HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttach 1 Appendix DTransportation Consultants
FINAL
A Traffic Study
For the Proposed Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods
F1 & F2 Residential Development
In the City of Dublin
October 24, 2001
Updated February 2004
PLEASANTON · SANTA ROSA
FINAL
A Traffic Study
For the Proposed Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods
F1 & F2 Residential Development
In the City of Dublin
October 24, 2001
Updated February 2004
Prepared by:
TJKM Transportation Consultants
5960 Inglewood Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton CA 94588
Tel: 925.463.0611
Fax: 925.463.3690
\\pls-server~judsdiction\d\dublin\157-145 school~fr021804 1 & f2.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 1
SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
LEVEl, OF SERVICE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................
IMPACT CRITERIA .............................................................................................................................................. 3
TRANSPORTATION NETWORK ............................................................................................................................ 4
BASELINE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 5
RESULTS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 6
SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................
IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................................................ 9
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................... 9
TRIP GENERATION ............................................................................................................................................. 9
TRIP ASSIGNMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 9
RESULTS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 13
SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 15
INTEILNAL CIRCULATION .......................................................................................................................... 15
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 16
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES ........................................................................................... 17
REFERENCES: ................................................................................................................................................... 17
APPENDIX A - LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY
APPENDIX B LEVEL OF SERVICE - BASELINE CONDITIONS
APPENDIX C - LEVEL OF SERVICE - BASELINE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE I: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BASELINE CONDITIONS ............................................ 6
TABLE II: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION .................................................................................................................. 9
TABLE III: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BASELINE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ................ 13
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1:
FIGURE 2:
F1GURE 3:
FIGURE 4:
FIGURE 5:
VICINITY MAP ...................................................................................................................................... 2
BASELINE PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..................................................................... 7
SITE PLAN ........................................................................................................................................... 10
TRIP DISTRIBUTION ASSUMPTIONS ..................................................................................................... 12
BASELINE PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............................................ 14
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Introduction
This report presents the results of TJKM's traffic impact analysis of the proposed Dublin Ranch Areas
F 1 and F2 Residential Development in Dublin. The proposed project consists of 240 single-family
dwelling units located primarily to the north of Gleason Drive between Brannigan Street and Fallon
Road. TJKM's traffic study for the proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School address traffic issues
related to the school development. Therefore, this study focuses on the impacts of the F1 and F2
Developments and assumes that the School is not built. The study area is sho~vn in Figure 1.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed development on the nearby
street system. The study approach was to determine if any nearby intersections are projected to
operate at worse than Level of Service (LOS) D and to determine what mitigation would be necessary
if level of service standards are exceeded. Finally, signal warrant analyses for unsignalized
intersections are also included. Nine intersections were analyzed for this study. These intersections
are listed belo~v and shown in Figure 1.
1. Tassajara Road/South Dublin Ranch Drive
2. Tassajara Road/Gleason Drive
3. Tassajara Road/Central Parkway
4. Tassajara Road/Dublin Boulevard
5. Grafton Street/Antone Way
6. Grafton Street/Gleason Drive*
7. Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive*
8. Grafton Street/Central Parkway*
9. Grafton Street/Kohnen Way*
The intersections marked with an asterisk (*) are future intersections.
The following two near-term scenarios were addressed in this study:
1. Baseline - Existing land use conditions plus future traffic from the approved and pending projects
that are expected to be either fully or partially built and occupied by September of 2005.
2. Baseline plus Dublin Ranch Area F1 and F2- Identical to the Baseline Scenario, but with traffic
added from the development of Dublin Ranch Area F1 and F2.
Summary
In summary, TJKM has reached the following conclusions regarding the proposed residential
development:
· Under baseline conditions, all twelve of the study intersections are expected to operate at an
acceptable level of service.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F f & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 1
February 18, 2004
'Q~ QION~V
'~QVQN~IOVH
2SEIOHNO~I
Under both the 'Baseline' and the 'Baseline plus Project' scenarios, the follo~ving
unsignalized intersections do not warrant traffic signalization.
· Grafton Street/Antone Way
· Grafton Street/Gleason Drive
· Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive
· Grafton Street/Central Parkway
· Grafton Street/Kohnen Way
However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and
Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons.
To discourage cut-through traffic, all-way STOP control should be installed within the F2
Neighborhood at the intersections of Rocky Hill Way/Brodie Lane/Brodie Court and Rocky
Hill Way/Ridgefield Way/Ridgefield Court.
Level of Service Analysis Methodology
Signalized Intersections
Peak hour intersection conditions are reported as volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios with corresponding
levels of service. Level of service ratings are qualitative descriptions of intersection operations and
are reported using an A through F letter rating system to describe travel delay and congestion. Level
of Sen'ice (LOS) A indicates free flow conditions with little or no delay, while LOS F indicates
jammed conditions with excessive delays and long back-ups.
The operating conditions at signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection
Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority
(CCTA). This method provides an overall intersection level of service. Appendix A contains a
detailed description of the methodology.
Unsignalized Intersections
At one-way and all-way STOP-controlled intersections, level of service was evaluated using the 1994
and 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Unsignalized Intersections analysis methodology. The
method ranks level of service on an A through F scale similar to that used for signalized intersections,
but uses average delay in seconds as its measure of effectiveness. The 1994 HCM methodology is
also described in detail in Appendix A.
Impact Criteria
The City of Dublin policy is to have its roadways and intersections operate no worse than LOS D.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 3
February 18, 2004
Transportation Nem'ork
The proposed project and the surrounding area are illustrated in Figure 1.
serving the project area are discussed be]ow.
Important roadways
Interstate 580 is an eight-lane east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such as
Livermore and Pleasanton as well as regional origins and destinations such as Oakland, Hayward and
Tracy. In the vicinity of the proposed project, I-580 carries between 188,000 and 199,000 vehicles
per day (vpd) (according to Caltrans' 2000 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways) with
interchanges at Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road, Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road,
and Fallon Road/E1 Charro Road.
Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial in the City' of Dublin. It is a four-lane road fronted
largely by retail and commercial uses west of Dougherty Road. Between Dougherty Road and
Tassajara Road, Dublin Boulevard is a six-lane divided arterial fronted primarily by residential,
commercial and vacant lands. Dublin Boulevard extends east of Tassajara Road to Keegan Street as a
four-to-five lane roadway fronted by new residential development. Average daily volume near Arnold
Road is approximatelyl6,000 vehicles.
Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580. North of 1-580, Hacienda Drive is
two-to-six-lane arterial running in the north-south direction from Gleason Drive southerly to 1-580. It
is primarily fronted by commercial, office and residential uses. Average daily volume near Central
Parkway is approximately 9,700 vehicles. South of 1-580, Hacienda Drive is a six-lane divided road,
a major arterial in the City of Pleasanton designed to provide access to 1-580.
Gleason Drive is an east-west four-lane road parallel to and north of Dublin Boulevard. It currently
serves the Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center, the Federal Correctional Institution and the developments
along Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive connects Tassajara Road with Arnold Road.
Tassajara Road connects ~vith Santa Rita Road at I-580 to the south and continues north to the Town
of Danville. North of the Contra Costa Count), line, it is named Camino Tassajara. Camino Tassajara
is used primarily for local traffic in the Tassajara Valley, xvith some through traffic.
Santa Rita Road is a six-lane divided urban arterial from the 1-580 interchange south to Valley
Avenue. It serves the east side of Pleasanton, including the Hacienda Business Park, and provides
access to the downtown Pleasanton area.
Central Parlovay is a two-to-three lane east-west collector that extends from Arnold Road to Keegan
Street (east of Tassajara Road) and being planned for an extension east of Fallon Road as part of the
East Dublin Properties project.
Antone Way is an east-west residential collector between Dublin Ranch Parkway and Fallon Road.
