Agenda packet — Oakley City Council, April 28, 2026 (part 2 of 4)

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
352

0.566 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

F Level Of Service:

93.0 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Two-way stop Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Exit Pocket Length [ft]
0 0 0 0 0 0 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 0 0 0 1 0 0 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width [ft]
Right Left Thru Left Right Thru Turning Movement
Lane Configuration
Westbound Southbound Northbound Approach
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Intersection Setup
0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
221 59 729 194 73 387 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
55 15 182 48 18 97 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Other Adjustment Factor

0.8600 0.8600 0.7800 0.7800 0.9000 0.9000 Peak Hour Factor 190 51 569 151 66 348 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Growth Factor

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 190 51 569 151 66 348 Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Volumes
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
T
.J
-
;
353
Intersection LOS F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 12.87
Approach LOS A A F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 1.89 70.23
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 15.98 0.00 219.46 219.46 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 8.78 8.78 Movement LOS A A A A F F
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 8.97 0.00 92.97 64.16 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.01 0.57 0.35
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 1: 1 Existing Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
354
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.484
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 16.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 100.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ ., Ir ., ,.. ., I ,-.
355
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 1 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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 102 2 126 5 0 15 1 412 104 75 311 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 26 1 32 1 0 4 0 103 26 19 78 0 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 0.8400 0.8400 0.8400 0.6500 0.6500 0.6500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9100 0.9100 0.9100 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 86 2 106 3 0 10 1 379 96 68 283 0 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 86 2 106 3 0 10 1 379 96 68 283 0 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
356
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0
Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
357
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 86.69 2.50 0.00 11.28 3.56 173.99 35.02 29.05 29.05 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.47 0.10 0.00 0.45 0.14 6.96 1.40 1.16 1.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 48.16 1.39 0.00 6.27 1.98 96.66 19.46 16.14 16.14 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.93 0.06 0.00 0.25 0.08 3.87 0.78 0.65 0.65 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes No No
Lane Group LOS B C A D F B C A A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 19.97 24.34 0.00 44.96 272.00 16.44 26.58 8.64 8.64 X, volume / capacity 0.80 0.23 0.00 0.79 0.99 0.80 0.79 0.20 0.20 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.95 2.05 0.00 22.52 249.23 3.40 5.30 0.18 0.18 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 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 0.15 0.04 0.15 0.15 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 18.02 22.29 0.00 22.44 22.77 13.04 21.28 8.46 8.46 c, Capacity [veh/h] 288 21 22 19 1 642 95 767 767
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1645 1752 1840 1564 1752 1768 1752 1840 1840 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.29 0.04 0.08 0.08 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.36 0.05 0.42 0.42 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 1 1 1 0 16 2 19 19
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45
Lane Group C L C R L C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
358
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 19.97 19.97 19.97 24.34 0.00 44.96 272.00 16.44 16.44 26.58 8.64 8.64 Movement LOS B B B C A D F B B C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 19.97 39.81 16.93 12.13
Approach LOS B D B B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 16.33
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.484
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 34.67 34.67 34.67 34.67
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.047 2.140 2.476 2.508 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] 667 667 1333 1333 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 20.00 5.00 5.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.939 1.593 2.413 1.878 Bicycle LOS A A B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
359
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.575
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 13.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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 Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Delta Rd Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 99 228 57 14 162 24 35 115 53 51 100 25 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 25 57 14 4 40 6 9 29 13 13 25 6 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9800 0.9800 0.9800 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 88 203 51 13 149 22 34 113 52 43 85 21 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] 88 203 51 13 149 22 34 113 52 43 85 21 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Delta Rd Delta Rd
Volumes
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
360
Intersection LOS B
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 13.01
Approach LOS C B B B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 15.42 11.27 11.60 11.37
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 91.94 33.71 35.50 30.08 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 3.68 1.35 1.42 1.20
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.57 0.32 0.33 0.29
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 668 634 620 605
Lanes
Intersection Settings
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
361
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.386
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 32.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 480.00 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 100.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. , I,-. ,,Ir ,,..
362
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 1 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 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] 153 416 106 108 370 147 172 169 128 67 110 66 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 38 104 26 27 93 37 43 42 32 17 28 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 136 370 94 95 326 129 165 162 123 58 95 57 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 136 370 94 95 326 129 165 162 123 58 95 57 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
363
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 15 38 0 15 38 0 18 40 0 22 44 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 40 0 16 40 0 16 20 0 16 20 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 115
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
364
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 202.66 151.94 143.10 142.87 161.86 149.39 110.30 203.12 155.19 91.22 221.41 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.11 6.08 5.72 5.71 6.47 5.98 4.41 8.12 6.21 3.65 8.86 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 114.80 84.41 79.50 79.37 89.92 82.99 61.28 115.13 86.22 50.68 128.47 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.59 3.38 3.18 3.17 3.60 3.32 2.45 4.61 3.45 2.03 5.14 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 E D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 58.05 12.63 12.69 56.68 13.89 14.00 54.36 48.62 47.94 59.32 53.79 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.25 0.25 0.81 0.26 0.26 0.74 0.68 0.61 0.77 0.86 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] 6.64 0.57 0.61 4.35 0.62 0.69 1.75 1.21 1.04 5.30 4.04 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 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.41 12.07 12.08 52.33 13.27 13.30 52.61 47.41 46.90 54.03 49.75 c, Capacity [veh/h] 170 1069 995 134 1031 933 232 249 211 87 205 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1726 1767 1855 1679 3431 1855 1573 1767 1730 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.09 0.08 0.04 0.10 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.10 0.58 0.58 0.08 0.56 0.56 0.07 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.12 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 11 66 66 9 64 64 8 15 15 6 14 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C
Lane Group Calculations
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
365
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 58.05 12.65 12.69 56.68 13.92 14.00 54.36 48.62 47.94 59.32 53.79 53.79 Movement LOS E B B E B B D D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 22.95 21.33 50.54 55.31
Approach LOS C C D E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 32.79
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.386
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 7881.94 0.00 0.00 3329.98 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 47.03 47.03 47.03 47.03
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.634 2.644 2.655 2.189 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] 565 565 602 677 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 29.59 29.59 28.11 25.19
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.116 2.075 2.333 1.961 Bicycle LOS B B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
366

0.375 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

F Level Of Service:

54.3 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Two-way stop Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width [ft]
Right Left Thru Left Right Thru Turning Movement
Lane Configuration
Westbound Southbound Northbound Approach
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Intersection Setup
0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
141 51 489 123 104 598 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
35 13 122 31 26 149 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Other Adjustment Factor

0.9500 0.9500 0.9100 0.9100 0.9400 0.9400 Peak Hour Factor 134 48 445 112 98 562 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Growth Factor

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 134 48 445 112 98 562 Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Volumes
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
T
.J
-
;
367
Intersection LOS F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 5.95
Approach LOS A A E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 1.94 40.51
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 11.91 0.00 112.44 112.44 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 4.50 4.50 Movement LOS A A A A F E
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 9.67 0.00 54.31 35.52 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.37 0.30
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 3: 3 Existing Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
368
Stonecreek Residential TIS C
Appendix C: Existing plus Project Conditions
Capacity Analysis Worksheets
369
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.561
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 17.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 100.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ ., Ir ., ,.. ., I ,-.
370
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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 160 6 62 1 3 12 14 357 230 136 716 1 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 40 2 16 0 1 3 3 89 57 34 179 0 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 0.6900 0.6900 0.6900 0.8100 0.8100 0.8100 0.7000 0.7000 0.7000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 123 5 48 1 2 8 11 289 186 95 501 1 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 27 0 1 0 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 96 5 47 1 2 8 11 289 177 95 501 1 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
371
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0
Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
372
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 115.67 0.63 1.92 11.57 16.55 246.45 73.09 85.53 85.49 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.63 0.03 0.08 0.46 0.66 9.86 2.92 3.42 3.42 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 64.26 0.35 1.07 6.43 9.20 147.02 40.60 47.51 47.49 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.57 0.01 0.04 0.26 0.37 5.88 1.62 1.90 1.90 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes No No
Lane Group LOS C C C E E B C A A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 24.62 27.91 29.04 55.60 75.53 19.38 27.17 9.28 9.28 X, volume / capacity 0.81 0.06 0.17 0.79 0.92 0.85 0.77 0.39 0.39 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 2.17 0.53 1.63 28.03 47.89 4.23 2.70 0.40 0.40 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 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 0.15 0.04 0.15 0.15 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 22.45 27.38 27.40 27.57 27.64 15.15 24.47 8.88 8.88 c, Capacity [veh/h] 281 17 18 15 15 692 176 909 908
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1699 1752 1840 1564 1752 1721 1752 1840 1839 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.34 0.08 0.19 0.19 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.40 0.10 0.49 0.49 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 9 1 1 1 0 22 6 27 27
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Lane Group C L C R L C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
373
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 24.62 24.62 24.62 27.91 29.04 55.60 75.53 19.38 19.38 27.17 9.28 9.28 Movement LOS C C C C C E E B B C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 24.62 48.89 20.69 12.13
Approach LOS C D C B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 17.18
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.561
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 34.67 34.67 34.67 34.67
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.199 2.146 2.675 2.648 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] 667 667 1333 1333 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 20.00 5.00 5.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.936 1.586 2.551 2.263 Bicycle LOS A A B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
374
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.353
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 10.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 39 104 43 3 166 91 44 82 53 47 78 4 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 10 26 11 1 41 23 11 20 13 12 19 1 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 0.8400 0.8400 0.8400 0.8700 0.8700 0.8700 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 0.8100 0.8100 0.8100 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 33 87 36 3 144 79 34 63 41 38 63 3 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 2 64 21 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 33 86 36 3 142 15 13 63 41 38 63 3 Name
Volumes
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
375
Intersection LOS B
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 10.12
Approach LOS A B A A
Approach Delay [s/veh] 9.90 10.52 10.00 9.78
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 26.35 39.80 25.73 18.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 1.05 1.59 1.03 0.72
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.26 0.35 0.26 0.20
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 707 737 692 659
Lanes
Intersection Settings
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
376
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.056
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 13.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: Sellers Rd/Street B
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 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] 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 Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Street B
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 22 148 0 0 274 9 28 0 66 0 0 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 6 37 0 0 69 2 7 0 17 0 0 0 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] 22 148 0 0 274 9 28 0 66 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 22 0 0 0 0 9 28 0 66 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] 0 148 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Street B
Volumes
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
377
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.28
Approach LOS A A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 1.02 0.00 11.40 11.62
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 1.31 1.31 1.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.45 12.45 12.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A B B B B B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 7.86 0.00 0.00 7.51 0.00 0.00 13.17 13.38 10.65 13.36 12.51 9.01 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.09 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 No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop
Intersection Settings
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
378
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.620
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 47.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 480.00 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 100.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. , I,-. ,,Ir ,,..
379
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 1 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 2 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 2 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] 196 435 114 76 581 205 196 62 130 263 242 155 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 49 109 28 19 145 51 49 16 33 66 60 39 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 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.9000 0.9000 0.9000 0.6700 0.6700 0.6700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 157 348 91 61 465 164 176 56 117 176 162 104 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 107 348 91 61 465 164 176 56 101 176 162 104 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
380
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 15 38 0 15 38 0 18 40 0 22 44 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 40 0 16 40 0 16 20 0 16 20 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 115
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
381
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 358.08 212.08 201.58 102.01 332.19 310.79 125.54 68.29 151.74 383.09 437.78 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 14.32 8.48 8.06 4.08 13.29 12.43 5.02 2.73 6.07 15.32 17.51 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 218.84 121.64 114.02 56.67 212.62 195.99 69.74 37.94 84.30 252.73 296.56 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.75 4.87 4.56 2.27 8.50 7.84 2.79 1.52 3.37 10.11 11.86 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Lane Group LOS F C C E C C D D D F D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 135.52 20.51 20.61 58.59 27.06 27.42 54.00 42.13 44.87 83.83 51.46 X, volume / capacity 1.15 0.33 0.33 0.78 0.52 0.53 0.76 0.21 0.52 0.95 0.94 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] 83.56 1.02 1.11 4.96 2.49 2.79 1.80 0.13 0.62 35.75 8.85 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 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.37 0.09 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.96 19.49 19.50 53.63 24.57 24.63 52.21 42.00 44.24 48.08 42.61 c, Capacity [veh/h] 170 861 800 98 785 711 256 296 250 276 423 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1724 1767 1855 1679 3431 1855 1565 1767 1735 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.04 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.15 0.23 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.10 0.46 0.46 0.05 0.42 0.42 0.07 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.24 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 11 53 53 6 49 49 9 18 18 18 28 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C
Lane Group Calculations
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
382
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 135.52 20.54 20.61 58.59 27.16 27.42 54.00 42.13 44.87 83.83 51.46 51.46 Movement LOS F C C E C C D D D F D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 50.80 30.00 49.05 64.36
Approach LOS D C D E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 47.16
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.620
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 1963.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 47.03 47.03 47.03 47.03
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.759 2.740 2.688 2.298 Crosswalk LOS C 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] 565 565 602 677 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 29.59 29.61 28.11 25.18
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.174 2.271 2.200 2.649 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
383

0.793 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

F Level Of Service:
195.3 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Two-way stop Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width [ft]
Right Left Thru Left Right Thru Turning Movement
Lane Configuration
Westbound Southbound Northbound Approach
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Intersection Setup
0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
279 76 729 214 79 387 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
70 19 182 54 20 97 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Other Adjustment Factor

0.8600 0.8600 0.7800 0.7800 0.9000 0.9000 Peak Hour Factor 240 65 569 167 71 348 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
50 14 0 16 5 0 Other Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Growth Factor

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 190 51 569 151 66 348 Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Volumes
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
T
.J
-
;
384
Intersection LOS F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 35.38
Approach LOS A A F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 2.06 170.30
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 18.12 0.00 414.04 414.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.00 16.56 16.56 Movement LOS A A A A F F
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 9.09 0.00 195.31 163.49 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.79 0.44
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 5: 5 Existing plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
385
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.520
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 17.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 100.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ ., Ir ., ,.. ., I ,-.
386
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 1 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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 124 2 127 5 0 15 1 412 138 76 311 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 31 1 32 1 0 4 0 103 35 19 78 0 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 0.8400 0.8400 0.8400 0.6500 0.6500 0.6500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9100 0.9100 0.9100 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 104 2 107 3 0 10 1 379 127 69 283 0 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 18 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 86 2 106 3 0 10 1 379 96 68 283 0 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
387
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 0
Control Type Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
388
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 106.61 2.75 0.00 12.01 3.64 204.46 39.00 31.90 31.90 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.26 0.11 0.00 0.48 0.15 8.18 1.56 1.28 1.28 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 59.23 1.53 0.00 6.67 2.02 116.10 21.67 17.72 17.72 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.37 0.06 0.00 0.27 0.08 4.64 0.87 0.71 0.71 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes No No
Lane Group LOS C C A D F B C A A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 21.27 26.27 0.00 46.81 279.69 17.55 28.22 8.77 8.77 X, volume / capacity 0.81 0.23 0.00 0.79 1.00 0.82 0.78 0.19 0.19 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.99 2.04 0.00 22.41 254.95 3.72 5.12 0.17 0.17 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 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 0.15 0.04 0.15 0.15 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 19.28 24.23 0.00 24.39 24.75 13.83 23.10 8.61 8.61 c, Capacity [veh/h] 311 21 22 19 1 667 97 802 802
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1653 1752 1840 1564 1752 1751 1752 1840 1840 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.31 0.04 0.08 0.08 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.19 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.38 0.06 0.44 0.44 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 9 1 1 1 0 19 3 22 22
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49
Lane Group C L C R L C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
389
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 21.27 21.27 21.27 26.27 0.00 46.81 279.69 17.55 17.55 28.22 8.77 8.77 Movement LOS C C C C A D F B B C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 21.27 41.67 18.02 12.59
Approach LOS C D B B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 17.36
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.520
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 34.67 34.67 34.67 34.67
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.094 2.140 2.497 2.509 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] 667 667 1333 1333 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 20.00 5.00 5.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.977 1.593 2.469 1.879 Bicycle LOS A A B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
390
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.630
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 15.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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 Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Delta Rd Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 99 230 57 14 163 71 108 115 53 51 100 25 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 25 58 14 4 41 18 27 29 13 13 25 6 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9800 0.9800 0.9800 0.8500 0.8500 0.8500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 88 205 51 13 150 65 106 113 52 43 85 21 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 2 0 0 1 43 72 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] 88 203 51 13 149 22 34 113 52 43 85 21 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Delta Rd Delta Rd
Volumes
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
391
Intersection LOS C
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 15.31
Approach LOS C B B B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 18.33 13.25 14.78 12.46
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 110.39 50.93 64.11 33.82 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 4.42 2.04 2.56 1.35
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.63 0.42 0.48 0.32
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 613 597 578 555
Lanes
Intersection Settings
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
392
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.043
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 13.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: Sellers Rd/Street B
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 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] 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 Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Street B
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 74 194 0 0 164 32 19 0 44 0 0 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 19 49 0 0 41 8 5 0 11 0 0 0 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] 74 194 0 0 164 32 19 0 44 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 74 0 0 0 0 32 19 0 44 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] 0 194 0 0 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd Street B
Volumes
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
393
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.39
Approach LOS A A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 2.14 0.00 10.91 12.20
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 4.26 4.26 4.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.73 7.73 7.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A B B A B B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 7.76 0.00 0.00 7.61 0.00 0.00 13.66 13.89 9.73 13.84 13.52 9.25 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.05 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 No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop
Intersection Settings
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
394
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.411
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 39.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 480.00 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 100.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. , I,-. ,,Ir ,,..
395
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 1 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 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] 190 416 106 108 370 147 172 169 186 67 110 66 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 47 104 26 27 93 37 43 42 47 17 28 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.8600 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 169 370 94 95 326 129 165 162 179 58 95 57 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 136 370 94 95 326 129 165 162 123 58 95 57 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
396
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 15 38 0 15 38 0 18 40 0 22 44 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 40 0 16 40 0 16 20 0 16 20 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 115
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
397
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 329.60 153.93 144.71 142.87 163.72 151.10 110.30 202.07 227.74 91.22 219.19 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 13.18 6.16 5.79 5.71 6.55 6.04 4.41 8.08 9.11 3.65 8.77 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 200.45 85.52 80.39 79.37 90.96 83.94 61.28 114.37 133.13 50.68 126.84 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.02 3.42 3.22 3.17 3.64 3.36 2.45 4.57 5.33 2.03 5.07 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes No No Yes Yes No Lane Group LOS F B B E B B D D D E D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 119.95 12.87 12.93 56.68 14.14 14.25 54.36 48.06 52.11 59.32 52.52 X, volume / capacity 1.12 0.25 0.26 0.81 0.26 0.27 0.74 0.66 0.86 0.77 0.83 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] 67.99 0.58 0.62 4.35 0.63 0.71 1.75 1.08 3.70 5.30 3.22 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 0.10 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.96 12.29 12.31 52.33 13.51 13.54 52.61 46.98 48.41 54.03 49.30 c, Capacity [veh/h] 170 1062 988 134 1024 926 232 256 218 87 212 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1726 1767 1855 1679 3431 1855 1573 1767 1730 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.04 0.10 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.10 0.57 0.57 0.08 0.55 0.55 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.12 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 11 66 66 9 64 64 8 16 16 6 14 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C
Lane Group Calculations
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
398
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 119.95 12.89 12.93 56.68 14.17 14.25 54.36 48.06 52.11 59.32 52.52 52.52 Movement LOS F B B E B B D D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 41.47 21.53 51.55 54.40
Approach LOS D C D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 39.57
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.411
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 7155.80 0.00 0.00 3329.98 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 47.03 47.03 47.03 47.03
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.659 2.644 2.676 2.189 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] 565 565 602 677 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 29.59 29.59 28.11 25.19
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.147 2.075 2.429 1.961 Bicycle LOS B B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
399

0.590 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

F Level Of Service:
113.5 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Two-way stop Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width [ft]
Right Left Thru Left Right Thru Turning Movement
Lane Configuration
Westbound Southbound Northbound Approach
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Intersection Setup
0 0 0 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
176 61 489 185 121 598 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
44 15 122 46 30 149 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Other Adjustment Factor

0.9500 0.9500 0.9100 0.9100 0.9400 0.9400 Peak Hour Factor 167 58 445 168 114 562 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
33 10 0 56 16 0 Other Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Growth Factor

2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 134 48 445 112 98 562 Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Volumes
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
T
.J
-
;
400
Intersection LOS F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 14.73
Approach LOS A A F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 2.79 93.38
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 19.76 0.00 224.40 224.40 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.00 8.98 8.98 Movement LOS A A B A F F
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 10.17 0.00 113.46 86.42 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.59 0.38
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 6: 6 Existing plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
401

0.677 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

B Level Of Service:

18.9 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Signalized Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk
No No No Curb Present

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

0.718 Volume to Capacity (v/c):

C Level Of Service:

24.4 Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutes Analysis Period:

HCM 6th Edition Analysis Method:

Signalized Control Type:

Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
No No No Crosswalk
No No No Curb Present

0.00 0.00 0.00 Grade [%]

40.00 40.00 40.00 Speed [mph]

