Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.85 0.85 0.93 0.96 0.96 Lanes: 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.53 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.15 Final Sat.: 3408 145 1689 1769 916 814 1769 1624 1624 1769 1556 265 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.22 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.25 0.31 0.23 0.11 0.11 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.0 10.0 34.9 10.0 10.0 10.0 23.5 34.1 34.1 24.9 35.5 35.5 Volume/Cap: 0.74 0.74 0.58 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.70 0.86 0.86 0.30 0.30 Delay/Veh: 48.7 48.7 25.6 38.7 38.6 38.6 27.7 28.0 35.4 48.2 21.2 21.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 48.7 48.7 25.6 38.7 38.6 38.6 27.7 28.0 35.4 48.2 21.2 21.2 LOS by Move: D D C D D D C C D D C C
HCM2kAvgQ: 6 6 8 1 1 1 1 10 15 14 3 3
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 23:10:15 Page 5-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Existing Plus Project PM Conditions with Mitigation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 23:10:15 Page 6-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Existing Plus Project PM Conditions with Mitigation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
FHWA Roundabout Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #14 Enterprise Dr / Willow St
******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh): 13.4 Level Of Service: B
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign
Lanes: 1 1 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 120 0 130 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 130
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 0 120 0 130 130 0 0 0 0 0 0 130
Added Vol: 142 127 42 127 168 327 192 17 91 21 8 64
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 142 247 42 257 298 327 192 17 91 21 8 194
User 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 PHF Adj: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PHF Volume: 154 268 46 279 324 355 209 18 99 23 9 211
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 154 268 46 279 324 355 209 18 99 23 9 211
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 154 268 46 279 324 355 209 18 99 23 9 211
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| PCE Module:
AutoPCE: 154 268 46 279 324 355 209 18 99 23 9 211
TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ComboPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BicyclePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AdjVolume: 154 268 46 279 324 355 209 18 99 23 9 211
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Delay Module: >> Time Period: 0.25 hours <<
CircVolume: 507 186 626 632
MaxVolume: 926 1100 862 859
PedVolume: 0 0 0 0
AdjMaxVol: 926 1100 862 859
ApproachVol: 468 959 326 242
ApproachV/C: 0.51 0.87 0.38 0.28
ApproachDel: 7.8 20.4 6.7 5.8
ApproachLOS: A C A A
Queue: 2.9 12.1 1.8 1.2
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 23:10:15 Page 7-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Existing Plus Project PM Conditions with Mitigation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #17 Mowry Ave. / Cherry St.
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 85 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.891
Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 34.4
Optimal Cycle: OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: C
******************************************************************************** Street Name: Cherry St. Mowry Ave.
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl
Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Oct 2006 << 4:45-5:45 pm Base Vol: 41 798 152 387 635 63 76 176 53 68 128 322
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 41 798 152 387 635 63 76 176 53 68 128 322 Added Vol: 0 20 0 147 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 249
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 41 818 152 534 647 63 76 176 53 68 128 571 User 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 PHF Adj: 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 PHF Volume: 46 919 171 600 727 71 85 198 60 76 144 642
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 919 171 600 727 71 85 198 60 76 144 642 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 46 919 171 600 727 71 85 198 60 76 144 642 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.93 0.93 0.83 0.90 0.93 0.83 0.93 0.98 0.83 0.93 0.86 0.86 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.37 1.63 Final Sat.: 1769 3538 1583 3432 3538 1583 1769 1862 1583 1769 598 2668 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.26 0.11 0.17 0.21 0.04 0.05 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.24 0.24 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 11.4 23.9 23.9 16.1 28.5 28.5 7.0 17.1 28.5 12.0 22.1 38.1 Volume/Cap: 0.19 0.93 0.38 0.93 0.61 0.13 0.59 0.53 0.11 0.31 0.93 0.54 Delay/Veh: 33.1 43.7 25.2 53.2 24.6 19.8 43.7 31.7 19.6 33.5 46.4 17.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 33.1 43.7 25.2 53.2 24.6 19.8 43.7 31.7 19.6 33.5 46.4 17.4 LOS by Move: C D C D C B D C B C D B
HCM2kAvgQ: 1 17 4 12 9 1 3 5 1 2 14 8
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 23:10:15 Page 7-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Existing Plus Project PM Conditions with Mitigation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:05 Page 1-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scenario Report
Scenario: Cum With Pj_PM
Command: Future _ WITH Project PM
Volume: Cum_PM
Geometry: CU_PM
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Project PM
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 5-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Gateway Blvd. / Thornton Ave.
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 1.056
Loss Time (sec): 12 Average Delay (sec/veh): 38.8
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Street Name: Thornton Ave. Gateway Blvd.
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Protected Split Phase Split Phase
Rights: Ovl Include Include Ovl
Min. Green: 0 10 10 7 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 17 May 2007 <<
Base Vol: 0 550 60 420 1070 0 0 0 0 40 0 450
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 0 550 60 420 1070 0 0 0 0 40 0 450
Added Vol: 0 144 3 0 232 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 694 63 420 1302 0 0 0 0 45 0 450
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 0 694 63 420 1302 0 0 0 0 45 0 450
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 694 63 420 1302 0 0 0 0 45 0 450
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 0 694 63 420 1302 0 0 0 0 45 0 450
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.73 Lanes: 0.00 2.75 0.25 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Final Sat.: 0 4604 418 3432 1862 0 0 0 0 1769 0 2786
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.16 Crit Moves: **** ****
Green Time: 0.0 10.0 20.0 33.0 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 43.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.98 0.49 0.24 1.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.24 Delay/Veh: 0.0 54.8 18.6 9.0 53.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 4.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 54.8 18.6 9.0 53.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 4.5 LOS by Move: A D B A D A A A A C A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 0 6 4 2 37 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 5-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 6-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #7 Thornton Ave. / Willow St.
