Hercules City Council
February 11, 2025

City of Hercules–Skelly Residential Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
FirstCarbon Solutions
Transportation Analysis

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Draft Traffic Impact Analysis Report
215 Skelly Residential Development
February 28, 2022
City of Hercules, California

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Page | i
Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4

1.1 Study Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.2 Study Intersections .................................................................................................................................................................. 4

1.3 Study Scenarios ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.0 Study Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 8

2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled ........................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Level of Service Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Level of Service Standards ..................................................................................................................................................10

3.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 12

3.1 Existing Setting and Roadway System ...........................................................................................................................12

3.2 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ..............................................................................................................................................12

3.3 Existing Bicycle Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................15

3.4 Existing Transit Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................17

3.5 Existing Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................................................................................19

3.6 Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions .................................................................................21

4.0 Existing plus Project Conditions .......................................................................................................... 23

4.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled .........................................................................................................................................................23

4.2 Project Trip Generation ........................................................................................................................................................23

4.3 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ...................................................................................................................24

4.5 Intersection Queuing Analysis ..........................................................................................................................................26

5.0 Cumulative No-Project Conditions (2040) .......................................................................................... 29

5.1 Intersections Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative No-Project Conditions ................................................29

6.0 Cumulative plus Project Conditions .................................................................................................... 31

6.1 Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative plus Project Conditions ................................................31

7.0 Additional Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33

7.1 Site Access ................................................................................................................................................................................33

9.2 On-Site Circulation ................................................................................................................................................................34

9.3 Parking........................................................................................................................................................................................34 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Page | ii

9.4 Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................35

Tables
Table 1: Signalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions ................................................................................................ 9 Table 2: Unsignalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions........................................................................................ 10 Table 3: Existing Bus Services ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions ........................................................................... 21 Table 5: Year 2020 VMT Generation .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Table 6: Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................................................................. 24 Table 7: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions .................................................. 26 Table 8. 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Selected Turn Lanes: .................................................................................... 27 Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 27 Table 12: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative Conditions ................................................................. 29 Table 13: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative plus Project Conditions ........................................ 31 Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3: Existing Pedestrian Facilities ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 4: Existing Bicycle Facilities .............................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 5: Existing Transit Facilities .............................................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 6: Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls ...................................................................................................... 20 Figure 7: Existing Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................. 22 Figure 8: Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................................................. 25 Figure 9: Existing plus Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................................................................ 28 Figure 10: Cumulative No-Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................................ 30 Figure 11: Cumulative plus Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .............................................................. 32

Appendices
Appendix A – Existing Turning Movement Counts
Appendix B – Existing Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Page | iii
Appendix C - CCTA TAZ Boundaries
Appendix D – Existing plus Project Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets Appendix E – Cumulative Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets Appendix F – Cumulative plus Project Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) conducted for the proposed residential development located at 215 Skelly in the City of Hercules. The project would replace a former horse ranch with 40 single family homes.

The purpose of this report is to provide summaries of changes in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and traffic impacts on the surrounding transportation system with the proposed project. The VMT analysis is based on the methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). To evaluate the effects on the transportation infrastructure due to the addition of traffic from the proposed project, an LOS analysis was conducted to determine consistency with City of Hercules and CCTA plans and standards.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
In the project vicinity, the CCTA Travel Demand Model generates daily residential VMT per resident of 14.7 for 2020, well below the countywide average of 19.78. Based on the CCTA VMT screening threshold of

16.81 this is considered a low-VMT area, and there is no substantial evidence that the project would generate high VMTs for this location. The project is expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and is exempt from further VMT analysis.

Project Trip Generation
TJKM developed estimated project trip generation for the proposed project based on published trip generation rates from the ITE publication Trip Generation (11th Edition). TJKM used published trip rates for the ITE land use Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) for this project. The proposed project is expected to generate 377 total daily trips, including 28 net new a.m. peak hour trips (7 in, 21 out) and 38 net new p.m. peak hour trips (24 in, 14 out).

Existing Conditions
Under this scenario, both of the study intersections operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during the a.m. peak hour, and both intersections operate acceptably in the p.m. peak hour. The two-way stop-controlled intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly operates at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour and LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue operates at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour.

Existing plus Project Conditions
Under this scenario, both of the study intersections would continue to operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during a.m. peak hour, and both study intersections operate acceptably in the p.m. peak hour. The two-way stop-controlled intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly operates at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue operates at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The project would be consistent with level of service standards set forth under the Hercules General Plan and CCTA Congestion Management Program.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 2
Cumulative Conditions
The Cumulative No-Project Conditions analysis forecasts how the study area’s transportation system would operate with the full build-out of the project in combination with the growth and changes of the surrounding community by the year 2040.

Under this scenario, both of the study intersections operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during both peak hours. The two-way stop-controlled intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly would continue to operate at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour and LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would continue to operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour.

Cumulative plus Project Conditions
Under this scenario, both of the study intersections would continue to operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during both peak hours. The two-way stop-controlled intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly would continue to operate at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour, and deteriorate to LOS C during the p.m. peak hour with an increase in delay of 2.2 seconds. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would continue to operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, and deteriorate to LOS D during the p.m. peak hour with an increased delay of 0.9 seconds. The project would be consistent with level of service standards set forth under the Hercules General Plan and CCTA Congestion Management Program.

Site Access and On-Site Circulation
TJKM concluded that the site plan will operate acceptably and provide adequate on-site vehicle circulation and access to parking spaces. The proposed project does not conflict with existing and planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities and will add trips to existing transit facilities, which can be accommodated by the existing transit capacity. Site access and circulation for vehicles are considered adequate, but on-site pedestrian circulation could be improved with additional curb ramps.

Parking
The project would require 80 off-street parking spaces for the 40 dwelling units. The proposed project would construct two-car garages with driveway aprons for each dwelling unit, providing 80 covered spaces satisfying City requirements, as well as 80 uncovered spaces. The proposed parking supply would therefore be more than adequate under City of Hercules requirements and would not produce any parking impacts on surrounding parcels or roadways.

Queuing Analysis
Queuing operations were analyzed at the one signalized intersection with dedicated left- and right-turn lanes, under Existing and Cumulative Conditions, with and without the proposed project. Under Existing Conditions, the signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would experience queue overflows in the eastbound left turn lane during PM peak hours, and overflows in the southbound left turn lane during one or both peak hours. Under Existing plus Project Conditions, the same turn lanes would continue to experience overflows during the same peak hours, with mild increases in queue lengths in the southbound left turn lane during the AM peak hours and a 20ft increase in queue lengths in the 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 3
eastbound left turn lane during PM peak hours. The addition of project trips would not cause any new queue overflows.

Recommendations
TJKM recommends the following:
 The grading plans for the site should be carefully evaluated to ensure that the finished grade and landscaping do not create any visual obstructions for vehicles exiting the driveways.  Add curb ramps to provide accessible throughout the development.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) conducted for the proposed residential development located at 215 Skelly in the City of Hercules. The proposed project would replace a former horse ranch with 40 single family homes. Primary access to the project site would be provided by a private street connecting to Skelly at the location of the existing driveway. This chapter discusses the TIS purpose, project study area, and analysis scenarios. Figure 1 shows the study area and project site location. Figure 2 shows the project site plan, dated November, 2021.

1.1 STUDY PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to provide summaries of changes in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and traffic impacts on the surrounding transportation system. The VMT analysis is based on the methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). To evaluate the effects on the transportation infrastructure due to the addition of traffic from the proposed project, an LOS analysis was conducted to determine consistency with City of Hercules and CCTA plans and standards.

1.2 STUDY INTERSECTIONS
TJKM evaluated traffic conditions at two study through remote field review.

The study intersections were selected based on TJKM’s working knowledge of the area with input and approval from the City of Hercules. San Pablo Avenue is identified as a Route of Regional Significance within the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) West County Action Plan. Due to ongoing traffic irregularities associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, observed traffic volumes were increased by an adjustment factor to estimate typical traffic volumes. This is discussed further in section 3.5.

The peak periods observed were between 7:00-9:00 a.m. and 4:00-6:00 p.m. The study intersections and associated traffic controls are as follows:

1. Hercules Avenue and Skelly/Zeus (Two-Way Stop)

2. Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue (Signalized)

1.3 STUDY SCENARIOS
The roadway operations analysis addresses the following four traffic scenarios:
 Existing Conditions – This scenario evaluates the study intersections based on adjusted existing traffic volumes, lane geometry and traffic controls.
 Existing plus Project Conditions – This scenario is identical to Existing Conditions, but with the addition of traffic from the proposed project.
 Cumulative Conditions (2040) – This scenario considers the development of the city and surrounding communities to the year 2040, projecting existing traffic volumes to the year 2040 using an annual growth factor of 0.27 percent per year. This growth factor was derived from 2016 and 2040 traffic volumes contained in The Veranda Shopping Center TIS (2016, Kittelson & Associates), and ultimately based on the 2040 CCTA traffic model.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 5
 Cumulative plus Project Conditions – This scenario is identical to Cumulative Conditions, but with the addition of traffic from the proposed project.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 6
Figure 1: Vicinity Map

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 7
Figure 2: Site Plan

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 8

2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY
Traffic impacts related to the proposed project were evaluated for both compliance with applicable regulatory documents and environmental significance as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The CEQA analysis was conducted in accordance with the Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts In CEQA published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the July 1, 2020, Technical Memorandum prepared by Fehr & Peers describing the VMT methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). As of July 1, 2020, intersection level of service (LOS) can no longer be used to determine significant CEQA impacts. However, an LOS analysis was conducted to determine consistency with City of Hercules and CCTA plans and standards.

2.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
This study evaluates project-related VMT as outlined in the adopted CCTA VMT methodology. The methodology and implementation guidelines were adopted by CCTA in July 2020. The City of Hercules has adopted CCTA VMT procedures and standards.

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory (December 2018) provides guidance to analysts and local jurisdictions for implementing VMT as a metric for determining the transportation impact for land use projects. The OPR guidelines state that for analysis purposes, “VMT” refers to automobile VMT, specifically passenger vehicles and light trucks. Heavy truck traffic is typically excluded.

The CCTA guidelines include a screening process that describes five scenarios in which a project would be with exempted from a VMT analysis requirement: 1) projects exempt from CEQA analysis, 2) small projects, 3) local serving projects, 4) projects in transit priority areas, and 5) projects in low VMT areas.

Using the CCTA methodologies, it appears that the proposed residential project will meet the exemption requirements for a low-VMT area. It should be noted that even if a project satisfies one or more of the screening criteria, lead agencies may still require a VMT analysis if there is evidence that the project has characteristics that might lead to a significant amount of VMT.

The following language is from the Project Screening section of the CCTA VMT methodologies and was applied to the proposed project:

2.5: Projects Located in Low VMT Areas. Residential and employment-generating projects located within a low VMT-generating area can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A low VMT area is defined as follows:
 For housing projects: Cities and unincorporated portions within CCTA’s five subregions that have existing home-based VMT per capita that is 85% or less of the existing County-wide average.

2.2 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Although Level of Service (LOS) is no longer relevant to CEQA, LOS can be used to determine conformity with an adopted general plan or congestion management program. LOS is a qualitative measure that describes operational conditions as they relate to the traffic stream and perceptions by motorists and 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 9
passengers. The LOS generally describes these conditions in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, delays, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. The operational LOS are given letter designations from A to F, with A representing the best operating conditions (free- flow) and F the worst (severely congested flow with high delays). Intersections generally are the capacity- controlling locations with respect to traffic operations on arterial and collector streets in urban areas.

