The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 241-08Rep r TO: FROM: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:MAY 12, 2008 CMR: 241:08 SUBJECT:RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING AND T1LANSPORTATION COMMISSION ON THE CHARLESTON ARASTRADERO CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS-PHASE 1 TRIAL IMPROVEMENTS ON CHARLESTON ROAD AND PLAN FOR PHASE 2 TRIAL IMPLEMENTATION ON ARASTRADERO ROAD. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Plarming and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommend that the City Council: 1.Approve the permanent retention of the Phase 1 trial striping and lane configurations on Charleston Road consisting of: a) a three-lane cross-section from Fabian to Alma Street, including one travel lane in each direction, a wide striped median and left turn pockets at intersections; and b) a modified four-lane cross-section from Alma Street to E1 Camino Real consisting of VaTo travel lanes in each direction and a narrow striped median 2.Direct staff to continue monitoring of traffic conditions on Charleston Road after implementation of traffic adaptive sig-nal timing along the entire Charleston/Arastradero Corridor and provide an update in December 2008. 3.Direct staff to work with the Guma High School administration to implement a trial of the Gram High School driveway capacity improvements and return to City Council by January 2009 with a reconmaendation on the Phase 2 trial striping plan for Arastradero Road between E1 Camino Real and Gunn High School to be implemented in summer 2009. 4.Direct staff to pursue all available grant funding opportunities for the design and construction of the permanent safety and streetscape improvements, including street trees and landscaping, lighting, median islands and bike lane improvements on Charleston Road as described in the CharlestordArastradero Corridor Plan. BACKGROUND In April 2003, the City Council directed staff to prepare a plan of transportation, safety and urban desigaa/landscape improvements for the Charleston/Arastradero Road Corridor. Charleston and Arastradero Roads are residential arterial streets that carry between 15,000 and 18,000 vehicles daily. Each is a four-lane undivided roadway. The corridor serves numerous residential CMR:241:08 Page 1 of 5 neighborhoods and 11 schools. In Janua’y 2004, the City Council approved the Charleston Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan and Phasing Plan (CMR: 122:04) which was developed to: Maintain existing travel time on the COlTidor to minimize diversion to other residential streets Reduce accidents on the corridor Improve conditions for pedestrian and bicycle travel Improve the quality of life on the corridor Enhance visual amenities along the corridor On December 2005, Council approved a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $965,000 for the implementation of the Gram High School driveway and signal improvements, and implementation of a "no frills" trial project consisting of the fundamental elements of the Corridor Plan, including restriping to the new lane geometry, striped median islands, 3 new enhanced pedestrian crosswalks ~vith in-pavement lighting, and necessary traffic si~o-nal modifications. The Trial Plan includes two phases: Phase 1 provided for construction of the intersection and traffic sig-nal modifications at the Arastradero Road/Gunn High driveway, implementation of traffic adaptive sig-nal timing and the striping changes along only East and West Charleston Roads between Fabian and E1 Camino Real. The Phase 1 striping plan and the Gunn High School intersection improvements were completed in August 2006. Phase 2 will implement the three-lane or four-lane striping plan for Arastradero Road from E1 Camino Real to just east of Gunn High School. As a result of major under~ound utilities construction along Arastradero Road this year, the Council authorized postponing Phase 2 until June 2009, when Arastradero Road is scheduled to be resurfaced. During the past 18 months, Planning staff has held regular meetings with the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor stakeholder colmnittee to discuss operational issues arising from the new trial striping installation, monitor the performance of the Phase 1 trial and to further evaluate and assess traffic conditions along Arastradero Road with regard to the feasibility of a trial of the reconm~ended three-lane striping plan from E1 Camino Real to Gunn High School. TJKM Transportation Consultants was retained to prepare an Evaluation Report on the Phase 1 improvements and recommendations for Phase 2 striping of Arastradero Road. On April 30th, staff presented the findings to the Planning & Transportation Commission of the staff analysis of the Phase 1 Trial on Charleston Road and next steps in determining the striping plan for Phase 2 trial on Arastradero Road. Attacl~nent A to the PTC report includes the full evaluation report prepared by TJKM Transportation Associates, consulting traffic engineers for CMR:241:08 Page 2 of 5 this project. The original CharlestonJArastradero Corridor Plan is included as Attactmaent B to the PTC report. BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS On April 30, 2008, the PTC voted unanimously (6-0, Conmaissioner Garber not present) to reconmaend to the City Council the staff recommendations as detailed on Page 1 of this report, including: 1) approving permanent retention of the 3-lane configuration on Charleston from Fabian to Alma and the modified 4-lane configuration from Alma to E1 Camino Real; 2) evaluating the traffic conditions along the corridor after implementation of traffic adaptive si~aal timing; 3) implementing the trial of the Gram High School driveway capacity improvements and reporting on the