King City City Council
October 22, 2024

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CITY OF KING CITY COUNCIL
AND
Sitting as SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF

THE FORMER CDA FOR THE CITY OF KING
AND
Sitting as PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY

FOR THE CITY OF KING
TUESDAY OCTOBER 22, 2024
6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL
212 S. VANDERHURST AVENUE
KING CITY, CALIFORNIA 93930
The City Council meeting will be conducted in hybrid in-person/virtual format.

To join the meeting virtually, please use the link below to join the Zoom meeting:
https://bit.ly/3e0zvaR
Meeting ID: 881 5287 9536
Or by telephone: 1-669-900-9128
Passcode: 052933
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting, Please contact the City Clerk's Office (831-386-5925) at least 48 hours prior to the Meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting.
* Please submit all correspondence for City Council PRIOR to the meeting with a copy to the City Clerk.

CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:

Coucil Members Oscar Avalos, Carlos DeLeon, Robert Cullen, Mayor Pro Tem Carlos Victoria, and Mayor Mike LeBarre

FLAG SALUTE

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

1. 2.

3. 4.

Coucil Members Oscar Avalos, Carlos DeLeon, Robert Cullen, Mayor Pro Tem Carlos Victoria, and Mayor Mike LeBarre

FLAG SALUTE

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
Small Business Development Center/Kosmont Associates South Monterey County Retail Study

PUBLIC COMMENT
Any member of the public may address the Council for a period not to exceed three minutes’ total on any item of interest within the jurisdiction of this Council that is not on the agenda. The Council will listen to all communications; however, in compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot act on items not on the agenda. Comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not to any individual Council Member.

Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member, staff member or member of the audience is not permitted.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS & COMMITTEE REPORTS
Individual Council Members may comment on Council business, his or her Council activities, City operations, projects or other items of community interest. Council Members may also request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting on any matter or take action to direct staff to prepare a staff report for a future agenda.

Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority Meeting Highlights 7(A) SALINAS VALLEY SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY MEETING-HIGHLIGHTSSEPTEMBER-2024.PDF

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Comments presented by the City Manager, City Attorney or other staff on City business and/or announcements.

CONSENT AGENDA
The following items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Members of the audience may speak on any item(s) listed on the Consent Agenda. Any Council Member, the City Manager, or the City Attorney may request that an item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to allow for full discussion. The Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion. Items withdrawn from the Consent Agenda may be considered by separate motions at the conclusion of the discussion of each item.

Consideration: Meeting Minutes Of October 8, 2024
Recommendation: approve and file
9(A) CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.PDF
Consideration: City Of King Check Register October 1, Through October 15, 2024 Recommendation: receive and file
9(B) CITY OF KING CHECK REGISTER OCTOBER 1-15,2024.PDF
Consideration: City Of King KCCP Payments For The Month Of September 2024

3. 4.

5. A.

6. 7.

A.

Documents:

8. 9.

A.

Documents:

B.

Documents:

C
Recommendation: receive and file
9(B) CITY OF KING CHECK REGISTER OCTOBER 1-15,2024.PDF
Consideration: City Of King KCCP Payments For The Month Of September 2024 Recommendation: receive and file.
9(C) CITY OF KING KCCP PAYMENTS SEPTEMBER 2024.PDF
Consideration: Award Of Bid For The 2024 King City Sediment Removal Project Recommendation: 1) award the base bid for the 2024 King City Sediment Removal Project as proposed by low bidder, Specialty Construction Company, in the amount of $75,995.00; and 2) authorize the City Manager to execute the contract and approve change orders up to 25%.
9(D) AWARD OF BID FOR THE 2024 KING CITY SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT.PDF
Consideration: Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Recommendation: adopt a Resolution authorizing the application and adopting the PLHA plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program. 9(E) PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION PROGRAM.PDF

PUBLIC HEARINGS

REGULAR BUSINESS
Consideration: Project Update On The San Antonio Drive/Broadway Street Bike Path And Safe Routes To Schools Improvements Project
Recommendation: 1) receive a presentation and update on the San Antonio Drive / Broadway Street Bike Path & Safe Routes to Schools Improvements Project; 2) direct staff to proceed with public outreach and agendize consideration of approval of the environmental review and preliminary design of the project at the November 26, 2024 City Council meeting; and 3) provide staff direction on any other items to address prior to submittal for City Council approval.
11(A) PROJECT UPDATE ON THE SAN ANTONIO DRIVE-BROADWAY

STREET BIKE PATH AND SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.PDF

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
Announcement(s) of any reportable action(s) taken in Closed Session will be made in open session and repeated at the beginning of the next Regular City Council meeting as this portion of the meeting is not recorded.

Conference With Legal Counsel – Regarding Commencing Litigation Pursuant To Government Code Section 54956.9. Case: 1

ADJOURNMENT
The City of King is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Documents:

C.

Documents:

D.

Documents:

E.

Documents:

10. 11.

A.

Documents:

12. A.

13. Conference With Legal Counsel Regarding Commencing Litigation Pursuant To Government Code Section 54956.9. Case: 1

ADJOURNMENT
The City of King is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

A.

13. Not official minutes of the meeting.

R E D U C E R E U S E R E C Y C L E
“To manage Salinas Valley solid waste as a resource, promoting sustainable, environmentally sound and cost-effective practices through an integrated system of waste reduction, reuse, recycling, innovative technology, customer service, and education.”

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

M E E T I N G HI G H L I G H T S
September 19, 2024
2024 EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR
The 2024 Employee of the Year Award was received by Tomás Lopez, Heavy Equipment Operator. Tomás has been with the Authority for over four years and was selected by his coworkers for his commitment, contributions, splendid work ethic, patience, and exceptional dedication to serving the Salinas Valley Community by providing excellent customer service with a positive attitude. CONGRATULATIONS TOMAS!
2023-24 SALINAS VALLEY SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT The report proudly highlighted the accomplishments, events, and activities of the past fiscal year. It included statistics on the finances, marketing, media, and outreach & education at schools and businesses, and so much more. Some of the highlighted accomplishments include the agency’s positive Net Position, the grand opening of the Johnson Canyon Landfill Education Center, the development of the Youth Council, and the extensive community outreach conducted to inspire the public to take initiative to become more resourceful and reduce waste to help shape a landfill-free future. To view the full report, visit our website at https://svswa.org/23-24annual-report/.

UPDATE ON AB 939 PROGRAMS AND FEE ALLOCATIONS
An overview of the AB 939 programs, the multiple reporting requirements, the 2023 estimated diversion rate and the allocation of the AB 939 fees was presented to the Board. The allocations of services and activities were detailed by percentages for each jurisdiction based on the approved FY 24-25 AB 939 budget of $5.08 million. This budget funds 24 full time staff, three recycling centers, the Household Hazardous Waste facility, and the marketing and public education programs.

CAPITAL PROJECT DESIGNS AND COST ESTIMATES
The conceptual designs for the three capital projects located across the Authority’s service area were presented to the Board. Staff reviewed in detail the designs of the North County Transfer Station and Johnson Canyon Road Entrance Facility Improvement and explained the Jolon Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project plans and specifications that will be included in the request for bids packet. The estimated cost for each of the projects and the potential funding sources available where also presented and detailed by staff. The Board directed staff to move forward with the release of the request for bids for the Jolon Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project and continue planning and permitting for the North County Transfer Station with the stipulation to examine additional safety measures for the main entrance. The Johnson Canyon Road Entrance project will be deferred until after the design and development of module VIII.

SAN BENITO COUNTY PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES
A letter from the San Benito County Board of Supervisors was received requesting a meeting between the Authority and their Sanitary Solutions Ad Hoc Committee (SSAHC) to explore partnership opportunities. The SSAHC is exploring solutions for landfill disposal capacity and opportunities for increased recycling. The Board discussed the letter indicating they are opposed to forming an Ad Hoc Committee. The Authority Board directed the General Manager to engage in discussion to obtain more information on what type of partnership opportunities the SSAHC is exploring.

FIN AN CIAL REPORT FOR MON TH EN DED JULY 2024 (8.3% OF THE FISCAL YEAR) Revenue collected $ 2,367,421 (8.9% of Estimated Revenue of $26,707,300) Expenditures for operations $ 1,616,852 (6.9% of Operating Budget of $23,350,000) Cash balance $ 37,935,162
7(A)
Not official minutes of the meeting.
“Manejar los residuos sólidos del Valle de Salinas como un recurso, promocionando prácticas sostenibles y ecológicamente racionales y practicas costos eficaces a través de un sistema integrado de reducción, reutilización, reciclaje, tecnología innovadora, servicio al cliente y educación.”

R E D U C I R R E U T I L I Z A R R E C I C L A R

JUNTA DIRECTIVA

N O T A S DE S T A C A D A S
19 de septiembre 2024
(Agencia gubernamental de gestión de residuos sólidos)
EMPLEADO DEL AÑO 2024
El premio de Empleado del Año 2024 lo recibió Tomás López, Operador de Equipo Pesado. Tomás ha estado con la Agencia por más de cuatro años y fue seleccionado por sus compañeros de trabajo por su compromiso, contribuciones, ética de trabajo espléndida, paciencia y dedicación excepcional para servir a la comunidad del Valle de Salinas al brindar un excelente servicio al cliente con una actitud positiva. ¡FELICITACIONES TOMAS! INFORME ANUAL DE SALINAS VALLEY RECYCLES 2023-24
El informe destacó con orgullo los logros, eventos y actividades del año fiscal pasado. Incluye estadísticas sobre finanzas, marketing, medios de comunicación, divulgación y educación en escuelas y empresas, y mucho más. Algunos de los logros destacados incluyen la Posición Neta positiva de la agencia, la gran inauguración del Centro Educativo del Vertedero de Johnson Canyon, el desarrollo del Consejo de la Juvenil y la amplia divulgación comunitaria realizada para inspirar al público a tomar la iniciativa para ser más ingenioso y reducir los desechos para ayudar a dar forma a un futuro sin vertederos. Para ver el informe completo, visite nuestro sitio web en https://svswa.org/23-24annual-report/.

ACTUALIZACIÓN SOBRE LOS PROGRAMAS Y LAS ASIGNACIONES DE TARIFAS DE LA AB 939 Se presentó al Consejo una descripción general de los programas de AB 939, los requisitos de informes múltiples, la tasa de desviación estimada para 2023 y la asignación de las tarifas de AB 939. Las asignaciones de servicios y actividades se detallaron en porcentajes para cada jurisdicción según el presupuesto AB 939 aprobado para el año fiscal 24-25 de $5.08 millones. Este presupuesto financia a 24 empleados a tiempo completo, tres centros de reciclaje, la instalación de desechos domésticos peligrosos y los programas de marketing y educación pública.

DISEÑOS DE PROYECTOS DE CAPITAL Y ESTIMACIONES DE COSTOS Se presento al Consejo los diseños conceptuales de los tres proyectos de capital ubicados en el área de servicio de la Agencia. El personal revisó en detalle los diseños de la Estación de Transferencia del Norte del Condado y la Mejora de las Instalaciones de la Entrada de Johnson Canyon Road y explicó los planes y especificaciones del Proyecto de Rehabilitación del Pavimento de Jolon Road que se incluirán en el paquete de solicitud de ofertas. El personal también presentó y detalló el costo estimado para cada uno de los proyectos y las posibles fuentes de financiamiento disponibles. El Consejo ordenó al personal que avanzara con la publicación de la solicitud de ofertas para el Proyecto de Rehabilitación del Pavimento de Jolon Road y continuara con la planificación y los permisos para la Estación de Transferencia del Norte del Condado con la estipulación de examinar medidas de seguridad adicionales para la entrada principal. El proyecto de la Entrada de Johnson Canyon Road se pospondrá hasta después del diseño y desarrollo del módulo VIII.

OPORTUNIDADES DE ASOCIACIÓN DEL CONDADO DE SAN BENITO
Se recibió una carta del Consejo de Supervisores del Condado de San Benito solicitando una reunión entre la Agencia y su Comité Ad Hoc de Soluciones Sanitarias (SSAHC por sus siglas en ingles) para explorar oportunidades de asociación. El SSAHC está explorando soluciones para la capacidad de eliminación de vertederos y oportunidades para aumentar el reciclaje. El Consejo analizó la carta indicando que se oponen a formar un Comité Ad Hoc. El Consejo ordenó al Gerente General que entablara un debate para obtener más información sobre qué tipo de oportunidades de asociación está explorando la SSAHC.

INFORME FINANCIERO DEL MES FIN ALIZADO EN JULIO 2024 (8.3% DEL AÑ O FISCAL) Ingresos recaudados $ 2,367,421 (8.9% del Ingreso Estimado de $26,707,300) Gastos de operaciones $ 1,616,852 (6.9% del Presupuesto Operativo de $23,350,000) Saldo de caja $ 37,935,162

City Council Meeting
October 8, 2024

1.__CALL TO ORDER:

Regular Meeting called to order at 6:00pm by Mayor LeBarre.

2.__ROLL CALL:

City Council: Mayor Mike LeBarre, Council member Carlos DeLeon, Council member Rob Cullen, Council members Oscar Avalos. Mayor Pro Tem Carlos Victoria(absent).

City Staff: City Manager Steven Adams; City Attorney Roy Santos; City Clerk, Erica Sonne.

3.__FLAG SALUTE:

The flag salute was led by Mayor LeBarre.

4. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:

None

5.__SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:

None

6. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS:

Karen Jernigan, 206 N. Mildred Ave., participated in an event at the Mission San Antonio de Padua with the California Mission Walkers conference with 130 in attendance this past Saturday October 5th where many people commented positively on the improvements in our little town and four of King City’s businesses were used. Rosa Pacheco catering Friday night dinner, Knights of Columbus from Saint John’s Church Saturday lunch, Francisco’s Tacos La Potranca De Jalisco, Saturday night dinner and Jenny’s Cake Decoration for tables and chairs. All of these businesses were on time and professional.

One of the speakers was Naomi Torres, superintendent of the Juan de Anza National Historic trail. Nearly 250 years ago Mr. Anza brought a group of 240 settlers made up of 30 families from Mexico into Baja California, their journey came near King City. She feels that having part of the trail along the Salinas River in San Lorenzo Park designated as a national trail would be an attraction for people to visit our city. After the first of the year, she would like to encourage the City Council to invite Ms. Torres and her staff to speak to City Council about the possibilities for this. She thanked the City Council and told them to keep up the good work.

