Oakley City Council
March 12, 2024

Bioretention facility in El Cerrito with active
and passive recreational uses.
1022
 WK(GLWLRQ³0$<
A series of planters is a more robust solution and is required for steeper slopes.
6ROXWLRQV IRU VXUIDFH VWRUDJH Placing a steep-sided depression in an urban landscape poses aesthetic challenges as well as practical challenges. First, use sheet flow, valley gutters, and trench drains, instead of pipes, to move runoff to the bioretention facility, so that inlets can be at or near ground level.

To further avoid the effects of high and steep drop offs, consider:
ƒ Increasing the facility area and reducing the surface depth accordingly.
ƒ Incorporating steps down into the facility.
ƒ Specifying taller, woody plants to block or discourage entry.

Mulch can be mounded a few inches deeper at walkway edges to transition to the top of soil elevation.
9DXOWV XWLOLW\ ER[HV EDFNIORZ SUHYHQWHUV DQG OLJKW VWDQGDUGV Utility features and structures must be located outside the bioretention facility—in adjacent walkways or in a separate area set aside for this purpose.
(PHUJHQF\RYHUIORZ The site grading plan should anticipate extreme events and potential clogging of the overflow, and should route emergency overflows safely.

Key check dams into bottom and side slopes.

Concrete check dams are a better solution on steeper slopes. 1023
WK(GLWLRQ³0$< 
7UHHV Bioretention areas can accommodate small
or large trees within the minimum areas and
volumes calculated by Equation 3-3. Tree canopies
intercept rain, and tree roots maintain soil
permeability and help retain runoff. Normal
maintenance of a bioretention facility should not
affect tree lifespan.

Consider the following when designing
bioretention facilities to accommodate trees,
especially large trees:
ƒ The bioretention facility requires 18" of soil
mix over the minimum surface area. Trees
can be planted in this soil mix; the area
occupied by the tree counts toward the
minimum area requirement.
ƒ Trees require sufficient rooting volume to
thrive. Structural soils can be used below or
around the soil mix.
ƒ Most tree roots extend horizontally near
the soil surface.
ƒ The bioretention soil mix has low
moisture-holding capacity. Consider
planning for tree roots to access native clay
soils through the side walls as the tree
grows. However, where needed, adjacent
paving or structures can be protected with
a root barrier.
ƒ A podium of native soil is sometimes
constructed so that the root ball can be
installed at the correct elevation (so that
bioretention soil mix and mulch do not
cover the tree’s root collar).
ƒ Large trees should be spaced appropriately for their
size at maturity.
ƒ Trees may need to be staked for longer because the
bioretention soil mix provides little structural
support against trees being toppled by wind.

Bioretention facility configured as a tree well.

Larger bioretention facility with trees.

Structural soil
Sand/compost mix Underdrain
1024
 WK(GLWLRQ³0$<
&ULWHULDIRU%LRUHWHQWLRQ
ˆ Bioretention facilities are located in a visible, well-trafficked area where possible.
ˆ Top of soil elevation is as high as possible. High walls and steep slopes adjacent to the facility are avoided.
ˆ Location and footprint of facility are congruent on site plan, landscaping plan, and grading plan.
ˆ Bioretention area is designed as a basin (level edges) or a series of basins, and grading plan is consistent with these elevations. Check dams, if any, are set so the lip or weir of each dam is at least as high as the toe of the next upstream dam.
ˆ Volume or depth of surface reservoir meets or exceeds minimum.

Freeboard above overflow (1"-2" recommended) is not included in surface reservoir volume.
ˆ 18" depth specified soil mix (reference Guidebook Appendix B). ˆ Area of soil mix meets or exceeds minimum.
ˆ Perforated pipe (PVC SDR 35 or approved equivalent) underdrain with discharge elevation at the top of the “Class 2 perm” layer. Holes facing downward. Connection and sufficient head to storm drain or approved discharge point.
ˆ No filter fabric.
ˆ Underdrain has a clean-out port consisting of a vertical, rigid, nonperforated PVC pipe, with a minimum diameter of 4 inches and a watertight cap.
ˆ Curb inlets are 12" wide, have 4"-6" reveal and an apron or other provision to prevent blockage when vegetation grows in, and energy dissipation as needed.
ˆ Overflow catch basin or manhole connected to a downstream storm drain or approved discharge point.
ˆ Emergency spillage will be safely conveyed overland.
ˆ Plantings are suitable to the climate, exposure, and a well-drained soil, and occasional inundation during large storm events.
ˆ Irrigation system with connection to water supply, on a separate zone.

See Appendix B.
ˆ Vaults, utility boxes, backflow preventers, and light standards are located outside the minimum soil mix surface area.

For treatment-and-flow-control facilities only
ˆ Volume of surface storage meets or exceeds minimum (V1). ˆ Volume of subsurface storage meets or exceeds minimum (V2). ˆ In “C” and “D” native soils, underdrain is connected to discharge through an appropriately sized orifice or other flow-limiting device. 1025
WK(GLWLRQ³0$<  
Notes: ƒ No liner, no filter fabric, no landscape cloth. ƒ Maintain BGL. TGL, TSL throughout facility area at elevations to be specified on drawing. ƒ Class 2 perm layer may extend below and underneath drop inlet. ƒ Elevation of perforated pipe underdrain is atop gravel layer. ƒ See Appendix B for soil mix specification, planting and irrigation guidance. ƒ See Chapter 3 for factors and equations used to calculate V1 V2 and orifice diameter. %LRUHWHQWLRQ)DFLOLW\
Cross-section
Not to Scale
Curb cut, or drop inlet if needed to ensure runoff capture ȩPLQ6'5RUHTXLYDOHQWsweep bend and cleanout min. ȩDERYHRYHUIORZ 0LQȩponding or as required to achieve V1
Concrete drop inlet or manhole with frame. Atrium or beehive grate preferred; ôȩRSHQLQJV Walls establish consistent rimelevation around perimeter Male threaded pipe end with cap center-drilled to specified orifice diameter (Omit cap for treatment-only) To storm drain or approved discharge point
Schedule 80 (no perforations) Seal penetration with grout. Native soil, no compaction. Rip to loosen.
ȩPLQ6'5RUequivalent, perforations facing down. Lay groove in top of gravel.

Specified soil mix
ȩPD[PXOFKLIspecified
Large diameter closed pipes or arches may augment storage to achieve V2 Vertical moisture barrier if needed to protect pavement or structures Top of Soil Layer TSL
Top of Gravel Layer TGL
Bottom of Gravel Layer BGL
0LQLPXPȩ
0LQLPXPȩRUDV
needed to achieve V2
Freeboard if neededto manage overflows
Class 2 permeable. Assume 40% porosity for calculation of V2 1026
 0$<
%LRUHWHQWLRQ)DFLOLW\
Plan
Not to Scale
Locate overflow for accessibility; does not need to be opposite from outlet $ = surface area of sand/compost mix that will flood before facility overflows 6' spacing of underdrain pipes is typically adequate
Separate facility from adjacent
landscaping with curb Multiple
inlet locations OK. Use cobbles or splash block.

OK to slope sand/compost mix against curb to reduce drop-off. And/or use plants to discourage entry.

Use curb inlets if slope along curb is greater than slope of gutter pan. 1027
The typical dry well is a prefabricated structure, such as an open-bottomed vault or box, placed in an excavation or
boring. The vault may be empty, which provides maximum
space efficiency, or may be filled with rock.

An infiltration basin has the same functional components—a volume to store runoff and sufficient area to infiltrate that volume into the native soil—but is open rather than covered.

Dry wells and infiltration basins must be designed with the minimum volume and infiltrative area calculated by Equation 3-3 using the sizing factors in Table 3-6.

Consult with the local municipal engineer regarding the need to verify soil permeability and other site conditions are suitable for dry wells and infiltration basins. Some proposed criteria are on Page 5-12 of Caltrans’ 2004 BMP Retrofit Pilot Study Final Report (CTSW-RT-01-050).

Dry wells should be sited to facilitate maintenance and allow for the potential future need for removal and replacement.

In locations where native soils are coarser than a medium sand, the area directly beneath the facility should be over-excavated by two feet and backfilled with sand as a groundwater
protection measure.

Projects on sites with
permeable soils
Compact footprint
Can be installed in
paved areas
Can be used only on
sites with Group “A”
or Group “B” soils
Requires minimum
of 10' from bottom
of facility to seasonal
high groundwater
Not suitable for
drainage from some
industrial areas or
arterial roads
Must be maintained
to prevent clogging.

Typically not as
aesthetically pleasing
as bioretention
facilities
Stormwater C.3
Guidebook
www.cccleanwater.org
1028
Volume (V) and infiltrative area (A) meet or exceed minimum.

Emergency spillage will be safely conveyed overland.

Depth from bottom of the facility to seasonally high groundwater Areas tributary to the facility do not include automotive repair shops; areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or greater average daily traffic on main roadway or 15,000 or more average daily traffic on intersecting roadway), car washes; fleet storage areas (bus, truck, etc.); nurseries, or other uses that may present an exceptional threat to groundwater quality.

Underlying soils are in Hydrologic Soil Group A or B. Infiltration rate is sufficient to ensure a full basin will drain completely within 72 hours. Soil infiltration rate has been confirmed.
10' setback from structures or as recommended by structural or geotechnical engineer
Grate or hatch
for maintenance access Sheet flow or
piped inflow
Vault with open
bottom
1029

ATTACHMENT B
1030
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Contra Costa
County, California Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
September 13, 20221031
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 1032
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 1033
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Contra Costa County, California..................................................................... 13 DaC—Delhi sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes.....................................................13 References............................................................................................................15 4 1034
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 1035
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 1036
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 1037
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 1038
9 Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4206340 4206370 4206400 4206430 4206460 4206490 4206520 4206550 4206340 4206370 4206400 4206430 4206460 4206490 4206520 4206550 611040 611070 611100 611130 611160 611190 611220 611250 611280 611310 611340 611370 611040 611070 611100 611130 611160 611190 611220 611250 611280 611310 611340 611370 37° 59' 59'' N
121° 44' 7'' W
37° 59' 59'' N
121° 43' 53'' W
37° 59' 52'' N
121° 44' 7'' W
37° 59' 52'' N
121° 43' 53'' W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 20 40 80 120
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,580 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
1039

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Contra Costa County, California
Survey Area Data: Version 18, Sep 9, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 23, 2022—Apr 24, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
10 1040
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI DaC Delhi sand, 2 to 9 percent
slopes

9.1 100.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 9.1 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Custom Soil Resource Report
11 1041
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 1042
Contra Costa County, California
DaC—Delhi sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: h98s
Elevation: 10 to 150 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 degrees F
Frost-free period: 260 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition
Delhi and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Delhi
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, terraces, flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Eolian deposits derived from igneous and sedimentary rock Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 5 inches: sand
H2 - 5 to 60 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 12 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 1043
Laugenour
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 1044
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 15 1045
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
16 1046

ATTACHMENT C
1047
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
43 41
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
65 64
63 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 OAKLEY ROAD
42 44 A STREET

B STREET

G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET

PARCEL A

PARCEL B

PARCEL C

PARCEL D

PARCEL E PARCEL F

PARCEL D

MAIN STREET
DMA 1A
118,202 SF
DMA 3A 156,910 SF
DMA 3B 6,991 SF
IMP 2
3,294 SF
DMA 10A
1,024 SF
DMA 10B
5,348 SF DMA 11B
11,009 SF DMA 12B
12,534 SF
DMA 11A
2,200 SF DMA 12A
1,781 SF
DMA 1B
11,211 SF
IMP 1
2,748 SF
IMP 3
3,556 SF
DMA 2A 81,299 SF
DMA 2B 10,014 SF
DMA 4
6,343 SF
IMP 10
1,023 SF
IMP 11
2,045 SF
IMP 12
1,644 SF
1048
Appendix J
Traffic Study
1049
CALIFORNIA | FLORIDA | TEXAS
Corporate Office 4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550, Pleasanton, CA 94588 925.463.0611 www.TJKM.com 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Introduction
This memorandum summarizes the results of the Traffic Analysis for the proposed residential development located at 2092 Oakley Road in the City of Oakley. The proposed project would demolish an existing single-family home at 2092 Oakley Road and construct an 83-dwelling unit single-family development. The project is located on the north side of Oakley Road, east of Empire Avenue. Direct access to the project site is proposed to be provided via an existing driveway on the north side of Oakley Road. Surrounding land uses include single-family detached homes, a mobile home neighborhood, and a retail center. Figure 1 displays the vicinity map. Figure 2 includes the proposed site plan for the project, dated September 14, 2022.

The purpose of this study is to identify the potential transportation impacts related to the proposed development. The evaluation of potential project traffic impacts follow the standards and methodologies set forth by Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, adopted by the City of Oakley in October 2018. As per the Guidelines, the project does not require a full Transportation Impact Study (TIS), however, analysis of site access, on-site parking and circulation, parking supply, sight distance, and project generated vehicle miles travelled are required to ensure the project does not impact traffic on the surrounding area.

Date: November 1, 2022
To: Dan Cosgrove, [email protected]
From: Chris Kinzel, TJKM
Subject: Traffic Study for 2092 Oakley Road in Oakley, CA 1050
Study Intersection Project Entrance Project Site
1 2
x
N
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
270-046
LEGEND
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
Live Oak Ave
Main St
Main St
Carol Ln
Big Break
Regional
Shoreline
Holly Creek
Park
Oakley
Park
Vintage Parkway
Elementary School
W Cypress Rd
El Monte Dr
Bedford Ln
Vintage Pkwy
Ho
Gamay Dr
lly Dr
Sauterne Way
Canopy Ln
TJKM
1051
N
Figure 2: Site Plan
270-046
TJKM
1052

4 Existing Setting
This section describes the existing conditions of the transportation system within the study area of the project. It describes the transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project site, including the roadway network, transit service, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM
Important roadways adjacent to the project site are discussed below:

Main Street is an east-west, divided, four-lane major arterial in the vicinity of the project site. The roadway extends between State Route 160 in the west and Delta Road to the southeast. Main Street provides access to several roadways and land uses through the City of Oakley. In the project vicinity, Main Street provides continuous sidewalks on both sides, with crosswalks across all approaches at signalized intersections. The crosswalks feature pedestrian push buttons with countdown signal heads, and ADA-compliant curb ramps. Class II be lanes currently exist along Main Street, in the project vicinity. Street lighting is provided via overhead street lights on the both sides of the roadway. The posted speed limit on Main Street is 40 miles per hour (mph) within the vicinity of the project.

Empire Avenue is a north-south, divided, four-lane major arterial in the vicinity of the project site.

Empire Avenue currently extends south from Main Street in the north to its termination at Shady Willow Lane to the south. Empire Avenue provides access to residential roadways and a retail center in the project vicinity. Empire Avenue features a continuous sidewalks on both sides, with signalized crosswalks in the immediate project vicinity. A Class III bike route exists on both sides of the roadway, south of Oakley Road. Street lighting is provided via overhead street lights along the east side of the roadway. The posted speed limit on Empire Avenue is 40 mph within the vicinity of the project.

Oakley Road is an east-west, divided, two- to four-lane street in the vicinity of the project site. Oakley Road is classified as a major arterial between Empire Avenue and Live Oak Avenue, and a minor arterial between Live Oak Avenue and Neroly Road. Oakley Road extends from the City Limits and beyond on the west to Empire Avenue to the east. It provides access to single family residences in the project vicinity. The roadway features continuous sidewalks on the south side between Empire Avenue and 225 feet west of Kenwood Circle but with a gap on the north side along the project frontage. There are no bicycle facilities along the roadway. Street lighting is provided via overhead street lights along both sides of the roadway. Oakley Road provides direct access to the project site via one full access driveway on the north side, near the intersection of Oakley Road and Canopy Lane. The posted speed limit on Oakley Road is 35 mph.

EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Walkability is defined as the ability to travel easily and safely between various origins and destinations without having to rely on automobiles or other motorized travel. The ideal “walkable” community includes wide sidewalks, a mix of land uses such as residential, employment, and shopping 1053

5 opportunities, a limited number of conflict points with vehicle traffic, and easy access to transit facilities and services.

Pedestrian facilities include crosswalks, sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and off-street paths, which provide safe and convenient routes for pedestrians to access the destinations such as institutions, businesses, public transportation, and recreation facilities.

In the project vicinity, sidewalks exist on both sides of Main Street and Empire Avenue, and on the south side of Oakley Road. Curb ramps exist along the sidewalks, and crosswalks are present at signalized intersections in the immediate project vicinity.

EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES
Bicycle facilities include the following:
 Multi-use Path (Class I) – Off-street two-way bikeways physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and used by people bicycling, walking and other non-motorized users.  Separated Bike Lanes (Class IV) – Dedicated, on-street bikeway physically distinct from the sidewalk and separated from motor vehicle traffic by a physical object like a curb, post, or parking.
 Bike Lanes (Class II) – Dedicated, on-street space for bicyclists delineated with painted pavement stripes and symbols. May also have striped buffers between bicycles and automobile travel lanes.
 Bike Routes (Class III) – Designated roadways for bicycle use by signs or other markings which may or may not include additional pavement width for cyclists.  Bike Boulevard (Class III) – Bike routes on calmer streets that are enhanced with traffic calming features.

Class II bike lanes exist along Main Street, between Big Break Road and Vintage Parkway, and along Oakley Road, between Empire Avenue and Kelsey Lane. A Class III bike route exists along Empire Avenue, between Oakley Road and Laurel Road.

The City of Oakley General Plan Update 2021 illustrates existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the City. Class II bike lanes are proposed on Oakley Road and Empire Avenue. A Class IV separated bikeway is proposed along Main Street, in the project vicinity.

EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES
Tri Delta Transit operates bus service services in the City of Oakley and surrounding East Contra Costa County. The closest transit stops to the proposed project site are located at the Main Street and Empire Avenue intersection, located 0.4 miles from the project site. These stops are served by Tri Delta Transit local bus routes 300X, 383 and 391. Table 1 describes weekday and weekend services and frequencies for the local bus routes. Figure 3 illustrates the existing transit service map in the project area. 1054

6 Table 1: Existing Transit Services
Route From To
Weekdays
Operating Hours Headway (minutes)
300X Brentwood Park & Ride Antioch BART 3:59 a.m. – 9:57 p.m. 15-45 383 Adams Lane/O’Hara Ave Wilbur Ave/ Cavallo
Rd 5:04 a.m. – 6:45 p.m. 45-90
391 Pittsburg Center BART Brentwood Park &
Ride 4:06 a.m.-1:28 a.m. 30-74
Source: trideltatransit.com

1055
N
Figure 3: Transit Service Map
270-046
1056 TJKM

8 Local Transportation Analysis
The following analysis details trip generation, distribution, intersection level of service, field observations, project site circulation and access, transit access, and bicycle and pedestrian access.

EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
TJKM evaluated the existing operations of the study intersections for the highest one-hour volumes during weekday morning and evening peak periods. Turning movement counts for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians reflect the weekday a.m. peak period (7:00-9:00 a.m.) and p.m. peak period (4:00-6:00 p.m.) at the study intersections in the most recently approved Oakley Citywide Model (2019). Figure 4 illustrates the existing lane geometry, and traffic controls at the study intersections. Figure 5 illustrates the existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour vehicle turning movement volumes at the study intersections.

Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions Under Existing Conditions, intersections were analyzed based on lane geometries and traffic controls provided by the Existing Conditions scenario of the Citywide Traffic Model and observed in the field.

Table 2 summarizes peak hour levels of service at the study intersections under Existing Conditions.

Under this scenario, both study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Detailed LOS worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix A.

Table 2: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions # Study Intersections Control Peak
Hour¹
Existing Conditions
V/C2 Average
Delay3 LOS4
1 Main St/Empire Ave Signal
AM 0.49 36.3 D
PM 0.50 26.4 C
2 Empire Ave/Oakley Rd Signal
AM 0.29 22.9 C
PM 0.30 29.6 C
Notes:
1 AM – morning peak hour; PM – evening peak hour.
2 V/C – Volume-to capacity ratio.
3 Delay: Average control delay in seconds per vehicle, reported values are overall for signalized and all-way-stop-control intersections; and critical minor approaches for one- and two-way stop-control intersections. 4 LOS: Level of Service.
1057
Traffic Signal
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
Figure 4: Existing Lane Patterns and Traffic Control
270-046
LEGEND
TJKM
1058
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
253 (255)
25 (36)
256 (129)
25 (15)33 (16)13 (10)
19 (327)
487 (867)
189 (61)
24 (186)
479 (394)
244 (11)
93 (68)
276 (333)
10 (13)
61 (61)314 (305)33 (108)
34 (76)
15 (37)
22 (69)
40 (55)
10 (23)
67 (88)
Figure 5: Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
270-046
LEGEND
TJKM XX AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume 1059

11 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ANALYSIS

PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
TJKM developed estimated project trip generation for the proposed project based on published trip generation rates from the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). TJKM used published trip rates for the ITE land use Single-Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) for both the proposed and existing land uses. Additionally, Table 3 shows the expected trips generated by the proposed project. The proposed project is expected to generate a total of 774 net new daily trips, 57 weekday a.m. peak hour trips (15 inbound, 42 outbound) and 77 weekday p.m. peak hour trips (48 inbound trips, 29 outbound trips).

Vehicle Trip Distribution
The distribution of peak-hour vehicle trips generated by the project was determined based on the methodology used for the Citywide Traffic Model (2019). Based on that methodology, trip distribution for residential developments are as follows: 45 percent of peak-hour trips are to/from origins and designations west of Oakley via SR 4; 15 percent are to/from origins and destinations south/east of Oakley via SR 4; 20 percent are to/from other destinations near Oakley via other routes; and 20 percent are internal to Oakley.

Figure 6 illustrates the trip distribution and assignment for the proposed project. 1060
12 Table 3: Project Trip Generation
Trip Generation for a Housing Development on Honey Lane, Oakley, CA Size2 Daily Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak
Rate Trips Rate In:Out % In Out Total Rate In:Out % In Out Total Proposed Land Use Single-Family Detached (ITE Code 210)1 83 DU 9.43 783 0.70 26:74 15 43 58 0.94 63:37 49 29 78 Existing Land Use Single-Family Detached (ITE Code 210)1 1 DU 9.43 9 0.70 26:74 0 1 1 0.94 63:37 1 0 1 Total Net Trips 774 15 42 57 48 29 77
Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. Notes: 1Single-Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) vehicle trip rates are based upon number of dwelling units. 2DU – dwelling units . 1061
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
15 (11)
10 (7)
3 (11)
6 (18)
5 (17)
9 (29)
1 (2)
25 (18)
15 (10)
5%
37%
23%
35%
XX%
1 2
Figure 6: Trip Distribution & Assignment
270-046
LEGEND
TJKM
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
Live Oak Ave
Main St
Main St
Carol Ln
Big Break
Regional
Shoreline
Holly Creek
Park
Oakley
Park
Vintage Parkway
Elementary School
W Cypress Rd
El Monte Dr
Bedford Ln
Vintage Pkwy
Ho
Gamay Dr
lly Dr
Sauterne Way
Canopy Ln
XX AM Peak Hour Project Trips
(XX) PM Peak Hour Project Trips
Trip Distribution
1062

14 Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions Under Existing plus Project Conditions, intersections were analyzed based on lane geometries and traffic controls provided by the Existing Conditions scenario of the Citywide Traffic Model and observed in the field, except for Oakley Road, which will be expanded to four lanes (two lanes per direction) with the project completion. Under this scenario, the project driveway on the north side of Oakley Road was also analyzed as a study intersection. Figure 7 shows the peak hour volumes at each intersection under Existing plus Project Conditions. Table 4 summarizes peak hour levels of service at the study intersections under Existing Conditions.

Under this scenario, all study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Thus, the project impact to the study intersections are insignificant under Existing plus Project Conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix B.

Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions # Study
Intersections Control Peak Hour¹
Existing Conditions Existing plus Project
Conditions Significant
Impact
V/C2 Average (Y/N)
Delay3 LOS4 V/C2 Average Delay3 LOS4
1 Main St/Empire
Ave Signal
AM 0.49 36.3 D 0.51 37.7 D N
PM 0.50 26.4 C 0.51 27.2 C N
2 Empire
Ave/Oakley Rd Signal
AM 0.29 22.9 C 0.31 24.5 C N
PM 0.30 29.6 C 0.31 30.3 C N
3 Oakley
Rd/Project Dwy
One-Way
Stop
AM - - - 0.04 9.0 A N
PM - - - 0.05 9.1 A N
Notes:
1 AM – morning peak hour; PM – evening peak hour.
2 V/C – Volume-to capacity ratio.
3 Delay: Average control delay in seconds per vehicle, reported values are overall for signalized and all-way-stop-control intersections; and critical minor approaches for one- and two-way stop-control intersections. 4 LOS: Level of Service.
1063
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
268 (266)
25 (36)
166 (136)
25 (15)33 (16)13 (10)
19 (11)
487 (394)
192 (197)
24 (61)
479 (867)
250 (345)
98 (85)
276 (333)
10 (13)
70 (90)314 (305)33 (108)
34 (76)
15 (37)
22 (69)
66 (75)
10 (23)
82 (98)
Figure 7: Existing plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 270-046
LEGEND
TJKM XX AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume 1064

16 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
Using the calibrated and validated Citywide Traffic Model, additional traffic projected to be generated from approved developments was forecasted for Background Conditions. The Background Conditions scenario includes additional traffic that would be generated by various approved projects completed within the City of Oakley and redistribution of traffic due to the Laurel Road extension. The approved projects include the Acacia Residential, Emerson Ranch Commercial, and Burroughs/WestGate Ventures Residential projects previously completed by TJKM, along with the following projects approved by the City of Oakley:
 Wendy’s Restaurant at Bridgehead Rd/Main Street
 Diablo Water District Corporation Yard Office and Shopping Building  Oakley Village Residential Subdivision
Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Background Conditions Lane geometry under Background Conditions reflects the Citywide Traffic Model, with the expansion of Oakley Road to its ultimate four-lane standard. Figure 8 shows the forecasted volumes at each intersection under Background Conditions. Table 5 summarizes peak hour levels of service at the study intersections under Background Conditions without the proposed Project.

Under this scenario, both study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Detailed LOS worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C.

Table 5: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Background Conditions # Study Intersections Control Peak
Hour¹
Background Conditions
V/C2 Average
Delay3 LOS4
1 Main St/Empire Ave Signal
AM 0.64 44.9 D
PM 0.81 46.5 D
2 Empire Ave/Oakley Rd Signal
AM 0.33 22.6 C
PM 0.35 29.7 C
Notes:
1 AM – morning peak hour; PM – evening peak hour.
2 V/C – Volume-to capacity ratio.
3 Delay: Average control delay in seconds per vehicle, reported values are overall for signalized and all-way-stop-control intersections; and critical minor approaches for one- and two-way stop-control intersections. 4 LOS: Level of Service.
1065
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
272 (300)
25 (36)
211 (199)
25 (15)33 (16)13 (10)
19 (11)
1,106 (851)
234 (244)
24 (61)
738 (1,577)
278 (353)
98 (84)
338 (427)
10 (13)
67 (81)387 (370)33 (108)
34 (76)
15 (37)
22 (69)
52 (76)
10 (23)
69 (112)
Figure 8: Background Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 270-046
LEGEND
TJKM XX AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume 1066

18 Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Background plus Project Conditions Under Background plus Project Conditions, intersections were analyzed based on lane geometries and traffic controls provided by the Background Conditions scenario of the Citywide Traffic Model and observed in the field. Under this scenario, the project driveway on the north side of Oakley Road was also analyzed as a study intersection, and Oakley Road is considered at its ultimate four-lane standard.

Figure 9 shows the peak hour volumes at each intersection under Existing plus Project Conditions.

Table 6 summarizes peak hour levels of service at the study intersections under Existing Conditions.

Under this scenario, all study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Thus, the project impact to the study intersections are insignificant under Background plus Project Conditions. Detailed LOS worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix D.

Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Background plus Project Conditions # Study
Intersections Control Peak Hour¹
Background Conditions Background plus
Project Conditions Significant
Impact
V/C2 Average (Y/N)
Delay3 LOS4 V/C2 Average Delay3 LOS4
1 Main St/Empire
Ave Signal
AM 0.64 44.9 D 0.65 46.8 D N
PM 0.81 46.5 D 0.83 47.8 D N
2 Empire
Ave/Oakley Rd Signal
AM 0.33 22.6 C 0.35 24.8 C N
PM 0.35 29.7 C 0.37 30.8 C N
3 Oakley
Rd/Project Dwy
One-Way
Stop
AM - - - 0.04 9.0 A N
PM - - - 0.03 9.1 A N
Notes:
1 AM – morning peak hour; PM – evening peak hour.
2 V/C – Volume-to capacity ratio.
3 Delay: Average control delay in seconds per vehicle, reported values are overall for signalized and all-way-stop-control intersections; and critical minor approaches for one- and two-way stop-control intersections. 4 LOS: Level of Service.
1067
Intersection #1
Main St / Empire Ave
Intersection #2
Oakley Rd / Empire Ave
Main St
Empire Ave
Oakley Rd
Empire Ave
287 (311)
25 (36)
221 (206)
25 (15)33 (16)13 (10)
19 (11)
1,106 (851)
237 (255)
24 (61)
738 (1,577)
284 (371)
103 (101)338 (427)
10 (13)
76 (110)387 (370)33 (108)
34 (76)
15 (37)
22 (69)
78 (96)
10 (23)
84 (122)
Figure 9: Background plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 270-046
LEGEND
TJKM XX AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume 1068

20 Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Analysis
TJKM conducted a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis for the proposed housing project located at the 2092 Oakley Road in the City of Oakley. The project proposes to build 83 single family housing units in a residential subdivision west of Main Street.

The VMT Analysis was performed for this project in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Model. The Travel Analysis Zone (TAZ) for this project in the model is #30200. 83 single family dwelling units were added into the TAZ for the base year to see if the project creates significant VMT impacts.

Figure 10 illustrates the project TAZ and surrounding TAZs in the project area.

As this project is not screened out from VMT analysis, two full model runs were performed for this project in accordance to CCTA VMT methodology. The first one is a base year 2020 run to analyze existing VMT per capita numbers for the City of Oakley. The second run is a base year plus project 2020 run with the housing units added in to see if its impact on VMT is significant.

From the 2020 Base Year run, the home based VMT per capita for the City of Oakley is 26.76. For a project to not be significant, the 85% threshold is set at 0.85 x 26.76 which is 22.75. This value is the less stringent home-based VMT per capita number as mentioned in the CCTA VMT methodology guidelines.

The 2020 Base Year plus Project model run added 83 single family dwelling Units into TAZ #30267. The resultant home based VMT per capita for the project TAZ is 19.09.

Since 19.09 is lower than the threshold of 22.75 for Oakley City, the 2092 Oakley Road Residential Project is found to have an insignificant VMT impact.
1069
21 Figure 10: Traffic Analysis Zones in Project Study Area 30200
30201
30196
30199
30208
30209
1070

22 Additional Analysis

SITE ACCESS AND ON-SITE CIRCULATION
This section analyzes site access and internal circulation for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles. The following analysis is subject to change per the finalization of the site plan.

Vehicle Access
Per the site plan (Figure 2), vehicle access to the proposed residential development is provided via A Street. A Street provides right-in and right-out only access to and from the project site on the north side of Oakley Road, near the Oakley Road and Canopy Lane intersection. The project will widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. It will also add curb, gutters and a sidewalk. It should be noted the project should follow City of Oakley requirements for driveways. A Street also facilitates traffic into the project site to four internal roadways, which all accommodate two-way traffic. The internal roadways will not connect to the mobile home park streets on the north and west sides of the project site. Based on the evaluation, the existing and proposed roadways are expected to provide adequate project site access for passenger vehicles.

TJKM also considered the adequacy of on-site circulation for vehicles, garbage trucks and emergency vehicles. Garbage trucks will also access the project site via A Street, on the north side of Oakley Road.

Emergency vehicle access is provided via a paved driveway on the west side of Main Street, in the northwest area of the project site. The site plan does not provide roadway widths, however, all internal roadways will accommodate two-way traffic. TJKM recommends the project driveway (A Street), emergency access driveway, and the internal roadways accommodate turning radii for garbage and emergency vehicles, and City of Oakley standards. Additionally, all driveways providing access to the single family residences should comply with City of Oakley Guidelines for residential driveways. Overall, the proposed on-site vehicle circulation should not result in any significant operational issues on City streets.

Pedestrian Access
In the project vicinity, continuous sidewalks are present along both sides of Main Street and Empire Avenue, and along the south side of Oakley Road. Sidewalks facilitate pedestrian traffic to and from the project site and the surrounding retail and residential land uses, along with transit stops located on Main Street. The nearby intersections of Main Street/Empire Avenue and Oakley Road/Empire Avenue provide curb ramps and signalized crosswalks with pedestrian push buttons across all approach legs. Currently, adequate street lighting is continuously provided on the south side of Oakley Road along the project frontage. The project will provide a pedestrian access to Main Street near the northwest corner of the site.

The project proposes to provide sidewalks on the north side of Oakley Road, along the project frontage, and for a short segment on the west side of Main Street, along the project frontage. 1071

23 Additionally, the project proposes to provide internal sidewalks and pedestrian pathways, connecting pedestrians to the residences, parking and park areas, and to the sidewalk on Main Street. Crosswalks are proposed across A Street, at the A Street and Oakley Road intersection, and at two crossings across internal roadways, B Street and F Street.