12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Lane Width [ft]
Right Left Thru Left Right Thru Turning Movement
Lane Configuration
Westbound Southbound Northbound Approach
Delta Rd Main S Brentwood Blvd Name
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 12: 12 Existing plus Project Conditions PM Mitigations Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
T
.J
-
;
407
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 598 121 185 489 61 176
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 149 30 46 122 15 44
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9400 0.9400 0.9100 0.9100 0.9500 0.9500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 562 114 168 445 58 167
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 16 56 0 10 33
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 562 98 112 445 48 134
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 12: 12 Existing plus Project Conditions PM Mitigations Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
408
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 10 0 0 10 10 0
Walk [s] 5 0 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 0 30 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 0 5 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 6 0 5 2 4 0
Control Type Permissive Permissive Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 12: 12 Existing plus Project Conditions PM Mitigations Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
409
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 419.54 123.64 73.22 154.20 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 16.78 4.95 2.93 6.17 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 281.87 68.69 40.68 85.67 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.27 2.75 1.63 3.43 Critical Lane Group Yes Yes No Yes
Lane Group LOS C C A C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 34.01 31.60 4.93 29.99
X, volume / capacity 0.95 0.80 0.43 0.83
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
d2, Incremental Delay [s] 18.31 6.21 0.37 6.21
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
k, delay calibration 0.38 0.11 0.15 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 15.70 25.39 4.56 23.78
c, Capacity [veh/h] 759 232 1134 285
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1631 1599 1679 1468
(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.44 0.12 0.29 0.16 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.47 0.14 0.68 0.19
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 29 9 41 12
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
C, Cycle Length [s] 61 61 61 61
Lane Group C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 12: 12 Existing plus Project Conditions PM Mitigations Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
410
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 34.01 34.01 31.60 4.93 29.99 29.99 Movement LOS C C C A C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 34.01 12.25 29.99
Approach LOS C B C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 24.43
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.718
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 667 667 667 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 20.00 20.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.746 2.672 1.951 Bicycle LOS B B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
11/16/2023
Scenario 12: 12 Existing plus Project Conditions PM Mitigations Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
411
Stonecreek Residential TIS D
Appendix D: Background Conditions
Capacity Analysis Worksheets
412
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.722
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 40.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
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] 150.00 100.00 150.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 185.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., J.rr irr ., II J. .,.,1,..
413
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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 191 87 314 19 312 175 75 570 195 840 1410 17 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 48 22 79 5 78 44 19 143 49 210 353 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 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 0.6900 0.6900 0.6900 0.8100 0.8100 0.8100 0.7000 0.7000 0.7000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 147 67 242 13 215 121 61 462 158 588 987 12 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] 9 10 27 5 8 28 29 21 8 79 46 6 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] 30 52 167 7 205 85 21 152 18 214 640 5 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 96 5 47 1 2 8 11 289 127 295 301 1 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
414
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 21 0 0 21 0 11 24 0 14 27 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 5 0 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 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 Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 80
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
415
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 210.14 164.75 131.26 336.89 80.11 96.34 246.50 240.84 378.37 574.29 577.74 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.41 6.59 5.25 13.48 3.20 3.85 9.86 9.63 15.13 22.97 23.11 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 120.23 91.53 72.92 216.29 44.51 53.52 147.06 142.84 248.98 408.55 411.42 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.81 3.66 2.92 8.65 1.78 2.14 5.88 5.71 9.96 16.34 16.46 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes No No No No Yes Lane Group LOS D D D D C E D D D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 48.26 44.67 43.60 49.70 34.90 59.45 38.68 40.46 40.26 35.62 36.08 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.65 0.65 0.88 0.31 0.77 0.70 0.72 0.91 0.91 0.92 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] 5.59 2.93 1.84 10.16 0.31 11.75 1.24 2.87 4.04 8.00 8.38 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 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42.66 41.74 41.76 39.54 34.59 47.70 37.44 37.59 36.22 27.62 27.70 c, Capacity [veh/h] 243 237 383 375 566 98 739 340 920 783 779 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1752 1710 2768 1835 2768 1752 3503 1613 3403 1840 1832 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.25 0.39 0.39 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.27 0.43 0.43 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 14 14 14 21 21 6 22 22 28 43 43 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
416
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 48.26 44.67 43.79 49.70 49.70 34.90 59.45 38.84 40.46 40.26 35.85 36.08 Movement LOS D D D D D C E D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 45.38 44.58 41.05 37.48
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 40.16
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.722
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 29.76 29.76 29.76 29.76
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.971 2.516 3.084 3.323 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] 425 425 450 525 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 24.81 24.81 24.03 21.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.536 2.395 2.022 3.430 Bicycle LOS B B B C
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - 8 4 2 1 Ring 1
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
417
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.377
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 48.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Sellers Ave/Laurel Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Thru Thru Right Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., II Irr ., ., r
418
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 23 171 264 679 295 60
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 6 43 66 170 74 15
Other Adjustment Factor 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 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 23 171 264 679 295 60
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 78 27 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 10 34 401 218 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 23 13 5 0 0 10
Growth Factor 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 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 148 224 200 50 50
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Volumes
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
419
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 10 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 5 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 35 31 65 0 69 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 30 30 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 5 5 0 5 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 6 0 4 0
Control Type Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fixed time
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
420
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 38.18 150.51 334.82 468.15 191.89 75.40 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.53 6.02 13.39 18.73 7.68 3.02 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 21.21 83.62 214.67 321.19 107.05 41.89 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.85 3.34 8.59 12.85 4.28 1.68 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes Yes No
Lane Group LOS E E D D D C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 57.68 64.77 43.19 52.59 35.84 33.80 X, volume / capacity 0.08 0.33 0.43 0.74 0.25 0.11
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.52 1.75 2.26 5.44 0.49 0.40 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 57.16 63.02 40.93 47.15 35.35 33.40 c, Capacity [veh/h] 294 512 607 914 1197 550
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1603 3204 1683 2532 3113 1431 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.05 0.16 0.27 0.09 0.04 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.18 0.16 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.38
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 31 27 61 61 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 169 169 169 169 169 169
Lane Group L C C R L R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
421
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 57.68 64.77 43.19 52.59 35.84 33.80 Movement LOS E E D D D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 63.93 49.96 35.50
Approach LOS E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 48.33
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.377
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 41.41 41.41 41.41
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.348 2.764 2.547 Crosswalk LOS B C B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 540 1220 1300 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 26.65 7.61 6.13
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.720 3.116 1.560 Bicycle LOS A C A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
422
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.332
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 10.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 89 85 3 152 49 22 63 44 158 63 3 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 22 21 1 38 12 6 16 11 40 16 1 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] 34 89 85 3 152 49 22 63 44 158 63 3 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 2 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] 1 1 49 0 7 27 9 0 3 120 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 7 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] 33 86 36 3 142 15 13 63 41 38 63 3 Name
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
423
Intersection LOS B
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 10.22
Approach LOS B B A B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.02 10.11 9.39 10.98
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 29.90 29.70 17.03 36.39 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 1.20 1.19 0.68 1.46
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.29 0.29 0.19 0.33
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 720 710 692 674
Lanes
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
424
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.789
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 52.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 49.21 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 1150.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 160.00 240.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. ,llr ,llr ,llr
425
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 1 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 2 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 2 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] 216 426 193 78 620 378 162 401 134 315 1175 224 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 54 107 48 19 155 94 41 100 34 79 294 56 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 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.9000 0.9000 0.9000 0.6700 0.6700 0.6700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 173 341 154 62 496 302 146 361 121 211 787 150 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] 36 4 6 1 2 0 2 33 0 17 64 7 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] 30 39 5 0 29 288 18 214 20 18 338 39 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 23 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 107 298 141 61 465 14 126 106 101 176 362 104 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
426
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 22 40 0 22 40 0 22 39 0 39 56 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 11 33 0 11 33 0 14 35 0 18 39 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 140
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
427
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 381.71 348.62 320.79 129.37 366.34 514.71 268.10 242.72 168.53 460.95 681.91 244.73 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 15.27 13.94 12.83 5.17 14.65 20.59 10.72 9.71 6.74 18.44 27.28 9.79 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 251.63 225.48 203.75 71.87 239.45 359.28 163.31 144.24 93.63 315.33 498.78 145.74 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 10.07 9.02 8.15 2.87 9.58 14.37 6.53 5.77 3.75 12.61 19.95 5.83 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS F D D E D E E D D E D C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 101.03 37.43 37.75 70.87 46.04 64.87 79.69 43.36 42.06 74.45 46.80 34.82 X, volume / capacity 0.95 0.49 0.49 0.80 0.61 0.85 0.88 0.44 0.33 0.93 0.96 0.41 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 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 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 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 40.47 2.56 2.87 5.55 2.79 17.97 17.93 0.12 0.17 18.70 2.27 0.18 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 k, delay calibration 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.17 0.04 0.04 0.20 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 60.56 34.86 34.88 65.32 43.25 46.90 61.76 43.24 41.89 55.75 44.54 34.64 c, Capacity [veh/h] 227 666 597 98 1010 445 185 917 408 337 1230 549 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1662 1767 3532 1557 1767 3532 1569 1767 3532 1577 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.04 0.18 0.24 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.18 0.33 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.10 0.26 0.26 0.19 0.35 0.35 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 18 50 50 8 40 40 15 36 36 27 49 49 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 Lane Group L C C L C R L C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
428
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 101.03 37.50 37.75 70.87 46.04 64.87 79.69 43.36 42.06 74.45 46.80 34.82 Movement LOS F D D E D E E D D E D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 53.99 54.45 51.56 50.32
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 52.26
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.789
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 1527.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 59.43 59.43 59.43 59.43
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.816 2.883 3.008 2.926 Crosswalk LOS C C C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 493 493 480 727 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.75 39.77 40.43 28.35
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.248 2.447 2.135 2.974 Bicycle LOS B B B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
17 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
429
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.425
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 1 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
18 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
llr ~11 ~r
430
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 412 78 204 818 81 240
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 103 19 51 204 20 60
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9000 0.9000 0.7800 0.7800 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 371 70 159 638 70 206
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 8 0 0 24 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 13 4 8 45 12 16
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 2 0 0 0 7 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 348 66 151 569 51 190
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Volumes
19 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
431
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.4 3.4 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 10 0 0 10 17 0
Walk [s] 5 0 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 4.4 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 0 30 60 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 0 5 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 6 0 5 2 4 0
Control Type Permissive Permissive Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
20 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
432
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 54.68 19.39 68.82 50.92 18.66 72.03 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.19 0.78 2.75 2.04 0.75 2.88 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.38 10.77 38.24 28.29 10.36 40.02 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.22 0.43 1.53 1.13 0.41 1.60 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS B B B A B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 14.41 12.81 19.10 6.98 11.83 16.54 X, volume / capacity 0.64 0.27 0.77 0.54 0.22 0.74
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.06 0.50 4.56 0.29 0.31 3.39 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 13.35 12.31 14.54 6.69 11.52 13.15 c, Capacity [veh/h] 645 288 267 1528 362 323
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3197 1427 1599 3197 1599 1427 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.26 0.05 0.17 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.48 0.23 0.23
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 7 7 6 17 8 8
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 2.00 3.40 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.40 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 36 36 36 36 36 36
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
21 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
433
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 14.41 12.81 19.10 6.98 11.83 16.54 Movement LOS B B B A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.16 9.40 15.35
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.71
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.425
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 667 1333 667 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 5.00 20.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.964 2.403 1.560 Bicycle LOS A B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
22 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 2: 2 Background Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
434
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.669
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 36.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 150.00 100.00 150.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 185.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., J.rr irr ., II J. .,., II J.
435
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 1 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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 167 138 936 22 63 288 197 1076 58 347 871 13 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 42 35 234 5 16 72 49 269 14 87 218 3 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 0.8400 0.8400 0.8400 0.6500 0.6500 0.6500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9100 0.9100 0.9100 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 140 116 786 14 41 187 181 990 53 316 793 12 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] 16 16 1 10 16 52 53 148 15 1 94 11 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] 29 98 679 1 25 125 127 463 17 97 566 1 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 86 2 106 3 0 10 1 379 7 218 133 0 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
436
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 43 0 0 21 0 12 32 0 24 44 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 5 0 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 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 Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
437
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 123.11 329.72 282.88 76.45 141.59 202.86 303.41 317.27 168.50 231.24 242.31 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.92 13.19 11.32 3.06 5.66 8.11 12.14 12.69 6.74 9.25 9.69 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 68.39 210.70 174.54 42.47 78.66 114.94 190.30 201.01 93.61 135.72 143.93 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.74 8.43 6.98 1.70 3.15 4.60 7.61 8.04 3.74 5.43 5.76 Critical Lane Group No No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS C D C D D D C D D C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 26.57 39.16 34.74 37.31 42.51 46.17 34.37 36.32 41.77 31.64 32.39 X, volume / capacity 0.34 0.83 0.87 0.35 0.79 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.78 0.65 0.65 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 8.22 3.26 0.88 3.75 7.32 2.05 3.97 2.98 0.82 1.57 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 0.11 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 26.17 30.94 31.48 36.43 38.76 38.85 32.32 32.34 38.80 30.82 30.82 c, Capacity [veh/h] 497 469 785 240 366 237 904 461 446 888 463 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1752 1652 2768 1816 2768 1752 3503 1788 3403 3503 1826 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.10 0.17 0.17 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.25 0.25 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 26 26 26 12 12 12 24 24 12 23 23 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
438
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 26.57 39.16 35.88 37.31 37.31 42.51 46.17 34.96 36.32 41.77 31.89 32.39 Movement LOS C D D D D D D C D D C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 35.02 41.32 36.68 34.68
Approach LOS D D D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 36.01
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.669
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 49.50 49.50 49.50 49.50
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.930 2.548 3.163 3.402 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] 650 283 433 633 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 27.34 44.20 36.84 28.02
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.607 2.175 2.292 2.237 Bicycle LOS D B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
439
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.332
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 49.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Sellers Ave/Laurel Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Thru Thru Right Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., II Irr ., ., r
440
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 16 364 180 185 670 59
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 91 45 46 168 15
Other Adjustment Factor 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 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 16 364 180 185 670 59
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 161 90 35 645 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 16 9 15 0 0 34
Growth Factor 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 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 194 75 150 25 25
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Volumes
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
441
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 10 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 5 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 35 31 65 0 69 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 30 30 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 5 5 0 5 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 6 0 4 0
Control Type Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fixed time
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
442
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 26.41 312.71 233.38 120.54 420.92 74.09 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.06 12.51 9.34 4.82 16.84 2.96 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 14.67 197.47 137.30 66.97 282.98 41.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.59 7.90 5.49 2.68 11.32 1.65 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No Yes No
Lane Group LOS E E D D D C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 57.26 75.44 39.88 37.73 42.67 33.77 X, volume / capacity 0.05 0.71 0.30 0.20 0.56 0.11
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.35 8.14 1.24 0.50 1.89 0.39 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 56.91 67.30 38.64 37.23 40.78 33.38 c, Capacity [veh/h] 294 512 607 914 1197 550
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1603 3204 1683 2532 3113 1431 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.22 0.04 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.18 0.16 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.38
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 31 27 61 61 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 169 169 169 169 169 169
Lane Group L C C R L R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
443
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 57.26 75.44 39.88 37.73 42.67 33.77 Movement LOS E E D D D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 74.68 38.79 41.95
Approach LOS E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 49.60
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.332
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 51.34 51.34 51.34
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.398 2.770 2.527 Crosswalk LOS B C B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 450 1017 1083 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.04 14.50 12.60
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.873 2.162 1.560 Bicycle LOS A B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
444
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.766
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 18.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 92 336 51 13 227 40 64 113 54 43 85 21 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 23 84 13 3 57 10 16 28 14 11 21 5 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] 92 336 51 13 227 40 64 113 54 43 85 21 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 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] 4 131 0 0 76 14 30 0 2 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 4 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] 88 203 51 13 149 22 34 113 52 43 85 21 Name
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
445
Intersection LOS C
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 18.53
Approach LOS D B B B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 25.06 14.38 14.00 12.38
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 176.91 63.00 50.78 28.50 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 7.08 2.52 2.03 1.14
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.77 0.47 0.42 0.28
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 625 593 556 532
Lanes
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
446
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.654
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 51.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 1150.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 160.00 240.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. ,llr ,llr ,llr
447
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 1 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 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] 216 463 154 113 458 382 311 890 214 66 339 69 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 54 116 38 28 114 95 78 222 53 16 85 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 192 412 137 99 403 336 299 854 205 58 298 61 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] 24 22 0 4 18 47 83 6 40 0 2 4 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] 32 45 11 0 59 260 76 634 42 0 35 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 16 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 136 345 119 95 326 29 140 187 123 58 245 57 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
448
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 33 33 0 37 37 0 27 59 0 11 43 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 11 33 0 11 33 0 14 35 0 18 39 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 140
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
449
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 320.53 282.39 264.34 185.33 224.29 394.66 586.60 541.00 259.05 110.85 237.57 97.42 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 12.82 11.30 10.57 7.41 8.97 15.79 23.46 21.64 10.36 4.43 9.50 3.90 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 203.54 174.17 160.47 102.96 130.59 261.94 400.81 380.95 156.47 61.58 140.40 54.12 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.14 6.97 6.42 4.12 5.22 10.48 16.03 15.24 6.26 2.46 5.62 2.16 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E C C E C D F D D E E D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 70.12 24.66 24.79 68.74 28.03 35.33 133.16 52.42 43.75 71.81 55.79 52.57 X, volume / capacity 0.91 0.37 0.37 0.84 0.31 0.58 1.08 0.94 0.51 0.79 0.62 0.29 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 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 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 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 10.48 1.18 1.30 5.06 0.56 3.78 74.67 2.28 0.35 5.93 0.44 0.24 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 k, delay calibration 0.09 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 59.65 23.48 23.49 63.68 27.47 31.56 58.49 50.14 43.40 65.88 55.35 52.32 c, Capacity [veh/h] 238 878 803 135 1466 655 288 945 421 84 544 240 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1697 1767 3532 1577 1767 3532 1575 1767 3532 1556 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.13 0.24 0.18 0.25 0.14 0.04 0.10 0.04 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.14 0.47 0.47 0.08 0.41 0.41 0.16 0.27 0.27 0.05 0.15 0.15 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 19 66 66 11 58 58 23 37 37 7 22 22 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 Lane Group L C C L C R L C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
450
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 70.12 24.70 24.79 68.74 28.03 35.33 133.16 52.42 43.75 71.81 55.79 52.57 Movement LOS E C C E C D F D D E E D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 36.49 35.78 68.86 57.55
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 51.49
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.654
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 5111.22 0.00 0.00 2643.21 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 59.43 59.43 59.43 59.43
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.729 2.863 2.984 2.783 Crosswalk LOS B C C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 393 450 766 541 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 45.20 42.04 26.66 37.25
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.247 2.346 2.727 1.951 Bicycle LOS B B B A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
17 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
451
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.315
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 7.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 1 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
18 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
llr ~11 ~r
452
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 687 118 144 540 14 14
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 172 30 36 135 3 3
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9400 0.9400 0.9100 0.9100 0.9500 0.9500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 646 111 131 491 13 13
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 26 0 0 16 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 51 13 19 30 8 11
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 7 0 0 0 4 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 562 98 112 445 1 2
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Volumes
19 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
453
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.4 3.4 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 10 0 0 10 17 0
Walk [s] 5 0 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 4.4 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 0 30 60 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 0 5 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 6 0 5 2 4 0
Control Type Permissive Permissive Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
20 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
454
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 44.27 13.29 39.32 0.98 4.30 4.55 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.77 0.53 1.57 0.04 0.17 0.18 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 24.59 7.38 21.85 0.55 2.39 2.53 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.98 0.30 0.87 0.02 0.10 0.10 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS A A B A B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 8.99 7.37 17.70 3.02 15.60 16.27 X, volume / capacity 0.66 0.25 0.74 0.29 0.24 0.27
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.71 0.28 5.53 0.08 2.16 2.82 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 8.28 7.09 12.16 2.94 13.44 13.45
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1044 466 194 1877 57 51
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3197 1427 1599 3197 1599 1427 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.21 0.08 0.09 0.17 0.01 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.33 0.33 0.12 0.59 0.04 0.04
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 9 9 3 17 1 1
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 2.00 3.40 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.40 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 29 29 29 29 29 29
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
21 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
455
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.99 7.37 17.70 3.02 15.60 16.27 Movement LOS A A B A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 8.76 6.11 15.94
Approach LOS A A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 7.70
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.315
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 667 1333 667 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 5.00 20.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.224 2.124 1.560 Bicycle LOS B B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
22 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/20/2023
Scenario 4: 4 Background Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
456
Stonecreek Residential TIS E
Appendix E: Background plus Project
Conditions Capacity Analysis Worksheets
457
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.742
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 43.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
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] 150.00 100.00 150.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 185.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., J.rr irr ., II J. .,.,1,..
458
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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 226 87 316 19 312 175 75 570 206 840 1410 17 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 56 22 79 5 78 44 19 143 52 210 353 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 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700 0.6900 0.6900 0.6900 0.8100 0.8100 0.8100 0.7000 0.7000 0.7000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 174 67 243 13 215 121 61 462 167 588 987 12 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 27 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 9 10 27 5 8 28 29 21 8 79 46 6 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] 30 52 167 7 205 85 21 152 18 214 640 5 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 96 5 47 1 2 8 11 289 127 295 301 1 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
459
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 21 0 0 21 0 11 24 0 14 27 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 5 0 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 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 Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 80
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
460
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 256.05 172.67 138.87 367.27 87.41 103.57 266.72 259.08 411.75 631.06 635.01 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 10.24 6.91 5.55 14.69 3.50 4.14 10.67 10.36 16.47 25.24 25.40 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 154.21 95.93 77.15 240.19 48.56 57.54 162.26 156.50 275.61 455.97 459.28 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.17 3.84 3.09 9.61 1.94 2.30 6.49 6.26 11.02 18.24 18.37 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes No Yes No No No No Yes Lane Group LOS D D D E D E D D D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 51.21 44.95 44.26 55.43 37.66 63.21 41.36 43.19 44.55 39.81 40.34 X, volume / capacity 0.83 0.57 0.58 0.89 0.31 0.77 0.71 0.72 0.93 0.92 0.92 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] 6.25 1.94 1.22 12.75 0.31 11.98 1.25 2.92 5.09 9.82 10.28 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 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.24 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 44.95 43.01 43.04 42.68 37.34 51.24 40.11 40.27 39.46 29.99 30.07 c, Capacity [veh/h] 274 267 432 371 560 97 746 342 901 777 774 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1752 1710 2768 1835 2768 1752 3503 1604 3403 1840 1832 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.25 0.39 0.39 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.26 0.42 0.42 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 17 17 22 22 6 23 23 29 46 46 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 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 C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