Signalized Intersections
The study intersection under traffic signal control was analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual 6th (HCM) Operations Methodology for signalized intersections described in Chapter 18. This methodology determines LOS based on average control delay per vehicle for the overall intersection during peak hour intersection operating conditions. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. The average control delay for signalized intersections was calculated using Synchro 10 analysis software and was correlated to a LOS designation as shown in Table

1. Table 1: Signalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions Level of Service Description
Average
Control
Delay
A
Signal progression is extremely favorable. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase and do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to the very low vehicle delay.

10.0 or less
B
Operations characterized by good signal progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average vehicle delay.

10.1 to 20.0
C
Higher delays may result from fair signal progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, though may still pass through the intersection without stopping.

20.1 to 35.0
D
The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable signal progression, long cycle lengths, or high volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

35.1 to 55.0
E
This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor signal progression, long cycle lengths, and high volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Individual cycle failures occur frequently.

55.1 to 80.0
F
This level of delay is considered unacceptable by most drivers. This condition often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major-contributing causes of such delay levels. greater than

80.0 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Ed., Chapter 18 (Transportation Research Board, 2010) Average Control Delay per Vehicle in seconds

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 10
Unsignalized Intersections
The study intersection under stop control (unsignalized) was analyzed using the HCM Operations Methodology (HCM 6th Ed.) for unsignalized intersections described in Chapter 20. LOS ratings for stop- sign controlled intersections are based on the average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. At the side street, one-way or two-way stop controlled intersections, the control delay is calculated for each movement, not for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the control delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane. The weighted average delay for the entire intersections is presented for all-way stop controlled intersections. The average control delay for unsignalized intersections was calculated using Synchro 10 analysis software and was correlated to a LOS designation as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Unsignalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, Chapter 20 (Transportation Research Board, 2010) Average Control Delay per Vehicle in seconds

2.3 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
Although level of service is no longer used for identifying impacts under CEQA, level of service analysis is still used for determining consistency with adopted agency plans and standards. Where standards refer to significant environmental impacts, this analysis instead identifies these as significant inconsistencies with adopted plans.

City of Hercules
The City of Hercules General Plan has established performance benchmarks for signalized intersections and roadway segments within its jurisdiction. The City’s policy is to maintain LOS D as the desired level of service on intersections along all Basic Routes, which includes all arterials, collectors, and local roads that are not Regional Routes. One exception to this standard is the City’s policy that Collector Roads operating worse than LOS D are not considered deficient if the intersection does not meet a Caltrans signal warrant.

This avoids over-signalizing intersections with low side-street volumes.

There is no specified criteria for determining significant impacts to unsignalized intersections. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that an unsignalized intersection experiences a significant inconsistency if the LOS falls below LOS D, and the intersection meets the MUTCD Peak Hour Signal Warrant during the same peak hour.

Level of Service Description Average Control Delay
A Little or no traffic delay ≤10
B Short Traffic delays >10 – 15
C Average traffic delays >15 – 25
D Long traffic delays >25 – 35
E Very long traffic delays >35 – 50
F Extreme traffic delays >50
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 11
Contra Costa Transportation Authority CMP Intersections In the project vicinity, San Pablo Avenue is designated as a Route of Regional Significance (RORS). The intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Hercules Avenue is part of the CCTA Congestion Management Program (CMP) and subject to regular monitoring and separate LOS standards. The Congestion Management Program specifies level of service standards for intersections and RORS, but it does not provide specific thresholds of significance.

The LOS Standard for the San Pablo Avenue and Hercules Avenue is LOS E. The project-generated increase in traffic is considered to have a significant inconsistency with the CMP if an intersection meets either of the following criteria:
 If intersection operations degrade from an acceptable level (LOS E or better) to an unacceptable level (LOS F).
 For transportation facilities that fail to meet LOS standards (as defined above) under no project conditions, an increase in the volume/capacity ratio by 0.03 or greater above no project conditions is considered to be significant.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 12

3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes existing conditions in the immediate project site vicinity, including roadway facilities, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and available transit service. In addition, existing traffic volumes and operations are presented for the study intersections, including the results of LOS calculations.

3.1 EXISTING SETTING AND ROADWAY SYSTEM
Relevant roadways adjacent to the project site are discussed below:

Interstate 80 (I-80) From the Alameda County line to the Solano County line. I-80 is the primary interregional commute corridor through West County, and has major regional significance to the Bay Area. I-80 is an eight- to twelve-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour (mph). The north-south freeway connects Hercules with nearby cities, such as Richmond and Vallejo, and regional destinations, such as San Francisco and Sacramento. It also provides access to the greater freeway network with direct connections to Interstate 580, Interstate 680, Interstate 780, State Route 4, State Route 29, and State Route 37.

San Pablo Avenue. From the Alameda County line to I-80/Pomona Street in Crockett. San Pablo Avenue is the most important corridor for inter-city travel in West County: it is the primary transit spine of the region, it travels through all of the West County cities (in many cases, functioning as “Main Street”), and it is the primary reliever route to I-80 during periods of severe freeway congestion. San Pablo is a four-lane major arterial that runs generally east-west in the immediate project vicinity with a posted speed limit of 25-40 mph. On-street parking is prohibited, and intermittent sidewalks are provided along particular sections of the corridor. This roadway is also designated as a Route of Regional Significance by the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA). Routes of Regional Significance are the most important streets in the County as designated by CCTA.

Skelly is a two-lane, east-west to north-south meandering street with a posted speed of 25 mph, which changes designation at Hercules Avenue. North of Hercules Avenue, Skelly becomes “Zeus,” a local street that provides access to the Olympic Hills HOA. South of Hercules Avenue, Skelly is a local street. On-street parking is permitted south of Hercules Avenue.

Hercules Avenue is a four-lane, generally north-south collector with a posted speed of 25 mph. Hercules Avenue extends from O’Neill Circle in the north to Village Parkway in the south. Sidewalks are provided on both sides, and on-street parking is generally permitted north of San Pablo Avenue.

3.2 EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Walkability is defined as the ability to travel easily and safely between various origins and destinations without having to rely on automobiles or other motorized travel. The ideal “walkable” community includes wide sidewalks, a mix of land uses such as residential, employment, and shopping opportunities, a limited number of conflict points with vehicle traffic, and easy access to transit facilities and services. 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 13
Pedestrian facilities consist of crosswalks, sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and off-street paths, which provide safe and convenient routes for pedestrians to access the destinations such as institutions, businesses, public transportation, and recreation facilities.

In the project vicinity, the study intersection which is signalized is equipped with pedestrian signal heads and cross walks. A crosswalk is present on the southeast leg of the unsignalized intersection along Hercules Avenue at the crossing of Skelly. There are continuous sidewalks present on Hercules Avenue and Skelly. Sidewalks are present in most sections, but not continuous, on portions of San Pablo Avenue.

There is a gap in the sidewalk on the both sides San Pablo Avenue between the eastbound pedestrian pathway outlet south of the project site and the westbound pedestrian pathway outlet which terminates near Charles Avenue on San Pablo Avenue. The existing asphalt concrete pathways along the south side of the project site function as sidewalks along much of their length but may include sloping sections that reduce accessibility. Most nearby bus stops are accessible from the project site via existing sidewalks and crosswalks within the vicinity of the project site. The existing pedestrian facilities in the study area are shown in Figure 3.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 14
Figure 3: Existing Pedestrian Facilities

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 15

3.3 EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES
Bicycle paths, lanes and routes are typical examples of bicycle transportation facilities, which are defined by Caltrans as being in one of the following three classes:

1. Class I Multiuse Trail – a completely separated facility designed for the exclusive use of bicyclists and pedestrians with crossing points minimized.

2. Class II Bike Lane –a designated lane for the exclusive or semi-exclusive use of bicycles with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with vehicle parking and cross-flows by pedestrians and motorists permitted.

3. Class III Bike Route –a route designated by signs or pavement markings and shared with pedestrians and motorists.

4. Class IV Separated Bikeway – an on-street facility reserved for use by bicyclists, with physical separation between the bikeway and travel lanes. Physical separation consists of vertical elements that may include curbs, landscaping, bollards, or parking lanes.

There are existing Class II bike lanes provided on San Pablo Avenue east of Hercules Avenue; an extension of the Class II bike lane is proposed in the Hercules 2018 General Plan Circulation Element. A multi-use trail is present along Pinole Creek to the west of the project site. The existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the study area are shown in Figure 4.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 16
Figure 4: Existing Bicycle Facilities

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 17

3.4 EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES
Existing transit service to the project is provided by the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WestCAT) and the Bay Area Rapid Transit system (BART). Such services are described below. It should be noted that the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in substantially decreased transit demand throughout the region, leading to reduced service hours and frequency across multiple transit agencies. It is expected that service hours and frequency will be expanded when transit demand returns to more typical levels.

WestCAT – WestCAT provides bus service to various communities in West Contra Costa County including Hercules. It operates local, express, and regional bus lines as well as the Lynx transbay service. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed project, Bus Routes #J, #JPX, #C3, and #19, provide service to the project site and vicinity. Table 3 summarizes existing bus service in the project vicinity.

BART - BART provides passenger service within the metropolitan Bay Area. BART currently has five main operating lines: Antioch-SFO/Millbrae, Dublin/Pleasanton-Daly City, Berryessa/North San Jose-Richmond, Berryessa/North San Jose-Daly City, and Richmond-Millbrae There are also connectors to Oakland International Airport (OAK) and San Francisco International Airport (SFO). BART operates between 5:00 a.m. and 9:00 on weekdays and between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on weekends. During the a.m. and p.m. peak commute periods, train service runs at 15-minute intervals to each destination. The closest BART station is located in El Cerrito del Norte on the east side of San Pablo Avenue near County Center.

The existing transit facilities in the study area are shown in Figure 5.

Table 3: Existing Bus Services
Route
# From To
Weekdays Weekend
Operating
Hours
Headway
(minutes)
Operating
Hours
Headway
(minutes)
J Hercules
Transit Center El Cerrito BART 4:24 a.m. –
11:33 p.m. 36 7:10 a.m. –
9:15 p.m. 45
JPX Hercules
Transit Center El Cerrito BART 5:14 am. –
8:46 p.m. 26 … …
C3 Hercules
Transit Center
Contra Costa
College
7:06 a.m. –
8:01 p.m. 20 … …
19 Hercules
Transit Center Hilltop Mall … … 8:59 a.m. –
9:00 p.m. 13
Source: WestCAT website https://www.westcat.org/home/SchedSysMap accessed February 8, 2022 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 18
Figure 5: Existing Transit Facilities

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 19

3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
TJKM evaluated existing traffic conditions at two study intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours on a typical weekday. Intersection turning movement counts of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians were collected during weekday a.m. peak period (7:00-9:00 a.m.) and p.m. peak period (4:00-6:00 p.m.) on January 13, 2022.

Due to ongoing traffic irregularities associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, historical counts at one intersection were used as a basis of adjusting new turning movement volumes to estimated typical volumes. The adjusted volumes were then used as the basis for analyzing Existing Conditions. The most recent historical counts in the study area were collected in 2016 at Hercules & San Pablo Avenue, as part of the DEIR for the 2018 update to the Circulation Element of the Hercules General Plan. For the a.m. peak hour, 2022 volumes were increased by 24.8 percent to match total volumes in 2016. For the p.m. peak hour, 2020 volumes were increased by 42.7 percent.