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 115 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.832
Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 41.5
Optimal Cycle: OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Street Name: Willow St. Thornton Ave.
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected
Rights: Ovl Include Include Include
Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 17 May 2007 << 5:00-6:00 pm Base Vol: 120 10 130 20 10 10 50 830 260 20 560 30
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 120 10 130 20 10 10 50 830 260 20 560 30
Added Vol: 147 3 233 0 3 0 0 0 237 381 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 267 13 363 20 13 10 50 830 497 401 560 30
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 267 13 363 20 13 10 50 830 497 401 560 30
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 267 13 363 20 13 10 50 830 497 401 560 30
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 267 13 363 20 13 10 50 830 497 401 560 30
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.93 0.93 0.83 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.88 0.88 0.93 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 1.91 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.57 0.43 1.00 1.25 0.75 1.00 0.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 3388 165 1583 1769 984 757 1769 2089 1251 1769 1753 94 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.08 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.40 0.40 0.23 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.0 10.0 38.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.6 50.3 50.3 28.7 66.4 66.4 Volume/Cap: 0.91 0.91 0.68 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.26 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.55 0.55 Delay/Veh: 80.6 80.6 36.4 48.9 49.0 49.0 47.6 38.8 38.8 64.2 15.8 15.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 80.6 80.6 36.4 48.9 49.0 49.0 47.6 38.8 38.8 64.2 15.8 15.8 LOS by Move: F F D D D D D D D E B B
HCM2kAvgQ: 8 8 12 1 1 1 2 25 25 17 13 13
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 6-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 7-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
FHWA Roundabout Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #14 Enterprise Dr / Willow St
******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh): 11.8 Level Of Service: B
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign
Lanes: 1 1 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:
Base Vol: 10 130 10 140 140 10 10 10 10 10 10 140
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 10 130 10 140 140 10 10 10 10 10 10 140
Added Vol: 142 127 42 127 168 327 192 17 91 21 8 64
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| PCE Module:
AutoPCE: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204
TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ComboPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BicyclePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AdjVolume: 152 257 52 267 308 337 202 27 101 31 18 204
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Delay Module: >> Time Period: 0.25 hours <<
CircVolume: 496 201 606 611
MaxVolume: 932 1091 873 870
PedVolume: 0 0 0 0
AdjMaxVol: 932 1091 873 870
ApproachVol: 461 912 330 253
ApproachV/C: 0.49 0.84 0.38 0.29
ApproachDel: 7.6 17.4 6.6 5.8
ApproachLOS: A C A A
Queue: 2.8 10.4 1.8 1.2
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 8-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative)
******************************************************************************** Intersection #17 Mowry Ave. / Cherry St.
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 135 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 1.339
Loss Time (sec): 16 Average Delay (sec/veh): 98.3
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F
******************************************************************************** Street Name: Cherry St. Mowry Ave.
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl
Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Oct 2006 << 4:45-5:45 pm Base Vol: 50 850 710 730 920 90 100 220 60 230 170 940
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 50 850 710 730 920 90 100 220 60 230 170 940 Added Vol: 0 20 0 147 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 249
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 50 870 710 877 932 90 100 220 60 230 170 1189 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 50 870 710 877 932 90 100 220 60 230 170 1189 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 50 870 710 877 932 90 100 220 60 230 170 1189 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 50 870 710 877 932 90 100 220 60 230 170 1189 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.93 0.93 0.83 0.90 0.93 0.83 0.93 0.98 0.83 0.90 0.85 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.25 1.75 Final Sat.: 1769 3538 1583 3432 3538 1583 1769 1862 1583 3432 405 2831 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.25 0.45 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.04 0.07 0.42 0.42 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 11.5 44.7 44.7 25.5 58.6 58.6 7.0 31.2 42.7 17.7 41.8 67.3 Volume/Cap: 0.33 0.74 1.35 1.35 0.61 0.13 1.09 0.51 0.12 0.51 1.35 0.84 Delay/Veh: 59.4 42.7 217.1 224.5 30.0 23.0 184.5 46.3 32.9 55.6 213 33.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 59.4 42.7 217.1 224.5 30.0 23.0 184.5 46.3 32.9 55.6 213 33.5 LOS by Move: E D F F C C F D C E F C
HCM2kAvgQ: 2 18 53 35 16 2 8 8 2 5 51 26
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK Cum With Pj_PM Tue May 18, 2021 22:52:07 Page 8-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newark-Dumbarton Rail SAP
2020 Analysis
Future Year 2035 Base Plus Project PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to FEHR & PEERS WALNUT CRK ATTACHMENT 1
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLES
Willow and Grand Park Project, Newark
Bus Turning Simulation Attachment 3 CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N.T.S. INCOMING 45' BUSES OUTGOING 45' BUSES 2201 Broadway | Suite 602 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200 | Fax (510) 253-0059 www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 28, 2022
To: Lesley Owning, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
From: Rob Rees, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Enterprise Drive – Willow Street Mixed-Use Project OK19-0325
This memorandum presents our findings for the Enterprise Drive cross section for the Willow Street Mixed-Use project. The review of Enterprise Drive cross section between Willow and Hickory Streets per request from the City of Newark and the development team is summarized below.