Keegan Street is a two-to-three-lane north-south collector, extending northerly from Dublin
Boulevard to Central Parkway.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 4
February 18, 2004
BASELINE CONDITIONS
The scenario evaluates how well the study intersections serve the existing traffic plus the traffic
expected to be generated from the nearby approved and pending projects. Existing turning movement
counts for the existing study intersections were conducted during December 2000 by TJKM. Future
traffic from the approved and the pending projects were either obtained from the previous traffic
impact study, or estimated based on the information contained in Trip Generation, Sixth Edition,
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Generators,
published by the San Diego Association of Governments (SanDAG).
The following provides the description for some of the existing and future development expected in
the vicinity of the proposed project.
Hacienda Crossings Development is a 469,600-square-foot retail center. The development consists of
a 120-room hotel, a 21-screen theater and a commercial center. The Hacienda Crossings site is
located in the southeast corner of the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection.
General Motors Development consists of 75,660 square feet of new automobile dealerships and an
automobile service facility on the south side of Dublin Boulevard, east of Tassajara Creek and north
ofi-580.
Creekside Business Park III consists of 590,000 square feet of office space located on the north side
of Central Parkway bounded by Hacienda Drive on the east and Arnold Drive on the west.
Koll Dublin Corporate Center consists of 590,000 square feet of office, 100,000 square feet of hotel
and 7,000 square feet of retail space to be located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard bounded by
Tassajara Road on the east and the General Motors Site on the west.
Sybase Office Development consists of 420,000 square feet of office development located on the west
side of Hacienda Drive, north of Dublin Boulevard.
Villas at Santa Rita Development consists of 324 apartments (132 one-bedroom, 144 two-bedroom
and 48 three-bedroom) on the east side of Hacienda Drive between Dublin Boulevard and Central
Parkway.
The Santa Rita Property Sites 1 lA & 1 lB development consists of 368 apartments and 341 single-
family detached homes on the east side of Hacienda Drive between Gleason Drive and Central
Parkway.
Tassajara Meadow I project consists of 106 single-family detached homes on the west side of
Tassajara Road and north of Gleason Drive
Tassajara Meadows Residential Development II consists of 96 single-family detached homes located
on the west side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
Emerald Glen Development consists of 143 single-family detached and 152 townhomes to be located
on the west side of Tassajara Road, north of Dublin Boulevard and south of future Central Parkway.
Emerald Glen Village Development consists of 390 apartments and 132,235 square feet of retail space
to be located on the west side of Tassajara Road, bounded by Dublin Boulevard on the south and
Central Parkway on the north.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 5
February 18, 2004
Yarra Yarra Residential Development consists of 252 single-family detached homes and
193 townhomes to be located on the ~vest side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
California Creekside Development consists of 154 single-family homes and 123 townhomes.
Dublin Ranch Phase I Residential Development consists of 847 single-family detached homes located
on the east side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
Dublin Ranch Area A Development consists of 562 single-family detached homes to be located along
both sides of Fallen Road, north of Central Parkway.
Dublin Ranch Area G Development consists of 1,426 apartments to be located on the east side of
Tassajara Road, north of Dublin Boulevard and south of Central Parkway.
Quar0, Lane School is a private school located north of Dublin Ranch on Tassajara Road.
Results of Level of Service Analysis
The total of Baseline traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure 2. The results of
the level of service analyses for the Baseline Scenario are shown in Table I, and detailed calculations
are contained in Appendix B. Under Baseline Conditions, all study intersections operate at
acceptable levels of service.
TABLE I: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BASELINE CONDITIONS
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Intersections Control
* LOS * LOS
Tassajara Road / So. Dublin Ranch Parkway Signal 0.65 B 0.57 A
Tassajara Road / Gleason Brive Signal 0.43 A 0.53 A
Tassajara Road / Central Parkway Signal 0.53 A 0.51 A
Tassajara Road / Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.62 B 0.79 C
1.4 (3.8) A (A) 1.2(3.8) A (A)
Grafton Street / Antone Way One-Way STOP
0.04 A 0.05 A
Grafton Street / Gleason Drive Signal
0.06 A 0.08 A
Brannigan Street / Gleason Drive Signal
O.03 A O.O6 A
Graf'ton Streel/Central Parkway Signal
7.2 A 7.2 A
Grafton Street/Kohnen Way All-Way STOP
Notes: * =
Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio for signalized intersections and Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and
yielding movements at STOP-controlled intersections.
X.X (X.X) = Overall intersection delay or LOS (Minor Movements Delay or LOS)
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 6
February 18, 2004
Intersection #1 Intersection #2 Intersection #3 Intersection #4 Intersection #5
'fassajara~S. Dublin Tassajara/Gleason Dr, TassajareJCentral Pkwy. TassjaraJDublin Grafton/Antone
~',-'~- ~'~63 (60)
~m.~' ~_ 105 (119)
~ I~ L~t~-24 (16)
113 (385)~ ~1 ~ r~'
36(lO)~
Intersection #6 Intersection #7 Intersection #8 Intersection #9
Graftort/Gleason Brannigan/Gleason Grafton/Central Grafton/Kohnen
.,,~- 116 (126)
~¢-0 (1)
73 (106)-~.~J'~ ~
5 (15)~ ~
-~ ~,-- 103 (117)
68 (91)-~l~/~'
5 (18)-~ ~
(39)
31 (31) -~1'~
2 (6)~ ~.
LEGEND
· Existing Intersection "7~'~' FUTURE
O Future Intersection TASSAJARA
ALIGNMENT
-- Existing Road ,,,.~ ,'
..... Future Road
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
'~t to Scale
L;ity of Dublin
Dublin Ranch Areas F1 & F2
Baseline Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes
157-145 - 2/17/04 - GL
Figure
2
Signal Warrant Analysis
Peak hour warrants contained in the Caltrans Traffic Manual were used to evaluate the need to install
traffic signals at the unsignalized study intersections. Signal warrant analyses based on peak hour
traffic volumes were conducted for Grafton Street/Antone Way, Grafton Street/Gleason Drive,
Grafton Street/Central Parkway, Grafton Street/Kohnen Way, and Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive.
The analyses revealed that none of these intersections are projected to warrant traffic signalization
under baseline conditions. However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan
Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons.
Therefore, these three study intersections were assumed to be signalized for the level-of-service
analysis.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 8
February 18, 2004
IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Description
The proposed project consists of 240 single-family detached homes located primarily to the north of
Gleason Drive bet~veen Brannigan Street and Fallon Road. Figure 3 illustrates the site plan for the
proposed project.
Trip Generation
The proposed development is expected to generate 2,115 daily trips, 180 trips during the a.m. peak
hour and 242 trips during the p.m. peak hour. The trip generation assumptions for the project are
based on information contained in Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers. Table II illustrates the estimated trip generation for the proposed project.
TABLE Ih PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Use Size Rate Trips Rate In:Out In Out Total Rate In:Out In Out Total
Single-
family 240
9.57 2,297 0.75 25:75 45 135 180 1.01 64:36 155 87 242
Detached du
Housing
Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Sixth Edition, 1997
Du: dwelling unit
Trip Assignment
Project trip distribution assumptions were developed based on existing travel patterns, knowledge of
the study area, information contained in previous traffic studies and the Tri-Valley Traffic Model.