The traffic count data are included in Appendix A. The existing lane geometries and traffic control at each study intersection are illustrated on Figure 6 and intersection turning movement volumes at each study intersection are illustrated on Figure 7.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 20
Figure 6: Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 21

3.6 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING CONDITIONS This scenario evaluates the study intersections based on existing traffic volumes, lane geometry and traffic controls, as described above. The peak hour factors calculated from the existing turning movement counts were used for the study intersections for the Existing Conditions analysis. The results of the LOS analysis using the HCM 6th Edition methodology and Synchro 10 software program for Existing Conditions are summarized in Table 4. Field verification of existing intersections, lane configurations, and traffic controls were also conducted remotely and provided the basis for the LOS analysis for Existing Conditions.

Under this scenario, both of the study intersections operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during the a.m. peak hour, and both study intersections operate acceptably in the p.m. peak hour. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue & San Pablo Avenue operates at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The unsignalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly/Zeus operates at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour and LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. It should be noted that at this intersection, the southbound approach on Zeus experiences higher delay than the northbound approach on Skelly during both peak hours. The northbound approach experiences 9.6 seconds of delay in both peak hours. LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix B.

Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions ID Intersection Intersection
Control Peak Hour
Existing Conditions
Average Delay¹ LOS²
1 Hercules Ave & Skelly/Zeus Two-Way
Stop Control
AM 12.4 B (SB)
PM 13.4 B (SB)
2 Hercules Ave & San Pablo Avenue Signal AM 24.1 C
PM 25.0 C
Notes:

AM – morning peak hour, PM – evening peak hour

1. Whole intersection weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections. Total control delay for the worst movement is presented for side-street stop – controlled intersections.

2. LOS = Level of Service
* CMP intersections with LOS E threshold
Bold indicates unacceptable operational conditions based on applicable jurisdictional standards.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 22
Figure 7: Existing Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 23

4.0 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
This analysis scenario presents the impacts of the proposed project at the study intersections and surrounding roadway system. This scenario is identical to Existing Conditions, but with the addition of traffic from the proposed project. The project would replace an existing horse ranch property with 40 single family homes.

4.1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As noted in section 2.1, the proposed project was evaluated using screening criteria adopted by CCTA, based on existing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) generated in the project area. For projects in areas with a similar mix of existing uses, residential projects are screened out if the home-based VMT per resident is at least 15 percent below the countywide average.

It should be noted that the CCTA travel demand model year 2020 is a simulation, based on data collected prior to the most recent decennial model update in 2016. The 2020 simulated baseline traffic conditions are therefore unaffected by actual pandemic-related traffic disruptions that occurred in 2020.

VMT Generated Per resident
The proposed project would construct 40 new single family homes on a site surrounded by similar low- density single family residential developments. The CCTA travel demand model generates simulated daily weekday VMT per capita by traffic analysis zone (TAZ) within Contra Costa County and throughout the Bay Area, for commute VMT per employee and residential VMT per capita. The project site is within the boundaries of an existing TAZ (#10236) that contains similar single family residential subdivisions under existing conditions. As shown in Table 5, the residential VMT per capita generated in this TAZ is 14.45. A map showing TAZ boundaries is included in Appendix C.

For the year 2020, the countywide residential VMT per capita generated by the CCTA travel demand model is 19.78. The corresponding threshold to consider a location to have low VMT, 15 percent below the countywide average, is 16.81. There is no apparent evidence that the project would generate more VMT than the surrounding area. Based on the CCTA screening criteria, the proposed project is expected to cause a less-than-significant impact under CEQA and is exempt from further VMT analysis.

Table 5: Year 2020 VMT Generation
TAZ # Description Population
Total Residential
VMT
Residential VMT
per Capita
10236 North of San Pablo Ave., between Hercules
Ave and Pinole Creek 1,036 8,288 14.45
Notes:

Source: CCTA travel demand model, baseline year 2020, Kittelson & Associates (2016)

4.2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
TJKM developed estimated project trip generation for the proposed project based on published trip generation rates from the ITE publication Trip Generation (11th Edition). TJKM used published trip rates for 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 24
the ITE land use Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) for this project. The proposed project is expected to generate 377 total daily trips, including 28 net new a.m. peak hour trips (7 in, 21 out) and 38 net new p.m. peak hour trips (24 in, 14 out).

Table 6 shows the trips expected to be generated by the proposed project.

Table 6: Project Trip Generation
Land Use2 Size2
Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Rate Trips Rate In:Out In Out Total Rate In:Out In Out Total Proposed Uses
Single-Family Detached
Housing (210) 40 DU 9.43 377 0.70 26:74 7 21 28 0.94 63:37 24 14 38 Total 337 7 21 28 24 14 38
Notes:

1. Trip Generation, 11th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 2017

2. DU: dwelling unit

4.3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Trip distribution is a process that determines in what proportion vehicles would be expected to travel between the project site and various destinations outside the project study area. Assignment determines the various routes that vehicles would take from the project site to each destination using the calculated trip distribution. Trip distribution assumptions for the proposed development project were developed based on the existing travel patterns and TJKM’s knowledge of the study area. The distribution assumptions for the proposed project are as follows:

It should be noted that, the distribution of those trips is approximate. The distribution assumptions applied to the existing use are as follows:
 60 percent to/from San Pablo Avenue West, to Richmond Parkway  40 percent to/from San Pablo Avenue East, to I-80 and SR-4 Figure 8 illustrates the trip distribution and trip assignment at the study intersections. The project trips were then added to traffic volumes under Existing Conditions to generate Existing plus Project Conditions traffic volumes.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 25
Figure 8: Project Trip Distribution and Assignment

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 26

4.4 Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions The intersection LOS analysis results for Existing plus Project Conditions are summarized in Table 6.

Under this scenario, both of the study intersections would continue to operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during the a.m. peak hour, and both study intersections operate acceptably in the p.m. peak hour. The two-way stop-controlled intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly/Zeus operates at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour with an increased delay of 0.8 seconds, and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour with an increased delay of 1.8 seconds. It should be noted that at this intersection, the southbound approach on Zeus would continue to experience higher delay than the northbound approach on Skelly during both peak hours. The northbound approach would experience 9.8 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour, an increase of 0.2 seconds, and 9.5 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour, a decrease of 0.1 seconds. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would continue to operate at LOS C with an increased delay of 0.6 seconds during both peak hours. The project would be consistent with level of service standards set forth under the Hercules General Plan and CCTA Congestion Management Program.

Figure 9 shows projected turning movement volumes at both of the study intersections for Existing plus Project Conditions. LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix D.

Table 7: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions ID Intersection Intersection
Control
Peak
Hour
Existing
Conditions
Existing plus
Project Conditions
Average
Delay¹ LOS² Average
Delay¹ LOS² Change in
Delay3

1 Hercules Ave & Skelly/Zeus Two-Way
Stop Control
AM 12.4 B 13.2 B (SB) 0.8
PM 13.4 B 15.2 C (SB) 1.8
2 Hercules Ave & San Pablo
Avenue Signal AM 24.1 C 24.7 C 0.6
PM 25.0 C 25.6 C 0.6
Notes: AM – morning peak hour, PM – evening peak hour, Weekend – Saturday noon peak hour, Bold indicates unacceptable operational conditions based on applicable jurisdictional standards. Red indicates significant impact.

1. Whole intersection weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections. Total control delay for the worst movement is presented for side-street stop – controlled intersections.

2. LOS = Level of Service

3. Change in average delay between Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions. Average delay may be reduced with the addition of project traffic to non-critical movements.

4. Change in critical volume to capacity ratio between Existing and Existing plus Project Condition * CMP intersections with LOS E threshold.

4.5 INTERSECTION QUEUING ANALYSIS
The 95th percentile queue lengths were calculated at the signalized study intersection under Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions. The project would add trips to dedicated left- and right-turn lanes at the intersection with dedicated turn lanes, Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue. Table 8 details the existing traffic volumes, added project trips, and queue lengths at all dedicated turn lanes at the signalized study intersection. For locations with dual turn lanes providing varying amounts of storage, the average storage length is provided. The 95th percentile queue lengths are rounded to the nearest five feet 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 27
and assume an average vehicle length of 25 feet. Queue lengths are averaged among all lanes within a lane group.

Under Existing Conditions, the intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would experience queue overflows in the eastbound left turn lane during PM peak hours, and in the southbound left turn lane during all peak hours, during one or both peak hours. Under Existing plus Project Conditions, the same turn lanes would continue to experience overflows during the same peak hours, with some increases in queue lengths. The addition of project trips would not cause any new queue overflows but would increase existing overflows in the Eastbound Left turn lane and the Southbound Left turn lane. Queuing worksheets for each scenario are provided in Appendix B and Appendix D.

Table 8. 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Selected Turn Lanes:

Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions
Existing
Conditions
Existing plus
Project Conditions
ID Study Intersection Lane
Group
Storage
Length
Peak
Hour
Existing
Volume
Net
Project
Trips
Queue
Length
Queue
Length
Change
in Queue
2 Hercules Ave & San
Pablo Avenue
Eastbound
Left 155 AM 87 4 120 123 5
PM 178 14 175 195 20
Eastbound
Right 160 AM 55 0 0 0 0
PM 201 0 60 60 0
Westbound
Left 300 AM
PM
84 137
0 0
100
180
100
185
0 5
Westbound
Right 165 AM
PM
126
157
3 10
35 20
40 25
5 5
Southbound
Left 90 AM
PM
166
106
8 6
125
100
130
100
5 0
Notes:
95th percentile queue lengths expressed in feet, rounded to the nearest five feet * Average storage per lane, where dual turn lanes provide different storage lengths Bold indicates queue length exceeds storage capacity
Red indicates queue length increases by more than one vehicle length

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 28
Figure 9: Existing plus Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 29

5.0 CUMULATIVE NO-PROJECT CONDITIONS (2040)
The Cumulative No-Project Conditions analysis forecasts how the study area’s transportation system would operate with the growth and changes of the surrounding community by the year 2040. Corridor volumes on Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue in the immediate project vicinity were obtained from baseline year 2018 and horizon year 2040 in the CCTA traffic model. Based on the growth in these corridor volumes, an annual compounding linear growth rate of 0.82% was applied to adjusted Existing Conditions to project future 2040 traffic volumes.

Figure 10 shows projected turning movement volumes at the study intersections for Cumulative Conditions for a.m. and p.m. peak hours.

5.1 INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – CUMULATIVE NO-PROJECT CONDITIONS The intersection LOS analysis results for Cumulative No-Project Conditions are summarized in Table 12.

Under this scenario, both of the study intersections operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during both peak hours. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would continue to operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. The unsignalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly would continue to operate at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour and LOS B during the p.m. peak hour, with a greater average delay in the southbound direction. LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix E.

Table 12: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative Conditions ID Intersection Intersection
Control Peak Hour
Cumulative Conditions
Average Delay¹ LOS²
1 Hercules Ave and Skelly/Zeus Two-Way Stop
Control
AM 13.5 B (SB)
PM 14.9 B (SB)
2 Hercules Ave and San Pablo
Ave Signal AM 31.7 C
PM 34.3 C
Notes:

AM – morning peak hour, PM – evening peak hour

1. Whole intersection weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections. Total control delay for the worst movement is presented for side-street stop – controlled intersections.

2. LOS = Level of Service
* CMP intersections with LOS E threshold
Bold indicates unacceptable operational conditions based on applicable jurisdictional standards.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 30
Figure 10: Cumulative No-Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 31

6.0 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
This scenario is identical to Cumulative No-Project Conditions, but with the addition of projected traffic from the proposed project. Trip generation, distribution, and assignment for the proposed project are identical to that assumed under Existing plus Project Conditions.

6.1 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS The intersection LOS analysis results for Cumulative plus Project Conditions are summarized in Table 13.