ROUNDABOUT ANALYSIS
Roundabout analysis is a process of evaluating intersection analysis for all movements during both AM and PM peak hour for a roundabout. The analysis for the roundabout at Enterprise Drive and Willow Street was performed using Sidra Intersection software (SIDRA) and the traffic volumes from Dumbarton TOD EIR. The study roundabout is currently operating with an eastbound right turn slip lane. Table 1 summarizes the 2035 buildout cumulative turn movements at the study roundabout from the Dumbarton TOD EIR.
Table 1:
Turning Volumes at Enterprise Drive and Willow Street – 2035 Cumulative Buildout Forecasts
Willow Street Enterprise Drive
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM 97 245 19 178 211 260 196 14 107 52 27 278
PM 110 218 52 267 255 247 281 27 114 31 18 204
The cumulative traffic forecasts shown in Table 1 illustrate that the heaviest traffic flows are anticipated along the Willow Street corridor. The volumes in Table 1 were used to analyze if the roundabout at Enterprise Drive and Willow Street could operate as a single lane roundabout. SIDRA shows the results in level of service (LOS) and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio. The intersection will Lesley Owning
February 28, 2022
operate with LOS B in the AM and LOS C in the PM. LOS B in the AM means the operation will experience minor delays with less then 15 seconds per vehicle. LOS C in the PM means the operation will experience moderate delays with less than 25 seconds per vehicle. The v/c ratio is 0.64 in the AM and 0.75 in the PM, which are under 0.85. Values under 0.85 typically represent conditions where the traffic network is serving the travel demand well. The SIDRA calculation worksheets are provided in Attachment A to this memorandum. The single lane roundabout operates well through Year 2035 and controls capacity to and from Enterprise Drive. As such, Enterprise Drive approaching the roundabout should be one lane in each direction to provide efficient vehicular movements approaching and departing the single lane roundabout.
RECOMMENDATIONS
This assessment results in the following recommendations:
• The roundabout at Enterprise Drive and Willow Street can be constructed as a single lane roundabout that will serve the travel demand well for 2035 buildout scenario with LOS B in the AM and LOS C in the PM.
• The Enterprise Drive cross section can be one lane in each direction consistent with the single lane roundabout. The recommended cross section is below.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Intersection Worksheets
SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [AM - Willow St & Enterprise Dr (Site Folder: General)] Site Category: One Lane Roundabout
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: FEHR AND PEERS | Licence: PLUS / Enterprise | Created: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:57:50 AM Project: \\Fpok03.fpainc.local\data\Projects\2019\OK19-0325.00_Willow_Street_Mixed_Use\Analysis\Task 4 - Hickory Alignment & Transit Simulations \SIDRA\Willow and Enterprise Roundabout.sip9
ATTACHMENT A
MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [AM - Willow St & Enterprise Dr (Site Folder: General)] Site Category: One Lane Roundabout
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT
VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.
Satn
Aver.
Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.
Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.
No.
Cycles
Aver.
Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Willow St
3 L2 97 3.0 105 3.0 0.456 9.9 LOS A 2.9 73.2 0.66 0.67 0.78 27.0 8 T1 245 3.0 266 3.0 0.456 9.9 LOS A 2.9 73.2 0.66 0.67 0.78 24.0 18 R2 19 3.0 21 3.0 0.456 9.9 LOS A 2.9 73.2 0.66 0.67 0.78 24.4 Approach 361 3.0 392 3.0 0.456 9.9 LOS A 2.9 73.2 0.66 0.67 0.78 24.9 East: Enterprise Dr
1 L2 52 3.0 57 3.0 0.536 13.2 LOS B 3.9 98.6 0.75 0.89 1.14 23.7 6 T1 27 3.0 29 3.0 0.536 13.2 LOS B 3.9 98.6 0.75 0.89 1.14 25.8 16 R2 278 3.0 302 3.0 0.536 13.2 LOS B 3.9 98.6 0.75 0.89 1.14 21.9 Approach 357 3.0 388 3.0 0.536 13.2 LOS B 3.9 98.6 0.75 0.89 1.14 22.5 North: Willow St
7 L2 178 3.0 193 3.0 0.644 12.3 LOS B 6.7 170.6 0.65 0.53 0.75 23.4 4 T1 211 3.0 229 3.0 0.644 12.3 LOS B 6.7 170.6 0.65 0.53 0.75 22.2 14 R2 260 3.0 283 3.0 0.644 12.3 LOS B 6.7 170.6 0.65 0.53 0.75 23.8 Approach 649 3.0 705 3.0 0.644 12.3 LOS B 6.7 170.6 0.65 0.53 0.75 23.3 West: Enterprise Dr
5 L2 196 3.0 213 3.0 0.426 9.8 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.66 0.69 0.78 21.0 2 T1 14 3.0 15 3.0 0.426 9.8 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.66 0.69 0.78 26.6 12 R2 107 3.0 116 3.0 0.426 9.8 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.66 0.69 0.78 24.9 Approach 317 3.0 345 3.0 0.426 9.8 LOS A 2.4 62.6 0.66 0.69 0.78 22.5 All Vehicles 1684 3.0 1830 3.0 0.644 11.5 LOS B 6.7 170.6 0.68 0.67 0.84 23.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).
Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.
Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.
Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).
Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: FEHR AND PEERS | Licence: PLUS / Enterprise | Processed: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:57:43 AM Project: \\Fpok03.fpainc.local\data\Projects\2019\OK19-0325.00_Willow_Street_Mixed_Use\Analysis\Task 4 - Hickory Alignment & Transit Simulations \SIDRA\Willow and Enterprise Roundabout.sip9
ATTACHMENT A
SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [PM - Willow St & Enterprise Dr (Site Folder: General)] Site Category: One Lane Roundabout
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: FEHR AND PEERS | Licence: PLUS / Enterprise | Created: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:57:53 AM Project: \\Fpok03.fpainc.local\data\Projects\2019\OK19-0325.00_Willow_Street_Mixed_Use\Analysis\Task 4 - Hickory Alignment & Transit Simulations \SIDRA\Willow and Enterprise Roundabout.sip9
ATTACHMENT A
MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [PM - Willow St & Enterprise Dr (Site Folder: General)] Site Category: One Lane Roundabout
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT
VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.
Satn
Aver.
Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.
Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.
No.
Cycles
Aver.
Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
South: Willow St
3 L2 110 3.0 120 3.0 0.595 15.5 LOS C 4.7 120.5 0.79 0.97 1.32 23.9 8 T1 218 3.0 237 3.0 0.595 15.5 LOS C 4.7 120.5 0.79 0.97 1.32 20.7 18 R2 52 3.0 57 3.0 0.595 15.5 LOS C 4.7 120.5 0.79 0.97 1.32 21.5 Approach 380 3.0 413 3.0 0.595 15.5 LOS C 4.7 120.5 0.79 0.97 1.32 21.8 East: Enterprise Dr
1 L2 31 3.0 34 3.0 0.412 11.2 LOS B 2.2 56.3 0.71 0.77 0.90 25.1 6 T1 18 3.0 20 3.0 0.412 11.2 LOS B 2.2 56.3 0.71 0.77 0.90 27.0 16 R2 204 3.0 222 3.0 0.412 11.2 LOS B 2.2 56.3 0.71 0.77 0.90 23.1 Approach 253 3.0 275 3.0 0.412 11.2 LOS B 2.2 56.3 0.71 0.77 0.90 23.7 North: Willow St
7 L2 267 3.0 290 3.0 0.749 15.9 LOS C 13.9 355.8 0.76 0.72 1.08 21.4 4 T1 255 3.0 277 3.0 0.749 15.9 LOS C 13.9 355.8 0.76 0.72 1.08 20.2 14 R2 247 3.0 268 3.0 0.749 15.9 LOS C 13.9 355.8 0.76 0.72 1.08 22.0 Approach 769 3.0 836 3.0 0.749 15.9 LOS C 13.9 355.8 0.76 0.72 1.08 21.2 West: Enterprise Dr
5 L2 281 3.0 305 3.0 0.644 17.0 LOS C 5.8 148.9 0.82 1.04 1.46 18.5 2 T1 27 3.0 29 3.0 0.644 17.0 LOS C 5.8 148.9 0.82 1.04 1.46 23.2 12 R2 114 3.0 124 3.0 0.644 17.0 LOS C 5.8 148.9 0.82 1.04 1.46 21.6 Approach 422 3.0 459 3.0 0.644 17.0 LOS C 5.8 148.9 0.82 1.04 1.46 19.6 All Vehicles 1824 3.0 1983 3.0 0.749 15.4 LOS C 13.9 355.8 0.77 0.85 1.19 21.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).
Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.
Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.
LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).
Roundabout Capacity Model: US HCM 6.
Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).
Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: Traditional M1.
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: FEHR AND PEERS | Licence: PLUS / Enterprise | Processed: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:57:44 AM Project: \\Fpok03.fpainc.local\data\Projects\2019\OK19-0325.00_Willow_Street_Mixed_Use\Analysis\Task 4 - Hickory Alignment & Transit Simulations \SIDRA\Willow and Enterprise Roundabout.sip9
ATTACHMENT A
2201 Broadway | Suite 602 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200 | Fax (510) 253-0059 www.fehrandpeers.com
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
Date: May 26, 2022
To: Lesley Owning, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
From: Rob Rees, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Trip Generation and Intersection Operations Analysis for Willow Street at G Street
OK19-0325
This memorandum presents the findings of the trip generation and intersection operations analysis prepared for the G Street intersection with Willow Street after buildout of the FMC Willow and Grand Park Project (formerly the Willow Street Mixed-Use Project) in Newark, CA.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Proposed construction of the Project includes a new street, G Street, that would intersect with Willow Street and serve 64 market-rate townhomes, 91 affordable housing units, 3,600 square feet of retail space, and a bus transit station with 72 commuter parking spaces. The trip generation generated by these uses would use G Street to access Willow Street.
Trip generation is the process of estimating vehicles that would likely access the Project. Trip generation for the SP EIR was estimated using methods, formulas, and rates presented by Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. To remain consistent with the SP EIR, Project trip generation was also estimated using the Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. Consistent with FMC Parcel C Project analysis, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition was used to estimate trip generation for land uses that were not evaluated in the SP EIR, except for the bus transit center, which used the Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition because data was not available from earlier editions.
