motor vehicle routes that grant exclusive right-of-way to non-motorized users, like pedestrians and bicyclists. They require physical buffers to ensure safety and comfort of the user.

Class II Bicycle Lanes
Class II bicycle lanes are one-way facilities that dedicate right-of-way to bicyclists within the same direction of roadway adjacent to motor vehicles. They are not physically separated from motor vehicle traffic. For this reason, Class II bicycle lanes can include an additional buffer striping space whenever possible to reduce the risk of collision between bicyclists and motor vehicles.

Class I Multi-Use Path
Class II Bike Lane
Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane

Page 289 of 403 ends

Recommendations 54
Class III Bicycle Routes
Class III bicycle routes, are one-way shared facilities typically on low speed and low volume roadways where bicyclists and motorists are expected to share the road. Therefore, these roadways can be designated as bicycle boulevards/neighborways with enhancements that include signing and pavement markings, volume management strategies, and speed management strategies such as neighborhood traffic circles.

Class IV Separated Bikeways (Cycle Track)
Class IV Separated Bikeways, also commonly referred to as “cycle tracks”, are one-way or two-way on-street bike facilities that include horizontal and vertical buffer separation from vehicles for increased bicyclist safety. Class IV separated bikeways are for the exclusive use of bicycles and may be raised.

4.1.3 Enhanced Bicycle Facility Types Treatments
To create Complete Streets, enhancements to the different bicycle facility types can be low cost and be effective in increasing safety for all users. Installation of the following outlined enhancement can often be coordinated with street resurfacing projects.

Buffered Bicycle Lanes
Buffered Bicycle Lanes provide an additional space between bikeways and motor vehicles for increased comfort and safety. Buffers are created through but are not limited to road markings, posts, barriers, on-street parking, and landscaping. The buffer also encourages bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked vehicles, keeping them out of the “door zone” where there is the potential danger of drivers or passengers suddenly opening doors into the bicyclists’ path.

Shared Lane Marking (“Sharrows”)
Sharrows are commonly used for Class III Bikeways when on-street parking is allowed adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes. To ensure the adequate amount of separation between bicyclists, motor vehicles, and parked vehicles, sharrows are often centered within the rightmost travel lane.

Class III Bike Route with Sharrow Marking
Class IV Separated Bikeway (Two-Way)
Class IV Separated Bikeway (One-Way)

Page 290 of 403 ends

55 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Bike Boxes
Bike Boxes are often installed at the front of travel lanes where signalized intersections are located and they designate bicyclists with a safe area to wait during red traffic signals.

Two-Stage Turn Box
A two-stage turn box is a designated waiting area at the right of a bike lane for bicyclists to advance in a multi-lane intersection or the left side of a bike lane if turning right.

Green Colored Conflict/Transition Striping
Green-colored striping can be used to highlight conflict areas between bicyclists and vehicles, such as where bicycle lanes merge across vehicle turn lanes or driveways.

Colored Bike Facilities
Colored Bike Facilities consist of colored pavement that increases visibility of bikeways and can help minimize bicyclists and motor vehicle collisions. Green-colored pavement for bicycle facilities is the standard in California and limitations include but are not limited to bicycle lanes, two-stage turn boxes, and separated bikeways within the roadway. For the full list of limitations and standards refer to Part 9 Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities of the CA MUTCD.

4.1.4 Low Stress Bicycle Facility Types
In the process of creating safer, more comfortable, and equitable Complete Streets, the City of El Centro may find that in some cases the conventional bicycle facility types may not meet the needs of the community. Therefore, this section outlines a comprehensive list of low-stress bicycle facility types that are used in different parts of the country successfully and can be found in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide or AASHTO Guide of the Development of Bicycle Facilities.

Neighborway/Bike Boulevards
A neighborway, sometimes called a bike boulevard, is an approach to reduce traffic, slow car speed, and improve safety for those biking, Two-stage Turn Box
Green Colored Conflict/Transition Striping
Bike Boulevard

Page 291 of 403 ends

Recommendations 56
walking, and rolling on quiet residential streets. They are typically located on more narrow, slow speed streets and combined with other traffic calming infrastructure like speed tables.

Protected Intersections
Protected intersections maintain physical separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles, creating a higher sense of safety and comfort. Protected intersections are set back from motor vehicles and bicyclists are not obligated to merge with traffic because they are provided a dedicated path.

Bicycle Signals
Bicycle signals, also referred to as bicycle beacons, are typically three lens signal heads with green, yellow, and red bikeway icons.

They allow bicyclists to have clarity when met with intersections and make crossing intersections safer. The use of bicycle signals is dependent on a variety of factors such as speed limits, bicycle crossing traffic, and planned or existing bicycle facilities.

Bicycle Detection
Bicycle detection is used at actuated signals which prioritize movement along primary corridors. Actuated signals can create conflicts for pedestrians if it is timed for the prioritization of motor vehicles.

Bicycle signals at activated signals alert the signal controller that a bicycle crossing event has been requested. However, bicycle detection can occur automatically or by the use of a push button.

Protected Intersections
Bicycle Signals

Page 292 of 403 ends

57 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

4.1.5 Traffic Calming
Traffic calming is a process that involves changes in street alignment, installation of barriers, and other physical measures to minimize collisions between vehicles and pedestrians. The intent of traffic calming is to decrease the negative impact to pedestrians, bicyclists, and residents that is caused by reckless driving. Successfully implementing traffic calming measures can increase street safety - making the city a more livable place.

Traffic Roundabout/ Traffic Circle
Traffic roundabout and traffic circles are traffic calming measures that slow and divert traffic to nearby streets, reducing right-of-way conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, and motor vehicles. However, traffic roundabouts consist of intersection points with yield control at its entry that allows a driver to proceed at controlled speeds in a counter-clockwise direction around a central island. Traffic circles on the other hand are often used on bicycle boulevards and on low volume residential streets to avoid or reduce right-of-way conflicts because the overall footprint is smaller when compared to roundabouts.