Under this scenario, both of the study intersections would continue to operate within applicable jurisdictional standards during both peak hours. The signalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue would continue to operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, with an increase in average delay, and degrade to LOS D during the p.m. peak hour. The unsignalized intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly would continue to operate at LOS B during the a.m. peak hour with a 1-second increase in average delay, and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour with a 2.2-second delay increase, with worse conditions in the southbound direction. The project would be consistent with level of service standards set forth under the Hercules General Plan and CCTA Congestion Management Program.

Figure 13 shows projected turning movement volumes at all the study intersections for Cumulative plus Project Conditions. LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix F.

Table 13: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative plus Project Conditions ID Intersection Intersection
Control
Peak
Hour
Cumulative
Conditions
Cumulative plus
Project Conditions
Average
Delay¹ LOS² Average
Delay¹ LOS² Change in Delay3
1 Hercules Ave and Skelly/Zeus Two-Way Stop
Controlled
AM 13.5 B (SB) 14.5 B (SB) 1.0
PM 14.9 B (SB) 17.1 C (SB) 2.2
2 Hercules Ave and San Pablo
Ave Signal AM 31.7 C 32.7 C 1.0
PM 34.3 C 35.2 D 0.9
Notes: AM – morning peak hour, PM – evening peak hour, Weekend – Saturday noon peak hour, Bold indicates unacceptable operational conditions based on applicable jurisdictional standards. Red indicates significant impact.

1. Whole intersection weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle for signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections. Total control delay for the worst movement is presented for side-street stop – controlled intersections.

2. LOS = Level of Service

3. Change in average delay between Cumulative and Cumulative plus Project Conditions. Average delay may be reduced with the addition of project traffic to non-critical movements.

4. Change in critical volume to capacity ratio between Cumulative and Cumulative plus Project Conditions * CMP intersections with LOS E threshold.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 32
Figure 11: Cumulative plus Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 33

7.0 ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS
The following sections provide additional analyses of other transportation issues associated with the project site, including:
 Site access and impacts
 On-site circulation
 Parking analysis
 Recommendations
The analyses in these sections are based on professional judgment in accordance with the standards and methods employed by traffic engineers. Although operational issues are not considered CEQA impacts, they do describe traffic conditions that are relevant to describing the project environment.

7.1 SITE ACCESS
This section analyzes site access for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles based on the site plan presented in Figure 2 (dated November, 2021).

Vehicle Access
Primary access to the project site would be provided by a direct connection to Skelly at the location of the existing driveway. TJKM recommends that the grading plans for the site be carefully evaluated to ensure that the finished grade and landscaping do not create any visual obstructions for vehicles exiting the driveway. Vehicle access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby roadways.

Pedestrian Access
Pedestrian access would be via internal sidewalks connecting to existing sidewalks on Skelly, and via a pedestrian trail to the south of the project site connecting Skelly to San Pablo Avenue. There is one crosswalk at the intersection of Hercules Avenue and Skelly, and there are 4-way signalized crosswalks at the intersection of Hercules Avenue and San Pablo Avenue. Existing pedestrian facilities provide continuous paths to nearby bus stops on San Pablo Avenue and to nearby shopping centers to the southwest of the project site, primarily via trail access. However, as shown in Figure 3, existing sidewalk facilities on San Pablo Avenue to the southwest of the project site terminate between the two pedestrian trail outlets to San Pablo Avenue. This disruption separates pedestrians from nearby shopping centers west of Pinole Creek when travelling along San Pablo Avenue, and may pose accessibility challenges due to the slope of the trail at some points.

A significant impact occurs if the proposed project conflicts with applicable or adopted policies, plans or programs related to pedestrians facilities or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of pedestrian facilities. The proposed project will not result in any such conflicts. Pedestrian access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby pedestrian facilities. 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 34
Bicycle Access
There are existing Class II bike lanes provided on San Pablo Avenue east of Hercules Avenue; an extension of the Class II bike lane is proposed in the Hercules 2018 General Plan Circulation Element. A multi-use trail is present along Pinole Creek to the west of the project site.

An impact to bicyclists occurs if the proposed project disrupt existing bicycle facilities; or conflict or create inconsistencies with adopted bicycle system plans, guidelines, and policies. A significant impact occurs if the proposed project conflicts with applicable or adopted policies, plans or programs related to bicycle facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of bicycle facilities. The proposed project will not result in any such conflicts. Bicycle access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby bicycle facilities.

Transit
A proposed project is considered to have a significant impact on transit if it conflicts with existing or planned transit facilities, or is expected to generate additional transit trips and does not provide adequate facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists to access transit routes and stops. The project site is adequately served by the transit service, as shown in Figure 5. Transit stops on San Pablo Avenue are within a one- half mile walk from the project site. Spread among multiple bus routes, the existing transit service can accommodate the proposed demand. Therefore, transit access to the project site is considered adequate and would not result in any significant impacts to the nearby transit network.

9.2 ON-SITE CIRCULATION
This section analyzes internal circulation based on the site plan presented in Figure 2 (dated November, 2021).

As shown in Figure 2, the street connecting all homes forms a loop, with westward extension in line with the access point from Skelly providing garage access to four homes. The street is 34-45 feet wide throughout, including sidewalks and on-street parking spaces. There is adequate space for vehicles to maneuver into and out of parking spaces and garages. The project would also provide adequate space for trucks and emergency vehicles to access the site and maneuver as needed, with adequate turning radii for truck access. There are no curb ramps or interior pedestrian crossings within the access loop. In order to ensure accessible pedestrian circulation between all homes and the nearest roadways, at least two curb ramps should be included on the inner side of the loop opposite new ramps on the outer edge of the loop, and a pair of ramps should be added near the connection point to Skelly. On-site circulation for vehicles is considered adequate, but pedestrian circulation could be improved with additional curb ramps.

9.3 PARKING
Under the City of Hercules zoning regulations, the proposed project, consisting of single family residential homes, would be classified as single family residential. The City of Hercules requires 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit (per Article 84-4.12); the proposed project provides 2 covered parking spaces and 2 uncovered parking spaces per unit, with additional overflow parking within the access loop. 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

P a g e | 35
As shown in the site plan dated November, 2021 (Figure 2), the proposed project will construct 40 new dwelling units. The project would require 80 parking spaces for the main dwelling units. The proposed project would construct two-car garages with driveway aprons for each dwelling unit, providing 80 covered spaces, exceeding City requirements, as well as 40 uncovered spaces. The development would also provide 4 parallel on-street parking spaces. All on-street spaces would be marked and contained within the project site, on the private street shared by the planned development and within close proximity to the homes. The proposed parking supply would therefore be more than adequate under City of Hercules requirements and would not produce any parking impacts on surrounding parcels or roadways.

9.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
TJKM recommends the following:
 The grading plans for the site should be carefully evaluated to ensure that the finished grade and landscaping do not create any visual obstructions for vehicles exiting driveways.  Add curb ramps to provide accessible crossings of loop road near Skelly and the pedestrian path to San Pablo Avenue.

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix A – Existing Turning Movement Counts

Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 22-080016-001 Day:

City: Hercules Date:

AM 10 3 3 1 AM
NOON 0000 NOON
PM 10 2 1 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0100 0 3 002 2
1 132 0 84
000 00 807
103 0 TEV 288 0 276 0 100
130 0 68 1 PHF 0.92 0.79
102 0 0010

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0118 PM
NOON 0000 NOON
AM 0008 AM
0 NONE
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm 34
Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Skelly/Zeus Thursday
SOUTHBOUND 1/13/2022
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM

PEAK HOURS
07:45 am - 08:45 am 24 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
98 0 171
Cars (AM) 10 HT (AM)
Hercules Ave

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Hercules Ave
85 0 134

CONTROL
2-Way Stop(NB/SB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 8

NORTHBOUND
Skelly/Zeus
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

NOONAM PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
NOON
PM
AM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
PM
AM
1 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
1 0
0 3 2
0 0
1 0
0 5
0 2
4 0
5 1
0 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
1 00
3 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
29 132
82 68
3 1
0 21
8 1
1 0
0 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
20 83
71 127
1 1
0 32
8 0
0 National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: 2-Way Stop(NB/SB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 002130000 1 5 002600 29
7:15 AM 003050000 3 1 001 1 0 40 54
7:30 AM 0040 1 1 0201 2 7 000960 60
7:45 AM 001080100 4 7 001 1 3 70 78
8:00 AM 0020 1 2 0000 2 6 000 2 0 1 1 0 71
8:15 AM 002090001 3 3 004 2 8 00 77
8:30 AM 003040010 2 4 102 2 3 40 62
8:45 AM 003060000 2 2 002 2 1 10 55

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00 2 0 1 5 8 0312 2 2 5 10 1 2 1 3 0 3 3 0 4 8 6 APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 95.24% 4.76% 93.55% 0.00% 4.84% 1.61% 0.88% 98.68% 0.44% 0.00% 6.86% 74.29% 18.86% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0080 3 3 0111 1 3 0 107 8 4 2 2 0 2 8 8
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.667 0.000 0.688 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.691 0.25 0 0.000 0.438 0.750 0.500 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 001050000 2 1 102 4 8 90 87
4:15 PM 113060000 1 2 102 2 2 60 54
4:30 PM 002080101 1 7 001 2 5 90 64
4:45 PM 002020002 1 8 003 3 7 61 71
5:00 PM 003040000 1 6 002 3 1 60 62
5:15 PM 003060210 1 9 001 2 9 91 71
5:30 PM 003020101 2 6 102 2 4 70 67
5:45 PM 001030001 1 7 002 2 5 30 52

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 11 1 8 0 3 6 0415 1 4 6 30 1 5 2 4 1 5 5 2 5 2 8 APPROACH %'s : 5.00% 5.00% 90.00% 0.00% 87.80% 0.00% 9.76% 2.44% 3.25% 94.81% 1.95% 0.00% 4.79% 77.00% 17.57% 0.64% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1180 2 1 0103 6 8 208 1 3 2 3 0 1 2 7 6
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250 0.667 0.000 0.656 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.375 0.81 0 0.500 0.000 0.667 0.688 0.833 0.25 0 22-080016-001
1/13/2022
Data - Total
Skelly/Zeus Skelly/Zeus Hercules Ave Hercules Ave
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.9230.667 0.729 0.702 0.883
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm

0.7930.500 0.611 0.83 0 0.725
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: 2-Way Stop(NB/SB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 002030000 1 4 002500 26
7:15 AM 003050000 3 1 001940 53
7:30 AM 0040 1 1 0201 2 6 000940 57
7:45 AM 001080100 4 5 001 1 2 60 74
8:00 AM 0020 1 2 0000 2 6 000 2 0 1 0 0 70
8:15 AM 002080001 3 2 004 2 8 00 75
8:30 AM 003040010 2 4 102 2 3 40 62
8:45 AM 003060000 2 2 002 2 1 10 55

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00 2 0 0 5 7 0312 2 2 0 10 1 2 1 2 7 2 9 0 4 7 2 APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00% 93.44% 0.00% 4.92% 1.64% 0.90% 98.65% 0.45% 0.00% 7.14% 75.60% 17.26 % 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0080 3 2 0111 1 2 7 107 8 3 2 0 0 2 8 1
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.667 0.000 0.667 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.706 0.250 0.000 0.438 0.741 0.50 0 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 001050000 2 1 102 4 8 90 87
4:15 PM 113060000 1 2 102 2 2 50 53
4:30 PM 002080101 1 7 001 2 5 90 64
4:45 PM 002020002 1 8 003 3 7 61 71
5:00 PM 003030000 1 6 002 3 1 60 61
5:15 PM 003060210 1 9 001 2 9 91 71
5:30 PM 003020101 2 6 102 2 4 70 67
5:45 PM 001030001 1 7 002 2 5 30 52