The proposed Project would be located less than a half-mile from the future Dumbarton Rail Transit Station, and it would construct the bus transit station element of the Rail Station. Considering the proximity of the Project to the future Dumbarton Rail Transit Station, some Project trips are likely to shift to transit. However, the future of the Dumbarton Rail line is uncertain due to funding Lesley Owning
May 26, 2022
constraints. Therefore, as a reasonable worst-case scenario, no transit reductions were assumed in the trip generation estimates, which is consistent with the trip generation in the SP EIR.
Table 1 on the next page summarizes the trip generation for the Project elements that would use G Street. Since the Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition does not differentiate between affordable housing and market-rate townhouses, this analysis combines them for 155 total residential units.
Using the SP EIR internalization assumptions, the Project elements that use G Street is estimated to generate about 852 daily, 72 AM peak hour, and 83 PM peak hour external vehicle trips.
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS AND SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
Intersection operations were evaluated at the G Street intersection with Willow Street to assess intersection operations.
Vehicle trip generation for the uses that would use G Street is summarized in Table 1. Vehicle trips were distributed to the road network using the trip distribution percentages from the SP EIR, and the distributed trips were assigned to the study intersection based on paths of travel. The assigned trips were then added to the “Existing with SP Buildout” and “Cumulative (Year 2035) with SP Buildout” traffic forecasts based on the current planned SP buildout as evaluated in the November 19, 2021, memorandum titled, Trip Generation and Intersection Operations Analysis – FMC Willow and Grand Park Project.
Attachment 1 provides the intersection analysis worksheets and the peak hour signal warrant worksheets. With buildout of the current specific plan the G Street intersection with Willow Street would operate as follows.
Intersection Level of Service – G Street at Willow Street (Side Street Stop Control Operations)
Study Scenario
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Signal
Warrant Met
(Yes / No)?
Level of
Service Delay Level of Service Delay
Existing Plus Project D 25.0 F 54.1 No
Cumulative 2035 Plus Project D 31.9 E 47.2 No
Notes: Intersection LOS and Delay represents the operations for the side-street stop control movements on G Street turning onto Willow Street because this traffic must stop before proceeding. Willow Street traffic does not stop and so its LOS would be “A”.
Source: ITE Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition; Fehr & Peers, 2022.
Lesley Owning
May 26, 2022
Level of Service E and F conditions occur during the PM peak hours when the traffic loads on Willow Street are greatest, and so it is more difficult to turn onto Willow Street from G Street.
The G Street intersection with Willow Street was reviewed for the Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrants (worksheets in Attachment 1). The peak hour warrant is not met because G Street traffic volumes are substantially lower than the minimum threshold for signalization. However, it is likely that the peak hour warrant for signalization will be met once the rail station traffic is added to the G Street corridor. The analysis in this memorandum assumes a bus transit station but not a rail station. Only the peak hour warrant was considered for this memorandum. Prior to signalization in the future after the project is constructed the full complement of signal warrants should be considered to determine if a traffic signal should be installed.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Intersection Analysis Worksheets and Peak Hour Signal Warrant Worksheets Lesley Owning
May 26, 2022
Table 1
FMC Willow and Grand Park Project Trip Generation for Uses Served by G Street Land Use Units1 ITE
Code Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
New Uses (Served by G Street)
Retail2 3.6 KSF 820 155 2 2 4 7 6 13
Townhomes/Apartments
(including 91 Affordable
Units)3
155 DU 230 680 8 37 45 36 18 54
Bus Transit Station5 72 PS 90 202 21 9 30 9 22 31
Total Project Trips using G Street 1,037 31 48 79 52 46 98 Reductions
Retail Internalization (-80%)6 -124 -2 -1 -3 -6 -4 -10
Townhomes/Apart Internalization (-9%)6 -61 -1 -3 -4 -3 -2 -5 Total Internalization (-80% retail, -9%
residential)6 -185 -3 -4 -7 -9 -6 -15
Net External Project Trips Using G Street 852 28 44 72 43 40 83
1. KSF = 1,000 square feet, DU = dwelling units
2. Based on the Dumbarton Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (RBF, May 2011):
Daily: T = 42.94 * (X);
AM Peak Hour: T = 1 * (X) (61% in, 39% out);
PM Peak Hour: T = 3.37 * (X) (49% in, 51% out)
3. Based on the Dumbarton Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (RBF, May 2011):
Daily: T = 4.39 * (X);
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.29 * (X) (17% in, 83% out);
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.35 * (X) (67% in, 33% out)
4. ITE Trip Generation (8th Edition) land use category 412 (County Park):
Daily: T = 2.28 * (X);
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.01 * (X) (80% in, 20% out);
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.06 * (X) 41% in, 59% out)
5. ITE Trip Generation (10th Edition) land use category 090 (Park and Ride Lot with Bus or Light Rail) Daily: T = 2.81 * (X);
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.42 * (X) (69% in, 31% out);
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.43 * (X) (28% in, 72% out)
6. As in the SP EIR, 9% of the residential trips and 80% of the commercial trips would be internal to the Specific Plan Area.
Sources: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition; ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition; Fehr & Peers, 2021.