Signals and Warning Devices
Signals and warning devices are used to warn and control traffic at unsignalized intersections and other locations to assist pedestrians when crossing the street. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB) and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) are typical signals used in lower volume and lower speed streets.

Speed Humps (“Bumps”) and Speed Cushions (Speed
Humps)
Speed humps or “bumps”, slow traffic speeds on low volume and low speed streets due to their protruding parabolic shape. Speed cushions are similar to speed humps with the exception of including wheel cutouts and extending longitudinal for larger vehicles to pass safely.

Traffic Circle
Signals and Warning Devices
Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane

Page 293 of 403 ends

Recommendations 58
Speed Tables (Raised Crosswalks)
Speed tables or raised crosswalks are a midblock traffic calming mea- sure that allow pedestrians to cross a street when intersections are too far apart. Speed tables are similar to speed humps but are longer and flat-topped that reduce speeds and enhance pedestrian safety.

Speed Displays
Speed displays measure the speed of approaching vehicles by radar and an LED display to inform drivers of their speeds, creating aware- ness of how fast they are traveling and effective in reducing motor vehicle speeds.

Reflective Border on Signal Head
Reflective borders on signal heads improves visibility of signal heads with a backplate and is made even more conspicuous by framing it with a yellow retroreflective border. These are more visible in both daytime and nighttime conditions.

Chicanes
Chicanes are a traffic calming measure that through a series of nar- rowing or alternating curb extensions increase the amount of public space and reduce traffic speeds.

Truck Aprons
Truck aprons allow large vehicles: trucks, buses, and recreational ve- hicles, to turn without striking pedestrians walking, rolling, bicycling, or any fixed objects. They are typically slightly raised pavement locat- ed between the road surface and the sidewalk, or the inner circle of a roundabout due to large vehicle turning radius.

On-Street Edge Friction
On-street edge friction is created by a combination of vertical speed control elements such as on-street parking, bicycle facilities, chicanes, curb extensions, site furnishings, and landscaping that reduces the ap- parent width of the street. Not only does this create a safer environ- ment, it can make walking and biking more attractive for pedestrians.

Speed Tables
Chicanes
Truck Apron

Page 294 of 403 ends

59 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

4.1.6 Green Street Improvements
Green street improvements incorporate tried
and true stormwater management practices into
transportation infrastructure to reduce stormwater runoff, prevent flooding, improve water quality, provide habitat for local flora and fauna,
and create an enjoyable streetscape. These improvements can be installed alongside sidewalks, roadways, parking lots, medians, and more to create a more sustainable and resilient corridor. The green street improvements listed below are from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Green Streets Handbook.7
Bioretention Area
A bioretention area, or rain garden, is a shallow surface depression planted with vegetation to retain, infiltrate, and filter stormwater runoff and pollution. Bioretention areas can vary in size, shape, and site and can take the form of cells, rain gardens, or bioswales. Bioretention areas can be located on sidewalks, street frontages, intersections, road medians, road shoulders, and parking lot islands or perimeters.

Permeable Pavement
Permeable pavements allow stormwater runoff to infiltrate through void space into the ground below or another stormwater management system instead of becoming surface runoff. Types of permeable pavement include porous asphalt, porous recycled surface products, pervious concrete, and pavers arranged with void spaces. Permeable pavement can be used instead of impervious materials on parking lots, parking lanes, driveways, sidewalks, walking paths, bicycle lanes, parkways, road shoulders, and low-traffic roads.

Stormwater Curb Extensions
Stormwater curb extensions, or stormwater bump outs, combine two street improvements - traffic calming and stormwater filtration - to produce multiple streetscape benefits. This strategy involves filling the area behind the curb with a bioretention soil media and vegetation similar to a bioretention cell or bioswale. Stormwater curb extensions can be located at intersections, midblock crossings, neighborhood or collector streets, or any length of a roadway.

Bioretention Area
Permeable Pavement
Stormwater Curb Extensions

Page 295 of 403 ends

Recommendations 60
Stormwater Curb Cuts
A curb cut is a cut in into a curb allowing for easier water access for collection and percolation of stormwater.

Stormwater Tree Systems
Stormwater tree systems, such as tree pits or tree trenches, contain a tree or shrub planted in a bioretention soil mix and a gravel reservoir designed to capture stormwater. Stormwater tree systems are typically located along sidewalks, medians, and parking lots and receive stormwater runoff through a curb cut, catch basin, or stormwater inlet.

Mini Parks (Pocket Parks)
Mini parks or “pocket parks” are small outdoor spaces found in already built out cities and can be designed in smaller lots than typical parks.8 They offer an opportunity to integrate green infrastructure treatments in an urban environment to create socializing and resting spaces along a corridor which can also support placemaking.

Stormwater Curb Cuts
Stormwater Tree Systems
Mini Park

Page 296 of 403 ends

61 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT

4.1.7 Placemaking
Cities can feel like built-out spaces but communities can continue to be improved and built around existing places. Placemaking started as
a concept credited to prominent historical figures in the field of city planning and it has been adopted as an approach to designing and managing public spaces, or the public realm, to strengthen connections between people and spaces. The City of El Centro can adopt some of the following placemaking elements on Imperial Avenue that can contribute to the creation of a Complete Street.

Signage and Wayfinding
Signage and wayfinding creates a system that allows pedestrians and bicyclists better awareness and orientation for increased safety.

Signs may be placed at important points and locations to call attention to users and inform them of any road changes as well as an opportunity for the City to incorporate branding.

Street Furnishings and Public Art
Furnishings are an important part of encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation and can help steer away from autocentric streets by providing shelter, bike racks, seating, and other amenities for people of all ages. Furnishings such as bus shelters and trash receptacles are opportunities for the city to incorporate branding and public art from local artists. Enhancing the public realm visually while also being functional can draw more people to walk, bike, and roll.

