HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.5 - 3162 Establish Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara
Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: April 7, 2020
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:
Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Establishing Precise Alignment for Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road
Alignment Project
Prepared by: Erwin Ching, Associate Civil Engineer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Council will again consider adopting a Resolution of Intention to establish the
precise alignment for the right-of-way lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive
and the Alameda-Contra Costa County Limit Line and set a public hearing date to hear
protests and objections on April 21, 2020. The City Council previously adopted
Resolution of Intention 17-20 on March 3, 2020, and set a public hearing for the March
17, 2020, City Council meeting. Because the March 17, 2020 City Council meeting was
subsequently cancelled by the proclamation of a local emergency due to the COVID -19
outbreak, the City Council will need to reconsider the item and establish a new public
hearing date.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for the Future Right -
of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive and Alameda -Contra Costa
County Limit Line and set a public hearing date to hear protests and obj ections on April
21, 2020.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The Tassajara Road Realignment and Widening Project, included in the City’s approved
2018-2023 Capital Improvement Program (ST0116), is part of the larger multi -
jurisdictional Tassajara Road/Camino Tassajara Realignment Project that extends from
Palisades Drive in the City to Windemere Parkway in Contra Costa County. This project
will be a joint effort between the City and Contra Costa County.
The City’s share of the total project’s estimated cost is $12.5 mil lion, which Staff
anticipates being funded by State Gas Tax, Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Account (SB-1) funds, and Traffic Impact Fees. There is no impact to the General Fund.
Page 2 of 2
DESCRIPTION:
On March 3, 2020, City Council adopted Resolution 17-20 (Attachment 4), a Resolution
of Intention to establish the precise alignment for the right -of-way lines for Tassajara
Road between Palisades Drive and the Alameda -Contra Costa County. The Resolution
set a public hearing on March 17, 2020 to hear protests a nd objections to the precise
alignment. Subsequently, the March 17, 2020, City Council meeting was cancelled by
the proclamation of a local emergency related to the COVID-19 epidemic.
Due to the meeting cancellation, a new Resolution of Intention (Attachment 1) must be
adopted to set the time and day for a public hearing where any and all persons
objecting to the establishment of the proposed right -of-way lines may appear before the
City Council and object thereto. If adopted, the Resolution of Intention sets a public
hearing for April 21, 2020. At the public hearing, City Council will hear public testimony,
review the proposed right-of-way lines, and then consider establishing the right -of-way
lines by the first reading of an ordinance. At the public hearing, City Council will also
consider approving related amendments to the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan.
The March 3, 2020, City Council report (Attachment 5) provides background, analysis,
and associated environmental review for the project.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:
None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
A copy of this report has been provided to all property owners abutting the proposed
revised alignment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Considering an Initial Study/CEQA Addend um and Adopting a Resolution
of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for Tassajara Road
2. Exhibit 1 to Resolution Considering an Initial Study/CEQA Addendum and Adopting a
Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for Tassajara Road
3. Exhibit A to Resolution Considering an Initial Study/CEQA Addendum and Adopting a
Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for Tassajara Road (Plat & Legal)
4. Resolution 17-20 - Resolution of Intention adopted March 3, 2020
5. City Council Staff Report March 3, 2020 with Attachments
6. Tassajara Road Realignment and Widening Project Budget
RESOLUTION NO. XX-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
CONSIDERING AN INITIAL STUDY/CEQA ADDENDUM AND ADOPTING A RESOLUTION OF
INTENTION TO ESTABLISH PRECISE ALIGNMENT FOR THE FUTURE RIGHT -OF-WAY
LINES FOR TASSAJARA ROAD BETWEEN PALISADES DRIVE AND ALAMEDA-CONTRA
COSTA COUNY LIMIT LINE
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin adopted Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road by
Ordinance No. 20-99 and Ordinance No. 21-04; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51 -93,
certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan (Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, SCH #91103064) (the “1993 EIR”)
that analyzed the ultimate development of Tassajara Road at six travel lanes; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, the Dublin City Council adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration for a precise alignment of a future six-lane major roadway within the Eastern Dublin
Planning Area (Tassajara Road/Fallon Road Ultimate Road Right -of-Way Alignment Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH #2004042008) (the “2004 IS/MN”); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 7.68, the City of Dublin has
proposed a revised alignment for portions of Tassajara Road that differs slightly from the alignment
previously approved in May 2004 (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Project includes a programmatic change in the number of ultimate travel
lanes from six lanes to four lanes for the portion of Tassajara Road as depicted on Exhibit 1,
attached to this Resolution and hereby incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the affected segment of Tassajara Road is between Palisades Drive and the
Alameda-Contra Costa County limit line; and
WHEREAS, to complete the Project, the alignment of Right-Of-Way Lines on Tassajara
Road between Palisades Drive and Alameda -Contra Costa County line must be adjusted; and
WHEREAS, the Right-Of-Way Lines are appropriate and compatible with the existing and
planned land uses and will not overburden public services; and
WHEREAS, the properties through which the proposed Right-Of-Way Lines pass are within
the boundary of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and therefore will be encompassed by, and consistent
with, the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, precise alignment for the future Right-Of-Way Lines will not have a substantial
adverse effect on safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to
property or public improvements; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code
Section 21166, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 require that when an EIR
or negative declaration has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of the following exists:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project
is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was
certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measures or alternative; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, Dublin has completed an Initial
Study/CEQA Addendum (the “Addendum”) for the Project as shown in the Initial Study/CEQA
Addendum for the Tassajara Road Ultimate Right -Of-Way Alignment Project prepared by Jerry
Haag on January 2020 is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum concluded that the Project would not result in any new
significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in 1993
EIR or the 2004 IS/MN and no other CEQA standards for supplemental revisions are met; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after hearing and considering all said reports,
recommendations and testimony at a public hearing on February 11, 2020, adopted Resolution 20-
04, recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council had previously adopted Resolution No. 17-20 setting a public
hearing for 7:00 p.m. on March 17, 2020, but the City Council’s regular meeting on March 17, 2020
was cancelled. In light of that cancellation, the City is adopting a revised resolution of intention in
order to reschedule the hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,
on the basis of substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but not limited to, the 1993
EIR, the 2004 IS/MN, the Addendum, and all related information presented to the City Council, that
the environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed and that an Addendum
is the appropriate environmental document for the proposed Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project will not result in any new significant impacts
or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identifi ed in the previous CEQA
documents and no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts this Resolution of
Intention and calls for a public hearing pursuant to Sections 7.68.080 through 7.6 8.100 of the
Dublin Municipal Code, at 7:00 p.m. on April 21, 2020, in the City of Dublin City Council Chambers,
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California or at a telephonic or electronic place, if such meeting is held
pursuant to the authority granted by Executive Order N-29-20, to hear protests and objections to
the establishment of the proposed Right-Of-Way lines as depicted on the legal description and plat
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to post this Resolution of
Intention in accordance with Section 7.68.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code at least 10 days before
the public hearing.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 7th day of April 2020, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
3504234.1
MEDP6 CO�141V
�� COSH � � .
0 C%" �%t f
LEGEND:
SEGMENT OF
FUTURE TASSAJARA
RD. THAT WILL BE
REDUCED FROM 6-
TO 4-LANES
'w PROPOSED REVISED
ALIGNMENT OF
TASSAJARA ROAD
'-'—PALISADES DR.
IL4,
� "R4
��ANE
TASSAJARA
N. DUBLIN
ROAD RANCH DR.
S. DUBLIN
RANCH DR.
b LANES
GLEASC►N DR.
■
CENTRAL PKWY.
■
E
■
DUBLIN BLVD,
B LAN ES�— _-
Source: City of Dublin
it N
I-580 v .
19702-020
1/2S/2020
Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION
LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP TO BE
CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOR
TASSAJARA ROAD WIDENING
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF THE LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP, AS
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT SERIES NO. 2006392818, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTH CORNER OF PARCEL B OF THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "TRACT
NO. 8133" RECORDED IN BOOK 343 OF MAPS AT PAGES I 1 THROUGH 19, ALAMEDA COUNTY
RECORDS, COMMON TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TASSAJARA ROAD,
SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES
LP, TFIENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TASSAJARA ROAD, ALONG A NON -TANGENT
CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 833.00 FEET, FROM WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS
NORTH 56053'23" EAST, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18013144" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 265.02
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE THF, FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1. ALONG ANON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 833.00 FEET, FROM
WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 75°07'07" EAST, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
20057'08" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 304.62 FEET;
2. NORTH 06004115" EAST, 72.56 FEET TO TFIE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1, SOUTH 73050'31" WEST, 4.78 FEET;
2. THENCE SOUTH 73 052'02" WEST, 162.51 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE AND ENTERING SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY
PROPERTIES LP THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1. SOUTH 25042'31"EAST, 368.54 FEET;
2. NORTH 75007'07" EAST, 16.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 28,696 SQ, FT MORE OR LESS
PORTION OF APN 986-0004-001-00
END OF DESCRIPTION
P:\19702\SRV\Mapping\Desc\19702_ROW DEDICATION-7.doc
PREPARED BY:
IAN B CE 1VjAj�'DONALD
LICEN EDL44D SURVEYOR NO.8817
STATE CALIFORNIA
® Zqy
DATE
9702-020
1/2S/2020
Page 2 of 3
P:\19702\SRV\Mapping\Desc\19702_ROW DEDICATION-7.dac
GON P UN�Y P
GO kA
GS��DOF DU9�-1N
SINGH FAMILY
PROPERTIES LP
APN 936-0004-001-00
SERIES NO, 2006392313
P.0.8.
P.O.C.
EX
PROP
R/W
SF
(R)
AREA TO BE DEDICATED
28,696± SF
PROP R/W
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 3 OF 3
ARW
r � \
- SEE D\TAIL
THIS SKEET
\
ca
o r'
p 6
O
1p
a�
P.O.B
Curve
Table
Curve #
Radius
Delta
Les31
G1
3000000,
0015'03"
Line Table
Line #
Bearing
Length
L1
N6004'15"E
72.56'
L2
N75007'07"E
16.99'
TRACT 8102
d \ 347 M. 50-70
N610
J `vj90
EX R/W \\�rn� w o
cp
\Cc> o,
BOUNDARY OF DESCRIPTION
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
CONTROL LINE
COUNTY LINE
ANGLE POINT
POINT OF BEGINNING
POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
EXISTING
PROPOSE
RIGHT OF WAY
SQUARE FEET
RADIAL BEARING
oo
s
Lp,
C \ P.O.G.
PARCEL 8
TRA CT 3133
343 Al, I I
RESOLUTION NO. 17-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
CONSIDER AN INITIAL STUDY/CEQA ADDENDUM AND ADOPT A
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH PRECISE ALIGNMENT FOR THE FUTURE
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR TASSAJARA ROAD BETWEEN PALISADES DRIVE AND
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LIMIT LINE
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin adopted Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road by
Ordinance No. 20-99 and Ordinance No. 21-04; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51-93,
certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan (Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, SCH #91103064) (the "1993 EIR")
that analyzed the ultimate development of Tassajara Road at six travel lanes; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, the Dublin City Council adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration for a precise alignment of a future six-lane major roadway within the Eastern Dublin
Planning Area (Tassajara Road/Fallon Road Ultimate Road Right-of-Way Alignment Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH #2004042008) (the "2004 IS/MN"); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 7.68, the City of Dublin has
proposed a revised alignment for portions of Tassajara Road that differs slightly from the
alignment previously approved in May 2004 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project includes a programmatic change in the number of ultimate travel
lanes from six lanes to four lanes for the portion of Tassajara Road as depicted on Exhibit 1,
attached to this Resolution and hereby incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the affected segment of Tassajara Road is between Palisades Drive and the
Alameda-Contra Costa County limit line; and
WHEREAS, to complete the Project, the alignment of Right-Of-Way Lines on Tassajara
Road between Palisades Drive and Alameda-Contra Costa County line must be adjusted; and
WHEREAS, the Right-Of-Way Lines are appropriate and compatible with the existing and
planned land uses and will not overburden public services; and
WHEREAS, the properties through which the proposed Right-Of-Way Lines pass are within
the boundary of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and therefore will be encompassed by, and
consistent with, the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, precise alignment for the future Right-Of-Way Lines will not have a substantial
adverse effect on safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to
property or public improvements; and
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code
Section 21166, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 require that when an EIR
or negative declaration has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of the following exists:
1.Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions
of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
2.Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative
Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3.New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was
certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a.The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
b.Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c.Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative; or
d.Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt
the mitigation measures or alternative; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, Dublin has completed an Initial
Study/CEQA Addendum (the "Addendum") for the Project as shown in the Initial Study/CEQA
Addendum for the Tassajara Road Ultimate Right-Of-Way Alignment Project prepared by Jerry
Haag on January 2020 is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum concluded that the Project would not result in any new
significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in
1993 EIR or the 2004 IS/MN and no other CEQA standards for supplemental revisions are met;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after hearing and considering all said reports,
recommendations and testimony at a public hearing on February 11, 2020, adopted Resolution
20-04, recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention.
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,
on the basis of substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but not limited to, the 1993
EIR, the 2004 IS/MN, the Addendum, and all related information presented to the City Council,
that the environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed and that an
Addendum is the appropriate environmental document for the proposed Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project will not result in any new significant impacts
or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in the previous CEQA
documents and no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts this Resolution of
Intention and calls for a public hearing pursuant to Sections 7.68.080 through 7.68.100 of the
Dublin Municipal Code, at 7:00 p.m. on March 17, 2020, in the City of Dublin City Council
Chambers, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California, to hear protests and objections to the
establishment of the proposed Right-Of-Way lines as depicted on the legal description and plat
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to post this Resolution of
Intention in accordance with Section 7.68.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code at least 10 days before
the public hearing.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Goel, Hernandez, Josey, Kumagai and Mayor Haubert
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 3 of 3
MEDP6 CO 141V
COSH .
0 C%" %
t f
LEGEND:
SEGMENT OF
FUTURE TASSAJARA
RD. THAT WILL BE
REDUCED FROM 6-
TO 4-LANES
w
PROPOSED REVISED
ALIGNMENT OF
TASSAJARA ROAD
PALISADES DR.
IL4,
R4
ANE
TASSAJARA
N. DUBLIN
ROAD
RANCH DR.
S. DUBLIN
RANCH DR.
b LANES
GLEASC N DR.
CENTRAL PKWY.
E
DUBLIN BLVD,
B LAN ES— _-
Source: City of Dublin
it N
I-580 v .
19702-020
1/2S/2020
Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION
LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP TO BE
CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOR
TASSAJARA ROAD WIDENING
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF THE LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP, AS
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT SERIES NO. 2006392818, ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS, MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTH CORNER OF PARCEL B OF THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "TRACT
NO. 8133" RECORDED IN BOOK 343 OF MAPS AT PAGES I 1 THROUGH 19, ALAMEDA COUNTY
RECORDS, COMMON TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TASSAJARA ROAD,
SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES
LP, TFIENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TASSAJARA ROAD, ALONG A NON -TANGENT
CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 833.00 FEET, FROM WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS
NORTH 56053'23" EAST, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18013144" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 265.02
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE THF, FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1. ALONG ANON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 833.00 FEET, FROM
WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 75°07'07" EAST, HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
20057'08" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 304.62 FEET;
2. NORTH 06004115" EAST, 72.56 FEET TO TFIE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES LP THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1, SOUTH 73050'31" WEST, 4.78 FEET;
2. THENCE SOUTH 73 052'02" WEST, 162.51 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE AND ENTERING SAID LANDS OF SINGH FAMILY
PROPERTIES LP THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1. SOUTH 25042'31"EAST, 368.54 FEET;
2. NORTH 75007'07" EAST, 16.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 28,696 SQ, FT MORE OR LESS
PORTION OF APN 986-0004-001-00
END OF DESCRIPTION
P:\19702\SRV\Mapping\Desc\19702_ROW DEDICATION-7.doc
PREPARED BY:
IAN B CE 1VjAj'DONALD
LICEN EDL44D SURVEYOR NO.8817
STATE CALIFORNIA
Zqy
DATE
9702-020
1/2S/2020
Page 2 of 3
P:\19702\SRV\Mapping\Desc\19702_ROW DEDICATION-7.dac
GON P UN Y
P
GO kA
GS
DOF DU9-1N
SINGH FAMILY
PROPERTIES LP
APN 936-0004-001-00
SERIES NO, 2006392313
P.0.8.
P.O.C.
EX
PROP
R/W
SF
R)
AREA TO BE DEDICATED
28,696± SF
PROP R/W
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 3 OF 3
ARW
r \
SEE D\TAIL
THIS SKEET
ca
o r' p6
O
1p a
P.O.B
Curve Table
Curve # Radius Delta Les31G13000000, 0015'03"
Line Table
Line # Bearing Length
L1 N6004'15"E 72.56'
L2 N75007'07"E 16.99'
TRACT 8102
d \ 347 M. 50-70
N610
J `
vj90
EX R/W \\rn wocp
Cc>
o,
BOUNDARY OF DESCRIPTION
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
CONTROL LINE
COUNTY LINE
ANGLE POINT
POINT OF BEGINNING
POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
EXISTING
PROPOSE
RIGHT OF WAY
SQUARE FEET
RADIAL BEARING
oosLp,
C \ P.O.G.
PARCEL 8
TRA CT 3133
343 Al, I I
Page 1 of 4
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: March 3, 2020
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:
Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Establish Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road Alignment Project
Prepared by: Erwin Ching, Associate Civil Engineer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Council will review and consider an Initial Study/CEQA Addendum and will
consider adopting a Resolution of Intention to establish the precise alignment for the
right-of-way lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive and the Alameda-Contra
Costa County Limit Line. The proposed alignment will revise the existing alignment in
the northerly segment of Tassajara Road.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for the Future Right-
of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive and Alameda-Contra Costa
County Limit Line.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The Tassajara Road Realignment and Widening Project, included in the City’s approved
2018-2023 Capital Improvement Program (ST0116), is part of the larger multi-
jurisdictional Tassajara Road/Camino Tassajara Realignment Project that extends from
Palisades Drive in the City to Windemere Parkway in Contra Costa County. This project
will be a joint effort between the City and Contra Costa County.
The City’s share of the total project’s estimated cost is $12.5 million, which Staff
anticipates being funded by State Gas Tax, Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Account (SB-1) funds, and Traffic Impact Fees. There is no impact to the General Fund.
DESCRIPTION:
Background
The General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan identify Tassajara Road as a six- to
eight-lane arterial roadway linking several developments in Eastern Dublin with Contra
Costa County (County) to the north, where the roadway name changes to Camino
Tassajara, and the I-580 freeway and City of Pleasanton to the south. In 1999 and
2004, the City adopted right-of-way lines for Tassajara Road, between I-580 and the
Page 2 of 4
northern boundary of Dublin Ranch Phase 1 as Ordinance No. 20-99 and between the
northern boundary of Dublin Ranch Phase 1 to Alameda - Contra Costa County limit line
as Ordinance No. 21-04.
In coordination with the Contra Costa County, a revised alignment of Tassajara
Road/Camino Tassajara was proposed between Palisades Drive in the City and
Windemere Parkway in the County, to improve the existing horizontal alignment and to
improve traffic safety. A conceptual alignment was included as an alternative within the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Moller Ranch (now Tassajara Hills) development
project, which was approved by the Planning Commission on November 27, 2012, as
Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-45.
On February 16, 2016, the City Council approved the addition of the Tassajara Road
Realignment and Widening Project into the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program
and directed staff to proceed with the preliminary design of a revised alignment of
Tassajara Road, which includes four lanes, instead of six lanes, north of North Dublin
Ranch Drive. The reduction from six lanes to four lanes was supported by a study
initiated by the City and Contra Costa County, “Tassajara Road/Camino Tassajara
Capacity Analysis” (“Traffic Analysis”), which was based on up-to-date land-use
estimates along with refined street network data anticipated in the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan (EDSP) and in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Traffic Analysis concluded
that reducing Tassajara Road/Camino Tassajara from six to four lanes (two in each
direction) between North Dublin Ranch Drive in the City and Windemere Parkway in the
County (Figure 1) would result in similar levels-of-service at intersections, minimal traffic
diversion to other roads, and minimal increase in travel times compared to a six-lane
configuration.
Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.68 - Establishing Right-of-Way Lines allows for
establishment of right-of-way lines for purposes of future roadway extension, widening,
or creation of space for future utilities, pedestrian pathways, fire and police emergency
access to property, and all public rights-of-way. The Municipal Code requires the
Planning Commission hold at least one public hearing on any proposed establishment
of right-of-way lines. Upon completion of the hearing, the Planning Commission shall
submit its report and recommendation to the City Council.
Furthermore, in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law, a planning local
agency (Planning Commission) must report on the project’s conformity to the General
Plan as to the location, purpose, and intent of the future right-of-way prior to the
establishment of said right-of way lines. Additionally, an environmental analysis in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) must be completed
for the proposed right-of-way alignment.
On February 11, 2020, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and
adopted a Resolution (Attachment 1), recommending that the City Council consider an
Initial Study/CEQA Addendum (Attachment 5) and recommending that the City Council
adopt a Resolution of Intention to establish precise alignment for the future Right-of-
Way Lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive and the Alameda-Contra Costa
County Limit Line.
The Planning Commission also reviewed and recommended the adoption of a General
Plan amendment and an Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) amendment related to
Page 3 of 4
the Tassajara Road Alignment Project. The General Plan amendment and EDSP
amendment did not include any land use changes, but instead proposed modifying the
number of lanes on Tassajara Road between North Dublin Ranch Drive to the Alameda-
Contra Costa County Limit from six lanes to four lanes.
If the City Council adopts the Resolution of Intention, a public hearing date of March 17,
2020, will be set. At the public hearing, City Council will hear public testimony, review
the proposed right-of-way lines, and then consider the Initial Study/CEQA Addendum
and consider establishing the right-of-way lines by the first reading of an ordinance. On
this same public hearing date, City Council will also consider approving the General
Plan amendment and EDSP amendment.
This agenda item was originally scheduled for February 18, 2020 but was moved to
ensure that the CEQA documents reflected in the packet were accurate.
ANALYSIS:
The establishment of right-of-way lines are intended to reserve sufficient right-of-way for
future road construction. Adoption of an ordinance to establish such lines will not result
in the immediate acquisition of any property but will preclude property owners from
constructing structures within the right-of-way area. The process of acquiring right-of-
way will not begin until after the project’s final design has been completed to ensure that
the required right-of-way has been accurately determined. Land use designations and
density of development surrounding the proposed revised alignment for Tassajara Road
are not modified through the proposed creation of the right-of-way lines. The existing
land uses in General Plan and EDSP will remain as they currently exist.
The Municipal Code requires that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention to
establish right-of-way lines (Attachment 2). The legal description and plat map
(Attachment 4) for the proposed right-of-way lines show the right-of-way that will be
required. Only one property will be affected by the proposed revised alignment and the
impact on this property is approximated in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1
Assessor’s Parcel
Number
Property Owner Right-of-way Acquisition
in Square Feet (SF)
986-0004-001-00 Singh Family Properties LP 28,696 SF
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Potential environmental impacts of the project were previously assessed in the EDSP
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH #91103064) in 1993, which analyzed the
future development of all of Eastern Dublin, including the future widening of Tassajara
Road from two to six lanes. In 2004, the City prepared an Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) (SCH #2004042008) for a precise alignment of Tassajara
Road for the ultimate widening to six lanes from North Dublin Ranch Drive to the
Alameda-Contra Costa County limit line.
The current project would reduce the number of travel lanes within the same area as
previously studied, from six lanes to four lanes. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, the City
Page 4 of 4
completed an Initial Study/CEQA Addendum (Attachment 5) which analyzed the
proposed project including its footprint and the proposed permanent right-of-way lines
for Tassajara Road, and concluded that the project would not result in any new
significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts
identified in the 1993 EIR or the 2004 IS/MND, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. No further environmental review is required for the
project.
The Planning Commission adopted a Resolution (Attachment 1) on February 11, 2020,
recommending the City Council review and consider the Tassajara Road Alignment
IS/Addendum and to adopt a Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for
the Future Right-of-way Lines for Tassajara Road between Palisades Drive and the
Alameda-Contra Costa County Limit Line. Prior to introducing an ordinance establishing
the right-of-way lines, the City Council will first consider the IS/Addendum for the project
and then consider approving the GP and EDSP amendments.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:
None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
A copy of this report has been provided to all property owners abutting the proposed
revised alignment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution Recommending that the City Council Consider an
IS/CEQA Addendum and Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment
for Tassajara Road
2. Resolution of Intention to Establish Precise Alignment for the Future Right-Of-Way
Lines for Tassajara Road
3. Exhibit 1 to Resolution of Intention
4. Exhibit A to Resolution of Intention - Legal Description and Plat Map
5. Initial Study/CEQA Addendum
6. CIP ST0116 Tassajara Road Realignment and Widening
RESOLUTION NO. 17-20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
CONSIDER AN INITIAL STUDY/CEQA ADDENDUM AND ADOPT A
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH PRECISE ALIGNMENT FOR THE FUTURE
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR TASSAJARA ROAD BETWEEN PALISADES DRIVE AND
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LIMIT LINE
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin adopted Right-Of-Way Lines for Tassajara Road by
Ordinance No. 20-99 and Ordinance No. 21-04; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51-93,
certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan (Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, SCH #91103064) (the "1993 EIR")
that analyzed the ultimate development of Tassajara Road at six travel lanes; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, the Dublin City Council adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration for a precise alignment of a future six-lane major roadway within the Eastern Dublin
Planning Area (Tassajara Road/Fallon Road Ultimate Road Right-of-Way Alignment Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH #2004042008) (the "2004 IS/MN"); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 7.68, the City of Dublin has
proposed a revised alignment for portions of Tassajara Road that differs slightly from the
alignment previously approved in May 2004 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project includes a programmatic change in the number of ultimate travel
lanes from six lanes to four lanes for the portion of Tassajara Road as depicted on Exhibit 1,
attached to this Resolution and hereby incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the affected segment of Tassajara Road is between Palisades Drive and the
Alameda-Contra Costa County limit line; and
WHEREAS, to complete the Project, the alignment of Right-Of-Way Lines on Tassajara
Road between Palisades Drive and Alameda-Contra Costa County line must be adjusted; and
WHEREAS, the Right-Of-Way Lines are appropriate and compatible with the existing and
planned land uses and will not overburden public services; and
WHEREAS, the properties through which the proposed Right-Of-Way Lines pass are within
the boundary of Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and therefore will be encompassed by, and
consistent with, the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, precise alignment for the future Right-Of-Way Lines will not have a substantial
adverse effect on safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to
property or public improvements; and
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code
Section 21166, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 require that when an EIR
or negative declaration has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial
evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of the following exists:
1.Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions
of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
2.Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative
Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3.New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was
certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a.The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
b.Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
c.Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative; or
d.Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt
the mitigation measures or alternative; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, Dublin has completed an Initial
Study/CEQA Addendum (the "Addendum") for the Project as shown in the Initial Study/CEQA
Addendum for the Tassajara Road Ultimate Right-Of-Way Alignment Project prepared by Jerry
Haag on January 2020 is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum concluded that the Project would not result in any new
significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in
1993 EIR or the 2004 IS/MN and no other CEQA standards for supplemental revisions are met;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after hearing and considering all said reports,
recommendations and testimony at a public hearing on February 11, 2020, adopted Resolution
20-04, recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intention.
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,
on the basis of substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but not limited to, the 1993
EIR, the 2004 IS/MN, the Addendum, and all related information presented to the City Council,
that the environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed and that an
Addendum is the appropriate environmental document for the proposed Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project will not result in any new significant impacts
or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in the previous CEQA
documents and no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts this Resolution of
Intention and calls for a public hearing pursuant to Sections 7.68.080 through 7.68.100 of the
Dublin Municipal Code, at 7:00 p.m. on March 17, 2020, in the City of Dublin City Council
Chambers, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California, to hear protests and objections to the
establishment of the proposed Right-Of-Way lines as depicted on the legal description and plat
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is directed to post this Resolution of
Intention in accordance with Section 7.68.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code at least 10 days before
the public hearing.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 2020, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Goel, Hernandez, Josey, Kumagai and Mayor Haubert
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Reso No. 17-20, Item 7.1, Adopted 03/03/20 Page 3 of 3
Tassa
Capacit
Final Re
By
1970 Broadw
Oakland, CA
(510) 763‐20
March 19, 20
jara R
ty Analy
eport
way, Suite 740
94612
61
015
Road/C
ysis
0
Caminno Tasssajaraa
Tassajara
Capacity A
Client
DKS Projec
Project Na
Related Ta
Document
File Path
Date Docu
Versi
Numb
0‐1
0‐2
0‐3
0‐4
1‐0
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ct Number
me
sk / WBS Num
Name
ment Issued
ion
ber
11/
11/
11/
2/1
3/1
no Tassajara
aft Report
City of D
14112‐0
Tassaja
mber N/A
Tassaja
p:\p\14
tassajar
March 1
Date
/18/2014 I
/19/2014 R
/21/2014 D
18/2015 U
19/2015 F
Docume
Dublin
001
ra Road/Camin
ra Road/Camin
4\14112‐001 ci
ra capacity ana
19, 2015
Versi
D
nitial Documen
Reviewed and u
Draft Report
Updated with c
Final Report
i
nt Descr
no Tassajara Ca
no Tassajara Ca
ty of dublin on
alysis draft tech
ion Contr
Description o
nt
updated
comments from
iption
apacity Analys
apacity Analys
n‐call tassajara
hnical report.d
rol
of Change
m City of Dubli
is
is Draft Report
rd\07 delivera
docx
in
March
t
ables\camino
Author
JMP
JMP
JMP
JMP/DCM
JMP/DCM
19, 2015
r
Tassajara
Capacity A
Table o
TABLE OF
APPENDIC
LIST OF FI
LIST OF TA
EXECUTIV
STUDY
SUMMA
CONCLU
EXISTING
STUDY
STUDY
ANALYSIS
STUDY
Scena
Scena
Mode
LEVEL O
Signa
Road
CCTA TR
ROADW
INTERS
CCTA TR
SIGNIFI
Contr
City o
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
of Conten
F CONTENTS ..