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 11 1 8 0 3 5 0415 1 4 6 30 1 5 2 4 1 5 4 2 5 2 6 APPROACH %'s : 5.00% 5.00% 90.00% 0.00% 87.50% 0.00% 10.00% 2.50% 3.25% 94.81% 1.95% 0.00 % 4.81% 77.24% 17.31% 0.64% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1180 2 1 0103 6 8 208 1 3 2 2 9 1 2 7 5
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250 0.667 0.000 0.656 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.375 0.81 0 0.500 0.000 0.667 0.688 0.806 0.250 22-080016-001
1/13/2022
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm

0.7900.500 0.611 0.83 0 0.720
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.937
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.667 0.708 0.717 0.859
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
Skelly/Zeus Skelly/Zeus Hercules Ave Hercules Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: 2-Way Stop(NB/SB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 0001000001000100 3
7:15 AM 0000000000000100 1
7:30 AM 0000000001000020 3
7:45 AM 0000000002000110 4
8:00 AM 0000000000000010 1
8:15 AM 0000100001000000 2
8:30 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:45 AM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 0001100005000340 1 4
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 42.86% 57.14% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 00001000030001207
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.375 0.00 0 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:15 PM 0000000000000010 1
4:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:45 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:00 PM 0000100000000000 1
5:15 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:45 PM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00001000000000102
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 00000000000000101
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 22-080016-001
1/13/2022
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm

0.2500.250
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.438
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.250 0.375 0.375
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
Skelly/Zeus Skelly/Zeus Hercules Ave Hercules Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: 2-Way Stop(NB/SB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 0000000000000000 0
7:15 AM 0000000000000000 0
7:30 AM 0000000000000000 0
7:45 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:00 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:15 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:30 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:45 AM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00000000000000000
APPROACH %'s :

PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 00000000000000000
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 0100010001000100

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:15 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:45 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:00 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:15 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:45 PM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00000000000000000
APPROACH %'s :

PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 00000000000000000
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 22-080016-001
1/13/2022
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm
07:45 am - 08:45 am
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
Skelly/Zeus Skelly/Zeus Hercules Ave Hercules Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement CountLocation: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave Project ID:

City: Hercules Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 00000000 0
7:15 AM 00120000 3
7:30 AM 10200000 3
7:45 AM 21120000 6
8:00 AM 10010000 2
8:15 AM 11000000 2
8:30 AM 10000000 1
8:45 AM 00000010 1

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 62450010 1 8
APPROACH %'s : 75.00% 25.00% 44.44% 55.56% 100.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 39 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 52130000 1 1
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.625 0.500 0.250 0.375
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 12001000 4
4:15 PM 11201100 6
4:30 PM 10000000 1
4:45 PM 12000001 4
5:00 PM 12000000 3
5:15 PM 00100000 1
5:30 PM 21000000 3
5:45 PM 10000000 1

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 88302101 2 3
APPROACH %'s : 50.00% 50.00% 100.00% 0.00% 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 100.00% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 286 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 45202101 1 5
PEAK HR FACTOR : 1.000 0.625 0.250 0.500 0.250 0.250
22-080016-001
1/13/2022

0.6250.750 0.250 0.375 0.250
04:00 pm - 05:00 pm

0.4580.583
PM

NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.333
07:45 am - 08:45 am
AM

NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Skelly/Zeus Skelly/Zeus Hercules Ave Hercules Ave
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 22-080016-002 Day:

City: Hercules Date:

AM 125 2 133 0 AM
NOON 0000 NOON
PM 88 10 71 3 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
1110 1 110 0 101
2 346 0 596
003 01 9 506 5
70 0 122 1 TEV 1743 0 1867 0 102
353 0 710 2 PHF 0.93 0.92
44 0 141 1 0 1 0.5 0.5

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 1 7 01 38 3 PM
NOON 0000 NOON
AM 0 110 5 137 AM
0 NONE
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm 248
Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Hercules Ave Thursday
SOUTHBOUND 1/13/2022
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM

PEAK HOURS
07:45 am - 08:45 am 176 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
865 0 625
Cars (AM) 247 HT (AM)
San Pablo Ave

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
San Pablo Ave
831 0 507

CONTROL
Signalized
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 111

NORTHBOUND
Hercules Ave
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

NOONAM PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
NOON
PM
AM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
PM
AM
0 0
1 1
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 0 4
0 2
3 0
2 1
0 3
2 0
1 0
9 01
12 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
29 11
14 1
2 0
3 1
0 2
110
337
95140
698
122
88 10
71 83
13 70
0 0
00 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 99
567
6443
339
69 123
2 130
136
5 108

National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 1 802 201 602 30 53 40 0 46 96 0 197
7:15 AM 24 1 16 0 16 1 36 0 12 46 11 0 6 132 10 0 311
7:30 AM 28 1 18 0 31 0 32 0 10 53 4 0 13 12 4 61 321
7:45 AM 34 1 31 0 37 2 43 0 15 109 9 0 12 157 17 1 468
8:00 AM 25 2 48 0 41 0 25 0 19 81 5 0 7 14 4 24 0 421
8:15 AM 28 2 33 0 38 0 32 0 18 98 15 0 13 147 30 0 454
8:30 AM 23 0 25 0 17 0 25 0 18 65 15 0 33 148 30 1 400
8:45 AM 21 1 15 0 21 0 35 0 14 70 12 1 12 88 21 0 311

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 201 8 208 0 217 3 251 0 111 556 71 1 100 1009 14 4 3 2883 APPROACH %'s : 48.20% 1.92% 49.88% 0.00% 46.07% 0.64% 53.29% 0.00% 15.02% 75.24% 9.61% 0. 14% 7.96% 80.33% 11.46% 0.24% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 110 5 137 0 133 2 125 0 70 353 44 0 65 596 101 2 1743 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.809 0.625 0.71 4 0.000 0.811 0.25 0 0.727 0.000 0.921 0.81 0 0.733 0.00 0 0.492 0.949 0.842 0.500 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 10 1 11 0 17 1 19 0 45 177 19 0 26 97 25 0 448
4:15 PM 14 0 12 0 18 1 14 0 26 151 27 0 29 90 24 0 406
4:30 PM 20 2 11 0 12 2 23 0 31 196 28 1 18 79 22 0 445
4:45 PM 10 7 19 0 14 1 20 2 34 16 4 3 5 2 1 99 42 7 0 448 5:00 PM 17 2 20 0 20 3 16 1 29 177 26 1 28 73 25 0 438
5:15 PM 22 3 23 0 17 5 21 0 30 20 4 3 4 0 3 38 13 6 1 510 5:30 PM 21 1 21 1 20 1 31 0 29 165 46 0 15 98 22 0 471
5:45 PM 8 0 19 0 20 1 12 0 32 166 41 0 23 84 17 0 423

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 122 16 136 1 138 15 156 3 256 1400 256 4 191 696 198 1 3589 APPROACH %'s : 44.36% 5.82% 49.45% 0.36% 44.23% 4.81% 50.00% 0.96% 13.36% 73.07% 13.36% 0 .21% 17.59% 64.09% 18.23% 0.09% PEAK HR : 04:45 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 70 13 83 1 71 10 88 3 122 710 141 3 95 346 110 1 186 7 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.795 0.46 4 0.902 0.250 0.888 0.500 0.710 0.375 0.89 7 0.870 0.766 0.375 0.72 0 0.883 0.76 4 0.250 22-080016-002
1/13/2022
Data - Total
Hercules Ave Hercules Ave San Pablo Ave San Pablo Ave
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.9310.840 0.793 0.87 8 0.901
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm

0.9150.870 0.827 0.910 0.914
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 1 702 201 602 30 43 00 0 46 56 0 187
7:15 AM 24 1 16 0 16 1 35 0 12 41 11 0 6 129 9 0 301
7:30 AM 2 811 803 103 20 94 74 01 3 1 1 9 5 1 308
7:45 AM 34 1 30 0 35 2 42 0 14 10 4 9 0 11 153 16 1 452 8:00 AM 25 2 48 0 41 0 25 0 19 76 5 0 7 131 23 0 402
8:15 AM 27 2 33 0 38 0 31 0 18 95 14 0 13 141 30 0 442
8:30 AM 22 0 25 0 16 0 25 0 18 64 15 0 33 142 30 1 391
8:45 AM 21 1 15 0 21 0 34 0 14 64 12 1 12 78 20 0 293

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 198 8 207 0 21 4 3 247 0 108 521 70 1 99 958 139 3 277 6 APPROACH %'s : 47.94% 1.94% 50.12% 0.00% 46.12% 0.65% 53.23% 0.00% 15.43% 74.43% 10.00% 0 .14% 8.26% 79.90% 11.59% 0.25% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 108 5 136 0 130 2 123 0 69 339 43 0 64 567 99 2 168 7 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.794 0.625 0.70 8 0.000 0.793 0.25 0 0.732 0.000 0.908 0.815 0.71 7 0.000 0.485 0.92 6 0.825 0.50 0 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 10 1 11 0 17 1 19 0 45 173 19 0 26 94 25 0 441
4:15 PM 14 0 12 0 18 1 14 0 26 145 27 0 29 85 23 0 394
4:30 PM 20 2 11 0 12 2 23 0 31 193 28 1 18 75 22 0 438
4:45 PM 10 7 19 0 14 1 20 2 34 159 34 2 19 90 27 0 438
5:00 PM 17 2 20 0 20 3 16 1 29 175 26 1 28 71 25 0 434
5:15 PM 22 3 23 0 17 5 21 0 30 201 34 0 33 79 36 1 505
5:30 PM 21 1 21 1 20 1 31 0 29 163 46 0 15 97 22 0 468
5:45 PM 8 0 19 0 19 1 12 0 32 163 41 0 21 82 17 0 415

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 122 16 136 1 137 15 156 3 256 1372 255 4 189 673 197 1 3533 APPROACH %'s : 44.36% 5.82% 49.45% 0.36% 44.05% 4.82% 50.16% 0.96% 13.57% 72.71% 13.51% 0 .21% 17.83% 63.49% 18.58% 0.09% PEAK HR : 04:45 PM 292 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 70 13 83 1 71 10 88 3 122 698 140 3 95 337 110 1 1845 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.795 0.46 4 0.902 0.250 0.888 0.500 0.710 0.375 0.89 7 0.868 0.761 0.375 0.72 0 0.869 0.764 0.250 22-080016-002
1/13/2022
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm

0.9130.870 0.827 0.908 0.911
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.933
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.830 0.807 0.888 0.888
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
Hercules Ave Hercules Ave San Pablo Ave San Pablo Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 1000000014000400 10
7:15 AM 0000001005000310 10
7:30 AM 0000000016000510 13
7:45 AM 0010201015001410 16
8:00 AM 0000000005000 1 3 10 19
8:15 AM 1000001003100600 12
8:30 AM 1000100001000600 9
8:45 AM 0000001006000 1 0 10 18

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 301030403 3 5 101 5 1 50 1 0 7
APPROACH %'s : 75.00% 0.00% 25.00% 0.00% 42.86% 0.00% 57.14% 0.00% 7.69% 89.74% 2.56% 0.0 0% 1.75% 89.47% 8.77% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 201030201 1 4 101 2 9 20 5 6
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.375 0.00 0 0.500 0.000 0.250 0.700 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.558 0.500 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 0000000004000300 7
4:15 PM 0000000006000510 12
4:30 PM 0000000003000400 7
4:45 PM 0000000005100400 10
5:00 PM 0000000002000200 4
5:15 PM 0000000003000200 5
5:30 PM 0000000002000100 3
5:45 PM 0000100003002200 8