Intersection Paving and Crosswalk Art
Special intersection paving and crosswalk art provide unique opportunities to highlight crossings at key locations while simultaneously integrating context-sensitive art. They are a great opportunity to incorporate culturally representative local art of El Centro. Paving treatments and crosswalk art do not define a crosswalk and should not be seen as a safety measure. Standard transverse or longitudinal high-visibility crosswalk markings are still required.

Signage and Wayfinding
Public Art
Crosswalk Art

Page 297 of 403 ends

Recommendations 62

4.1.8 Transit/New Mobility
New mobility refers to evolving and emerging
forms of clean and/or shared forms of transpor-
tation, which can include micromobility, ride-hail-
ing, carpools, and automated and connected ve-
hicles. These forms of transportation can provide
alternatives to gas-powered, single-occupancy cars and help reduce air pollution and GHG emissions. Clean mobility and shared options also help address transportation equity by providing affordable trans- portation choices for lower-income households and those who are unable to drive or own a car.

Real-Time Bus Information
Real-time bus information allows riders to predict their journey and manage their time more effectively. This increases the convenience of transit for riders by providing accurate, updated location of their bus.

Transit Stop Amenities
Transit stop amenities such as shelters with overhead protection, seating, trash receptacles, and lighting are essential for encouraging people to use public transit.

Floating Bus Island
A floating bus island is located between travel lanes and bicycle lanes where transit passengers board and alight transit vehicles. Pedes- trians cross the bicycle lane when traveling to or from the platform where the bus stop is located. This eliminates conflict between bi- cyclists traveling in bicycle lanes and transit vehicles that must pull curbside to load and unload passengers.

Electric Shuttles
Electric shuttles can help address gaps within a community by sup- plementing the existing transit network or by creating new transit routes where they currently don’t exist. Depending on the make and model, electric-powered shuttles can be used to offer transit services within a specified radius.

Real-time Bus Information
Transit Stop Shelter
Floating Bus Island

Page 298 of 403 ends

63 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Carsharing Service
An electric carsharing service could be established by purchasing a fleet of electric cars. These cars could be rented by residents to address their transportation needs, such as commuting to work, running errands, or getting to medical appointments. The City would have its own EV charging infrastructure which could be combined with other electric mobility options, such as electric shuttles and electric vanpool/carpool services.

Bikeshare
Docked bikeshare is a shared transport service in which bicycles or e-bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a short-term basis for a price or for free. Docked bikeshare systems allow people to borrow a bicycle from a “dock” or station and return it to another dock belonging to the same system. Docked bikeshare systems often include electric-assist bicycles that provide extra comfort for users.

E-Scootershare
Scootershare programs are popular forms of shared transportation services that involve the rental of electric motorized scooters for short trips. These programs involve the use of a mobile app to look for, rent, pay, and park the rented scooter. Scootershare programs provide a high degree of flexibility for the individual user and can be an effective method for closing mobility gaps. Short trips to visit family members and access to schools, parks, commercial areas, and transit stops are all possible with a scootershare program.

Carsharing
Bikeshare
E-scooter

Page 299 of 403 ends

Recommendations 64

4.2 Goals, Objectives, and Actions
Policies that contain goals, objectives, and actions were developed to assist El Centro staff implement the preferred concept. These policies were developed using the existing conditions analysis, public engagement process, and feedback from city staff.

Goal 1: Provide Safe Modes of Transportation for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and Drivers As a part of a Complete Street, providing safety for all modes of transportation for people of all ages and abilities is vital and can be pursued through strengthened connectivity, an enhanced network, and the implementation of Complete Street principles.

Objective 1 Improve pedestrian connections for increased safety and comfort.

Action 1.1 Implement the currently adopted Active Transportation and Safe Routes to School Plan to increase the number of pedestrian and bicyclist trips from everyday destinations and transit stops.

Action 1.2 Update the Active Transportation and Safe Routes to School Plan to meet future trends and re-engage community members on existing conditions and opportunities.

Action 1.3 Implement high-visibility crosswalks and accessible pedestrian signals at high-volume intersections.

Action 1.4 Identify opportunities to add or enhance safe bicycle and pedestrian crossings along Imperial Avenue that connect to major destinations.

Action 1.5 Mitigate the impact of vehicular traffic to the pedestrian public realm by identifying and establishing curb extensions at intersections.

Objective 2 Create a safe bicyclist network that encourages use of active transportation.

Action 2.1 Identify hot spot locations of bicycle and pedestrian collisions with motor vehicles to develop countermeasures such as midblock crossings, bicycle facilities, and bicycle signals.

Action 2.2 Install bicycle facilities that connect to proposed pathways and future transit stops along Imperial Avenue.

Action 2.3 Identify a curb space management program that could be prioritizing adapting curb space, specifically in front of commercial area, to the current needs of the corridor such as bicycle parking, rideshare pick-up/drop-off, and pedestrian amenities.

Objective 3 Promote safe driving through Complete Street principles.

Action 3.1 Construct raised medians or hardened centerlines where applicable to improve traffic safety.

Action 3.2 Traffic-calming tools should be considered along Imperial Avenue where joined to collector streets.

Action 3.3 Repurpose unneeded right-of-way where space allows to implement bicycle and pedestrian improvements.

Action 3.4 Implement traffic calming measures and programs that encourage safe driving.

Action 3.5 All signalized arterial intersections should integrate monitoring and traffic flow control infrastructure for future roadway improvements and maintenance.

Page 300 of 403 ends

65 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Goal 2: Increase Opportunities for Equitable Access
Imperial Avenue as a highly used corridor at the heart of El Centro and is a major connector that can increase opportunities for equitable access for all users. Imperial Avenue as a Complete Street has the potential of enhancing safety for pedestrians walking, bicycling, rolling, using public transit, and driving.

Objective 1 Prioritize the needs of underinvested and underserved transit users.

