APPENDIX A
2026
TRAFFIC NEEDS ANAYSIS - DIF PROGRAM UPDATE
JIM DAMKOWITCH, PRINCIPAL DKS
DKS ASSOCIATES | 428 J Street Sacramento, CA
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6 1
TRAFFIC NEEDS A SSESSMENT - DIF PROGRAM UPDATE
DATE: April 9, 2026
TO: Nina Buelna, Public Works Director | City of Goleta FROM: Jim Damkowitch, Principal | DKS Associates
SUBJECT: City of Goleta Development Impact Fee Program Update Project #24675-002
INTRODUCTION
As part of the overall Development Impact Fee (DIF) update by the City of Goleta, DKS performed a traffic needs analysis of existing and future year roadway deficiencies within the City of Goleta. The analysis also includes a developer fee fair -share assessment analysis for the identified roadway deficiencies. These analyses serve to inform the update of the Goleta Development Impact Fee (DIF) fee schedule for traffic. The intent of the DIF is to contribute funds for construction of the City of Goleta’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) through administration of locally generated developer traffic impact fees. This analysis satisfies the requisite California Mitigation Fee Act (MFA) nexus requirements for developer-based fee programs in the State of California.
The deficiency analysis and fair-share assessment were based on the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan approved by the City of Goleta on October 2, 2006 including subsequent amendments to the plan. Projected land use assumptions were developed by the City of Goleta and are consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. These assumptions are reflected in the recently updated City of Goleta Travel Model. The Goleta Travel Model is the operative analysis tool for identifying capital pro ject needs to offset the impacts of growth citywide and to determine the fair-share calculations for allocating the DIF cost estimates. The latter is a requisite step for developing a fee schedule by land use type.
GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL UPDATE
The VISUM Goleta Travel Model is an analysis tool that gives the City of Goleta the capability to generate technical information pertinent to the understanding of travel behavior and transportation network performance within the City. This information is c ritical to the development, updating and monitoring of the City’s transportation capital improvement program, analysis of specific transportation projects and programs, and General Plan land use and transportation strategies and policies.
The Goleta Travel Model estimates peak -hour traffic (AM and PM) for both existing year and future year conditions, providing roadway segment volumes and intersection turning movements that support detailed operational analyses. The ability to predict futur e volume sets helps determine whether a given road segment or intersection will operate acceptably under future conditions, as well
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6 2
as the extent to which new development within and outside the City will contribute to future infrastructure deficiencies identified within the City of Goleta.
A comprehensive update to the Goleta Travel Model was completed in August 2025. The baseline model was updated to reflect 2024 conditions and was validated to State/Federal criteria. A 2050 travel forecast was developed based on the City of Goleta’s General Plan land use buildout and adopted resolutions. For areas within the modeling domain but outside the City’s boundaries, land uses were updated to reflect 2050 conditions based on County and City of Santa Barbara rezones, school (K -12) enrollment projections, UCSB L ong Range Development Plan projections, Santa Barbara Airport enplanement projections, and applicable County/City of Santa Barbara Specific Plans.
SBCAG’s Regional Travel Demand Model baseline and 2050 volumes were used to establish traffic growth at all entry/exit points (i.e., gateways) into the Goleta Travel Model modeling domain (i.e., Goleta Valley).
A complete description of the Goleta Travel Model update is provided in the Technical Memorandum City of Goleta Travel Model Update, DKS December 2025 provided in Appendix A.1.
MITIGIATION FEE ACT (MFA)
The Mitigation Fee Act (MFA) nexus criteria ensures that the DIF program only funds the share of transportation improvements costs that are reasonably related to the impacts of new development occurring or anticipat ed to occur in the City of Goleta. In this regard, DIF capital projects must conform to the following criteria:
• Existing Deficiencies: A DIF capital project on roadways determined to be deficient under baseline conditions, can only increase the capacity of a transportation facility or service such that future operating conditions are returned to levels experienced under baseline conditions (i.e., degradation attributable to only new growth is applicable); • Future Deficiencies: A DIF capital project must increase the capacity of a transportation facility or service that otherwise would be deficient at the time horizon (2050); • Fair Share: t he DIF can only fund that share of a capital project reasonably related to the impacts of new development occurring inside the City of Goleta; • Discount Fair Share: California Government Code section 66005.1 indicates the need to establish a methodology within the program to account for reducing the fee when VMT efficient housing development meets a set of specific characteristics (see legislative updates).
MFA LEGISLATIVE UPDATES
Since the last update of the DIF in 2019, the following legislative updates to the MFA have occurred. • AB 602 - With the passage of AB 602 (2021), residential fees must now be based on floor area versus by unit. If an agency wishes to continue charging residential fees on a per unit basis – a defensible justification must be developed and submitted. AB 602 also protracts noticing and public review requirements including on- line public access to draft documents prior to fee adoption.
• SB 99 (ADUs) - SB 13 addresses how Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are to be addressed as part of traffic impact fee programs. SB 13 (2019) amended Section 65852.2 of the
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6 3
California Government Code to specify that local agencies may not impose development impact fees on ADUs of less than 750 square feet. Any impact fees must be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.
• AB 358 (VMT Efficient Residential Housing Discount) - If a housing development satisfies all of the following characteristics, the fee, or the portion thereof relating to vehicular traffic impacts, shall be set at a rate that reflects a lower rate of automobile trip generation associated with such housing developments in comparison with housing developments without all of these characteristics.
(1) The housing development is located within a transit priority area and the major transit stop, if planned, is programmed to be completed before or within one year from the scheduled completion and occupancy of the housing development. (2) The housing development is located within one-half mile from three or more of the following:
(A) A supermarket or grocery store.
(B) A public park.
(C) A community center.
(D) A pharmacy or drugstore.
(E) A medical clinic or hospital.
(F) A public library.
(G) A school that maintains a kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive. (H) A licensed childcare facility.
(I) A restaurant. For purposes of this paragraph, a “restaurant” means a retail food establishment that prepares, serves, and vends food directly to the consumer.
(3) The housing development provides no more than one onsite parking space for zero- to two-bedroom units, and two onsite parking spaces for three or more bedroom units.
For this purpose, the City of Goleta applies a discounted fee amount of 15% based on the trip generation study: S mart Growth Trip Generation Study (SANDAG, June 2010) . This study compared the vehicle trip generation characteristics of seven development projects in the San Diego region with similar “smart growth” characteristics identified above. The average reduction in trip generation was shown to be approximately 15% relative to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) based trip generation factors for housing developments without these characteristics.
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6 4
GOLETA DIF STRUCTURE
FEE ASSESSMENT GEOGRAPHY
The Goleta Travel Model is comprised of 1 92 geographical spaces called Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ’s). These 192 TAZ’s are the primary units of analysis for modeling purposes. TAZs are delimited on the basis of socio -economic, topographic, political, and transportation facilities information. For purposes of this analysis, the following sub -areas were identified based on the Goleta Travel Model TAZ structure:
• City of Goleta TAZs;
• Non-City TAZs; and,
• External Zone TAZs.
These three areas are the operative geographic units needed to determine the DIF. New development and the resulting trip growth associated with the City of Goleta TAZs determine the DIF while trips associated with Non-City and External TAZ growth do not.
Goleta Travel Model TAZs was further grouped into the following sub-geographies:
• City of Goleta
• County of Santa Barbara Less Rezone Areas;
• County of Santa Barbara Rezone Areas;
• City of Santa Barbara – Airport Master Plan and Airport Specific Plan Areas; • City of Santa Barbara – East Goleta Valley; and,
• University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Trips associated with new development planned within these sub-areas were analyzed to determine the fee implications associated with inter-jurisdictional travel demand. These geographies are shown in Figure 1. TAZ to Planning Area correspondence tables were developed and coded as VISUM graphics parameter files for analysis.
FEE ASSESSMENT PLANNING HORIZON
Given that fee programs are specifically designed to address traffic resulting from new growth, a baseline year must be established to distinguish new growth versus existing development. For residential development, the baseline year of the DIF is 20 25 and was based on the Department of Finance, Population and Housing Estimates for Cities and Counties. Nonresidential estimates for 2025 were based on the Goleta Traffic Model data for 20 24. Based on built and occupied development permits, the implication of t he base year gap of one year for nonresidential development was considered negligible.
The planning horizon for this fee assessment is 20 50. This forecast horizon is consistent with the planning horizon developed for the City’s travel model forecast horizon. A planning horizon of 2050 is considered long enough to plan for long-term infrastructure needs, yet short enough to represent reasonably anticipated growth based on current land use policy.
5 FIGURE 1: GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL SUB -AREAS
6 PLANNING HORIZON LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Land use assumptions within Goleta City Limits were based on project build- out as defined in the City of Goleta’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. For areas within the Goleta Valley that are outside the Goleta City Limits, growth projections were based on the following:
• Buildout of the County of Santa Barbara’s cumulative residential and non -residential project list as defined in the Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan, the Isla Vista Specific Plan and the Gaviota Community Plan;
• County Rezones converting previously zone agricultural areas for residential; • Buildout of the University of California at Santa Barbara Long Range Development Plan; • K1-12 School enrollment projections; and,
• Buildout of the City of Santa Barbara’s Santa Barbara Airport Master Plan and Specific Plan.
Table 1 provides a summary of the net development growth assumed to occur between 20 24 and 2050 stratified by model land use category. Figure 2 shows how planned residential growth will be dispersed geographically. Note that these totals reflect the entire Goleta Travel Model modeling domain – including the other jurisdictions cited above. Table 2 provides the land use growth projected for City of Goleta. This data is stratified by TAZ for traffic modeling purposes. Table 3 refines the data in Table 2 to reflect the DIF base year of 2025 (adds one year) and consolidates into the DIF fee schedule land use categories.
PLANNING HORIZON EXTERNAL TRAFFIC ASSUMPTIONS
AM/PM peak hour external traffic growth assumptions for 2050 were developed as part of the Goleta Travel Model update. For state highway facilities, external growth assumptions were developed from SBCAG’s regional travel model projected growth, and historical traffic growth based on counts or published volumes. External assumptions for non -state facilities w ere based on SBCAG’s regional travel model projected growth and future land use considerations (i.e., potential to be impacted by future development). The following external link 20 24-2050 traffic growth assumptions were made for the Goleta Travel Model forecasts:
1. SR-154 0 (-)%
2. SR-192/Cathedral Oaks 44%
3. State Street 17%
4. Calle Real (East) 24 %
5. Highway 101 (East) 13 %
6. Modoc Drive 14 %
7. Las Palmas Drive 7 %
8. Highway 101 (West) 0 (-)%
9. Calle Real (West) 57 %
The lack of projected traffic growth for the two gateways that serve interregional trips between northern Santa Barbara County and the South Coast is based on SBCAG’s 2050 regional growth forecasts and SBCAG travel modeling performed as part of the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communit y Strategy (RTP/SCS) . These projections are driven by a greater future housing development allocation in the South Coast which serves to remedy the jobs housing imbalance between northern and southern Santa Barbara County effectively reducing travel demand at these two gateways in the future.
7 Table 1: Goleta Travel Model Land Use Growth Summary (all Jurisdictions) Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 14,187 16,871 2,684
Multi Family MFDU DU 13,285 24,682 11,397
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF 640 937 297
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 1,881 2,753 872 Office OFFICE KSF 3,552 5,585 2,033
Research & Development R_D KSF - 66 66
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 6,801 7,682 881
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 1,386 1,530 144
Agriculture AGRI Acres 6,815 6,868 53
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 949 1,456 507
Restaurant RESTR KSF 285 364 79
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 6,330 6,862 532 Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 6,976 8,251 1,275 Medical MEDICAL KSF 220 357 137
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 1,078 1,152 74
Theater THEATER KSF 9 90 81
Auto AUTO KSF 530 632 102
Hospital HOSP KSF 135 195 60
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 441 618 177
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day 1,741 3,127 1,386 UCSB UCSB Students 19,039 25,000 5,961
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU 65 65 0
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU 6,887 7,216 329 La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF 651 398 (253)
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms 360 422 62
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp 9,528 11,400 1,872 Bank BANK KSF 23 37 14
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF 35 38 3
Golf Course GOLF Holes 63 45 (18)
8 Figure 2. Distribution of Planned Residential Growth in Goleta Valley
9 Table 2: Goleta Travel Model - City of Goleta Land Use Growth Summary Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 6,101 6,571 470
Multi Family MFDU DU 7,516 9,973 2,457
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF 491 528 37
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 1,225 1,861 636
Office OFFICE KSF 2,936 4,672 1,736
Research & Development R_D KSF - 66 66
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 6,410 7,088 678
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 274 418 144
Agriculture AGRI Acres 369 367 (2)
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 630 1,022 392
Restaurant RESTR KSF 210 244 34
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 2,555 2,752 197
Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 3,170 4,367 1,197
Medical MEDICAL KSF 150 225 75
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 595 629 34
Theater THEATER KSF - 65 65
Auto AUTO KSF 424 499 75
Hospital HOSP KSF 101 161 60
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 254 368 114
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day - - -
UCSB UCSB Students - - -
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU - - -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU - - -
La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF - - -
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms 360 422 62
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp - - -
Bank BANK KSF 23 28 5
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF 35 35 -
Golf Course GOLF Holes 18 18 -
10 Table 3: City of Goleta Land Use Growth Summary
Land Use
Existing
(2025)1 Buildout
Residential (dwelling units)
Single Family Detached 5,533 6,511 978 15% All Other Residential 7,622 9,973 2,351 24% Total Residential 13,155 16,484 3,329 20% Retail / Commercial (1,000 sq. ft.)
Auto Services 424 499 75 15% Banks 23 28 5 18% Fast Food Restaurants 35 35 - 0% Hotels2 410 664 254 38% Indoor Recreation 254 368 114 31% Shopping Mall - - - NA Neighborhood Commercial 1,225 1,861 636 34% Regional Commercial 491 528 37 7% Resort Hotel3 281 329 48 15% Restaurants 210 244 34 14% Theater - 65 65 NA Subtotal 3,353 4,621 1,268 27%
Office & Medical (1,000 sq. ft.)
Hospitals 101 161 60 37% Medical 150 225 75 33% Office 2,936 4,672 1,736 37%
Subtotal 3,187 5,058 1,871 37%
Industrial (1,000 sq. ft.)
Heavy Industrial 274 418 144 34% Light Industrial 6,410 7,088 678 10% Research & Development - 66 66 NA Subtotal 6,684 7,572 888 12%
Total Non-residential 13,224 17,251 4,027 23% 1 Residential estimates for 2025 based on DOF data. Nonresidential estimates for 2025 based on travel demand model data for 2024. The amount of subsequent development would not materially affect the nexus analysis in this report.
2 Land use data for hotel rooms (630 existing, 1,022 buildout, and 392 growth) converted to building square feet at 650 square feet per room.
3 Land use data for resort hotel rooms (360 existing, 422 buildout, and 62 growth) converted to building square feet at 780 square feet per room.
Sources: State of California, Department of Finance, Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State — January 1, 2025 ; Goleta Traffic Model land use scenario (2024 and General Plan buildout - Land_Use_2024_GPU_Goleta_TAZs_only.xlsx); Jan A. DeRoos, Planning and Programming a Hotel, Cornell University, 2011.
Growth
(% Buildout)
11 TOTAL NEW TRIPS RESULTING FROM NEW GROWTH
Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, vehicle trips from existing growth and external areas are not applicable to developer -based fee programs. To estimate the number of “new” trips from new development within the City of Goleta, the difference between the 202 4 Baseline model and 2050 General Plan model trip generation estimates from within the City’s jurisdiction was calculated. This excludes trip growth within County of Santa Barbara TAZs, City of Santa Barbara TAZs, UCSB TAZs, and external/regional trips. Based on trip rates established in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (12th Edition) and adjusted to exclude pass -by trips 1, 8,844 new PM peak hour trips are projected to generated from planned development within the City of Goleta over the 25-year planning horizon.
DEFICIENCY A SSESSMENT – TECHNICAL APPROACH
Existing/future year operational deficiencies were identified based on the City’s General Plan adopted service standard of Level of Service (LOS) C2. All analyses reflect AM/PM peak hours during average weekday (Tues-Thurs) traffic conditions. Peak hours are defined as the maximum consecutive 60 minutes during the weekday peak commute hour periods of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and between 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM. All counts were collected in May 2024. Operational determinations herein do not reflect peak season or peak weekend traffic as these conditions can be dominated by interregional traffic that is not appropriate for computing traffic fees to local development. The following deficiency screens were applied to determine operational implications of future development:
• Signalized Intersection Level of Service (ICU Planning Method) • Signalized Intersection Level of Service (HCM Operational Method – for select locations) • Non-Signalized Intersection Level of Service (HCM Operational Method) • Intersection 95th Percentile Queues (HCM Operational Method) • Intersection Peak Hour Signal Warrant (CA MUTCD)
• Goleta Roadway ADT Threshold (City General Plan Adopted Threshold) • Freeway Mainline (HCM Operational Method)
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
For signalized intersections, t he volume-to-capacity ratio of conflicting turn movements using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method was applied to determine the LOS at signalized intersections. For some specialized studies, average control delay based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition Operational Methodology was applied to determine signalized intersection operations. For intersections analyzed using the HCM 7 th Edition, 95th percentile queues were also analyzed. Intersections were identified as operationally deficient if their peak hour 95 th percentile queue exceeded available queue storage.
1 Pass-by trips reflect trip ends that are intermediate stops between an origin and destination and therefore place additional demand on the roadway network. Pass -by rates are based on surveys conducted by the San Diego Association of Governments and provide sufficient detail by land use category. 2 Pursuant to the City’s General Plan, the intersection of Hollister/Storke Road has an LOS standard of “D”. For US 101 mainline analyses an LOS standard of “D” is also applied.
12 NON -SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
For stop-controlled intersections, average delay criteria was applied to determine the LOS based on the HCM 7th Edition operational methodology. The potential need for modifying an intersection control type from stop control to a traffic signal or roundabout at the non -signalized intersections was based on the peak hour signal warrant criteria of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD, 2025).
INTERSECTION SIGNAL WARRANT
Signal warrant analyses were performed for 21 stop-controlled intersections under both Baseline and Future conditions. Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) was applied to identify a deficiency at a study intersection.
Meeting Warrant 3 only identifies a potential deficiency and not necessarily that a signal (or roundabout) is warranted. This analysis did not evaluate all of the warrants for traffic signals but instead focused on the peak hour warrant as an “indicator” of the likelihood of a given non-signalized intersection warranting a change in control type . Before a control type conversion is implemented, the full set of nine warrants should be performed at those locations identified as showing a deficiency.
This analysis was performed in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).
LOCAL ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Roadway deficiencies were based on the City of Goleta’s adopted roadway classification and LOS thresholds. These LOS thresholds are based on average daily traffic volumes and provide a generalized estimate of LOS.
FREEWAY MAINLINE
Deficiencies on freeway mainline facilities were based on the HCM 7th Edition operational methodology for merge-diverge influence areas. LOS on these facilities is based on vehicle density expressed as passenger cars per lane per mile (pcplpm).
The operational criteria for each of these approaches are presented in Attachment A.2.
EXISTING DEFICIENCIES
Given that the financial responsibility for fully mitigating existing deficiencies cannot be placed on new development, identification of existing deficiencies is a requisite step in developing a traffic fee program. At a maximum, only the degree of future degradation to an existing deficiency, as measured by the share of new development’s peak hour traffic growth is applicable. Intersection baseline deficiencies were based on AM/PM peak hour turning movement counts while roadway segment baseline deficiencies were based on 72-hour (Tues-Thurs) continuous counts.
FUTURE DEFICIENCIES
As described above, the Goleta Travel Model was used to generate future volumes based on 20 50 land use growth projections relative to the existing (no -build) transportation network (i.e., without DIF capital projects). The projected volumes from the Goleta Travel Model provide the basis for determining future deficiencies in the City’s roadway network.
13 MODEL POST -PROCESSING
Before “raw” model output can be considered suitable for operational determinations, post- processing adjustments must be performed. The recommended procedure is based on the N ational Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 765. NCHRP-765 adjustments entail using model generated link-based growth (computed variation between base year and forecast year model link volumes) to adjust baseline traffic counts to reflect future conditions. These adjustments were performed for both daily roadway segment volumes and AM/PM peak hour intersection turn movements respectively. These adjustments are described below.
Roadway Segments
Given that the City of Goleta ’s General Plan applies a daily traffic threshold for roadway segments, the Goleta Travel Model’s peak hour forecast volumes must be factored to yield future daily volumes.
Where daily traffic counts exist – roadway counts are “grown” to reflect 2050 conditions by dividing the delta between model baseline and 20 50 PM peak hour forecast by 0.1 and adding to the count.
Where daily traffic counts are not available, future year 2050 daily volumes are estimated by dividing the NCHRP-765 adjusted PM peak hour segment volume by 0.1. Both approaches are based on the simplifying assumption that PM peak hour volumes are 10% of daily volumes. The estimated 20 50 daily volumes can then be compared to City of Goleta’s established General Plan ADT Thresholds.
These LOS thresholds provide a generalized estimate of LOS C and serve as a screen for existing and/or future year problem identification. These thresholds should not be construed as daily roadway volume capacities given that all roads are under -utilized during off -peak hours, while heavily congested roadways will sometimes experience volumes higher than those reported herein.
Intersection Turn Movements”
The Goleta Travel Model generates both AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes for each model intersection. To generate 2050 forecast AM/PM peak hour turning movements at intersections, turn movement counts are “grown” to reflect 2050 conditions by adding the delta between model baseline and 2050 forecast turn movement to the AM and PM intersection turn movement counts respectively. The future year turn movements are then used for operational assessments.
DEFICIENCY ANALYSIS RESULTS
Tables 4 and Table 5 provide the existing intersection ICU LOS results for the AM and PM peak hours respectively. Tables 6 and Table 7 provide the 2050 future intersection ICU LOS results for the AM and PM peak hours respectively. Baseline and future ICU LOS worksheets are provided in Attachment A.3.
Table 8A and Table 8B present the existing and future ADT Threshold analysis based on the “Delta” and “Peak Hour Adjustment” methods respectively.
Table 9 provides the Baseline and 2050 future US 101 merge -diverge analysis LOS results for northbound/southbound between Fairview and Los Carneros and for northbound between Los Carneros and Storke. Baseline and future merge-diverge LOS worksheets are provided in Attachment A.4.
14 Table 10 provides the existing and future Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3 results. It also provides the circulatory lane requirements (i.e., single- or two-lane) if roundabout control is the preferred control type versus signalization. A technical memorandum of this analysis is provided in Attachment A.5.
In addition to aforementioned analyses , three focused corridor-based operational analyses were performed. These more detailed analyses include:
• Cathedral Oaks Corridor Analysis (between Northgate Drive and Storke Road); • South Patterson Corridor Analysis (Hollister Avenue between Fairview Avenue and Patterson Road); and,
• South Fairview Avenue Analysis
These more detailed operational studies examined intersection LOS based on average control delay and 95th percentile queue estimates based on th e Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition Operational Methodology using SYNCHRO and SIDRA operational software . Intersections were identified as operationally deficient if their peak hour HCM LOS exceeded LOS C or their 95th percentile queues exceeded available queue storage. The results of these more engineering -based operational determinations supersede those de termined through planning -based methods. The following locations were determined to be deficient based on these more detailed operational assessments:
• Hollister Avenue / Sumida Gardens Lane Intersection
• Hollister / Patterson Intersection
• Cathedral Oaks Avenue / Glen Annie Road Intersection
• Cathedral Oaks Avenue / Alameda Avenue Intersection
• South Fairview Avenue Roadway Widening (channelization and queue storage) These operational studies are documented in technical memorandums provided in Attachment A.6, Attachment A.7, and Attachment A.8 respectively.
A fourth specialized analysis entailed analyzing the mode shift benefits of a pedestrian/bicycle only grade separated crossing of US 101 (called the Goleta Freeway Crossing) and the diversion benefits of the connecting Phelps Road with Henry Wang Drive . Based on this analysis, both these improvements serve to reduce vehic ular demand at the Hollister/Storke intersection which under future 2050 baseline conditions is shown to become deficient. Combined with the Hollister Avenue at Storke Road Improvement Widening (West of Storke Road), operations at Storke/Hollister are shown to operate within standard (i.e., LOS D). This technical memorandum is provided in Attachment A.9.
Based on these analyses, a total of 32 deficient locations were identified for inclusion in the Goleta DIF. The 32 deficient locations are shown in Figure 3. Project renderings and cost estimates for each improvement are provided in Appendix B.