The trip distribution assumptions for project trips are:
36 percent will travel on 1-580 to and from the west
15 percent will travel on 1-580 to and from the east
8 percent will travel on Hacienda Drive to and from the south
· 8 percent will travel
· 7 percent will travel
· 6 percent will travel
5 percent xvill travel
· 5 percent will travel
· 4 percent will travel
· 3 percent will travel
· 3 percent will travel
on Santa Rita Road to and from the south
west on Dublin Boulevard to and from Dougherty Road and beyond
on Santa Rita Road to and from the north
on Hopyard Road to and from the south
within the East Dublin Area
on Fallon Road to and from the south
to and from the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station.
on Dougherty Road to and from the north
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 9
February 18, 2004
// ,/'
I /
/
/
/
/
/
/
'iD ~tKlO~lt
Figure 4 illustrates the trip distribution assumptions for the proposed project. The project trips were
assigned to the study intersections using these trip distribution assumptions to produce forecasts for
project traffic volumes at all of the study intersections. The assumed street network for Baseline plus
Project conditions is also shown on Figure 4.
To avoid double counting of the trips between existing approved and pending developments in East
Dublin and the proposed development, adjustments were made to the trip generation to account for
the interaction among the projects. Fm'thermore, adjustments were made to account for how
developments in East Dublin will affect traffic entering and exiting Pleasanton.
The City of Pleasanton traffic model assigns most of the traffic from its future developments to 1-580
and not to East Dublin (which the model assumes has no development). With the development of
East Dublin, some of the existing and future traffic from the City of Pleasanton assigned to 1-580 by
the Pleasanton model will actually be destined for East Dublin. Therefore, TJKM adjusted the
projected trips to account for how development in East Dublin will change the distribution of traffic
entering and exiting Pleasanton in the vicinity of the Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road/I-580 Overpass.
Based on trip assignments presented in various traffic studies, TJKM estimated the number of trips
from future developments in East Dublin exiting and entenng Pleasanton. To avoid double counting
of trips, for each trip exiting Pleasanton and destined for East Dublin, an equivalent amount of
outbound trips xvas removed from the eastbound and westbound I-580 and appropriate ramps. For
each trip entering Pleasanton from future developments in East Dublin, an equivalent amount of
inbound trips was removed from 1-580. With the current congestion on westbound 1-580 during the
a.m. peak hour and eastbound 1-580 during the p.m. peak hour, the Pleasanton model assigns 20% of
Pleasanton traffic to Santa Rita/Tassajara Road/I-580 interchange, 70% to the Hacienda Drive/I-580
interchange and 10% to the Hopyard Road/Dougherty Road/I-580 interchange in the peak direction.
TJKM applied these same percentages xvhen removing inbound and outbound trips from 1-580.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 11
February 18, 2004
Results of Level of Service Analysis
Figure 5 illustrates the peak hour turning movements for this scenario. The results of the level of
service analysis performed for this scenario are contained in Table III and detailed calculations are
contained in Appendix C. Under this scenario, all study intersections are expected to continue to
operate at acceptable level of service. The level of service for all study intersections remains
essentially the same, with the volume-to-capacity ratio (V/C ratio) at the signalized intersections
increasing by no more than 0.03. Therefore, the proposed residential project is not considered to
cause any traffic impact on the nearby road network.
TABLE III: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ~ BASELINE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Assumed A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Intersections Control
* LOS * LOS
1 Tassajara Road / So. Dublin Ranch Pkwy. Signal 0.65 B 0.58 A
2 Tassajara Road / Gleason Drive Signal 0.44 A 0.56 A
3 Tassajara Road / Central Parkway Signal 0.56 A 0.54 A
4 Tassajara Road / Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.65 B 0.81 D
1.4 (3.8) A (A) 1.2 (3.8) A (A)
5 Graftoa Street / Antone Way One-Way STOP
0.08 A 0,O9 A
6 Grafton Street / Gleason Drive Signal
0.11 A 0.16 A
7 Brannigan Street / Gteason Drive Signal
0.03 A 0.06 A
8 Grafton Street/Central Parkway Signal
9 Graflon Street/Kohnen Way All-Way STOP 7.6 A 7.2 A
Notes: * =
Volume-to-capaci~ (V/C) ratio for signalized intersections and Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and
yielding movements at STOP*controlled intersections.
X.X (X.X) = Overall intersection delay or LOS (Minor Movements Delay or LOS)
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 13
February 18, 2004
Intersection #1 Intersection #2 Intersection #3 Intersection #4 Intersection #5
Tassajara/S. Dublin Tassajara/Gleason Dr. Tassajara/Central Pkwy, Tassjara/Dublin Grafton/Antone
~"m-~" I ~_ 54 (54)
c4,,- .,-i.~_45 (28)
.~' I~ ~} ~- 178 (220)
36 39) ~
7 (46)
62 (73)~
~'~ ;- t~l--45 (12)
~' ~ "~ t ~- 206 (240)
128 (489)-~ I'% '~ ,~'
243 ~1(42~I, ~ ~"--~-~'~
Intersection #6 Intersection #7 Intersection #8 Intersection #9
Grafton/Gieason Brannigan/Gleason Grafton/Central Graflon/Kohnen
roc4oJ ~_1 (2)
12 (43)~4 '%'~
78 (120)_~'1 ~-~--
~-'-~-.~ I ~_ 1 (1)
°,~,° t~--2 (2)
1 (0)~
'~- 39 (39)
31 (31)~1'~I
2 (8)~.~ ~
LEGEND
· Existing Intersection
O Future Intersection
I-- Existing Road
..... Future Road
CQUARRY LN SCHOOL DRW~
City of Dublin
Dublin Ranch Areas F1 & F2
Baseline + Project Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes
157-145 - 2]17/04 - GL
Figure
5
Signal Warrant Analysis
Peak hour signal warrant analyses revealed that none of the unsignalized study intersections are
projected to warrant traffic signalization under Baseline plus Project conditions. However, the
intersections of Graflon Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton
Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons. Therefore, these three study
intersections were assumed to be signalized for the level-of-service analysis.
Internal Circulation
To discourage cut-through traffic, all-way STOP control should be installed within the F2
Neighborhood at the intersections of Rocky Hill Way/Brodie Lane/Brodie Court and Rocky Hill
Way/Ridgefield Way/Ridgefield Court. Traffic calming devices (such as the "traffic oval" shown on
the site plan) should be considered along Rocky Hill Way and Ridgefield Way in the F2
Neighborhood to discourage speeding.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 15
February 18, 2004
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, TJKM has reached the follo~ving conclusions regarding the proposed residential
development:
· Under the Baseline condition, all twelve of the study intersections operate at an acceptable
level of service.
With the additional traffic from the proposed project, all nine of the study intersections are
projected to continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. Therefore, the project is not
considered to cause significant traffic impact on the study intersections.
Under both the 'Baseline' and the 'Baseline plus Project' scenarios, none of the unsignalized
study intersections are projected to warrant traffic signalization. However, the intersections
of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton Street/Central
Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons.
To discourage cut-through traffic, all-way STOP control should be installed at the
intersections of Rocky Hill Way/Brodie Lane/Brodie Court and Rocky Hill Way/Ridgefield
Way/Ridgefield Court.
· Traffic calming devices should be considered along Rocky Hill Way and Ridgefield Way to
discourage speeding.