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 000010000 2 8 102 2 3 10 5 6
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 96.55% 3.45% 0.00% 7.69% 88.46% 3.85% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:45 PM 292 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 000000000 1 2 100900 2 2
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.600 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.563 0.00 0 0.000 22-080016-002
1/13/2022
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm

0.5500.542 0.563
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.737
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.750 0.417 0.667 0.571
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
Hercules Ave Hercules Ave San Pablo Ave San Pablo Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave
City: Hercules Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 7:00 AM 0000000000000000 0
7:15 AM 0000000003000000 3
7:30 AM 1000000000000000 1
7:45 AM 0100000000000000 1
8:00 AM 0000000000000100 1
8:15 AM 0000000001000000 1
8:30 AM 0000000000000000 0
8:45 AM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 11000000040001007
APPROACH %'s : 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 01000000010001003
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SB L SBT SBR SBU EB L EBT EBR EBU WB L WBT WBR WBU 1 0 . 5 0 . 5 0111012101210

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL 4:00 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:15 PM 0000000000000010 1
4:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
4:45 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:00 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:15 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:30 PM 0000000000000000 0
5:45 PM 0000000000000000 0

NL NT N R NU S L ST SR SU E L ET E R EU W L WT W R WU TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 00000000000000101
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00 % 0.00%
PEAK HR : 04:45 PM 292 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 00000000000000000
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 22-080016-002
1/13/2022
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm
07:45 am - 08:45 am

0.750
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.250 0.250 0.250
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
Hercules Ave Hercules Ave San Pablo Ave San Pablo Ave
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement CountLocation: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave Project ID:

City: Hercules Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 01000010 2
7:15 AM 00030020 5
7:30 AM 10000020 3
7:45 AM 01000000 1
8:00 AM 00000001 1
8:15 AM 11002110 6
8:30 AM 01000120 4
8:45 AM 01000001 2

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 25032282 2 4
APPROACH %'s : 28.57% 71.43% 0.00% 100.00% 50.00% 50.00% 80.00% 20.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 39 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 13002231 1 2
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.750 0.250 0.500 0.375 0.250
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 10003110 6
4:15 PM 01001000 2
4:30 PM 00012000 3
4:45 PM 10000100 2
5:00 PM 00003110 5
5:15 PM 00001100 2
5:30 PM 11000000 2
5:45 PM 00000000 0

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 3201 1 0 420 2 2
APPROACH %'s : 60.00% 40.00% 0.00% 100.00% 71.43% 28.57% 100.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:45 PM 289 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 21004310 1 1
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.250 0.333 0.750 0.250
22-080016-002
1/13/2022

0.5500.375 0.438 0.250
04:45 pm - 05:45 pm

0.5000.500
PM

NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.333 0.500
07:45 am - 08:45 am
AM

NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Hercules Ave Hercules Ave San Pablo Ave San Pablo Ave

HERCULES AVE HERCULES AVESAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 13 HERCULES AVE & SAN PABLO AVE AM
Tuesday, December 6, 2016Date and Start Time:

Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates
Peak Hour - All Vehicles
Traffic Counts
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk
Peak Hour: 07:15 AM - 08:15 AM
Peak 15-Minutes: 07:45 AM - 08:00 AM
379 108
1,026
719
30879
462
1,269

0.96 N
S
EW

0.89 0.87

0.84 0.91
(260)(662)
(2,000)
(1,265)
(2,360)
(883)
(513)(173)
207
1 167
47 926
51 24
382
56 2
0 4136
4 168
0 SAN PABLO AVE

SAN PABLO AVE

HERCULES AVE

HERCULES AVE
9 8
3 5
N
S
EW
44 30
7 2
1 4
Left Thru Right Total
EastboundInterval
Start Time
Rolling
Hour West East South North
Pedestrain Crossings
U-Turn
Westbound Northbound Southbound
Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 38 1 0 37 10 12 63 0 7 243 480 2 1 0 22,1315 11 24 38 7:15 AM 0 34 1 1 26 20 11 57 2 5 288 536 1 3 0 52,1755 12 32 60 7:30 AM 0 34 0 0 37 10 15 97 0 9 252 549 2 1 1 02,1338 4 33 59 7:45 AM 0 39 0 0 60 00 12 117 0 12 203 566 2 3 1 22,0656 17 53 47 8:00 AM 0 29 3 0 44 10 18 111 0 25 183 524 0 1 0 21,9275 14 50 41 8:15 AM 0 28 0 1 44 00 12 83 0 24 201 494 3 2 1 110 29 24 38 8:30 AM 0 19 0 0 23 01 22 87 1 23 223 481 2 0 0 08 21 21 32 8:45 AM 0 27 1 0 25 00 21 91 1 10 159 428 5 1 0 06 21 22 44 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right
Eastbound
U-Turn
Westbound Northbound Southbound
TotalLeft Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeft Thru RightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 00 2 0 0 2 0 40 0 0 0
Lights 136 4 168 166 4 20353 363 24 49 898 46 2,1170 2 0 1 Mediums 0 0 0 1 0 43 17 0 2 26 1 540 0 0 0
Total 56 382 24 51 926 47 136 4 168 167 4 207 2,1750 2 0 1

HERCULES AVE HERCULES AVESAN PABLO AVESAN PABLO AVE
(303) 216-2439
www.alltrafficdata.net
Location: 13 HERCULES AVE & SAN PABLO AVE PM
Tuesday, December 6, 2016Date and Start Time:

Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates
Peak Hour - All Vehicles
Traffic Counts
Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses.

Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk
Peak Hour: 04:30 PM - 05:30 PM
Peak 15-Minutes: 05:15 PM - 05:30 PM
156 320
721
1,454
142240
1,646
651

0.91 N
S
EW

0.83 0.83

0.87 0.93
(630)(296)
(1,334)
(2,772)
(1,183)
(3,164)
(262)(471)
89 0
57 130
492
98 132
1,333
181
1 0
1070
9 63
0 SAN PABLO AVE

SAN PABLO AVE

HERCULES AVE

HERCULES AVE
9 13
0 4
N
S
EW
94 00
0 9
4 0
Left Thru Right Total
EastboundInterval
Start Time
Rolling
Hour West East South North
Pedestrain Crossings
U-Turn
Westbound Northbound Southbound
Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 7 2 0 8 10 49 258 0 16 91 521 2 5 1 12,47528 19 23 19 4:15 PM 0 17 2 0 21 10 53 365 0 31 65 635 0 2 1 02,57131 22 11 16 4:30 PM 0 16 2 0 20 40 47 357 0 25 115 678 1 0 0 02,66531 25 11 25 4:45 PM 0 23 1 0 16 40 46 324 0 23 99 641 1 6 0 02,63725 39 17 24 5:00 PM 0 15 2 0 13 10 35 311 1 23 113 617 2 3 0 92,58139 28 18 18 5:15 PM 0 16 4 0 8 10 53 341 0 27 165 729 0 3 0 037 38 17 22 5:30 PM 0 15 2 0 13 20 50 305 0 31 148 650 0 3 0 025 26 13 20 5:45 PM 0 13 0 0 18 13 59 267 1 39 98 585 1 4 0 125 26 15 20 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right
Eastbound
U-Turn
Westbound Northbound Southbound
TotalLeft Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeft Thru RightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0
Lights 69 9 63 56 10 88178 1,316 132 98 473 129 2,6220 1 0 0 Mediums 1 0 0 1 0 13 16 0 0 19 1 420 0 0 0
Total 181 1,333 132 98 492 130 70 9 63 57 10 89 2,6650 1 0 0 215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix B – Existing Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets

HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 7:00 am Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 162 1 9 105 27 0 0 10 42 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 1 162 1 9 105 27 0 0 10 42 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 04407000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - -----------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 70 70 70 88 88 88 67 67 67 73 73 73
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 1 231 1 10 119 31 0 0 15 58 0 1

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 157 0 0 236 0 0 393 415 236 403 400 142 Stage 1 - ----- 2 3 8 2 3 8- 1 6 2 1 6 2-
Stage 2 - ----- 1 5 5 1 7 7- 2 4 1 2 3 8-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1423 - - 1331 - - 566 528 803 558 538 906 Stage 1 - ----- 7 6 5 7 0 8- 8 4 0 7 6 4-
Stage 2 - ----- 8 4 7 7 5 3- 7 6 2 7 0 8-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1414 - - 1326 - - 559 517 800 540 527 900 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ----- 5 5 9 5 1 7- 5 4 0 5 2 7-
Stage 1 - ----- 7 6 1 7 0 4- 8 3 3 7 5 3-
Stage 2 - ----- 8 3 9 7 4 2- 7 4 7 7 0 4-

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 9.6 12.4

HCM LOS A B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 800 1414 - - 1326 - - 545
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.019 0.001 - - 0.008 - - 0.108
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 7.5 0 - 7.7 0 - 12.4
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 7:00 am Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 87 440 55 84 744 126 137 6 171 166 2 156 Future Volume (veh/h) 87 440 55 84 744 126 137 6 171 166 2 156 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 99 500 62 93 827 140 163 7 204 210 3 197 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.79 0.79 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 127 1047 459 120 1032 448 210 10 277 273 409 345 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1559 1781 3554 1541 1781 52 1511 1781 1870 1576 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 99 500 62 93 827 140 163 0 211 210 3 197 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1559 1781 1777 1541 1781 0 1563 1781 1870 1576 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 6.9 1.7 3.1 12.8 4.2 5.3 0.0 7.6 6.8 0.1 6.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 6.9 1.7 3.1 12.8 4.2 5.3 0.0 7.6 6.8 0.1 6.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 127 1047 459 120 1032 448 210 0 287 273 409 345 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.48 0.14 0.78 0.80 0.31 0.78 0.00 0.74 0.77 0.01 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 164 1089 478 206 1173 508 445 0 492 537 686 578 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.3 17.3 15.5 27.4 19.6 16.5 25.6 0.0 23.0 24.3 18.2 20.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.4 0.3 0.1 10.3 3.6 0.4 6.0 0.0 3.7 4.5 0.0 1.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.8 2.5 0.6 1.5 5.1 1.3 2.5 0.0 2.9 3.1 0.0 2.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 17.6 15.6 37.7 23.2 16.9 31.6 0.0 26.7 28.8 18.3 22.3 LnGrp LOS D B B D C B C A C C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 661 1060 374 410
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.3 23.7 28.8 25.6
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.7 15.5 8.5 22.1 11.5 17.6 8.7 21.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.8 6.9 18.3 14.9 21.9 5.5 19.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.8 9.6 5.1 8.9 7.3 8.7 5.3 14.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.9 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.5 0.0 2.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.1
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: PM
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 4:00 pm Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 97 3 13 188 43 1 1 11 30 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 4 97 3 13 188 43 1 1 11 30 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 9 02209103301
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - -----------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 73 73 73 50 50 50 61 61 61
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 5 117 4 18 258 59 2 2 22 49 0 2

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 326 0 0 123 0 0 457 493 124 477 466 298 Stage 1 - ----- 1 3 1 1 3 1- 3 3 3 3 3 3-
Stage 2 - ----- 3 2 6 3 6 2- 1 4 4 1 3 3-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1234 - - 1464 - - 514 477 927 498 494 741 Stage 1 - ----- 8 7 3 7 8 8- 6 8 1 6 4 4-
Stage 2 - ----- 6 8 7 6 2 5- 8 5 9 7 8 6-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1223 - - 1461 - - 504 463 923 472 479 734 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ----- 5 0 4 4 6 3- 4 7 2 4 7 9-
Stage 1 - ----- 8 6 8 7 8 3- 6 7 2 6 2 9-
Stage 2 - ----- 6 7 5 6 1 0- 8 3 1 7 8 1-

