Agenda packet — Suisun City City Council, April 1, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

CITY COUNCIL
Alma Hernandez, Mayor
Jenalee Dawson, Mayor Pro Tem
Amit Pal, Councilmember
Parise Shepherd, Councilmember
Princess Washington, Councilmember

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

A G E N D A

REGULAR MEETING OF THE SUISUN CITY COUNCIL,

SUISUN CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY,

AND SUISUN CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

TUESDAY, APRIL
1, 2025
5:00 PM

Suisun City Council Chambers - 701 Civic Center Boulevard - Suisun City, California

.
5:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
6:30 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

MEETINGS ARE HELD IN-PERSON, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE VIA ZOOM

ZOOM MEETING INFORMATION:

WEBSITE: https://zoom.us/join
MEETING ID:
865 4268 6830
CALL IN PHONE NUMBER: (707) 438-1720

REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BY EMAILING [email protected] (PRIOR TO 4 PM), VIA WEBSITE, OR ZOOM CALL IN PHONE NUMBER (707) 438-1720
(If attending the meeting via phone press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute/mute for public comment.) (Next Ord. No. – 809)
(Next City Council Res. No. 2025 – 21)
Next Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency Res. No. SA2025 - 02) (Next Housing Authority Res. No. HA2025 – 03)

5:00 P.M CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez

ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members

1 1.

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
A Closed Session will be held, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6, to Conduct Labor Negotiations among:

Agency Negotiator: City Manager, Bret Prebula
Employee Organization:

SCEA (Suisun City Employees' Association);
SCPOA (Suisun City Police Officers Association);
SCPFA (Suisun City Professional Firefighters' Association); SCMPEA (Suisun City Management and Professional Employees' Association); Unrepresented Employees;
Temporary/Part-Time Employees.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the closed session agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)

PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED SESSION
(In accordance with Section 54956(a), public comments are limited to items on this closed session agenda, and to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the comment period.)

CLOSED SESSION
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54950 the Suisun City Council will hold a Closed Session for the Purpose of:

RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION (City Manager Conference Room, City Hall)

6:30 RECONVENE OPEN SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez

ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

INVOCATION

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Announcement of Actions Taken, if any in Closed Session.

APPROVAL OF REORDERING OF AGENDA

CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the regular meeting agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)

REPORTS (Informational items only.)
2 2.

City Manager Update - (Prebula: [email protected]).

3. City Attorney Report - (Enright).

4. Presentation on Montezuma Carbon Hub - (Representative of Center for Biological Diversity).

5. Proclamation Proclaiming the April 9, 2025 to be "Education and Sharing Day" - (Hernandez: [email protected]).

6. Proclamation Proclaiming April 13 - 19, 2025 as "National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week" - (Hernandez: [email protected]).

7. Approving Appointments to the General Tax Oversight Committee (Measure S) - (two appointments for five-year terms expiring April 2030; one appointment to fill one unscheduled vacancy term expiring April 2027) - (Hernandez: [email protected]).

8. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Funding Agreement with the Solano Transportation Authority for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project - (Dum:
[email protected]).

9. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorize the Police Department to Enforce Parking Restrictions set by Solano Transportation Authority in the Mobility Hub Parking Lot - (Roth: [email protected]).

Joint City Council / Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency / Housing Authority

10. City Council/Successor Agency/Housing Authority Approval of the Minutes of the Meetings of the Suisun City Council, Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency, and Housing Authority held on March 18, 2025 - (Skinner: [email protected]).

11. Council Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Recommending City Council Approve a General Plan Amendment, Amending the Transportation Element, Amending the Vehicular Transportation Diagram Removing the Railroad Avenue Alignment Connection to Olive Avenue - (Bermudez: [email protected]).

PUBLIC COMMENT
(Request by citizens to discuss any matter under our jurisdiction other than an item posted on this agenda per California Government Code §54954.3. Comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the public comment period, although informational answers to questions may be given and matters may be referred for placement on a future agenda.)

PRESENTATIONS/APPOINTMENTS
(Presentations, Awards, Proclamations, Appointments).

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items requiring little or no discussion may be acted upon with one motion.

PUBLIC HEARING

GENERAL BUSINESS

COUNCIL COMMENTS
3 12.

Non-Discussion Items.

REPORTS: (Informational items only)

ADJOURNMENT
Public Access To Agenda Documents
A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item for the open session of this meeting, and provided to the City Council, are available for public review at least 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority Meeting at Suisun City Hall 701 Civic Center Blvd., Suisun City. Agenda related writings or documents provided to a majority of the Council/Board/Commissioners less than 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority meeting related to an agenda item for the open session of this meeting will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours. An agenda packet is also located at the entrance to the Council Chambers during the meeting for public review. The city may charge photocopying charges for requested copies of such documents. To the extent feasible, the agenda packet is available for online public viewing on the City’s website: https://www.suisun.com/Government/City-

Council/Agendas The City Council/Agency/Authority hopes to conclude its public business by 10:00 p.m. No new items will be taken up after 10:00 p.m., unless so moved by a majority of the City Council, and any items remaining will be agendized for the next meeting. The agendas have been prepared with the hope that all items scheduled will be discussed within the time allowed.

Accommodations
If you require an accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (707) 421-7302 or [email protected]. The City’s reasonable accommodation policy is available for review on the City’s website at www.suisun.com/government/city-council/, you may request an electronic copy or have a copy mailed to you. Please note that for accommodations that are not readily available, you must make your request as soon as you can prior to the time of the meeting.

Decorum
All participants are expected to conduct themselves with mutual respect. Conduct that disrupts meetings will be addressed in accordance with Section 54957.95 of the Government Code.

Ordinances
Ordinances are city laws contained in the Suisun City Municipal Code. Enacting a new city law or changing an existing one is a two-step process. Government Code 36934 provides, except when, after reading the title, further reading is waived by regular motion adopted by majority vote all ordinances shall be read in full either at the time of introduction or passage; provided, however, that a reading of the title or ordinance shall not be required if the title is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance is made available to the public online and in print at the meeting prior to the introduction or passage.

Certification Of Posting
Agendas for regular and special meetings are posted in accordance with the Brown Act at Suisun City Hall, 701 Civic Center Boulevard, Suisun City, CA. Agendas may be posted at other Suisun City locations including:

Suisun City Fire Station, 621 Pintail Drive, Suisun City, CA; Joe Nelson Center, 611 Village Drive, Suisun City, CA;
Harbor Master Office, 800 Kellogg Street, Suisun City, CA. 4 I, Ashley Nash, Administrative Assistant II for the City of Suisun City, declare under penalty of perjury that the above agenda was posted and available for review, in compliance with the Brown Act. 5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

April
1, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Funding Agreement with the Solano Transportation Authority for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There would be no impact to the General Fund. The City is eligible to receive an additional $600,000 from Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) funds distributed by the Solano Transportation Authority (STA) for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project (Project). This will bring the total RTIF award amount to the intended $800,000. All funds were not fully available at the time of the initial Funding Agreement being executed. There is no required local match for these funds. This action would not award any contracts for any work at this time.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Government.

BACKGROUND:

The Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) for the County is a multi- jurisdictional fee imposed on new development to cover a portion of the costs for new transportation facilities required to serve new developments within the County.

STAFF REPORT:

The City met with STA in October 2022. After this meeting, STA recommended authorizing RTIF District 2 funds for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project (“Project”), specifically for the Environmental phase. It was understood at that time that only the ultimate final award to the City would be in the amount of $800,000 however, only $200,000 was available at the time of execution of the initial Funding Agreement. Now that the additionally planned for $600,000 is available it is appropriate to execute the First Amendment to the Funding Agreement. The Project includes a RTIF eligible roadway project, as approved as part of the STA’s RTIF Nexus Report, and would serve the City's transportation interests. The Railroad Avenue Extension Project will provide alternative access to State Route Highway (SR 12) 12, Suisun City waterfront, and the Suisun-Fairfield Train Depot.

Currently, the west end of Railroad Avenue terminates at Marina Boulevard. The Project will extend Railroad Avenue from Marina Boulevard to Main Street and SR 12.

By entering into the First Amendment to the Funding Agreement, the City continues to agrees to all terms in the original Funding Agreement which include the following:
1 .

City will ensure that the Environmental phase of the Project is completed including obtaining National Environmental Policy Act or California Environmental Quality Act approvals. 2 .

City agrees to adhere to adopted RTIF Policies, as amended, during the life of the Project, including the requirement to provide a specific Strategic Implementation Plan for the entire improvements. These include:

Project description (including purpose and need);
Cost estimates for each phase of the Project;
Anticipated schedule with milestones of completion; and Identified or anticipated additional funding sources for the entire Project.

3. City agrees to pay for all costs exceeding the RTIF funding of $800,000. 13 By entering into this First Amendment to the Funding Agreement, the STA agrees to the following:
1 .

STA agrees to process and approve the RTIF funding request, as appropriate, for a total amount not-to-exceed $800,000.
2 .

The City shall provide supporting documents for these allowable expenses prior to any reimbursement occurring.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025- ___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Funding Agreement with the Solano Transportation Authority for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Funding Agreement with the Solano Transportation Authority for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.
2 .

Project Location Map.
3 .

First Amendment to the Funding Agreement between the Solano Transportation Authority and the City of Suisun City for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.

PREPARED BY:

Amanda Dum, Management Analyst II
REVIEWED BY:

Nouae Vue, Public Works Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the RTIF Funding Agreement with the Solano Transportation Authority for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.

2. Project Location Map.

3. First Amendment to the Funding Agreement between the Solano Transportation Authority and the City of Suisun City for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project. 14 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORATION IMPACT FEE (RTIF) FUNDING AGREEMENT

WITH THE SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR THE RAILROAD

A VENUE EXTENSION PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Solano Transportation Authority (STA), as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the Solano area, is responsible for countywide planning, programming transportation funds, managing and providing transportation programs and services, delivering transportation projects, and setting transportation priorities, and; WHEREAS, as part of those responsibilities STA administers the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) for the County which is a multi-jurisdictional fee imposed on new development to cover a portion of the costs for new transportation facilities required to serve new developments within the County; and
WHEREAS, after a meeting on October 2022 between Suisun City and STA, STA recommended and had the STA Board has approve the distribution of a total of $800,000 in RTIF District 2 funds to Suisun City for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project with only $200,000 being available at the time of the executed Agreement and with the understanding that once the additional $600,000 was available the Agreement would be amended in order to distribute the additional $600,000 to the City; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2023, City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a Funding Agreement with STA for the City to receive the $200,000 in RTIF District 2 funds and this Funding Agreement was fully executed on January 4, 2024; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2025, the STA Board Agenda included an item to awarded Suisun City the additional $600,000 in RTIF District 2 funds now that the funds areavailable; and WHEREAS, the Railroad Avenue Extension Project will provide alternative access to State Route Highway (SR) 12, Suisun City waterfront, and the Suisun-Fairfield Train Depot.

Currently, Railroad Avenue ends at Marina Boulevard. The Project will extend Railroad Avenue from Marina Boulevard to Main Street and SR 12; and
WHEREAS, in order to continue to move the Railroad Avenue Extension Project forward, the attached First Amendment to the Funding Agreement between the STA and the City will need to be executed, noting that STA desires to fund the activities in accordance with the terms of the initial Funding Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager to take all actions necessary to execute the Funding Agreement 15 Resolution No. 2025-___
Adopted April 1, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

between the Solano Transportation Authority and the City of Suisun City for the Railroad Avenue Extension Project.

PASSED AND ADOPTEDat a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 1st day of April 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 1st day of April 2025. ____________________________________
Anita Skinner
City Clerk
16 RAILROAD A VENUE EXTENSION PROJECT

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Approximate LocaƟon –
Railroad Ave. Extension Project
17 1
@[email protected]

FIRST AMENDMENT TO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE

FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN

SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
AND

CITY OF SUISUN CITY
FOR

THE RAILROAD AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT
This First Amendment (“ First Amendment ”) is made between the Solano Transportation Authority, a joint powers authority organized under Government Code section 6500 et seq. consisting of the County of Solano and the cities of Benicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville, and Vallejo (“STA”); and the City of Suisun City, a municipal corporation (“ City”), each individually referred to as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties” to be effective as of _____________________, 2025.

1. RECITALS
A. The Parties entered into a Funding Agreement on January 4, 2024 (the “ Agreement”) to allocate $200,000 in District 2 Regional Traffic Impact Fee (“ RTIF”) funds for the Railroad Avenue Extension project (the “Project”).

B. The Parties now desire to amend the Agreement (“ First Amendment”) to increase the budget for the Project, which was approved by the STA Board on February 12, 2025 as set forth below.

2. AGREEMENT
This First Amendment represents a budget increase of $600,000 in RTIF District 2 funds for preliminary engineering work, for a total RTIF commitment to the Project of $800,000.

3. EFFECTIVENESS OF CONTRACT
Except as set forth in this First Amendment, all of terms and conditions specified in the Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY CITY OF SUISUN CITY
By: ________________________________
Daryl K. Halls, Executive Director
By: ________________________________
Bret Prebula, City Manager
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:

By: ________________________________
Megan J. Callaway, STA Legal Counsel
By: ________________________________
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
18 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

April
1, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorize the Police Department to Enforce Parking Restrictions set by Solano Transportation Authority in the Mobility Hub Parking Lot.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed ordinance would not directly cost the City. However, additional staff time may be required to monitor the parking lots and process infractions, but that time is expected to be minimal. In addition, if the parking lot is monitored and enforced as described, it may decrease the city’s police force's overall costs and reduce the current burden on Police Department resources.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance and improve productivity, efficiency, effectiveness, customer service, and citizen satisfaction in all areas of municipal organization.

BACKGROUND:

In December 2024, the

Solano Transportation Authority (STA) adopted a resolution prohibiting parking in the Suisun Mobility Hub from 2 a.m. until 5 a.m. with limited exceptions and making violating the restrictions an offense. STA has also placed signage in the parking lot detailing this policy. However, STA does not have the authority to enforce these restrictions. To that end, STA has asked the Suisun City Police Department to enforce the parking restrictions against vehicles that park in the lot during these restricted hours.

The goals of this ordinance are to align the City’s code with that of STA, affirm the City’s authority to enforce parking restrictions and discourage the parking lot from becoming a gathering space for long- term use by vehicles.

STAFF REPORT:

Chapter 10 of the City Code governs vehicle and traffic rules of conduct and restrictions. Section

10.22.030 grants the city council the authority to regulate parking facilities owned or controlled by the city when established by resolution. Specifically, Section 10.22.030 allows the resolutions to address (1) specific parking areas for limited use, (2) specific parking spaces for limited use, (3) limited time parking spaces or areas, (4) other restrictions permitted within Chapter 10.22, Publicly Owned Parking Facilities. This is not the first restricted parking lot in Suisun City, and this practice is common in other cities.

The City Code includes various enforcement mechanisms should an individual be found to be in violation of the proposed ordinance. Violation shall be punished as an infraction under California Vehicle Code section 42001 and City of Suisun City ordinance 10.22. Vehicles improperly parked may be removed or towed at the owner’s expense, as provided by Vehicle Code sections 22519 and 2265 and City of Suisun City Municipal Code section 10.22.070.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve Resolution No. 2025- __: Authorize the Police Department to Enforce Parking Restrictions set by Solano Transportation 19 Authority in the Mobility Hub Parking Lot.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:

1. Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorize the Police Department to Enforce Parking Restrictions set by Solano Transportation Authority in the Mobility Hub Parking Lot.

2. Solano Transportation Authority Resolution NO. 2024-13.

PREPARED BY:

Aaron Roth, Police Chief
REVIEWED BY:

City Manager, Bret Prebula
APPROVED BY:

City Manager, Bret Prebula

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution Authorizing Enforcement of Parking Restrictions.doc

2. STA Reso No. 2024-13 Suisun City Mobility Hub Parking Regulations .
20 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE PARKING RESTRICTIONS

SET BY SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY IN THE MOBILITY HUB

PARKING LOT
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2024, Solano Transportation Authority passed Resolution 2024-13 establishing parking regulations in the City of Suisun City’s Mobility Hub Parking Lot and;
WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City Municipal Code Section 10.22.030 allows the city council to regulate parking facilities owned by or controlled by the city and; WHEREAS, due to motorist’s use of the newly constructed Suisun City Mobility Hub Parking Lot, it is in the general public's best interest to establish regulations for the proper use of the parking lot.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Suisun City that the Suisun City Police Department shall regulate and enforce parking restrictions as described in Solano Transportation Authority Resolution 24-13, attached as Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 1st of April 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City of Suisun City this 1st day of April 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
21 Attachment A: Resolution No. 2024-13

SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-13

RESOLUTION OF THE SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
ESTABLISHING PARKING REGULATIONS IN THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY’S

MOBILITY HUB PARKING LOT

WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code sections 21113 and 22519 authorize Solano Transportation Authority (“STA”) to regulate or prohibit parking of vehicles in any off-street parking facility under its control; and

WHEREAS, due to motorists’ use of the newly constructed Suisun City Mobility Hub Parking Lot, it is in the best interest of the general public to establish regulations for the proper use of the parking lot.

RESOLVED, parking in the STA’s parking lot shall be subject to the following regulations and be restricted as follows:

1. All persons operating or parking a vehicle on property owned, leased or administered by STA must comply with the California Vehicle Code and the rules and regulations, as well as City of Suisun City ordinance 10.22 promulgated under the authority of this Resolution.

2. No person shall park or leave standing any vehicle in STA’s Suisun City Mobility Hub Parking Lot between the hours of 2AM TO 5AM daily unless authorized by the City of Suisun City or STA.

3. No person shall be allowed to stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle, whether attended or unattended upon the driveways or property of STA which are marked clearly and legibly with the words “RESERVED PARKING” unless authorized by City of Suisun City or STA.

4. No person at any time shall stop, park or leave standing any vehicle in any STA parking facility, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a peace officer, in any of the following places:
a. Alongside curb space where no parking is indicated by a sign or curb space is painted red;
b. On a crosswalk;
c. In front of a driveway;
d. Within fifteen (15) feet of a fire hydrant, except vehicles owned or operated by a fire department and clearly marked as such;
e. Alongside curb space painted yellow except commercially licensed or government vehicles engaged in loading or unloading but in no case for a period of time exceeding fifteen (15) minutes;
f. Alongside curb space painted white except vehicles stopping to load and unload passengers but no case for period of time exceeding five (5) minutes; g. In any place marked as parking for disabled parking unless disabled person license plate or placard is displayed;
22 h. In any place marked as parking for electric vehicles if not an electric vehicle; and
i. In any other place other than within a parking space clearly marked as such by white or yellow lines on the pavement and in no such instance shall a vehicle occupy more than one parking space as delineated by such lines.

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the violation of these restrictions shall constitute an offense, conviction of which shall be punished as an infraction under the provisions of California Vehicle Code section 42001 and City of Suisun City ordinance 10.22. Vehicles improperly parked may be removed or towed away at the owner’s expense, as provided by Vehicle Code sections 22519 and 22651, as well as City of Suisun City ordinance 10.22.070.

FURTHER RESOLVED, that appropriate signs shall be erected or placed to give proper notice of the regulations and restrictions promulgated under authority of this Resolution in the affected areas of STA property.

This resolution was adopted by Solano Transportation Authority on December 11, 2024.

_____________________________
Mitch Mashburn, STA Board Chair
Solano Transportation Authority

Passed by the Solano Transportation Authority (STA) Board on this 11 th day of December 2024
by the following vote:

Ayes: 7 – Bird, Carli, Hernandez, Mashburn, Moy, McConnell, and Okamura Noes: 0

Absent: 1 - Young
Abstain: 0

Attest:

Johanna Masiclat
Clerk of the Board

I, Daryl K. Halls, the Solano Transportation Authority Executive Director, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution was introduced, passed and adopted by said Authority at the regular meeting thereof held this 11
th day of December 2024.

______________________________
Daryl K. Halls, Executive Director
Solano Transportation Authority

23 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
24 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

April
1, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

City Council/Successor Agency/Housing Authority Approval of the Minutes of the Meetings of the Suisun City Council, Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency, and Housing Authority held on March 18, 2025 - (Skinner:[email protected]).

FISCAL IMPACT:

None

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance.

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to Government Code 40801, the City Clerk shall keep an accurate record of the proceedings of the City Council meetings. City Council minutes are prepared in a manner consistent with the intent of the Government Code. Minutes provide a record of when and where the meeting took place, type of meeting, and report any action taken, including the vote of each member of the City Council.

STAFF REPORT:

The minutes of the meetings of the Suisun City Council, Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency, and Housing Authority held on March 18, 2025.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Minutes - March 18, 2025, Regular Meeting of the City Council-Successor Agency-Housing Authority

PREPARED BY:

Anita Skinner, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2025 03 18 cc sa ha 630 Minutes.docx
25 CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Alma Hernandez, Mayor Jenalee
Dawson, Mayor Pro Tem Amit Pal,
Councilmember Parise Shepherd,
Councilmember Princess Washington,
Councilmember

MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING OF THE SUISUN CITY COUNCIL,

SUISUN CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY,

AND SUISUN CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2025
6:30 PM
Suisun City Council Chambers - 701 Civic Center Boulevard - Suisun City, California .

MEETINGS ARE HELD IN-PERSON, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE VIA ZOOM ZOOM MEETING INFORMATION:

WEBSITE: https://zoom.us/join
MEETING ID: 831 8926 3722
CALL IN PHONE NUMBER: (707) 438-1720

REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BY EMAILING [email protected] (PRIOR TO 4 PM), VIA WEBSITE, OR ZOOM CALL IN PHONE NUMBER (707) 438 -1720 (If attending the meeting via phone press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute/mute for public comment.) (Next Ord. No. – 818)
(Next City Council Res. No. 2025 – 20)
Next Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency Res. No. SA2025 - 02) (Next Housing Authority Res. No. HA2025 – 02)

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez called the meeting to order at 6:41pm.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
ABSENT: None

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Council Member Shepherd.

INVOCATION
Given by Clerk Skinner
26 APPROVAL OF REORDERING OF AGENDA
Motion by Council Member Pal to approve agenda as presented and seconded by Vice Mayor Dawson. Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
NOES: None
CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION None
(Any items on the regular meeting agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)
REPORTS (Informational items only.)

1. City Manager Update - (Prebula: [email protected]).  Main street, staff did a speed check, looking to install rumble strips and speed signs.  Staff working with Buzz Oates to alleviate the issues of cars and debris on Gentry property.

2. City Attorney Report - (Enright).
 On 4/1 will be discussing policy for commissions.

Thomas Lombardo spoke about previous requests for street signs at Olive and Tabor.

Don Lipary comments on PGE work being done in his neighborhood; street light out on Crane Drive and PGE has been out several times and still no power to the pole.

Tom LeBlanc commented on the City of Fairfield discussing camping on public streets and are changing their ordinances.

Catherine Brown commented on posting of at least 7 signs along Hwy 12 that are illegal, signs being placed on stop signs, city property that she is has been picking up.

Donna LeBlanc commented that Ms. Brown has also been weeding along Civic Center Drive; public announcement for a Fire Department grant and would like to know how much is Fire and how much is crosswalk; Hwy 12 work by Caltrans in the median, hope they are planning to replace fences and plants that were recently placed; Assemblywoman Wilson hosting an open house on 3/27 at 10 am.

Unnamed speaker comments regarding water rights especially for the proposed new development.

Lilia Dardon read a scripture.

Steve Olry commented on the strategic plan; doesn’t appear you feel city’s financial crisis exists now that Measure S has passed; city party expenditure now up to $60k. 27 On Line
Michelle Chavez thanked Amanda extra patrol for George Guynn home as gun shots into home, why was the city party not held at a city facility; Blossom/ old Railroad Avenue have more junk; urban camper on Humphrey needs to be removed; spending money for city party and then asking resident assistance is wrong.

Unnamed speaker comments regarding homeless around his property; shopping carts, seems council continues to drag their feet.
#424 important that Suisun continues to grow.

PRESENTATIONS/APPOINTMENTS
(Presentations, Awards, Proclamations, Appointments).

3. Proclamation Proclaiming the Month of March 2025 as "Red Cross Month" - (Hernandez:[email protected]).

Mayor Hernandez read proclamation which was presented by Vice Mayor Dawson.

Dr. Pasqual, with the Red Cross, accepted the proclamation, highlighted several programs and thanked the Council. Rashawn Smith, Red Cross was also present.

Council Members thanked the Red Cross for all the work they do.

4. Mayoral Appointments to Commissions, Committees and Council Boards Mayor Hernandez briefly explained the process that was followed for the recommendations for appointments. Thanked Council Member Pal and Vice Mayor Dawson for their efforts on reviewing the applications.
a. Approving Appointments to the Planning Commission (three appointments for four- year terms expiring January 2029).

Explore an alternate member at a future meeting.

Albert Enault, Thomas Kamin, Terry West
b. Approving Appointments to the Recreation, Parks, Marina and Arts Commission (three appointments for four-year terms expiring January 2029; one appointment to fill one unscheduled vacancy term expiring January 2027).

Unscheduled vacancy: term expiring January 2027
Juan Vasquez
Term expiring 2029
Donna LeBlanc, Essex Cook, Willie Nickson
Juan Vasquez
c. Approving Appointments to the Suisun City/Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District Joint Committee (2 appointments).

Council Members Pal and Washington
28 d. Community Action Partnership Joint Powers Authority (CAP Solano JPA) (Homelessness Regional Board) (2 appointments).

Vice Mayor Dawson and Mayor Hernandez
e. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) General Assembly (appointment of Mayor as Voting Delegate and Councilmember as Alternate).

Mayor Hernandez and Alternate Council Member Shepherd
f. Appointment of Legislative Advocacy Ad hoc Committee for 2025.

Council Member Washington and Mayor Hernandez
Motion by Mayor Hernandez to approve appointments as named and seconded by Vice Mayor Dawson. Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items requiring little or no discussion may be acted upon with one motion.

City Council

5. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-20: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement between the City of Suisun City and Pyro Spectaculars North, Inc. for Pyrotechnic Display Services for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 - Hull ([email protected]).

Joint City Council/Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency

6. Council/Agency Approval of February 2025 Accounts Payable and Payroll Warrants - (Deol:
[email protected]).

Joint City Council / Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency / Housing Authority

7. City Council/Successor Agency/Housing Authority Approval of the Minutes of the Meetings of the Suisun City Council, Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency, and Housing Authority held on March 4, 2025; and Minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the Suisun City Council and Planning Commission – (Skinner: [email protected]).

Item #6
Donna LeBlanc: page 33 an additional $16K+ for Green Valley Country Club, US Bank Card, Prestige Casino $3K+ page 35; Christina Penland DJ for $1k+ page 36, we are watching credit card charges; repeated charges for tool repairs, why can’t there be a contract with a specific company.

ON LINE
Michelle Chavez could have a paid for a CSO for what was spent on the city party; have a light show rather than the fireworks on the 4th of July.

Council Member Washington pulled #6.
29 Motion by Vice Mayor Dawson to approve Consent Calendar Items 5 & 7 and seconded by Council Member Washington. Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Item 6
Mr. Prebula feels there are accounting errors and will sit down with the team to review.

Council Member Pal asked for exact amount to be on the next agenda.

Council Member Washington asked for future reference is approval of these amount are within City Manager’s prevue. Mr. Prebula explained.

Motion by Council Member Washington to approve Consent Calendar Item #6 and seconded by Vice Mayor Dawson. Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

PUBLIC HEARING
Housing Authority

8. Housing Authority Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-02: Approving the Certification and Submittal of the 5-Year Public Housing Agency Plan for 2025-2029 to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development - (Goltiao: [email protected]).

Housing Manager Jason Goltiao presented the report.

Council Member Pal asked clarifying questions.

Mayor Hernandez opened Public Hearing.

Donna LeBlanc asked if those project specific vouchers being held, be used elsewhere until the project is complete; if an employee of the city owns a second home can they place a relative, can they use a housing placement voucher, which may be the case happening right now; city does not own Section 8 property; money that is received the same money paid out to landlords.

Michelle Chavez asked how many project-based units are at the Marina Apts? How many apartments are still vacant? Can they be used for seniors?
Kat Caesar asked does that afford the housing authority to function properly if only a portion of vouchers are used.

There being no further comments Mayor Hernandez closed the Public Hearing.

Mr. Goltiao responded to public comments.
30 Motion by Council Member Washington to approve Item 8 and seconded by Vice Mayor Dawson.

Motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd, Washington
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

GENERAL BUSINESS
City Council

9. Vision for Suisun City: Building Resilience and Expanding Opportunities Next Steps - (Prebula: [email protected]).

Mr. Prebula gave a brief background and presented the report.

Council asked clarifying questions. Mr. Prebula and City Attorney Enright responded.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Vickie Jackson in favor of the expansion and affordable housing that California Forever could bring.

Walter Coty, Jr. commented on vision of sports he hopes California Forever could bring.

Anthony Summer came to bless you, youth program that provides services like yard work, removing graffiti, thinks expansion is a wonderful idea.