Action 1.1 Pedestrian and bicycle crossings should be accessible by all and include safe traffic signals, marked crosswalks, and follow ADA guidelines.

Action 1.2 Improved pedestrian treatments for a safer walking experience should be prioritized at the intersection of Adams Avenue and Imperial Avenue due to the future planned improvements for Opportunity Area 1 as stated within the El Centro General Plan Update.

Action 1.3 The City of El Centro should coordinate with the City of Imperial to align efforts to promote bicycle connections and enhance public transportation connections.

Action 1.4 Focus complete street principles along Imperial Avenue and create connections to vital services like health and wellness services, recreational uses, and retail food services.

Action 1.5 Incorporate the identified Complete Streets goals, objectives, and actions in a sensitive manner that recognize the different needs among neighborhoods and communities.

Action 1.6 Imperial Avenue should be universally accessible and accommodate children, seniors, and people of all abilities.

Objective 2 Explore implementation of programs and projects that reduce transportation costs.

Action 2.1 Coordinate with Imperial Avenue Transit (IVT) to improve access for those who work, live, and play along Imperial Avenue per Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Action 2.2 Implement projects identified in Public Works’ ADA Self-Evaluations and Needs Assessments.

Action 2.3 Innovative technologies or smart transportation programs should be incorporated to increase efficiency.

Action 2.4 Identify, increase, and maintain shared mobility programs for the population who is highly-dependent on alternative modes of transportation.

Action 2.5 Increase transportation options between employers and employees commuting to Imperial Avenue from areas with limited transportation access.

Objective 3 Create connected multimodal networks that meet the needs of all users.

Action 3.1 Imperial Avenue lane widths should be minimized where appropriate to discourage high vehicle speeds and to shorten pedestrian crossing distances.

Action 3.2 Introduce traffic calming elements and bicycle and pedestrian amenities to slow vehicle speeds along Imperial Avenue, such as at intersections and midblock crossings.

Page 301 of 403 ends

Recommendations 66
Goal 3: Provide a Reliable Corridor to Promote the Use of Public Transit Designing a Complete Street includes providing the necessary infrastructure improvements for the use of public transit along Imperial Avenue which takes riders to their desired destinations along the corridor, throughout El Centro, and neighboring communities. Therefore, Imperial Avenue should be designed to be a reliable means for public transportation.

Objective 1 Identify and provide safe and pleasant bus shelters along Imperial Avenue.

Action 1.1 Enhance the Imperial Avenue streetscape by following adopted bus shelter guidelines to encourage the use of public transit.

Action 1.2 Enhance bus stop and waiting area amenities along the Imperial Avenue corridor by providing seating, shade, lighting, real-time travel informational displays, and trash receptacles.

Action 1.3 Coordinate with Imperial Valley Transit (IVT) and Imperial County Transportation Commission (ICTC) to provide bus shelters and waiting area in locations that accommodate Imperial Avenues future growth as identified in El Centro General Plan and supporting documents.

Action 1.4 Locate areas where there is a possible need for rideshare pick-up and drop-off joint bus shelter waiting areas.

Objective 2 Enhance streetscape along Imperial Avenue transit routes to promote use of bus stops.

Action 2.1 Revitalize and enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure through coordination with future Visual Enhancement Area (VEA) plans or guidelines. El Centro General Plan identifies Imperial Avenue as a VEA.

Action 2.2 Streetscape should acknowledge cultural and environmental considerations.

Action 2.3 Install sidewalks where currently missing to create a consistent public right of way that creates areas for future transit stops.

Objective 3 Create a secure environment/corridor for pedestrians and traffic at bus stops and transit centers.

Action 3.1 Provide direct access to transit facilities and ensuring visibility to and from vehicles by avoiding blind spots often created by inappropriate landscape, fencing, and other structures.

Action 3.2 Provide and maintain lighting at all transit facilities (i.e., bus stops, bus shelters, transit center).

Objective 4 Encourage public transit improvements between neighboring cities.

Action 4.1 The City of El Centro should coordinate with Imperial County Transportation Commission (ICTC), Caltrans, and neighboring cities to identify necessary regional roadway improvements for improved transit access between El Centro and adjacent cities.

Action 4.2 Foster relationships with adjoining communities identified in the El Centro Vision 2050 Strategic Plan for the improvement of adjoining roadways.

Action 4.3 Promote the use of public transportation options offered along Imperial Avenue that can improve the reach of transit for El Centro residents.

Action 4.4 Monitor and evaluate the need to implement transit priority treatments, such as dedicated bus lanes, queue jumper lanes, and transit signal priority strategies, to improve transit ontime performance and reliability.

Page 302 of 403 ends

67 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Goal 4: Design a Comfortable and Sustainable Street Environment Designing and creating a comfortable and sustainable street environment impacts community well-being and identity along Imperial Avenue. Comfort can be enhanced by creating space for pedestrians and bicyclists and sustainability improved by implementing a visually appealing streetscape through thoughtful placemaking and urban greening. With these improvements, Imperial Avenue can be a vibrant corridor encouraging physical activity and strengthening community ties.

Objective 1 Design Imperial Avenue as a comfortable environment that promotes physical activity.

Action 1.1 Prioritize establishing a sidewalk network that is safe and accessible with pedestrian amenities that connect pedestrians to schools, shopping, dining, parks, medical facilities, and public facilities.

Action 1.2 Sidewalks and pedestrian crossings should be continuous and free of obstructions to ensure adequate capacity and comfort.

Action 1.3 Promote and support sustainable transportation choices such as shuttle services, direct transit routes, or rideshare programs.

Objective 2 Reinforce community culture and identity through sustainable design solutions.

Action 2.1 Opportunities should be identified along Imperial Avenue where trees and landscaping can be incorporated to provide a “green corridor” to strengthen community identity, character, and culture.

Action 2.2 Buffers with urban greening should be considered along the corridor to create shade and decrease the heat island effect.

