HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachmt 1 Exhibit A - Addendum & Suppl Traffic Anlys
CEQA Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General
Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (certified 5/10/1993) and the
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Ikea Project (certified 3/16/2004)
For the Emerald Place Retail Center Projed, PA 07-019
August 3, 2007
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PRIOR CEQA ANALYSIS:
On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution 53-93 approving the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment. At the same time, the City Council adopted Resolution 53-
91 certifYing a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General
Plan Amendment, hereinafter referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR (SCH 91103064). This
Environmental Impact Report evaluated the environmental impacts associated with developing the 6,920
acre Eastern Dublin planning area with a range of residential, commercial, light industrial, open space,
parks, schools, and other public uses.
In 2003, a development application was submitted to the City of Dublin for a General Plan and Specific
Plan Amendment to change the land use designation on a 27.55-acre piece of property located within the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area from Campus Office to General Commercial. The development
proposal for the subject property included a 317,000 square foot Ikl~a retail store and a 137,000 square
foot "lifestyle" retail center on the southwest corner of Hacienda Drive and Martinelli Way.
An Initial Study was completed to determine if the proposed Ikea store and neighboring retail center
would require additional environmental review beyond that already .malyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
The Initial Study determined that although many of the impacts of the proposed project were already
addressed, there were changed circumstances and/or new information that could result in new or
intensified impacts. These included:
1. The potential for new or newly-designated special status biological species to be present on
the subject site;
2. A change in traffic and commuting patterns since 1993 which could have substantially
increased regional traffic and congestion; and
3. The potential for new regional air quality impacts due to be traffic impacts and congestion.
A Supplemental EIR was completed, which examined these potential impacts (SCH 2003092076). On
March 16, 2004, the Dublin City Council reviewed and approved a Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development
Rezoning, General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment, and related applications for the subject site. The
City Council certified the Supplemental EIR (SEIR) for the Ikea Project, including the neighboring retail
center (Resolution 44-04), approved the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments (Resolution 47-
04), and on April 6, 2004, adopted Ordinance 10-04 approving the rezoning and related PD
Development Plan (collectively, the "Prior Approvals"). The Prior Approvals included findings and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations related to supplemental Air Quality and Traffic Impacts
identified in the SEIR. At the end of 2006, the City of Dublin received notice that Ikea did not intend to
move forward with the construction of their retail store, and that another developer intended to propose a
modified retail commercial use on the property.
Exhibit A
In April 2007, Blake Hunt Ventures submitted a Stage 1 Planned Development Rezoning application to
the City, seeking entitlements for a revised project consisting of a 305,000 square foot retail commercial
shopping center on the same 27.55-acre site studied in the Ikea Project SEIR, hereafter referred to as "the
Project".
The Prior Approvals (including the two certified EIRs) referenced above are incorporated herein by
reference and available for public review at Dublin City Hall during normal business hours.
CURRENT CEQA ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION THAT AN ADDENDUM IS
APPROPRlA TE FOR THIS PROJECT:
In order to determine if there were any significant environmental impacts that were present with the
revised project proposal that were not already addressed (and mitigated if necessary) in the both the
Eastern Dublin EIR and the Ikea Project Supplemental EIR, an Initial Study was completed. The Initial
Study, dated August 3, 2007 and incorporated herein by referen;:e, determined that the potentially
significant effects of the project were adequately addressed in the both of the above documents, and that
no substantial changes have been proposed to the Project or the conditions under which the Project will
be undertaken which require revisions of the previous EIRs. This Addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR
and the Ikea Project Supplemental EIR has been prepared, which notes the difference in the current and
previously analyzed projects and their relation to the certified Eastern Dublin EIR and the Ikea Project
Supplemental EIR.