Herbert Dardon stated he didn’t realize we were approving California Forever; suggested City Manager look for other options; not enough info currently; need to be careful with what is being presented to us; presentation was made in panic mode.

Donna LeBlanc sees the good and the bad along with the possibilities; ideas have expanded but our finances have not, look at every opportunity.

Bob Megary commented we need housing and jobs
Ray Willis feels city needs to grow, needs housing, and California Forever will do that.

Roberto Valdez, So Co Audubon Society commented on letter opposing California Forever; opposed to any annexation by California Forever.

Danny Bernardini, Napa-Solano Building Officials, Suisun City is definitely a union town; helped get Measure S passed.

Jim DeKloe, acknowledged George Guynn who gave his life to the city; council said it would be transparent, expected a map tonight; council are empowering California Forever.

Steve Olry commented Suisun has an economic problem; infrastructure is not the way to go, we will not survive after 5 years.

Mitchell Megary commented on affordable housing; sees opportunity with just a little dream; standing still going in circles; California Forever gives us an opening to grow and bring jobs. 31 Michael Hamilton commented on the Crescent Neighborhood that were demolished in the 80’s; Suisun needs the expansion.

ON LINE
Dwayne Krom commented on letter sent to City Manager; lack of map at presentation.

Michelle Chavez commented she doesn’t think we should be considering annexation when we can’t keep our house straight and spending money that we don’t have.

Unnamed speaker commented that affordable housing does not exist in California; take care of what we have; work on our schools; stop and consider what the residents are telling you, upgrade our infrastructure first.

Council Member Washington left dais at 9:46pm and returned at 9:49pm.

Lito Santos commented he feels there will be a bait and switch with California Forever; who will do the roads and all the services.

Mr. Prebula responded to questions.

Motion by Council Member Pal to approve Item 9 and seconded by Vice Mayor Dawson Council Member Washington amended motion to add that the City Attorney be present at any meeting.

City Manager spoke on issues with legal counsel being in attendance.

Council Member Washington asked clarifying question; feels it’s protection for the city by having attorney there.

City Attorney Enright stated he initially does not need to be involved; but will have a roll to do due diligence.

Council Member Washington rescinded amended motion.

Council Pal asked at what point does developer financial responsibility kick in in reference to staff time and negotiations.

City Attorney Enright responded that it will be the developer’s financial responsibility.

AYES: Dawson, Hernandez, Pal, Shepherd
NOES: Washington
ABSENT: None

COUNCIL COMMENTS
REPORTS: (Informational items only)

10. Non-Discussion Items.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no motion to start any new agenda item past 10pm the meeting was adjourned at 10:22pm. ___________________________
Anita Skinner, City Clerk
32 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

April
1, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Recommending City Council Approve a General Plan Amendment, Amending the Transportation Element, Amending the Vehicular Transportation Diagram Removing the Railroad Avenue Alignment Connection to Olive Avenue.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed General Plan Amendment is a staff led initiative and costs associated for this work task, including the services of Fehr & Peers are funded by the General Fund.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance and Develop Sustainable Economy.

BACKGROUND:

According to State law, a General Plan must cover at least eight topic areas known as "elements." The mandatory elements include land use, transportation, housing, open space, conservation, safety, noise, and environmental justice. Each element provides a general summary of its topic areas and a series of goals and policies. Some elements include a detailed diagram (exhibit) outlining the critical information about the goals and policies.

The Transportation Element is one of the mandatory components of the General Plan. It provides a comprehensive overview of the City's circulation conditions. The Vehicular Transportation Diagram is where you can find the details, including major roadway classifications, such as arterials, collector, and local streets. This diagram also shows future planned roadway designs and locations.

Railroad Avenue is classified as an arterial roadway and is unique, given Sunset Avenue bifurcates it.

The west leg is a four-lane roadway, and the east leg, which connects to Sunset Avenue and terminates at East Tabor Avenue, is a two-lane roadway. This segment is a stop control roadway served by three- way stop signs. The roadway connects to the City of Fairfield and East Tabor Avenue right-of-way.

Vehicular circulation at the terminus of Railroad Avenue and East Tabor Avene is controlled by a three- way, signed, controlled intersection that allows free movement in all directions and includes a signalized railroad crossing.

The City is proposing an amendment to the General Plan’s Vehicular Transportation Diagram to remove a future scenario outlined in the Transportation Element. The existing General Plan shows a proposed realignment of Railroad Avenue, linking it to East Tabor Avenue through Olive Avenue and ultimately East Tabor Avenue. The proposed General Plan Amendment would remove the realignment from the General Plan and ensure that Railroad Avenue would remain as the primary through traffic roadway between Sunset Avenue (west) and East Tabor Avenue.

The Transportation Element deals with the movement of people and goods in and around Suisun City. It enables residents, workers, and visitors to travel comfortably and conveniently by car, bike, transit, or foot. The Transportation Element also includes planning projections related to new roadway design and circulation redesign in some cases. One such projection is the Railroad Avenue/Olive Avenue realignment extension. This policy dates back to the General Plan in 1992, where the City supported the following statement:
33 Policy 10. Railroad Avenue shall be extended due east from Humphrey Drive to Olive Avenue and shall be upgraded to arterial standards in this area. Olive Avenue would become part of Railroad Avenue.

The existing portion of Railroad Avenue between Humphrey Drive and East Tabor Avenue would be abandoned. The future alignment of the extension or Railroad Avenue would be determined in the future. The realignment of Railroad Avenue would be determined based on the least number of conflicts with Southern Pacific Railroad line.

Several decades later, during the most recent update to the General Plan in 2015, the City eliminated the policy language, but the policy's intent was carried forward and identified as a future roadway improvement in the Vehicular Transportation Diagram (Attachment 1.a.). Recognizing that decades have passed since its first documented reference in 1992, staff determined that it would be practical to analyze the need for the extension, considering there has been no movement by the City to fund, purchase land, and design the realignment. Based on the findings of a study, the elimination of the realignment could open up surrounding development opportunities for property physically affected by the realignment and property adjacent to the Olive Avenue corridor.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 27, 2024, to review the proposed removal of the Railroad Avenue realignment from the General Plan (Attachment 1b.). During the meeting, the Commission heard comments from approximately seven individuals who expressed concerns about eliminating the realignment. After deliberating on the issue, the Planning Commission voted to deny the staff’s recommendation for the City Council to approve the General Plan Amendment (1-3), which would have removed the realignment from the General Plan’s Vehicular Transportation Diagram.

On March 19, 2024, the City Council reviewed and considered a General Plan amendment that sought to remove the Railroad Avenue realignment connecting to Olive Avenue. After review and discussion of staff’s recommendations the City Council decided to continue the item so that staff and the traffic consultant, Fehr & Peers could update additional information from a previously prepared traffic study.

Fehr & Peers updated the traffic analysis by preparing a second analysis that evaluated the impact of the Railroad Avenue Realignment Project on East Tabor Avenue, assessing crash data, traffic operations, and alternative improvement measures. The study examined Existing, Near-Term, and Cumulative (2040) conditions, focusing on six key intersections in Suisun City and Fairfield. This study was presented to the City Council on January 21, 2025 (Attachment 2).

Key Findings:
• All six intersections currently operate at acceptable traffic levels (LOS D or better), but by 2040, four will degrade to LOS E or F without improvements. • The East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection experienced the highest crash concentration, with 18 crashes from 2019-2023, primarily from left-turn movements. • Over 50% of Railroad Avenue traffic is cut-through, with only 15% traveling to and from the immediate neighborhood.

Evaluation of Improvement Options:
• Option A: Realignment of Railroad Avenue removes the problematic intersection but worsens conditions at three other intersections.
• Option B (Preferred Option): Restricts the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection to right-in/right-out movements, reducing crash risks and providing a low-cost solution ($250,000–$440,000).
• Option C: Installing traffic signals at key intersections would be costly ($10.9M–$41.4M) 34 and likely opposed by regulatory agencies.

Additional Considerations:
• Widening East Tabor Avenue to four lanes would improve traffic flow but is inconsistent with city planning policies and opposed by regulatory bodies.
• The proposed Olive Avenue extension to Prosperity Lane would divert cut-through traffic from Railroad Avenue but shift congestion to other intersections.

STAFF REPORT:

The preliminary estimated cost for the Railroad Avenue realignment, as updated in the current traffic study, ranges from $4.6 million to $9.4 million. For decades, the City has not established a comprehensive funding program specifically for this realignment. The City's fee program generates funds when building permits are issued, with proceeds deposited into the Off-Site Street Improvement (OSSIP) account and the Municipal Facilities & Equipment account. These funds are then allocated to City-wide Street programs. However, dedicated funding for Railroad Avenue improvements only began to accumulate with the construction of the Blossom Apartments. While the Stizzy Cannabis Dispensary did not provide specific funding for Railroad Avenue improvements, it contributed to the City-wide Street program and dedicated right-of-way frontage to the City. Similarly, the Blossom Apartments dedicated additional right-of-way and contributed funding for future Railroad Avenue improvements. The current balance in the dedicated funding account for Railroad Avenue improvements is $27,378. The Citywide OSSIP account balance totals $4.3 million.

Option B Cost
According to the
Railroad Avenue Realignment Report
(January 2025), Option B has been identified as
the preferred alternative. Unlike other proposals, Option B does not include realigning Railroad Avenue. Instead, it focuses on modifying the existing East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection to improve traffic operations and safety.

Under this alternative, left turns would be prohibited at the intersection, and all approaches would be restricted to right-in, right-out movements only. To reinforce these restrictions, the project would include appropriate signage, raised curb extensions, and concrete medians with mountable curbs. The total estimated cost for these improvements is $450,000, which may be shared between the two cities.

The City’s share to cover the costs of the improvements will come from partial funding through a combination of near-term residential development, a potential cannabis operation, and possibly the development of the vacant Sunset Avenue/Railroad Avenue lot. Additionally, staff is commissioning a Nexus Study to update the City’s comprehensive fee program, which would establish funding mechanisms for future projects, ensuring a fair distribution of costs.

Staff has determined that either funding approach would ensure that future safety improvements at the Railroad Avenue/East Tabor intersection would be funded by private development, thereby mitigating the financial burden on the City.

Funding Sources / Fair Share Calculation
At the January 21, 2025, the City Council meeting, discussions focused on Option B and identifying potential funding sources for its improvements. With only $27,378 currently allocated for Railroad Avenue, falling significantly short of the estimated $500,000 needed to complete Option B, the City Council deliberated on potential avenues to secure the necessary funding to advance the safety improvements.

35 As part of discussions with the City Council and given that East Tabor Avenue falls within the City of Fairfield, the City Council directed staff to reengage with Fairfield officials to assess their future plans for roadway improvements and their willingness to participate in the proposed Option B improvements.

In addition to exploring potential contributions from the City of Fairfield, the City Council also instructed staff to estimate a fair share contribution from surrounding developments. To support this effort, staff engaged Fehr & Peers to conduct an analysis identifying foreseeable developments and the funding these projects could contribute toward the Option B improvements.

Staff met with Fairfield’s Public Works Director to review the proposed General Plan amendment and discuss the safety improvements associated with Option B. During the discussion, it became clear that the right-in, right-out reconfiguration would likely require modifications within Suisun City’s right-of- way as well.

Consequently, the estimated project cost could exceed the initial projection of $500,000. A more precise cost estimate will be provided as design plans are further developed.

Both agencies agreed to request that the Solano Transportation Authority (STA) include the Option B safety improvement project in its upcoming Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP).

This strategic inclusion would enhance the project's chances for potential federal, state, and regional funding opportunities.

Staff also identified the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as a promising funding source since existing safety data indicates a need for improvements at this intersection, making it a strong candidate for HSIP funding. Furthermore, the discussion highlighted the importance of ensuring that future developments in the area contribute their fair share to the improvement costs. These contributions could potentially serve as matching funds for grant applications. However, at this time, no confirmed funding sources are available.

Fehr & Peers estimated the construction cost of the preferred alternative to range between $250,000 and $440,000, based on similar California projects from 2022 to 2024. This estimate includes planning, engineering, environmental clearance, construction-related soft costs, management, inspection, and contingency but excludes costs for underground utility relocation or right-of-way acquisition.

To calculate each project’s fair share fee, Fehr & Peers calculated the projects trip generation and estimated the number of planned project vehicle trips that would utilize the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection. The number of planned project vehicle trips was divided by the growth in traffic volumes at the study location between Existing and Cumulative conditions to estimate the planned project’s fair share.

Based on discussions with City of Suisun City staff, Fehr & Peers determined that there are two foreseeable projects along the Railroad Avenue corridor which would contribute a fair share fee toward the preferred Option B alternative:

Potential Olive Residential Development: 70 single-family residential dwelling units to be located
on a vacant parcel along Olive Avenue.

Potential Cannabissary: a 2,494 square foot marijuana dispensary to be located on a vacant
parcel
at the Railroad Avenue/Humphrey Drive intersection.

The Olive Avenue Residential project is expected to generate 49 AM and 66 PM peak hour trips, with 60% passing through the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection, contributing about 8% to its traffic growth. The project's fair share contribution is estimated between $18,000 and $37,000.

36 The Cannabissary project is expected to generate 26 AM and 47 PM peak hour trips, with 60% passing through the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection, contributing about 5% to its traffic growth. The project's fair share contribution is estimated between $10,000 and $25,000.

Conclusion
Staff recommend proceeding with Option B, which proposes modifications to the existing East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection to enhance traffic operations while eliminating the planned Railroad Avenue extension. According to a Fehr & Peers study, the estimated cost of these safety improvements is approximately $500,000. However, funding for these improvements remains limited.

Over the past few years, the City has collected only $27,378 from developments along Railroad Avenue. When combined with an estimated $62,000 in foreseeable development revenue, the total available funding amounts to $89,378, leaving a shortfall of $410,622.

It is important to note that these
cost estimates reflect current dollars. Delays in project completion will likely result in higher costs due to inflation and other market fluctuations.

Although there are additional funds in the OSSIP account, after discussions with the City of Fairfield about roadway improvements, staff suggests that funding for Option B be sourced from regional funding opportunities and fair share contributions from foreseeable future development projects. This approach will ensure that the City's financial resources are used efficiently while leveraging external funding to support necessary infrastructure improvements.

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Option B safety improvements and formally remove the Railroad Avenue extension from further consideration. Additionally, staff will seek regional funding sources and fair share contributions from upcoming development projects to finance these improvements.

Upon approval, staff will collaborate with regional agencies to identify potential funding sources and coordinate with developers to secure fair share contributions. Further updates will be provided to the City Council as funding opportunities and project timelines become clearer Environmental Review
The proposed General Plan amendment to remove the Railroad Avenue realignment from Railroad Avenue/Humphrey Drive to Olive Avenue from the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Network Diagram meets all criteria for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, exceptions to the applicability of a Categorical Exemption, as specified in Section 15300.2(a) through (f) of the State CEQA Guidelines, do not apply to the project.

Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 (Attachment 4).

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

The updated Fehr & Peers traffic study presents three options for the realignment of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue. Based on the findings, including traffic safety data, cost considerations, and signalization requirements in the findings of the report, staff is recommending Option B. This option would eliminate left turns onto Railroad Avenue from East Tabor Avenue, creating a right-turn movements at the intersection of Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue.

37 City Council Action
1 .

City Council hold a public hearing, and:
2 .

Determine that the General Plan Amendment to remove the Railroad Avenue realignment from Railroad Avenue to Olive Avenue from the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Diagram meets all criteria for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
3 .

Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2025- : Recommending City Council Approve a General Plan Amendment, Amending the Transportation Element, Amending the Vehicular Transportation Diagram Removing the Railroad Avenue Alignment Connection to Olive Avenue.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Resolution No. 2025- : Recommending City Council Approve a General Plan Amendment, Amending the Transportation Element, Amending the Vehicular Transportation Diagram Removing the Railroad Avenue Alignment Connection to Olive Avenue a
.

Current Vehicular Diagram
b
.

Proposed Vehicular Transportation Diagram
2 .

Evaluation of the Feasibility of Eliminating the General Plan Railroad Avenue 3 .

Realignment at East Tabor Avenue
4 .

Fair Share Memorandum
5 .

California Environmental Quality Act Categorical Exemption Report

PREPARED BY:

Jim Bermudez, Development Services Director
REVIEWED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2025- : Recommending City Council Approve a General Plan Amendment, Amending the Transportation Element, Amending the Vehicular Transportation Diagram Removing the Railroad Avenue Alignment Connection to Olive Avenue
1a. Exhibit 1a Current Vehicular Transportation Diagram.pdf 2b. Exhibit 1b Proposed Vehicular Transportation Diagram.pdf

3. Attachment 2 Fehr Peers Railroad Realignment Final Report 011325.pdf

4. Attachment 3 Fair Share Memo Final 25-03-13.pdf

5. Class 1 CE Report 2023 06 09.

6. Vehicular Transportation GP Amendment
38 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT,

AMENDING THE TRANSPORATION ELEMENT, AMENDING THE VEHICULAR

TRANSPORTATION DIAGRAM REMOVING THE RAILROAD AVENUE ALIGNMENT

CONNECTING TO OLIVE AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City Council has authority per State law and Suisun City Municipal Code Section 17.56 to take action on General Plan Amendments; and WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City, Development Services Department has initiated an amendment to the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a comprehensive update to the General Plan including the Transportation Element on May 5, 2015 as well as subsequent amendments; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Diagram provides a higher level of detail that reflects the major roadway classifications such as, arterials, collector, and local streets; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Diagram reflects future planned roadway designs and locations; and
WHEREAS, the Railroad Avenue is classified as an arterial roadway and is unique given it is bifurcated by Sunset Avenue. The west leg is a four-lane roadway and the east leg which connects to Sunset Avenue and terminates at East Tabor Avenue, is a two-lane roadway; and WHEREAS, vehicular circulation at the terminus of Railroad Avenue and East Tabor Avenue is controlled by a three-way signed controlled intersection that allows free movements in all directions and includes a signalized railroad crossing; and
WHEREAS, The City is proposing a General Plan amendment to the Vehicular Transportation Diagram. The amendment aims to remove a future scenario identified in the Transportation Element calling for a Railroad Avenue and Olive Avenue connection to East Tabor Avenue; and WHEREAS, the City hired Fehr & Peers, an experienced traffic consultant in 2020 to evaluate the feasibility of eliminating the Railroad Avenue/Olive Avenue realignment to East Tabor Avenue; and WHEREAS, Fehr & Peers concluded that traffic operations and collusion history were satisfactory to ensure the City can make the necessary findings that warrant the removal of the Railroad Avenue/Olive Avenue realignment; and
WHERAS, On February 27, 2024, a public hearing was held to contemplate the proposed General Plan Amendment and after deliberations, the Planning Commission voted 1-3 to denying the proposed General Plan Amendment; and
39 WHEREAS, On March 19, 2024, a public hearing was held to contemplate the proposed General Plan Amendment and after deliberations, the City Council made no action and requested that an updated traffic impact study be completed; and
WHEREAS, the City hired Fehr & Peers to update the previous 2020 traffic study focusing on traffic operations, level of service, costs for improvements, and safety; and WHEREAS, the Fehr & Peers updated traffic analysis was presented to the City Council on January 21, 2025, and the City Council directed staff to explore funding options; and WHEREAS, staff tasked Fehr & Peers to prepare a cost sharing analysis of foreseeable projects that could assist with funding of Option B improvements; and WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City has conducted an environmental analysis to remove the Railroad Avenue realignment from Railroad Avenue/Humphrey Drive to Olive Avenue from the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Network Diagram meets all criteria for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, exceptions to the applicability of a Categorical Exemption, as specified in Section 15300.2(a) through (f) of the State CEQA Guidelines, do not apply to the project. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301; and WHEREAS, after due consideration of all materials and testimony, and using its independent judgment, the City Council desires to amend the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Diagram removing the Railroad Avenue realignment connecting to Olive Avenue.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Suisun City, exercising its independent judgment as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.

2. The City Council finds no substantial new evidence in the record and that the City of Suisun City has conducted an environmental analysis to remove the Railroad Avenue realignment from Railroad Avenue/Humphrey Drive to Olive Avenue from the General Plan Vehicular Transportation Network Diagram and concludes as specified in Section 15300.2(a) through (f) of the State CEQA Guidelines, do not apply to the project. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301; and

3. A review of the General Plan Transportation Chapter policies which are relevant to the potential elimination of Railroad Avenue east end realignment indicates that the elimination of the realignment would not cause internal inconsistencies within the General Plan Transportation Element and the amendment is consistent with the General Plan policies. Specifically, Policy T-1.3: The City’s Level of Service policy will be implemented in consideration of the need for pedestrian and bicycle access, the need for emergency vehicle access, and policies designed to reduce vehicle miles travelled.

The operations analysis finds that the current network configuration, with signalization at East Tabor Avenue/Clay Bank Road and East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue, can be 40 reasonably expected to serve traffic acceptably in the long term. Therefore, assuming these improvements are made (when traffic conditions indicate they are needed), eliminating the realignment is consistent with Policy T-1.3.

Policy T-2.5: The City prefers direct connections that allow cars, bikes and pedestrian through traffic over “doglegs” or “T” intersections.

The current connection of Railroad Avenue to East Tabor Avenue is a “T” intersection, with Railroad Avenue terminating at East Tabor Avenue. As such, the current configuration is a more direct connection between these two arterial roadways than the connection with the realignment, which would require drivers to use Olive Avenue to travel between East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue. Therefore, eliminating the realignment is consistent with Policy T-2.5.

Policy T-6.1: The City will facilitate construction and maintenance of an accessible, safe, pleasant, convenient, and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system that connects local destinations and surrounding communities. The City will support development of a safe and accessible trail network connected to the on-street bicycle and transportation system that provides transportation and recreational opportunities for Suisun City residents and employees.

If the Railroad Avenue realignment is removed from the General Plan and the intersection of Railroad Avenue and East Tabor Avenue is modified to allow only right-turn movements, eliminating left turns onto Railroad Avenue, it would enhance the safety and accessibility for both cyclists and pedestrians. This modification would reduce conflicts between motor vehicles and non-motorized users, creating a safer, more efficient environment for everyone on the road.

4. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTEDby a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 1st of April 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers: _____________________________________________ NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City of Suisun City this 1st day of April 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
41 GENERAL PLAN 2035 – VEHICULAR TRANSPORTATION DIAGRAM (CURRENT CONDITION)

Proposed General Plan Amendment
42 GENERAL PLAN 2035 – VEHICULAR TRANSPORTATION DIAGRAM (PROPOSED CONDITION)

Proposed General Plan Amendment
43 Railroad Avenue
Realignment – Project
Alternatives

Prepared for:

Suisun City

1/13/2025

WC24-4088

44 Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Findings ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Recommendation ................................................................................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Project Alternatives .............................................................................................................................................................. 4

1.1.1 Project Alternatives .................................................................................................................................................. 4

2. Analysis Approach ..................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 6

2.1.1 Study Locations.......................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1.2 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1.3 Study Scenarios ......................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1.4 LOS Analysis Methodology .................................................................................................................................11

2.1.5 City LOS Guidelines ................................................................................................................................................11

3. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................. 13

3.1 Collision Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................13

3.2 Travel Behavior ....................................................................................................................................................................14

3.3 Existing Intersection Operations ...................................................................................................................................15

3.4 Vehicle Queues ....................................................................................................................................................................16

4. Near-Term Conditions ............................................................................................................ 17

4.1 Near-Term Forecasts .........................................................................................................................................................17

4.2 Near-Term Operations Analysis and Vehicle Queue s ..........................................................................................17

5. Cumulative Conditions ........................................................................................................... 19

5.1 Cumulative Traffic Forecasts ...........................................................................................................................................19

5.2 Cumulative Operations Analysis and Vehicle Queues .........................................................................................19

6. Cost Estimate ........................................................................................................................... 21

6.1 Project Alternatives Improvement Measures ...........................................................................................................21

6.2 Project Alternatives Cost Estimates .............................................................................................................................26

7. Findings and Recommendations ........................................................................................... 27 Study Findings ....................................................................................................................................................................27 Study Recommendation .................................................................................................................................................28 45 Appendices

Appendix A: Counts
Appendix B: LOS Calculation Sheets
Appendix C: Vehicle Queue Tables

46 List of Figures

Figure 1: Project Site Vicinity and Study Intersections .......................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Railroad Avenue Project Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 9 Figure 3: Olive Avenue Extension Alternative ........................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 4: Railroad Avenue Project Alternative – Improvements & Cost Estimate ................................................... 22 Figure 5: Prohibited Lefts at Railroad Avenue Project Alternative – Improvements & Cost Estimate ............. 23 Figure 6: Railroad Avenue Signalized Project Alternative – Improvements & Cost Estimate ............................. 24 Figure 7: Olive Avenue Extension Project Alternative – Improvements & Cost Estimate ..................................... 25

List of Tables

Table 1: Intersection LOS and Average Control Delay ........................................................................................................ 11 Table 2: Study Intersections LOS Threshold by Jurisdiction ............................................................................................. 12 Table 3: Summary of Collision Types ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Table 4: Existing Conditions LOS Results Summary ............................................................................................................. 15 Table 5: Near-Term Conditions LOS Results Summary ...................................................................................................... 18 Table 6: Cumulative Conditions LOS Results Summary ..................................................................................................... 20 Table 7: Project Alternatives Improvement Measures ........................................................................................................ 21 Table 8: Project Alternative Cost Estimates Summary ........................................................................................................ 26

47 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
1 Executive Summary
This report represents the traffic operations assessment of East Tabor Avenue regarding the Railroad Avenue Realignment Project in the City of Suisun City, California. This report includes a crash and origin- destination analysis, level of service assessment, and cost estimation for the four project alternativ es.

Purpose
The purpose of this study is to assess traffic operations for alternative corridor improvement measure s for East Tabor Avenue between Sunset Avenue and Olive A venue. This report is a sequel to a 2020 study that evaluated the feasibility of eliminating the Railroad Avenue realignment at East Tabor Avenue and concluded that it would not cause internal inconsistencies with the City of Suisun City General Plan Transportation Element.

This operations analysis is provided for Existing, Near-Term, and Cumulative conditions that consider the existing street configuration, realignment, and alternative designs. The analysis also quantitatively evaluates the Olive Avenue extension south to Prosperity Lane along Emperor Drive alternative to determine how the extension would affect operations along Railroad Avenue, East Tabor Avenue, and Olive Avenue. A review of existing crash data is also provided to understand the primary and secondary crash factors and potential countermeasures that may be included in the alternative corridor improvement measures.

Study Findings
The following is a summary of key findings of the traffic operations and safety evaluation. • All six study intersections currently operate at level of service (LOS) D or better conditions. • The greatest concentration of crashes along East Tabor Avenue from 2019 to 2023 occurred at the side-street stop-controlled intersection of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue where a total of 18 crashes occurred over the five-year window. Ten of the 18 crashes involved left turn movements at the intersection.
• Under Cumulative conditions for the year 2040, four of the six study intersections would operate at LOS E or F conditions with existing street configuration and traffic controls. The forecast growth for 2040 in the Fairfield-Suisun City travel model that was applied to develop cumulative volumes is greater in the current model version than the prior version of the model that was applied for the 2020 study. This increase in forecast growth resulted in higher volumes for the 2040 forecast year at the study intersections.
• The following is a summary of the Cumulative analysis of traffic operations for the three East Tabor Avenue corridor improvement options.
o Option A: Realignment of Railroad Avenue and the resulting e limination of the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection would result in LOS E or F conditions at the remaining three intersections along East Tabor Avenue.
48 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
2 o Option B: Providing right-in and right-out only movements at the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection by eliminating left turn movements would reduce crashes at the intersection but result in LOS F conditions at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Clay Bank Road and Sunset Avenue as lef t turn movements at Railroad Avenue would shift to these two locations.
o Option C: Installing traffic signals at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Railroad Avenue and Clay Bank Road would result in LOS F conditions at the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection and at the East Tabor Avenue/Olive Avenue minor streets.
• Achieving LOS D or better conditions at the intersections along East Tabor Avenue would require widening from two to four lanes that is inconsistent with the Suisun City or Fairfield General Plan Circulation Elements that call for the road to be two lanes. From prior conversations with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and Union Pacific (UP) conducted by City of Suisun City staff, it is anticipated that they would oppose widening of East Tabor Avenue at the UP rail crossing located between Clay Bay Road and Railroad Avenue. • There is currently no dedicated funding source for installation of traffic signals at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Railroad Avenue and Clay Bank Road. The City of Fairfield prioritizes the installation of a future signal at East Tabor Avenue and Clay Bank Road on the study corridor.

From prior conversations with the CPUC and UP condu cted by City of Suisun City staff, it is anticipated that they would oppose installation of traffic signals at both the intersections of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue due to the proximity of these intersections (i.e., particularly Railroad Avenue) to the adjacent UP rail crossing.
• An origin-destination evaluation of existing commute traffic using the segment of Railroad Avenue south of East Tabor was conducted to determi ne who uses the route and would be affected by the Option B Measure described above, indicates the following. o Summary: Over 50 percent of the trips using Railroa d Avenue in the study area are cut-through traffic, with only 15 percent of the trips traveling to and from the immediate neighborhood between Sunset Avenue and Ea st Tabor Avenue. o 38 percent of the trips along Railroad Avenue are destined for SR 12 o 62 percent of the trips along Railroad Avenue are locally destined, broken down as follows:
 46 percent are local Suisun City trips
 16 percent are local non-Suisun City trips
o Only 15 percent of the local trips travel to and from immediate neighborhoods connecting directly to Railroad Avenue between Suns et Avenue and East Tabor Avenue.