recommended plan for Phase 2 trial on Arastradero Road to the Council by January 2009; and 4) directing staff to seek gant funding for the permanent streetscape and safety improvements described in the Corridor Plan. Draft minutes of the Planning and Transportation Commission meeting are provided as Attachment B. The Commission focused on specific segments of the Charleston Road trial and issues associated with traffic and safety conditions along Arastradero Road. Commissioner Lippert and Chair Holman inquired about the parking capacity on the Gunn High School calnpus and scope of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) pro~am offered at Guma High. Commissioner Tuma inquired about the safety of implementing an enhanced crosswalk on Arastradero Road to Briones Park. Commissioners Fineberg and Keller inquired about the desig-n of the merge from two lanes to one just west of Fabian, and striping issues in front of Hoover Elementary School and at the design of the turn pockets at Grove and Sutherland. Staff commented that there would be ongoing monitoring of the specific striping issues raised by Commissioners, and changes could be made in the future if problems develop. Despite these additional considerations and comments, Commissioners expressed broad support for the retention of the trial striping plan on Charleston Road and the planning and next steps in the Phase 2 trial for Arastradero Road. Approximately 20 members of the public addressed the Conmaission in person and approximately 42 members of the public submitted written comments to the Commission. The ~eat majority supported the staff recommendations. Several speakers co~rm~ented about specific striping and operational issues along Charleston Road including the westbound merge from two lanes to one just west of Fabian, turn pockets at Sutherland and Grove, and others had specific comments about the future striping of Arastradero Road. Written correspondence received by the Commission is provided in Attactmaent C. RESOURCE IMPACT Capital Improvement Progam (CIP) Project PL-05002 provided funding for the implementation of the Charleston!Arastradero Con’idor Phase ! Trial and Gram High School Driveway and intersection improvements. The Street Maintenance CIP Project PE-86070 will fund the Phase 2 resurfacing and restriping trial on Arastradero Road in 2009. The trial installation of the driveway circulation improvements on the Gunn High School campus will be funded by the Palo Alto Unified School District. CMR:241:08 Page 3 of 5 The estimated cost for the complete streetscape and safety improvements along the entire cmTidor as detailed in the Corridor Plan was approximately $6.2 million. The Charleston!Arastradero Road Pedestrian and Bicyclist Traffic Impact Fee is estimated to generate over $800,000 over 10 years. Approximately $375,000 of this amount was spent on the Phase 1 improvements. The balance of the estimated funding will be available as local match contributions for future federal state and loca! want applications. Potential want funding sources include the following want programs: VTA Local Streets and County Roads fund and Community Desig-n and Transportation, Metropolitan Transportation Conm~ission Transportation for Livable Communities, Caltrans Safe Routes to School, Federal Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancements. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Plan on January 20, 2004 (Resolution 8395). The plan included mitigation that would reduce the identified environmental impacts to. a less than si~aificant leve!. The MND covered the implementation of the full Charleston/Arastradero Corridor project including the trial and Guam High School intersection improvements. The trial project has not changed or worsened traffic conditions to a level of significance and the conditions are consistent with the previous CEQA analysis. ATTACHMENTS A. Plmming and Transportation Commission Report dated 4-30-08 B. Draft Minutes of the April 30, 2008 Planning and Transportation Conmaission meeting C. Correspondence to the Planning and Transportation Commission COURTESY COPIES Charleston/Arastradero Stakeholders Group Noreen Likins, Principal, Gunn High School Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee PREPARED BY: GAY~ LIKENS Transportation Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD: CURTIS WILLIAMS haterim Director of Planning and Community Environment CMR:241:08 Page 4 of 5 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: STEVE~MSLIE~,/KELLY MORARIU Deputy, City Managers CMR:241:08 Page 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT A PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION DIVISION STAFF REPORT 2 TO: FROM: AGENDA DATE: SUBJECT: PLAN~TING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Gayle Likens Transportation Manager DEPARTMENT: Planning and Community Environment April 30, 2008 Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Improvements Update: Review- and Recommendation on the Evaluation of Phase 1 Trial Improvements on Charleston Road and Plan for Phase 2 Trial Implementation on Arastradero Road. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommend that the City Council: 1.Approve the permanent retention of the Phase 1 trial striping and lane configurations on Charleston Road consisting of: a) a three-lane cross-section from Fabian to Ahna Street, including one travel lane in each direction, a wide striped median and left turn pockets at intersections b) a modified four-lane cross-section from Alma Street to E1 Camino Real consisting of two travel lanes in each direction and a narrow striped median 2.Direct staff to continue monitoring of traffic conditions on Charleston Road after implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing along the entire CharlestordArastradero Corridor and provide an update in December 2008. 