Action 2.3 Consider the implementation of an “Adopt a Tree Program” to enhance the public realm of Imperial Avenue.

Objective 3 Design a visually attractive streetscape through placemaking.

Action 3.1 Integrate new signage, wayfinding, decorative lighting, branding, and public art into the bicycle and pedestrian network; and near identified key locations.

Action 3.2 Opportunities for the integration of public art should be explored at crosswalks and intersections.

Action 3.3 Coordinate with the appropriate Visual Enhancement Area Plans for the development of future gateways and wayfinding along Imperial Avenue.

Action 3.4 Utilize streetscape to provide a visually attractive and physically comfortable environment that promotes environmental justice.

Action 3.5 Coordinate the relocation or visual improvement strategies of utilities with utility companies to allow space for complete street elements.

Page 303 of 403 ends

Recommendations 68
Goal 5: Coordination with Future Citywide Improvements
As El Centro continues to flourish, Imperial Avenue will need to adapt to the community’s changing needs as demand for multimodal transportation increases. City staff should work to develop a Complete Street and plan to maintain and invest in the continuous betterment of Imperial Avenue with the present and future in mind.

Objective 1 Encourage open communication and coordination among City departments and agencies for successful implementation of Complete Street Strategies.

Action 1.1 Dedicate staff time to create an advisory committee that meets routinely to guide the implementation of the Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan.

Objective 2 Ensure the planning process incorporates best practices for implementation.

Action 2.1 Develop a phased implementation strategy for incremental improvements.

Action 2.2 Incorporate Complete Street policies into future planning documents.

Objective 3 Construct, maintain, and invest in an infrastructure for all.

Action 3.1 New development should promote connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to parks, schools, shopping, medical facilities, and employment destinations.

Action 3.2 Ensure new development provides a roadway, pedestrian, and bicycling network that meets the needs of future development.

Action 3.3 The City is encouraged to work with existing and future developments to continue the street grid network of short blocks for enhanced connectivity.

Action 3.4 Maintain facilities to meet the needs of the community.

Action 3.5 Plan, construct, and maintain infrastructure to avoid future upsizing while meeting future growth goals.

Objective 4 Identify funding partnership opportunities.

Action 4.1 Partner with schools to ensure transportation facilities such as sidewalks and bicycle lanes are suitable for students.

Action 4.2 New developments should extend improvements to the public realm/public right of way.

Objective 5 Pursue Federal and State infrastructure funding to improve and maintain corridor.

Action 5.1 Create a walkable corridor by identifying sidewalk gaps along Imperial Avenue and seek funding to fill in gaps.

Action 5.2 Identify funding sources to fund ongoing routine maintenance of sidewalks, roadways, and transit amenities/facilities.

Page 304 of 403 ends

4.3 Imperial Avenue Preferred Concept
The following section depicts the Preferred Complete Streets Concept that is based on extensive analysis of Imperial Avenue, feedback received throughout the public engagement process, and coordination meetings with City Staff. The Preferred Concept includes recommended Complete Streets Toolkit treatments such as:

Class I Multi-use Path
Class IV Separated Bikeway
Green conflict striping/transition striping where bike facilities intersect with driveways High Visibility Crosswalks (Sidewalk Art Opportunity)
Pedestrian-scale Lighting
Medians (Green Street Infrastructure Opportunity)
Placemaking (Mini/Pocket Park Opportunity)
Wayfinding and Signage at key points along the entire corridor Enhanced Bus Shelters (Floating Bus Island Opportunity) The Preferred Complete Streets Concept has been developed as preliminary conceptual plans, found in Appendix A.5, along with three-dimensional sections and can be used by City Staff in the pursuit of funding for future implementation.

Implementation is recommended once the study area is
relinquished to El Centro since at the time of the development of this CSP, Caltrans has ownership of the study area. While El Centro anticipates gaining control of the study area in the future, Caltrans reviewed and provided guidance — included in Appendix A.1.
“All these toolkit
elements sound great!”

Page 305 of 403 ends

Recommendations 70
Segment A

FROM TO
Adams Avenue Scott Avenue
Segment B

FROM TO
Scott Avenue Lincoln Ave
Segment C

FROM TO
Lincoln Ave Treshill Road

Page 306 of 403 ends

71 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Segment A
Segment A Summary
Segment A is the southernmost segment of the Imperial Avenue study area from Adams Avenue and Scott Avenue. This segment has existing sidewalks, bus shelters for bus lines 2 and 3, raised narrow medians, wide travel lanes, and a railroad crossing between Woodward Avenue and Scott Avenue. Attractions on this segment include take-out and dine-in eateries, hotel accommodations, and retail businesses. Although sidewalks exist along most of Segment A, they are missing or need improvement from Woodward Avenue to Scott Avenue on both the east and west sides. The railroad bisects this connection and grade changes along with drainage considerations exist.

Recommendations
The proposed improvements for Segment A include the addition of a Class IV separated bikeway on both the east and west sides from Adams Avenue north towards the railroad crossing.

At-grade railroad crossings, gates, and other safety equipment for pedestrians/bicyclists should be further evaluated in future studies. Considerations for elevation changes and ensuring ADA accessibility are essential. From the railroad crossing north towards Scott Avenue, Class I multiuse paths are proposed that can be used by both pedestrians and bicyclists. At the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Scott Avenue, a potential placemaking opportunity exists for the inclusion of a linear park with trees, landscaping, seating, wayfinding signage, public art, and more that can contribute to creating a gathering space to strengthen community character.

Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Carlos
Aguilar
Park
Lincoln
Elementary
Adams Park
McKinley
Elementary
86 86
N

FROM TO
Adams Avenue Scott Avenue

0.4 Miles
35-45 8 Min 4 Min
MPH
3 Min
Note: El Centro will need to verify speed reduction and final design requirements, such as Clear Recovery Zones (CRZ), during the engineering design phase

Page 307 of 403 ends

Recommendations 72
960
960
960
960
960
960
958.7
958.9
959.2
959.8 959.6
959.6
959.4
959.7
959.3
959.6
959.1
958.9
959.4
958.2
958.8
959.2
957.9
959.6
958.9
957.8
958.5
958.4
958.4
957.7
957.5
958.1
958.2
957.2 958.2
958.6
958.8
957.5
956.6
956.8
957.5
956.6
957.7
958.8
959.5
958.2
959.2
957.6
957.5
957.8
957.2
957.1
958.4
958.2
957.8
958.7
957.9
958.3
958.4
959.5
956.5
958.8
958.5
958.4
958.3
958.7
958.2
957.3
957.1
957.3
957.5
959.6
958.8
957.3
960.2
958.5
957.4
957.7
957.1
956.6
957.4
956.7
956.7
956.7
957.6
956.5
959.6
958.3
959.4
959.8
959.7
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured

EUCLID AVE
Driveway
Driveway

ADAMS AVE
12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 7' 10' 8' 6' 9'
Bus Stop
5' 5' 3' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12'
12'11'11'12'

WOODWARD AVE
Driveway Driveway
Driveway
Driveway Driveway Driveway Driveway Driveway
Driveway
Driveway

EL CENTRO AVE
5'
2'
10'
961.28109
960
960
955
960
960
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
960
957.3
957.5
955.1
956.3
960.6
961.1
960.8
959.6
954.4
957.2
959.3
955.5
959.7
955.6
956.5956.2
956.5
955.6
955.6
955.7
957.7
957.5
958.6
957.3
955.3
955.4
956.1
956.3
956.3
955.8
955.3
956.8956.5
955.6
956.3
955.8
957.6
957.6
955.2
954.8
957.2
955.3
955.6
954.5
954.8
955.2
955.4
957.4
957.5
957.5
956.9
954.5
954.7
956.9
957.3
955.5
955.7
955.4
955.3
958.6
959.7
956.1
956.1
958.9
960.9
960.2
960.2
959.4
959.8
959.7
957.4
958.4
956.6
956.5
956.6
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured

SCOTT AVE
Class I
Class I
Library Main
Entrance
Driveway
Class I
One-way Travel Lane
Class I

RAILROAD TACKS
Driveway
Driveway
Cycle Track
12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 5' 10' 5' 4' 2'
2'
10' 4' 12' 11' 11'
10'
11' 11' 11' 12'
4' 8' 3' 11' 8' 4' 10'
2' 10' 4' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 5' 10' 3'

FRONTAGE ROAD
Parking
Driveway
Driveway
Driveway
Driveway
Driveway
High Visibility Crosswalk Bike Crossing Markings Class IV Separated Bikeway Class I Multi-use Path Urban Greening Medians KTU+A
3916 Normal St
San Diego, CA 92103
Conceptual Plan Scale: 1" = 80'-0"
Sheet 1 of 1
City of El Centro
Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan Imperial Avenue from Adams Ave to Scott Ave January 2025 City of El Centro
1275 Main St
El Centro, CA 92243
MBI
9635 Granite Ridge Drive
San Diego, CA 92123
Class IV separated bikeway
ramps up to sidewalk level;
typical for every intersection
with curb extensions
Bus stop with enhanced
treatments; Refer to ICTC
Bust Stop Design Guidelines
for more design information
15' Curb radius; typical
for local streets at
Imperial Avenue Coordination needed with
property owner to determine
final design solution; multiple
driveways and elevation
changes; opportunities to
enhance drainage and introduce
green stormwater infrastructure
Enhanced bus shelter;
shade, seating, signage,
and trash/recycling
receptacles
At-grade railroad crossing, gates,
and other safety equipment for
pedestrians/bicyclists should be
further evaluated in future
studies; considerations for
elevation change and ensuring
ADA accessibility are essential
Transitions from
sidewalk/Class IV
separated bikeways to
Class I multi-use path
Placemaking
opportunity; linear
park with trees,
landscaping, seating,
signage, art, exercise
equipment, etc.

MATCHLINE - SEE LOWER LEFT SEGMENT A END

SEGMENT A START MATCHLINE - SEE UPPER RIGHT
Note: Higher-resolution versions of these cutsheets can be found in the Appendix

Page 308 of 403 ends

73 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Varies Sidewalk Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Shoulder Sidewalk Varies Existing
Proposed
Varies Sidewalk Sidewalk
Class IV Green Conflict Striping Class IV
Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Varies
Figure 4-2: Segment A Preferred Concept Sections

Page 309 of 403 ends

Recommendations 74
End of Segment A

Page 310 of 403 ends

75 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Segment B
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Lincoln
Elementary
Adams Park
McKinley
Elementary
86 86
N Segment B Summary
Segment B, Scott Avenue to Lincoln Avenue, is the middle segment of this study along Imperial Avenue. The segment has a frontage road on the west side for two-way traffic, a mixture of raised and earthen medians, and a lack of sidewalks on the east and west sides directly on Imperial Avenue.

However, sidewalks exist along the western side of the Frontage Road. A key attraction on Segment B includes El Centro Library which offers informational, educational, cultural, and recreational materials and programming for the diverse community of El Centro. Other attractions include take-out and dine-in eateries, federal facilities, medical establishments, and retail businesses. Although not directly along the corridor, but important to highlight, are the park and school facilities on the west of Segment B, as they are major attractions for the community. Existing public transportation includes bus routes 2 and Green next to the El Centro Library.