The remaining 47 percent travel to and from other neighborhoods. 49 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
3 Study Recommendation
East Tabor Avenue between Sunset Avenue and Olive A venue Option B , which would provide right-in and right-out only m ovements at the East Tabor Avenue/ Railroad Avenue intersection and thereby eliminate all left turn movements, is the preferred measure for the following reasons.
• It provides the greatest safety benefit by eliminating the potential for left turn conflicts that were the cause of 56 percent of the 18 reported crashes at the intersection of East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue between 2019 and 2023.
• Option B is a low-cost improvement (approximately $250,000 to $440,000) that could be implemented relatively quickly.
• There is currently no dedicated funding to install traffic signals at the existing stop-controlled intersections along East Tabor at Railroad Avenue or Clay Bank Road. The estimated cost of installing traffic signals at these two locations is $10.9 million to $41.4 million. • Over 50 percent of the trips using Railroad Avenue in the study area are cut-through traffic, with only 15 percent of the trips traveling to and from the immediate neighborhood between Sunset Avenue and East Tabor Avenue.
• The City of Fairfield prioritizes the future installation of a traffic signal at the East Tabor Avenue/Clay Bank Road intersection over the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection. • Option A, the realignment of Railroad Avenue, would result in LOS E or F conditions at the remaining three intersections along East Tabor Avenue.
• Prior conversations with the CPUC and UP conducted by City of Suisun City staff indicate that they are likely to oppose Option C (traffic signals at both Clay Bank Road and Railroad Avenue) as well as the widening of East Tabor Avenue from two to fo ur lanes. The widening of East Tabor Avenue is also inconsistent with the Suisun City or Fairfield General Plan Circulation Elements that call for the road to be two lanes.

While the intersection modification at East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue is the preferred option based on consultation with City of Fairfield and City of Suisun City staff, East Tabor Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the City of Fairfield. Therefore, although the City of Suisun City is leading this stu dy to assess roadway modifications along the border of th e two cities, the City of Fairfield will need to initiate and approve any improvements to intersections along East Tabor Avenue within their jurisdiction.

Olive Avenue Extension south to Prosperity Lane along Emperor Drive Alternative This project alternative would extend Olive Avenue further south to Prosperity Lane and connect to Emperor Drive. This would allow a new access point to SR 12 and deter vehicles from utilizing Railroad Avenue as a cut-through route. However, although Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue would benefit from the safety measures taken (prohibited left turns), the extension would not improve the overall traffic operations and instead shift vehicles to the other study intersections along East Tabor Avenue and Emperor Drive.
50 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
4 1. Introduction
This report presents the traffic operations assessment of East Tabor Avenue regarding the Railroad Avenue Widening and Realignment Project in Suisun C ity. This report includes a LOS assessment, and intersection review and recommendations.

1.1 Project Alternatives
Suisun City’s General Plan Vehicular Transportation Network proposes the widening and realignment of Railroad Avenue as follows:

1. Realigning Railroad Avenue from Sunset Avenue to th e Laurel Creek Diversion Channel a. Eliminating the Sunset Avenue/Railroad Avenue North intersection

2. Widening Railroad Avenue from the Laurel Creek Diversion Channel to Humphrey Drive

3. Realigning Railroad Avenue from Humphrey Drive to O live Avenue a. Eliminating the Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue intersection

4. Widening Olive Avenue from East Tabor Avenue contin uing southerly approximately 550 feet to the intersection of Olive Avenue and the proposed Railroad Avenue realignment

5. Widening of Sunset Avenue from New Railroad Avenue to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) railroad tracks
Previous studies were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of removing the Railroad Avenue realignment from East Tabor Avenue to Olive Avenue from the Gen eral Plan (Improvement 3 in the list above). A 2020 study found that although the traffic operations would not operate acceptably in Cumulative conditions with the current network configuration and controls, other operation alternatives could improve operations along the corridor, and collision rates in the study area did not indicate a systemic safety problem associated with the roadway configuration that would be resolved or improved by removing the Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue intersection and relocating Railroad Avenue to connect to Olive Avenue. Thus, it was concluded that the elimination of the Railroad Avenue realignment at East Tabor Avenue would not cause internal inconsistencies within the General Plan Transportation Element.

Because of the previous conclusions, this study included an operations analysis evaluating the East Tabor Avenue corridor that considered Existing conditions, the realignment, and alternative designs that could eliminate the proposed realignment.

1.1.1 Project Alternatives
In addition to the Railroad Avenue realignment network configuration, the following project alternatives were evaluated in this study:

No Realignment with Prohibited Lefts to/from Railro ad Avenue – This project alternative would not include the realignment and instead would prohibit left-turning movements at the 51 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
5 Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue intersection and only allow right-turning movements to and from Railroad Avenue.

No Realignment with Signals along East Tabor Avenue – This project alternative would not include the realignment and instead would install new traffic signals at intersections along East Tabor Avenue.

Olive Avenue Extension – This project alternative would not include the realignment and instead prohibit left turns at Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue and would extend Olive Avenue further south to Prosperity Lane, continuing to Emperor Drive, to create another access point to Highway

12. 52

Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
6 2. Analysis Approach
This section described the assumptions and methodologies utilized in the level of service analysis.

2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Analysis

2.1.1 Study Locations
Intersections are generally the critical capacity-controlling elements of suburban roadway networks.

Therefore, the operations of critical intersections surrounding the project area are used as indicator s of the adequacy of the vehicular circulation system. The following study intersections, also shown in Figure 1, were selected in coordination with the City of Suisun City and City of Fairfield staff as those most likely to be affected by the project alternatives, and thus warrant analysis:

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor Avenue

2. Clay Bank Road/East Tabor Avenue

3. Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor Avenue

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive

6. Emperor Drive/Highway 12 (SR 12)

2.1.2 Data Collection
Weekday AM (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and PM (4:00 PM and 6:00 PM) peak period intersection turning movement counts (vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles) were collected in May and August 2024 on a clear day, when schools were in session. Appendix A includes a summary of the weekday count data. Signal timing data was collected by the City of Fairfield and Caltrans.

2.1.3 Study Scenarios
The following Study scenarios were evaluated for the weekday AM and PM peak hours:
• Existing – Existing conditions based on traffic counts at the study intersections. • Near-Term No Project – Forecasts for the near-term scenario are based on traffic growth trends from the Fairfield-Suisun City travel demand model and traffic generated from approved projects expected to be developed in the next 5 to 10 years.
• Near-Term with Realignment – Near-term conditions w ith Railroad Avenue realigned from Humphrey Avenue to Olive Avenue.
• Near-Term without Realignment and with Prohibited L eft Turns at Railroad Avenue – Near-term conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with left turns prohibited at Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue.
• Near-Term without Realignment and with Signals alon g East Tabor Avenue – Near-term conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with new traffic signals along East Tabor Avenue. 53 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
7 • Near-Term without Realignment and with Olive Extension – Near-term conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with left turns prohibited at Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue and Olive Avenue extended further south to Prosperity Lane. • Cumulative No Project – Forecasts for the cumulative scenario are based on traffic growth trends from the Fairfield-Suisun City travel demand model, based on land use assumptions described in the City of Suisun City and City of Fairfield General Plans. • Cumulative with Realignment – Cumulative conditions with Railroad Avenue realigned from Humphrey Avenue to Olive Avenue.
• Cumulative without Realignment and with Prohibited Left Turns at Railroad Avenue – Cumulative conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with left turns prohibited at Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue.
• Cumulative without Realignment and with Signals along East Tabor Avenue – Cumulative conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with new traffic signals along East Tabor Avenue. • Cumulative without Realignment and with Olive Extension – Cumulative conditions without Railroad Avenue realigned, with left turns prohibited at Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue and Olive Avenue extended further south to Prosperity Lane.

Figure 2 depicts each study scenario along East Tabor Avenu e and the improvements indicated at each of the study intersections. Figure 3 depicts the Olive Avenue extension scenario and its proposed improvements.

54 McCoy Creek
Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
E Travis BlvdE Travis Blvd
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Pintail DrPintail Dr
Anderson DrAnderson Dr
Winters DrWinters Dr
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Sunset AveSunset AveGrizzly Island RdGrizzly Island Rd
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Tolenas RdTolenas Rd
Dover AveDover Ave
Emperor DrEmperor Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
12 1
2 3
4 5
6 WC24-4088_1_StudyArea
Project Site Vicinity and Study Intersections
Figure 1
Study Intersection
#Area of Focus
55 Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Air Base PkwyAir Base Pkwy
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Grande CirGrande Cir
Grande CirGrande Cir
Manor PlManor Pl
King/f_isher WayKing/f_isher Way
Falcon DrFalcon Dr Cormorant DrCormorant Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Villa CtVilla Ct

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
1 2
3 4
Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Air Base PkwyAir Base Pkwy
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Grande CirGrande Cir
Grande CirGrande Cir
Manor PlManor Pl
King/f_isher WayKing/f_isher Way
Falcon DrFalcon Dr Cormorant DrCormorant Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Villa CtVilla Ct

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
1 2
3 4
AWSC

SSSC SSSC
AWSC

SSSC SSSC SSSC
AWSC
FF FF

XXXXXXXXXX X X X X
X

NO PROJECT RAILROAD AVENUE REALIGNMENT

PROHIBITED LEFTS AT RAILROAD AVENUE RAILROAD AVENUE SIGNALIZED Study Intersection Signalized Intersection All Way Stop Controlled Intersection Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection (Free East-West Movements on Tabor)
Proposed Realignment Road Closure Right Turn Movements Only #
WC24-4088_2_RRAalts
Railroad Avenue Project Alternatives
Figure 2

AWSC SSSC XXXXX
FF
56 McCoy Creek
Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
E Travis BlvdE Travis Blvd
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Pintail DrPintail Dr
Anderson DrAnderson Dr
Winters DrWinters Dr
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Sunset AveSunset AveGrizzly Island RdGrizzly Island Rd
Emperor DrEmperor Dr
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Tolenas RdTolenas Rd
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Dover AveDover Ave

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
12 1
2 3
4 5
6 AWSC
AWSC
SSSC
FF FF
WC24-4088_3_OliveExt
Olive Avenue Extension Alternative
Figure 3
Study Intersection Signalized Intersection All Way Stop Controlled Intersection Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection (Free East-West Movements on Tabor)
Proposed Extension
#

AWSC SSSC
Right Turn Movements Only
FF
57 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
11 2.1.4 LOS Analysis Methodology
Synchro software, using methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual , was used to perform this analysis. The analysis results are summarized in vehicle delay in seconds and LOS. LOS is a qualitative description of operations ranging from LOS A, when the roadway facility has excess capacity and vehicles experience little or no delay, to LOS F, where the volume of vehicles exceeds the capacity, resulting in long queues and excessive delays. The study intersections LOS were established based on traffic analysis using the Transportation Research Board (TRB) method in the Highway Capacity Manual , 6th Edition.

For signalized intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by all vehicles passing through the intersection. This methodology uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the delay per vehicle. The delay per vehicle is a portion of the total delay attributed to the signal operations and includes initial deceleration, queu e move up time, time stopped, and acceleration.

At unsignalized intersections, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop-controlled movement. This incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, the LOS is represented by the average control delay for the whole intersection. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average delay and worst-case approach delay and associated LOS are reported in this study. The average control delays and LOS designations for signalized and unsignalized intersections are summarized in Table 1 .

Table 1: Intersection LOS and Average Control Delay
LOS Signalized Unsignalized
A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0
B 10.1 to 20.0 10.0 to 15.0
C 20.1 to 35.0 15.1 to 25.0
D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 to 35.0
E 55.1 to 80.0 35.1 to 50.0
F > 80.0 > 50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual , 6th Edition.

2.1.5 City LOS Guidelines
The Suisun City General Plan and the City of Fairfield General Plan Update were referenced to determine the criteria against which effects should be evaluated as part of the operations analysis.

The City of Fairfield’s guidelines set a performance target of LOS D during the peak hours for intersections and roadway segments within the Planning Area. Any intersections or segments that fall below this standard require evaluation for potential improvements unless exempted. 58 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025
12 Per the City of Fairfield’s guidelines, the following intersections and locations are exempted from th e LOS standards:
• Roadways included as part of the Route of Regional Significance • Heart of Fairfield area
• Areas within one-quarter mile radius of schools
• Suisun Valley Road and Business Center Drive intersection The City of Suisun City’s guidelines state the transportation system must maintain LOS E or better during peak travel periods.

2.1.5.1 LOS Thresholds
Table 2 below depicts the jurisdictions in which each study intersection falls under and their LOS threshold.

Table 2: Study Intersections LOS Threshold by Jurisdiction Intersection Jurisdiction(s) LOS Threshold

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor Avenue City of Fairfield -1

2. Clay Bank Road/East Tabor Avenue City of Fairfie ld D

3. Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue City of Fairfi eld D

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor Avenue City of Fairfield D

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive City of Suisun City E

6. Emperor Drive/SR 12 City of Suisun City/Caltrans E
Notes:

1. Intersection is within one-quarter mile radius of a school; therefore, it is exempt from the LOS standard.

Source: Fehr & Peers, January 2025.

59 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

13 3. Existing Conditions
This section describes the existing multimodal transportation system in the study area, including the crash history and travel behavior along the East Tabor Avenue corridor, as well as existing operating conditions at the study intersections.

3.1 Collision Analysis
Crash data was obtained from SafeTREC’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) for a five-year period up to the most recent full year of data available. TIMS is a platform that provides access to California crash data, the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), that has been geo-coded by SafeTREC 1. Only crashes resulting in an injury or fatality are included in the TIMS database.

An analysis of crash data from 2019 to 2023 indicates several concerning safety trends near our study intersections. Firstly, there has been an increase in the number of crashes within the study area, despite traffic volumes remaining relatively stable. Secondly, crashes are predominantly occurring during peak hours when traffic is heaviest along the corridor. These peak hours coincide with school commute times, resulting in higher volumes of child pedestrians.

The primary causes of crashes along the corridor include right-of-way violations, unsafe speeds, and driving under the influence (DUI). The East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue intersection has the highest concentration of crashes along the corridor. Broadside crashes are particularly prevalent at this intersection, occurring at twice the citywide rate. The predominant crash movements at this location involve westbound left turns (WBL) and eastbound through movements (EBT), as well as northbound left turns (NBL) and eastbound through movements (EBT).

The greatest concentration of crashes along East Tabor Avenue from 2019 to 2023 occurred at the side- street stop-controlled intersection of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue where a total of 18 crash es occurred over the five-year window. Ten of the 18 crashes involved left turn movements at the intersection. Table 3 below summarizes the collisions that occurred along the corridor between 2019 to 2023.

Table 3: Summary of Collision Types
Intersection Number of
Collisions Primary Collision Type

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor Avenue 9 Rear-End

1 SafeTREC, founded in 2000, is a part of University of California, Berkeley, affiliated with the School of Public Health and the Institute of Transportation Studies, with additional partnerships with the Department of City and Regional Planning, Public Policy, and Transportation Engineering. 60 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

14 Intersection Number of
Collisions Primary Collision Type

2. Clay Bank Road/East Tabor Avenue 9 Rear-End (5)

3. Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue 18 Broadside ( 13)

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor Avenue 3 Broadside (2)
Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

3.2 Travel Behavior
StreetLight is a transportation data vendor that is one of the early pioneers of using Big Data analytics for a range of mobility data. They anonymously mine and analyze GPS-sourced data from connected vehicles and mobile devices. StreetLight provides a range of data including traffic counts, corridor origin- destination data, and travel characteristics for selected areas.

An analysis utilizing StreetLight data was conducted to ascertain the percentage of traffic volume within the project site during peak hours attributable to school traffic patterns. The following schools were included in the analysis:
• Cleo Gordon Elementary School
• Grange Middle School
• Tolenas Academy of Music and Media
During the AM and PM school peak periods, traffic associated with the three nearby schools accounted for 23% and 27% of the total traffic volumes along the East Tabor Avenue corridor, respectively. Due to staggered bus schedules in the afternoon, only traffic from Grange Middle School falls within our PM (4 :00 to 6:00 PM) peak hour. Therefore, the PM peak hour traffic volume from Grange Middle School constitutes 8% of the total traffic volume along the study corridor.

An origin-destination evaluation of existing commute traffic using the segment of Railroad Avenue south of East Tabor was conducted to determine who uses the route and would be affected by implementation of right-in, right-out movements only at the intersection of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue, indicates the following.
• Summary: Over 50 percent of the trips using Railroa d Avenue in the study area are cut- through traffic, with only 15 percent of the trips traveling to and from the immediate neighborhood between Sunset Avenue and East Tabor A venue. • 38 percent of the trips along Railroad Avenue are destined for SR 12 • 62 percent of the trips along Railroad Avenue are locally destined, broken down as follows:
 46 percent are local Suisun City trips
61 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

15  16 percent are local non-Suisun City trips
• Only 15 percent of the local trips travel to and from immediate neighborhoods connecting directly to Railroad Avenue between Sunset Avenue and East Tabor Avenue. The remaining 47 percent travel to and from other neighborhoods.

3.3 Existing Intersection Operations
Existing intersection lane configurations and peak hour turning movement volumes were used to calculate the intersection LOS and queues during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. For each study intersection, the 60-minute period with the highest traffic volumes during each two-hour count period was identified as the respective peak hour of traffic. Table 4 presents the existing LOS analysis results using the analysis methodology described previously. Detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.

Table 4: Existing Conditions LOS Results Summary
Intersection Control 1 Peak Hour 2
Existing No Project
Delay 3 LOS 4

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor Avenue Signal
AM 20 B
PM 23 C

2. Clay Bank Road/East Tabor Avenue AWSC
AM 11 B
PM <10 A

3. Railroad Avenue/East Tabor Avenue SSSC
AM 12 (25) B (C)
PM 14 (28) B (D)

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor Avenue SSSC
AM <10 (22) A (C)
PM <10 (11) A (B)

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive AWSC
AM <10 A
PM <10 A

6. Emperor Drive/SR-12 Signal
AM 31 C
PM 31 C
Notes:

1. Traffic control type (SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Controlled; AWSC = All-Way Stop-Controlled; Signal = Signalized).

2. AM = Weekday morning peak hour, PM = weekday evening peak hour.

3. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections and all-way stop-controlled intersections. Side- street stop-controlled delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Approach Delay). Delay calculated per HCM 6 th Edition methodologies.

4. LOS designation per HCM 6 th Edition.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

Under existing conditions, all intersections operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours.

Therefore, all intersections operate at an acceptable LOS under Existing no Project peak hour condition. 62 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

16 3.4 Vehicle Queues
Although all intersections currently operate within the City’s standards of LOS D or better, there can be periodic vehicle spillback and delays for some individual movements. Table C-1 in Appendix C presents the AM and PM peak hour 95 th percentile queues for the project study intersections where vehicles queues may occasionally exceed the vehicle storage length. These queues are indicative of maximum design queues occurring during the peak traffic period.

63 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

17 4. Near-Term Conditions
This section discusses the Near-Term traffic conditions with and without the project alternatives. The Near-Term conditions analysis considers approved projects within the study area that are expected to b e constructed and occupied in the next 5 to 10 years.

4.1 Near-Term Forecasts
To assess future growth with planned development in the City of Suisun City and the City of Fairfield, several sources of data were reviewed, including the Fairfield-Suisun City travel model, and traffic growth trends as described in Suisun City’s and Fairfield’s General Plans. Traffic forecasts within the immediate study area were reviewed to ensure that known developments were adequately reflected in the forecasts.

Minor adjustments were made to the forecasts to balance traffic volumes between closely spaced intersections in the study area. Approved projects expected to be constructed and occupied in the study area in the Near-Term scenario and growth rates from the regional model were applied to reflect expected increases in traffic.

4.2 Near-Term Operations Analysis and Vehicle Queues
As shown in Table 5 , many of the intersections in each Near-Term scenario operate at an unsatisfactory level that exceeds the LOS thresholds of the two cities.

Table C-2 in Appendix C presents AM and PM peak hour 95 th percentile queues for movements where vehicle queues may occasionally exceed the vehicle storage length in the Near-Term and Near-Term plus Project conditions. These queues are indicative of maximum design queues occurring during the period o f peak traffic.
64 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

18 Table 5: Near-Term Conditions LOS Results Summary
Intersection Control 1 Peak
Hour 2
Near-Term No
Project
Near-Term with
Realignment
Near-Term with
Prohibited Lefts
Near-Term with
Signals
Near-Term with
Olive Extension
Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor
Avenue 5 Signal
AM
40 D 28 C 126 F 40 D 44 D
PM 44 D 29 C 59 E 48 D 48 D

2. Clay Bank Road/East
Tabor Avenue AWSC 6
AM
18 C 23 C 117 F 14 B 34 D
PM 33 D 104 F 73 F 11 B 100 F

3. Railroad Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue SSSC 6
AM
62 (> 120) F (F) -7 -7 45 (86) E (F) 27 C 11 (16) B (C) PM 62 (> 120) F (F) -7 -7 < 10 (10) A (A) 83 F 32 (53) D (F)

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor
Avenue SSSC 8
AM
< 10 (27) A (D) 61 F 87 (> 120) F (F) 30 (> 120) D (F) 35 D PM < 10 (15) A (C) 67 F < 10 (22) A (C) < 10 (34) A (D) 93 F

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail
Drive AWSC
AM
< 10 A -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 17 C
PM < 10 A -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 17 C

6. Emperor Drive/SR 12 5 Signal
AM 98 F -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 111 F
PM 115 F -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 106 F
Notes:

1. Traffic control type (SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Controlled; Signal = Signalized).

2. AM = Weekday morning peak hour, PM = weekday evening peak hour.

3. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections. Side-street stop-controlled delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Approach Delay). Delay calculated per HCM 6 th Edition methodologies.

4. LOS designation per HCM 6 th Edition.

5. Signal timings were optimized in all project scenarios.

6. Intersection traffic control type is signalized in the Near-Term with signals scenario.

7. Intersection does not exist in the Near-Term with realignment scenario.

8. Intersection traffic control type is signalized in the Near-Term realignment scenario and Olive Avenue extension scenario.

9. Delay and LOS results are not impacted by any of the project scenarios that occur solely along East Tabor Avenue.

Bold text indicates unacceptable operations.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.
65 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

19 5. Cumulative Conditions
This section discusses Cumulative traffic conditions with and without the project alternatives. The future conditions analysis considers development within the City of Suisun City and City of Fairfield as described in the General Plans.

5.1 Cumulative Traffic Forecasts
To assess future growth with planned development in the City of Suisun City and the City of Fairfield, several sources of data were reviewed, including the Fairfield-Suisun City travel model, and traffic growth trends as described in Suisun City’s and Fairfield’s General Plans. Traffic forecasts within the immediate study area were reviewed to ensure that known developments were adequately reflected in the forecasts.

Minor adjustments were made to the forecasts to balance traffic volumes between closely spaced intersections in the study area. The resulting cumulative forecasts are representative of conditions in the year 2040.

5.2 Cumulative Operations Analysis and Vehicle Queues
As shown in Table 6, many of the intersections in each Cumulative scenario operate at an unsatisfactory level outside of the cities’ LOS threshold.

Table C-3 in Appendix C presents AM and PM peak hour 95 th percentile queues for movements where
vehicle queues may occasionally exceed the vehicle storage length in the Cumulative and Cumulative plu s Project conditions. These queues are indicative of maximum design queues occurring during the period o f peak traffic.
66 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

20 Table 6: Cumulative Conditions LOS Results Summary
Intersection Control 1 Peak
Hour 2
Cumulative No
Project
Cumulative with
Realignment
Cumulative with
Prohibited Lefts
Cumulative with
Signals
Cumulative with
Olive Extension
Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4 Delay 3 LOS 4

1. Sunset Avenue/East Tabor
Avenue 5 Signal
AM 60 E 45 D > 120 F 78 E 53 D
PM 49 D 59 E > 120 F 47 D 66 E

2. Clay Bank Road/East
Tabor Avenue AWSC 6
AM 79 F 88 F > 120 F 13 B 78 F
PM 60 F > 120 F 107 F 27 C > 120 F

3. Railroad Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue SSSC 6
AM 58 (> 120) F (F)
-7 -7 36 (79) E (F) 32 C 13 (22) B (C)
PM 54 (> 120) F (F) -7 -7 17 (18) C (C) 116 F 59 (113) F (F)

4. Olive Avenue/East Tabor
Avenue SSSC 8
AM < 10 (19) A (C) 89 F 103 (> 120)
F (F) 29 (> 120) D (F) 42 E
PM < 10 (19) A (C) > 120 F 11 (108) B (F) 19 (> 120) C (F) > 120 F

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail
Drive AWSC
AM < 10 A
-9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 44 E
PM < 10 A -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 59 F

6. Emperor Drive/SR 12 5 Signal
AM 109 F -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 110 F
PM > 120 F -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 > 120 F
Notes:

1. Traffic control type (SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Controlled; Signal = Signalized).

2. AM = Weekday morning peak hour, PM = weekday evening peak hour.

4. LOS designation per HCM 6 th Edition.

5. Signal timings were optimized in all project scenarios.

6. Intersection traffic control type is signalized in the Cumulative with signals scenario.

7. Intersection does not exist in the Cumulative with realignment scenario.

8. Intersection traffic control type is signalized in the Cumulative realignment scenario and Olive Avenue extension scenario.

9. Delay and LOS results are not impacted by any of the project scenarios that occur solely along East Tabor Avenue.

Bold text indicates unacceptable operations.

Source: Fehr & Peers, January 2025.
67 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

21 6. Cost Estimate
The following section discusses the improvement measures and cost estimate ranges for each project alternative.

6.1 Project Alternatives Improvement Measures
Table 7 represents the improvement measures that were identified for each project alternative. Note that these are high-level improvement measures that were identified and should not serve as the only basis for deciding the full extent of the design and/or construction of each improvement. Further investigation and analysis should be conducted to determine the extent of design and construction necessary.

Table 7: Project Alternatives Improvement Measures
Project Alternative Int. # Improvement Measure
Railroad Avenue Realignment
1 Re-program traffic signal
3 Realignment: Construct new two-lane roadway with concrete median and sidewalks. Optional new traffic signal at Olive Avenue pending further traffic studies.

Intersection Closure: Construct new concrete sidewalk, restripe roadway, and install appropriate signage to indicate intersection closure. 4 Install new traffic signal and construct a northbound right turn pocket.

Prohibited Lefts at Railroad
Avenue
1 Re-program traffic signal
3 Construct raised curb extensions and concrete median with mountable curb and install appropriate signage indicating no left turns at the intersection.

Railroad Avenue Signalized
1 Re -program traffic signal
2 Install new traffic signal
3 Install new traffic signal and widen Railroad Ave nue into a four-lane-roadway.

Olive Avenue Extension
1 Re-program traffic signal
3 Construct raised curb extensions and concrete median with mountable curb and install appropriate signage indicating no left turns at the intersection. 4 Install new traffic signal and construct a northb ound right turn pocket. 6 Re-program traffic signal
Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

Figures 4 through 7 depict the location of each improvement measure fo r each project alternative and its overall cost range.

68 Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Air Base PkwyAir Base Pkwy
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Grande CirGrande Cir
Grande CirGrande Cir
Manor PlManor Pl
King/f_isher WayKing/f_isher Way
Falcon DrFalcon Dr Cormorant DrCormorant Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Villa CtVilla Ct

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
1 2
3 4
AWSC

XXXXXXXXXX X X X X
X
Reprogram
traﬀic signal
Construct new concrete sidewalk, restripe roadway, and
install appropriate signage to indicate intersection closure.

Construct new two-lane roadway with concrete median and sidewalks.

Optional new traﬀic signal at Olive Avenue pending further traﬀic studies.

Install new traﬀic
signal and construct
a northbound
right turn pocket
This project alternative would cost approximately $4.6M–$9.4M Notes:

1. These cost estimates are based on construction costs from similar projects in Northern and Southern California based on 2022 to 2024 cost data.

2. These cost estimates include an allowance for planning, engineering, environmental clearance, construction-related soft costs (such as mobilization and traﬀic control), construction management inspection, and contingency.

3. These cost estimates do not include any costs related to relocation or reconstruction of underground utilities that may or may not be present in the project vicinity or impacts to and potential right-of-way acquisition.

WC24-4088_4_ImpCost-1
Railroad Avenue Realignment Project Alternative — Improvements and Cost Estimate Figure 4
Study Intersection Signalized Intersection All Way Stop Controlled Intersection Proposed Realignment Road Closure
#
AWSC
XXXXX
69 Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Air Base PkwyAir Base Pkwy
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Grande CirGrande Cir
Grande CirGrande Cir
Manor PlManor Pl
King/f_isher WayKing/f_isher Way
Falcon DrFalcon Dr Cormorant DrCormorant Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Villa CtVilla Ct

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
1 2
3 4
AWSC

SSSC SSSC
FF FF
Reprogram
traﬀic signal
Construct raised curb extensions and concrete median with mountable curb and install appropriate signage indicating no left turns at the intersection.