CES ...............
IGURES .........
ABLES ..........
VE SUMMARY
APPROACH ..
ARY OF RESU
USIONS ........
ROADWAY S
INTERSECTIO
ROADWAY SE
S METHODOL
SCENARIOS ..
ario #1 – Fou
ario #2 – Six‐l
el Adjustmen
OF SERVICE M
alized Intersec
way Segment
RAVEL DEMA
WAY SEGMEN
ECTION VOLU
RAVEL DEMA
CANT IMPAC
ra Costa Coun
of Dublin ......
no Tassajara
aft Report
nts
....................
....................
....................
....................
Y ..................
.....................
LTS ...............
.....................
SETTING .......
ONS ................
EGMENTS .....
LOGY ............
.....................
r‐lane Capaci
lane Capacity
ts .................
METHODOLOG
ctions ...........
ts ..................
AND MODEL ..
T VOLUME FO
UME FORECAS
AND MODEL R
T CRITERIA ...
nty and Tri‐Va
.....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
ty on Tassaja
y on Tassajara
.....................
GIES AND PAR
.....................
.....................
.....................
ORECAST MET
ST METHODO
REVIEW .........
.....................
alley Transpo
.....................
i
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
......................
......................
......................
....................
......................
......................
....................
......................
ra Road/Cam
a Road/Camin
......................
RAMETERS.....
......................
......................
......................
THODOLOGY
OLOGY ...........
......................
......................
rtation Counc
......................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
mino Tassajara
no Tassajara .
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Y ....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
cil .................
.....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
a ...................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
March
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
......................
......................
......................
....................
......................
......................
....................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
19, 2015
....... I
...... II
..... III
..... III
...... 1
....... 1
....... 2
....... 5
...... 6
....... 6
....... 6
...... 8
....... 8
....... 8
....... 8
....... 8
....... 9
....... 9
..... 10
..... 11
..... 11
..... 12
..... 12
..... 13
..... 13
..... 13
Tassajara
Capacity A
Town
Caltra
EXISTING
EXISTIN
INTERS
ROADW
FUTURE C
2040 LA
2040 SE
INTERS
ROADW
FINDINGS
STUDY PA
Appen
APPEND
APPEND
APPEND
APPEND
APPEND
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
n of Danville .
ans ...............
CONDITIONS
NG TRAFFIC VO
ECTION PEAK
WAY PEAK HO
CUMULATIVE
AND USE DES
ELECT‐LINK A
ECTION PEAK
WAY PEAK HO
S AND CONCL
ARTICIPANTS
dices
DIX A INTERSE
DIX B ROADW
DIX C MODEL
DIX D LANE AS
DIX E SELECT‐
no Tassajara
aft Report
.....................
.....................
S ..................
OLUMES AND
K HOUR LEVEL
UR LEVEL OF
E (2040) COND
CRIPTION .....
NALYSIS .......
K HOUR LEVEL
UR LEVEL OF
LUSIONS .......
...................
ECTION LEVE
WAY SEGMENT
LINK VOLUM
SSUMPTIONS
‐LINK ANALYS
.....................
.....................
....................
D LANE CONF
L OF SERVICE
SERVICE ANA
DITIONS .......
.....................
.....................
L OF SERVICE
SERVICE ANA
....................
....................
L OF SERVICE
T LEVEL OF SE
MES
S
SIS
ii
......................
......................
....................
IGURATIONS
ANALYSIS (EX
ALYSIS (EXIST
....................
......................
......................
ANALYSIS (CU
ALYSIS (CUMU
....................
....................
E ANALYSIS
ERVICE ANALY
.....................
.....................
....................
....................
XISTING CON
TING CONDITI
....................
.....................
.....................
UMULATIVE 2
ULATIVE 2040
....................
....................
YSIS
.....................
.....................
....................
.....................
DITIONS) ......
ONS) ............
....................
.....................
.....................
2040 CONDIT
0 CONDITION
....................
....................
March
......................
......................
....................
......................
......................
......................
....................
......................
......................
TIONS) ...........
NS) .................
....................
....................
19, 2015
..... 14
..... 14
.... 14
..... 14
..... 18
..... 19
.... 20
..... 20
..... 20
..... 24
..... 29
.... 31
.... 32
Tassajara
Capacity A
List of
Figure 1 ‐
Figure 2 ‐
Figure 3 ‐
Figure 4 ‐
Figure 5 ‐
Figure 6 ‐
Figure 7 ‐
Figure 8 ‐
List of
Table 1 –
Table 2 –
Table 3 –
Table 4 –
Table 5 –
Table 6 –
Table 7 –
Table 8 –
Table 9 –
Table 10 –
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
Figures
Study Area ..
Lane Configu
Existing Cond
Existing Cond
4‐Lane Cumu
6‐Lane Cumu
4‐Lane Cumu
6‐Lane Cumu
Tables
Study Interse
List of Deficie
Signalized Int
Roadway Seg
Existing Cond
Existing Cond
2040 Select‐L
Cumulative 2
Cumulative 2
– Cumulative
no Tassajara
aft Report
.....................
urations ........
dition Traffic
dition Link Vo
ulative 2040 C
ulative 2040 C
ulative 2040 C
ulative 2040 C
ections and Ju
ent Intersecti
tersection LO
gment LOS Th
ditions Interse
dition Roadwa
Link Analysis
2040 Conditio
2040 Conditio
2040 Conditi
.....................
.....................
Volumes ......
olumes ..........
Condition Lin
Condition Lin
Condition Tra
Condition Tra
urisdiction .....
ons under Fu
OS Thresholds
hresholds and
ection Level o
ay Segment L
Volumes.......
ons Intersectio
ons Intersectio
ions Roadway
iii
......................
......................
......................
......................
k Volumes ....
k Volumes ....
affic Volumes
affic Volumes
......................
uture 2040 Tra
and Definitio
d Definitions ..
of Service ......
Level of Servic
......................
on Level of Se
on Level of Se
y Segment Le
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
....................
....................
.....................
affic Conditio
ons ...............
.....................
.....................
ce .................
.....................
ervice – AM P
ervice – PM P
evel of Service
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
ons ................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Peak Hour .....
Peak Hour .....
e ...................
March
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
19, 2015
....... 7
..... 15
..... 16
..... 17
..... 22
..... 23
..... 27
..... 28
....... 3
....... 4
....... 9
..... 10
..... 18
..... 19
..... 21
..... 24
..... 25
..... 30
Tassajara
Capacity A
Execut
The City o
Tassajara
Route of
future gr
developm
lanes and
standards
Tri Valley
Tassajara
Town of D
staff, Alam
County Tr
Study A
Key inters
Dublin, D
determine
operate t
to evalua
traffic imp
Scenario #
With an a
City of Du
the study
expected
Avenue, C
via Highla
six lanes
existing tr
Scenario #
With an
whether
between
demand f
expected
1 Dougher
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
tive Summ
of Dublin and
Road/Camin
Regional Sig
rowth in tra
ments in the p
d intersection
s of Contra Co
y Transportat
is from Dubl
Danville in Co
meda County
ransportation
Approach
sections and
Danville and
e if two or th
he roadway a
te the numb
pact on local
#1 – Four‐lan
assumed cap
ublin in Alame
assessed wh
to divert to
Collier Canyon
and Road. Wh
were assume
ravel lanes alo
#2 – Six‐lane
assumed cap
relevant stan
I‐580 and I‐
forecast and L
to attract ad
rty Valley Sett
no Tassajara
aft Report
mary
d Contra Cos
o Tassajara R
nificance in t
affic along t
proximate reg
n configuratio
osta County,
tion Plan/Act
in Boulevard
ontra Costa C
y staff, San R
n Authority st
roadway seg
San Ramon,
hree travel la
acceptably un
er of lanes n
roadways in t
e Capacity on
acity of four
eda County to
hether relevan
use local ro
n Road, and N
hile the majo
ed south of D
ong the roadw
Capacity on T
pacity of six
ndards would
680 to avoid
LOS analysis t
ditional traffi
tlement Agre
sta County ar
Road corridor
the Tri‐Valley
the study ro
gion. The pur
on needed to
the City of D
tion Plan1. T
in the City of
County. This
Ramon and D
aff.
gments in th
and Contra
anes per direc
nder future (2
eeded to me
the Tri‐Valley
n Tassajara Ro
lanes on Tas
o Sycamore V
nt standards
oadways such
North Liverm
ority of Tassaj
Dublin Boulev
way segment
Tassajara Roa
lanes on Ta
d be met and
d congestion
that widening
ic of approxim
eement (1994
1
re planning t
r to meet fut
y Transportat
oadway will
rpose of this
o operate Ta
Dublin, the Ci
The study ro
f Dublin in Ala
study was co
Danville staff,
e study area
Costa Coun
ction are nee
2040) traffic c
eet the releva
y area from po
oad/Camino T
ssajara Road/
Valley Road in
would be me
h as El Charr
ore Road to a
jara Road/Ca
vard along Ta
t.
ad/Camino Ta
assajara Road
d whether so
on I‐580 an
g Tassajara Ro
mately 100 ve
4)
to improve tr
ture multi‐mo
tion Plan/Act
result prim
study was to
assajara Road
ty of Danville
adway segm
ameda Count
onducted in
, and Contra
a were select
ty staff. The
eded on Tass
conditions. Tw
ant standards
ossible traffic
Tassajara
/Camino Tass
n the Town of
et and wheth
ro Road/Fallo
access Tassaj
mino Tassaja
assajara Road
assajara
d and Camin
ome traffic w
nd I‐680. It w
oad/Camino T
ehicles per ho
ransportation
odal transpo
tion Plan and
marily from
o determine t
d/Camino Ta
e, the City of
ment of Tassa
ty to Sycamor
collaboration
Costa Count
ted in consult
e objective o
sajara Road/
wo traffic sce
s and to dete
c diversions d
sajara from G
f Danville in C
her traffic to/f
on Road, Isa
jara Road/Cam
ara was mode
d consistent
o Tassajara,
would use thi
was determin
Tassajara fro
our each duri
March
n facilities alo
rtation needs
d it is expect
planned res
the number o
ssajara to m
San Ramon
ajara Road/
re Valley Roa
n with City of
ty and Contr
tation with C
of the study
/Camino Tass
enarios were
ermine the p
described as f
Gleason Drive
Contra Costa
from I‐580 w
bel Avenue,
mino Tassaja
eled with fou
with the num
the study a
is roadway a
ned from the
m four to six
ing both the A
19, 2015
ong the
s. It is a
ted that
sidential
of travel
eet the
and the
Camino
d in the
f Dublin
ra Costa
Cities of
was to
ajara to
studied
otential
ollows:
e in the
County,
would be
Portola
ra Road
ur lanes,
mber of
assessed
as a link
e travel
lanes is
AM and
Tassajara
Capacity A
PM. This
Road, Wi
areas sou
insignifica
area. It is
arterials i
Road is e
Doughert
The study
traffic con
including
The CCTA
because i
Alameda
travel dem
link analy
area that
lanes. The
Capacity M
Summa
This is an
Road/Cam
analysis i
study area
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
is the traffic
ndemere Par
uth of Contra
ant (less than
s also not ex
in Contra Cos
expected to
y Road/Dubli
y roadway seg
nditions. The
the Mollar Ra
A countywide
t produced a
countywide t
mand model i
ysis was cond
may result f
e intersection
Manual analy
ary of Resu
n investigativ
mino Tassaja
ncluded leve
a as listed in T
no Tassajara
aft Report
c that would
rkway and Bo
a Costa Coun
n 1 percent) a
xpected to s
sta County a
relieve traff
n Boulevard
gments and in
existing con
anch Traffic Im
e travel dema
a more conse
travel deman
is included in
ducted to det
from widenin
n and roadwa
ysis methodol
ults
ve study to d
ra acceptabl
l of service a
Table 1.
have otherw
ollinger Cany
nty. The shif
and does not
significantly i
nd Alameda
ic congestion
intersection.
ntersections w
ditions were
mpact Study
and model w
ervative traffi
nd model. The
the Analysis
termine trave
g Tassajara R
ay segment le
logy.
determine th
y according
analysis for 1
2
wise used oth
on Road, Air
ft in traffic f
t affect the o
mpact other
County. How
n along Dou
were analyze
analyzed us
and the 2014
was used to f
ic forecast th
e detailed dis
Methodology
el patterns an
Road/Camino
evel of servic
he number o
to establish
12 intersectio
her arterials
rway Parkway
from the var
overall travel
r intersection
wever, a sligh
ugherty Road
ed under exist
ing recent tr
4 Tri‐Valley Tr
forecast the
han the Dubl
scussion on t
y section of t
nd the extent
o Tassajara fro
e analysis we
of travel lane
ed and app
ons and six (6
such as Dou
y and I‐680 t
rious listed a
distribution
ns and roadw
ht shift in tra
d and particu
ting and cum
affic data fro
ransportation
cumulative 2
in travel dem
the reason fo
his report. Fu
t of traffic di
om four trav
ere conducte
es needed to
licable signif
6) roadway s
March
ugherty Road
to and from j
arterials is re
pattern in th
way segment
affic from Do
ularly at the
ulative (futur
om multiple s
n/Action Plan
2040 traffic v
mand model a
or selecting th
urthermore, a
iversion in th
vel lanes to si
d using the H
o operate Ta
ficance criter
segments wit
19, 2015
d, Fallon
job rich
elatively
he study
ts along
ugherty
critical
re 2040)
sources,
.
volumes
and the
he CCTA
a select‐
he study
ix travel
Highway
assajara
ria. The
thin the
Tassajara
Capacity A
Table 1 – S
No
1 San
2 San
3 Tass
4 Tass
5 Fall
6 Cam
7 El C
8 El C
9 Fall
10 Fall
11 Cam
12 Cam
Study Roa
The appl
significan
1. Ta
2. Ta
3. Ta
4. C
5. C
6. C
Assumptio
For the p
optimized
consisten
Level of S
Intersecti
intersecti
hours. Th
hour but
Fallon Ro
peak hou
The Cami
County G
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
Study Intersect
Inte
ta Rita Rd/I‐58
ta Rita Rd/Tas
sajara Rd/Dub
sajara Rd/Glea
on Rd/Camino
mino Tassajara/
Charro Rd/I‐580
Charro Rd/Fallo
on Rd/Dublin B
on Rd/Silvera
mino Tassajara/
mino Tassajara
adway Segme
icable level
ce is LOS E.
assajara Road
assajara Road
assajara Road
amino Tassaj
amino Tassaj
amino Tassaj
on
urpose of the
d by the var
t basis to asse
ervice Analys
ions LOS Res
ons currently
e Tassajara R
operates una
ad/Camino T
r but operate
no Tassajara/
eneral Plan s
no Tassajara
aft Report
tions and Juris
ersection Name
80 EB off‐ramp
sajara Rd/I‐580
lin Blvd
ason Dr
o Tassajara/Tas
/Highland Rd
0 EB off‐ramp
on Rd/I‐580 WB
Blvd
Ranch Dr
/Windemere P
and Crow Can
ents
of services s
d between Gl
d between No
d/Camino Tas
ara from Win
ara from Lusi
ara from Crow
e analysis, it w
ious agencie
ess the impac
sis (Existing Tr
sults – Based
y operate acc
oad/Dublin B
acceptably at
Tassajara/Tas
es unacceptab
/Highland Ro
standard duri
sdiction
e
p
0 WB off‐ramp
ssajara Rd
B ramps
Pkwy
nyon Rd
standard for
eason Drive a
orth Dublin R
ssajara from F
ndemere Park
itano Street t
w Canyon Ro
was assumed
s under cum
ct of the two
raffic Conditio
d on the LOS
eptably acco
Boulevard inte
LOS E under
sajara Road
bly at LOS F u
ad intersectio
ng the AM pe
3
Owne
Caltrans
p Caltrans
City of Dub
City of Dub
City of Dub
Contra Cos
Caltrans
Caltrans
City of Dub
City of Dub
Contra Cos
Town of Da
r Tassajara R
and North Du
anch Drive to
Fallon Road to
kway to Lusita
o Crow Canyo
ad to Sycamo
d that the sig
mulative (futu
study scenar
ons)
S results und
rding to appl
ersection ope
the City of D
intersection o
nder the City
on operates u
eak hour and
rship
Ci
Ci
blin Ci
blin Ci
blin Ci
ta County Co
Ca
Ca
blin Ci
blin Ci
ta County Co
anville To
Road/Camino
ublin Ranch D
o Fallon Road
o Windemere
ano Street
on Road; and
ore Valley Roa
nalized study
ure 2040) tra
rios.
der Existing C
icable LOS st
erates accept
Dublin standa
operates acc
y of Dublin sta
unacceptably
d operates ac
Signal Opera
ity of Pleasanto
ity of Pleasanto
ity of Dublin
ity of Dublin
ity of Dublin
ontra Costa Co
altrans
altrans
ity of Dublin
ity of Dublin
ontra Costa Co
own of Danvill
o Tassajara, a
rive
e Parkway
d
ad
y intersection
affic conditio
Conditions, n
tandards duri
ably at LOS C
ard during the
ceptably at LO
andard durin
y at LOS E und
cceptably at L
March
tor
Appli
LO
Stan
on D
on D
D
D
D
ounty C
D
D
D
D
ounty C
e D
a regional ro
ns will be pro
ons. This pro
ine of the 1
ng AM and P
C during the A
e PM peak ho
OS D during
g the AM pea
der the Contr
LOS C during
19, 2015
icable
OS
ndard
D
D
D
D
D
C
D
D
D
D
C
D
oute of
oactively
ovides a
2 study
PM peak
AM peak
our. The
the PM
ak hour.
ra Costa
the PM
Tassajara
Capacity A
peak hou
operates
Roadway
during AM
faster dur
Level of S
Intersecti
located u
peak hou
intersecti
Table 2 – L
Defic
Tassajar
Tassajar
Fallon
Source:
Notes:
a. Delay
b. LOS =
c. Analy
analysis
BOLD in
During th
than the
Fallon Ro
scenario.
During th
intersecti
E standar
operate w
Roadway
Drive ope
6‐lane sc
expected
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
r. Only the i
worse than th
LOS Results
M and PM pe
ring the AM p
ervice Analys
ions LOS Res
nder the City
r or PM peak
ons expected
List of Deficien
cient Intersect
a Rd and Dubl
ra Rd and Glea
Rd and Dublin
: DKS Associate
y is in seconds
= Level of Serv
ysis performed
s
ndicates unacc
e AM peak h
2014 Tri‐Vall
ad/Dublin Bo
he PM peak
ons are expe
rd under both
worse than LO
LOS Results
erate at LOS C
enarios the
to operate a
no Tassajara
aft Report
ntersection o
he 2014 Tri‐V
– Under Exis
ak hours in b
peak hour.
sis (Cumulativ
sults – Under
y of Dublin ju
k hour or bot
d to operate u
nt Intersections
ion (#1
Del
in Blvd 39
son Dr 97
Blvd 59
es, 2014
per vehicle an
ice
d using Synchro
ceptable LOS
hour, the Tas
ey Transport
oulevard inte
k hour, the
cted to opera
h scenarios. A
OS E under th
– Under Cum
C or better du
segment of
at LOS C or LO
of Fallon Rd/
Valley Transpo
ting Conditio
both the nort
ve/Future 204
r Cumulative
urisdiction ar
th according
unacceptably
s under Future
AM Peak
1) 4‐Lane
lay LOS D
.9 D
.8 F
.5 E
nd is based on a
o 8.0 HCM 200
ssajara Road/
ation Plan/Ac
rsection is ex
Tassajara R
ate worse tha
Also, the Tas
e six‐lane sce
mulative 2040
uring AM and
Tassajara Ro
OS D during t
4
Camino Tass
ortation Plan/
ons, all study
hbound and
40 Traffic Con
2040 Condit
e expected t
to the City o
are listed in T
e 2040 Traffic C
k Hour
(#2) 6‐Lane
Delay LOS
40.2 D
90.4 F
52.1 D
average stoppe
0 based on lim
/Gleason Driv
ction Plan LO
xpected to op
Road/Gleason
an the 2014 T
ssajara Road/
enario.
0 Conditions,
d PM peak ho
oad between
the AM peak
ajara/Tassaja
/Action Plan
roadway seg
southbound
nditions)
tions, three (
o operate un
of Dublin sign
Table 2.
Conditions
PM
(#1) 4‐Lan
Delay LO
96.9
73.9
168.1
ed delay.
mitations in HCM
ve intersectio
OS E standard
perate worse
n Drive and
Tri‐Valley Tra
/Dublin Boule
, all roadway
ours in both d
n Gleason D
k hour in both
ara Rd during
LOS E standa
ments operat
directions. G
(3) of the 12
nacceptably u
nificant impac
M Peak Hour
ne (#2) 6‐
OS Delay
F 136.5
E 101.5
F 188
M 2010
on is expecte
d under both
e than LOS D
Fallon Roa
nsportation P
evard interse
segments no
directions. Un
Drive and Du
h directions.
March
g the AM pea
rd.
te at LOS C o
Generally, spe
2 study inters
under either
ct criteria. Th
App
L
Sta
‐Lane
LOS
F
F
F
ed to operate
scenarios w
under the fo
d/Dublin Bo
Plan/Action P
ection is expe
orth of Dublin
nder both 4‐la
ublin Ranch D
During the P
19, 2015
ak hour
r better
eeds are
sections
the AM
he three
plicable
LOS
ndard
D
D
D
e worse
hile the
our‐lane
oulevard
Plan LOS
ected to
n Ranch
ane and
Drive is
M peak
Tassajara
Capacity A
hour it op
lane Scen
scenarios
Select‐lin
there is n
travel lan
the study
Road/Cam
during the
Conclus
The selec
both four
overall tra
intersecti
The result
similar le
However,
scenario p
delay per
time, the
southbou
10% to 15
It can the
scenarios
any signif
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
perates at LO
nario than the
.
k Analysis –
no significant
es on Tassaja
y roadway fr
mino Tasssaja
e AM and PM
sions
t‐link analysi
r lane and six
avel distribut
ons and road
ts of the Cum
evel of servic
for intersec
provides less
r vehicle duri
travel time s
nd segment
5% travel time
erefore be co
that widenin
icant benefit
no Tassajara
aft Report
OS F in the no
e six lane sce
The results o
difference in
ara Road/Cam
rom four lan
ra by less tha
M peak hours.
s results indi
x lane scenar
tion pattern
way segment
mulative Cond
ce with sligh
ctions that a
than 10 seco
ng the PM p
savings is gen
along Tassaja
e savings dur
oncluded from
ng Tassajara R
to motorists.
orthbound dir
enario; howev
of the select
n the traffic d
mino Tasssaja
nes to six lan
an 100 vehicle
icate that the
io. The shift
in the study
ts along arter
ditions analys
ht improveme
re expected
onds of saving
peak hour. Ad
nerally under
ara Road bet
ing the PM pe
m the similar
Road/Camino
.
5
rection. The t
ver there is v
link analysis
distribution p
ara is increas
nes is expec
es per hour in
ere are no si
in traffic is re
area. It is als
rials in Contra
ses for the fo
ents at som
to experien
gs per vehicle
dditionally, w
r 5% of the se
tween Gleaso
eak hour.
ity in results
Tassajara fro
travel time is
very little dif
for roadway
attern in the
ed from four
cted to slight
n both northb
gnificant diff
elatively insig
so not expec
a Costa Count
our‐lane and s
e intersectio
ce intolerab
e during the A
while the six‐l
egment trave
on Drive and
of the analy
om four to six
s consistently
fference in LO
ys in the stud
e study area w
r to six lanes.
tly increase
bound and so
ferences in tr
gnificant and
cted to signif
ty and Alame
six‐lane scena
ons under th
le delays at
AM peak hou
ane scenario
el time with t
North Ranch
ysis for the fo
x lanes is not
March
longer unde
OS between t
dy area indica
when the num
. However, w
traffic on Ta
outhbound dir
ravel pattern
does not aff
icantly impac
eda County.
arios general
he six‐lane sc
LOS F, the
r, and an inc
o shows lowe
the exception
h Drive which
our‐lane and
expected to r
19, 2015
er the 4‐
the two
ate that
mber of
widening
assajara
rections
s under
fect the
ct other
ly show
cenario.
six‐lane
rease in
er travel
n of the
h shows
six‐lane
result in
Tassajara
Capacity A
Existin
Study In
Figure 1 s
All of the
synchroni
are opera
ramp inte
Rd/I‐580
Camino T
intersecti
Study R
Tassajara
concrete
access lim
directions
Tassajara
of unsigna
center‐tu
roadway
bike lane
Tassajara
with a low
side of the
Camino T
density of
roadway.
posted sp
Camino T
concrete
speed lim
Camino T
raised con
limit of 45
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ng Roadwa
ntersectio
shows the stu
study interse
ized. The Cam
ated by Contr
ersections are
WB off‐ramp
assajara/Crow
ons are all op
Roadway S
Road betwee
median and
mited to only
s of travel.
Road betwee
alized access
rn lane that
for the majo
between Nor
Road/Camin
w density of
e roadway. It
Tassajara bet
f unsignalized
The roadwa
peed limit of 4
Tassajara betw
median betw
it of 45 mph
Tassajara from
ncrete media
5 mph with ac
no Tassajara
aft Report
ay Setting
ons
udy area and l
ections are sig
mino Tassajar
ra Costa Cou
e operated b
p intersection
w Canyon Ro
perated by th
Segments
en Gleason D
curbs on eit
y signalized in
en North Dub
points. The
continues no
rity of the se
rth Dublin Ra
no Tassajara b
unsignalized
t has a posted
tween Winde
d access poin
y segment h
45 mph.
ween Lusitan
ween signalize
with access li
m Crown Can
an between s
ccess limited
g
locations of t
gnalized and
ra/Highland R
nty. The El C
by Caltrans. T
ns are owned
ad intersectio
e City of Dub
Drive and Nor
her side of t
ntersections a
blin Ranch Dri
segment has
orth until Sh
egment. It ha
nch Drive and
between Fall
access point
d speed limit o
emere Parkw
nts. The roadw
has striped le
no Street and
ed intersectio
imited to only
nyon Road a
signalized inte
to only signa
6
he 12 study in
operating “fr
Road and Cam
Charro Road/
The Santa Rit
d by Caltrans
on is operate
lin.
th Dublin Ran
the roadway.
along the roa
ive and Fallon
striped left‐t
hadow Hill Dr
as a posted s
d Shadow Hill
on Road and
s. The roadw
of 45 mph.
way and Lusit
way segment
eft turn lanes
d Crow Canyo
ons and curbs
y signalized in
nd Sycamore
ersections an
lized intersec
ntersections.
ree”. In other
mino Tassajar
/I‐580 EB off‐
ta Road/I‐580
but operate
ed by the Tow
nch Drive is a
. It has a pos
adway. There
n Road is a tw
turn lanes at
rive and has
peed limit of
l Drive.
d Windemere
way segment
tano Street i
t has no med
s at Highland
on Road is a
s on both side
ntersections a
e Valley Road
nd curbs on e
ctions along t
r words the t
ra/Windemer
‐ramp and Fa
0 EB off‐ram
d by the City
wn of Danville
a four‐lane ro
sted speed li
e are Class II
wo‐lane roadw
t major acces
a curb on t
f 45 mph. Th
e Parkway is
has no media
is a two‐lane
dian or curb o
d Road and F
four‐lane roa
es of the road
along the roa
d is a four‐la
either side. It
the roadway.