7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:

Council Member DeLeon stated he had nothing to report this evening, however he had a question about rent stabilization. City Manager Adams explained that in general it would be recommended against rent control for a couple of reasons the first being it reduces the housing supply, people are locked into a low rent then never want to give up their unit, where otherwise typically someone would move up in their housing, with rent control there are less low-income units available for people that need them. Secondly lack of housing is the real problem currently. We would be concerned about potential rent control or stabilization because it is hard to get developers to come here already to build and this may make it even 9(A)

harder. The City Manager stated a more comprehensive study could be brought back. Council Member DeLeon stated that we should keep an eye on it and consider it later on down the road.

Council Member Cullen stated he got to attend the Monterey County Business Council meeting a few weeks ago where Dr. Chris Thornberg gave an analysis on housing in Monterey County. He warned about the unintentional consequences of rent control. The last meeting for the Solid Waste Authority was for the Annual Report and Meeting Highlights will be in the next City Council meeting packet. He stated that at Rotary tomorrow Zoe Lofgren and Sheriff Tina Nieto will be speaking.

Council Member Avalos stated he had nothing to report this evening. Mayor LeBarre reminded council member Avalos of the annual event this weekend. He stated that So. Mo. County Foundation event is happening Saturday from 4-7p.m.

Mayor LeBarre stated tomorrow he will be heading to the State Rail Conference in San Diego. The visit to Lawrence Livermore Labs was productive, he looks forward to more interaction and he thanked Doreen and Octavio for getting that set-up.

8. CITY STAFF REPORTS AND COMMENTS:

City Manager Adams reminded Council that Ciclovia is this Sunday. Lots of agencies participating. We got approved for another grant partnering with CHISPA our portion will be for another stretch of the bike path.

City Attorney Santos stated the legislature passed a new law increasing noticing requirements for changes in zoning to 20 days for both Planning Commission and City Council approval.

9. CONSENT
A. Consideration: Meeting Minutes of September 24, 2024, Council Meeting B. Consideration: City of King Check Register September 16, through September 30, 2024 C. Consideration: Cancelation of Regular Meeting on December 24,2024 D. Consideration: Public Participation Plan
E. Consideration: Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Plan F. Consideration: Amendment No. 2 to the Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Consultant Services Agreement
G. Consideration: Award of Bid for King City Tennis/Pickleball Court Project, Including Adopting Finding of a Categorical Exemption, Pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines H. Consideration: Amended Purchasing and Procurement Policy Action: Motion to approve consent agenda items A-H with correction to the minutes by Cullen seconded by Avalos.

AYES: Council Members: LeBarre, Avalos, Cullen, DeLeon, NOES: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members: Victoria
ABSTAIN: Council Members:

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

None

11. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. Consideration: 2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) Application – Neighborhood Availability Improvement Project, Including Finding of a Categorical Exemption Pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines and Finding of a NEPA Categorical Exclusion Pursuant to Section 58.5 of 24 CFR, Part 58 City Manager Adams introduced this item.

Beth Dodd, Adams/Ashby, further introduced this item.

Action: Motion to 1) adopt a Resolution approving the submission of the 2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) application for the Neighborhood Street Improvement Project and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to the application; 2) find the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption, adopt a Class 1 Categorical Exemption, and instruct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk; and 3) find that the project qualifies for a National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) Categorical Exclusion subject to Section 58.5 of 24 CFR, Part 58 by Avalos seconded by DeLeon.

AYES: Council Members: LeBarre, Avalos, Cullen, DeLeon, NOES: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members: Victoria
ABSTAIN: Council Members:

B. Consideration: Second Amendment to Monarch Inn Lease Agreement City Manager Adams introduced this item.

Councilmember DeLeon asked about evictions from the Monarch Inn.

Action: Motion to 1) approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a Second Amendment to the Lease Agreement for the Monarch Inn for the temporary homeless shelter program; and 2) appropriate $95,000 from the General Fund unappropriated fund balance for a portion of the rent costs by DeLeon seconded by Cullen.

AYES: Council Members: LeBarre, Avalos, Cullen, DeLeon, NOES: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members: Victoria
ABSTAIN: Council Members:

12. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Regarding Commencing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9. Case: 1
This item was continued to the next meeting.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor LeBarre adjourned the meeting at 6:27p.m.

Approved Signatures:

Mayor Mike LeBarre City Clerk, Erica Sonne
City of King City of King
Item No. 9(B)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF CITY OF KING CHECK REGISTER
OCTOBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2024
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council receive and file.

BACKGROUND:

At least once a month, the City Treasurer shall submit to the City Council, a copy of the invoices paid for the previous month.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this item is to provide the Council an opportunity to review and monitor ongoing expenditures. These documents are attached.

COST ANALYSIS:

There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No Environmental Review required for this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for Council consideration:

1. Receive and file the report; or

2. Provide other direction to staff regarding requests for additional information.

Item No. 9(C)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: OCTOBR 22, 2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF CITY OF KING KCCP PAYMENTS FOR
THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2024
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council receive and file.

BACKGROUND:

At least once a month, the City Treasurer shall submit to the City Council, a copy of the invoices paid for the previous month.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this item is to provide the Council an opportunity to review and monitor ongoing expenditures. These documents are attached.

COST ANALYSIS:

There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No Environmental Review required for this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for Council consideration:

1. Receive and file the report; or

2. Provide other direction to staff regarding requests for additional information.

Item No. 9(D)

STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: OCTAVIO HURTADO, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY

ENGINEER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF BID FOR THE 2024 KING

CITY SEDIMENT REMOVAL PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council: 1) award the base bid for the 2024 King City Sediment Removal Project as proposed by low bidder, Specialty Construction Company, in the amount of $75,995.00; and 2) authorize the City Manager to execute the contract and approve change orders up to 25%.

BACKGROUND:

On September 12, 2017, Council approved entering into an agreement to participate in the Salinas River Maintenance Program. The purpose of the agreement is to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers’ 404 Permit, State Regional Water Quality Control Board 401 Certification, and the Program Guidelines.

A component of the Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program is to remove sediment along the San Lorenzo Creek. Maintenance of the San Lorenzo Creek Channel is a high priority to the City due to potential flooding during major storms. Sediment has built up over the years, reducing the flow capacity of the creek. To help minimize the damage to adjacent properties along the San Lorenzo Creek, Monterey County Water Resource Agency (MCWRA) obtained environmental permits to perform various maintenance activities within the Salinas River and the San Lorenzo Creek. These permits consist of the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) General 404 Permit and the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 401 Water Quality Permit. These permits restrict the activities performed within the Salinas River and the San Lorenzo Creek by the adjacent property owners.

The permits allow for 2,000 Cubic Yards of sediment to be removed within each permit year. The City prepared and submitted a work plan to remove sediment

CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF BID FOR THE 2024 KING CITY SEDIMENT

REMOVAL PROJECT
OCTOBER 22, 2024
PAGE 2 OF 3
and transport it to a site upstream. The upstream site was sold by the City, but the rights to place sediment associated with this program were retained.

The City participated in the program in 2017 and removed the first 2,000 cubic yards of sediment along the Creek between US 101 bridge to the first golf course access bridge. In 2018, the City did not participate in the program due to budget constraints. In 2019 through 2023, the City resumed participation in the sediment removal program upstream from the US 101 bridge. This would be the seventh round of sediment removal to help reduce the potential of flooding.

DISCUSSION:

The City received an approved Verification Request Form (VRF) under Routine Maintenance Agreement No 1600-2016-0016-R4 for the proposed work.

Improvement Plans and Specifications were put out to bid for the 2024 King City Sediment Removal Project. The proposed project consists of sediment removal of 2,000 cubic yards out of the San Lorenzo Creek form the First Street bridge to the US 101 bridge.

Sediment is to be trucked out along an established access route. No more than two feet in depth of sediment will be removed, and the upstream-to-downstream slope will be maintained. The areas where sediment removal will take place are devoid of vegetation, so vegetation removal will not occur. Access will follow existing routes. No new access routes will be created.

Staff believe the program has been instrumental in minimizing flooding damage and severity during multiple major rain events during the past few years.

Therefore, continuation of the program is recommended.

The City received the following bids:

Contractor Base bid
Specialty Construction Company Inc. $75,995.00
The Don Chapin Company Inc. $80,000.00
COST ANALYSIS:

Funding for this project was included in the 2024/2025 budget. The City appropriated $100,000.00 to prepare plans and specs, perform the work, and provide inspection and biological monitoring.

EXHIBIT 1

EXHIBIT 2
Item No. 9 (E)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING

ALLOCATION PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the application and adopting the PLHA plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program.

BACKGROUND:

At the February 27, 2024 meeting, the City Council adopted a Resolution authorizing the application and adoption of the PLHA plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program. There was an error in the Resolution, so it needs to be adopted again by City Council and submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). PLHA provides funding to local governments in California for housing -related projects and programs that assist in addressing the unmet housing needs of their communities.

DISCUSSION:

King City PLHA funds are being used to provide assistance to CHISPA for the construction of low-income housing units, operation of the Monarch Inn temporary homeless shelter program, and construction of the improvements to the Days Inn building for the permanent supportive housing project. The original Resolution adopted included the amount of the current allocation. Staff has been notified that the Resolution should instead include the total estimated 5-year allocation amount. Therefore, the PLHA dollar amount is the only change to the Resolution.

2024-5013

AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KING

AUTHORIZING THE APPLICATION AND ADOPTING THE PLHA PLAN FOR THE

PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION PROGRAM
All of the City Council of the City of King hereby consents to adopt and ratify the following resolution.

A. WHEREAS, the Department is authorized to provide up to $296 million under the SB 2 Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Formula Component from the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund for assistance to Cities and Counties (as described in Health and Safety Code section 50470 et seq.; and
(Chapter 364, Statutes of 2017 (SB 2)).

B. WHEREAS the State of California (the “State”), Department of Housing and Community Development (“Department”) issued a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) dated December 29, 2023 under the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (“PLHA”) Program; and
C. WHEREAS, the City of King is an eligible Local government who has applied for program funds to administer one or more eligible activities, or a Local or Regional Housing Trust Fund to whom an eligible Local government delegated its PLHA formula allocation; and
D. WHEREAS, the Department may approve funding allocations for PLHA Program, subject to the terms and conditions of the Guidelines, NOFA, Program requirements, the Standard Agreement, and other contracts between the Department and PLHA grant recipients.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. If Applicant receives a grant of PLHA funds from the Department pursuant to the above referenced PLHA NOFA, it represents and certifies that it will use all such funds in a manner consistent and in compliance with all applicable state and federal statutes, rules, regulations, and laws, including without limitation all rules and laws regarding the PLHA Program, as well as any and all contracts Applicant may have with the Department.

2. Applicant is hereby authorized and directed to receive a PLHA grant, in an amount not to exceed the five-year estimate of the PLHA formula allocations, as stated in Appendix B of the current NOFA $805,115.00 in accordance with all applicable rules and laws.3. Applicant hereby agrees to use the PLHA funds for eligible activities as approved by the Department and in accordance with all Program requirements, Guidelines, other rules and laws, as well as in a manner consistent and in compliance with the Standard Agreement and other contracts between the Applicant and the Department.

3. Applicant hereby agrees to use the PLHA funds for eligible activities as approved by the Department and in accordance with all Program requirements. Guidelines, other rules and laws, as well as in a manner consistent and in compliance with the Standard Agreement and other contracts between the Applicant and the Department

4. Pursuant to Section 302(c)(4) of the Guidelines, Applicant’s PLHA Plan for the 2019- 2023 Allocations is attached to this resolution, and Applicant hereby adopts this PLHA Plan and certifies compliance with all public notice, public comment, and public hearing requirements in accordance with the Guidelines.

5. If applicable: Applicant certifies that it was delegated by N/A to submit an application on its behalf and administer the PLHA grant award for the formula allocation of PLHA funds, pursuant to Guidelines Section 300(c) and 300(d), and the legally binding agreement between the recipient of the PLHA funds and the Applicant is submitted with the PLHA application.

6. If applicable: Applicant certifies that it has or will subgrant some or all of its PLHA funds to another entity or entities. Pursuant to Guidelines Section 302(c)(3), “entity” means a housing developer or program operator but does not mean an administering Local government to whom a Local government may delegate its PLHA allocation.

7. If applicable: Applicant certifies that its selection process of these subgrantees was or will be accessible to the public and avoided or shall avoid any conflicts of interest.

8. If applicable: Pursuant to Applicant’s certification in this resolution, the PLHA funds will be expended only for eligible Activities and consistent with all program requirements.

9. If applicable: Applicant certifies that, if funds are used for the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of for-sale housing projects or units within for-sale housing projects, the grantee shall record a deed restriction against the property that will ensure compliance with one of the requirements stated in Guidelines Section 302(c)(6)(A),(B) and (C).

10. If applicable: Applicant certifies that, if funds are used for the development of an Affordable Rental Housing Development, the Local government shall make PLHA assistance in the form of a low-interest, deferred loan to the Sponsor of the Project, and such loan shall be evidenced through a Promissory Note secured by a Deed of Trust and a Regulatory Agreement shall restrict occupancy and rents in accordance with a Local government-approved underwriting of the Project for a term of at least 55 years.

11. Applicant shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the Standard Agreement, the PLHA Program Guidelines and any other applicable SB 2 Guidelines published by the Department.

12. The City Manager is authorized to execute the PLHA Program Application, the PLHA Standard Agreement and any subsequent amendments or modifications thereto, as well as any other documents which are related to the Program or the PLHA grant awarded to Applicant, as the Department may deem Appropriate.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of King this 22nd day of October 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

ABSTENTIONS:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Signature of Approving Officer:
_____________________________
Erica Sonne, City Clerk

CERTIFICATE OF THE ATTESTING OFFICER
The undersigned, Officer of the City Clerk, Erica Sonne, does hereby attest and certify that the subject Resolution is a true, full and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of King which was duly convened and held on the date stated thereon, and that said document has not been amended, modified, repealed or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.