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 16
February 18, 2004
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES
TJKM Personnel:
Gordon Lum, P.E., Project Director
Pratyush Bhatia, Project Engineer
Geri Foley, Graphics Designer
Lily Moore, Word Processor
Persons/Agencies Consulted:
Mr. Dave Chadboume, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Rod Andrade, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Peter Quady, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Ray Kuzbari, City of Dublin
Mr. Mike Porto, City of Dublin
Mr. Paul Kruger, City of Dublin
References:
Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997
Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report No. 209, Transportation Research Board, 1994 and 2000
Traffic Manual, Caltrans, 1992
A Traffic Impact Study for the Villas at Santa Rita Apartments, TJKM, March 1997
A Traffic Impact Study for Santa Rita Property' Sites JlA and llB Development, TJKM, October 1997
A Traffic Impact Study for Casterson Property Residential Development, TJKM, November 1997
A Traffic Impact Study for Creekside Business Park IIIDevelopment, TJKM, March 1998
A Traffic lmFact Study for General Motors' Development, TJKM, July 1998
A Traffic Impact Study for Koll Dublin Corporate Center Development, TJKM, July 1998
A Traffic Impact Study for Dublin Ranch Phase IResidential Development, TJKM, July 1998
A Traffic Impact Study for EmeraM Glen Residential Development, TJKM, February 1999
A Traffic Impact Study for Yarra Yarra Residential Development, TJKM, January 1999
A Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Areas F-H, TJKM, September 1999
Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 & F2 Residential Development
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 17
February 18, 2004
Transportation Consultants
FINAL
A Traffic Study
For the Proposed
Dublin Ranch Middle School
In the City of Dublin
October 23, 2001
Updated February 2004
PLEASANTON · SANTA ROSA
FINAL
A Traffic Study
For the Proposed
Dublin Ranch Middle School
In the City of Dublin
October 23, 2001
Updated February 2004
Prepared by:
TJKM Transportation Consultants
5960 Inglewood Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton CA 94588
Tel: 925.463.0611
Fax: 925.463.3690
\\pls-serveg, judsdiction\d\dublin\157-145 schoob?.O04 reports\r021804 school.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 1
SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................. 5
EXISTING TRANSPORTATION 1NETWORK .............................................................................................................
LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS METIIODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 6
IMPACT CRITERIA .............................................................................................................................................. 6
BASELINE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................ 7
RESULTS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................10
IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT .......................................................................................................... 11
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................................... 11
MODE SPLIT ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 1
TR~ GENE~TION ........................................................................................................................................... 12
TR~ DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ............................................................................................................ 13
DRWEWAY LOCATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 16
DROP-OFF/PICK-UP CIRCULATION ................................................................................................................... 16
ON-SITE AND SPEC~L EVENT PA~G .......................................................................................................... 16
PEDESTRIANS ................................................................................................................................................... 16
B~CYCLES ......................................................................................................................................................... 17
T~4NSIT ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 17
T~FFIC SIGNAL WA~NT ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................
BUILDOUT CONDITIONS (6-8 SCHOOL) ............................................................................................................. 20
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WAR~NT ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................21
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 23
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES ........................................................................................... 24
TJKM PERSONNEL: ......................................................................................................................................... 24
PERSONS/AGENCIES CONSULTED ..................................................................................................................... 24
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX A - DESCRIPTION OF THE LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY
APPENDIX B - RESULTS OF THE INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS - BASELINE CONDITIONS
APPENDIX C - MODE SPLIT A2qD TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX D - RESULTS OF THE INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS - BASELINE PLUS AREA Fi
& F2 PLUS K THROUGH 8TM GRADE
APPENDIX E - RESULTS OF THE INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS - BUILDOUT CONDITIONS
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE I: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE- BASELINE CONDITIONS ............................................ 8
TABLE II: PROJECTED STUDENT ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE MODES ......................................................................... 11
TABLE III: PEAK HOUR PROJECT AUTOMOBILE TRIP GENERATION .................................................................... 12
TABLE IV: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BASELINE PLUS AREAS F1 & F2 PLUS K THROUGH
8TM GRADE ................................................................................................................................................... 19
TABLE V: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BUILDOUT ............................................................ 21
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP ...................................................................................................................................... 2
FIGURE 2: STUDY INTERSECTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 3
FIGURE 3: BASELINE AM PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES .............................................................. 9
FIGURE 4 A: K-8TH GRADE SCHOOL ATTENDANCE AREA & ASSUMED STREET NETWORK ............................... 14
FIGURE 4 B: 6TH-8TH GRADE SCHOOL ATTENDANCE AREA & ASSUMED STREET NETWORK ............................ 15
FIGURE 5: BASELINE + AREA F 1 & F2 + K-8 AM PEAK HOUR TURNrNG MOVEMENT VOLUMES ...................... 18
FIGURE 6: BUILDOUT AM PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES ........................................................... 22
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Introduction
This report presents the results of TJKM's traffic impact analysis of the proposed Dublin Ranch Middle
School in the City of Dublin. The school is expected to have a capacity for up to 1,200 students on an
approximately 24-acre site to be located on the southwest quadrant of South Dublin Ranch Drive and
Graflon Street. A Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Neighborhoods F1 and F2 Residential
Development, prepared by TJKM, addresses traffic issues related to the proposed single-family home
development in the neighborhoods to the south and east of the school.
This report will examine the impact of the proposed school assuming the F 1 and F2 Neighborhoods are
built and occupied. The traffic impact analysis will be two pronged. The first scenario will evaluate the
school as a kindergarten through 8th grade (K-8) institution as of September 2005. The second scenario
will examine the school for grades 6 through 8 (6-8) based on the buildout of all residential units in the
middle school's attendance area. The proposed location for the school is shown in Figure 1.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed school on the nearby street
system. The study approach was to determine if any nearby intersections are projected to operate at
worse than Level of Service (LOS) D and to determine what mitigation would be necessary if level of
service standards are exceeded. The study also includes roadway segment level of service analysis for
key roadway segments within the study area. Ten intersections were analyzed for this study. These
intersections are listed below and shown in Figure 2.
1. Tassajara Road / South Dublin Ranch Parkway
2. Tassajara Road / Gleason Drive
3. Tassajara Road / Central Parkway
4. Tassajara Road / Dublin Boulevard
5. Grafton Street / Antone Way
6. Grafton Street / Gleason Drive*
7. Brannigan Street / Gleason Drive*
8. School Driveway Out / Kohnen Way*
9. Grafton Street / Central Parkway*
10. Grafton Street / Kohnen Way*
The intersections marked with an asterisk (*) are future intersections.
The near-term scenarios include approved and pending projects that may be built and fully occupied
within the next 10 years. This study recommends the minimum required lane geometry for the near term
scenario. Ultimate lane requirements should be based on Year 2020 traffic volumes from the Tri-Valley
Traffic Model. The following three near-term scenarios were addressed in the study:
1. Baseline - Existing land use conditions plus future traffic from the approved and pending
projects that are expected to be built and at least partially occupied by September of 2005.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 1
February 18, 2004
0
0
e-
"Z'e° i
'O~ OqON~V
~SUOHNOIdl
sn~::l¥~ ~O
'WOVQN31OVH
0
0
c-
O
Baseline plus Area F1 and F2 plus K-8 - Identical to the Baseline Scenario, but with traffic
added from the development of Dublin Ranch Area F 1 and F2 Neighborhoods and school for
kindergarten through 8th grade.
Buildout plus Area F1 and F2 plus 6-8 - Assumes that all of the Baseline residential and
commercial projects are fully occupied and utilized, respectively. Dublin Ranch Area F1 and F2
Neighborhoods fully occupied as well as the Middle School for grades 6 through 8 only.
Summary
h~ summary, TJKM has reached the following conclusions regarding the proposed middle school
development:
· Under the Baseline condition, all of the twelve study intersections operate at an acceptable level of
service.
With the additional traffic from the proposed school, all of the twelve study intersections are
projected to continue to operate at acceptable level of service. Therefore, the school is not considered
to cause significant traffic impact on the study intersections.
· Under the 'Baseline', 'Baseline plus F1 & F2 plus School K-8' and 'Buildout' scenarios, all the
following unsignalized intersections do not warrant traffic signalization.
· Grafton Street/Antone Way
· Graflon Street/Gleason Drive
· Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive
· Grafton Street/Central Parkway
· Graflon Street/Kohnen Way
However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and
Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons.
The intersection ofKohnen Way/Grafton Street and the Future School Exit/Kohnen Way should be all-
way STOP controlled. The northbound approaches on Shelton Lane and Thomdike Lane should be
STOP controlled at Kohnen Way. Mid-block crosswalks not controlled by STOP signs should not be
installed in the vicinity of the school.