15 Table 4: Existing AM Peak Hour ICU Intersection Operations Summary
Node Intersection Entering Volume
Number Name Control Type AM Count Max Delay Max LOS Adj. V/C Adj. LOS 151 Cathedral Oaks & Kellogg Signalized 1,359 96.63 A 0.39 A 164 Cathedral Oaks & La Patera TWSC 1,023 28.7 D
169 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd TWSC 1,025 25.97 D
171 Cathedral Oaks & Fairview Signalized 1,380 0.45 A
173 Cathedral Oaks & Cambridge Signalized 1,290 0.36 A
195 Cathedral Oaks & Los Carneros TWSC 967 23.61 C
203 Stow Canyon & Fairview TWSC 1,148 43.83 E
204 Fairview & Berkeley Signalized 1,256 0.38 A
240 Fairview & Shirrell Way TWSC 1,255 26.32 D
241 Encina & Fairview Signalized 1,268 0.37 A
273 Cathedral Oaks & Brandon TWSC 388 12.23 B
276 Cathedral Oaks & Alameda Signalized 807 0.43 A
277 Cathedral Oaks & Glen Anne Signalized 1,253 0.5 A
279 Calle Real & Los Caneros Roundabout 907 5.84 A 0.28 A 280 Calle Real & La Patera TWSC 394 11.08 B
282 Calle Real & Carlo Dr TWSC 894 17.32 C
288 Calle Real & Fairview Signalized 2,291 0.7 C
289 Fairview & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,458 0.64 B
296 Calle Real & Kellogg Signalized 1,035 0.37 A
305 Patterson & Overpass Signalized 1,904 0.53 A
306 Patterson & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,598 0.89 D 307 Patterson & US 101 NB Ramp Signalized 2,672 0.63 B
359 Cathedral Oaks & Winchester Canyon AWSC 421 9.16 A
372 Glen Annie & Del Norte TWSC 695 9.4 A
375 Los Caneros & US101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,174 0.58 A 376 Los Carneros & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 1,565 0.5 A 383 Fairview & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,495 0.63 B
385 Hollister & Fairview Signalized 2,260 0.61 B
386 Fairview & Mandarin TWSC 1,964 59.72 F
387 Hollister & Orange TWSC 1,508 46.06 E
390 Hollister & Pine/Nectarine Signalized 1,304 0.4 A
394 Hollister & Rutherford Signalized 1,204 0.33 A
396 Hollister & Community Center West Driveway TWSC 1,209 8.75 A 399 Hollister & Kellogg Signalized 1,811 0.5 A
402 Hollister & SR-217 SB Ramps Roundabout* 1,876 0.49 A 405 Hollister & SR-217 NB Ramps Roundabout* 1,659 0.32 A 441 Calle Real & NB 101 OnRamp TWSC 176 9.99 A
445 Calle Real & Winchester Canyon AWSC 490 9.3 A 0.25 A 450 Calle Real & Brandon Dr. TWSC 432 11.31 B
451 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real TWSC 500 12.38 B
461 Storke & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,392 0.62 B
462 Storke & US 101 SB Ramp Signalized 2,765 0.84 D
465 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral (west/south) TWSC 1,229 11.31 B 466 Los Carneros & Cremona Signalized 1,336 0.36 A
467 Los Carneros & Calle Koral Signalized 1,816 0.5 A
489 Hollister & Patterson Signalized 2,286 0.55 A
506 Cathedral Oaks 101 SB-Ramp TWSC 1,022 63.56 F
511 Hollister & Pebble Beach Rd TWSC 771 16.55 C
512 Hollister & Palo Alto Dr TWSC 745 17.77 C
513 Hollister & Coronado TWSC 728 13.68 B
515 Hollister & Cannon Green TWSC 1,087 22.6 C
517 Hollister & Pacific Oaks Signalized 1,258 0.39 A
518 Hollister & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,303 36.91 E
521 Storke & Marketplace Signalized 1,593 0.39 A
522 Hollister & Storke Signalized 2,772 0.5 A
524 Hollister & Coromar Project Access Signalized 1,151 0.32 A 525 Hollister & Los Carneros Signalized 1,790 0.41 A
526 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave TWSC 887 15.56 C
528 Hollister & Los Carneros Way Signalized 952 0.26 A
530 Hollister & Aero Camino Signalized 1,008 0.29 A
553 Storke & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,098 18.65 C
556 Fowler & Fairview TWSC 370 10.89 B
562 Storke & Phelps Signalized 1,126 0.42 A
564 Mesa & Los Carneros Signalized 1,271 0.21 A
617 Los Caneros & Castilian Signalized 1,268 0.37 A
624 Cathedral Oaks & Calle Real AWSC 865 20.66 C 0.64 B 630 Hollister & Marketplace/Village Way Signalized 1,498 0.42 A 636 Hollister & Cathedral Oaks TWSC 743 14.71 B
717 Hollister & Entrance Signalized 1,038 0.39 A
856 Hollister & Cortona TWSC 1,160 33.91 D
864 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,076 10.15 B 877 Hollister & Sumida Gardens Signalized 1,048 0.3 A
1042 Hollister & Santa Babara Shores TWSC 732 13.52 B
1141 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave TWSC 886 22.03 C 1182 Ward & Ekwill TWSC 217 10.1 B
* Under construction at the time of this analysis
AM Count (ICU 1)
16 Table 5: Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Operations Summary
Node Intersection Entering Volume
Number Name Control Type PM Count Max Delay Max LOS Adj. V/C Adj. LOS 151 Cathedral Oaks & Kellogg Signalized 1,216 0.36 A
164 Cathedral Oaks & La Patera TWSC 855 21.27 C
169 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd TWSC 888 21.08 C
171 Cathedral Oaks & Fairview Signalized 1,281 0.39 A
173 Cathedral Oaks & Cambridge Signalized 1,146 0.31 A
195 Cathedral Oaks & Los Carneros TWSC 902 20 C
203 Stow Canyon & Fairview TWSC 832 20.07 C
204 Fairview & Berkeley Signalized 949 0.31 A
240 Fairview & Shirrell Way TWSC 1,000 21.03 C
241 Encina & Fairview Signalized 1,069 0.38 A
273 Cathedral Oaks & Brandon TWSC 405 12.3 B
276 Cathedral Oaks & Alameda Signalized 686 0.33 A
277 Cathedral Oaks & Glen Anne Signalized 1,161 0.47 A
279 Calle Real & Los Caneros Roundabout 1,146 7.85 A 0.37 A 280 Calle Real & La Patera TWSC 841 17.71 C
282 Calle Real & Carlo Dr TWSC 1,109 21.34 C
288 Calle Real & Fairview Signalized 2,634 0.67 B
289 Fairview & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,442 0.75 C
296 Calle Real & Kellogg Signalized 1,528 0.43 A
305 Patterson & Overpass Signalized 2,021 0.55 A
306 Patterson & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,782 0.90 E 307 Patterson & US 101 NB Ramp Signalized 2,930 0.66 B
359 Cathedral Oaks & Winchester Canyon AWSC 419 8.79 A 0.05 A 372 Glen Annie & Del Norte TWSC 713 9.49 A
375 Los Caneros & US101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,188 0.6 B 376 Los Carneros & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 1,785 0.54 A 383 Fairview & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,698 0.84 D
385 Hollister & Fairview Signalized 3,014 0.71 C
386 Fairview & Mandarin TWSC 2,288 784.89 F
387 Hollister & Orange TWSC 2,017 111.53 F
390 Hollister & Pine/Nectarine Signalized 2,000 0.59 A
394 Hollister & Rutherford Signalized 1,868 0.47 A
396 Hollister & Community Center West Driveway TWSC 1,760 10.53 B 399 Hollister & Kellogg Signalized 2,483 0.57 A
402 Hollister & SR-217 SB Ramps Roundabout* 2,463 0.6 B 405 Hollister & SR-217 NB Ramps Roundabout* 2,250 0.5 A 441 Calle Real & NB 101 OnRamp TWSC 305 10.97 B
445 Calle Real & Winchester Canyon AWSC 646 11.37 B 0.29 A 450 Calle Real & Brandon Dr. TWSC 313 10.26 B
451 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real TWSC 379 10.89 B
461 Storke & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,742 0.71 C
462 Storke & US 101 SB Ramp Signalized 2,973 0.63 B
465 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral (west/south) TWSC 1,575 10.66 B 466 Los Carneros & Cremona Signalized 1,622 0.43 A
467 Los Carneros & Calle Koral Signalized 2,151 0.59 A
489 Hollister & Patterson Signalized 2,572 0.63 B
506 Cathedral Oaks 101 SB-Ramp TWSC 1,010 31.1 D
511 Hollister & Pebble Beach Rd TWSC 951 21.42 C
512 Hollister & Palo Alto Dr TWSC 937 20.59 C
513 Hollister & Coronado TWSC 966 16.83 C
515 Hollister & Cannon Green TWSC 1,378 29.25 D
517 Hollister & Pacific Oaks Signalized 1,636 0.47 A
518 Hollister & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,817 264.57 F
521 Storke & Marketplace Signalized 2,208 0.53 A
522 Hollister & Storke Signalized 3,903 0.7 C
524 Hollister & Coromar Project Access Signalized 1,924 0.48 A 525 Hollister & Los Carneros Signalized 3,013 0.57 A
526 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,322 23.95 C
528 Hollister & Los Carneros Way Signalized 1,422 0.39 A 530 Hollister & Aero Camino Signalized 1,493 0.41 A
553 Storke & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,766 65.78 F
556 Fowler & Fairview TWSC 575 13 B
562 Storke & Phelps Signalized 1,672 0.49 A
564 Mesa & Los Carneros Signalized 1,934 0.28 A
617 Los Caneros & Castilian Signalized 1,630 0.47 A
620 Hollister & St Joseph TWSC 1,388 27.04 D
624 Cathedral Oaks & Calle Real AWSC 920 18.74 C 0.59 A 630 Hollister & Marketplace/Village Way Signalized 2,621 0.68 B 636 Hollister & Cathedral Oaks TWSC 935 20.15 C 0 A
717 Hollister & Entrance Signalized 1,232 0.39 A
856 Hollister & Cortona TWSC 1,805 69.71 F
864 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,857 11.64 B 877 Hollister & Sumida Gardens Signalized 1,410 0.37 A
1042 Hollister & Santa Babara Shores TWSC 909 14.89 B
1141 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave TWSC 941 22.71 C 1182 Ward & Ekwill TWSC 293 10.57 B
* Under construction at the time of this analysis
PM Count (ICU 1)
17 Table 6: 2050 AM Peak Hour ICU Intersection Operations Summary
Node Intersection Entering Volume
Number Name Control Type AM Forecast Max Delay Max LOS Adj. V/C Adj. LOS 151 Cathedral Oaks & Kellogg Signalized 1,585 0.46 A
164 Cathedral Oaks & La Patera TWSC 1,247 42.01 E
169 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd TWSC 1,266 46.26 E
171 Cathedral Oaks & Fairview Signalized 1,623 0.53 A
173 Cathedral Oaks & Cambridge Signalized 1,528 0.43 A
195 Cathedral Oaks & Los Carneros TWSC 1,284 64.42 F
203 Stow Canyon & Fairview TWSC 1,348 283.48 F
204 Fairview & Berkeley Signalized 1,440 0.42 A
240 Fairview & Shirrell Way TWSC 1,443 36.32 E
241 Encina & Fairview Signalized 1,462 0.4 A
273 Cathedral Oaks & Brandon TWSC 428 12.9 B
276 Cathedral Oaks & Alameda Signalized 1,331 0.44 A
277 Cathedral Oaks & Glen Anne Signalized 1,709 0.68 B
279 Calle Real & Los Caneros Roundabout 1,254 9.4 A 0.4 A 280 Calle Real & La Patera TWSC 514 12.37 B
282 Calle Real & Carlo Dr TWSC 996 19.65 C
288 Calle Real & Fairview Signalized 2,587 0.73 C
289 Fairview & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,778 0.73 C
296 Calle Real & Kellogg Signalized 1,224 0.4 A
305 Patterson & Overpass Signalized 2,455 0.59 A
306 Patterson & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 3,129 1.02 F 307 Patterson & US 101 NB Ramp Signalized 3,095 .0.75 C 359 Cathedral Oaks & Winchester Canyon AWSC 474 9.46 A 0.12 A 372 Glen Annie & Del Norte TWSC 1,078 12.17 B
375 Los Caneros & US101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,567 0.68 B 376 Los Carneros & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 1,959 0.6 B 383 Fairview & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,992 0.74 C
385 Hollister & Fairview Signalized 3,083 0.76 C
386 Fairview & Mandarin TWSC 2,477 333.31 F
387 Hollister & Orange TWSC 2,024 291.28 F
390 Hollister & Pine/Nectarine Signalized 1,758 0.49 A
394 Hollister & Rutherford Signalized 1,583 0.41 A
396 Hollister & Community Center West Driveway TWSC 1,580 8.77 A 399 Hollister & Kellogg Signalized 2,377 0.55 A
402 Hollister & SR-217 SB Ramps Roundabout 2,418 0.55 A 405 Hollister & SR-217 NB Ramps Roundabout 2,301 0.51 A 441 Calle Real & NB 101 OnRamp TWSC 184 10.04 B
445 Calle Real & Winchester Canyon AWSC 522 9.68 A 0.28 A 450 Calle Real & Brandon Dr. TWSC 471 11.63 B
451 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real TWSC 535 12.84 B
461 Storke & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 3,123 0.76 C
462 Storke & US 101 SB Ramp Signalized 3,253 0.88 D
465 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral (west/south) TWSC 1,507 13 B 466 Los Carneros & Cremona Signalized 1,690 0.45 A
467 Los Carneros & Calle Koral Signalized 2,245 0.6 B
489 Hollister & Patterson Signalized 3,213 0.79 C
506 Cathedral Oaks 101 SB-Ramp TWSC 1,169 130.14 F
511 Hollister & Pebble Beach Rd TWSC 952 19.75 C
512 Hollister & Palo Alto Dr TWSC 901 21.2 C
513 Hollister & Coronado TWSC 878 15.39 C
515 Hollister & Cannon Green TWSC 1,330 28.61 D
517 Hollister & Pacific Oaks Signalized 1,708 41.26 A 0.47 A 518 Hollister & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,662 76.76 F
521 Storke & Marketplace Signalized 2,007 49.73 A 0.46 A 522 Hollister & Storke Signalized 3,576 763.47 A 0.6 B
524 Hollister & Coromar Project Access Signalized 1,700 28.26 A 0.45 A 525 Hollister & Los Carneros Signalized 2,408 50.07 A 0.5 A 526 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,234 24.24 C
528 Hollister & Los Carneros Way Signalized 1,332 49.64 A 0.36 A 530 Hollister & Aero Camino Signalized 1,353 62.48 A 0.38 A 553 Storke & Santa Felicia TWSC 1,441 29.6 D
556 Fowler & Fairview TWSC 479 11.88 B
562 Storke & Phelps Signalized 1,423 47.69 A 0.47 A
564 Mesa & Los Carneros Signalized 1,524 52.54 A 0.29 A 617 Los Caneros & Castilian Signalized 1,644 65.1 A 0.5 A 624 Cathedral Oaks & Calle Real AWSC 960 27.94 D 0.74 C 630 Hollister & Marketplace/Village Way Signalized 1,900 39.1 A 0.47 A 636 Hollister & Cathedral Oaks TWSC 887 17.02 C
717 Hollister & Entrance Signalized 1,217 283.6 A 0.41 A 856 Hollister & Cortona TWSC 1,775 2115.38 F
864 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,525 10.84 B 877 Hollister & Sumida Gardens Signalized 1,933 2891.44 A 0.53 A 1042 Hollister & Santa Babara Shores TWSC 879 15.12 C
1141 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,046 31.78 D 1182 Ward & Ekwill TWSC 236 10.2 B
AM 2050 (ICU 1) VISUM V6
18 Table 7: 2050 PM Peak Hour ICU Intersection Operations Summary
Node Intersection Entering Volume
Number Name Control Type PM Forecast Max Delay Max LOS Adj. V/C Adj. LOS 151 Cathedral Oaks & Kellogg Signalized 1,531 0.45 A
164 Cathedral Oaks & La Patera TWSC 1,198 37.07 E 0 A
169 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd TWSC 1,224 36.9 E 0 A
171 Cathedral Oaks & Fairview Signalized 1,697 0.58 A
173 Cathedral Oaks & Cambridge Signalized 1,516 0.41 A
195 Cathedral Oaks & Los Carneros TWSC 1,281 93.56 F 0 A 203 Stow Canyon & Fairview TWSC 991 24.82 C 0 A
204 Fairview & Berkeley Signalized 1,101 0.34 A
240 Fairview & Shirrell Way TWSC 1,156 28.8 D 0 A
241 Encina & Fairview Signalized 1,217 0.41 A
273 Cathedral Oaks & Brandon TWSC 498 13.7 B 0 A
276 Cathedral Oaks & Alameda Signalized 1,339 0.34 A
277 Cathedral Oaks & Glen Anne Signalized 1,692 0.56 A
279 Calle Real & Los Caneros Roundabout 1,556 15.99 C 0.55 A 280 Calle Real & La Patera TWSC 1,071 24.22 C 0 A
282 Calle Real & Carlo Dr TWSC 1,320 24.9 C 0 A
288 Calle Real & Fairview Signalized 3,022 0.8 D
289 Fairview & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,772 0.76 C
296 Calle Real & Kellogg Signalized 1,834 0.47 A
305 Patterson & Overpass Signalized 2,576 0.62 B
306 Patterson & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 3,307 1.06 F 307 Patterson & US 101 NB Ramp Signalized 3,198 0.72 C
359 Cathedral Oaks & Winchester Canyon AWSC 580 10.17 B 0.26 A 372 Glen Annie & Del Norte TWSC 1,108 10.37 B 0 A
375 Los Caneros & US101 SB Ramps Signalized 2,719 0.75 C 376 Los Carneros & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 2,181 0.56 A 383 Fairview & US 101 SB Ramps Signalized 3,444 1.05 F
385 Hollister & Fairview Signalized 4,115 0.72 C
386 Fairview & Mandarin TWSC 3,070 10000 F 0 A
387 Hollister & Orange TWSC 2,781 10000 F 0 A
390 Hollister & Pine/Nectarine Signalized 2,520 0.72 C
394 Hollister & Rutherford Signalized 2,242 0.61 B
396 Hollister & Community Center West Driveway TWSC 2,090 12.38 B 0 A 399 Hollister & Kellogg Signalized 3,078 0.72 C
402 Hollister & SR-217 SB Ramps Roundabout 3,040 0.78 C 405 Hollister & SR-217 NB Ramps Roundabout 3,014 0.6 B
441 Calle Real & NB 101 OnRamp TWSC 310 11.01 B 0 A
445 Calle Real & Winchester Canyon AWSC 679 11.97 B 0.32 A 450 Calle Real & Brandon Dr. TWSC 368 10.51 B 0 A
451 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real TWSC 429 11.37 B 0 A
461 Storke & US 101 NB Ramps Signalized 3,402 0.78 C
462 Storke & US 101 SB Ramp Signalized 3,836 0.9 E
465 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral (west/south) TWSC 1,875 10.76 B 0 A 466 Los Carneros & Cremona Signalized 2,176 0.67 B
467 Los Carneros & Calle Koral Signalized 2,758 0.75 C
489 Hollister & Patterson Signalized 3,503 0.74 C
506 Cathedral Oaks 101 SB-Ramp TWSC 1,347 67.48 F 0 A
511 Hollister & Pebble Beach Rd TWSC 1,314 33.5 D 0 A
512 Hollister & Palo Alto Dr TWSC 1,283 31.13 D 0 A
513 Hollister & Coronado TWSC 1,235 21.64 C 0 A
515 Hollister & Cannon Green TWSC 1,666 48.59 E 0 A
517 Hollister & Pacific Oaks Signalized 2,143 0.62 B
518 Hollister & Santa Felicia TWSC 2,197 5469.17 F 0 A
521 Storke & Marketplace Signalized 2,607 0.6 B
522 Hollister & Storke Signalized 5,026 1.02 F
524 Hollister & Coromar Project Access Signalized 2,591 0.73 C 525 Hollister & Los Carneros Signalized 3,783 0.71 C
526 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,882 66.13 F 0 A
528 Hollister & Los Carneros Way Signalized 1,990 0.53 A 530 Hollister & Aero Camino Signalized 1,926 0.49 A
553 Storke & Santa Felicia TWSC 2,111 546.93 F 0 A
556 Fowler & Fairview TWSC 724 14.97 B 0 A
562 Storke & Phelps Signalized 2,063 0.56 A
564 Mesa & Los Carneros Signalized 2,196 0.28 A
617 Los Caneros & Castilian Signalized 2,125 0.58 A
620 Hollister & St Joseph TWSC 2,034 49.05 E 0 A
624 Cathedral Oaks & Calle Real AWSC 1,139 29.05 D 0.73 C 630 Hollister & Marketplace/Village Way Signalized 3,022 0.75 C 636 Hollister & Cathedral Oaks TWSC 1,294 38.59 E 0 A
717 Hollister & Entrance Signalized 1,489 0.43 A
856 Hollister & Cortona TWSC 2,838 10000 F 0 A
864 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave TWSC 2,157 13.37 B 0 A 877 Hollister & Sumida Gardens Signalized 2,451 0.75 C
1042 Hollister & Santa Babara Shores TWSC 1,252 19.47 C 0 A 1141 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave TWSC 1,290 41.53 E 0 A 1182 Ward & Ekwill TWSC 308 10.84 B 0 A
* Under construction at the time of this analysis
PM 2050 (ICU 1) VISUM V6
19 Table 8A: Roadway Segment ADT Threshold Operations Summary
Location
Model Link ID Functional
Classification Lanes
LOS C
Threshold
(ADT)
ADT
Adjusted
Future
ADT
Existing
Above
Threshold
Future
Above
Threshold
Brandon Dr near Calle Real 280 Collector 2 9,280 1,555 2,175 - - Calle Real near Amador Ave 21106 Local 2 7,280 10,063 12,341 Yes Yes Calle Real near N Turnpike Rd 143 Major Arterial 4 34,000 9,482 13,446 - - Calle Real near Vega Dr 171 Major Arterial 2 14,300 11,033 13,375 - - Calle Real near Via Lee 144 Major Arterial 2 14,300 8,232 9,146 - - Carlo Dr near Verdura Ave 115 Collector 2 9,280 1,298 1,273 - - Carson St near S Fairview Ave 424 Local 2 7,280 1,907 3,765 - - Cathedral Oaks Rd near Calle Real 274 Major Arterial 2 14,300 3,310 5,080 - - Cathedral Oaks Rd near El Rodeo Rd 51 Major Arterial 2 14,300 10,657 13,503 - - Cathedral Oaks Rd near Glen Annie Rd 617 Major Arterial 2 14,300 8,977 11,820 - - Cathedral Oaks Rd near Santa Margueria Dr 633 Major Arterial 2 14,300 2,655 4,764 - - Del Norte Dr near Colusa Dr 290 Collector 2 9,280 7,373 10,447 - Yes El Colegio Rd near Embarcadero Del Norte 562 Minor Arterial 4 30,100 11,702 15,973 - - Fairview Ave near Calle Real 804 Major Arterial 6 34,000 23,970 23,751 - - Fairview Ave near El Camino Real 306 Major Arterial 4 34,000 22,413 29,865 - - Fairview Ave near Hollister Ave 311 Major Arterial 4 34,000 20,861 28,632 - - Glen Annie Rd near Cathedral Oaks Dr 163 Major Arterial 2 14,300 7,340 10,456 - - Hollister Ave near Cathedral Oaks Rd 458 Major Arterial 2 14,300 6,761 10,392 - - Hollister Ave near Glen Annie Rd 479 Major Arterial 4 34,000 26,393 30,321 - - Hollister Ave near Lopez Rd 420 Major Arterial 4 34,000 20,017 25,009 - - Hollister Ave near Puente Dr 352 Major Arterial 4 34,000 15,726 17,595 - - Kellogg Ave near Kellogg Way 428 Minor Arterial 2 12,500 2,535 4,234 - - Kellogg Ave near Marbury Dr 132 Collector 2 9,280 3,695 3,815 - - La Patera Ln near Shamrock Ave 112 Collector 2 9,280 2,206 2,188 - - Los Carneros Rd near Calle Koral 798 Major Arterial 5 34,000 23,721 29,062 - - Los Carneros Rd near El Comino Real WB Ramps 166 Major Arterial 4 34,000 11,743 15,279 - - Los Carneros Rd near Hollister Ave 488 Major Arterial 4 34,000 19,464 24,292 - - Ocean Rd near El Colegio Rd 569 Minor Arterial 4 30,100 10,005 14,434 - - Patterson Ave near Calle Real 813 Major Arterial 4 34,000 14,672 16,427 - - Patterson Ave near Overpass Rd 811 Major Arterial 4 34,000 22,447 27,643 - - Phelps Rd near Storke Rd 686 Minor Arterial 2 12,500 2,933 3,658 - - Pine Ave near Thorn Wood Dr 907 Collector 2 9,280 2,465 3,756 - - San Marcos Rd near Patricia Ln 139 Local 2 7,280 3,069 3,622 - - Santa Felicia Dr near Storke Rd 509 Local 2 7,280 3,895 4,508 - - Stadium Rd near El Colegio Rd 564 Local 2 7,280 2,437 3,149 - - Storke Rd near Hollister Ave 483 Major Arterial 5 34,000 23,560 30,729 - - Storke Rd near Willowgrove Dr 533 Major Arterial 2 14,300 13,790 16,964 - Yes Turnpike Rd near El Camino Real EB Ramps 140 Major Arterial 4 34,000 21,401 22,873 - - Turnpike Rd near El Camino Real WB Ramps 217 Major Arterial 4 34,000 23,636 28,026 - - Winchester Canoyn Rd near Calle Real 388 Minor Arterial 2 12,500 3,775 3,816 - -
20 Table 8B: Roadway Segment PM Peak Hour Adjusted ADT Threshold Operations Summary
Table 9. HCM 7th Edition US 101 Merge-Diverge Analysis Results
Location Model Link
ID
Functional
Classification Lanes
LOS C
Threshold
(ADT)
ADT
Adjusted
Future
ADT
Existing
Above
Threshold
Future
Above
Threshold
Aero Camino north of Hollister Ave 933 Local 2 7,280 1,400 1, 528 - - Alameda Ave south of Cathedral Oaks Rd 162 Local 2 7,280 1,920 3, 408 - - Berkeley Rd east of Fairview Ave 80 Collector 2 9,280 1,360 1, 441 - - Cambridge Dr north of Cathedral Oaks Rd 1 Collector 2 9,280 1,500 1, 571 - - Cannon Green Dr south of Hollister Ave 468 Collector 2 9,280 2,480 3, 731 - - Castilian Dr west of Los Carneros Rd 667 Local 2 7,280 3,260 4, 957 - - Fairview Ave north of Hollister Avenue 312 Major Arterial 4 34,000 18,330 24, 681 - - Hollister Avenue west of Entrance Road 471 Major Arterial 4 34,000 9,150 11, 336 - - Hollister Avenue west of Cannon Green Drive 781 Major Arterial 4 34,000 11,840 14, 445 - - Hollister Avenue west of Pacific Oaks Rd 472 Major Arterial 4 34,000 14,010 17, 185 - - Hollister Avenue west of Storke Road 478 Major Arterial 4 34,000 21,760 25, 205 - - Hollister Avenue east of Storke Road 815 Major Arterial 4 34,000 17,500 24, 572 - - Hollister Avenue west of Los Carneros Road 831 Major Arterial 4 34,000 18,570 21, 848 - - Hollister Avenue east of Los Carneros Road 486 Major Arterial 4 34,000 13,080 17, 288 - - Hollister Avenue west of Fairview Avenue 310 Major Arterial 4 34,000 17,150 21, 861 - - Hollister Avenue west of Pine Avenue 823 Major Arterial 4 34,000 16,940 21, 368 - - Hollister Avenue west of Kellog Avenue 824 Major Arterial 4 34,000 18,240 21, 002 - - Hollister Avenue west of Patterson Avenue 436 Major Arterial 4 34,000 12,980 17, 278 - - Kellog Avenue north of Hollister Avenue 330 Local 2 7,280 3,800 5, 360 - - Kellog Avenue south of Hollister 329 Minor Arterial 2 12,500 6,060 8, 600 - - Los Carneros Road north of Cremona Drive 924 Major Arterial 4 34,000 16,000 20, 501 - - Los Carneros Road north of Hollister Avenue 794 Major Arterial 4 34,000 14,070 17, 567 - - Los Carneros Road south of Hollister Avenue 488 Major Arterial 4 34,000 16,440 20, 874 - - Los Carneros Road south of Discovery Drive 639 Major Arterial 2 14,300 16,020 18, 358 Yes Yes Nectarine Avenue north of Hollister Avenue 317 Local 2 7,280 1,370 2, 422 - - Pine Avenue north of Gaviota Street 701 Collector 2 9,280 4,450 4, 684 - - Orange Avenue north of Hollister Avenue 756 Local 2 7,280 970 1, 325 - - Shirrell Way west of Fairview Avenue 116 Local 2 7,280 2,460 2, 802 - - Storke Road south of US 101 SB Ramps 408 Major Arterial 4 34,000 27,070 34, 723 Yes Yes Stow Canyon Road west of Fairview Avenue 739 Collector 2 9,280 1,910 2, 389 - - Calle Real near El Camino Real On-Ramp 378 Local 2 7,280 1,200 1, 236 - - Storke Rd south of Phelps Rd 517 Major Arterial 4 34,000 12,560 16, 463 - - Los Carneros Road south of US-101 799 Major Arterial 4 34,000 20,260 25, 190 - - Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
NB N Los Carneros Rd On-Ramp 30.1 D 34.7 D 33.4 D 36.4 E NB Between N Los Carneros Rd On-Ramp and Storke Rd Off-Ramp 28.6 D 35.1 E 33.1 D 37.8 E NB Storke Rd Off-Ramp 31.3 D 36.5 E 35 D 38.3 E
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
NB N Los Carneros Rd On-Ramp 27.1 C 26.7 C 27.8 C 31.7 D NB Between N Los Carneros Rd On-Ramp and N Fairview Ave Off-Ramp 26.5 D 26.4 D 27.5 D 33.6 D NB N Fairview Ave Off-Ramp 31.4 D 31.3 D 32.2 D 36.8 E
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
SB N Fairview Ave On-Ramp 25.3 C 29.4 D 30.7 D 28.9 D
SB Between N Fairview Ave On-Ramp and N Los Carneros Rd Off-Ramp 23.8 C 28.8 D 30.5 D 27.8 D SB N Los Carneros Rd Off-Ramp 29 D 33.6 D 33 D 32.8 D
22.9 C 24.2 C
R11 - US 101 SB Aux Lanes Between Fairview Avenue and Los Carneros Road Dir. Location/Type
Baseline (2024) Future No Project (2050) Future Plus Project (2050) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
21.8 C 26.4 C
24.3 C 26.7 C
R11 - US 101 NB Aux Lanes Between Los Carneros Road and Fairview Avenue Dir. Location/Type
Baseline (2024) Future No Project (2050) Future Plus Project (2050) PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour
Location/TypeDir.