The 2007 Project varies from the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the lKEA Project SEIR
as follows:
Table 1
Project Comparison
IKEA Project described in 2004
SEIR
Emerald Plate Town Center
ro osal
305,000 SF
270,000 SF
Difference
Total Pro' ect size
Retail
Restaurant
454,000 SF
329,000 SF
217 KSF Ikea store
112 KSF ad'acent retail ctr.
46,000 SF
21 KSF inside Ikea store
25 KSF at ad'acent retail ctr.
62,000 SF
17,000 SF
-149,000 SF
-59,000 SF
35,000 SF 1
-11,000 SF
Warehouse
Office
None
Ancillary to relail use and
included in retail square
foota e above
Parkin s aces 1,405 arkin s aces 1,423 arkin ~; aces
Sources: Ikea Project SEIR (certified 3/16/2004) and Current Stage 1 Site Plan (dated 8/21/07)
-62,000 SF
-17,000 SF
+18 s aces
IAdditional retail use may be substituted for restaurant uses or additional restaurmt use may be substituted for retail use at
exchange ratios described further in this document. For the purposes of this table, the square footage comparison is based on
the project as currently proposed.
Although the overall project size is smaller under the revised propo:;al, the Initial Study determined that
an additional examination of potential impacts to the traffic and circulation section of the SEIR should
be completed to ensure that no new significant environmental impacts could be identified and that no
increase in the severity of the previously-identified impacts would be: discovered.
SUPPLEMENTARY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS:
The City completed a supplementary traffic analysis to analyze how the traffic impacts of the revised
project (305,000 square foot retail center with 35,000 square feet dl~voted to restaurant uses) compared
to the project studied in the certified Ikea Project Supplemental EIR (454,000 square feet retail,
warehouse, office uses with a maximum of 46,000 square feet of restaurant uses). The analysis
concluded that the traffic impacts would not be substantially diff.~rent. The traffic analysis and the
accompanying level of service analysis completed by the City Traffic Engineer is attached to this
Addendum as Exhibit A-I, and incorporated herein by reference. The highlights of the traffic analysis
are included in the sections below.
In assessing whether the revised retail center project creates significant impacts that were not present or
that were substantially more severe than the Ikea project, the traffic analysis examined three main
measurements:
1. Overall trip generation rates of the revised Project;
2. Impacts to levels of service at key intersections as a result of the revised project; and
3. Consistency of the Project with the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
requirements.
Proiect Trip Generation Rates. The traffic analysis examined the Project trip generation rates of the
proposed land uses at the highest daily peak hour, as follows:
. Table 2
Project Trip Generation
PM Peak Hour
land Use Size Net New Trips
(ksf) In Out Total
New Blake Hunt 305 KSF retail center
Shoooina Center1 270 381 413 794
Restaurant2 35 133 85 218
TOTAL 305 514 498 1,012
Source: Supplementary Traffic Analysis for the Revised Project (conductecl by the City Traffic Engineer and dated
1/8/07)
Notes: ksf = thousand square feet
1. Trip rate based on regression equation (and not average value) from ITE's Trip Generation (7th Edition),
according to the guiding principles stated in the Trip Generation Handt100k (October 1998). Shopping Center
rate based on ITE Land Use Code 820.
2. Trip rate based on average rate from ITE's Trip Generation (7th Edition), according to the guiding principles
stated in the Trip Generation Handbook (October 1998). Restaurant rate based on ITE Land Use Code 932.
Level of Service Analvsis. Since the trip generation rate and the PM peak hour trip rate for a quality
restaurant are higher than the trip generation rate for a retail space of the same size, the traffic analysis
assumed that the project would contain 35,000 square feet of gross huilding area for restaurant purposes
and 270,000 square feet of gross building area for retail purposes.
However, in an effort to analyze a variety of possible scenarios for tte actual use of the center, and based
on the ITE standards for restaurant and retail uses, it was determined by the City Traffic Engineer that
for each square foot of space more than 270,000 that is used for retail instead of restaurant, the traffic
impacts of the proposed project are reduced compared to the project with a higher amount of restaurant
uses. Conversely, for each square foot of space more than 35,000 that is used for restaurant instead of
retail, the traffic impacts of the proposed project area increased. The PD-Development Plan includes the
flexibility to substitute retail space for restaurant space and vice versa at the exchange ratios indicated
below:
. For each square foot of restaurant space above 35,000 square feet, 2.12 square feet of retail
square footage shall be removed from the 270,000 square foot retail area and, conversely,
. For each square foot of retail space above 270,000 square feet, 0.47 square feet of restaurant
square footage shall be removed from the 35,000 square foot restaurant area.
The traffic analysis conducted assumes that the project will contain 270,000 square feet of retail square
footage and 35,000 square feet of restaurant. Any variation from these numbers will need to incorporate
the above-stated exchange ratios to determine the maximum allowable square footage permitted that will
keep the overall project trip generation rate under the 1,012 net newP .M. Peak Hour trip threshold noted
in Table 2.