· An eastbound left-mm lane should be installed on Kohnen Way between Shelton Lane and the School
Entrance Driveway.
With the school open, parking should be prohibited on the both sides of Kohnen Way between the
School Exit Driveway and Grafton Street. The north side of Kohnen Way between the driveways for
the school loop road will be used as a loading zone by Livermore-Amador Valley Transportation
Agency (LAVTA) buses.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 4
February 18, 2004
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Transportation Network
The proposed project and the surrounding area are illustrated in Figure 2.
project area are discussed below.
Important roadways serving the
Interstate 580 is an eight-lane east-~vest freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such as Livermore
and Pleasanton as well as regional origins and destinations such as Oakland, Hayward and Tracy. In the
vicinity of the proposed project, I-580 carries between 188,000 and 199,000 vehicles per day (vpd)
(according to Caltrans' 2000 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways) with interchanges at
Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road, Hacienda Drive, Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road, and Fallon Road/E1
Charro Road.
Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial in the City of Dublin. It is a four-lane road fronted largely
by retail and commercial uses west of Dougherty Road. Between Dougherty Road and Tassaj ara Road,
Dublin Boulevard is a six-lane divided arterial fronted primarily by residential, commercial and vacant
lands. Dublin Boulevard extends east of Tassajara Road to Keegan Street as a four-to-five lane roadway
fronted by new residential development. Average daily volume near Arnold Road is approxirnatelyl 6,000
vehicles.
Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to 1-580. North ofi-580, Hacienda Drive is two-
to-six-lane arterial running in the north-south direction from Gleason Drive southerly to 1-580. It is
primarily fronted by commercial, office and residential uses. Average daily volume near Central Parkway
is approximately 9,700 vehicles. South ofi-580, Hacienda Drive is a six-lane divided road, a major
arterial in the City of Pleasanton designed to provide access to 1-580.
Gleason Drive is an east-west four-lane road parallel to and north of Dublin Boulevard. It currently
serves the Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center, the Federal Correctional Institution and the developments
along Gleason Drive. Gleason Drive connects Tassajara Road with Arnold Road.
Tassajara Road connects with Santa Rita Road at 1-580 to the south and continues north to the Town of
Danville. North of the Contra Costa County line, it is named Camino Tassajara. Camino Tassajara is
used primarily for local traffic in the Tassajara Valley, with some through traffic.
Santa Rita Road is a six-lane divided urban arterial from the 1-580 interchange south to Valley Avenue. It
serves the east side of Pleasanton, including the Hacienda Business Park, and provides access to the
downtown Pleasanton area.
Central Parkway is a two-to-three lane east-west collector that extends from Arnold Road to Keegan
Street (east of Tassajara Road) and being planned for an extension east of Fallon Road as part of the East
Dublin Properties project.
Antone Way is an east-west residential collector between Dublin Ranch Parkway and Fallon Road.
Keegan Street is a two-to-three-lane north-south collector, extending northerly from Dublin Boulevard to
Central Parkway.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 5
February 18, 2004
Level of Service Analysis Methodology
Signalized Intersections
Peak hour intersection conditions are reported as volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios with corresponding
levels of setwrice. Level of service ratings are qualitative descriptions of intersection operations and are
reported using an A through F letter rating system to describe travel delay and congestion. Level of
Service (LOS) A indicates free floxv conditions with little or no delay, while LOS F indicates jammed
conditions with excessive delays and long back-ups.
The operating conditions at signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity
Utilization (ICU) methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). This
method provides an overall intersection level of service. Appendix A contains a detailed description of
the methodology.
Unsignalized Intersections
At one-way and all-way STOP-controlled intersections, level of service was evaluated using the1994 and
2000 HCM Unsignalized Intersections analysis methodology. The method ranks level of service on an A
through F scale similar to that used for signalized intersections, but uses average delay in seconds as its
measure of effectiveness. The 1994 HCM methodology is also described in detail in Appendix A.
Impact Criteria
The City of Dublin policy is to have its roadways and intersections operate no worse than LOS D.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 6
February18,2004
BASELINE CONDITIONS
The scenario evaluates how well the study intersections serve the existing traffic plus the traffic expected
to be generated from the nearby approved and pending projects. Existing turning movement counts for
the existing study intersections were conducted during December 2000 by TJKM. Future traffic from the
approved and the pending projects are either obtained from the previous traffic impact study, or estimated
based on the information contained in Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Generators, published by the San Diego
Association of Governments (SanDAG).
The following provides the description for some of the existing and future development expected in the
vicinity of the proposed project.
Hacienda Crossings Development is a 469,600-square-foot retail center. The development consists of a
120-room hotel, a 21-screen theater and a commercial center. The Hacienda Crossings site is located in
the southeast comer of the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection.
General ~¥lotors Development consists of 75,660 square feet of new automobile dealerships and an
automobile service facility on the south side of Dublin Boulevard, east of Tassajara Creek and north of 1-
580.
Creeks'ide Business Park II! consists of 590,000 square feet of office space located on the north side of
Central Parkway bounded by Hacienda Drive on the east and Arnold Drive on the west.
Koll Dublin Corporate Center consists of 590,000 square feet of office, 100,000 square feet of hotel and
7,000 square feet of retail space to be located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard bounded by
Tassajara Road on the east and the General Motors Site on the west.
Sybase Office Development consists of 420,000 square feet of office development located on the west side
of Hacienda Drive, north of Dublin Boulevard.
Villas at Santa Rita Development consists of 324 apartments (132 one-bedroom, 144 two-bedroom and 48
three-bedroom) on the east side of Hacienda Drive between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway.
The Santa Rita Property Sites 1 lA & 1 lB development consists of 368 apartments and 341 single-family
detached homes on the east side of Hacienda Drive between Gleason Drive and Central Parkway.
Tassajara Meadow I project consists of 106 single-family detached homes on the west side of Tassajara
Road and north of Gleason Drive
Tassajara Meadows Residential Development II consists of 96 single-family detached homes located on
the west side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
Emerald Glen Residential Development consists of 143 single-family detached and 152 townhomes to be
located on the west side of Tassajara Road, north of Dublin Boulevard and south of future Central
Parkway.
Emerald Glen Village Development consists of 390 apartments and 132,235 square feet of retail space to
be located on the west side of Tassajara Road, bounded by Dublin Boulevard on the south and Central
Parkway on the north.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 7
February 18, 2004
Yarra Yarra Residential Development consists of 252 single-family detached homes and 193 townhomes
to be located on the west side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
California Creekside Residential Development consists of 154 single-family detached homes and 123
townhomes.
Dublin Ranch Phase [Residential Development consists of 847 single-family detached homes located on
the east side of Tassajara Road, north of Gleason Drive.
Dublin Ranch Area A Development consists of 562 single-family detached homes to be located along
both sides of Fallen Road, north of Central Parkway.
Dublin Ranch Area G Development consists of 1,426 apartments to be located on the east side of
Tassajara Road, north of Dublin Boulevard and south of Central Parkway.
Quarry Lane School is a private school located north of Dublin Ranch on Tassajara Road.
Results of Level of Service Analysis
The Baseline traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure 3. The results of the level of
service (LOS) analyses for the Baseline Scenario are shown in Table I, and detailed calculations are
contained in Appendix B. The LOS was calculated for only the a.m. peak hour because schools are
typically dismissed prior to the p.m. peak commute period. Under Baseline Conditions, all study
intersections operate at acceptable levels of service.