R10 - US 101 NB Aux Lane Between Los Carneros Road and Storke Road AM Peak Hour
Baseline (2024) Future No Project (2050) Future Plus Project (2050) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
21 Table 10. Signal Warrant (Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3) and Roundabout Control Analysis Results
INTERSECTION
SIGNAL WARRANT ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS
PERFORMED?
MEETS WARRANT
PERFORMED? RECOMMENDED NO.
OF LANES BASELINE
SCENARIO
FUTURE
SCENARIO
1. Cathedral Oaks Road & La Patera Yes No No No
2. Cathedral Oaks Road & Carlo Drive Yes No No Yes Single-Lane
3. Cathedral Oaks Road & Los Carneros Yes No Yes No
4. Stow Canyon Road & N Fairview Avenue Yes Yes Yes No
5. N Fairview Avenue & Shirrell Way Yes No No No
6. S Fairview Avenue & Mandarin Drive Yes Yes Yes No
7. Hollister Avenue & Orange Avenue Yes No Yes No
8. Cathedral Oaks Road & US 101 SB Ramps Yes No Yes Yes Single-Lane
9. Hollister Avenue & Pebble Beach Road Yes No No No
10. Hollister Avenue & Palo Alto Drive Yes No No Yes Single- or Two-Lane
11. Hollister Avenue & Cannon Green Drive Yes No Yes No
12. Hollister Avenue & Santa Felicia Drive Yes Yes Yes Yes Two-Lane
13. Hollister Avenue & Cremona Drive Yes No Yes Yes Single- or Two-Lane
14. Storke Road & Santa Felicia Drive Yes Yes Yes Yes Single- or Two-Lane
15. Hollister Avenue & St Joseph Street Yes No Yes No
16. Cathedral Oaks Road & Calle Real Yes No Yes No
17. Hollister Avenue & Cathedral Oaks Road Yes No Yes Yes Single-or Two-Lane
18. Hollister Avenue & Cortona Drive Yes Yes Yes Yes Two-Lane with SBR By- Pass Lane
19. Hollister Avenue & Sperling
Preserve/Ellwood Driveway Yes No No Yes Single- or Two-Lane
20. Calle Real & Carlo Drive Yes Yes Yes Yes Single-Lane
21. Calle Real & La Patera Yes No No No
22 Figure 3. Goleta DIF Capital Improvement Projects and Locations
23 FAIR SHARE
Fair share refers to the share of the total cost of a DIF capital project that is related to the impacts of new development occurring within the City of Goleta’s jurisdiction.
Fair share percentages were developed by performing “Flow Bundle” analysis (i.e., select link) for each deficient DIF roadway segment and intersection using the Goleta Travel Model . The link/node volume delta (or difference) between the baseline and 2050 model runs represents “new” trips generated by future growth - thereby allowing trips generated by new growth to be isolated.
The following adjustments to total project costs were applied to determine the DIF fair share for roadway projects to yield a final fair share allocation percentage specific to each identified DIF deficiency.
Internal Trip Share: The Goleta Travel Model was used to measure the share of total trips on a specific facility that (1) start and end inside the city (Internal-Internal); (2) start or end outside the city with the other end of the trip occurring inside the city (Internal -External or External-Internal); and, 3) start and end outside the city (External-External). The share of trips associated with (1) plus half the share of trips associated with (2) represents the total internal share of trips that can be attributed to new development within the city. This share of total project costs can be funded by the DIF. External Trip Share: The share of trips associated with (3) plus half the share of trips associated with (2) represents the total external share of trips not associated with new development within the city. This share of total project costs cannot be funded by the DIF.
Existing/Future Development Share: For capital projects that address an existing (20 24) deficiency only the percentage of future degradation to an existing deficiency is applicable. The existing development share of the project cost equals the existing AM/PM peak hour trips on the facility as a share of the total AM/PM
peak hour trips on the facility
at the time horizon ( see
Scenario C in Example
Figure). For a DIF capital
project that addresses a
future (20 50) deficiency –
100% of the cost is applied
(see Scenario B in Example
Figure). The new
development share of the
applicable cost is then
determined by tracking the
number of internal trips, as
defined above, attributable to
new development in the City
of Goleta.
24 Table 11 lists each DIF project, summarizes the deficiency trigger and analysis method that provides the nexus for a given project ’s inclusion in the list, the total cost for each improvement that will remedy the deficiency and the share of the total cost that is attributable to new development. The latter is premised on whether a given improvement addresses an existing deficiency or a future deficiency. For nine of the 32 DIF project locations, more detailed operational studies were performed. These studies are documented in technical memorandums and provided as attachments to this report.
Table 12 presents the Goleta Travel Model trips (categorized by jurisdiction) and the resulting fair share cost assessment. As shown, each DIF improvement location is defined as either an “Existing” or “Future” deficiency based on the applicable operational criteria described previously. Baseline trips and future trips identified as traversing a given facility by the Goleta Travel Model are reported. The difference between future and baseline trips reflects the portion of trips resulting from new development. These trips can then be stratified by City of Goleta “new” trips, to reflect the City’s total fair share responsibility to fund a given DIF improvement.
The sum of the improvement costs required to remedy all 32 identified deficiencies yields a total capital cost of $485,640,000. This is reduced to $439,490,000 given that the total cost of the Goleta Freeway Crossing is split 50/50 between the traffic fee and the pedestrian/bicycle fee. This was done given that the Goleta Freeway Crossing, although strictly a pedestrian/bicycle facility improvement, contributes to mode shifts that will provide operational benefits to the future deficiency at the Hollister/Storke intersection.
Factoring for existing deficiencies reduces the total fair share cost to $ $286,241,000. Applying the fair share percentages by project yields a total holistic fair share cost for the City of Goleta of $185,014,000. This reflects approximately 65% of the total fair share DIF roadway improvement costs.
For informational purposes, the fair share costs associated with future development in non -Goleta jurisdictions is also calculated. This amount sums to $ 101,228,000 which is approximately 35% of total fair share DIF roadway improvement costs. Of the non -Goleta fair share amount, the burden by non-Goleta jurisdiction is as follows:
• UCSB Long Range Development Plan: $17,292,000 6.04% • City of Santa Barbara Airport & Specific Plans: $19,196,000 6.71% • County of Santa Barbara: $64,740,000 22.62%
Note, the County of Santa Barbara is attributable for growth in the unincorporated County in Goleta Valley (i.e., Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan, the Isla Vista Specific Plan, the Gaviota Community Plan) and a number of significant rezone areas that converts previously zoned agriculture parcels to residential (see Figure 1).
25 Table 11. DIF Project List and Costs
Map ID Link/Node
ID Base Future Deficient
Period Base LOS Future LOS COST % $
I-01 288 Fairview Avenue/Calle Real
Intersection Improvements
2,451 2,831 Future PM B D n/a ICU $23,875 100% $23,875
I-02 383 Fairview Avenue at US101 SB On-
Ramp Improvements
1,889 2,443 Existing PM D F n/a ICU/HCM $28,800 29% $8,440 I-07 522
Hollister Avenue at Storke Road
Improvement Widening - West of
Storke Road
4,094 5,158 Future PM C F n/a ICU $3,620 100% $3,620
I-08 306 Patterson Avenue at US101 SB
Ramp Improvements
3,782 4,716 Existing AM/PM E F n/a ICU $44,450 25% $10,981 I-10 489 Hollister Avenue at Patterson
Avenue
5,155 6,996 Future AM/PM n/a HCM $3,600 100% $3,600
I-12-02 282 New Intersection C ontrol - C alle
Real / C arlo Drive
837 1,059 Existing PM C C Yes ICU $4,980 26% $1,315
I-12-02 (I4) 624
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / Hollister
Avenue / US 101 NB Ramps
1,135 1,439 Future AM/PM C D Yes ICU $5,640 100% $5,640 I-12-05 195
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / Los
C arneros Road
1,625 2,266 Future AM/PM C F Yes ICU $6,555 100% $6,555 I-12-06 164
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / N L a
Patera L ane
1,459 1,953 Existing AM/PM D E No ICU $7,205 34% $2,443 I-12-07 203
New Intersection C ontrol -
Fairview Avenue / Stow Canyon
Road
826 1,017 Existing AM E F Yes ICU $7,015 23% $1,617
I-12-10 515
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Cannon Green
Drive
1,526 1,844 Existing PM D E Yes ICU $5,925 21% $1,235
I-12-11 511
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Pebble Beach
Drive
778 1,131 Future PM C D No ICU $8,015 100% $8,015
I-12-12 877
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Sumida
Gardens Lane
1,487 2,445 Future PM n/a HCM $6,425 100% $6,425
I-12-23 169 New Intersection C ontrol - C arlo
Drive / C athedral Oaks Road
1,363 1,861 Existing AM/PM D E No ICU $8,050 37% $2,943 I-12-27 506 New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks / 101 S B-Ramp
1,382 1,836 Existing AM/PM F F Yes ICU $34,000 33% $11,158 I-12-30 512 New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Palo Alto Drive
836 1,153 Future PM C D No ICU $10,200 100% $10,200
I-12-31 518
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Santa Felicia
Drive
3,269 3,996 Existing AM/PM F F Yes ICU $2,180 22% $484
I-12-32 553 New Intersection C ontrol - Storke
Avenue / Santa Felicia Drive
1,581 1,929 Existing PM F F Yes ICU $270 22% $59
I-12-33 1042
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / C athedral Oaks
Avenue
733 1,065 Future PM C C Yes ICU $9,250 100% $9,250
I-12-34 856 New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / C ortona Drive
3,460 4,651 Existing AM/PM F F Yes ICU $1,700 34% $585
I-12-35 277
New Intersection C ontrol -
Cathedral Oaks Avenue / Glen
Annie Road
2,167 3,126 Future AM/PM n/a HCM $5,900 100% $5,900
I-12-36 276
New Intersection C ontrol -
Cathedral Oaks Avenue /
Alameda Avenue
1,597 2,505 Future AM/PM n/a HCM $5,985 100% $5,985
I-18 462 Storke Roa d a t US101 SB Ra mps 2,331 2,775 Existing AM D D n/a ICU $22,400 19% $4,260 I-22 385
Hollister Avenue / Fairview
Avenue Intersection
Improvements
2,724 3,679 Future PM C E n/a ICU $15,850 100% $15,850
R-02 * Hollister Avenue Complete Streets
C orridor Plan
2,535 3,299 Existing AM/PM $10,750 30% $3,240
R-05 * Goleta US 101 Bike/Ped
Overcrossing
251 479 Future PM $46,150 100% $46,150
R-09 21126 Phelps Road Extension 191 399 Future AM $18,800 100% $18,800 R-10 294 US 101 NB Aux Lane Between Los
C arneros Road and Storke Road
1,034 1,137 Existing PM E E n/a HCM $22,650 10% $2,249
R-11 301
US 101 NB/SB Aux Lanes Between
Fairview Avenue and Los
C arneros Road
1,517 2,008 Future PM D E n/a HCM $33,500 100% $33,500
R-12 517 Storke Road Widening: Phelps
Road to City Limits
1,043 1,411 Existing PM n/a ADT $6,000 35% $2,117
R-13 *
R-13: Los C arneros Way
Realignment
Extra: Los C arneros & C alle Koral
2,161 2,920 Future PM $23,550 100% $23,550
R-14 495 South Fairview Avenue Widening 263 410 Future PM $6,200 100% $6,200 Notes
* R-02 Average of link #754,309,322,648,816,817,818,819,820,821,822,823,824,825,832,833,834, and 835 * R-05 Total cost is $92.3 million: Cost split 50/50 with Ped/Bike Fee * R-13 Sum of link #628 and node #467
Footnotes
1. Improvements associated with queue spill-back conditions - see South Patterson Traffic Analysis in Appendix A.6
2. Improvements associated with queue spill-back conditions - see Cathedral Oaks Traffic Analysis in Appendix A.7
3. Improvement associated with Goleta Old Town Revitialization - minor side-street deficiencies.
4. Improvement costs split 50/50 with Ped and Bike Fee. Improvement supports I-07 by relieving traffic at Storke/Hollister, See Appendix A.9
5. Improvement supports I-07 by relieving traffic at Storke/Hollister, See Appendix A.9
6. Improvement associated with deficiency at Los Carneros/Calle Koral and Realignment of Camino Vistas
7. Deficiency and improvement identified in South Fairview Technical Memorandum, Dowling Associates, 7/23/2009 in Appendix A.8 Queue Spillback See
Footnote 1
Queue Spillback See
Footnote 2
Queue Spillback See
Footnote 2
See Footnote 3
See Footnote 4
See Footnote 5
> C
See Footnote 6
See Footnote 7
Adj for Existing
DeficienciesLOS Method
Project Cost ($1,000s)
Signal
Warrant #3
See Footnote 1
Network Obj.
CIP Project Locations
Volumes Existing or
Future
Deficiency
Deficiency Assessment
26 Table 12. DIF Fair Share
Base Future Future Delta
Trips by
Jurisdiction
Trips by
Jurisdiction
Net New Trips by
Jurisdiction
Map ID Link/Node
ID Base Future COST % $ Total Trips Less
External
Total Trips Less
External
Total Trips Less
External
City of
Goleta UCSB SB Old Town SB East SB Airport
County (less
County
Rezone)
County
Rezone
City of
Goleta UCSB SB Old Town SB East SB Airport
County (less
County
Rezone)
County
Rezone
I-01 288 Fairview Avenue/Calle Real
Intersection Improvements
2,451 2,831 Future $23,875 100% $23,875 2,451 2,831 380 259 13 16 3 6 72 12 68% 3% 4% 1% 2% 19% 3% 68.22% $16,280 $831 $978 $162 $367 $4,526 $731 I-02 383 Fairview Avenue at US101 SB On-
Ramp Improvements
1,889 2,443 Existing $28,800 29% $8,440 1,889 2,443 554 298 10 107 26 13 96 3 54% 2% 19% 5% 2% 17% 0% 53.87% $4,547 $160 $1,632 $397 $198 $1,464 $41 I-07 522
Hollister Avenue at Storke Road
Improvement Widening - West of
Storke Road
4,094 5,158 Future $3,620 100% $3,620 4,094 5,158 1065 665 39 29 26 1 278 27 62% 4% 3% 2% 0% 26% 2% 62.51% $2,261 $133 $98 $87 $5 $945 $90 I-08 306 Patterson Avenue at US101 SB
Ramp Improvements
3,782 4,716 Existing $44,450 25% $10,981 3,782 4,716 935 347 96 14 26 14 172 265 37% 10% 1% 3% 1% 18% 28% 37.18% $4,081 $1,129 $160 $311 $161 $2,022 $3,117 I-10 489 Hollister Avenue at Patterson
Avenue
5,155 6,996 Future $3,600 100% $3,600 5,155 6,996 1842 652 47 33 30 15 497 567 35% 3% 2% 2% 1% 27% 31% 35.42% $1,275 $93 $64 $59 $29 $972 $1,108 I-12-02 282 New Intersection C ontrol - C alle
Real / C arlo Drive
837 1,059 Existing $4,980 26% $1,315 837 1,059 220 150 10 6 1 1 52 2 68% 5% 3% 0% 0% 23% 1% 67.69% $893 $62 $33 $3 $6 $308 $9 I-12-02 (I4) 624
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / Hollister
Avenue / US 101 NB Ramps
1,135 1,439 Future $5,640 100% $5,640 1,135 1,439 304 256 2 3 2 1 37 2 84% 1% 1% 1% 0% 12% 1% 84.08% $4,743 $40 $62 $42 $22 $686 $44 I-12-05 195
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / Los
C arneros Road
1,625 2,266 Future $6,555 100% $6,555 1,625 2,266 643 365 21 13 29 0 213 3 57% 3% 2% 5% 0% 33% 0% 56.92% $3,722 $212 $128 $298 $0 $2,170 $26 I-12-06 164
New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks Road / N L a
Patera L ane
1,459 1,953 Existing $7,205 34% $2,443 1,459 1,953 496 284 21 7 28 0 153 3 57% 4% 1% 6% 0% 31% 1% 57.37% $1,398 $105 $32 $138 $2 $753 $15 I-12-07 203
New Intersection C ontrol -
Fairview Avenue / Stow Canyon
Road
826 1,017 Existing $7,015 23% $1,617 826 1,017 189 145 1 7 6 2 21 8 77% 0% 3% 3% 1% 11% 4% 76.08% $1,238 $6 $56 $51 $21 $181 $64 I-12-10 515
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Cannon Green
Drive
1,526 1,844 Existing $5,925 21% $1,235 1,526 1,844 318 279 6 5 0 0 25 2 88% 2% 2% 0% 0% 8% 1% 87.74% $1,084 $24 $20 $2 $0 $96 $10 I-12-11 511
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Pebble Beach
Drive
778 1,131 Future $8,015 100% $8,015 778 1,131 353 309 5 2 2 0 32 2 88% 2% 0% 1% 0% 9% 1% 87.53% $7,016 $124 $36 $52 $5 $726 $56 I-12-12 877
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Sumida
Gardens Lane
1,487 2,445 Future $6,425 100% $6,425 1,487 2,445 958 247 44 27 16 12 108 503 26% 5% 3% 2% 1% 11% 52% 25.77% $1,657 $296 $180 $109 $82 $727 $3,373 I-12-23 169 New Intersection C ontrol - C arlo
Drive / C athedral Oaks Road
1,363 1,861 Existing $8,050 37% $2,943 1,363 1,861 498 289 23 7 28 1 147 3 58% 5% 1% 6% 0% 30% 1% 58.07% $1,710 $134 $39 $165 $4 $871 $20 I-12-27 506 New Intersection C ontrol -
C athedral Oaks / 101 S B-Ramp
1,382 1,836 Existing $34,000 33% $11,158 1,382 1,836 454 368 5 5 6 2 62 7 81% 1% 1% 1% 0% 14% 1% 81.10% $9,039 $125 $116 $148 $48 $1,517 $165 I-12-30 512 New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Palo Alto Drive
836 1,153 Future $10,200 100% $10,200 836 1,153 317 282 5 2 1 0 25 1 89% 2% 1% 0% 0% 8% 0% 88.98% $9,086 $162 $62 $30 $5 $812 $42 I-12-31 518
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / Santa Felicia
Drive
3,269 3,996 Existing $2,180 22% $484 3,269 3,996 724 610 9 14 11 2 62 16 84% 1% 2% 1% 0% 9% 2% 84.01% $408 $6 $10 $7 $1 $41 $11 I-12-32 553 New Intersection C ontrol - Storke
Avenue / Santa Felicia Drive
1,581 1,929 Existing $270 22% $59 1,581 1,929 349 175 73 5 4 0 84 7 50% 21% 2% 1% 0% 24% 2% 50.35% $30 $12 $1 $1 $0 $14 $1 I-12-33 1042
New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / C athedral Oaks
Avenue
733 1,065 Future $9,250 100% $9,250 733 1,065 333 295 5 2 2 0 28 1 89% 2% 1% 0% 0% 8% 0% 88.68% $8,189 $144 $47 $45 $6 $783 $37 I-12-34 856 New Intersection C ontrol -
Hollister Avenue / C ortona Drive
3,460 4,651 Existing $1,700 34% $585 3,460 4,651 1191 880 2 41 14 3 230 21 74% 0% 3% 1% 0% 19% 2% 73.85% $432 $1 $20 $7 $1 $113 $10 I-12-35 277
New Intersection C ontrol -
Cathedral Oaks Avenue / Glen
Annie Road
2,167 3,126 Future $5,900 100% $5,900 2,167 3,126 959 261 43 14 16 4 612 9 27% 4% 1% 2% 0% 64% 1% 27.25% $1,607 $264 $88 $95 $22 $3,768 $55 I-12-36 276
New Intersection C ontrol -
Cathedral Oaks Avenue /
Alameda Avenue
1,597 2,505 Future $5,985 100% $5,985 1,597 2,505 908 274 28 11 5 4 584 2 30% 3% 1% 1% 0% 64% 0% 30.18% $1,805 $187 $70 $35 $27 $3,848 $13 I-18 462 Storke Roa d a t US101 SB Ra mps 2,331 2,775 Existing $22,400 19% $4,260 2,331 2,775 443 222 8 2 14 5 185 8 50% 2% 0% 3% 1% 42% 2% 50.09% $2,134 $79 $21 $132 $46 $1,775 $73 I-22 385
Hollister Avenue / Fairview
Avenue Intersection
Improvements
2,724 3,679 Future $15,850 100% $15,850 2,724 3,679 955 505 25 191 24 31 108 71 53% 3% 20% 2% 3% 11% 7% 52.89% $8,386 $416 $3,167 $396 $514 $1,795 $1,177 R-02 * Hollister Avenue Complete Streets
C orridor Plan
2,535 3,299 Existing $10,750 30% $3,240 2,535 3,299 758 360 9 74 4 4 112 194 48% 1% 10% 1% 1% 15% 26% 47.12% $1,540 $40 $316 $17 $17 $480 $831 R-05 * Goleta US 101 Bike/Ped
Overcrossing
251 479 Future $46,150 100% $46,150 251 479 228 194 5 0 3 0 25 1 85% 2% 0% 1% 0% 11% 1% 85.00% $39,252 $1,022 $20 $594 $22 $4,969 $270 R-09 21126 Phelps Road Extension 191 399 Future $18,800 100% $18,800 191 399 208 101 85 1 0 0 21 0 48% 41% 1% 0% 0% 10% 0% 48.32% $9,100 $7,706 $117 $5 $13 $1,854 $6 R-10 294 US 101 NB Aux Lane Between Los
C arneros Road and Storke Road
1,034 1,137 Existing $22,650 10% $2,249 1,034 1,137 101 25 5 3 0 3 61 4 25% 5% 3% 0% 3% 60% 4% 24.61% $565 $119 $66 $0 $64 $1,354 $82 R-11 301
US 101 NB/SB Aux Lanes Between
Fairview Avenue and Los
C arneros Road
1,517 2,008 Future $33,500 100% $33,500 1,517 2,008 489 299 12 5 29 3 98 44 61% 2% 1% 6% 1% 20% 9% 60.79% $20,439 $804 $348 $1,956 $234 $6,683 $3,037 R-12 517 Storke Road Widening: Phelps
Road to City Limits
1,043 1,411 Existing $6,000 35% $2,117 1,043 1,411 368 165 92 3 1 0 106 1 45% 25% 1% 0% 0% 29% 0% 44.96% $951 $529 $19 $3 $1 $609 $4 R-13 *
R-13: Los C arneros Way
Realignment
Extra: Los C arneros & C alle Koral
2,161 2,920 Future $23,550 100% $23,550 2,161 2,920 759 556 45 31 24 1 87 15 73% 6% 4% 3% 0% 12% 2% 73.22% $17,250 $1,407 $957 $743 $24 $2,710 $458 R-14 495 South Fairview Avenue Widening 263 410 Future $6,200 100% $6,200 263 410 148 69 22 6 0 47 4 1 47% 15% 4% 0% 32% 3% 0% 46.84% $2,897 $921 $233 $0 $1,959 $167 $23 Notes $9,196 $6,093 $3,907 $49,740 $15,000
* R-02 Average of link #754,309,322,648,816,817,818,819,820,821,822,823,824,825,832,833,834, and 835 $185,014 $17,292 $19,196 * R-05 Total cost is $92.3 million: Cost split 50/50 with Ped/Bike Fee 64.64% 6.04% 6.71% * R-13 Sum of link #628 and node #467
$64,740
22.62%
SB East Cost
(x1000)
SB Airport
Cost (x1000)
Cnty Less RZ.
Cost (x1000)
County Rezone
Cost (x1000)
Adj for Existing
Deficiencies Net New Trips % Fair Share City of
Goleta Fair
Share
Project Cost ($1,000s) Future - Detail
City of Goleta
Cost (x1000)
UCSB Cost
(x1000)
SB Old Town
Cost (x1000)
Network Obj.
CIP Project Locations
Volumes Existing or
Future
Deficiency
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6
ATTACHMENT A.1
CITY OF GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL UPDATE
MODEL PLOTS (AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST)
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 12, 2025
TO: Nina Buelna, Public Works Director | City of Goleta FROM: Jim Damkowitch, Principal | DKS Associates
SUBJECT: City of Goleta Travel Model Project #24675-002
INTRODUCTION
This memorandum summarizes the recent update to the City of Goleta’s Travel Model . Updates to model software, model inputs, and assumptions will be described in addition to the baseline model validation performance. Future land use updates will also be described.
Among other planning applications, the updated model will be applied to update of the Goleta Traffic Impact Fee (GTIF) portion of the City’s Development Impact Fee (DIF) schedule. The DIF contributes funds for construction of the City of Goleta’s Transportation Improvement Program (GTIP) through administration of locally generated developer traffic impact fees . These updates ensure consistency with the California Mitigation Fee Act (MFA) nexus requirements and support the City’s long -term transportation funding strategy.
GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL UPDATE
The VISUM Goleta Travel Model is an analy tical tool that enables the City of Goleta to generate technical information relevant to understanding travel behavior and transportation network performance within the City. This information is critical to the development, updating and monitoring of the City’s Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP), analysis of specific transportation projects and programs, and General Plan land use and transportation strategies and policies.
The Goleta Travel Model estimates peak-hour traffic (AM and PM) for both existing year and future year conditions, providing roadway segment volumes and intersection turning movements that support detailed operational analyses. The ability to predict future volume sets helps determine whether a given road segment or intersection will operate acceptably under future conditions, as well as the extent to which new development within and outside the City will contribute to future infrastructure deficiencies identified within the City of Goleta.
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 2
KEY MODEL UPDATES
A comprehensive update to the Goleta Travel Model was completed in August 2025. The following key update tasks were performed as part of the update:
• Upgraded software platform from PTV VISUM version 16.0 to version 25.1 • Updated baseline land use from 2013 to reflect 2024 conditions based on the following information:
City of Goleta:
Residential and Non-residential land use permit data (2013-2024) GP Update Resolutions
Elementary, Middle School, High School 2024 Enrollment Built Housing Unit Summaries 2013-2024 (back check)
County of Santa Barbara:
Residential and Non-residential land use permit data (2013-2024) County GP Rezones
City of Santa Barbara
Residential and Non-residential land use permit data (2013-2024) La Cumbre Plaza GP Rezones
UCSB:
Residential permit data (2013-2024)
Student Enrollment (2024)
• All City of Goleta land use was QA-QC by the City – including land use of neighboring jurisdictions. The County of Santa Barbara, City of Santa Barbara, and UCSB land use updated were informed and coordinated with the County and the City. Ground truthing new development was also verified/checked using web resources (Google Earth, Google Maps, etc.). • Conducted a comprehensive data collection effort in 2024, including recording counts in the model link attribute fields (AM and PM peak hours segment and intersection turning movements counts). Data collection report is provided in Attachment A to this memorandum. • Updated external traffic (i.e., model boundary conditions) using most recent traffic counts at external stations.