March
traffic signals
e Road inters
allon Road/I‐5
p and the Ta
y of Pleasant
e. The remain
oadway with a
mit of 45 m
bike lanes f
way with low
ss points as w
the east side
ere is a nort
a two‐lane r
an or curb on
e roadway w
on either side
Finley Road.
adway with a
dway. It has a
adway.
ane roadway
has a posted
19, 2015
are not
sections
580 WB
assajara
on. The
ning five
a raised
ph with
for both
density
well as a
e of the
hbound
oadway
n either
with low
e of the
It has a
a raised
a posted
y with a
d speed
NO SCALE
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
405 205
8 26
512
99W
SPEED
20
1Figure
205
This symbol has white
hairline edge for placing
over darker backgounds
00%
11 Howard St/Boone Av
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
11.0 B 0.28
LT
TH
RT
RT
TH
LT
RTTHLT
LTTHRT
- Signalized Study Intersection & Number
LEGEND
00
V/CLOS*Delay**
00.0 X 0.00
- PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Volume Turn Movement
RightThruLeft
LTTH RT
- Lane Configuration
- Stop Sign
- Traffic Signal
000
*A/A = Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS
**Unsignalized Delay = Highest Minor Street Approach Delay
126
105
217
5 84
Study AreaCamino TassajaraP:\P\14\14112-001 City of Dublin On-Call Tassajara Rd\06 GraphicsDougher
ty
RdAlcos
ta
B
lvd
Dublin Blvd
Gleason DrVillage PkwyAma
d
or
V
all
ey
Blv
d
Owe
n
s
D
r
W Las
P
o
sit
a
s
Bl
v
d
Stoneridge Dr
E
B
r
a
n
c
h
P
k
w
y
Pimlico
DrBlackhawk RdSilvera
Ranch
Dr
Westminster Pl
Tassajara Ranch Dr
Tassajara Village Dr
Buckingham Pl
Parkhaven Dr
Jasmine Wy
Lawrence Wy
Hansen Ln
Shadow Creek Dr
Knollview Dr
Charbray St
Lusitano St
12
6
11
5
10
4
3
2
9
8
71Dougher
ty
RdDougherty RdN. Dublin
Ranch Rd
Antone Wy
S Dublin
Ranch Rd
Signal Hill Dr
Turnberry Dr
- Signalized Intersection
- Danville/Dublin City
Boundary
- Contra Costa County
Boundary
City of Danville
City of D
u
b
l
i
n
Contra
C
o
s
t
a
C
o
u
n
t
y Alameda CountyCamino TassajaraCami
n
o
Tassaj
a
r
a
Windemere P
k
w
y
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
Tassajara RdAM (PM) - Segment Peak Hour Volumes
Tassajara
Capacity A
Analys
Study S
In order t
traffic div
Scenario
With an a
City of Du
the study
Charro Ro
to access
Road/Cam
Boulevard
segment.
Scenario
With assu
roadway t
model as
lanes from
Plan.
Model Ad
During th
more accu
adjustme
R
p
A
C
V
C
Pa
Appendix
future sce
In additio
scenarios
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
sis Method
Scenarios
o determine
ersions, the f
o #1 – Four‐l
assumed cap
ublin in Alame
y assesses wh
oad/Fallon Ro
s Tassajara R
mino Tassajar
d along Tassa
o #2 – Six‐lan
umed capacity
to access Cam
sumes six la
m Windemer
djustments
e model scen
urately the ex
nts were mad
evised the nu
lanned roadw
dded a centro
oded Tassaja
alley Road fo
oded Tassaja
arkway for Sc
x C contains a
enarios.
on, key roadw
were revie
no Tassajara
aft Report
dology
the potentia
following two
lane Capacit
acity of four
eda County to
hether traffic
oad, Isabel Av
Road/Camino
ra is modeled
ajara Road co
ne Capacity
y of six lanes
mino Tassajar
nes from the
e Parkway to
nario develop
xisting and fu
de to the netw
umber of lane
way improvem
oid connecto
ara Road/Cam
r Scenario #1
ara Road/Cam
cenario #2.
a table and m
way improve
ewed to en
l of traffic im
o scenarios ar
ty on Tassaj
lanes on Tas
o Sycamore V
c to/from I‐58
venue, Portol
Tassajara Ro
with four lan
onsistent wit
on Tassajar
on Tassajara
ra in Danville
e Tassajara R
o Tassajara R
pment proces
uture roadwa
work:
es along Tassa
ments,
r from Silvera
mino Tassajar
1, and
mino Tassajar
maps showing
ments were
nsure that
8
pact on local
e analyzed:
ara Road/C
ssajara Road/
Valley Road in
80 is expecte
a Avenue, Co
oad via High
nes, the upda
h the numbe
ra Road/Cam
Road, there
to avoid cong
Road/I‐580 in
anch Drive a
ss the CCTA t
ay network co
ajara Road, Sa
a Ranch Drive
ra as a 4‐lan
a as a 6‐lane
g the number
identified an
the models
roadways in
Camino Tass
/Camino Tass
n the Town of
ed to divert t
ollier Canyon
hland Road.
ated CCTA Mo
er of existing
mino Tassaj
is the possib
gestion on I‐5
nterchange to
ccording to t
travel deman
onfiguration i
anta Rita Roa
e to Tassajara
ne facility fro
e facility from
r of travel lan
nd the future
accurately
the Tri‐Valle
sajara
sajara from G
f Danville in C
to use local r
Road, and No
While the m
odel has six la
g travel lanes
jara
ility that som
580 and I‐680
o Windemere
the Contra Co
nd model wa
in the project
ad and El Cha
a Rd,
om Gleason D
m Gleason Dr
nes assumed
e model netw
reflect the
March
ey area from p
Gleason Drive
Contra Costa
roadways suc
orth Livermo
majority of Ta
anes south of
s along the r
me traffic will
0. The update
e Parkway a
osta County G
s adjusted to
t area. The fo
rro Road to r
Drive to Syca
rive to Winde
for the exist
works for th
planned r
19, 2015
possible
e in the
County,
ch as El
re Road
assajara
f Dublin
oadway
use this
ed CCTA
nd four
General
o reflect
ollowing
reflect
amore
emere
ting and
e study
oadway
Tassajara
Capacity A
improvem
Costa Cou
C
Jo
Ex
H
Ex
Fa
Sa
Level o
Signalize
A Level of
the avera
represent
LOS A is c
Valley Tra
capacity.
Table 3 – S
According
capacity a
during the
Highway C
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ments. Some o
unty’s Compre
onstruction o
oaquin Count
xtension of D
acienda Drive
xtension of D
allon Rd/El Ch
anta Rita Roa
f Service M
ed Intersect
f Service (LOS
age delay p
ting free‐flow
considered ex
ansportation
LOS definitio
Signalized Inte
L
Sou
Boa
g to the City o
analysis were
e weekday A
Capacity Man
no Tassajara
aft Report
of the key pr
ehensive Tran
of HOV lanes
y
Dublin Bouleva
e widening
Dougherty Roa
harro Road in
ad interchang
Methodolo
tions
S) evaluation
er vehicle e
w conditions t
xcellent, whi
Plan/Action
ns, considerin
rsection LOS T
Level of
Service
A
A
B
C
D
E
F
urce: 2000 High
ard, 2000.
of Dublin, Mo
e conducted
M peak hour
nual (HCM) op
ojects that ar
nsportation P
s on I‐580 fr
ard from Fallo
ad
nterchange im
e improveme
ogies and P
is a qualitat
experienced
to “F” repres
le LOS E is co
Plan; and L
ng vehicle de
Thresholds and
Average Cont
(seconds/v
≤ 10
> 10 and ≤ 2
> 20 and ≤ 3
> 35 and ≤ 5
> 55 and ≤ 8
> 80
hway Capacity
oller Ranch Tr
on April 19,
(7:00 to 9:00
perations me
9
re included in
Project List ar
rom Tassajara
on Road to Ai
mprovements
ents
Parameter
ive descriptio
during peak
senting conge
onsidered sat
LOS F repres
lay for signali
d Definitions
trol Delay
vehicle)
F
In
0 S
M
5 S
A
5 A
T
0 U
S
F
E
y Manual, Tran
raffic Impact
2012. Inters
0 AM) and PM
thodology an
n the model n
re:
a Road to V
irway Boulev
rs
on of an inte
k travel peri
ested conditi
tisfactory op
sents unacce
ized intersect
Descr
Free flow/
nsignificant De
Stable Operatio
Minimal Delay
Stable Operatio
Acceptable Del
Approaching U
Tolerable Delay
Unstable Opera
Significant Dela
Forced Flow/
Excessive Delay
nsportation Re
Study interse
sections were
M peak hour
nd Synchro 8.
networks acc
Vasco Road a
ard
rsection’s pe
iods. LOS ca
ions with lon
erating cond
eptable cond
tions, are sho
ription
elay
on/
on/
ay
nstable/
y
ation/
ay
y
esearch
ection vehicle
e evaluated f
(4:00 to 6:00
0 software.
March
ording to the
nd further to
rformance ba
an range fro
ng delays. Ge
itions under
ditions, at or
own in Table 3
e counts used
for traffic con
0 PM) using th
19, 2015
e Contra
o San
ased on
om “A”
enerally,
the Tri‐
r above
3.
d for the
nditions
he 2000
Tassajara
Capacity A
For signal
intersecti
the inters
intersecti
Roadway
Measures
performa
used to c
reflects th
including
congested
while LOS
Plan; and
vehicle tr
As there
calculated
delay for
Table 4 – R
The above
done by c
2 According
Transporta
Capacity M
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ized intersect
on. The LOS
section. A com
on.
y Segments
s of effective
nce measure
characterize v
he factors tha
control dela
d conditions
S E is consider
LOS F repre
avel speeds a
is no coord
d as the sum
study interse
Roadway Segm
Level
Servic
A
B
C
D
E
F
Source: 20
e MOEs for e
comparing the
g to the 2013 C
ation/Action Pl
Manual for ana
no Tassajara
aft Report
tions, this me
is then based
mbined avera
ness (MOE)
es as signal d
vehicular LOS
at influence r
y. LOS can r
with long de
red satisfacto
esents unacce
as a percenta
ination betw
of free flow
ctions within
ment LOS Thres
of
ce
Tr
Perce
010 Highway C
xisting condit
e results of th
CCTA Technica
lan for Routes
lyses of impact
ethodology de
d on average
age delay, we
for roadway
elay, travel t
S for a given
unning time a
range from “
elays and ext
ory operating
eptable cond
age of free flo
ween signals
travel time a
each study s
sholds and De
ravel Speed a
entage of Fre
Speed
>85
> 67 and ≤ 8
> 50 and ≤ 6
> 40 and ≤ 5
> 30 and ≤ 4
> 30
Capacity Manu
tions provide
he each propo
l Procedures (p
of Regional Sig
ts of developm
10
etermines the
e delay (in se
eighted by ap
segments re
ime, and ave
direction of
along each lin
A” represent
ensive queui
conditions un
ditions, at or
ow speed, are
along the st
long each stu
segment.
finitions
as a
ee Flow
5
7
0
0
ual2
e a basis for e
osed scenario
p.26) and spec
gnificance, “an
ment or benefit
e capacity of
conds per ve
pproach volum
eported in th
erage speeds
travel along
nk and the de
ting free‐flow
ing. Generally
nder the Tri‐V
above capac
e shown in Ta
tudy roadwa
udy segment
Desc
Primarily Free
Reasonably un
operation
Stable Operati
Less stable op
Unstable Oper
Significant Del
Extremely low
Extensive que
evaluating the
o.
cified in the 20
nalysts are enco
ts from transpo
each lane gro
ehicle) for the
me, and LOS
his analysis in
. Through ve
a roadway s
elay incurred
w conditions
y, LOS A is c
Valley Transp
city. LOS def
able 4 and m
y segments,
and the aver
ription
flow operatio
nimpeded
ion
eration
ration/
lay
w speed/
uing
e proposed sc
14 Tri‐Valley
ouraged to use
ortation impro
March
oup approach
e movements
is presented
nclude such c
ehicle travel s
segment. Thi
by through v
to “F” repre
onsidered ex
portation Plan
finitions, cons
meet CCTA sta
travel time
rage through
n
cenarios. This
e the 2010 Hig
ovements”.
19, 2015
hing the
s within
for the
corridor
speed is
s speed
vehicles,
esenting
xcellent,
n/Action
sidering
andards.
will be
‐vehicle
s will be
hway
Tassajara
Capacity A
CCTA T
To estima
version of
also make
interim d
5‐year in
environm
that set h
land use
analysis. I
the result
Different
horizon y
years bet
Projection
land use s
The curre
• A
• A
• P
• P
• O
For this ef
• 20
• 20
For each
procedure
Roadwa
The volum
general, o
Instead, c
produced
illustrated
Horizon
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
Travel Dem
ate the future
f the CCTA tra
es use of 201
raft land use
ncrements. I
ental review
as not been r
distributions
In general, th
ts of this analy
highway net
years. The cu
tween 2000 a
n, the model
set for the sce
nt countywid
M Peak hour
M Peak perio
M peak hour,
M Peak perio
Off‐Peak perio
ffort, the follo
013 (represen
040 (represen
scenario, th
es are further
ay Segmen
me forecasts
outputs from
changes in for
by the trav
d in the follow
Year Volume
no Tassajara
aft Report
mand Mode
e year traffic
avel demand
0 count data
Projections 2
t should be
is currently
reviewed and
and therefo
he land use e
ysis more con
works are av
rrent version
and 2040. Fo
interpolates
enario year.
de travel dem
,
od (6‐10 AM),
,
od (3‐7 PM), a
od, covering a
owing model
nting the “exi
nting Scenario
he AM peak
r described in
nt Volume
for the stud
m the travel
recast deman
vel demand
wing equation
es = Existing (
el
demand inpu
model was u
. The land us
2011 (Curren
e noted tha
underway an
d approved by
ore not appro
stimates in P
nservative co
vailable in the
n of the trave
or scenario ye
the land use
and model in
and
ll remaining h
datasets wer
isting year” m
os 1 and 2 in
k hour and
n the followin
e Forecast
y segments w
demand mo
nd volumes b
model, were
n:
(Observed) V
Mo
11
uts for the tra
used. This mo
e and socio‐d
nt Regional Pl
at the Cont
nd will be bas
y the local jur
opriate for th
Projections 20
mpared to re
e model to r
el demand m
ears that are
e between th
ncludes the fo
hours.
re used:
model scenari
horizon year
PM peak ho
g sections.
Methodol
were develop
odel were no
etween the e
e added to
Volumes + (Ho
odel Forecast
affic operatio
odel set is cali
demographics
lans) which c
tra Costa C
sed on ABAG
risdictions, it
he Tassajara
011 are highe
esults based o
represent net
model can ge
e not directly
he nearest tw
ollowing analy
io),
2040).
our assignme
logy
ped using the
ot used direc
existing year a
observed tr
orizon Year M
t)
onal analysis,
ibrated to 200
s information
over years 20
ountywide T
G’s Projection
includes an a
Road/Camin
er than Proje
on Projections
twork improv
enerate scena
y included in
wo years in o
ysis periods:
ents were u
e CCTA trave
ctly in the o
and each futu
affic volume
Model Forecas
March
the latest ap
00 traffic cou
n is based on
010 through
Transportatio
s 2013, but b
approximatio
o Tassajara c
ections 2013,
s 2013.
vements at d
ario networks
the ABAG la
order to deve
tilized. The
el demand m
operational a
ure scenario
es. This appr
st – “Existing
19, 2015
pproved
unts and
ABAG’s
2040 in
on Plan
because
n of the
capacity
making
different
s for all
and use
elop the
specific
odel. In
analysis.
year, as
roach is
g Year”
Tassajara
Capacity A
For new f
used dire
adjustme
The 2013
used to fo
growth w
existing p
volumes f
The appro
approach
Interse
For the i
procedure
then appl
Following
intersecti
This proce
• G
• C
• A
ex
• A
CCTA T
As the lar
demand m
model by
travel dem
area, incl
Parkway,
Road, El C
The CCTA
model vo
compariso
similar re
being slig
models a
facilities b
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
facilities and
ectly for inp
nts described
model datas
orecast grow
will be determ
peak hour vol
for both exist
oach describ
and departu
ection Volu
ntersection a
es described
ying the Furn
g this proced
ons.
ess may be su
enerate 2013
ompute the m
pply Furness
xisting turn m
pply manual
Travel Dem
rgest part of
model for the
y comparing i
mand model.
uding but no
Fallon Road
Charro Road a
A travel dema
olumes, as th
on showed th
sults with re
ghtly more co
long Tassajar
being coded d
no Tassajara
aft Report
movements t
put to the o
d below.
set was used
wth for the fu
mined using th
ume for each
ing and futur
ed above wa
re links for th
ume Forec
analysis, an
above to det
ness methodo
dure, manua
ummarized as
3 and 2040 m
model growth
methodolog
movement de
adjustments
mand Mode
the study co
e roadway ca
t with a) the
. The compar
ot limited to
, Gleason Dr
and Stoneridg
and model vo
he City of D
hat the two m
spect to the
onservative.
ra Road and
differently in
that do not e
operational
d for the “exi
uture traffic c
he respective
h link. Appen
re year scenar
as used to de
he study inter
cast Metho
expanded ap
termine appr
ology to dete
al adjustmen
s follows:
model forecast
h for each link
gy to comput
mands and fo
to balance de
el Review
rridor is in Co
apacity analy
e City of Dub
rison mostly
the following
rive, Central
ge Drive.
olumes were
Dublin and th
models (both
trip allocatio
There were
Fallon Road,
the two mod
12
exist today, t
analysis, sub
isting year” m
conditions. Fo
peak hour m
dix D contain
rios.
evelop foreca
rsections.
odology
pproach was
oach‐link and
ermine individ
ts were ma
ts for each int
k (2040 mode
e individual t
orecast appro
emands betw
ontra Costa C
ysis. However
lin travel dem
focused in th
g facilities: Ta
Parkway, Du
e compared w
he Tri‐Valley
based on lan
on in the stud
certain signi
, but that di
dels; the two
he horizon‐ye
bject to the
model foreca
or AM and P
models. This g
ns maps of th
asts for the a
used. This
d departure‐l
dual turning
de to balan
tersection ap
el output min
turning move
oach and dep
ween adjacent
County, it wa
r, DKS took a
mand model
he estimated
assajara Roa
ublin Bouleva
with the Alam
y are incorpo
d use forecas
dy area, with
ificant volum
d not raise c
models have
ear model fo
reasonablen
ast. The 2040
PM analysis p
growth volum
he study area
arterial segm
approach inv
ink growth fo
movements a
nce demands
pproach and d
nus 2010 mod
ement dema
arture link gr
t intersection
s decided to
a first step in
and b) the A
peak hour v
d/Camino Ta
ard, Dougher
meda county
orated in Ala
sts of Project
the volumes
me difference
concerns as
e different ass
March
orecast outpu
ness and ba
0 model data
periods, the f
me was added
a showing mo
ments, as wel
volved apply
or each inter
at each inter
s between a
departure link
del output);
nd forecasts
rowth; and
ns.
use the CCTA
n assessing th
Alameda coun
volumes in th
assajara, Win
rty Road, San
wide travel d
ameda Coun
ions 2011) pr
s in the CCTA
es between t
it was due t
sumptions ab
19, 2015
uts were
alancing
set was
forecast
d to the
odel link
l as the
ying the
section,
section.
adjacent
k;
using
A travel
he CCTA
ntywide
he study
demere
nta Rita
demand
nty. The
roduced
A model
the two
o those
bout the
Tassajara
Capacity A
number o
case.
Having co
the Alam
segment
analysis. T
produced
“gateway
Signific
Contra C
The Tri‐Va
such as in
is an acce
area rega
evaluated
50 or mor
The stan
Plan/Actio
At the int
LOS stand
intersecti
threshold
Project.
City of D
An impac
project w
significant
previously
that the C
already op
uses HCM
with the H
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
of lanes of the
ompared the
eda countyw
is located in
The model s
more conse
capacity con
cant Impac
Costa County
alley Transpo
ntersections a
ptable level o
ardless of ho
d under CCTA
re project trip
dard set for
on Plan is LOS
tersections of
dard is LOS C
ons are regar
as outlined
ublin
t would be s
ould exceed a
t if a new inte
y identified in
City strive fo
perating belo
M 2000 metho
HCM 2000 me
no Tassajara
aft Report
e two facilitie
CCTA travel d
wide model, a
Contra Costa
cenarios wer
rvative traffic
straints”.
ct Criteria
y and Tri‐Va
ortation Coun
along Camino
of traffic oper
ow the inter
A requiremen
ps in a peak p
rth for Rout
S E. All study
f Camino Tas
based on the
rded as a sem
in the Count
ignificant if a
acceptable le
ersection is id
n the Eastern
or LOS D at in
ow an accepta
od for interse
ethod
es, and that re
demand mod
as well as tak
a County, it w
re developed
c volumes in
alley Transp
cil set maxim
Tassajara. Ac
ration at inte
rsections are
ts include sig
eriod when u
tes of Regio
intersections
ssajara/Highla
e standard se
mi‐rural inter
ty’s comment
an intersectio
evels with the
dentified as e
Dublin EIR a
ntersections.
able threshold
ection LOS ca
13
esulted in the
del volumes w
king into acc
was decided t
using the “u
the study are
portation Co
mum levels of
ccording to th
rsections on t
e currently o
gnalized inter
used to assess
onal Significa
s are on Route
and Road and
et forth in in
section and t
ts in the Add
on operating
e addition of p
xceeding acce
as a study inte
An impact w
d and the pro
lculations. Th
ese facilities a
with those fro
count the fac
to use the CC
unconstraine
ea compared
ouncil
f congestion f
he CCTA requ
the routes of
operating. Fu
rsections tha
s the potentia
ance in the
es of Regiona
d Camino Tas
the Contra C
therefore hav
dendum to th
at an accept
project traffic
eptable level
ersection. Th
would also b
oject worsens
he remaining
attracting trip
om the City o
ct that the m
CTA travel dem
ed” version o
to the versio
for routes of
uirements, lev
f regional sign
urthermore,
t are expecte
al impact of n
2014 Tri‐Va
al Significance
ssajara/Wind
Costa County
ve a more str
he Proposed
table level of
c. In addition,
s and if such
e General Pla
e significant
s the conditio
intersections
March
ps differently
of Dublin mo
majority of th
mand model
of the model
on that incorp
regional sign
vel of service
nificance in th
intersections
ed to be affe
new developm
alley Transpo
e.
emere Parkw
General Plan
ringent perfo
Creekside Ce
f service with
, an impact w
intersection w
an standard r
if an interse
on. The City of
s were also a
19, 2015
in each
odel and
e study
for this
as that
porated
ificance
E (LOS)
he study
s to be
ected by
ment.
ortation
way, the
n. These
ormance
emetery
hout the
would be
was not
requires
ection is
f Dublin
nalyzed
Tassajara
Capacity A
Town of
The Tri‐V
Regional S
are:
• D
m
• Sy
• C
Intersecti
Capacity
intersecti
Caltrans
Caltrans e
highway f
that the l
highway f
maintaine
Existin
Existing
The lane
Condition
condition
3 Town of D
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
Danville3
Valley Council
Significance i
anville Boule
missing segme
ycamore Valle
row Canyon R
ons on the f
Manual (HCM
on of Crow C
endeavors to
facilities, how
ead agency c
facility is ope
ed.
ng Conditi
g Traffic V
configuration
ns traffic volu
s.
Danville Gener
no Tassajara
aft Report
l has establis
nclude two co
vard/San Ram
ent through D
ey Road and
Road (south o
first two of t
M) Operation
anyon Road a
o maintain a
wever, Caltran
consult with
erating at less
ions
Volumes an
ns for each o
umes are pre
ral Plan, Chapt
shed LOS sta
orridors with
mon Valley Bo
Downtown Da
Camino Tassa
of Camino Tas
these corrido
nal Method.
and Camino T
target LOS a
ns acknowled
Caltrans to d
s (worse) tha
nd Lane Co
of the study
sented in Fig
er 4, 2013
14
andards for “
in Danville an
oulevard sout
anville in the c
ajara (a single
ssajara)
ors are subje
The Town o
Tassajara.
at the transit
dges that this
determine th
n the approp
onfigurati
intersections
gure 3. Figure
“Routes of R
nd one corrid
th of Sycamo
center)
e corridor com
ect to an LOS
of Danville h
tion between
may not alw
e appropriat
priate target
ions
s are presen
e 4 shows lin
Regional Sign
dor on the edg
ore Valley (a s
mprised of tw
S E standard
as a standar
n LOS “C” an
ways be feasib
e target LOS
LOS, the exis
ted in Figure
nk volumes u
March
ificance.” Ro
ge of Danville
single corrido
wo roads)
d using the H
rd of LOS D
nd LOS “D” o
ble and recom
. If an existin
sting MOE sh
e 2 and the
under existing
19, 2015
outes of
e. These
or with a
Highway
for the
on State
mmends
ng State
ould be
Existing
g traffic
Figure 2
Existing Lane Configuration
Traffic Signal
Stop Sign
A A CDE
LEGENDJJL NA CD PA C
JJ NA A C
JLL N N9. Fallon Rd & Dublin Blvd 10. Fallon Rd & Sivera Ranch Dr 11. Camino Tassajara & Windemere Pkwy 12. Camino Tassajara & Crow Canyon Rd
DE
A DA A A CDJLL N JL KL JLL N NJL NA CE D
JJ N NCDE
5. Tassajara Rd & Fallon Rd 6. Camino Tassajara & Highland Rd 7. El Charro Rd & I‐580 EB ramps 8. El Charro Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
A A CCE
A CEOA BEEJL N L N JKL JLLJL N NCCCE
CCE
JJLL N NA A A CCE
JL N NA A DJLL N
1. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 EB ramps
2. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
3. Tassajara Rd & Dublin Blvd
4. Tassajara Rd & Gleason Dr A A EEA A EEA A A CDJLL N
JJLLL
JJLLLL N N
P:\P\14\14112‐001 City of Dublin On‐Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics\Camino Tassajara Volume Figures v2
RT
RT TH LT LT
LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
RT TH LT
TH RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT LT TH LT LT RT TH RT TH LT
LT LT TH RT TH RT LT TH RT TH RT
TH
RT RT
RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT RT TH RT TH RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT LT LT TH LT LT TH LT LT TH RT
TH TH
RT RT RT RT
Traffic Signal
AM(PM)258 (307)0 (0)181 (189)408 (402)15 (46)364 (516)75 (33)21 (158)71 (128)
282 (1017)193 (183)99 (184)
12. Camino Tassajara & Crow Canyon Rd
78 (72)28 (13)
434 (438)
252 (172)74 (32)82 (214)192 (514)182 (182)
5 (1)21 (6)42 (127)88 (1)21 (18)71 (19)170 (415)2 (47)2 (3) 97 (5)58 (22)
0 (1) 264 (43)198 (314)
3 (3)2 (6)270 (425)59 (157)347 (196)274 (571)5. Tassajara Rd & Fallon Rd 6. Camino Tassajara & Highland Rd 7. El Charro Rd & I‐580 EB ramps 8. El Charro Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
681 (235)120 (79)0 (1)443 (208)53 (215)86 (191)416 (703)172 (191)665 (338)
181 (477)
33 (66)1009 (1433)553 (677)63 (551)329 (402)553 (714)117 (394)114 (192)
48 (213)230 (71)920 (466)59 (23)252 (151)
374 (479)
315 (298)
15 (34)
51 (22)
191 (147)
155 (67)779 (1288)398 (537)1. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 EB ramps
2. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
3. Tassajara Rd & Dublin Blvd
4. Tassajara Rd & Gleason Dr228 (298)1013 (1021)175 (288)844 (647)866 (1104)163 (179)
544 (509)
384 (233)
538 (434)
59 (306)
147 (226)170 (99)1094 (654)16 (55)148 (428)287 (124)
10. Fallon Rd & Sivera Ranch Dr
3 (19)138 (78)1 (5)11 (9)65 (128)29 (10)
11. Camino Tassajara & Windemere Pkwy
62 (35)501 (188)Volume Turning
Movements
Figure 3
LEGEND
87 (329)
9. Fallon Rd & Dublin Blvd
29 (20)512 (360)0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (1)
18 (88)
Existing Condition Turn Movement Volumes
20 (30)
0 (1)56 (79)124 (468)P:\P\14\14112‐001 City of Dublin On‐Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics\Camino Tassajara Volume Figures v2
NO SCALE
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
405 205
8 26
512
99W
SPEED
20
4Figure
205
This symbol has white
hairline edge for placing
over darker backgounds
00%
11 Howard St/Boone Av
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
11.0 B 0.28
LT
TH
RT
RT
TH
LT
RTTHLT
LTTHRT
- Signalized Study Intersection & Number
LEGEND
00
V/CLOS*Delay**
00.0 X 0.00
- PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Volume Turn Movement
RightThruLeft
LTTH RT
- Lane Configuration
- Stop Sign
- Traffic Signal
000
*A/A = Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS
**Unsignalized Delay = Highest Minor Street Approach Delay
126
105
217
5 84
Existing Condition Link Volumes
P:\P\14\14112-001 City of Dublin On-Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics- Signalized Intersection
- Danville City Boundary
- Dublin City Boundary
- Contra Costa County
BoundaryAM (PM) - Segment Peak Hour Voumes
Tassajara
Capacity A
Interse
Table 5 su
and PM p
Table 5 – E
No
1 Sa
I‐5
2 Sa
Rd
3 Ta
4 Ta
5 Fa
Ta
6 Ca
Hig
7 El
I‐5
8 El
58
9 Fa
10 Fa
Sil
11 Ca
W
12 Ca
Cr
Source:
Notes:
a. Delay
b. LOS =
BOLD in
Appendix
Condition
standards
acceptabl
standard
at LOS C d
during the
E under th
at LOS C
during the
standard.