3.Direct staff to work with the Gunn High School administration to implement a trial of the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements and return to City Council by January 2009 with a recommendation on the Phase 2 trial striping plan for Arastradero Road between E1 Camino Real and Gunn High School to be implemented in summer 2009. 4.Direct staff to pursue all available gant funding opportunities for the design and construction of the permanent safety and streetscape improvements, including street trees and landscaping, lighting, median islands and bike lane improvements on Charleston Road as described in the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Plan. City of Palo Alto Page 1 BACKGROUND In April 2003, the City Council directed staff to prepare a plan of transportation, safety and urban design/landscape improvements for the Charleston Arastradero Road Corridor. Charleston and Arastradero Roads are residential arterial streets which carry between 15,000 and 18,000 vehicles daily. Each is a four-lane undivided roadway. The corridor serves numerous residential neighborhoods and 11 schools. The objectives of the plan included: Maintain existing travel time on the corridor to minimize diversion to other residential streets Reduce accidents on the corridor Improve conditions for pedestrian and bicycle travel Improve the quality of life on the corridor Enhance visual amenities along the corridor In January 2004, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approved the Plan and Phasing Plan (CMR: 122:04) for the Charleston Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan (Attachment B). The recommended phasing plan included the following: -Installation of a new dedicated westbound right turn lane on Arastradero Road at the Gunn High School driveway and associated driveway improvements. -Deployment of traffic adaptive signal techno!ogy along the entire corridor. -Demonstration of a three-lane section (~o travel lanes, one in each direction) from west of Fabian to Alma Street and from west of Et Camino Rea! to east of Gunn High School driveway Retention of two travel lanes in each direction at both the east and west approaches of Middlefield, from the east approach to Alma to the west approach to E1 Camino Real, and at the east and west approaches to the Gurm High School driveway, and at the east approach to Foothill Expressway. At the conclusion of the demonstration trial, the Plan called for making permanent changes that were proven to be desirable in the trial. o Installation of permanent frontage improvements, including street trees, median islands, and new street lighting, etc. On December 2005, Council approved a budget amendment ordinance in the amount of $965,000 for the implementation of the Gunn High School driveway and signal improvements, and implementation of a "no frills" trial project consisting of the fundamental elements of the Corridor Plan, including restriping to the new- lane geometry, striped median islands, 3 new enhanced pedestrian crosswalks with in-pavement lighting, and necessary traffic signal modifications. This basic project did not include the more costly elements such as continuous concrete or asphalt median islands, corner bulbouts, colored pavement in the bike lanes or raised concrete median islands with landscaping. These elements were deferred until the permanent project was approved and the City secured funding to implement the permanent project. Funding for the striping trial project was allocated from the Infrastructure Reserve with reimbursement from the CharlestoniArastradero Corridor Pedestrian and Bicyclists Safety Impact Fee. The Gurm High School traffic signal and intersection modifications were funded with reimbursements from the Stanford Research Park Mitigation Impact Fee Reserve. City of Palo Alto Page 2 City c.,f Pato At~_o - ~_.]~arles~on-~,ras~ac-ero ~ial Traffic In,p~’ovemen:s St.udy Cor,’-idor and Segmenr.s Figure 1 "l’en’rm n 4 Segment 2 City of Palo Alto Page 3 In 2006, the decision was made to implement the trial in two Phases: ¯Phase 1 included construction of the intersection and traffic signal modifications at the Arastradero Road/Gunn High driveway, implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing and the striping changes along only East and West Charleston Roads between Fabian and E1 Camino Real. The Phase 1 striping plan and the Gunn High School intersection improvements were completed in August 2006. ¯Phase 2, comprised of the three-lane or four-lane striping plan for Arastradero Road was to follow one year later. As a result of major underground utilities construction along Arastradero Road this year, the Council authorized postponing Phase 2 until June 2009, when Arastradero Road is scheduled to be resurfaced in conjunction with the annual street maintenance project. DISCUSSION SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES: In the past 18 months since the initiation of the Phase 1 improvements, Planning staff has held regnlar meetings with the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor stakeholder committee (see Attachment C) to discuss operational issues arising from the new trial striping installation, monitor the performance of the Phase 1 trial and to further evaluate and assess traffic conditions along Arastradero Road with regard to the feasibility of a trial of the recommended three-lane striping plan from E1 Camino Real to Gunn High School. TJKM Transportation Consultants was retained to prepare an Evaluation Report on the Phase 1 improvements and recommendations for Phase 2 striping of Arastradero Road (Attachment A). Phase 1: Charleston Road Trial Results Access to Hoover School and Nelson/Charleston Intersection In spring 