• Network coding to reflect roadway geometrics
• Updated trip generation estimates to the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) • Updated Master Land Use File to include the following land use selections:
o Baseline Land Use (2024)
o GPU Land Use (2050) – reflects City build out conditions. A Cumulative land use is available that reflects EPAP – existing plus approved and pending developments. • Adjusted for County rezone areas to reflect new development near Ward Memorial Boulevard and Hollister Avenue that was previously zoned for agriculture • Updated “Flow Bundle” districts to track future trips by jurisdictions (City, County, City of Santa Barbara, and University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB)) GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 3
MODEL CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION ANALYSIS
Static and Dynamic validations of both the AM and PM peak hour models were performed to evaluate the veracity of the Goleta Travel Model to accurately predict travel behavior. Goleta’s 2024 baseline model results were evaluated relative to several key validation criteria consistent with the following related travel demand model publications:
• 2024 Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines (California Transportation Commission) • Travel Forecasting Guidelines (California Department Transportation, 1992) To facilitate the validation assessment, the following 2024 baseline model files were reviewed:
• Loaded existing year model networks (AM/PM Peak Hour Assignments) • Geographic files of centroids
• Geographic files of Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) boundaries • Excel summary file of static validation statistics
Additional model validation criteria from the following state/federal documents were also referenced, although not all were directly relevant to this review:
• Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual Second Edition • Travel Model Improvement Program Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual Second Edition (September 24, 2010)
• A Manual of Regional Transportation Modeling Practice for Air Quality Analysis • Transportation-Air Quality Planning: Issues & Analysis Needs • EPA Section 187 Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) Forecasting and Tracking Guidance (March 1992) • Guidance for the Use of Latest Planning Assumptions in Transportation Conformity Determinations (December 2008)
STATIC VALIDATION
Based on the review of the aforementioned documents, the following static criteria shown in Table 1 were selected for this evaluation.
TABLE 1: PRIMARY STATIC VALIDATION CRITERIA AND THRESHOLDS
VALIDAT ION ITEM CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTANCE
PERCENT OF LINKS WITH VOLUME- TO-COUNT RATIOS WITHIN
CALTRANS DEVIATION ALLOWANCE At Least 75%
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT At Least 0.88
PERCENT ROOT MEAN SQUARED ERROR (RMSE) Below 40%
The link-based validation results were compared to established state/federal standard criteria for replicating model volumes relative to count data on various road types and for percent error at screenlines. Intersection and roadway segment locations where traffic counts were performed are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively.
Figure 2 also identifies the model validation screenlines. Based on the existing sample of roadway locations historically tracked by the City of Goleta for model validation purposes, AM and PM peak GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 4
hour static validation results for established screenlines within t he Goleta modeling domain are provided in Table 2 and Table 3. Results indicate that baseline model volumes are within acceptable error tolerances proscribed by validation criteria for screenlines . Although within error tolerance, Screenline 8 (Santa Barbara Airport) and Screenline 9 (UCSB) exhibit the greatest deviation from traffic counts. This is not surprising given the a -typical trip generation and distribution of these “special generators”.
Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the Goleta Model Coefficient of Determination for AM peak and PM peak, respectively. As shown in the figures, the correlation coefficient between the Goleta Travel Model baseline volumes and traffic counts is 0.95 for AM peak hour and 0,94 for PM peak hour, which meets established acceptance criteria. Another statistic for identifying the consistency between the model outputs and the existing year counts is the percent Root Mean Square Error (RSME). The percent RMSE for the Goleta Travel Model baseline is 30.0 percent, which is well below the maximum acceptable range of 40 percent. These static validation tests confirm that the model meets established criteria for validation of travel demand models.
DYNAMIC VALIDATION
In addition to performing these static validation analyses, dynamic validation tests were conducted to evaluate the model’s behavioral response to changes in input assumptions. Dynamic validation assesses whether the model “behaves” appropriately when land use or network inputs are modified.
The model’s behavior was analyzed for the AM and PM peak hour periods for the following scenarios:
• Addition of 300 single-family swelling units to the TAZ 10 • Addition of total of 250,000 square feet of regional commercial area to TAZ 15 • Addition of a bypass with the inclusion of La Patera and Elwood Station freeway crossings 1 Table 4 and Table 5 summarize the AM and PM peak hour dynamic validation results for the Goleta Travel Model baseline model, respectively. As shown, the addition of 300 single family residential units and 250,000 square feet of commercial floor results in VMT increases in bo th the AM and PM peak hour models. The freeway crossing results indicate that Elwood Station crossing results in a VMT decrease in both the AM/PM peak hours while the La Patera crossing results in a minimal VMT increase in both the AM/PM peak hours. These dynamic validation results reflect a reasonable response by the Goleta Travel Model to changes in model inputs.
MODEL CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION FINDINGS
Based on the results of both the static and dynamic validation tests, it was determined that the Goleta Travel Model meets or exceeds established calibration and validation criteria for travel demand model existing year calibration and validation.
1 All dynamic validation scenarios were included solely as theoretical tests of model responsiveness and are not intended to represent future projects or planning horizon improvements.
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 5
FIGURE 1: GOLATA TRAVEL MODEL INTERSECTION COUNT LOCATIONS
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 6
FIGURE 2: GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL ROADWAY SEGMENT COUNT LOCATIONS AND SCREENLINES
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 7
TABLE 2: AM PEAK HOUR STATIC VALIDATION RESULTS BY SCREENLINE
SCRRENLINE
# SCRRENLINE NAME MODEL
AMF
COUNT
AMF
MODEL
AMB
COUNT
AMB
MODEL
AMT
COUNT
AMT % AMT ABS % ALLOW
AMT
1 NS - W/o Storke/Glenn Annie 4150 3771 2786 2504 6937 6275 11% 11% 30% 2 NS - W/o Fairview 4600 4778 5250 4762 9850 9540 3% 3% 25% 3 NS - E/o Turnpike 5999 6059 6657 5790 12656 11849 7% 7% 23% 4 EW - N/o Hwy 101 West 3072 3497 4249 4011 7321 7508 -2% 2% 28% 5 EW - S/o Hwy 101 West 2491 2881 4109 3710 6600 6591 0% 0% 29% 6 EW - N/o Hwy 101 East 2419 2591 3288 3168 5707 5759 -1% 1% 31% 7 EW - S/o Hwy 101 East 2797 2961 3891 3650 6687 6611 1% 1% 29% 8 EW - SB Airport 1661 1392 2394 2078 4055 3470 17% 17% 40% 9 EW - N/o UCSB 663 600 1816 1582 2479 2182 14% 14% 46% Total 27853 28530 34440 31255 62293 59785 4% 4% 15%
TABLE 3: PM PEAK HOUR STATIC VALIDATION RESULTS BY SCREENLINE
SCRRENLINE
# SCRRENLINE NAME MODEL
PMF
COUNT
PMF
MODEL
PMB
COUNT
PMB
MODEL
PMT
COUNT
PMT % PMT ABS % ALLOW
PMT
1 NS - W/o Storke/Glenn Annie 3177 3183 4847 4441 8024 7624 5% 5% 28% 2 NS - W/o Fairview 6033 5072 4987 5411 11020 10483 5% 5% 25% 3 NS - E/o Turnpike 7183 6270 6374 6365 13557 12635 7% 7% 22% 4 EW - N/o Hwy 101 West 5054 4646 3620 4123 8674 8769 -1% 1% 26% 5 EW - S/o Hwy 101 West 5314 4401 2574 3306 7888 7707 2% 2% 28% 6 EW - N/o Hwy 101 East 3576 3494 2917 3058 6494 6552 -1% 1% 29% 7 EW - S/o Hwy 101 East 4241 3871 3362 3375 7603 7246 5% 5% 28% 8 EW - SB Airport 3167 2832 1890 2133 5057 4965 2% 2% 34% 9 EW - N/o UCSB 2522 2086 911 1304 3433 3390 1% 1% 40%
Total 40268 35855 31483 33516 71751 69371 3% 3% 15%
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 8
FIGURE 3: AM PEAK HOUR GOLETA MODEL COEFFICIENT OF DETERMINATION
FIGURE 4: PM PEAK HOUR GOLETA MODEL COE FFICIENT OF DETERMINATION
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 9
TABLE 4: GOL ETA BASELINE TRAVEL MODEL DYNAMIC VALIDATION RESULTS FOR THE AM
SCENARIO
AM SCENARIO VMT VHT AVG.
SPEED
CHANGE FROM BASE
VMT VHT Avg. Speed
AM BASE 53866 1272 42.36 0 0 0
PLUS 300 SFDU IN TAZ 10 54190 1282 42.28 324 10 -0.08
PLUS 250 KS REG COMM IN TAZ 15 54063 1279 42.27 197 7 -0.09 ADDED LA PATERA CROSSING 53939 1270 42.48 73 -2 0.12
ADDED ELWOOD STATION 53685 1266 42.41 -181 -6 0.04
TABLE 5: GOL ETA BASELINE TRAVEL MODEL DYNAMIC VALIDATION RESULTS FOR THE PM
SCENARIO
PM SCENARIO VMT VHT AVG.
SPEED
CHANGE FROM BASE
VMT VHT Avg. Speed
PM BASE 62,216 1,573 39.56 0 0 0
PLUS 300 SFDU IN TAZ 10 62,579 1,589 39.39 363 16 -0.17 PLUS 250 KS REG COMM IN TAZ 15 62,786 1,601 39.21 571 29 -0.35 ADDED LA PATERA CROSSING 62,300 1,560 39.94 85 -13 0.37 ADDED ELWOOD STATION 62,067 1,565 39.67 -149 -8 0.11
MODEL PLANNING HORIZON
The baseline year for the Goleta Traffic Model data is 2024. The planning horizon for this fee assessment is 2050. This forecast horizon is consistent with the planning horizon used by the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) for its’ countywide regional travel model. A planning horizon of 2050 is considered long enough to plan for long-term infrastructure needs, yet short enough to represent reasonably anticipated growth based on current land use policy.
PLANNING HORIZON LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Land use assumptions within Goleta City Limits were based on project build- out as defined in the City of Goleta’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. For areas reflected in the Goleta travel model that lie outside the Goleta City Limits, growth projections were based on the following:
• Buildout of the County of Santa Barbara’s General Plan residential and non-residential development list as defined in the Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan, the Isla Vista Specific Plan and the Gaviota Community Plan. This update also reflects the recent re-zones for unincorporated areas previously zoned for agriculture
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 10
• Buildout of the UCSB Long Range Plan
• K-12 school enrollment projections
• External traffic growth (i.e., model boundary conditions) based 2050 forecast information from SBCAG’s regional travel demand model
• Buildout of the City of Santa Barbara’s Santa Barbara Airport Master Plan and Airport Specific Plan
Table 6 through Table 10 provide a summary of the net development growth assumed to occur between 2024 and 2050 stratified by model land use category, for the entire model area, the City of Goleta, Santa Barbara County, the City of Santa Barbara, and UCSB, respectively. A generalized map of the various sub-areas of interest within the Goleta Model modeling domain is provided in Figure
3. Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the mix of single-family dwelling units, multi-family dwelling units, and student housing for the 2024 baseline and 2050 build-out respectively.
MODEL PLOTS
The following model plots are available up request:
• Goleta Model TAZ Structure
• Goleta Model Baseline 2024 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Goleta Model Baseline 2024 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Goleta Model Baseline 2024 Daily Traffic Volumes (PM Peak Hour / 0.1) • Goleta Model Baseline 2024 Intersection Control Type
• Goleta Model Baseline 2024 Number of Lanes
• Goleta Model GPU Buildout 2050 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Goleta Model GPU Buildout 2050 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes • Goleta Model GPU Buildout 2050 Daily Traffic Volumes (PM Peak Hour / 0.1) • Goleta Model GPU Buildout 2050 Intersection Control Type
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 11
TABLE 6: MODEL LAND USE GROWTH SUMMARY – TOTAL MODEL AREA Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 14,187 16,871 2,684
Multi Family MFDU DU 13,285 24,682 11,397
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF 640 937 297
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 1,881 2,753 872 Office OFFICE KSF 3,552 5,585 2,033
Research & Development R_D KSF - 66 66
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 6,801 7,682 881
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 1,386 1,530 144
Agriculture AGRI Acres 6,815 6,868 53
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 949 1,456 507
Restaurant RESTR KSF 285 364 79
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 6,330 6,862 532 Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 6,976 8,251 1,275 Medical MEDICAL KSF 220 357 137
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 1,078 1,152 74
Theater THEATER KSF 9 90 81
Auto AUTO KSF 530 632 102
Hospital HOSP KSF 135 195 60
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 441 618 177
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day 1,741 3,127 1,386 UCSB UCSB Students 19,039 25,000 5,961
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU 65 65 -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU 6,887 7,216 329 La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF 651 398 (253)
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms 360 422 62
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp 9,528 11,400 1,872 Bank BANK KSF 23 37 14
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF 35 38 3
Golf Course GOLF Holes 63 45 (18)
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 12
TABLE 7: MODEL LAND USE GROWTH SUMMARY – CITY OF GOLETA Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 6,101 6,571 470
Multi Family MFDU DU 7,516 9,973 2,457
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF 491 528 37
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 1,225 1,861 636
Office OFFICE KSF 2,936 4,672 1,736
Research & Development R_D KSF - 66 66
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 6,410 7,088 678
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 274 418 144
Agriculture AGRI Acres 369 367 (2)
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 630 1,022 392
Restaurant RESTR KSF 210 244 34
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 2,555 2,752 197
Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 3,170 4,367 1,197
Medical MEDICAL KSF 150 225 75
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 595 629 34
Theater THEATER KSF - 65 65
Auto AUTO KSF 424 499 75
Hospital HOSP KSF 101 161 60
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 254 368 114
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day - - -
UCSB UCSB Students - - -
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU - - -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU - - -
La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF - - -
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms 360 422 62
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp - - -
Bank BANK KSF 23 28 5
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF 35 35 -
Golf Course GOLF Holes 18 18 -
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 13
TABLE 8: MODEL LAND USE GROWTH SUMMARY – SANTA BARBARA COUNTY Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 7,353 9,333 1,980
Multi Family MFDU DU 3,524 9,318 5,794
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF 149 383 234
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 571 719 148
Office OFFICE KSF 316 355 39
Research & Development R_D KSF - - -
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 287 319 32
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 344 344 -
Agriculture AGRI Acres 6,446 6,501 55
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 157 272 115
Restaurant RESTR KSF 44 81 37
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 2,941 3,056 115 Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 2,500 2,500 - Medical MEDICAL KSF - - -
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 450 490 40
Theater THEATER KSF 9 16 7
Auto AUTO KSF 11 14 3
Hospital HOSP KSF 17 17 -
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 166 219 53
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day - - - UCSB UCSB Students - - -
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU 65 65 -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU 3,619 3,619 - La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF - - -
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms - - -
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp - - -
Bank BANK KSF - 9 9
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF - 3 3
Golf Course GOLF Holes 24 6 (18)
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 14
TABLE 9: MODEL LAND USE GROWTH SUMMARY – CITY OF SANTA BARBARA Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 697 729 32
Multi Family MFDU DU 2,223 4,963 2,740
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF - 26 26
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF 85 173 88
Office OFFICE KSF 300 558 258
Research & Development R_D KSF - - -
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF 104 275 171
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF 768 768 -
Agriculture AGRI Acres - - -
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms 162 162 -
Restaurant RESTR KSF 31 39 8
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students 834 1,054 220
Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students 1,306 1,384 78 Medical MEDICAL KSF 70 132 62
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres 33 33 -
Theater THEATER KSF - 9 9
Auto AUTO KSF 95 119 24
Hospital HOSP KSF 17 17 -
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF 21 31 10
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day 1,741 3,127 1,386 UCSB UCSB Students - - -
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU - - -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU - - - La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF 651 398 (253)
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms - - -
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp - - -
Bank BANK KSF - - -
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF - - -
Golf Course GOLF Holes 9 9 -
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 15
TABLE 10: MODEL LAND USE GROWTH SUMMARY – UC SANTA BARBARA Land Use Category Model ID Units 2024
Existing 2050 GPU Change
Single Family SFDU DU 36 89 53
Multi Family MFDU DU 22 127 105
Regional Commercial REG_COMM KSF - - -
Neighborhood Commercial NB_COMM KSF - - -
Office OFFICE KSF - - -
Research & Development R_D KSF - - -
Light Industrial LT_INDUST KSF - - -
Heavy Industrial HV_INDUST KSF - - -
Agriculture AGRI Acres - - -
Hotel/Motel HOTEL Rooms - - -
Restaurant RESTR KSF - - -
Elementary School K_SCHOOL Students - - -
Middle-High School H_SCHOOL Students - - -
Medical MEDICAL KSF - - -
Park Recreation PARK_REC Acres - - -
Theater THEATER KSF - - -
Auto AUTO KSF - - -
Hospital HOSP KSF - - -
Indoor Recreation INDOOR_REC KSF - - -
Santa Barbara Airport SB_AIRPORT Pax/Day - - - UCSB UCSB Students 19,039 25,000 5,961
Student Housing (Off Campus) STU_HSE DU - - -
Student Housing (On Campus) STUDENT_HO DU 2,909 3,238 329 La Cumbre Mall LA_CUMBRA KSF - - -
Resort Hotel RESORT_HOT Rooms - - -
UCSB Faculty/Staff FACULTY_ST Emp 9,528 11,400 1,872 Bank BANK KSF - - -
Fast Food Restaurant F_FOOD KSF - - -
Golf Course GOLF Holes 3 3 -
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 16
FIGURE 3: GOLETA TRAVEL MODEL SUB -AREAS
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 17
FIGURE 4: GOLETA MODEL BASELINE RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025 18
FIGURE 5: GOLETA MODEL GPU 2050 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • DECEMBER 2025
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF GOLETA 2024 TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY
MODEL PLOTS (AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST)
DATE: August 30, 2024
TO: Nina Buelna | City of Goleta
Gerald Comati | COM3 Program Manager
FROM: Jim Damkowitch | DKS Associates
SUBJECT: Goleta Traffic Count Summary
INTRODUCTION
As part of the Goleta Travel Model update and the update to the City’s Development Impact Fee update, the City of Goleta commissioned a city-wide traffic count data collection effort. A total of 94 AM/PM peak period intersection turn movement counts were performed including 43 roadway segment 72-hour continues counts (daily counts). The intersection turn movement counts provide pedestrian, bicycle, and truck classifications. The ADT segment counts include vehicle classification.
A complete listing of the count locations is provided in Attachment A . All traffic counts were performed by Quality Counts, a data collection vendor under contract with DKS Associates. All traffic counts were performed with video between May 7 th-9th 2024. Video cameras were mounted outside of Caltrans State right-of-way. The City’s encroachment permit for the traffic count effort is provided in Attachment B.
The 2024 traffic counts will be used to validate the Goleta Travel Model updated 2024 baseline and will be instrumental in the DIF deficiency assessment. The counts can be viewed through an interactive web-based mapping tool provided by Quality Counts called DataPoint. Access to DataPoint and the 2024 count data is provided by the following link : https://dks.data-point.io/. See Attachment C for screenshots of DataPoint.
QA-QC CHECKS
DKS performed QA-QC checks on the collected data. These checks included: Ramp to Ramp Volume Balancing (all State Highway ramp intersections); and, Volume checks between segment counts and intersection approach volumes sums (25 intersections with segment counts nearby).
Given that no access points typically exist between most ramp intersections, perfect balance is expected (slight deviations are acceptable and typically reflect slightly off-set count time signatures).
Given the presence of access points (side streets or driveways), volume checks between segment and intersection approach volumes should reveal some degree of volume imbalance. These were checked for reasonableness. Based on the QA -QC checks performed, all traffic counts checks were determined to be reasonably satisfied.
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 2
TREND COMPARISONS (2013 – 2024)
The last city-wide traffic data collection occurred in 2013. Some count s performed in 2014-15 were added and/or substituted in. It is this data set that informed the last update of the Goleta Traffic Model (2015) and the subsequent DIF update (2019). Given that t he 2013 count locations (i.e., intersections and roadway segments) were the same as those collected in May 2024, a comparative analysis between the two data sets was possible to discern traffic growth trends in the City of Goleta over the 11-year period. Note, that this time span includes the suppressed traffic effects experienced during the pandemic (shelter in place orders). A common question that most jurisdictions have today is whether or not current traffic trends have rebounded to pre-pandemic levels.
Beside performing counts at state owned and operated ramp intersections, several counts were also performed at locations that are owned and operated by the County of Santa Barbara. These counts were performed by the City given that the Goleta Travel Model covers areas outside the City limits.
This better ensures that circulation patterns in the greater Goleta Valley are properly reflected accounted for by the Goleta Travel Model.
US 101 TRENDS
The city-wide traffic data collection did not entail performing US 101 mainline counts. This data was provided through the Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS). This data is collected statewide in real-time from nearly 40,000 individual detectors spanning the freeway system across all major metropolitan areas of California. PeMS is also an Archived Data User Service (ADUS) that provides over ten years of data for historical analysis. It integrates a wide variety of information from Caltrans and other local agency systems, including:
• Traffic Detectors
• Incidents
• Lane Closures
• Census Traffic Counts
• Vehicle Classification
• Weight-In-Motion
• Roadway Inventory
There are four active PeMS stations along US 101 that pass through the City of Goleta. These are on US 101 at Patterson, Fairview, Los Carneros and Glenn Annie. Based on review the data, only the Fairview station located at Post Mile 22.13 provided a complete data set from 2013 to 2024. Figure 1 shows the Annual Average Daily (AADT) Traffic for US 101 at this location. Figure 2 provides the same historical trend but averages all the active PeMS data collected on US 101 throughout Santa Barbara County. Note the dip experienced in 2016 is likely the result of construction activity.
CITY VOLUME TRENDS
To compare trends on all other roadways in the City of Goleta (including SR 217) , the screenlines denoted in Figure 3 were used to compare sums of traffic passing through each screenline . This enables the percentage change in traffic between 2013 and 2024 affecting portions of the City to be determined. Table 1 provides the 2013 vs. 2024 daily volume sums and the difference by screenline.
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 3
Figure 1. US 101 at Fairview Avenue Annual Average Daily Volumes (PeMS Data)
Figure 2. US 101 Countywide Annual Average Daily Volumes (PeMS Data)
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 4
Figure 3. Goleta Screenlines
East-West Screenlines (less US 101) Screenlines 1-3
North-South Screenlies (Less Airport and UCSB) Screenlines 4-7 Airport Screenline Screenline 8
UCSB Screenline Screenline 9
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 5
Table 1. Goleta Screenline Volume Sum Comparisons
xx: Count comparison suspect – segment count location shift xx: Volume shift between Fairview and Patterson of approximately 11,500 vehicles is construction related diversion.