An adverse effect to pedestrians occurs if the proposed project disrupts existing pedestrian facilities; or conflicts and/or creates inconsistencies with adopted pedestrian system plans, guidelines, and policies. TJKM recommends the project provides adequate curb ramps, which comply with City of Oakley standards, at all internal intersections and driveways. New sidewalks and curb ramps should comply with American Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, and should conform to the existing pedestrian network in the project vicinity. Per the site plan (Figure 2), the proposed sidewalks will not interrupt the traffic lanes on Oakley Road and Main Street, and thus, adverse impacts to existing and future planned pedestrian facilities are not expected.

Bicycle Access
In the project vicinity, Class II bike lanes exist along Main Street, and along the project frontage on Oakley Road, between Empire Avenue and Kelsey Lane. A Class III bike route exists along Empire Avenue, between Oakley Road and Laurel Road.

An adverse effect to bicyclists occurs if the proposed project disrupts existing bicycle facilities; or conflicts and/or creates inconsistencies with adopted bicycle system plans, guidelines, and policies.

The City of Oakley General Plan Update 2021 illustrates existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the City. The project does not propose bicycle facilities along surrounding roadways, thus adverse impacts to existing and future planned bicycle facilities are not expected.

Transit Access
The proposed project may add only a few trips to the existing transit services, which can be accommodated by the existing transit capacity. The nearest transit stops are located at the intersection of Main Street and Empire Avenue, approximately 0.4 miles north from the project site. The project proposes to provide sidewalks connecting the project site to Empire Avenue and Main Street, which will facilitate pedestrian traffic to the nearby transit stops. Thus, the project will not have an adverse effect on existing and future planned transit facilities in the immediate project vicinity. 1072

24 Conclusions
Project Trip Generation
The proposed project is expected to generate a total of 774 net new daily trips, 57 weekday a.m. peak hour trips (15 inbound, 42 outbound) and 77 weekday p.m. peak hour trips (48 inbound trips, 29 outbound trips).

Traffic Signal Impact
Traffic signals exist in the immediate vicinity of the project site, at the intersections of Main Street/Empire Avenue and Oakley Road/Empire Avenue. TJKM evaluated the intersections under Existing and Background traffic conditions, without and with the addition of project traffic. Under Existing and Background scenarios, the proposed project is not expected to significantly impact traffic conditions at the study intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.

Site Access and On-Site Circulation
Vehicles will access the project site via a right-in and right-out only driveway on the north side of Oakley Road, near the intersection of Oakley Road and Canopy Lane. The project will widen Oakley Road to its ultimate four lane standard along the project frontage. The existing and proposed roadways are expected to provide adequate project site access for passenger vehicles.

TJKM recommends the project driveway accommodates turning radii for garbage and emergency vehicles, and City of Oakley standards. Overall, the proposed on-site vehicle circulation should not result in any significant operational issues on City streets.

Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Adverse Effects
The project will add frontage sidewalks and a pedestrian and bicycle connection with Main Street and does not conflict with existing and future planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities. The proposed project will add very few trips to the existing transit facilities, which can be accommodated by the existing transit capacity and the transit stops at the Main Street and Empire Avenue intersection.

Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Analysis
Based on the 2020 Base Year plus Project model run, the home based VMT per capita for the project TAZ is 19.09, which is lower than the threshold of 22.75 for Oakley City. Thus, the 2092 Oakley Road residential project is found to have an insignificant VMT impact.

1073

25 APPENDIX A
Intersection Level of Service Worksheets – Existing Conditions

1074
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.495
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 36.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1075
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 347 34 214 21 54 41 212 547 21 31 622 317 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 87 9 53 5 14 10 53 137 5 8 156 79 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.6100 0.6100 0.6100 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 253 25 156 13 33 25 189 487 19 24 479 244 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 253 25 156 13 33 25 189 487 19 24 479 244 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1076
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 26 0 0 30 0 16 40 0 14 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 21 0 0 25 0 12 34 0 10 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1077
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 194.35 35.12 260.05 95.99 50.91 390.81 151.42 149.65 47.51 204.64 219.27 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.77 1.40 10.40 3.84 2.04 15.63 6.06 5.99 1.90 8.19 8.77 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 108.81 19.51 157.23 53.33 28.28 248.17 84.12 83.14 26.40 116.23 126.90 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.35 0.78 6.29 2.13 1.13 9.93 3.36 3.33 1.06 4.65 5.08 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes Lane Group LOS D D E D D F B B E B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 43.79 39.77 55.93 53.86 51.29 136.43 12.00 12.01 72.86 17.33 18.82 X, volume / capacity 0.63 0.12 0.86 0.70 0.44 1.09 0.26 0.26 0.76 0.35 0.40 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.46 0.06 10.88 3.02 1.23 87.43 0.59 0.60 19.40 0.55 1.51 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.04 0.45 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 43.33 39.71 45.05 50.84 50.06 49.00 11.41 11.41 53.45 16.79 17.31 c, Capacity [veh/h] 547 296 249 108 93 194 1086 1072 41 1774 792 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1574 1844 1589 1781 1870 1846 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.10 0.02 0.14 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.17 0.20 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.58 0.58 0.02 0.50 0.50 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 17 17 6 6 12 64 64 2 55 55 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1078
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 43.79 39.77 55.93 53.86 53.86 51.29 136.43 12.01 12.01 72.86 17.33 18.82 Movement LOS D D E D D D F B B E B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 47.93 52.95 45.83 19.59
Approach LOS D D D B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 36.33
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.495
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1062.58 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.719 2.006 2.737 2.877 Crosswalk LOS B B B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 375 462 622 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.33 32.53 26.12 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.541 1.751 2.203 2.360 Bicycle LOS B A B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1079
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.290
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 22.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1080
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 1 1 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 2 2 2 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 1 2 2
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 0 1
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 1 1 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 52 13 87 113 337 12 45 430 84 29 19 44 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 13 3 22 28 84 3 11 108 21 7 5 11 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 0.8200 0.8200 0.8200 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 40 10 67 93 276 10 33 314 61 22 15 34 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 40 10 67 93 276 10 33 314 61 22 15 34 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1081
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 16 0 19 44 0 16 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 11 0 15 38 0 12 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1082
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 37.74 38.11 108.60 141.97 63.50 63.03 60.20 120.64 115.68 61.91 57.28 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.51 1.52 4.34 5.68 2.54 2.52 2.41 4.83 4.63 2.48 2.29 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 20.97 21.17 60.34 78.87 35.28 35.02 33.44 67.02 64.27 34.39 31.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.84 0.85 2.41 3.15 1.41 1.40 1.34 2.68 2.57 1.38 1.27 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Lane Group LOS D D D D A A E A A D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 48.04 48.02 52.69 53.98 7.04 7.04 60.66 9.73 9.78 53.29 53.95 X, volume / capacity 0.24 0.23 0.73 0.81 0.14 0.14 0.77 0.23 0.23 0.55 0.58 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.32 0.31 3.13 4.12 0.24 0.24 7.86 0.46 0.49 2.05 2.65 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 47.72 47.71 49.56 49.86 6.80 6.80 52.80 9.27 9.29 51.23 51.30 c, Capacity [veh/h] 137 140 120 140 1244 1227 58 1158 1092 87 75 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1815 1554 1781 1870 1844 1781 1870 1764 1815 1579 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.03 0.62 0.62 0.05 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 8 8 9 73 73 4 68 68 5 5 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1083
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 48.04 48.02 52.69 53.98 7.04 7.04 60.66 9.75 9.78 53.29 53.29 53.95 Movement LOS D D D D A A E A A D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 50.70 18.52 13.85 53.61
Approach LOS D B B D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 22.88
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.290
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 1867.90 3721.41 6829.45 2599.84 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.247 2.573 2.680 1.978 Crosswalk LOS B B B A
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 198 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 44.66 23.84 25.84 29.09
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.810 1.941 2.021 1.711 Bicycle LOS A A B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1084
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.500
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 26.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1085
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 274 39 139 13 20 19 196 415 12 71 1008 380 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 69 10 35 3 5 5 49 104 3 18 252 95 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.7900 0.7900 0.7900 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 255 36 129 10 16 15 186 394 11 61 867 327 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 255 36 129 10 16 15 186 394 11 61 867 327 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1086
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall Yes No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 22 0 0 30 0 20 43 0 15 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 17 0 0 25 0 16 37 0 11 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1087
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 160.79 42.91 168.54 43.54 24.57 260.06 93.64 92.90 96.75 300.22 234.67 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.43 1.72 6.74 1.74 0.98 10.40 3.75 3.72 3.87 12.01 9.39 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 89.33 23.84 93.63 24.19 13.65 157.24 52.02 51.61 53.75 187.83 138.25 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.57 0.95 3.75 0.97 0.55 6.29 2.08 2.06 2.15 7.51 5.53 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D D E D E A A E B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 47.63 44.18 49.90 56.71 54.45 65.47 9.12 9.12 61.51 16.30 16.01 X, volume / capacity 0.69 0.18 0.77 0.61 0.40 0.87 0.18 0.18 0.78 0.51 0.43 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.81 0.15 2.66 3.98 2.04 18.31 0.35 0.35 9.96 0.96 1.55 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.23 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 46.82 44.03 47.24 52.73 52.41 47.15 8.77 8.77 51.55 15.35 14.46 c, Capacity [veh/h] 397 214 180 54 47 225 1167 1156 91 1968 879 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1569 1834 1589 1781 1870 1852 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.04 0.28 0.24 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.62 0.62 0.05 0.55 0.55 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 13 13 13 3 3 14 69 69 6 61 61 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1088
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 47.63 44.18 49.90 56.71 56.71 54.45 65.47 9.12 9.12 61.51 16.30 16.01 Movement LOS D D D E E D E A A E B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 48.03 55.88 26.85 18.43
Approach LOS D E C B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 26.38
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.500
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1256.05 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.691 1.998 2.775 2.934 Crosswalk LOS B A C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 302 462 676 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.65 32.53 24.09 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.305 1.645 2.074 2.763 Bicycle LOS B A B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1089
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.300
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 15.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 315.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1090
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 1 0 2
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 1 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 1 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 2 2
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 2 1 1
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 74 362 14 116 328 66 78 42 85 65 27 104 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 18 90 4 29 82 16 19 10 21 16 7 26 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 68 333 13 108 305 61 69 37 76 55 23 88 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 68 333 13 108 305 61 69 37 76 55 23 88 Name Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway Oakley Rd
Volumes
7 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1091
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0 0 23 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 17 44 0 14 41 0 0 34 0 0 18 0
All red [s] 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 13 38 0 10 35 0 0 30 0 0 13 0
Minimum Green [s] 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1092
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 94.80 100.84 100.02 160.43 99.89 96.01 151.68 105.44 52.67 53.61 128.71 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.79 4.03 4.00 6.42 4.00 3.84 6.07 4.22 2.11 2.14 5.15 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 52.66 56.02 55.57 89.13 55.49 53.34 84.27 58.58 29.26 29.78 71.50 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.11 2.24 2.22 3.57 2.22 2.13 3.37 2.34 1.17 1.19 2.86 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No Yes No No No Yes Lane Group LOS E B B E B B D D D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 56.33 12.32 12.33 62.19 11.01 11.07 50.36 49.01 47.05 47.02 51.60 X, volume / capacity 0.77 0.18 0.18 0.81 0.18 0.19 0.71 0.57 0.28 0.28 0.74 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 4.94 0.38 0.39 12.40 0.37 0.41 2.00 1.31 0.35 0.34 2.91 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.39 11.94 11.94 49.79 10.63 10.66 48.36 47.70 46.70 46.69 48.69 c, Capacity [veh/h] 96 1044 1030 143 1093 1023 170 148 161 166 140 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1870 1845 1781 1870 1749 1811 1574 1781 1832 1547 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.05 0.56 0.56 0.08 0.59 0.59 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 6 61 61 9 64 64 10 10 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 5.10 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C C L C C C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1093
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 56.33 12.33 12.33 62.19 11.03 11.07 50.36 50.36 49.01 47.05 47.02 51.60 Movement LOS E B B E B B D D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 19.56 22.67 49.80 49.46
Approach LOS B C D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.59
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.300
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 8.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 2422.80 2123.23 3886.57 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 47.29 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.561 2.686 2.010 2.250 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 684 629 545 235 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 23.83 25.85 29.09 42.90
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.931 1.980 1.898 1.883 Bicycle LOS A A A A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Existing Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1094