TABLE I: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BASELINE CONDITIONS
A.M. Peak Hour
Intersections Control
* LOS
1 Tassajara Road / South Dublin Ranch Parkway Signal 0.65 B
2 Tassajara Road / Gleason Drive Signal 0.43 A
3 Tassajara Road / Central Parkway Signal 0.53 A
4 Tassajara Road / Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.62 B
5 Graflon Street / Antone Way One-Way STOP 1.4 (3.8) A (A)
6 Graflon Street / Gleason Drive Signal 0.04 A
7 Brannigan Street / Gleason Drive Signal 0.09 A
9 Grafton Street/Central Parkway Signal 0.03 A
10 Graf'ton Street/Kohnen Way Ali-Way STOP 7.2 A
Notes:
Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio for signalized intersections and Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and
yielding movements at STOP-controlled intersections.
X.X (X.X) = Overall intersection delay or LOS (Minor Movements Delay or LOS)
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 8
February 18, 2004
Intersection #1 Intersection #2 Intersection #3 intersection #4 Intersection #5
Tassajara/S. Dublin TassajareJGleason Dr. Tassajara/Central Pkwy. Tassjara/Dublin Graffor~Antone
%'T'F 1~-45
~¢ ,~ '-~.1 ~"- 178
7~
62~
Intersection #6 Intersection #7 intersection #9 Intersection #10
Grafton/Gleason Brannigan/Gleason Grafton/Central Grafton/Kohnen
F~16
73--~,- '~ ~
5~ Z~
~- 39
LEGEND
· Existing Intersection
O Future Intersection
-- Existing Road
..... Future Road
North
"~t to Scale
City of Dublin
Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
Baseline AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes
157-145 - 2/17/04 - GL
Figure
3
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Peak hour warrants contained in the Caltrans Traffic Manual were used to evaluate the need to install
traffic signals at the unsignalized study intersections. Signal warrant analyses based on peak hour traffic
volumes were conducted for Grafton Street/Antone Way, Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Grafton
Street/Central Parkway, Grafton Street/Kohnen Way, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton
Street/Kohnen Way. The analyses revealed that none of these intersections are projected to warrant
traffic signalization under Baseline conditions. However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason
Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for
safety reasons. Therefore, these three study intersections were assumed to be signalized for the level-of-
service analysis.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 10
February 18, 2004
IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Description
Dublin Ranch Middle School is proposed to be open in September 2005 initially as a kindergarten through
8th grade school with approximately 1,100 students, with the ultimate capacity for 1,200 middle school
students. The proposed school is bounded on the north by South Dublin Ranch Drive, on the east by
Grafton Street and on the south by Kohnen Way. A 50-acre high school site with the capacity for
approximately 985 students was originally assumed for this site in the East Dublin Specific Plan and
analyzed in the E1R. Based on standard rates published in Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation, 6m Edition, it would be reasonable to assume that the traffic impacts associated with a 985-
student high school would be approximately the same, if not less, than a 1,200-student middle school.
Mode Split
Student arrivals occur via several travel modes: automobile (parent pick-up/drop-off), bus, bicycle, roller
blades, and foot travel. Typically, more children leave school in the afternoon by foot and bus than arrive
by these modes in the morning peak. This result is to be expected, as more parents are able to take children
to school in the morning in conjunction with work trips (or to avoid colder weather). Based on where
students are anticipated to live, mode split estimates were developed for the proposed school. Table 1I
illustrates the estimated mode splits for the morning and afternoon school peaks for the proposed school,
while it is serving kindergarten though 8th graders (K-8). The amount of students arriving by automobile is
consistent with the findings of the 2000-01 California Statewide HousehoM Travel Survey published by the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
TABLE II: PROJECTED STUDENT ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE MODES
Percent
Mode
Morning Afternoon
(Arrival) (Departure)
Automobile 71% 66 %
Foot/Roller Blade 16 % 20 %
Bicycle 8 % 8 %
Bus (public transit) 5 % 6 %
TOTAL 100 % 100 %
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 11
February 18, 2004
Trip Generation
Trip generation is defined as the number of one-way vehicle trips produced by a particular land use or study
site. The total number of peak hour vehicle trips generated by the school is split into inbound and
outbound traffic for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The trip generation estimates assume that the a.m.
school peak hour xvill coincide with the a.m. peak hour for nearby streets.
Trip generation for the proposed school is based on the density of residential units that will be served by
the school. Based on School Facility Needs Analysis for Dublin Unified School District, July 2003,
prepared by Shilts Consultants, the following generation rates per type of dwelling unit (d.u.) were used
for kindergarten through 5th grade:
Single-family = 0.36 student/d.u.
· Single-family Small Lot = 0.36 studenEd.u.
· Townhouse = 0.14 student/d.u.
· Multi-family = 0.07 student/d.u.
Similarly, the following student generation rates per type of dwelling unit were used for grades 6th through
Single-family = 0.17 student/d.u.
· Single-family Small Lot = 0.17 student/d.u.
· Townhouse = 0.05 student/d.u.
· Multi-family = 0.04 student/d.u.
The following assumptions were made for the proposed school:
· student enrollment (assumed to be 1,100 for K-8 in 9/04 and ultimately 1,200 for 6th - 8t~' grades ),
· daily absentee rate (assumed to be five percent of enrollment),
· average number of students per vehicle during the morning (assumed to be 1.7 per vehicle),
· average number of students per vehicle during the afternoon (assumed to be 2.0 per vehicle), and
· number of faculty and staff members (assumed one faculty-staff per 17 students).
Based on the above assumptions, the estimated automobile trip generation for the proposed school is
approximately 930 trips during the a.m. street peak hour when the school is K-8 and 1,020 trips when it
becomes a 6th-8th school. The p.m. street peak hour is assumed not to correspond with the p.m. school peak
hour. A summary of the automobile trip generation assumptions for the proposed school is contained in
Table III. The vehicle trips represented in the table include trips generated by students and faculty/staff,
with the assumption that all members of the faculty/staff ~vill drive alone and arrive during the a.m. peak
hour. Detailed mode split and trip generation calculations are contained in Appendix C for both K-8 and 6%
8th school scenarios.
TABLE III: PEAK HOUR PROJECT AUTOMOBILE TRIP GENERATION
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. School Peak Hour
Use Size
In:Out In Out Total In:Out In Out Total
K. - 8th School 1,100 53:47 498 436 934 46:54344 407 751
6t~ - 8th School 1,200 53:47 543 474 1,017 46:54375 443 818
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 12
February 18, 2004
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution is the process of determining in what proportion of vehicle trips will travel between
different locations within a traffic study area. Trip assignment is the allocation of vehicle trips to available
routes (local streets) between locations in the traffic study area. To aid in the determination of trip
distribution, the area that would be served by the proposed school was divided into 12-traffic analysis zones,
w/th each zone representing subdivisions or other residential units that will be served by the school. As
shown on Figures 4a for the K-8 school and 4b for the 6-8 school, the following subdivisions are assumed to
be within the school boundary.
The following estimate of occupied units by September 2005 is based on information provided by MacKay
and Somps. By 2005, these units are expected to generate k-8th students at Dublin Ranch School except for
four zones (1,2 3 and 11) where the units will send k-5th students to Dougherty School (as noted below).
However, the 6th through 8th students in these four zones are assumed to attend Dublin Ranch School in
2005 and beyond.
Zone 1: California Creekside, Archstone, Jefferson, and Summer Glen (238 single-family (SF), 263 small
lot single family (SSF), 123 townhouses (TH), and 693 multi-family (MF)). K-5th students in this zone will
attend Dougherty School.
Zone 2: Greenbriar, Tassajara Meadows Phases 1 and 2 (406 SSF, 154 TH). K-5th students in this zone will
attend Dougherty School.
Zone 3: Toll Brothers and Shea Apartments (143 SSF, 152 TH, 390 MF). K-5th students in this zone will
attend Dougherty School.