This project alternative would cost approximately $250K–$440K Notes:

1. These cost estimates are based on construction costs from similar projects in Northern and Southern California based on 2022 to 2024 cost data.

WC24-4088_5_ImpCost-2
Prohibited Lefts at Railroad Avenue Project Alternative — Improvements and Cost Estimate Figure 5
Study Intersection Signalized Intersection All Way Stop Controlled Intersection Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection (Free East-West Movements on Tabor)
Right Turn Movements Only
#

AWSC SSSC
FF
70 Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Air Base PkwyAir Base Pkwy
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Grande CirGrande Cir
Grande CirGrande Cir
Manor PlManor Pl
King/f_isher WayKing/f_isher Way
Falcon DrFalcon Dr Cormorant DrCormorant Dr
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Villa CtVilla Ct

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
1 2
3 4
SSSC
Reprogram
traﬀic signal
Install new traﬀic signal
Install new traﬀic signal and widen
Railroad Avenue into a four-lane roadway
This project alternative would cost approximately $10.9M–$41.4M Notes:

1. These cost estimates are based on construction costs from similar projects in Northern and Southern California based on 2022 to 2024 cost data.

WC24-4088_6_ImpCost-3
Railroad Avenue Signalized Project Alternative — Improvements and Cost Estimate Figure 6
Study Intersection Signalized Intersection Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection (Free East-West Movements on Tabor)
#
SSSC
71 McCoy Creek
Laurel Creek
E Tabor AveE Tabor Ave
E Travis BlvdE Travis Blvd
Meadowlark DrMeadowlark Dr
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Railroad AveRailroad Ave
Pintail DrPintail Dr
Anderson DrAnderson Dr
Winters DrWinters Dr
Sunset AveSunset Ave
Sunset AveSunset AveGrizzly Island RdGrizzly Island Rd
Emperor DrEmperor Dr
Olive AveOlive Ave
Humphrey DrHumphrey Dr
Worley RdWorley Rd
Blossom AveBlossom Ave
Tolenas RdTolenas Rd
Clay Bank RdClay Bank Rd
Dover AveDover Ave

SUISUN CITY

FAIRFIELD
12 1
2 3
4 5
6 AWSC
AWSC
SSSC
FF FF
WC24-4088_7_ImpCost-4
Olive Avenue Extension Project Alternative —
Improvements and Cost Estimate
Figure 7
Study Intersection Signalized Intersection All Way Stop Controlled Intersection Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection (Free East-West Movements on Tabor)
Proposed Extension
#

AWSC SSSC
Right Turn Movements Only
FF
Reprogram
traﬀic signal
Reprogram
traﬀic signal
Construct raised curb extensions and concrete median with mountable curb and install appropriate signage indicating no left turns at the intersection.

Install new traﬀic
signal and construct
a northbound
right turn pocket
This project alternative would cost approximately $1.7M–$2.5M Notes:

1. These cost estimates are based on
construction costs from similar projects
in Northern and Southern California
based on 2022 to 2024 cost data.

2. These cost estimates include an
allowance for planning, engineering,
environmental clearance,
construction-related soft costs (such as
mobilization and traﬀic control),
construction management inspection,
and contingency.

3. These cost estimates do not include any
costs related to relocation or
reconstruction of underground utilities
that may or may not be present in the
project vicinity or impacts to and
potential right-of-way acquisition.
72 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

26 6.2 Project Alternatives Cost Estimates
Table 8 represents the approximate cost estimates for each project alternative that were calculated based on the improvement measure previously identif ied in Table 7.

Table 8: Project Alternative Cost Estimates Summary
Project Alternative Cost Minimum Cost Maximum
Railroad Avenue Realignment $ 4,600,000 $ 9,400,000 Prohibited Lefts at Railroad Avenue $ 250 ,000 $ 440 ,000 Railroad Avenue Signalized $ 10,900,000 $ 41,400,000
Olive Avenue Extension $ 1,700,000 $ 2,500,000
Notes:

1. These cost estimates are based on construction costs from similar projects in Northern and Southern California based on 2022 to 2024 cost data.

2. These cost estimates include an allowance for planning, engineering, environmental clearance, construction-related soft costs (such as mobilization, traffic control), construction management inspection, and contingency.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

Overall, various improvements must be made with eac h study alternative with cost estimates ranging from $250,000 to $41,400,000. The most cost-effective alternative that requires the least number of improvements is the right-in/right-out scenario where left turns would be prohibited to and from Railr oad Avenue along E Tabor Avenue (Intersection 3 in our study area). 73 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

27 7. Findings and Recommendations
The following section describes the study findings and recommendations.

Study Findings
The following is a summary of key findings of the traffic operations and safety evaluation. • All six study intersections currently operate at level of service (LOS) D or better conditions. • The greatest concentration of crashes along East Tabor Avenue from 2019 to 2023 occurred at the side-street stop-controlled intersection of East Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue where a total of 18 crashes occurred over the five-year window. Ten of the 18 crashes involved left turn movements at the intersection.
• Under Cumulative conditions for the year 2040, four of the six study intersections would operate at LOS E or F conditions with existing street configuration and traffic controls. The forecast growth for 2040 in the Fairfield-Suisun City travel model that was applied to develop cumulative volumes is greater in the current model version than the prior version of the model that was applied for the 2020 study. This increase in forecast growth resulted in higher volumes for the 2040 forecast year at the study intersections.
• The following is a summary of the Cumulative analysis of traffic operations for the three East Tabor Avenue corridor improvement options.
o Option A: Realignment of Railroad Avenue and the resulting e limination of the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection would result in LOS E or F conditions at the remaining three intersections along East Tabor Avenue.
o Option B: Providing right-in and right-out only movements at the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection by eliminating left turn movements would reduce crashes at the intersection but result in LOS F conditions at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Clay Bank Road and Sunset Avenue as lef t turn movements at Railroad Avenue would shift to these two locations.
o Option C: Installing traffic signals at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Railroad Avenue and Clay Bank Road would result in LOS F conditions at the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection and at the East Tabor Avenue/Olive Avenue minor streets.
• Achieving LOS D or better conditions at the intersections along East Tabor Avenue would require widening from two to four lanes that is inconsistent with the Suisun City or Fairfield General Plan Circulation Elements that call for the road to be two lanes. From prior conversations with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and Union Pacific (UP) conducted by City of Suisun City staff, it is anticipated that they would oppose widening of East Tabor Avenue at the UP rail crossing located between Clay Bay Road and Railroad Avenue. 74 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

28 • There is currently no dedicated funding source for installation of traffic signals at the intersections of East Tabor Avenue with Railroad Avenue and Clay Bank Road. The City of Fairfield prioritizes the installation of a future signal at East Tabor Avenue and Clay Bank Road on the study corridor.

The remaining 47 percent travel to and from other neighborhoods.

Study Recommendation
East Tabor Avenue between Sunset Avenue and Olive A venue Option B , which would provide right-in and right-out only m ovements at the East Tabor Avenue/ Railroad Avenue intersection and thereby eliminate all left turn movements, is the preferred measure for the following reasons.
• It provides the greatest safety benefit by eliminating the potential for left turn conflicts that were the cause of 56 percent of the 18 reported crashes at the intersection of East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue between 2019 and 2023.
• Option B is a low-cost improvement (approximately $250,000 to $440,000) that could be implemented relatively quickly.
• There is currently no dedicated funding to install traffic signals at the existing stop-controlled intersections along East Tabor at Railroad Avenue or Clay Bank Road. The estimated cost of installing traffic signals at these two locations is $10.9 million to 41.4 million. • Over 50 percent of the trips using Railroad Avenue in the study area are cut-through traffic, with only 15 percent of the trips traveling to and from the immediate neighborhood between Sunset Avenue and East Tabor Avenue.
• The City of Fairfield prioritizes the future installation of a traffic signal at the East Tabor Avenue/Clay Bank Road intersection over the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection. 75 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

29 • Option A, the realignment of Railroad Avenue, would result in LOS E or F conditions at the remaining three intersections along East Tabor Avenue.
• Prior conversations with the CPUC and UP conducted by City of Suisun City staff indicate that they are likely to oppose Option C (traffic signals at both Clay Bank Road and Railroad Avenue) as well as the widening of East Tabor Avenue from two to fo ur lanes. The widening of East Tabor Avenue is also inconsistent with the Suisun City or Fairfield General Plan Circulation Elements that call for the road to be two lanes.

76 Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Appendix A: Counts

77 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
5 6
7 20
19 17
33 29
136
89491 0 2 12 1 27
40 73
Peak Hour 9 4 6 0 19 1 0
0 2 0 4 22 1Count Total 15 11 16 0 42 2
0 9 140 0 0 0 0 68:45 AM 2 2 0 0 4
0 1 4 0 8 21
10 8:30 AM 3 2 2 0 7 0 0 1
0 0 0 2 0 5
8 7
8:15 AM 2 1 1 0 4 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 1
0 6 11
8:00 AM 3 0 1 0 4 0
1 0 0 0 1 3
0 0 6
2 7:30 AM 1 2 4 0 7 0 0 0
1 0 1 1 0 3
0 7 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 1 2 0 4
0 0 1
- 0% -HV% - 0% 3% 2% -
1 2
7:15 AM 1 1 3 0 5 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 0
West North South
7:00 AM 2 2 3
1 311 0 175 0 1 0157 0 172 334 1 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
3% - 0% - 0% 1%1% 1% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 1 217
1 0 575 2 314 0
0 0 0 0 19 03 0 0 1 0 5
3 1,372 0
HV 0 0 6 3 0
Count Total 0 1 350 264 0 344 540 1 1 4 2,397 0
348 1,3382 46 0 0 0 10 49 71 0 0 69
0 0 0 327 1,372
8:45 AM 0 0 76 34
0 0 63 0 55 0
287 1,339
8:30 AM 0 0 65 33 0 33 78
0 39 0 0 0 00 47 53 1 0 62
0 0 3 376 1,270
8:15 AM 0 0 43 42
0 0 94 0 31 0
382 1,059
8:00 AM 0 1 51 37 0 47 112
0 50 0 1 0 00 45 91 0 0 92
0 1 0 294 0
7:45 AM 0 0 58 45
0 0 70 0 37 0
218 0
7:30 AM 0 0 36 30 0 53 67
0 33 0 0 0 00 41 38 0 0 71
0 0 0 165 0
7:15 AM 0 0 10 25
0 0 54 0 23 07:00 AM 0 0 11 18 0 29 30

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.33
TOTAL 1.4% 0.90
TH RT
WB 0.8% 0.80
NB 1.2% 0.86
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.4% 0.91
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
27 49
1 12
N
Sunset Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveSunset Ave
E Tabor Ave
Driveway
1,372TEV:

0.9PHF: 3
0 1
4 2
0 1
334
172
507
393
0 175
0 311
486
329
0 157
217
1 375
648
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 78 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
100 0 0 0
200 0 0 0
0100
0 1
0 00
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 THLT
20 0 0 01 0
4 001 0 1
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0 1000 00 0 0 0
1 2
8:45 AM
1 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
00 0 0 00 0
0 2
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
3 8:00 AM
100 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
11 0 0 00 07:15 AM 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 07:00 AM
RT
19 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 5 0 0 0 00 1 3 0 0 1

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 0 0 42 0
Peak Hour 0 0 6 3
0 0 8 0 8 0Count Total 0 0 8 7 0 6 5
4 190 0 0 0 0 00 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 7 19
8:45 AM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 2 0
4 19
8:30 AM 0 0 2 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 4 20
8:15 AM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
4 23
8:00 AM 0 0 2 1 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 7 0
7:45 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 3 0 1 0
5 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
0 1 0 0 0 00 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 7 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 1
0 0 2 0 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 2 0 1 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 79 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
12 3
2 2
4 4
3 6
36 19110 0 3 5 0 3
8 18
Peak Hour 3 5 7 1 16 3 0
1 1 0 7 10 0Count Total 5 8 9 1 23 5
0 2 21 0 1 0 2 25:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 0 1 1
2 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 1
1 2
5:15 PM 1 0 1 0 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 2
5:00 PM 1 2 1 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1
3 4:30 PM 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 4 2
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 1 2 0 3
0 0 0
- 1% 0%HV% - 0% 0% 1% -
2 5
4:15 PM 2 2 2 1 7 1 0
0 0 0 2 5 0
West North South
4:00 PM 1 1 2
1 316 2 310 0 0 4206 0 172 251 4 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
2% - - 0% 100% 1%1% 1% 25%
Peak
Hour
All 0 2 271
6 0 612 3 636 0
0 0 0 1 16 03 1 0 2 0 5
1 1,539 0
HV 0 0 1 2 0
Count Total 0 3 524 414 0 338 494 0 8 5 3,043 0
370 1,5041 83 0 0 1 20 37 63 0 0 75
0 1 0 398 1,507
5:45 PM 0 0 63 45
1 0 77 0 82 0
386 1,521
5:30 PM 0 0 65 61 0 46 65
0 81 0 0 0 20 57 64 0 0 74
0 2 0 350 1,490
5:15 PM 0 1 64 43
1 0 70 0 80 0
373 1,539
5:00 PM 0 0 61 59 0 26 51
1 83 0 0 1 00 42 62 1 0 64
0 0 0 412 0
4:45 PM 0 0 75 44
0 0 97 0 81 0
355 0
4:30 PM 0 0 72 64 0 38 60
1 71 0 0 1 10 43 54 1 0 73
0 2 0 399 0
4:15 PM 0 0 60 50
2 0 82 0 75 04:00 PM 0 2 64 48 0 49 75

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 20.0% 0.63
TOTAL 1.0% 0.93
TH RT
WB 1.2% 0.85
NB 1.1% 0.88
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.6% 0.88
1 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 11
0 5
N
Sunset Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveSunset Ave
E Tabor Ave
Driveway
1,539TEV:

0.93PHF: 1
4 0
5 8
0 4
251
172
427
581
0 310
2 316
628
382
0 206
271
2 479
568
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 80 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
120 0 0 0
230 1 0 0
0110
0 0
0 01
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 THLT
30 0 0 00 0
7 001 0 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0 4201 00 0 1 0
1 2
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
1 5:30 PM
10 0 0 00 0
0 1
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
3 5:00 PM
000 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
10 0 0 00 04:15 PM 0
0 0
0 0 0
2 04:00 PM
RT
16 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 5 0 0 0 10 1 3 1 0 2

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 0 1 23 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 2
1 0 4 0 5 0Count Total 0 0 2 3 0 4 3
1 70 0 0 0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 9
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 11
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 4 16
5:15 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0
3 16
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
0 2 0 0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
7 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 10 0 1 1 0 1
0 0 0 4 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Sunset Ave Driveway
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 81 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 13
6 7
2 3
1 0
32 1340 0 1 0 0 9
20 12
Peak Hr 11 4 0 8 23 0 1
1 0 0 1 0 0Count Total 14 11 0 12 37 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 08:45 AM 1 1 0 1 3
0 0 0 0 0 1
3 8:30 AM 3 2 0 3 8 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0
8:15 AM 2 1 0 4 7 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 7 0
8:00 AM 2 1 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5 1
7 7:30 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 6
1 6 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 4 0 0 1 5
0 0 0
- - -HV% - 5% 3% - -
0 0
7:15 AM 0 3 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 2 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 279 00 0 0 189 275 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- - 1% - 3% 2%- 1% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 155 155
467 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 0 5 23 02 2 0 0 0 0
177 1,230 0
HV 0 7 4 0 0
Count Total 0 284 264 0 0 0 314 452 0 299 2,080 0
250 1,1590 0 0 44 0 500 0 35 37 0 0
66 0 53 298 1,230
8:45 AM 0 50 34 0
51 0 0 0 0 0
273 1,207
8:30 AM 0 37 48 0 0 0 43
0 0 0 56 0 500 0 37 66 0 0
85 0 41 338 1,111
8:15 AM 0 39 25 0
86 0 0 0 0 0
321 921
8:00 AM 0 31 40 0 0 0 55
0 0 0 72 0 330 0 54 72 0 0
56 0 38 275 0
7:45 AM 0 48 42 0
70 0 0 0 0 0
177 0
7:30 AM 0 37 31 0 0 0 43
0 0 0 37 0 220 0 29 45 0 0
36 0 12 148 0
7:15 AM 0 20 24 0
40 0 0 0 0 07:00 AM 0 22 20 0 0 0 18
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 1.8% 0.90
TOTAL 1.9% 0.91

TH RTUT LT TH RT UT LT
WB 0.9% 0.82
NB - -
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 3.5% 0.86
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
0 0
0 0
0 1
9 4
0 0
N
Clay Bank Rd
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor Ave
Clay Bank Rd
E Tabor Ave
1,230TEV:

0.91PHF: 177
279 456
430
0 275
189 464
434
0 155
155310
366
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 82 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 1 00 0 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
23 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 3 0 50 0 2 2 0 0
4 0 8 37 0
Peak Hour 0 7 4 0
7 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 7 7 0 0 0 4
3 210 0 0 1 0 00 0 0 1 0 0
2 0 1 8 23
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
7 17
8:30 AM 0 2 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 30 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 13
8:15 AM 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
5 16
8:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 2 0
7:45 AM 0 3 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 2 0 0
0 0 1 6 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 83 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
2 100 0 0 0 0 1
1 1
Peak Hr 7 11 0 6 24 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 8 14 0 9 31 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 05:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 5:30 PM 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 1 0 0 2 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 4:30 PM 1 2 0 1 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
3 9 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 2 4 0 0 6
0 0 0
- - -HV% - 3% 0% - -
0 0
4:15 PM 1 2 0 2 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 3 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 241 00 0 0 184 219 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- - 1% - 2% 2%- 2% 3%
Peak
Hour
All 0 175 237
396 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 0 3 24 04 7 0 0 0 0
148 1,204 0
HV 0 6 1 0 0
Count Total 0 374 432 0 0 0 360 453 0 294 2,309 0
240 1,1050 0 0 48 0 220 0 49 39 0 0
58 0 43 302 1,177
5:45 PM 0 40 42 0
50 0 0 0 0 0
280 1,153
5:30 PM 0 50 52 0 0 0 49
0 0 0 49 0 460 0 37 44 0 0
57 0 35 283 1,150
5:15 PM 0 53 51 0
44 0 0 0 0 0
312 1,204
5:00 PM 0 56 50 0 0 0 41
0 0 0 64 0 400 0 49 54 0 0
64 0 32 278 0
4:45 PM 0 41 64 0
40 0 0 0 0 0
277 0
4:30 PM 0 41 59 0 0 0 42
0 0 0 52 0 380 0 39 61 0 0
61 0 38 337 0
4:15 PM 0 39 48 0
64 0 0 0 0 04:00 PM 0 54 66 0 0 0 54
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 1.5% 0.94
TOTAL 2.0% 0.89

TH RTUT LT TH RT UT LT
WB 2.7% 0.85
NB - -
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.7% 0.86
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
N
Clay Bank Rd
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor Ave
Clay Bank Rd
E Tabor Ave
1,204TEV:

0.89PHF: 148
241 389
394
0 219
184 403
478
0 237
175412
332
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 84 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
24 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 3 0 30 0 4 7 0 0
3 0 6 31 0
Peak Hour 0 6 1 0
7 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 7 1 0 0 0 7
1 70 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 3 12
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 13
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 3 18
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 24
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 3 1 0 0
1 0 0 4 0
4:45 PM 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
5 0
4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 2 0 0
1 0 2 9 0
4:15 PM 0 1 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave N/A Clay Bank Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 85 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 12
6 6
0 0
2 2
28 12
WB 0.9% 0.79
NB 0.9% 0.85
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.2% 0.83
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB - -
TOTAL 1.0% 0.84
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 26 29 0 41 44

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
0 41 62 0 0 14
0 0 0 185 0
7:15 AM 0 0 37 30
0 0 13 0 32 0
0 0 0 317 0
7:45 AM 0 0 76 37
0 0 22 0 61 0
238 0
7:30 AM 0 0 63 23 0 59 89
0 54 0 0 0 0
400 1,140
8:00 AM 0 0 75 46 0 80 126
0 79 0 0 0 00 83 103 0 0 22
0 40 71 0 0 33
0 0 0 416 1,371
8:15 AM 0 0 43 40
0 0 25 0 64 0
0 0 0 269 1,351
8:45 AM 0 0 46 35
0 0 26 0 36 0
266 1,399
8:30 AM 0 0 51 58 0 44 54
0 39 0 0 0 0
256 1,2070 40 0 0 0 00 58 52 0 0 25
Count Total 0 0 417 298 0 446 601 0 0 0 2,347 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 257
0 0 180 0 405 0
0 0 0 0 14 04 0 0 0 0 3
0 1,399 0
HV 0 0 2 3 0 2
102 0 243 0 0 0146 0 262 389 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
1% - - - - 1%1% 1% - - 0% -HV% - - 1% 2% -
0 0
7:15 AM 0 2 2 0 4 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 2 2 0 0 4 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 2 0 0 3
0 1 0 0 5 1
6 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 6
0 0
8:15 AM 3 1 1 0 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 4
8:00 AM 1 3 1 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 2 2 1 0 5
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 8:30 AM 3 2 1 0 6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 10 0 0 0 0 0
15 13
Peak Hr 5 6 3 0 14 1 0
1 0 0 3 0 0Count Total 12 14 7 0 33 2
50 0 1 0 0 7
0 1
0 0
0 0
7 5
0 0
N
Railroad Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveRailroad Ave
E Tabor Ave
1,399TEV:

0.84PHF:
389
262 651
500
0 243
102345
408
0 146
257403
491
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 86 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
0 0 0 4 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
4 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 00 0 2 0 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 5 13
8:15 AM 0 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
3 12
8:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 14
8:30 AM 0 0 1 2 0 1 1
0 1 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 6 19
8:45 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 1 0 0 0
5 210 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 33 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 3
0 0 3 0 4 0Count Total 0 0 4 8 0 5 9
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
14 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 3 0 0 0 00 2 4 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 1 0 0
1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0
7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
3 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 87 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 1
1 0
0 0
0 0
2 2
WB 1.7% 0.77
NB 1.3% 0.85
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.6% 0.91
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB - -
TOTAL 1.2% 0.85
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 80 45 0 59 90

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
1 44 57 0 0 36
0 0 0 392 0
4:15 PM 0 0 61 33
0 0 36 0 82 0
0 0 0 331 0
4:45 PM 0 0 79 42
0 0 28 0 65 0
297 0
4:30 PM 0 0 75 53 0 48 62
0 65 0 0 0 0
306 1,326
5:00 PM 0 0 67 40 0 51 54
0 53 0 0 0 00 37 61 0 0 34
0 37 48 0 0 28
0 0 0 319 1,253
5:15 PM 0 0 63 42
0 0 40 0 67 0
0 0 0 310 1,226
5:45 PM 0 0 56 35
0 0 30 0 57 0
291 1,247
5:30 PM 0 0 77 36 0 42 68
0 73 0 0 0 0
282 1,2020 69 0 0 0 00 39 58 0 0 25
Count Total 0 0 558 326 1 357 498 0 0 0 2,528 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 295
0 0 257 0 531 0
0 0 0 0 16 07 0 0 3 0 2
0 1,326 0
HV 0 0 2 1 0 1
134 0 265 0 0 0173 1 188 270 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
1% - - - - 1%1% 3% - - 2% -HV% - - 1% 1% 0%
0 0
4:15 PM 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 1 2 1 0 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 3 1 0 4
0 1 0 0 1 0
0 4:30 PM 1 3 2 0 6 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 1 4 0 0 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
2 0
Peak Hr 3 8 5 0 16 0 0
1 1 0 2 0 0Count Total 4 13 5 0 22 0
01 0 1 0 0 2
0 0
0 1
0 0
2 0
0 0
N
Railroad Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveRailroad Ave
E Tabor Ave
1,326TEV:

0.85PHF:
270
188 459
561
1 265
134399
361
0 173
295468
404
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 88 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
0 0 0 4 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
2 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 12
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 16
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 10
5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 1 3
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 9
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 60 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 22 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 1
0 0 3 0 2 0Count Total 0 0 3 1 0 2 11
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
16 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Railroad Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 2 0 0 0 00 1 7 0 0 3
0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 2
1 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 1 00 1 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 89 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
4 4
12 7
2 0
3 1
33 21
WB 0.9% 0.76
NB 2.9% 0.73
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.4% 0.79
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB - -
TOTAL 1.2% 0.83
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 49 2 0 0 83

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
0 0 98 0 0 3
0 0 0 139 0
7:15 AM 0 0 89 1
0 0 4 0 1 0
0 0 0 274 0
7:45 AM 0 0 160 2
0 0 9 0 2 0
195 0
7:30 AM 0 0 118 3 0 1 141
0 4 0 0 0 0
353 961
8:00 AM 0 0 139 2 0 5 203
0 6 0 0 0 00 1 178 0 0 6
0 0 107 0 0 4
0 0 0 357 1,179
8:15 AM 1 0 81 5
0 0 6 0 2 0
0 0 0 178 1,086
8:45 AM 1 0 74 11
0 0 4 0 0 0
198 1,182
8:30 AM 0 0 78 7 0 0 89
0 0 0 0 0 0
197 9300 0 0 0 0 00 2 104 0 0 5
Count Total 2 0 788 33 0 9 1,003 0 0 0 1,891 0
Peak
Hour
All 1 0 498
0 0 41 0 15 0
0 0 0 0 14 06 0 0 1 0 0
0 1,182 0
HV 0 0 6 1 0 0
25 0 10 0 0 012 0 7 629 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% - - - - 1%0% 1% - - 4% -HV% 0% - 1% 8% -
2 2
7:15 AM 0 2 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 1 1 0 4
0 0 0 0 7 5
4 7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1
8:15 AM 3 2 0 0 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7 0
8:00 AM 1 3 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 2 1 0 3
0 0 0 0 2 1
0 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0
19 14
Peak Hr 7 6 1 0 14 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 8 12 2 0 22 0
60 0 0 0 0 15
0 0
0 0
0 0
15 6
0 0
N
Olive Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveOlive Ave
E Tabor Ave
1,182TEV:

0.83PHF:
629
7 636
508
0 10
2535
19 0
12 498511
655
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 90 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
2 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 11
8:15 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 9
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 14
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 14
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 130 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 22 0
Peak Hour 0 0 6 1
0 0 2 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 7 1 0 0 12
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
14 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 6 0 0 1
0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 91 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
3 3
WB 1.8% 0.77
NB 0.0% 0.83
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.86
Date: 05/23/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB - -
TOTAL 1.2% 0.83
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 153 12 0 2 141

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
0 3 96 0 0 6
0 0 0 314 0
4:15 PM 0 0 124 7
0 0 6 0 0 0
0 0 0 247 0
4:45 PM 1 0 128 9
0 0 5 0 4 0
238 0
4:30 PM 0 0 131 3 0 1 103
0 2 0 0 0 0
242 1,041
5:00 PM 0 0 119 8 0 2 96
0 2 0 0 0 01 3 90 0 0 8
0 2 87 0 0 5
0 0 0 231 958
5:15 PM 0 0 125 12
0 0 3 0 3 0
0 0 0 251 957
5:45 PM 0 0 120 3
0 0 4 0 1 0
233 953
5:30 PM 0 0 129 6 0 2 109
0 2 0 0 0 0
220 9350 2 0 0 0 00 0 91 0 0 4
Count Total 1 0 1,029 60 1 15 813 0 0 0 1,976 0
Peak
Hour
All 1 0 536
0 0 41 0 16 0
0 0 0 0 12 07 0 0 0 0 0
0 1,041 0
HV 0 0 4 0 0 1
25 0 8 0 0 031 1 9 430 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% - - - - 1%11% 2% - - 0% -HV% 0% - 1% 0% 0%
0 1
4:15 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 3 0 0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 2 2 0 0 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1
5:00 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
1 2
Peak Hr 4 8 0 0 12 0 1
1 0 0 1 0 0Count Total 5 14 0 0 19 0
20 0 1 0 0 1
0 0
0 0
1 0
1 2
0 0
N
Olive Ave
E Tabor Ave
E Tabor AveOlive Ave
E Tabor Ave
1,041TEV:

0.83PHF:
430
9 440
545
1 8
2533
40 0
31 536568
456
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 92 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
0 0 0 3 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
2 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
4:45 PM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 11
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 12
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 10
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 10
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 70 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 19 0
Peak Hour 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 5 0 0 1 13
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
12 0
Interval
Start
E Tabor Ave E Tabor Ave Olive Ave N/A
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 0 0 00 1 7 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0 0 0 0Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 93 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 4
4 1
0 5
1 1
16 1060 1 2 1 0 3
6 9
Peak Hour 5 4 3 1 13 0 1
1 0 1 2 1 0Count Total 11 10 6 1 28 0
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 08:45 AM 2 3 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 1 0
3 8:30 AM 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 1
0 0
8:15 AM 0 1 1 0 2 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1
8:00 AM 1 3 2 1 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 2
2 7:30 AM 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0
- 2% 0%HV% - 4% 3% 0% -
0 0
7:15 AM 2 2 1 0 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 1 1 1
0 99 14 59 0 0 4646 0 44 250 3 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
2% - - 0% 1% 2%0% 2% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 24 134
4 0 149 40 109 0
0 0 0 1 13 04 0 0 2 0 1
75 794 0
HV 0 1 4 0 0
Count Total 0 45 235 91 0 79 388 3 79 114 1,336 0
164 71012 18 0 2 5 120 6 42 1 0 12
0 10 14 157 778
8:45 AM 0 9 32 13
0 0 17 9 12 0
162 794
8:30 AM 0 7 26 18 0 5 39
4 14 0 0 5 150 6 39 0 0 21
0 12 25 227 767
8:15 AM 0 7 34 17
2 0 36 4 8 0
232 626
8:00 AM 0 5 29 10 0 13 83
4 25 0 0 12 180 10 75 0 0 28
0 17 17 173 0
7:45 AM 0 8 40 12
1 0 14 2 12 0
135 0
7:30 AM 0 4 31 7 0 15 53
3 12 0 1 11 60 14 39 0 0 9
0 7 7 86 0
7:15 AM 0 4 25 11
0 0 12 2 8 07:00 AM 0 1 18 3 0 10 18

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 08/21/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.8% 0.82
TOTAL 1.6% 0.86
TH RT
WB 1.3% 0.76
NB 1.7% 0.75
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.5% 0.85
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
3 6
0 1
N
Emperor Dr
Pintail Dr
Pintail DrEmperor Dr
Pintail Dr
Emperor Dr
794TEV:

0.86PHF: 75
46 0
121
41 0
3 250
44 297
193
0 59
14 99
172
136
0 46
134
24 204
424
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 94 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
000 0 0 1
000 0 0 1
0000
0 0
0 00
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 1
0 0 0
0 THLT
20 0 0 10 0
2 010 0 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0 2000 00 0 0 0
0 2
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
2 8:30 AM
10 0 0 10 0
1 1
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 8:00 AM
000 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
00 0 0 00 07:15 AM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 07:00 AM
RT
13 0
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 0 0 0 10 0 4 0 0 2

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 0 1 28 0
Peak Hour 0 1 4 0
0 0 5 0 1 0Count Total 0 3 5 3 0 0 10
5 160 0 0 0 0 00 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 12
8:45 AM 0 2 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
2 13
8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 7 16
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0
1 12
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0
7:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 2 0 0 1
0 0 0 3 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 95 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2 1
0 1
3 2
2 3
14 1020 1 5 2 0 6
7 5
Peak Hour 2 1 1 0 4 2 2
2 0 1 6 2 0Count Total 10 1 2 1 14 3
0 3 01 0 0 0 1 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 1 1
1 5:30 PM 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 1
1 0
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0 0 1 2 0
0 1 0
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
1 4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 5 0 0 0 5
0 0 0
- 2% 0%HV% - 0% 1% 1% -
0 2
4:15 PM 1 0 0 1 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 2 0 0
0 65 52 145 0 4 3768 0 24 156 7 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% - 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 1% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 46 190
10 0 107 107 268 0
0 0 0 0 4 01 0 0 1 0 0
40 834 0
HV 0 0 1 1 0
Count Total 0 83 396 123 0 58 290 6 67 71 1,586 0
226 83416 43 0 1 11 70 5 42 1 0 15
0 6 16 193 788
5:45 PM 0 13 47 25
2 0 22 8 31 0
198 781
5:30 PM 0 10 50 13 0 6 29
14 29 0 1 11 130 8 41 2 0 9
2 9 4 217 783
5:15 PM 0 14 42 14
2 0 19 14 42 0
180 752
5:00 PM 0 9 51 16 0 5 44
12 20 0 0 7 80 10 37 1 0 15
2 6 7 186 0
4:45 PM 0 6 53 11
1 0 8 18 36 0
200 0
4:30 PM 0 10 45 16 0 9 28
10 37 0 0 7 80 11 39 0 0 13
0 10 8 186 0
4:15 PM 0 8 55 12
1 0 6 15 30 04:00 PM 0 13 53 16 0 4 30

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 08/21/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.81
TOTAL 0.5% 0.92
TH RT
WB 0.5% 0.92
NB 0.4% 0.87
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.89
1 1
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
6 2
0 2
N
Emperor Dr
Pintail Dr
Pintail DrEmperor Dr
Pintail Dr
Emperor Dr
834TEV:

0.92PHF: 40
37 4
81 105
0 7
156
24 187
339
0 145
52 65
262
129
0 68
190
46 304
261
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 96 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 0
110 0 2 0
210 0 2 0
0000
1 0
0 10
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 THLT
50 0 1 00 0
6 000 0 0
1 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 1Count Total
0 5100 00 1 0 0
2 4
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
2 5:30 PM
10 0 0 00 0
1 2
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
1 5:00 PM
000 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
10 0 0 00 04:15 PM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 04:00 PM
RT
4 0
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 1 0 0 1

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 1 0 14 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 1
0 0 2 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 6 4 0 0 1
0 40 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 9
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
1 8
5:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 9
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 10
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 3 2
0 0 1 0 0 0
2 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Pintail Dr Pintail Dr Emperor Dr Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 97 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
2 10
1 1
1 0
16 1340 0 0 0 1 8
10 4
Peak Hour 83 123 0 2 208 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2Count Total 168 243 3 3 417 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 08:45 AM 24 30 0 0 54
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 8:30 AM 29 30 0 1 60 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0
8:15 AM 15 29 1 0 45 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 6 4
8:00 AM 28 35 0 1 64 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0
0 7:30 AM 16 29 0 0 45 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 50 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 22 33 0 0 55
0 0 0
- 0% 0%HV% - 2% 21% 4% 0%
1 0
7:15 AM 17 26 0 1 44 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 17 31 2
2 149 28 33 0 17 2947 2 41 940 11 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% - 6% 0% 1% 11%5% 13% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 81 374
27 0 273 39 45 0
0 1 0 1 208 0121 0 0 0 0 0
151 1,903 0
HV 0 2 79 2 0
Count Total 3 198 835 124 2 52 1,705 26 38 251 3,618 0
428 1,7632 3 0 5 4 190 3 184 3 0 19
1 3 27 442 1,759
8:45 AM 1 43 118 24
4 0 32 2 2 0
430 1,838
8:30 AM 2 33 124 23 0 2 187
6 4 0 3 1 240 2 179 2 0 27
4 8 35 463 1,903
8:15 AM 0 30 128 24
5 0 37 9 19 0
424 1,855
8:00 AM 0 17 118 11 1 8 191
11 8 0 3 8 330 10 211 3 0 44
6 9 52 521 0
7:45 AM 0 33 47 13
2 0 40 5 5 0
495 0
7:30 AM 0 18 104 13 1 17 249
3 1 0 4 4 310 6 289 1 0 28
0 1 30 415 0
7:15 AM 0 13 105 10
7 0 46 1 3 07:00 AM 0 11 91 6 0 4 215

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
HWY 12 HWY 12 Lawler Ranch Pkwy Emperor Dr 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 08/21/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 1.0% 0.74
TOTAL 10.9% 0.91
TH RT
WB 12.4% 0.84
NB 0.0% 0.81
Peak Hour: 7:15 AM 8:15 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 16.5% 0.86
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
8 4
1 0
N
Emperor Dr
HWY 12
HWY 12Lawler Ranch
Pkwy
HWY 12
Emperor Dr
1,903TEV:

0.91PHF: 151
29 17
197
120
0 11
940
41 994
426
2 33
28 149
210
117
0 47
374
81 502
1,240
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 98 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
000 0 0 0
000 0 0 0
0000
0 0
0 00
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 THLT
00 0 0 00 0
0 000 0 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0 0000 00 0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 8:30 AM
00 0 0 00 0
0 0
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 8:00 AM
000 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
00 0 0 00 07:15 AM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 07:00 AM
RT
208 0
Interval
Start
HWY 12 HWY 12 Lawler Ranch Pkwy Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 10 2 121 0 0 0

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
2 0 1 417 0
Peak Hour 0 2 79 2
0 0 0 2 1 0Count Total 0 3 163 2 0 3 240
54 2230 0 0 0 0 00 0 30 0 0 0
1 0 0 60 224
8:45 AM 0 1 23 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
45 209
8:30 AM 0 0 29 0 0 0 30
1 0 0 0 0 00 0 29 0 0 0
1 0 0 64 208
8:15 AM 0 0 15 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
55 194
8:00 AM 0 1 26 1 0 1 34
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 33 0 0 0
0 0 0 45 0
7:45 AM 0 1 20 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
44 0
7:30 AM 0 0 16 0 0 1 28
0 0 0 0 0 10 0 26 0 0 0
0 0 0 50 0
7:15 AM 0 0 17 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 17 0 0 1 30

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
HWY 12 HWY 12 Lawler Ranch Pkwy Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 99 www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
0 0
0 2
0 5
2 2
11 920 1 1 0 5 2
2 2
Peak Hour 55 38 2 0 95 0 0
0 0 1 1 2 5Count Total 119 87 2 2 210 0
0 2 00 0 0 0 0 05:45 PM 8 8 0 0 16
1 1 0 2 0 0
2 5:30 PM 17 6 0 0 23 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0
0 0
5:15 PM 14 13 0 0 27 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 16 11 2 0 29 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0
0 4:30 PM 17 12 0 0 29 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 40 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 10 5 0 1 16
0 0 0
0% 2% 0%HV% 0% 1% 5% 0% -
0 0
4:15 PM 17 12 0 1 30 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 20 20 0
0 105 15 28 0 18 15174 0 26 724 25 1
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% - 0% 0% 0% 4%0% 5% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 4 282 1,066
53 2 177 29 43 0
0 0 0 0 95 038 0 0 2 0 0
105 2,588 0
HV 0 2 53 0 0
Count Total 7 507 2,036 303 0 63 1,427 33 29 202 4,911 0 608 2,5883 6 0 5 6 310 8 179 2 0 17
6 3 23 653 2,548
5:45 PM 1 74 229 47
7 1 30 2 7 0
638 2,484
5:30 PM 2 70 288 46 0 6 162
2 11 0 3 3 310 2 184 7 0 34
4 3 20 689 2,407
5:15 PM 0 66 266 29
9 0 24 8 4 0
568 2,323
5:00 PM 1 72 283 52 0 10 199
5 5 0 3 6 270 14 173 8 1 23
7 4 25 589 0
4:45 PM 1 50 219 33
6 0 16 3 5 0
561 0
4:30 PM 0 54 268 32 0 7 162
4 4 0 3 2 160 10 176 6 0 14
2 2 29 605 0
4:15 PM 2 67 227 30
8 0 19 2 1 04:00 PM 0 54 256 34 0 6 192

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
HWY 12 HWY 12 Lawler Ranch Pkwy Emperor Dr 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 08/21/2024
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.82
TOTAL 3.7% 0.94
TH RT
WB 4.9% 0.89
NB 1.3% 0.79
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 3.6% 0.94
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 2
5 0
N
Emperor Dr
HWY 12
HWY 12Lawler Ranch
Pkwy
HWY 12
Emperor Dr
2,588TEV:

0.94PHF: 105
15 18
138
322
0 25
724
26 775
1,112
0 28
15 105
149
216
1 174
1,066
282
1,526
938
4 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] 100 www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
000 0 0 0
000 0 0 0
0000
0 0
0 00
0 THLT
00000000
0 00
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 THLT
10 0 1 00 0
1 000 0 0
1 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 1Count Total
0 1000 00 0 0 0
1 1
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM
00 0 0 00 0
0 0
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 5:00 PM
000 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
00 0 0 00 04:15 PM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 04:00 PM
RT
95 0
Interval
Start
HWY 12 HWY 12 Lawler Ranch Pkwy Emperor Dr
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 38 0 0 2

RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 0 2 210 0
Peak Hour 0 2 53 0
0 0 2 0 0 0Count Total 0 3 115 1 0 0 87
16 950 0 0 0 0 00 0 8 0 0 0
0 0 0 23 95
5:45 PM 0 1 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
27 101
5:30 PM 0 1 16 0 0 0 6
0 0 0 0 0 00 0 13 0 0 0
0 0 0 29 104
5:15 PM 0 0 14 0
0 0 2 0 0 0
16 115
5:00 PM 0 0 16 0 0 0 11
0 0 0 0 0 10 0 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 29 0
4:45 PM 0 0 10 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
30 0
4:30 PM 0 1 16 0 0 0 12
0 0 0 0 0 10 0 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 40 0
4:15 PM 0 0 17 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 19 1 0 0 20

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

Appendix B: LOS Calculation Sheets
102
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 318 336 105.5% 19.7 2.7 B
Through
Right Turn 157 160 102.0% 6.4 1.7 A
Subtotal 475 496 104.4% 15.4 2.0 B
Left Turn 1 1 90.0% 10.6 23.0 B
Through 1 1 50.0% 8.6 18.4 A
Right Turn 3 4 123.3% 8.5 15.2 A
Subtotal 5 5 102.0% 22.2 22.3 C
Left Turn 1 1 70.0% 0.0 0.0 A
Through 199 210 105.3% 32.5 13.5 C
Right Turn 154 157 101.9% 24.0 14.5 C
Subtotal 354 367 103.7% 28.9 13.7 C
Left Turn 192 192 100.2% 29.1 3.1 C
Through 334 350 104.6% 10.5 1.4 B
Right Turn 1 2 180.0% 5.6 5.3 A
Subtotal 527 544 103.1% 17.3 1.5 B
Total 1,361 1,412 103.7% 19.8 3.5 B

25.4 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 269 279 103.9% 11.6 3.3 B
Through
Right Turn 162 165 102.0% 5.1 1.4 A
Subtotal 431 445 103.2% 9.2 2.5 A
Left Turn 155 164 105.7% 10.5 1.1 B
Through 149 157 105.6% 11.5 1.8 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 304 321 105.6% 11.0 1.3 B
Left Turn
Through 200 214 106.9% 15.2 2.6 C
Right Turn 294 306 104.0% 9.6 2.4 A
Subtotal 494 520 105.2% 12.0 2.4 B
Total 1,229 1,285 104.6% 10.8 1.8 B
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
103
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenuve/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 102 104 102.2% 79.0 35.3 F
Through
Right Turn 243 259 106.6% 8.8 3.6 A
Subtotal 345 363 105.3% 24.5 9.6 C
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 268 277 103.5% 6.0 1.0 A
Right Turn 150 159 105.9% 5.6 1.0 A
Subtotal 418 436 104.3% 5.9 1.0 A
Left Turn 262 267 101.8% 12.1 5.7 B
Through 392 412 105.2% 7.3 2.9 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 654 679 103.8% 9.1 3.9 A
Total 1,417 1,478 104.3% 11.7 3.1 B

34.8 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 25 27 109.2% 26.7 7.9 D
Through
Right Turn 10 12 115.0% 8.0 7.1 A
Subtotal 35 39 110.9% 21.8 7.2 C
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 499 519 104.1% 2.0 0.3 A
Right Turn 12 14 115.8% 1.7 0.3 A
Subtotal 511 533 104.3% 2.0 0.2 A
Left Turn 7 7 102.9% 3.8 2.0 A
Through 629 649 103.2% 1.9 0.6 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 636 656 103.2% 1.9 0.6 A
Total 1,182 1,228 103.9% 2.6 0.5 A
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
104
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 87 85 97.6% 7.4 1.7 A
Through 13 25 193.1% 5.1 1.8 A
Right Turn 57 58 102.3% 5.4 1.9 A
Subtotal 157 168 107.2% 6.4 1.4 A
Left Turn 1 0 20.0% 0.0 0.0 A
Through 52 50 95.4% 7.0 1.0 A
Right Turn 66 70 105.3% 4.9 1.1 A
Subtotal 119 119 100.3% 5.7 1.0 A
Left Turn 21 20 96.2% 6.7 1.5 A
Through 125 124 99.4% 6.4 0.4 A
Right Turn 40 41 103.0% 4.5 0.6 A
Subtotal 186 186 99.8% 6.1 0.4 A
Left Turn 52 53 101.9% 7.7 1.8 A
Through 250 257 102.7% 8.2 1.3 A
Right Turn 3 4 120.0% 2.8 2.6 A
Subtotal 305 313 102.7% 8.1 1.3 A
Total 767 787 102.6% 7.0 0.9 A

7.6 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/Highway 12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 149 151 101.1% 27.0 3.7 C
Through 28 28 98.6% 33.6 15.1 C
Right Turn 33 36 107.9% 5.6 2.0 A
Subtotal 210 214 101.8% 24.0 4.0 C
Left Turn 17 16 95.9% 27.7 12.4 C
Through 29 44 152.4% 23.2 7.4 C
Right Turn 151 150 99.5% 14.7 4.2 B
Subtotal 197 211 107.0% 17.5 3.8 B
Left Turn 81 84 103.2% 34.2 6.7 C
Through 374 379 101.2% 20.0 3.5 C
Right Turn 47 48 101.3% 3.4 1.0 A
Subtotal 502 510 101.5% 21.0 3.0 C
Left Turn 43 42 98.4% 47.8 13.1 D
Through 940 959 102.1% 40.7 8.0 D
Right Turn 11 13 115.5% 8.3 6.1 A
Subtotal 994 1,014 102.0% 40.7 7.9 D
Total 1,903 1,949 102.4% 31.3 4.5 C
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
105
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 316 315 99.7% 17.5 2.0 B
Through 2 2 85.0% 3.0 9.4 A
Right Turn 310 311 100.2% 7.5 1.1 A
Subtotal 628 627 99.9% 12.6 1.3 B
Left Turn
Through 4 3 82.5% 20.3 22.9 C
Right Turn 1 2 180.0% 1.7 3.0 A
Subtotal 5 5 102.0% 16.5 18.8 B
Left Turn 2 2 100.0% 24.4 33.3 C
Through 271 265 97.9% 44.3 28.4 D
Right Turn 206 207 100.7% 36.9 29.3 D
Subtotal 479 475 99.1% 41.1 28.4 D
Left Turn 172 176 102.4% 26.4 3.7 C
Through 251 252 100.3% 10.1 1.6 B
Right Turn 4 4 87.5% 4.2 8.1 A
Subtotal 427 432 101.1% 17.0 2.0 B
Total 1,539 1,539 100.0% 23.1 9.9 C

38.4 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 241 234 97.0% 7.9 1.2 A
Through
Right Turn 148 147 99.4% 4.3 1.0 A
Subtotal 389 381 97.9% 6.5 1.0 A
Left Turn 175 170 97.0% 9.4 1.2 A
Through 237 235 99.3% 10.9 1.2 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 412 405 98.3% 10.3 1.0 B
Left Turn
Through 184 188 101.9% 14.1 1.5 B
Right Turn 219 220 100.3% 9.1 1.4 A
Subtotal 403 407 101.0% 11.5 1.2 B
Total 1,204 1,193 99.1% 9.6 0.8 A
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
106
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 134 134 99.8% 66.4 29.2 F
Through
Right Turn 265 265 99.8% 7.8 3.5 A
Subtotal 399 398 99.8% 28.2 12.1 D
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 295 285 96.7% 9.6 1.9 A
Right Turn 183 183 99.9% 9.3 1.7 A
Subtotal 478 468 97.9% 9.5 1.9 A
Left Turn 189 192 101.7% 8.3 2.7 A
Through 269 274 102.0% 5.7 2.3 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 458 467 101.9% 6.8 2.5 A
Total 1,335 1,333 99.9% 14.1 4.3 B

38.7 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 25 23 93.6% 13.1 5.1 B
Through
Right Turn 8 9 113.8% 5.7 4.9 A
Subtotal 33 33 98.5% 11.1 4.3 B
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 529 520 98.3% 2.1 0.4 A
Right Turn 31 31 99.7% 1.5 0.4 A
Subtotal 560 551 98.4% 2.0 0.4 A
Left Turn 10 9 87.0% 2.6 2.3 A
Through 433 442 102.0% 0.9 0.2 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 443 451 101.7% 0.9 0.3 A
Total 1,036 1,034 99.8% 1.8 0.3 A
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
107
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Existing Condition
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 65 63 97.4% 10.3 1.8 B
Through 52 57 109.0% 10.4 2.6 B
Right Turn 145 154 106.4% 8.9 1.8 A
Subtotal 262 274 104.7% 9.5 1.7 A
Left Turn 4 4 87.5% 3.3 3.4 A
Through 37 37 101.1% 6.4 1.1 A
Right Turn 40 40 100.3% 3.2 0.5 A
Subtotal 81 81 100.0% 4.6 0.9 A
Left Turn 46 46 100.0% 6.1 1.2 A
Through 190 191 100.7% 7.2 1.2 A
Right Turn 68 68 100.3% 4.8 1.1 A
Subtotal 304 306 100.5% 6.5 0.8 A
Left Turn 24 24 100.4% 5.9 1.1 A
Through 156 160 102.3% 6.5 0.7 A
Right Turn 7 7 105.7% 2.8 1.9 A
Subtotal 187 191 102.2% 6.3 0.7 A
Total 834 852 102.1% 7.3 0.8 A

9.7 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/Highway 12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 106 106 99.7% 34.3 6.5 C
Through 15 16 108.0% 29.3 19.4 C
Right Turn 28 26 93.6% 9.9 5.8 A
Subtotal 149 148 99.4% 30.8 6.1 C
Left Turn 18 17 96.1% 22.0 10.7 C
Through 15 18 122.7% 21.7 10.5 C
Right Turn 105 105 100.3% 10.7 2.7 B
Subtotal 138 141 102.2% 13.7 3.5 B
Left Turn 286 294 102.9% 37.4 6.0 D
Through 1,066 1,060 99.4% 26.0 3.3 C
Right Turn 174 170 97.6% 6.5 1.5 A
Subtotal 1,526 1,524 99.9% 26.1 3.4 C
Left Turn 26 23 88.8% 46.6 17.9 D
Through 724 728 100.5% 44.3 15.5 D
Right Turn 25 27 107.6% 11.6 10.3 B
Subtotal 775 778 100.4% 43.2 14.9 D
Total 2,588 2,591 100.1% 30.7 6.4 C
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 9/9/2024
108
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 328 99.3% 19.6 2.1 B
Through
Right Turn 170 167 98.3% 6.7 1.2 A
Subtotal 500 495 98.9% 15.1 1.8 B
Left Turn 10 9 89.0% 19.3 12.8 B
Through 10 12 115.0% 37.3 12.1 D
Right Turn 10 9 91.0% 7.5 4.5 A
Subtotal 30 30 98.3% 24.3 8.2 C
Left Turn 10 9 93.0% 79.7 42.6 E
Through 210 214 101.8% 91.1 32.7 F
Right Turn 250 253 101.1% 83.0 30.9 F
Subtotal 470 476 101.2% 86.8 31.4 F
Left Turn 290 279 96.2% 33.6 6.7 C
Through 410 406 99.0% 12.9 2.0 B
Right Turn 10 10 98.0% 7.8 7.5 A
Subtotal 710 695 97.9% 21.3 4.3 C
Total 1,710 1,695 99.1% 38.3 10.2 D

73.9 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 429 99.9% 34.0 16.4 D
Through
Right Turn 270 274 101.4% 8.9 2.3 A
Subtotal 700 703 100.5% 24.4 11.1 C
Left Turn 180 177 98.1% 13.8 3.1 B
Through 160 166 103.8% 13.2 1.7 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 340 343 100.8% 13.5 2.1 B
Left Turn
Through 250 229 91.7% 15.9 2.4 C
Right Turn 360 331 92.1% 7.6 0.8 A
Subtotal 610 561 91.9% 11.0 1.0 B
Total 1,650 1,607 97.4% 17.6 5.0 C

27.3 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
109
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 170 114 66.9% 382.2 78.7 F
Through
Right Turn 260 183 70.3% 299.8 67.4 F
Subtotal 430 297 69.0% 329.6 69.0 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 330 338 102.5% 6.1 0.9 A
Right Turn 260 260 99.8% 6.2 0.9 A
Subtotal 590 598 101.3% 6.1 0.9 A
Left Turn 300 308 102.8% 17.4 5.6 C
Through 440 443 100.6% 10.3 3.6 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 740 751 101.5% 13.2 4.4 B
Total 1,760 1,646 93.5% 61.7 3.1 F
308.0
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 60 57 95.3% 31.3 13.1 D
Through
Right Turn 20 20 101.5% 14.1 10.1 B
Subtotal 80 78 96.9% 26.9 12.7 D
Left Turn 20 20 102.0% 14.1 5.2 B
Through
Right Turn 10 11 108.0% 7.7 6.8 A
Subtotal 30 31 104.0% 12.6 5.1 B
Left Turn 10 8 81.0% 5.5 5.2 A
Through 540 472 87.4% 2.0 0.2 A
Right Turn 40 37 91.8% 1.5 0.3 A
Subtotal 590 517 87.6% 2.0 0.2 A
Left Turn 10 10 95.0% 4.3 2.9 A
Through 670 682 101.8% 2.4 1.2 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 691 101.7% 2.5 1.2 A
Total 1,380 1,317 95.4% 4.2 1.5 A

24.3 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
110
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 100 93 93.4% 8.2 1.0 A
Through 20 30 149.5% 5.6 3.0 A
Right Turn 60 61 101.0% 6.6 1.1 A
Subtotal 180 184 102.2% 7.4 0.8 A
Left Turn 10 9 92.0% 5.7 5.0 A
Through 60 64 106.8% 7.7 1.3 A
Right Turn 70 70 99.4% 5.0 0.7 A
Subtotal 140 143 102.1% 6.4 0.9 A
Left Turn 30 29 96.7% 6.1 1.5 A
Through 130 135 103.8% 7.4 1.2 A
Right Turn 70 72 102.9% 4.8 0.9 A
Subtotal 230 236 102.6% 6.6 1.0 A
Left Turn 60 59 98.8% 9.1 1.8 A
Through 300 297 99.0% 9.9 2.1 A
Right Turn 10 10 104.0% 7.3 7.0 A
Subtotal 370 367 99.1% 9.8 2.0 A
Total 920 929 101.0% 8.0 1.0 A

8.8 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 150 150 100.1% 34.9 6.5 C
Through 30 35 117.7% 41.4 12.4 D
Right Turn 50 48 95.8% 8.2 2.0 A
Subtotal 230 233 101.5% 30.8 5.5 C
Left Turn 50 50 100.0% 36.2 7.8 D
Through 30 41 137.7% 24.2 6.7 C
Right Turn 160 163 101.7% 20.6 3.9 C
Subtotal 240 254 105.8% 24.2 2.9 C
Left Turn 90 85 94.3% 38.2 5.3 D
Through 840 842 100.2% 25.6 3.1 C
Right Turn 50 48 96.6% 5.5 1.1 A
Subtotal 980 975 99.5% 25.8 3.0 C
Left Turn 60 52 86.2% 177.2 47.2 F
Through 1,340 1,234 92.1% 175.9 51.9 F
Right Turn 20 18 90.5% 155.2 67.1 F
Subtotal 1,420 1,304 91.8% 175.6 51.6 F
Total 2,870 2,766 96.4% 98.0 24.0 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
111
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 400 405 101.1% 21.1 3.0 C
Through 10 10 98.0% 20.3 9.9 C
Right Turn 460 468 101.8% 12.9 1.1 B
Subtotal 870 883 101.4% 16.7 1.5 B
Left Turn
Through 10 9 89.0% 29.5 19.9 C
Right Turn 10 10 95.0% 9.2 4.7 A
Subtotal 20 18 92.0% 20.6 11.4 C
Left Turn 10 9 90.0% 114.0 60.3 F
Through 290 274 94.4% 121.9 24.7 F
Right Turn 230 211 91.9% 118.8 22.8 F
Subtotal 530 494 93.2% 120.4 23.4 F
Left Turn 190 172 90.3% 31.3 3.6 C
Through 300 268 89.4% 14.0 2.8 B
Right Turn 10 9 90.0% 9.8 6.3 A
Subtotal 500 449 89.8% 20.6 2.2 C
Total 1,920 1,844 96.0% 44.0 5.9 D

90.4 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 410 417 101.6% 77.9 49.6 F
Through
Right Turn 180 182 101.2% 21.7 50.9 C
Subtotal 590 599 101.5% 61.8 48.8 F
Left Turn 230 233 101.4% 20.1 8.2 C
Through 330 322 97.5% 23.6 13.3 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 555 99.1% 22.4 11.5 C
Left Turn
Through 250 196 78.3% 15.6 1.4 C
Right Turn 430 326 75.8% 7.8 0.7 A
Subtotal 680 522 76.7% 10.7 0.9 B
Total 1,830 1,676 91.6% 33.2 17.6 D