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ection Peak
ummarizes th
eak hours.
Existing Condit
Intersection
nta Rita Rd/
580 EB off‐ram
nta Rita Rd/Ta
d/I‐580 WB off‐
ssajara Rd/Du
ssajara Rd/Gle
llon Rd/Camin
ssajara/Tassaj
amino Tassajar
ghland Rd
Charro Rd/
580 EB off‐ram
Charro Rd/Fall
80 WB ramps
llon Rd/Dublin
llon Rd/
vera Ranch Dr
amino Tassajar
indemere Pkw
amino Tassajar
ow Canyon Rd
: DKS Associate
y is in seconds
= Level of Serv
ndicates unacc
x A contains t
ns, nine of th
s during AM
y at LOS D du
during the AM
during the AM
e PM peak ho
he Contra Co
during the P
e AM peak h
no Tassajara
aft Report
k Hour Lev
he results of t
tions Intersect
Name
p
assajara
‐ramp
blin Blvd
eason Dr
o
ara Rd
a/
p
lon Rd/I‐
n Blvd
a/
wy
a and
es, 2014
per vehicle an
ice
ceptable LOS
the LOS analy
e 12 study in
and PM pea
uring the PM
M peak hour.
M peak hour
our. The Cam
sta County G
PM peak hou
our operates
vel of Serv
the intersect
tion Level of Se
Control
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
nd is based on a
ysis and calcu
ntersections
k hours. The
peak hour bu
. The Tassajar
but operates
ino Tassajara
eneral Plan st
ur. Only the
s worse than
18
vice Analy
ion LOS analy
ervice
AM peak ho
Average
Delaya LO
55.9
10.3
35.8
27.8
16.0
65.8
4.0
6.0
11.2
5.6
21.6
24.3
average stoppe
lation worksh
currently ope
Santa Rita R
ut operates u
ra Road/Dubl
s unacceptab
a/Highland Ro
tandard durin
intersection
the 2014 Tri‐
ysis (Existi
ysis conducte
our PM p
OSb Averag
Delaya
E 38.1
B 12.1
D 57.8
C 36.5
D 46.4
E 24.1
A 7.5
A 8.4
B 18.3
A 4.9
C 23.5
C 39.3
ed delay.
heets. Based
erate accepta
Road/I‐580 EB
unacceptably
in Boulevard
bly at LOS E u
oad intersecti
ng the AM pe
of Fallon Rd
‐Valley Trans
ing Condit
ed for the Exi
peak hour
ge
a LOSb
D
B
E
D
D
C
A
A
B
A
C
D
on the LOS r
ably accordin
B off‐ramp in
at LOS E und
intersection
under the City
ion operates
eak hour and
d/Camino Tas
portation Pla
March
tions)
isting Conditi
esults under
ng to applica
ntersection o
der the City of
operates acc
y of Dublin st
unacceptably
operates acc
ssajara/Tassa
an/Action Pla
19, 2015
ons AM
Existing
ble LOS
operates
f Dublin
ceptably
tandard
y at LOS
ceptably
ajara Rd
n LOS E
Tassajara
Capacity A
Roadwa
Table 6
condition
for throu
determine
factors us
median, a
speeds as
LOS analy
As shown
both direc
Table 6 – E
Tassajara R
North Dub
Tassajara R
Ranch Dr a
Tassajara R
between F
Parkway
Camino Ta
parkway a
Camino Ta
Street and
Camino Ta
Canyon Ro
Road
Notes: Fr
Trave
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ay Peak H
summarizes
s. Average tra
ugh traffic at
ed using free
sed to calcul
access point d
s a percentag
ysis and calcu
n in Table 6, a
ctions. Gener
Existing Condit
Roadway Segm
Rd between Gl
lin Ranch Dr
Rd between No
and Fallon Road
Rd/Camino Tas
Fallon Rd and W
ssajara betwee
nd Lusitano St
ssajara betwee
Crow Canyon
ssajara betwee
oad and Sycam
ree flow Speed is
el Time (sec) = T
no Tassajara
aft Report
our Level
the average
avel time was
t study inter
‐flow speeds
late free flow
density and n
ge of free flow
lation worksh
all roadway s
rally, speeds a
tion Roadway
ment
eason Dr and
orth Dublin
d
ssajara
Windemere
en Windemere
reet
en Lusitano
Rd
en Crow
ore Valley
s defined by HCM
he average time
of Service
travel time
s calculated a
rsections wit
calculated fr
w speed incl
number of lan
w speed as d
heets.
segments ope
are faster dur
Segment Leve
Approach
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
e Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
M 2010 method
e taken for a veh
19
e Analysis
e and roadw
as the sum of
hin each roa
rom the 2010
ude posted s
nes. Roadway
efined in Tab
erate at LOS
ring the AM p
el of Service
Peak Hour
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
d AM
PM
ology
hicle to travel the
(Existing
way segment
free‐flow tra
adway segm
0 Highway Ca
speed limit,
y Segment LO
ble 4. Appen
C or better d
peak hour.
r Average T
e segment.
Condition
level of ser
avel time and
ent. Free flo
pacity Manua
existence an
OS is determin
dix B provide
during AM an
Travel Time (se
69.6
82.6
63.2
79.7
86.2
86.2
95.2
111.0
98.5
109.8
87.8
88.6
329.2
325.4
325.4
325.8
213.9
213.9
237.6
244.4
278.8
301.6
250.8
250.8
March
ns)
rvice under
average sign
ow travel tim
al methodolo
nd type of cu
ned by vehicl
es roadway s
nd PM peak h
ec) Segme
C
C
B
C
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
19, 2015
existing
al delay
me was
ogy. The
urb and
e travel
segment
hours in
ent LOS
C
C
B
C
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
Tassajara
Capacity A
Future
2040 La
According
significant
Livermore
CCTA Cou
2040 Se
Select‐link
peak‐hou
Tassajara/
Tassajara
Turnberry
Road for b
Appendix
Tassajara
the level
summariz
when the
However,
on Tassaj
southbou
significant
Figure 5 a
traffic con
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
e Cumulat
and Use D
g to the volu
t new develo
e and Pleasan
untywide Mod
elect‐Link
k analyses we
r traffic cond
/Tassajara Ro
Road betwee
y Drive. Table
both scenario
x E contains p
Road/Camin
of traffic dis
zed in Table 6
e number of t
widening th
jara Road/Ca
nd directions
t differences
and Figure 6 s
nditions.
no Tassajara
aft Report
tive (2040
escription
ume forecast
opment and g
nton. Growth
del, which is d
k Analysis
ere conducte
itions to dete
oad. The links
en Fallon Roa
e 7 shows av
os and peak h
plots of the se
o Tassajara in
stribution alo
6, there is no
travel lanes o
e study road
amino Tassaj
s during the A
in travel patt
show link vol
0) Conditi
n
s for year 20
growth in all
h in trip gene
described mo
d for both Sc
ermine the tra
s selected for
ad and Winde
verage flows
hours.
elect‐link ana
n the study a
ng the vario
significant dif
on Tassajara R
way from fou
jara by less
AM and PM p
terns under b
umes for the
20
ions
040, as I‐580
of the Bay A
eration was b
ore in detail u
cenario 1 and
avel patterns
the analysis
emere Parkwa
along severa
lysis with traf
rea. The thick
us routes in
fference in th
Road/Camino
ur lanes to si
than 100 v
eak hours. Th
both four lane
4‐lane and 6
0 gets more
Area, traffic d
based on land
nder the Ana
d Scenario 2 u
s of vehicles u
are Camino T
ay, and Fallon
l segments a
ffic volumes
kness of the v
the study ar
he traffic dist
o Tassajara is
ix lanes is ex
vehicles per
herefore it ca
es and six lane
6‐lane scenari
congested in
diverts to loc
d use project
alysis Method
under the AM
using various
Tassajara nort
n Road betwe
along Camino
along various
various links
rea. As show
ribution patte
increased fro
pected to slig
hour in bot
an be conclud
es scenario.
ios respective
March
n the future
cal streets in
tions included
dology section
M peak hour
segments of
th of Highlan
een Antone W
o Tassajara/Ta
s roadways in
graphically in
n in the figu
ern in the stu
om four to si
ghtly increase
th northbou
ded that there
ely under cum
19, 2015
due to
Dublin,
d in the
n.
and PM
Camino
d Road,
Way and
assajara
ncluding
ndicates
res and
udy area
ix lanes.
e traffic
nd and
e are no
mulative
Tassajara
Capacity A
Table 7 – 2
Tassajara
and North
Tassajara
Ranch Dr
Tassajara
between
Parkway
Camino T
Windeme
Street
Camino T
Street and
Camino T
Canyon R
Road
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
2040 Select‐Lin
Roadway Segm
Rd between G
h Dublin Ranch
Rd between N
and Fallon Roa
Rd/Camino Ta
Fallon Rd and
Tassajara betwe
ere parkway an
Tassajara betwe
d Crow Canyon
Tassajara betwe
Road and Sycam
no Tassajara
aft Report
nk Analysis Vo
ment
Gleason Dr
h Dr
North Dublin
ad
assajara
Windemere
een
nd Lusitano
een Lusitano
n Rd
een Crow
more Valley
lumes
Approach
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
Southbound
Northbound
21
Peak Hour
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
d
AM
PM
r
Scenario
Average
Volume
422
75
75
272
500
150
175
300
670
320
603
495
670
200
400
475
300
150
600
200
20
30
350
40
1
e
e
Scenario
Averag
Volum
490
75
72
332
550
150
150
390
750
315
660
550
735
200
400
530
400
150
600
200
30
30
350
50
March
o 2
ge
me
19, 2015
NO SCALE
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
405 205
8 26
512
99W
SPEED
20
5Figure
205
This symbol has white
hairline edge for placing
over darker backgounds
00%
11 Howard St/Boone Av
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
11.0 B 0.28
LT
TH
RT
RT
TH
LT
RTTHLT
LTTHRT
- Signalized Study Intersection & Number
LEGEND
00
V/CLOS*Delay**
00.0 X 0.00
- PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Volume Turn Movement
RightThruLeft
LTTH RT
- Lane Configuration
- Stop Sign
- Traffic Signal
000
*A/A = Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS
**Unsignalized Delay = Highest Minor Street Approach Delay
126
105
217
5 84
4-Lane Cumulative 2040 Condition
Link VolumesP:\P\14\14112-001 City of Dublin On-Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics- Signalized Intersection
- Danville City Boundary
- Dublin City Boundary
- Contra Costa County
BoundaryAM (PM) - Segment Peak Hour Volumes
NO SCALE
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
405 205
8 26
512
99W
SPEED
20
6Figure
205
This symbol has white
hairline edge for placing
over darker backgounds
00%
11 Howard St/Boone Av
A
A
AAAA
AAAA
A
A
11.0 B 0.28
LT
TH
RT
RT
TH
LT
RTTHLT
LTTHRT
- Signalized Study Intersection & Number
LEGEND
00
V/CLOS*Delay**
00.0 X 0.00
- PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume
- Volume Turn Movement
RightThruLeft
LTTH RT
- Lane Configuration
- Stop Sign
- Traffic Signal
000
*A/A = Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS
**Unsignalized Delay = Highest Minor Street Approach Delay
126
105
217
5 84
6-Lane Cumulative 2040 Condition
Link VolumesP:\P\14\14112-001 City of Dublin On-Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics- Signalized Intersection
- Danville City Boundary
- Dublin City Boundary
- Contra Costa County
BoundaryAM (PM) - Segment Peak Hour Volumes
Tassajara
Capacity A
Interse
Conditi
Table 8 c
during the
Table 8 – C
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Sourc
Notes
a. De
b. LOS
BOLD
During th
following
condition
Sa
Ta
The inters
worse tha
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ection Peak
ions)
compares the
e AM peak ho
Cumulative 204
Intersecti
Santa Rita Rd
EB off‐ramp
Santa Rita Rd
Rd and I‐580
ramp
Tassajara Rd
Blvd
Tassajara Rd
Gleason Dr
Fallon Rd/Ca
Tassajara an
Rd
Camino Tass
Highland Rd
El Charro Rd
EB off‐ramp
El Charro Rd/
and I‐580 W
Fallon Rd/Du
Fallon Rd/Sil
Dr
Camino Tass
Windemere
Camino Tass
Crow Canyon
ce: DKS Associa
s:
lay is in second
S = Level of Se
D indicates una
he AM Peak
two interse
s:
anta Rita Rd a
assajara Road
sections of Ta
an the 2014
no Tassajara
aft Report
k Hour Lev
e results of th
our between
40 Conditions
ion Name
d and I‐580
d/Tassajara
0 WB off‐
and Dublin
and
amino
d Tassajara
ajara and
and I‐580
/Fallon Rd
B ramps
ublin Blvd
vera Ranch
ajara and
Pkwy
ajara and
n Rd
ates, 2014
ds per vehicle a
rvice
cceptable LOS
hour, the in
ections are
and I‐580 EB o
d and Gleason
assajara Road
Tri‐Valley Tr
vel of Serv
he intersectio
the 4‐lane an
Intersection L
Control
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
and is based on
ntersection L
expected to
off‐ramp (und
n Drive (unde
d and Gleaso
ransportation
24
vice Analy
on LOS analy
nd 6‐lane scen
Level of Service
W
4‐Lane Scen
Average
Delaya
94.5
29.4
40.4
87.8
18.6
11.5
6.3
6.1
33.4
6.0
28.2
25.7
n average stop
OS is genera
o operate u
der both 4‐la
er both 4‐lane
n Drive and S
n Plan/Action
ysis (Cumu
ysis conducte
narios.
e – AM Peak H
With Optimizat
nario 6‐L
LOSb Aver
Del
F 95
C 29
D 39
F 80
B 16
B 9.
A 6.
A 9.
C 33
A 5.
C 27
C 26
pped delay.
ally similar b
nacceptably
ne and 6‐lane
e and 6‐lane s
Santa Rita Rd
n Plan LOS E
ulative 204
ed for the Cu
Hour
ion
Lane Scenario
rage
aya LOSb
5.8 F
9.2 C
9.5 D
0.1 F
6.9 B
.0 A
.3 A
.7 A
3.4 C
.9 A
7.4 C
6.0 C
between the
under cumu
e scenarios)
scenarios)
d and I‐580 E
standard un
March
40
umulative Con
Applicable
LOS
Standard
D
D
D
D
D
C
D
D
D
D
C
D
two scenari
ulative 2040
B off‐ramp o
nder both sce
19, 2015
nditions
e
os. The
0 traffic
operates
enarios.
Tassajara
Capacity A
Table 9 c
during the
Table 9 – C
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Sourc
Notes
a. De
b. LOS
BOLD
During th
following
condition
Ta
Ta
Fa
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
compares the
e PM peak ho
Cumulative 204
Intersecti
Santa Rita Rd
EB off‐ramp
Santa Rita Rd
Rd and I‐580
ramp
Tassajara Rd
Blvd
Tassajara Rd
Gleason Dr
Fallon Rd/Ca
Tassajara an
Rd
Camino Tass
Highland Rd
El Charro Rd
EB off‐ramp
El Charro Rd/
and I‐580 W
Fallon Rd/Du
Fallon Rd/Sil
Dr
Camino Tass
Windemere
Camino Tass
Crow Canyon
ce: DKS Associa
s:
lay is in second
S = Level of Se
D indicates una
he PM Peak
three inter
s:
assajara Road
assajara Road
allon Road an
no Tassajara
aft Report
e results of th
our between t
40 Conditions
ion Name
d and I‐580
d/Tassajara
0 WB off‐
and Dublin
and
amino
d Tassajara
ajara and
and I‐580
/Fallon Rd
B ramps
ublin Blvd
vera Ranch
ajara and
Pkwy
ajara and
n Rd
ates, 2014
ds per vehicle a
rvice
cceptable LOS
hour, the in
sections are
d and Dublin
d and Gleason
nd Dublin Bou
he intersectio
the 4‐Lane an
Intersection L
Control
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
Signalized
and is based on
ntersection LO
expected t
Boulevard (un
n Drive (unde
ulevard (unde
25
on LOS analy
nd 6‐Lane sce
Level of Service
W
4‐Lane Scen
Average
Delaya
39.2
12.9
91.2
65.4
16.8
11.6
11.4
7.4
132.7
6.1
20.9
44.2
n average stop
OS is genera
o operate u
nder both 4‐l
er both 4‐lane
er both 4‐lane
ysis conducte
enarios.
e – PM Peak H
With Optimizat
nario 6‐L
LOSb Aver
Del
D 47
B 17
F 133
E 87
B 17
B 12
B 11
A 4.
F 174
A 6.
C 20
D 42
pped delay.
ally similar b
unacceptably
ane and 6‐lan
e and 6‐lane s
e and 6‐lane s
ed for the Cu
Hour
ion
Lane Scenario
rage
aya LOSb
7.7 C
7.8 B
3.5 F
7.9 F
7.1 B
2.3 B
1.3 B
.4 A
4.9 F
.1 A
0.6 C
2.5 D
between the
under cum
ne scenarios)
scenarios)
scenarios)
March
umulative Con
Applicable
LOS
Standard
D
D
D
D
D
C
D
D
D
D
C
D
two scenari
ulative 2040
19, 2015
nditions
e
os. The
0 traffic
Tassajara
Capacity A
The inters
Road and
standard
Figure 5 a
under cum
on the LO
at LOS E o
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
sections of T
Dublin Boule
under both s
and Figure 6 s
mulative 2040
OS results und
or better duri
no Tassajara
aft Report
assajara Road
evard operate
cenarios.
show the fore
0 traffic cond
der Cumulativ
ng both the A
d and Dublin
e worse than
ecasted traffi
ditions. Appen
ve Conditions
AM and PM p
26
Boulevard, T
the 2014 Tri
ic volumes fo
ndix A provid
s, nine of the
eak hours for
Tassajara Roa
i‐Valley Trans
or the 4‐lane
des LOS analy
e twelve stud
r both the 4‐L
ad and Gleas
sportation Pla
and 6‐lane sc
ysis and calcu
dy intersectio
Lane and 6‐La
March
on Drive, and
an/Action Pla
cenarios resp
ulation sheets
ns currently o
ane scenarios
19, 2015
d Fallon
an LOS E
pectively
s. Based
operate
s.
RT
RT TH LT LT
LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
RT TH LT
TH RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT LT TH LT LT RT TH RT TH LT
LT LT TH RT TH RT LT TH RT TH RT
TH
RT RT
RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT RT TH RT TH RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT LT LT TH LT LT TH LT LT TH RT
TH TH
RT RT RT RT
Traffic Signal
AM(PM)
LEGEND
Figure 7
Volume Turning
Movements 4‐Lane Cumulative Condition Turn Movement Volumes
353 (1264)153 (120)609 (685)213 (522)36 (94) 4 (9)24 (103)87 (189)
568 (2486)56 (0)241 (1715)267 (0)44 (61)149 (0) 102 (72) 400 (315) 49 (79)595 (595)570 (366)221 (581)762 (1099)298 (109)
884 (0)82 (28)
954 (0)599 (472)390 (47)769 (147)114 (166)509 (547)47 (180)9. Fallon Rd & Dublin Blvd 10. Fallon Rd & Sivera Ranch Dr 11. Camino Tassajara & Windemere Pkwy 12. Camino Tassajara & Crow Canyon Rd
73 (694)1028 (198)7 (44)659 (481)578 (1754)74 (34)97 (182)206 (798)232 (674)12 (59)277 (1663)636 (949)455 (854)429 (264)
1 (1)144 (58)468 (553)92 (2)3 (5) 266 (10)292 (380)
0 (0) 80 (103)50 (27)
2 (2)17 (102)747 (602)1692 (739)1336 (342)640 (1008)5. Tassajara Rd & Fallon Rd 6. Camino Tassajara & Highland Rd 7. El Charro Rd & I‐580 EB ramps 8. El Charro Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
991 (405)552 (376)0 (0)849 (234)50 (235)348 (150)
86 (514)
110 (304)124 (104)892 (1542)198 (275)13 (39)
4. Tassajara Rd & Gleason Dr
838 (167)1101 (1087)171 (143)318 (89)
652 (67)
223 (509)
159 (670)
189 (1893)440 (463)1033 (1039)244 (899)844 (253)
72 (76)
658 (259)
3. Tassajara Rd & Dublin Blvd
325 (242)1332 (985)48 (267)1483 (2237)611 (677)1318 (346)
536 (373)
2. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
1950 (1147)584 (923)992 (590)
705 (256)
183 (325)854 (946)414 (963)208 (453)
420 (409)
1. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 EB ramps
557 (1207)1134 (94)163 (22)P:\P\14\14112‐001 City of Dublin On‐Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics\Camino Tassajara Volume Figures v2
RT
RT TH LT LT
LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
RT TH LT
TH RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT
TH
RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT
TH
RT
RT RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT LT TH LT LT RT TH RT TH LT
LT LT TH RT TH RT LT TH RT TH RT
TH
RT RT
RT RT
TH TH
RT TH LT RT TH RT TH RT TH LT LT
LT LT TH RT LT LT TH LT LT TH LT LT TH RT
TH TH
RT RT RT RT
Traffic Signal
AM(PM)
LEGEND
Figure 8
Volume Turning
Movements 6‐Lane Cumulative Condition Turn Movement Volumes
347 (1271)108 (132)590 (657)239 (515)44 (20) 4 (9)16 (102)73 (185)
633 (2473)67 (0)259 (1551)263 (0)45 (57)199 (0) 101 (73) 401 (309) 35 (84)651 (549)591 (371)238 (634)782 (1133)384 (104)
826 (0)126 (25)
984 (0)671 (477)238 (45)765 (152)89 (174)457 (540)59 (170)9. Fallon Rd & Dublin Blvd 10. Fallon Rd & Sivera Ranch Dr 11. Camino Tassajara & Windemere Pkwy 12. Camino Tassajara & Crow Canyon Rd
72 (781)1007 (153)6 (45)606 (484)578 (1663)74 (34)64 (163)208 (789)254 (727)3 (59)257 (1646)636 (931)411 (940)427 (252)
1 (1)128 (40)550 (525)92 (2)3 (5) 135 (9)222 (366)
0 (0) 183 (103)75 (0)
2 (2)11 (95)734 (605)1720 (745)1292 (338)735 (1037)5. Tassajara Rd & Fallon Rd 6. Camino Tassajara & Highland Rd 7. El Charro Rd & I‐580 EB ramps 8. El Charro Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
994 (383)531 (398)0 (0)830 (237)44 (238)423 (191)
83 (391)
111 (232)120 (105)902 (2068)211 (370)16 (24)
4. Tassajara Rd & Gleason Dr
827 (154)1416 (1067)187 (175)312 (140)
609 (80)
174 (458)
160 (992)
232 (1844)372 (348)1011 (1477)291 (841)788 (315)
86 (155)
680 (281)
3. Tassajara Rd & Dublin Blvd
394 (211)1462 (988)82 (289)1486 (2351)588 (677)1335 (337)
494 (515)
2. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 WB ramps
2008 (1147)550 (930)953 (611)
727 (285)
194 (330)832 (1007)415 (936)192 (438)
416 (426)
1. Santa Rita Rd & I‐580 EB ramps
589 (1213)1078 (86)172 (20)P:\P\14\14112‐001 City of Dublin On‐Call Tassajara Rd\06 Graphics\Camino Tassajara Volume Figures v2
Tassajara
Capacity A
Roadwa
Table 10
Average t
through t
As shown
during AM
between
in both d
time is lo
between t
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
ay Peak H
compares the
travel time w
raffic at study
in Table 10,
M and PM pe
Gleason Drive
irections. Du
nger in almos
the scenarios
no Tassajara
aft Report
our Level
e estimated a
was calculate
y intersection
all roadway s
eak hours in
e and North D
ring the PM p
st all cases un
s.
of Service
average trave
ed as the su
ns within each
segments nor
both directio
Dublin Ranch
peak hour it
nder the 4‐La
29
e Analysis
el times and s
m of free flo
h roadway se
rth of North D
ons. Under bo
Drive operat
operates at L
ane Scenario;
(Cumulat
segment LOS
ow travel tim
egment.
Dublin Ranch
oth scenarios
tes at LOS C o
LOS E in the
; however the
tive 2040 C
under each o
me and avera
h Drive operat
s, the segmen
or LOS D durin
northbound
ere is very lit
March
Conditions
of the two sce
age signal de
te at LOS C o
nt of Tassaja
ng the AM pe
direction. Th
tle difference
19, 2015
s)
enarios.
elay for
r better
ra Road
eak hour
e travel
e in LOS
Tassajara
Capacity A
Table 10 –
Road
Segm
Tassajara Rd
Gleason Dr a
Dublin Ranch
Tassajara Rd
North Dublin
and Fallon Ro
Tassajara Rd/
Tassajara bet
Rd and Wind
Parkway
Camino Tass
between Win
parkway and
Street
Camino Tass
between Lus
and Crow Ca
Camino Tass
between Cro
Road and Syc
Valley Road
Notes:
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
– Cumulative 20
dway
ment A
between
nd North
h Dr
between
n Ranch Dr
oad
/Camino
tween Fallon
demere
ajara
ndemere
d Lusitano
ajara
sitano Street
nyon Rd
ajara
ow Canyon
camore
Free flow Spee
Travel Time (se
no Tassajara
aft Report
040 Condition
Approach Pe
Ho
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
SB
A
P
NB
A
P
d is defined by H
ec) = The average
s Roadway Se
eak
our
4‐La
Avera
Travel T
(sec
AM 79.7
M 70.0
AM 89.1
M 137.
AM 86.0
M 86.0
AM 93.4
M 98.3
AM 103.
M 103.
AM 89.2
M 90.4
AM 352.
M 330.
AM 326.
M 327.
AM 213.
M 213.
AM 237.
M 240.
AM 280.
M 307.
AM 250.
M 250.
HCM 2010 meth
e time taken for
30
gment Level o
ane Scenario
age
Time
c)
Segme
LOS
7 C
0 C
1 D
3 E
0 A
0 A
4 A
3 A
1 B
8 B
2 A
4 A
3 A
5 A
7 A
6 A
9 A
9 A
8 A
7 A
6 A
1 B
8 A
8 A
odology
a vehicle to trav
of Service
6‐Lan
ent
S
Averag
Travel Ti
(sec)
78.4
61.6
86.2
135.1
85.9
85.9
93.2
98.4
101.9
104.1
88.9
90.4
346.0
329.9
324.6
326.9
213.5
213.5
237.0
241.5
281.1
305.4
250.3
250.3
vel the segment
ne Scenario
ge
ime Segmen
LOS
C
B
C
E
A
A
A
A
9 B
B
A
A
0 A
9 A
6 A
9 A
5 A
5 A
0 A
5 A
A
4 B
A
A
t.
March
Diff
nt Average
Travel Tim
(sec)
‐1.3
‐8.4
‐2.9
‐2.2
‐0.1
‐0.1
‐0.2
0.1
‐1.2
0.3
‐0.3
0
‐6.3
‐0.6
‐2.1
‐0.7
‐0.4
‐0.4
‐0.8
0.8
0.5
‐1.7
‐0.5
‐0.5
19, 2015
ference
e Segment
LOS
No change
CB
DC
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
Tassajara
Capacity A
Finding
The CCTA
the adequ
generated
Livermore
with the m
City of D
demand m
roadway
volumes t
The level
unincorpo
The exist
Road/Cam
similar int
under fut
difference
The result
similar le
However,
scenario p
delay per
time, the
and five m
It can the
scenarios
any signif
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
gs and Co
A Countywide
uate number
d from propo
e, San Ramon
model output
ublin Model.
models, the C
segments ar
than the ACTC
of service w
orated Contra
ting CCTA m
mino Tassajar
tersection an
ture traffic c
es in travel pa
ts of the Cum
evel of servic
for intersec
provides less
r vehicle duri
travel time sa
minutes.
erefore be co
that widenin
icant benefit
no Tassajara
aft Report
onclusion
e Travel Dema
of lanes alon
osed future d
n, Danville a
t with forecas
While there
CCTA Travel
re in Contra
C and Dublin
was conducted
a Costa Count
model shows
ra and this st
nd roadway s
conditions. T
atterns under
mulative Cond
ce with sligh
ctions that a
than 10 seco
ng the PM p
avings is gene
oncluded from
ng Tassajara R
to motorists.
s
and Model w
ng Tassajara R
development
nd unincorpo
sts from the A
e is consisten
Demand Mod
Costa Coun
travel deman
d for key inte
ty to assess a
s variable la
tudy determi
segment LOS
The select‐lin
r both four la
ditions analys
ht improveme
re expected
onds of saving
peak hour. Ad
erally two sec
m the similar
Road/Camino
.