461
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 51.21 44.95 44.39 55.43 55.43 37.66 63.21 41.49 43.19 44.55 40.07 40.34 Movement LOS D D D E E D E D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 46.93 49.28 43.82 41.73
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 43.82
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.742
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 29.76 29.76 29.76 29.76
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.984 2.516 3.095 3.324 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] 425 425 450 525 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 24.81 24.81 24.03 21.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.597 2.395 2.028 3.430 Bicycle LOS B B B C
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - 8 4 2 1 Ring 1
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
462
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.417
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 49.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Sellers Ave/Laurel Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Thru Thru Right Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., II Irr ., ., r
463
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 73 200 274 689 308 76
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 18 50 69 172 77 19
Other Adjustment Factor 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 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 73 200 274 689 308 76
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 50 28 9 0 0 16
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 2 88 40 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 10 34 401 218 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 23 13 5 0 0 10
Growth Factor 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 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 148 224 200 50 50
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Volumes
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
464
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 10 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 5 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 35 31 65 0 69 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 30 30 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 5 5 0 5 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 6 0 4 0
Control Type Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fixed time
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
465
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 126.27 178.27 347.49 476.86 199.21 96.71 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.05 7.13 13.90 19.07 7.97 3.87 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 70.15 99.04 224.60 328.29 112.31 53.73 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.81 3.96 8.98 13.13 4.49 2.15 Critical Lane Group Yes No No Yes Yes No
Lane Group LOS E E D D D C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 61.04 65.86 43.63 53.15 36.03 34.32 X, volume / capacity 0.25 0.39 0.45 0.75 0.26 0.14
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 2.01 2.24 2.41 5.74 0.52 0.52 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 59.03 63.63 41.22 47.41 35.51 33.80 c, Capacity [veh/h] 294 512 607 914 1197 550
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1603 3204 1683 2532 3113 1431 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.06 0.16 0.27 0.10 0.05 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.18 0.16 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.38
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 31 27 61 61 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 169 169 169 169 169 169
Lane Group L C C R L R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
466
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 61.04 65.86 43.63 53.15 36.03 34.32 Movement LOS E E D D D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 64.57 50.44 35.69
Approach LOS E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 49.33
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.417
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 41.41 41.41 41.41
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.391 2.785 2.567 Crosswalk LOS B C B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 540 1220 1300 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 26.65 7.61 6.13
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.785 3.149 1.560 Bicycle LOS A C A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
467
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.336
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 10.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 90 85 3 154 63 27 63 44 158 63 3 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 23 21 1 39 16 7 16 11 40 16 1 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] 34 90 85 3 154 63 27 63 44 158 63 3 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 2 14 5 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 2 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] 1 1 49 0 7 27 9 0 3 120 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 7 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] 33 86 36 3 142 15 13 63 41 38 63 3 Name
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
468
Intersection LOS B
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 10.37
Approach LOS B B A B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 10.13 10.34 9.56 11.12
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 30.53 33.01 18.13 37.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 1.22 1.32 0.73 1.48
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.29 0.31 0.20 0.34
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 713 710 682 666
Lanes
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
469
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.086
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 9.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: Sellers Ave/Street B
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 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] 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 Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Street B
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 6 11 0 0 42 25 78 0 16 0 0 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 3 0 0 11 6 20 0 4 0 0 0 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] 6 11 0 0 42 25 78 0 16 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 6 0 0 0 0 25 78 0 16 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 10 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 8 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 0 0 0 0 0
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Street B
Volumes
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
470
Intersection LOS A
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 5.18
Approach LOS A A A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 2.60 0.00 9.33 8.99
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.46 8.46 8.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 7.36 0.00 0.00 7.24 0.00 0.00 9.40 9.89 9.00 9.07 9.52 8.36 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.02 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 No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop
Intersection Settings
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
471
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.810
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 53.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 49.21 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 1150.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 160.00 240.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. ,llr ,llr ,llr
472
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 1 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 2 0 2 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 2 0 2 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] 216 426 193 78 620 378 162 419 134 315 1249 224 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 54 107 48 19 155 94 41 105 34 79 312 56 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 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.8000 0.9000 0.9000 0.9000 0.6700 0.6700 0.6700 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 173 341 154 62 496 302 146 377 121 211 837 150 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 16 0 0 50 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 36 4 6 1 2 0 2 33 0 17 64 7 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] 30 39 5 0 29 288 18 214 20 18 338 39 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 23 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 107 298 141 61 465 14 126 106 101 176 362 104 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
473
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 22 40 0 22 40 0 22 39 0 39 56 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 11 33 0 11 33 0 14 35 0 18 39 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 140
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
17 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
474
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 381.71 359.81 331.14 129.37 377.79 551.65 268.10 246.52 163.48 460.95 718.45 238.06 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 15.27 14.39 13.25 5.17 15.11 22.07 10.72 9.86 6.54 18.44 28.74 9.52 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 251.63 234.29 211.80 71.87 248.52 389.76 163.31 147.07 90.82 315.33 529.72 140.77 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 10.07 9.37 8.47 2.87 9.94 15.59 6.53 5.88 3.63 12.61 21.19 5.63 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Lane Group LOS F D D E D E E D D E D C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 101.03 40.02 40.40 70.87 49.23 76.09 79.69 41.35 39.87 74.45 45.76 32.77 X, volume / capacity 0.95 0.52 0.52 0.80 0.66 0.91 0.88 0.43 0.31 0.93 0.96 0.39 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 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 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 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 40.47 3.02 3.38 5.55 3.60 26.61 17.93 0.11 0.15 18.70 2.47 0.16 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 k, delay calibration 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.17 0.04 0.04 0.20 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 60.56 37.00 37.02 65.32 45.63 49.48 61.76 41.24 39.73 55.75 43.29 32.61 c, Capacity [veh/h] 227 630 565 98 942 415 185 986 438 337 1298 580 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1662 1767 3532 1556 1767 3532 1570 1767 3532 1577 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.04 0.18 0.24 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.18 0.35 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.13 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.37 0.37 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 18 48 48 8 37 37 15 39 39 27 51 51 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 Lane Group L C C L C R L C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
18 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
475
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 101.03 40.11 40.40 70.87 49.23 76.09 79.69 41.35 39.87 74.45 45.76 32.77 Movement LOS F D D E D E E D D E D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 55.94 60.23 49.76 49.19
Approach LOS E E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 53.25
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.810
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 1527.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 59.43 59.43 59.43 59.43
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.816 2.883 3.028 2.944 Crosswalk LOS C C C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 493 493 480 727 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 39.75 39.77 40.43 28.35
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.248 2.447 2.149 3.035 Bicycle LOS B B B C
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
19 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
476
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.425
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 1 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
20 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
llr ~11 ~r
477
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 412 83 204 818 98 240
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 103 21 51 204 24 60
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9000 0.9000 0.7800 0.7800 0.8600 0.8600 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 371 75 159 638 84 206
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 5 0 0 14 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 8 0 0 24 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 13 4 8 45 12 16
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 2 0 0 0 7 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 348 66 151 569 51 190
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Volumes
21 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
478
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.4 3.4 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 10 0 0 10 17 0
Walk [s] 5 0 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 4.4 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 0 30 60 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 0 5 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 6 0 5 2 4 0
Control Type Permissive Permissive Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
22 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
479
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 55.06 20.89 69.26 51.65 22.98 71.85 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.20 0.84 2.77 2.07 0.92 2.87 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.59 11.61 38.48 28.69 12.76 39.92 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.22 0.46 1.54 1.15 0.51 1.60 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS B B B A B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 14.47 12.95 19.18 7.02 12.04 16.41 X, volume / capacity 0.64 0.29 0.77 0.54 0.27 0.74
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.06 0.54 4.57 0.29 0.39 3.27 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 13.41 12.41 14.60 6.73 11.65 13.14 c, Capacity [veh/h] 646 288 266 1527 365 325
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3197 1427 1599 3197 1599 1427 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.06 0.13 0.26 0.06 0.17 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.48 0.23 0.23
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 7 7 6 17 8 8
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 2.00 3.40 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.40 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 37 37 37 37 37 37
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
23 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
480
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 14.47 12.95 19.18 7.02 12.04 16.41 Movement LOS B B B A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.21 9.45 15.14
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.76
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.425
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 667 1333 667 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 5.00 20.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.968 2.403 1.560 Bicycle LOS A B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
24 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 7: 7 Background plus Project Conditions AM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
481
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.677
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 36.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Sellers Rd/E Cypress 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] 50.00 50.00 45.00 50.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 150.00 100.00 150.00 110.00 100.00 100.00 185.00 100.00 185.00 250.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Intersection Setup
1 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., J.rr irr ., II J. .,., II J.
482
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 1 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 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 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] 188 138 937 22 63 288 197 1076 91 348 871 13 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 47 35 234 5 16 72 49 269 23 87 218 3 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 0.8400 0.8400 0.8400 0.6500 0.6500 0.6500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.9100 0.9100 0.9100 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 158 116 787 14 41 187 181 990 84 317 793 12 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 18 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 16 16 1 10 16 52 53 148 15 1 94 11 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] 29 98 679 1 25 125 127 463 17 97 566 1 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 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 [%] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 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] 86 2 106 3 0 10 1 379 7 218 133 0 Name Sellers Rd Sellers Rd E Cypress Rd E Cypress Rd
Volumes
2 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
483
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 No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 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 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 43 0 0 21 0 12 32 0 24 44 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 30 0 0 30 0 30 60 0 30 60 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 5 0 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - - - - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 0 4 0 5 2 0 1 6 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 Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
3 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
484
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 145.66 341.64 291.62 78.92 146.20 207.70 319.00 329.96 174.49 234.65 245.58 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.83 13.67 11.66 3.16 5.85 8.31 12.76 13.20 6.98 9.39 9.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 80.92 220.01 181.23 43.85 81.22 118.46 202.35 210.88 96.94 138.24 146.37 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.24 8.80 7.25 1.75 3.25 4.74 8.09 8.44 3.88 5.53 5.85 Critical Lane Group No No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS C D D D D D C D D C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 27.85 40.92 35.91 38.37 43.72 47.39 34.87 36.90 42.95 31.75 32.42 X, volume / capacity 0.38 0.83 0.88 0.36 0.79 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.78 0.64 0.64 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] 0.48 8.99 3.42 0.89 3.84 7.43 2.04 4.04 3.05 0.74 1.41 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 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 27.36 31.93 32.49 37.48 39.88 39.95 32.83 32.87 39.90 31.02 31.02 c, Capacity [veh/h] 494 466 781 239 365 237 930 468 445 915 477 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1752 1652 2768 1816 2768 1752 3503 1761 3403 3503 1826 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.11 0.23 0.25 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.10 0.17 0.17 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.26 0.26 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 27 27 27 12 12 13 25 25 12 25 25 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 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] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Lane Group L C R C R L C C L C C
Lane Group Calculations
4 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
485
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 27.85 40.92 37.20 38.37 38.37 43.72 47.39 35.44 36.90 42.95 31.98 32.42 Movement LOS C D D D D D D D D D C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 36.25 42.50 37.26 35.08
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 36.79
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.677
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
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 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 49.50 49.50 49.50 49.50
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.945 2.548 3.174 3.403 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] 650 283 433 633 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 27.34 44.20 36.84 28.02
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 3.644 2.175 2.310 2.237 Bicycle LOS D B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
5 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
486
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.376
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 50.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Sellers Ave/Laurel Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Thru Thru Right Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
6 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
., II Irr ., ., r
487
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 49 384 213 191 680 115
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 12 96 53 48 170 29
Other Adjustment Factor 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 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 49 384 213 191 680 115
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 33 19 32 0 0 56
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 1 6 10 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 161 90 35 645 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 16 9 15 0 0 34
Growth Factor 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 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 194 75 150 25 25
Name Sellers Rd Sellers Ave Laurel Rd
Volumes
7 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
488
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 10 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 5 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 35 31 65 0 69 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 30 30 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 5 5 0 5 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 6 0 4 0
Control Type Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fixed time
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Coordinated
Cycle Length [s] 120
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
8 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
489
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 83.05 331.00 272.29 124.78 427.78 150.99 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.32 13.24 10.89 4.99 17.11 6.04 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 46.14 211.69 166.49 69.32 288.50 83.89 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.85 8.47 6.66 2.77 11.54 3.36 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No Yes No
Lane Group LOS E E D D D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 59.34 77.49 41.10 37.84 42.90 35.66 X, volume / capacity 0.17 0.75 0.35 0.21 0.57 0.21
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.22 9.71 1.59 0.52 1.96 0.86 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 58.12 67.78 39.51 37.32 40.94 34.80 c, Capacity [veh/h] 294 512 607 914 1197 550
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1603 3204 1683 2532 3113 1431 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.03 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.22 0.08 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.18 0.16 0.36 0.36 0.38 0.38
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 31 27 61 61 65 65
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 169 169 169 169 169 169
Lane Group L C C R L R
Lane Group Calculations
9 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
490
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 59.34 77.49 41.10 37.84 42.90 35.66 Movement LOS E E D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 75.44 39.56 41.85
Approach LOS E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 50.20
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.376
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 51.34 51.34 51.34
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.455 2.792 2.551 Crosswalk LOS B C B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 450 1017 1083 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 36.04 14.50 12.60
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 1.917 2.226 1.560 Bicycle LOS A B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
10 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
491
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.785
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 19.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: All-way stop
Intersection 3: Sellers Rd/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 50.00 50.00 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] 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
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 92 338 51 13 228 50 80 113 54 43 85 21 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 23 85 13 3 57 13 20 28 14 11 21 5 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] 92 338 51 13 228 50 80 113 54 43 85 21 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 2 0 0 1 10 16 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 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] 4 131 0 0 76 14 30 0 2 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 1 4 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] 88 203 51 13 149 22 34 113 52 43 85 21 Name
Volumes
11 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
492
Intersection LOS C
Intersection Delay [s/veh] 19.64
Approach LOS D C B B
Approach Delay [s/veh] 26.95 15.15 14.89 12.67
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft] 187.98 69.35 58.18 29.34 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh] 7.52 2.77 2.33 1.17
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Degree of Utilization, x 0.78 0.50 0.45 0.29
Capacity per Entry Lane [veh/h] 613 584 547 521
Lanes
Intersection Settings
12 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
493
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.085
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: Sellers Ave/Street B
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 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] 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 Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Street B
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 18 162 0 0 95 88 52 0 11 0 0 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 5 41 0 0 24 22 13 0 3 0 0 0 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] 18 162 0 0 95 88 52 0 11 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 18 0 0 0 0 88 52 0 11 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] 0 161 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 1 0 0 5 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 0 0 0 0 0
Name Sellers Ave Sellers Ave Street B
Volumes
13 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
+ + + +
494
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.97
Approach LOS A A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.76 0.00 11.16 10.57
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.05 8.05 8.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS A A A A A A B B A B B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 7.62 0.00 0.00 7.54 0.00 0.00 11.50 11.85 9.56 11.02 11.62 9.08 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 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 No
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop
Intersection Settings
14 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
495
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.670
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 51.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 5: Main St/Laurel 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 40.00 35.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 305.00 100.00 1150.00 215.00 100.00 215.00 160.00 100.00 160.00 240.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 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 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Intersection Setup
15 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
, I,-. ,llr ,llr ,llr
496
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 1
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 1 0 0 1
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 1
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 1 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 1 0 0 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] 216 463 154 113 458 382 311 948 214 66 376 69 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 54 116 38 28 114 95 78 237 53 16 94 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 0.8900 0.8900 0.8900 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 192 412 137 99 403 336 299 910 205 58 331 61 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 56 0 0 33 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 24 22 0 4 18 47 83 6 40 0 2 4 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] 32 45 11 0 59 260 76 634 42 0 35 0 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 16 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 [%] 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 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] 136 345 119 95 326 29 140 187 123 58 245 57 Name Main St Main St Laurel Rd Laurel Rd
Volumes
16 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
497
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 No No
Maximum Recall No Yes No Yes No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.1 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 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 18 0 0 24 0 0 26 0 0 30 0
Walk [s] 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Split [s] 33 33 0 37 37 0 27 59 0 11 43 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.1 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 11 33 0 11 33 0 14 35 0 18 39 0
Minimum Green [s] 6 10 0 6 10 0 6 6 0 6 6 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 7 4 0 3 8 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lagging Force-Off
Offset [s] 108.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 140
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
17 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
498
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 320.53 291.07 272.44 185.33 230.23 406.90 586.60 569.18 253.63 110.85 255.88 95.25 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 12.82 11.64 10.90 7.41 9.21 16.28 23.46 22.77 10.15 4.43 10.24 3.81 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 203.54 180.81 166.60 102.96 134.97 271.73 400.81 404.30 152.40 61.58 154.09 52.91 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.14 7.23 6.66 4.12 5.40 10.87 16.03 16.17 6.10 2.46 6.16 2.12 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E C C E C D F D D E D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 70.12 26.26 26.40 68.74 29.66 37.69 133.16 51.26 41.76 71.81 54.24 50.50 X, volume / capacity 0.91 0.38 0.38 0.84 0.33 0.61 1.08 0.95 0.48 0.79 0.62 0.26 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 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 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 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 10.48 1.30 1.42 5.06 0.61 4.33 74.67 2.27 0.30 5.93 0.40 0.19 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 k, delay calibration 0.09 0.50 0.50 0.04 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 59.65 24.97 24.98 63.68 29.04 33.36 58.49 48.99 41.47 65.88 53.84 50.31 c, Capacity [veh/h] 238 847 775 135 1408 629 288 1003 447 84 602 265 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1767 1855 1697 1767 3532 1577 1767 3532 1575 1767 3532 1556 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.12 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.13 0.24 0.18 0.27 0.14 0.04 0.11 0.04 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.14 0.46 0.46 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.16 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.17 0.17 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 19 64 64 11 56 56 23 40 40 7 24 24 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.40 3.40 2.00 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 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.10 5.10 C, Cycle Length [s] 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 Lane Group L C C L C R L C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
18 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
499
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 70.12 26.30 26.40 68.74 29.66 37.69 133.16 51.26 41.76 71.81 54.24 50.50 Movement LOS E C C E C D F D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 37.69 37.51 67.17 56.00
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 51.65
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.670
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 5111.22 0.00 0.00 2643.21 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 59.43 59.43 59.43 59.43
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.729 2.863 3.004 2.801 Crosswalk LOS B C C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 393 450 766 541 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 45.20 42.04 26.66 37.25
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.247 2.346 2.775 1.981 Bicycle LOS B B C A
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
19 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
500
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.320
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): 7.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 6th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 6: Main St/Delta Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Curb Present No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 40.00 40.00 40.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 1 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Intersection Setup
20 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
llr ~11 ~r
501
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 687 135 144 540 24 14
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 172 34 36 135 6 3
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9400 0.9400 0.9100 0.9100 0.9500 0.9500 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 646 127 131 491 23 13
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 16 0 0 10 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 26 0 0 16 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 51 13 19 30 8 11
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 7 0 0 0 4 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 562 98 112 445 1 2
Name Brentwood Blvd Main S Delta Rd
Volumes
21 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
502
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 Detector Length [ft] 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
Pedestrian Recall No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.4 0.0 2.0 3.4 3.4 0.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 10 0 0 10 17 0
Walk [s] 5 0 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0
Amber [s] 4.4 0.0 3.0 4.4 4.4 0.0
Maximum Green [s] 30 0 30 60 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 0 5 5 5 0
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 6 0 5 2 4 0
Control Type Permissive Permissive Protected Permissive Permissive Permissive Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 0.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
22 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
503
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 46.28 16.16 40.67 1.52 7.07 4.06 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.85 0.65 1.63 0.06 0.28 0.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 25.71 8.98 22.59 0.84 3.93 2.26 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.03 0.36 0.90 0.03 0.16 0.09 Critical Lane Group Yes No Yes No Yes No
Lane Group LOS A A B A B B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 9.16 7.66 18.15 3.13 15.91 14.94 X, volume / capacity 0.66 0.29 0.75 0.29 0.32 0.21
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 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
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 0.72 0.34 5.74 0.08 2.44 1.54 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 8.45 7.32 12.42 3.05 13.47 13.40
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1042 465 192 1865 75 67
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3197 1427 1599 3197 1599 1427 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.02 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.33 0.33 0.12 0.58 0.05 0.05
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 9 9 3 17 1 1
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.40 3.40 2.00 3.40 3.40 3.40 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.40 5.40 4.00 5.40 5.40 5.40 C, Cycle Length [s] 29 29 29 29 29 29
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
23 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
504
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 9.16 7.66 18.15 3.13 15.91 14.94 Movement LOS A A B A B B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 8.92 6.30 15.55
Approach LOS A A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 7.92
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.320
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crosswalk LOS F F F
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 667 1333 667 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 20.00 5.00 20.00
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.238 2.124 1.560 Bicycle LOS B B A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ring 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 5 Ring 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 2 - Ring 1
Sequence
24 Administrative Report
TJKM
Citywide Model
6/21/2023
Scenario 8: 8 Background plus Project Conditions PM
Version 2020 (SP 0-6)
Generated with
I
I
505
Appendix C
Planning Survey Report