HCM 6th TWSC FMC Willow & Grand Park
1: Willow Street & G Street AM Existing Plus Project
Synchro 11 Report
Fehr & Peers Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.9
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 14 10 729 465 18
Future Vol, veh/h 30 14 10 729 465 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 100 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 33 15 11 792 505 20
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1329 515 525 0 - 0
Stage 1 515 -----
Stage 2 814 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 171 560 1042 - - -
Stage 1 600 -----
Stage 2 436 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 169 560 1042 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 169 -----
Stage 1 593 -----
Stage 2 436 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 25 0.1 0
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1042 - 169 560 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 - 0.193 0.027 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - 31.3 11.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - D B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.7 0.1 - -
HCM 6th TWSC FMC Willow & Grand Park
1: Willow Street & G Street PM Existing Plus Project
Synchro 11 Report
Fehr & Peers Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 28 12 14 674 946 29
Future Vol, veh/h 28 12 14 674 946 29
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 100 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 30 13 15 733 1028 32
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1807 1044 1060 0 - 0
Stage 1 1044 -----
Stage 2 763 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 87 278 657 - - -
Stage 1 339 -----
Stage 2 460 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 85 278 657 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 85 -----
Stage 1 331 -----
Stage 2 460 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 54.1 0.2 0
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 657 - 85 278 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.023 - 0.358 0.047 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - 69.3 18.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 1.4 0.1 - -
HCM 6th TWSC FMC Willow & Grand Park
1: Willow Street & G Street AM 2035 Plus Project
Synchro 11 Report
Fehr & Peers Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 14 10 823 536 18
Future Vol, veh/h 30 14 10 823 536 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 100 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 33 15 11 895 583 20
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1510 593 603 0 - 0
Stage 1 593 -----
Stage 2 917 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 133 506 975 - - -
Stage 1 552 -----
Stage 2 390 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 132 506 975 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 132 -----
Stage 1 546 -----
Stage 2 390 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 31.9 0.1 0
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 975 - 132 506 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - 0.247 0.03 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - 41 12.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - E B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.9 0.1 - -
HCM 6th TWSC FMC Willow & Grand Park
1: Willow Street & G Street PM 2035 Plus Project
Synchro 11 Report
Fehr & Peers Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 28 12 14 649 900 29
Future Vol, veh/h 28 12 14 649 900 29
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 100 - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 30 13 15 705 978 32
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1729 994 1010 0 - 0
Stage 1 994 -----
Stage 2 735 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 97 297 686 - - -
Stage 1 358 -----
Stage 2 474 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 95 297 686 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 95 -----
Stage 1 350 -----
Stage 2 474 -----
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 47.2 0.2 0
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 686 - 95 297 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.022 - 0.32 0.044 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 - 59.8 17.7 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 1.2 0.1 - -
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario Existing Plus Project Minor Street G Street Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 10 0 30 0 X North/South
Through 729 465 0 0 East/West
Right 0 18 14 0
Total 739 483 44 0
Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Willow Street G Street * Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 1 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,222 44
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Minor Street Higher Volume Approach - VPH
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014 150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario Existing Plus Project Minor Street G Street Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 10 0 30 0 X North/South
Through 729 465 0 0 East/West
Right 0 18 14 0
Total 739 483 44 0
Intersection Geometry
1 3
54 Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
44 Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing Plus Project 0.7 44 1,266
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 650
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario Existing Plus Project Minor Street G Street Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 14 0 28 0 X North/South
Through 674 946 0 0 East/West
Right 0 29 12 0
Total 688 975 40 0
Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Willow Street G Street * Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 1 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,663 40
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Minor Street Higher Volume Approach - VPH
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014 150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario Existing Plus Project Minor Street G Street Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 14 0 28 0 X North/South
Through 674 946 0 0 East/West
Right 0 29 12 0
Total 688 975 40 0
Intersection Geometry
1 3
0 Approach with Worst Case Delay 0
#N/A
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing Plus Project #N/A 40 1,703
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 650
Condition Satisfied? #N/A Not Met Met
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario 2035 Plus Project
Minor Street G Street Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 10 0 30 0 X North/South
Through 823 536 0 0 East/West
Right 0 18 14 0
Total 833 554 44 0
Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Willow Street G Street * Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 1 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,387 44
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Minor Street Higher Volume Approach - VPH
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014 150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario 2035 Plus Project
Minor Street G Street Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 10 0 30 0 X North/South
Through 823 536 0 0 East/West
Right 0 18 14 0
Total 833 554 44 0
Intersection Geometry
1 3
47 Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
44 Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
2035 Plus Project 0.6 44 1,431
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 650
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario 2035 Plus Project
Minor Street G Street Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 14 0 28 0 X North/South
Through 649 900 0 0 East/West
Right 0 29 12 0
Total 663 929 40 0
Major Street Minor Street Warrant Met Willow Street G Street * Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 1 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,592 40
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Minor Street Higher Volume Approach - VPH
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH) Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014 150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project FMC Willow & Grand Park