31
was executed
Road/Camino
s in the vicin
orated Contr
Alameda CTC
ncy in travel
del was used
nty and the
nd models.
ersections in
ny possible tr
nes (i.e. 2‐3
ned that eith
results along
k analysis re
nes and six la
ses for the fo
ents at som
to experien
gs per vehicle
dditionally, w
conds or less
ity in results
Tassajara fro
for future 20
Tassajara to
nity of the C
ra Costa Cou
C’s Countywid
distribution
d for the stud
model conse
Dublin, Live
raffic impacts
3 lanes in e
her two or th
g Tassajara R
esults indicat
anes scenario
our‐lane and s
e intersectio
ce intolerab
e during the A
while the six‐l
for segments
of the analy
om four to six
040 traffic vo
accommoda
amino Tassaj
nty. The resu
de Travel Dem
pattern amo
dy because m
ervatively for
rmore, San R
s due to traffi
each directio
hree lanes pe
Road and Cam
te that there
.
six‐lane scena
ons under th
le delays at
AM peak hou
ane scenario
s with travel t
ysis for the fo
x lanes is not
March
olumes to det
te traffic that
jara Road in
ults were co
mand Model
ong the three
majority of th
recast higher
Ramon, Danv
ic diversions.
on) along Ta
er direction p
mino Tassaja
e are no sig
arios general
he six‐lane sc
LOS F, the
r, and an inc
o shows lowe
times betwee
our‐lane and
expected to r
19, 2015
termine
t will be
Dublin,
mpared
and the
e travel
he study
r traffic
ville and
assajara
produce
ra Road
gnificant
ly show
cenario.
six‐lane
rease in
er travel
en three
six‐lane
result in
Tassajara
Capacity A
Study P
DKS Perso
Bill Loudo
David Ma
Joshua Pil
Adonis Ga
Garnet W
Deserae M
Others
Obaid Kha
Gary Huis
Angela Vi
Nancy We
John Cunn
Reference
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
a Road/Camin
Analysis –Dra
Participan
onnel
on, P.E.
hama, P.E.
lachowski, Ph
arefalakis, E.I
Wing, E.I.T.
Mallori
an, P.E.
sing
llar, P.E.
eir
ningham
es
. Mollar
. Green
. Tri‐Val
. Compr
(Contr
. Highw
no Tassajara
aft Report
nts
hD, P.E.
.T.
r Ranch Traffi
Traffic ADSEI
lley Transpor
rehensive Agr
ra Costa Coun
way Capacity M
Principa
Project
Transpo
Transpo
Associat
Word P
City of D
City of D
Contra C
Contra C
Contra C
ic Impact Stud
IR, Kittleson A
tation Plan/A
reement to S
nty Case No. C
Manual, 2000
32
al‐In‐Charge
Manager
ortation Engin
ortation Plann
te Transporta
rocessing and
Dublin
Dublin
Costa County
Costa County
Costa County
dy Final Repo
Associates 10/
Action Plan, D
Settle Litigati
C‐02‐02250; S
0 and 2010 Tr
neer
ner
ation Enginee
d Graphic Des
y Public Work
y Public Work
y Public Work
ort, Kimley‐Ho
0/2013
DKS, 2014
ion, Town of
San Joaquin C
ransportation
er
signer
ks Departmen
ks Departmen
ks Departmen
orn & Associa
f Danville v. C
County Case N
n Research Bo
March
nt
nt
nt
ates, 09/10/20
Contra Costa
No. CV‐020073
oard
19, 2015
012
a, et al.,
3)
Appendix A
Intersection Level of Service Analysis
APPENDIX A1
Existing Condition
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)538 147 665 163 0 374 0 779 398 175 1013 228
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 5085 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 5085 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)578 158 715 175 0 402 0 838 428 188 1089 245
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 84 0 0 19 0 0 316 0 0 134
Lane Group Flow (vph) 578 158 631 175 0 383 0 838 112 188 1089 111
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.9 30.5 30.5 9.9 38.4 26.7 26.7 15.4 46.1 46.1
Effective Green, g (s) 21.9 30.5 30.5 9.9 33.9 26.7 26.7 15.4 46.1 46.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.33 0.26 0.26 0.15 0.45 0.45
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 739 558 474 334 928 1334 415 268 1603 717
v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.08 0.05 0.14 0.16 0.11 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm c0.40 0.07 0.07
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.28 1.33 0.52 0.41 0.63 0.27 0.70 0.68 0.15
Uniform Delay, d1 37.7 27.3 35.6 43.7 26.3 33.2 29.8 41.0 22.0 16.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 5.0 0.1 163.0 0.7 0.1 0.9 0.4 6.6 1.2 0.1
Delay (s)42.7 27.4 198.6 44.4 26.4 34.1 30.2 47.6 23.2 16.5
Level of Service D C F D C CCDCB
Approach Delay (s)117.9 31.8 32.8 25.1
Approach LOS F C C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 55.9 HCM Level of Service E
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 101.8 Sum of lost time (s)16.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.2% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 544 0 315 0 1009 553 0 866 844
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.88
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 3539 1583 5085 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 3539 1583 5085 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 567 0 328 0 1051 576 0 902 917
RTOR Reduction (vph)000001250025600407
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 567 0 203 0 1051 320 0 902 510
Turn Type Prot custom NA Perm NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s)15.1 15.1 33.1 33.1 33.1 33.1
Effective Green, g (s)15.1 15.1 33.1 33.1 33.1 33.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)871 707 1969 881 2829 1550
v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 c0.30 0.18
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.20 0.18
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.29 0.53 0.36 0.32 0.33
Uniform Delay, d1 19.8 17.9 8.3 7.3 7.1 7.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1
Delay (s)21.2 18.0 8.6 7.6 7.2 7.3
Level of Service C B A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 20.0 8.3 7.2
Approach LOS ABAA
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 10.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 59.5 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)59 63 181 384 191 15 329 553 117 16 1094 170
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.88 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 2787 4990 3502 4990 3539 1583 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 2787 4990 3502 4990 3539 1583 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)61 65 187 396 197 15 339 570 121 16 1128 175
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 31 03000350053
Lane Group Flow (vph) 61 65 156 396 209 0 339 570 86 16 1128 122
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 32.4 17.1 17.1 16.4 88.5 88.5 5.9 78.0 78.0
Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 16.0 32.4 17.1 17.1 16.4 88.5 88.5 5.9 78.0 78.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.59 0.59 0.04 0.52 0.52
Clearance Time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 379 604 571 401 547 2095 937 135 3343 1454
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.02 0.03 c0.08 c0.06 c0.07 0.16 0.00 c0.18
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.05 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.26 0.69 0.52 0.62 0.27 0.09 0.12 0.34 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 60.7 60.7 48.6 63.7 62.4 63.6 14.8 13.2 69.3 20.8 17.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.2 0.1 2.9 1.2 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1
Delay (s)60.8 60.9 48.7 66.6 63.6 65.0 15.2 13.4 69.4 21.0 18.0
Level of Service E E D E E EBBECB
Approach Delay (s)53.6 65.6 31.4 21.2
Approach LOS D E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 35.8 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 149.5 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.6% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)48 114 33 252 155 51 86 416 172 59 920 230
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 1794 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 1794 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Adj. Flow (vph)58 137 40 304 187 61 104 501 207 71 1108 277
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 34 0800011600115
Lane Group Flow (vph) 58 137 6 304 240 0 104 501 91 71 1108 162
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.5 15.2 15.2 13.6 23.3 8.0 43.6 43.6 7.7 43.3 43.3
Effective Green, g (s) 5.5 15.2 15.2 13.6 23.3 8.0 43.6 43.6 7.7 43.3 43.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.23 0.08 0.44 0.44 0.08 0.44 0.44
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 190 285 242 470 421 276 1552 694 137 1542 690
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.07 c0.09 c0.13 0.03 0.14 c0.04 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.06 0.10
v/c Ratio 0.31 0.48 0.03 0.65 0.57 0.38 0.32 0.13 0.52 0.72 0.23
Uniform Delay, d1 45.1 38.5 35.8 40.6 33.6 43.3 18.2 16.6 44.1 23.0 17.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 2.2 0.1 2.7 2.5 0.6 0.2 0.1 2.5 1.7 0.2
Delay (s)45.8 40.7 35.9 43.3 36.1 44.0 18.4 16.7 46.5 24.8 17.9
Level of Service DDDDD DBBDCB
Approach Delay (s)41.1 40.1 21.3 24.5
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 27.8 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 99.4 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)192 5 21 2 3 0 21 42 88 0 120 681
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1770 1863 1583 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1770 1863 1583 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)206 5 23 2 3 0 23 45 95 0 129 732
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 16 000005400486
Lane Group Flow (vph) 206 572302345410129246
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.9 16.8 16.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 24.0 24.0 18.5 18.5
Effective Green, g (s) 16.9 16.8 16.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 24.0 24.0 18.5 18.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.44 0.44 0.34 0.34
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 544 569 484 32 30 29 813 691 627 532
v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.00 0.00 c0.00 c0.01 0.02 0.07
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.03 c0.16
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.10 0.79 0.06 0.06 0.21 0.46
Uniform Delay, d1 14.9 13.3 13.3 26.5 26.7 27.0 9.0 9.0 13.0 14.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.1 2.0 79.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.9
Delay (s)15.5 13.3 13.3 27.7 28.6 106.5 9.0 9.0 13.2 15.2
Level of Service B B B C C F A A B B
Approach Delay (s)15.3 28.2 22.7 14.9
Approach LOS B C C B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 16.0 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.0 Sum of lost time (s)13.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.8% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)97 264 170 2 53 443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1657 1860 1770 1863
Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1657 1860 1770 1863
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)102 278 179 2 56 466
RTOR Reduction (vph) 65 00000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 315 0 181 0 56 466
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.0 92.2 7.5 103.7
Effective Green, g (s) 22.0 92.2 7.5 103.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.68 0.06 0.76
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 269 1264 98 1424
v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.10 c0.03 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.17 0.14 0.57 0.33
Uniform Delay, d1 56.8 7.7 62.5 5.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 109.9 0.2 4.9 0.6
Delay (s)166.7 8.0 67.5 5.6
Level of Service F A E A
Approach Delay (s) 166.7 8.0 12.3
Approach LOS F A B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 65.8 HCM Level of Service E
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 135.7 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)182 0 71 00007521059270
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.90 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 3378 1441 3037 1441
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 3378 1441 3037 1441
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)202 0 79 00008323066300
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 61 0000100940
Lane Group Flow (vph) 202 0 18 000084210122150
Turn Type custom custom NA Free NA Free
Protected Phases 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 Free Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.4 4.4 7.4 19.8 7.4 19.8
Effective Green, g (s) 4.4 4.4 7.4 19.8 7.4 19.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.37 1.00 0.37 1.00
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 763 619 1262 1441 1135 1441
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.04
v/s Ratio Perm c0.06 0.01 0.01 c0.10
v/c Ratio 0.26 0.03 0.07 0.01 0.11 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 6.4 6.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Delay (s)6.4 6.0 4.0 0.0 4.1 0.1
Level of Service A A A A A A
Approach Delay (s)6.3 0.0 3.2 2.5
Approach LOS AAAA
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 4.0 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.15
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 19.8 Sum of lost time (s)4.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 58 2 198 0 181 74 0 274 347
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1690 2787 1759 1504 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1690 2787 1759 1504 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 64 2 220 0 201 82 0 304 386
RTOR Reduction (vph)0000013301000184
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 33 33 87 0 208 74 0 304 202
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Free NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 Free 6
Actuated Green, G (s)10.1 10.1 18.2 11.8 37.0 19.4 19.4
Effective Green, g (s)10.1 10.1 14.7 11.8 37.0 19.4 19.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.40 0.32 1.00 0.52 0.52
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)459 461 1107 561 1504 1856 830
v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.02 c0.03 0.05 c0.13
v/c Ratio 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.37 0.05 0.16 0.24
Uniform Delay, d1 10.0 10.0 6.9 9.7 0.0 4.6 4.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1
Delay (s)10.0 10.0 6.9 9.9 0.1 4.6 4.9
Level of Service A A A A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 7.7 7.3 4.7
Approach LOS AAAA
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.25
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 37.0 Sum of lost time (s)11.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)18 0 87 0 0 0 56 258 0 0 512 29
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 1770 3539 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 1770 3539 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)19 0 92 0 0 0 59 272 0 0 539 31
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 75 0000000011
Lane Group Flow (vph) 19 0 17 0 0 0 59 272 0 0 539 20
Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Prot NA Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 14.4 5.7 56.8 45.8 52.5
Effective Green, g (s) 6.7 14.4 5.7 56.8 45.8 52.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.18 0.07 0.71 0.57 0.66
Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.9 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 148 501 126 2510 2024 1142
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.03 0.08 c0.15 0.00
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.03 0.47 0.11 0.27 0.02
Uniform Delay, d1 34.0 27.1 35.7 3.7 8.7 4.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.0
Delay (s)34.1 27.1 36.7 3.8 9.0 4.8
Level of Service C C D A A A
Approach Delay (s)28.3 0.0 9.6 8.8
Approach LOS C A A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 11.2 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.24
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.1 Sum of lost time (s)14.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)1 29 11 65 138 3
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1616 1770 1863 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1616 1770 1863 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Adj. Flow (vph)1 39 15 88 186 4
RTOR Reduction (vph) 38 00002
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2 0 15 88 186 2
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 1.0 1.1 28.3 23.2 23.2
Effective Green, g (s) 1.0 1.1 28.3 23.2 23.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.03 0.73 0.60 0.60
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)42 50 1366 1120 951
v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 c0.01 0.05 c0.10
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.05 0.30 0.06 0.17 0.00
Uniform Delay, d1 18.3 18.4 1.4 3.4 3.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 3.4 0.0 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)18.5 21.7 1.5 3.6 3.1
Level of Service B C A A A
Approach Delay (s) 18.5 4.4 3.5
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 5.6 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.17
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 38.6 Sum of lost time (s)13.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)20 287 82 148 501 62
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 1863 3481
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 1863 3481
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)22 312 89 161 545 67
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 270 0020
Lane Group Flow (vph) 22 42 89 161 610 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.0 17.4 7.7 104.1 92.4
Effective Green, g (s) 4.0 17.4 7.7 104.1 92.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.14 0.06 0.81 0.72
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)55 379 207 1518 2517
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.02 c0.03 0.09 c0.18
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.11 0.43 0.11 0.24
Uniform Delay, d1 60.7 48.4 57.9 2.4 5.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2
Delay (s)62.5 48.5 58.5 2.5 6.2
Level of Service E D E A A
Approach Delay (s) 49.4 22.5 6.2
Approach LOS D C A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 21.6 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.26
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 127.8 Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Existing AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)71 282 99 252 434 28 193 364 124 15 408 78
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3507 3433 3373 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3507 3433 3373 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)77 307 108 274 472 30 210 396 135 16 443 85
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 87 03001760051
Lane Group Flow (vph) 77 307 21 274 499 0 210 409 45 16 443 34
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.4 14.6 14.6 12.2 21.4 10.2 28.7 28.7 1.9 20.4 20.4
Effective Green, g (s) 5.4 14.6 14.6 12.2 21.4 10.2 28.7 28.7 1.9 20.4 20.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.19 0.19 0.16 0.28 0.13 0.38 0.38 0.02 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 243 676 303 797 982 458 1267 541 85 945 423
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.09 0.05 c0.14 c0.06 0.12 0.00 c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.03 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.32 0.45 0.07 0.34 0.51 0.46 0.32 0.08 0.19 0.47 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 33.7 27.4 25.3 28.5 23.1 30.6 16.9 15.4 36.5 23.5 21.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.1
Delay (s)34.0 28.0 25.5 28.6 23.7 30.8 17.1 15.5 36.9 24.0 21.1
Level of Service CCCCC CBBDCC
Approach Delay (s)28.4 25.4 20.7 23.9
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 24.3 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.4 Sum of lost time (s)20.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)434 226 338 179 0 479 0 1288 537 288 1021 298
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 5085 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 5085 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph)452 235 352 186 0 499 0 1342 559 300 1064 310
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 89 0 0 15 0 0 326 0 0 143
Lane Group Flow (vph) 452 235 263 186 0 484 0 1342 233 300 1064 167
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 20.0 28.1 28.1 11.8 47.5 37.1 37.1 23.1 64.2 64.2
Effective Green, g (s) 20.0 28.1 28.1 11.8 43.0 37.1 37.1 23.1 64.2 64.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.10 0.36 0.31 0.31 0.19 0.54 0.54
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 575 438 373 339 1004 1580 492 342 1903 851
v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.13 0.05 0.17 c0.26 c0.17 0.30
v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 0.15 0.11
v/c Ratio 0.79 0.54 0.71 0.55 0.48 0.85 0.47 0.88 0.56 0.20
Uniform Delay, d1 47.6 40.0 41.9 51.3 29.6 38.5 33.3 46.8 18.2 14.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 7.0 1.3 6.0 1.8 0.4 5.9 3.2 21.4 1.2 0.5
Delay (s)54.6 41.2 47.8 53.1 29.9 44.4 36.5 68.2 19.4 14.8
Level of Service DDDD C DDEBB
Approach Delay (s)49.3 36.2 42.1 27.3
Approach LOS DDDC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 38.1 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 119.4 Sum of lost time (s)14.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.9% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WEB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 509 0 298 0 1433 677 0 1104 647
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.88
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 3539 1583 5085 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 3539 1583 5085 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 530 0 310 0 1493 705 0 1150 703
RTOR Reduction (vph)00000430026600266
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 530 0 267 0 1493 439 0 1150 437
Turn Type Prot custom NA Perm NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s)17.3 17.3 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1
Effective Green, g (s)17.3 17.3 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)785 637 2202 985 3164 1734
v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 c0.42 0.23
v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.28 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.68 0.42 0.68 0.45 0.36 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 26.6 24.9 9.3 7.5 7.0 6.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.4 1.7 1.5 0.3 0.3
Delay (s)28.9 25.4 11.0 8.9 7.3 6.8
Level of Service C C B A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 27.6 10.4 7.1
Approach LOS A C B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 12.1 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.7 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)306 551 477 233 147 34 402 714 394 55 654 99
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 0.88 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 2787 4990 3440 4990 3539 1583 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 2787 4990 3440 4990 3539 1583 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Adj. Flow (vph)319 574 497 243 153 35 419 744 410 57 681 103
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 71 060001620080
Lane Group Flow (vph) 319 574 426 243 182 0 419 744 248 57 681 23
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.5 81.5 102.7 16.5 75.5 21.2 47.0 47.0 15.1 40.9 40.9
Effective Green, g (s) 22.5 81.5 102.7 16.5 75.5 21.2 47.0 47.0 15.1 40.9 40.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.45 0.56 0.09 0.41 0.12 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.22 0.22
Clearance Time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 424 1584 1572 452 1426 581 913 409 285 1439 626
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.16 0.03 0.05 0.05 c0.08 c0.21 0.02 0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.16 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.36 0.27 0.54 0.13 0.72 0.81 0.61 0.20 0.47 0.04
Uniform Delay, d1 77.1 33.2 20.4 79.2 32.9 77.6 63.5 59.4 77.9 61.3 55.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 6.6 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.2 3.7 5.7 2.5 0.1 0.2 0.0
Delay (s)83.7 33.8 20.5 79.8 33.1 81.3 69.1 61.9 78.0 61.5 55.2
Level of Service F C C E C F EEEEE
Approach Delay (s)40.5 59.4 70.5 61.9
Approach LOS D E E E
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 57.8 HCM Level of Service E
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 182.1 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.1% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)213 192 66 151 67 22 191 703 191 23 466 71
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 1794 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 1794 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Adj. Flow (vph)234 211 73 166 74 24 210 773 210 25 512 78
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 060001440059
Lane Group Flow (vph) 234 211 27 166 92 0 210 773 66 25 512 19
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.0 40.7 40.7 10.9 38.6 12.3 34.8 34.8 4.5 27.0 27.0
Effective Green, g (s) 13.0 40.7 40.7 10.9 38.6 12.3 34.8 34.8 4.5 27.0 27.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.10 0.35 0.11 0.32 0.32 0.04 0.25 0.25
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 405 688 585 340 628 383 1118 500 72 867 388
v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.11 0.05 0.05 c0.06 c0.22 0.01 0.14
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.04 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.31 0.05 0.49 0.15 0.55 0.69 0.13 0.35 0.59 0.05
Uniform Delay, d1 46.0 24.7 22.3 47.0 24.5 46.3 33.0 26.9 51.4 36.7 31.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.0 1.2 0.1 1.1 0.5 1.6 1.9 0.1 2.9 1.1 0.1
Delay (s)48.0 25.9 22.4 48.1 25.0 47.9 34.9 27.0 54.3 37.8 31.8
Level of Service DCCDC DCCDDC
Approach Delay (s)35.4 39.5 35.8 37.7
Approach LOS DDDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 36.5 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.2 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)514 1 18 33161271179235
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583 1770 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)559 1 20 33171381186255
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 14 00100100146
Lane Group Flow (vph) 559 1633071380186109
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 47.5 44.5 44.5 15.0 12.0 12.0 1.8 59.6 59.6 1.8 59.5 59.5
Effective Green, g (s) 47.5 44.5 44.5 15.0 12.0 12.0 1.8 59.6 59.6 1.8 59.5 59.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.32 0.32 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.43 0.43 0.01 0.43 0.43
Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 607 598 508 192 161 137 23 801 681 23 800 680
v/s Ratio Prot c0.32 0.00 0.00 c0.00 c0.00 c0.07 0.00 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07
v/c Ratio 0.92 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.30 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.11 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 43.7 32.0 32.1 55.2 57.9 57.8 67.8 24.3 22.5 67.5 23.7 24.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 21.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 2.7 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.5
Delay (s)65.3 32.0 32.1 55.4 58.1 57.8 70.5 24.8 22.5 67.8 23.9 24.8
Level of Service E C C EEEECCECC
Approach Delay (s)64.1 56.9 27.0 24.7
Approach LOS E E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 46.4 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 138.6 Sum of lost time (s)13.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)5 43 415 47 215 208
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.88 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1629 1837 1770 1863
Flt Permitted 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1629 1837 1770 1863
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)5 44 428 48 222 214
RTOR Reduction (vph) 42 02000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 7 0 474 0 222 214
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.7 92.3 19.8 116.1
Effective Green, g (s) 4.7 92.3 19.8 116.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.71 0.15 0.89
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)59 1296 268 1654
v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 c0.26 c0.13 0.11
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.11 0.37 0.83 0.13
Uniform Delay, d1 61.0 7.6 53.9 0.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.8 17.8 0.2
Delay (s)61.3 8.4 71.7 1.1
Level of Service E A E A
Approach Delay (s) 61.3 8.4 37.0
Approach LOS E A D
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 24.1 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.8 Sum of lost time (s)14.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)182 0 19 0000331580157425
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.89 0.85 0.91 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 3032 1441 3098 1441
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 3032 1441 3098 1441
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)198 0 21 0000361720171462
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 18 0000212105656
Lane Group Flow (vph) 198 030000101650346175
Turn Type Prot custom NA Perm NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 8.1 8.1 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 8.1 8.1 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 342 2293 1090 2343 1090
v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.03 0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.05 c0.12
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.15 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 27.0 25.5 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3
Delay (s)27.3 25.5 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.5
Level of Service C C A A A A
Approach Delay (s)27.1 0.0 2.1 2.4
Approach LOS C A A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 7.5 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.20
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.1 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.9% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 22 6 314 0 189 32 0 571 196
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1718 2787 1766 1504 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1718 2787 1766 1504 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 23 6 334 0 201 34 0 607 209
RTOR Reduction (vph)0000026500110052
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 14 15 69 0 204 20 0 607 157
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Perm NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s)10.0 10.0 18.0 45.0 45.0 52.5 52.5
Effective Green, g (s)10.0 10.0 14.5 45.0 45.0 52.5 52.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.21 0.64 0.64 0.75 0.75
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)240 245 577 1135 967 2654 1187
v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.01 c0.02 0.01 0.10
v/c Ratio 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.02 0.23 0.13
Uniform Delay, d1 25.9 25.9 22.6 5.0 4.5 2.6 2.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2
Delay (s)26.0 26.0 22.6 5.4 4.6 2.8 2.7
Level of Service C C C A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 22.9 5.3 2.8
Approach LOS A C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 8.4 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.21
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 70.0 Sum of lost time (s)7.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)88 1 329 1 0 0 79 307 0 0 360 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1863 2787 1770 1770 3539 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 1863 2787 1770 1770 3539 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)91 1 339 1 0 0 81 316 0 0 371 21
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 286 000000007
Lane Group Flow (vph) 91 1 53 1 0 0 81 316 0 0 371 14
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot Prot NA Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.7 12.8 12.8 0.8 6.7 54.5 42.5 53.2
Effective Green, g (s) 10.7 12.8 12.8 0.8 6.7 54.5 42.5 53.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.08 0.66 0.52 0.65
Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 230 290 433 17 144 2344 1828 1125
v/s Ratio Prot c0.05 0.00 0.00 c0.05 0.09 c0.10 0.00
v/s Ratio Perm c0.02 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.00 0.12 0.06 0.56 0.13 0.20 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 32.8 29.4 29.9 40.4 36.4 5.2 10.8 5.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.5 3.0 0.1 0.3 0.0
Delay (s)33.2 29.4 30.1 40.9 39.4 5.3 11.0 5.2
Level of Service CCCD DA BA
Approach Delay (s)30.8 40.9 12.2 10.7
Approach LOS C D B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 18.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.26
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 82.3 Sum of lost time (s)14.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)5 10 9 128 78 19
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1671 1770 1863 1863 1583
Flt Permitted 0.98 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1671 1770 1863 1863 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87
Adj. Flow (vph)6 11 10 147 90 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 11 00005
Lane Group Flow (vph) 6 0 10 147 90 17
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 1.1 1.3 64.8 59.5 59.5
Effective Green, g (s) 1.1 1.3 64.8 59.5 59.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.02 0.86 0.79 0.79
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)24 31 1605 1474 1253
v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 c0.01 c0.08 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.26 0.32 0.09 0.06 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 36.6 36.5 0.8 1.7 1.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 6.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)38.7 42.5 0.9 1.8 1.7
Level of Service D D A A A
Approach Delay (s) 38.7 3.5 1.8
Approach LOS D A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 4.9 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.09
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 75.2 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)30 124 214 428 188 35
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.98
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 1863 3456
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 1863 3456
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph)32 132 228 455 200 37
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 110 0040
Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 22 228 455 233 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.7 22.5 13.3 109.8 92.5
Effective Green, g (s) 4.7 22.5 13.3 109.8 92.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.17 0.10 0.82 0.69
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)62 469 342 1530 2391
v/s Ratio Prot c0.02 c0.01 c0.07 c0.24 0.07
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.52 0.05 0.67 0.30 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 63.4 46.6 58.1 2.8 6.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 3.0 0.0 3.8 0.5 0.1
Delay (s)66.4 46.6 61.8 3.3 6.9
Level of Service E D E A A
Approach Delay (s) 50.5 22.9 6.9
Approach LOS D C A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 23.5 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.33
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 133.7 Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.2% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Existing PM 10/3/2014 Baseline Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)128 1017 184 172 438 13 183 516 468 46 402 72
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3524 3433 3268 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3524 3433 3268 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)139 1105 200 187 476 14 199 561 509 50 437 78
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 75 0100152090053
Lane Group Flow (vph) 139 1105 125 187 489 0 199 724 122 50 437 25
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 39.0 39.0 9.8 38.7 12.0 43.0 43.0 5.9 36.9 36.9
Effective Green, g (s) 10.1 39.0 39.0 9.8 38.7 12.0 43.0 43.0 5.9 36.9 36.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.33 0.10 0.37 0.37 0.05 0.32 0.32
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 297 1183 529 419 1169 353 1204 531 174 1119 501
v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.31 0.04 c0.14 c0.06 c0.22 0.01 0.12
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.08 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.93 0.24 0.45 0.42 0.56 0.60 0.23 0.29 0.39 0.05
Uniform Delay, d1 50.7 37.6 28.1 50.9 30.3 49.9 29.9 25.4 53.4 31.1 27.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 13.2 0.2 0.8 0.2 2.1 2.2 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.2
Delay (s)51.9 50.8 28.3 51.6 30.5 51.9 32.1 26.4 54.3 32.2 27.9
Level of Service DDCDC DCCDCC
Approach Delay (s)47.8 36.3 33.7 33.5
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 39.3 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.7 Sum of lost time (s)9.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.9% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
APPENDIX A2
Cumulative Conditions 4-Lane Scenario
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)705 183 992 208 0 420 0 854 414 163 1134 557
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)758 197 1067 224 0 452 0 918 445 175 1219 599
RTOR Reduction (vph)00700320031800336
Lane Group Flow (vph) 758 197 1060 224 0 420 0 918 127 175 1219 263
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 28.4 47.6 47.6 5.5 31.0 31.3 31.3 6.3 41.6 41.6
Effective Green, g (s) 28.4 47.6 47.6 5.5 31.0 31.3 31.3 6.3 41.6 41.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.43 0.43 0.05 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.38 0.38
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 886 806 685 172 785 1007 793 101 1338 599
v/s Ratio Prot 0.22 0.11 c0.07 0.15 0.26 c0.10 c0.34
v/s Ratio Perm c0.67 0.05 0.17
v/c Ratio 0.86 0.24 1.55 1.30 0.54 0.91 0.16 1.73 0.91 0.44
Uniform Delay, d1 38.8 19.8 31.2 52.2 33.4 38.0 29.5 51.9 32.4 25.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 0.61 0.16
Incremental Delay, d2 7.8 0.1 253.7 171.8 0.4 13.7 0.4 349.2 5.9 1.2
Delay (s)46.7 19.9 284.9 224.0 33.8 51.7 29.9 387.7 25.7 5.3
Level of Service D B F F C D C F C A
Approach Delay (s)169.8 96.8 44.6 51.4
Approach LOS F F D D
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 94.5 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.35
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 111.0% ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 1318 0 536 0 1483 611 0 584 1950
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.90 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4863 4348 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4863 4348 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 1373 0 558 0 1545 636 0 608 2120
RTOR Reduction (vph)000001206600282559
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1373 0 546 0 2115 0 0 1386 501
Turn Type Prot custom NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 6
Actuated Green, G (s)46.7 46.7 52.0 52.0 52.0
Effective Green, g (s)46.7 46.7 52.0 52.0 52.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.47 0.47 0.47
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1457 1183 2299 2055 644
v/s Ratio Prot c0.40 c0.43 0.32
v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 0.37
v/c Ratio 0.94 0.46 0.92 1.07dr 0.78
Uniform Delay, d1 30.4 22.7 27.1 22.4 24.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.73 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 12.2 0.1 5.1 1.8 9.0
Delay (s)42.6 22.8 24.9 24.2 33.2
Level of Service D C C C C
Approach Delay (s)0.0 36.9 24.9 27.7
Approach LOS A D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 29.4 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.2% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane.