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0.4 9.6 13.4

HCM LOS A B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 809 1223 - - 1461 - - 477
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.032 0.004 - - 0.012 - - 0.107
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 8 0 - 7.5 0 - 13.4
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: PM 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 4:00 pm Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 178 1013 201 137 494 157 101 19 118 106 14 126 Future Volume (veh/h) 178 1013 201 137 494 157 101 19 118 106 14 126 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 196 1113 221 151 543 173 116 22 136 128 17 152 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.83 0.83 0.83 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 242 1329 584 189 1222 531 150 33 204 183 315 263 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.34 0.34 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1561 1781 3554 1545 1781 220 1361 1781 1870 1565 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 196 1113 221 151 543 173 116 0 158 128 17 152 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1561 1781 1777 1545 1781 0 1581 1781 1870 1565 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.2 19.2 6.9 5.6 8.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 6.4 4.7 0.5 6.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.2 19.2 6.9 5.6 8.0 5.6 4.3 0.0 6.4 4.7 0.5 6.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 242 1329 584 189 1222 531 150 0 237 183 315 263 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.84 0.38 0.80 0.44 0.33 0.77 0.00 0.67 0.70 0.05 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 363 1452 638 209 1222 531 328 0 437 476 673 563 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.2 19.2 15.4 29.4 17.1 16.3 30.2 0.0 27.0 29.2 23.5 25.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.0 4.2 0.4 17.9 0.3 0.4 8.1 0.0 3.2 4.8 0.1 2.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.4 7.6 2.2 3.1 2.9 1.8 2.1 0.0 2.5 2.2 0.2 2.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.3 23.4 15.8 47.3 17.4 16.7 38.2 0.0 30.2 34.0 23.6 27.8 LnGrp LOS D C B D B B D A CCCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 1530 867 274 297
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.9 22.4 33.6 30.2
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 14.6 11.6 29.7 10.2 15.8 13.7 27.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.6 7.9 27.5 12.4 24.2 13.7 21.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.7 8.4 7.6 21.2 6.3 8.0 9.2 10.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.6 0.0 3.9 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.0
HCM 6th LOS C
Queues Timing Plan: AM Peak
2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 7:00 am Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 99 500 63 93 827 140 163 211 210 3 197 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.43 0.10 0.49 0.76 0.25 0.54 0.58 0.60 0.01 0.50 Control Delay 51.5 20.5 0.3 38.9 26.9 5.3 31.4 12.3 30.9 23.5 9.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.5 20.5 0.3 38.9 26.9 5.3 31.4 12.3 30.9 23.5 9.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 78 0 33 141 0 56 2 71 1 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #118 147 0 #98 #288 37 111 47 123 7 33 Internal Link Dist (ft) 335 442 438 310
Turn Bay Length (ft) 155 160 300 165 90
Base Capacity (vph) 156 1156 607 196 1120 583 423 615 511 655 675 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.63 0.43 0.10 0.47 0.74 0.24 0.39 0.34 0.41 0.00 0.29 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Timing Plan: PM
2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Conditions, 01/13/2022 4:00 pm Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 196 1113 221 151 543 173 116 158 128 17 152 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.82 0.31 0.77 0.47 0.26 0.49 0.55 0.50 0.06 0.39 Control Delay 40.0 27.2 6.0 60.5 22.4 2.3 36.8 16.2 35.5 28.6 6.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 40.0 27.2 6.0 60.5 22.4 2.3 36.8 16.2 35.5 28.6 6.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) 78 217 10 65 98 0 47 9 52 7 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #176 #408 60 #182 174 19 100 57 98 22 24 Internal Link Dist (ft) 335 442 438 310
Turn Bay Length (ft) 155 160 300 165 90
Base Capacity (vph) 340 1365 714 196 1157 661 307 515 446 632 650 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.58 0.82 0.31 0.77 0.47 0.26 0.38 0.31 0.29 0.03 0.23 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix C – CCTA TAZ Boundaries

215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix D – Existing plus Project Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets

HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing plus Project Conditions Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 162 1 16 105 27 0 0 31 42 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 1 162 1 16 105 27 0 0 31 42 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 04407000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - -----------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 70 70 70 88 88 88 67 67 67 73 73 73
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 1 231 1 18 119 31 0 0 46 58 0 1

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 157 0 0 236 0 0 409 431 236 435 416 142 Stage 1 - ----- 2 3 8 2 3 8- 1 7 8 1 7 8-
Stage 2 - ----- 1 7 1 1 9 3- 2 5 7 2 3 8-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - ----- 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1423 - - 1331 - - 553 517 803 531 527 906 Stage 1 - ----- 7 6 5 7 0 8- 8 2 4 7 5 2-
Stage 2 - ----- 8 3 1 7 4 1- 7 4 8 7 0 8-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1414 - - 1326 - - 544 503 800 491 513 900 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ----- 5 4 4 5 0 3- 4 9 1 5 1 3-
Stage 1 - ----- 7 6 1 7 0 4- 8 1 7 7 3 5-
Stage 2 - ----- 8 1 7 7 2 5- 7 0 4 7 0 4-

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 9.8 13.2

HCM LOS A B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 800 1414 - - 1326 - - 496
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.058 0.001 - - 0.014 - - 0.119
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 7.5 0 - 7.8 0 - 13.2
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing plus Project Conditions Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 91 440 55 84 744 129 137 6 171 174 2 169 Future Volume (veh/h) 91 440 55 84 744 129 137 6 171 174 2 169 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 103 500 62 93 827 143 163 7 204 220 3 214 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.79 0.79 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 132 1049 460 120 1024 444 210 9 276 282 417 352 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.30 0.30 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1559 1781 3554 1541 1781 52 1511 1781 1870 1577 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 103 500 62 93 827 143 163 0 211 220 3 214 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1559 1781 1777 1541 1781 0 1563 1781 1870 1577 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.4 7.0 1.8 3.1 13.1 4.4 5.4 0.0 7.7 7.2 0.1 7.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.4 7.0 1.8 3.1 13.1 4.4 5.4 0.0 7.7 7.2 0.1 7.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 132 1049 460 120 1024 444 210 0 285 282 417 352 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.48 0.13 0.78 0.81 0.32 0.78 0.00 0.74 0.78 0.01 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 162 1072 470 203 1154 500 438 0 484 529 675 569 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.6 17.5 15.7 27.8 20.0 16.9 26.0 0.0 23.4 24.5 18.3 21.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.9 0.3 0.1 10.3 3.9 0.4 6.1 0.0 3.7 4.7 0.0 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 2.5 0.6 1.6 5.2 1.4 2.5 0.0 3.0 3.3 0.0 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.5 17.9 15.8 38.2 23.9 17.3 32.1 0.0 27.2 29.2 18.3 22.9 LnGrp LOS D B B D C B C A C C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 665 1063 374 437
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.0 24.3 29.3 26.0
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.1 15.6 8.6 22.4 11.6 18.0 9.0 22.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.8 6.9 18.3 14.9 21.9 5.5 19.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.2 9.7 5.1 9.0 7.4 9.4 5.4 15.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.8 0.0 2.3 0.2 0.6 0.0 2.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: PM
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 97 3 37 188 43 1 1 25 30 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 4 97 3 37 188 43 1 1 25 30 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 9 0 2 2 0 9 1 0 3 3 0 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 73 73 73 50 50 50 61 61 61
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 117 4 51 258 59 2 2 50 49 0 2

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 326 0 0 123 0 0 523 559 124 557 532 298 Stage 1 - - - - - - 131 131 - 399 399 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 392 428 - 158 133 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1234 - - 1464 - - 465 438 927 441 453 741 Stage 1 - - - - - - 873 788 - 627 602 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 633 585 - 844 786 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1223 - - 1461 - - 446 413 923 396 427 734 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 446 413 - 396 427 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 868 783 - 619 571 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 604 555 - 791 781 -

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 1 9.5 15.2

HCM LOS A C

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 850 1223 - - 1461 - - 402
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 0.004 - - 0.035 - - 0.126
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 8 0 - 7.6 0 - 15.2
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.4
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: PM 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 192 1013 201 137 494 167 101 19 118 112 14 134 Future Volume (veh/h) 192 1013 201 137 494 167 101 19 118 112 14 134 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 211 1113 221 151 543 184 116 22 136 135 17 161 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.83 0.83 0.83 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 258 1324 582 189 1186 515 150 33 204 189 321 269 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1561 1781 3554 1545 1781 220 1361 1781 1870 1566 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 211 1113 221 151 543 184 116 0 158 135 17 161 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1561 1781 1777 1545 1781 0 1581 1781 1870 1566 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.8 19.4 7.0 5.6 8.1 6.1 4.3 0.0 6.4 5.0 0.5 6.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.8 19.4 7.0 5.6 8.1 6.1 4.3 0.0 6.4 5.0 0.5 6.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 258 1324 582 189 1186 515 150 0 237 189 321 269 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.84 0.38 0.80 0.46 0.36 0.77 0.00 0.67 0.71 0.05 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 360 1442 633 208 1186 515 326 0 434 473 668 559 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.1 19.4 15.5 29.6 17.8 17.1 30.4 0.0 27.2 29.3 23.5 25.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.9 4.4 0.4 18.2 0.3 0.4 8.1 0.0 3.2 4.9 0.1 2.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.8 7.7 2.2 3.2 3.0 2.0 2.1 0.0 2.6 2.3 0.2 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 38.0 23.8 16.0 47.8 18.0 17.5 38.5 0.0 30.5 34.2 23.5 28.1 LnGrp LOS D C B D B B D A C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1545 878 274 313
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.6 23.0 33.8 30.5
Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.7 14.6 11.7 29.7 10.2 16.1 14.3 27.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.6 7.9 27.5 12.4 24.2 13.7 21.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.0 8.4 7.6 21.4 6.3 8.4 9.8 10.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.6 0.0 3.8 0.1 0.5 0.2 3.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.6
HCM 6th LOS C
Queues Timing Plan: AM Peak
2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/26/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing plus Project Conditions Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 103 500 63 93 827 143 163 211 220 3 214 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.43 0.10 0.49 0.76 0.25 0.54 0.58 0.61 0.01 0.52 Control Delay 54.0 20.6 0.3 39.1 27.1 5.5 31.6 12.4 31.3 23.5 9.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 54.0 20.6 0.3 39.1 27.1 5.5 31.6 12.4 31.3 23.5 9.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 80 0 33 142 0 56 2 75 1 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #123 147 0 #98 #288 39 111 47 129 7 34 Internal Link Dist (ft) 335 442 438 310
Turn Bay Length (ft) 155 160 300 165 90
Base Capacity (vph) 155 1151 605 195 1114 581 421 613 509 652 683 Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.66 0.43 0.10 0.48 0.74 0.25 0.39 0.34 0.43 0.00 0.31 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Timing Plan: PM
2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Existing Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 211 1113 221 151 543 184 116 158 135 17 161 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.82 0.31 0.77 0.48 0.28 0.49 0.55 0.51 0.06 0.41 Control Delay 41.7 27.6 6.1 61.2 22.9 2.7 37.0 16.2 35.7 28.5 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 41.7 27.6 6.1 61.2 22.9 2.7 37.0 16.2 35.7 28.5 7.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) 84 220 10 65 100 0 47 9 55 7 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #197 #412 61 #183 176 25 101 58 102 22 29 Internal Link Dist (ft) 335 442 438 310
Turn Bay Length (ft) 155 160 300 165 90
Base Capacity (vph) 338 1359 712 195 1132 652 306 513 445 629 648 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.82 0.31 0.77 0.48 0.28 0.38 0.31 0.30 0.03 0.25 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix E – Cumulative Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets

HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 188 1 10 122 31 0 0 12 49 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 1 188 1 10 122 31 0 0 12 49 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 4 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 70 70 70 88 88 88 67 67 67 73 73 73
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 269 1 11 139 35 0 0 18 67 0 1

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 181 0 0 274 0 0 455 479 274 467 462 164 Stage 1 - - - - - - 276 276 - 186 186 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 179 203 - 281 276 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1394 - - 1289 - - 515 486 765 506 497 881 Stage 1 - - - - - - 730 682 - 816 746 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 823 733 - 726 682 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1385 - - 1284 - - 508 475 762 487 486 875 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 508 475 - 487 486 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 726 679 - 809 733 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 813 721 - 708 679 -

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 9.8 13.5

HCM LOS A B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 762 1385 - - 1284 - - 491
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 0.001 - - 0.009 - - 0.139
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 7.6 0 - 7.8 0 - 13.5
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.5
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 101 510 64 97 862 146 159 7 198 192 2 181 Future Volume (veh/h) 101 510 64 97 862 146 159 7 198 192 2 181 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 115 580 73 108 958 162 189 8 236 243 3 229 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.79 0.79 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 144 1045 458 138 1032 448 236 10 296 298 431 364 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1558 1781 3554 1541 1781 51 1512 1781 1870 1577 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 580 73 108 958 162 189 0 244 243 3 229 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1558 1781 1777 1541 1781 0 1563 1781 1870 1577 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 9.3 2.4 4.0 17.8 5.7 7.0 0.0 10.1 8.9 0.1 8.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 9.3 2.4 4.0 17.8 5.7 7.0 0.0 10.1 8.9 0.1 8.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 144 1045 458 138 1032 448 236 0 306 298 431 364 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.56 0.16 0.78 0.93 0.36 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.82 0.01 0.63 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 144 1045 458 181 1032 448 391 0 433 473 604 509 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.6 20.2 17.7 30.7 23.4 19.1 28.6 0.0 26.0 27.2 20.1 23.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.8 0.6 0.2 14.8 13.9 0.5 6.2 0.0 6.8 6.0 0.0 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.8 3.5 0.8 2.2 8.6 1.9 3.3 0.0 4.2 4.2 0.0 3.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.4 20.8 17.9 45.5 37.3 19.6 34.8 0.0 32.7 33.2 20.1 25.3 LnGrp LOS E C B D D B C A C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 768 1228 433 475
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.9 35.7 33.6 29.3
Approach LOS C D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.8 17.8 9.8 24.4 13.5 20.1 10.0 24.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.8 6.9 18.3 14.9 21.9 5.5 19.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.9 12.1 6.0 11.3 9.0 10.9 6.3 19.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.8 0.0 2.2 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 31.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS 4:00 pm 01/13/2022 Cumulative Conditions Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 112 3 15 218 50 1 1 13 35 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 5 112 3 15 218 50 1 1 13 35 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 9 0 2 2 0 9 1 0 3 3 0 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 73 73 73 50 50 50 61 61 61
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 6 135 4 21 299 68 2 2 26 57 0 2

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 376 0 0 141 0 0 528 569 142 550 537 343 Stage 1 - - - - - - 151 151 - 384 384 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 377 418 - 166 153 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1182 - - 1442 - - 461 432 906 446 450 700 Stage 1 - - - - - - 851 772 - 639 611 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 644 591 - 836 771 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1439 - - 450 416 902 418 434 693 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 450 416 - 418 434 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 844 766 - 629 594 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 630 574 - 803 765 -

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0.4 9.7 14.9

HCM LOS A B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 788 1172 - - 1439 - - 423
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 0.005 - - 0.014 - - 0.14
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 0 - 7.5 0 - 14.9
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.5
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS 4:00 pm 01/13/2022 Cumulative Conditions Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 206 1174 233 159 572 182 117 22 137 123 16 146 Future Volume (veh/h) 206 1174 233 159 572 182 117 22 137 123 16 146 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 226 1290 256 175 629 200 134 25 157 148 19 176 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.83 0.83 0.83 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 270 1335 586 192 1181 513 171 35 217 198 327 274 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.38 0.38 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.10 0.16 0.16 0.11 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1561 1781 3554 1545 1781 217 1364 1781 1870 1566 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 226 1290 256 175 629 200 134 0 182 148 19 176 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1561 1781 1777 1545 1781 0 1581 1781 1870 1566 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.0 26.1 9.0 7.1 10.5 7.3 5.4 0.0 8.0 5.9 0.6 7.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.0 26.1 9.0 7.1 10.5 7.3 5.4 0.0 8.0 5.9 0.6 7.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 270 1335 586 192 1181 513 171 0 252 198 327 274 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.97 0.44 0.91 0.53 0.39 0.78 0.00 0.72 0.75 0.06 0.64 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 333 1335 586 192 1181 513 302 0 402 438 618 518 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.2 22.4 17.1 32.3 19.8 18.8 32.4 0.0 29.2 31.5 25.2 28.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.3 17.2 0.5 40.7 0.5 0.5 7.6 0.0 3.9 5.5 0.1 2.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.7 12.7 2.9 5.0 4.0 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.2 2.8 0.3 2.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.5 39.6 17.6 73.0 20.3 19.2 40.0 0.0 33.1 37.0 25.3 30.6 LnGrp LOS D D B E C B D A C D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1772 1004 316 343
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.1 29.3 36.1 33.1
Approach LOS D C D C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.7 16.2 12.4 32.0 11.5 17.3 15.6 28.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.6 7.9 27.5 12.4 24.2 13.7 21.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.9 10.0 9.1 28.1 7.4 9.7 11.0 12.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.2 3.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 34.3
HCM 6th LOS C
215 Skelly Residential Traffic Impact Study

Appendix F – Cumulative plus Project Conditions Intersections Level of Service Worksheets
HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 188 1 17 122 31 0 0 33 49 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 1 188 1 17 122 31 0 0 33 49 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 7 0 4 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 70 70 70 88 88 88 67 67 67 73 73 73
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 269 1 19 139 35 0 0 49 67 0 1

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 181 0 0 274 0 0 471 495 274 498 478 164 Stage 1 - - - - - - 276 276 - 202 202 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 195 219 - 296 276 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1394 - - 1289 - - 503 476 765 483 486 881 Stage 1 - - - - - - 730 682 - 800 734 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 807 722 - 712 682 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1385 - - 1284 - - 494 463 762 443 472 875 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 494 463 - 443 472 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 726 679 - 794 717 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 793 705 - 665 679 -

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 10.1 14.5

HCM LOS B B

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 762 1385 - - 1284 - - 447
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.065 0.001 - - 0.015 - - 0.153
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.1 7.6 0 - 7.8 0 - 14.5
HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.5
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 105 510 64 97 862 149 159 7 198 200 2 194 Future Volume (veh/h) 105 510 64 97 862 149 159 7 198 200 2 194 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 119 580 73 108 958 166 189 8 236 253 3 246 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.79 0.79 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 143 1035 454 138 1025 444 235 10 296 307 441 372 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1558 1781 3554 1541 1781 51 1512 1781 1870 1577 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 119 580 73 108 958 166 189 0 244 253 3 246 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1558 1781 1777 1541 1781 0 1563 1781 1870 1577 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 9.4 2.4 4.1 17.9 5.9 7.0 0.0 10.2 9.4 0.1 9.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 9.4 2.4 4.1 17.9 5.9 7.0 0.0 10.2 9.4 0.1 9.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 143 1035 454 138 1025 444 235 0 306 307 441 372 V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.56 0.16 0.78 0.94 0.37 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.82 0.01 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 143 1035 454 180 1025 444 388 0 430 469 599 505 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.0 20.5 18.0 30.9 23.7 19.4 28.8 0.0 26.2 27.3 20.0 23.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 31.8 0.7 0.2 15.1 15.0 0.5 6.3 0.0 7.0 7.0 0.0 2.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.1 3.6 0.8 2.2 8.8 2.0 3.3 0.0 4.2 4.4 0.0 3.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.7 21.2 18.2 46.0 38.7 19.9 35.1 0.0 33.2 34.3 20.0 25.7 LnGrp LOS E C B D D B D A C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 772 1232 433 502
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.3 36.8 34.0 30.0
Approach LOS C D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.3 17.9 9.8 24.4 13.5 20.6 10.0 24.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.8 6.9 18.3 14.9 21.9 5.5 19.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.4 12.2 6.1 11.4 9.0 11.7 6.5 19.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.8 0.0 2.2 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 32.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC Timing Plan: PM
1: Skelly/Zeus & Hercules Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 112 3 39 218 50 1 1 27 35 0 1
Future Vol, veh/h 5 112 3 39 218 50 1 1 27 35 0 1
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 9 0 2 2 0 9 1 0 3 3 0 1
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 73 73 73 50 50 50 61 61 61
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 6 135 4 53 299 68 2 2 54 57 0 2

Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 376 0 0 141 0 0 592 633 142 628 601 343 Stage 1 - - - - - - 151 151 - 448 448 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 441 482 - 180 153 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1182 - - 1442 - - 418 397 906 395 414 700 Stage 1 - - - - - - 851 772 - 590 573 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 595 553 - 822 771 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1172 - - 1439 - - 399 372 902 351 388 693 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 399 372 - 351 388 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 844 766 - 581 541 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 565 522 - 764 765 -

Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 1 9.7 17.1

HCM LOS A C

Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 826 1172 - - 1439 - - 356
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.07 0.005 - - 0.037 - - 0.166
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 8.1 0 - 7.6 0 - 17.1
HCM Lane LOS A A A - A A - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.6
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Timing Plan: PM 2: Hercules Ave & San Pablo Ave 01/28/2022
215 Skelly Residential TIS: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions, Synchro 10 Report TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 220 1174 233 159 572 192 117 22 137 129 16 154 Future Volume (veh/h) 220 1174 233 159 572 192 117 22 137 129 16 154 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 242 1290 256 175 629 211 134 25 157 155 19 186 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.83 0.83 0.83 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 285 1328 584 191 1141 496 171 35 217 205 333 279 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.32 0.32 0.10 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1561 1781 3554 1544 1781 217 1364 1781 1870 1566 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 242 1290 256 175 629 211 134 0 182 155 19 186 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1561 1781 1777 1544 1781 0 1581 1781 1870 1566 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.7 26.3 9.0 7.2 10.7 7.9 5.4 0.0 8.0 6.2 0.6 8.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.7 26.3 9.0 7.2 10.7 7.9 5.4 0.0 8.0 6.2 0.6 8.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 285 1328 584 191 1141 496 171 0 251 205 333 279 V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.97 0.44 0.91 0.55 0.43 0.78 0.00 0.72 0.76 0.06 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 332 1328 584 191 1141 496 300 0 400 436 615 515 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.0 22.6 17.3 32.5 20.6 19.6 32.5 0.0 29.4 31.5 25.1 28.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.5 18.2 0.5 41.9 0.6 0.6 7.7 0.0 3.9 5.6 0.1 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.2 12.9 3.0 5.1 4.1 0.1 2.7 0.0 3.3 2.9 0.3 3.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.5 40.8 17.8 74.4 21.2 20.2 40.2 0.0 33.3 37.1 25.2 30.9 LnGrp LOS D D B E C C D A C D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1788 1015 316 360
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.3 30.1 36.2 33.3
Approach LOS D C D C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 16.2 12.4 32.0 11.6 17.6 16.3 28.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.6 7.9 27.5 12.4 24.2 13.7 21.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.2 10.0 9.2 28.3 7.4 10.1 11.7 12.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.1 3.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.2
HCM 6th LOS D