The results of the supplementary traffic analysis comparing the two projects and their impacts to
intersection levels of service are as follows:
Table 3
Intersection levels of Service - Buildout Conditions
PI' Peak Hour
With With
Signalized Intersections IKEA Project Emerald Place Retail Center
(As approved) Project
(270 ksf retail + 35 ksf
restaurant)
v/c lOS v/c lOS
Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road 0.93 E 0.93 E
Dublin Boulevard/Hacienda Drive 0.84 D 0.84 D
1-580 EB Ramp/Santa Rita Road/Pimlico 0.84 D 0.84 D
Drive (Mitigated per Fallon Village SEIR)
Hacienda Drive/Martinelli WaylHacienda 0.75 C 0.77 C
Crossings
1-580 EB Ramp/Hopyard Road 0.87 D 0.87 D
Notes: ksf = thousand square feet
Source: Supplementary Traffic Analysis for the Revised Project (conducteci by the City Traffic Engineer and dated
1/8/07)
As shown above, the levels of service at critical intersections are not increased as a result of the revised
Project. The volume to capacity ratio is slightly increased at the Hacienda Drive intersection, however,
the level of service remains unchanged and at a less than significant level.
The traffic analysis concludes that no new or substantially more severe significant impacts on levels of
service at nearby critical intersections will result from the Project, and no additional mitigation measures
are required.
Consistencv with the Congestion Management Agency reauirements. The Alameda County Congestion
Management Agency (ACCMA) may require additional traffic impact analysis on Routes of Regional
Significance if specific project trip generation thresholds are exceedt:d. The threshold for analysis is met
if the project generates 100+ net new vehicle trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The ACCMA
assumptions for potential vehicle trips are based on local General Plans.
Under the Campus Office land use category that was studied in the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR, 922 PM
peak hour trips would have been generated by a project on this 27.55-acre site. Under the midpoint
range of the General Commercial land use category that was adopted for the Ikea Project, 962 PM peak
hour trips would have been generated. The revised Project would generate 1,012 PM peak hour trips
(assuming 35,000 square feet of restaurant uses within the Project\ As noted above, exchange ratios
have been established which allow some flexibility in "trading" retail square footage for restaurant
square footage (and vice versa) without increasing the overall trip generation rate for the project.
As shown in Table 3 of the traffic analysis, the Project would generate approximately 50 more PM peak
hour trips than assumed under the General Commercial designation. Thus, the net new PM peak hour
trips generated by the revised Project would generate fewer trips th;m ACCMA's 100-trip threshold, as
compared to mid-point density General Commercial development (or previous General PlanlEastern
Dublin Specific Plan designation of Campus Office). Therefore, no additional traffic impact analysis on
Routes of Regional Significance is required to satisfY the Land Use Analysis Program of the Alameda
County Congestion Management Program.
It was determined by the City Traffic Engineer that there was not a :mbstantial difference in the impacts
to levels of service at the City's key intersections, as detailed in Exhibit A-I to this Addendum.
Additionally, the increase in PM peak hour trips resulted in only 5(] PM peak additional trips, which is
below the threshold triggering ACCMA review. After reviewing the prior EIRs and the Supplementary
Traffic Analysis and assessing the minor increase in PM peak hour trips, the City Traffic Engineer
concluded that the traffic mitigation measures that were approved in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Ikea
Project SEIR would also be sufficient to mitigate the traffic-related impacts of the revised Project and
that no new or additional mitigation measures are required for the Project.
NO SUBSEQUENT REVIEW IS REQUIRED PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15162:
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no
subsequent EIR shall be prepared for this Project, as no substantial changes have been proposed to the
Project or the conditions under which the Project will be underta:ken which require revisions of the
previous EIRs. No new significant environmental impacts have been identified and no substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified impacts has been discovered.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, with minor technical amendments and clarifications as
outlined in this Addendum, the Program Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan and General Plan Amendment and the Supplemental EIR for the Ikea Project will continue to
adequately address the significant environmental impacts of the revi~:ed Project.