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)159 189 223 844 658 72 440 1033 244 48 1332 325
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)164 195 230 870 678 74 454 1065 252 49 1373 335
RTOR Reduction (vph)00400590014800201
Lane Group Flow (vph) 164 195 226 870 678 15 454 1065 104 49 1373 134
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 33.0 26.8 26.8 26.8 17.0 53.7 53.7 11.8 48.5 48.5
Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 16.0 33.0 26.8 26.8 26.8 17.0 53.7 53.7 11.8 48.5 48.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.13 0.41 0.41 0.09 0.37 0.37
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 422 624 706 1026 1046 326 651 2641 1149 311 2385 1037
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.04 0.04 c0.17 c0.13 c0.09 0.17 0.01 c0.21
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.05
v/c Ratio 0.39 0.31 0.32 0.85 0.65 0.05 0.70 0.40 0.09 0.16 0.58 0.13
Uniform Delay, d1 52.6 52.1 39.5 49.8 47.4 41.5 54.2 27.0 23.4 54.7 32.7 27.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.3 0.1 6.4 1.4 0.1 2.6 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.3
Delay (s)52.9 52.4 39.6 56.2 48.8 41.6 56.8 27.5 23.5 54.8 33.7 27.2
Level of Service D D D E D D E CCDCC
Approach Delay (s)47.5 52.4 34.4 33.1
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 40.4 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 130.3 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.4% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)86 110 13 348 652 318 124 892 198 171 1101 838
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 3433 3365 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 3433 3365 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Adj. Flow (vph)104 133 16 419 786 383 149 1075 239 206 1327 1010
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 12 0 41 0 0 0 130 0 0 72
Lane Group Flow (vph) 104 133 4 419 1128 0 149 1075 109 206 1327 938
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.0 37.0 37.0 14.5 46.5 5.5 54.6 54.6 19.6 68.7 68.7
Effective Green, g (s) 5.0 37.0 37.0 14.5 46.5 5.5 54.6 54.6 19.6 68.7 68.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.26 0.26 0.10 0.32 0.04 0.38 0.38 0.14 0.47 0.47
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 118 903 404 343 1079 130 1333 596 239 1677 750
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.04 c0.12 c0.34 0.04 0.30 c0.12 0.37
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.07 c0.59
v/c Ratio 0.88 0.15 0.01 1.22 1.05 1.15 0.81 0.18 0.86 0.79 1.25
Uniform Delay, d1 69.7 41.8 40.3 65.2 49.2 69.8 40.5 30.3 61.4 32.1 38.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 48.0 0.1 0.0 123.1 40.1 123.6 3.9 0.2 25.6 2.8 123.7
Delay (s)117.7 41.9 40.3 188.4 89.4 193.3 44.3 30.5 87.0 34.9 161.8
Level of Service F D D F F F D C F C F
Approach Delay (s)73.0 115.5 57.3 89.5
Approach LOS E F E F
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 87.8 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.16
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 145.0 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 96.6% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)455 1 97 3 2 0 144 468 92 0 552 991
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 0.94 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)489 1 104 3 2 0 155 503 99 0 594 1066
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 82 000004000659
Lane Group Flow (vph) 489 1 22 3 2 0 155 503 59 0 594 407
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 13.5 16.5 16.5 1.5 4.5 11.9 46.0 46.0 29.5 29.5
Effective Green, g (s) 13.5 16.5 16.5 1.5 4.5 11.9 46.0 46.0 29.5 29.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.06 0.15 0.60 0.60 0.38 0.38
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 873 756 338 34 109 273 2109 943 1352 1065
v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 c0.09 0.14 c0.17
v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.04 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.56 0.00 0.07 0.09 0.02 0.57 0.24 0.06 0.44 0.38
Uniform Delay, d1 29.1 23.9 24.2 37.2 34.3 30.3 7.3 6.5 17.7 17.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3
Delay (s)30.1 23.9 24.3 38.7 34.4 31.9 7.4 6.6 18.0 17.6
Level of Service CCCDC CAA BB
Approach Delay (s)29.1 37.0 12.3 17.7
Approach LOS C D B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 18.6 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.44
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.2 Sum of lost time (s)13.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.3% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)266 80 232 12 50 849
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1738 3512 1770 3539
Flt Permitted 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1738 3512 1770 3539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)280 84 244 13 53 894
RTOR Reduction (vph) 31 08000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 333 0 249 0 53 894
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.6 12.8 1.8 18.6
Effective Green, g (s) 10.6 12.8 1.8 18.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.33 0.05 0.47
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 470 1147 81 1679
v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.07 0.03 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.71 0.22 0.65 0.53
Uniform Delay, d1 12.9 9.6 18.4 7.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 0.4 13.5 1.2
Delay (s)16.9 10.0 31.9 8.5
Level of Service B B C A
Approach Delay (s) 16.9 10.0 9.8
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 11.5 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 39.2 Sum of lost time (s)10.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)429 0 206 000027763601692 747
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4420 1362 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4420 1362 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)477 0 229 000030870701880 830
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 18 00001340000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 477 0 211 000052835301880 830
Turn Type custom custom NA Free NA Free
Protected Phases 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 Free Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 10.9 31.1 50.0 31.1 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 10.9 10.9 31.1 50.0 31.1 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.62 1.00 0.62 1.00
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 748 608 2749 1362 3163 1583
v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.37
v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.08 0.26 c0.52
v/c Ratio 0.64 0.35 0.19 0.26 0.59 0.52
Uniform Delay, d1 17.8 16.5 4.1 0.0 5.7 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.2
Delay (s)19.1 16.7 4.2 0.5 6.0 1.2
Level of Service B B A A A A
Approach Delay (s)18.3 0.0 2.9 4.5
Approach LOS BAAA
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.3 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)4.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 292 17 50 0 578 74 0 640 1336
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.91 1.00 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1694 2787 5085 1583 4438 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1694 2787 5085 1583 4438 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 324 19 56 0 642 82 0 711 1484
RTOR Reduction (vph)00000440000233233
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 172 171 12 0 642 82 0 1220 509
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Free NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 Free 6
Actuated Green, G (s)8.2 8.2 14.2 28.8 50.0 34.3 34.3
Effective Green, g (s)8.2 8.2 10.7 28.8 50.0 34.3 34.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.21 0.58 1.00 0.69 0.69
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)276 278 596 2929 1583 3044 934
v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 0.27
v/s Ratio Perm c0.10 0.10 0.00 0.05 c0.37
v/c Ratio 0.62 0.62 0.02 0.22 0.05 0.40 0.54
Uniform Delay, d1 19.5 19.4 15.5 5.1 0.0 3.4 3.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 2.8 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.4 2.3
Delay (s)22.6 22.3 15.5 2.2 0.1 3.8 6.2
Level of Service C C B A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 21.5 1.9 4.6
Approach LOS A C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.1 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)7.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.4% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)36 568 149 762 954 884 56 241 267 667 1028 73
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 5085 2787 3433 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 5085 2787 3433 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)38 598 157 802 1004 931 59 254 281 702 1082 77
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 119 0 0 505 0 0 245 0 0 38
Lane Group Flow (vph) 38 598 38 802 1004 426 59 254 36 702 1082 39
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8462
Actuated Green, G (s) 3.1 20.9 20.9 25.6 43.4 43.4 3.0 13.2 13.2 23.7 33.9 37.0
Effective Green, g (s) 3.1 20.9 20.9 25.6 43.4 43.4 3.0 13.2 13.2 23.7 33.9 37.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.23 0.33 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 103 1033 566 1241 2145 668 145 652 358 791 1675 569
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.12 0.16 0.20 0.01 c0.05 c0.20 c0.21 0.00
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.27 0.01 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.37 0.58 0.07 0.65 0.47 0.64 0.41 0.39 0.10 0.89 0.65 0.07
Uniform Delay, d1 48.9 37.0 33.1 34.6 21.4 23.5 49.1 41.2 39.6 38.3 29.4 21.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 0.2 2.3 0.7 1.8 0.6 11.5 1.9 0.0
Delay (s)49.8 38.0 33.2 35.5 21.7 25.8 49.8 42.9 40.2 49.8 31.3 21.6
Level of Service DDCDCCDDDDCC
Approach Delay (s)37.6 27.1 42.3 37.9
Approach LOS DCDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 33.4 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 102.9 Sum of lost time (s)15.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.6% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)4 102 44 595 659 7
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1617 1770 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1617 1770 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Adj. Flow (vph)5 138 59 804 891 9
RTOR Reduction (vph) 124 00004
Lane Group Flow (vph) 19 0 59 804 891 5
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.6 3.2 32.9 25.7 25.7
Effective Green, g (s) 4.6 3.2 32.9 25.7 25.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.07 0.70 0.55 0.55
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 159 121 3575 2792 869
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.03 0.16 c0.18
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.12 0.49 0.22 0.32 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 19.2 21.0 2.5 5.8 4.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 3.1 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)19.4 24.1 2.5 5.9 4.8
Level of Service B C A A A
Approach Delay (s) 19.4 4.0 5.9
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.0 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.31
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 46.8 Sum of lost time (s)13.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)24 400 570 221 769 390
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.95
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 3539 3361
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 3539 3361
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)26 435 620 240 836 424
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 99 0 0 45 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 26 336 620 240 1215 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 1.6 36.2 21.1 67.2 42.1
Effective Green, g (s) 1.6 36.2 21.1 67.2 42.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.02 0.39 0.22 0.72 0.45
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)30 1074 771 2533 1507
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.12 c0.18 0.07 c0.36
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.87 0.31 0.80 0.09 0.81
Uniform Delay, d1 46.0 20.2 34.4 4.1 22.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 105.7 0.1 5.8 0.1 4.7
Delay (s)151.7 20.2 40.2 4.1 27.1
Level of Service F C D A C
Approach Delay (s) 27.6 30.1 27.1
Approach LOS C C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 28.2 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 93.9 Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)87 353 49 298 599 82 153 609 213 47 509 114
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3475 3433 3373 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3475 3433 3373 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)95 384 53 324 651 89 166 662 232 51 553 124
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 43 0 11 0 0 2 135 0 0 87
Lane Group Flow (vph) 95 384 10 324 729 0 166 683 74 51 553 37
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.5 15.6 15.6 14.9 26.0 6.3 28.1 28.1 1.6 23.4 23.4
Effective Green, g (s) 4.5 15.6 15.6 14.9 26.0 6.3 28.1 28.1 1.6 23.4 23.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.33 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.02 0.30 0.30
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 195 697 312 939 1141 273 1197 511 69 1046 468
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.11 0.06 c0.21 c0.05 c0.20 0.01 0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.55 0.03 0.35 0.64 0.61 0.57 0.15 0.74 0.53 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 36.2 28.6 25.7 27.9 22.6 35.3 20.7 17.4 38.6 23.3 20.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.2 0.1 0.1 1.3 2.6 0.8 0.2 29.5 0.6 0.1
Delay (s)36.9 29.8 25.8 28.0 23.9 37.9 21.5 17.6 68.1 23.9 20.2
Level of Service DCCCC DCBECC
Approach Delay (s)30.7 25.2 23.3 26.4
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 25.7 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.2 Sum of lost time (s)15.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.8% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)256 325 590 453 0 409 0 946 963 22 94 1207
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)275 349 634 487 0 440 0 1017 1035 24 101 1298
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 473 0 0 48 0 0 511 0 0 582
Lane Group Flow (vph) 275 349 161 487 0 392 0 1017 524 24 101 716
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 12.2 24.7 24.7 15.9 35.9 41.9 41.9 3.0 48.9 48.9
Effective Green, g (s) 12.2 24.7 24.7 15.9 31.4 41.9 41.9 3.0 48.9 48.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.24 0.24 0.15 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.03 0.47 0.47
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 400 439 373 521 835 1415 1114 51 1651 739
v/s Ratio Prot 0.08 c0.19 c0.14 c0.14 0.29 0.01 0.03
v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.19 c0.45
v/c Ratio 0.69 0.79 0.43 0.93 0.47 0.72 0.47 0.47 0.06 0.97
Uniform Delay, d1 44.5 37.7 34.1 43.9 29.9 26.5 23.2 50.1 15.3 27.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 3.9 9.0 0.3 23.9 0.2 1.8 0.3 2.5 0.0 25.3
Delay (s)48.4 46.7 34.4 67.8 30.1 28.3 23.6 52.6 15.4 52.5
Level of Service D D C E C C C D B D
Approach Delay (s)40.8 49.9 25.9 49.9
Approach LOS DDCD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 39.2 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 104.8 Sum of lost time (s)19.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.2% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 346 0 373 0 2237 677 0 923 1147
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 0.94 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4908 4522 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4908 4522 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 360 0 389 0 2330 705 0 961 1247
RTOR Reduction (vph)000001308300179209
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 360 0 376 0 2952 0 0 1406 414
Turn Type Prot custom NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 6
Actuated Green, G (s)10.4 10.4 43.1 43.1 43.1
Effective Green, g (s)10.4 10.4 43.1 43.1 43.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.67 0.67 0.67
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)551 447 3264 3008 906
v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.60 0.31
v/s Ratio Perm c0.14 0.30
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.84 0.90 0.47 0.46
Uniform Delay, d1 25.5 26.4 9.1 5.3 5.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 12.9 4.0 0.1 0.4
Delay (s)27.6 39.3 13.1 5.4 5.6
Level of Service C D B A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 33.7 13.1 5.4
Approach LOS A C B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 12.9 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 64.8 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.8% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)670 1893 509 253 259 76 463 1039 899 267 985 242
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)691 1952 525 261 267 78 477 1071 927 275 1015 249
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 19 0 0 54 0 0 280 0 0 173
Lane Group Flow (vph) 691 1952 506 261 267 24 477 1071 647 275 1015 76
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 20.0 50.0 66.0 16.0 46.0 46.0 16.0 47.0 47.0 15.0 46.0 46.0
Effective Green, g (s) 20.0 50.0 66.0 16.0 46.0 46.0 16.0 47.0 47.0 15.0 46.0 46.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.33 0.44 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.10 0.31 0.31
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 458 1695 1226 532 1559 485 532 2008 873 343 1965 855
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 c0.38 0.04 0.05 0.05 c0.10 0.17 0.08 0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.02 c0.23 0.03
v/c Ratio 1.51 1.15 0.41 0.49 0.17 0.05 0.90 0.53 0.74 0.80 0.52 0.09
Uniform Delay, d1 65.0 50.0 28.7 63.2 38.1 36.6 66.2 42.5 46.1 66.0 42.8 37.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 240.0 75.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 17.2 1.0 5.6 12.0 1.0 0.2
Delay (s)305.0 125.5 28.8 63.4 38.1 36.6 83.4 43.5 51.7 78.0 43.8 37.3
Level of Service F F C E D D F D D E D D
Approach Delay (s)148.7 48.8 54.2 48.9
Approach LOS F D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 91.2 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.00
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 150.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.8% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)514 304 39 150 67 89 104 1542 275 143 1087 167
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 3433 3237 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 3433 3237 3433 3539 1583 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Adj. Flow (vph)619 366 47 181 81 107 125 1858 331 172 1310 201
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 39 0 96 0 0 0 91 0 0 78
Lane Group Flow (vph) 619 366 8 181 92 0 125 1858 240 172 1310 123
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 19.5 20.9 20.9 11.1 12.5 7.9 55.8 55.8 11.5 59.4 59.4
Effective Green, g (s) 19.5 20.9 20.9 11.1 12.5 7.9 55.8 55.8 11.5 59.4 59.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.11 0.07 0.47 0.47 0.10 0.50 0.50
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 564 624 279 321 341 229 1665 745 172 1772 793
v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 c0.10 0.05 0.03 0.04 c0.52 c0.10 c0.37
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.15 0.08
v/c Ratio 1.10 0.59 0.03 0.56 0.27 0.55 1.12 0.32 1.00 0.74 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 49.5 44.9 40.5 51.4 48.9 53.6 31.4 19.6 53.5 23.5 16.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 67.3 1.9 0.1 1.8 0.7 2.1 61.1 0.3 68.6 1.8 0.1
Delay (s)116.9 46.8 40.5 53.3 49.6 55.7 92.5 19.9 122.2 25.2 16.1
Level of Service F DDDD EFBFCB
Approach Delay (s)88.5 51.4 80.1 34.1
Approach LOS F D F C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 65.4 HCM Level of Service E
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.04
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 118.6 Sum of lost time (s)19.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.0% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)854 1 182 5 2 0 58 553 2 0 376 405
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 0.94 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)918 1 196 5 2 0 62 595 2 0 404 435
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 130 00000100307
Lane Group Flow (vph) 918 1 66 5 2 0 62 595 1 0 404 128
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.1 22.0 22.0 1.3 1.2 5.0 28.8 28.8 19.2 19.2
Effective Green, g (s) 22.1 22.0 22.0 1.3 1.2 5.0 28.8 28.8 19.2 19.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.44 0.44 0.29 0.29
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1689 1192 533 35 34 136 1561 698 1041 819
v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.00 c0.00 0.00 0.04 c0.17 0.11
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.00 0.05
v/c Ratio 0.54 0.00 0.12 0.14 0.06 0.46 0.38 0.00 0.39 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 17.5 14.4 15.0 31.5 31.5 28.8 12.3 10.2 18.4 17.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.0 0.1 2.6 1.0 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.1
Delay (s)18.0 14.4 15.1 34.0 32.5 29.7 12.3 10.2 18.7 17.2
Level of Service B B B C C C B B B B
Approach Delay (s)17.5 33.6 14.0 17.9
Approach LOS B C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 16.8 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.41
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 65.3 Sum of lost time (s)8.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)10 103 674 59 235 234
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.88 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1627 3497 1770 3539
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1627 3497 1770 3539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)11 108 709 62 247 246
RTOR Reduction (vph) 102 0 14 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 17 0 757 0 247 246
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 2.4 16.6 8.3 28.9
Effective Green, g (s) 2.4 16.6 8.3 28.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.40 0.20 0.70
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)95 1406 356 2476
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.22 c0.14 0.07
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.18 0.54 0.69 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 18.5 9.4 15.3 2.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.5 4.7 0.1
Delay (s)18.9 10.9 20.0 2.1
Level of Service B B B A
Approach Delay (s) 18.9 10.9 11.1
Approach LOS B B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 11.6 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 41.3 Sum of lost time (s)14.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)264 0 798 00001663 949 0 739 602
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4677 1362 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4677 1362 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)293 0 887 00001848 1054 0 821 669
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 186 0000590000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 293 0 701 00002190 653 0 821 669
Turn Type custom custom NA Free NA Free
Protected Phases 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 Free Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.3 14.3 27.7 50.0 27.7 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 14.3 14.3 27.7 50.0 27.7 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.29 0.55 1.00 0.55 1.00
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 982 797 2591 1362 2817 1583
v/s Ratio Prot c0.47 0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 c0.25 0.48 0.42
v/c Ratio 0.30 0.88 0.85 0.48 0.29 0.42
Uniform Delay, d1 13.9 17.0 9.4 0.0 5.9 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.79 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 10.8 3.6 1.2 0.2 0.8
Delay (s)14.0 27.8 13.0 1.2 4.9 0.8
Level of Service B C B A A A
Approach Delay (s)24.4 0.0 10.3 3.0
Approach LOS C A B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 11.4 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 380 102 27 0 1754 34 0 1008 342
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.91 1.00 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.99 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1720 2787 5085 1583 4777 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1720 2787 5085 1583 4777 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 422 113 30 0 1949 38 0 1120 380
RTOR Reduction (vph)00000300008127
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 266 269 27 0 1949 38 0 1158 207
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Free NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 Free 6
Actuated Green, G (s)11.5 11.5 16.1 26.4 50.0 31.0 31.0
Effective Green, g (s)11.5 11.5 16.1 26.4 50.0 31.0 31.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.53 1.00 0.62 0.62
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)387 396 897 2685 1583 2962 844
v/s Ratio Prot c0.38 c0.24
v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.16 0.01 0.02 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.69 0.68 0.03 0.73 0.02 0.39 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 17.6 17.6 11.6 9.0 0.0 4.8 4.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 3.6 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.4 0.7
Delay (s)21.6 21.2 11.6 5.4 0.0 5.2 4.9
Level of Service C C B A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 20.9 5.3 5.1
Approach LOS A C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 7.4 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)7.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)94 2486 0 1099 0 0 0 1715 0 0 198 694
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.94 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 4990 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 4990 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)99 2617 0 1157 0 0 0 1805 0 0 208 731
RTOR Reduction (vph)0000000000056
Lane Group Flow (vph) 99 2617 0 1157 0 0 0 1805 0 0 208 675
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8462
Actuated Green, G (s) 90.7 58.1 27.7 39.0 37.7 128.4
Effective Green, g (s) 90.7 58.1 27.7 39.0 37.7 128.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.42 0.20 0.28 0.27 0.92
Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.9 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2240 2125 994 1427 1379 1583
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 c0.51 c0.23 c0.35 0.04 0.28
v/s Ratio Perm 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.04 1.23 1.16 1.26 0.15 0.43
Uniform Delay, d1 8.6 40.5 55.6 50.0 38.5 0.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 108.5 85.0 124.9 0.2 0.1
Delay (s)8.6 149.0 140.6 174.9 38.7 0.7
Level of Service A F F F D A
Approach Delay (s)143.8 140.6 174.9 9.1
Approach LOS F F F A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 132.7 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.23
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 139.0 Sum of lost time (s)14.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 113.6% ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)9 72 61 595 481 44
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1630 1770 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1630 1770 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Adj. Flow (vph)12 97 82 804 650 59
RTOR Reduction (vph) 87 000029
Lane Group Flow (vph) 22 0 82 804 650 30
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.5 3.8 29.9 22.1 22.1
Effective Green, g (s) 4.5 3.8 29.9 22.1 22.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.09 0.68 0.51 0.51
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 168 154 3479 2572 801
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.05 c0.16 0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.53 0.23 0.25 0.04
Uniform Delay, d1 17.8 19.1 2.6 6.1 5.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 3.5 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)18.0 22.6 2.7 6.2 5.5
Level of Service B C A A A
Approach Delay (s) 18.0 4.5 6.2
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.1 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.23
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 43.7 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)103 315 366 581 147 47
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 3539 3411
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 3539 3411
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)112 342 398 632 160 51
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 249 0 0 22 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 112 93 398 632 189 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.0 21.4 12.0 53.0 37.0
Effective Green, g (s) 6.0 21.4 12.0 53.0 37.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.27 0.15 0.68 0.47
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 135 761 525 2392 1610
v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.03 c0.12 c0.18 0.06
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.83 0.12 0.76 0.26 0.12
Uniform Delay, d1 35.7 21.4 31.8 5.0 11.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 31.2 0.0 5.5 0.3 0.1
Delay (s)66.9 21.5 37.3 5.3 11.7
Level of Service E C D A B
Approach Delay (s) 32.7 17.7 11.7
Approach LOS C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 20.9 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.38
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.4 Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)189 1264 79 109 472 28 120 685 522 180 547 166
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3510 3433 3298 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3510 3433 3298 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)205 1374 86 118 513 30 130 745 567 196 595 180
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 44 0400172600121
Lane Group Flow (vph) 205 1374 42 118 539 0 130 892 377 196 595 59
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 7.9 39.8 39.8 3.0 34.9 7.4 34.9 34.9 6.0 33.5 33.5
Effective Green, g (s) 7.9 39.8 39.8 3.0 34.9 7.4 34.9 34.9 6.0 33.5 33.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.39 0.39 0.03 0.34 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.33 0.33
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 264 1371 613 146 1193 247 1121 490 201 1154 516
v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.39 c0.02 0.15 0.04 c0.27 c0.06 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.26 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.78 1.00 0.07 0.81 0.45 0.53 0.80 0.77 0.98 0.52 0.11
Uniform Delay, d1 46.5 31.5 19.8 49.6 26.4 46.0 30.7 30.3 48.3 28.0 24.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 12.2 24.8 0.1 25.6 0.4 0.9 4.2 7.6 55.6 0.5 0.1
Delay (s)58.8 56.3 19.9 75.2 26.8 46.9 34.9 37.8 103.9 28.5 24.3
Level of Service EEBEC DCDFCC
Approach Delay (s)54.7 35.5 36.8 43.0
Approach LOS DDDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 44.2 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.85
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 102.7 Sum of lost time (s)13.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.7% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
APPENDIX A3
Cumulative Conditions 6-Lane Scenario
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)727 194 953 192 0 416 0 832 415 172 1078 589
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)782 209 1025 206 0 447 0 895 446 185 1159 633
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 12 0 0 42 0 0 314 0 0 382
Lane Group Flow (vph) 782 209 1013 206 0 405 0 895 132 185 1159 251
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 33.8 40.5 40.5 4.5 17.2 29.7 29.7 6.0 39.7 39.7
Effective Green, g (s) 33.8 40.5 40.5 4.5 17.2 29.7 29.7 6.0 39.7 39.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.17 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.40 0.40
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1160 755 641 154 479 1051 828 106 1405 628
v/s Ratio Prot 0.23 0.11 c0.06 0.15 0.25 c0.10 c0.33
v/s Ratio Perm c0.64 0.05 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.67 0.28 1.58 1.34 0.85 0.85 0.16 1.75 0.82 0.40
Uniform Delay, d1 28.4 19.9 29.8 47.8 40.1 33.1 25.9 47.0 27.0 21.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 1.46
Incremental Delay, d2 1.2 0.1 268.2 189.1 12.4 8.7 0.4 352.7 2.7 0.9
Delay (s)29.6 20.0 298.0 236.9 52.5 41.8 26.4 399.8 21.5 32.3
Level of Service C C F F D D C F C C
Approach Delay (s)165.1 110.7 36.6 60.4
Approach LOS F F D E
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 95.8 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.24
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)13.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 106.6% ICU Level of Service G
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 1335 0 494 0 1486 588 0 550 2008
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.96 0.90 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4869 4333 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4869 4333 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 1391 0 515 0 1548 612 0 573 2183
RTOR Reduction (vph)000001107100342584
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1391 0 504 0 2089 0 0 1323 507
Turn Type Prot custom NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 6
Actuated Green, G (s)42.2 42.2 46.5 46.5 46.5
Effective Green, g (s)42.2 42.2 46.5 46.5 46.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.42 0.46 0.46 0.46
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1449 1176 2264 2015 633
v/s Ratio Prot c0.41 c0.43 0.31
v/s Ratio Perm 0.18 0.37
v/c Ratio 0.96 0.43 0.92 1.05dr 0.80
Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 20.4 25.1 20.6 22.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.82 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 14.9 0.1 5.3 1.7 10.3
Delay (s)42.9 20.5 25.8 22.3 33.1
Level of Service D C C C C
Approach Delay (s)0.0 36.9 25.8 26.6
Approach LOS A D C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 29.2 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.2% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
dr Defacto Right Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a right lane.