Zone 4: Dublin Ranch Phase 1 (568 SF, 279 SSF)
Zone 5: Dublin Ranch Areas F and G (115 SSF and 842 MF)
Zone 6: Dublin Ranch Areas B and C (96 SSF and 92 MF)
Zone 7: Dublin Ranch Area A (337 SF)
Zone 8: Dublin Ranch Area F2 (119 SF)
Zone 9: Dublin Ranch Area F1 (102 SF)
Zone 10: Di Manto Property (26 SSF)
Zone 11: Transit Center (300 MF). (K-5th students in this zone will attend Dougherty School).
Zone 12: Northern Properties (0 unit)
A total of 2,317 dwelling units are assumed to be served by the K-8 school. The 12 zones are assumed to be
100 percent occupied for the middle school (6th-8t~ grades).
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 13
February 18, 2004
[mm~ ~o
'3AV
NV~)IO¥~
'~la VGN~IOVH ~
,mm)~mm
'3A¥
N¥~IQV~ L TM
'(3~1 QlONl::J¥
0
· au X.LU3HDnOQ
Driveway Locations
Dublin Unified School District has prepared a detailed site plan that ties down the three driveway locations
on Kohnen Way. As shown on Figure 1, one driveway serves the west parking lot, while the other two
driveways serve the loading/unloading zone and east parking lot. The proposed one-way (counter
clockwise) circulation pattern for the loading zone allows the passenger side of'the vehicle to be along the
curb of the loading zone. The east driveway for loading zone/east parking lot is proposed to be an inbound
(entrance) only driveway and the corresponding west driveway is proposed to be an outbound (exit) only
driveway. The entrance driveway is designed to be wide enough to accommodate right turners and left
turners simultaneously. The right turners will also benefit from a westbound right mm only lane on Kohnen
Way between the entrance driveway and Grafton Street, while the left turners will have an eastbound left
turn only lane on Kohnen Way between the entrance driveway and Shelton Lane.
Drop-Off/Pick-up Circulation
The site plan shows a loop road for passenger loading/unloading. The proposed loop road is wide enough to
accommodate two lanes, with the "outside" lane (adjacent to the school) designated as a loading zone, and
the "inside" lane designated for circulation (with no stopping allowed).
To avoid congestion within the loop road, some parents may want to drop-off or pick-up their children on
Kohnen Way. For safety reasons, this practice should be prohibited by placing NO STOPPING signs
approximately every 150 feet on both sides of Kohnen Way between the exit drivexvay and Graf-ton Street.
On-Site and Special Event Parking
Assuming one faculty/staff member for every 17 students, the proposed school could employ approximately
71 (=1,200/17) faculty and staff members. The site plan shows two parking lots, with a total of
approximately 175 stalls, which is more than enough to meet the expected daily demand from faculty/staff,
visitors, and volunteers.
Pedestrians
Generation
The proposed school is expected to generate approximately 160 inbound pedestrians during the morning
peak and 210 outbound during the afternoon peak. Because of the expected heavy pedestrian volumes, the
sidewalk along the southern frontage of the school should be at least six feet in width.
An all-way STOP is recommended where the School exit driveway intersects Kohnen Way, with a painted
yellow crosswalk across the west leg of the intersection. Approximately 40 inbound and 50 outbound
pedestrians are expected to use this intersection. The Kohnen Way/Grafton Street intersection should also
be all-way STOP controlled. Approximately 90 inbound and 110 outbound pedestrians are expected to use
this intersection. The remaining pedestrians are expected to live north of the School and therefore would not
need to cross at these two all-way STOP controlled intersections.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 16
February 18, 2004
School Area Signing and Striping
To enhance safety, the school area should be clearly defined by appropriate signing and striping. The
Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that crosswalks may be painted yellow when they are contiguous to
school buildings or grounds. In addition, any crosswalks within 600 feet of school buildings or grounds
may also be painted yelloxv. All marked crosswalks along the southern frontage of the School should be
painted yellow. Mid-block crossxvalks not controlled by STOP signs should not be installed in the vicinity
of the School.
The intersection ofKohnen Way/Grafton Street and the Future School Exit/Kohnen Way should be all-way
STOP controlled. The northbound approaches on Shelton Lane and Thorndike Lane should be STOP
controlled at Kohnen Way. Because future traffic and pedestrian volumes are unknown at this time, the City
should evaluate crossing guard warrants after school-related pedestrian and bicycle patterns have had a
chance to develop. Although Kohnen Way/Grafton Street and the Future School Exit/Kohnen Way
intersections will be controlled with all-way STOP signs, they may be candidates for evaluation.
Bicycles
The proposed school, when it becomes a middle school, is expected to generate as many as 110 inbound
bicyclists during the morning peak and an equivalent amount outbound during the afternoon peak. The
following bicycle-related improvements are recommended in conjunction with the opening of the new
school:
· Students should be educated about safe bicycle riding and the preferred route to school
from their homes.
· On-site bicycle racks should be provided.
Transit
The proposed school, when it becomes a middle school, is expected to generate approximately 50
inbound and 60 outbound transit passengers during the morning and afternoon peaks, respectively. A
'bus-only loading zone is proposed on the north side of Kohnen Way between the driveways for the loop
road. Maximized bus use and minimized auto use will smooth the flow of traffic, reduce the number of
potential vehicular/pedestrian conflicts, and decrease local vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT).
K-8 SCHOOL CONDITIONS
Level of Service Analysis
Figure 5 illustrates the peak hour turning movement for Baseline plus Area F1 and F2 plus K through 82~
Grade condition. The results of the level of service analysis performed for this scenario are contained in
Table IV and detailed calculations are contained in Appendix D. All of the study intersections are
expected to operate at acceptable level of service.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 17
February 18, 2004
Intersection #1 Intersection #2 Intersection #3 Intersection #4 Intersection #5
Tassajare]S. Dublin TassajaraJGleason Dr. TassajareJCentral Pkwy. Tassjara/Dublin Grafton/Antone
~,L~ ~-456
37 ~41 co LO LO
~ ~-._ 1~54
c~,~- ~-
28-~
62~
~_ 39
Y 156
Intersection #6 Intersection #7 Intersection #8 Intersection #9 intersection #10
Grafton/Gleason Brannigan/Gleason Driveway OutJKohnen Graftor~Central Graftom'Kohnen
LEGEND
· Existing Intersection
0 Future Intersection
-- Existing Road
..... Future Road
North
Not to Scale
y of Dublin
I-'roposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
Baseline + Area F1 + F2 + K-8 Peak Hour
Turning Movement Volumes
157-145 - 2/17/04 - GL
Figure
5
TABLE IV: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ~ BASELINE PLUS AREAS F1 & F2 PLUS
K THROUGH 8TM GRADE
Baseline plus F1 & F2
Baseline
plus K-8
Intersections Control A.M. Peak Hour
* LOS * LOS
1 Tassajara Road / So. Dublin Ranch Pkwy, Signal 0,65 B 0.65 B
2 Tassajara Road / Gleason Drive Sign al 0,43 A 0.51 A
3 Tassajara Road / Central Parkway Signal 0.53 A 0.67 B
4 Tassajara Road / Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.62 B 0.73 C
5 Grafton Street / Antone Way One-Way STOP 1.4 (3,8) A (A) 4,7 (12.1) A (B)
6 Grafton Street / Gleason Drive Signal 0,04 A 0.13 A
7 Brannigan Street / Gleason Drive Signal 0.09 A 0.47 A
8 Future School Exit / Kohnen Way All-Way STOP N/A N/A 9.9 A
9 Grafton Street/Central Parkway Signal 0,03 A 0.05 A
10 Grafton Street/Kohnen Way All-Way STOP 7,2 A 8.8 A
Notes: * =
Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio for signalized intersections and Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and
yielding movements at STOP-controlled intersections.