ATTEST:

Signature of Attesting Officer
Erica Sonne, City Clerk
Item No. 11 (A)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: OCTAVIO HURTADO, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY

ENGINEER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT UPDATE ON THE SAN

ANTONIO DRIVE / BROADWAY STREET BIKE PATH AND SAFE

ROUTES TO SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended the City Council: 1) receive a presentation and update on the San Antonio Drive / Broadway Street Bike Path & Safe Routes to Schools Improvements Project; 2) direct staff to proceed with public outreach and agendize consideration of approval of the environmental review and preliminary design of the project at the November 26, 2024 City Council meeting; and 3) provide staff direction on any other items to address prior to submittal for City Council approval.

BACKGROUND:

In 2023 City was awarded $11,043,000 Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 6 Small Urban & Rural Component funds for the San Antonio Drive Path & Safe Routes to Schools Improvements Project.

The project includes a 1.6-mile paved bicycle and pedestrian paths, three roundabouts and close sidewalk and ADA curb ramp gaps along San Antonio Drive from Mildred Avenue to Broadway Street. The project will reduce travel lanes, crossing distances and exposure to motorized traffic by installing a 14-feet trail with a 5-feet landscape buffers on both sides for pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity as illustrated in the location map below.

At the January 23, 2024 meeting, the City Council approved a contract with KimleyHorn to prepare a Project Approval and Environmental Review . The preliminary results will be presented at this time for City Council feedback before finalizing the study.

CITY COUNCIL

PROJECT UPDATE ON THE SAN ANTONIO DRIVE PATH AND SAFE ROUTES

TO SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENTS
OCTOBER 22, 2024
PAGE 2 OF 5
DISCUSSION:

The project is currently in the Project Approval & Environmental Document (PA&ED) Phase, which includes the constructability review of the project in conformance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will establish project limits and identify mitigation measures on the project. The PA&ED review will include the proposed work plan, schedule, environmental requirements, and identify construction impacts. This phase also includes an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) to determine the most appropriate intersection control type along Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue. The CEQA analysis and ICE memo have been completed and are included as attachments.

This phase also includes public outreach, consisting of two public workshops and one presentation at the City’s City Council meeting. Public outreach will take place in October/November 2024. Based on the feedback received during the outreach efforts, the consultant will proceed with the preparation of preliminary engineering drawings. The objective is to receive approval from Caltrans on the PA&ED in

CITY COUNCIL

PROJECT UPDATE ON THE SAN ANTONIO DRIVE PATH AND SAFE ROUTES

TO SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENTS
OCTOBER 22, 2024
PAGE 3 OF 5
order to proceed with the solicitation of the Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) Phase 2.

The Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) report concluded that a roundabout is the preferred alternative for each of the study intersections (along Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue).

The Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) is a data-driven, performance-based framework and approach used to objectively screen alternatives and identify an optimal geometric and control solution for an intersection. The optimal solution is analyzed via a benefit to cost ratio (BCR) by monetizing the societal costs associated with safety (collisions), delay, GHG emissions, operations & maintenance, and initial capital costs. The analysis first compares each proposed alternative to the existing condition, and then each alternative to one another.

While traditional stop controls (stops and signals) may have less initial capital costs, roundabouts dramatically reduce the amount of injury collisions and generally have reduced maintenance costs.

In general, roundabouts reduce collision conflict points and the tight circle of a roundabout forces drivers to slow down, and the most sever types of intersection crashes – right-angle, left-turn and head-on collisions are unlikely. Roundabouts improve traffic flow by reducing the need to stop. Pedestrian crossing distances are reduced to one lane making it safer for pedestrians while reducing the wait time for drivers before being able to proceed.

Following City Council and public feedback, recommendations will be presented to City Council on November 26, 2024 for formal consideration. Adoption of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration and approval of the project scope will be necessary to meet the grant obligations.

COST ANALYSIS:

There is no impact to the General Fund. The project is paid for with grant funds from the Active Transportation Program (ATP).

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15074, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (IS/ND) has been prepared for the San Antonio Drive Path and Safe Routes to Schools Project. The IS/ND is provided as Exhibit A to Draft Resolution provided as Attachment 1 recommending the adoption of a Negative Declaration for the San Antonio Drive Path & Safe Routes to Schools Improvements Project. The Initial Study/Negative Declaration

CITY COUNCIL

PROJECT UPDATE ON THE SAN ANTONIO DRIVE PATH AND SAFE ROUTES

TO SCHOOLS IMPROVEMENTS
OCTOBER 22, 2024
PAGE 4 OF 5
document was available for public review between July 24, 2024, and ending on August 23, 2024.

Notification to responsible agencies for this meeting was completed via mailings to the State Clearinghouse, community and regional interest groups, noticed in The King City Rustler, and posted on the city's website. No comments were received during the 30-day public review period or in response to the legal notice that was published on July 24, 2024.

The Initial Study examined any potentially significant impacts based on CEQA thresholds of significance and concluded that there is no substantial evidence to suggest that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. The following reasons support these findings:

1. The proposal is a logical component of the existing land use pattern and circulation system of this area.

2. Potentially adverse construction effects will be addressed by implementation of construction best practices and/or standard conditions of approval.

3. The project will yield beneficial impacts with respect to bicycle and pedestrian safety.

4. No significance thresholds under CEQA will be exceeded.

5. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted goals, policies and land uses of the City of King City General Plan and Municipal Code.

The environmental determination will be presented to the City Council for consideration along with the recommendation on the project scope at the November 26, 2024 meeting.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration:

1. Receive project update and direct staff to proceed with public outreach and completion of the PA&ED;

2. Direct staff to incorporate additional analysis or more information on alternatives to the study prior to initiating community outreach;

3. Direct staff to pursue a different option as the preferred alternative for improvements to the intersections on Broadway Street; or

4. Provide staff other direction.

Exhibits:

1. Intersection Control Evaluation Report

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Intersection Control Evaluation
Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue in King City, CA

INTRODUCTION
An Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) was completed for three intersections along Broadway Street in King City, California.
• Broadway Street at Franciscan Way (“Intersection 1” and “Franciscan Way intersection”) • Broadway Street at Canal Street (“Intersection 2” and “Canal Street intersection”) • Broadway Street at Mildred Avenue (“Intersection 3” and “Mildred Avenue intersection”) The Franciscan Way intersection is currently four-legged and operates as a side-street stop-control (SSSC).

The Canal Street intersection is currently three-legged and operates as a SSSC. The Mildred Avenue intersection is currently four-legged and operates as an all-way stop-control (AWSC). The Franciscan Way and Canal Street intersections have left-turn lanes along Broadway Street and an additional turn lane on the side-street. The Mildred Avenue intersection has left-turn lanes along Broadway Street and no additional turn lanes on the side-streets.

A proposed road diet along Broadway Street requires reconfiguration of the three study intersections. The road diet retains on-street parking on both sides of the road and adds a bi-directional Class IV bike path along the north side of the intersection and bulb-outs. The inclusion of the bike path and bulb-outs will require the removal of the two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) along Broadway Street between San Antonio Drive and Mildred Avenue. This will result in no additional turn lanes at the Franciscan Way and Canal Street intersections.

SUMMARY OF KEY PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Five performance metrics were evaluated at the study intersection to calculate the Benefit Cost (B/C) Ratio which measures the expected return on investment for each proposed intersection control. The performance measures used to calculate the benefits between the proposed alternatives are:
• Safety Benefit (of the proposed intersection control type) • Delay Reduction Benefit (of the proposed intersection control type) • Emission Reduction Benefit (of the proposed intersection control type) Performance measures used to calculate the conceptual level costs between the proposed alternatives are:
• Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Cost (added costs of the proposed intersection control type) • Initial Capital Cost (added costs of the proposed intersection control type) Refer to Appendix A for a detailed description of each performance measure and the Cal B/C 2020 Value Comparison Table1
that were used in this B/C Analysis.

Analysis Design Year
Design year traffic scenarios were developed using the traffic volume counts taken on April 9th, 2024 to establish project baseline conditions and to evaluate the effectiveness of intersection control strategies at the study intersection. As directed by the City of King (the “City”) and TAMC, the weekday AM and PM peak-hour traffic analyses were completed for the following scenarios:
• Opening Year (2024) Conditions
1 Cal B/C 2020 Value Comparison Table, Caltrans, January 2020.

Exhibit 1
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

• Peak hour volumes from traffic counts
• Design Life (2044) Conditions
• The volume forecasts are based on an assumed linear growth rate of 1.172% determined by the future planned development taking place.

See Appendix B for the intersection traffic volumes and heavy vehicle percentages that were used for the intersection analysis.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

FRANCISCAN WAY INTERSECTION
Proposed Intersection Control Alternatives
Three intersection control alternatives were ultimately considered in the ICE Analysis for the intersection of Franciscan Way and Broadway Street. See Appendix C, Appendix D, and Appendix E for the operational analysis worksheets for each alternative. The preliminary concept layouts for each alternative based on the operational analyses are included in Appendix F.

The intersection of Franciscan Way and Broadway Street does not satisfy signal warrants per the 2014 MUTCD (Revision 6). Since signal warrants were not met, a proposed signal was not evaluated as an alternative for this intersection. See Appendix G for signal warrant analysis reports.

The following intersection control improvement alternatives were evaluated in this ICE Analysis:
• All Way Stop Control (AWSC)
• Side Street Stop Control (SSSC)
• Roundabout
Alternative A: All Way Stop Control
This alternative has stop-controlled single lane legs in all directions. The worst operations occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS of E and average delay of 36.7 seconds. The max 95th percentile queue length is the EB approach with 275 feet, which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. See Table 1 below for the summary of Alternative A analysis. Figure 1 below shows a concept layout of the AWSC alternative.

Table 1: Franciscan Way AWSC Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 C 19.7 0.752 175 (EB) C 16 0.642 125 (EB)
2044 C 17.1 0.700 150 (EB) E 36.7 0.894 275 (EB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 1: Franciscan Way AWSC Concept Layout
Alternative B: Side Street Stop Control
This alternative includes a stop controlled single lane southern leg with a left and right turn lane while the EB/WB legs are uncontrolled. The worst operations occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS of F and average delay of 90.3 seconds. The max 95th percentile queue length is the NB approach with 175 feet, which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. See Table 2 below for the summary of Alternative A analysis. Figure 2 below shows a concept layout of the side street stop control alternative.

Table 2: Franciscan SSSC Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 C 21.2 0.205 25 (NB) D 28.2 0.485 75 (NB)
2044 C 19.5 0.176 25 (NB) F 90.3 0.909 175 (NB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 2: Franciscan SSSW Concept Layout
Alternative C: Roundabout
This alternative includes a four-legged single-lane roundabout. The worst operations will occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS A and an average delay of 7.9 seconds. The maximum 95th percentile queue length occurs on the EB approach at year 2044 and is 100 feet which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. Table 3 below includes a summary of the roundabout operations. Figure 3 below shows a concept layout of the proposed roundabout.

Table 3: Roundabout Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 A 6.5 0.459 100 (EB) A 6.3 0.358 50 (EB)
2044 A 6.2 0.431 75 (EB) A 7.9 0.471 100 (EB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 3: Franciscan Way Roundabout Control Concept Layout

Performance Measure Summary
The following figures show the cost of key performance measures for each control types at the intersection of Franciscan Way and Broadway Street assuming 20-years of intersection operations to calculate life-cycle costs. Each intersection control type corresponds to the proposed alternatives discussed on pages 3, 4, and

5. Table 4 on page 7 summarizes the costs associated with each alternative.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Table 4: Performance Measure Summary

Benefit Performance Measure Summary
Safety Preferred Alternative:

Based on the lowest predicted life-cycle cost
for safety, the preferred intersection control
type for this intersection is a roundabout. See
Appendix H for the Interactive Highway
Safety Design Manual (IHSDM)’s KABCO
values used for the safety analysis.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Delay Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the lowest predicted lifecycle cost for delay, the preferred intersection control type for this
intersection is side street stop control.

Emissions
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the life-cycle cost for
emissions, the preferred intersection
control type for this intersection is side
street stop control.

Cost Performance Measure Summary
O&M
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on lowest expected annual O&M
costs, the preferred intersection control type
for this intersection is either all way or side
street stop control.

B/C Analysis Summary
The following equation illustrates the B/C ratio and Table 5 provides the description of B/C ratio scoring:

⁄ Ratio Score 
∑
  



∑ 
  



Table 5: Description of B/C Ratio Scoring
B/C Ratio Score Description
B/C = 1.00 A B/C ratio of 1.00 is a neutral rating. This indicates that the ROI for side street stop control is equal to all way stop control/roundabout.

B/C < 1.00 A B/C ratio less than 1.00 indicates that side street stop control will provide a better ROI when compared to all way stop control/roundabout.

B/C > 1.00 A B/C ratio greater than 1.00 indicates that all way stop control/roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to side street stop control.

B/C = NA-R When the cost of all way stop control/roundabout is less than the cost of side street stop control and all way stop control/roundabout provides benefit over side street stop control, a B/C ratio cannot be computed. This special case is denoted by “NA-R” and indicates that all way stop control/roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to side street stop control.

The B/C score is based on the net present value using a discount rate of 4% through the life-cycle duration of 20 years for each of the five performance measures.

Note: ROI=Return of Investment
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

The summary results of the B/C analysis at the study intersection are summarized in Table 6. The B/C analysis is based on comparing the all way stop control and roundabout alternatives to the SSSC alternative.

The AWSC alternative has a negative B/C ratio because the AWSC alternative yeilds less benefits compared to the SSSC alternative while also having greater costs. The roundabout has a B/C ratio greater than 1.0, which indicates that it is the more cost-effective compared to the SSSC alternative.

Table 6: Summary of Life-Cycle B/C Analysis – B/C Ratios

Figure 4 shows the accumulated cost of
all five performance measures for each
proposed alternative. This figure reflects
the B/C ratio results between each
alternative. The roundabout starts with a
larger accumulated cost because of the
greater initial capital cost, but because of
the greater societal costs of the AWSC
and SSSC alternatives, the roundabout
provides a greater return on investment
after 2027. The roundabout is the
preferred intersection control type for
the entire 20-year analysis time period.

Figure 4: Accumulated Costs Between Proposed Alternatives

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

CANAL STREET INTERSECTION
Proposed Intersection Control Alternatives
Three intersection control alternatives were ultimately considered in the ICE Analysis for the intersection of Canal Street and Broadway Street. See Appendix C, Appendix D, and Appendix E for the operational analysis worksheets for each alternative. The preliminary concept layouts for each alternative based on the operational analyses are included in Appendix F.