506

Page 1 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
Application Form and Planning Survey Report
To Comply With and Receive Permit Coverage Under
The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan
and Natural Community Conservation Plan
Please complete this application to apply for take authorization under the state and federal East Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP incidental take permits. The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy (“Conservancy”) or local jurisdiction (City of Brentwood, City of Clayton, City of Oakley, City of Pittsburg, and Contra Costa County) may request more information in order to deem the application complete.

I. PROJECT OVERVIEW

PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT NAME: Stonecreek (Subdivision 9647)
PROJECT TYPE: Residential Commercial Transportation Utility Other PROJECT DESCRIPTION (BRIEF): Construction of a 176-lot residential subdivision. A detailed project description is included in Attachment A.

PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: West of Sellers Avenue, just south of Kings Canyon Way and Teton Road, in Oakley, Contra Costa County, California.

PARCEL/PROJECT SIZE (ACRES): 50.81+/- acre (3 Parcels encompassing 50.44+/- acres and 0.37+/-acres of Off-site Improvements.

PROJECT APN(S): 033-140-020, 033-140-021, and 033-140-028 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE: July 2023 FINAL PSR DATE: (City/County/Conservancy use) LEAD PLANNER: Ken Strelo
JURISDICTION: City of Brentwood City of Clayton City of Oakley City of Pittsburg Contra Costa County Participating Special Entity*

DEVELOPMENT FEE ZONE: Zone I Zone II Zone III Zone IV
See figure 9-1 of the HCP/NCCP at www.cocohcp.org for a generalized development fee zone map. Detailed development fee zone maps by jurisdiction are available from the jurisdiction.

PROJECT APPLICANT INFORMATION
APPLICANT’S NAME: Ponderosa Homes II, Inc.

AUTHORIZED AGENT’S NAME AND TITLE: Jeff Schroeder, Senior V.P. Land, Planning & Operations PHONE NO.: (925) 460-8910 APPLICANT’S E-MAIL: [email protected] MAILING ADDRESS: 5020 Franklin Drive, Ste. 200, Pleasanton, CA 94588 BIOLOGIST INFORMATION1
BIOLOGICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL FIRM: Moore Biological Consultants CONTACT NAME AND TITLE: Diane S. Moore, M.S.

PHONE NO.: (209) 745-1159 CONTACT’S E-MAIL: [email protected] MAILING ADDRESS: Moore Biological Consultants, 10330 Twin Cities Rd., Ste. 30, Galt, California 95632 1 A USFWS/CDFW-approved biologist (project-specific) is required to conduct the surveys. Please submit biologist(s) approval request to the Conservancy. *Participating Special Entities are organizations not subject to the authority of a local jurisdiction. Such organizations may include school districts, irrigation districts, transportation agencies, local park districts, geological hazard abatement districts, or other utilities or special districts that own land or provide public services.

IZI □ □ □ □
I
□ □ IZI □
□ □
IZI □ □ □
I
I
507

Page 2 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
II. PROJECT DETAILS
Please complete and/or provide the following attachments:
1) Project Description
Attach as Attachment A: Project Description. Provide a detailed written description that concisely and completely describes the project and location. Include the following information:
• All activities proposed for the site or project, including roads utilized, construction staging areas, and the installation of underground facilities, to ensure the entire project is covered by the HCP/NCCP permit
• Proposed construction dates, including details on construction phases, if applicable • Reference a City/County application number for the project, if applicable • General Best Management Practices, if applicable
• If the project will have temporary impacts, please provide a restoration plan describing how the site will be restored to pre-project conditions, including revegetation seed mixes or plantings and timing 2) Project Vicinity Map
Provide a project vicinity map. Attach as Figure 1 in Attachment B: Figures. 3) Project Site Plans
Provide any project site plans for the project. Attach as Figure 2 in Attachment B: Figures. 4) CEQA Document
Indicate the status of CEQA documents prepared for the project. Provide additional comments below table if necessary.

Type of Document Status Date Completed
Initial Study Not yet initiated N/A
Notice of Preparation
Draft EIR
Final EIR
Notice of Categorical Exemption
Notice of Statutory Exemption
Other (describe)
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND IMPACTS
Please complete and/or provide the following attachments:
1) Field-Verified Land Cover Map2
Attach a field-verified land cover map in Attachment B: Figures and label as Figure 3. The map should contain all land cover types present on-site overlaid on aerial/satellite imagery. Map colors for the land cover types should conform to the HCP/NCCP (see Figure 3-3: Landcover in the Inventory Area for land cover type legend).
2) Photographs of the Project Site
Attach representative photos of the project site in Attachment B: Figures and label as Figure 4. Please provide captions for each photo.
2 For PSEs and city or county public works projects, please also identify permanent and temporary impact areas by overlaying crosshatching (permanent impacts) and hatching (temporary impacts) on the land cover map.

IZI
□
□
□
□
□
□
508

Page 3 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
3) Land Cover Types and Impacts and Supplemental Tables • For all terrestrial land cover types please provide calculations to the nearest hundredth of an acre (0.01).

For aquatic land cover types please provide calculations to the nearest thousandth of an acre (0.001). • Permanent Impacts are broadly defined in the ECCC HCP/NCCP to include all areas removed from an undeveloped or habitat-providing state and includes land in the same parcel or project that is not developed, graded, physically altered, or directly affected in any way but is isolated from natural areas by the covered activity. Unless such undeveloped land is dedicated to the Preserve System or is a deed-restricted creek setback, the development mitigation fee will apply (if proposed, would require Conservancy approval). • Temporary Impacts are broadly defined in the ECCC HCP/NCCP as any impact on vegetation or habitat that does not result in permanent habitat removal (i.e., vegetation can eventually recover). • If wetland (riparian woodland/scrub, wetland, or aquatic) land cover types are present on the parcel but will not be impacted please discuss in the following section 4) Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters. Wetland impact fees will only be charged if wetland features are impacted. However, development fees will apply to the entire parcel. • Stream land cover type is considered a linear feature where impacts are calculated based on length impacted. The acreage within a stream, below Top of Bank (TOB), must be assigned to the adjacent land cover type(s). Insert area of impact to stream below TOB in parentheses after the Land Cover acreage number (e.g., Riparian Woodland/Scrub: 10 (0.036) – where 10 is the total impacted acreage including 0.036 acre, which is the acreage within stream TOB).

Complete following supplemental Stream Feature Detail table to provide information for linear feet. • Total Impacts acreage should be the total parcel acreage (development project) or project footprint acreage (rural infrastructure or utility project).

Table 1: Land Cover Types and Impacts
Land Cover Type Permanent
Impacts
Temporary
Impacts
Stream Setback Preserve System
Dedication
Grassland
Annual Grassland
Alkali Grassland
Ruderal 50.43
Shrubland
Chaparral and Scrub
Woodland
Oak Savannah
Oak Woodland
Riparian
Riparian Woodland/Scrub
Wetland
Permanent Wetland
Seasonal Wetland 0.008
Alkali Wetland
Aquatic
Aquatic (Reservoir/Open Water)
Slough/Channel
Pond
Stream (in linear feet) - - - -
Irrigated Agriculture
Pasture
Cropland
Orchard
Vineyard
Other
Nonnative woodland
Wind turbines
Developed (not counted toward Fees)
Urban 0.37
Aqueduct
Turf
Landfill
TOTAL IMPACTS 50.81
Proposed for HCP/NCCP
Dedication on the Parcel
(Requires Conservancy Approval)
I I
I I
509

Page 4 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
Identify any uncommon vegetation and uncommon landscape features3:

Supplemental to Table 1: Uncommon Vegetation and Landscape Features Please provide details of impacts to stream features:

Stream Name: None
Watershed:

Supplemental to Table 1: Stream Feature Detail5
3 These acreages are for Conservancy tracking purposes. Impacts to these uncommon vegetation and landscape features should be accounted for within the land cover types in Table 1 (e.g., x acres of purple needlegrass in this supplemental table should be accounted for within annual grassland in Table 1). 4 Insert amount/number, not acreage. Provide additional information on these features in Attachment A: Project Description. 5 Use more than 1 row as necessary to describe impacts to streams on site. 6 See glossary (Appendix A) for definition of stream type and order. 7 Stream length is measured along stream centerline, based on length of impact to any part of the stream channel, TOB to TOB.

Permanent
Impacts
Temporary
Impacts
Uncommon Grassland Alliances
Purple Needlegrass Grassland
Blue Wildrye Grassland
Creeping Ryegrass Grassland
Wildflower Fields
Squirreltail Grassland
One-sided Bluegrass Grassland
Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland
Saltgrass Grassland
Alkali Sacaton Bunchgrass Grassland
Other
Uncommon Landscape Features
Rock Outcrops
Caves
Springs and seeps
Scalds
Sand Deposits
Mines4
Buildings (bat roosts)3
Potential nest sites (trees or cliffs)3 2 trees
Stream Width Stream Type6 Permanent Impacts
(linear feet)7
Temporary Impacts
(linear feet)7
≤ 25 feet wide
> 25 feet wide
Perennial
Intermittent
Ephemeral, 3rd or higher order
Ephemeral, 1st or 2nd order

≤ 25 feet wide
> 25 feet wide
Perennial
Intermittent
Ephemeral, 3rd or higher order
Ephemeral, 1st or 2nd order

I I
□
□
□
IZI
I j
□
□ □
□ □
□
□
□ □
□ □
□
□
□ □
□ □
□
510

Page 5 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
4) Summary of Land Cover Types
Please provide a written summary of descriptions for land cover types found on site including characteristic vegetation.

Ruderal Grassland: There is 50.44 acres of the “Ruderal Grassland” land cover type in the site. Grasslands in the site have been highly disturbed by past agricultural use and grading much of the site 15+ years ago; the site is primarily bare dirt and sparse vegetation (Figures 4a – 4d). The north part of the site was an orchard before it was rough-graded between 2007-2008. The south part of the site appears to have been farmed in hand-picked grapes that were removed between 2020-2021. The north part of the site currently consists of rough-graded house pads and roads and the south part of the site contains resprouted vines and other small shrubs. Soils in the site are very sandy. Grassland species observed in the site include field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), oats (Avena sp.), and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis).

Urban/Developed (Off-site Improvements): There is 0.37 acres of the “Urban/Developed” land cover type (i.e., Sellers Avenue along the east edge of the site, along (see Figure 3, 4h, and 5a).

Seasonal Wetland: There is 0.008+/-acre “Seasonal Wetland” in the northwest part of the site, just southeast of a pump station (Figures 3, 4h, and 5a). The wetland is situated in a topographically low area and supports a small patch tules (Schoenoplectus acutus). The wetland was created during initial grading of the site years ago; it is not apparent in any historical aerial photographs of the site prior to grading. The wetland is in very close proximity to the pump station, a residential subdivision, and a stubbed off road, and appears to be supported, or at least supplemented, by an underground water source such as a leaking storm drain pipe or irrigation run-off from landscaped areas to the north.

Trees: There are only two trees in the site. There is large palm at a former home site in the northeast part of the site and an ornamental along the south fence line. There are several other trees adjacent to the south edge of the site and a few adjacent to the west edge, which appear to be just off-site. 5) Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters
If wetlands and waters are present on the project site, project proponents must conduct a delineation of jurisdictional wetlands and waters. Jurisdictional wetlands and waters are defined on pages 1-18 and 1-19 of the ECCC HCP/NCCP as the following land cover types: permanent wetland, seasonal wetland, alkali wetland, aquatic, pond, slough/channel, and stream. It should be noted that these features differ for federal and state jurisdictions. If you have identified any of these land cover types in Table 1, complete the section below. a) Attach the wetland delineation report as Attachment E: Wetland Delineation. If a wetland delineation has not been completed, please explain below in section 4c. b) Please check the following permits the project may require. Please submit copies of these permits to the Conservancy prior to the start of construction:

CWA Section 404 Permit8 CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification Waste Discharge Requirements Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement c) Provide any additional information on impacts to jurisdictional wetland and waters below, including status of the permit(s):

An assessment of potentially jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. or wetlands in the site was undertaken on June 15, 2023. There are no potentially jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. in the site.

There is 0.008+/-acre seasonal wetland in the northwest part of the site, just southeast of a pump station (Attachment E). The wetland was created during initial grading of the site years ago and is best described as a “construction artifact”. The wetland appears to be supported, or at least supplemented, by an 8 The USACE Sacramento District issued a Regional General Permit 1 (RGP) related to ECCC HCP/NCCP covered activities. The RGP is designed to streamline wetland permitting in the entire ECCC HCP/NCCP Plan Area by coordinating the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures in the Plan with the Corps’ wetland permitting requirement. Applicants seeking authorization under this RGP shall notify the Corps in accordance with RGP general condition number 18 (Notification). □
□
□
□
511

Page 6 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
underground water source such as a leaking storm drain pipe or irrigation run-off from landscaped areas to the north. It is hydrologically and spatially isolated from Marsh Creek and does not meet the regulatory criteria of a jurisdictional wetland. Despite its created nature, the wetland could fall under the jurisdiction of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as a “Water of the State”.

The remainder of the site consists primarily of highly disturbed ruderal grassland vegetation and on-site soils are sandy and appear well draining.

The 0.008+/-acre seasonal wetland is within the footprint of the extension of Teton Road and will be filled. Due to a May 26, 2023 Supreme Court decision, ACOE is now “on hold” in processing Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) requests. Depending on project timing, the applicant may choose to request a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) from ACOE and secure authorization from ACOE to fill the wetland under Regional General Permit 1 (RGP 1). Alternately, the applicant may request an AJD (when possible) from ACOE. If ACOE concurs the wetland is non-jurisdictional, no further interface with ACOE will be required. In what is viewed as a highly unlikely scenario the wetland is deemed jurisdictional by ACOE through the AJD process, the applicant would need to secure authorization from ACOE to fill the wetland under RGP 1.

Filling the 0.008+/- acre seasonal wetland will involve securing either 401 Certification and/or Waste Discharge Requirements from RWQCB.

A Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from California Department of Fish and Wildlife is not needed as the wetland is not a Stream or Lake.
6) Species-Specific Planning Survey Requirements
Based on the land cover types found on-site and identified in Table 1, check the applicable boxes in Table 2a.

Table 2a. Species –Specific Planning Survey Requirements Land Cover Type
in Project Area Required Survey Species Habitat Element in Project Area Planning Survey Requirement9 Info in HCP Grasslands,
oak savannah,
agriculture, or
ruderal
San Joaquin kit fox Assumed if within modeled range
of species
If within modeled range of species,
identify and map potential breeding or
denning habitat within the project site
and a 250-ft radius around the project
footprint.
pp. 6-37
to 6-38
Western burrowing
owl
Assumed Identify and map potential breeding
habitat within the project site and a
500-ft radius around the project
footprint. Please note the HCP
requires buffers for occupied burrows.

Surveys may need to encompass an
area larger than the project footprint.
pp. 6-39
to 6-41
Aquatic
(ponds,
wetlands,
streams, sloughs,
channels, and
marshes)
Giant garter snake Aquatic habitat accessible from
the San Joaquin River
Identify and map potential habitat. pp. 6-43
to 6-45
California tiger
salamander
Ponds and wetlands
Vernal pools
Reservoirs
Small lakes
Identify and map potential breeding
habitat. Document habitat quality and
features. Provide the Conservancy
with photo-documentation and report.
pp. 6-45
California
red-legged frog
Slow-moving streams, ponds and
wetlands
Identify and map potential breeding
habitat. Document habitat quality and
features. Provide the Conservancy
with photo-documentation and report.
p. 6-46
Covered shrimp Seasonal wetlands
Vernal pools
Sandstone rock outcrops
Sandstone depressions
Identify and map potential habitat.

Please note the HCP requires a 50 foot
non-disturbance buffer from seasonal
wetlands that may be occupied by
covered shrimp. Surveys may need to
encompass an area larger than the
pp. 6-46
to 6-48
9 The planning survey requirements in this table are not comprehensive. Please refer to Chapter 6.4.3 in the ECCC HCP/NCCP for more detail. □
□ □
□
□
□
512

Page 7 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
project footprint.

Any Townsend’s big-eared
bat
Rock formations with caves
Mines
Abandoned buildings outside
urban area
Map and document potential breeding
or roosting habitat.
pp. 6-36
to 6-37
Swainson’s hawk Potential nest sites within 1,000
feet of project
Inspect large trees for presence of nest
sites. Document and map.
pp. 6-41
to 6-43
Golden Eagle Potential nest sites with ½ mile of
project
Inspect large trees for presence of nest
sites. Document and map.
pp. 6-38
to 6-39
Surveys for all covered species must be conducted by a qualified biologist (USFWS/CDFW project-specific approved). Please submit biologist approval request to the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy.

Surveys for all covered species must be conducted according to the respective USFWS or CDFW survey protocols, as identified in Chapter

6.4.3 in the HCP/NCCP.
7) Planning Survey Species Habitat Maps
Provide Planning Survey Species Habitat Maps as required in Table 2a, attach as Figure 5 in Attachment B:

Figures.
8) Results of Species Specific Surveys
Provide a written summary describing the results of the planning surveys. Please discuss the location, quantity, and quality of suitable habitat for specified covered wildlife species on the project site.

General Setting: The 50.81+/- acre Project Site is in Oakley, in Contra Costa County, California (Figure 1). The Study Area is located just west of Sellers Avenue and just south of Kings Canyon Way and Teton Road. The site is within Section 31, in Township 2 North, Range 3 East of the USGS 7.5-minute Brentwood topographic quadrangle. The site has been leveled and is situated at approximately 25 feet above mean sea level.

Surrounding land uses in this portion of Oakley are primarily agricultural and residential, with a mixture of residential subdivisions and larger, ranchette-styled homes on larger parcels. Marsh Creek is situated just west of the site and Sellers Avenue is situated to the east. A residential subdivision, larger home site, and grassland fields border the north edge of the site. There are a few ranchette-styled homes to the south of the site. There is an abandoned nursery situated just southeast of the site.

Western Burrowing Owl: The project site contains ruderal grassland and is within the range of western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB, 2023) does not contain any records of western burrowing owl within 500 feet of the site or in the larger geographical area depicted in Figure 5b. The site was inspected for burrowing owls and ground squirrel burrows with evidence of burrowing owl occupancy (i.e., white wash, pellets, feathers).

Comprehensive inspection of potential burrowing owl habitat was accomplished by walking meandering transects throughout the property. Although several ground squirrel burrows were observed in the site, no western burrowing owls or burrows with evidence of burrowing owl occupancy were observed. Further, most of the ground squirrel burrows appeared unoccupied as cobwebs were seen at the entrance in a majority of the burrows in the site.

Swainson’s Hawk: The site contains areas of ruderal grassland and is along the western edge of the range of Swainson’s hawks (Buteo swainsoni). There are two trees in the site that are potentially suitable for nesting Swainson’s hawks and there are several potential nest trees adjacent to and visible from the site that are also suitable, including a row of trees just off-site to the south. All trees in the site and visible from the site were inspected for raptor stick nests and none were observed. No Swainson’s hawks were observed during the field survey, which was conducted within the nesting period for this species. CDFW’s CNDDB contains no occurrences of Swainson’s hawk within 1,000 feet of the site or within the larger geographical area depicted in Figure 5b.
□
513

Page 8 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
Golden Eagle: The site contains ruderal grassland and is within the range of golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos).

CDFW’s CNDDB contains no occurrences of golden eagle within 0.5 miles of the site or within the larger geographical area depicted in Figure 5b. There are 2 trees in the site that are potentially suitable for nesting golden eagles and several other large trees adjacent to and visible from the site. Trees in the site and visible from the site were inspected for raptor stick nests and none were observed. No golden eagles were observed during the survey and this species nests more often on cliffs in remote natural areas than in trees near urban settings.

Other Covered Species: The 0.008+/-acre seasonal wetland is not a vernal pool and is not the type of “seasonal wetland” that provides suitable habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), or other special-status branchiopods. The seasonal wetland is not vegetated with hydrophytes commonly found in seasonal wetlands where listed branchiopods occur such as perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) and seaside barley (Hordeum marinum) and does not support any “vernal pool species” such as coyote thistle (Eryngium vaseyi), popcorn-flower (Plagiobthrys stipitatus), or Fremont goldfields (Lasthenia fremontii). To the contrary, the seasonal wetland is vegetated with a dense stand of bullrush. In conclusion, the seasonal wetland does not provide suitable habitat for special-status branchiopods and protocol-level surveys for covered shrimp were not warranted. 9) Covered and No-Take Plants
Please check the applicable boxes in Table 2b based on the land cover types found in the project area. If suitable land cover types are present on site, surveys must be conducted using approved CDFW/USFWS methods during the appropriate season for identification of covered and no-take species (see page 6-9 of the ECCC HCP/NCCP). Reference populations of covered and no-take plants should be visited, where possible, prior to conducting surveys to confirm that the plant species is visible and detectable at the time surveys are conducted. In order to complete all the necessary covered and no-take plant surveys, spring, summer, and fall surveys may be required.