CONCLUSION:
The City prepared an Initial Study in connection with the determination to adopt an Addendum. As
provided in Section 15164, the Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be
considered with the priorEIR and SEIR before making a decision on the proposed project. The Initial
Study, the supplementary traffic analysis and its updated Level of Service analysis conducted by the City
Traffic Engineer, the Eastern Dublin EIR, and the Ikea Project SEIR are available for review in the
Community Development Department at the City of Dublin, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California.
Exhibit A-I:
Supplementary Traffic Analysis for the Revised Emerald Place Retail Center Project and
Level of Service CalculationslResults
P A 07-019
January 8, 2007
Back2round
The City of Dublin Traffic Engineer conducted a threshold analysis to determine the maximum
square footage of General Commercial development that can be supported on the Project site
without creating additional traffic impacts at study area intersections beyond those projected
under buildout conditions of the City's General Plan including the currently approved IKEA
Project. Based on this review, it was concluded that up to 305,000 square feet (SF) of General
Commercial use can be supported on this site, including 270,0(]0 SF shopping center retail and
35,000 SF restaurant use. The traffic analysis associated with this finding is summarized below,
and the detailed level of service analysis conducted follows this document.
Proiect Trio Generation and Assimment
Trip generation during the weekday PM peak hour was calculated for a 305,000 SF shopping
center, including 270,000 SF retail and 35,000 SF restaurant use. Table 1 below summarizes trip
generation calculations. The analysis was specifically conducted during the weekday PM peak
hour because peak demand for retaiVrestaurant uses typically coincides with peak traffic demand
on adjacent streets occurring during the evening commute period
Table 1
Project Trip Generation
PM Peak Hour
Land Use Size Trip Rates Total Trips % Net New Trips
(ksf) In Out In Out Pass- By In Out Total
Shoppinj1; Center1 270 2.14 2.32 578 626 34 381 413 794
Restauranr 35 6,66 4.26 233 149 43 133 85 218
TOTAL 305 811 775 514 498 1,012
Notes:
ksf= thousand square feet
L Trip rate based on regression equation (and not average value) from lIE's Trip Generation (7lb Edition),
according to the guiding principles stated in the Trip Generation Handbook (October 1998), Shopping Center
rate based on ITE Land Use Code 820,
2, Trip rate based on average rate from ITE's Trip Generation (7lb Edition), according to the guiding principles
stated in the Trip Generation Handbook (October 1998). Restaurant rate hased on ITE Land Use Code 932,
Exhibit A-I
The above Project trips were then assigned to individual turning movements at adjacent
intersections using the same trip distribution and assignment assumptions used in the traffic
analysis for the IKEA Project SEIR. This information was udlized to update PM peak hour
turning movement volume forecasts at critical intersections in lhe vicinity of the Project under
buildout conditions, assuming that the above 305,000 SF shopping center is developed in place
of the IKEA Project.
Level of Service Analvsis
Levels of service (LOS) at five adjacent intersections were calculated during the PM peak hour
under buildout conditions with the 305,000 SF shopping center occupying the study site (see
attached analysis sheets). The LOS calculations were then compared to previously calculated
levels of service from the City's traffic demand model which includes IKEA Project trips. The
results of this comparative analysis are summarized in Table:2 below. The five intersections
listed in Table 2 were selected for the analysis because they are currently projected to operate at
or below level of service D during the PM peak hour at buildout, and/or are in proximity to the
Project site.
Table 2
Intersection Levels of Serviee - Buildout C Dnditions
PM Peak Hour
With With
Signalized Intersections IKEA Project Emerald Plaee Retail Center
(As approved) Project
(271() ksf retail + 35 kse restaurant)
vie LOS vie LOS
Dublin BoulevardIDougherty Road 0.93 E 0.93 E
Dublin BoulevardlHacienda Drive 0.84 D 0.84 D
1-580 EB RamplSanta Rita RoadlPimlico 0.84 D 0.84 D
Drive (Mitigated per Fallon Village SEIR)
Hacienda DrivelMartinelli Wayl 0.75 C 0.77 C
Hacienda Crossings
1-580 EB RamplHopyard Road 0,87 D 0,87 D
Notes:
ksf= thousand square feet
As shown in Table 2, the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios are not expected to change at the study
intersections as a result of the 305,000 SF shopping center Project, except for the Hacienda
DrivelMartinelli Way/Hacienda Crossings intersection where thf: v/c ratio is expected to increase
insignificantly from 0.75 to 0.77 - still within an acceptable LOS standard. This increase would
not affect the intersection LOS and the intersection is projected to operate at level of service "C",
which is an acceptable level. Levels of service would remain unchanged at all five intersections,
as indicated in Table 2.
The Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection is projected to operate at level of service
"E" during the PM peak hour under buildout conditions. A~; a result, this intersection was
identified as the most critical intersection in determining an llpper threshold for the size of
General Commercial development that can be supported by the ~djacent street system. Based on
this LOS analysis, it was concluded that 305,000 SF of shopping center (including 270,000 SF
retail and 35,000 SF restaurant use) would represent the maximum size of development that can
be supported without causing the v/c ratio at the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection
to further increase where operations already exceed the City's target performance of LOS "D".
For example, if development size exceeded the 305,000 SF threshold, the PM peak hour v/c ratio
at this intersection would then increase beyond current projeetions of 0.93 at buildout, and
intersection operations could deteriorate into a more unstable LOS "E."
Based on this analysis, there would be no additional supplemental cumulative impacts at study
area intersections beyond those described in the IKEA SEIR as a result of implementing the
above 305,000 SF shopping center Project. Therefore, the supplemental mitigations listed in the
IKEA SEIR remain adequate and no additional mitigations are required.
Consistency with Alameda County Cone:estion Manae:ement Ae:encv Requirements
The above 305,000 SF shopping center Project would be consistent with current "General
Commercial" designation for this site under the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) may require additional traffic
impact analysis on Routes of Regional Significance if specific project trip generation thresholds
are exceeded. The threshold for analysis is met if the project generates 100+ net new vehicle
trips during the weekday PM peak hour.
To assess whether additional traffic impact analysis is neCf:Ssary on Routes of Regional
Significance in the Project area, the 305,000 SF Project trip generation during the PM peak hour
was compared to the following site development scenarios, as shown in Table 3:
1. General Commercial development at mid-point density, as specified in the General Plan
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
2. Previous General Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan designation of Campus Office for the
site (e.g., previous Commerce One approvals).
Table 3
Congestion Management Agency Trip Generation Assessment
Site Development PM Peak u,[)ur Trips
Scenarios
305 ksf Shopping CenterI 1,012 1,012
Mid-Point Density GC<I 962
Campus Office" 922
Trip Difference +50 +90
Notes:
ksf = thousand square feet
1. See Project Trip Generation discussed above.
2. Mid-point density equivalent to 359,893 SF, Shopping Center assumed for trip generation (with 34% pass-by) based on
lTE Land Use Code 820, Trip rate based on regression equation (and not avel'll/i,e value) /Torn ITE's Trip Generation (7th
Edition), according to the guiding principles stated in the Trip Generation Handb,)ok (October 1998),
3. See lKEA Proiect SEIR, Table 4.3.10.
As noted in Table 3, the net new PM peak hour trips generated by the 305,000 SF shopping
center scenario would generate fewer trips than ACCMA's 100-trip threshold, as compared to
mid-point density General Commercial development or previous General Plan/Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan designation of Campus Office. Therefore, no additional traffic impact analysis on
Routes of Regional Significance is required to satisfy the Land Use Analysis Program of the
Alameda County Congestion Management Program (CMP).
Exchane:e Ratio: Retail square footae:e to restaurant and vict:-versa
At the Applicant's request, the City Traffic Engineer reviewed trip generation comparisons
between shopping center retail and restaurant uses, considering PM peak hour trip generation
rates as well as percent pass-by traffic for each type of use in the analysis. Based on this review,
the City Traffic Engineer determined that for each square foot of space more than 270,000 that is
used for retail instead of restaurant, the traffic impacts of the proposed project are reduced
compared to the project with a higher amount of restaurant uses. Conversely, for each square
foot of space more than 35,000 that is used for restaurant instead of retail, the traffic impacts of
the proposed project are increased. Based on the trip generation rates of the two use types, the
City Traffic Engineer determined that square footage can be "traded" at the exchange ratios
indicated below:
. For each square foot of restaurant space above 35,000 square feet developed in the
project, 2.12 square feet of retail square footage shall be removed from the 270,000
square foot retail area and, conversely,
. For each square foot of retail space above 270,000 square feet developed in the project,
0.47 square feet of restaurant square footage shall be removed from the 35,000 square
foot restaurant area.