26 APPENDIX B
Intersection Level of Service Worksheets – Existing plus Project Conditions

1095
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.511
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 37.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1096
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 367 34 227 21 54 41 216 547 21 31 622 325 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 92 9 57 5 14 10 54 137 5 8 156 81 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.6100 0.6100 0.6100 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 268 25 166 13 33 25 192 487 19 24 479 250 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 15 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 6
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 253 25 156 13 33 25 189 487 19 24 479 244 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1097
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 26 0 0 30 0 16 40 0 14 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 21 0 0 25 0 12 34 0 10 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1098
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 202.49 34.77 278.67 96.00 50.91 407.34 154.87 153.06 47.51 207.58 228.18 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.10 1.39 11.15 3.84 2.04 16.29 6.19 6.12 1.90 8.30 9.13 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 114.68 19.32 171.33 53.33 28.28 258.62 86.04 85.03 26.40 118.37 133.46 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.59 0.77 6.85 2.13 1.13 10.34 3.44 3.40 1.06 4.73 5.34 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes Lane Group LOS D D E D D F B B E B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 43.33 39.09 58.30 53.86 51.29 144.17 12.41 12.42 72.86 17.84 19.55 X, volume / capacity 0.64 0.11 0.87 0.70 0.44 1.11 0.27 0.27 0.76 0.36 0.42 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.45 0.06 13.58 3.02 1.23 95.17 0.61 0.62 19.40 0.57 1.64 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.18 0.04 0.04 0.46 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42.88 39.04 44.71 50.84 50.06 49.00 11.80 11.80 53.45 17.27 17.91 c, Capacity [veh/h] 571 309 260 108 93 194 1073 1059 41 1748 780 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1575 1844 1589 1781 1870 1846 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.02 0.14 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.17 0.20 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.57 0.57 0.02 0.49 0.49 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 18 18 18 6 6 12 63 63 2 54 54 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1099
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 43.33 39.09 58.30 53.86 53.86 51.29 144.17 12.42 12.42 72.86 17.84 19.55 Movement LOS D D E D D D F B B E B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 48.51 52.95 48.72 20.15
Approach LOS D D D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 37.71
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.511
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1029.04 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.729 2.006 2.741 2.883 Crosswalk LOS B B B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 375 462 622 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.33 32.53 26.12 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.596 1.751 2.206 2.366 Bicycle LOS B A B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1100
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.309
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 24.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1101
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 1 1 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 2 2 2 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 1 2 2
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 0 1
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 1 1 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 86 13 106 120 337 12 45 430 96 29 19 44 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 21 3 27 30 84 3 11 108 24 7 5 11 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 0.8200 0.8200 0.8200 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 66 10 82 98 276 10 33 314 70 22 15 34 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 26 0 15 5 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 40 10 67 93 276 10 33 314 61 22 15 34 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1102
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 16 0 19 44 0 16 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 11 0 15 38 0 12 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1103
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 57.23 57.70 136.11 150.46 66.71 66.21 60.20 131.58 125.44 61.91 57.28 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.29 2.31 5.44 6.02 2.67 2.65 2.41 5.26 5.02 2.48 2.29 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 31.80 32.06 75.61 83.59 37.06 36.78 33.44 73.10 69.69 34.39 31.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.27 1.28 3.02 3.34 1.48 1.47 1.34 2.92 2.79 1.38 1.27 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Lane Group LOS D D D D A A E B B D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 47.38 47.36 54.55 53.68 7.53 7.54 60.66 10.61 10.68 53.29 53.95 X, volume / capacity 0.31 0.31 0.77 0.81 0.14 0.14 0.77 0.24 0.24 0.55 0.58 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.41 0.41 5.62 4.07 0.25 0.25 7.86 0.50 0.54 2.05 2.65 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 46.96 46.96 48.93 49.61 7.29 7.29 52.80 10.11 10.13 51.23 51.30 c, Capacity [veh/h] 158 160 138 148 1222 1205 58 1128 1057 87 75 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1803 1556 1781 1870 1844 1781 1870 1752 1815 1579 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.14 0.15 0.03 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.65 0.65 0.03 0.60 0.60 0.05 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 10 10 10 9 72 72 4 66 66 5 5 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1104
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 47.37 47.36 54.55 53.68 7.54 7.54 60.66 10.64 10.68 53.29 53.29 53.95 Movement LOS D D D D A A E B B D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 51.08 19.34 14.59 53.61
Approach LOS D B B D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 24.53
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.309
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 1837.33 3624.60 6829.45 2599.84 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.411 2.580 2.690 1.978 Crosswalk LOS B B B A
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 198 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 44.66 23.84 25.84 29.09
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.898 1.947 2.031 1.711 Bicycle LOS A A B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1105
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.044
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 9.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Oakley Rd/Project Dwy
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 25.00 35.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 158 0 0 169 15 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 40 0 0 42 4 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 158 0 0 169 15 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 41 0 0 0 15
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 0 0 169 0
Name Oakley Rd
Volumes
11 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1106
Intersection LOS A
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.98
Approach LOS B A A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.13 8.98 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B B A A A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 10.45 11.22 8.73 0.00 0.00 8.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
12 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1107
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.510
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 27.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1108
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 286 39 146 13 20 19 207 415 12 71 1008 401 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 72 10 37 3 5 5 52 104 3 18 252 100 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.7900 0.7900 0.7900 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 266 36 136 10 16 15 197 394 11 61 867 345 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 11 0 7 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 18
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 255 36 129 10 16 15 186 394 11 61 867 327 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1109
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall Yes No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 22 0 0 30 0 20 43 0 15 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 17 0 0 25 0 16 37 0 11 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1110
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 167.58 42.67 177.30 43.54 24.57 275.76 95.01 94.25 96.75 307.49 254.65 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.70 1.71 7.09 1.74 0.98 11.03 3.80 3.77 3.87 12.30 10.19 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 93.10 23.71 98.50 24.19 13.65 169.12 52.78 52.36 53.75 193.44 153.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.72 0.95 3.94 0.97 0.55 6.76 2.11 2.09 2.15 7.74 6.13 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D D E D E A A E B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 47.38 43.77 49.89 56.71 54.45 67.24 9.31 9.31 61.51 17.05 17.18 X, volume / capacity 0.70 0.18 0.78 0.61 0.40 0.88 0.18 0.19 0.78 0.52 0.46 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.81 0.14 2.84 3.98 2.04 20.41 0.35 0.36 9.96 1.01 1.80 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.26 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 46.58 43.63 47.05 52.73 52.41 46.83 8.96 8.96 51.55 16.04 15.38 c, Capacity [veh/h] 410 222 186 54 47 236 1160 1148 91 1932 863 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1569 1834 1589 1781 1870 1852 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.04 0.28 0.25 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.62 0.62 0.05 0.54 0.54 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 13 13 13 3 3 15 68 68 6 60 60 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1111
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 47.38 43.77 49.89 56.71 56.71 54.45 67.24 9.31 9.31 61.51 17.05 17.18 Movement LOS D D D E E D E A A E B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 47.86 55.88 28.23 19.22
Approach LOS D E C B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 27.22
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.510
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1237.99 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.702 1.998 2.779 2.941 Crosswalk LOS B A C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 302 462 676 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.65 32.53 24.09 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.337 1.645 2.083 2.781 Bicycle LOS B A B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1112
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.312
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 30.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 15.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 315.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1113
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 1 0 2
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 1 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 1 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 2 2
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 2 1 1
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 92 362 14 116 328 97 78 42 85 88 27 115 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 23 90 4 29 82 24 19 10 21 22 7 29 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 85 333 13 108 305 90 69 37 76 75 23 98 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 17 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 20 0 10
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 68 333 13 108 305 61 69 37 76 55 23 88 Name Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway Oakley Rd
Volumes
7 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1114
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0 0 23 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 17 44 0 14 41 0 0 34 0 0 18 0
All red [s] 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 13 38 0 10 35 0 0 30 0 0 13 0
Minimum Green [s] 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1115
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 116.53 102.83 101.96 160.43 116.52 110.05 151.68 105.44 65.80 66.85 143.24 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.66 4.11 4.08 6.42 4.66 4.40 6.07 4.22 2.63 2.67 5.73 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 64.74 57.13 56.65 89.13 64.73 61.14 84.27 58.58 36.55 37.14 79.58 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.59 2.29 2.27 3.57 2.59 2.45 3.37 2.34 1.46 1.49 3.18 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Lane Group LOS E B B E B B D D D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 55.05 12.69 12.70 62.19 12.17 12.25 50.36 49.02 46.74 46.72 51.89 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.18 0.18 0.81 0.21 0.21 0.71 0.57 0.33 0.33 0.77 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 4.41 0.39 0.40 12.40 0.44 0.50 2.00 1.31 0.41 0.40 3.54 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 50.65 12.30 12.30 49.79 11.72 11.76 48.36 47.70 46.33 46.32 48.35 c, Capacity [veh/h] 117 1032 1018 143 1059 971 170 148 173 177 150 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1870 1845 1781 1870 1715 1811 1574 1781 1821 1549 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.07 0.55 0.55 0.08 0.57 0.57 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 7 61 61 9 62 62 10 10 11 11 11 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 5.10 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C C L C C C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1116
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 55.05 12.69 12.70 62.19 12.20 12.25 50.36 50.36 49.02 46.73 46.72 51.89 Movement LOS E B B E B B D D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 21.02 22.93 49.80 49.31
Approach LOS C C D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 30.33
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.312
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 8.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 2385.45 2123.23 3886.57 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 47.29 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.568 2.698 2.010 2.416 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 684 629 545 235 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 23.83 25.85 29.09 42.90
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.946 2.006 1.898 1.939 Bicycle LOS A B A A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1117
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.046
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 9.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Oakley Rd/Project Dwy
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 25.00 35.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 209 0 0 166 67 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 52 0 0 42 17 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 209 0 0 166 67 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 30 0 0 0 48
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 0 19
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 0 0 166 0
Name Oakley Rd
Volumes
11 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1118
Intersection LOS A
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.79
Approach LOS B A A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.62 9.13 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B B A A A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 10.92 12.08 8.87 0.00 0.00 9.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
12 Existing plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1119

27 APPENDIX C
Intersection Level of Service Worksheets – Background Conditions

1120
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.641
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 44.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1121
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 373 34 289 21 54 41 263 1243 21 31 958 361 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 93 9 72 5 14 10 66 311 5 8 240 90 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.6100 0.6100 0.6100 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 272 25 211 13 33 25 234 1106 19 24 738 278 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 43 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 19 0 55 0 0 0 45 559 0 0 216 34 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 253 25 156 13 33 25 189 487 19 24 479 244 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1122
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 26 0 0 30 0 16 40 0 14 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 21 0 0 25 0 12 34 0 10 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1123
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 200.19 33.69 402.43 96.01 50.92 613.13 414.62 413.77 48.16 350.14 273.28 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.01 1.35 16.10 3.84 2.04 24.53 16.58 16.55 1.93 14.01 10.93 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 113.02 18.72 268.15 53.34 28.29 387.72 277.92 277.24 26.75 226.68 167.24 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.52 0.75 10.73 2.13 1.13 15.51 11.12 11.09 1.07 9.07 6.69 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D F D D F B B E C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 41.02 37.04 82.60 53.87 51.30 238.04 19.45 19.50 72.86 22.66 22.32 X, volume / capacity 0.58 0.10 0.98 0.70 0.44 1.35 0.61 0.62 0.76 0.57 0.48 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.30 0.04 38.19 3.03 1.23 189.04 2.73 2.76 19.40 1.44 2.25 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.34 0.04 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 40.72 37.00 44.40 50.84 50.07 49.00 16.72 16.74 53.45 21.22 20.07 c, Capacity [veh/h] 648 350 295 108 93 194 1031 1025 41 1670 745 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1577 1844 1589 1781 1870 1859 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.02 0.18 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.34 0.34 0.02 0.27 0.23 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.55 0.55 0.02 0.47 0.47 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 21 21 21 6 6 12 61 61 2 52 52 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1124
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 41.02 37.04 82.60 53.87 53.87 51.30 238.04 19.47 19.50 72.86 22.66 22.32 Movement LOS D D F D D D F B B E C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 58.09 52.96 57.12 23.72
Approach LOS E D E C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 44.95
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.641
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 869.10 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.762 2.006 2.856 2.953 Crosswalk LOS C B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 375 462 622 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.33 32.53 26.12 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.708 1.751 2.819 2.673 Bicycle LOS B A C B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1125
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.332
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 22.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1126
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 1 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 2 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 1 0 2
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 0 1
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 1 1 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 76 15 101 120 412 12 45 530 92 29 19 44 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 19 4 25 30 103 3 11 133 23 7 5 11 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800 0.8200 0.8200 0.8200 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 52 10 69 98 338 10 33 387 67 22 15 34 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 12 0 2 5 62 0 0 73 6 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 40 10 67 93 276 10 33 314 61 22 15 34 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1127
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 16 0 19 44 0 16 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 11 0 15 38 0 12 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1128
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 52.65 53.16 126.73 150.46 81.90 81.31 60.20 158.53 151.86 61.91 57.38 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.11 2.13 5.07 6.02 3.28 3.25 2.41 6.34 6.07 2.48 2.30 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 29.25 29.53 70.40 83.59 45.50 45.17 33.44 88.07 84.36 34.39 31.88 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.17 1.18 2.82 3.34 1.82 1.81 1.34 3.52 3.37 1.38 1.28 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Lane Group LOS D D D D A A E B B D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 47.56 47.55 52.83 53.68 7.63 7.64 60.66 10.89 10.94 53.28 54.10 X, volume / capacity 0.30 0.29 0.76 0.81 0.17 0.17 0.77 0.28 0.28 0.55 0.59 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.40 0.39 3.74 4.07 0.31 0.31 7.86 0.62 0.66 2.05 2.80 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 47.17 47.16 49.09 49.61 7.32 7.32 52.80 10.27 10.28 51.23 51.30 c, Capacity [veh/h] 153 155 133 148 1228 1215 58 1134 1076 87 74 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1809 1555 1781 1870 1851 1781 1870 1775 1815 1553 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.66 0.66 0.03 0.61 0.61 0.05 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 9 9 9 9 72 72 4 67 67 5 5 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1129
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 47.56 47.55 52.83 53.68 7.63 7.64 60.66 10.91 10.94 53.28 53.28 54.10 Movement LOS D D D D A A E B B D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 50.33 17.79 14.27 53.68
Approach LOS D B B D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 22.61
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.332
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 3650.08 6829.45 2599.84 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.407 2.624 2.725 1.978 Crosswalk LOS B B B A
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 198 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 44.66 23.83 25.84 29.11
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.876 2.008 2.110 1.711 Bicycle LOS A B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1130
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.813
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 46.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1131
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 323 39 214 13 20 19 257 896 12 71 1834 410 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 81 10 53 3 5 5 64 224 3 18 458 103 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.7900 0.7900 0.7900 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 300 36 199 10 16 15 244 851 11 61 1577 353 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 89 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 45 0 70 0 0 0 58 383 0 0 621 26 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 255 36 129 10 16 15 186 394 11 61 867 327 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1132
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall Yes No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 22 0 0 30 0 20 43 0 15 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 17 0 0 25 0 16 37 0 11 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1133
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 182.68 40.81 287.29 43.54 24.57 393.45 256.38 255.53 98.25 990.45 297.02 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.31 1.63 11.49 1.74 0.98 15.74 10.26 10.22 3.93 39.62 11.88 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 101.49 22.67 177.92 24.19 13.65 260.98 154.47 153.83 54.58 740.27 185.37 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.06 0.91 7.12 0.97 0.55 10.44 6.18 6.15 2.18 29.61 7.41 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D E E D F B B E F C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 44.18 40.58 68.95 56.71 54.45 95.07 13.49 13.50 61.51 58.73 21.14 X, volume / capacity 0.62 0.14 0.90 0.61 0.40 0.99 0.41 0.41 0.78 1.04 0.52 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.45 0.08 23.13 3.98 2.04 48.13 1.15 1.16 9.95 31.10 2.42 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.25 0.04 0.04 0.40 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 43.74 40.50 45.82 52.73 52.41 46.94 12.34 12.34 51.55 27.64 18.71 c, Capacity [veh/h] 522 282 238 54 47 259 1100 1094 91 1771 791 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1574 1834 1589 1781 1870 1861 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.09 0.02 0.14 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.52 0.26 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.59 0.59 0.05 0.50 0.50 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 17 17 3 3 16 65 65 6 55 55 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1134
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 44.18 40.58 68.95 56.71 56.71 54.45 95.07 13.49 13.50 61.51 58.73 21.14 Movement LOS D D E E E D F B B E F C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 53.14 55.88 31.49 52.16
Approach LOS D E C D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 46.48
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.813
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1062.58 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.738 1.998 2.940 3.041 Crosswalk LOS B A C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 302 462 676 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.65 32.53 24.09 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.510 1.645 2.521 3.469 Bicycle LOS B A B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1135
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.345
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1136
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 2 0 1 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 1 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 1 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 2 1 1 2
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 2 2 1
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 89 27 132 91 464 14 116 398 87 78 42 85 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 22 7 33 23 116 4 29 99 22 19 10 21 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 76 23 112 84 427 13 108 370 81 69 37 76 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 21 0 24 16 94 0 0 65 20 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 55 23 88 68 333 13 108 305 61 69 37 76 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1137
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 18 0 17 44 0 14 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 13 0 13 38 0 10 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1138
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 65.45 66.54 175.18 115.32 138.85 137.78 160.43 138.60 132.08 151.68 105.44 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.62 2.66 7.01 4.61 5.55 5.51 6.42 5.54 5.28 6.07 4.22 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 36.36 36.97 97.32 64.07 77.14 76.54 89.13 77.00 73.38 84.27 58.58 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.45 1.48 3.89 2.56 3.09 3.06 3.57 3.08 2.94 3.37 2.34 Critical Lane Group No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D E E B B E B B D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.67 45.65 56.80 55.11 13.79 13.80 62.19 12.99 13.07 50.36 49.02 X, volume / capacity 0.30 0.30 0.80 0.79 0.24 0.24 0.81 0.24 0.24 0.71 0.57 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.33 0.32 8.94 4.43 0.55 0.56 12.40 0.54 0.59 2.00 1.31 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.12 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 45.34 45.34 47.85 50.69 13.24 13.25 49.79 12.45 12.47 48.36 47.70 c, Capacity [veh/h] 190 195 166 116 1013 1003 143 1042 973 170 148 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1821 1551 1781 1870 1851 1781 1870 1747 1811 1574 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.03 0.03 0.09 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.13 0.14 0.07 0.05 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.54 0.54 0.08 0.56 0.56 0.09 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 12 12 12 7 60 60 9 61 61 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1139
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.67 45.65 56.80 55.11 13.80 13.80 62.19 13.02 13.07 50.36 50.36 49.02 Movement LOS D D E E B B E B B D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 51.59 20.41 22.52 49.80
Approach LOS D C C D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.67
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.345
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 2327.71 2123.23 3886.57 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.417 2.617 2.733 2.010 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 235 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 42.90 23.83 25.85 29.09
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.969 2.029 2.055 1.898 Bicycle LOS A B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Background Conditions Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1140