Recommendations
The proposed improvements for Segment B include the addition of a two-way Class IV separated bikeway on the east side of the frontage road from Scott Avenue north towards Lincoln Avenue. The two-way Class IV separated bikeway creates opportunities for the integration of urban greening, signage, and stormwater treatments on the west side of Imperial Avenue. A Class I multi-use path is another facility proposed on the east side of the entirety of Segment B. Class I multi-use paths can include a tree-lined buffer adjacent to Imperial Avenue that provides separation for bicyclists and pedestrians and provides stormwater catchment opportunities. The existing frontage road at the time of this study accommodates two-way traffic. However, it is recommended that it be converted to a one-way northbound travel lane. Additionally, along the east side of the frontage road, designated onstreet parking is proposed. Further study is recommended to coordinate with businesses and to study traffic flow along the frontage road to determine special access considerations. To accommodate the proposed northbound one-way couplet on Frontage Road, the southbound bus stop is relocated to Imperial Avenue with improvements such as a bus pad, bus shelter with seating and lighting, and wayfinding signage. On Imperial Avenue, two proposed signalized intersections fall within Segment B and are located at Villa Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. The proposed signalized intersections are recommended to include traffic signals, high-visibility pedestrian crossings, and adjusted signal timing.

FROM TO
Scott Avenue Lincoln Ave

0.4 Miles
45 MPH
8 Min 4 Min 3 Min
Carlos
Aguilar
Park
Note: El Centro will need to verify speed reduction and final design requirements, such as Clear Recovery Zones (CRZ), during the engineering
design phase

Page 311 of 403 ends

Recommendations 76
955
955
955
955
955
955
955 955
955
955
955
955.5 955.6
955.6
955.6
955.7
957.7
957.5
958.6
957.3
955.4
956.3
956.3
955.3
956.5
957.6
957.6
955.2
954.8
957.2
955.6
954.5
954.8
955.4
957.4
957.5
957.5
956.9
954.9
955.5
957.1
956.7
956.8
954.5
954.7
954.4954.3
954.8
956.8
956.9
955.2
955.7
956.7
956.6
956.6
955.8
954.9
955.8
957.4
955.5
955.7
955.4
955.6
955.4
955.8
958.6959.7
956.1
956.1
958.9
955.1
956.5
956.6
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Obscured

SCOTT AVE

VILLA AVE
One-way Travel Lane
Class I
Class I Class I
Library Main
Entrance
Driveway
Class I
Class I
One-way Travel Lane
Bus Stop
Driveway Driveway
Driveway
Driveway
Cycle Track
Cycle Track
12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 5' 10' 5' 4' 2'
2'
10' 4' 12' 11' 11'
10'
11' 11' 11' 12'
4' 8' 3' 11' 8' 4' 10'

FRONTAGE ROAD
11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 4' 10'
2'
2'
10' 4' 12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 13' 11' 8' 4' 8'
Parking
One-way Travel Lane
Driveway
Driveway
Driveway Driveway Driveway
Parking
954.70106
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
950
955
954.8
955.4
956.8
954.4
954.9
954.7
954.3 954.9
953.7
956.8
954.1
954.6 953.6
953.5
954.7
956.3
955.8
954.7
954.2
953.8
954.2
953.6
953.9
953.4
953.8
953.6
952.6
952.5
953.3
953.5
952.7
953.2
956.8
955.8
956.3
955.4
955.8
954.3
952.5
955.8
953.2
953.9
953.6
953.6
954.2
953.9
954.5
954.9
954.8
953.1
953.7
954.6
954.7
954.5
954.5
953.9
952.4
952.9
953.6
955.8
953.8
955.1
955.5
954.6
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured

PICO AVE

FRONTAGE ROAD FRONTAGE ROAD
Class I Class I Class I
Class I
Driveway Driveway Driveway Driveway Driveway Driveway
Driveway Driveway
Driveway Driveway
Cycle Track Cycle Track
Placemaking

LINCOLN AVE
16' 12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 13' 11' 8' 4' 6'
12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 16'
Parking
Cycle Track
12'12'
11'
Class I
16'
High Visibility Crosswalk Bike Crossing Markings Class IV Separated Bikeway Class I Multi-use Path Urban Greening Medians KTU+A
3916 Normal St
San Diego, CA 92103
Conceptual Plan Scale: 1" = 80'-0"
Sheet 1 of 1
City of El Centro
Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan Imperial Avenue from Scott Ave to Lincoln Ave January 2025 City of El Centro
1275 Main St
El Centro, CA 92243
MBI
9635 Granite Ridge Drive
San Diego, CA 92123
City to work with
property owner to
determine final design
New location for bus
stop; bus plaza with
enhancements i.e. shade,
seating, signage, etc.

Frontage Road: one-way
traffic configuration with
parallel on-street parking
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Placemaking
opportunity; mini park
with trees, landscaping,
seating, signage, art,
exercise equipment, etc.

New traffic signal;
enhanced pedestrian
crossing; new median
refuge island; adjust
signal timing
New traffic signal;
enhanced pedestrian
crossing; adjust
signal timing
Class IV two-way separated bikeway;
opportunities for urban greening,
signage, and stormwater treatments
Pedestrian enhancements
include new parkway with
street trees; greater separation
from vehicular traffic
Placemaking
opportunity; linear
park with trees,
landscaping, seating,
signage, art, exercise
equipment, etc.

Class I
multi-use path
Frontage Road: one-way
traffic configuration with
parallel on-street parking
Class IV two-way separated bikeway;
opportunities for urban greening,
signage, and stormwater treatments
Pedestrian enhancements
include new parkway with
street trees; greater separation
from vehicular traffic
Class I
multi-use path
Class IV two-way separated bikeway;
opportunities for urban greening,
signage, and stormwater treatments
Pedestrian enhancements
include new parkway with
street trees; greater separation
from vehicular traffic
Frontage Road: one-way
traffic configuration with
parallel on-street parking
Frontage Road: one-way
traffic configuration with
parallel on-street parking
Existing Signalized
Intersection
Proposed Signalized
Intersection
New median refuge
island; adjust signal
timing
Figure 4-3: Segment B Preferred Concept

MATCHLINE - SEE LOWER LEFT SEGMENT B END

SEGMENT B START MATCHLINE - SEE UPPER RIGHT
Note: Higher-resolution versions of these cutsheets can be found in the Appendix