Screenline Segment ID Segment Roadway 2013 ADT 2024 ADT Delta Growth 1 1a Cathedral Oaks Rd near Glen Annie Rd 9,174 8,979 -195 -2.13% 1b Del Norte Dr near Colusa Dr 1,328 7,371 6,043 455.05% 1c Calle Real near Amador Ave 14,781 10,063 -4,718 -31.92% 1d Hollister Ave near Glen Annie Rd 25,593 26,392 799 3.12% 1e Santa Felicia Dr near Storke Rd 4,030 3,895 -135 -3.35% 1f Phelps Rd near Storke Rd 3,776 2,933 -843 -22.33%
58,682 59,633 951 1.62%
2 2a Cathedral Oaks Rd near Santa Marguerita Dr 6,896 2,655 -4,241 -61.50% 2b Calle Real near Vega Dr 10,414 11,033 619 5.94%
2c Hollister Ave west of Fairview Ave 18,240 20,019 1,779 9.75% 2e Carson St near S Fairview Ave 2,946 1,906 -1,040 -35.30% 38,496 35,613 -2,883 -7.49%
3 3a Cathedral Oaks Rd near El Rodeo Rd 8,961 10,658 1,697 18.94% 3b Calle Real near Via Lee 6,128 8,231 2,103 34.32%
3c Calle Real near N Turnpike Rd 6,458 9,482 3,024 46.83% 3d Hollister Ave near Puente Dr 15,510 15,725 215 1.39% 37,057 44,096 7,039 19.00%
4 4b Cathedral Oaks Rd near Calle Real 2,725 3,310 585 21.47% 4c Winchester Canyon Rd near Calle Real 3,050 3,775 725 23.77% 4d Brandon Dr near Calle Real 2,507 1,553 -954 -38.05%
4e Glen Annie Rd near Cathedral Oaks Dr 7,654 7,339 -315 -4.12% 4f Los Carneros Rd near El Camino Real WB Ramps 10,096 11,741 1,645 16.29% 4g La Patera Ln near Shamrock Ave 3,237 2,204 -1,033 -31.91% 4h Carlo Dr near Verdura Ave 1,971 1,298 -673 -34.15%
4i Fairview Ave near Calle Real 25,788 23,969 -1,819 -7.05% 4j Kellogg Ave near Marbury Dr 6,207 3,693 -2,514 -40.50% 63,235 58,882 -4,353 -6.88%
5 5a Hollister Ave near Cathedral Oaks Rd 6,212 6,759 547 8.81% 5b Storke Rd south of Highway 101 34,122 26,392 -7,730 -22.65% 5c Los Carneros Rd near Calle Koral 22,050 23,720 1,670 7.57% 5d Fairview Ave south of US-101 Interchange 23,700 22,413 -1,287 -5.43% 5d (2d) Fairview Ave near Hollister Ave 9,025 20,859 11,834 131.12% 95,109 100,143 5,034 5.29%
6 6a Patterson Ave near Calle Real 25,885 14,670 -11,215 -43.33% 6b San Marcos Rd near Patricia Ln 3,091 3,102 11 0.36%
6c Turnpike Rd near El Camino Real WB Ramps 18,918 21,402 2,484 13.13% 47,894 39,174 -8,720 -18.21%
7 7a Ward Memorial Blvd near US 101 21,900 25,156 3,256 14.87% 7b Patterson Ave near Overpass Rd 20,086 22,446 2,360 11.75% 7c Turnpike Rd near El Camino Real EB Ramps 21,222 23,636 2,414 11.37% 7d Hollister Ave near N Arboleda Rd 13,557 16,864 3,307 24.39% 76,765 88,102 11,337 14.77%
8 8a Storke Rd near Willowgrove Dr 13,280 13,788 508 3.83% 8b Los Carneros Rd south of Hollister Ave 15,420 19,463 4,043 26.22% 8c Ward Memorial Blvd north of Sandspit Rd 12,000 16,412 4,412 36.77% 40,700 49,663 8,963 22.02%
9 9a El Colegio Rd near Embarcadero Del Norte 9,785 11,703 1,918 19.60% 9b Stadium Rd near El Colegio Rd 3,279 2,437 -842 -25.68% 9c Ocean Rd near El Colegio Rd 9,009 10,005 996 11.06%
9d Ward Memorial Blvd near Mesa Rd 11,600 16,401 4,801 41.39% 33,673 40,546 6,873 20.41%
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 7
ATTACHMENT A
TRAFFIC COUNT LOCATIONS
(All locations are listed/labeled twice)
Location & Location: Denotes Intersection Turn Movement Count Location E of/W of/N of/S of Location: Denotes a 72-hr Segment Count
Quality Counts (QC)
City of Goleta Traffic Counts – 05-01-2024
LOCATIONS
Order ID: 165701
Project Name: City of Goleta Area Traffic Counts - 05-01-2024 Site Code: Intersection/Location
16570101 Glen Annie Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570102 Glen Annie Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570103 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Calle Real
16570104 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Calle Real
16570105 Hwy 101 NB On Ramp & Calle Real
16570106 Hwy 101 NB On Ramp & Calle Real
16570107 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Hwy 101 SB Ramps
16570108 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Hwy 101 SB Ramps
16570109 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Hollister Ave
16570110 Cathedral Oaks Rd & Hollister Ave
16570111 Winchester Canyon Rd & Calle Real/Hwy 101 NB Off Ramp 16570112 Winchester Canyon Rd & Calle Real/Hwy 101 NB Off Ramp 16570113 Winchester Canyon Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570114 Winchester Canyon Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570115 Brandon Dr & Calle Real
16570116 Brandon Dr & Calle Real
16570117 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real
16570118 San Rossano Dr & Calle Real
16570119 Cannon Green Dr & Hollister Ave
16570120 Cannon Green Dr & Hollister Ave
16570121 Entrance Rd & Hollister Ave
16570122 Entrance Rd & Hollister Ave
16570123 Alameda Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570124 Alameda Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570125 Pacific Oaks Rd & Hollister Ave
16570126 Pacific Oaks Rd & Hollister Ave
16570127 Santa Felicia Dr & Hollister Ave
16570128 Santa Felicia Dr & Hollister Ave
16570129 Village Way & Hollister Ave
16570130 Village Way & Hollister Ave
16570131 Storke Rd & Hollister Ave
16570132 Storke Rd & Hollister Ave
16570133 Cortona Dr & Hollister Ave
16570134 Cortona Dr & Hollister Ave
16570135 Storke Rd & Santa Felicia Dr
16570136 Storke Rd & Santa Felicia Dr
16570137 Storke Rd & Phelps Rd
16570138 Storke Rd & Phelps Rd
16570139 Storke Rd & Storke Plaza
16570140 Storke Rd & Storke Plaza
16570141 Los Carneros Rd & El Colegio Rd
16570142 Los Carneros Rd & El Colegio Rd
16570143 Los Carneros Rd & Mesa Rd
16570144 Los Carneros Rd & Mesa Rd
16570145 Los Carneros Rd & Hollister Ave
16570146 Los Carneros Rd & Hollister Ave
16570147 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave
16570148 Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave
Order ID: 165701
Project Name: City of Goleta Area Traffic Counts - 05-01-2024 Site Code: Intersection/Location
16570149 Coromar Dr & Hollister Ave
16570150 Coromar Dr & Hollister Ave
16570151 Los Carneros Rd & Castilian Dr
16570152 Los Carneros Rd & Castilian Dr
16570153 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral
16570154 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral
16570155 Los Carneros Rd & Cremona Dr
16570156 Los Carneros Rd & Cremona Dr
16570157 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave
16570158 Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave
16570159 Los Carneros Way & Hollister Ave
16570160 Los Carneros Way & Hollister Ave
16570161 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral
16570162 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral
16570163 Los Carneros Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
16570164 Los Carneros Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
16570165 Aero Camino & Hollister Ave
16570166 Aero Camino & Hollister Ave
16570167 Stadium Rd & El Colegio Rd
16570168 Stadium Rd & El Colegio Rd
16570169 Los Carneros Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570170 Los Carneros Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
16570171 David Love Pl & Hollister Ave
16570172 David Love Pl & Hollister Ave
16570173 S Fairview Ave & James Fowler Rd
16570174 S Fairview Ave & James Fowler Rd
16570175 S Fairview Ave & Hollister Ave
16570176 S Fairview Ave & Hollister Ave
16570177 N Fairview Ave & S Fairview Ave
16570178 N Fairview Ave & S Fairview Ave
16570179 N Los Carneros Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
16570180 N Los Carneros Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
16570181 S Orange Ave & Hollister Ave
16570182 S Orange Ave & Hollister Ave
16570183 Nectarine Ave & Hollister Ave
16570184 Nectarine Ave & Hollister Ave
16570185 Rutherford St & Hollister Ave
16570186 Rutherford St & Hollister Ave
16570187 Community Center W Dwy & Hollister Ave
16570188 Community Center W Dwy & Hollister Ave
16570189 S Kellogg Ave & Hollister Ave
16570190 S Kellogg Ave & Hollister Ave
16570191 US 217 WB Ramps & Hollister Ave
16570192 US 217 WB Ramps & Hollister Ave
16570193 US 217 EB Ramp/Ward Dr & Hollister Ave
16570194 US 217 EB Ramp/Ward Dr & Hollister Ave
16570195 St Josephs St & Hollister Ave
16570196 St Josephs St & Hollister Ave
Order ID: 165701
Project Name: City of Goleta Area Traffic Counts - 05-01-2024 Site Code: Intersection/Location
16570197 Sumida Gardens Ln & Hollister Ave
16570198 Sumida Gardens Ln & Hollister Ave
16570199 Ward Dr & Ekwill St
165701100 Ward Dr & Ekwill St
165701101 S Patterson Ave & Hollister Ave
165701102 S Patterson Ave & Hollister Ave
165701103 Walnut Ln & Hollister Ave
165701104 Walnut Ln & Hollister Ave
165701105 S Patterson Ave & Overpass Rd
165701106 S Patterson Ave & Overpass Rd
165701107 S Patterson Ave & US 101 SB Ramps
165701108 S Patterson Ave & US 101 SB Ramps
165701109 S Patterson Ave & US 101 NB Ramps
165701110 S Patterson Ave & US 101 NB Ramps
165701111 N Fairview Ave & US 101 NB Ramps
165701112 N Fairview Ave & US 101 NB Ramps
165701113 N Fairview Ave & Calle Real
165701114 N Fairview Ave & Calle Real
165701115 N Fairview Ave & Encina Rd
165701116 N Fairview Ave & Encina Rd
165701117 N Fairview Ave & Shirrell Way
165701118 N Fairview Ave & Shirrell Way
165701119 N Kellogg Ave & Calle Real
165701120 N Kellogg Ave & Calle Real
165701121 N Fairview Ave & Berkeley Rd
165701122 N Fairview Ave & Berkeley Rd
165701123 N Fairview Ave & Stow Canyon Rd
165701124 N Fairview Ave & Stow Canyon Rd
165701125 N Fairview Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701126 N Fairview Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701127 Cambridge Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701128 Cambridge Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701129 N Kellogg Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701130 N Kellogg Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701131 N Patterson Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701132 N Patterson Ave & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701133 N Patterson Ave & University Dr
165701134 N Patterson Ave & University Dr
165701135 N Patterson Ave & Calle Real
165701136 N Patterson Ave & Calle Real
165701137 S Turnpike Rd & Hollister Ave
165701138 S Turnpike Rd & Hollister Ave
165701139 N Turnpike Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701140 N Turnpike Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701141 N Turnpike Rd & Calle Real
165701142 N Turnpike Rd & Calle Real
165701143 S Turnpike Rd & US 101 NB Ramps
165701144 S Turnpike Rd & US 101 NB Ramps
Order ID: 165701
Project Name: City of Goleta Area Traffic Counts - 05-01-2024 Site Code: Intersection/Location
165701145 S Patterson Ave & US 101 SB Ramps
165701146 S Patterson Ave & US 101 SB Ramps
165701147 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave 165701148 Sperling Preserve/Ellwood Dwy & Hollister Ave 165701149 Pebble Beach Dr & Hollister Ave
165701150 Pebble Beach Dr & Hollister Ave
165701151 Santa Barbara Shores Dr & Hollister Ave
165701152 Santa Barbara Shores Dr & Hollister Ave
165701153 Palo Alto Dr & Hollister Ave
165701154 Palo Alto Dr & Hollister Ave
165701155 Coronado Dr & Hollister Ave
165701156 Coronado Dr & Hollister Ave
165701157 Brandon Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701158 Brandon Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701159 Glen Annie Rd & Del Norte Dr
165701160 Glen Annie Rd & Del Norte Dr
165701161 Glen Annie Rd & Calle Real
165701162 Glen Annie Rd & Calle Real
165701163 Glen Annie Rd/Storke Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
165701164 Glen Annie Rd/Storke Rd & US 101 SB Ramps
165701165 Los Carneros Rd & US 101 NB Ramps
165701166 Los Carneros Rd & US 101 NB Ramps
165701167 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Real
165701168 Los Carneros Rd & Calle Real
165701169 N La Patera Ln & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701170 N La Patera Ln & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701171 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701172 Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701173 N La Patera Ln & Calle Real
165701174 N La Patera Ln & Calle Real
165701175 Carlo Dr & Calle Real
165701176 Carlo Dr & Calle Real
165701177 San Marcos Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701178 San Marcos Rd & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701179 Modoc Rd & Hollister Ave
165701180 Modoc Rd & Hollister Ave
165701181 CA 154 SB Ramps & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701182 CA 154 SB Ramps & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701183 CA 154 NB Ramps & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701184 CA 154 NB Ramps & Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701185 CA 154 & Calle Real
165701186 CA 154 & Calle Real
165701187 CA 154 & State St
165701188 CA 154 & State St
165701189 Cathedral Oaks Rd W of Glen Annie Rd
165701190 Cathedral Oaks Rd N of Calle Real
165701191 Hollister Ave E of Cathedral Oaks Rd
165701192 Winchester Canyon Rd N of Calle Real
Order ID: 165701
Project Name: City of Goleta Area Traffic Counts - 05-01-2024 Site Code: Intersection/Location
165701193 Brandon Dr North of Calle Real
165701194 Del Norte Dr W of Glen Annie Rd
165701195 Calle Real btwn Amador Ave & Colusa Dr
165701196 Glen Annie Rd Btwn Del Norte Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd 165701197 Storke Rd Btwn Hwy 101 SB Ramps & Hollister Ave 165701198 Hollister Ave btwn Village Way & Glen Annie Rd 165701199 Phelps Rd W of Whitman St
165701200 Santa Felicia Dr W of Storke Rd
165701201 Los Carneros Rd S of Hollister Ave
165701202 Los Carneros Rd N of Calle Koral
165701203 Los Carneros Rd S of Calle Real
165701204 N La Patera Ln btwn Shamrock Ave and Calle Real 165701205 Carlo Dr btwn Caleta Ave & Verdura Ave
165701206 Cathedral Oaks Rd E of Santa Margerita Dr
165701207 Calle Real btwn Carlo Dr & Vega Dr
165701208 N Fairview Ave S of Calle Real
165701209 S Fairview Ave N of Hollister Ave
165701210 Hollister Ave W of Fairview Ave
165701211 S Fairview Ave S of Hollister Ave
165701212 Carson St E of Fairview Ave
165701213 Pine Ave N of Thornwood Dr
165701214 S Kellogg Ave S of Kellogg Way
165701215 CA 217 N of Sandspit Rd
165701216 CA 217 S of Sandspit Rd
165701217 Ocean Ave S of Mesa Rd
165701218 El Colegio Rd W of Stadium Rd
165701219 Stadium Rd N of El Colegio Rd
165701220 Storke Rd S of Whittier Dr
165701221 N Kellogg Ave S of Marbury Dr
165701222 N Patterson Ave S of Calle Real
165701223 S Patterson Ave N of Overpass Rd
165701224 CA 217 N of Hollister Ave
165701225 San Marcos Rd N of Calle Real
165701226 S Turnpike Rd S of Calle Real
165701227 Calle Real W of Turnpike Rd
165701228 Calle Real E of Turnpike Rd
165701229 S Turnpike Rd N of San Gordiano Ave
165701230 Hollister Ave btwn S Turnpike Rd and Manga Vista St 165701231 Cathedral Oaks Rd btwn N Turnpike Rd and El Rodeo Rd 165701232 Hollister Ave btwn Nogal Dr and Modoc Rd
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 8
ATTACHMENT B
TRAFFIC COUNT CITY ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
Duration:
15 Duration Type:
Days
Start Work:
05/17/2024
End Work:
05/31/2024
Work Required?:
No
Work Required?:
No
Work Required?:
No
Work Required?:
Yes
Type:
Other
Other:
traffic cameras
Work Required?:
No
Work Required?:
No
Will power be
No
Impact to MTD Bus
No
Applicant/Mail to:
Gerald
Comati
Goleta ,
CA
93117
Permittee:
Owner:
Responsible Party:
CITY OF GOLETA
130
CREMONA DRIVE
GOLETA
CA
93117
On-Site Company Representative:
Quality Counts LLC
None
Encroachment
EP-24-084
Date Printed: 05/02/2024
Property Information
Owner:
Tax ID:
Phone:
Lot Number:
Address:
Various locations throughout the City of Goleta
Subdivision:
Permission is hereby granted for work in the public right-of-way, as noted below. All work shall be done in accordance with the Santa Barbara County Department of Public Works Transportation Division Engineering Design Standards and all other applicable State and Local laws, ordinances, and regulations.
Permit Information
Status:
Issued
Expiration Date:
06/29/2024
Permit Number:
EP-24-084
Issued Date:
05/02/2024
Permit Type:
Encroachment
Total Fees:
$0.00
Notes:
Installation of temporary traffic count cameras
General Information
Asphalt Concrete (AC) Roadway - Cut, Trench or Boring Pits, etc.
Paint or Street Marking Obliteration
Concrete Removal
Use of Public Right-of-Way
Traffic Control Plan - Impacts to Vehicle, Bicycle, Pedestrian Travel Way Temporary No Parking Required - No other roadway impacts Other Impacts
Various locations throughout the City of Goleta
Quality Counts (QC)
City of Goleta Traffic Counts – 05-01-2024
INSURANCE CERTIFICATES
INSR ADDL SUBR
LTR INSR WVD
DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
PRODUCER CONTACT
NAME:
FAXPHONE
(A/C, No):(A/C, No, Ext):
E-MAIL
ADDRESS:
INSURER A :
INSURED INSURER B :
INSURER C :
INSURER D :
INSURER E :
INSURER F :
POLICY NUMBER
POLICY EFF POLICY EXPTYPE OF INSURANCE LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY)
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
UMBRELLA LIAB
EXCESS LIAB
WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #
Y / N
N / A
(Mandatory in NH)
ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
EACH OCCURRENCE $
DAMAGE TO RENTED $PREMISES (Ea occurrence)CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $
GENERAL AGGREGATE $GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $
$
PRO-
OTHER:
LOCJECT
COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
$(Ea accident)
BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ANY AUTO
OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $AUTOS ONLY AUTOS
AUTOS ONLY
HIRED PROPERTY DAMAGE $AUTOS ONLY (Per accident)
$
OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $
CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DED RETENTION $ $
PER OTH-
STATUTE ER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $
If yes, describe under
E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below POLICY
NON-OWNED
SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE
THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS
CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS
CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.
IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.
If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer any rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:
CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORDACORD 25 (2016/03) ACORD
TM CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE
Hanover American Insurance Company
Hanover Insurance Company
Argonaut Insurance Company
Allmerica Financial Benefit Ins. Co.
1/29/2024
USI Insurance Services NW PR
601 Union Street, Suite 1000
Seattle, WA 98101
Please See Below
206 441-6300 610-362-8530
[email protected]
Quality Counts, LLC
8407 Laurel Fair Circle Suite 400
Tampa, FL 33610
36064
22292
19801
41840
A X
X
X
X X ZZ2J63800000 02/01/2024 02/01/2025 1,000,000
1,000,000
10,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
D
X
X X
X X AW2J61461000 02/01/2024 02/01/2025 1,000,000
B X X
0 X X UH2J63800100
(Follow Form)
02/01/2024 02/01/2025 5,000,000
5,000,000
B
N
X WH2J61459700 02/01/2024 02/01/2025 X
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
C Professional
Liability
X 121AE019401103 01/01/2024 02/01/2025 $2,000,000 per claim $2,000,000 annl aggr.
Professional Liability coverage is written on a claims-made basis.
The General Liability policy includes an automatic Additional Insured endorsement that provides Additional Insured status to the Certificate Holder, only when there is a written contract that requires such status, and only with regard to work performed on behalf of the named insured.
City of Goleta
130 Cremona Dr, Ste B
Goleta, CA 93117-0000
1 of 1
#S43462183/M43460298
QUALICOU1Client#: 1757383
BLKZP
1 of 1
#S43462183/M43460298
421-2915 06 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission. Page 1 of 4 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY BROADENING ENDORSEMENT
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following:
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART
SUMMARY OF COVERAGES
1. Additional Insured by Contract, Agreement or Permit Included
2. Additional Insured – Primary and Non-Contributory Included
3. Blanket Waiver of Subrogation Included
4. Bodily Injury Redefined Included
5. Broad Form Property Damage – Borrowed Equipment, Customers Goods & Use of Elevators Included
6. Knowledge of Occurrence Included
7. Liberalization Clause lncluded
8. Medical Payments – Extended Reporting Period Included
9. Newly Acquired or Formed Organizations - Covered until end of policy period Included
10. Non-owned Watercraft 51 ft.
11. Supplementary Payments Increased Limits
- Bail Bonds $2,500
- Loss of Earnings $1000
12. Unintentional Failure to Disclose Hazards Included
13. Unintentional Failure to Notify Included
This endorsement amen ds coverages provided under the Commercial General Liability Coverage Part through new coverages, higher limits and broader coverage grants.
1. Additional Insured by Contract, Agreement or
Permit
The following is added to SECTION II – WHO IS
AN INSURED:
Additional Insured by Contract, Agreement or
Permit
a. Any person or organization with whom you
agreed in a written contract, written agreement
or permit that such person or organization to
add an additional insured on your policy is an
additional insured only with respect to liability
for “bodily injury”, “property damage”, or
“personal and advertising injury” caused, in
whole or in part, by your acts or omissions, or
the acts or omissions of those acting on your
behalf, but only with respect to:
(1) "Your work" for the additional insured(s)
designated in the contract, agreement or
permit;
(2) Premises you own, rent, lease or occupy ;
or
(3) Your m aintenance, operation or use of
equipment leased to you.
b. The insurance afforded to such additional
insured described above:
(1) Only applies to the extent permitted by
law; and
(2) Will not be broader than the insura nce
which you are required by the contract ,
agreement or permit to provide for such
additional insured.
ZZ2 J638000 00 0901120
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 9
ATTACHMENT C
QUALITY COUNTS DATAPOINT WEB PORTAL
Screenshots
Access to DataPoint by clicking the following link: https://dks.data-point.io/ Overall Study Area – Blue are Intersections | Green are Segments
Zoomed In – Intersection Selection (S. Fairview Ave & Hollister Avenue)
Zoomed In – Roadway Selection (Hollister Avenue West of Fairview Avenue)
GOLETA TRAFFIC COUNT TRENDS • AUGUEST 2024 6
FINDINGS
Based on US 101 PeMS AADT trends, daily volumes on US 101 have fully recovered from the traffic suppression caused by the pandemic. Traffic is now emulating the peak daily volumes experienced in 2013 (the highest traffic year experienced in Goleta). The daily volume screenline analysis is summarized below. As shown, summing across all screenlines indicates that citywide, traffic has increased by approximately 5 percent since 2013. This is primarily attributable to east -west travel and to a lesser extent north-south trip interchanges across US 101. The most significant growth on a percentage basis has occurred at the Airport and UCSB screenlines that each increased over 20 percent since 2013. This can be attributable to increased airport operations at the Santa Barbara City Airport and increased UCSB enrollment since 2013. UCSB total enrollment has increase from 19,362 (graduate and undergraduate combined) in 2013 to 25,198 students in 2024 – a 30 percent increase1. Conversely, Santa Barbara City College enrollment has declined since 2014. Despite this, City College student housing has continued to shift to Isla Vista and become part of the overall growth in UCSB traffic/screenline. UCSB has also developed new student housing to absorb its enrollment increases.
1 https://www.google.com/search?q=ucsb+enrollment+by+year&sca_esv=cdc61fbb8ee1234c&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS1101US 1101&ei=IQzVZo7xMI6a0PEPpIS30QU&oq=UCSB+Enrollment+&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiEFVDU0IgRW5yb2xsbWVud CAqAggFMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQA BiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHMgoQABiwAxjWBBhHSNsyUABYAHABeACQAQCYAXigAXiqAQMwLjG4AQHIAQCYAgGgAg OYAwCIBgGQBgiSBwExoAfpBA&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6
ATTACHMENT A.2
CITY OF GOLETA OPERATIONAL CRITERIA
Local Transportation Deficiency Criteria
The City of Goleta defines transportation deficiency criteria through the City General Plan Circulation Element. The primary policies of concern for this study are TE 4, which defines target LOS standards, TE 5, which defines planned street and road improv ements, and TE 13, which defines traffic impacts for new developments. From these policies, the City defines a traffic impact as any project which causes an intersection on a major arterial, minor arterial, or collector roadway to degrade below a LOS C exc ept at the intersection of Storke and Hollister where an LOS D standard will be maintained. Projects are required to evaluate the creation of safety hazards, potential adverse effects on local neighborhood streets, and other substantial transportation concerns. The following criteria has been used in this study to identify intersection deficiencies where the projects may be considered responsible for improving the intersection:
• At signalized and roundabout intersections:
o The traffic generated by the project results in an intersection operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS.
o The traffic generated by the project results in an increase to average delay of more than 5 seconds at an intersection that is operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project. o Results in increasing the length of an existing queue beyond the available storage at any intersection’s right- or left-turn storage pocket by more than one vehicle length (25-feet). o Results in increasing the length of an existing queue already exceeding the available storage at any intersection’s right - or left-turn storage pocket by more than one vehicle length (25-feet).
o Results in queueing into adjacent intersections.
• At unsignalized intersections:
o The traffic generated by the project results in an unsignalized intersection movement/approach operating at an acceptable LOS to deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS, and results in the intersection meeting a traffic signal warrant. o For an unsignalized intersection that meets a signal warrant, traffic generated by the project increases the delay by more than 5 seconds at a movement/approach that is operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project.
o Results in increasing the length of an existing queue beyond the available storage at any intersection’s right- or left-turn storage pocket by more than one vehicle length (25-feet). o Result in increasing the length of an existing queue already exceeding the available storage at any intersection’s right - or left-turn storage pocket by more than one vehicle length (25-feet).
Level of Service
Level of service (LOS) is a concept used by traffic engineers to describe the peak hour traffic conditions at a given intersection. There are six levels of service, Level A through Level F, with A being the least congested and F being the most congested. The City of Goleta has an intersection level of service goal of LOS C, which means that LOS A through C are considered to provide traffic conditions in the acceptable range and LOS D and F provide traffic conditions in the unacceptable range.
Stop Controlled Intersections
The methodology for analysis of stop -controlled intersections is the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition. This method calculates average delay per vehicle for each major street movement and minor street left -turn movements - based on the availability of adequate gaps in the main street through traffic. At intersections with minor street stop control, most of the major street traffic experiences little or no delay, and by definition have acceptable conditions. The major street left-turn movements and the minor street movements are all susceptible to delay of varying degrees. Generally, the higher the major street traffic volumes, the higher the delay for the minor movements.
An LOS designation is assigned to individual or combinations of movements (for shared lanes) based upon delay. An average total delay per vehicle for each minor street movement and for the major street left-turn movements is calculated, based on the avail ability of adequate gaps in the major street through traffic. A level of service designation is assigned to individual movements or to combinations of movements (in the case of shared lanes) based upon delay. Levels of service are reported herein for eac h movement (or group of movements) based upon the respective average delay per vehicle.
Table 1 presents the average delay criteria used to determine the level of service at unsignalized intersections.
At all-way stop intersections, the level of service is determined by the weighted average delay for all vehicles entering the intersection. The methodology for this type of intersection calculates a single weighted average delay and LOS for the intersection as a whole. The average delay criteria used to determine the level of service at all-way stop intersections is the same as that presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Level of Service Criteria – Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Delay1
(seconds/veh)
A 0.0 - 10.0
B 10.1 - 15.0
C 15.1 - 25.0
D 25.1 - 35.0
E 35.1 - 50.0
F >50.0
1 Weighted average of delay
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC
Signalized Intersections ICU Planning Method
The methodology used to determine signalized intersection LOS is the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. The ICU method calculates an intersection’s LOS by taking the sum of each pair of intersection critical movements (movements that compete for the same space within the intersection) and dividing that value by the intersections saturation flow rate (capacity).
The saturation flow rate assumed for all City intersections is 1,600 vehicles per lane per hour.
Each critical movement’s volum e to capacity ratio is then summed and a 10 percent lost time adjustment is added to yield a peak hour volume to capacity ratio that is the basis for determining the intersection’s LOS.
Table 2 presents the V/C ratio criteria used to determine the level of service at signalized intersections.
Table 2 – ICU Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of
Service
(LOS)
Volume/Capacity
Ratio Description
A 0.000–0.600 Very Low Delay: This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during a green phase.
Most vehicles do not stop at all.
B 0.601–0.700 Minimal Delays: This level of service generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than at LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay.
C 0.701–0.800 Acceptable Delay: Delay increases due to only fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures (to service all waiting vehicles) may begin to appear at this level of service. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping.
D 0.801–0.900 Approaching Unstable/Tolerable Delays: The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.
E 0.901–1.000 Unstable Operation/Significant Delays: These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
F >1.000 Excessive Delays: Describes operations with average delay in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over-saturation (i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection) and with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels.
Signalized & Non-Signalized Intersections HCM Operational Method The Level of Service (LOS) is an intersection performance measure commonly used to provide an overview of how each movement and the overall intersection is operating. The LOS provides a “report card” rating of letters A through F based on average vehicle d elay through the intersection. LOS A indicates free flow conditions with minimal delay traveling through an intersection while LOS F indicates excessive vehicle delay and demand is greater than capacity.
For signals, intersection average delay and LOS are based on the average for all vehicles, while at two-way stop-controlled intersections, it’s based on the movement with the highest delay. The Highway Capacity Manual has LOS criteria for unsignalized and signalized intersections as shown in Table 3.
Traffic operations analysis for traffic signals and stop controlled intersections in the study area was conducted using Synchro 12. Roundabout intersections were analyzed using Sidra 10. Both software platforms employ the methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition.
Table 3: Intersection Level-of-Service
1. Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, Transportation Research Board.
Intersection Queuing Analysis
95th percentile queue results are defined as the length of the queue which is exceeded five percent of the time during the analysis time period. The 95th percentile queue is useful in determining the appropriate storage requirements such as length of turn pockets but is not representative of what an average driver would experience during their commute. Queue lengths were estimated using Synchro 12 for stop-controlled and signalized intersections and Sidra 10 for roundabout intersections.
Roadway Segment Level of Service
Table 4 shows the City of Goleta’s established roadway classification and level of service thresholds for segment analysis. These LOS thresholds provide a generalized estimate of LOS and serve as a screen for existing and/or future year problem identification. These thresholds should not be construed as daily roadway volume capacities given that all roads are under-utilized during off -peak hours, while heavily congested roadways will sometimes experience volumes higher that those reported herein.
Freeway Mainline Segment and Merge-Diverge
Highway 101 basic freeway segment and merge -diverge LOS methodologies published in HCM 7th Edition were applied. The HCM methods for mainline and ramps analyses were performed using HCS validated Excel spreadsheets. Table 4 shows LOS criteria for freeway and ramps analysis.
LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)
TOTAL DELAY PER VEHICLE (SECONDS)
SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED
A < 10 < 10
B > 10 and < 20 > 10 and < 15
C > 20 and < 35 > 15 and < 25
D > 35 and < 55 > 25 and < 35
E > 55 and < 80 > 35 and < 50
F > 80 > 50
Table 4 – Roadway Classification & Level of Service Thresholds
* Source: City of Goleta
Table 1 – Freeway and Ramp LOS Criteria
2 Lanes 4 Lanes
4+
Lanes1 2 Lanes 4 Lanes
4+
Lanes1
Major Arterial (MA)
Continuous roadways that carry through traffic between
various neighborhoods and communities, frequently
providing access to major traffic generators such as
shopping areas, employment centers, and higher density
residential areas. Roadways would have a minimum of
12-foot wide lanes with shoulders. Signals are typically spaced at a minimum 0.5-mile intervals.
17,900 42,480 58,750 14,300 34,000 47,000
Minor Arterial (MNA)
Roadways that serve as a secondary type of arterial
facility carrying local and through traffic within
communities, frequently connecting neighborhood areas
within the City, providing access to shopping areas,
employment centers, and higher density residential
areas. Roadways would have a minimum of 12-foot
wide lanes with shoulders. Signal intervals typically
range from 0.25 to 0.5 mile.