X.X (X.X) = Overall intersection delay or LOS (Minor Movements Delay or LOS)
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Traffic signal warrants were analyzed for the non-signalized study intersections. The analyses revealed
that none of these intersections are projected to warrant traffic signalization under Baseline plus FI & F2
plus K-8 School conditions. However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan
Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons.
Therefore, these three study intersections ~vere assumed to be signalized for the level-of-service analysis.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 19
February 18, 2004
Buildout Conditions (6-8 school)
Trip Distribution and Assignment
The following estimate of occupied units for Buildout Conditions was provided by staff from MacKay
and Somps. The traffic analysis zones were previously shown on Figure 4b.
Zone 1: California Creekside, Archsone, Jefferson, and Summer Glen (238 single-family (SF), 263 small lot
single family (SSF), 123 townhouses (TH), and 693 multi-family (MI?)).
Zone 2: Greenbriar, Tassajara Meadows Phases 1 and 2 (456 SSF, 193 TH)
Zone 3: Toll Brothers and Shea Apartments (143 SSF, 152 TH, 390 MF)
Zone 4: Dublin Ranch Phase 1 (568 SF, 279 SSF)
Zone 5: Dublin Ranch Areas F and G (557 SSF and 1,404 MF)
Zone 6: Dublin Ranch Areas B and C (958 SSF and 916 MF)
Zone 7: Dublin Ranch Area A (552 SF)
Zone 8: Dublin Ranch Area F2 (119 SF)
Zone 9: Dublin Ranch Area F1 (102 SF)
Zone 10: Di Manto Property (261 SSF)
Zone 11: Transit Center (1,500 MF)
Zone 12: Northern Properties (869 SF and 421 SSF)
A total of approximately 4,903 dwelling units are assumed to be served by the 6-8 Middle School.
For Buildout Conditions, a Day Care and Church School consisting of a 3,400 square feet day care and a
120-student church school are assumed to be located on the west side of Brannigan Street north of
Gleason Drive. Based on calculations presented in TJKM's letter report dated October 25, 2002, these
two developments are expected to generate a total of 154 trips in the a.m. weekday peak hour and 69 trips
during the p.m. peak hour.
Level of Service Analysis
Figure 6 illustrates the peak hour turning movement volumes for Buildout conditions (Dublin Ranch
Middle School serving grades 6 through 8). The results of the level of service analysis performed for this
scenario are contained in Table V and detailed calculations are contained in Appendix E. The analysis
assumes that the southbound Brannigan Street approach at Gleason Drive is in its ultimate configuration,
which would include two right turn lanes and a shared through/left lane. All of the study intersections are
expected to operate at acceptable level of service.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 20
February 18, 2004
TABLE V: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - BUILDOUT
Baseline plus F1 & F2
plus K-8 Buildout
Assumed
Intersections Control A.M. Peak Hour
* LOS * LOS
1 Tassajara Road / So, Dublin Ranch Pkwy. Signal 0.65 B 0.68 B
2 Tassajara Road / Gleason Drive Signal 0.82 D 0.61 B
3 Tassajara Road / Central Parkway Signal 0.67 B 0.80 C
4 Tassaiara Road / Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.73 C 0.52 A
5 Grafton Street / Antone Way One-Way STOP 2,2 (3,4) A (A) 3.0 (11.0) A (B)
6 Graflon Street / Gleason Brive Signal 0.13 A 0.24 A
7 Brannigan Street / Gleason Drive Signal 0.47 A 0.42 A
8 Future School Exit / Kohnen Way All-Way STOP 9,9 A 11.3 B
9 Graflon Street/Central Parkway Signal 0.05 A 0.13 A
10 Graflon Street/Kohnen Way All-Way STOP 8.8 A 8.8 A
Notes:
* =Volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio for signalized intersections and Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and
yielding movements at STOP-controlled intersections.
X.X (X.X) = Overall intersection delay or LOS (Minor Movements Delay or LOS)
** = In case Grafton Street/Gleason Drive is signalized.
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Traffic signal warrants were analyzed for the non-signalized study intersections. The analyses revealed
that none of these intersections are projected to warrant traffic signalization under Buildout conditions.
However, the intersections of Grafton Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton
Street/Central Parkway should be signalized for safety reasons. Therefore, these three study intersections
were assumed to be signalized for the level-of-service analysis.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 21
February 18, 2004
intersection #1 Intersection #2 Intersection #3 Intersection #4 intersection #5
TassajaraJS. Dublin Tassajara/Gleason Dr. TassajaraJCentral Pkwy. Tassjara/Dublin Grafton/Antone
~ 69
~.~85
46-+~
intersection #6 Intersection #7 Intersection #8 Intersection #9 Intersection #10
Grafton/Gleason Brannigan/Gleason Driveway OutJKohnen GraftordCentral Grafton/Kohnen
,~-,o I ~,_45
u~p I~- 155
~8~
134 ~-o~
~-o~ ~63
~J ~r I,~ ~- 279
164-~ oj~
23-~ *r,-.
,~ t .~-30
273-4~ ~/~
LEGEND
· Existing Intersection ,~'~
O Future Intersection FUtUrE
-- Existing Road , ALIGNMENT
..... Future Road
~,- ~~ f
,---
~ '~ *', .- ..... k .......
No~h
' to S~le
City of Dublin
Dublin Ranch Areas F1 & F2
Buildout AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes
157-145 - 2J17/04- GL
Figure
6
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, TJKM has reached the following conclusions regarding the proposed Middle School
development:
· Under the Baseline condition, all of the ten study intersections operate at an acceptable level of
service.
With the additional traffic from the proposed project, all of the ten study intersections are projected to
continue to operate at acceptable level of service. Therefore, the project is not considered to cause
significant traffic impact on the study intersections.
Under both the 'Baseline' and the 'Baseline plus Project' scenarios, none of the unsignalized study
intersections are projected to warrant traffic signalization. However, the intersections of Grafton
Street/Gleason Drive, Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive and Grafton Street/Central Parkway should be
signalized for safety reasons.
· Mid-block crosswalks not controlled by STOP signs should not be installed in the vicinity of the
school.
· Parking should be prohibited on both sides of Kohnen Way between the School exit driveway and
Grafton Street.
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 23
February 18, 2004
STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES
TJKM Personnel:
Gordon Lum, P.E., Project Director
Pratyush Bhatia, Project Engineer
Geri Foley, Graphics Designer
Lily Moore, Word Processor
Persons/Agencies Consulted
Mr. Dave Chadbourne, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Rod Andrade, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Peter Quady, MacKay & Somps
Mr. Ray Kuzbari, City of Dublin
Mr. Mike Porto, City of Dublin
Mr. Paul Kruger, City of Dublin
References
Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997
Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1994 and 2000
Traffic Manual, Caltrans, 1992
School Facility Needs Analysis for Dublin Unified School District, Shilts Consultants, July 2003
Expected Level-of-Service at Gleason Drive/Brannigan Street in Dublin, TJKM, October 2002
A Trafficlmpact Study for the Villas at Santa Rita Apartments, TJKM, March 1997
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Traffic
Impact Study for Santa Rita Property Sites ]IA and liB Development, TJKM, October 1997
Impact Study for Casterson Property Residential Development, TJKM, November 1997
Impact Study for Creekside Business Park III Development, TJKM, March 1998
Impact Study for General Motors Development, TJKM, July 1998
Impact Study for Koll Dublin Corporate Center Development, TJKM, July 1998
Impact Study for Dublin Ranch Phase I Residential Development, TJKM, July 1998
Impact Study for Emerald Glen Residential Development, TJKM, February 1999
Impact Study for Yarra Yarra Residential Development, TJKM, January 1999
Study for the Proposed Dublin Ranch Areas F-H, TJKM, September 1999
Traffic Study for the Proposed Dub/in Ranch Middle School
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Page 24
February 18, 2004