Major Street Willow Street Scenario 2035 Plus Project
Minor Street G Street Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 14 0 28 0 X North/South
Through 649 900 0 0 East/West
Right 0 29 12 0
Total 663 929 40 0
Intersection Geometry
1 3
25 Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
40 Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
2035 Plus Project 0.3 40 1,632
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 650
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
RESOLUTION NO. 10, 184
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWARK
ESTABLISHING AFFORDABLE UNITS NEEDED TO FULLY MITIGATE
THE IMPACT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE NEED FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND HOUSING IMPACT FEES FOR
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2010, the City Council of the City of Newark adopted the Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with State law, which includes the goal of encouraging the provision of a range of housing opportunities to meet the City' s share of the regional housing need and, to implement that goal, includes Program 8 to review the City's affordable housing ordinance and consider amendments to respond to market conditions; and WHEREAS, to implement the affordable housing goals and programs of the City's Housing Element, including Program 8 in the City's 2007 -2014 Housing Element, the City Council has considered and introduced on this same date an ordinance to repeal the City' s existing affordable housing ordinance ( Chapter 17. 18 of the Newark Municipal Code) and add a new Chapter 17. 18 ( the " Affordable Housing Ordinance ") which, among other things: 1) authorizes the imposition of housing impact fees on residential developments to mitigate the impact of such developments on the need for affordable housing in the City; and 2) continues to authorize the imposition of housing impact fees for nonresidential developments to mitigate the impact of such projects on the need for affordable housing in the City; and WHEREAS, land prices are a key factor preventing development of new affordable housing. New housing construction in the City which does not include affordable units aggravates the existing shortage of affordable housing by absorbing the supply of available residential land. This reduces the supply of land for affordable housing and increases the price of remaining residential land. At the same time, new market -rate housing contributes to the demand for goods and services, increasing local employment at very low, low, and moderate - income wage levels, which will increase the demand for and exacerbate the shortage of housing available to persons at those income levels; and
WHEREAS, to further implement the affordable housing goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the City' s 2010 Housing Element and to ensure that the housing impact fees adopted by this resolution do not exceed the actual affordable housing impacts attributable to the development projects on which the fees are imposed, the City Council has considered the Residential Nexus Analysis, Newark, California" dated March 2014 and prepared by Keyser - Marston Associates, Inc. ( the " Nexus Study "), which study demonstrates that, to fully mitigate the burdens created by new market -rate units in residential projects on the need for very low, low, and moderate - income housing, a housing impact fee of $23. 80 to $ 35. 60 per square foot of new market rate development would be needed, or from 12 percent to 21 percent of units in each residential development would need to be affordable to very low, low, and moderate - income households; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to repeal the Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fee and to adopt housing impact fees for residential developments as authorized by Section
17. 18. 030( B) of the Affordable Housing Ordinance, which housing impact fees do not exceed the justified fees needed to mitigate the actual affordable housing impacts attributable to the developments on which the fees are imposed, and which fees are lower than the amount found by the Nexus Study to be needed to fully mitigate the burdens created by new market -rate units in residential projects on the need for affordable housing to ensure that residential projects remain economically feasible; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also desires to adopt the percentage of affordable units needed to fully mitigate the impact of residential developments on the need for affordable housing, as authorized by Section 17. 18. 060(A) of the Affordable Housing Ordinance; and WHEREAS, in compliance with the Affordable Housing Ordinance, all housing impact fees collected shall be deposited into the City' s affordable housing fund to be used solely to increase and preserve the supply of housing affordable to households of very low, low, and moderate incomes ( including necessary administrative costs); and WHEREAS, at least ten days prior to the date this resolution is being heard, data was made available to the public indicating the amount of cost, or estimated cost, required to provide the service for which the fee or service charge is levied and the revenue sources anticipated to provide the service, including general fund revenues in accordance with Government Code Section 66019; and
WHEREAS, at least fourteen days prior to the date this resolution is being heard, notice was provided to those persons or organizations who had requested notice of these fees, in accordance with Government Code Section 66019; and
WHEREAS, notice of the hearing on the proposed fees was published twice in the manner set forth in section 6062a as required by Government Code Section 66018; and WHEREAS, a duly and properly noticed public hearing was conducted by the City Council on April 10, 2014.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newark, California, as follows:
1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated by this reference.
2. Repeal of Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fees. The City Council hereby repeals and removes the Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fee established by Resolution No. 8802 and amended by Resolution No. 9398.
3. Adoption of Residential Housing Impact Fees. The City Council hereby adopts housing impact fees for residential development as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.
Resolution No. 10, 184
4. Annual Adjustment to Housing Impact Fees. The City Council may review housing impact fees from time to time. For any annual period during which the City Council does not review the housing impact fee, fee amounts shall be adjusted once by the community development director based on the percentage increase in the Engineering News - Record Construction Cost Index for San Francisco, California.
5. Percentage of Affordable Units Needed to Fully Mitigate Impacts of Residential Development. The City Council hereby determines that the following percentages of affordable units will fully mitigate the impacts of residential development on the need for affordable housing:
Required Affordable
Units*
Single
Family
Large Lot
Single
Family
Small Lot
Townhome Condo Apartment
Very Low Income 11% 10% 8% 9% 6%
Low Income 5% 5% 4% 4 % 3%
Moderate Income 5% 4% 4% 4% 3%
TOTAL 21% 19% 16% 17% 12%
Definitions of project types and affordability categories are contained in the Nexus Study.
Notwithstanding the above, for a specific residential development, the City Council may determine that an alternative distribution of affordable units will fully mitigate the impacts of that development on the need for affordable housing, based on community needs and the characteristics of the development.
6. California Environmental Ouality Act. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of this resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the fees may have a significant effect on the environment, in that this resolution contains no provisions modifying the physical design, development, or construction of residences or nonresidential structures ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15061( b)( 3)).