38.4 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
112
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 290 123 42.3% 424.5 89.2 F
Through
Right Turn 280 116 41.4% 370.7 82.7 F
Subtotal 570 239 41.9% 397.9 84.3 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 380 375 98.6% 10.3 0.5 B
Right Turn 360 363 100.8% 10.6 0.5 B
Subtotal 740 738 99.7% 10.5 0.5 B
Left Turn 200 192 95.9% 23.8 6.7 C
Through 390 402 103.0% 13.7 5.6 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 594 100.6% 16.8 5.8 C
Total 1,900 1,570 82.6% 62.2 7.1 F
344.0
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 70 68 96.4% 16.5 4.7 C
Through
Right Turn 10 11 109.0% 5.7 3.4 A
Subtotal 80 78 98.0% 15.3 4.2 C
Left Turn 10 9 90.0% 10.3 5.9 B
Through
Right Turn 10 9 93.0% 3.4 2.9 A
Subtotal 20 18 91.5% 9.3 6.3 A
Left Turn 10 7 68.0% 4.7 2.7 A
Through 570 424 74.4% 2.1 0.4 A
Right Turn 80 59 73.4% 1.4 0.3 A
Subtotal 660 490 74.2% 2.0 0.4 A
Left Turn 20 19 97.0% 4.1 2.3 A
Through 510 517 101.4% 1.7 1.1 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 530 537 101.2% 1.7 1.1 A
Total 1,290 1,123 87.0% 3.0 0.8 A

14.4 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
113
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 100 91 90.7% 12.1 1.9 B
Through 60 68 112.5% 12.4 3.1 B
Right Turn 150 138 91.7% 11.2 2.5 B
Subtotal 310 296 95.4% 11.7 2.0 B
Left Turn 10 9 93.0% 5.1 2.2 A
Through 40 40 101.0% 6.5 1.0 A
Right Turn 40 39 98.3% 4.1 0.5 A
Subtotal 90 89 98.9% 5.4 0.7 A
Left Turn 50 51 101.0% 9.7 2.5 A
Through 240 248 103.2% 10.6 2.4 B
Right Turn 90 90 99.6% 8.2 1.9 A
Subtotal 380 388 102.0% 10.0 2.0 A
Left Turn 30 27 88.3% 7.0 1.4 A
Through 180 177 98.4% 6.8 0.7 A
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 5.4 1.4 A
Subtotal 220 214 97.1% 6.7 0.6 A
Total 1,000 986 98.6% 9.4 1.2 A

10.9 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 110 110 100.4% 42.4 6.5 D
Through 20 18 92.0% 52.5 22.7 D
Right Turn 50 54 107.8% 16.8 6.6 B
Subtotal 180 183 101.5% 36.4 7.8 D
Left Turn 30 31 103.3% 34.1 9.5 C
Through 20 20 101.0% 36.6 11.1 D
Right Turn 110 109 98.6% 20.2 6.3 C
Subtotal 160 160 99.8% 25.6 5.0 C
Left Turn 290 270 93.0% 107.5 37.5 F
Through 1,560 1,533 98.2% 112.5 47.0 F
Right Turn 180 179 99.4% 86.9 47.7 F
Subtotal 2,030 1,981 97.6% 109.7 45.5 F
Left Turn 50 49 97.4% 150.7 67.1 F
Through 1,170 1,143 97.7% 148.8 74.9 F
Right Turn 70 71 101.0% 114.7 70.9 F
Subtotal 1,290 1,263 97.9% 147.0 74.3 F
Total 3,660 3,586 98.0% 114.5 38.1 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
114
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Realignment
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 322 97.5% 31.7 4.5 C
Through
Right Turn 170 172 101.4% 7.2 2.0 A
Subtotal 500 494 98.8% 23.2 3.5 C
Left Turn 10 9 89.0% 40.5 10.5 D
Through 10 11 110.0% 30.2 15.4 C
Right Turn 10 9 89.0% 13.2 14.3 B
Subtotal 30 29 96.0% 32.3 7.8 C
Left Turn 10 10 95.0% 48.3 31.9 D
Through 210 221 105.4% 45.5 20.5 D
Right Turn 250 258 103.1% 35.6 16.9 D
Subtotal 470 489 103.9% 40.6 18.6 D
Left Turn 290 288 99.3% 36.1 6.0 D
Through 410 426 103.9% 12.9 2.3 B
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 9.9 8.1 A
Subtotal 710 724 102.0% 22.1 3.0 C
Total 1,710 1,736 101.5% 27.8 6.1 C

45.2 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 421 98.0% 43.1 18.3 E
Through
Right Turn 270 272 100.8% 9.3 4.5 A
Subtotal 700 693 99.0% 30.1 11.7 D
Left Turn 180 185 102.7% 15.1 2.6 C
Through 160 169 105.4% 14.8 4.4 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 340 354 104.0% 15.1 2.8 C
Left Turn
Through 250 257 102.8% 28.9 13.9 D
Right Turn 360 368 102.2% 14.5 4.8 B
Subtotal 610 625 102.4% 20.6 8.1 C
Total 1,650 1,672 101.3% 23.4 6.9 C

24.5 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
115
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Realignment
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 590 588 99.7% 17.4 8.6 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 588 99.7% 17.4 8.6 C
Left Turn
Through 610 625 102.5% 1.7 0.8 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 610 625 102.5% 1.7 0.8 A
Total 1,200 1,213 101.1% 9.5 4.4 A

11.4 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 230 233 101.3% 37.0 4.7 E
Through
Right Turn 280 283 101.2% 12.3 2.5 B
Subtotal 510 516 101.2% 23.5 3.8 C
Left Turn 20 21 102.5% 51.4 17.5 F
Through
Right Turn 10 10 96.0% 21.6 13.8 C
Subtotal 30 30 100.3% 42.9 13.2 E
Left Turn 10 10 99.0% 56.4 19.8 F
Through 280 280 99.9% 62.3 10.3 F
Right Turn 300 302 100.8% 55.8 11.7 F
Subtotal 590 592 100.3% 58.8 10.8 F
Left Turn 310 307 99.0% 116.9 47.7 F
Through 370 379 102.3% 66.8 42.2 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 685 100.8% 91.3 44.7 F
Total 1,810 1,824 100.8% 60.6 18.1 F
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12 /4/2024
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Realignment
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 590 588 99.7% 17.4 8.6 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 588 99.7% 17.4 8.6 C
Left Turn
Through 610 625 102.5% 1.7 0.8 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 610 625 102.5% 1.7 0.8 A
Total 1,200 1,213 101.1% 9.5 4.4 A

11.4 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 230 233 101.3% 37.0 4.7 E
Through
Right Turn 280 283 101.2% 12.3 2.5 B
Subtotal 510 516 101.2% 23.5 3.8 C
Left Turn 20 21 102.5% 51.4 17.5 F
Through
Right Turn 10 10 96.0% 21.6 13.8 C
Subtotal 30 30 100.3% 42.9 13.2 E
Left Turn 10 10 99.0% 56.4 19.8 F
Through 280 280 99.9% 62.3 10.3 F
Right Turn 300 302 100.8% 55.8 11.7 F
Subtotal 590 592 100.3% 58.8 10.8 F
Left Turn 310 307 99.0% 116.9 47.7 F
Through 370 379 102.3% 66.8 42.2 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 685 100.8% 91.3 44.7 F
Total 1,810 1,824 100.8% 60.6 18.1 F
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12 /4/2024
116
SimTraffic Post-Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Railroad Ave Realignment
Near Term w/ Realignment
PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 400 402 100.5% 26.2 3.2 C
Through 10 11 107.0% 20.7 15.9 C
Right Turn 460 458 99.5% 12.7 2.3 B
Subtotal 870 871 100.1% 19.0 2.2 B
Left Turn
Through 10 11 107.0% 29.1 17.6 C
Right Turn 10 12 117.0% 10.2 5.6 B
Subtotal 20 22 112.0% 21.6 12.7 C
Left Turn 10 8 82.0% 38.2 31.4 D
Through 290 291 100.5% 53.3 26.1 D
Right Turn 230 234 101.6% 47.3 27.4 D
Subtotal 530 533 100.6% 50.6 26.7 D
Left Turn 190 180 94.9% 33.5 5.6 C
Through 300 293 97.6% 10.9 1.6 B
Right Turn 10 10 95.0% 6.5 6.7 A
Subtotal 500 483 96.5% 18.8 2.8 B
Total 1,920 1,909 99.4% 28.5 8.5 C

40.1 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 410 364 88.8% 247.8 20.3 F
Through
Right Turn 180 155 86.3% 200.3 38.0 F
Subtotal 590 519 88.0% 234.4 21.6 F
Left Turn 230 223 96.8% 86.9 41.0 F
Through 330 317 96.0% 106.8 50.4 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 540 96.3% 98.5 46.5 F
Left Turn
Through 250 257 102.8% 18.7 2.8 C
Right Turn 430 442 102.8% 11.9 2.7 B
Subtotal 680 699 102.8% 14.5 1.5 B
Total 1,830 1,758 96.1% 103.7 17.6 F

48.8 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12 /4/2024
117
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Realignment
Volume and Delay by Movement HPM Peak our
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 740 669 90.3% 80.8 5.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 740 669 90.3% 80.8 5.0 F
Left Turn
Through 680 699 102.9% 1.4 0.2 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 699 102.9% 1.4 0.2 A
Total 1,420 1,368 96.3% 41.9 2.3 E

52.5 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 360 362 100.5% 92.5 55.2 F
Through
Right Turn 290 294 101.2% 63.2 54.2 F
Subtotal 650 655 100.8% 79.9 55.6 F
Left Turn 10 11 111.0% 45.9 17.6 E
Through
Right Turn 10 13 126.0% 9.1 3.3 A
Subtotal 20 24 118.5% 23.6 5.8 C
Left Turn 10 9 85.0% 70.5 25.4 F
Through 290 266 91.8% 75.0 2.9 F
Right Turn 440 385 87.5% 65.8 5.0 F
Subtotal 740 660 89.1% 69.6 3.8 F
Left Turn 220 221 100.6% 78.2 22.4 F
Through 310 328 105.7% 29.0 15.2 D
Right Turn
Subtotal 530 549 103.6% 48.9 18.0 E
Total 1,940 1,888 97.3% 66.6 19.6 F
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2 024
118
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 430 437 101.7% 34.3 3.1 C
Through
Right Turn 220 214 97.5% 6.8 1.6 A
Subtotal 650 652 100.3% 25.1 3.1 C
Left Turn 10 8 83.0% 57.1 18.9 E
Through 10 9 90.0% 52.6 29.4 D
Right Turn 10 12 115.0% 18.3 16.0 B
Subtotal 30 29 96.0% 42.5 13.7 D
Left Turn 10 11 112.0% 117.7 48.7 F
Through 210 208 99.0% 116.5 40.3 F
Right Turn 250 248 99.2% 107.1 38.3 F
Subtotal 470 467 99.4% 111.4 38.7 F
Left Turn 590 402 68.1% 252.4 19.1 F
Through 350 240 68.5% 220.9 10.0 F
Right Turn 10 6 63.0% 173.7 106.6 F
Subtotal 950 648 68.2% 240.9 13.5 F
Total 2,100 1,796 85.5% 126.0 12.4 F
208.6
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 405 94.1% 168.1 71.3 F
Through
Right Turn 270 252 93.1% 145.7 64.9 F
Subtotal 700 656 93.7% 160.5 66.4 F
Left Turn 180 174 96.8% 17.5 3.6 C
Through 160 160 99.8% 13.8 1.6 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 340 334 98.2% 15.9 2.4 C
Left Turn
Through 490 395 80.5% 168.8 24.8 F
Right Turn 270 224 82.8% 54.1 7.1 F
Subtotal 760 618 81.3% 129.0 18.9 F
Total 1,800 1,608 89.4% 116.6 27.7 F
134.9
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
119
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 260 266 102.2% 6.7 1.4 A
Subtotal 260 266 102.2% 6.7 1.4 A
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 330 316 95.6% 24.1 1.5 C
Right Turn 260 253 97.2% 23.9 1.6 C
Subtotal 590 568 96.3% 24.0 1.5 C
Left Turn
Through 760 612 80.5% 85.5 17.1 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 760 612 80.5% 85.5 17.1 F
Total 1,610 1,446 89.8% 44.5 3.7 E

53.9 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 80 16 19.9% 842.9 104.8 F
Through
Right Turn 20 4 20.5% 835.8 128.3 F
Subtotal 100 20 20.0% 397.2 429.2 F
Left Turn 20 11 55.0% 505.2 367.4 F
Through
Right Turn 10 7 68.0% 515.7 352.3 F
Subtotal 30 18 59.3% 149.5 184.0 F
Left Turn 10 9 85.0% 16.0 12.0 C
Through 540 527 97.7% 3.4 0.3 A
Right Turn 40 40 99.3% 2.8 0.3 A
Subtotal 590 576 97.6% 3.6 0.3 A
Left Turn 10 10 103.0% 134.0 73.5 F
Through 670 592 88.3% 176.5 62.9 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 602 88.5% 176.4 62.6 F
Total 1,400 1,216 86.8% 87.3 21.8 F
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
120
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 520 522 100.4% 57.1 15.1 E
Through 10 11 111.0% 64.5 20.7 E
Right Turn 600 601 100.1% 24.4 8.9 C
Subtotal 1,130 1,134 100.3% 40.1 10.5 D
Left Turn
Through 10 10 99.0% 60.0 24.4 E
Right Turn 10 12 117.0% 13.1 10.1 B
Subtotal 20 22 108.0% 35.2 14.9 D
Left Turn 10 9 88.0% 116.1 50.0 F
Through 290 263 90.6% 138.0 11.3 F
Right Turn 230 206 89.6% 129.2 9.9 F
Subtotal 530 478 90.1% 134.4 10.1 F
Left Turn 390 386 99.0% 48.4 9.3 D
Through 200 202 100.8% 18.2 3.1 B
Right Turn 10 11 109.0% 13.9 9.6 B
Subtotal 600 599 99.8% 37.9 7.8 D
Total 2,280 2,232 97.9% 59.4 6.5 E
109.2
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 410 392 95.7% 184.0 53.3 F
Through
Right Turn 180 178 98.8% 128.0 93.5 F
Subtotal 590 570 96.6% 166.9 64.5 F
Left Turn 230 224 97.4% 24.0 6.6 C
Through 330 319 96.6% 26.5 10.2 D
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 543 96.9% 25.7 8.5 D
Left Turn
Through 350 349 99.7% 46.5 23.1 E
Right Turn 260 265 102.0% 6.8 2.6 A
Subtotal 610 614 100.6% 29.2 14.0 D
Total 1,760 1,727 98.1% 72.6 23.1 F

85.7 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
121
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 280 275 98.3% 7.1 0.9 A
Subtotal 280 275 98.3% 7.1 0.9 A
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 380 372 97.9% 10.0 1.0 A
Right Turn 360 339 94.1% 9.8 1.2 A
Subtotal 740 711 96.1% 9.9 1.1 A
Left Turn
Through 610 615 100.8% 5.1 2.8 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 610 615 100.8% 5.1 2.8 A
Total 1,630 1,601 98.2% 7.6 1.1 A

6.7 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 90 92 102.7% 22.3 6.2 C
Through
Right Turn 10 9 92.0% 13.8 15.1 B
Subtotal 100 102 101.6% 22.0 6.2 C
Left Turn 10 10 97.0% 11.9 7.0 B
Through
Right Turn 10 9 93.0% 4.9 3.7 A
Subtotal 20 19 95.0% 9.8 5.1 A
Left Turn 10 8 80.0% 5.1 1.4 A
Through 570 558 97.9% 2.7 0.4 A
Right Turn 80 81 101.6% 1.8 0.3 A
Subtotal 660 647 98.1% 2.6 0.3 A
Left Turn 20 23 114.5% 4.6 1.6 A
Through 510 513 100.5% 0.9 0.2 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 530 536 101.1% 1.1 0.2 A
Total 1,310 1,303 99.5% 3.7 0.9 A
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
122
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 330 100.0% 20.5 1.5 C
Through
Right Turn 170 171 100.6% 6.2 2.2 A
Subtotal 500 501 100.2% 15.6 1.1 B
Left Turn 10 9 88.0% 35.0 16.4 D
Through 10 11 106.0% 39.0 14.4 D
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 15.4 14.4 B
Subtotal 30 30 99.7% 32.8 6.9 C
Left Turn 10 10 101.0% 82.5 33.6 F
Through 210 216 102.8% 93.7 31.7 F
Right Turn 250 251 100.4% 83.8 31.8 F
Subtotal 470 477 101.5% 88.5 31.0 F
Left Turn 290 284 97.9% 36.7 7.5 D
Through 410 418 101.8% 14.8 2.0 B
Right Turn 10 9 93.0% 13.2 7.7 B
Subtotal 710 711 100.1% 24.0 4.2 C
Total 1,710 1,719 100.5% 39.8 9.7 D

58.9 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue Signal Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 432 100.3% 25.9 3.4 C
Through
Right Turn 270 268 99.4% 6.0 1.6 A
Subtotal 700 700 100.0% 18.1 2.2 B
Left Turn 180 184 102.3% 20.8 2.8 C
Through 160 163 101.6% 12.8 1.9 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 340 347 101.9% 17.0 1.9 B
Left Turn
Through 250 247 98.8% 12.2 2.2 B
Right Turn 360 368 102.3% 5.6 0.8 A
Subtotal 610 615 100.9% 8.2 1.2 A
Total 1,650 1,662 100.7% 14.3 1.5 B

26.9 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
123
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 170 168 98.6% 28.2 6.3 C
Through
Right Turn 260 266 102.3% 6.9 1.3 A
Subtotal 430 434 100.9% 15.5 3.4 B
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 330 332 100.6% 15.8 3.0 B
Right Turn 260 266 102.2% 14.7 3.0 B
Subtotal 590 598 101.3% 15.3 3.0 B
Left Turn 300 304 101.4% 72.3 7.8 E
Through 440 442 100.5% 21.9 4.3 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 740 747 100.9% 42.4 5.9 D
Total 1,760 1,778 101.0% 26.8 3.1 C

63.0 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 60 59 98.2% 278.4 182.6 F
Through
Right Turn 20 17 87.0% 297.6 232.0 F
Subtotal 80 76 95.4% 280.9 185.7 F
Left Turn 20 19 94.5% 51.3 39.6 F
Through
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 115.2 72.6 F
Subtotal 30 29 96.7% 71.1 53.3 F
Left Turn 10 10 98.0% 11.1 5.6 B
Through 540 543 100.6% 4.6 0.5 A
Right Turn 40 41 101.3% 3.8 0.6 A
Subtotal 590 593 100.6% 4.6 0.5 A
Left Turn 10 11 112.0% 27.5 37.5 D
Through 670 674 100.7% 31.2 35.3 D
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 686 100.8% 31.1 35.3 D
Total 1,380 1,384 100.3% 29.5 18.6 D
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
124
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 400 420 105.1% 19.8 2.2 B
Through 10 11 112.0% 13.4 11.2 B
Right Turn 460 466 101.3% 10.8 1.6 B
Subtotal 870 898 103.2% 15.1 1.2 B
Left Turn
Through 10 10 96.0% 49.5 19.2 D
Right Turn 10 10 102.0% 13.4 8.8 B
Subtotal 20 20 99.0% 28.5 9.8 C
Left Turn 10 8 81.0% 131.3 35.7 F
Through 290 266 91.8% 133.2 10.4 F
Right Turn 230 218 94.9% 125.1 10.2 F
Subtotal 530 493 92.9% 129.4 9.5 F
Left Turn 190 173 91.3% 32.6 4.2 C
Through 300 282 94.1% 14.4 2.6 B
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 9.2 7.4 A
Subtotal 500 466 93.2% 21.0 2.7 C
Total 1,920 1,876 97.7% 47.6 1.6 D
112.3
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 410 419 102.2% 17.8 3.3 B
Through
Right Turn 180 183 101.7% 5.2 3.3 A
Subtotal 590 602 102.1% 13.9 3.1 B
Left Turn 230 220 95.6% 16.2 1.8 B
Through 330 329 99.6% 11.1 1.6 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 549 97.9% 13.2 1.0 B
Left Turn
Through 250 207 82.9% 8.7 1.0 A
Right Turn 430 348 80.8% 5.1 0.4 A
Subtotal 680 555 81.6% 6.4 0.5 A
Total 1,830 1,705 93.2% 11.2 1.3 B

16.5 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
125
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 290 157 54.2% 332.6 31.8 F
Through
Right Turn 280 155 55.5% 280.8 28.7 F
Subtotal 570 313 54.9% 307.6 34.0 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 380 380 99.9% 38.7 7.4 D
Right Turn 360 371 103.1% 36.6 7.5 D
Subtotal 740 751 101.4% 37.7 7.4 D
Left Turn 200 202 101.2% 59.8 14.3 E
Through 390 398 102.1% 22.9 6.9 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 600 101.8% 35.6 9.7 D
Total 1,900 1,664 87.6% 83.2 5.7 F
310.0
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 70 68 97.4% 34.5 35.3 D
Through
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 32.3 49.6 D
Subtotal 80 79 98.4% 33.8 35.8 D
Left Turn 10 8 84.0% 17.5 12.3 C
Through
Right Turn 10 10 99.0% 25.7 33.7 D
Subtotal 20 18 91.5% 20.7 16.4 C
Left Turn 10 9 85.0% 8.7 4.2 A
Through 570 464 81.3% 6.5 1.5 A
Right Turn 80 62 77.3% 5.6 1.6 A
Subtotal 660 534 80.9% 6.4 1.6 A
Left Turn 20 19 94.5% 4.6 2.9 A
Through 510 523 102.6% 3.1 2.9 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 530 542 102.3% 3.2 2.8 A
Total 1,290 1,173 90.9% 7.1 4.5 A
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
126
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 370 377 102.0% 30.4 3.6 C
Through
Right Turn 220 211 95.7% 8.5 1.5 A
Subtotal 590 588 99.6% 22.5 2.4 C
Left Turn 10 10 96.0% 47.5 27.1 D
Through 10 11 106.0% 35.0 24.7 D
Right Turn 10 11 106.0% 19.9 9.3 B
Subtotal 30 31 102.7% 35.4 11.8 D
Left Turn 10 11 109.0% 69.5 38.7 E
Through 210 215 102.5% 67.3 21.8 E
Right Turn 250 249 99.8% 55.4 20.7 E
Subtotal 470 476 101.2% 61.2 20.9 E
Left Turn 340 341 100.2% 69.3 31.8 E
Through 420 432 102.9% 33.7 21.2 C
Right Turn 10 12 119.0% 35.7 31.1 D
Subtotal 770 785 101.9% 49.6 26.9 D
Total 1,860 1,879 101.0% 43.8 11.8 D

53.1 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 422 98.1% 64.4 59.1 F
Through
Right Turn 270 270 99.9% 29.6 64.5 D
Subtotal 700 691 98.8% 51.5 57.9 F
Left Turn 180 176 97.7% 14.8 3.7 B
Through 160 161 100.8% 13.0 3.7 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 340 337 99.1% 14.1 3.3 B
Left Turn
Through 310 327 105.6% 40.5 25.0 E
Right Turn 280 285 101.6% 11.4 1.9 B
Subtotal 590 612 103.7% 26.6 13.7 D
Total 1,630 1,640 100.6% 34.3 27.3 D

53.5 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
127
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 260 267 102.6% 16.1 8.4 C
Subtotal 260 267 102.6% 16.1 8.4 C
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 330 331 100.3% 14.1 4.2 B
Right Turn 260 265 102.0% 12.2 3.7 B
Subtotal 590 596 101.0% 13.3 4.0 B
Left Turn
Through 590 601 101.8% 5.4 2.4 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 601 101.8% 5.4 2.4 A
Total 1,440 1,464 101.6% 10.6 3.5 B

15.3 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue
Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 160 159 99.6% 35.9 5.6 E
Through
Right Turn 30 33 109.7% 14.7 8.6 B
Subtotal 190 192 101.2% 32.3 5.1 D
Left Turn 20 20 99.0% 41.9 16.7 E
Through
Right Turn 10 12 118.0% 21.1 24.8 C
Subtotal 30 32 105.3% 35.2 18.5 E
Left Turn 10 11 112.0% 51.3 29.0 F
Through 540 536 99.2% 39.4 3.4 E
Right Turn 40 39 98.0% 34.8 9.3 D
Subtotal 590 586 99.4% 39.4 3.3 E
Left Turn 260 264 101.4% 50.9 12.5 F
Through 420 430 102.3% 19.8 7.1 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 693 102.0% 32.3 9.2 D
Total 1,490 1,504 100.9% 34.8 4.3 D

51.3 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
128
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 80 81 101.8% 12.8 2.8 B
Through 70 80 114.4% 10.5 3.5 B
Right Turn 50 49 97.8% 9.4 3.0 A
Subtotal 200 210 105.2% 11.1 2.7 B
Left Turn 10 10 96.0% 14.2 14.0 B
Through 140 141 100.9% 22.3 8.5 C
Right Turn 240 241 100.2% 19.7 9.0 C
Subtotal 390 391 100.4% 20.6 8.6 C
Left Turn 70 69 98.4% 10.4 2.8 B
Through 130 134 103.4% 10.7 2.7 B
Right Turn 70 74 106.3% 8.2 1.8 A
Subtotal 270 278 102.9% 10.0 2.1 B
Left Turn 60 60 99.5% 21.8 7.7 C
Through 300 294 98.0% 22.6 8.2 C
Right Turn 10 11 108.0% 21.4 18.5 C
Subtotal 370 365 98.5% 22.5 7.8 C
Total 1,230 1,244 101.1% 17.4 5.1 C

20.5 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 150 153 102.3% 36.0 5.5 D
Through 30 30 99.7% 38.5 12.7 D
Right Turn 50 47 94.6% 10.8 4.1 B
Subtotal 230 231 100.3% 31.8 4.4 C
Left Turn 50 49 97.2% 31.5 10.6 C
Through 40 61 152.5% 25.6 6.2 C
Right Turn 230 234 101.7% 23.1 3.2 C
Subtotal 320 344 107.3% 24.7 3.2 C
Left Turn 100 100 100.0% 47.1 6.1 D
Through 830 836 100.7% 27.4 3.6 C
Right Turn 50 47 93.2% 5.2 1.0 A
Subtotal 980 983 100.3% 28.5 3.1 C
Left Turn 60 52 86.5% 204.7 35.6 F
Through 1,330 1,219 91.7% 216.5 36.4 F
Right Turn 30 31 101.7% 183.4 41.1 F
Subtotal 1,420 1,302 91.7% 215.3 35.9 F
Total 2,950 2,859 96.9% 110.9 12.1 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
129
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 360 353 98.1% 28.9 4.9 C
Through 10 10 102.0% 30.0 20.2 C
Right Turn 400 404 100.9% 12.7 2.7 B
Subtotal 770 767 99.6% 20.6 3.1 C
Left Turn
Through 10 11 113.0% 60.1 21.4 E
Right Turn 10 11 109.0% 10.4 7.7 B
Subtotal 20 22 111.0% 42.4 23.8 D
Left Turn 10 9 93.0% 103.7 36.3 F
Through 290 287 99.1% 107.2 18.3 F
Right Turn 230 228 99.2% 98.5 19.1 F
Subtotal 530 525 99.0% 103.6 18.5 F
Left Turn 340 302 88.7% 45.7 15.6 D
Through 350 314 89.7% 16.1 4.2 B
Right Turn 10 10 96.0% 9.2 8.9 A
Subtotal 700 625 89.3% 30.9 11.0 C
Total 2,020 1,939 96.0% 47.6 6.3 D

66.9 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 410 382 93.1% 170.5 65.1 F
Through
Right Turn 180 169 93.9% 84.3 82.6 F
Subtotal 590 551 93.4% 144.5 70.1 F
Left Turn 230 223 97.0% 29.3 7.1 D
Through 330 336 101.9% 33.0 12.8 D
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 559 99.9% 31.8 10.5 D
Left Turn
Through 450 393 87.4% 166.3 5.7 F
Right Turn 330 299 90.5% 59.9 15.9 F
Subtotal 780 692 88.7% 121.5 9.6 F
Total 1,930 1,802 93.4% 100.1 21.8 F
115.7
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
130
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 280 281 100.4% 27.9 26.3 D
Subtotal 280 281 100.4% 27.9 26.3 D
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 380 373 98.2% 12.3 2.3 B
Right Turn 360 357 99.2% 10.7 1.9 B
Subtotal 740 730 98.7% 11.6 2.0 B
Left Turn
Through 780 694 88.9% 53.1 13.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 780 694 88.9% 53.1 13.0 F
Total 1,800 1,705 94.7% 31.7 6.2 D

18.1 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue
Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 310 254 82.1% 283.8 90.5 F
Through
Right Turn 190 187 98.6% 104.6 116.5 F
Subtotal 500 442 88.4% 204.9 110.2 F
Left Turn 10 10 95.0% 48.5 29.1 E
Through
Right Turn 10 11 110.0% 19.7 13.4 C
Subtotal 20 21 102.5% 31.7 14.2 D
Left Turn 10 10 102.0% 57.1 32.6 F
Through 570 550 96.6% 27.4 5.2 D
Right Turn 80 80 99.8% 24.4 5.1 C
Subtotal 660 640 97.0% 27.6 4.9 D
Left Turn 70 71 101.4% 109.2 55.0 F
Through 460 440 95.7% 100.8 56.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 530 511 96.5% 102.0 55.1 F
Total 1,710 1,614 94.4% 93.1 29.0 F