Table 2b. Covered and No-Take Plant Species
Plant Species
Covered
(C) or NoTake (N)Associated Land
Cover Type
Typical Habitat or Physical Conditions, if
Known
Typical Blooming
Period
Suitable Land
Cover Type
Present
Adobe navarretia
(Navarretia nigelliformis ssp.
radians) a
C Annual Grassland Generally found on clay barrens in Annual Grassland bApr–Jun Yes No
Alkali milkvetch
(Astragalus tener ssp. tener)
N Alkali grassland
Alkali wetland
Annual grassland
Seasonal wetland
Generally found in vernally moist habitat in soils with a slight to strongly elevated pH
Mar–Jun Yes
No
Big tarplant
(Blepharizonia plumosa)
C Annual grassland Elevation below 1500 feet d most often on Altamont Series or Complex soils
Jul–Oct Yes
No
Brewer’s dwarf flax
(Hesperolinon breweri)
C Annual grassland
Chaparral and scrub
Oak savanna
Oak woodland
Generally, restricted to grassland areas within a 500+
buffer from oak woodland and/or chaparral/scrub d
May–Jul Yes
No
Brittlescale
(Atriplex depressa)
C Alkali grassland
Alkali wetland
Restricted to soils of the Pescadero or Solano soil
series; generally found in southeastern region of plan
area d
May–Oct Yes
No
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum
(Tropidocarpum capparideum)
N Alkali grassland Mar–Apr Yes
No
Contra Costa goldfields
(Lasthenia conjugens)
N Alkali grassland
Alkali wetland
Annual grassland
Seasonal wetland
Generally found in vernal pools Mar–Jun Yes
No
Diablo Helianthella
(Helianthella castanea)
C Chaparral and scrub
Oak savanna
Oak woodland
Elevations generally above 650 feet d Mar–Jun Yes
No
Diamond-petaled poppy
(Eschscholzia rhombipetala)
N Annual grassland Mar–Apr Yes
No
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
514

Page 9 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
Large-flowered fiddleneck
(Amsinckia grandiflora)
N Annual grassland Generally on clay soil Apr–May Yes
No
Mount Diablo buckwheat
(Eriogonum truncatum)
N Annual grassland
Chaparral and scrub
Ecotone of grassland and chaparral/scrub Apr–Sep Yes
No
Mount Diablo fairy-lantern
(Calochortus pulchellus)
C Annual grassland
Chaparral and scrub
Oak savanna
Oak woodland
Elevations generally between 650 and 2,600d Apr–Jun Yes No
Mount Diablo Manzanita
(Arctostaphylos auriculata)
C Chaparral and scrub Elevations generally between 700 and 1,860 feet; restricted to the eastern and northern flanks of Mt.

Diablo d and the vicinity of Black Diamond Mines
Jan–Mar Yes
No
Recurved larkspur
(Delphinium recurvatum)
C Alkali grassland
Alkali wetland
Mar–Jun Yes
No
Round-leaved filaree
(California macrophylla) c
C Annual grassland Mar–May Yes
No
San Joaquin spearscale
(Extriplex joaquiniana) e
C Alkali grassland
Alkali wetland
Apr–Oct Yes
No
Showy madia
(Madia radiata)
C Annual grassland
Oak savanna
Oak woodland
Primarily occupies open grassland or grassland on
edge of oak woodland
Mar–May Yes
No
a The species Navarretia nigelliformis subsp. nigelliformis is no longer considered to occur within Contra Costa County based on specimen annotations at the UC and Jepson Herbaria at the University of California Berkeley as well as the opinions of experts in the genus. This taxon is now recognized as Navarretia nigelliformis subsp. radians. Any subspecies of Navarretia nigelliformis encountered as a part of botanical surveys in support of a PSR should be considered as covered under this HCP/NCCP. b Habitat for the Navarretia nigelliformis subspecies that occurs within the inventory are is inaccurately described in the HCP/NCCP as vernal pools. The entity within the Inventory generally occupies clay barrens within Annual Grassland habitat, which is an upland habitat type. c From California Native Plant Society. 2007. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v7-07d). Sacramento, CA. Species may be identifiable outside of the typical blooming period; a professional botanist shall determine if a covered or no take plant occurs on the project site. Reference population of covered and no-take plants should be visited, where possible, prior to conducting surveys to confirm that the plant is visible and detectable at the time surveys are conducted. d See Species Profiles in Appendix D of the Final HCP/NCCP. Reference populations of covered and no-take plants should be visited, where possible, prior to conducting surveys to confirm that the plant species is visible and detectable at the time surveys are conducted. e In the recent update to the Jepson eflora (JFP 2013) Atriplex joaquinana has been circumscribed and segregated into a new genus called Extriplex based on the work of Elizabeth Zacharias and Bruce Baldwin (2010). The etymology of the genus Extriplex means, “beyond or outside Atriplex”. 10) Results of Covered and No-Take Plant Species
Provide a written summary describing the results of the planning surveys conducted as required in Table 2b.

Describe the methods used to survey the site for all covered and no-take plants, including the dates and times of all surveys conducted (see Tables 3-8 and 6-5 of the ECCC HCP/NCCP for covered and no-take plants), including reference populations visited prior to conducting surveys.

If any covered or no-take plant species were found, include the following information in the results summary:
• Description and number of occurrences and their rough population size. • Description of the “health” of each occurrence, as defined on pages 5-49 and 5-50 of the HCP/NCCP. • A map of all the occurrences.
• Justification of surveying time window, if outside of the plant’s blooming period. • The CNDDB form(s) submitted to CDFW (if this is a new occurrence). • A description of the anticipated impacts that the covered activity will have on the occurrence and how the project will avoid impacts to all covered and no-take plant species. If impacts to covered plant species cannot be avoided and plants will be removed by covered activity, the Conservancy must be notified and has the option to salvage the covered plants. All projects must demonstrate avoidance of all six no-take plants (see table 6-5 of the HCP/NCCP).

Survey Methods
A survey to assess potentially suitable habitat for special-status plants was undertaken on June 15, 2023. The site was systematically searched by walking and driving throughout the site.

Survey Results and Discussion
The site is ruderal grassland almost completely void of vegetation; a majority of the site is bare dirt. Due to an absence of potentially suitable habitat for special-status plants, focused surveys during the blooming period of each species in Table 2b were not warranted.
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
□
IZI
515

Page 10 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
IV. SPECIES-SPECIFIC AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION REQUIREMENTS Please complete and/or provide the following attachments:
1) Species-Specific Avoidance and Minimization for Selected Covered Wildlife Complete the following table and check the applicable box for covered species determined by the planning surveys.

Table 3. Summary of Applicable Preconstruction Surveys, Avoidance and Minimization, and Construction Monitoring Requirements10
Species Preconstruction Survey
Requirements
Avoidance and Minimization
Requirements
Construction Monitoring Required Info in
HCP
San
Joaquin
kit fox
• On project footprint and 250-ft
radius, map all dens (>5 in.
diameter) and determine status
• Provide written survey results
to USFWS within 5 working
days after surveying
• Monitor dens
• Destroy unoccupied dens
• Discourage use of occupied (nonnatal) dens
• Establish exclusion zones ( >50 ft
for potential dens, and >100 ft for
known dens)
• Notify USFWS of occupied natal
dens
pp. 6-37
to 6-38
Western
burrowing
owl
• On project footprint and 500-ft
radius, identify and map all
owls and burrows, and
determine status
• Document use of habitat (e.g.
breeding, foraging)
• Avoid occupied nests during
breeding season (Feb-Sep)
• Avoid occupied burrows during
nonbreeding season (Sep – Feb)
• Install one-way doors in occupied
burrow (if avoidance not possible)
• Monitor burrows with doors
installed
• Establish buffer zones (250 ft
around nests)
• Establish buffer zones (160 ft
around burrows)
pp. 6-39
to 6-41
Giant
garter
snake
• Delineate aquatic habitat up to
200 ft from water’s edge on
each side
• Document any occurrences
• Limit construction to Oct-May
• Dewater habitat April 15 – Sep 30
prior to construction
• Minimize clearing for construction
• Delineate 200 ft buffer around
potential habitat near construction
• Provide field report on monitoring
efforts
• Stop construction activities if
snake is encountered; allow snake
to passively relocate
• Remove temporary fill or debris
from construction site
• Mandatory training for
construction personnel
pp. 6-43
to 6-45
California
tiger
salamander
• Provide written notification to
USFWS and CDFW regarding
timing of construction and
likelihood of occurrence on site
• Allow agency staff to translocate
species, if requested
• None p. 6-45
California
red-legged
frog
• Provide written notification to
USFWS and CDFW regarding
timing of construction and
likelihood of occurrence on site
• Allow agency staff to translocate
species, if requested
• None p. 6-46
Covered
shrimp
• Establish presence/absence
• Document and evaluate use of
all habitat features (e.g. vernal
pools, rock outcrops)
• Establish buffer near construction
activities
• Prohibit incompatible activities
• Establish buffer around outer edge
of all hydric vegetation associated
with habitat (50 ft or immediate
watershed, whichever is larger)
• Mandatory training for
construction personnel
pp. 6-46
to 6-48
Townsend’s
big-eared
bat
• Establish presence/absence
• Determine if potential sites
were recently occupied (guano)
• Seal hibernacula before Nov
• Seal nursery sites before April
• Delay construction near occupied
sites until hibernation or nursery
seasons are over
• None pp. 6-36
to 6-37
Swainson’s
hawk
• Determine whether potential
nests are occupied
• No construction within 1,000 ft of
occupied nests within breeding
season (March 15 - Sep 15)
• If necessary, remove active nest
tree after nesting season to
prevent occupancy in second year.
• Establish 1,000 ft buffer around
active nest and monitor
compliance (no activity within
established buffer)
pp. 6-41
to 6-43
Golden
Eagle
• Establish presence/absence of
nesting eagles
• No construction within ½ mile near
active nests (most activity late Jan
– Aug)
• Establish ½ mile buffer around
active nest and monitor
compliance with buffer
pp. 6-38
to 6-39
10 The requirements in this table are not comprehensive; they are detailed in the next section on the following page. □
□
□
□
□
□
516

Page 11 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
2) Required Preconstruction Surveys, Avoidance and Minimization, and Construction Monitoring All preconstruction surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 6.4.3, Species-Level Measures, and Table 6-1 of the ECCC HCP/NCCP. Detailed descriptions of preconstruction surveys, avoidance and minimization, and construction monitoring applicable to each of the wildlife species in Table 3 are located below. Please remove the species-specific measures that do not apply to your project (highlight entire section and delete).

WESTERN BURROWING OWL
Preconstruction Surveys
Prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities, a USFWS/CDFW- approved biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey in areas identified in the planning surveys as having potential burrowing owl habitat.

The surveys will establish the presence or absence of western burrowing owl and/or habitat features and evaluate use by owls in accordance with CDFW survey guidelines (California Department of Fish and Game 1995).

On the parcel where the activity is proposed, the biologist will survey the proposed disturbance footprint and a 500-foot radius from the perimeter of the proposed footprint to identify burrows and owls. Adjacent parcels under different land ownership will not be surveyed. Surveys should take place near sunrise or sunset in accordance with CDFW guidelines. All burrows or burrowing owls will be identified and mapped. Surveys will take place no more than 30 days prior to construction. During the breeding season (February 1– August 31), surveys will document whether burrowing owls are nesting in or directly adjacent to disturbance areas. During the nonbreeding season (September 1–January 31), surveys will document whether burrowing owls are using habitat in or directly adjacent to any disturbance area. Survey results will be valid only for the season (breeding or nonbreeding) during which the survey is conducted.

Avoidance and Minimization and Construction Monitoring
This measure incorporates avoidance and minimization guidelines from CDFW’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 1995).

If burrowing owls are found during the breeding season (February 1 – August 31), the project proponent will avoid all nest sites that could be disturbed by project construction during the remainder of the breeding season or while the nest is occupied by adults or young. Avoidance will include establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone (described below). Construction may occur during the breeding season if a qualified biologist monitors the nest and determines that the birds have not begun egg-laying and incubation or that the juveniles from the occupied burrows have fledged. During the nonbreeding season (September 1 – January 31), the project proponent should avoid the owls and the burrows they are using, if possible. Avoidance will include the establishment of a buffer zone (described below).

During the breeding season, buffer zones of at least 250 feet in which no construction activities can occur will be established around each occupied burrow (nest site). Buffer zones of 160 feet will be established around each burrow being used during the nonbreeding season. The buffers will be delineated by highly visible, temporary construction fencing.

If occupied burrows for burrowing owls are not avoided, passive relocation will be implemented. Owls should be excluded from burrows in the immediate impact zone and within a 160-foot buffer zone by installing oneway doors in burrow entrances. These doors should be in place for 48 hours prior to excavation. The project area should be monitored daily for 1 week to confirm that the owl has abandoned the burrow. Whenever possible, burrows should be excavated using hand tools and refilled to prevent reoccupation (California Department of Fish and Game 1995). Plastic tubing or a similar structure should be inserted in the tunnels during excavation to maintain an escape route for any owls inside the burrow.

SWAINSON’S HAWK
Preconstruction Survey
Prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities that occurs during the nesting season (March 15– September 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey no more than 1 month prior to construction to establish whether Swainson’s hawk nests within 1,000 feet of the project site are occupied. If 517

Page 12 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
potentially occupied nests within 1,000 feet are off the project site, then their occupancy will be determined by observation from public roads or by observations of Swainson’s hawk activity (e.g., foraging) near the project site. If nests are occupied, minimization measures and construction monitoring are required (see below).

Avoidance and Minimization and Construction Monitoring
During the nesting season (March 15–September 15), covered activities within 1,000 feet of occupied nests or nests under construction will be prohibited to prevent nest abandonment. If site-specific conditions or the nature of the covered activity (e.g., steep topography, dense vegetation, limited activities) indicate that a smaller buffer could be used, the Implementing Entity will coordinate with CDFW/USFWS to determine the appropriate buffer size.

If young fledge prior to September 15, covered activities can proceed normally. If the active nest site is shielded from view and noise from the project site by other development, topography, or other features, the project applicant can apply to the Implementing Entity for a waiver of this avoidance measure. Any waiver must also be approved by USFWS and CDFW. While the nest is occupied, activities outside the buffer can take place.

All active nest trees will be preserved on site, if feasible. Nest trees, including non-native trees, lost to covered activities will be mitigated by the project proponent according to the requirements below.

Mitigation for Loss of Nest Trees
The loss of non-riparian Swainson’s hawk nest trees will be mitigated by the project proponent by:
• If feasible on-site, planting 15 saplings for every tree lost with the objective of having at least 5 mature trees established for every tree lost according to the requirements listed below.

AND either
1) Pay the Implementing Entity an additional fee to purchase, plant, maintain, and monitor 15 saplings on the HCP/NCCP Preserve System for every tree lost according to the requirements listed below, OR
2) The project proponent will plant, maintain, and monitor 15 saplings for every tree lost at a site to be approved by the Implementing Entity (e.g., within an HCP/NCCP Preserve or existing open space linked to HCP/NCCP preserves), according to the requirements listed below.

The following requirements will be met for all planting options:
• Tree survival shall be monitored at least annually for 5 years, then every other year until year 12. All trees lost during the first 5 years will be replaced. Success will be reached at the end of 12 years if at least 5 trees per tree lost survive without supplemental irrigation or protection from herbivory. Trees must also survive for at least three years without irrigation. • Irrigation and fencing to protect from deer and other herbivores may be needed for the first several years to ensure maximum tree survival.
• Native trees suitable for this site should be planted. When site conditions permit, a variety of native trees will be planted for each tree lost to providetrees with different growth rates, maturation, and life span, and to provide a variety of tree canopy structures for Swainson’s hawk. This variety will help to ensure that nest trees will be available in the short term (5-10 years for cottonwoods and willows) and in the long term (e.g., Valley oak, sycamore). This will also minimize the temporal loss of nest trees. • Riparian woodland restoration conducted as a result of covered activities (i.e., loss of riparian woodland) can be used to offset the nest tree planting requirement above, if the nest trees are riparian species.
• Whenever feasible and when site conditions permit, trees should be planted in clumps together or with existing trees to provide larger areas of suitable nesting habitat and to create a natural buffer between nest trees and adjacent development (if plantings occur on the development site). • Whenever feasible, plantings on the site should occur closest to suitable foraging habitat outside the UDA.
• Trees planted in the HCP/NCCP preserves or other approved offsite location will occur within the known range of Swainson’s hawk in the inventory area and as close as possible to high-quality foraging habitat.
518

Page 13 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
GOLDEN EAGLE
Preconstruction Survey
Prior to implementation of covered activities, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey to establish whether nests of golden eagles are occupied (see Section 6.3.1, Planning Surveys). If nests are occupied, minimization requirements and construction monitoring will be required.

Avoidance and Minimization
Covered activities will be prohibited within 0.5 mile of active nests. Nests can be built and active at almost any time of the year, although mating and egg incubation occurs late January through August, with peak activity in March through July. If site-specific conditions or the nature of the covered activity (e.g., steep topography, dense vegetation, limited activities) indicate that a smaller buffer could be appropriate or that a larger buffer should be implemented, the Implementing Entity will coordinate with CDFW/USFWS to determine the appropriate buffer size.

Construction Monitoring
Construction monitoring will focus on ensuring that no covered activities occur within the buffer zone established around an active nest. Although no known golden eagle nest sites occur within or near the ULL, covered activities inside and outside of the Preserve System have the potential to disturb golden eagle nest sites. Construction monitoring will ensure that direct effects to golden eagles are minimized. 3) Construction Monitoring Plan
Before implementing a covered activity, the applicant will develop and submit a construction monitoring plan to the planning department of the local land use jurisdiction and the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy for review and approval. Elements of a brief construction monitoring plan will include the following:
• Results of planning and preconstruction surveys.11
• Description of avoidance and minimization measures to be implemented, including a description of project-specific refinements to the measures or additional measures not included in the HCP/NCCP. • Description of monitoring activities, including monitoring frequency and duration, and specific activities to be monitored.
• Description of the onsite authority of the construction monitor to modify implementation of the activity.

Check box to acknowledge this requirement.

V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ON COVERED ACTIVITIES
1) Check off the HCP conservation measures that apply to the project.

APPLIES TO ALL PROJECTS
Conservation Measure 1.11. Avoid Direct Impacts on Extremely Rare Plants, Fully Protected Wildlife Species, or Migratory Birds. This conservation measure applies to all projects. All projects will avoid all impacts on extremely rare plants and fully protected species listed in Table 6-5 of the ECCC HCP/NCCP. See HCP pp. 6-23 to 6-25, and Table 6-5.

APPLIES TO PROJECTS THAT IMPACT COVERED PLANT SPECIES
Conservation Measure 3.10. Plant Salvage when Impacts are Unavoidable. This condition applies to projects that cannot avoid impacts on covered plants and help protect covered plants by prescribing salvage whenever avoidance of impacts is not feasible. Project proponents 11 If the preconstruction surveys do not trigger construction monitoring, results of preconstruction surveys should still be submitted to the local jurisdiction and the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy.
□
519

Page 14 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
wishing to remove populations of covered plants must notify the Conservancy of their construction schedule to allow the Conservancy the option of salvaging the populations. See HCP pp. 6-48 to 6-50.

APPLIES TO PROJECTS THAT INCLUDE ARE ADJACENT TO STREAMS, PONDS, OR WETLANDS Conservation Measure 2.12. Wetland, Pond, and Stream Avoidance and Minimization. All projects will implement measures described in the HCP to avoid and minimize impacts on wetlands, ponds, streams, and riparian woodland/scrub. See HCP pp. 6-33 to 6-35.

APPLIES TO NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Conservation Measure 1.10. Maintain Hydrologic Conditions and Minimize Erosion. All new development must avoid or minimize direct and indirect impacts on local hydrological conditions and erosion by incorporating the applicable Provision C.3 Amendments of the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program’s (CCCCWP’s) amended NPDES Permit (order no. R2-2003-0022; permit no. CAS002912). The overall goal of this measure is to ensure that new development covered under the HCP has no or minimal adverse effects on downstream fisheries to avoid take of fish listed under ESA or CESA. See HCP pp. 6-21 to 6-22.

APPLIES TO NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT INCLUDE OR ARE ADJACENT TO STREAMS, PONDS, OR WETLANDS Conservation Measure 1.7. Establish Stream Setbacks. A stream setback will be applied to all development projects covered by the HCP according to the stream types listed in Table 6-2 of the HCP. See HCP pp. 6-15 to 6-18 and Table 6-2.

APPLIES TO NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ADJACENT TO EXISTING PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, HCP PRESERVES, OR LIKELY HCP ACQUISITION SITES
Conservation Measure 1.6. Minimize Development Footprint Adjacent to Open Space. Project applicants are encouraged to minimize their development footprint and set aside portions of their land to contribute to the HCP Preserve System. Land set aside that contributes to the HCP biological goals and objectives may be credited against development fees. See HCP pages 6-14 to 6-15.

Conservation Measure 1.8. Establish Fuel Management Buffer to Protect Preserves and Property. Buffer zones will provide a buffer between development and wildlands that allows adequate fuel management to minimize the risk of wildlife damage to property or to the preserve. The minimum buffer zone for new development is 100 feet. See HCP pages 6-18 to 6-19.

Conservation Measure 1.9. Incorporate Urban-Wildlife Interface Design Elements. These projects will incorporate design elements at the urban-wildlife interface to minimize the indirect impacts of development on the adjacent preserve. See HCP pp. 6-20 to 6-21.

APPLIES TO ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECTS OUTSIDE THE UDA
Conservation Measure 1.12. Implement Best Management Practices for Rural Road Maintenance. Road maintenance activities have the potential to affect covered species by introducing sediment and other pollutants into downstream waterways, spreading invasive weeds, and disturbing breeding wildlife. In order to avoid and minimize these impacts, BMPs described in the HCP will be used where appropriate and feasible. See HCP pp. 6-25 to 6-26.