28 APPENDIX D
Intersection Level of Service Worksheets – Background plus Project Conditions
1141
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.651
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 46.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1142
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 393 34 303 21 54 41 266 1243 21 31 958 369 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 98 9 76 5 14 10 67 311 5 8 240 92 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.6100 0.6100 0.6100 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 287 25 221 13 33 25 237 1106 19 24 738 284 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 15 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 6
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 43 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 19 0 55 0 0 0 45 559 0 0 216 34 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 253 25 156 13 33 25 189 487 19 24 479 244 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1143
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 26 0 0 30 0 16 40 0 14 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 21 0 0 25 0 12 34 0 10 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1144
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 209.70 33.69 450.65 96.01 50.92 626.75 414.61 413.78 48.16 350.14 279.85 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.39 1.35 18.03 3.84 2.04 25.07 16.58 16.55 1.93 14.01 11.19 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 119.91 18.72 302.15 53.34 28.29 396.24 277.91 277.24 26.75 226.68 172.23 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.80 0.75 12.09 2.13 1.13 15.85 11.12 11.09 1.07 9.07 6.89 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D F D D F B B E C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 41.33 37.04 96.91 53.87 51.30 244.35 19.45 19.50 72.86 22.66 22.54 X, volume / capacity 0.61 0.10 1.03 0.70 0.44 1.37 0.61 0.62 0.76 0.57 0.50 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.34 0.04 52.29 3.03 1.23 195.35 2.73 2.76 19.40 1.44 2.34 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.38 0.04 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 40.99 37.00 44.62 50.84 50.07 49.00 16.72 16.74 53.45 21.22 20.20 c, Capacity [veh/h] 648 350 295 108 93 194 1031 1025 41 1670 745 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1577 1844 1589 1781 1870 1859 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.02 0.19 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.34 0.34 0.02 0.27 0.23 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.55 0.55 0.02 0.47 0.47 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 21 21 21 6 6 12 61 61 2 52 52 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1145
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 41.33 37.04 96.91 53.87 53.87 51.30 244.35 19.47 19.50 72.86 22.66 22.54 Movement LOS D D F D D D F B B E C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 64.20 52.96 58.57 23.78
Approach LOS E D E C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 46.84
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.651
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 832.99 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.771 2.006 2.859 2.957 Crosswalk LOS C B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 375 462 622 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.33 32.53 26.12 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.764 1.751 2.822 2.680 Bicycle LOS C A C B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1146
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.354
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 24.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1147
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 1 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 2 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 1 0 2
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 1 1 0 1
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 1 1 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 115 15 124 126 412 12 45 530 104 29 19 44 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 29 4 31 31 103 3 11 133 26 7 5 11 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.6800 0.6800 0.6800 0.8200 0.8200 0.8200 0.7300 0.7300 0.7300 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 78 10 84 103 338 10 33 387 76 22 15 34 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 26 0 15 5 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 12 0 2 5 62 0 0 73 6 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 40 10 67 93 276 10 33 314 61 22 15 34 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1148
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 16 0 19 44 0 16 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 11 0 15 38 0 12 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1149
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 74.84 75.46 172.17 157.74 86.41 85.79 60.20 172.32 164.20 61.91 57.38 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.99 3.02 6.89 6.31 3.46 3.43 2.41 6.89 6.57 2.48 2.30 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 41.58 41.92 95.65 87.63 48.01 47.66 33.44 95.73 91.22 34.39 31.88 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.66 1.68 3.83 3.51 1.92 1.91 1.34 3.83 3.65 1.38 1.28 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Lane Group LOS D D E D A A E B B D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 46.80 46.79 61.06 53.43 8.22 8.23 60.66 11.90 11.96 53.29 54.10 X, volume / capacity 0.37 0.37 0.80 0.82 0.18 0.18 0.77 0.30 0.30 0.55 0.59 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.47 0.47 12.64 4.03 0.32 0.33 7.86 0.68 0.73 2.05 2.81 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.15 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 46.32 46.32 48.42 49.40 7.90 7.90 52.80 11.22 11.23 51.23 51.30 c, Capacity [veh/h] 176 178 154 154 1203 1191 58 1102 1040 87 74 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1801 1557 1781 1870 1851 1781 1870 1765 1815 1553 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.64 0.64 0.03 0.59 0.59 0.05 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 11 11 11 9 71 71 4 65 65 5 5 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1150
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 46.79 46.79 61.06 53.43 8.22 8.23 60.66 11.92 11.96 53.29 53.29 54.10 Movement LOS D D E D A A E B B D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 53.76 18.58 15.16 53.68
Approach LOS D B B D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 24.83
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.354
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 3532.89 6829.45 2599.84 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.425 2.632 2.736 1.978 Crosswalk LOS B B B A
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 198 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 44.66 23.83 25.84 29.11
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.979 2.013 2.120 1.711 Bicycle LOS A B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1151
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.045
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 9.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Oakley Rd/Project Dwy
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 25.00 35.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 172 0 0 180 15 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 43 0 0 45 4 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 172 0 0 180 15 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 41 0 0 0 15
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 11 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 0 0 169 0
Name Oakley Rd
Volumes
11 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1152
Intersection LOS A
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.93
Approach LOS B A A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.27 9.01 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B B A A A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 10.63 11.42 8.77 0.00 0.00 9.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
12 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1153
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.825
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 47.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Main St/Empire Ave
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 25.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 120.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 100.00 100.00 190.00 100.00 250.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Intersection Setup
1 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1154
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 3 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 3 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 334 39 222 13 20 19 268 896 12 71 1834 431 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 84 10 55 3 5 5 67 224 3 18 458 108 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.7900 0.7900 0.7900 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 311 36 206 10 16 15 255 851 11 61 1577 371 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 11 0 7 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 18
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 89 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 45 0 70 0 0 0 58 383 0 0 621 26 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 255 36 129 10 16 15 186 394 11 61 867 327 Name Empire Ave Charles Way Main St Main St
Volumes
2 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1155
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall Yes No No Yes No Yes
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.0 3.8 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 19 0 0 20 0 0 19 0 0 24 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 Split [s] 0 22 0 0 30 0 20 43 0 15 38 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.0 4.8 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 17 0 0 25 0 16 37 0 11 33 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 10 0 4 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 3 0 0 4 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
Control Type Split Split Split Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 54.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1156
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 189.53 40.81 309.99 43.54 24.57 431.77 256.38 255.53 98.25 990.45 314.59 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.58 1.63 12.40 1.74 0.98 17.27 10.26 10.22 3.93 39.62 12.58 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 105.36 22.67 195.38 24.19 13.65 286.21 154.46 153.83 54.58 740.27 198.93 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.21 0.91 7.82 0.97 0.55 11.45 6.18 6.15 2.18 29.61 7.96 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS D D E E D F B B E F C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 44.38 40.58 76.13 56.71 54.45 108.25 13.49 13.50 61.51 58.73 21.74 X, volume / capacity 0.64 0.14 0.93 0.61 0.40 1.03 0.41 0.41 0.78 1.04 0.54 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.49 0.08 30.04 3.98 2.04 61.25 1.15 1.16 9.95 31.10 2.69 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.28 0.04 0.04 0.43 0.50 0.50 0.08 0.50 0.50 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 43.89 40.50 46.09 52.73 52.41 47.00 12.34 12.34 51.55 27.64 19.05 c, Capacity [veh/h] 522 282 238 54 47 259 1100 1094 91 1771 791 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3459 1870 1574 1834 1589 1781 1870 1861 1781 3560 1589 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.10 0.02 0.14 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.52 0.27 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.59 0.59 0.05 0.50 0.50 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 17 17 3 3 16 65 65 6 55 55 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 3.40 2.60 2.60 2.00 3.80 3.80 2.00 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 5.40 4.60 4.60 4.00 5.80 5.80 4.00 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C R
Lane Group Calculations
4 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1157
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 44.38 40.58 76.13 56.71 56.71 54.45 108.25 13.49 13.50 61.51 58.73 21.74 Movement LOS D D E E E D F B B E F C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 55.98 55.88 35.09 51.99
Approach LOS E E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 47.83
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.825
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 1041.94 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.749 1.998 2.944 3.047 Crosswalk LOS B A C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 302 462 676 593 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.65 32.53 24.09 27.23
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.541 1.645 2.530 3.487 Bicycle LOS B A B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1158
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.366
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 30.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Empire Ave/Oakley Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 35.00 40.00 40.00 15.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 315.00 100.00 100.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Eastbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Intersection Setup
6 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1159
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 2 0 1 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 1 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 1 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 2 1 1 2
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 2 2 1
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 113 27 144 110 464 14 116 398 118 78 42 85 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 28 7 36 27 116 4 29 99 30 19 10 21 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 96 23 122 101 427 13 108 370 110 69 37 76 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 20 0 10 17 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 21 0 24 16 94 0 0 65 20 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 55 23 88 68 333 13 108 305 61 69 37 76 Name Oakley Rd Empire Ave Empire Ave Driveway
Volumes
7 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1160
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No Yes No Yes No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 0 0 26 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 18 0 17 44 0 14 41 0 0 34 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 13 0 13 38 0 10 35 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 1.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
8 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1161
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 78.91 80.10 196.80 138.34 141.60 140.48 160.43 158.88 149.12 151.68 105.44 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.16 3.20 7.87 5.53 5.66 5.62 6.42 6.36 5.96 6.07 4.22 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 43.84 44.50 110.58 76.86 78.67 78.05 89.13 88.26 82.85 84.27 58.58 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.75 1.78 4.42 3.07 3.15 3.12 3.57 3.53 3.31 3.37 2.34 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes No Lane Group LOS D D E D B B E B B D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.33 45.32 60.30 54.12 14.21 14.22 62.19 14.32 14.43 50.36 49.02 X, volume / capacity 0.34 0.34 0.82 0.80 0.24 0.24 0.81 0.27 0.27 0.71 0.57 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.37 0.36 12.80 4.15 0.57 0.57 12.40 0.64 0.72 2.00 1.31 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 44.96 44.95 47.51 49.97 13.64 13.65 49.79 13.68 13.71 48.36 47.70 c, Capacity [veh/h] 203 206 176 137 1000 990 143 1007 923 170 148 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1781 1814 1552 1781 1870 1851 1781 1870 1715 1811 1574 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.14 0.15 0.07 0.05 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.54 0.54 0.08 0.54 0.54 0.09 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 13 13 13 8 59 59 9 59 59 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 4.40 4.40 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.10 5.10 5.10 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 6.40 6.40 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C R L C C L C C C R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1162
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.32 45.32 60.30 54.12 14.22 14.22 62.19 14.36 14.43 50.36 50.36 49.02 Movement LOS D D E D B B E B B D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 52.92 21.68 23.15 49.80
Approach LOS D C C D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 30.79
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.366
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 8.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 2286.95 2123.23 3886.57 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 47.29 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.437 2.625 2.745 2.010 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 235 684 629 545 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 42.90 23.83 25.85 29.09
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.028 2.045 2.081 1.898 Bicycle LOS B B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
10 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1163
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.032
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 9.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Oakley Rd/Project Dwy
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 25.00 35.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Oakley Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 240 0 0 201 48 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 60 0 0 50 12 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 240 0 0 201 48 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 30 0 0 0 48
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 35 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166 0 0 166 0
Name Oakley Rd
Volumes
11 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1164
Intersection LOS A
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.51
Approach LOS B A A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.93 9.12 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B B A A A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 11.31 12.53 8.96 0.00 0.00 9.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
12 Background plus Project Report
TJKM
2092 Oakley Rd
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-0)
Generated with
1165
Ord. No -24 Page 1 of 5 [DATE]
ORDINANCE NO. -24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING A REZONE TO REZONE A 9.99-ACRE SITE FROM C (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT TO P-1 (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS 2092 THE VILLAGE AT OAKLEY ROAD SUBDIVISION 9634 (RZ 03-22) APN 037-110-031

FINDINGS
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2022, Owen Poole and Dan Cosgrove (“Applicant”) filed an application requesting approval of the following entitlements (“Project”):
 General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM);
 Rezone (RZ 03-22) of 9.99 acres from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District;
 Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) for development of the 9.99 acres site;  Tentative Map (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements;
 Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three home types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project; and
WHEREAS, the proposed homes consist of three two two-story house plans each with three elevations. Floor plans range from 1,848 to 2,236 square feet of livable area; and
WHEREAS, the project site is located at 2092 Oakley Road Avenue and is zoned C (General Commercial) District. (APN: 037-110-031); and WHEREAS, the proposal complies with the requirements of the rezoning application requirements of Section 2.4.012 (a) of the Oakley Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City prepared a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”). The Notice of Intent (“NOI”) to Adopt an MND and IS was circulated for public review and comment from November 16, 2023 to December 18, 2023. It was filed with the County Clerk and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”), emailed or mailed out to over 60 public agencies and parties requesting such notice, and posted in the same manner as a Notice of Public hearing, which is at locations throughout the City and at the project site; and
1166
Ord. No -24 Page 2 of 5 [DATE]
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the project at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Planning Commission held a vote and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24 recommending the City Council approve the project, as revised by the Planning Commission during its deliberations; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted revised plans consistent with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24; and
WHEREAS, on or before March 1, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the Project was duly noticed in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general distribution, was posted at the Project site, at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, and outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, was posted to the City’s website, and was mailed out to all owners of property within a 500-foot radius of the project’s boundaries, to parties requesting such notice, and to outside agencies; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, the City Council opened the public hearing at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the City Council took a vote and adopted this resolution adopting the CEQA MND and approving the project, as conditioned; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, the City Council adopted the Project’s CEQA IS/MND in conjunction with approval of the proposed Final Development Plan (FDP 02- 22), Tentative Map (TM 04-22), and Design Review (DR 07-22).

The City Council of the City of Oakley does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings
A. Pursuant to Section 2.4.012 of the Oakley Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Oakley hereby finds and determines as follows:

1. The change proposed will comply with the General Plan in that the proposed rezone from C District to P-1 District will not result in a use or density that is not in line with the underlying General Plan Land Use Designation of Residential Medium (RM); and

2. The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts in that the residential density will be similar to residential densities in the general vicinity and the project has been designed in order to reduce conflicts with nearby commercial land uses; and
1167
Ord. No -24 Page 3 of 5 [DATE]

3. Community need, but not necessarily future financial success, has been demonstrated for the use proposed in that the project will result in the construction of additional housing units, which is necessary to meet demand in the community since the City of Oakley falls under the jurisdiction of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), and ABAG uses a predominately demographic formula to allocate the regional housing needs among the incorporated cities and unincorporated county. This process results in a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and the number reflected in that assessment becomes part the City of Oakley’s estimated housing needs. The development of this project will help the City meet its regional fair share housing goal.

B. Pursuant to Section 9.1.1002 of the Oakley Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Oakley hereby finds and determines as follows:

1. The Applicant intends for the start of construction within two (2) years from the effective date of zoning change and plan approval in that, whether the Applicant acts as developer or broker, construction within two years is reasonable depending on market conditions;

2. The proposed Planned Unit Development is consistent with the City of Oakley General Plan in that the density and type of development is consistent with the RM General Plan Land use Designation;

3. The project will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood in that:
a. The project and integrates pedestrian connectivity to Main Street and nearby commercial developments;
b. Vehicular transportation will have almost immediate access to major arterials such as Empire Avenue and Main Street;
c. The type of development is expected to be desirable in that it includes a variety of homes sizes on smaller lots with an HOA which can appeal to those less interested in large private yards that require maintenance and that may value nearby access to public
transportation and walkable amenities;
d. The other HOA amenities such as the park and public gathering areas are additional attractions for the project; and

4. The development will be a harmonious and integrated plan that includes exceptions from the normal application of the Oakley Municipal Code due to the number and size of amenities usually found in larger subdivisions, such as a park, public gathering areas, and pedestrian-only entries to front 1168
Ord. No -24 Page 4 of 5 [DATE]
porches. The P-1 District is justified to allow for project-specific development regulations in order to design a feasible project within the allowable range of the General Plan Land Use Designation of RM.

SECTION 2. Property Defined and Rezoned
A. 9.99 acres of real property located at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, CA 94561 (APN 037-110-031).

SECTION 3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding Pursuant to California State Law, an Initial Study was conducted by the Planning Division to evaluate the potential effects of this project upon the environment. The Initial Study analysis found there were no potentially significant impacts, and therefore a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Based upon the findings contained in the Initial Study it has been determined that this project will not have a significant impact upon the environment.

SECTION 4. Severability
If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable.

SECTION 5. Effective Date and Posting
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation, or by publishing a summary of the proposed ordinance, posting a certified copy of the proposed office in the City Clerk’s Office at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the ordinance is to be adopted, and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, publishing a summary of the ordinance with the names of the Council Members voting for and against the ordinance.
1169
Ord. No -24 Page 5 of 5 [DATE]
The foregoing ordinance was adopted with the reading waived at a regular meeting of the Oakley City Council on __________________, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
__________________________________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor Date
ATTEST:
________________________________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
1170
Reso. No. -24 Page 1 of 2 March 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. -24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL MAKING FINDINGS TO APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REDESIGNATE 9.99 ACRES

FROM COMMERCIAL (CO) TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) FOR THE PROJECT TITLED “THE VILLAGE AT 2092 OAKLEY ROAD SUBDIVISION 9634 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA 01-22)”
APNS 033-110-031
WHEREAS, this is an application by Owen Poole and Dan Cosgrove (“Applicant”) requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM). This project includes compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. The site is located at 2092 Oakley Road and is zoned C (General Commercial) District. APN 037-110-031; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City prepared a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”). The Notice of Intent (“NOI”) to Adopt an MND and IS was circulated for public review and comment from November 16, 2023 to December 18, 2023. It was filed with the County Clerk and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”), emailed or mailed out to over 60 public agencies and parties requesting such notice, and posted in the same manner as a Notice of Public hearing, which is at locations throughout the City and at the project site; and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the project at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Planning Commission held a vote and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24 recommending the City Council approve the project, as revised by the Planning Commission during its deliberations; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted revised plans consistent with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24; and
WHEREAS, on or before March 1, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the Project was duly noticed in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general distribution, was posted at the Project site, at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, and outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, was posted to the City’s website, and was mailed out to all owners of property within a 500-foot radius of the project’s boundaries, to parties requesting such notice, and to outside agencies; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, the City Council opened the public hearing at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the City Council took a vote and adopted this resolution adopting the CEQA MND and approving the project, as conditioned; and
1171
Reso. No. -24 Page 2 of 2 March 12, 2024
WHEREAS, these Findings are based on the City’s General Plan and the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and the information submitted to the City Council at its March 12, 2024 meeting, both written and oral, as reflected in the minutes of such meetings, together with the documents contained in the file for the Project (hereafter the “Record”).