7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall go into full force and effect on June 9, 2014, [ 60 days after adoption] but only if Ordinance No. 473 to add the new Affordable Housing Ordinance is effective prior to that date.
Resolution No. 10, 184 3
I HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newark held on April 10, 2014, by Council Member Freitas, who moved its adoption and passage, which motion was carried after being duly seconded, and passed by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Freitas, Marshall, Vice Mayor Apodaca and Mayor Nagy
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Collazo
SECONDED: Council Member Marshall
Y v.
s i i
Resolution No. 10, 184 4
APPROVED:
s /ALAN L.
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
Enterprise Fund Account Description Fee
Cost Center No. in dollars)
A. DEVELOPMENT, Continued
401 -0000 3860 4. Housing
ILF
a. Residential Housing Impact Fee* ( revised
annually)
First 1, 000 sq. ft, floor 20 /square foot
area/ unit **
All sq. ft. over 1, 000 sq. floor 8 /square foot
area/ unit
Established by Resolution No. 10, 184. Floor area
for a residential development equals the sum of the
horizontal floor areas of a building measured from
the exterior face of exterior walls or from the center
line of a wall separating two buildings, excluding
garages, carports, and common areas.
No housing impact fee is charged for the first 200
sq. ft. of floor area for additions to existing
dwellings.
b. Non - Residential Housing Impact Fee * ** ( revised
annually)
1) Commercial 3. 51 /square foot
2) Industrial 0.65 /square foot
Established by Resolution No. 8802. Floor area
for a commercial development equals the sum of
the horizontal floor areas of a building measured
from the exterior face of exterior walls or from the
center line of a wall separating two buildings.
Where no walls exist, the floor area is the area
covered by the roof excluding two feet on each side
Resolution No. 10, 184
of the structure. Outside areas used for sales or
display ( such as nurseries, building materials, auto
sales, etc.) may be considered part of floor area
when the community development director
determines that the use of the outside area
significantly contributes to the employee density of
the building.
NOTE: This resolution does not modify the non - residential housing impact fee nor the method of calculating the non - residential housing impact fee. The method for calculating the fee is identical to that previously contained in Section 17. 18. 020( G).
Resolution No. 10, 184
Item H. 1.
DATE 07/23/2026
TO Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM Neetu Salwan, City Clerk
SUBJECT Appoint Delegate/Alternates to the 2026 League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the California Cities Annual Conference and Expo. This year's event will be held September 23 - 25, 2026 at the Anaheim Convention Center. On Friday, September 25, there is a General Assembly meeting comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city.
The appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing the City and voting on resolutions that impact the League of California Cities policy and potential bylaw amendments. A copy of the voting delegate process is attached.
Council Member Grindall has advised that he will attend the Conference and requested to serve as the City's voting delegate. A vote is required to appoint Council Member Grindall as the CIty's voting delegate and up to two alternate delegates may be selected.
Funds to attend the annual League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo are included in the City’s operating budget.
Attachments
2026 Voting Delegate Packet
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: Wednesday, May 13, 2026
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Sept. 23-25, 2026 Anaheim Convention Center
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.
Taking place on Friday, Sept. 25, 2026 the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.
To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.
Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.
Following council action, please submit your city’s delegates through the online submission portal by Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2026. When completing the Voting Delegate submission form, you will be asked to attest that council action was taken. You will need to be signed in to your My Cal Cities account when submitting the form.
Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide pre-conference communications with voting delegates.
Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration opens June 2.
For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and Council Action Advised by September 1, 2026
alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.
Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.
Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.
Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.
The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the Anaheim Convention Center, will be open at the following times: Wednesday, Sept. 23, 8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Sept. 24, 7:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. On Friday, Sept. 25, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.
The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.
Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.
Once again, thank you for submitting your voting delegate and alternates by Tuesday, Sept. 1. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].
Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly 1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines
1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.
2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.
3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.
4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.
5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.
6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.
7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.
Sixty days before the
Annual Conference
and Expo, Cal Cities
members may submit
policy proposals on
issues of importance
to cities. The resolution must
have the concurrence of at least
five additional member cities or
individual members.
How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure Cal Cities represents cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities’ advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policies that erode local control.
The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how resolutions and the General Assembly work.
The petitioned
resolution is an
alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during
the annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of
member cities, and submitted to
the Cal Cities President at least
24 hours before the beginning
of the General Assembly.
Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities
President assigns
general resolutions
to policy committees
where members
review, debate, and recommend
positions for each policy proposal.
Recommendations are forwarded
to the Resolutions Committee.
Who’s who
The Resolutions Committee
includes representatives
from each Cal Cities
diversity caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, and policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.
Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.
The General Assembly is a
meeting of the collective
body of all voting
delegates —one from
every member city.
Seven policy committees
meet throughout the year
to review and recommend
positions to take on bills
and regulatory proposals.
Policy committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division, and
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.
During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions
Committee. Potential Cal Cities bylaws
amendments are also considered at this meeting.
Cal Cities policy
development is a memberinformed process,
grounded in the voices and
experiences of city officials
throughout the state.
For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions
Committee considers
all resolutions. General
Resolutions approved1 by
either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee are next
considered by the General Assembly.
General resolutions not approved, or
referred for further study by both a
policy committee and the Resolutions
Committee do not go to the General
Assembly. All Petitioned Resolutions
are considered by the General
Assembly, unless disqualified.2
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f).