Page 312 of 403 ends

77 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Library Sidewalk Frontage Rd Drainage Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Varies Existing
Proposed
Library Sidewalk Frontage Rd Drainage Travel Lanes Median Travel Lanes Class I Street Parking Class IV
Northbound One-way Street
Figure 4-4: Segment B Preferred Concept Sections

Page 313 of 403 ends

Recommendations 78
End of Segment B

Page 314 of 403 ends

79 Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan DRAFT
Segment C
Martin
Luther King
Elementary
Lincoln
Elementary
Adams Park
McKinley
Elementary
86 86
N Segment C Summary
Segment C is the northernmost segment of this study from Lincoln Avenue to Treshill Road near the Central Drain and northern city boundary. This segment has wide earthen medians, a lack of sidewalks along the entire segment, and undeveloped shoulders with an earthen irrigation channel on the east side and a channelized flood control system on the west side. Attractions on this segment include take-out and dine-in eateries, places of worship, grocery stores, medical establishments, federal facilities, and retail businesses. Although there are no bus stops directly on this segment of Imperial Avenue, there is transit access nearby on Bradshaw Avenue and Cruickshank Drive.

Recommendations
The proposed improvements for Segment C include the addition of Class I multi-use path facilities on both sides of Imperial Avenue. At the intersection of Imperial Avenue and Lincoln Avenue, a placemaking opportunity exists for a mini park with urban greening elements such as trees and landscaping. A mini park also creates a space for the potential display of art by local artists and amenities such as exercise equipment. A proposed signalized intersection falls within Segment B and is recommended at the intersection of Imperial Avenue and El Dorado Avenue with the addition of high-visibility crosswalks and adjusted signal timing. Throughout the outreach efforts of this CSP, community members expressed a desire for more direct connections to business storefronts and building frontages. This feedback was incorporated by proposing pedestrian/ bicycle bridges over the channelized flood control system throughout Segment C. El Centro will coordinate with the City of Imperial to ensure continuity of the proposed recommendations.

FROM TO
Lincoln Ave Treshill Road

0.8 Miles
17 Min 10 Min 5 Min
Carlos
Aguilar
Park
Note: El Centro will need to verify speed reduction and final design requirements, such as Clear Recovery Zones (CRZ), during the engineering design phase 45-55
MPH

Page 315 of 403 ends

Recommendations 80
954.70106
955
950
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
955
950
955
953.8
953.6
952.6
955.8
954.3
952.5
955.8
952.3
953.2
953.9
953.6
953.6
954.2
953.9
954.2
954.7
953.5
951.7
951.9
952.6
952.5 954.3 954.4
954.7
954.3
955.7
954.6
954.5
954.9
954.8
953.1
953.7
952.8
953.5
954.2
952.9 954.2
953.8
954.9
953.9
954.9
953.9
953.5
953.3
953.2
953.2
952.3
951.7
954.6
954.5
953.2
952.4
952.6
951.9
954.2
954.1
953.7
952.6
952.2 953.7
951.4
952.9
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured
Class I
Class I
Class I
Class I
Driveway
Driveway Driveway
Cycle Track
Placemaking

LINCOLN AVE
12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 16'
16' 12' 11' 12' 11' 11' 12' 16'
12'12'
Class I
EL DORADO AVE 12'
12'12'
12'-7.5"
12'
14'-8.6"
11'
Class I
Class I
16'
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
955
955
955
950
950
950
950
953.3
952.5
953.3
954.6
953.7
953.8
951.6
953.6
954.3
951.7
953.7 952.6
953.2
953.6
953.2
952.9
952.8
953.2
951.9
950.5
950.5
950.7
953.8
953.1
953.4
955.1
955.2
955.5
954.9
953.3
954.3
953.7
953.7
953.2
953.6
952.8
953.8
952.4
952.6
951.9
951.9
953.5
952.4
952.7
952.3
951.6
950.9
949.9
949.5
949.8
952.1
951.6
950.6
952.7
952.4
952.4
952.7
Vegetation
Ground
Obscured

BRADSHAW AVE
Class I
Class I
Class I
Class I
14' 12' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12' 14'
11' 11' 12' 11' 11'

COTTONWOOD DRIVE
High Visibility Crosswalk Bike Crossing Markings Class IV Separated Bikeway Class I Multi-use Path Urban Greening Medians KTU+A
3916 Normal St
San Diego, CA 92103
Conceptual Plan Scale: 1" = 80'-0"
Sheet 1 of 2
City of El Centro
Imperial Avenue Complete Streets Plan Imperial Avenue from Lincoln Ave Treshill Ave January 2025 City of El Centro
1275 Main St
El Centro, CA 92243
MBI
9635 Granite Ridge Drive
San Diego, CA 92123
Placemaking
opportunity; mini park
with trees, landscaping,
seating, signage, art,
exercise equipment, etc.

New traffic signal;
enhanced pedestrian
crossing; adjust
signal timing
Class IV two-way separated
bikeway; opportunities for
urban greening, signage,
and stormwater treatments
Pedestrian
enhancements include
new parkway with
street trees; greater
separation from
vehicular traffic
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
New traffic signal;
enhanced
pedestrian
crossing; adjust
signal timing
Pedestrian
bridge
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Pedestrian
bridge
Pedestrian
bridge
Pedestrian
bridge
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Class I
multi-use path
Pedestrian
bridge
Existing Signalized
Intersection
Proposed Signalized
Intersection
New median refuge
island; adjust signal
timing
Figure 4-5: Segment C Preferred Concept (1 of 2)

MATCHLINE - SEE LOWER LEFT MATCHLINE - SEE NEXT PAGE

SEGMENT C START MATCHLINE - SEE UPPER RIGHT
Note: Higher-resolution versions of these cutsheets can be found in the Appendix

Page 316 of 403 ends

El Centro City CouncilFebruary 4, 2025

El Centro City Council
February 4, 2025