15,700 37,680 NA 12,500 30,100 NA
Collector Streets (Col)
Roadways designed to collect traffic from local streets and connect to major or minor arterials. Collector
Streets provide access to local streets within residential and commercial areas and conect streets of higher
calssifications to permit adequate traffic circulation.
Generally no more than 2 travel lanes and signalized at intersections with arterial roadways.
11,600 NA NA 9,280 NA NA
Local Streets (L)
Roadways designed to provide access to individual
properties carrying traffic to and from a collector street.
Intended to serve adjacent uses and are not intended for through traffic. Designed with two lanes and close to
moderately close driveways.
9,100 NA NA 7,280 NA NA
Source: City of Goleta, 2006.
1 4+Lanes includes 5 or 6 lane roadways.
LOS C ADT ThresholdADT Design Capacity
Functional Street
Classification Purpose and Design Factors
Level of Density Density Density Density
Service pc/mi/ln pc/mi/ln pc/mi/ln pc/mi/ln
FFS = 70 FFS = 65 FFS = 60 FFS = 55
A 11 11 11 11
B 18 18 18 18
C 26 26 26 26
D 35 35 35 35
E 45 45 45 45
F - - - -
Level of Density
Service pc/mi/ln
A ≤ 10
B > 10-20
C > 20-28
D > 28-35
E > 35
F -
Level of Service Criteria For Basic Freeway Segments
Level of Service Criteria For Ramp Merge-Diverge Areas
Signal Warrant Status
The potential need for traffic signals at the unsignalized intersections is evaluated herein, using the peak hour signal warrant criteria of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Signal warrant criteria are traffic volume levels above which it is presumed that the need for a traffic signal is warranted. Traffic signals tend to reduce the potential for right-angle type collisions but also tend to increase the potential for less sev ere rear-end collisions. The signal warrant volumes represent the threshold point at which the potential for more rear-end collisions is offset by the potential for fewer more severe right -angle collisions. When the signal warrant volumes are exceeded, a n intersection should be considered for signalization; however, the decision to install a traffic signal should not be based solely upon the warrants. Delay, congestion, approach conditions, driver confusion, future land use or other evidence of the nee d for right of way assignment beyond that provided by stop signs must be demonstrated.
As stated in the 2024 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), “ An engineering study of traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of the location shall be performed to determine whether installation of a traffic control signal is justified at a particular location. The inves tigation of the need for a traffic control signal shall include an analysis of the applicable factors contained in the following traffic signal warrants and other factors related to existing operation and safety at the study location:
Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume.
Warrant 3, Peak Hour.
Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume.
Warrant 5, School Crossing.
Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System.
Warrant 7, Crash Experience.
Warrant 8, Roadway Network.
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.”
This traffic impact analysis did not evaluate all of the warrants for traffic signals, but instead focused on the peak hour warrant. The MUTCD states that, “This [peak hour] signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time .” So the peak hour warrant is being used in this impact analysis study as an “indicator” of the likelihood of an unsignalized intersection warranting a traffic signal in the future.
Intersections that exceed the peak hour warrant are considered for the pur poses of this impact analysis to be likely to meet one or more of the other signal warrants (such as t he 4-hour or 8- hour warrants). This peak hour analysis is not intended to replace a rigorous and complete traffic signal warrant analysis by the responsible jurisdiction.
GOLETA MODEL • CALIBRATION -VALIDATION MEMORANDUM • APRIL 202 6
ATTACHMENT A.3
BASELINE AND FUTURE ICU LOS WORKSHEETS
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.29
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.39
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 107 14 55 33 466 94 18 8 63 14 470 17
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 27 4 14 8 117 24 5 2 16 4 118 4
Adjusted Volume 107 14 55 33 466 94 18 8 63 14 470 17
Approach
Lane Group C R L C C R L C
ID 3 4 0 1 8 9 5 6
Lanes LT R L T, RT LT R L T, RT
Volume 121 55 33 560 26 63 14 487
Approach
Lane Group 3 4 0 1 8 9 5 6
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 107 14 55 33 466 94 18 8 63 14 470 17
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.067 0.076 0.034 0.021 0.175 0.175 0.011 0.016 0.039 0.009 0.152 0.152 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.067 0.076 0.034 0.021 0.175 0.175 0.011 0.016 0.039 0.009 0.152 0.152 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 151: Cathedral Oaks & Kellogg
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.25
Worst Case Delay28.7
Worst Case LOSD
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 4.00 2.00 1.00 44.00 473.00 7.00 5.00 0.00 43.00 10.00 422.00 12.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 4.35 2.17 1.09 47.83 514.13 7.61 5.43 0.00 46.74 10.87 458.70 13.04 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 4.35 2.17 1.09 47.83 5.43 0.00 46.74 10.87
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 1123.911107.07 517.93 471.74 1102.171104.35 465.22 521.74 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 1123.911107.07 517.93 471.74 1102.171104.35 465.22 521.74 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 184.27 211.94 561.59 1100.65 190.68 212.72 601.37 1054.92 Capacity 157.31 196.17 561.59 1100.65 174.34 196.90 601.37 1054.92 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 4.35 2.17 1.09 47.83 514.13 7.61 5.43 0.00 46.74 10.87 458.70 13.04 cmx, Capacity 157.31 196.17 561.59 1100.65 174.34 196.90 601.37 1054.92 V / C 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.01
d, Delay 28.70 24.17 12.23 8.42 26.57 24.20 11.90 8.45
LOS D C B A D C B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 7.61 47.83 521.74 52.17 10.87 471.74
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 187.15 479.13
V / C 0.04 0.11
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.13 0.37
d, Delay 25.05 13.43
LOS D B
dA, Approach Delay 25.05 13.43
Approach LOS D B
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
0.71 0.19
D B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
25.05 0.71 13.43 0.19
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 164: Cathedral Oaks & La Patera
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.73
Worst Case Delay25.97
Worst Case LOSD
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 10.00 1.00 4.00 10.00 461.00 11.00 37.00 3.00 21.00 3.00 409.00 55.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 10.87 1.09 4.35 10.87 501.09 11.96 40.22 3.26 22.83 3.26 444.57 59.78 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 10.87 1.09 4.35 10.87 40.22 3.26 22.83 3.26
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 1011.411039.67 507.07 504.35 1012.501015.76 474.46 513.04 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 1011.411039.67 507.07 504.35 1012.501015.76 474.46 513.04 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 219.84 232.25 569.58 1070.61 219.46 239.89 594.21 1062.74 Capacity 205.51 228.90 569.58 1070.61 213.64 236.43 594.21 1062.74 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 10.87 1.09 4.35 10.87 501.09 11.96 40.22 3.26 22.83 3.26 444.57 59.78 cmx, Capacity 205.51 228.90 569.58 1070.61 213.64 236.43 594.21 1062.74 V / C 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.01 0.04 0.00
d, Delay 23.52 21.73 12.33 8.40 25.97 24.35 15.18 8.39
LOS C C B A D C C A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S W (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1L1, T, R1
vx, Volume 16.30 10.87 513.04 66.30 507.61
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 249.79 275.75 1758.32
V / C 0.07 0.24 0.29
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.21 0.94 0.01
d, Delay 20.42 22.18 8.39
LOS C C
dA, Approach Delay 20.42 22.18 0.05
Approach LOS C C
0.17 0.00
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.04 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major)
20.42 0.17 22.18 0.05
C C
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 169: Carlo Dr & Cathedral Oaks Rd
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.353
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.453
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 47 51 16 237 344 28 81 45 144 14 265 108
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 12 13 4 59 86 7 20 11 36 4 66 27
Adjusted Volume 47 51 16 237 344 28 81 45 144 14 265 108 Approach
Lane Group L C L C L C L C
ID 16 17 13 14 22 23 19 20
Lanes L T, RT L T, RT L T, RT L T, RT
Volume 47 67 237 372 81 189 14 373
Approach
Lane Group 16 17 13 14 22 23 19 20
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 3200 1600 3200 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 47 51 16 237 344 28 81 45 144 14 265 108
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.029 0.021 0.021 0.148 0.116 0.116 0.051 0.059 0.059 0.009 0.117 0.117 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.029 0.021 0.021 0.148 0.116 0.116 0.051 0.059 0.059 0.009 0.117 0.117 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 171: Cathedral Oaks & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.263
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.363
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 29 8 75 25 549 17 33 10 35 29 458 22
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 7 2 19 6 137 4 8 3 9 7 115 6
Adjusted Volume 29 8 75 25 549 17 33 10 35 29 458 22
Approach
Lane Group C R L C C R L C
ID 28 29 25 26 33 34 30 31
Lanes LT R L T, RT LT R L T, RT
Volume 37 75 25 566 43 35 29 480
Approach
Lane Group 28 29 25 26 33 34 30 31
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 29 8 75 25 549 17 33 10 35 29 458 22
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.023 0.047 0.016 0.177 0.177 0.021 0.027 0.022 0.018 0.150 0.150 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.023 0.047 0.016 0.177 0.177 0.021 0.027 0.022 0.018 0.150 0.150 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 173: Cathedral Oaks & Cambridge
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay3.01
Worst Case Delay23.61
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 114.00 367.00 38.00 77.00 316.00 55.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 123.91 398.91 41.30 83.70 343.48 59.78 Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Rank 2 1 3 2 1 1
vx, Volume 123.91 41.30 83.70
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 403.26 990.22 343.48
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 403.26 990.22 343.48
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1166.37 275.50 703.82
Capacity 1166.37 237.89 703.82
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.10 6.20
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.40 6.20
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Volume 123.91 398.91 41.30 83.70 343.48 59.78
cmx, Capacity 1166.37 237.89 703.82
V / C 0.11 0.17 0.12
d, Delay 8.45 23.61 13.59
LOS A C B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements L1, R1
vx, Volume 123.91 398.91 125.00 343.48 59.78
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 427.29
V / C 0.29
Q95, 95% Queue Length 1.23
d, Delay 16.90
LOS C
dA, Approach Delay 16.90
Approach LOS C
C
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
2.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
E (Major) S W (Major)
2.00 16.90 0.00
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
E (Major) S W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 195: Cathedral Oaks & Los Carneros
Volume and Adjustments
E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay8.27
Worst Case Delay43.83
Worst Case LOSE
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 6.00 287.00 96.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 255.00 201.00 5.00 34.00 0.00 256.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 6.52 311.96 104.35 3.26 2.17 3.26 277.17 218.48 5.43 36.96 0.00 278.26 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2
vx, Volume 6.52 3.26 2.17 3.26 277.17 36.96 0.00 278.26 Conflicting Volume (Veh) 223.91 944.57 1204.89 111.96 416.30 1041.851155.43 208.15 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 223.91 944.57 1204.89 111.96 416.30 1041.851155.43 208.15 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1356.76 219.72 185.43 926.17 1153.57 186.69 198.41 804.08 Capacity 1356.76 103.63 133.75 926.17 1153.57 132.60 143.11 804.08 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 6.52 311.96 104.35 3.26 2.17 3.26 277.17 218.48 5.43 36.96 0.00 278.26 cmx, Capacity 1356.76 103.63 133.75 926.17 1153.57 132.60 143.11 804.08 V / C 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.24 0.28 0.00 0.35
d, Delay 7.67 40.88 33.06 10.03 9.11 43.83 41.83 21.16
LOS A E D B A E E C
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach E W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Movements T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1
vx, Volume 6.52 208.15 208.15 8.70 277.17 223.91 315.22 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 169.70 504.54
V / C 0.05 0.62
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.16 4.76
d, Delay 27.36 23.81
LOS D C
dA, Approach Delay 27.36 23.81
Approach LOS D C
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) S (Major)
0.12 5.04
D C
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.12 27.36 5.04 23.81
N (Major) E S (Major) W
N (Major) E S (Major) W
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) E S (Major) W
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 203: Stow Canyon & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) E S (Major) W
Pedestrians
N (Major) E S (Major) W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.278
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.378
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 26 563 4 62 8 45 4 486 39 5 0 14
PHF 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 Peak 15 Volume 7 153 1 17 2 12 1 132 11 1 0 4
Adjusted Volume 28 612 4 67 9 49 4 528 42 5 0 15
Approach E W
Lane Group L C C L C C
ID 59 60 58 63 64 62
Lanes L T, RT LTR L T, RT LTR
Volume 28 616 125 4 571 21
Approach E W
Lane Group 59 60 58 63 64 62
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 28 612 4 67 9 49 4 528 42 5 0 15
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.193 0.193 0.042 0.078 0.078 0.003 0.178 0.178 0.003 0.000 0.013 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.193 0.193 0.042 0.078 0.078 0.003 0.178 0.178 0.003 0.000 0.013 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N S
Saturation Flow Rate
N S
Node 204: Fairview & Berkeley
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay2.04
Worst Case Delay26.32
Worst Case LOSD
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Base Volume 595.00 49.00 31.00 476.00 58.00 46.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 646.74 53.26 33.70 517.39 63.04 50.00 Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Rank 1 1 2 1 3 2
vx, Volume 33.70 63.04 50.00
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 700.00 999.46 350.00
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 700.00 999.46 350.00
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 906.22 243.44 652.01
Capacity 906.22 232.87 652.01
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.80 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Volume 646.74 53.26 33.70 517.39 63.04 50.00
cmx, Capacity 906.22 232.87 652.01
V / C 0.04 0.27 0.08
d, Delay 9.13 26.32 16.38
LOS A D C
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1
Movements T, R1 L1, R1
vx, Volume 350.00 350.00 33.70 258.70 258.70 113.04
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 325.39
V / C 0.35
Q95, 95% Queue Length 1.57
d, Delay 21.92
LOS C
dA, Approach Delay 21.92
Approach LOS C
C
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) S (Major)
0.00 0.56
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) S (Major) W
0.00 0.56 21.92
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) S (Major) W
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) S (Major) W
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) S (Major) W
Pedestrians
Node 240: Fairview & Shirrell Way
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) S (Major) W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.274
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.374
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 109 526 52 79 447 55
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 27 132 13 20 112 14
Adjusted Volume 109 526 52 79 447 55
Approach S
Lane Group L C L R C
ID 68 69 66 67 71
Lanes L T, T L R T, RT
Volume 109 526 52 79 502
Approach S
Lane Group 68 69 66 67 71
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Volume 109 526 52 79 447 55
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.068 0.164 0.033 0.049 0.157 0.157 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.068 0.164 0.033 0.049 0.157 0.157 Critical Movement Y Y Y
N E S
N E
Saturation Flow Rate
N E
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 241: Encina & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay3.83
Worst Case Delay12.23
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 13.00 2.00 6.00 56.00 50.00 2.00 17.00 1.00 64.00 1.00 124.00 52.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 14.13 2.17 6.52 60.87 54.35 2.17 18.48 1.09 69.57 1.09 134.78 56.52 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 14.13 2.17 6.52 60.87 18.48 1.09 69.57 1.09
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 376.63 369.57 54.35 191.30 318.48 315.22 134.78 56.52 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 376.63 369.57 54.35 191.30 318.48 315.22 134.78 56.52 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 584.43 563.08 1018.391394.43 638.19 603.81 919.45 1561.00 Capacity 514.58 537.33 1018.391394.43 602.77 576.20 919.45 1561.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 14.13 2.17 6.52 60.87 54.35 2.17 18.48 1.09 69.57 1.09 134.78 56.52 cmx, Capacity 514.58 537.33 1018.391394.43 602.77 576.20 919.45 1561.00 V / C 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00
d, Delay 12.23 11.94 8.77 7.70 11.50 11.78 9.45 7.31
LOS B B A A B B A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements L1, T, R1 L1, T, R1
vx, Volume 22.83 60.87 54.35 2.17 89.13 1.09 134.78 56.52 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 602.11 823.75
V / C 0.04 0.11
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.12 0.36
d, Delay 11.21 9.90
LOS B A
dA, Approach Delay 11.21 9.90
Approach LOS B A
3.99 0.04
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
11.21 3.99 9.90 0.04
B A
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 273: Cathedral Oaks & Brandon
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.328
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.428
Approach N
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 122 186 15 153 250 81
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 31 47 4 38 63 20
Adjusted Volume 122 186 15 153 250 81
Approach N
Lane Group L C L R C R
ID 111 112 115 116 113 114
Lanes L T L R T R
Volume 122 186 15 153 250 81
Approach N
Lane Group 111 112 115 116 113 114
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Approach N
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Volume 122 186 15 153 250 81
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.076 0.116 0.009 0.096 0.156 0.051 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.076 0.116 0.009 0.096 0.156 0.051 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
E S W
E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 276: Cathedral Oaks & Alameda
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.396
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.496
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 9 25 7 57 284 11 248 34 82 11 297 188
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 2 6 2 14 71 3 62 9 21 3 74 47
Adjusted Volume 9 25 7 57 284 11 248 34 82 11 297 188
Approach
Lane Group L C L C R L C R L C R
ID 123 124 120 121 122 117 118 119 125 126 127
Lanes L RT L T R L T R L T R
Volume 9 32 57 284 11 248 34 82 11 297 188
Approach
Lane Group 123 124 120 121 122 117 118 119 125 126 127
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 9 25 7 57 284 11 248 34 82 11 297 188
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.006 0.020 0.020 0.036 0.178 0.007 0.155 0.021 0.051 0.007 0.186 0.118 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.006 0.020 0.020 0.036 0.178 0.007 0.155 0.021 0.051 0.007 0.186 0.118 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 277: Cathedral Oaks & Glen Anne
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Roundabout
Method HCM 7th Edition
Average Delay 5.59
Average LOS A
Worst Case Delay5.84
Worst Case LOSA
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume (veh/h) 24.00 218.00 248.00 9.00 152.00 256.00 PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Volume, Lane Flow Rate (veh/h) 26.09 236.96 269.57 9.78 165.22 278.26 Approach N E S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, T L1, R1 T, R1
Volume, Lane Flow Rate (veh/h) 263.043279.348443.478
P_T, Share of Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
f_HV, Heavy-Vehicle Adjustment Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 Adjusted Volume (pc/h) 263.043279.348443.478
De-Facto Movements L1, T L1, R1 T, R1
Is Bypass Lane
Uses Bypass
Bypass Type
Bypass Volume (pc/h) 0.000 0.000 0.000
Non-Bypass Volume (pc/h) 263.043279.348443.478
Approach N E S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, T L1, R1 T, R1
v_e, Entry Volume (pc/h) 263.04 279.35 443.48
v_bypass, Bypass Volume (pc/h)
t_f, Follow Up Headway
t_c, Critical Headway
A, Capacity Calibration Factor 1380.001380.001380.00
B, Capacity Calibration Factor 0.001020.001020.00102
v_c, Conflicting Volume (pc/h) 269.57 165.22 26.09
v_ex,pce, Conflicting Volume for Bypass Lane (pc/h)
c_pce, Capacity (pc/h) 1048.261165.981343.76
n_ped, Conflicting Pedestrian Volume 0.00 0.00 0.00
f_ped, Pedestrian Adjustment Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000
P_T, Share of Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
f_HV, Heavy-Vehicle Adjustment Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 Proportion of CAVs 0.000 0.000 0.000
c, Capacity (veh/h) 1048.261165.981343.76
Approach N E S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, T L1, R1 T, R1
v, Volume, Lane Flow Rate (veh/h) 263.04 279.35 443.48
c, Capacity (veh/h) 1048.261165.981343.76
x, Volume-to-Capacity Ratio 0.25 0.24 0.33
Q_95, 95% Queue Length (veh) 1.00 0.94 1.47
d, Delay (s/veh) 5.84 5.26 5.65
LOS A A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) 5.84 5.26 5.65
Approach LOS A A A
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
v, Volume, Lane Flow Rate (veh/h) 26.09 236.96 269.57 9.78 165.22 278.26 c, Capacity (veh/h) 1048.261048.261165.981165.981343.761343.76 x, Volume-to-Capacity Ratio 0.02 0.23 0.23 0.01 0.12 0.21 d, Delay (s/veh) 5.84 5.84 5.26 5.26 5.65 5.65
LOS A A A A A A
Approach Delay (s/veh)
Approach LOS
5.84 5.26 5.65
A A A
Capacity
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E S
Volume
Node 279:Calle Real & Los Caneros
Volume by Movement
N E S
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay2.47
Worst Case Delay11.08
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 63.00 19.00 100.00 60.00 12.00 140.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 68.48 20.65 108.70 65.22 13.04 152.17 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 3 2 1 1 2 1
vx, Volume 68.48 20.65 13.04
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 319.57 141.30 173.91
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 319.57 141.30 173.91
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 677.99 911.85 1414.93
Capacity 671.16 911.85 1414.93
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.20 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10 0.00
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.70 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.40 6.20 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 68.48 20.65 108.70 65.22 13.04 152.17
cmx, Capacity 671.16 911.85 1414.93
V / C 0.10 0.02 0.01
d, Delay 11.08 9.66 7.56
LOS B A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N E (Major)W (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, R1 T, R1 L1, T
vx, Volume 89.13 173.91 165.22
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 714.89 1800.00
V / C 0.12 0.09
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.43 0.02
d, Delay 10.75 7.56
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 10.75 0.00 0.60
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
B
0.00 0.08
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E (Major) W (Major)
10.75 0.00 0.60
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N E (Major) W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 280: Calle Real & La Patera
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay2.42
Worst Case Delay17.32
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 54.00 58.00 281.00 16.00 70.00 415.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 58.70 63.04 305.43 17.39 76.09 451.09 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 3 2 1 1 2 1
vx, Volume 58.70 63.04 76.09
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 691.85 161.41 322.83
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 691.85 161.41 322.83
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 382.46 861.32 1248.36
Capacity 355.81 861.32 1248.36
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.90 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10 0.00
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.70 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.80 6.90 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 58.70 63.04 305.43 17.39 76.09 451.09
cmx, Capacity 355.81 861.32 1248.36
V / C 0.16 0.07 0.06
d, Delay 17.32 11.38 8.07
LOS C B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N E (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3
Movements L1, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 121.74 322.83 76.09 225.54 225.54
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 511.17
V / C 0.24
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.93
d, Delay 14.24
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 14.24 0.00
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
W (Major)
1.16 B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E (Major) W (Major)
14.24 0.00 1.16
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N E (Major) W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 282: Calle Real & Carlo Dr
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.598
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.698
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 63 471 44 167 103 34 267 452 185 35 121 349 PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 16 118 11 42 26 9 67 113 46 9 30 87
Adjusted Volume 63 471 44 167 103 34 267 452 185 35 121 349 Approach
Lane Group L C L C C R L C R
ID 134 135 131 133 128 130 137 138 139
Lanes L T, RT L, L RT LT, T R L T R
Volume 63 515 167 137 719 185 35 121 349
Approach
Lane Group 134 135 131 133 128 130 137 138 139
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 3200 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 63 471 44 167 103 34 267 452 185 35 121 349
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.039 0.161 0.161 0.052 0.086 0.086 0.167 0.225 0.116 0.022 0.076 0.218 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.039 0.161 0.161 0.052 0.086 0.086 0.167 0.225 0.116 0.022 0.076 0.218 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 288: Calle Real & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.537
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.637
Approach N S
Movement T T R1 L1 R1
Base Volume 137 426 516 413 118
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 34 107 129 103 30
Adjusted Volume 137 426 516 413 118
Approach N S
Lane Group C C R L R
ID 142 140 141 143 145
Lanes T T R L, L R
Volume 137 426 516 413 118
Approach N S
Lane Group 142 140 141 143 145
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600
Approach N S
Movement T T R1 L1 R1
Volume 137 426 516 413 118
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.086 0.266 0.323 0.129 0.074 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.086 0.266 0.323 0.129 0.074 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Saturation Flow Rate
E W
Capacity Analysis
E W
E W
Node 289: Fairview & US 101 NB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.267
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.367
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 178 53 313 110 38 343
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 45 13 78 28 10 86
Adjusted Volume 178 53 313 110 38 343
Approach E
Lane Group L R C L C
ID 148 149 146 150 151
Lanes L R T, RT L T, T
Volume 178 53 423 38 343
Approach E
Lane Group 148 149 146 150 151
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 1 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 3200 1600 3200
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Volume 178 53 313 110 38 343
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.111 0.033 0.132 0.132 0.024 0.107 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.111 0.033 0.132 0.132 0.024 0.107 Critical Movement Y Y Y
N E W
N W
Saturation Flow Rate
N W
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 296: Calle Real & Kellogg
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.43
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.53
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 42 953 108 21 2 48 14 577 32 95 1 11
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 11 238 27 5 1 12 4 144 8 24 0 3
Adjusted Volume 42 953 108 21 2 48 14 577 32 95 1 11
Approach
Lane Group L C C R L C C R
ID 155 156 153 154 160 161 158 159
Lanes L T, RT LT R L T, RT LT R
Volume 42 1061 23 48 14 609 96 11
Approach
Lane Group 155 156 153 154 160 161 158 159
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 42 953 108 21 2 48 14 577 32 95 1 11
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.026 0.332 0.332 0.013 0.014 0.030 0.009 0.190 0.190 0.059 0.060 0.007 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.026 0.332 0.332 0.013 0.014 0.030 0.009 0.190 0.190 0.059 0.060 0.007 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 305: Patterson & Overpass
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS C
Critical V/C 0.788
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.888
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 611 726 444 279 168 6 364
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 153 182 111 70 42 2 91
Adjusted Volume 611 726 444 279 168 6 364
Approach E W
Lane Group L C C R C
ID 163 164 167 169 165
Lanes L T T, T R L, LTR
Volume 611 726 444 279 538
Approach E W
Lane Group 163 164 167 169 165
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 1 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 3200 1600 3200
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 611 726 444 279 168 6 364
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.382 0.454 0.139 0.174 0.053 0.168 0.168 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.382 0.454 0.139 0.174 0.053 0.168 0.168 Critical Movement Y Y Y
N S W
N S
Saturation Flow Rate
N S
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 306: Patterson & US 101 SB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.53
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.63
Approach W
Movement T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 895 341 430 21 379 230 376
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 224 85 108 5 95 58 94
Adjusted Volume 895 341 430 21 379 230 376
Approach E W
Lane Group C R C L C
ID 174 177 171 178 179
Lanes T, T, T R L, LTR, R L T, T
Volume 895 341 830 230 376
Approach E W
Lane Group 174 177 171 178 179
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 3 1 3 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 4800 1600 4800 1600 3200
Approach W
Movement T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T
Volume 895 341 430 21 379 230 376
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.186 0.213 0.134 0.173 0.173 0.144 0.118 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.186 0.213 0.134 0.173 0.173 0.144 0.118 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 307: Patterson & US 101 NB Ramp
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S
N E S
N S
Saturation Flow Rate
N S
Capacity Analysis
Control Type AWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
Average Delay 8.75
Average LOS A
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 26.00 10.00 50.00 7.00 93.00 6.00 62.00 18.00 36.00 3.00 99.00 11.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 Flow Rate 28.26 10.87 54.35 7.61 101.09 6.52 67.39 19.57 39.13 3.26 107.61 11.96 Geometry Group
Approach N
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2
Total Lane Flow Rate 93.48 7.61 107.61 86.96 39.13 3.26 119.57 Left Turn Flow Rate 28.26 7.61 0.00 67.39 0.00 3.26 0.00 Right Turn Flow Rate 54.35 0.00 6.52 0.00 39.13 0.00 11.96 PLT, Proportion LT 0.30 1.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 1.00 0.00
PRT, Proportion RT 0.58 0.00 0.06 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.10
PHV, Proportion HV 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hLT,adj, Headway adjustment for left turns 0.20
hRT,adj, Headway adjustment for right turns -0.60
hHV,adj, Headway adjustment for heavy vehicles 1.70
hadj, Headway adjustment -0.29 0.50 -0.04 0.39 -0.70 0.50 -0.07 Approach N
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2
Total Lane Flow Rate 93.48 7.61 107.61 86.96 39.13 3.26 119.57 hd initial 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
x initial 0.08 0.01 0.10 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.11
hd, iteration 1 4.70 5.44 4.89 5.33 4.24 5.43 4.86
Difference, iteration 1 1.50 2.24 1.69 2.13 1.04 2.23 1.66 hd, iteration 2 4.96 5.67 5.12 5.56 4.47 5.66 5.09