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)160 232 174 788 680 86 372 1011 291 82 1462 394
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)165 239 179 812 701 89 384 1042 300 85 1507 406
RTOR Reduction (vph)00400720018500221
Lane Group Flow (vph) 165 239 175 812 701 17 384 1042 115 85 1507 185
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 16.0 16.0 32.2 24.6 24.6 24.6 16.2 48.0 48.0 15.0 46.8 46.8
Effective Green, g (s) 16.0 16.0 32.2 24.6 24.6 24.6 16.2 48.0 48.0 15.0 46.8 46.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.26 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.38 0.12 0.37 0.37
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 437 648 715 977 996 310 644 2449 1065 410 2388 1038
v/s Ratio Prot 0.05 0.05 0.03 c0.16 c0.14 c0.08 0.16 0.02 c0.24
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.07
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.37 0.25 0.83 0.70 0.06 0.60 0.43 0.11 0.21 0.63 0.18
Uniform Delay, d1 50.2 50.2 37.1 48.5 47.1 41.1 51.6 28.6 25.0 49.9 32.3 26.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.4 0.1 5.8 2.3 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.3 0.4
Delay (s)50.4 50.5 37.1 54.3 49.4 41.1 52.6 29.2 25.2 50.0 33.6 26.8
Level of Service DDDDDDDCCDCC
Approach Delay (s)46.4 51.4 33.7 32.9
Approach LOS DDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 39.5 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 125.6 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.2% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)83 111 16 423 609 312 120 902 211 187 1416 827
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 3433 3359 3433 5085 1583 1770 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 3433 3359 3433 5085 1583 1770 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Adj. Flow (vph)100 134 19 510 734 376 145 1087 254 225 1706 996
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 14 0 45 0 0 0 169 0 0 83
Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 134 5 510 1065 0 145 1087 85 225 1706 913
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 5.3 36.6 36.6 17.5 48.8 5.5 48.5 48.5 22.7 65.7 65.7
Effective Green, g (s) 5.3 36.6 36.6 17.5 48.8 5.5 48.5 48.5 22.7 65.7 65.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.34 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.16 0.45 0.45
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 126 896 401 415 1134 131 1706 531 278 2310 719
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.04 c0.15 c0.32 c0.04 0.21 0.13 0.34
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.05 c0.58
v/c Ratio 0.79 0.15 0.01 1.23 0.94 1.11 0.64 0.16 0.81 0.74 1.27
Uniform Delay, d1 69.1 41.9 40.5 63.5 46.5 69.5 40.6 33.7 58.9 32.4 39.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 27.3 0.1 0.0 122.6 14.6 110.2 0.9 0.2 15.4 1.4 132.0
Delay (s)96.4 42.1 40.5 186.1 61.1 179.7 41.5 33.9 74.2 33.7 171.4
Level of Service F D D F E F D C E C F
Approach Delay (s)63.4 100.4 53.7 83.7
Approach LOS E F D F
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 80.1 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.13
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 144.6 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 94.5% ICU Level of Service F
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)411 1 64 3 2 0 128 550 92 0 531 994
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 0.94 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)442 1 69 3 2 0 138 591 99 0 571 1069
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 55 000003900644
Lane Group Flow (vph) 442 1 14 3 2 0 138 591 60 0 571 425
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 15.9 15.7 15.7 1.5 1.3 11.2 46.3 46.3 30.5 30.5
Effective Green, g (s) 15.9 15.7 15.7 1.5 1.3 11.2 46.3 46.3 30.5 30.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.02 0.15 0.60 0.60 0.40 0.40
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1034 724 324 35 32 258 2136 956 1407 1108
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.00 c0.00 0.00 c0.08 0.17 c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.04 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.00 0.04 0.09 0.06 0.53 0.28 0.06 0.41 0.38
Uniform Delay, d1 26.4 24.3 24.5 36.9 37.1 30.3 7.2 6.3 16.6 16.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3
Delay (s)26.8 24.3 24.6 38.4 38.2 31.4 7.3 6.3 16.9 16.7
Level of Service CCCDD CAA BB
Approach Delay (s)26.5 38.3 11.2 16.8
Approach LOS C D B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 16.9 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.7 Sum of lost time (s)13.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)135 183 254 3 44 830
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1682 3533 1770 3539
Flt Permitted 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1682 3533 1770 3539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)142 193 267 3 46 874
RTOR Reduction (vph) 143 01000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 192 0 269 0 46 874
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 8.0 13.9 1.8 19.7
Effective Green, g (s) 8.0 13.9 1.8 19.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.37 0.05 0.52
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 357 1303 85 1849
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.08 0.03 c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.54 0.21 0.54 0.47
Uniform Delay, d1 13.2 8.1 17.5 5.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.4 3.7 0.9
Delay (s)14.0 8.5 21.3 6.6
Level of Service B A C A
Approach Delay (s) 14.0 8.5 7.3
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 9.0 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 37.7 Sum of lost time (s)10.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.0% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)427 0 208 000025763601720 734
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4407 1362 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4407 1362 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)474 0 231 000028670701911 816
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 16 00001330000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 474 0 215 000050735301911 816
Turn Type custom custom NA Free NA Free
Protected Phases 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 Free Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.8 10.8 31.2 50.0 31.2 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 10.8 10.8 31.2 50.0 31.2 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.62 1.00 0.62 1.00
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 742 602 2750 1362 3173 1583
v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm 0.14 0.08 0.26 c0.52
v/c Ratio 0.64 0.36 0.18 0.26 0.60 0.52
Uniform Delay, d1 17.8 16.6 4.0 0.0 5.7 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.8 1.2
Delay (s)19.2 16.8 4.1 0.5 5.8 1.2
Level of Service B B A A A A
Approach Delay (s)18.4 0.0 2.8 4.4
Approach LOS BAAA
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.3 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)4.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.1% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 222 11 75 0 578 74 0 735 1292
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.88 0.91 1.00 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 0.93 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1693 2787 5085 1583 4469 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1693 2787 5085 1583 4469 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 247 12 83 0 642 82 0 817 1436
RTOR Reduction (vph)00000660000223223
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 128 131 17 0 642 82 0 1312 495
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Free NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 Free 6
Actuated Green, G (s)8.0 8.0 14.0 29.0 50.0 34.5 34.5
Effective Green, g (s)8.0 8.0 10.5 29.0 50.0 34.5 34.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.21 0.58 1.00 0.69 0.69
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)269 271 585 2949 1583 3084 940
v/s Ratio Prot 0.13 0.29
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.05 c0.36
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.03 0.22 0.05 0.43 0.53
Uniform Delay, d1 19.1 19.1 15.7 5.0 0.0 3.4 3.8
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.22 7.72
Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.4 1.7
Delay (s)19.6 19.6 15.7 2.9 0.1 1.1 30.9
Level of Service B B B A A A C
Approach Delay (s)0.0 18.7 2.5 10.6
Approach LOS ABAB
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 9.7 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)7.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)44 633 199 782 984 826 67 259 263 544 1007 72
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.91 0.88 0.97 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 5085 2787 3433 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 5085 2787 3433 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)46 666 209 823 1036 869 71 273 277 573 1060 76
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 141 0 0 386 0 0 234 0 0 34
Lane Group Flow (vph) 46 666 68 823 1036 483 71 273 43 573 1060 42
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8462
Actuated Green, G (s) 3.5 22.3 22.3 23.0 41.8 41.8 3.5 15.4 15.4 19.8 31.7 35.2
Effective Green, g (s) 3.5 22.3 22.3 23.0 41.8 41.8 3.5 15.4 15.4 19.8 31.7 35.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.04 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.42 0.42 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.32 0.35
Clearance Time (s) 5.3 4.9 4.9 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 120 1134 622 1148 2126 662 175 783 429 680 1612 557
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.13 c0.16 0.20 0.01 0.05 c0.17 c0.21 0.00
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 c0.30 0.02 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.59 0.11 0.72 0.49 0.73 0.41 0.35 0.10 0.84 0.66 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 47.2 34.7 30.9 35.5 21.3 24.4 47.2 37.8 36.3 38.6 29.5 21.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.75 1.58 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.9 0.1 1.8 0.2 4.3 0.6 1.2 0.5 9.0 2.1 0.0
Delay (s)47.9 35.7 31.1 37.3 21.5 28.7 43.0 29.6 57.9 47.6 31.6 21.6
Level of Service DDCDCCDCEDCC
Approach Delay (s)35.2 28.5 43.8 36.5
Approach LOS DCDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 33.4 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)10.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)4 101 45 651 606 6
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1617 1770 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1617 1770 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Adj. Flow (vph)5 136 61 880 819 8
RTOR Reduction (vph) 122 00004
Lane Group Flow (vph) 19 0 61 880 819 4
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.6 3.2 31.6 24.4 24.4
Effective Green, g (s) 4.6 3.2 31.6 24.4 24.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.07 0.69 0.54 0.54
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 163 124 3532 2727 849
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.03 0.17 c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.12 0.49 0.25 0.30 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 18.6 20.4 2.6 5.8 4.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 3.1 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)18.7 23.4 2.6 6.0 4.9
Level of Service B C A A A
Approach Delay (s) 18.7 4.0 6.0
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 5.9 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.29
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 45.5 Sum of lost time (s)13.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)16 401 591 238 765 238
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.96
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 3539 3413
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 3539 3413
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)17 436 642 259 832 259
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 92 0 0 20 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 17 344 642 259 1071 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 0.7 36.6 21.7 67.3 41.6
Effective Green, g (s) 0.7 36.6 21.7 67.3 41.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.01 0.39 0.23 0.72 0.45
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)13 1098 802 2564 1528
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.12 c0.19 0.07 c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.31 0.31 0.80 0.10 0.70
Uniform Delay, d1 46.1 19.5 33.6 3.8 20.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 363.0 0.1 5.4 0.1 2.7
Delay (s)409.1 19.5 39.0 3.9 23.3
Level of Service F B D A C
Approach Delay (s) 34.1 28.9 23.3
Approach LOS C C C
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 27.4 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 92.9 Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.6% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Cumulative AM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 2-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)73 347 35 384 671 126 108 590 239 59 457 89
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3455 3433 3370 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3455 3433 3370 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)79 377 38 417 729 137 117 641 260 64 497 97
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 31 0 15 0 0 3 157 0 0 69
Lane Group Flow (vph) 79 377 7 417 851 0 117 664 77 64 497 28
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 3.7 15.7 15.7 17.5 29.5 5.3 26.9 26.9 2.2 23.8 23.8
Effective Green, g (s) 3.7 15.7 15.7 17.5 29.5 5.3 26.9 26.9 2.2 23.8 23.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.19 0.19 0.22 0.36 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.29 0.29
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 156 683 306 1074 1254 224 1115 477 93 1036 463
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.11 0.08 c0.25 c0.03 c0.20 0.02 0.14
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.05 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.55 0.02 0.39 0.68 0.52 0.60 0.16 0.69 0.48 0.06
Uniform Delay, d1 37.9 29.6 26.6 27.3 21.9 36.8 22.7 19.2 39.2 23.7 20.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 1.2 0.0 0.1 1.6 1.0 1.0 0.2 15.5 0.5 0.1
Delay (s)38.9 30.8 26.6 27.4 23.5 37.8 23.7 19.5 54.7 24.1 20.8
Level of Service DCCCC DCBDCC
Approach Delay (s)31.8 24.8 24.3 26.6
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 26.0 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 81.3 Sum of lost time (s)20.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Santa Rita Road & I-580 EB off-ramp/Pimlico Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)285 330 611 438 0 426 0 1007 936 20 86 1213
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 4.0 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.95 0.88 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 1863 1583 3433 2787 3539 2787 1770 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)306 355 657 471 0 458 0 1083 1006 22 92 1304
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 452 0 0 44 0 0 590 0 0 587
Lane Group Flow (vph) 306 355 205 471 0 414 0 1083 416 22 92 717
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot custom NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 3 8 7 5 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases 8 6 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 23.8 24.8 24.8 13.7 20.8 36.1 36.1 6.1 46.2 46.2
Effective Green, g (s) 23.8 24.8 24.8 13.7 20.8 36.1 36.1 6.1 46.2 46.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.14 0.21 0.36 0.36 0.06 0.46 0.46
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 4.0 5.4 5.4
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 817 462 393 470 580 1278 1006 108 1635 731
v/s Ratio Prot 0.09 c0.19 c0.14 0.15 0.31 0.01 0.03
v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.15 c0.45
v/c Ratio 0.37 0.77 0.52 1.00 0.71 0.85 0.41 0.20 0.06 0.98
Uniform Delay, d1 31.9 34.9 32.5 43.1 36.8 29.4 24.0 44.6 14.9 26.5
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.21 0.86 1.92
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 6.8 0.6 42.0 3.5 7.1 1.3 0.3 0.1 27.3
Delay (s)32.0 41.7 33.1 85.2 40.3 36.5 25.2 54.1 12.9 78.2
Level of Service C D C F D D C D B E
Approach Delay (s)35.1 63.1 31.1 73.6
Approach LOS D E C E
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 47.7 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)9.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 79.6% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Santa Rita Road/Tassajara Road & I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 337 0 515 0 2351 677 0 930 1147
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.91 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 0.94 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4915 4524 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4915 4524 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 351 0 536 0 2449 705 0 969 1247
RTOR Reduction (vph)000001005100115196
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 351 0 526 0 3103 0 0 1478 427
Turn Type Prot custom NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 6
Actuated Green, G (s)20.2 20.2 68.5 68.5 68.5
Effective Green, g (s)20.2 20.2 68.5 68.5 68.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.68 0.68 0.68
Clearance Time (s)5.4 5.4 5.9 5.9 5.9
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)693 563 3367 3099 933
v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.63 0.33
v/s Ratio Perm c0.19 0.31
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.93 0.92 0.48 0.46
Uniform Delay, d1 35.5 39.2 13.5 7.4 7.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.74 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 22.4 5.1 0.5 1.6
Delay (s)35.7 61.7 15.0 7.9 8.8
Level of Service D E B A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 51.4 15.0 8.2
Approach LOS A D B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 17.8 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)11.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.0% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Tassajara Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)992 1844 458 315 281 155 348 1477 841 289 988 211
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.88 0.94 0.91 1.00 0.94 0.86 0.88 0.97 0.86 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 2787 4990 5085 1583 4990 6408 2787 3433 6408 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Adj. Flow (vph)1023 1901 472 325 290 160 359 1523 867 298 1019 218
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 13 0 0 111 0 0 279 0 0 151
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1023 1901 459 325 290 49 359 1523 588 298 1019 67
Turn Type Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 52316 38 74
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 20.0 50.0 66.0 16.0 46.0 46.0 16.0 46.2 46.2 15.8 46.0 46.0
Effective Green, g (s) 20.0 50.0 66.0 16.0 46.0 46.0 16.0 46.2 46.2 15.8 46.0 46.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.33 0.44 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.31
Clearance Time (s) 5.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 458 1695 1226 532 1559 485 532 1974 858 362 1965 855
v/s Ratio Prot c0.30 c0.37 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.07 c0.24 c0.09 0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.03 0.21 0.02
v/c Ratio 2.23 1.12 0.37 0.61 0.19 0.10 0.67 0.77 0.69 0.82 0.52 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 65.0 50.0 28.2 64.0 38.2 37.2 64.5 47.1 45.5 65.7 42.9 36.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 562.2 63.2 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.1 2.7 3.0 4.4 13.4 1.0 0.2
Delay (s)627.2 113.2 28.2 65.5 38.3 37.3 67.2 50.1 50.0 79.1 43.9 37.1
Level of Service F F C E D D E D D E D D
Approach Delay (s)256.2 49.5 52.3 49.7
Approach LOS F D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 133.5 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 150.0 Sum of lost time (s)16.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 101.2% ICU Level of Service G
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Tassajara Road & Gleason Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)391 232 24 191 80 140 105 2068 370 175 1067 154
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 3433 3201 3433 5085 1583 1770 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 3433 3201 3433 5085 1583 1770 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Adj. Flow (vph)471 280 29 230 96 169 127 2492 446 211 1286 186
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 24 0 101 0 0 0 177 0 0 105
Lane Group Flow (vph) 471 280 5 230 164 0 127 2492 269 211 1286 81
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2 8 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 13.1 13.1 6.4 13.0 5.0 33.5 33.5 5.5 34.0 34.0
Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 13.1 13.1 6.4 13.0 5.0 33.5 33.5 5.5 34.0 34.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.06 0.43 0.43 0.07 0.44 0.44
Clearance Time (s)4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.3 5.3 4.5 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.0 4.0 2.5 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 287 596 267 282 535 221 2190 682 125 2222 692
v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 c0.08 0.07 0.05 0.04 c0.49 c0.12 0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00 0.17 0.05
v/c Ratio 1.64 0.47 0.02 0.82 0.31 0.57 1.14 0.40 1.69 0.58 0.12
Uniform Delay, d1 35.6 29.2 27.0 35.1 28.4 35.4 22.1 15.2 36.1 16.5 13.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 303.8 1.0 0.0 16.0 0.6 2.9 68.2 0.5 341.6 0.4 0.1
Delay (s)339.4 30.2 27.0 51.2 29.0 38.3 90.4 15.7 377.8 16.9 13.1
Level of Service F CCDC DFBFBB
Approach Delay (s)216.8 39.3 77.4 61.8
Approach LOS F D E E
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 87.9 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.01
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.8 Sum of lost time (s)14.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.6% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Fallon Road/Camino Tassajara & Tassajara Road/Syrah Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)940 1 163 5 2 0 40 525 2 0 398 383
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Lane Util. Factor 0.94 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.88
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)4990 3539 1583 1770 1863 1770 3539 1583 3539 2787
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Adj. Flow (vph)1011 1 175 5 2 0 43 565 2 0 428 412
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 115 00000100291
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1011 1 60 5 2 0 43 565 1 0 428 121
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 3 8 7 4
Permitted Phases 2684
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.8 22.7 22.7 1.3 1.2 4.9 29.0 29.0 19.5 19.5
Effective Green, g (s) 22.8 22.7 22.7 1.3 1.2 4.9 29.0 29.0 19.5 19.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.44 0.44 0.29 0.29
Clearance Time (s)4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1719 1214 543 35 34 131 1550 693 1042 821
v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.00 c0.00 0.00 0.02 c0.16 0.12
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.00 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.59 0.00 0.11 0.14 0.06 0.33 0.36 0.00 0.41 0.15
Uniform Delay, d1 17.8 14.3 14.9 31.9 31.9 29.1 12.4 10.5 18.7 17.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.0 0.1 2.6 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.1
Delay (s)18.5 14.3 15.0 34.5 32.9 29.6 12.5 10.5 19.1 17.3
Level of Service B B B C C C B B B B
Approach Delay (s)17.9 34.0 13.7 18.2
Approach LOS B C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 17.1 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 66.2 Sum of lost time (s)8.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.8% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Camino Tassajara & Highland Road 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)9 103 727 59 238 237
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 0.88 0.99 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1624 3499 1770 3539
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1624 3499 1770 3539
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)9 108 765 62 251 249
RTOR Reduction (vph) 102 0 13 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 15 0 814 0 251 249
Turn Type NA NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 4 6 5 2
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 2.4 17.1 7.8 28.9
Effective Green, g (s) 2.4 17.1 7.8 28.9
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.06 0.41 0.19 0.70
Clearance Time (s)4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)94 1449 334 2476
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.23 c0.14 0.07
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.16 0.56 0.75 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 18.5 9.2 15.8 2.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.6 8.2 0.1
Delay (s)18.8 10.8 24.0 2.1
Level of Service B B C A
Approach Delay (s) 18.8 10.8 13.1
Approach LOS B B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 12.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 41.3 Sum of lost time (s)14.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: El Charro Road & I-580 EB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)252 0 789 00001646 931 0 745 605
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 0.97 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 2787 4681 1362 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 2787 4681 1362 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)280 0 877 00001829 1034 0 828 672
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 148 0000550000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 280 0 729 00002157 651 0 828 672
Turn Type custom custom NA Free NA Free
Protected Phases 2 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 Free Free
Actuated Green, G (s) 15.5 15.5 26.5 50.0 26.5 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 15.5 15.5 26.5 50.0 26.5 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.53 1.00 0.53 1.00
Clearance Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1064 864 2481 1362 2695 1583
v/s Ratio Prot c0.46 0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 c0.26 0.48 0.42
v/c Ratio 0.26 0.84 0.87 0.48 0.31 0.42
Uniform Delay, d1 13.0 16.1 10.2 0.0 6.6 0.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 7.2 4.5 1.2 0.3 0.8
Delay (s)13.0 23.4 14.7 1.2 5.6 0.8
Level of Service B C B A A A
Approach Delay (s)20.9 0.0 11.7 3.4
Approach LOS C A B A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 11.3 HCM Level of Service B
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)8.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: El Charro Road/Fallon Road & I-580 WB on-ramp/I-580 WB off-ramp 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)0 0 0 366 95 0 0 1663 34 0 1037 338
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 0.95 0.91 1.00 0.86 0.86
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1681 1719 5085 1583 4783 1362
Flt Permitted 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1681 1719 5085 1583 4783 1362
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 407 106 0 0 1848 38 0 1152 376
RTOR Reduction (vph)00000000006128
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 252 261 0 0 1848 38 0 1184 210
Turn Type Perm NA custom NA Free NA Perm
Protected Phases 8 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 1 8 Free 6
Actuated Green, G (s)11.4 11.4 31.1 50.0 31.1 31.1
Effective Green, g (s)11.4 11.4 31.1 50.0 31.1 31.1
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.62 1.00 0.62 0.62
Clearance Time (s)3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vehicle Extension (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)383 392 3163 1583 2975 847
v/s Ratio Prot c0.36 0.25
v/s Ratio Perm 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.66 0.67 0.58 0.02 0.40 0.25
Uniform Delay, d1 17.5 17.6 5.6 0.0 4.7 4.2
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.20 0.03
Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 3.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.5
Delay (s)20.6 20.9 2.7 0.0 1.3 0.7
Level of Service C C A A A A
Approach Delay (s)0.0 20.7 2.7 1.1
Approach LOS A C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 4.4 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.0 Sum of lost time (s)7.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.4% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Fallon Road & Dublin Boulevard 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)20 2473 0 1133 0 0 0 1551 0 0 153 781
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)5.3 4.9 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 0.94 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 5085 4990 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 5085 4990 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph)21 2603 0 1193 0 0 0 1633 0 0 161 822
RTOR Reduction (vph)0000000000087
Lane Group Flow (vph) 21 2603 0 1193 0 0 0 1633 0 0 161 735
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA pm+ov
Protected Phases 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 3
Permitted Phases 8462