LOS Results
LOS software by TJKM Transportation consultants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
condition: Buildout+prj
12/20/06
INTERSECTION
Count Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
city of Dublin
peak Hour PM
1 Dougherty/Dublin
Time
RIGHT THRU LEFT
134 1315 44
I I I
^ I I I
I <--- v --->
2.0 1.1 4.1 2.0
CCTA METHOD
LEFT 263
8-PHASE SIGNAL
^
I split? N
1.0 --- 18 RIGHT
STREET NAME:
THRU 1456 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1719 THRU Dublin
RIGHT
566 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 --- 798 LEFT
I <--- ^ ---> I
v I I I v
I I I SIG WARRANTS:
1015 1922 544 urb=Y, Rur=Y
LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
STREET NAME: Dougherty
N
W + E
S
MOVEMENT
========================================================================
CRITICAL
V/C
NB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
SB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
T + R
EB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
WB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY
544
1922
1015
134
1315
44
566
1456
263
18
1719
798
238 *
1922
1015
134
1315
44
1449
177 *
1456
263
o *
1719
798
3000
4950
4304
1650
6600
3000
6600
3000
4950
3000
1650
4950
4304
'Ii/C
RATIO
0.0793
0.3883
0.2358
0.2358
0.0812
0.1992
0.0147
0.2195
0.2195
0.0590
0.2941
0.0877
0.2941
0.0000
0.3473
0.1854
0.1854
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE:
0.93
E
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=BLDPRJ.INT,VOL=BLDPRJPM.PMV,CAP=...LOSCAP.TAB
page 1
LOS Results
LOS software by TJKM Transportation consultants
=======================================================~=================
condition: Buildout+prj
12/20/06
INTERSECTION
Count Date
=========================================================================
City of Dublin
PE!ak Hou r PM
4 Hacienda/Dublin
Time
CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL
----------- 275 547 253
I I I
^ I I I ^
I <--- v ---> I split? N
LEFT 346 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0--- 52 RIGHT
STREET NAME:
THRU 1446 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 901 THRU Dublin
RIGHT 320 2.5 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 --- 768 LEFT
I <--- ^ ---> I
v I I I v
N I I I SIG WARRANTS:
W + E 295 902 763 urb=Y, Rur=Y
S LEFT THRU RIGHT split? N
STREET NAME: Hacienda
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED ~/C CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO v/c
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NB RIGHT (R) 763 341 * 1650 0.2067 0.2067
THRU (T) 902 902 4950 0.1822
LEFT (L) 295 295 4304 0.0685
SB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
EB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
WB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
275
547
253
85 *
547
253
1650
4950
3000
0.0515
0.1105
0.0843
0.0843
320
1446
346
114 *
1446
346
3000
4950
3000
0.0380
0.2921
0.1153
0.2921
52
901
768
o *
901
768
1650
4950
3000
0.0000
0.1820
0.2560
0.2560
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.84
D
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=BLDPRJ.INT,VOL=BLDPRJPM.PMV,CAP=...LOSCAP.TAB
page 2
LOS Resul1:s
LOS software by TJKM Transportation consultants
---------------------------------------------------.---------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
condition: Buildout+prj
12/20/06
===================================================:=====================
INTERSECTION
Count Date
7 Santa Rita Rd./1-580 EB Ramps city of Dublin
Ti me PE~ak Hou r PM
LEFT 1057
RIGHT THRU LEFT 7-PHASE SIGNAL
927 1791 270
I I I
^ I I I ^
I <--- v ---> I split? N
3.0 1.9 2.0 1.0 2.5 515 RIGHT
CCTA METHOD
THRU
RIGHT
79 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<---
STREET NAME:
o THRU 1-580 EB Ramps
65
1.9
0.0 4.1
<--- ^
I I
I I
o 2596
LEFT THRU
1.1
--->
I
I
203
RIGHT split? N
2.0 ---
I
v
126
LEFT
I
v
N
W + E
S
SIG WARRANTS:
urb=Y, Rur=Y
STREET NAME: Santa Rita Rd.