Difference, iteration 2 0.26 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 hd, iteration 3 4.99 5.70 5.16 5.59 4.50 5.70 5.12
Difference, iteration 3 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Convergence Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
hd final, Departure Headway 4.99 5.70 5.16 5.59 4.50 5.70 5.12 x final, Degree of Utilization 0.13 0.01 0.15 0.14 0.05 0.01 0.17 Approach N
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2
Total Lane Flow Rate 93.48 7.61 107.61 86.96 39.13 3.26 119.57 hd, Departure Headway 4.99 5.70 5.16 5.59 4.50 5.70 5.12 x, Degree of Utilization 0.13 0.01 0.15 0.14 0.05 0.01 0.17 m, Move Up Time 2.00 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30
ts, Service Time 2.99 3.40 2.86 3.29 2.20 3.40 2.82
Capacity 720.99 630.42 697.56 643.34 799.06 631.77 702.33 Delay 8.73 8.47 8.80 9.16 7.43 8.42 8.87
LOS A A A A A A A
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.45 0.04 0.55 0.47 0.15 0.02 0.61 Approach Delay 8.73
Approach LOS A
Intersection Delay
Intersection LOS
A A A
8.75 A
Capacity and Level of Service
E S W
8.78 8.63 8.86
1.70 1.70 1.70
Departure Headway
E S W
0.50 0.50 0.50
-0.70 -0.70 -0.70
E S W
Node 359: Cathedral Oaks & Winchester Canyon
Volume and Adjustments
N E S W
4b 5 5 5
Saturation Headway
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.8
Worst Case Delay9.4
Worst Case LOSA
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
Base Volume 243.00 23.00 370.00 59.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
V, Adjusted Volume 264.13 25.00 402.17 64.13
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
Rank 1 1 1 2
vx, Volume 64.13
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 144.57
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00
Conflicting Volume 144.57
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 882.90
Capacity 882.90
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.10
G, % Grade 0.00 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.30
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Volume 264.13 25.00 402.17 64.13
cmx, Capacity 882.90
V / C 0.07
d, Delay 9.40
LOS A
dA, Approach Delay 0.00 9.40
Approach LOS A
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay 0.00
Approach W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Movements T, R1
vx, Volume 144.57 144.57 201.09 201.09 64.13
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay 9.40
Approach LOS A
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) S (Major)
N (Major)
Node 372: Glen Annie & Del Norte
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major)
Pedestrians
N (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major)
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Movement
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.484
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.584
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 75 944 235 394 249 54 223
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 19 236 59 99 62 14 56
Adjusted Volume 75 944 235 394 249 54 223
Approach E S
Lane Group L C C C R
ID 255 256 260 258 259
Lanes L T, T T, RT LT R
Volume 75 944 629 303 223
Approach E S
Lane Group 255 256 260 258 259
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 3200 1600 1600
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 75 944 235 394 249 54 223
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.047 0.295 0.197 0.197 0.156 0.189 0.139 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.047 0.295 0.197 0.197 0.156 0.189 0.139 Critical Movement Y Y
N S W
N W
Saturation Flow Rate
N W
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 375: Los Caneros & US101 SB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.395
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.495
Approach W
Movement T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 354 140 639 3 55 37 337
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 89 35 160 1 14 9 84
Adjusted Volume 354 140 639 3 55 37 337
Approach N E W
Lane Group C C L C
ID 264 262 266 267
Lanes T, RT L, LTR L T, T
Volume 494 697 37 337
Approach N E W
Lane Group 264 262 266 267
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 2 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 1600 3200
Approach W
Movement T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T
Volume 354 140 639 3 55 37 337
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.154 0.154 0.200 0.218 0.218 0.023 0.105 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.154 0.154 0.200 0.218 0.218 0.023 0.105 Critical Movement Y Y Y
S
Saturation Flow Rate
S
Capacity Analysis
N E S
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 376: Los Carneros & US 101 NB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.531
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.631
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 438 821 467 397 137 1 234
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 110 205 117 99 34 0 59
Adjusted Volume 438 821 467 397 137 1 234
Approach E
Lane Group L C C R C R
ID 272 274 269 271 276 277
Lanes L, L T, T T, T R LT R
Volume 438 821 467 397 138 234
Approach E
Lane Group 272 274 269 271 276 277
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 2 2 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 3200 1600 1600 1600
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 438 821 467 397 137 1 234
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.137 0.257 0.146 0.248 0.086 0.086 0.146 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.137 0.257 0.146 0.248 0.086 0.086 0.146 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N S W
N S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 383: Fairview & US 101 SB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.513
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.613
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 298 254 401 39 253 261 76 129 35 165 258 91 PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 75 64 100 10 63 65 19 32 9 41 65 23
Adjusted Volume 298 254 401 39 253 261 76 129 35 165 258 91 Approach
Lane Group L C R L C R L C L C R
ID 285 287 289 281 282 284 278 279 290 292 294
Lanes L, L T, T R L T, T R L T, RT L, L T, T R
Volume 298 254 401 39 253 261 76 164 165 258 91
Approach
Lane Group 285 287 289 281 282 284 278 279 290 292 294
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 3200 3200 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 298 254 401 39 253 261 76 129 35 165 258 91
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.093 0.079 0.251 0.024 0.079 0.163 0.048 0.051 0.051 0.052 0.081 0.057 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.093 0.079 0.251 0.024 0.079 0.163 0.048 0.051 0.051 0.052 0.081 0.057 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 385: Hollister & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay3.3
Worst Case Delay59.72
Worst Case LOSF
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 84.00 967.00 47.00 215.00 628.00 23.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 91.30 1051.09 51.09 233.70 682.61 25.00 Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Rank 2 1 3 2 1 1
vx, Volume 91.30 51.09 233.70
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 707.61 1390.76 341.30
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 707.61 1390.76 341.30
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 900.35 135.63 660.47
Capacity 900.35 116.21 660.47
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.80 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Volume 91.30 1051.09 51.09 233.70 682.61 25.00
cmx, Capacity 900.35 116.21 660.47
V / C 0.10 0.44 0.35
d, Delay 9.45 59.72 13.43
LOS A F B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements
vx, Volume 91.30 525.54 525.54 51.09 233.70 341.30 341.30 25.00 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS C
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) E S (Major)
0.76 21.73 0.00
C
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) E S (Major)
0.76 21.73 0.00
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) E S (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) E S (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) E S (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 386: Fairview & Mandarin
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) E S (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.19
Worst Case Delay46.06
Worst Case LOSE
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 4.00 0.00 19.00 46.00 787.00 8.00 19.00 0.00 17.00 7.00 565.00 36.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 4.35 0.00 20.65 50.00 855.43 8.70 20.65 0.00 18.48 7.61 614.13 39.13 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 4.35 0.00 20.65 50.00 20.65 0.00 18.48 7.61
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 1282.071628.26 432.07 653.26 1176.631613.04 326.63 864.13 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 1282.071628.26 432.07 653.26 1176.631613.04 326.63 864.13 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 124.50 102.95 577.17 943.14 148.81 105.18 674.99 787.24 Capacity 111.25 94.58 577.17 943.14 131.82 96.63 674.99 787.24 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 4.35 0.00 20.65 50.00 855.43 8.70 20.65 0.00 18.48 7.61 614.13 39.13 cmx, Capacity 111.25 94.58 577.17 943.14 131.82 96.63 674.99 787.24 V / C 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.05 0.16 0.00 0.03 0.01
d, Delay 38.23 43.93 12.11 9.03 36.12 46.06 14.14 9.62
LOS E E B A E E B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 25.00 50.00 432.07 432.07 39.13 7.61 326.63 326.63 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 333.94 212.62
V / C 0.07 0.18
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.24 0.67
d, Delay 16.65 25.74
LOS C D
dA, Approach Delay 16.65 25.74
Approach LOS C D
0.49 0.11
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
16.65 0.49 25.74 0.11
C D
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 387: Hollister & Orange
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.296
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.396
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 29 9 25 57 519 20 58 7 72 7 409 92
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 7 2 6 14 130 5 15 2 18 2 102 23
Adjusted Volume 29 9 25 57 519 20 58 7 72 7 409 92
Approach N S
Lane Group C L C C L C
ID 298 295 296 302 299 300
Lanes LTR L T, RT LTR L T, RT
Volume 63 57 539 137 7 501
Approach N S
Lane Group 298 295 296 302 299 300
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 29 9 25 57 519 20 58 7 72 7 409 92
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.039 0.039 0.036 0.168 0.168 0.036 0.086 0.086 0.004 0.157 0.157 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.018 0.039 0.039 0.036 0.168 0.168 0.036 0.086 0.086 0.004 0.157 0.157 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
E W
Saturation Flow Rate
E W
Node 390: Hollister & Pine/Nectarine
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.227
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.327
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 48 575 17 32 495 37
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 12 144 4 8 124 9
Adjusted Volume 48 575 17 32 495 37
Approach S W
Lane Group L C C C
ID 303 304 308 306
Lanes L T, T LTR T, RT
Volume 48 575 49 532
Approach S W
Lane Group 303 304 308 306
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 3200
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Volume 48 575 17 32 495 37
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.030 0.180 0.011 0.031 0.166 0.166 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.030 0.180 0.011 0.031 0.166 0.166 Critical Movement Y Y Y
E
Saturation Flow Rate
E
Capacity Analysis
E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 394: Hollister & Rutherford
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.3
Worst Case Delay8.75
Worst Case LOSA
Approach S
Movement L1 T T R1
Base Volume 41.00 636.00 503.00 29.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
V, Adjusted Volume 44.57 691.30 546.74 31.52
Approach S
Movement L1 T T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00
Approach S
Movement L1 T T R1
Rank 2 1 1 1
vx, Volume 44.57
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 578.26
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00
Conflicting Volume 578.26
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1005.41
Capacity 1005.41
Approach S
Movement L1 T T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00
G, % Grade 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20
Approach S
Movement L1 T T R1
vx, Volume 44.57 691.30 546.74 31.52
cmx, Capacity 1005.41
V / C 0.04
d, Delay 8.75
LOS A
dA, Approach Delay 0.00
Approach LOS A
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements T, R1
vx, Volume 44.57 345.65 345.65 289.13 289.13
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay 0.00
Approach LOS A
0.53 0.00
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
0.53 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
E (Major) W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
E (Major) W (Major)
E (Major) W (Major)
Node 396: Hollister & Community Center West Driveway
Volume and Adjustments
E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.396
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.496
Approach S
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 96 4 33 271 594 83 116 35 469 55
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 24 1 8 68 149 21 29 9 117 14
Adjusted Volume 96 4 33 271 594 83 116 35 469 55
Approach S
Lane Group C R L C R L C
ID 321 322 318 319 317 323 324
Lanes LT R L T, RT R L T, RT
Volume 100 33 271 677 116 35 524
Approach S
Lane Group 321 322 318 319 317 323 324
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 Approach S
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 R1 L1 T R1
Volume 96 4 33 271 594 83 116 35 469 55
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.060 0.063 0.021 0.169 0.212 0.212 0.073 0.022 0.164 0.164 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.060 0.063 0.021 0.169 0.212 0.212 0.073 0.022 0.164 0.164 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E W
N E W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 399: Hollister & Kellogg
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.487
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.587
Approach S
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T T R1
Base Volume 165 0 414 99 417 734 47
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 41 0 104 25 104 184 12
Adjusted Volume 165 0 414 99 417 734 47
Approach N S W
Lane Group C L C C C
ID 331 326 327 328 333
Lanes LTR, R L T, T T, T T, RT
Volume 579 99 265 152 781
Approach N S W
Lane Group 331 326 327 328 333
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 2 1 2 2 2
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 1600 3200 3200 3200
Approach S
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T T R1
Volume 165 0 414 99 417 734 47
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.103 0.000 0.181 0.062 0.083 0.244 0.244 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.103 0.000 0.181 0.062 0.083 0.244 0.244 Critical Movement Y Y Y
E
Saturation Flow Rate
E
Capacity Analysis
N E W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 402: Hollister & SR-217 SB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.319
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.419
Approach N
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 39 432 79 57 61 64 352 443 132
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 10 108 20 14 15 16 88 111 33
Adjusted Volume 39 432 79 57 61 64 352 443 132
Approach N
Lane Group L C R C R L C
ID 337 338 340 335 336 341 343
Lanes L T, T R LT R L, L T, RT
Volume 39 432 79 118 64 352 575
Approach N
Lane Group 337 338 340 335 336 341 343
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 1 2 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 3200 Approach N
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 39 432 79 57 61 64 352 443 132
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.024 0.135 0.049 0.036 0.074 0.040 0.110 0.180 0.180 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.024 0.135 0.049 0.036 0.074 0.040 0.110 0.180 0.180 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
E S W
E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 405: Hollister & SR-217 NB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay4.37
Worst Case Delay9.99
Worst Case LOSA
Approach S (Major)
Movement L1 T T R1
Base Volume 65.00 34.00 77.00 0.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
V, Adjusted Volume 70.65 36.96 83.70 0.00
Approach S (Major)
Movement L1 T T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00
Approach S (Major)
Movement L1 T T R1
Rank 1 1 2 2
vx, Volume 83.70 0.00
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 89.13 89.13
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 89.13 89.13
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 804.78 974.42
Capacity 804.78 974.42
Approach S (Major)
Movement L1 T T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 6.50 6.20
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.50 6.20
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 4.00 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 4.00 3.30
Approach S (Major)
Movement L1 T T R1
vx, Volume 70.65 36.96 83.70 0.00
cmx, Capacity 804.78 974.42
V / C 0.10 0.00
d, Delay 9.99 9.21
LOS A A
dA, Approach Delay 0.00
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay 0.00
Approach E (Major)S (Major) W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, T T, R1
vx, Volume 107.61 83.70
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 804.78
V / C 0.10
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.35
d, Delay 9.99
LOS A
dA, Approach Delay 0.00 0.00 9.99
Approach LOS A
A
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
0.00 9.99
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
E (Major) W
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
E (Major) W
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
E (Major) W
E (Major) W
Node 441: Calle Real & NB 101 OnRamp
Volume and Adjustments
E (Major) W
Pedestrians
Control Type AWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
Average Delay 8.43
Average LOS A
Approach N W
Movement R1 T R1 L1
Base Volume 155.00 202.00 79.00 54.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
Flow Rate 168.48 219.57 85.87 58.70
Geometry Group 1 1
Approach N E W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 168.48 305.43 58.70
Left Turn Flow Rate 0.00 0.00 58.70
Right Turn Flow Rate 168.48 85.87 0.00
PLT, Proportion LT 0.00 0.00 1.00
PRT, Proportion RT 1.00 0.28 0.00
PHV, Proportion HV 0.00 0.00 0.00
hLT,adj, Headway adjustment for left turns 0.20 0.20 0.20 hRT,adj, Headway adjustment for right turns -0.60 -0.60 -0.60 hHV,adj, Headway adjustment for heavy vehicles 1.70 1.70 1.70 hadj, Headway adjustment -0.60 -0.17 0.20
Approach N E W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 168.48 305.43 58.70
hd initial 3.20 3.20 3.20
x initial 0.15 0.27 0.05
hd, iteration 1 3.40 4.07 4.39
Difference, iteration 1 0.20 0.87 1.19
hd, iteration 2 3.44 4.11 4.41
Difference, iteration 2 0.04 0.04 0.02
Convergence Y Y Y
hd final, Departure Headway 3.44 4.11 4.41
x final, Degree of Utilization 0.16 0.35 0.07
Approach N E W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 168.48 305.43 58.70
hd, Departure Headway 3.44 4.11 4.41
x, Degree of Utilization 0.16 0.35 0.07
m, Move Up Time 2.00 2.00 2.00
ts, Service Time 1.44 2.11 2.41
Capacity 1046.65 876.34 816.18
Delay 7.10 9.30 7.75
LOS A A A
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.57 1.60 0.23
Approach Delay 7.10 9.30 7.75
Approach LOS A A A
Intersection Delay
Intersection LOS
Capacity and Level of Service
8.43 A
Node 445: Calle Real & Winchester Canyon
Volume and Adjustments
E
1 Saturation Headway
Departure Headway
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay4.4
Worst Case Delay11.31
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 152.00 14.00 45.00 92.00 5.00 124.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 165.22 15.22 48.91 100.00 5.43 134.78 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 3 2 1 1 2 1
vx, Volume 165.22 15.22 5.43
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 244.57 98.91 148.91
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 244.57 98.91 148.91
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 748.20 962.38 1444.90
Capacity 745.16 962.38 1444.90
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.20 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10 0.00
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.70 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.40 6.20 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 165.22 15.22 48.91 100.00 5.43 134.78
cmx, Capacity 745.16 962.38 1444.90
V / C 0.22 0.02 0.00
d, Delay 11.31 10.22 7.50
LOS B B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N E (Major)W (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, R1 T, R1 L1, T
vx, Volume 180.43 148.91 140.22
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 759.62 1800.00
V / C 0.24 0.08
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.93 0.01
d, Delay 11.21 7.50
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 11.21 0.00 0.29
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
B
0.00 0.03
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E (Major) W (Major)
11.21 0.00 0.29
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N E (Major) W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 450: Calle Real & Brandon Dr.
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.87
Worst Case Delay12.38
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 62.00 12.00 138.00 16.00 6.00 266.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 67.39 13.04 150.00 17.39 6.52 289.13 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 3 2 1 1 2 1
vx, Volume 67.39 13.04 6.52
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 460.87 158.70 167.39
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 460.87 158.70 167.39
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 562.44 891.86 1422.69
Capacity 559.37 891.86 1422.69
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.10 6.20 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10 0.00
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.70 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.40 6.20 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 67.39 13.04 150.00 17.39 6.52 289.13
cmx, Capacity 559.37 891.86 1422.69
V / C 0.12 0.01 0.00
d, Delay 12.38 9.98 7.54
LOS B A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N E (Major)W (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements L1, R1 T, R1 L1, T
vx, Volume 80.43 167.39 295.65
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 595.36 1800.00
V / C 0.14 0.16
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.47 0.01
d, Delay 11.99 7.54
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 11.99 0.00 0.17
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
B
0.00 0.04
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E (Major) W (Major)
11.99 0.00 0.17
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N E (Major) W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 451: San Rossano Dr & Calle Real
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.518
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.618
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 4 296 9 677 327 180 118 157 37 29 3 555
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 1 74 2 169 82 45 30 39 9 7 1 139
Adjusted Volume 4 296 9 677 327 180 118 157 37 29 3 555 Approach E
Lane Group L C C L C L C
ID 381 382 378 374 376 384 385
Lanes L T, RT L, LT, RT L, L T, RT L RT, R
Volume 4 305 1184 118 194 29 558
Approach E
Lane Group 381 382 378 374 376 384 385
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 3 2 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 4800 3200 3200 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 4 296 9 677 327 180 118 157 37 29 3 555
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.003 0.095 0.095 0.212 0.247 0.247 0.037 0.061 0.061 0.018 0.174 0.174 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.003 0.095 0.095 0.212 0.247 0.247 0.037 0.061 0.061 0.018 0.174 0.174 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
N S W
Node 461: Storke & US 101 NB Ramps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS C
Critical V/C 0.74
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.84
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 509 1038 270 770 14 4 160
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 127 260 68 193 4 1 40
Adjusted Volume 509 1038 270 770 14 4 160
Approach E
Lane Group L C C R C R
ID 390 392 387 389 394 395
Lanes L, L T, T T, T R LT R
Volume 509 1038 270 770 18 160
Approach E
Lane Group 390 392 387 389 394 395
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 2 2 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 3200 1600 1600 1600
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 509 1038 270 770 14 4 160
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.159 0.324 0.084 0.481 0.009 0.011 0.100 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.159 0.324 0.084 0.481 0.009 0.011 0.100 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N S W
N S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 462: Storke & US 101 SB Ramp
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.21
Worst Case Delay11.31
Worst Case LOSB
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
Base Volume 746.00 11.00 449.00 23.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
V, Adjusted Volume 810.87 11.96 488.04 25.00
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
Rank 1 1 1 2
vx, Volume 25.00
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 411.41
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00
Conflicting Volume 411.41
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 595.18
Capacity 595.18
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.10
G, % Grade 0.00 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.30
Approach S (Major) W
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Volume 810.87 11.96 488.04 25.00
cmx, Capacity 595.18
V / C 0.04
d, Delay 11.31
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 0.00 11.31
Approach LOS B
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay 0.00
Approach W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Movements T, R1
vx, Volume 411.41 411.41 244.02 244.02 25.00
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay 11.31
Approach LOS B
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) S (Major)
N (Major)
Node 465: Los Carneros Rd & Calle Koral (west/south)
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major)
Pedestrians
N (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major)
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Movement
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.263
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.363
Approach N
Movement R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 2 93 753 5 10 1 22 8 439 2
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 1 23 188 1 3 0 6 2 110 1
Adjusted Volume 2 93 753 5 10 1 22 8 439 2
Approach N S
Lane Group R L C C L C
ID 400 397 398 396 402 403
Lanes R, R L T, RT LTR L T, RT
Volume 2 93 758 33 8 441
Approach N S
Lane Group 400 397 398 396 402 403
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 1 2 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200
Approach N
Movement R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 2 93 753 5 10 1 22 8 439 2
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.001 0.058 0.237 0.237 0.006 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.138 0.138 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.001 0.058 0.237 0.237 0.006 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.138 0.138 Critical Movement Y Y Y
E S W
E W
Saturation Flow Rate
E W
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 466: Los Carneros & Cremona
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.403
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.503
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 172 827 52 35 8 120 10 448 10 101 8 25
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 43 207 13 9 2 30 3 112 3 25 2 6
Adjusted Volume 172 827 52 35 8 120 10 448 10 101 8 25
Approach
Lane Group L C R L C R L C L C
ID 408 409 411 405 406 407 414 415 412 413
Lanes L T, T R L T R L T, T, RT L RT
Volume 172 827 52 35 8 120 10 458 101 33
Approach
Lane Group 408 409 411 405 406 407 414 415 412 413
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 4800 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 172 827 52 35 8 120 10 448 10 101 8 25
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.108 0.258 0.033 0.022 0.005 0.075 0.006 0.095 0.095 0.063 0.021 0.021 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.108 0.258 0.033 0.022 0.005 0.075 0.006 0.095 0.095 0.063 0.021 0.021 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 467: Los Carneros & Calle Koral
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.45
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.55
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 256 363 184 73 362 405 31 134 62 65 300 51
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 64 91 46 18 91 101 8 34 16 16 75 13
Adjusted Volume 256 363 184 73 362 405 31 134 62 65 300 51 Approach
Lane Group L C L C L C L C
ID 428 430 425 426 436 437 432 434
Lanes L, L T, RT L T, RT L T, RT L, L T, RT
Volume 256 547 73 767 31 196 65 351
Approach
Lane Group 428 430 425 426 436 437 432 434
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 1600 3200 1600 3200 3200 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 256 363 184 73 362 405 31 134 62 65 300 51
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.080 0.171 0.171 0.046 0.240 0.240 0.019 0.061 0.061 0.020 0.110 0.110 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.080 0.171 0.171 0.046 0.240 0.240 0.019 0.061 0.061 0.020 0.110 0.110 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 489: Hollister & Patterson
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay6.93
Worst Case Delay63.56
Worst Case LOSF
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 284.00 252.00 114.00 226.00 52.00 6.00 87.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 308.70 273.91 123.91 245.65 56.52 6.52 94.57 Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 2 1 1 1 3 3 2
vx, Volume 308.70 56.52 6.52 94.57
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 369.57 1138.041260.87 273.91
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 369.57 1138.041260.87 273.91
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1200.07 180.22 171.71 769.66
Capacity 1200.07 125.54 119.62 769.66
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 7.10 6.50 6.20
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30
Approach E
Movement L1 T T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 308.70 273.91 123.91 245.65 56.52 6.52 94.57 cmx, Capacity 1200.07 125.54 119.62 769.66
V / C 0.26 0.45 0.05 0.12
d, Delay 9.04 62.14 63.56 10.33
LOS A F F B
dA, Approach Delay 0.00
Approach LOS A
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach E S (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements T, R1 L1, T
vx, Volume 308.70 273.91 369.57 63.04 94.57
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 124.90
V / C 0.50
Q95, 95% Queue Length 2.80
d, Delay 62.29
LOS F
dA, Approach Delay 0.00 0.00
Approach LOS A D
D
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) W
4.79 31.12
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) S (Major) W
4.79 0.00 31.12
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) S (Major) W
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) S (Major) W
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) S (Major) W
Pedestrians
Node 506: Cathedral Oaks 101 SB-Ramp
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) S (Major) W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.27
Worst Case Delay16.55
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 22.00 0.00 35.00 5.00 370.00 8.00 11.00 0.00 5.00 5.00 305.00 5.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 23.91 0.00 38.04 5.43 402.17 8.70 11.96 0.00 5.43 5.43 331.52 5.43 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 23.91 0.00 38.04 5.43 11.96 0.00 5.43 5.43
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 589.67 760.87 201.09 336.96 576.09 766.85 168.48 410.87 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 589.67 760.87 201.09 336.96 576.09 766.85 168.48 410.87 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 395.61 337.55 812.49 1233.57 404.54 334.88 852.42 1158.89 Capacity 388.83 333.89 812.49 1233.57 381.42 331.25 852.42 1158.89 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 23.91 0.00 38.04 5.43 402.17 8.70 11.96 0.00 5.43 5.43 331.52 5.43 cmx, Capacity 388.83 333.89 812.49 1233.57 381.42 331.25 852.42 1158.89 V / C 0.06 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00
d, Delay 15.02 16.55 10.20 7.93 14.74 16.17 9.53 8.12
LOS C C B A B C A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements L1, T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 61.96 5.43 402.17 8.70 17.39 5.43 168.48 168.48 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 571.96 461.03
V / C 0.11 0.04
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.36 0.12
d, Delay 12.06 13.11
LOS B B
dA, Approach Delay 12.06 13.11
Approach LOS B B
0.10 0.13
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
12.06 0.10 13.11 0.13
B B
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 511: Hollister & Pebble Beach Rd
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.38
Worst Case Delay17.77
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 5.00 0.00 1.00 8.00 336.00 14.00 19.00 0.00 20.00 47.00 285.00 10.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 5.43 0.00 1.09 8.70 365.22 15.22 20.65 0.00 21.74 51.09 309.78 10.87 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 5.43 0.00 1.09 8.70 20.65 0.00 21.74 51.09