APPLIES TO NEW ROADS OR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS OUTSIDE THE UDA Conservation Measure 1.14. Design Requirements for Covered Roads Outside the Urban Development Area (UDA). New roads or road improvements outside the UDA have impacts on many covered species far beyond the direct impacts of their project footprints. To minimize the impacts of new, expanded, and improved roads in agricultural and natural areas of the inventory area, road and bridge construction projects will adopt siting, design, and construction requirements described in the HCP and listed in Table 6-6. See HCP pp. 6-27 to 6-33 and Table 6-6.

APPLIES TO FLOOD CONTROL MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES
Conservation Measure 1.13. Implement Best Management Practices for Flood Control Facility Maintenance. Flood control maintenance activities have the potential to affect covered species by introducing sediment and other pollutants into downstream waterways and disturbing breeding wildlife. In order to avoid and minimize these impacts, BMPs described in the HCP will be used where appropriate and feasible. See HCP pp. 6-26 to 6-27.
2) For all checked conservation measures, describe how the project will comply with each measure.

Attach as Attachment C: Project Compliance to HCP Conditions.

VI. MITIGATION MEASURES
1) Mitigation Fee Calculator(s)
Complete and attach the fee calculator (use permanent and/or temporary impact fee calculator as appropriate), and attach as Attachment D: Fee Calculator(s). □
□
□
□
□
□
520

Page 15 ends

Planning Survey Report Form, Revised July 2015
2) Briefly describe the amount of fees to be paid and when applicant plans to submit payment.

The 50.81+/- acre site contains 50.43+/- acres of Ruderal Grassland, a 0.008+/-acre Seasonal Wetland, and

0.37+/- acres of Urban/Developed land.

The site is within Fee Zone 1 and construction is expected to commence in 2024.

Under the current (2023) fee schedule, Development fees of $19,611.52 per acre would be assessed on 50.44 acres ($989,205.07).

Additionally, Wetland Mitigation fees of $392,489.03 per acre would be assessed on 0.008 acres ($3,139.91).

Under the 2023 fee schedule, the fee total is $992,344.08.

Fees will be paid pursuant to the fee schedule that is in place at the time construction commences. 521
ATTACHMENT A: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
522
Stonecreek (Subdivision 9647)
Project Description
July 2023
The 50.81+/- acre Project Site is in Oakley, in Contra Costa County, California (Figure 1). The Study Area is located just west of Sellers Avenue and just south of Kings Canyon Way and Teton Road. The site is within Section 31, in Township 2 North, Range 3 East of the USGS 7.5-minute Brentwood topographic quadrangle. The project site includes a parcel encompassing 50.44+/- acres and an off-site 0.37-acre sliver along Sellers Avenue.

Ponderosa Homes II, Inc. plans to develop the parcel in to a 176-lot residential subdivision (Figures 2a-2f). Access in to the site from the east will be from Sellers Avenue, as well as from Teton Road and Kings Canyon Way, which will be extended to the south from their stubs along the north edge of the site. A network of roads and culde-sacs, most of which were rough graded several years ago, will provide access to all of lots in the subdivision. The project is expected to involve improvements to the Sellers Avenue, such as an additional lane and/or construction of a sidewalk. Any off-site road improvements will occur in a 0.37-acre area along the east edge of the site.

There will be a park and a stormwater detention basin in the northwest part of the site between developed areas and the Marsh Creek corridor. A second stormwater detention basin in the northeast part of the site. The treated stormwater will be conveyed to an existing City storm drain system in Teton Road. The proposed project will connect to existing City infrastructure in Teton Road and Kings Canyon Way, respectively, to provide sewer and water service to the site.

Standard construction best management practices (BMPs) will be employed during construction to minimize the potential for erosion and off-site transport of fines.

BMPs will include use of water trucks, appropriate compaction of soil, and installation of straw wattles, silt fences or other technologies along the perimeter of the site during construction, and stabilization of bare soils as appropriate with seeding, straw, and/or hydromulch.

Construction is expected to begin in early-2024 and is expected to continue through 2025.
523
ATTACHMENT B: FIGURES
524
. 0 1,000 2,000
Figure 1
Map Date: 06/20/2023
Site Map/USGS
C:\FEC_INC\Projects\Moore Biological\Stonecreek\MXD\stonecreek_psr_figure_1.mxd City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, CA
Stonecreek
Moore Biological
Consultants
Source: USGS 7.5' Quadrangles

BRENTWOOD, CA
Section: 31
Township: 02N
Range: 03E
^_
Study Area
Project Site
R~ev11te
Sacram nto
S.1nta RO!ia
Elk Grove
f .1 trf U!l l d
ValleJo
Concord A~I~
San
Frn nasco
..

0.1kl.lnd'
Tr.icy
San L
Lrvermo,e
San ~.l illl eo Fremont
•!..•~·- ,i. • •-·
San Jo&e
11' ......
;. ....

SIOCklon
MOde~o
Industrial '
l 9 Waste Pond
- - ~
J;J
"> §
21 ; ,
(::)
Well 46
0 s
. . I "
I • "l:•o-1
...
525
N
Figure 2a: TENTATIVE MAP - COVER SHEET
.;--
• ,£
-----'"" -1113~----i1--,--_c__,--11'.
t---~--+::,c0-10,f-,----'-----,-J~--11

VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE
GENERAL NOTES:

1. OWNER/ APPLICANT:

2. CIVIL ENGINEER:

3. SOILS ENGINEER:

PONDEROSA HOMES II, INC.
5020 FRANKLIN DRIVE, STE. 200
PLEASANTON, CA 94588
(925) 460-8910

JEFF SCHROEDER
CARLSON, BARBEE & GIBSON, INC.
2633 CAMINO RAMON, SUITE 350
SAN RAMON, CA 94583
(925) 866-0322
JASON D. VOGAN, RCE 59299
ENGEO, INC.

APPRO
DELTA DIABLO WATER___..--
DISTRICT WELL SITE 1
(NOT AD::!!BLO WATER )
DISTRICT EASEMENT "' ; • /
FUTURE p ARK TO REMAIN >-
/--- ..__,,/ ~ PARCELB / ,,,____
/
/
//
/__..,..:;.--('"
173
176
174
175
- - _ _/.
- - -----
I
I
)
l 70 l o ,__ ___ 1~ 171
169
1 ,----
1 39 I
40 41
78 79
EIRRA TRAIL ROAD 2ll
~ □ f-----r'
2 3 4 5 6 7 8

STREET A
38 37 36 35 34 33 32
42 43 44 45 46 47 48

STREETB
77 76 75 74 73 72 71
•
I
: 10 ~ ~-
31 30 29
49 50 51
70 69 68
11 -,
'i
28 :

I
I
52 :
).
- .../.
-~
'i 67 I
I
I
17278 GOLDEN VALLEY PARKWAY
LATHROP, CA 95330
(925) 835-0610 ~ 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

4. 5.

6. 7.

8. 9.

TOPOGRAPHIC SOURCE:

CONTOUR INTERVAL:

BENCHMARK:

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY:

BASIS OF BEARINGS:

FLOOD ZONE:

10. ASSESSORS PARCEL NO:

STEVE HARRIS, RGE 2804
GEOMAPS INC.
3362 MATHER FIELD ROAD
RANCHO CORDOVA, CA 95670
(916) 361-9133
1 - FOOT BASED ON NGVD29 {EXISTING & PROPOSED)
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BENCHMARK #3164, SET BRASS TAG AND FASTENER IN SIDEWALK SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BRIDGE OVER MARCH CREEK ON DELTA ROAD, 0.7 MILES EAST OF HIGHWAY 4.

ELEVATION = 42.027 FEET (NGVD29)
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY IS BASED ON PHOTOGRAPHY TAKEN ON AUGUST 19, 2022 AND PREPARED BY GEOMAPS. THE FIUGHT WAS SURVEY GROUND CONTROLLED BY CARLSON, BARBEE & GIBSON, INC.

THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY WAS DETERMINED BY FOUND IRON PIPE MONUMENTS ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, T.2 N., R.3 E, M.D.B.&M.; THE BEARING BEING N01'02'1 o·w PER 72 PM 33 AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PRECISE TRAVERSE OF SELLERS AVENUE. THE BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM ZONE Ill.

ZONE X (SEE DATUM CONVERSION NOTE)

REFER TO FLOOD INSURANCE RA TE MAP
PANEL 06013C0360G (MARCH 21, 2017)

DATUM CONVERSION NOTE

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SHOWN IS BASED ON THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (NGVD29). FEMA FLOOD ZONE AND

BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL 168 ~ --- ------
167 STREETC ~- --- --- -- --- --- -~
r 'i
166 : i 165 164 163 162 161 160 159 i
I I I
I I I
~~~~~, I ~~;~ ;=;~~~~~~~31-1 _ __. __ ....___"iJ: ~'\ ·· · ~~~---0) 158 I = = )t--------
FROST
033-140-022
• l 157
!" )
)-----
) 156
l1---~-~--
l I
,,--- --,
r 'i
i 140 139 138 i
I I
I I ~ I I
E-< I 141 137 I
~ l'--1 ---t------'11
E-<
CZl 142
143
136
135
'
12 13 14 15 16 17
,,-- -
r'
i 27
I
I
i 53 ~
,,-- -
r
I 66
I
I
I
i 90
l
26 25
54 55
65 64
91 92
,,--- --,
24 56
63 r 'i
I I
I 131 130 129 I
I I
93 µ., Ii-: __ ...,__~---'---...;.: d
ffi 1
1 132 128 I ~ ~ I ~ CZl 133 127 CZl
134 126
I
23 57
62 r
I
I
18 22
58 61
94 l''
.
zu -=== n,
I
19 20 :
).
- .../.
----~
21 59
-~
'i
60 I
I
I
95 'i
I
I
l
,,- -
r
::C: I 96 100
i ,_: ----~--H
E-< I CO
CZl i 97 98 99 : ~ l ). o
~--------.../. u
~-----
112 111
113
114
115 I
116 I
110
0 109 I
108 I
I
REYFS
o. 3-140-:0 "j 9
=
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
I
I
I
I
'
,,..

11. PROPOSED SITE AREA:

12. EXISTING LAND USE:
033-140-020, 033-140-021 & 033-140-028

50.44± AC

RESIDENTIAL LOW (RL) & RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW (RV)

RESIDENTIAL LOW (RL) & RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW (RV)
DA TUM OF 1988 (NA VD88).

ALL NGVD29 ELEVATIONS CAN BE CONVERTED TD NAVD88 BY ADDING 2.37 FEET. FDR EXAMPLE, ELEVATION 31.00 (NGVD29) + 2.37 (CONVERSION FACTOR) = ELEVATION 33.37 {NAVD88).
"'
153 154 155 i
)
144 145
I
146 I
I
)
I 123 I
l
124
I
125 I
I
)
I
l 117
I,
llO
.

IU /
1M • lau: • ! I 0: ·:
'--'-~ -'rl,..J.,,tt-" I "---=I----'=

13. PROPOSED LAND USE:

14. ZONING:

15. PROPOSED LOT SIZES:

16. PROPOSED DENSITY:

17. EXISTING STRUCTURES:

18. EXISTING UTILITIES:

19. EXISTING TREES:

20. WALLS AND FENCING:

21. PUBLIC UTILITIES:

22. UTILITY PROV1DER:

23. STREETS:

24. GRADING:

25. BOUNDARY:

26. PHASING:

27. FINAL MAP:

28. DIMENSIONS:

P-1 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH DEVELOPMENT PLAN (P-1) 60' X 100' - 6,000 SF MIN
70' X 11 Q' - 7,500 SF MIN
176 DU / 50.44± AC = 3.5 DU/AC
ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY TO BE REMOVED.

ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY TO BE REMOVED UNLESS OTHERl'llSE NOTED.

EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY TO BE REMOVED UNLESS OTHERl'llSE NOTED.

ALL WALLS AND FENCING 1'11LL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND PRIVATELY MAINTAINED EXCEPT LANDSCAPE PRIVACY WALLS ALONG SELLERS AVENUE WHICH WILL BE IN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY.

ALL UTILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR 'MTHIN A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 'MLL BE PUBLIC AND WILL BE PUBLICLY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.

SEWER:

WATER:

STORM DRAIN:

GAS & ELECTRIC:

TELEPHONE:

CABLE TV:

IRON HOUSE SANITARY DISTRICT

DIAB LO WATER DISTRICT

CITY OF OAKLEY

PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC
AT&T

COMCAST

ALL STREETS WILL BE PER CITY STANDARD AND DEDICATED TD THE CITY OF OAKLEY AS A PUBLICLY OWNED AND MAINTAINED STREET.

PROPOSED GRADING IS PRELIMINARY. FINAL GRADING IS SUBJECT TO FINAL DESIGN.

THE BOUNDARY AND EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON RECORD TITLE

INFORMATION AS LISTED AND DESCRIBED IN THE PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 14, 2022, ORDER NUMBER 0131-625476ala.

ND ADDITIONAL TITLE RESEARCH HAS BEEN PREFORMED TD COMPLETE THIS PACKAGE.

PROJECT MAY BE CONSTRUCTED IN PHASES.

MULTIPLE FINAL MAPS MAY BE FILED UPON APPROVAL OF THE VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP.

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITH FINAL MAP. .
... .JUI . . . JU ~·
~· .
!/"
- ____,;
152 151 150
,::::::::,.
- - __/.

STREETD
,,--- - -
r
149 148 i 122 121 120 119
I
.\ rn~~~=-=-=-=-=~--~~~~~-~.~=~~-~,--~~-~~-- -~-------~~~~-~-~~~~·~-~--~~ 118
~- ~.- .= • 1/VARREN '-'c ~ :'' f URL ONG
;,~ f:, ~~ -:'' ~• f' ~ l" -:'' 033- j 40-Q 1 Q~ .~ 'H 2 ; 033- j LtQ-004_) >~ x f~ JIIJ "" ~~ ~J \ D ll;7~ H '!:6 '----............ ~-j PARCEL SUMMARY Sheet List Table
I
Q 00 o
Do_ .. ,
oo . a,

PARCEL/ LOT LAND USE OWNER
LOTS 1-176 RESIDENTIAL PRIVATE

PARCEL A HCP BUFFER/ OPEN SPACE CITY
Sheet Number
1 2
3 Sheet Title

GENERAL NOTES, STREET SECTIONS, & SHEET INDEX

EXISTING CONDITIONS

DIMENSION SITE PLAN (WEST)

GENERAL NOTES, STREET SECTIONS,
& SHEET INDEX
a,
!
I
a,
+
I
PARCEL B PARK CITY 4

PARCEL C STORM WATER DETENTION BASIN & CITY WATER QUALITY 5 6
PARCEL D OPEN SPACE CITY 7
8 9

DIMENSION SITE PLAN (EAST)

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (WEST)

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (EAST)

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (WEST)

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (EAST)

PRELIMINARY STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647
OAKLEY
-$cCALIFORNIA 0

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1"=100' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
cbg SAN RAMON ■ (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE • (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
100 200 300 CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS
JOB NO.: 1216-010
D
,, . .
.
u, .
u,
SHEET NO.
1 OF 9 SHEETS
G:\1216-01 OIACAD\ TM\TM01.DWG
526
X
X X
X X
Figure 2b: GRADING PLAN (WEST)
- 27.S 27.6
-
e ' ' ' 21.J 27.4
211.7 . ' 2U
c-,.,-,-.-~':'--'.~ crrY Of OAKLEY --,:, '" '
' 27.4
-- 27.5
•

TOP OF BANK
''.m

27.1 '

27.5 '

27.!. \. J ,., '
' FLOOD HAZARD
LINE
,.,
QJ3-Ll50-044 . 27.4
•
-- ' 27.0
'" 27.9
' ,,.
'
'

27.8 27.4 l -,. . 27.2
•
'

27.2 ' ,,---.._
/ - / ~ - ~=,""'' ' / - ~
,,,,-:; ·17 ~ _,,,...------,
P 29 6 ~7 MJ 6/
' 173 ~; 174 ,;, ";'
p 31.0 / 30: 8 175
,.,\ ( "; '" P 29.9 £,..--~
X

30.16 J/11
'
"" ' P 29.6 "'
1 • 21.J ...

P 29.9 " P 29.9
P 2 .9
,.,
'
,.,
. 42~'
, P 29.9
SD
,.,
•

27.8 • 37 ,,.

P 29.5
"
,,..4
' 36
P 29.5

27.8 •
44 P 29.0

27.6 27.8
•
5 6 7 8 9 ';
P 29.4 ,; P 29.4 P 2l9 P 29.o ,,, P 29.o
P 29.5 '"' • P 9.2

27.6 45
P 28.5

27.7 '
216
'
, p 8.2
"' •
.,
, 47
P 27.7
,, 31 '" . J.8,7 P 28.7

27.J

27.9 M
8 ,, 49
' " P 28.0 P 27.7

27.6 '
30 P 28.4
2'.1
•
50 P 27.4
'
,.,
SD HP 26.45 0_75% LP
----

26.9 26.9 b8

27.1 '
10 9
"·'
, 28
P c28. f., P 28.4 ' ,.,
•
"27. I
51 52~·
P 27.4 P 27.4
P 28.4 L3 ,.,
'
PL
PAD

WOOD FENCE
PAD
1' MAX RETAINING

IN KICKER BOARD

SECTION A

NOT TO SCALE
PL/RW
;;

CONTOUR TO EXISTING
GROUND AT 3: 1 MAX
~
EXISTING 1' OB
'-½¥t~ '1/. • •

SECTIOND

NOT TO SCALE
PL

WOOD FENCE
1' MAX RETAINING

IN KICKER BOARD

SECTIONB

NOT TO SCALE
PL

WOOD FENCE
1' OB
3:1SL~
EXIS~l;G \ I PAD
GROUND
1/,

SECTIONE

NOT TO SCALE
(SEE NOTE BELOW)

EDGE GRADING NOTE

WOOD FENCE
PL

SECTIONC

NOT TO SCALE
PL

WOOD FENCE

EXISTING
GROUND
\

SECTIONF

NOT TO SCALE
170 74 "
'
P 30.2 7
P ~:~~ P 28.5 ' P 28.0
72 P 27.5 71 - 70 '.___ 69 ' 68 ';' 6 66 ~ 27.5 P J.7.5 - p ) 7.3 P 27.3 P 2 .3

IF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT CANNOT

BE OBTAIN TO GRADE ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTY,
A RETAINING WALL WILL BE REQUIRED.
]
'\
"'
'"
[j
JW
I
I
,
'
,.,
'
169 P 30.5
' 21.5
• 80 I~ 2
P ~1.0
"'
.59
. ' 8
82 211.,
' P 29.0
, ..
'
'---
' ,.,
8 3 __.___,,..

P 28.5 ~.
'"
,.,
87 P 28.5 P 28.5 P 28.5 P 28.3
"' , .. ,., ' '
LP 27.29 HP*27.83 LP 27.19 HP*27.72 LP 27 2 HP*27.61

0.75% 0.75% 0.75% 0.75% x27.25 0.75%

21.7 "--------- • '" • --..__________:1--~+-.,,,----1
, 88
' p 28.3

27.5 '
139
,, .
'
\
89 ,.
. p 3
I 65 ';' 16~ ':' 163 ";' 162 :'"161 ~ a,
-
~-• ~ "' ~,•~l~ 1~~ ~ ·~f•=P~, ~o~.2~;~·~P~29_l _ ~~f~: 2=8~.8,.=: ~c~P~2~8.~8~=P-2-8.~8~=,.=·'~~~ P12~~-~8;~, rti: ~ - - ~ n.s ~ ~ f!,4
P 28.5

27.4 26.0..:
~ 141
Jl!.6
'
J0.8
'
J0.2
.

J0.4
JIJ.8
'
' JIJ.J
..
.,.,
'
JIJ.'
'
JIJ.'
'
C f' )
Jal
'
"" J1.0 ---- '
,.?.b-<~--r"'~,.,,....,._,.,,....,._~~~"", ,;,, 158
, , (j.C}} P 28.5 ~o· 1 29.9 2!J.2 n.1 } 1--~,,"' ~ '-----""n '-----,'"=' - ---,,,,""-I ' uJ P 28.5
,.. ,., P 27.8 27.8
JO.I
•
JO.J
•
J/18
'
,.,
'
'
.,,
'
JO.J
'
.,,
"" '
J0.2
'
,.,
'
,.,
'
, } I:'' ,., 157
P 29.2 • ""
142 136
P 28.4 ~
::· }
}-----
} 3:1~-' 15 ,., 143 ., ,15' 135 '
•
J/H
,.,
'

29.6 '
~
,.,
'
J0.6
•
JO.I c:,>
'
} _SLOPE_
Jl),6
•
P 31.3
•
154
P 31.2
JO.O
'
291
JO.J
'
0 '
,.,
'
f50
P 31.0
'
144
P 31.5
,., 149°
P 31.0
\ WARREN
033- 'j 40-0 'J 0
146
,., 145 ,., P 31.5
P 31.5
,., 28
' 148 ' ,.,
147
P 31.5 P 31.5
' 29.9 29.J 0 .
'°
.62
•
0 N

26.J
'
I
I
22 ,., '

PAD ELEVATION NOTE -MARSH CREEK EDGE

PAD ELEVATIONS ADJACENT TO MARSH CREEK ARE ESTABLISHED TO ENSURE

THAT THE FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION FOR EACH BUILDING WILL BE A MINIMUM 1-FOOT ABOVE THE CREEK'S BASE FLOOD ELEVATION IN CONFORMANCE l'ilTH THE CITY'S FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE.

EXISTING
liDil
Ill
0 LEGEND

PROPOSED
------
I, + , +, + , + ,I
!18"SD: •
ii
Ill

DATUM CONVERSION NOTE

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SHOWN IS BASED ON THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (NGVD29). FEMA FLOOD ZONE AND

BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DA TUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).

ALL NG'v029 ELEVATIONS CAN BE CONVERTED TO NA'v088 BY ADDING 2.37 FEET. FOR EXAMPLE, ELEVATION 31.00 (NGVD29) + 2.37 (CONVERSION FACTOR) = ELEVATION 33.37 (NA'v088).

DESCRIPTION

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

FLOOD HAZARD LINE

TOP OF CURB

EASEMENT

CENTERLINE

SIDEWALK

AC PAVEMENT

BIORETENTION

STORM DRAIN PIPE

CATCH BASIN

FIELD INLET

MANHOLE

ABBREVIATIONS
BD
BW
CL
EX
FC
HP
LP
OB
p
PL
PUE
RET
RW
SD
SDFM
TSM
TYP

BOUNDARY

BACK OF WALK

CENTERLINE

EXISTING

FACE OF CURB

HIGH POINT

LOW POINT

OVERBUILD
PAD

PROPERTY LINE

PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

RETAINING

RIGHT OF WAY

STORM DRAIN

STORM DRAIN FORCE MAIN

TOP OF SOIL MIX

TYPICAL

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (WEST)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1 "=80' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
OAKLEY
-$c- cbg SAN RAMON ■ (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE • (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SHEET NO.
5 CALIFORNIA 0 80 160 240 CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS OF 9 SHEETS JOB NO.: 1216-010
G:\1216-01 O\ACAD\ TM\TM05.DWG
527
Figure 2c: GRADING PLAN (EAST)
J )-----, 0
U::: l ~·r ~· :,, 1

22.6 •
,,_,
• "·'

22.6 . ,_,_,

22.5 •
g:JQ
0 =3 ~ C

EDGFMONT

STATION, LLC
,;, / ~, 033- 150-Q 1 8
•
2l0 .EDGEtvlONT STATION,
033- '] 50-0 'j ·1
LLC
,,
I
I 28
52 r l ....___,,....,.m CD
CD 2<J 0 .
"'
,._, 2" . •
13 P _28.0
2<5
•
26-6
27 P 28.0

28.2 •
53 P 26.A-.,
•
,._,
•
J ,._, U.7
14 2"15 "' 16
;,, p 27.6 P 27.2
ZiJ e.0 26.8
•

STREET A
SDFM
" -··
26 25 " 24
P 26.5
P 27.4 P 26.9
54 5
• "''
• 26-7
55 •
56 P 26.4 P 25.9 ;., P 25.9
SD

0.75%
• "'

0.75%
• '25
no
. .0
17 2P 26.3 18
SD
X
P 25.9
23 ., 22
P 6.5 P 25.8
57 p 22,JJ
•
2' ' \
25-4
•
58 LP 24.38 HP 24.83 STREET 8 LP

25.5 • •

22.7 •
19 P 25.-4,
2l2

RETAINING WALL
205
P 25.0
21 P 25,8
59 P 25.4
2st
l.r)
~
' 57 66 :· 65 64 , 63 2 2 62 . 61
~ I---+--'-
CF)_
~
~
~ CF)_
8 P 26.4
2'6
'
90 P 27.4
P 26.4,.5
. P 26.0
. ,., ' p 26.0
,.,
• 91 '"
P 27,4 ; I P 27.0 '!'

27.0 • "
P 26.0
P 27.0 ,._,
•
• '"
• 5
.

P 25.4
"' •
94 0.75% X

5. 77 HP 26.23 SD
.112
[il ,.,
97 P 26.3
• '"

0.75%

25.48 LP 25.24
• 25.2 24.6
• 22.7
'
100 , P 25.8
'"
•
'28.7
, 98 99
•
P 26.5 ~p 26.5
• '"
LP 25.22
0 15
"' .
~ 138 · 131 130 ,., 129 < P 27.7 , 111 21" • 110 0 109 108 ~ P 27.3
"'

27.B
I 1 35 I ..... o , ~
1---------1 ! I
133
" O P 28.5
" 134
I •
123 27.8 .7
P 30.3

0.75%
I
I "28.4
147

91.s
122
P 30.2
• • 2'4
•
P 27.3 p 27.3 "-7
-,
" 113
• 126 ""
P 28.0
3: f SLOPE 0
124 125 "' " P 29.7 ' P 29.4
• 117 ':'

21.,
0 27.4 0 P.28.2

0.75%

STREETD

21.6 21.;
• 121 •
'l~ ·,,, 2;' J, ; -
120 -----1-.;_ 119 ,. 118
•
0 0
,,., ~, I"
P 26.8
--
,.,
•
0 .
,_,,
"' •

27.4 •
,.,
26-2
•
•
"'
26-4
I I 27.4
P 29.6 P 29.0 ,P 28.6 P 28.9
"'

FURLONG
033- 'j 40-004
~
•
"' 27.4
0000
0 00 0
;" 00
P 26.8
• "'
,.,
.
•
"'
"'
"' •

25.5 0
,.,
•

27.6 ,.,
•
P 26.8
2'5
.
,.,,
,.,
•

27.J
P 27.1
0 I
.... "'26.7
oQoooooo 21.1
.
• "'
• '"
,,,
'"
• "'
,c 22.7
"·
, ..
,.,

22.2 22.4
'
2-lJ
•

22.5 •

22.,
.
•
LP 24.42 0. 75%
P 25,9
P 25.9
,f, 26.3
P 26.8
105
P 27.2

27.0 26-2
.
106 ~7
P 27.7
,,_,
'
2J.8 "
I
I
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
I
I
l+-------c"''-----R"ol• 27.1 ><
.
26-7
107
,.,,
•

25.8 .
0 .,., J

26.5 •
•
"'
.7
J
J
I I
"!
I
I
J,
.

I
I
,,
I
""+ I •
I
26-5 \ . •
7 I
2<J ,.,
j
I

27.J
•
• 27.9
•

27.2 •

22.5 • '"
'" •
0 2'2
•
,.,
.
, .. .
•

22.J
•
,.,,
,,,
2 2112
.
;a.,
•

27.8 27.8
•
"
C
•
"' OAKLEY
-$cCALIFORNIA
PL

WOOD FENCE

PAD PAD
1' MAX RETAINING

IN KICKER BOARD

SECTION A

NOT TO SCALE
PL

WOOD FENCE
1' OB
3:1 SL~
EXIS~;G \ I PAD
GROUND

SECTIOND

NOT TO SCALE
(SEE NOTE BELOW)

EDGE GRADING NOTE

IF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT CANNOT

BE OBTAIN TO GRADE ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTY,
A RETAINING WALL \'11LL BE REQUIRED .

WOOD FENCE

WOOD FENCE
1' MAX RETAINING

IN KICKER BOARD
PL

SECTIONB

NOT TO SCALE
PL
1' OB
r,;SLOPE
PAD

SECTIONE

NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND

EXISTING
IIDII
II
0 PROPOSED
------
I, + , + , + , + ,I
!18"SD> ·
ii
II
~

DESCRIPTION

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

TOP OF CURB

EASEMENT

CENTERLINE

SIDEWALK

AC PAVEMENT

BIORETENTION

STORM DRAIN PIPE

CATCH BASIN

FIELD INLET

MANHOLE
PL/RW
PL

WOOD FENCE
3' MAX

RET WALL

SECTIONC

NOT TO SCALE
6" LANDSCAPE

PRIVACY WALL

SECTIONF

NOT TO SCALE

SELLERS
AVE

ABBREVIATIONS
BO
BW
CL
EX
FC
HP
LP
OB
p
PL
PUE
RET
RW
SD
SDFM
TSM
TYP

BOUNDARY

BACK OF WALK

CENTERLINE

EXISTING

FACE OF CURB

HIGH POINT

LOW POINT

OVERBUILD
PAD

PROPERTY LINE

PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT

RETAINING

RIGHT OF WAY

STORM DRAIN

STORM DRAIN FORCE MAIN

TOP OF SOIL MIX

TYPICAL

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (EAST)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1 "=80' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
cbg SAN RAMON ■ (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE ■ (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
0 80 160 240 CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS
JOB NO.: 1216-010
SHEET NO .
6 OF 9 SHEETS
G:\1216-01 OIACAD\ TM\TM06.DWG
528
X
X X
X X
Figure 2d: UTILITY PLAN (WEST)
'" •
'Jl.27.7
-
'- Ir"': ;;
!" \ §~ ,,..4
"
,., • - 27.S 27.6 21.J ... TRAILROA1) 27.6 27.8 • - ' • • - "" r-1 I e 27.J 27.4 . ,, • .. • Cl::'. ~ ~~;JI 211.7
- t::; L. . [;'.'. 2U • I
~'-rrrY
n
'" Of OAKLEY -
lt' U) ~ ';' ("za 9 " 25.6 ......, '" . '
' QJ3-Ll50-044 27.4 • jl.6 27.4
" r::7 ,,.,
-- -- ~- "- - - ~ ~ -- - --- - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 I "' CB
CB FH
1}
2'
□
V,
24 SD 24 ....
/ 11/ CB
N
?] Fl CB CB
/-:::-:_~ FH 39 SSMH SSMH I ✓,,,.,.,---....-../ INV OUT 17.1 INV OUT 15.8 271 // / --...& /// SSMH CB / INV OUT 20.8 37 36 33 32 31 30 29 28 18'
18'
~
/ 17 6 INV OUT 16,6 38 35 34 \),
40 -::::' 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 CB
/
173 174
172
171
]
I
' '"
[j
llO
41 175 "' SDMH
INV OUT 19.7
8 ss

SSMH CB
INV OUT 15.7 170
CB
78 SSMH 77 76 75
INV OUT 14.3
169
FH 79
80 81 82 83
SDMH
168 INV OUT 22.6
"'
SSMH
167 INV OUT 13.4
CB
166 SSMH
INV OUT 13.9 164 163 162
FlH
CB
INV OUT 18.3
74 73 72 71 70
84 85 86
SSMH
INV OUT 15.2
CB
CB
161 160 159
CB
69 87
FH
48 SD
CB
140
68 88
CB
139
67 89
<Xl
V,
V,
<Xl
~
158
141 ,.?.b~ ,.,r--,r' ~ ,,.,,.-.,.... ,..,-......, ,...,,-.,...... ,,.r,,-.. ~ ~ 0} i J0.6
'
J0.6
' l
' J0.4
J0.4
'
J0.2
'
• m, FROST
033-1 Ll0-022
. ""
J0.8
'
' JO.J
..
'
,.,
'
,.,
•
.,,,
'
•
"·'

29.4 "
"' •
JO.I
•
....,.,_,...,....,.,_,...,....,.,_,...,....,.,___,
C f' )
JllB
'
"" J1.0 ---- '
,., '
"" • JO.J
'
JO.J
'
"" '
,.,
•
"' .

J0.2
'
' '"
.,,,
'
"" '

29.6 '
}---------1
}1 157
::· }
}--------:.. ........
} 156
} t------.---.-----t
}
,.; }
}
~. }
}
153
BO
152
155
SDMH
154 INV OUT 21.9
"'
8 W
CB
SSMH
151 150
INV OUT 17.8
137
136
CB
142 SSMH
INV OUT 15.4
143 135
SDMH
SSMH INV OUT 19.5
INV OUT 16.5 -~-.-----',I
146
144 145
REET
149 148
E--<
CZl
I
<Xl
<Xl
~
JO.I ~ JfJ.2
' '
L \ _ 7 __,, _ __ .._1_47_:FH _::-:J~~
WARREN
033-"J40-0"JO ~,., ,"'
J0.6 JO.f
' '
,0.0
' J0.6
' JO.J
'
211.9 0
'
.,-..,
531
CB I
18'
I
132
1331
I
'j 23
OAKLEY
-$cCALIFORNIA
I 5' MIN
I

I '---------,
I

2.5'±

CONCEPTUAL STREET TREE

LOCATION (CENTER BETWEEN

CURB DRAIN & WATER LATERAL)
I
I
I--
I
I
I
. . . . I . .
'

WATER METER BOX
w ss
9'±
HOUSE
• DR.IVEWAY.

SEWER
. CLEANOUT
3'±
AND BACKFLOW 5' MIN
WATER LATERAL_/ "-SEWER LATERAL

AREA DRAIN (TYP)

PROPERTY LJNE

THRU THE CURB DRAIN (TYP)
. . . I •

TYPICAL UTILITY LATERAL DETAIL

NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND

EXISTING
• - "'4EX 18" SD>-•
-- -i EX 8" SS >-- ---IEX 8" Wl---
[Ql]
Ill
0 ..
...

PROPOSED
------
I, + , + , + , + ,I
~
! 18" SD > ·
I 8" w I
iii
Ill
..

DESCRIPTION

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

TOP OF CURB

EASEMENT

CENTERLINE

SIDEWALK

AC PAVEMENT

BIORETENTION

STORM DRAIN PIPE

SANITARY SEWER PIPE

WATER PIPE

CATCH BASIN

FIELD INLET

MANHOLE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

BLOWOFF

ABBREVIATIONS
AC
AD
BO
BO
BW
CB
CL
EX

ASPHALT CONCRETE

AREA DRAIN

BOUNDARY

BLOWOFF

BACK OF WALK

CATCH BASIN

CENTERLINE

EXISTING

FC FACE OF CURB
FH
Fl
INV
JT
OB
PUE
R
SF
SD
SDFM
SDMH
ss
SSFM
SSMH
SW
TC

FIRE HYDRANT

FIELJD INLET
INVERT

JOINT TRENCH

OVERBUILD

PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
RADIUS

SQUARE FEET

STORM DRAIN

STORM DRAIN FORCE MAIN

STORM DRAIN MANHOLE

SANITARY SEWER

SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN

SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE

SIDEWALK

TOP OF CURB

TSM TOP OF SOIL MIX

TYP TYPICAL

W WATER

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (WEST)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1 "=80' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
cbg SAN RAMON ■ (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE • (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SHEET NO.
7 0 80 160 240 CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS OF 9 SHEETS JOB NO.: 1216-010
G:\1216-01 O\ACAD\ TM\TM07 .DWG
529
Figure 2e: UTILITY PLAN (EAST)
r--
E--
~
~
~ (/)
~
~ (/)
CT)
~7 \ 8 ----- )-----, l
U::: 0
~·r ~· Hll ,,; \ ~· ~· 22.8 ¥· ~· ~ 22.2
,I
=3~~ "'
r l ....____.......,.m CD
EDGFMONT ;lO
2 ~
8 £DG£tvlONT STATJON, LLC
. STATJON, LLC O 2;1 & 0 033- 'j 50-0 'j 'j SSMH
• 22.4
.
2 " / !''_03
9;-" t?_,0-Q 1 8 ,-.-,,.,~ " INV IN 8.4 CD 2<J
0 •

22.,
•

22.,
22,2
•
0 .
-- ....__,, ~ 2.10 X n., 2Z~ )( 22.7 INV OUT 8.2
l.2::,;,,--_,:_· -----'.J:==::::;::::=--...:."'~=====--_,:_· ~=====~1;=---SANITARY SEWER ~ ;:;;;;::~ ¥~~Ii I ,,, PUMP STATION - U9 24.7 'j 1
FH
28 18'
CB
I 52
CB
67 12' 89 6
,
138
I
137
I 'J 36
I
'J35
L
I
146 12'
I
I 147
FH
j=Y'.": =
""'
6 ~ ~7 f\)
36 SD
3:
00 00
3:
00 5l
N
_,_
,.,
•
2'6
•
J "' '" BO '
14 15 FH
13 16 17 18 19 20
"" FH
24 SDFM
27 SSMH
SSMH INV OUT 12.3
INV OUT 14.3 26 25 24 23 22 21
18' SDMH
.,_ __ _,__ __ +-------l----+----+-----:=--+- INV OUT 14.3 58 -sDMH
INV OUT 14.3 54 53 55 56 57
CB CB
"' CB N
65 64 63 62
SSMH
INV OUT 12.6
18'
90 92
SSMH 91 93
.1
48 SD
SDMH
INV OUT 17.6
131 130 129
132
133 127
FH
SSMH
INV OUT 15.4 3:
134 126
CB
18' 123 12512'
SDMH 124 6
INV OUT 19.5
SSMH
INV OUT 14.8
SSMH
INV OUT 11.2
FH
SD
6 SSFM
CB CB
61 60
CB I
SSMH 96 INV OUT 10.2
94 95 97 98
B
CB
8 ss 48 SD
SSMH
112 INV OUT 12.0
SDMH
INV OUT 16.8
00 CB
INV OUT 15.7
111
110
113 --
28' 04;~
•
,., ,.,
114 • . ~
I '" •
115 ~ ,.,
•
I 25.5
'" 26-2
I • • 0
116
~,.. I" '" 28.6 • •
,.. ,.,
•
"'O ,,.,
• • 2'8 27.0
8 ss 27.4
•
• ,.. ,.,

27.4 SSMH .
-
CB
24 SD
109
• ,.,
2H
•
2<5
.
,..
•
CB 121 120 INV OUT 15.5 ,., 0
122
BO
~_.~_
• 2«
119

FURLONG
033- 'j 40-004
~ ~ ~
118
• ~
I " •
2"

27.4 0000
,,,
0 00 0
00·
•
• 2'-7
I

27.J
0 -

27.1 .
99 108
80 - • 2'6
,.,
•
2'9 ,,,
\...r •
2<5
,.,
• 2'.5
2<5 0 []
• r1
f) ~o
,,,
•
2'2
• 0
,., ,., -~
'"
"•u
0 ,,.....i \..,-
,., •
(/)
(/)
00 (/)
(/)
00 ,.,
2<5
•
• 2<5
\]'
,.,
•
CB
SSMH 101
INV OUT 12.2
SSMH 102
INV OUT 14.2
12' 103
104
105
SSMH
INV OUT 13.1
106
107
SSMH
INV OUT 13.7
.
2'-7
2<5
,.,
•

25.8 .
242 ,.,
•

26.5 •
2<7
2<5
.
7 -
}
,.,
•
2<J
~
,.,
~? •
• '"
I
I
5l
N
I
V I
I
I
I
I
I
I

27.J
•
J
2 t8
I
"!
I
I
J,
.

I
I
"" •
I
I
,.,
I
I
'1'
I
,,j,
.

I
I ,.,
j
I
-~
•

22.4 •
"-'
• .7 22.,
•
~,,__ "'
.J
• ,,,
•
,,,
,,, J
2'6
•
2 0
x27.5
+ .

27.7 "'
2112
. , ..
•
~ ~·
;,.,
I 2'2
•

27.J
•
..,
•
• 27.9 27.8
, ..
.
,., • • "
•27.4
~
D

27.2 ~
•
"
•
• • 27.2
"' OAKLEY
-$cCALIFORNIA
LEGEND

EXISTING PROPOSED DESCRIPTION ABBREVIATIONS
-- PROJECT BOUNDARY AC ASPHALT CONCRETE
----- LOT LINE AD AREA DRAIN

TOP OF CURB BD BOUNDARY

BO BLOWOFF --------- --------- EASEMENT BW BACK OF WALK

CENTERLINE CB CATCH BASIN

CL CENTERLINE

SIDEWALK EX EXISTING

FC FACE OF CURB

AC PAVEMENT FH FIRE HYDRANT
Fl FIELD INLET

I' T ' T ' T ' T ,I BIORETENTION INV INVERT
• - "'4EX 18" SD>-• ! 18" SD > · STORM DRAIN PIPE JT JOINT TRENCH OB OVERBUILD - - -i EX 8" SS >-- ~ SANITARY SEWER PIPE

PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
---IEX 8" Wl--- I 8" w I WATER PIPE R RADIUS
□ iii CATCH BASIN SF SQUARE FEET
Ill FIELD INLET SD STORM DRAIN Ill SDFM STORM DRAIN FORCE MAIN 0 • MANHOLE SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
ss SANITARY SEWER .. .. WATER VALVE SSFM SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN ... .... FIRE HYDRANT SSMH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
• SW SIDEWALK

BLOWOFF TC TOP OF CURB

TSM TOP OF SOIL MIX

TYP TYPICAL
w WATER

PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN (EAST)

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1 "=80' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
cbg SAN RAMON ■ (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE • (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
0 80 160 240 CIVIL ENGINEERS ■ SURVEYORS ■ PLANNERS
JOB NO.: 1216-010
SHEET NO.
8 OF 9 SHEETS
G:\1216-01 OIACAD\ TM\TM08.DWG
530
Figure 2f: PRELIMINARY STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN
@})

FUTURE PARK

PARCELB
176
•
EIRRA TRAIL ROAD 2ll
~ □ e------,-1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
SD ~
39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 I
173 174
175 41
\~~fl---4------10 f-------+---+---+---+--+---+----+----+---+--+---l f \ 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
•

BIORETENTION AREA SUMMARY

DMA DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT IMPERVIOUS PERVIOUS REQUIRED TREATMENT PROVIDED TREATMENT PONDING

AREA (SF) AREA (SF) AREA (SF) AREA (SF) AREA (SF) DEPTH (IN) DMA 1 2,058,481 1,167,134 841,157 50,050 50,190 12
DMA 2 154,277 SELF-RETAINING AREA OR FUTIJRE BIIORETENTION AREA TO BE PRO'v1DED WITI-1 PARK DESIGN NOTES:

1. ALL BIORETENTION AREAS HAVE BEEN SIZED PER THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLEANWATER PROGRAM IMP SIZING CALCULATOR. 18" Bl ORE TENTION