55.8 EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
131
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Near Term w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 20 17 83.0% 20.6 8.3 C
Through 360 325 90.2% 19.4 5.7 C
Right Turn 130 114 87.5% 17.2 4.9 C
Subtotal 510 455 89.2% 18.9 5.1 C
Left Turn 10 11 105.0% 7.0 5.3 A
Through 60 60 99.2% 7.9 1.1 A
Right Turn 70 69 98.7% 5.0 0.7 A
Subtotal 140 139 99.4% 6.5 0.9 A
Left Turn 150 153 102.1% 20.7 11.6 C
Through 240 242 100.8% 22.7 12.7 C
Right Turn 90 95 105.9% 18.9 10.2 C
Subtotal 480 490 102.1% 21.4 11.7 C
Left Turn 30 29 96.7% 9.6 5.6 A
Through 180 186 103.1% 9.7 2.5 A
Right Turn 10 11 107.0% 5.5 2.6 A
Subtotal 220 225 102.4% 9.5 2.8 A
Total 1,350 1,310 97.0% 17.0 5.3 C

20.7 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 110 106 96.5% 45.3 5.0 D
Through 20 18 90.5% 44.7 17.8 D
Right Turn 50 51 102.8% 17.2 6.4 B
Subtotal 180 176 97.6% 37.9 4.8 D
Left Turn 30 28 92.7% 42.3 12.5 D
Through 20 24 118.0% 32.4 16.2 C
Right Turn 130 134 103.4% 18.7 3.4 B
Subtotal 180 186 103.2% 23.7 4.3 C
Left Turn 400 326 81.5% 323.9 55.1 F
Through 1,550 1,396 90.1% 87.3 24.2 F
Right Turn 180 162 89.7% 55.7 21.8 E
Subtotal 2,130 1,884 88.4% 126.6 22.4 F
Left Turn 50 48 96.2% 97.9 45.7 F
Through 1,160 1,157 99.7% 101.8 43.7 F
Right Turn 160 165 103.1% 66.9 47.0 E
Subtotal 1,370 1,370 100.0% 97.4 43.7 F
Total 3,860 3,615 93.6% 106.1 23.0 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
132
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 330 100.0% 21.8 2.3 C
Through
Right Turn 180 188 104.7% 6.2 1.5 A
Subtotal 510 518 101.6% 16.3 1.9 B
Left Turn 10 9 85.0% 36.5 20.0 D
Through 10 10 95.0% 39.5 17.5 D
Right Turn 10 11 113.0% 9.8 8.1 A
Subtotal 30 29 97.7% 31.9 13.0 C
Left Turn 10 7 74.0% 92.0 60.5 F
Through 210 184 87.4% 128.2 9.9 F
Right Turn 340 303 89.1% 120.1 13.1 F
Subtotal 560 494 88.2% 123.1 11.3 F
Left Turn 380 343 90.3% 66.9 37.3 E
Through 550 521 94.8% 34.1 31.4 C
Right Turn 10 9 90.0% 27.2 34.6 C
Subtotal 940 874 92.9% 47.0 33.5 D
Total 2,040 1,915 93.9% 59.5 14.6 E
101.2
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 500 471 94.1% 156.9 28.8 F
Through
Right Turn 440 415 94.3% 134.3 35.6 F
Subtotal 940 885 94.2% 146.2 31.4 F
Left Turn 210 199 94.9% 15.3 2.8 C
Through 150 141 94.3% 12.2 1.0 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 360 341 94.6% 14.0 1.8 B
Left Turn
Through 290 249 85.8% 22.7 4.3 C
Right Turn 400 348 87.0% 12.5 3.5 B
Subtotal 690 597 86.5% 16.6 2.9 C
Total 1,990 1,823 91.6% 78.7 14.9 F

91.8 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
133
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 210 102 48.7% 411.3 48.7 F
Through
Right Turn 310 153 49.2% 339.7 58.7 F
Subtotal 520 255 49.0% 367.2 46.8 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 340 332 97.7% 5.8 1.1 A
Right Turn 310 285 92.0% 5.9 1.1 A
Subtotal 650 617 95.0% 5.8 1.1 A
Left Turn 300 306 101.8% 17.2 1.6 C
Through 480 489 101.9% 10.7 1.9 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 780 795 101.9% 13.2 1.7 B
Total 1,950 1,667 85.5% 57.7 3.0 F
414.0
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 60 62 103.0% 24.1 8.4 C
Through
Right Turn 30 30 99.0% 10.2 5.6 B
Subtotal 90 92 101.7% 19.2 5.8 C
Left Turn 10 10 98.0% 15.0 8.3 B
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 10 98.0% 15.0 8.3 B
Left Turn
Through 610 445 72.9% 2.0 0.3 A
Right Turn 40 34 83.8% 1.3 0.2 A
Subtotal 650 478 73.6% 2.0 0.2 A
Left Turn 20 20 100.5% 4.6 2.2 A
Through 720 730 101.4% 2.8 2.1 A
Right Turn 10 11 109.0% 1.1 1.6 A
Subtotal 750 761 101.5% 2.8 2.0 A
Total 1,500 1,341 89.4% 3.8 1.3 A

24.1 EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
134
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 110 103 93.8% 8.7 1.9 A
Through 20 30 150.5% 5.4 1.1 A
Right Turn 60 54 90.5% 6.1 0.8 A
Subtotal 190 188 98.7% 7.4 1.1 A
Left Turn 10 9 89.0% 7.6 2.4 A
Through 60 61 101.7% 7.7 1.8 A
Right Turn 70 73 103.6% 6.0 1.8 A
Subtotal 140 142 101.7% 6.9 1.6 A
Left Turn 30 30 98.3% 8.1 2.0 A
Through 130 135 104.2% 7.6 0.9 A
Right Turn 80 77 96.1% 5.3 0.5 A
Subtotal 240 242 100.8% 6.9 0.7 A
Left Turn 60 52 87.0% 13.6 8.1 B
Through 340 347 101.9% 13.8 6.8 B
Right Turn 10 12 116.0% 7.4 4.6 A
Subtotal 410 410 100.1% 13.6 6.8 B
Total 980 982 100.2% 9.9 3.1 A

11.9 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 150 155 103.6% 36.5 5.8 D
Through 30 27 91.0% 37.4 15.9 D
Right Turn 60 59 97.5% 13.9 2.9 B
Subtotal 240 241 100.5% 30.7 3.5 C
Left Turn 70 71 101.3% 36.2 8.8 D
Through 40 50 124.5% 25.3 11.4 C
Right Turn 160 158 98.5% 21.8 3.3 C
Subtotal 270 278 103.1% 25.8 3.7 C
Left Turn 90 86 95.1% 50.7 9.1 D
Through 1,170 1,173 100.3% 44.0 13.7 D
Right Turn 50 52 104.2% 17.9 12.3 B
Subtotal 1,310 1,311 100.1% 43.3 13.2 D
Left Turn 80 61 76.8% 200.5 28.7 F
Through 1,690 1,279 75.7% 203.0 16.1 F
Right Turn 20 14 70.0% 186.1 46.4 F
Subtotal 1,790 1,355 75.7% 203.0 16.0 F
Total 3,610 3,185 88.2% 109.4 8.1 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
135
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 450 457 101.4% 23.7 2.4 C
Through 10 11 111.0% 25.3 13.4 C
Right Turn 610 622 102.0% 18.9 5.2 B
Subtotal 1,070 1,090 101.9% 21.1 2.8 C
Left Turn
Through 10 9 86.0% 41.5 21.2 D
Right Turn 10 10 100.0% 10.4 7.1 B
Subtotal 20 19 93.0% 25.8 10.1 C
Left Turn 10 9 89.0% 135.6 37.7 F
Through 290 253 87.3% 142.3 8.3 F
Right Turn 240 205 85.5% 135.4 9.3 F
Subtotal 540 467 86.6% 139.0 7.9 F
Left Turn 310 257 82.7% 40.7 5.8 D
Through 340 283 83.3% 16.2 2.2 B
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 8.7 5.4 A
Subtotal 660 550 83.3% 27.7 4.5 C
Total 2,290 2,126 92.8% 48.5 0.9 D
133.6
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 419 97.4% 129.1 59.6 F
Through
Right Turn 310 304 98.1% 50.7 68.7 F
Subtotal 740 723 97.7% 96.0 62.7 F
Left Turn 270 261 96.7% 51.4 34.1 F
Through 410 393 95.9% 57.6 36.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 654 96.2% 55.3 35.3 F
Left Turn
Through 250 146 58.4% 16.0 1.9 C
Right Turn 510 283 55.5% 8.3 2.4 A
Subtotal 760 429 56.5% 11.0 1.7 B
Total 2,180 1,806 82.8% 59.8 28.1 F

53.6 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 10/16/2024
136
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 400 74 18.4% 507.5 87.0 F
Through
Right Turn 330 60 18.2% 452.3 101.0 F
Subtotal 730 134 18.3% 481.4 92.9 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 460 444 96.5% 7.1 0.5 A
Right Turn 380 369 97.0% 7.5 0.4 A
Subtotal 840 812 96.7% 7.3 0.4 A
Left Turn 250 250 99.9% 28.4 10.3 D
Through 360 360 99.9% 13.2 5.2 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 610 609 99.9% 19.5 7.2 C
Total 2,180 1,555 71.3% 54.0 5.3 F
507.5
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 50 52 103.2% 20.2 10.9 C
Through
Right Turn 20 19 95.0% 14.4 13.9 B
Subtotal 70 71 100.9% 18.5 11.9 C
Left Turn 10 8 83.0% 10.8 10.7 B
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 8 83.0% 10.8 10.7 B
Left Turn
Through 720 456 63.3% 2.1 0.3 A
Right Turn 70 47 67.4% 1.5 0.4 A
Subtotal 790 503 63.7% 2.1 0.3 A
Left Turn 30 31 102.3% 4.8 2.5 A
Through 560 559 99.8% 5.0 8.3 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 589 99.9% 5.0 8.1 A
Total 1,460 1,171 80.2% 4.8 5.0 A

19.6 EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 10/16/2024
137
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 120 100 83.3% 13.2 2.7 B
Through 60 61 100.8% 12.2 2.9 B
Right Turn 150 117 78.2% 10.4 3.4 B
Subtotal 330 278 84.2% 11.8 2.8 B
Left Turn 10 9 92.0% 5.9 2.7 A
Through 40 40 101.0% 6.9 0.7 A
Right Turn 40 41 102.5% 4.2 0.8 A
Subtotal 90 91 100.7% 5.8 0.6 A
Left Turn 50 49 98.0% 10.6 2.9 B
Through 290 298 102.9% 11.2 2.0 B
Right Turn 100 99 99.4% 8.5 3.0 A
Subtotal 440 447 101.5% 10.5 2.1 B
Left Turn 30 35 115.0% 6.8 1.9 A
Through 220 222 101.0% 7.4 1.1 A
Right Turn 10 10 99.0% 5.5 2.3 A
Subtotal 260 267 102.6% 7.3 1.2 A
Total 1,120 1,082 96.6% 9.8 1.6 A

13.2 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 110 111 101.1% 39.6 6.8 D
Through 20 21 104.5% 49.7 15.1 D
Right Turn 70 73 104.0% 19.0 4.7 B
Subtotal 200 205 102.5% 33.2 5.1 C
Left Turn 40 43 107.5% 40.2 10.3 D
Through 20 26 127.5% 28.6 8.4 C
Right Turn 110 107 97.5% 18.2 4.9 B
Subtotal 170 176 103.4% 25.5 5.7 C
Left Turn 290 230 79.4% 138.6 12.9 F
Through 1,950 1,532 78.6% 148.9 11.0 F
Right Turn 200 159 79.7% 129.7 19.3 F
Subtotal 2,440 1,922 78.8% 146.1 11.4 F
Left Turn 70 60 85.4% 210.1 36.1 F
Through 1,390 1,212 87.2% 196.0 14.0 F
Right Turn 90 75 82.8% 167.2 13.9 F
Subtotal 1,550 1,347 86.9% 194.8 14.3 F
Total 4,360 3,649 83.7% 151.5 7.6 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 10/16/2024
138
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Realignment Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 340 102.9% 28.4 3.9 C
Through
Right Turn 180 176 97.9% 5.9 1.4 A
Subtotal 510 516 101.2% 20.7 3.4 C
Left Turn 10 8 79.0% 39.0 27.5 D
Through 10 9 90.0% 27.9 17.8 C
Right Turn 10 11 114.0% 6.8 5.5 A
Subtotal 30 28 94.3% 28.4 12.0 C
Left Turn 10 9 86.0% 92.3 41.7 F
Through 210 200 95.1% 83.5 25.2 F
Right Turn 340 337 99.0% 76.6 24.2 E
Subtotal 560 545 97.3% 79.3 24.8 E
Left Turn 380 342 89.9% 59.1 17.8 E
Through 470 431 91.7% 22.4 10.9 C
Right Turn 10 10 100.0% 25.5 18.6 C
Subtotal 860 783 91.0% 38.6 13.7 D
Total 1,960 1,872 95.5% 45.3 9.5 D

71.6 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 570 471 82.7% 180.7 11.3 F
Through
Right Turn 380 311 81.7% 161.0 15.5 F
Subtotal 950 782 82.3% 172.4 10.7 F
Left Turn 210 208 99.0% 18.9 5.7 C
Through 160 153 95.5% 13.6 1.4 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 370 361 97.5% 16.7 3.7 C
Left Turn
Through 270 262 96.9% 29.6 9.2 D
Right Turn 400 364 90.9% 14.6 5.7 B
Subtotal 670 625 93.3% 21.2 6.6 C
Total 1,990 1,768 88.8% 88.0 4.1 F
148.4
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
139
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Realignment Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Uncontrolled Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 730 620 84.9% 22.3 14.9 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 730 620 84.9% 22.3 14.9 C
Left Turn
Through 670 625 93.3% 1.6 0.5 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 670 625 93.3% 1.6 0.5 A
Total 1,400 1,244 88.9% 12.0 7.7 B

14.3 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 280 278 99.2% 40.5 6.6 D
Through
Right Turn 280 281 100.4% 14.5 5.0 B
Subtotal 560 559 99.8% 27.6 6.0 C
Left Turn 10 9 87.0% 54.7 36.8 D
Through
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 9.3 6.5 A
Subtotal 20 19 96.0% 35.7 21.3 D
Left Turn 10 9 92.0% 65.2 39.6 E
Through 310 259 83.7% 65.3 14.9 E
Right Turn 410 353 86.1% 57.5 16.0 E
Subtotal 730 622 85.2% 60.9 15.1 E
Left Turn 340 302 88.9% 192.2 18.9 F
Through 380 332 87.4% 144.3 21.6 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 720 634 88.1% 168.4 20.5 F
Total 2,030 1,834 90.3% 89.1 7.4 F
107.6
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Realignment Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Uncontrolled Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 730 620 84.9% 22.3 14.9 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 730 620 84.9% 22.3 14.9 C
Left Turn
Through 670 625 93.3% 1.6 0.5 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 670 625 93.3% 1.6 0.5 A
Total 1,400 1,244 88.9% 12.0 7.7 B

14.3 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 280 278 99.2% 40.5 6.6 D
Through
Right Turn 280 281 100.4% 14.5 5.0 B
Subtotal 560 559 99.8% 27.6 6.0 C
Left Turn 10 9 87.0% 54.7 36.8 D
Through
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 9.3 6.5 A
Subtotal 20 19 96.0% 35.7 21.3 D
Left Turn 10 9 92.0% 65.2 39.6 E
Through 310 259 83.7% 65.3 14.9 E
Right Turn 410 353 86.1% 57.5 16.0 E
Subtotal 730 622 85.2% 60.9 15.1 E
Left Turn 340 302 88.9% 192.2 18.9 F
Through 380 332 87.4% 144.3 21.6 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 720 634 88.1% 168.4 20.5 F
Total 2,030 1,834 90.3% 89.1 7.4 F
107.6
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
140
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Realignment Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 450 458 101.7% 41.5 9.5 D
Through 10 8 83.0% 36.0 24.5 D
Right Turn 610 594 97.4% 60.7 26.7 E
Subtotal 1,070 1,060 99.1% 51.9 17.6 D
Left Turn
Through 10 13 132.0% 42.2 16.6 D
Right Turn 10 11 109.0% 8.3 3.9 A
Subtotal 20 24 120.5% 26.0 12.1 C
Left Turn 10 9 90.0% 72.7 58.2 E
Through 290 263 90.5% 122.9 48.5 F
Right Turn 240 233 97.2% 116.0 51.4 F
Subtotal 540 505 93.5% 119.6 49.3 F
Left Turn 310 257 83.0% 39.6 6.7 D
Through 340 296 87.1% 14.8 1.6 B
Right Turn 10 9 90.0% 5.4 4.2 A
Subtotal 660 563 85.2% 25.9 4.7 C
Total 2,290 2,152 94.0% 57.8 15.6 E

57.6 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 328 76.2% 251.2 15.7 F
Through
Right Turn 310 233 75.0% 197.4 20.9 F
Subtotal 740 560 75.7% 229.3 13.9 F
Left Turn 270 218 80.8% 265.5 21.4 F
Through 410 325 79.2% 299.1 18.5 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 543 79.9% 286.4 14.3 F
Left Turn
Through 250 238 95.0% 18.5 3.6 C
Right Turn 510 429 84.1% 10.7 1.2 B
Subtotal 760 667 87.7% 13.6 1.4 B
Total 2,180 1,770 81.2% 164.6 4.7 F
129.1
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
141
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Realignment Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Uncontrolled Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 840 659 78.4% 86.7 4.1 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 840 659 78.4% 86.7 4.1 F
Left Turn
Through 760 656 86.3% 0.8 0.1 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 760 656 86.3% 0.8 0.1 A
Total 1,600 1,315 82.2% 44.7 2.0 E

76.0 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 450 382 84.8% 182.9 10.9 F
Through
Right Turn 350 284 81.3% 160.6 11.7 F
Subtotal 800 666 83.2% 173.2 10.8 F
Left Turn 10 10 102.0% 39.3 29.2 D
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 10 102.0% 39.3 29.2 D
Left Turn
Through 390 295 75.7% 79.5 5.0 E
Right Turn 450 345 76.8% 71.2 6.0 E
Subtotal 840 641 76.3% 74.9 5.4 E
Left Turn 280 253 90.5% 231.6 34.9 F
Through 310 279 89.8% 161.5 36.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 532 90.2% 197.4 37.1 F
Total 2,240 1,849 82.5% 146.4 10.5 F
144.1
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
142
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 450 459 102.0% 46.8 9.6 D
Through
Right Turn 250 248 99.1% 6.6 1.4 A
Subtotal 700 707 101.0% 32.4 6.2 C
Left Turn 10 9 85.0% 56.5 32.5 E
Through 10 10 96.0% 52.2 21.4 D
Right Turn 10 10 99.0% 18.5 13.2 B
Subtotal 30 28 93.3% 43.3 10.1 D
Left Turn 10 7 68.0% 106.4 56.4 F
Through 210 173 82.3% 156.9 16.8 F
Right Turn 340 270 79.4% 144.5 12.6 F
Subtotal 560 450 80.3% 149.0 13.1 F
Left Turn 710 453 63.8% 233.5 18.1 F
Through 400 258 64.6% 206.9 12.1 F
Right Turn 10 7 72.0% 188.8 85.2 F
Subtotal 1,120 718 64.1% 224.1 16.1 F
Total 2,410 1,903 79.0% 130.9 7.4 F
188.6
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 570 401 70.3% 215.3 11.6 F
Through
Right Turn 380 258 68.0% 181.1 15.9 F
Subtotal 950 659 69.4% 201.6 10.2 F
Left Turn 210 185 88.0% 19.8 4.4 C
Through 160 150 93.6% 14.1 1.1 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 370 334 90.4% 17.4 2.5 C
Left Turn
Through 530 398 75.1% 171.8 12.5 F
Right Turn 290 218 75.1% 69.1 15.2 F
Subtotal 820 616 75.1% 136.1 11.4 F
Total 2,140 1,609 75.2% 137.2 6.1 F
195.8
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
143
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 260 263 101.2% 6.5 1.7 A
Subtotal 260 263 101.2% 6.5 1.7 A
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 370 287 77.5% 6.5 1.0 A
Right Turn 360 271 75.2% 6.2 1.2 A
Subtotal 730 558 76.4% 6.4 1.1 A
Left Turn
Through 820 612 74.6% 79.1 8.2 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 820 612 74.6% 79.1 8.2 F
Total 1,810 1,433 79.1% 36.3 2.3 E

64.5 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 100 18 18.1% 852.2 62.4 F
Through
Right Turn 20 4 19.0% 842.7 97.0 F
Subtotal 120 22 18.3% 490.0 424.6 F
Left Turn 10 6 61.0% 421.0 412.3 F
Through
Right Turn 10 7 74.0% 447.3 375.1 F
Subtotal 20 14 67.5% 156.9 238.0 F
Left Turn 10 7 67.0% 5.8 4.8 A
Through 570 490 86.0% 1.8 0.4 A
Right Turn 50 47 94.0% 1.3 0.4 A
Subtotal 630 544 86.3% 1.9 0.3 A
Left Turn 10 9 94.0% 156.5 64.7 F
Through 710 590 83.1% 192.3 16.5 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 720 599 83.3% 192.1 16.4 F
Total 1,490 1,179 79.1% 102.7 11.5 F
300.7
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
144
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 610 503 82.4% 57.9 6.5 E
Through 10 11 107.0% 40.8 22.7 D
Right Turn 830 684 82.4% 48.3 4.3 D
Subtotal 1,450 1,198 82.6% 52.3 2.5 D
Left Turn
Through 10 11 106.0% 52.1 21.6 D
Right Turn 10 11 112.0% 19.4 14.5 B
Subtotal 20 22 109.0% 35.1 17.5 D
Left Turn 10 8 83.0% 134.0 57.4 F
Through 290 249 85.9% 139.8 8.3 F
Right Turn 240 216 90.0% 132.0 10.3 F
Subtotal 540 473 87.7% 136.3 8.9 F
Left Turn 560 453 80.8% 248.5 13.8 F
Through 220 179 81.4% 218.3 11.3 F
Right Turn 10 7 74.0% 144.2 103.9 F
Subtotal 790 639 80.9% 239.6 13.1 F
Total 2,800 2,332 83.3% 120.2 4.4 F
123.0
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 382 88.8% 215.7 13.4 F
Through
Right Turn 310 276 89.2% 188.4 19.2 F
Subtotal 740 658 88.9% 204.0 14.0 F
Left Turn 270 225 83.2% 22.7 4.9 C
Through 410 343 83.6% 29.5 10.6 D
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 567 83.4% 27.2 8.4 D
Left Turn
Through 380 372 97.8% 110.0 51.6 F
Right Turn 250 256 102.3% 21.8 20.5 C
Subtotal 630 627 99.6% 76.7 40.1 F
Total 2,050 1,853 90.4% 107.3 17.4 F

95.7 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
145
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative RIRO
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 330 329 99.7% 11.5 4.0 B
Subtotal 330 329 99.7% 11.5 4.0 B
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 460 411 89.3% 18.1 4.8 C
Right Turn 380 326 85.7% 17.9 4.9 C
Subtotal 840 737 87.7% 18.0 4.8 C
Left Turn
Through 630 629 99.8% 18.4 10.6 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 630 629 99.8% 18.4 10.6 C
Total 1,800 1,694 94.1% 16.8 5.1 C

9.2 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 70 68 97.0% 109.8 134.2 F
Through
Right Turn 20 19 96.5% 98.8 150.5 F
Subtotal 90 87 96.9% 107.8 135.1 F
Left Turn 10 9 94.0% 14.4 12.4 B
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 9 94.0% 14.4 12.4 B
Left Turn
Through 720 662 92.0% 2.3 0.1 A
Right Turn 70 67 95.9% 1.5 0.3 A
Subtotal 790 730 92.3% 2.2 0.1 A
Left Turn 30 31 104.3% 6.2 2.5 A
Through 560 564 100.8% 9.2 12.4 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 596 100.9% 9.1 11.8 A
Total 1,480 1,422 96.1% 11.1 12.0 B

26.5 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
146
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 330 331 100.3% 21.2 2.8 C
Through
Right Turn 180 176 97.6% 6.6 1.8 A
Subtotal 510 507 99.3% 16.4 2.3 B
Left Turn 10 10 104.0% 42.6 21.5 D
Through 10 9 90.0% 33.6 20.6 C
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 15.1 16.7 B
Subtotal 30 30 98.3% 31.4 14.4 C
Left Turn 10 8 75.0% 137.1 54.4 F
Through 210 193 92.1% 135.0 12.3 F
Right Turn 340 294 86.4% 126.2 9.7 F
Subtotal 560 495 88.4% 130.2 8.2 F
Left Turn 380 355 93.4% 106.2 48.5 F
Through 550 544 99.0% 72.7 46.6 E
Right Turn 10 9 94.0% 50.5 51.6 D
Subtotal 940 909 96.6% 85.7 48.1 F
Total 2,040 1,939 95.1% 78.2 23.5 E
111.2
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 500 501 100.2% 18.5 3.7 B
Through
Right Turn 440 432 98.2% 8.8 1.8 A
Subtotal 940 933 99.3% 14.0 2.4 B
Left Turn 210 198 94.0% 25.5 2.8 C
Through 150 149 99.3% 12.4 2.1 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 360 346 96.2% 20.1 1.5 C
Left Turn
Through 290 286 98.7% 12.4 1.3 B
Right Turn 400 394 98.5% 5.7 0.4 A
Subtotal 690 680 98.6% 8.5 0.8 A
Total 1,990 1,960 98.5% 13.2 1.4 B

20.4 Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
147
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 210 209 99.7% 61.5 25.6 E
Through
Right Turn 310 316 101.9% 9.0 1.5 A
Subtotal 520 525 101.0% 30.2 10.8 C
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 340 350 102.9% 24.9 4.6 C
Right Turn 310 304 98.1% 23.7 4.3 C
Subtotal 650 654 100.6% 24.4 4.4 C
Left Turn 300 287 95.7% 70.8 9.7 E
Through 480 462 96.2% 21.3 3.4 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 780 749 96.0% 40.3 5.4 D
Total 1,950 1,928 98.9% 32.3 4.1 C

56.8 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 60 57 95.2% 311.1 146.4 F
Through
Right Turn 30 27 89.7% 314.5 159.1 F
Subtotal 90 84 93.3% 313.0 148.3 F
Left Turn 10 12 115.0% 19.8 9.3 C
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 12 115.0% 19.8 9.3 C
Left Turn
Through 610 618 101.3% 5.1 1.0 A
Right Turn 40 40 100.8% 4.3 0.8 A
Subtotal 650 658 101.2% 5.0 1.0 A
Left Turn 20 21 107.0% 10.6 8.1 B
Through 720 691 95.9% 17.1 12.2 C
Right Turn 10 11 112.0% 9.6 13.7 A
Subtotal 750 723 96.5% 16.7 11.9 C
Total 1,500 1,477 98.5% 28.8 11.5 D
117.4
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 11/8/2024
148
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 450 450 100.0% 21.3 2.6 C
Through 10 11 113.0% 15.0 8.0 B
Right Turn 610 619 101.5% 17.6 5.6 B
Subtotal 1,070 1,081 101.0% 19.1 3.6 B
Left Turn
Through 10 9 87.0% 33.9 16.5 C
Right Turn 10 10 96.0% 10.6 7.2 B
Subtotal 20 18 91.5% 24.5 13.2 C
Left Turn 10 8 78.0% 119.5 68.5 F
Through 290 247 85.0% 146.4 11.0 F
Right Turn 240 208 86.6% 134.1 14.3 F
Subtotal 540 462 85.6% 140.9 11.2 F
Left Turn 310 264 85.0% 37.6 7.1 D
Through 340 310 91.3% 16.3 1.8 B
Right Turn 10 10 103.0% 10.4 6.3 B
Subtotal 660 584 88.5% 25.9 4.1 C
Total 2,290 2,145 93.7% 47.3 2.3 D
134.1
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 434 100.8% 59.9 45.0 E
Through
Right Turn 310 312 100.8% 13.9 26.4 B
Subtotal 740 746 100.8% 42.0 39.5 D
Left Turn 270 258 95.7% 27.0 10.0 C
Through 410 395 96.4% 29.9 16.1 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 654 96.1% 28.8 13.5 C
Left Turn
Through 250 169 67.6% 11.6 2.4 B
Right Turn 510 347 67.9% 4.7 0.5 A
Subtotal 760 515 67.8% 7.1 1.0 A
Total 2,180 1,915 87.8% 27.3 15.8 C