The intersection of Canal Street and Broadway Street does not satisfy signal warrants per the 2014 MUTCD (Revision 6). Since signal warrants were not met, a proposed signal was not evaluated as an alternative for this intersection. See Appendix G for signal warrant analysis reports.

The following intersection control improvement alternatives were evaluated in this ICE Analysis:
• All Way Stop Control (AWSC)
• Side Street Stop Control (SSSC)
• Roundabout
Alternative A: All Way Stop Control
This alternative has stop controlled single lane legs in all directions. The worst operations occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS of F and average delay of 53.1 seconds. The max 95th percentile queue length is the WB approach with 350 feet, which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. See Table 7 below for the summary of Alternative A analysis. Figure 5 below shows a concept layout of the AWSC alternative.

Table 7: Canal Street AWSC Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 B 10.6 0.399 50 (WB) C 20.8 0.724 150 (WB)
2044 B 12.6 0.512 75 (WB) F 53.1 0.971 350 (WB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 5: Canal Street AWSC Concept Layout
Alternative B: Side Street Stop Control
This alternative includes a stop controlled single lane southern leg with a left and right turn lane while the EB/WB legs are uncontrolled. The worst operations occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS of E and average delay of 47.3 seconds. The max 95th percentile queue length is the NB approach with 150 feet, which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. See Table 8 below for the summary of Alternative A analysis. Figure 6 below shows a concept layout of the SSSC alternative.

Table 8: Canal Street SSSC Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 B 13.6 0.205 25 (NB) C 22.1 0.456 50 (NB)
2044 C 16 0.289 25 (NB) E 47.3 0.750 150 (NB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 6: Canal Street SSSC Concept Layout
Alternative C: Roundabout
This alternative includes a three legged single-lane roundabout. The worst operations will occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS A and an average delay of 7.7 seconds. The maximum 95th percentile queue length occurs on the WB approach at year 2044 and is 100 feet which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. Table 9 below includes a summary of the roundabout operations. Figure 7 below shows a concept layout of the proposed roundabout.

Table 9: Roundabout Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 A 4.8 0.237 25 (EB) A 6.3 0.398 50 (EB)
2044 A 5.1 0.294 50 (EB) A 7.7 0.497 100 (WB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 7: Canal Street Roundabout Control Concept Layout

Performance Measure Summary
The following figures show the cost of key performance measures for each control types at the intersection of Canal Street and Broadway Street assuming 20-years of intersection operations to calculate life-cycle costs. Each intersection control type corresponds to the proposed alternatives discussed on pages 10, 11, and 12. Table 10 on page 14 summarizes the costs associated with each alternative.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Table 10: Performance Measure Summary

Benefit Performance Measure Summary
Safety Preferred Alternative:

Based on the lowest predicted life-cycle cost
for safety, the preferred intersection control
type for this intersection is a roundabout. See
Appendix H for the Interactive Highway
Safety Design Manual (IHSDM)’s KABCO
values used for the safety analysis.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Delay Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the lowest predicted lifecycle cost for delay, the preferred intersection control type for this
intersection is side street stop control.

Emissions
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the life-cycle cost for
emissions, the preferred intersection
control type for this intersection is side
street stop control.

Cost Performance Measure Summary
O&M
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on lowest expected annual O&M
costs, the preferred intersection control type
for this intersection is either side street or all
way stop control.

B/C Analysis Summary
The following equation illustrates the B/C ratio and Table 11 provides the description of B/C ratio scoring:

⁄ Ratio Score 
∑
  



∑ 
  



Table 11: Description of B/C Ratio Scoring
B/C Ratio Score Description
B/C = 1.00 A B/C ratio of 1.00 is a neutral rating. This indicates that the ROI for side street stop control is equal to all way stop control/roundabout.

B/C < 1.00 A B/C ratio less than 1.00 indicates that side street stop control will provide a better ROI when compared to all way stop control/roundabout.

B/C > 1.00 A B/C ratio greater than 1.00 indicates that all way stop control/roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to side street stop control.

B/C = NA-R When the cost of all way stop control/roundabout is less than the cost of side street stop control and all way stop control/roundabout provides benefit over side street stop control, a B/C ratio cannot be computed. This special case is denoted by “NA-R” and indicates that all way stop control/roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to side street stop control.

The B/C score is based on the net present value using a discount rate of 4% through the life-cycle duration of 20 years for each of the five performance measures.

Note: ROI=Return of Investment
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

The summary results of the B/C analysis at the study intersection are summarized in Table 12. The B/C analysis is based on comparing the AWSC and roundabout alternatives to the SSSC alternative. The AWSC alternative has a negative B/C because the AWSC yeilds less benefits compared to the SSSC alternative while also having larger costs. The roundabout has a B/C ratios greater than 1.0, which indicates that it is the most cost-effective intersection control type compared to the existing signal.

Table 12: Summary of Life-Cycle B/C Analysis – B/C Ratios

Figure 8 shows the accumulated cost of
all five performance measures for each
proposed alternative. This figure reflects
the B/C ratio results between each
alternative. The roundabout starts with a
larger accumulated cost because of the
greater initial capital cost, but because of
the greater societal costs of the AWSC
and SSSC alternatives, the roundabout
provides a greater return on investment
after 2039. The roundabout is the
preferred intersection control type for
the entire 20-year analysis time period.

Figure 8: Accumulated Costs Between Proposed Alternatives

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

MILDRED AVENUE INTERSECTION
Proposed Intersection Control Alternatives
Two intersection control alternatives were ultimately considered in the ICE Analysis for the intersection of Mildred Avenue and Broadway Street. See Appendix E and Appendix I for the operational analysis worksheets for each alternative. The preliminary concept layouts for each alternative based on the operational analyses are included in Appendix F.

The intersection of Mildred Avenue and Broadway Street satisfied signal warrants per the 2014 MUTCD (Revision 6). Since signal warrants were met, a proposed signal was evaluated as an alternative for this intersection. See Appendix G for signal warrant analysis reports.

The following intersection control improvement alternatives were evaluated in this ICE Analysis:
• Proposed Signal Control
• Roundabout
Alternative A: Proposed Signal Control
This alternative has signal controlled single lane legs in all directions. The worst operations occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS of E and average delay of 61.0 seconds. The max 95th percentile queue length is the WB approach with 400 feet, which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. See Table 13 below for the summary of Alternative A analysis. Figure 9 below shows a concept layout of the proposed traffic signal.

Table 13: Signal Control Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 C 33.5 0.730 150 (EB) C 28.3 0.770 325 (WB)
2044 E 55.7 0.930 175 (EB) E 61.0 0.860 400 (WB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 9: Mildred Ave Signal Concept Layout
Alternative C: Roundabout
This alternative includes a four legged single-lane roundabout. The worst operations will occur during the 2044 PM peak hour with a LOS A and an average delay of 9.8 seconds. The maximum 95th percentile queue length occurs on the EB approach at year 2044 and is 100 feet which doesn’t conflict with the adjacent intersection. Table 14 below includes a summary of the roundabout operations. Figure 10 below shows a concept layout of the proposed roundabout.

Table 14: Roundabout Operations
AM PM
Design
Year
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
LOS
Delay
(s)
v/c
95% Queue (ft)
(approach)
2024 A 5.4 0.265 25 (EB) A 7.5 0.443 75 (EB)
2044 A 6.5 0.336 50 (EB) A 9.8 0.565 100 (EB)
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Figure 10: Mildred Ave Roundabout Control Concept Layout

Performance Measure Summary
The following figures show the cost of key performance measures for each control types at the intersection of Mildred Ave and Broadway Street assuming 20-years of intersection operations to calculate life-cycle costs. Each intersection control type corresponds to the proposed alternatives discussed on pages 17 and

18. Table 15 on page 20 summarizes the costs associated with each alternative.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Table 15: Performance Measure Summary

Benefit Performance Measure Summary
Safety Preferred Alternative:

Based on the lowest predicted life-cycle cost
for safety, the preferred intersection control
type for this intersection is a roundabout. See
Appendix H for the Interactive Highway
Safety Design Manual (IHSDM)’s KABCO
values used for the safety analysis.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

Delay Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the lowest predicted lifecycle cost for delay, the preferred intersection control type for this
intersection is a roundabout.

Emissions
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on the life-cycle cost for
emissions, the preferred intersection
control type for this intersection is signal
controlled.

Cost Performance Measure Summary
O&M
Preferred Alternative:

Based solely on lowest expected annual O&M
costs, the preferred intersection control type
for this intersection is a roundabout.

B/C Analysis Summary
The following equation illustrates the B/C ratio and Table 16 provides the description of B/C ratio scoring:

⁄ Ratio Score 
∑
  



∑ 
  



Table 16: Description of B/C Ratio Scoring
B/C Ratio Score Description
B/C = 1.00 A B/C ratio of 1.00 is a neutral rating. This indicates that the ROI for the proposed signal is equal to a roundabout.

B/C < 1.00 A B/C ratio less than 1.00 indicates that the proposed signal will provide a better ROI when compared to a roundabout.

B/C > 1.00 A B/C ratio greater than 1.00 indicates that a roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to the proposed signal.

B/C = NA-R When the cost of a roundabout is less than the cost of the proposed signal and a roundabout provides benefit over the proposed signal, a B/C ratio cannot be computed. This special case is denoted by “NA-R” and indicates that a roundabout provides a better ROI when compared to the proposed signal.

The B/C score is based on the net present value using a discount rate of 4% through the life-cycle duration of 20 years for each of the five performance measures.

Note: ROI=Return of Investment
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

The summary results of the B/C analysis at the study intersection are summarized in Table 17. The B/C analysis is based on comparing the proposed signal to the a roundabout. The B/C ratio for the roundabout is defined as ‘NA-R’ because the roundabout provides more benefits than the signal, while also having less costs. Since the roundabout has lower costs and a higher benefits compared to the proposed signal, a roundabout would be the most cost-effective intersection control type.

Table 17: Summary of Life-Cycle B/C Analysis – B/C Ratios

Figure 11 shows the accumulated cost of
all five performance measures for both
proposed alternatives. This figure reflects
the B/C ratio results between both
alternatives. The roundabout starts with a
lower accumulated cost, and due to the
greater societal costs of the proposed
signal, the roundabout provides a greater
return on investment throughout the
design life. A roundabout is the preferred
intersection control type for the entire
20-year analysis time period.

Figure 11: Accumulated Costs Between Proposed Alternatives

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
An analysis of the estimated benefit and cost performance measures for the Franciscan Way intersection indicate that, when forecast traffic volumes are considered for a minimum 20-year service life, a roundabout-controlled intersection is the preferred alternative. • The intersection type that provides the most safety benefit for this intersection is a roundabout which has the lowest life cycle cost of $1,189,335.
• The intersection type that provides that most delay benefit is the side street stop-controlled alternative which has the lowest life cycle cost of $278,938. • The intersection type that provides the most operations and maintenance benefit is either the side street stop controlled, or all way stop controlled alternative which have the lowest life cycle cost of $9,354.
• The intersection type that provides that most emissions benefit is the side street stop-controlled alternative which has the lowest life cycle cost of $47,214. • The side street stop-controlled alternative has the lowest initial capital cost of $1,000,000. • The B/C ratios for the intersection are -98.85 and 5.18 respectively, when the all way stop control and roundabout are compared to the side street stop control alternative. Since the B/C ratio of the roundabout is greater than 1.0, the roundabout the most cost-effective.

An analysis of the estimated benefit and cost performance measures for the Canal Street intersection indicate that, when forecast traffic volumes are considered for a minimum 20-year service life, a roundabout-controlled intersection is the preferred alternative. • The intersection type that provides the most safety benefit for this intersection is a roundabout which has the lowest life cycle cost of $1,086,327.
• The intersection type that provides that most delay benefit is the side street stop-controlled alternative which has the lowest life cycle cost of $250,170. • The intersection type that provides the most operations and maintenance benefit is either the side street stop controlled, or all way stop controlled alternative which have the lowest life cycle cost of $9,354.
• The intersection type that provides that most emissions benefit is the side street stop-controlled alternative which has the lowest life cycle cost of $43,056. • The side street stop-controlled alternative has the lowest initial capital cost of $1,000,000. • The B/C ratios for the intersection are -650.55 and 1.84 respectively, when the all way stop control and roundabout are compared to the side street stop control alternative. Since the B/C ratio of the roundabout is greater than 1.0, the roundabout the most cost-effective.

An analysis of the estimated benefit and cost performance measures for the Mildred Avenue intersection indicate that, when forecast traffic volumes are considered for a minimum 20-year service life, a roundabout-controlled intersection is the preferred alternative. • The intersection type that provides the most safety benefit for this intersection is a roundabout which has the lowest life cycle cost of $1,436,895.
• The intersection type that provides that most delay benefit is a roundabout which has the lowest life cycle cost of $447,060.
• The intersection type that provides the most operations and maintenance benefit a roundabout which has the lowest life cycle cost of $18,708.
• The intersection type that provides that most emissions benefit is the proposed signal alternative which has the lowest life cycle cost of $92,138.
• The proposed signal alternative has the lowest initial capital cost of $1,150,000.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue

• The B/C ratio for the roundabout is NA-R when compared to the proposed signal alternative, which means that the costs of the roundabout are lower while the benefits are higher compared to the proposed signal. Since the costs are lower and the benefits provided by the roundabout are greater than the proposed signal, the roundabout the most cost-effective.

The most noteworthy performance measure driving the B/C Ratios is safety. Since the costs associated with safety are so much higher compared to the other metrics, safety costs contribute more to the B/C ratio.

Appendix
Appendix A – Description of Benefit Cost Performance Measures and Caltrans Cal B/C 2020 Value Comparison Table
Appendix B – Traffic Volumes
Appendix C – Side Street Stop Control Synchro Operational Analysis Appendix D – All Way Stop Control Synchro Operational Analysis Appendix E – Roundabout SIDRA Operational Analysis
Appendix F – Preliminary Concept Layouts for Side Street Stop Control, All Way Stop Control, Proposed Signal, and Roundabout
Appendix G – Signal Warrants
Appendix H – HSM Predictive Method Safety Analysis IHSDM KABCO Values Appendix I – Proposed Traffic Signal Control Synchro Operational Analysis Appendix J – Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Ratio Worksheet
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix A
Description of Benefit Cost Performance Measures and Caltrans Cal B/C 2020 Value Comparison Table
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024

BACKGROUND ON BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS
The ICE Analysis is based on the results of a B/C analysis, which is an objective, data-driven calculation that helps inform investment decisions when stakeholders are evaluating intersection control improvements.