SOIL PER MRP
PRO'v1SION C.3

REQUIREMENTS
12" CLASS II

PERMEABLE
BASE

TOP OF SOIL MIX (TSM) ELEVATION

AS INDICATED IN BIORETENTION

AREA SUMMARY TABLE

OVERFLOW STRUCTURE

BIORETENTION AREA

NOT TO SCALE
BIORETENTION AREA NOTES:
4" PERFORATED (2 PERFORATION SETS MINIMUM)
SCHEDULE 40 PVC (MIN SLOPE =0.005)

1. INSTALL A 6" DEEP 3'x3' GROUTED COBBLE OUTIFALL AT ALL DRAIN OUTLETS AND SWALE CONNECTION LOCATIONS TO BIORETENTION.

2. ALL COBBLES SHALL BE 3" -6" IN DIAMETER.

3. MINIMUM SLOPE OF ALL PERFORATED PIPE TO BE 0.005.

4. ALL PERFORATED DRAIN PIPES TO HAVE 8" MINIMUM OF DRAIN ROCK ABOVE THE PIPE.

5. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE AT LEAST 3 INCHES OF COMPOSTED NON-FLOATING MULCH ON ANY EXPOSED EARTH WITHIN TI-IE BIORETENTION AREA. 171
170
169
168
167
.--------I
166
I • t Jf.O
I = ' .

STREETB- ~
77 76 75 74
79 80 81 82 83 ~
5 8
( STREfoT C~----,-~~ ~
165 164 163 162 161
FROST
033-140-022
~· .
.
a,
.
a, 1 153
152
73 72 71 70 69 68 67
84 85 86 87 88 89
160 159 140 139 138
141 137
157 142 136
156 143 135
154 155 144 145 146
151 150 149 148 147
l !JIU !11.J
~·
L f·') -~~· ,:,• f' ~ l". ~-'!'_~033-140L~010~ :;'\
";.' ~ ~• • If,' ~, "'-- If'' ",,, \ D ";' f\1 ~•
LEGEND
------ 25
---- , , , + + + + , , , + + + +
====ill"3[>=
<§:I>
I IMP 1 I

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT NUMBER

PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY

PROPOSED LOT LINE

PROPOSED FACE OF CURB

LIMIT OF DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA (OMA)

GRADE BREAK

BIORETENTION AREA

STORM DRAIN PIPE

OVERLAND FLOW DIRECTION

DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA

INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT PRACTICE - BIORETENTION AREA
OAKLEY
-$cCALIFORNIA
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
SD
SDFM
27 26 25 24 23 22 21
53 54 55 56 57 58 59
66 65 64 63 62 61 60
90 91 92 93 94 95
131 130 129 I C
112
;~~ll---11-3 -----l
111
132 128
133 127
134 126
123 124 125
122 121 120
114
115
116
117
119 118
a,
.
v.o
.
.
a,
96 97
110
0 ,,.
101
100 102
103
98 99 104
105
106
109 107
• 25.5 • 25.
•
REYFS ~· 0 •.
o a, O O
0 o. 3-140-0·19 • -- . • ilf,f
n:, 1/J.4 Ii .... . ~~
= •
IIJ i
1M • lau: • ! I

JIU JIJ
I
1n a,
.. ,
oo

PRELIMINARY STORM WATER

CONTROL PLAN
I
I
I
'
':n.:
,.,
,..

I +
21f 21.J
I
I
~-I
I
a,
+
I
D
,, ' .
v.,
.
. . ZT~ ZT.J

VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
STONECREEK - SUBDIVISION 9647

CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1"=100' DATE: MAY 2, 2023
SHEET NO.
cbg SAN RAMON • (925) 866-0322
ROSEVILLE • (916) 788-4456
WWW.CBANDG.COM
9 0 100 200 300 CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS OF 9 SHEETS JOB NO.: 1216-010
G:\1216-01 OIACAD\ TM\TM09.DWG
531
Sellers Ave
Marsh Creek Trl
C:\FEC_INC\Projects\Moore Biological\Stonecreek\MXD\stonecreek_psr_figure_3.mxd .

Figure 3
Map Date: 06/28/2023
Aerial Source: Google Earth (02/11/2022)
Moore Biological
Consultants
Field Verified Landcover Map
City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, CA
Stonecreek
0 200 400 Project Site (50.44 acres)
Off Site Improvements (0.37 acre)
Project Site 50.43 0.008 -
Off-Site - - 0.37
Total 50.43 0.008 0.37
Ruderal Grassland
(Acres)
Seasonal Wetland
(Acres)
Urban/Developed
D D (Acres)
•
•
532

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Previously graded road in the northeast part of the site, looking west; 06/15/23.

Previously graded road in the west part of the site, looking west from the east edge of the site; 06/15/23. This will be the future entrance road in to the subdivision from Sellers Avenue.

FIGURE 4a

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
533

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Prior vineyard in the south part of the site, looking west; 06/15/23. This portion of the site supported a small vineyard, but the vines have been removed for several years.

There are resprouted vines and small ornamental seedlings within this area.

Previously graded house pad in the southwest part of the site, looking east; 06/15/22.

FIGURE 4b

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
534

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Two palm trees in the northeast part of the site, looking northwest; 06/15/23. This portion of the site previously supported a small home site.

Demolished home site in the south part of the site, looking northwest; 06/15/23.

FIGURE 4c

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
535

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
North edge of the site, looking east from the northwest part of the site; 06/15/23.

North edge of the site, looking west from the northeast corner of the site; 06/15/23.

FIGURE 4d

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
536

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
West edge of the site, looking north from the southwest part of the site; 06/15/23.

South edge of the site, looking west from the southeast part of the site; 06/15/23. There are several trees adjacent to the south edge of the site.

FIGURE 4e

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
537

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Shrubs in the northwest part of the site, looking northwest; 06/15/23. Most of the trees and shrubs are located just off-site; a few shrubs may be just within the site boundary.

Large eucalyptus trees adjacent to the south edge of the site, looking southwest from the south part of the site; 06/15/23.

FIGURE 4f

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
538

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Cluster of ground squirrel burrows located along an elevated home pad in the south part of the site, looking southeast; 06/15/23.

A walking path and Marsh Creek located just west of the west edge of the site, looking northwest; 06/15/23.

FIGURE 4g

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
539

MOORE BIOLOGICAL
Seasonal wetland in the northwest part of the site, just southeast of the off-site pump station, looking south; 06/15/23. The wetland developed after initial grading several years ago and may be supported, or at least enhanced, via an underground water source.

Sellers Avenue, looking south from the northeast part of the site; 06/15/23. This area will be subject to off-site road improvements as part of the project.

FIGURE 4h

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
540
!(
!(
Sellers Ave
Marsh Creek Trl
Project Site 50.43 0.008 -
Off-Site - - 0.37
Total 50.43 0.008 0.37
*Assumed habitat for burrowing owl
Ruderal Grassland
(Acres) *
Urban/Developed
(Acres)
Seasonal Wetland
(Acres)
C:\FEC_INC\Projects\Moore Biological\Stonecreek\MXD\stonecreek_psr_figure_5a.mxd . Figure 5a
Map Date: 06/268/2023
Aerial Source: Google Earth (02/11/2022)
Moore Biological
Consultants
Planning Survey Species Habitat Map
City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, CA
Stonecreek
0 200 400
Project Site (50.44 acres)
Off Site Improvements (0.37 acre)
Trees; assumed habitat for Swainson's
hawk, golden eagle, and white-tailed kite. !(
D D
541
C:\FEC_INC\Projects\Moore Biological\Stonecreek\MXD\stonecreek_psr_figure_5b.mxd Regional Species Habitat Map
. 0 500 1,000
Figure 5b
Map Date: 06/22/2023
Aerial Source: Google Earth (08/2020)
Stonecreek
City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, CA
Moore Biological
Consultants
Western Burrowing Owl
Potential Habitat within 500 ft.

Study Area
Swainson Hawk
Potential Habitat within 1,000 ft.

Golden Eagle
Potential Habitat within 0.5 miles
C:1
C:1
ij_
~:§;
,j
..
\<::1';9£St7f)'
~;~ CA
~., ~~;m 1t:rrm~ rrp.,.. _.-,-,; -"~~m ·~· °4'~
~ -~ •· -,; ff~~
ft • , - ---- ti
• r ~~ · ' '>.;;? _,< tl ~ _-... ', ... ✓ tj, ~ \
.... ---- ~ ·~ \
I
• -~ ~- ', ~ t· .. \ · I t-...... --------, •
I I I
r I ,- \....-, r_J I I
I / / . . I
I /
/ ,,
/ . / ·.:....--'
-
542
ATTACHMENT C: PROJECT COMPLIANCE TO HCP CONDITIONS
543
Stonecreek (Subdivision 9647)
Project Compliance to HCP Conditions
July 2023
HCP/NCCP Conservation Measure 1.11. Avoid Direct Impacts on Extremely Rare Plants, Fully Protected Wildlife Species, or Covered Migratory Birds:

The potential for special-status plants to occur within the site is considered extremely remote, as described in Section III (10).

Species-specific pre-construction surveys, and if needed, monitoring and avoidance requirements for burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and golden eagle will be conducted as described in Section IV (2). There is no suitable habitat in the site for ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), a “fully protected species,” per California Fish and Game Code Section 4700. Similarly, there is no suitable nesting habitat in the site for peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), a “fully protected species,” per California Fish and Game Code Section 3511.

White-tailed kite (Elanus caeruleus), another “fully protected species,” per California Fish and Game Code Section 3511 could potentially nest in trees in or near the site. Prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities that occur during the nesting season (March 15-August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey no more than 1 month prior to construction to establish whether white-tailed kite is nesting in trees within or visible from the site. In the event active nests are found, an initial 300-foot buffer shall be established around the nest tree. Ground disturbance related to covered activities within the buffer shall either be delayed until a qualified biologist determines nesting is complete, or until the applicant and consults with the Implementing Entity (i.e., City of Oakley) and CDFW and implements CDFW-approved measures to minimize potential disturbance.

Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), a State of California threatened species, could nest in vegetation in and adjacent to portions of Marsh Creek such as patches of wild rose, bulrush, cattails, and willows. On-site grasslands and vegetation could be used by other species of nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If possible, any ground disturbance related to covered activities will occur outside of the general bird nesting season (February 1 through August 31).

Alternately, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey no more than 2 weeks prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities. In the event 544
active raptors or tricolored blackbird nests are found, and initial 300-foot buffer shall be established around the nests. In the event nests o other birds are found, an initial 50-foot buffer shall be established around the nest. Ground disturbance related to covered activities within the buffers shall either be delayed until a qualified biologist determines nesting is complete, or until the applicant consults with the Implementing Entity and CDFW and implements CDFW-approved measures to minimize potential disturbance.

HCP/NCCP Conservation Measure 1.10. Maintain Hydrologic Conditions and Minimize Erosion:

The project has been designed to maintain hydrologic conditions and minimize erosion. Standard construction best management practices (BMPs) will be employed during construction to minimize the potential for erosion and off-site transport of fines. BMPs will include use of water trucks, appropriate compaction of soil, and installation of straw wattles, silt fences or other technologies along the perimeter of the site during construction, and stabilization of bare soils as appropriate with seeding, straw, and/or hydromulch.

HCP/NCCP Conservation Measure 2.12. Wetland, Pond, and Stream Avoidance and Minimization:

Potentially jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and wetlands in the site are being avoided to the maximum extent practicable. There are no potentially jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. in the site. The 0.008-acre seasonal wetland in the northwest part of the site is within the footprint of the extension of Teton Road and will be filled.

Marsh Creek, which is adjacent to the site, will be fully avoided by project construction.

The following measures from pages 6-33 through 6-35 will be implemented to avoid and minimize impacts of covered activities on wetlands:
• The project will comply with the guidelines in Conservation Measure 1.10 to minimize the effects of urban development on downstream hydrology, streams, and wetlands.
• Personnel conducting ground-disturbing activities adjacent to Marsh Creek will be trained by a qualified biologist in the avoidance and minimization measures and the permit obligations of project proponents working under the ECCCHCP. Vehicles and equipment will be parked on pavement, existing roads, and previously disturbed areas.
545
• Trash generated during project construction will be promptly and properly removed from the site.
• No construction or maintenance vehicles will be refueled within 200 feet of Marsh Creek unless a bermed and lined refueling area is constructed and hazardous material absorbent pads are available in the event of a spill. • Appropriate erosion-control measures (e.g., fiber rolls, filter fences, vegetative buffer strips) will be used on site to reduce siltation and runoff of contaminants into Marsh Creek. Filter fences and mesh will be of material that will not entrap reptiles and amphibians. Erosion control blankets shall be used as a last resort because of their tendency to biodegrade slowly and trap reptiles and amphibians.
• Fiber rolls used for erosion control will be certified as free of noxious weed seed.
• Seed mixtures applied for erosion control will not contain invasive non-native species, and will be composed of native species or sterile nonnative species. • Herbicides will not be applied within the buffer area along Marsh Creek unless needed to control serious invasive plants. In this case, herbicides that have been approved for use by EPA in or adjacent to aquatic habitats may be used as long as label instructions are followed and applications avoid or minimize impacts on covered species and their habitats. Appropriate herbicides may be applied to the ruderal grassland within the buffer area during the dry season to control nonnative invasive species such as yellow star-thistle. Herbicide drift shall be minimized by applying the herbicide as close to the target area as possible.

HCP/NCCP Conservation Measure 1.7. Establish Stream Setbacks:

A stream is defined in Chapter 3 of the ECCCHCP as “a long, narrow body of flowing water that occupies a channel with defined bed and bank and moves to lower elevations under the force of gravity”.

Marsh Creek, which is adjacent to the site, will be fully avoided by project construction. A 75-foot stream setback will be implemented along Marsh Creek; the subdivision roads and lots will be located outside the stream setback. Bioretention basins will be constructed within the setback.

Stream setbacks are designed to protect existing habitat quality, to protect water quality and hydrologic processes through buffering, and allow for at least 546
minimal restoration (page 6-16). The stream setback measure is intended to achieve several purposes as listed on pages 6-16 and 6-17 of the ECCCHCP, along a variety of stream types. Six of the seven purposes have applicability to the project:
• Maintain or improve water quality by filtering sediments and pollutants from urban runoff before they reach the stream.
• Allow for protection of potentially restored riparian woodland and scrub within and adjacent to the stream.
• Maintain a buffer zone between urban development and existing and restored nesting habitat for Swainson’s hawk and other bird species. • Maintain and enhance the water quality of the stream to protect native fish populations, including populations of special-status species that occur in downstream creeks (i.e., fall-run Chinook salmon in Marsh Creek). • Maintain a more viable wildlife corridor for some species (e.g., western pond turtle, raccoon) than would be present with a narrower buffer zone. • Maximize the natural flood protection value of the floodplain. 547
ATTACHMENT D: FEE CALCULATOR
548
ECCC HCP/NCCP 2023 Fee Calculator Worksheet
Permanent Impacts
PROJECT APPLICANT:

PROJECT NAME:

APN(s):

JURISDICTION:

DATE:

DEVELOPMENT FEE

PERMANENT IMPACTS
(ACRES)
2023 FEE/ACRE
subject to change 1, 5
Fee Zone 1 50.44 x $19,611.52 = $989,205.07
Fee Zone 2 x $39,223.04 = $0.00
Fee Zone 3 x $9,805.76 = $0.00
Fee Zone 42 x $29,417.28 = $0.00
Development Fee Total = $989,205.07

WETLAND MITIGATION FEE

PERMANENT IMPACTS
(ACRES)
2023 FEE/ACRE
subject to change 1, 5
x $110,667.08 = $0.00
Perennial Wetland x $167,718.29 = $0.00
Seasonal Wetland 0.008 x $392,489.03 = $3,139.91
Alkali Wetland x $396,778.59 = $0.00
Ponds x $215,976.51 = $0.00
Aquatic (open water) x $107,988.87 = $0.00
Slough / Channel x $154,206.78 = $0.00

STREAMS

PERMANENT IMPACTS
(LINEAR FEET)
2023 FEE/LINEAR FT
subject to change 1, 5
x $569.07 = $0.00
x $854.23 = $0.00
Wetland Mitigation Fee Total = $3,139.91

STREAM SETBACK ENCROACHMENT

ENCROACHMENT

IMPACTS (ACRES)
2023 FEE/ACRE
subject to change 1, 5
Encroachment in Stream Setback x $55,333.54 = $0.00
Stream Setback Encroachment Total = $0.00
FINAL FEE CALCULATION Development Fee Total $989,205.07 Wetland Mitigation Fee Total + $3,139.91
Encroachment in Stream Setback Fee Total + $0.00
Mitigation Fee Subtotal = $992,344.98
+
= $992,344.98
Ponderosa Homes II, Inc.

Stonecreek (Subdivision 9647)
033-140-020, 033-140-021, and 033-140-028
July 2023
Oakley
3 Per Chapter 9.3.1 of the HCP/NCCP, for every acre of impact on wetlands, streams, ponds, and riparian woodland/scrub, applicants will pay the appropriate development fee (according to fee zone) towards land acquisition and the conservation program as a whole, as well as a wetland mitigation fee to cover the costs of successful restoration or creation.

See appropriate ordinance or HCP/NCCP Figure 9-
1 to determine Fee Zone
March 7, 2023
Contribution to Recovery4
Streams greater than 25 feet wide

TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID
2 Fee Zone 4 is not shown on Figure 9-1 of the HCP/NCCP but refers to the fee applicable to those few covered acitivities located in northeastern Antioch (p. 9-21). 1 Development fees are adjusted annually (no later than March 15 of each year) according to a formula that includes both a Home Price Index (HPI) and a Consumer Price Index (CPI). The Wetland Mitigation Fees are adjusted according to a CPI.

Streams 25 feet wide or less
4 Participating Special Entities (PSEs) are required to pay fees over and above permanent and temporary impact mitigation fees to cover indirect costs of extending permit coverage, including a portion of the costs of the initial preparation of the Plan, and a portion of the costs of conservation actions designed to contribute to species recovery. This amount will be determined in accordance with the Contribution to Recovery Implementation Policy adopted by the Conservancy Governing Board on December 8, 2014.

Riparian woodland / scrub
5 The Conservancy conducted the periodic fee audit required by the HCP/NCCP in 2023. Action by the County and participating cities is pending, which could result in adjustments to some or all fees in 2023.

Impacts to riparian/scrub, wetlands, ponds,
aquatic, and slough/channel are charged both a
wetland mitigation fee and a development fee.

Include these impact acres to development fee
above.3
549
ATTACHMENT E: WETLAND DELINEATION MAP
550
Marsh Creek Trl
Potential Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands
Stonecreek
City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, CA
Map Date: July 2023
0 200 400
Ü
Moore Biological 1 inch = 200 feet
Consultants
Data Disclaimer:

The delineation has been done in accordance with the 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers and the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. The boundaries and jurisdictional status of all waters shown on this map are preliminary and subject to verification by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Aerial Source: Google Earth (02/11/2022)
Study Area
(50.44 acres)
Seasonal Wetland -
(0.008 ac / 334 sf)
1 inch = 50 feet
LJ
~
551
Appendix D
Peak Flow Control Modeling

552
Integrated Surface and Ground Water Hydrology • Wetland and Channel Restoration • Water Quality • Erosion and Sedimentation • Storm Water and Floodplain Management 800 Bancroft Way • Suite 101 • Berkeley, CA 94710 • (510) 704-1000 931 Mission Street • Santa Cruz, CA 95060 • (831) 457-9900 12020 Donner Pass Road • Unit B1 • Truckee, CA 96160 • (530) 550-9776 www.balancehydro.com • email: [email protected]
November 9, 2023
Jeff Schroeder
Ponderosa Homes II, Inc.
5020 Franklin Drive, Suite 200
Pleasanton, California 94588
RE: Summary of Peak Flow Control Modeling for the Stonecreek Subdivision City of Oakley, Contra Costa County, California
Dear Jeff Schroeder:

Thank you again for providing Balance Hydrologics (“Balance”) the opportunity to assist with the modeling of stormwater management infrastructure at the proposed Stonecreek Subdivision (“Project”) in the City of Oakley. As you are aware, we had the pleasure of assisting with the drainage planning for the site when it was originally considered for development, and we are pleased to see the project back on track to completion.

Per our discussions with Carlson, Barbee and Gibson, Inc. (“CBG”), Balance staff has completed a series of hydrologic modeling runs consistent with the guidance set forth by the City and the Contra Costa Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“Flood Control”) to assess whether the proposed infrastructure can provide flood control for the proposed subdivision. This report summarizes the work completed and design recommendations to achieve flood control objectives.

Project Description and Regional Drainage
The proposed project is located within the City of Oakley, and is bordered by Marsh Creek to the west, Sellers Avenue to the east, and privately owned land/driveways to the north and south (Figure 1).

Currently the land is unoccupied but partially mass-graded for development (i.e., DMA 1), as the project was underway in 2006 and inactive until a revised plan was resumed in 2023. Completing the 176-lot subdivision over approximately 48 acres within DMA 1 is anticipated to occur first (referred to herein as the “post-project condition”), however, future phases will potentially include development of DMAs 2, 3, 4, and 5 (referred to herein as the “future condition”). This analysis addresses infrastructure sizing for both conditions.
/1,. Balance {~~ Hydrologies
553
Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Jeff Schroeder
November 9, 2023

Page 2 ends

Oakley City CouncilApril 28, 2026

Oakley City Council
April 28, 2026