Actuated Green, G (s) 68.7 34.1 29.7 22.0 20.7 89.4
Effective Green, g (s) 68.7 34.1 29.7 22.0 20.7 89.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.69 0.34 0.30 0.22 0.21 0.89
Clearance Time (s)5.3 4.9 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 2358 1734 1482 1119 1053 1583
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.51 c0.24 c0.32 0.03 0.32
v/s Ratio Perm 0.15
v/c Ratio 0.01 1.50 0.80 1.46 0.15 0.46
Uniform Delay, d1 4.9 33.0 32.5 39.0 32.5 1.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0 228.6 3.1 210.8 0.3 0.1
Delay (s)4.9 261.5 35.6 242.4 32.8 1.0
Level of Service A F D F C A
Approach Delay (s)259.5 35.6 242.4 6.2
Approach LOS F D F A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 174.9 HCM Level of Service F
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.25
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.0 Sum of lost time (s)14.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 110.8% ICU Level of Service H
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
10: Fallon Road & Silvera Ranch Drive 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 10
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)9 73 57 549 484 45
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00
Frt 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1630 1770 5085 5085 1583
Flt Permitted 0.99 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1630 1770 5085 5085 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Adj. Flow (vph)12 99 77 742 654 61
RTOR Reduction (vph) 89 000030
Lane Group Flow (vph) 22 0 77 742 654 31
Turn Type NA Prot NA NA Perm
Protected Phases 4 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 4.5 3.8 30.2 22.4 22.4
Effective Green, g (s) 4.5 3.8 30.2 22.4 22.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.09 0.69 0.51 0.51
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 167 153 3490 2589 806
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 c0.04 0.15 c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.13 0.50 0.21 0.25 0.04
Uniform Delay, d1 18.0 19.2 2.5 6.1 5.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 2.6 0.1 0.1 0.0
Delay (s)18.1 21.8 2.6 6.2 5.4
Level of Service B C A A A
Approach Delay (s) 18.1 4.4 6.1
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 6.1 HCM Level of Service A
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.27
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 44.0 Sum of lost time (s)13.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.6% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
11: Camino Tassajara & Windemere Parkway 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 11
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)102 309 371 634 152 45
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.97
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770 2787 3433 3539 3418
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770 2787 3433 3539 3418
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)111 336 403 689 165 49
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 244 0 0 20 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 111 92 403 689 194 0
Turn Type NA custom Prot NA NA
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.0 21.4 12.0 53.0 37.0
Effective Green, g (s) 6.0 21.4 12.0 53.0 37.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.27 0.15 0.68 0.47
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 135 761 525 2392 1613
v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 c0.03 c0.12 c0.19 0.06
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.82 0.12 0.77 0.29 0.12
Uniform Delay, d1 35.7 21.4 31.9 5.1 11.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 30.2 0.0 6.0 0.3 0.2
Delay (s)65.9 21.5 37.9 5.4 11.7
Level of Service E C D A B
Approach Delay (s) 32.5 17.4 11.7
Approach LOS C B B
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 20.6 HCM Level of Service C
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.4 Sum of lost time (s)12.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.5% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: Crow Canyon Road/Blackhawk Road & Camino Tassajara 3/18/2015
Cumulative PM 5:00 pm 10/3/2014 3-Lanes Synchro 8 Report
JMP Page 12
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)185 1271 84 104 477 25 132 657 515 170 540 174
Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.91 0.91 0.97 0.95 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)3433 3539 1583 4990 3513 3433 3291 1441 3433 3539 1583
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)3433 3539 1583 4990 3513 3433 3291 1441 3433 3539 1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph)201 1382 91 113 518 27 143 714 560 185 587 189
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 46 0300192700128
Lane Group Flow (vph) 201 1382 45 113 542 0 143 869 359 185 587 61
Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 2 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 9.7 40.1 40.1 3.0 33.4 7.5 34.5 34.5 6.0 33.0 33.0
Effective Green, g (s) 9.7 40.1 40.1 3.0 33.4 7.5 34.5 34.5 6.0 33.0 33.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.39 0.39 0.03 0.33 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.32 0.32
Clearance Time (s)4.0 5.7 5.7 4.0 5.7 4.0 5.3 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.3
Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 325 1383 619 146 1144 251 1107 485 201 1138 509
v/s Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.39 c0.02 0.15 0.04 c0.26 c0.05 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.25 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.62 1.00 0.07 0.77 0.47 0.57 0.78 0.74 0.92 0.52 0.12
Uniform Delay, d1 44.7 31.2 19.6 49.5 27.6 46.0 30.7 30.1 48.1 28.3 24.6
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 23.9 0.1 20.4 0.4 1.8 3.9 6.2 41.2 0.5 0.1
Delay (s)47.1 55.1 19.7 69.9 28.0 47.8 34.6 36.3 89.3 28.8 24.7
Level of Service D E B E C D C D F C C
Approach Delay (s)52.2 35.2 36.4 39.7
Approach LOS DDDD
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay 42.5 HCM Level of Service D
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 102.6 Sum of lost time (s)13.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.8% ICU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Appendix B
Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis
Roadway SegmentSegment Length (mi)Speed LimitSpeed ConstantMedian/ CurbCross Section AdjAccess PointsAccess DensityLanes Access AdjBase Freeflow Speed1 (mph)Distance between SignalsSignal Spacing AdjFreeflow Speed (mph)Freeflow Travel Time (sec)ApproachPeak HourSignal delayAverage Travel Time (sec)Average Speed (mph)Speed RatioSegment LOSAM 24.8 69.6 26 65% CPM 37.8 82.6 22 55% CAM 18.4 63.2 28 70% BPM 34.9 79.7 23 57% CAM 86.2 46 100%APM86.2 46 100%AAM 9.0 95.2 42 91%APM 24.8 111.0 36 78% BAM 13.2 98.5 40 86%APM 24.5 109.8 36 78% BAM 2.5 87.8 45 97%APM 3.3 88.6 45 97%AAM 11.8 329.2 45 97%APM 8.0 325.4 45 97%AAM 8.0 325.4 45 97%APM 8.4 325.8 45 97%AAM213.9 40 99%APM213.9 40 99%AAM 23.7 237.6 36 89%APM 30.5 244.4 35 87%AAM 28.0 278.8 37 89%APM 50.8 301.6 35 84% BAM250.8 42 101%APM250.8 42 101%AExisting Conditions40.41600 0.9 41.621100 0.9 40.25800 1.0 45.95800 1.0 46.45540021 -0.36 -0.318 -0.30 -0.2112SouthboundNorthbound45 46.8 -2.7Restrictive Median, CurbCamino Tassajara between Lusitano Street and Crow Canyon Rd2.443.9 213.9SouthboundNorthbound46.8-2.7Restrictive Median, Curb45Camino Tassajara between Crow Canyon Road and Sycamore Valley Road2.943.9250.80-0.21150 0.9SouthboundNorthbound46.80No Median, No Curb21600Tassajara Rd/Camino Tassajara between Fallon Rd and Windemere Parkway1.146.5 85.3SouthboundNorthbound46.8 0No Median, No Curb4545Camino Tassajara between Windemere parkway and Lusitano Street4.146.5 317.41.0 46.5SouthboundNorthbound46.8 -0.5Non-restrictive Median, Curb5Tassajara Rd between Gleason Dr and North Dublin Ranch Dr0.543.9 44.8SouthboundNorthbound46.8 -2.7Restrictive Median, Curb2 -0.24545Tassajara Rd between North Dublin Ranch Dr and Fallon Road1.146.0 86.24
Roadway SegmentSegment Length (mi)Speed LimitSpeed ConstantMedian/ CurbCross Section AdjAccess PointsAccess DensityLanesAccess AdjBase Freeflow Speed1 (mph)Distance between SignalsSignal Spacing AdjFreeflow Speed (mph)Freeflow Travel Time (sec)ApproachPeak HourSignal delayAverage Travel Time (sec)Segment LOSAM 34.9 79.7 CPM 25.2 70.0 CAM 44.3 89.1 DPM 92.5 137.3EAM86.0APM86.0AAM 7.4 93.4APM 12.3 98.3AAM 18.0 103.1 BPM 18.7 103.8 BAM 4.1 89.2APM 5.3 90.4AAM 35.6 352.3APM 13.8 330.5AAM 10.0 326.7APM 10.9 327.6AAM213.9APM213.9AAM 23.9 237.8APM 26.8 240.7AAM 29.8 280.6APM 56.3 307.1 BAM 250.8APM250.8ACumulative Conditions 4‐Lane Scenario41.6 250.8SouthboundNorthbound-2.7 0 0 2 -0.2 43.90.9 40.4 213.9SouthboundNorthboundCamino Tassajara between Crow Canyon Road and Sycamore Valley Road2.9 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb0 0 2 -0.2 43.9 1150Camino Tassajara between Lusitano Street and Crow Canyon Rd2.4 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb-2.71600 0.946.6 316.7SouthboundNorthbound0 18 4 2 -0.2 46.61.0 46.5 85.1SouthboundNorthboundCamino Tassajara between Windemere parkway and Lusitano Street4.1 45 46.8No Median, No Curb6 5 2 -0.2 46.6 5800Tassajara Rd/Camino Tassajara between Fallon Rd and Windemere Parkway1.1 45 46.8No Median, No Curb021600 1.046.0 86.0SouthboundNorthbound-0.5 5 5 2 -0.2 46.10.9 40.2 44.8SouthboundNorthboundTassajara Rd between North Dublin Ranch Dr and Fallon Road1.1 45 46.8Non-restrictive Median, Curb2 4 2 -0.2 43.9 1100Tassajara Rd between Gleason Dr and North Dublin Ranch Dr0.5 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb-2.75800 1.0
Roadway SegmentSegment Length (mi)Speed LimitSpeed ConstantMedian/ CurbCross Section AdjAccess PointsAccess DensityLanes Access AdjBase Freeflow Speed1 (mph)Distance between SignalsSignal Spacing AdjFreeflow Speed (mph)Freeflow Travel Time (sec)ApproachPeak HourSignal delayAverage Travel Time (sec)Average Speed (mph)Speed RatioSegment LOSAM 33.7 78.4 23 57% CPM 16.9 61.6 29 72% BAM 41.5 86.2 21 52% CPM 90.4 135.1 13 32%EAM 85.9 46 100%APM85.9 46 100%AAM 7.3 93.2 42 91%APM 12.5 98.4 40 87%AAM 16.9 101.9 39 84% BPM 19.1 104.1 38 82% BAM 3.9 88.9 45 97%APM 5.4 90.4 44 94%AAM 29.9 346.0 43 92%APM 13.8 329.9 45 96%AAM 8.5 324.6 45 96%APM 10.8 326.9 45 96%AAM213.5 40 99%APM213.5 40 99%AAM 23.5 237.0 36 89%APM 28.0 241.5 36 89%AAM 30.8 281.1 37 89%APM 55.1 305.4 34 82% BAM250.3 42 101%APM250.3 42 101%ACumulative Conditions 6‐Lane Scenario41.7 250.3SouthboundNorthbound-2.7 0 0 3 -0.1 44.00.9 40.5 213.5SouthboundNorthboundCamino Tassajara between Crow Canyon Road and Sycamore Valley Road2.9 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb0 0 3 -0.1 44.0 1150Camino Tassajara between Lusitano Street and Crow Canyon Rd2.4 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb-2.71600 0.946.7 316.1SouthboundNorthbound0 18 4 3 -0.1 46.71.0 46.6 85.0SouthboundNorthboundCamino Tassajara between Windemere parkway and Lusitano Street4.1 45 46.8No Median, No Curb6 5 3 -0.1 46.7 5800Tassajara Rd/Camino Tassajara between Fallon Rd and Windemere Parkway1.1 45 46.8No Median, No Curb021600 1.046.1 85.9SouthboundNorthbound-0.5 5 5 3 -0.1 46.20.9 40.3 44.7SouthboundNorthboundTassajara Rd between North Dublin Ranch Dr and Fallon Road1.1 45 46.8Non-restrictive Median, Curb2 4 3 -0.1 44.0 1100Tassajara Rd between Gleason Dr and North Dublin Ranch Dr0.5 45 46.8Restrictive Median, Curb-2.75800 1.0
Appendix C
Lane Assumptions
Original Model Inputs (NB/SB)Modified based on Existing Conditions (NB/SB)Model Adjustment?Lane Assumptions (NB/SB)Change from Modified Existing?Lane Assumptions (NB/SB)Change from Modified Existing?Tassajara Rd/Camino TassajaraI‐580 WB Ramps to Dublin Blvd3/33/3No3/3No3/3NoDublin Blvd to Central Pkwy2/22/3Yes2/3No3/3YesCentral Pkwy to S Dublin Ranch Cir2/22/2No2/2No3/3YesS Dublin Ranch Cir to N Dublin Ranch Cir2/22/3Yes2/3No3/3YesN Dublin Ranch Cir to Fallon Dr2/21/1Yes2/2Yes3/3YesFallon Dr to Windemere Pkwy1/11/1No2/2Yes3/3YesWindemere Pkwy to Lucitano St1/11/1No2/2Yes2/2YesLucitano St to Tassajara Ranch Dr2/22/2No2/2No2/2NoTassajara Ranch Dr to Crow Canyon Rd 2/23/3Yes3/3No3/3NoFallon DrI‐580 WB Ramps to Central Pkwy1/12/2Yes3/3Yes3/3NoCentral Pkwy to Gleason Dr1/13/3Yes3/3No3/3NoGleason Dr to Signal Hill Dr1/12/2Yes3/3Yes3/3NoSignal Hill Dr to Tassajara Rd1/13/3Yes3/3No3/3NoOther modifications to the model ‐ added a second centroid connector to represent Silvera Ranch Dr connecting to Tassajara Rd in addition to Fallon Rd to better model traffic assignment stemming from that residential development.SegmentExisting ConditionsScenario 1Scenario 2
Lane Assumptions Tassajara Rd Fallon Rd Dublin Blvd Tassajara Rd Fallon Rd Dublin Blvd Original 2013Final 2013
Lane Assumptions (cont’d) Camino Tassajara Crow Canyon Rd Windemere Pkwy Highland Rd Windemere Pkwy Highland Rd Crow Canyon Rd Camino Tassajara Original 2013Final 2013
Lane Assumptions (cont’d) Tassajara Rd Fallon Rd Dublin Blvd Tassajara Rd Fallon Rd Dublin Blvd Scenario 1 (2040)Scenario 2 (2040)
Lane Assumptions (cont’d) Camino Tassajara Crow Canyon Rd Windemere Pkwy Highland Rd Windemere Pkwy Highland Rd Crow Canyon Rd Camino Tassajara Scenario 1 (2040)Scenario 2 (2040)
Appendix D
Model Link Volumes
Link Volumes
Tassajara Rd 2013 AM
Link Volumes (cont’d)
Tassajara Rd 2013 PM
Link Volumes – AM Peak Hour Windemere Pkwy Tassajara Rd Windemere PkwyTassajara Rd Scenario 1Scenario 2
Link Volumes – PM Peak Hour Windemere Pkwy Tassajara Rd Windemere PkwyTassajara Rd Scenario 1Scenario 2
Appendix E
Select‐link Analysis
3
1
628
80 5170
5
8
9
3 312
2475420
248
510
168
00
170
3419
023112
209
1 3 4
6 7 1
561
2
00
00
17225
01
1 3
11
750336470 56060 1
0603679 205890331880
0
57353643813123810
2 1 6 175186 10600
470
36
561
2
51432
13
1 1
0
589
016741103373
2
1
1
2
0
752400
02
00
632 7 2 0511
35
74
625
001231
247 270
1045698103
0
0577
659
132
100
00 752410367763683668 00
2
30
3
5
23
00057
3013929676
629
0
10123300
1 43
0000
00
4562
81
0
136310034
1271
0
10
2264803653
05
33
81
00
123125220
24146 2
561
103633100
3140000
165
0021 331 536
11
1522
28
00
151 00
0000 9 5030
000
13
525412000030 2000003047
814
10
100
00220
1
5
1017
1541
2085152
0100
1
25
00
264
1 1
51
1081
343
75
4136846870
5447171 513
00227
1 1 0117
92
246610
14
10
2 6
003 1004570
118267710313
247503
20133
168
22002 2 0 3411
014
00
00
32
814
00 00404570
4054522413
5921
315
01
1237261
0
001127311703
2 0
00
1 07
10
97
65
4
4
8
05 67
00000015251 561220
342300
3
0013977114118
0
12
0
0
0 0
00
230
247
00
33188
1837
213
13647
1322
00
8
45
0
0011775168715702
1 07015010
00
0 0
1213115912
1
1 3371367781
0000
414000
33188
00770
3718000300
10 0251910221000
0069
3
0
05000
71300253416111560
0
1
0
3
0010 10151 006 1
0 0
00
00
3
591
2
132412 560200525
1116
1430
3
0
25
1500127020
02
00
2159
3097071643126142901
0020430
2 916
52010700
50
10
1
33
1
0 2125453 1498103020100813 0120
10
5726
2200000
1 4 7
05 618
202400311990
320011
5
00141
71
20
9
6
6
2
00
5220251
595
0400
8824113
00 10665000943
74
1000
05201935000031200
2
111
0
0
051563519869814247102
332
0
008008217
000
00 29136110000
01
1 58
000012911
0
0
1019 629
45110
0
4113
2700 0
00
206
15
022102
010000227
247
0 001022
00
1 0
932101
7
0010
0
21
2 062
00
2416 500125777612
523167000247
227
102 0
0 2134006 71
19309 0
143
90
038500 1083014 575
50 1100
019000 340162
14
10
31
005300
00000000
0
0 11217
0000 143
161120
7000006009 8
5887211021
0000 32419801102
1000
1
05530
20
0677911
6
37001
01
0
100
6
11194512
61
80
37181431
1 58005320012
1
1
3100
00
00 131140
00
0000 7
13
00
1
40 1
022740550
000
068301 430
613
1117700
4
0 160
3201 03014023 1100
5
01314
8
00
03
53010683
0
5 9 7
0063505
352
121
2 7
00
071
0090
1590 4278201
1 0
1
7
1
7
373 1960
53 182332
2413
21
000 0
080
0
1 00
5
000
0
3 0
1202
10 029677
1
0
1 700
10000 301
3800110
01 6101800310905551 10002
01528500004410
76
1
1410 63 001 0233115
4
63
001
45
025
4
70
4
01 3 351163
0
0
581 0240
0
1
130
1928010
0
1025153
4 9
00
00280001100
21
300
0000 2 0
714508
10
1
00 60612
0 0
060
00247505
0 60
81
6323000
0 100
217
2021
98
312101610
0
7000
01192
020
0
0
00
00
0
0
1
2
0 10300
1550 10000000010
103
300 00006210
1 12127
0
0
0
0 001
0117 888000
1240
0
0
00035
01
00 000
00005
00
33
3
Camino Tassajara Capacity Analysis
0 .5 1 1.5
Miles
AM Peak Hour Select-Link Analysis - Scenario 1
1,000 500 250
2
2
9888 9134
6
3
2 640
30831 66
135
41
215
00
251
2842
101065
66
2 8 6
1 6 3
6318
00
00
22195
10
1 8
11
470015238 13760 0
0499314 1363494480
0
011933343187013000
2 6 4 188256 72200
38152
6318
26384
8
463
101654335734
5
3
3
9
843100
11
00
3191 7 4 208
62
83
93
005106
115 171
01113556104
0
0527
717
53
100
00 833043415458251529 00
5
01
6
2
05
00491
034372490
254
1
1115300
08
0000
00
23421
42
6
263620034
11120
0
01
3258647545
30
49
05
00
97106130
24154 1863
12150150
800000
921
0003 321 811
15
1114
42
00
23 00
0000 6 0501
000
11
445410000103 3500004628
128
00
16
00130
4
3
78
4425
01175107
0000
00
00
63
8
13
0015
2715
10
1 165362680
2614759 27
0051
9 680
38
258301
47
6 2
001 300080
115615443400
318410
0189
164
74001 0 30103
010
00
00
33
74
00 0000080
1254441819
3866
995
00
3143726
0
001763271510
0 2
00
1 18
00
85
55
2
2
5
00 131
0
0000001130 631801
304300
0
0011118213235
6
31
0
0
0 0
00
141
252
00
9448
3715
85
32717
1918
00
1
45
0
0011111298201800
0 00714200
00
0 0
2623421800
5
1 702228186
0000
116000
9448
00180
3235001000
00 115400320000
0063
8
0
30010
51100443011111530
0
1
0
4
0001 3183 004 5
0 0
00
00
0
150
28
191811 654001943
1412
2825
0
1
0
0000150011
10
00
1863131
183
1171049116549620201011
0000460
1 929
44004800
02
00
2
92
4
0 280971926434154100000187 0000
0
01
4650
01000
2 1 5
10 68
191500241258
33006
14
0075
0
24
00
2
5
5
5
00
3301145
239
1100
1214311
00 11563001118
73
0000
10191527000001200
3
414
0
0
0477639241515628113010
230
1
0080034211
000
00 5321001 2
0000
00
78
00112100
0
0
003 254
21400
0
5732
3315300 0
00
0312
11
10281
000000141
252
0 000023
00
1 0
2111002
1
185
0
13
0 0628
00
2933 2000207301
112101
7000252
141
004 0
0 432900163
1294 1
08
00
00900 611600 502
01 2000
30000 18101
47
2
004200
00000000
8
0
0 2113142
0000 08
12140
048000001 3 4
258101013
0100 340240321771281
4001
1
48001
00
3114990
2 5
15001
01 01
650
00
0
212221
22
00
1537011
7800183011
0
1300
00
480 24260
00
0000 18
13
00
0
00 4
10131272
420
000
4852802 5 00
1456300
2140
5610 1600012 1010
0
11147
00
03
0000251
0
2 4 9
00100
1
110
5 7
00
11
0000
280 8027300
0 0
2
2
1
00218
26 2843
1819
110
000 0
000
4
100
18
0000
0
0
2
0
310
0 000492
0
1
0
4 7 101
1
0000 432
70011050 42030007102010001
010717500000120
0
232597
0
20100 111 002
190103170
14
0000
00 0
16
3
8
5
481 1 22357
0
0
1 0140
1
1
1110
151900
0
00026
1
00
00211000
2500000
10
33100
0000 28
80102
00
0
00 48331
0 0
0000
0030832
0 00
7
2103342000 100
00012
56
94027890
0
000
00121749700
0 00
0
110
0
100
34210 12000000050
00 000000 2700
0
0
0 004
005 20
10 9127
0
00004
8
10 4300 0000
0
100106
00
94
6
Camino Tassajara Capacity Analysis
0 .5 1 1.5
Miles
PM Peak Hour Select-Link Analysis - Scenario 1
750 375 188
3
1
669
72 5180
6
2
7
3 014
2567420
211
510
197
00
185
3120
032912
192
1 3 1
7 2 8
596
1
00
00
17226
01
1 4
11
650234527 56450 1
0660746 306270312030
0
6739334779120210
2 4 9 204187 14400
527
34
596
1
51412
11
1 0
0
627
017371033277
2
1
1
1
7
672500
02
00
1032 3 1 0510
35
66
665
001229
210 229
0046610592
0
0
510
727
140
110
00 67259774233725688 00
3
30
2
524
01071
3015028696
669
0
9133600
1 94
0000
00
4273
4
9
135310025
1351
0
10
2255863459
06
32
81
00
114262
20246 1
596
9443670
2190000
175
0011 331 240
13
1323
30
00
151 00
0001 9 5040
000
12
475812000130 2000002652
814
10
90
00262
1
6
918
1541
2085101
0101
1
33
00
164
1 0
51
1091
363
76
4167047290
5347178 412
00226
1 0 0157
102
255820
13
11
2 5
003 1006162
11827429713
256704
20175
150
21012 2 1 2901
014
00
00
32
913
00 001006162
3058472711
5922
295
01
1235251
0
00113118703
2 1
00
1 05
00
87
73
4
5
3
05 56
00000013261 596120
312500
3
0014167114917
1
11
0
0
0 0
00
272
208
00
31203
1641
213
12714
1125
00
11
36
0
0011783177720502
0 07015210
00
0 0
13179168221
1 0711437783
1000
415000
31203
00670
3917000400
10 0252210231000
0059
3
0
050071400273114111460
0 9
2
0010 8151 007 0
0 0
00
00
2
721
2
112712 590200527
1016
1333
4
0
33
1400136020
02
00
1159
3087078643142123001
0000430
2 916
47010770
51
20
1
33
3
0 1114521 19789702010079 0110
5
20
6624
230000
1 8 4
07 518
232100331790
320095
00141
71
00
8
5
9
3
00
5220267
616
0400
97221120
00 130042
96
1000
0323173700037200
2
141
0
0
0449703230611853802
332
0
007007117
000
00 32158139
0000
01
1 37
00014401
0
0
1021 669
47110
0
4412
2700
00
1 06
13
02294
010000208
0 00122
00
1 0
82200112 01 4
0
11
2 062
00
2216 5001406913
534
15
7000
208
262
102 0
0 2331007 2 8
17321 01
194
120
03800 983012 510
70 1100
022001 310182
13
11
56
106200
00000000
0
0 121218
0000 194
161021
7700006109 8
3
5782212011
0200 2323001102
1000
0
05730
20
0677811
6
41001
01
0
006
11511
640
41161231
1 3700557002
0
1
2100
00
00 179140
00
0000 6
13
00
5
30 1
022238450
000
0702032
613
2147700
4
0 170
3501 03012034 0100
01313
9
0 2
52010725
0
6 1 8
1062504
552
121
2 6
00
078
000
1684948101
2 0
1
6
1
7
313 1859
53 2156
2711
21
000 0
070
1
5
000
1
2
74
0
1203
10 0011697
0
0
1 700
10000 3970110
01 71010701 20012
01018500005310
075
2
1210 53 000203695
5
62
01
06
0
40
4
01 3 371265
0
0
71 0220
0
140
1729010
0
122853
6 7
00
000290001100
31
200
0000 636221908
10
1
00
0
0 66211
0 0
060176
00256704 80
81
832310200
24
2121
105
31291710
0
7700
0169102
00
0
0
00
00
0
1
7
0 9700
140 900000010
92
00 000010
1 130
1
0 001
0
100
800038
0 10024
01
00 0000
00003
00
31
3
Camino Tassajara Capacity Analysis
0 .5 1 1.5
Miles
AM Peak Hour Select-Link Analysis - Scenario 2
750 375 188
2
2
9989 9134
6
4
2 740
30851 66
133
31
207
00
239
2942
001026
67
2 8 2
1 6 7
6421
00
00
22205
10
1 4
11
460015140 13770 0
0555311 13644133480
0
012233339127012900
2 5 0 182245 72500
40151
6421
26384
8
464
101664846334
5
1
3
9
853100
11
00
3221 7 6 208
62
85
94
006102
117 174
00113555104
0
0
529
667
53
80
00 853048515453252581 00
3
01
6
205
00791
0443109542
256
1
1114300
08
0000
00
24381
32
6
253520034
10120
0
01
3257647641
30
55
06
00
93105125
24054 2164
12140160
800000
922
0002 321 910
12
1114
31
00
23 00
0000 6 0501
000
11
445010000003 2500004526
128
00
16
00125
4
3
78
4425
01158107
0000
00
00
53
8
13
0015
2615
10
1 165872700
2615259 17
0061
9 577
38
258401
47
6 2
001 300081
114615448500
318510
0187
164
73001 0 25102
000
00
00
33
74
00 0000081
1150441619
3967
956
00
1143526
0
002253271010
0 2
00
1 08
00
86
53
2
3
5
00 13
9
0000001100 642101
304300
0
0014117113235
5
21
0
0
0 0
00
135
251
00
13348
3714
84
32667
1916
00
4
45
0
001011888191500
0 00717300
00
0 0
25205218005
1 802428188
0000
116000
13348
00180
3235001000
00 115400320000
0054
8
0
300151000433111101430
0
1
0
4
0001 3173 004 5
0 0
00
00
0
180
12
191611 663001941
1512
2925
0
1
0
000120011
10
0
2164133
1161079116541082120911
000430
1 929
43007800
02
00
2
92
4
0 534096 1625485154100000127 0000
0
01
4650
01000
2 0 7
20 68
191500241258
33006
13
0074
0
24
00
1
5
5
8
00
3301146
242
1100
12143110
00 110019
73
0000
10191526000001300
3
313
0
0
047959225195553411051
230
1
0080035211
000
00 44291500000
00
68
001211
0
0
003 256
21700
0
5432
319800
00
0 212
11
10121
000000135
251
0 00022
00
1 0
11110031 15
0
12
0 0612
00
2933 00020721401
122
1016000251
135
003 0
0 4330001 6 7
12104 1
08
00
00700 610900 505
02 2000
30000 19111
57
2
004100
00000000
8
0
0 21142
0000 08
12140
078001001 3 2
2
333101012
0100 40250322251121
4001
1
48001
00
2111990
2 2
14001
01 21
660
00
112321
23
00
1437011
680036301
0
1100
00
7821250
00
0000 18
12
00
0
00 4
10141162
320
000
78580025 00
1356200140
5310 1300022 1010
12147
0
02
0000252
0
2 5 8
01100
1
110
5 8
0
11
000
280 8000
0 0
2
1
8
0218
26 43
1619
113
000 0
00
4
0
36
0000
0
0
2
0
110
0 000545
0
0
0
7 6 1000000 437011038020002010001
010715800000110
2496
0
2010 111 002
190103180
14
000
00 0
15
9
83
1 0 22057
0
0
1 0140
1
1
1010
161900
0
00026
1
00
0021100
5000100
10
28001
0000 12
81102
01
0
00 53821
0 0
0000
0030852 90
6
293331000 100
00012
55
0278
0
0
000
00121800 00
110
0
100
1310 120000
00050
00 000000 251
0
0
0 004
0
0 50320
10 9
0
00003
00 4100 0000
000103
00
6
Camino Tassajara Capacity Analysis
0 .5 1 1.5
Miles
PM Peak Hour Select-Link Analysis - Scenario 2
750 375 188
Number ST0116 Program STREETS
ESTIMATED COSTS
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
9100 $11,280 $91,458 $89,360 $108,440 $300,538
9200 $116,096 $1,214,206 $454,110 $145,050 $1,929,462
9300 $1,980,000 $1,980,000
9400 $48,589 $7,751,411 $7,800,000
9500 $490,000 $490,000
$127,376 $1,305,664 $592,059 $10,474,901 $12,500,000
FUNDING SOURCE
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
2201 $200,000 $200,000
2220 $15,254 $84,746 $592,059 $692,059
4301 $112,122 $108,638 $220,760
Road Maint. & Rehab.
Account (RMRA)
TASSAJARA ROAD REALIGNMENT AND WIDENING -
FALLON ROAD TO NORTH CITY LIMIT
2018-2023 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Salaries & Benefits
Contract Services
Land/Right of Way
Improvements
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
State Gas Tax
Traffic Impact Fee -
Category 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project provides for the planning and preliminary engineering to define a new roadway alignment, design cross-section,right-of-way, and environmental clearance for
Tassajara Road between North Dublin Ranch Drive and the City and Contra Costa County limit. The project also provides for the design and construction of a realigned
Tassajara Road from Fallon Drive to the northern City limit. The design and construction of the southerly Tassajara Road segment, down to North Dublin Ranch Drive, is
included in another Capital Improvement Program, project, Tassajara Road Improvements - North Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School.
The project will improve Tassajara Road to a four-lane arterial standard with bike lanes, sidewalks, landscaped median, stormwater treatment areas, and other associated
street improvements. Portions of the existing roadway have been improved by adjacent development projects and this project will complete the street improvements and
realign a portion of existing roadway to improve safety and achieve good circulation while adhering to the Complete Streets Policy. The roadway segment is a project within
both the Tri-Valley Transportation Council Strategic Expenditure Plan (Project B-8) and the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact (Category 1) Fee Program. Design and
construction of the realigned roadway will be coordinated with Contra Costa County.
ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT:TBD
MANAGING DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUNDING SOURCE
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
4303 $409,263 $409,263
4306 $503,017 $2,000,000 $2,503,017
9998 $8,474,901 $8,474,901
$127,376 $1,305,664 $592,059 $10,474,901 $12,500,000
ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT
TOTAL
Traffic Impact Fee -
Category 3
TVTD
Unidentified
Number ST0116 Program STREETS
ESTIMATED COSTS
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
9100 $11,280 $91,458 $89,360 $108,440 $300,538
9200 $116,096 $1,214,206 $454,110 $145,050 $1,929,462
9300 $1,980,000 $1,980,000
9400 $48,589 $7,751,411 $7,800,000
9500 $490,000 $490,000
$127,376 $1,305,664 $592,059 $10,474,901 $12,500,000
FUNDING SOURCE
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
2201 $200,000 $200,000
2220 $15,254 $84,746 $592,059 $692,059
4301 $112,122 $108,638 $220,760
Road Maint. & Rehab.
Account (RMRA)
TASSAJARA ROAD REALIGNMENT AND WIDENING -
FALLON ROAD TO NORTH CITY LIMIT
2018-2023 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Salaries & Benefits
Contract Services
Land/Right of Way
Improvements
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
State Gas Tax
Traffic Impact Fee -
Category 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project provides for the planning and preliminary engineering to define a new roadway alignment, design cross-section,right-of-way, and environmental clearance for
Tassajara Road between North Dublin Ranch Drive and the City and Contra Costa County limit. The project also provides for the design and construction of a realigned
Tassajara Road from Fallon Drive to the northern City limit. The design and construction of the southerly Tassajara Road segment, down to North Dublin Ranch Drive, is
included in another Capital Improvement Program, project, Tassajara Road Improvements - North Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School.
The project will improve Tassajara Road to a four-lane arterial standard with bike lanes, sidewalks, landscaped median, stormwater treatment areas, and other associated
street improvements. Portions of the existing roadway have been improved by adjacent development projects and this project will complete the street improvements and
realign a portion of existing roadway to improve safety and achieve good circulation while adhering to the Complete Streets Policy. The roadway segment is a project within
both the Tri-Valley Transportation Council Strategic Expenditure Plan (Project B-8) and the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact (Category 1) Fee Program. Design and
construction of the realigned roadway will be coordinated with Contra Costa County.
ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT:TBD
MANAGING DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUNDING SOURCE
PRIOR
YEARS
2018-2019
BUDGET 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023
FUTURE
YEARS
ESTIMATE TOTALS
4303 $409,263 $409,263
4306 $503,017 $2,000,000 $2,503,017
9998 $8,474,901 $8,474,901
$127,376 $1,305,664 $592,059 $10,474,901 $12,500,000
ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT
TOTAL
Traffic Impact Fee -
Category 3
TVTD
Unidentified