The calculations identify cost effective improvements considering the full lifecycle of the improvement, typically 20 years.

Five performance metrics are typically evaluated for proposed conceptual control types at each study location to determine the B/C ratio. The metrics include:
• Safety – measuring the societal cost associated with the predicted number and severity of collisions.
• Delay – measuring the societal cost associated with the number of person-hours of delay. • Emissions – measuring the societal cost associated with the exposure to health-based pollutants emitted by motor vehicles.
• Operations and Maintenance – measuring common annualized costs associated with operating and maintaining the intersection control.
• Initial Capital Costs – measuring the capital costs needed to plan, design, and construct the intersection improvement. The capital costs include construction, capital support, and right of way.

Benefit Performance Measures
The following performance measures are used to calculate the benefit, or cost savings, of the proposed intersection control improvement compared to the existing condition. For each performance measure, the proposed improvement provides a benefit if the calculated life-cycle cost of the proposed improvement is less than the life-cycle cost of the existing condition. The magnitude of the benefit is the difference between the life-cycle cost of the existing condition less the life-cycle cost of the proposed improvement.

Safety
Safety measures the societal cost associated with the predicted number and severity of collisions that may occur for the existing and each proposed intersection control type. The number of predicted collisions was calculated using Highway Safety Manual predictive methods and crash modification factors (CMF). Since CMFs and Safety Performance Functions (SPF) are statistical models based on historical crash data, the safety cost is only a prediction of crash severity distribution and does not perfectly represent the future crash data.

Delay
Delay measures the societal cost associated with the number of person-hours of delay at the intersection during the study period. Consistent with the Caltrans Vehicle Operation Cost Parameters 2020, vehicle occupancy of 1.15 is used to convert delay to person-hours of delay at a value of $19.70 per vehicle-hour of delay, which is the weighted-average of automobile and truck.

Emissions
The emissions performance measure calculates the societal cost associated with exposure to health-based pollutants emitted by motor vehicles. Pollutant emissions are running emissions based on the average speed of vehicles traveling through the intersection during the study period. Pollutant emissions evaluated include reactive organic gasses (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM10). The societal cost of emissions is calculated using emission data from the California Air Resource Board (CARB) Methods to Find the Cost-Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects, Table 4 Emission Factors by Speed, ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
September 2019 and cost per ton data from Caltrans Vehicle Operation Cost Parameters 2020 for emissions (Note: VOC is assumed to be synonymous with ROG).

Cost Performance Measures
The following performance measures are used to calculate the added cost of the proposed intersection control improvements compared to the existing control. For each performance measure, the proposed improvements add to the cost of the intersection if the calculated life-cycle cost of the proposed improvement is greater than the life-cycle cost of existing condition. The magnitude of the cost is the difference between the life-cycle cost of the proposed improvement less the life-cycle cost of the existing condition.

Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
The operations and maintenance performance measure incorporate common annualized costs associated with operating and maintaining the proposed type of intersection control. Common costs include signal timing and maintenance, power consumption for signal operations and intersection illumination, landscape maintenance, and pavement rehabilitation. Average annualized costs were used.

Initial Capital Costs
The initial capital costs performance measure estimates the capital costs needed to plan, design, and construct the proposed intersection improvement. The capital costs include construction, capital support, and right of way.

As described in the United States Department of Transportation’s Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs (Jan. 2020 , p. 6), a blend of “localized data with national estimates or industry standards to complete a more robust analysis” can be applied. The default parameters for the 2020 INFRA Cal-B/C tool are a blend of California and national values assessed at a 2018 base year.

Users should revise default parameters if more applicable values exist for a project being assessed. Revisions can be made within the “Parameters” tab of the Excel workbook by entering a new value into the individual cell. In addition, assumptions identified in the “Project Information” tab (red or blue cells) can be adjusted based for a specific project, e.g., average vehicle occupancy, percent truck, roadway type, etc. The table below is a comparison of California and national values—assumed 2020 INFRA Cal-B/C values are highlighted in yellow.

Parameters Cal-B/C Values Fed. Values Notes
Current Dollar Value applied
in tool 2018 2018
All assumed Cal-B/C parameters are adjusted for 2018 dollars.

Assumed Cal-B/C values in the model have been escalated to 2018 dollars, as recommended in the guidance.

Real Discount Rate 4.00% 7.00% A sensitivity analysis of 3% is no longer required.

Average Vehicle Occupancy

1.67 Cal-B/C factors in peak and non-peak average vehicle occupancy, whereas the federal guidance uses a single AVO figure. Thus, the default values apply to California statewide average.

Non-peak – 1.3
Peak – 1.15
Period of analysis Construction, plus 20
years after completion.

Construction, plus 20 years
after completion in most
situations.

Federal guidance suggests applying no more than 30 years for analytical purposes after project completion.

Travel Time Parameters
Statewide Average Hourly
Wage ($/hr.) $28.44 California values extracted from BLS data.

Heavy and Light Truck
Drivers Average Hourly
Wage ($/hr.)
$21.20 California values extracted from BLS data.

Heavy and Light Truck
Drivers Benefits and Costs
($/hr.)
$11.08 California values extracted from BLS data.

Automobile/Personal
($/hr./per) $14.20 $15.20
For calculation methodology, see Cal-B/C tech doc. (Volume 4), pp. II-37 to II-38.

Link : https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/f0009451- cal-bctechsupplementvol4v4-a11y.pdf
Truck/Business ($/hr./veh.) $32.30 $29.50
For calculation methodology, see Cal-B/C tech doc. (Volume 4), pp. II-37 to II-38.

Link: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/f0009451- cal-bctechsupplementvol4v4-a11y.pdf
Auto & Truck
Composite/All Purpose
($/hr./veh)
$19.70 $25.55
Federal weighted average based on a typical distribution of local travel by surface modes (95.4% personal, 4.6% truck). California assumes a different distribution (91% personal, 9% truck). Applicants should apply their own distribution of business versus personal travel if available.

Transit/Transit Rail
Operators ($/hr./per) $14.20 (passenger)
$15.20 (local personal
travel) Cal-B/C only values “transit” per passenger. Federal guidance states, for wait times, the value should be doubled. Values for personal travel based on local travel values and intercity personal travel are described in US DOT’s Value of Travel Time guidance. A valuation of the “transit operator” is also not a factor in the Cal-B/C model.
$21.30 (intercity personal
travel)
$50.20 (transit rail
operator)
Average Fuel Price
Automobile (regular
unleaded) ($/gal) $3.31
Fuel prices for gasoline and diesel were extracted the US Energy Information Administration's 2018 Petroleum and Other Liquids annual report.

For calculation methodology, see Cal-B/C tech doc. (Volume 4), pp. II-37 to II-38. pp. II-37 to II-46.

Link: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/f0009451- cal-bctechsupplementvol4v4-a11y.pdf
Truck (diesel) ($/gal.) $3.44
Fuel prices for gasoline and diesel were extracted the US Energy Information Administration's 2017 Petroleum and Other Liquids annual report.

Link: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/transportation-planning/documents/f0009451- cal-bctechsupplementvol4v4-a11y.pdf
State Sales Tax (gasoline) 2.25% Value is applicable to California.

State Sales Tax (diesel) 13.00% Value is applicable to California.

Average Local Sales Tax 0.50% Value is applicable to California.

Federal Fuel Excise Tax
(gasoline) ($/gal.) $0.184
Federal Fuel Excise Tax
(diesel) ($/gal.) $0.244
State Fuel Excise Tax
(gasoline) ($/gal.) $0.417 Value is applicable to California (current rate increased on 7/19 to $0.473)
State Fuel Excise Tax
(diesel) ($/gal.) $0.36 Value is applicable to California (reflective of Nov. 2017 SB-1 increase) Non-Fuel Cost Per Mile
Automobile $0.326
Federal guidance does not provide an estimate. Non-fuel costs are based on 2016 Cal-B/C estimate and escalated to 2018 using OMB Table

10.1 GDP. Cal-B/C auto value assessed at 3.13 cents (2016) and base value for truck is ATRI (2014) value.

Truck/Light Duty Vehicles $0.434 $0.41
Cal-B/C breaks out fuel and non-fuel costs. US DOT Guidance factors in fuel costs when estimating vehicle operation costs. Truck was escalated using 2018 divided by 2014 indices, as the base year in the model was 2016.

Commercial Trucks $0.96
Cal-B/C breaks out fuel and non-fuel costs for commercial trucks. US DOT Guidance factors in fuel costs, repair, insurance, permits, license, etc.

Accident Cost Parameters
Cost of Fatality/Killed $9.8M $9.6M
Accident costs are based on reported federal benefit-cost guidance rate for 2018. The assumed rate in the 2016 Cal-B/C model differs.

Level A (Severe)/Incapacitating $467,000 $459,100
Accident costs are based on reported federal benefit-cost guidance rate for 2018. The assumed rate in the 2016 Cal-B/C model differs.

Level B (Moderate)/Nonincapacitating $127,100 $125,000 Accident costs are based on reported federal benefit-cost guidance rate for 2018. The assumed rate in the 2016 Cal-B/C model differs.

Level (Minor)/Possible Injury $65,000 $63,900
Accident costs are based on reported federal benefit-cost guidance rate for 2018. The assumed rate in the 2016 Cal-B/C model differs.

Cost of Property Damage (PDO) $4,374 $4,400 Accident costs are based on reported federal benefit-cost guidance rate for 2018. The assumed rate in the 2016 Cal-B/C model differs.

Pollutant Emissions
CO $75 - $160 $0
Cal-B/C estimates are based on Corporate Average Fuel Economy for MY2017-MY2025 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (August 2012), page 922, Table VIII-16, “Economic Values Used for Benefits Computations (2010 dollars)”. Values are inflated from 2010 dollars to 2016 dollars using the GDP deflator. Cal-B/C rates vary depending on project location. Cal-B/C calculation methodology can be viewed in its tech. doc. vol. 4, pp. II-51 to II-61. Cal-B/C value differs based on geographic three regional categories within California.

Link: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/transportationplanning/documents/f0009451-cal-bctechsupplementvol4v4-a11y.pdf No value identified in the federal guidance document, thus, no value assessed.

CO2 $38 $0.91
USDOT recommends using a monetary value of $1 per metric ton (2018) for the social cost of carbon based on the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021- 2026 report. However, Cal-B/C’s CO2 unit of measurement is in short ton. Thus, the conversion value is $1 per metric divided by 1.1023 short ton equals $0.91.

NOX
$13,900 –
$63,900 $8,600 Cal-B/C value differs based on three regional categories within California.Applied the 2018 federal rate.

PM10
$107,700 –
$523,300 $387,300 Cal-B/C value differs based on three regional categories within California.Applied the 2018 federal rate.

SO2
$54,400 –
$196,600 $50,100 Cal-B/C value differs based on three regional categories within California.Applied the 2018 federal rate.

VOC $1,025 –
$3,970 $2,100 Cal-B/C value differs based on three regional categories within California.Applied the 2018 federal rate.

ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix B
Traffic Volumes

Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 24-080074-001 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 3 0 2 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 0 0 0 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
1 383 0 240
0 0 0 0 0 30 0 15
3 0 1 0 TEV 727 0 999 0 0 0 0
370 0 388 1 PHF 0.64 0.94
51 0 61 0
0 1 0 1

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 93 0 43 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 25 0 14 AM
0 NONE
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM 1
Franciscan Way & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Franciscan Way Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 4/9/2024

PEAK HOURS
2:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 7 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
431 0 386
Totals (AM) 91 Total Bikes (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
268 0 476

CONTROL
1-Way Stop(NB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Totals (PM) Total Bikes (PM)
0 66

NORTHBOUND
Franciscan Way
Totals (NOON) Total Bikes (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
0 0
1 2
0 0
20 310
5 3
0 2
2 0
6 50 1030 14
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
0 0
0 1
000
001
1 383
61 30
388
1 000
93043
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
4 240
51 15
370
3 302
25014
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 24-080074-002 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 0 0 0 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 0 0 0 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 382 0 216
0 0 0 0 1 91 0 75
0 0 0 0 TEV 647 0 1055 0 0 0 0
220 0 358 1 PHF 0.92 0.92
37 0 64 0
0 1 0 1

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 42 0 118 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 14 0 85 AM
0 NONE
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM 0
Canal St & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Canal St Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 4/9/2024

PEAK HOURS
2:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 0 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
476 0 305
Totals (AM) 155 Total Bikes (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
230 0 424

CONTROL
1-Way Stop(NB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Totals (PM) Total Bikes (PM)
0 112

NORTHBOUND
Canal St
Totals (NOON) Total Bikes (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
34 0
28 14
0 185
130 5520
15 0
0 0
0 0
0 00 000 0
0 1
0 1
1 0
000
002
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 1
0 0
1 0
000
000
0 382
64 91
358
0 000
420118
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 216
37 75
220
0 000
14085
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 24-080074-003 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 124 41 39 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 160 40 57 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 1 0 0 0 54 0 47
1 293 0 151
0 0 0 0 1 29 0 9
103 0 151 1 TEV 828 0 1218 0 0 0 0
169 0 307 1 PHF 0.89 0.93
15 0 26 0
0 0 1 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 23 53 25 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 34 72 24 AM
0 NONE
03:45 PM - 04:45 PM 258
Mildred Ave & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Mildred Ave Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 4/9/2024

PEAK HOURS
2:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 222 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
389 0 232
Totals (AM) 95 Total Bikes (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
309 0 476

CONTROL
4-Way Stop
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Totals (PM) Total Bikes (PM)
0 65

NORTHBOUND
Mildred Ave
Totals (NOON) Total Bikes (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
11 0
1 5
0 56
170 050
10 12
0 42
8 0
0 70 161250 22
0 2
0 1
3 1
000
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 2
0 0
0 1
000
100
54 293
26 29
307
151
1604057
235325
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
47 151
15 9
169
103
1244139
347224
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix C
Side Street Stop Control Synchro Operational Analysis