NOW, THEREFORE, on the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire Record, the City Council makes the following findings regarding the General Plan Amendment as shown in “Exhibit A” of this resolution in support of the recommended approvals:

A. The change in Land Use Designation will provide for the orderly, well planned and balanced growth within the City in that:

1. Amending the General Plan Land Use designation to Residential Medium (“RM”) would make the property more consistent with surrounding residential uses and will allow for additional infill housing that will be located near public transit and existing commercial uses;

2. The project design and conditions of approval will minimize the potential issues that could arise with residential and commercial adjacent to teach other; and

3. Infill development of residential uses will assist in meeting the demand due to the shortage of housing in California.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, on the basis of the foregoing Findings and the entire Record, the City Council hereby approves the amendment to the General Plan as shown in “Exhibit A” of this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 12th day of March 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTIONS:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
________________________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor Date
ATTEST:
_______________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
1172
Exhibit A to Resolution No. _______
Reso. No. -24 March 12, 2024
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) 1173
Resolution No. -24 Page 1 of 24 March 12, 2024
RESOLUTION NO. -24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL MAKING FINDINGS

AND ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DELCARATION AND RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE VILLAGE AT 2092 OAKLEY ROAD SUBDIVISION 9634 (FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22) APN 037-110-031 WHEREAS, on September 20, 2022, Owen Poole and Dan Cosgrove (“Applicant”) filed an application requesting approval of: 1) a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM); 2) a Rezone (RZ 03-22) of 9.99 acres from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District; 3) a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) for development of the 9.99 acres site; 4) a Tentative Map (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements; and 5) a Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three home types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project (“Project”). The site is located at 2092 Oakley Road and is zoned C (General Commercial) District. APN 037- 110-031; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution applies to the Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22), Tentative Map (TM 04-22), and Design Review (DR 07-22) entitlements; and WHEREAS, on April 12, 2023, the project application was deemed complete per Government Code section 65920 et. seq; and
WHEREAS, the project site is designated as Commercial (CO) in the Oakley General Plan, and zoned C (General Commercial) District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City prepared a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”). The Notice of Intent (“NOI”) to Adopt an MND and IS was circulated for public review and comment from November 16, 2023 to December 18, 2023. It was filed with the County Clerk and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”), emailed or mailed out to over 60 public agencies and parties requesting such notice, and posted in the same manner as a Notice of Public hearing, which is at locations throughout the City and at the project site; and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the project at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Planning Commission held a vote and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24 recommending the City Council approve the project, as revised by the Planning Commission during its deliberations; and
1174
Resolution No. -24 Page 2 of 24 March 12, 2024
WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted revised plans consistent with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24; and
WHEREAS, on or before March 1, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the Project was duly noticed in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general distribution, was posted at the Project site, at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, and outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, was posted to the City’s website, and was mailed out to all owners of property within a 500-foot radius of the project’s boundaries, to parties requesting such notice, and to outside agencies; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, the City Council opened the public hearing at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the City Council took a vote and adopted this resolution adopting the CEQA MND and approving the project, as conditioned; and
WHEREAS, these Findings are based on the City’s General Plan and the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and the information submitted to the City Council at its March 12, 2024 meeting, both written and oral, as reflected in the minutes of such meetings, together with the documents contained in the file for the Project (hereafter the “Record”).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, on the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire Record, the City Council makes the following additional findings in support of the recommendation to the City Council to approve the CEQA MND and Project, as conditioned:

A. The Project’s Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines and is recommended to be adopted by the City Council in conjunction with the Project’s General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22), Rezone (RZ 03-22), Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22), Tentative Map (TM 04-22), and Design Review (DR 07-22) approvals. Development of the project is subject to all adopted mitigation measures as included in the IS/MND Mitigation Monitoring Program (“MMP”), attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, unless modified pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines and adopted by the City Council.

B. In regard to the application requesting approval of a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) in conjunction with the project’s P-1 District, the Planning Commission finds that:

1. The Final Development Plan together with the other components of the proposed project’s submitted materials includes all of the applicable required information as required by the Oakley Municipal Code, including, but not limited to the information included on the sheet titled “Final Development Plan”, the Tentative Map and its associated sheets, and the Design Review plans such as the home elevations and landscape plans. 1175
Resolution No. -24 Page 3 of 24 March 12, 2024
C. In regard to the application requesting approval of Tentative Map 9634 (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements, the Planning Commission that:

1. The Project’s Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines; and

2. The proposed Tentative Map (“TM”), together with the provisions of its design and improvements, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, and applicable portions of the Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use Designation, in that the TM’s gross density (approximately 8.3 du/ga) falls within the gross density range of the RM General Plan Land Use Designation of 5.5-9.6 du/ga, and the TM is tied to a P-1 District, which sets its own development regulations, such as required yard setbacks and minimum lot sizes; and

3. The site is physically suitable for the project in that: it is accessible; not physically constrained other than the reduction in net developable acres due to frontage right of way dedication, onsite stormwater detention and treatment, in-tract park, and in-tract public gathering areas; is similar to surrounding residentially developed projects; and it is also able to accommodate the proposed density of development in a manner consistent with the underlying land use designation of RM; and

4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density and number of dwelling units in that the proposed TM falls within the allowable density while creating lots compliant with the project’s P-1 District, and public roads to access the homes; and

5. The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the proposed subdivision consists of 83 single family residential lots. Construction and grading of the project are subject to building or grading permits, and violations of any such permits are subject to appropriate enforcement; and

6. Public improvements are proposed and conditioned to occur as a result of the subdivision, which is a benefit to the public and surrounding residents and property owners of the vicinity. One such improvement will be the dedication and frontage improvements along Oakley Road, which currently lacks any sort of curb, gutter, or sidewalk for pedestrian or bicycle safety; and
1176
Resolution No. -24 Page 4 of 24 March 12, 2024

7. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

D. In regard to the application requesting approval of Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three home types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project, the Planning Commission that:

1. The proposed Design Review plans are consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of Residential Medium (RM) and the project’s Tentative Map, P-1 District zoning, and Final Development Plan; and

2. The proposed Residential Siting and Lot Design is consistent with the City of Oakley Residential Design Guidelines in that while the homes do not have substantial variation in setbacks, the pedestrian alley-loaded paseo entrances to the homes provide for a landscaped, walkable entry way to the homes with front facade and porch designs that create aesthetic variations, and changes in roof plans among the same floor plan assist in giving the overall neighborhood more visual variety in overall vertical massing along the streetscape; and

3. The Architectural Character of the proposed single-family homes is consistent with the applicable City of Oakley Residential Design Guidelines in that a variety of materials and architectural styles are used allowing for several different color schemes, and the homes will have unique exterior lighting designs for each architectural type, use of false shutters to enhance the exterior appearances, and a different garage door design for each architectural type.

E. The project complies with Measure J Growth Management requirements.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, on the basis of the above Findings and the Record, the City Council approves of the Applicant’s request for a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22), Tentative Map (TM 04-22), and Design Review (DR 07-22), subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

Conditions of Approval
Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Oakley Municipal Code. Any exceptions must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the application received by the Planning Division dated September 20, 2022, as well as additional information acquired since that time and made part of the project file.
1177
Resolution No. -24 Page 5 of 24 March 12, 2024

THE FOLLOWING PLANNING AND BUILDING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SHALL

BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED:

PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
General:

1. The proposed project is approved, as shown on the revised plan included as attachments to the March 12, 2024 City Council Staff Report, and as modified by or with the following conditions of approval.

2. These approvals shall be effectuated within a period of three (3) years from the effective date of the related Rezone approval by recording a final map and if not effectuated shall expire on that same date three years later. Prior to the expiration date, the applicant may apply for a Tentative Map Extension pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Code and Subdivision Map Act, which would include extension of the related entitlements.

3. All construction drawings submitted for plan check shall be in substantial compliance with the plans presented to and approved by the City Council on March 12, 2024.

4. All conditions of approval shall be satisfied by the owner/developer. All costs associated with compliance with the conditions shall be at the owner/developer’s expense.

5. Noise generating construction activities, including such things as power generators, shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on City, State and Federal Holidays. The restrictions on allowed working days and times may be modified on prior written approval by the Community Development Director.

6. Should archaeological materials be uncovered during grading, trenching or other on- site excavation(s), earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped until a professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation(s), if deemed necessary.

7. All mitigation measures addressed in the environmental document shall be complied with and addressed as outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for this project (incorporated as Exhibit A), per the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
1178
Resolution No. -24 Page 6 of 24 March 12, 2024

8. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained within the HCP Planning Survey Report for the Project, per the review and approval of the Community Development Director.

9. The applicant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Oakley, the City Approving Authorities, and the officers, agents, and employees of the City from any and all claims, damages and liability (including, but not limited to, damages, attorney fees, expenses of litigation, costs of court).

10.The applicant shall post a copy of the City of Oakley General Plan 2020 Land Use Diagram, in a conspicuous place, within the model homes or sales office.

Final Development Plan/Development Standards:

11.The project development standards, such as minimum setbacks, shall be listed in table form on the Final Development Plan that are presented to the City Council for their consideration. The Development Standards shall match those shown on the plans and as described in the Planning Commission Staff Report.

12.The final location of the 8-foot tall decorative split-face CMU wall between the project site and adjacent commercial development shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director and City Engineer.

13.The Final Development Plan shall include regulations either prohibiting or regulating accessory structures.

Design Review

14.The applicant shall explore the use of garage doors with windows or false windows and if feasible, a minimum of sixty percent (60%) of the garage doors throughout the subdivision shall have decorative windows or false windows.

Parks and Landscaping:

15.This project will include a Homeowners Association which will own and maintain the park, gathering areas, and other common areas. If the park is available to the general public, the applicant will be credited the appropriate amount on their per lot park impact fees. If the park is only available to members of the HOA, the applicant will be required to pay the full in-lieu park impact fees on each lot.

16.The final landscape plan shall include all trees as shown on the conceptual landscape plans approved with the project. Modifications to the species, size, or location of the trees is subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director and City Engineer. It is the responsibility of the applicant to plan utilities, joint trenches, and other improvements that could interfere with 1179
Resolution No. -24 Page 7 of 24 March 12, 2024
placement of trees in a manner to allow the trees to be planted without conflict to those other improvements.

17.All trees located along the Oakley Road frontage and along the entryway to the subdivision shall be 36” box size at installation.

18.A landscaping and irrigation plan for all front yard, right-of-way, parks, open space, and trail landscaping shall conform to the Oakley Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Oakley Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and shall be installed prior to final occupancy. The plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall be certified in compliance with the City’s Water Conservation Ordinance.

19.California native drought tolerant plants shall be used as much as possible. All trees shall be a mix of fifteen-gallon, 24” box, and 36” box where conditioned; all shrubs shall be a minimum five-gallon size, except as otherwise noted.

20.All landscaped areas not covered by shrubs or groundcover shall be covered with bark or acceptable alternative as reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. On slopes greater than 3 to 1, the applicant shall use an alternative to bark per the review and approval of the Community Development Director. Areas covered with bark shall use a weed barrier.

21.The applicant shall maintain all private landscaping until occupancy.

Fences and Walls:

22.Good neighbor fences between private properties shall be six-foot tall, constructed of wood that is resistant to rotting and warping, and erected with galvanized metal posts surrounded and completely hidden by wood fascia that matches the main fencing. Posts and fascia shall be capped by either a decorative upper fence rail or post cap. Good neighbor fences facing a street shall be constructed of a durable material such as, but not limited to, masonry, vinyl, enhanced wood, composite or other durable material, or stained or painted on both sides to prevent water damage, subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.

23.Any CMU walls, such as landscape retaining walls, shall use colored (i.e., nongrey) split-face CMU for all publicly and privately visible portions of the wall.

24.Anti-graffiti techniques shall be used on sound walls.

Subdivision Design:

25.Driveway openings shall be a maximum 18’ in width or up to 25% of a lot’s frontage. 1180
Resolution No. -24 Page 8 of 24 March 12, 2024

26.The street names shall be approved by the Community Development Department and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.

Subdivision Disclosures:

27.The model home complex shall have a copy of the City of Oakley’s General Plan land use map posted within the sales office or included with the informational material provided to prospective home buyers.

28.Where a lot/parcel is located within 300’ of a high voltage electric transmission line, the applicant shall record the following notice:
“The subject property is located near a high voltage electric transmission line. Purchasers should be aware that there is ongoing research on possible potential adverse health effects caused by the exposure to a magnetic field generated by high voltage lines. Although much more research is needed before the question of whether magnetic fields actually cause adverse health effects can be resolved, the basis for such a hypothesis is established. At this time, no risk assessment has been made.” When a Final Subdivision Public Report issued by the California Department of Real Estate is required, the applicant shall also request that the Department of Real Estate insert the above note in the report.

29.The following statements shall be recorded at the County Recorder’s Office for each parcel to notify future owners of the parcels that they own property in an agricultural area:
“This document shall serve as notification that you have purchased land in an agricultural area where you may regularly find farm equipment using local roads; farm equipment causing dust or blowing sand; crop dusting and spraying occurring regularly; burning associated with agricultural activities; noise associated with farm equipment such as zon guns and aerial crop dusting and certain animals, including equestrian trails as well as flies may exist on surrounding properties. This statement is again notification that this is part of the agricultural way of life in the open space areas of the City of Oakley and you should be fully aware of this at the time of purchase.

30. The following statement shall be recorded at the County Recorder’s Office for each parcel to notify the future owners of the parcel that they are within the Antioch School District and shall be prominently displayed in sales office for the public to view:
1181
Resolution No. -24 Page 9 of 24 March 12, 2024
This document shall serve as notification that you have purchased land within the Antioch Unified School District.

Properties located within Antioch Unified School District boundaries are subject to Mello Roos tax. Potential property owners should be fully aware of this at the time of purchase.” Energy Efficiency:

31.Water heaters shall provide an energy efficiency factor of 0.62 or better.

32.Dual zone air conditioning shall be provided on all two-story residential units.

33.Air conditioning condenser units shall be located to take advantage of natural shade. Condensers should not be placed on the west or south elevation of a home unless shade is provided. The location of the condenser shall be added to all plot plans for review and approval of the Community Development Director.

34.Design and site units so as to take advantage of natural heating and cooling, sin and wind exposure, and solar energy opportunities.

Waste Management Plan:

35.The applicant shall submit a Waste Management Plan that complies with the City of Oakley Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance.

BUILDING DIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

36.Plans shall meet the currently adopted Uniform Codes as well as the newest T-24 Energy requirements from the State of California Energy Commission. To confirm the most recently adopted codes please contact the Building Division at (925) 625- 7005.

37.An Automatic Life Safety Sprinkler System shall be required in all new construction pursuant to Ordinance 22-06. The automatic Life Safety Sprinkler Systems in commercial and industrial buildings shall be designed and installed to the standards and requirements found in the most recent version of the NFPA (National Fire Protection Association). Automatic Life Safety Sprinkler Systems in hotels and apartments shall be installed to the standards and requirements found in the most recent version of the NFPA Standard 13R. After July 1, 2011, the Automatic Life Safety Sprinkler Systems in one and two family dwellings, and townhouses not more than three stories above grade plane, shall be designed and installed to the standards and requirements found in the 2010 California Residential Code section R313.

38.Prior to requesting a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, all Conditions of Approval required for occupancy must be completed. When the 1182
Resolution No. -24 Page 10 of 24 March 12, 2024
Public Works Division and the Planning Division place Conditions of Approval on the project, those divisions will sign off on the project prior to the request for a Building division final inspection. Similarly, if the Health Department and/or Fire Department reviewed and approved the original plans, those departments must sign off on the project prior to the request for a final inspection by the Building Division.

PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN ENCROACHMENT AND/OR GRADING PERMIT:

39.GENERAL. All public improvements shall be made according to the latest adopted City Standard Drawings and Specifications. All work shall conform to the applicable City ordinances. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job-related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless a special permit is issued.

The developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the City performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense.

40.ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. All work in the public right-of-way, including any blockage or partial closure of sidewalks will require an Encroachment Permit.

Special provisions such as limitations on work hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required.

41.GRADING PERMIT. All earthwork must comply with the City’s Grading Ordinance.

A Grading Permit must be issued by the public works department prior to site disturbance.

42.PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS. The developer or their representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least forty-eight (48) hours before starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all improvements in approved plans. Failure to do so will result in rejection of work that was completed without inspection.

43.PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING. Prior to issuance of any permit or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall:
a) Along with the project applicant, attend a pre-construction meeting with the City Engineer to discuss the project conditions of approval, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters.
b) Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project conditions of approval and will make certain that all project sub-contractors 1183
Resolution No. -24 Page 11 of 24 March 12, 2024
have read and understand them prior to commencing work and that a copy of the project conditions of approval will be posted on site at all times during construction.