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 647.28 813.04 190.22 320.65 617.39 815.22 160.33 380.43 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 647.28 813.04 190.22 320.65 617.39 815.22 160.33 380.43 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 359.83 314.92 825.59 1250.65 377.98 314.01 862.69 1189.10 Capacity 331.53 297.65 825.59 1250.65 356.78 296.79 862.69 1189.10 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 5.43 0.00 1.09 8.70 365.22 15.22 20.65 0.00 21.74 51.09 309.78 10.87 cmx, Capacity 331.53 297.65 825.59 1250.65 356.78 296.79 862.69 1189.10 V / C 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.04
d, Delay 16.04 17.27 9.54 7.90 15.73 17.77 9.81 8.16
LOS C C A A C C A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 6.52 8.70 190.22 190.22 42.39 51.09 160.33 160.33 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 368.25 510.23
V / C 0.02 0.08
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.05 0.27
d, Delay 14.95 12.69
LOS B B
dA, Approach Delay 14.95 12.69
Approach LOS B B
0.18 1.12
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
14.95 0.18 12.69 1.12
B B
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 512: Hollister & Palo Alto Dr
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.81
Worst Case Delay13.68
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 16.00 305.00 46.00 54.00 287.00 20.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 17.39 331.52 50.00 58.70 311.96 21.74 Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Rank 2 1 3 2 1 1
vx, Volume 17.39 50.00 58.70
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 333.70 523.37 166.85
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 333.70 523.37 166.85
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1236.97 488.33 854.46
Capacity 1236.97 480.77 854.46
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.80 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Volume 17.39 331.52 50.00 58.70 311.96 21.74
cmx, Capacity 1236.97 480.77 854.46
V / C 0.01 0.10 0.07
d, Delay 7.95 13.68 10.41
LOS A B B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements L1, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 17.39 165.76 165.76 108.70 166.85 166.85
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 629.41
V / C 0.17
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.62
d, Delay 11.91
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 11.91
Approach LOS B
B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
0.40 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
E (Major) S W (Major)
0.40 11.91 0.00
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
E (Major) S W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 513: Hollister & Coronado
Volume and Adjustments
E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay2.67
Worst Case Delay22.6
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 54.00 300.00 40.00 107.00 561.00 25.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 58.70 326.09 43.48 116.30 609.78 27.17 Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Rank 2 1 3 2 1 1
vx, Volume 58.70 43.48 116.30
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 636.96 903.80 318.48
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 636.96 903.80 318.48
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 956.36 280.37 683.19
Capacity 956.36 261.45 683.19
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.80 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
vx, Volume 58.70 326.09 43.48 116.30 609.78 27.17
cmx, Capacity 956.36 261.45 683.19
V / C 0.06 0.17 0.17
d, Delay 9.01 22.60 14.10
LOS A C B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements L1, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 58.70 163.04 163.04 159.78 318.48 318.48
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 474.79
V / C 0.34
Q95, 95% Queue Length 1.51
d, Delay 16.42
LOS C
dA, Approach Delay 16.42
Approach LOS C
C
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
1.37 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
E (Major) S W (Major)
1.37 16.42 0.00
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
E (Major) S W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 515: Hollister & Cannon Green
Volume and Adjustments
E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.288
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.388
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T L1 R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 0 0 0 47 339 75 121 0 581 95
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 0 0 0 12 85 19 30 0 145 24
Adjusted Volume 0 0 0 47 339 75 121 0 581 95
Approach N
Lane Group C L C L R L C
ID 462 459 460 466 467 463 464
Lanes LTR L T, T L R L T, RT
Volume 0 47 339 75 121 0 676
Approach N
Lane Group 462 459 460 466 467 463 464
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T L1 R1 L1 T R1
Volume 0 0 0 47 339 75 121 0 581 95
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.106 0.047 0.076 0.000 0.211 0.211 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.106 0.047 0.076 0.000 0.211 0.211 Critical Movement Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
E S W
Node 517: Hollister & Pacific Oaks
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay1.95
Worst Case Delay36.91
Worst Case LOSE
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 8.00 0.00 3.00 87.00 368.00 33.00 10.00 2.00 71.00 4.00 691.00 26.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 8.70 0.00 3.26 94.57 400.00 35.87 10.87 2.17 77.17 4.35 751.09 28.26 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 8.70 0.00 3.26 94.57 10.87 2.17 77.17 4.35
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 992.39 1395.11 217.93 779.35 1163.041398.91 389.67 435.87 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 992.39 1395.11 217.93 779.35 1163.041398.91 389.67 435.87 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 202.83 142.64 792.57 846.70 152.26 141.89 614.73 1134.62 Capacity 151.34 123.61 792.57 846.70 131.40 122.95 614.73 1134.62 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 8.70 0.00 3.26 94.57 400.00 35.87 10.87 2.17 77.17 4.35 751.09 28.26 cmx, Capacity 151.34 123.61 792.57 846.70 131.40 122.95 614.73 1134.62 V / C 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.08 0.02 0.13 0.00
d, Delay 30.00 35.34 10.76 9.79 35.02 36.91 13.48 8.19
LOS D E B A E E B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Movements L1, T, R1 T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 11.96 94.57 217.93 217.93 90.22 4.35 389.67 389.67 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 194.18 399.29
V / C 0.06 0.23
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.20 0.87
d, Delay 24.75 16.64
LOS C C
dA, Approach Delay 24.75 16.64
Approach LOS C C
1.74 0.05
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
24.75 1.74 16.64 0.05
C C
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 518: Hollister & Santa Felicia
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.29
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.39
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 31 390 257 26 12 29 50 492 45 179 15 67
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 8 98 64 7 3 7 13 123 11 45 4 17
Adjusted Volume 31 390 257 26 12 29 50 492 45 179 15 67 Approach W
Lane Group C R C R C C
ID 471 473 468 469 477 474
Lanes T, T R LT R T, RT L, LTR
Volume 390 257 38 29 537 261
Approach W
Lane Group 471 473 468 469 477 474
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 1 1 1 2 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1520 614 3200 1600 1600 1600 1520 771 3200 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 31 390 257 26 12 29 50 492 45 179 15 67
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.019 0.122 0.161 0.016 0.024 0.018 0.031 0.168 0.168 0.056 0.082 0.082 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.019 0.122 0.161 0.016 0.024 0.018 0.031 0.168 0.168 0.056 0.082 0.082 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S
470 476
1600 1600
1 1
Capacity Analysis
470 476
L L
31 50
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S
L L
Node 521: Storke & Marketplace
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.399
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.499
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 164 423 285 164 157 96 31 539 154 381 314 64 PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 41 106 71 41 39 24 8 135 39 95 79 16
Adjusted Volume 164 423 285 164 157 96 31 539 154 381 314 64 Approach
Lane Group L C R L C R L C R L C R
ID 484 486 488 479 481 483 494 496 498 489 491 493
Lanes L, L T, T R L, L T, T R L, L T, T R L, L T, T R
Volume 164 423 285 164 157 96 31 539 154 381 314 64
Approach
Lane Group 484 486 488 479 481 483 494 496 498 489 491 493 Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 3200 1600 3200 3200 1600 3200 3200 1600 3200 3200 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 164 423 285 164 157 96 31 539 154 381 314 64
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.051 0.132 0.178 0.051 0.049 0.060 0.010 0.168 0.096 0.119 0.098 0.040 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.051 0.132 0.178 0.051 0.049 0.060 0.010 0.168 0.096 0.119 0.098 0.040 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 522: Hollister & Storke
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.217
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.317
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 19 3 20 37 466 18 6 3 9 23 523 24
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 5 1 5 9 117 5 2 1 2 6 131 6
Adjusted Volume 19 3 20 37 466 18 6 3 9 23 523 24
Approach N
Lane Group C L C C R L C R
ID 504 501 502 499 500 505 506 508
Lanes LTR L T, RT LT R L T, T R
Volume 42 37 484 9 9 23 523 24
Approach N
Lane Group 504 501 502 499 500 505 506 508
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 19 3 20 37 466 18 6 3 9 23 523 24
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.012 0.026 0.026 0.023 0.151 0.151 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.014 0.163 0.015 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.012 0.026 0.026 0.023 0.151 0.151 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.014 0.163 0.015 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
E S W
Node 524: Hollister & Coromar Project Access
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.306
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.406
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 34 285 122 76 278 18 54 346 121 43 268 145
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 9 71 31 19 70 5 14 87 30 11 67 36
Adjusted Volume 34 285 122 76 278 18 54 346 121 43 268 145 Approach
Lane Group L C R L C L C R L C
ID 512 513 515 509 510 520 522 524 516 518
Lanes L T, T R L T, RT L, L T, T R L, L T, RT
Volume 34 285 122 76 296 54 346 121 43 413
Approach
Lane Group 512 513 515 509 510 520 522 524 516 518
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 3200 3200 1600 3200 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 34 285 122 76 278 18 54 346 121 43 268 145
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.021 0.089 0.076 0.048 0.093 0.093 0.017 0.108 0.076 0.013 0.129 0.129 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.021 0.089 0.076 0.048 0.093 0.093 0.017 0.108 0.076 0.013 0.129 0.129 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 525: Hollister & Los Carneros
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.48
Worst Case Delay15.56
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 6.00 10.00 392.00 16.00 29.00 434.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 6.52 10.87 426.09 17.39 31.52 471.74 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 3 2 1 1 2 1
vx, Volume 6.52 10.87 31.52
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 733.70 221.74 443.48
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 733.70 221.74 443.48
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 359.82 788.14 1127.33
Capacity 348.24 788.14 1127.33
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.90 4.10
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.10 0.00
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.70 0.00 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.80 6.90 4.10
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 3.30 2.20
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 6.52 10.87 426.09 17.39 31.52 471.74
cmx, Capacity 348.24 788.14 1127.33
V / C 0.02 0.01 0.03
d, Delay 15.56 9.79 8.23
LOS C A A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements L1, R1 T, R1 L1, T
vx, Volume 17.39 221.74 221.74 251.63 251.63
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 534.80 1800.00
V / C 0.03 0.14
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.10 0.05
d, Delay 11.96 8.23
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 11.96
Approach LOS B
B
0.00 0.23
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.52
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N E (Major) W (Major)
11.96 0.00 0.52
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N E (Major) W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N E (Major) W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 526: Cremona Dr & Hollister Ave
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.162
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.262
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 69 20 389 35 12 427
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 17 5 97 9 3 107
Adjusted Volume 69 20 389 35 12 427
Approach E
Lane Group L R C L C
ID 527 529 525 530 531
Lanes L, L R T, RT L T, T
Volume 69 20 424 12 427
Approach E
Lane Group 527 529 525 530 531
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 2 1 2 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 3200 1600 3200 1600 3200
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Volume 69 20 389 35 12 427
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.022 0.013 0.133 0.133 0.008 0.133 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.022 0.013 0.133 0.133 0.008 0.133 Critical Movement Y Y Y
N E W
N W
Saturation Flow Rate
N W
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 528: Hollister & Los Carneros Way
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.186
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.286
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 32 2 36 3 385 57 6 1 6 34 418 28
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 8 1 9 1 96 14 2 0 2 9 105 7
Adjusted Volume 32 2 36 3 385 57 6 1 6 34 418 28
Approach
Lane Group C R L C C R L C
ID 538 539 535 536 533 534 540 541
Lanes LT R L T, RT LT R L T, RT
Volume 34 36 3 442 7 6 34 446
Approach
Lane Group 538 539 535 536 533 534 540 541
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 32 2 36 3 385 57 6 1 6 34 418 28
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.020 0.021 0.023 0.002 0.138 0.138 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.021 0.139 0.139 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.020 0.021 0.023 0.002 0.138 0.138 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.021 0.139 0.139 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 530: Hollister & Aero Camino
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.89
Worst Case Delay18.65
Worst Case LOSC
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Base Volume 410.00 31.00 42.00 569.00 17.00 29.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 445.65 33.70 45.65 618.48 18.48 31.52 Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Rank 1 1 2 1 3 2
vx, Volume 45.65 18.48 31.52
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 479.35 863.04 239.67
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 479.35 863.04 239.67
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1093.57 297.71 767.57
Capacity 1093.57 282.70 767.57
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.50 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.10
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.80 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 3.30
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Volume 445.65 33.70 45.65 618.48 18.48 31.52
cmx, Capacity 1093.57 282.70 767.57
V / C 0.04 0.07 0.04
d, Delay 8.44 18.65 10.60
LOS A C B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach W
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3 Lane 1
Movements T, R1 L1, R1
vx, Volume 239.67 239.67 45.65 309.24 309.24 50.00
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 469.79
V / C 0.11
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.36
d, Delay 13.58
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 13.58
Approach LOS B
B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) S (Major)
0.00 0.58
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) S (Major) W
0.00 0.58 13.58
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) S (Major) W
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) S (Major) W
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) S (Major) W
Pedestrians
Node 553: Storke & Santa Felicia
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) S (Major) W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.94
Worst Case Delay10.89
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Base Volume 18.00 181.00 1.00 20.00 145.00 5.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 19.57 196.74 1.09 21.74 157.61 5.43
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
Rank 2 1 3 2 1 1
vx, Volume 19.57 1.09 21.74
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 160.33 376.63 160.33
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 160.33 376.63 160.33
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1431.14 628.83 735.58
Capacity 1431.14 627.84 735.58
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.10 6.50
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.20
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.40 6.50
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00
Approach
Movement T R1 L1 T L1 R1
vx, Volume 19.57 196.74 1.09 21.74 157.61 5.43
cmx, Capacity 1431.14 627.84 735.58
V / C 0.01 0.00 0.03
d, Delay 7.55 10.89 10.05
LOS A B B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N (Major) S W (Major)
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1
Movements T, R1 L1, T L1, R1
vx, Volume 216.30 22.83 163.04
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 1431.14 729.62
V / C 0.15 0.03
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.53 0.10
d, Delay 7.55 10.09
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 0.68 10.09 0.00
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) S W (Major)
0.68 10.09 0.00
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) S W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
Node 556: Fowler & Fairview
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.318
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.418
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 56 305 40 10 6 110 32 342 12 149 6 58
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 14 76 10 3 2 28 8 86 3 37 2 15
Adjusted Volume 56 305 40 10 6 110 32 342 12 149 6 58
Approach E
Lane Group L C C L C L C
ID 544 545 543 549 550 547 548
Lanes L T, RT LTR L T, RT L RT
Volume 56 345 126 32 354 149 64
Approach E
Lane Group 544 545 543 549 550 547 548
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 56 305 40 10 6 110 32 342 12 149 6 58
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.035 0.108 0.108 0.006 0.079 0.079 0.020 0.111 0.111 0.093 0.040 0.040 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.035 0.108 0.108 0.006 0.079 0.079 0.020 0.111 0.111 0.093 0.040 0.040 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
N S W
Node 562: Storke & Phelps
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.108
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.208
Approach N
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Base Volume 40 7 16 98 34 32
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Peak 15 Volume 10 2 4 25 9 8
Adjusted Volume 40 7 16 98 34 32
Approach N E
Lane Group C L R C R
ID 552 555 556 553 554
Lanes LT L R T R
Volume 47 16 98 34 32
Approach N E
Lane Group 552 555 556 553 554
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Number of Lanes 1 1 1 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Approach N
Movement L1 T L1 R1 T R1
Volume 40 7 16 98 34 32
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.025 0.029 0.010 0.061 0.021 0.020 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.025 0.029 0.010 0.061 0.021 0.020 Critical Movement Y Y Y
E S W
S W
Saturation Flow Rate
S W
Capacity Analysis
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
Node 564: Mesa & Los Carneros
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
E S W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.268
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.368
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 32 456 282 0 2 4 29 417 6 24 1 15
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 8 114 71 0 1 1 7 104 2 6 0 4
Adjusted Volume 32 456 282 0 2 4 29 417 6 24 1 15
Approach E
Lane Group L C C L C C R
ID 603 604 602 608 609 606 607
Lanes L T, RT LTR L T, RT LT R
Volume 32 738 6 29 423 25 15
Approach E
Lane Group 603 604 602 608 609 606 607
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 1
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 32 456 282 0 2 4 29 417 6 24 1 15
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.020 0.231 0.231 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.018 0.132 0.132 0.015 0.016 0.009 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.020 0.231 0.231 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.018 0.132 0.132 0.015 0.016 0.009 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
N S W
Node 617: Los Caneros & Castilian
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type AWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
Average Delay 15.09
Average LOS C
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 0.00 189.00 25.00 325.00 44.00 5.00 52.00 98.00 51.00 6.00 5.00 65.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 Flow Rate 0.00 205.43 27.17 353.26 47.83 5.43 56.52 106.52 55.43 6.52 5.43 70.65 Geometry Group
Approach W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 0.00 232.61 353.26 53.26 56.52 161.96 82.61 Left Turn Flow Rate 0.00 0.00 353.26 0.00 56.52 0.00 6.52 Right Turn Flow Rate 0.00 27.17 0.00 5.43 0.00 55.43 70.65 PLT, Proportion LT 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.08
PRT, Proportion RT 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.34 0.86
PHV, Proportion HV 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hLT,adj, Headway adjustment for left turns 0.20
hRT,adj, Headway adjustment for right turns -0.60
hHV,adj, Headway adjustment for heavy vehicles 1.70
hadj, Headway adjustment 0.00 -0.08 0.50 -0.07 0.50 -0.24 -0.50 Approach W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 0.00 232.61 353.26 53.26 56.52 161.96 82.61 hd initial 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20
x initial 0.00 0.21 0.31 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.07
hd, iteration 1 5.45 5.37 5.78 5.21 5.96 5.22 5.08
Difference, iteration 1 2.25 2.17 2.58 2.01 2.76 2.02 1.88 hd, iteration 2 6.18 6.09 6.30 5.73 6.72 5.97 5.88
Difference, iteration 2 0.72 0.72 0.52 0.52 0.75 0.75 0.81 hd, iteration 3 6.36 6.28 6.48 5.91 6.91 6.17 6.13
Difference, iteration 3 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.25 hd, iteration 4 6.42 6.33 6.53 5.95 6.98 6.23 6.20
Difference, iteration 4 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 Convergence Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
hd final, Departure Headway 6.42 6.33 6.53 5.95 6.98 6.23 6.20 x final, Degree of Utilization 0.00 0.41 0.64 0.09 0.11 0.28 0.14 Approach W
Lanes Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1
Total Lane Flow Rate 0.00 232.61 353.26 53.26 56.52 161.96 82.61 hd, Departure Headway 6.42 6.33 6.53 5.95 6.98 6.23 6.20 x, Degree of Utilization 0.00 0.41 0.64 0.09 0.11 0.28 0.14 m, Move Up Time 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.00
ts, Service Time 4.12 4.03 4.23 3.65 4.68 3.93 4.20
Capacity 560.45 567.89 551.28 604.85 516.04 577.60 580.68 Delay 9.12 13.41 20.66 9.23 10.53 11.34 10.23
LOS A B C A B B B
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.00 2.05 5.09 0.29 0.37 1.16 0.50 Approach Delay 10.23
Approach LOS B
Intersection Delay
Intersection LOS
B C B
15.09 C
Capacity and Level of Service
N E S
13.41 19.16 11.13
1.70 1.70 1.70
Departure Headway
N E S
0.50 0.50 0.50
-0.70 -0.70 -0.70
N E S
Node 624: Cathedral Oaks & Calle Real
Volume and Adjustments
N E S W
5 5 5 4b
Saturation Headway
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.323
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.423
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 68 7 14 46 464 48 29 2 41 26 715 38
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 17 2 4 12 116 12 7 1 10 7 179 10
Adjusted Volume 68 7 14 46 464 48 29 2 41 26 715 38
Approach N
Lane Group C L C R C R L C
ID 618 613 615 617 611 612 619 620
Lanes LTR L, L T, T R LT R L T, RT
Volume 89 46 464 48 31 41 26 753
Approach N
Lane Group 618 613 615 617 611 612 619 620
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 3200 3200 1600 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 68 7 14 46 464 48 29 2 41 26 715 38
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.043 0.056 0.056 0.014 0.145 0.030 0.018 0.019 0.026 0.016 0.235 0.235 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.043 0.056 0.056 0.014 0.145 0.030 0.018 0.019 0.026 0.016 0.235 0.235 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
Capacity Analysis
N E S W
E S W
Node 630: Hollister & Marketplace/Village Way
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.95
Worst Case Delay14.71
Worst Case LOSB
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Base Volume 276.00 83.00 28.00 320.00 22.00 14.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 300.00 90.22 30.43 347.83 23.91 15.22 Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
Rank 1 1 2 1 3 2
vx, Volume 30.43 23.91 15.22
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 345.11 723.37 345.11
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00
Conflicting Volume 345.11 723.37 345.11
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 1225.11 395.86 581.08
Capacity 1225.11 394.67 581.08
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 4.10 7.10 6.50
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.20 0.20
G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.70 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 4.10 6.40 6.50
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90
tf, Follow-Up Headway 2.20 3.50 4.00
Approach
Movement L1 R1 T R1 L1 T
vx, Volume 300.00 90.22 30.43 347.83 23.91 15.22
cmx, Capacity 1225.11 394.67 581.08
V / C 0.02 0.06 0.03
d, Delay 8.01 14.71 11.36
LOS A B B
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements
vx, Volume 300.00 90.22 30.43 347.83 23.91 15.22
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS B
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
N (Major) E (Major) W
0.00 0.64 13.41
B
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
N (Major) E (Major) W
0.00 0.64 13.41
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N (Major) E (Major) W
0.00 0.00 0.00
N (Major) E (Major) W
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
N (Major) E (Major) W
Pedestrians
Node 636: Hollister & Cathedral Oaks
Volume and Adjustments
N (Major) E (Major) W
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.29
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.39
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 10 1 1 48 276 19 77 3 213 5 346 39
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 3 0 0 12 69 5 19 1 53 1 87 10
Adjusted Volume 10 1 1 48 276 19 77 3 213 5 346 39
Approach
Lane Group C R L C C R L C
ID 627 628 624 625 622 623 629 630
Lanes LT R L T, RT LT R L T, RT
Volume 11 1 48 295 80 213 5 385
Approach
Lane Group 627 628 624 625 622 623 629 630
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 10 1 1 48 276 19 77 3 213 5 346 39
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.006 0.007 0.001 0.030 0.092 0.092 0.048 0.050 0.133 0.003 0.120 0.120 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.006 0.007 0.001 0.030 0.092 0.092 0.048 0.050 0.133 0.003 0.120 0.120 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 717: Hollister & Entrance
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay2
Worst Case Delay33.91
Worst Case LOSD
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 10.00 0.00 82.00 0.00 326.00 19.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140.00 583.00 0.00 PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920 V, Adjusted Volume 10.87 0.00 89.13 0.00 354.35 20.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 152.17 633.70 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Rank 4 3 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 2 1 1
vx, Volume 10.87 0.00 89.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 152.17
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 985.87 1302.72 187.50 633.70 1115.221313.04 316.85 375.00 Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conflicting Volume 985.87 1302.72 187.50 633.70 1115.221313.04 316.85 375.00 Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No No No
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 205.06 162.09 828.90 959.02 165.04 159.80 684.84 1194.57 Capacity 173.35 137.03 828.90 959.02 124.52 135.09 684.84 1194.57 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 G, % Grade
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 tc, Critical Headway 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 7.50 6.50 6.90 4.10 tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 2.20 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
vx, Volume 10.87 0.00 89.13 0.00 354.35 20.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 152.17 633.70 0.00 cmx, Capacity 173.35 137.03 828.90 959.02 124.52 135.09 684.84 1194.57 V / C 0.06 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13
d, Delay 27.02 32.53 10.60 8.75 33.91 31.65 10.26 8.45
LOS D D B A D D B A
dA, Approach Delay
Approach LOS
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay
Approach N S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 3
Movements L1, T, R1 L1, T T, R1 L1, T, R1 T, R1
vx, Volume 100.00 187.50 187.50 0.00 152.17 316.85 316.85 Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity 587.44 0.00 177.59
V / C 0.17 0.00 0.00
Q95, 95% Queue Length 0.61 0.00 0.00
d, Delay 12.38 4.38 25.27
LOS B D
dA, Approach Delay 12.38 25.27
Approach LOS B D
0.00 1.64
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Movement
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
12.38 0.00 25.27 1.64
B D
N E (Major) S W (Major)
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
N E (Major) S W (Major)
0.00 0.00 0.00
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
Node 856: Hollister & Cortona
Volume and Adjustments
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Pedestrians
N E (Major) S W (Major)
Control Type TWSC
Method HCM 7th Edition
dI, Average Delay0.02
Worst Case Delay10.15
Worst Case LOSB
Approach E (Major) S
Movement T R1 T R1
Base Volume 520.00 2.00 551.00 3.00
PHF, Peak-hour factor 0.920 0.920 0.920 0.920
V, Adjusted Volume 565.22 2.17 598.91 3.26
Approach E (Major) S
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Flow (Ped/hr) 0.00
w, Lane Width (ft) 12.00
Sp, Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.50
fpb, Percent Blockage 0.00
Approach E (Major) S
Movement T R1 T R1
Rank 1 2 1 1
vx, Volume 2.17
Conflicting Volume (Veh) 301.09
Conflicting Volume (Ped) 0.00
Conflicting Volume 301.09
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance
Number of Storage Spaces in Median Refuge Area
cpx, Potential Capacity 701.00
Capacity 701.00
Approach E (Major) S
Movement T R1 T R1
tc,base, Base Critical Headway 6.90
tc,base,I, Base Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,base,II, Base Critical Headway (Stage II)
tc,HV, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 2.00
Phv, % Heavy Vehicles 0.00
tc,G, Grade Adjustment Factor 0.10
G, % Grade 0.00 0.00
T3,lt, Geometry Adjustment Factor 0.00
tc, Critical Headway 6.90
tc,I, Critical Headway (Stage I)
tc,II, Critical Headway (Stage II)
tf,base, Base Follow-Up Headway 3.30
tf,hv, Heavy Vehicles Adjustment Factor 1.00
tf, Follow-Up Headway 3.30
Approach E (Major) S
Movement T R1 T R1
vx, Volume 565.22 2.17 598.91 3.26
cmx, Capacity 701.00
V / C 0.00
d, Delay 10.15
LOS B
dA, Approach Delay 0.00 10.15
Approach LOS B
dRank1, Rank 1 Delay 0.00
Approach S
Lane Lane 1 Lane 2 Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 2
Movements T, R1
vx, Volume 282.61 282.61 2.17 301.09 301.09
Flared Storage Size
cmx, Capacity
V / C
Q95, 95% Queue Length
d, Delay
LOS
dA, Approach Delay 10.15
Approach LOS B
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Delay and Level of Service by Lane
E (Major) W (Major)
W (Major)
Node 864: Deckers Outdoor Access & Hollister Ave
Volume and Adjustments
W (Major)
Pedestrians
W (Major)
Capacity of Movements below Rank 1
W (Major)
Critical Headway and Follow Up Headway
W (Major)
0.00 Delay and Level of Service by Movement
Control Type Signalized
Method ICU Method 1
LOS A
Critical V/C 0.199
Loss Time 0
Cycle Length 100
Adj V/C 0.299
Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Base Volume 52 2 60 7 444 12 8 2 7 20 394 40
PHF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Peak 15 Volume 13 1 15 2 111 3 2 1 2 5 99 10
Adjusted Volume 52 2 60 7 444 12 8 2 7 20 394 40
Approach
Lane Group L C L C L C L C
ID 635 636 632 633 640 641 637 638
Lanes L RT L T, RT L RT L T, RT
Volume 52 62 7 456 8 9 20 434
Approach
Lane Group 635 636 632 633 640 641 637 638
Base Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Number of Lanes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Saturation Flow Rate 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 1600 3200 Approach
Movement L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1 L1 T R1
Volume 52 2 60 7 444 12 8 2 7 20 394 40
Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.033 0.039 0.039 0.004 0.143 0.143 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.013 0.136 0.136 Overlap adjusted Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.033 0.039 0.039 0.004 0.143 0.143 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.013 0.136 0.136 Critical Movement Y Y Y Y
N E S W
Volume and Adjustments by Lane Group
N E S W
Saturation Flow Rate
N E S W
Capacity Analysis
Node 877: Hollister & Sumida Gardens
Volume and Adjustments by Movement
N E S W