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 370 51 15 240 4 25 1 14 2 0 4
Future Vol, veh/h 3 370 51 15 240 4 25 1 14 2 0 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 13 0 4 4 0 13 1 0 8 8 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 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 529 73 21 343 6 36 1 20 3 0 6
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 362 0 0 606 0 0 970 982 578 993 1015 360 Stage 1 - - - - - - 578 578 - 401 401 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 392 404 - 592 614 -
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 1197 - - 972 - - 233 249 516 224 238 684 Stage 1 - - - - - - 501 501 - 626 601 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 633 599 - 493 483 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1184 - - 969 - - 224 238 511 205 227 676 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 224 238 - 205 227 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 497 497 - 616 578 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 610 576 - 467 479 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.1 0.5 21.2 14.6

HCM LOS C B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 279 1184 - - 969 - - 383
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.205 0.004 - - 0.022 - - 0.022
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 21.2 8.1 0 - 8.8 0 - 14.6
HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 0.8 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.1
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 388 61 30 383 1 93 0 43 0 1 2
Future Vol, veh/h 3 388 61 30 383 1 93 0 43 0 1 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 19 0 7 7 0 19 2 0 5 5 0 2
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 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 3 408 64 32 403 1 98 0 45 0 1 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 423 0 0 479 0 0 924 940 452 961 972 425 Stage 1 - - - - - - 453 453 - 487 487 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 471 487 - 474 485 -
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 1136 - - 1083 - - 250 264 608 236 252 629 Stage 1 - - - - - - 586 570 - 562 550 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 573 550 - 571 552 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1118 - - 1077 - - 239 247 602 207 236 618 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 239 247 - 207 236 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 580 564 - 551 521 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 547 521 - 524 546 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.1 0.6 28.2 14

HCM LOS D B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 295 1118 - - 1077 - - 401
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.485 0.003 - - 0.029 - - 0.008
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 28.2 8.2 0 - 8.4 0 - 14
HCM Lane LOS D A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 2.5 0 - - 0.1 - - 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 457 63 19 296 5 31 1 17 2 0 5
Future Vol, veh/h 4 457 63 19 296 5 31 1 17 2 0 5
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 13 0 4 4 0 13 1 0 8 8 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 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 497 68 21 322 5 34 1 18 2 0 5
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 340 0 0 569 0 0 913 925 543 937 957 339 Stage 1 - - - - - - 543 543 - 380 380 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 370 382 - 557 577 -
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 1219 - - 1003 - - 254 269 540 245 258 703 Stage 1 - - - - - - 524 520 - 642 614 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 650 613 - 515 502 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1206 - - 1000 - - 245 257 535 226 247 695 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 245 257 - 226 247 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 520 516 - 632 591 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 628 590 - 490 498 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.1 0.5 19.5 13.4

HCM LOS C B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 302 1206 - - 1000 - - 436
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.176 0.004 - - 0.021 - - 0.017
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 19.5 8 0 - 8.7 0 - 13.4
HCM Lane LOS C A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 0.6 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.1
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 12.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 479 75 37 473 1 115 0 53 0 1 2
Future Vol, veh/h 4 479 75 37 473 1 115 0 53 0 1 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 19 0 7 7 0 19 2 0 5 5 0 2
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 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 521 82 40 514 1 125 0 58 0 1 2
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 534 0 0 610 0 0 1175 1191 574 1218 1232 536 Stage 1 - - - - - - 577 577 - 614 614 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 598 614 - 604 618 -
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 1034 - - 969 - - 168 187 518 157 177 545 Stage 1 - - - - - - 502 502 - 479 483 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 489 483 - 485 481 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1018 - - 963 - - 157 171 513 130 162 535 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 157 171 - 130 162 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 496 496 - 468 448 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 457 448 - 426 475 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.1 0.6 90.3 17

HCM LOS F C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 201 1018 - - 963 - - 303
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.909 0.004 - - 0.042 - - 0.011
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 90.3 8.6 0 - 8.9 0 - 17
HCM Lane LOS F A A - A A - C
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 7.2 0 - - 0.1 - - 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 220 37 75 216 14 85
Future Vol, veh/h 220 37 75 216 14 85
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 57 57 0 213 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 239 40 82 235 15 92
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 336 0 928 316
Stage 1 - - - - 316 -
Stage 2 - - - - 612 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1223 - 297 724
Stage 1 - - - - 739 -
Stage 2 - - - - 541 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1165 - 214 690
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 214 -
Stage 1 - - - - 704 -
Stage 2 - - - - 409 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 2.1 13.6

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 525 - - 1165 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.205 - - 0.07 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 13.6 - - 8.3 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 0.8 - - 0.2 -
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 358 64 91 382 42 118
Future Vol, veh/h 358 64 91 382 42 118
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 28 28 0 48 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 389 70 99 415 46 128
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 487 0 1113 452
Stage 1 - - - - 452 -
Stage 2 - - - - 661 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1076 - 231 608
Stage 1 - - - - 641 -
Stage 2 - - - - 514 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1051 - 190 594
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 190 -
Stage 1 - - - - 626 -
Stage 2 - - - - 433 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 1.7 22.1

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 381 - - 1051 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.456 - - 0.094 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 22.1 - - 8.8 0
HCM Lane LOS C - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 2.3 - - 0.3 -
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 272 46 93 267 17 105
Future Vol, veh/h 272 46 93 267 17 105
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 57 57 0 213 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 296 50 101 290 18 114
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 403 0 1083 378
Stage 1 - - - - 378 -
Stage 2 - - - - 705 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1156 - 240 669
Stage 1 - - - - 693 -
Stage 2 - - - - 490 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1101 - 168 637
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 168 -
Stage 1 - - - - 660 -
Stage 2 - - - - 359 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 2.2 16

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 459 - - 1101 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.289 - - 0.092 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 16 - - 8.6 0
HCM Lane LOS C - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 1.2 - - 0.3 -
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 442 79 112 472 52 146
Future Vol, veh/h 442 79 112 472 52 146
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 28 28 0 48 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 480 86 122 513 57 159
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 594 0 1356 551
Stage 1 - - - - 551 -
Stage 2 - - - - 805 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 982 - 165 534
Stage 1 - - - - 577 -
Stage 2 - - - - 440 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 959 - 127 522
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 127 -
Stage 1 - - - - 564 -
Stage 2 - - - - 347 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 1.8 47.3

HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 287 - - 959 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.75 - - 0.127 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 47.3 - - 9.3 0
HCM Lane LOS E - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q (veh) 5.6 - - 0.4 -
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix D
All Way Stop Control Synchro Operational Analysis

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 16.4
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 370 51 15 240 4 25 1 14 2 0 4
Future Vol, veh/h 3 370 51 15 240 4 25 1 14 2 0 4
Peak Hour Factor 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 529 73 21 343 6 36 1 20 3 0 6
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 19.7 12.3 9.7 9

HCM LOS C B A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 63% 1% 6% 33%
Vol Thru, % 3% 87% 93% 0%
Vol Right, % 35% 12% 2% 67%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 40 424 259 6
LT Vol 25 3 15 2
Through Vol 1 370 240 0
RT Vol 14 51 4 4
Lane Flow Rate 57 606 370 9
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.094 0.751 0.489 0.014
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.953 4.461 4.756 5.933
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 596 806 755 607
Service Time 4.049 2.504 2.809 3.933
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.096 0.752 0.49 0.015
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.7 19.7 12.3 9
HCM Lane LOS A C B A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.3 7.1 2.7 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 15.1
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 388 61 30 383 1 93 0 43 0 1 2
Future Vol, veh/h 3 388 61 30 383 1 93 0 43 0 1 2
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 3 408 64 32 403 1 98 0 45 0 1 2
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 16 15.5 11 9.1

HCM LOS C C B A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 68% 1% 7% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 86% 93% 33%
Vol Right, % 32% 13% 0% 67%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 136 452 414 3
LT Vol 93 3 30 0
Through Vol 0 388 383 1
RT Vol 43 61 1 2
Lane Flow Rate 143 476 436 3
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.24 0.634 0.608 0.005
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.039 4.905 5.023 6.082
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 597 742 723 589
Service Time 4.058 2.905 3.023 4.112
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.24 0.642 0.603 0.005
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 11 16 15.5 9.1
HCM Lane LOS B C C A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 4.6 4.2 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.7
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 457 63 19 296 5 31 1 17 2 0 5
Future Vol, veh/h 4 457 63 19 296 5 31 1 17 2 0 5
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 497 68 21 322 5 34 1 18 2 0 5
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 17.1 11.6 9.5 8.8

HCM LOS C B A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 63% 1% 6% 29%
Vol Thru, % 2% 87% 93% 0%
Vol Right, % 35% 12% 2% 71%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 49 524 320 7
LT Vol 31 4 19 2
Through Vol 1 457 296 0
RT Vol 17 63 5 5
Lane Flow Rate 53 570 348 8
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.086 0.699 0.454 0.012
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.829 4.416 4.697 5.642
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 610 814 765 627
Service Time 3.912 2.452 2.741 3.738
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.087 0.7 0.455 0.013
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.5 17.1 11.6 8.8
HCM Lane LOS A C B A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.3 5.8 2.4 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
3: Franciscan Way/Driveway & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 31
Intersection LOS D
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 479 75 37 473 1 115 0 53 0 1 2
Future Vol, veh/h 4 479 75 37 473 1 115 0 53 0 1 2
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 521 82 40 514 1 125 0 58 0 1 2
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 36.7 30.7 13.2 10.2

HCM LOS E D B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 68% 1% 7% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 86% 93% 33%
Vol Right, % 32% 13% 0% 67%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 168 558 511 3
LT Vol 115 4 37 0
Through Vol 0 479 473 1
RT Vol 53 75 1 2
Lane Flow Rate 183 607 555 3
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.34 0.894 0.841 0.007
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.701 5.305 5.45 7.189
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 533 679 661 501
Service Time 4.779 3.362 3.508 5.189
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.343 0.894 0.84 0.006
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 13.2 36.7 30.7 10.2
HCM Lane LOS B E D B
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.5 11.2 9.3 0
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 220 37 75 216 14 85
Future Vol, veh/h 220 37 75 216 14 85
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 239 40 82 235 15 92
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB WB NB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.8 10.6 8.6

HCM LOS A B A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1
Vol Left, % 14% 0% 26%
Vol Thru, % 0% 86% 74%
Vol Right, % 86% 14% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 99 257 291
LT Vol 14 0 75
Through Vol 0 220 216
RT Vol 85 37 0
Lane Flow Rate 108 279 316
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.142 0.345 0.399
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.757 4.451 4.541
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 751 807 791
Service Time 2.801 2.484 2.574
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.144 0.346 0.399
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 8.6 9.8 10.6
HCM Lane LOS A A B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 1.5 1.9
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 17.8
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 358 64 91 382 42 118
Future Vol, veh/h 358 64 91 382 42 118
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 389 70 99 415 46 128
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB WB NB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 16.9 20.8 11.2

HCM LOS C C B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1
Vol Left, % 26% 0% 19%
Vol Thru, % 0% 85% 81%
Vol Right, % 74% 15% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 160 422 473
LT Vol 42 0 91
Through Vol 0 358 382
RT Vol 118 64 0
Lane Flow Rate 174 459 514
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.283 0.645 0.731
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.855 5.065 5.117
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 612 711 710
Service Time 3.901 3.097 3.146
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.284 0.646 0.724
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 11.2 16.9 20.8
HCM Lane LOS B C C
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.2 4.7 6.4
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.6
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 272 46 93 267 17 105
Future Vol, veh/h 272 46 93 267 17 105
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 296 50 101 290 18 114
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB WB NB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 11.4 12.6 9.3

HCM LOS B B A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1
Vol Left, % 14% 0% 26%
Vol Thru, % 0% 86% 74%
Vol Right, % 86% 14% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 122 318 360
LT Vol 17 0 93
Through Vol 0 272 267
RT Vol 105 46 0
Lane Flow Rate 133 346 391
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.187 0.444 0.511
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.074 4.626 4.705
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 702 774 763
Service Time 3.149 2.682 2.76
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.189 0.447 0.512
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.3 11.4 12.6
HCM Lane LOS A B B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 2.3 2.9
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
9: Canal St & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 39.4
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 442 79 112 472 52 146
Future Vol, veh/h 442 79 112 472 52 146
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 480 86 122 513 57 159
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB WB NB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB WB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 33.9 53.1 13.6

HCM LOS D F B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1
Vol Left, % 26% 0% 19%
Vol Thru, % 0% 85% 81%
Vol Right, % 74% 15% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 198 521 584
LT Vol 52 0 112
Through Vol 0 442 472
RT Vol 146 79 0
Lane Flow Rate 215 566 635
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.386 0.866 0.976
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.464 5.508 5.534
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 553 651 654
Service Time 4.554 3.577 3.598
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.389 0.869 0.971
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 13.6 33.9 53.1
HCM Lane LOS B D F
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.8 10 14.4
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix E
Roundabout SIDRA Operational Analysis