44.CONSTRUCTION STREET PARKING. No vehicle having a manufacturer's rated gross vehicle weight exceeding ten thousand (10,000) pounds shall be allowed to park on the portion of a street which abuts property in a residential zone without prior approval from the City Engineer.

45.EROSION CONTROL. Interim and final erosion control plans shall be prepared and submitted to the Public Works Department. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be submitted to the State SMARTS system for projects disturbing more than one acre and obtain a WDID number. A maximum of two weeks is allowed between clearing of an area and stabilizing/building on an area if grading is allowed during the rainy season. Interim erosion control measures, to be carried out during construction and before installation of the final landscaping shall be included. Interim erosion control method shall include, but are not limited to: silt fences, fiber rolls (with locations and details), erosion control blankets, City standard seeding specification, filter berms, check dams, retention basins, etc. Provide erosion control measures as needed to protect downstream water quality during winter months. The grading, drainage, erosion control plans and SWPPP shall comply with applicable measures contained in the City of Oakley’s NPDES Permit.

46.DUST CONTROL. Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites to ensure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. Watering on public streets shall not occur. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the City Engineer, or at least once a day.

Watering associated with on-site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept daily during the workweek to the satisfaction of the City. Demolition or earthwork activities shall be halted when wind speeds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 MPH. All trucks hauling soil, sand, or other loose debris shall be covered.

47.SILT AND MUD IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. It is the responsibility of contractor and homeowner to make sure that all dirt tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up daily. Mud, silt, concrete, and other construction debris SHALL NOT 1184
Resolution No. -24 Page 12 of 24 March 12, 2024
be washed into the City’s storm drains. Construction entrances must be in place per the Erosion Control Plan.

48.TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN. The project sponsor will be required to work with the Public Works Department to develop a traffic control plan per the current California MUTCD. This plan will include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
a) Construction activities shall be strategically timed and coordinated to minimize traffic disruption for schools, residents, businesses, and special events. The schools located on the haul route shall be contacted to help with the coordination of the trucking operation to minimize traffic disruption. b) Flag persons shall be placed at locations necessary to control one-way traffic flow, if required. All flag persons shall have the capability of communicating with each other to coordinate the operation.
c) Prior to construction, advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding one-way operation, specifying dates and hours of operation and lane closures on main arterial and collector streets, and will be permitted only between the hours of 8:30AM to 2:30PM on M, T, TH & F. 8:30AM to 12:00PM on W.
d) The traffic control plan shall be reviewed for compliance with the project’s Haul Route, approved by the City of Oakley.
e) A full road closure will require a detour plan and a road closure permit issued by the Public Works Department.

49.CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Applicant shall submit a construction management plan that shall incorporate at a minimum the Earth Movement Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Project Schedule, site security fencing, employee parking, construction staging area, construction trailer, and proposed outhouse locations. The public street shall not be used for any construction related activities, including parking for workers and storage of vehicles.

50.RESTORATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. The developer shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of developer's operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc. shall be repaired and replaced to a condition equal to or better than the original condition. Existing improvement to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Public Works & Engineering Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. Developer shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. 1185
Resolution No. -24 Page 13 of 24 March 12, 2024

51.SIDEWALK REPAIR. The developer shall repair and replace to existing City standards any sidewalk damaged now or during construction of this project.

Sidewalk repair shall match existing color, texture, and design, and shall be constructed per City Standard Details. The limits of sidewalk repair will be determined by the Public Works Inspector during the construction phase of the project.

52.CURB AND GUTTER. The developer shall repair and replace to existing City standards any curb and gutter damaged now or during construction of this project.

New curb and gutter shall be constructed per City Standard Details. The limits of curb and gutter repair will be determined by the Public Works Inspector during the construction phase of the project.

53.CONSTRUCTION NOISE. Between the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. weekends and holidays, construction, alteration, or repair activities shall be allowed. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding eighty-five (85) dBA at twenty-five (25) feet. If the device is located within a structure on the property, the measurement shall be made at distances as close to twenty-five (25) feet from the device as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane shall not exceed eighty-five (85) dBA. Pickup and delivery of materials and equipment is restricted to the hours listed above unless prior written approval is obtained by the Public Works Department.

54.GOOD HOUSEKEEPING. Good housekeeping practices shall be observed at all times during the course of construction. Superintendence of construction shall be diligently performed by a person or persons authorized to do so at all times during working hours. The storing of goods and/or materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless a special permit is issued by the Engineering Division. The adjacent public right-of-way shall be kept clear of all job-related dirt and debris at the end of the day. Dirt and debris shall not be washed into storm drainage facilities. The storing of goods and materials on the sidewalk and/or the street will not be allowed unless a special permit is issued. The developer's representative in charge shall be at the job site during all working hours. Failure to maintain the public right-of-way according to this condition may result in the City performing the required maintenance at the developer's expense.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE GRADING PLAN:

55.EXISTING WELLS. Provide documentation that any gas wells located onsite have been abandoned per regulations.

56.GEOLOGY AND SOIL MITIGATION MEASURES. A geotechnical investigation shall be conducted for the project to determine the surface and sub-surface conditions at the site and to determine the potential for surface fault rupture on the 1186
Resolution No. -24 Page 14 of 24 March 12, 2024
site. The geotechnical study shall provide recommendations for site grading as well as the design of foundations, retaining walls, concrete slab-on-grade construction, excavation, drainage, on-site utility trenching and pavement sections.

The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design, and erosion control. All recommendations of the investigation shall be incorporated into project plans. One copy of the geologic report shall be submitted with the grading permit and public improvement application. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant’s soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans to ensure that designs for foundations, retaining walls, site grading, and site drainage are in accordance with their recommendations. The applicant’s soils engineer’s approval shall then be conveyed to the City either by letter or by signing the plans.

57.GRADING
a) Grade any slopes with a vertical height of four (4) feet or more at a slope no steeper than 3H to 1V. Retaining walls that may be installed to reduce the slope must be masonry and comply with the City’s building code. b) Retaining wall or other suitable option acceptable by the City Engineer is required where the grade differential between property or adjacent lots are greater than 6”. Retaining walls are required to be identified on the grading plans and shall have a note stating a separate building permit is required for retaining wall greater than four (4) feet in height, measured from the bottom of footing to top of wall.
c) At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post at the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site noticing that construction work will commence. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with their name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall always be kept current and shall consist of persons with authority to indicate and implement corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of the individual responsible for noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the notice. The notice shall be reissued with each phase of major grading activity. A copy of the notice shall be concurrently transmitted to the City Engineer. The notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names and addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed.
d) Submit a Haul Route Plan to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to importing or exporting any material from the site. The plan shall include the location of the borrow or fill area, the proposed haul routes, the estimated number and frequency of trips, and the proposed schedule of hauling. Based on this plan, the City Engineer shall determine whether pavement condition surveys must be conducted along the proposed haul routes to determine what 1187
Resolution No. -24 Page 15 of 24 March 12, 2024
impacts the trucking activities may have. The project proponents shall be responsible to repair to their pre-construction condition any roads along the utilized routes.
e) Prior to commencement of any site work that will result in a land disturbance of one acre or more, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer that the requirements for obtaining a State General Construction Permit have been met. Such evidence may be a copy of the Notice of Intent Letter sent by the State Water Resources Control Board. The WDID Number shall be shown on the grading plan prior to approval by the City Engineer. f) The burying of any construction debris is prohibited on construction sites.

58.NPDES – NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM.

Comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the NPDES for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley – Region IV), including the Stormwater C.3 requirements as detailed in the Guidebook available at www.cccleanwater.org
Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMP’s) for the reduction or elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site’s storm water drainage.
 Offer pavers for household driveways and/or walkways as an option to buyers.
 Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area.  Delineate all storm drains with “No Dumping, Drains to the Delta” permanent metal markers per City Standards.
 Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street curb and gutter.
 Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program to buyers.
 Other alternatives as approved by the City Engineer.
 Prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the project’s storm water control measures.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN:

59.PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. Construct the project streets within public right of way to City public road standards and as shown on the Tentative Map with the following exceptions:
1188
Resolution No. -24 Page 16 of 24 March 12, 2024
a) The minimum street grade may be lowered from the standard 1% to 0.75% provided that the project proponent demonstrates that the City’s drainage standards can be achieved.
b) Submit a turning radius exhibit to the City Engineer for review and approval to illustrate that the ninety-degree turns of project streets can accommodate the largest expected vehicle to use the streets without the inclusion of City standard elbows. If the exhibit illustrates that elbows are necessary to accommodate the expected traffic, then they shall be included in the improvement plans.

60.ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS. The following improvements shall be installed by the developer as shown on the Tentative Map. Plans for these roadway improvements shall be prepared by a California registered civil engineer, reviewed, and approved by the City, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. a) Design and construct the frontage improvements for Oakley Road as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map. The improvements must be consistent with the City of Oakley standard for a four-lane divided arterial roadway. The median island will need to be improved to its ultimate width. The Developer must continue the coordination efforts with the adjacent property owner west of the project to fully construct the improvements of Oakley Road between Montevino Way to the eastern limits for the project frontage to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. b) Design and construct the project entrance from Oakley Road for a right-in and right-out only driveway as outlined in the Traffic Report prepared for this development. The driveway must be designed to accommodate turning radii for garbage and emergency vehicles. The project driveway must be designed to meet standard sight distance requirements.
c) Design and construct the frontage improvements for MainStreet as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map. The improvements must be consistent with the City of Oakley standard for a six-lane divided arterial.

61.Install traffic calming measures consistent with the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. The traffic calming measures shall be included on the improvement plans and are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.

62.Install traffic control devices such as stop signs and other signing and striping on the project streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

63.Construct emergency vehicle access from Main Street to F Street as shown on the approved Tentative Map. The design and configuration of the accesses shall be per the current City standard and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. 1189
Resolution No. -24 Page 17 of 24 March 12, 2024

64.Construct an asphalt concrete overlay for the entire width of the northern half of Oakley Road up to the median curb adjacent to the project to be coordinated with the pavement widening required for the project. The City Engineer shall determine the depth and extent of the overlay. The extent of utility trenching pavement repair must be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

65.Design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (Handicap Access) and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

66.DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
a) Collect and convey all stormwater entering and /or originating on this property, without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage facility, to an adequate natural watercourse having definable bed and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage facility that conveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse.
b) Submit a final hydrology and hydraulic report including 10-year and 100-year frequency event calculations for the proposed drainage system and stormwater pond to the city Engineer for review and approval. The report shall include study of the downstream storm drain facilities to confirm its adequacy and mitigate on-site so that the peak flows of post-project conditions do not exceed the pre-project peak flows. The report must include a narrative that describes the project’s proposed overland release for storm water runoff. In the event of a failure of the project’s storm drain system, the overland release path shall convey storm water runoff to a public street right-of-way or drainage channel.

All pad elevations shall be designed to be at a minimum 12 inches above the 100-year storm elevation scenario.
c) Design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Municipal Code and City design standards.
d) Prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner.
e) Dedicate a public drainage easement over the drainage system that conveys storm water run-off from public streets.
f) On-site parking areas and driveways shall not surface drain across public sidewalk or driveway aprons.

67.SIGHT DISTANCE EXHIBIT. For the project driveways’ ingress and egress, provide an exhibit that will analyze the sight distance required for the appropriate speed limit identified with this project as required by the City Engineer. 1190
Resolution No. -24 Page 18 of 24 March 12, 2024

68.DESIGN CHANGES. The Applicant's registered Engineer shall notify the City Engineer, in writing, at least 72 hours in advance of all differences between the proposed work and the design indicated on the plans. Any proposed changes shall be subject to the approval of the City before altered work is started. A plan revision must be submitted for approval by the City Engineer.

69.JOINT TRENCH PLANS. The applicant shall submit Joint Trench Composite Plans to the City for review prior to approval of improvement plans or recordation of the final map. The developer shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the improvement Plan submittals for the project. The composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans shall be signed by a licensed civil engineer. The joint trench plans shall include street and/or site lighting and associated photometrics. A letter shall be provided by PG&E stating that public streetlight billing will be per Rule LS2A, and that private lights shall be metered with billing to the owner. Pole numbers, assigned by PG&E, shall be clearly delineated on the plans.

70.UTILITIES & UNDERGROUNDING
a) Underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities per City of Oakley code section Title 6 Chapter 8 Underground Utility Districts. b) All utility boxes shall be installed underground, and all wires and cables must be installed in conduits. Compliance with this condition shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer.
c) Above ground utility boxes shall be camouflaged per the review and approval of the City Engineer.
d) A written approval from Diablo Water District and Iron House Sanitary District must be provided that all underground utility improvements have passed all testing requirements prior to commencement of paving a street.

71.The Developer must coordinate with the adjacent property owner west of the project to underground the existing utilities along Oakley Road as required by the Deferred Improvement Agreement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

72.STREETLIGHTS. Install streetlights along all public streets as required by the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall determine the final number and location of the lights, and the lights shall be on an LS2-A rate service. Streetlights shall be spun aluminum “cobra head” style or decorative residential streetlights as required by the City of Oakley Standard Plans.
1191
Resolution No. -24 Page 19 of 24 March 12, 2024

73.LANDSCAPING IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY
a) Prepare landscape plans for landscape improvements within the public right of way. Landscape plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.

b) Install public right-of-way landscaping along the project’s frontages as required by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. c) Maintain all landscaping within the public right-of-way until such time that the adjacent roadway improvements have been accepted for maintenance. d) Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy, an inspection will be performed to verify the health and location of the street trees. Trees in poor health or those without adequate clearance from utilities will require replacement or relocation.

74.FENCING. Any proposed fencing and walls shall be located on private property and maintained by the property owner or owner.

75.SOUNDWALL. Soundwalls along any right of way or public property shall be installed within private property and not within public right of way. The soundwall must match the proposed soundwalls in this area or as required to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

76.MAINTENANCE EXHIBIT. Submit a maintenance exhibit showing the responsible maintenance entity of proposed subdivision improvements. The exhibit must clearly show which areas are to be maintained by the City of Oakley. a) Parcels A, B, C, D, E, and F are to be retained and maintained by the Owner/Developer/HOA.
b) Bioretention Areas to be maintained by the Owner/Developer/HOA.

THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP:

77.BONDS. The applicant shall supply suitable securities for all improvements that are a part of the development in a form acceptable to the City in the amount of 100% (performance), 50% (labor and material) prior to issuance of any permit.

78.FINAL MAP. Submit a Final Map prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor. The final map shall be recorded, and the Subdivision Agreement must be executed before any building permits are issued. Insurance shall be provided per the terms of the Subdivision Agreement.
1192
Resolution No. -24 Page 20 of 24 March 12, 2024

79.DEDICATIONS. The following shall be dedicated on the final map. The dedication shall be recorded before any permits are issued and under specific timelines listed below:
a) Dedicate the required right-of-way along the project frontage on Oakley Road and MainStreet as shown in the typical sections of the Tentative Map.

b) Relinquish abutter’s rights of access along all non-primary frontages to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
c) Public Utility Easement (PUE): 5’ PUE beyond public right of way as required. d) Ingress-egress, storm drainage easements, emergency access easements as required.

Any necessary rights of way, rights of entry, permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or permanent, public and private road, utility and drainage improvements shall be furnished to the City. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant must provide the necessary documentation that any existing easements no longer necessary have been quitclaimed.

80.PRIVATE EASEMENTS. Agreements detailing rights, limitations, and responsibilities of involved parties shall accompany each private easement. The easements and associated agreements shall be recorded simultaneously with the final map.

81.UTILITY SETBACKS. Building foundations shall be set back from utility lines a sufficient distance to allow excavation of the utility without undermining the house foundation. The City Engineer shall determine the appropriate setback based on the depth of the utility, input from the project soils engineer, and the type of foundation.

82.DRAINAGE FEES. Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements as adopted by the County Board of Supervisors. The applicant shall pay the fee in effect at the time of final map approval. Certain improvements required by the Conditions of Approval for this development, or the Code may be eligible for credit or reimbursement against the drainage area fee. The developer should contact the City Engineer to personally determine the extent of any credit or reimbursement for which they might be eligible. Any credit or reimbursements shall be determined prior to filing the final map or as approved by the Flood Control District.
1193
Resolution No. -24 Page 21 of 24 March 12, 2024

83.ANNEXATIONS
a) The applicant shall establish a funding mechanism to cover the ongoing financial impact their project has on fire protection services provided in the City.

All costs associated with meeting this condition of approval shall be paid for by the applicant. Compliance with this requirement shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall be completed prior to final map approval. b) The applicant shall establish a funding mechanism to cover the ongoing financial impact their project has on police services provided in the City. All costs associated with meeting this condition of approval shall be paid for by the applicant. Compliance with this requirement shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall be completed prior to final map approval. c) The applicant shall establish a funding mechanism to cover the ongoing financial impact their project has on maintenance and operation services associated with public landscaping, parks, streetlighting, and stormwater facilities. All costs associated with meeting this condition of approval shall be paid for by the applicant. Compliance with this requirement shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall be completed prior to final map approval.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT:

84.PAD CERTIFICATION. A letter from a licensed land surveyor stating that the building pad was constructed in accordance with the approved plans shall be provided prior to the issuance of the building permit.