18.4 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
149
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative with Signals
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 400 156 39.1% 461.1 28.3 F
Through
Right Turn 330 115 34.9% 334.4 126.6 F
Subtotal 730 272 37.2% 398.2 70.4 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 460 448 97.4% 80.8 13.1 F
Right Turn 380 378 99.4% 77.7 13.3 E
Subtotal 840 826 98.3% 79.4 13.1 E
Left Turn 250 247 98.9% 78.4 19.2 E
Through 360 363 100.8% 24.1 6.4 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 610 610 100.0% 46.9 12.9 D
Total 2,180 1,707 78.3% 116.1 9.5 F
455.8
Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 50 48 96.6% 134.5 110.0 F
Through
Right Turn 20 20 97.5% 143.0 136.7 F
Subtotal 70 68 96.9% 137.6 115.0 F
Left Turn 10 10 100.0% 11.3 10.1 B
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 10 100.0% 10.9 10.5 B
Left Turn
Through 720 509 70.7% 8.0 1.5 A
Right Turn 70 54 76.6% 6.7 1.5 A
Subtotal 790 563 71.2% 7.9 1.5 A
Left Turn 30 34 112.3% 12.0 7.5 B
Through 560 563 100.6% 17.1 15.5 C
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 597 101.2% 16.9 15.1 C
Total 1,460 1,238 84.8% 19.4 12.7 C

27.6 EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 10/18/2024
150
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 380 384 101.1% 31.8 2.7 C
Through
Right Turn 250 259 103.8% 7.7 1.8 A
Subtotal 630 643 102.1% 22.0 2.5 C
Left Turn 10 10 99.0% 47.1 22.9 D
Through 10 10 96.0% 62.9 31.9 E
Right Turn 10 11 105.0% 18.8 8.6 B
Subtotal 30 30 100.0% 42.0 16.7 D
Left Turn 10 8 84.0% 142.9 43.6 F
Through 210 194 92.6% 133.2 16.3 F
Right Turn 340 306 90.0% 122.6 15.8 F
Subtotal 560 509 90.8% 127.2 15.4 F
Left Turn 350 340 97.1% 53.4 11.6 D
Through 550 535 97.3% 21.9 6.0 C
Right Turn 10 10 103.0% 17.4 12.6 B
Subtotal 910 885 97.3% 34.3 8.4 C
Total 2,130 2,067 97.1% 52.7 3.8 D

92.0 Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 500 452 90.4% 156.5 57.3 F
Through
Right Turn 440 406 92.2% 134.6 59.4 F
Subtotal 940 858 91.2% 146.4 57.5 F
Left Turn 210 205 97.5% 18.0 4.5 C
Through 150 152 101.0% 13.3 2.3 B
Right Turn
Subtotal 360 356 98.9% 16.1 3.4 C
Left Turn
Through 260 264 101.6% 31.8 16.2 D
Right Turn 300 303 100.9% 11.2 2.4 B
Subtotal 560 567 101.3% 21.1 8.9 C
Total 1,860 1,781 95.7% 78.0 27.1 F

87.5 WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
151
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 310 318 102.4% 21.6 10.7 C
Subtotal 310 318 102.4% 21.6 10.7 C
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 340 324 95.4% 16.4 4.8 C
Right Turn 310 291 93.8% 14.1 4.4 B
Subtotal 650 615 94.6% 15.3 4.6 C
Left Turn
Through 560 558 99.7% 4.5 1.3 A
Right Turn
Subtotal 560 558 99.7% 4.5 1.3 A
Total 1,520 1,491 98.1% 12.7 4.0 B

26.2 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue
Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph) Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 170 166 97.4% 46.8 5.2 E
Through
Right Turn 40 44 110.3% 12.0 5.3 B
Subtotal 210 210 99.8% 39.3 3.8 E
Left Turn 10 11 107.0% 40.4 25.5 E
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 11 107.0% 40.4 25.5 E
Left Turn
Through 610 589 96.5% 37.0 3.9 E
Right Turn 40 39 97.8% 35.6 10.2 E
Subtotal 650 628 96.6% 36.8 3.6 E
Left Turn 350 350 99.9% 69.0 36.7 F
Through 390 394 101.0% 29.4 29.8 D
Right Turn 10 9 92.0% 13.0 17.6 B
Subtotal 750 753 100.4% 47.2 32.4 E
Total 1,620 1,601 98.8% 42.0 15.1 E

53.3 EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
152
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 90 90 99.6% 16.0 2.9 C
Through 70 81 116.3% 12.7 2.5 B
Right Turn 50 45 89.0% 12.6 4.3 B
Subtotal 210 216 102.6% 14.1 2.7 B
Left Turn 10 10 98.0% 45.0 34.4 E
Through 170 170 100.2% 64.9 16.6 F
Right Turn 290 281 97.0% 63.8 15.6 F
Subtotal 470 462 98.2% 64.3 15.7 F
Left Turn 80 81 101.3% 18.4 7.0 C
Through 130 132 101.6% 16.3 4.1 C
Right Turn 90 95 105.4% 14.6 4.5 B
Subtotal 300 308 102.7% 16.3 4.5 C
Left Turn 60 57 94.7% 58.1 23.2 F
Through 340 344 101.2% 58.3 23.4 F
Right Turn 10 10 101.0% 55.7 33.9 F
Subtotal 410 411 100.3% 58.0 23.1 F
Total 1,390 1,396 100.4% 44.1 10.7 E

43.4 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 150 151 100.7% 44.6 6.8 D
Through 30 29 96.0% 43.6 13.3 D
Right Turn 60 62 102.5% 15.0 2.9 B
Subtotal 240 241 100.6% 37.6 5.7 D
Left Turn 70 69 98.9% 36.2 5.7 D
Through 60 84 140.3% 30.8 14.2 C
Right Turn 250 253 101.1% 28.6 9.8 C
Subtotal 380 406 106.9% 30.2 9.6 C
Left Turn 100 100 100.2% 53.6 8.4 D
Through 1,160 1,175 101.3% 45.1 12.1 D
Right Turn 50 57 114.8% 15.0 6.2 B
Subtotal 1,310 1,333 101.7% 44.6 10.9 D
Left Turn 80 63 78.8% 222.0 32.2 F
Through 1,680 1,246 74.2% 210.3 23.7 F
Right Turn 30 20 67.3% 169.8 48.5 F
Subtotal 1,790 1,330 74.3% 210.4 23.4 F
Total 3,720 3,310 89.0% 109.3 8.9 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
153
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Sunset Ave/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 410 415 101.1% 32.2 4.9 C
Through 10 10 96.0% 33.0 19.4 C
Right Turn 530 525 99.0% 16.0 4.8 B
Subtotal 950 949 99.9% 23.5 4.0 C
Left Turn
Through 10 10 96.0% 45.2 25.9 D
Right Turn 10 9 90.0% 16.7 23.9 B
Subtotal 20 19 93.0% 31.3 22.3 C
Left Turn 10 9 89.0% 132.4 67.0 F
Through 290 264 91.1% 137.5 6.7 F
Right Turn 240 218 90.8% 127.2 6.7 F
Subtotal 540 491 90.9% 132.9 5.9 F
Left Turn 510 386 75.7% 99.0 41.7 F
Through 430 329 76.6% 56.3 37.6 E
Right Turn 10 9 89.0% 48.4 43.6 D
Subtotal 950 724 76.2% 80.4 41.1 F
Total 2,460 2,183 88.7% 66.3 14.2 E
106.5
Intersection 2 Clay Bank Road/E Tabor Avenue All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn 430 375 87.2% 222.7 16.1 F
Through
Right Turn 310 260 83.7% 195.3 13.6 F
Subtotal 740 634 85.7% 211.6 14.5 F
Left Turn 270 242 89.4% 138.9 66.4 F
Through 410 384 93.8% 147.2 64.6 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 680 626 92.0% 143.9 65.2 F
Left Turn
Through 540 388 71.8% 168.4 4.7 F
Right Turn 350 247 70.5% 74.4 16.6 F
Subtotal 890 634 71.3% 131.1 8.4 F
Total 2,310 1,895 82.0% 162.0 20.3 F
164.0
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
154
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Railroad Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Side-street Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn
Through
Right Turn 330 312 94.5% 112.9 65.4 F
Subtotal 330 312 94.5% 112.9 65.4 F
Left Turn
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal
Left Turn
Through 460 428 92.9% 24.4 2.8 C
Right Turn 380 344 90.5% 21.4 2.5 C
Subtotal 840 772 91.8% 23.1 2.6 C
Left Turn
Through 890 625 70.2% 79.9 10.0 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 890 625 70.2% 79.9 10.0 F
Total 2,060 1,708 82.9% 59.0 12.8 F

63.8 Intersection 4 Olive Avenue/E Tabor Avenue Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 380 238 62.6% 553.1 73.3 F
Through
Right Turn 250 162 64.9% 579.8 95.2 F
Subtotal 630 400 63.5% 559.4 76.8 F
Left Turn 10 11 106.0% 58.4 23.3 E
Through
Right Turn
Subtotal 10 11 106.0% 58.4 23.3 E
Left Turn
Through 720 661 91.8% 41.0 3.9 D
Right Turn 70 63 89.4% 35.8 7.7 D
Subtotal 790 724 91.6% 40.5 4.0 D
Left Turn 80 56 70.3% 363.3 30.4 F
Through 510 396 77.6% 335.8 42.1 F
Right Turn
Subtotal 590 452 76.6% 340.1 38.3 F
Total 2,020 1,586 78.5% 242.9 16.5 F
144.0
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
155
SimTraffic Post-Processor Railroad Ave Realignment
Average Results from 10 Runs Cumulative w/ Olive
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 5 Emperor Drive/Pintail Drive All-way Stop Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 20 15 74.5% 22.1 6.8 C
Through 450 344 76.5% 22.3 4.3 C
Right Turn 130 102 78.2% 20.6 3.5 C
Subtotal 600 461 76.8% 21.9 4.0 C
Left Turn 10 11 112.0% 9.4 3.8 A
Through 60 58 96.8% 9.1 1.6 A
Right Turn 70 74 105.1% 5.9 1.0 A
Subtotal 140 143 102.1% 7.5 1.2 A
Left Turn 200 191 95.6% 123.8 61.5 F
Through 290 280 96.4% 123.3 61.2 F
Right Turn 100 96 96.3% 118.1 59.3 F
Subtotal 590 567 96.1% 122.9 60.9 F
Left Turn 30 30 100.0% 10.3 3.2 B
Through 220 221 100.6% 12.0 2.7 B
Right Turn 10 12 118.0% 9.6 6.2 A
Subtotal 260 263 101.2% 11.8 2.7 B
Total 1,590 1,434 90.2% 58.6 25.3 F

63.6 Intersection 6 Emperor Drive/CA-12 Signal
Demand Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement Volume (vph)Average Percent Average Std. Dev. LOS Left Turn 110 104 94.5% 44.3 6.4 D
Through 20 20 98.5% 50.1 17.9 D
Right Turn 70 73 104.1% 19.1 4.2 B
Subtotal 200 197 98.3% 35.9 4.8 D
Left Turn 40 38 94.3% 41.6 14.8 D
Through 20 23 113.0% 22.9 7.3 C
Right Turn 130 130 100.3% 15.4 3.6 B
Subtotal 190 191 100.4% 21.0 5.1 C
Left Turn 450 310 69.0% 281.0 45.6 F
Through 1,940 1,418 73.1% 129.7 19.6 F
Right Turn 200 141 70.7% 97.9 23.7 F
Subtotal 2,590 1,870 72.2% 152.3 13.6 F
Left Turn 70 57 81.7% 197.1 33.1 F
Through 1,380 1,174 85.1% 192.8 32.1 F
Right Turn 200 167 83.6% 163.9 34.4 F
Subtotal 1,650 1,398 84.8% 189.7 32.4 F
Total 4,630 3,656 79.0% 151.3 15.3 F
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Served Volume (vph)
NB
SB
EB
WB
Fehr & Peers 12/4/2024
156
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Appendix C: Vehicle Queue Tables

157
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-1: Existing Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2 Storage
Length (ft)
Existing No Project

Average
Queue (ft)
95th%ile
Queue (ft)

1. Sunset Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBL 150 10 10

EBTR 370 160 290
WBL 210 100 170
WBTR 620 90 160
NBTL 1,280 140 210
NBR 1,280 50 90
SB 60 10 30
PM
EBL 150 10 30
EBTR 370 250 440
WBL 210 100 160
WBTR 620 70 140
NBTL 1,280 130 200
NBR 1,280 90 140
SB 60 10 30

2. Clay Bank Road/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBL 80 60 90

EBT 230 60 90
WBT 3 520 60 100
WBR 3 520 70 110
SBL 630 70 120
SBR 630 40 70
PM
EBL 80 60 90
EBT 230 70 100
WBT 3 520 60 90
WBR 3 520 60 80
SBL 630 60 90
SBR 630 40 60

3. Railroad Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBT
3 100 10 20
EBR 3 110 10 40
WBTL 360 100 210
WBT 110 30 110
NBL 810 90 200
NBR 70 70 150
PM EBT 3 100 10 10
158
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-1: Existing Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2 Storage
Length (ft)
Existing No Project

Average
Queue (ft)
95th%ile
Queue (ft)

EBR 3 110 10 30
WBTL 360 70 140
WBT 110 10 50
NBL 810 90 190
NBR 70 70 150

4. Olive Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBTR 360 50 70

WBTL 410 10 40
NB 4,200 30 60
PM
EBTR 360 50 60
WBTL 410 10 40
NB 4,200 30 60

5. Emperor Drive/Pintail
Drive
AM
EB 630 60 100

WB 180 80 120
NB 920 60 100
SB 830 50 80
PM
EB 630 70 110
WB 180 60 80
NB 920 90 160
SB 830 40 60

6. Emperor Drive/ SR 12
AM
EBL 490 60 120
EBT 4,200 100 170
EBR 280 20 50
WBL 260 60 180
WBT 4,700 280 440
WBR 250 20 80
NBL 210 30 100
NBTL 790 100 170
NBR 130 30 80
SBL 130 20 50
SBTR 600 80 150
PM
EBL 490 170 280
EBT 4,200 210 370
159
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-1: Existing Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2 Storage
Length (ft)
Existing No Project

Average
Queue (ft)
95th%ile
Queue (ft)

EBR 280 60 180
WBL 260 30 90
WBT 4,700 230 370
WBR 250 20 90
NBL 210 20 60
NBTL 790 70 120
NBR 130 20 50
SBL 130 20 50
SBTR 600 50 90
Notes:

Bold = Queue exceeds available storage length
East Tabor Avenue, Pintail Drive, and SR 12 are eastbound/westbound.

Sunset Avenue, Clay Bank Road, Railroad Avenue, Olive Avenue, and Emperor Drive are northbound/southbound.

1. 95th Percentile Queue: the maximum back of queue with 95th percentile traffic volumes

2. Movement Key: EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound; NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; T = Through; L = Left; R = Right

3. Storage length for this movement is limited to the rail crossing tracks.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

160
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

1. Sunset
Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBL 150 30 110 20 70 30 110 20 70 30 110
EBTR 370 400 620 260 450 510 650 220 370 370 590
WBL 210 150 230 160 230 230 230 210 270 200 260
WBTR 620 130 260 130 250 1,790 2,130 610 1,240 320 680
NBTL 1,280 150 240 180 280 260 400 170 260 210 330
NBR 1,280 60 90 60 100 70 110 60 100 70 120
SB 60 30 60 20 70 30 70 30 70 30 70
PM
EBL 150 30 110 20 80 30 90 30 100 20 90
EBTR 370 540 680 310 520 590 670 590 660 500 710
WBL 210 100 160 110 180 210 260 100 170 180 250
WBTR 620 90 160 90 170 270 530 100 180 150 330
NBTL 1,280 180 280 210 320 370 460 180 290 200 320
NBR 1,280 130 220 140 250 240 390 140 230 130 220
SB 60 20 50 30 60 30 60 20 50 30 60

2. Clay Bank
Road/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBL 80 80 150 80 170 140 190 90 140 90 180
EBT 230 70 150 80 180 110 200 80 170 80 180
WBT 3 520 80 120 100 190 520 540 90 150 160 300
WBR 3 520 80 120 110 190 300 600 80 120 90 160
SBL 630 170 320 210 400 580 890 120 190 280 520
SBR 630 70 110 80 150 410 870 60 110 120 270
PM
EBL 80 100 180 140 250 100 190 90 140 150 240
EBT 230 120 240 360 840 130 250 90 170 170 340
WBT 3 520 70 110 110 180 210 360 60 110 480 600
161
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

3. Railroad
Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBT
3 100 30 120 -5 - 5 140 220 70 100 60 220
EBR 3 110 60 150 -5 - 5 120 200 50 80 40 130
WBL 360 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 110 190 -5 - 5
WBTL 360 120 240 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
WBT 110 190 380 -5 - 5 360 400 130 230 30 130
NBL 810 820 960 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 90 160 -5 - 5
NBR 70 130 210 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
NBR 4 810 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 70 120 70 130 100 180
PM
EBT 3 100 30 120 -5 - 5 10 10 180 340 70 210
EBR 3 110 50 170 -5 - 5 10 10 200 340 60 190
WBL 360 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 170 320 -5 - 5
WBTL 360 120 240 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
WBT 110 50 170 -5 - 5 50 220 140 240 280 470
NBL 810 1,020 1,050 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 1,020 1,040 -5 - 5
NBR 70 130 230 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
NBR 4 810 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 70 120 150 210 110 220

4. Olive
Avenue/East
Tabor Avenue
AM
EBL 200 10 50 70 240 10 40 10 30 40 140
EBTR 360 10 10 350 490 10 20 10 10 310 370
WBL 180 50 120 230 270 30 140 10 30 190 260
WBTR 410 20 70 570 1,010 760 1,290 20 90 210 420
NB 4,200 40 90 -5 - 5 810 1,490 70 140 -5 - 5
NBTL 4,200 -5 - 5 200 350 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 120 200
162
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-2: Near-Term Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2
Storage
Length
(ft)
Near-Term No
Project
Near-Term with
Realignment
Near-Term with
Prohibited Lefts
Near-Term with
Signals
Near-Term with
Olive Extension
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
NBR 150 -5 - 5 130 220 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 30 50
SB 100 20 40 30 70 100 150 30 70 30 70
PM
EBL 200 10 30 120 260 10 20 30 80 40 140
EBTR 360 10 10 410 460 10 10 40 70 310 370
WBL 180 30 80 190 260 20 40 10 30 110 250
WBTR 410 10 20 210 440 10 10 10 60 390 750
NB 4,200 50 80 -5 - 5 60 110 50 100 -5 - 5
NBTL 4,200 -5 - 5 620 1,010 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 550 1,090
NBR 150 -5 - 5 160 230 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 210 600
SB 100 20 50 30 60 20 50 20 50 20 50

5. Emperor
Drive/Pintail
Drive
AM
EB 630 70 100 -
6 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 90 150
WB 180 90 150 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 130 230
NB 430 70 110 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 80 140
SB 830 60 90 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 140 260
PM
EB 630 90 150 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 150 280
WB 180 60 100 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 70 110
NB 430 110 180 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 170 260
SB 830 40 60 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 50 80

6. Emperor
Drive/ SR 12 AM
EBL 490 80 150 -
6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 90 160
EBT 4,200 220 17 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 230 350
EBR 280 30 90 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 90
WBL 260 120 300 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 110 270
WBT 4,700 1,270 1,710 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 1,490 1,800 WBR 250 40 180 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 60 220
163
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-2: Near-Term Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2
Storage
Length
(ft)
Near-Term No
Project
Near-Term with
Realignment
Near-Term with
Prohibited Lefts
Near-Term with
Signals
Near-Term with
Olive Extension
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
NBL 210 40 120 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 50 150
NBTL 790 110 190 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 120 200
NBR 130 40 100 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 40 120
SBL 130 50 110 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 50 110
SBTR 600 100 190 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 160 290
PM
EBL 490 380 620 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 490 550
EBT 4,200 1,040 1,690 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 1,340 1,840 EBR 280 190 390 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 160 370
WBL 260 100 270 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 100 260
WBT 4,700 890 1,310 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 700 1,060
WBR 250 100 290 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 170 350
NBL 210 30 100 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 90
NBTL 790 90 170 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 90 160
NBR 130 40 110 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 40 100
SBL 130 30 60 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 60
SBTR 600 70 120 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 80 150
Notes:

Bold = Queue exceeds available storage length
East Tabor Avenue, Pintail Drive, and SR 12 are eastbound/westbound.

Sunset Avenue, Clay Bank Road, Railroad Avenue, Olive Avenue, and Emperor Drive are northbound/southbound.

1. 95th Percentile Queue: the maximum back of queue with 95th percentile traffic volumes

2. Movement Key: EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound; NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; T = Through; L = Left; R = Right

3. Storage length for this movement is limited to the rail crossing tracks.

4. Storage length is longer in this project scenario.

5. Movement does not exist in this scenario.
164
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

6. Queue results are not impacted by any of the project scenarios that occur solely along East Tabor Avenue.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

165
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Table E-3: Cumulative Weekday Peak Hour Average & 95th Percentile Queue 1 Intersection Peak
Hour Movement 2
Storage
Length
(ft)
Cumulative No
Project
Cumulative with
Realignment
Cumulative with
Prohibited Lefts
Cumulative with
Signals
Cumulative with
Olive Extension

Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)

1. Sunset
Avenue/East
Tabor
Avenue
AM
EBL 150 20 100 30 100 30 110 30 120 30 120

EBTR 370 560 710 450 670 600 670 590 670 570 700
WBL 210 200 260 200 260 230 230 210 260 200 270
WBTR 620 380 800 310 680 1,780 2,100 610 1,300 320 630
NBTL 1,280 150 240 180 280 310 440 150 230 230 340
NBR 1,280 60 100 60 90 70 120 60 100 80 120
SB 60 30 60 30 60 30 70 30 60 30 70
PM
EBL 150 30 120 30 100 20 100 30 110 30 100
EBTR 370 610 650 440 660 590 660 600 670 590 680
WBL 210 150 230 160 250 230 230 150 230 230 240
WBTR 620 110 230 130 280 1,500 2,220 130 260 660 1,070
NBTL 1,280 210 310 290 440 380 460 210 310 250 380
NBR 1,280 210 340 280 440 380 470 200 330 180 310
SB 60 20 50 30 60 30 60 20 50 20 60

2. Clay Bank
Road/East
Tabor
Avenue
AM
EBL 80 80 120 80 130 80 130 90 150 100 190

EBT 230 60 100 60 100 60 100 70 140 80 180
WBT 3 520 250 350 290 430 720 730 250 330 100 170
WBR 3 520 250 360 280 440 560 720 220 270 80 140
SBL 630 670 930 790 950 830 870 170 270 600 880
SBR 630 580 1,010 750 1,040 820 900 90 160 490 900
PM
EBL 80 130 190 150 190 110 180 110 170 200 230
EBT 230 290 570 1,250 2,100 150 270 160 310 740 1,310
WBT 3 520 230 280 280 400 520 700 220 270 520 540
166
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)

WBR 3 520 230 300 340 550 280 480 60 100 340 650
SBL 630 420 690 740 1,030 660 1,000 230 460 710 980
SBR 630 160 430 660 1,160 550 1,070 110 270 610 1,060

3. Railroad
Avenue/East
Tabor
Avenue
AM
EBT
3 100 180 270 -5 - 5 180 250 300 430 40 150
EBR 3 110 200 290 -5 - 5 180 250 300 420 50 160
WBL 360 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 300 430 -5 - 5
WBTL 360 150 280 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
WBT 110 70 210 -5 - 5 360 410 190 250 20 70
NBL 810 1,010 1,060 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 160 280 - 5 - 5
NBR 70 150 270 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
NBR 4 810 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 70 110 90 160 80 140
PM
EBT 3 100 190 310 -5 - 5 210 340 480 710 110 240
EBR 3 110 210 330 -5 - 5 210 330 450 620 60 190
WBL 360 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 250 400 -5 - 5
WBTL 360 160 320 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
WBT 110 70 210 -5 - 5 120 300 170 250 360 400
NBL 810 1,020 1,030 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 1,020 1,040 -5 - 5
NBR 70 100 220 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5
NBR 4 810 - 5 - 5 - 5 - 5 90 150 1,010 1,120 410 730

4. Olive
Avenue/East
Tabor
Avenue
AM
EBL 200 10 10 30 120 10 20 10 10 10 10

EBTR 360 60 70 470 550 60 70 70 100 10 20
WBL 180 10 40 240 260 50 190 20 70 80 150
WBTR 410 10 50 910 1,350 940 1,430 150 450 10 50
NB 4,200 60 100 -5 - 5 940 1,620 250 510 1,320 2,230
167
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)

NBTL 4,200 -5 - 5 260 460 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - -
NBR 150 - - 140 220 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 - -
SB 100 10 40 20 60 60 120 20 40 20 40
PM
EBL 200 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
EBTR 360 60 70 500 550 60 70 90 120 400 450
WBL 180 20 50 240 260 20 60 30 80 170 330
WBTR 410 20 90 900 1,330 30 100 80 270 1,500 2,590
NB 4,200 50 90 -5 - 5 90 180 90 190 - -
NBTL 4,200 -5 - 5 1,270 1,470 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 1,890 3,530 NBR 150 -5 - 5 160 220 -5 - 5 - 5 - 5 1,580 3,460
SB 100 10 40 20 40 10 40 10 40 20 40

5. Emperor
Drive/Pintail
Drive
AM
EB 630 70 110 -
6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 110 170
WB 180 120 220 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 200 350
NB 430 70 120 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 100 160
SB 830 60 90 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 310 420
PM
EB 630 100 180 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 630 1,020
WB 180 70 110 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 80 130
NB 430 110 180 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 190 290
SB 830 40 70 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 60 90

6. Emperor
Drive/ SR 12 AM
EBL 490 110 260 -
6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 170 400
EBT 4,200 380 590 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 460 750
EBR 280 70 220 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 70 250
WBL 260 120 300 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 130 300
WBT 4,700 1,640 1,690 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 1,640 1,700 168
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)

WBR 250 30 150 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 50 190
NBL 210 40 130 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 60 160
NBTL 790 120 200 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 130 210
NBR 130 50 120 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 130
SBL 130 60 130 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 60 140
SBTR 600 110 220 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 200 350
PM
EBL 490 430 660 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 510 510
EBT 4,200 1,610 1,710 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 1,620 1,680 EBR 280 190 400 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 160 370
WBL 260 130 310 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 130 300
WBT 4,700 1,320 1,600 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 1,350 1,600 WBR 250 120 320 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 200 370
NBL 210 30 100 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 20 80
NBTL 790 90 170 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 90 160
NBR 130 50 110 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 50 110
SBL 130 40 90 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 30 70
SBTR 600 70 130 -6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 80 150
Notes:

Bold = Queue exceeds available storage length
East Tabor Avenue, Pintail Drive, and SR 12 are eastbound/westbound.

Sunset Avenue, Clay Bank Road, Railroad Avenue, Olive Avenue, and Emperor Drive are northbound/southbound.

1. 95th Percentile Queue: the maximum back of queue with 95th percentile traffic volumes

2. Movement Key: EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound; NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; T = Through; L = Left; R = Right

3. Storage length for this movement is limited to the rail crossing tracks.

4. Storage length is longer in this project scenario. 169
Railroad Avenue Realignment
January 2025

Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)
Average
Queue
(ft)
95th%ile
Queue
(ft)

5. Movement does not exist in this scenario.

6. Queue results are not impacted by any of the project scenarios that occur solely along East Tabor Avenue.

Source: Fehr & Peers, December 2024.

170

100 Pringle Avenue | Suite 600 | Walnut Creek, CA 94596 | (925) 930-7100 | Fax (925) 933-7090 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum

Date: March 13, 2025
To: Jim Bermudez, Suisun City Development Services Director Nouae Vue, Suisun City Public Works Director/City Engineer From: Sarah Chan, PE TE
Subject: East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue Preferred Alternative (Option B) Fair Share Calculations
WC24-4088
In 2020, Fehr & Peers, in coordination with City of Suisun City staff, evaluated the feasibility of eliminating the planned Railroad Avenue realignment at East Tabor Avenue. The study concluded that eliminating the realignment project and keeping the existing configuration would not cause internal inconsistencies with planned documents. Subsequently, in January 2025, Fehr & Peers prepared the Railroad Avenue Realignment analysis and report. The analysis evaluated traffic operations for three alternative improvement measures for the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection. The report concludes that Option B, which provides right-in and right-out only movements at the East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection by eliminating left turns, would be the most favorable alternative because it would reduce crashes at the intersection.

The purpose of this memorandum is to describe the preferred alternative, the estimated cost for improvements, and identify the potential fair share obligations for two nearby developments.

Preferred Alternative
As described in the Railroad Avenue Realignment Report (January 2025), Option B was the preferred alternative. Option B would not include the realignment along Railroad Avenue and instead would modify the existing East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue intersection by prohibiting left turns and providing right-in and right-out only movements for all approaches. In addition to the appropriate signage, the preferred alternative would construct raised curb extensions and concrete medians with mountable curbs to enforce the right-in and right-out only operations.

Since left turns would be prohibited, the preferred alternative would result in a redistribution of vehicular traffic along the East Tabor Avenue corridor; therefore, in addition to the physical improvements at East Tabor Avenue/Railroad Avenue, the preferred alternative proposes to re- 171
Jim Bermudez and Nouae Vue | City of Suisun City
March 13, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

Suisun City City CouncilApril 1, 2025

Suisun City City Council
April 1, 2025