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2024 AM Existing Alt00 (Site Folder: Franciscan)] Broadway St at Franciscan Way
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB_Franciscan Way
Lane 1d 57 2.0 830 0.069 100 5.0 LOS A 0.2 6.2 Full 950 0.0 0.0 Approach 57 2.0 0.069 5.0 LOS A 0.2 6.2
East: WB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 370 2.0 1296 0.286 100 5.1 LOS A 1.6 40.3 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 370 2.0 0.286 5.1 LOS A 1.6 40.3
North: SB_Driveway
Lane 1d 10 2.0 884 0.011 100 4.2 LOS A 0.0 1.1 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 10 2.0 0.011 4.2 LOS A 0.0 1.1
West: EB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 606 2.0 1318 0.459 100 6.5 LOS A 3.4 86.6 Full 750 0.0 0.0 Approach 606 2.0 0.459 6.5 LOS A 3.4 86.6
Intersectio
n
1043 2.0 0.459 5.9 LOS A 3.4 86.6
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:22 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2024 PM Existing Alt00 (Site Folder: Franciscan)] Broadway St at Franciscan Way
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB_Franciscan Way
Lane 1d 144 2.0 928 0.155 100 5.3 LOS A 0.6 15.2 Full 950 0.0 0.0 Approach 144 2.0 0.155 5.3 LOS A 0.6 15.2
East: WB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 436 2.0 1216 0.358 100 6.3 LOS A 2.1 54.2 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 436 2.0 0.358 6.3 LOS A 2.1 54.2
North: SB_Driveway
Lane 1d 4 2.0 767 0.005 100 4.7 LOS A 0.0 0.5 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 4 2.0 0.005 4.7 LOS A 0.0 0.5
West: EB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 476 2.0 1307 0.364 100 5.7 LOS A 2.3 58.4 Full 750 0.0 0.0 Approach 476 2.0 0.364 5.7 LOS A 2.3 58.4
Intersectio
n
1060 2.0 0.364 5.9 LOS A 2.3 58.4
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:22 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2044 AM Existing Alt00 (Site Folder: Franciscan)] Broadway St at Franciscan Way
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB_Franciscan Way
Lane 1d 53 2.0 855 0.062 100 4.8 LOS A 0.2 5.6 Full 950 0.0 0.0 Approach 53 2.0 0.062 4.8 LOS A 0.2 5.6
East: WB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 348 2.0 1299 0.268 100 4.9 LOS A 1.5 36.9 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 348 2.0 0.268 4.9 LOS A 1.5 36.9
North: SB_Driveway
Lane 1d 9 2.0 907 0.010 100 4.1 LOS A 0.0 0.9 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 9 2.0 0.010 4.1 LOS A 0.0 0.9
West: EB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 570 2.0 1321 0.431 100 6.2 LOS A 3.1 77.6 Full 750 0.0 0.0 Approach 570 2.0 0.431 6.2 LOS A 3.1 77.6
Intersectio
n
979 2.0 0.431 5.6 LOS A 3.1 77.6
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:23 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2044 PM Existing Alt00 (Site Folder: Franciscan)] Broadway St at Franciscan Way
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB_Franciscan Way
Lane 1d 184 2.0 831 0.221 100 6.7 LOS A 0.9 22.2 Full 950 0.0 0.0 Approach 184 2.0 0.221 6.7 LOS A 0.9 22.2
East: WB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 555 2.0 1180 0.471 100 7.9 LOS A 3.2 81.5 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 555 2.0 0.471 7.9 LOS A 3.2 81.5
North: SB_Driveway
Lane 1d 4 2.0 656 0.007 100 5.6 LOS A 0.0 0.6 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 4 2.0 0.007 5.6 LOS A 0.0 0.6
West: EB_Broadway St
Lane 1d 607 2.0 1295 0.468 100 7.0 LOS A 3.5 88.2 Full 750 0.0 0.0 Approach 607 2.0 0.468 7.0 LOS A 3.5 88.2
Intersectio
n
1350 2.0 0.471 7.3 LOS A 3.5 88.2
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:23 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [INT_2024_AM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Canal St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - Canal St
Lane 1d 108 2.0 1051 0.102 100 4.3 LOS A 0.4 11.2 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 108 2.0 0.102 4.3 LOS A 0.4 11.2
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 316 2.0 1333 0.237 100 4.3 LOS A 1.3 32.3 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 316 2.0 0.237 4.3 LOS A 1.3 32.3
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 279 2.0 1243 0.225 100 4.8 LOS A 1.2 29.2 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 279 2.0 0.225 4.8 LOS A 1.2 29.2
Intersectio
n
703 2.0 0.237 4.5 LOS A 1.3 32.3
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:36 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [INT_2024_PM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Canal St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - Canal St
Lane 1d 174 2.0 896 0.194 100 5.9 LOS A 0.9 21.8 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 174 2.0 0.194 5.9 LOS A 0.9 21.8
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 514 2.0 1291 0.398 100 6.3 LOS A 2.6 66.7 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 514 2.0 0.398 6.3 LOS A 2.6 66.7
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 459 2.0 1220 0.376 100 6.4 LOS A 2.3 58.6 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 459 2.0 0.376 6.4 LOS A 2.3 58.6
Intersectio
n
1147 2.0 0.398 6.3 LOS A 2.6 66.7
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:36 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [INT_2044_AM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Canal St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - Canal St
Lane 1d 133 2.0 990 0.134 100 4.8 LOS A 0.6 14.8 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 133 2.0 0.134 4.8 LOS A 0.6 14.8
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 391 2.0 1329 0.294 100 4.8 LOS A 1.7 43.2 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 391 2.0 0.294 4.8 LOS A 1.7 43.2
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 346 2.0 1217 0.284 100 5.4 LOS A 1.5 39.2 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 346 2.0 0.284 5.4 LOS A 1.5 39.2
Intersectio
n
870 2.0 0.294 5.1 LOS A 1.7 43.2
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:37 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 1 [INT_2044_PM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Canal St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - Canal St
Lane 1d 215 2.0 813 0.265 100 7.3 LOS A 1.2 30.3 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 215 2.0 0.265 7.3 LOS A 1.2 30.3
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 635 2.0 1276 0.497 100 7.6 LOS A 3.8 97.1 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 635 2.0 0.497 7.6 LOS A 3.8 97.1
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 566 2.0 1191 0.475 100 7.9 LOS A 3.3 83.9 Full 900 0.0 0.0 Approach 566 2.0 0.475 7.9 LOS A 3.3 83.9
Intersectio
n
1416 2.0 0.497 7.7 LOS A 3.8 97.1
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:03:37 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 2 [INT_2024_AM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Mildred St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - S Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 146 2.0 935 0.156 100 5.3 LOS A 0.7 17.2 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 146 2.0 0.156 5.3 LOS A 0.7 17.2
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 233 2.0 1056 0.220 100 5.4 LOS A 1.1 26.7 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 233 2.0 0.220 5.4 LOS A 1.1 26.7
North: SB - N Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 229 2.0 1075 0.213 100 5.3 LOS A 1.0 25.9 Full 800 0.0 0.0 Approach 229 2.0 0.213 5.3 LOS A 1.0 25.9
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 322 2.0 1219 0.265 100 5.2 LOS A 1.4 35.8 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 322 2.0 0.265 5.2 LOS A 1.4 35.8
Intersectio
n
930 2.0 0.265 5.3 LOS A 1.4 35.8
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:31:20 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 2 [INT_2024_PM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Mildred St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - S Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 109 2.0 752 0.144 100 6.3 LOS A 0.6 14.9 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 109 2.0 0.144 6.3 LOS A 0.6 14.9
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 404 2.0 1046 0.387 100 7.4 LOS A 2.2 55.4 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 404 2.0 0.387 7.4 LOS A 2.2 55.4
North: SB - N Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 276 2.0 914 0.302 100 7.1 LOS A 1.5 37.3 Full 800 0.0 0.0 Approach 276 2.0 0.302 7.1 LOS A 1.5 37.3
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 520 2.0 1174 0.443 100 7.5 LOS A 2.9 73.7 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 520 2.0 0.443 7.5 LOS A 2.9 73.7
Intersectio
n
1310 2.0 0.443 7.3 LOS A 2.9 73.7
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:31:21 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 2 [INT_2044_AM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Mildred St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - S Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 181 2.0 857 0.211 100 6.3 LOS A 0.9 23.6 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 181 2.0 0.211 6.3 LOS A 0.9 23.6
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 287 2.0 996 0.288 100 6.5 LOS A 1.4 36.3 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 287 2.0 0.288 6.5 LOS A 1.4 36.3
North: SB - N Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 283 2.0 1019 0.278 100 6.2 LOS A 1.4 35.1 Full 800 0.0 0.0 Approach 283 2.0 0.278 6.2 LOS A 1.4 35.1
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 399 2.0 1189 0.336 100 6.1 LOS A 1.9 48.8 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 399 2.0 0.336 6.1 LOS A 1.9 48.8
Intersectio
n
1149 2.0 0.336 6.3 LOS A 1.9 48.8
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:31:21 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9

LANE SUMMARY
Site: 2 [INT_2044_PM_ALT00 (Site Folder: Mildred St RAB)] New Site
Site Category: (None)
Roundabout
Lane Use and Performance
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
Cap. QUEUE
Deg.

Satn
Lane
Util.

Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Lane
Config
Lane
Length
Cap.

Adj.

Prob.

Block.
[ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % %
South: NB - S Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 133 2.0 656 0.203 100 7.9 LOS A 0.8 20.9 Full 300 0.0 0.0 Approach 133 2.0 0.203 7.9 LOS A 0.8 20.9
East: WB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 500 2.0 986 0.507 100 9.8 LOS A 3.6 92.2 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 500 2.0 0.507 9.8 LOS A 3.6 92.2
North: SB - N Mildred Ave
Lane 1d 341 2.0 833 0.409 100 9.3 LOS A 2.3 57.4 Full 800 0.0 0.0 Approach 341 2.0 0.409 9.3 LOS A 2.3 57.4
West: EB - Broadway St
Lane 1d 642 2.0 1136 0.565 100 9.8 LOS A 4.3 109.6 Full 550 0.0 0.0 Approach 642 2.0 0.565 9.8 LOS A 4.3 109.6
Intersectio
n
1616 2.0 0.565 9.5 LOS A 4.3 109.6
Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

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

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

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

Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.

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

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 3:31:22 PM Project: K:\SAC_RDWY\094557XXX - King City San Antonio Path SRTS\Analysis\Sidra\King City San Antonio_05.2024.sip9 ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix F
Preliminary Concept Layouts for Side Street Stop Control, All Way Stop Control, Proposed Signal, and Roundabout

BROADWAY ST
N

FRANCISCAN
W
AY

BROADWAY ST

FRANCISCAN W AY
N

BROADWAY ST

FRANCISCAN W AY
N

BROADWAY ST
N
CANAL
ST

BROADWAY ST
N
CANAL
ST

BROADWAY ST
N
CANAL
ST

BROADWAY ST
N

M ILDRED AVE

BROADWAY ST
N

M ILDRED AVE
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix G
Signal Warrants

Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
Warrant 3: Peak Hour
Source: CAMUTCD 2014, Revision 6
Major Street: Broadway St Number of Approach Lanes: 1
Minor Street: Franciscan Dr Number of Approach Lanes: 1 City, State: King City, California
Speed Limit or critical speed on major traffic > 40 mph? In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population? This locationCANNOT use the 70% Factor
Warrant 3 is Satisfied if a peak hour of an average day is plotted above the applicable curve.

Warrant 3 Satisfied: NO
Point falls above the the applicable curve
Plotted points representing the VPH above the applicable curve (1 total) Plotted points representing the VPH below the applicable curve (1 total) Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
Minor Street
578
33 866
136

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
Approach Lanes 7:00 AM-8:00 AM 4:00 PM-5:00 PM
FALSE
FALSE
Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
Warrant 3: Peak Hour
Source: CAMUTCD 2014, Revision 6
Major Street: Broadway St Number of Approach Lanes: 1
Minor Street: Canal St Number of Approach Lanes: 1
City, State: King City, California
Speed Limit or critical speed on major traffic > 40 mph? In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population? This location CANNOT use the 70% Factor
Warrant 3 is Satisfied IF a peak hour of an average day is plotted above the applicable curve.

Warrant 3 Satisfied: NO
Point falls above the the applicable curve
Plotted points representing the VPH above the applicable curve (1 total) Plotted points representing the VPH below the applicable curve (1 total)

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
Approach Lanes 8:00 AM-9:00 AM 4:00 PM-5:00 PM
FALSE
FALSE
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
Minor Street
493
77 895
160
Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
Warrant 3: Peak Hour
Source: CAMUTCD 2014, Revision 6
Major Street: Broadway St Number of Approach Lanes: 1
Minor Street: Mildred Ave Number of Approach Lanes: 1
City, State: King City, California
Speed Limit or critical speed on major traffic > 40 mph? In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population? This location CANNOT use the 70% Factor
Warrant 3 is Satisfied if a peak hour of an average day is plotted above the applicable curve.

Warrant 3 Satisfied: YES
Point falls above the the applicable curve
Plotted points representing the VPH above the applicable curve (1 total) Plotted points representing the VPH below the applicable curve (1 total)

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
Approach Lanes 8:00 AM-9:00 AM 4:00 PM-5:00 PM
FALSE
FALSE
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
Minor Street
392
201
851
253
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix H
HSM Predictive Method Safety Analysis IHSDM KABCO Values

US 101 SB Ramps at Terven Ave/Airport Blvd
Year Total K A B C O
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.26% 12.19% 37.57% 47.75%
- - 0.009 0.082 0.444 1.368 1.738
KABC PDO 0.24% 2.27% 12.24% 37.75% 47.50%
- - 0.009 0.087 0.468 1.443 1.816
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.22% 11.97% 36.90% 48.69%
- - 0.006 0.061 0.327 1.009 1.332
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.23% 12.01% 37.02% 48.52%
- - 0.007 0.064 0.343 1.056 1.384
Year Total K A B C O
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.26% 12.19% 37.59% 47.73%
- - 0.009 0.082 0.444 1.369 1.738
KABC PDO 0.24% 2.27% 12.25% 37.76% 47.49%
- - 0.009 0.087 0.468 1.444 1.816
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.22% 11.97% 36.91% 48.67%
- - 0.006 0.061 0.328 1.010 1.332
KABC PDO 0.23% 2.23% 12.01% 37.03% 48.50%
- - 0.007 0.064 0.343 1.057 1.384
Year Total K A B C O
KABC PDO 0.08% 0.80% 4.34% 13.37% 81.40%

0.288 1.379 0.002 0.024 0.128 0.394 2.397
KABC PDO 0.08% 0.81% 4.36% 13.44% 81.31%

0.288 1.385 0.003 0.025 0.135 0.416 2.515
KABC PDO 0.08% 0.79% 4.26% 13.13% 81.73%

0.288 1.358 0.002 0.017 0.094 0.291 1.809
KABC PDO 0.08% 0.79% 4.27% 13.18% 81.67%

0.288 1.362 0.002 0.018 0.099 0.304 1.885
Existing Signal Safety Values
2025 3.64
2036 2.74
2035 3.82
2045 2.85
CMF
2045

2.94 2.31
2045 2.85
Proposed Roundabout Safety Values
CMF
Proposed Signal Safety Values
2035 3.09
2036 2.21
2025
CMF
2025 3.64
2035 3.82
2036 2.74
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix I
Proposed Traffic Signal Control Synchro Operational Analysis