---------------------------------------------------.---------------------
---------------------------------------------------.---------------------
MOVEMENT
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY
V/C
~,TIO
CRITICAL
v/c
NB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
T + R
203
2596
203
2596
2799
1650
6600
6600
0.1230
0.3933
0.4241
0.4241
SB RIGHT (R) 927 927 1650 0.5618
THRU (T) 1791 1791 3300 0.5427
LEFT (L) 270 270 1650 0.1636 0.1636
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EB RIGHT (R) 65 65 1650 0.0394
THRU (T) 79 79 1650 0.0479
LEFT (L) 1057 1057 4304 0.2456 0.2456
WB RIGHT (R)
LEFT (L)
515
126
24 *
126
3000
3000
0.0080
0.0420
0.0080
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE:
0.84
D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=BLDPRJ.INT,VOL=BLDPRJPM.PMV,CAP=...LOSCAP.TAB
page 3
LOS Results
LOS Software by TJKM Transportation consultants
--------------------------------------------------_._--------------------
---------------------------------------------------.---------------------
condition: Buildout+prj
12/20/06
INTERSECTION
Count Date
==================================================::=====================
City of Dublin
PE!ak Hou r PM
CCTA METHOD
LEFT 458
18 Hacienda Dr/Hacienda xing
Time
^
I
RIGHT THRU
260 1376
I I
I I
<--- v
1.0 1.1 4.1
LEFT
10
I
I
--->
2.0
6-PHASE SIGNAL
^
I split? N
1.1 --- 10 RIGHT
STREET NAME:
THRU 42 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 40 THRU Hacienda xing
RIGHT 1173
N
W + E
S
3.1
3.0 3.0
<--- ^
I I
I I
753 1502
LEFT THRU
1.5 2.0 --- 409
---> I
I v
I
331
RIGHT split? N
I
v
STREET NAME: Hacienda Dr
LEFT
SIG WARRANTS:
urb=Y, Rur=Y
MOVEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRITICAL
v/c
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY
'Ii/C
R.A TIO
NB RIGHT (R) 331 106 * 1650 0.0642
THRU (T) 1502 1502 4950 0.3034
LEFT (L) 753 753 4304 0.1750 0.1750
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB RIGHT (R) 260 260 1650 0.1576
THRU (T) 1376 1376 6600 0.2085
LEFT (L) 10 10 3000 0.0033
T + R 1636 6600 0.2479 0.2479
EB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
T + R
WB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
LEFT (L)
T + R
1173
42
458
884 *
42
458
926
4304
1650
1650
4304
1650
1650
3000
1650
0.2054
0.0255
0.2776
0.2151
0.2151
10
40
409
10
40
409
50
0.0061
0.0242
0.1363
0.0303
0.1363
========================================================================
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE:
0.77
C
========================================================================
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=BLDPRJ.INT,VOL=BLDPRJPM.PMV,CAP=...LOSCAP.TAB
page 4
LOS Results
LOS software by TJKM Transportation consultants
=========================================================================
condition: Buildout+prj
12/20/06
=========================================================================
INTERSECTION
Count Date
26 Hopyard Rd./I-580 EB Ramps
Time
City of Dublin
PE!ak Hour PM
CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 2-PHASE SIGNAL
----------- 529 1597 0
I I I
^ I I I ^
I <--- v ---> I split? N
LEFT 852 2.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 0 RIGHT
STREET NAME:
THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) O.O<n- 0 THRU 1-580 EB Ramps
RIGHT 1200 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 n_ O LEFT
I <--- ^ ---> I
v I I I V
N I I I SIG WARRANTS:
W + E o 2722 337 urb=Y, Rur=Y
S LEFT THRU RIGHT split? N
STREET NAME: Hopyard Rd.
===================================================:=====================
MOVEMENT
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY
V/C
R)l,TIO
CRITICAL
v/c
NB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
337
2722
337
2722
1800
5400
0.1872
0.5041
0.5041
SB RIGHT (R)
THRU (T)
529
1597
529
1597
1800
5400
0.2939
0.2957
EB RIGHT (R)
LEFT (L)
1200
852
1200
852
3273
3273
o . 3666
0.2603
0.3666
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO:
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE:
0.87
o
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=BLDPRJ.INT,VOL=BLDPRJPM.PMV,CAP=...LOSCAP.TAB
page 5