85.SOILS ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION. During construction, all excavations and grading shall be inspected by the applicant’s soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geotechnical report and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary.

The results of the construction observation and testing should be documented in an “as-built” letter/report prepared by the applicants’ soils engineer and submitted to the City before any building permit is granted.

86.AGREEMENT FOR STORMWATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS. The property owner shall enter into an agreement with the City for maintenance of the stormwater filtration devices required to be installed on this project. The agreement will specify that certain routine maintenance shall be performed by the property owner and will specify device maintenance reporting requirements. The agreement will also specify routine inspection requirements, permits and payment of fees. The agreement shall be recorded prior to release of any occupancy permits. 1194
Resolution No. -24 Page 22 of 24 March 12, 2024

87.AS-BUILT PLANS. After completion of the construction of all work, the original plans shall have all changes (change orders and field changes) clearly marked.

The "as-built" plans shall again be signed and "wet-stamped" by the civil engineer who prepared the plans, attesting to the changes. The original "as-built" plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Inspector. A Mylar and AutoCAD disk of the approved "as-built" plans shall be provided to the City before acceptance of improvements.

88.IMPACT FEES. Comply with the requirements of the development impact fees listed below, in addition to those noticed by the City Council in Resolution 85-00 and 08-03. The applicant shall pay the fees in the amounts in effect at the time each building permit is issued.
a) Traffic Impact Fee (authorized by Ordinance No. 14-00, adopted by Resolution 49-03, update Resolution No 91-21);
b) Regional Transportation Development Impact Mitigation Fee or any future alternative regional fee adopted by the City (authorized by Ordinance No. 14- 00, adopted by Resolution No. 73-05);
c) Park Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee (adopted by Ordinance No. 03-03, updated Resolution No. 48-17);
d) Park Impact Fee (authorized by Ordinance No. 05-00, adopted by Resolution No. 19-03, updated Resolution No. 48-17);
e) Public Facilities Fee (authorized by Ordinance No. 05-00, adopted by Resolution No. 18-03);
f) Fire Facilities Impact Fee (adopted by Resolution No. 24-21); g) General Plan Fee (adopted by Resolution No. 53-03);
h) East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan Fee (adopted by Ordinance 6-23).

The applicant should contact the City Engineer prior to constructing any public improvements to determine if any of the required improvements are eligible for credits or reimbursements against the applicable traffic benefit fees or from future developments. 1195
Resolution No. -24 Page 23 of 24 March 12, 2024

ADVISORY NOTES
The following Advisory Notes are provided to the applicant as a courtesy but are not a part of the conditions of approval. Advisory Notes are provided for the purpose of informing the applicant of additional ordinance requirements that must be met in order to proceed with development.

A. The applicant/owner should be aware of the expiration dates and renewing requirements prior to requesting building or grading permits.

B. The project will require a grading permit pursuant to the Oakley Municipal Code.

C. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of Ironhouse Sanitary District.

D. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Diablo Water District.

E. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa Water District.

F. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.

G. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of Contra Costa Environmental Health if subject to applicable permits.

H. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Division. Building permits are required prior to the construction of most structures.

I. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is the applicant’s responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Wildlife, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Game Code.

J. The applicant shall be responsible for paying applicable CEQA filing fees for the County Clerk for the Notice of Determination as well as the State Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Filing Fee.

K. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers.

It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to determine if a permit is required, and if it can be obtained.

L. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for construction within existing City rights of way.

M. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for construction within the State right of way.
1196
Resolution No. -24 Page 24 of 24 March 12, 2024
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 12th day of March 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTENTIONS:

APPROVED:

Anissa Williams, Mayor Date
ATTEST:

Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
1197
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 1
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Mitigation Monitoring Program
– January 2024
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines require Lead Agencies to adopt a program for monitoring the mitigation measures required to avoid significant environmental impacts of a project. The Mitigation Monitoring Program ensures that mitigation measures imposed by the City are completed at the appropriate time in the development process.

The mitigation measures identified in The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration are listed below along with the party responsible for implementation of the mitigation measure, the party responsible for monitoring implementation of the mitigation measure, the milestones for implementation and monitoring, and a sign off that the mitigation measure has been implemented.
1198
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 2
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
Cultural Resources
V (b,c). Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a
unique archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5; or disturb
any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated
cemetaries?
V-1. If buried archaeological, paleontological, and/or
cultural resources are encountered during site
grading or other site work, all such work shall be
halted immediately within 100 feet of the
discovery and the developer shall immediately
notify the City of Oakley Planning Division of the
discovery. In such case, the developer shall be
required, at their own expense, to retain the
services of a qualified archaeologist for the
purpose of recording, protecting, or curating the
discovery, as appropriate. The archaeologist shall
be required to submit to the City of Oakley
Planning Division for review and approval a report
of the findings and method of curation or
protection of the resources. Further grading or
site work within the area of discovery would not
be allowed until the preceding work has occurred.

The foregoing requirements shall be noted on the
project improvement plans and disclosed to any
subcontractors by the general contractor or job
superintendent during pre-construction meetings,
subject to review and approval by the City of
Oakley Planning Division.

V-2. Pursuant to State Health and Safety Code
§7050.5 (c) State Public Resources Code
§5097.98, if human bone or bone of unknown
origin is found during construction, all work shall
stop within 100 feet of the find and the Contra
Costa County Coroner shall be contacted
immediately. If the remains are determined to be
Native American, the Coroner shall notify the
Native American Heritage Commission, who shall
notify the person believed to be the most likely
descendant. The most likely descendant shall
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
Qualified
Archaeologist
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
Contra Costa
County
Coroner
Native
American
Heritage
If buried
archaeological,
paleontological,
and/or cultural
resources are
encounterd during
site grading or other
site work.

If human bone or
bone of unknown
origin is found
during construction.
1199
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 3
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
work with the contractor to develop a program for
re-internment of the human remains and any
associated artifacts. Additional work is not to take
place within 100 feet of the find until the identified
appropriate actions have been implemented.

The foregoing requirements shall be noted on the
project improvement plans and disclosed to any
subcontractors by the general contractor or job
superintendent during pre-construction meetings,
subject to review and approval of compliance by
the City of Oakley Planning Division.

Commission
Geology and Soils
VII (a[iii,iv],
c,d).

Would the project directly or indirectly
cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving seismic-related
ground failure, including liquefaction, or
landslides; or be located on a geologic
unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; or
be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
VII-1. Prior to approval of any grading permits, the
project Civil Engineer shall show on the project
plans that the project design adheres to all
engineering recommendations provided in the
site-specific Geotechnical Investigation prepared
for the proposed project by BAEZ Geotechnical
Group. Proof of compliance with all
recommendations specified in the Geotechnical
Investigation shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer.

The project plans shall include, but not be limited
to, engineering recommendations related to site
preparation and grading, utility trench excavation,
backfill, foundations, concrete slab-on-grade
floors, exterior concrete flatwork, retaining walls,
pavement areas, and project review and
construction monitoring.

The site demolition activities shall also specify
that any underground structures, such as
abandoned irrigation lines, septic tanks, and
leach fields, encountered during demolition and
construction shall be properly removed, all
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
City Engineer
Prior to approval of
any grading permits.
1200
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 4
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
excavations left open for backfilling, and loose
material created by the demolition of existing
structures should be excavated and replaced as
engineered fill.

VII (f). Would the project directly or indirectly
destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
VII-2. Implement Mitigation Measures V-1 and V-2. See Mitigation Measures V-1
and V-2
See Mitigation
Measures V-1 and
V-2.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
VIII (a,b). Would the project generate greenhouse
gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment; or conflict
with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gasses?
VIII-1. Consistent with the BAAQMD’s thresholds of
significance, prior to issuance of building permits
for the proposed project, the project applicant
shall demonstrate via project design and/or
notation included on project design that natural
gas infrastructure shall be prohibited. Natural gas
infrastructure may be allowed if the applicant
implements alternative methods that reduce the
project’s greenhouse gas emissions in an equally
effective or superior manner as would exist
without natural gas emission infrastructure.

Conformance with the foregoing requirement
shall be confirmed through review and approval
of building permit plans by the City of Oakley
Planning Division.

City of Oakley
Planning
Division
Prior to the issuance
of building permits.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
IX (b). Would the project create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
IX-1. Prior to initiation of construction activities on the proposed project site, the project applicant shall
complete an analysis of on-site soils to determine
whether substantial concentrations of
organochloride pesticides, arsenic, or other soil
contaminants are present above the applicable
direct exposure Environmental Screening Levels
(ESLs) set by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board, the residential screening levels set by the
Department of Toxic Substances Control’s
Human Health Risk Assessment Note 3, and/or
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
Prior to initiation of
construction
activities.
1201
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 5
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s
Regional Screening Levels for Region 9. If
contaminants are not detected above applicable
ESLs/RSLs, then further mitigation is not
required. If contaminants are detected above the
applicable ESLs/RSLs, then the soils shall be
remediated by off-hauling to a licensed landfill
facility. Such remediation activities shall be
performed by a licensed hazardous waste
contractor (Class A) and contractor personnel
that have completed 40-hour OSHA hazardous
training. Impacted soils shall be managed in
accordance with the recommendations of
applicable federal, State, and local standards, to
the satisfaction of the City of Oakley and the
Contra Costa County Environmental Health
Division. The results of soil sampling and
analysis, as well as verification of proper
remediation and disposal, shall be submitted to
the City of Oakley Planning Division for review
and approval.

IX-2. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit by the City for any on-site structures, the project applicant
shall provide a site assessment that determines
whether any structures to be demolished contain
lead-based paint (LBP), asbestos, mercury, or
polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Sampling shall be
conducted in accordance with the California
Department of Toxic Substances Control’s 2006
Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with
Potential Contamination from Lead based Paint,
Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers. If
structures do not contain the aforementioned
chemicals, further mitigation is not required;
however, if LBP is found, all loose and peeling
paint shall be removed and disposed of by a
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
City Engineer
Prior to issuance of
a demolition permit.
1202
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 6
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
licensed and certified lead paint removal
contractor, in accordance with CARB
recommendations and OSHA requirements. If
asbestos is found, all construction activities shall
comply with all requirements and regulations
promulgated through the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP). The demolition contractor shall be
informed that all paint on the buildings shall be
considered as containing lead and/or asbestos.

The contractor shall follow all work practice
standards set forth in the Asbestos National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(Asbestos NESHAP, 40 CFR, Part 61, Subpart M)
regulations, as well as Section V, Chapter 3 of the
OSHA Technical Manual. Should mercury or
polychlorinated biphenyl caulk be detected, the
removal, demolition, and disposal of such
chemicals shall be conducted in compliance with
California environmental regulations and policies.

Work practice standards generally include
appropriate precautions to protect construction
workers and the surrounding community, and
appropriate disposal methods for construction
waste containing lead paint or asbestos in
accordance with federal, State, and local
regulations subject to approval by the City
Engineer.

IX-3. During ground-disturbing activities, if one or more wells and/or septic systems are identified on-site,
the project applicant shall hire a licensed
contractor to obtain the applicable abandonment
permit from Contra Costa County Environmental
Health Division (CCCEHD), and properly
abandon the on-site wells and/or septic systems
CCCEHD
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
During grounddisturbing activities.
1203
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 7
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
for review and approval by the CCCEHD and the
City of Oakley Planning Division.

IX (f). Would the project impair
implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
IX-4. Prior to issuance of demolition or grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare and submit a
Traffic Control Plan to the City for review and
approval. The Traffic Control Plan shall include,
but not be limited to, the following items, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer:
• Truck drivers shall be notified of and
required to use the most direct route
between the site and SR 4, as determined
by the City Engineering Department;
• All site ingress and egress shall occur only
at the main driveways to the project site
and construction activities may require
installation of temporary (or ultimate)
traffic signals as determined by the City
Engineer;
• Specifically-designated travel routes for
large vehicles shall be monitored and
controlled by flaggers for large
construction vehicle ingress and egress;
• Warning signs indicating frequent truck
entry and exit shall be posted on Oakley
Road and Main Street;
• Any debris and mud on nearby streets
caused by trucks shall be monitored daily
and may require instituting a street
cleaning program;
• Construction employee parking shall be
provided on the project site to eliminate
conflicts with nearby areas. Construction
of the project shall be staggered so that
employee parking demand is met primarily
by using on-site parking; and
City of Oakley
Planning
Division
City Engineer
Prior to issuance of
demolition or
grading permits.
1204
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 8
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
• If importation and exportation of material
becomes a traffic nuisance, the City
Engineer shall limit the hours the activities
can take place.

Noise
XIII (a). Would the project result in generation of
a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinacnce, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
XIII-1. Prior to approval of grading permits, the following criteria shall be established and noted on graded
plans, subject to review and approval by the City
of Oakley Planning Division:
• Construction activities shall be limited to
between the daytime hours of 7:30 AM to
7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and 9:00
AM to 7:00 PM on Saturdays, Sundays,
and holidays.
• Construction equipment shall be properly
maintained and equipped with noisereduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with
manufacturers’ recommendations.

Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed
during equipment operation.
• When not in use, motorized construction
equipment shall not be left idling for more
than five minutes.
• Stationary equipment (power generators,
compressors, etc.) shall be located at the
furthest practical distance from nearby
noise-sensitive land uses or sufficiently
shielded to reduce noise-related impacts.

City of Oakley
Planning
Division
Prior to the approval
of grading permits.
1205
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
XIII (b). Would the project result in the
generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
XIII-2. Throughout the duration of construction, any
compaction required within 26 feet from the
adjacent residential structures to the north and
west shall be accomplished by using static drum
rollers, which use weight instead of vibrations to
achieve soil compaction. As an alternative to this
requirement, preconstruction crack
documentation and construction vibration
monitoring could be conducted to ensure that
construction vibrations do not cause damage to
any adjacent structures. Proof of compliance with
this measure shall be submitted to the City of
Oakley Public Works and Engineering
Department for review and approval.

City of Oakley
Public Works
and
Engineering
Department
Throughout the
duration of
construction.

Transportation
XVII (c,d). Would the project substantially increase
hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment); or result in
inadequate emergency access ?
XVII-1. Implement Mitigation Measure IX-4. See Mitigation Measure IX-4
See Mitigation
Measure IX-4.

Tribal Cultural Resources
XVIII (a,b). Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource listed or eligible
for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020. 1(k); or a resource
determined by the lead agency, in its
descretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section
5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
XVIII-1. Implement Mitigation Measures V-1 and V-2. See Mitigation Measures V-1
and V-2
See Mitigation
Measures V-1 and
V-2.
1206
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 10
Mitigation Monitoring Program Janaury 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Impact
Number Impact Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Agency
Implementation
Schedule
Signoff
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.
1207
Business Name Primary Contact Email Address Primary Address Phone # Full Primary Address Active Licenses ASUCENA'S TAX SERVICES, LLC [email protected] (925) 642-9094 333 SLATE ST OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
BMO BANK N.A. [email protected] (925) 625-2211 2195 MAIN ST
OAKLEY CA 94561

BUSINESS LICENSE
CACHIROS YARD MAINTENANCE [email protected] (925) 978-3377 5328 ELM LN OAKLEY CA 94561

BUSINESS LICENSE
CHELYS HOUSE CLEANING [email protected] (925) 354-1801 5328 ELM LN OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
HAUOLI CO LLC [email protected] (510) 393-3202 67 SUN CHASE CT OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
JENELLE'S TREASURES [email protected] (510) 757-6100 5685 MAIN ST

RANCHO CO-OP
OAKLEY CA 94561

BUSINESS LICENSE
JTB JAVIER THE BARBER [email protected] (925) 303-0455 3460 MAIN ST

MAIN STREET SALON SUITES
OAKLEY CA 94561

BUSINESS LICENSE
PIN-CO STUCCO INC [email protected] (925) 848-6986 313 DEERPARK WAY OAKLEY CA 94561-3160

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE

PORTERFIELD'S MARKETING

CONSULTANTS
[email protected] (925) 628-2576 4650 WINCHESTER DR OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE

RISING SUN HR, A PROFESSIONAL

CORPORATION
[email protected] (510) 269-7608 1458 BIG REDWOOD DR
OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
RONZ TUTORING [email protected] (925) 252-3444 517 BRINWOOD WAY OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
S&S SCRAP & METAL, LTD., LLC (916) 254-9619 252 AGATA WAY OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
ZIPPY'S HAUL SERVICES AND MORE [email protected] (925) 698-7926 20 MINARET RD OAKLEY CA 94561

HOME BASED BUSINESS LICENSE
1208