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
Queues Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 207 10 223 146 229
v/c Ratio 0.73 0.30 0.06 0.58 0.44 0.60
Control Delay (s/veh) 59.7 16.2 28.3 24.8 23.8 19.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 59.7 16.2 28.3 24.8 23.8 19.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 39 3 54 35 34
Queue Length 95th (ft) #142 128 18 135 94 102
Internal Link Dist (ft) 121 152 195 84
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 75
Base Capacity (vph) 158 681 158 556 585 576
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.73 0.30 0.06 0.40 0.25 0.40
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 103 169 15 9 151 47 34 72 24 39 41 124 Future Volume (veh/h) 103 169 15 9 151 47 34 72 24 39 41 124 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.78 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.87 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 116 190 17 10 170 53 38 81 27 44 46 139 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 135 538 48 18 321 100 79 168 56 64 66 201
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1648 147 1781 1234 385 447 953 318 293 306 925 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 0 207 10 0 223 146 0 0 229 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1796 1781 0 1618 1718 0 0 1524 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 0.0 5.2 0.3 0.0 7.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 0.0 5.2 0.3 0.0 7.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.24 0.26 0.18 0.19 0.61
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 135 0 586 18 0 421 303 0 0 331 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.00 0.35 0.55 0.00 0.53 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 135 0 586 135 0 451 479 0 0 425 0 0 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.0 0.0 15.2 29.2 0.0 18.8 22.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 38.6 0.0 0.4 23.2 0.0 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 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 3.0 0.0 2.0 0.3 0.0 2.6 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 65.6 0.0 15.6 52.3 0.0 19.8 23.1 0.0 0.0 24.7 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS E B D B C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 323 233 146 229
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.5 21.2 23.1 24.7
Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.6 23.3 16.9 8.5 19.4 14.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.5 16.5 16.5 4.5 16.5 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 7.2 10.2 5.8 9.0 6.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 26.6
HCM 6th LOS C
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
Queues Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 162 358 31 373 109 276
v/c Ratio 0.54 0.43 0.20 0.77 0.43 0.72
Control Delay (s/veh) 35.0 17.6 37.2 38.1 31.5 31.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 35.0 17.6 37.2 38.1 31.5 31.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 65 90 13 144 37 75
Queue Length 95th (ft) 132 222 43 #335 89 #191
Internal Link Dist (ft) 121 152 195 84
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 75
Base Capacity (vph) 443 869 154 529 448 472
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.41 0.20 0.71 0.24 0.58
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2024 Existing
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 151 307 26 29 293 54 23 53 25 57 40 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 151 307 26 29 293 54 23 53 25 57 40 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.95 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 162 330 28 31 315 58 25 57 27 61 43 172 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 225 604 51 48 390 72 50 113 54 78 55 219
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.03 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.22 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1690 143 1781 1514 279 397 904 428 357 252 1006 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 162 0 358 31 0 373 109 0 0 276 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1833 1781 0 1792 1730 0 0 1614 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 0.0 9.2 1.0 0.0 11.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 0.0 9.2 1.0 0.0 11.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.16 0.23 0.25 0.22 0.62
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 225 0 655 48 0 462 217 0 0 352 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.72 0.00 0.55 0.64 0.00 0.81 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 503 0 939 176 0 589 486 0 0 456 0 0 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.7 0.0 15.1 28.3 0.0 20.4 24.0 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 0.0 0.7 13.5 0.0 6.4 1.8 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 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 2.3 0.0 3.6 0.6 0.0 5.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 29.0 0.0 15.8 41.8 0.0 26.9 25.8 0.0 0.0 28.3 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C B D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 520 404 109 276
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.9 28.0 25.8 28.3
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.6 25.0 16.8 11.4 19.2 11.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.8 30.1 16.6 16.6 19.3 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 11.2 11.5 7.1 13.5 5.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.2 0.8 0.3 1.2 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 24.7
HCM 6th LOS C
King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
Queues Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 248 12 265 176 273
v/c Ratio 0.93 0.37 0.08 0.67 0.50 0.68
Control Delay (s/veh) 97.6 18.0 30.5 29.1 25.7 23.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 97.6 18.0 30.5 29.1 25.7 23.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 48 55 4 74 49 51
Queue Length 95th (ft) #176 161 20 #172 112 137
Internal Link Dist (ft) 121 152 195 84
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 75
Base Capacity (vph) 147 669 147 519 546 544
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.94 0.37 0.08 0.51 0.32 0.50
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

King City San Antonio Path SRTS 2044 Future
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: AM Peak
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 127 209 19 11 186 58 42 89 30 48 51 153 Future Volume (veh/h) 127 209 19 11 186 58 42 89 30 48 51 153 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.78 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.88 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 138 227 21 12 202 63 46 97 33 52 55 166 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 130 516 48 21 312 97 83 174 59 67 71 214
Arrive On Green 0.07 0.31 0.31 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.23 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1640 152 1781 1229 383 450 948 322 292 309 932 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 138 0 248 12 0 265 176 0 0 273 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1791 1781 0 1613 1720 0 0 1532 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 0.0 6.8 0.4 0.0 9.0 5.7 0.0 0.0 10.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 0.0 6.8 0.4 0.0 9.0 5.7 0.0 0.0 10.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.24 0.26 0.19 0.19 0.61
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 130 0 564 21 0 409 316 0 0 352 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 1.06 0.00 0.44 0.56 0.00 0.65 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 130 0 564 130 0 432 461 0 0 410 0 0 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.6 0.0 16.8 30.3 0.0 20.5 22.9 0.0 0.0 22.2 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 96.1 0.0 0.5 20.8 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 7.8 0.0 0.0 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 5.3 0.0 2.7 0.3 0.0 3.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 124.6 0.0 17.3 51.1 0.0 23.6 24.4 0.0 0.0 30.1 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS F B D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 386 277 176 273
Approach Delay, s/veh 55.7 24.8 24.4 30.1
Approach LOS E C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.7 23.4 18.1 8.5 19.6 15.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.5 16.5 16.5 4.5 16.5 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 8.8 12.3 6.5 11.0 7.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.9 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 36.8
HCM 6th LOS D
2044 Future
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
Queues Synchro 12 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBT SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 202 447 39 466 135 344
v/c Ratio 0.77 0.55 0.35 0.84 0.53 0.86
Control Delay (s/veh) 56.8 21.2 48.6 41.1 37.5 47.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 56.8 21.2 48.6 41.1 37.5 47.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 104 174 20 213 59 136
Queue Length 95th (ft) #234 295 54 #393 115 #314
Internal Link Dist (ft) 121 152 195 84
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 75
Base Capacity (vph) 271 844 110 658 380 415
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.53 0.35 0.71 0.36 0.83
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
2044 Future
12: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Timing Plan: PM Peak
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 186 379 32 36 362 67 28 65 31 70 49 198 Future Volume (veh/h) 186 379 32 36 362 67 28 65 31 70 49 198 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.96 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 202 412 35 39 393 73 30 71 34 76 53 215 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 243 685 58 53 452 84 49 115 55 81 56 228
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.41 0.41 0.03 0.30 0.30 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1691 144 1781 1514 281 384 909 435 357 249 1010 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 202 0 447 39 0 466 135 0 0 344 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1834 1781 0 1795 1729 0 0 1616 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.3 0.0 14.4 1.6 0.0 18.5 5.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.3 0.0 14.4 1.6 0.0 18.5 5.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.16 0.22 0.25 0.22 0.62
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 243 0 743 53 0 536 219 0 0 365 0 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.00 0.60 0.74 0.00 0.87 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 284 0 868 116 0 680 379 0 0 365 0 0 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.6 0.0 17.6 36.2 0.0 25.0 31.1 0.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.5 0.0 0.9 18.1 0.0 9.8 2.8 0.0 0.0 32.4 0.0 0.0 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 4.6 0.0 6.0 1.0 0.0 9.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 48.1 0.0 18.5 54.3 0.0 34.8 33.9 0.0 0.0 61.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D C C E
Approach Vol, veh/h 649 505 135 344
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.7 36.3 33.9 61.0
Approach LOS C D C E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.2 34.5 21.0 14.3 26.4 13.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.9 35.6 17.0 12.0 28.5 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 16.4 17.7 10.3 20.5 7.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 37.9
HCM 6th LOS D
ICE – Broadway Street at Franciscan Way, Canal Street, and Mildred Avenue May 20, 2024
Appendix J
Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Ratio Worksheet
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Cost of Collisions $138,150 $92,348 $82,610
Discounted Life Cycle Cost of Collisions $1,983,646 $1,322,668 $1,189,335 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Quantity (hours) 922 3272 1010
Annual Cost $13,283 $48,665 $15,362
Total Discounted Life Cycle Cost $278,938 $1,021,975 $322,594 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Cost $3,236 $4,387 $3,454
Total Discounted Lify Cycle Cost $47,214 $64,008 $50,395 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual O&M Costs $600 $600 $1,200
Discounted Life Cycle O&M Costs $8,754 $8,754 $17,508
Discounted Pavement Rehab Costs $0 $0 $0
Total O&M Costs $9,354 $9,354 $18,708
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
High Approximation $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,135,000
Low Approximation $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,135,000
Average for Both Ramps $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,135,000 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Safety $ 1,983,646 $ 1,322,668 $ 1,189,335
Delay $ 278,938 $ 1,021,975 $ 322,594
Emissions $ 47,214 $ 64,008 $ 50,395
O&M $ 9,354 $ 9,354 $ 18,708
Initial Capital $ 1,000,000 $ 1,001,000 $ 1,135,000
Total Net Present Value $3,319,152 $3,419,005 $2,716,033 Added Benefits Compared to SSSC SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Safety $ - $ 660,978 $ 794,311
Delay $ - $ (743,038) $ (43,657)
Emissions $ - $ (16,793) $ (3,181)
Total Benefits $ - $ (98,854) $ 747,473
Added Cost Compared to Existing Conditions SSSC AWSC Roundabout O&M $ - $ - $ 9,354
Initial Capital $ - $ 1,000 $ 135,000
Total Costs $ - $ 1,000 $ 144,354
B/C Ratio Compared to Existing Conditions N/A -98.85 5.18 Delay
Operations and Maintenance
Initial Capital
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Total Costs ( C )
Total Benefits ( B )
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Emissions

FRANCISCAN WAY - LIFE CYCLE COST CALCULATIONS

PERFORMANCE MEASURE LIFE CYCLE COST (NET PRESENT VALUE) Safety
Intersection
Intersection Icons
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Cost of Collisions $93,378 $78,006 $73,382
Discounted Life Cycle Cost of Collisions $1,337,416 $1,124,302 $1,086,327 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Quantity (hours) 806 3566 983
Annual Cost $11,913 $52,245 $14,880
Total Discounted Life Cycle Cost $250,170 $1,097,146 $312,478 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual Cost $2,951 $4,095 $3,341
Total Discounted Lify Cycle Cost $43,056 $59,747 $48,746 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Annual O&M Costs $600 $600 $1,200
Discounted Life Cycle O&M Costs $8,754 $8,754 $17,508
Discounted Pavement Rehab Costs $0 $0 $0
Total O&M Costs $9,354 $9,354 $18,708
SSSC AWSC Roundabout
High Approximation $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,090,000
Low Approximation $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,090,000
Average for Both Ramps $1,000,000 $1,001,000 $1,090,000 SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Safety $ 1,337,416 $ 1,124,302 $ 1,086,327
Delay $ 250,170 $ 1,097,146 $ 312,478
Emissions $ 43,056 $ 59,747 $ 48,746
O&M $ 9,354 $ 9,354 $ 18,708
Initial Capital $ 1,000,000 $ 1,001,000 $ 1,090,000
Total Net Present Value $2,639,996 $3,291,550 $2,556,260 Added Benefits Compared to SSSC SSSC AWSC Roundabout
Safety $ - $ 213,114 $ 251,089
Delay $ - $ (846,976) $ (62,308)
Emissions $ - $ (16,691) $ (5,690)
Total Benefits $ - $ (650,553) $ 5,075,018
Added Cost Compared to Existing Conditions SSSC AWSC Roundabout O&M $ - $ - $ 9,354
Initial Capital $ - $ 1,000 $ 90,000
Total Costs $0 $ 1,000 $ 99,354
B/C Ratio Compared to Existing Conditions N/A -650.55 51.08 Delay
Operations and Maintenance
Initial Capital
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Total Costs ( C )
Total Benefits ( B )
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Emissions

CANAL STREET - LIFE CYCLE COST CALCULATIONS

PERFORMANCE MEASURE LIFE CYCLE COST (NET PRESENT VALUE) Safety
Intersection
Intersection Icons
Signal Roundabout
Signal Roundabout
Annual Cost of Collisions $220,708 $99,926
Discounted Life Cycle Cost of Collisions $3,191,275 $1,436,895 Signal Roundabout
Annual Quantity (hours) 6091 1412
Annual Cost $90,898 $21,289
Total Discounted Life Cycle Cost $1,908,856 $447,060
Signal Roundabout
Annual Cost $6,315 $6,893
Total Discounted Lify Cycle Cost $92,138 $100,571
Signal Roundabout
Annual O&M Costs $9,700 $1,200
Discounted Life Cycle O&M Costs $141,526 $17,508
Discounted Pavement Rehab Costs $0 $0
Total O&M Costs $151,226 $18,708
Signal Roundabout
High Approximation $1,150,000 $1,195,000
Low Approximation $1,150,000 $1,195,000
Average for Both Ramps $1,150,000 $1,195,000
Signal Roundabout
Safety $ 3,191,275 $ 1,436,895
Delay $ 1,908,856 $ 447,060
Emissions $ 92,138 $ 100,571
O&M $ 151,226 $ 18,708
Initial Capital $ 1,150,000 $ 1,195,000
Total Net Present Value $6,493,496 $3,198,235
Added Benefits Compared to Signal Signal Roundabout
Safety $ - $ 1,754,380
Delay $ - $ 1,461,796
Emissions $ - $ (8,433)
Total Benefits $0 $ 23,976,822
Added Cost Compared to Existing Conditions Signal Roundabout O&M $ - $ (132,518)
Initial Capital $ - $ 45,000
Total Costs $0 $ (87,518)
B/C Ratio Compared to Existing Conditions N/A -273.97
Delay
Operations and Maintenance
Initial Capital
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Total Costs ( C )
Total Benefits ( B )
TOTAL PROJECT LIFE CYCLE SUMMARY FOR 20 YEARS
Emissions

MILDRED AVENUE - LIFE CYCLE COST CALCULATIONS

PERFORMANCE MEASURE LIFE CYCLE COST (NET PRESENT VALUE) Safety
Intersection
Intersection Icons