2007, monitoring confirmed significant queuing during the morning commute at Hoover School caused by delays in school traffic being able to merge onto Charleston Road. Hoover drivers perceived they had insufficient gaps in the single westbound traffic lane to merge safely into traffic. Queuing traffic backed up the len~h of the school driveway. A secondaw problem arose at the Nelson/Charleston intersection, a major school crossing for students attending Hoover, J. L. Stanford and Fairmeadow schools. Because it is illegal to make an eastbound left turn from Charleston Road into the Hoover campus, one of the benefits of the 3-lane configuration was the provision of a u-turn lane at the Nelson/Charleston intersection. The u-turn lane helps to reduce the volume of Hoover School commute cars turning into Nelson and making unsafe u-turns in the Greenmeadow neighborhood at the same hours when children are walking and biking to school. Initially, in the a.m., Hoover bound drivers experienced delays attempting to make a u-turn at the Nelson Drive intersection due to the steady stream of westbound traffic and fewer adequate gaps in traffic. In order to resolve these issues, the traffic signal timing was changed in fall 2007 at the Nelson/Charleston intersection to create a 6 second "gap" in westbound traffic; queuing at Hoover was reduced by 35% to a manageable level and the change did not result in queues backing up to the adjacent signals in the a.m. Hoover school representatives on the stakeholder City of Palo Alto Page 4 committee report that this problem has been resolved to their satisfaction. Mid-block Crosswalk near Briones Park The stakeholders committee requested that TJKM evaluate the feasibility of installing a marked crosswalk on Arastradero to facilitate access to Briones Park. TJKM conducted field observations and evaluated the potential crosswalk with the City’s adopted warrants for marked mid-block crosswalks. While the conditions at this location do not satisfy the requirements for a marked crosswalk (too high traffic volumes and too few pedestrians), the current four-lane undivided road presents safety and access challenges for pedestrians. Further, there are no controlled crosswalks on Arastradero between E1 Camino Real and Coulombe, a distance of.3 miles. A marked crosswalk to the park would clarify where pedestrians should cross. TJKM has recommended an enhanced crosswalk design with a median refuge so pedestrians can cross the road in two stages as depicted on Figure 11 of the evaluation report. This design can be incorporated into the Phase 2 striping plan for Arastradero Road next summer. Implementation of Traffic Adaptive Signal Timin~ The City’s traffic signal system employs advanced traffic signal controllers fully capable of traffic adaptive signal timing and coordination. All of the software and hardware (detector loops) are in place along the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor. Traffic adaptive signal timing reacts to changing traffic conditions in real time and constantly adjusts cycle-by-cycle to adjust cycle lengths, ~een times, etc., to optimize the system performance. Until recently there were some technical issues with the City’s adaptive system. These have recently been resolved and transportation and TJKM staff will implement the new timings within the next two months. Extensive traffic counts were taken by the City’s consultant in the spring 2007 to develop traffic adaptive timing plans. The traffic adaptive timing plans are estimated to reduce delay by up to 20% along the corridor. Evaluation of Charleston Road Striping Plans The City Council adopted seven quantifiable and objective performance measures for the Charleston!Arastradero Corridor Plan. Of the 7 measures, only the first 3 can be evaluated at the present time; the remaining 4 measures need more time to evaluate. Performance Measure #l: no increase in Corridor trm, el time Travel times on the corridor between Fabian and Alma were measured before and after by floating car surveys in May 2006 and May 2007. The results are provided on Table 1, below. Average travel time increased by 11% during the morning peak period but decreased during the evening commute period. The largest increase in travel time occurs in the morning westbound on Charleston between Fabian and Alma. The reverse flow experienced no additional travel time, nor did either direction in the evening peak. While the travel time measure was not technically achieved, the overall changes in travel time are not substantial and the implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing should improve travel time from 15 to 20%. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Table h Comparison of Travel Times on Charleston Road Segment:Direction Be~re Difference Fabian Way --> Alma 204 lStreet Alma Street --> Fabian 198 -!0Way Average of Both Directions 201 -4.5 Notes: Source: Westbound Easzbound Both Be~re is May 23, 2006 AEer is M~ 9, 2007 After 248 22.3 Travel Times in Seconds Difference 22 P.M. Before After 212 2i3 i75 165 193.5 189 Charleston Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, April 2008 Performance Measure #2: no increase in delay or critical movement delay along the Corridor Traffic volumes have increase between 2004 and 2007. Consequently, TJKM evaluated the critical movement delay at all of the intersections along Charleston Road in two ways. First, a comparison was made using 2004 counts with both the previous striping and with the new striping. Second a similar comparison was made using the 2007 data (see Table II, below). Using the 2004 data as a constant, the critical movement delays resulting from only the restriping showed every little change, a combined increase in total delay of 7 seconds (1 percent increase) in the A.M. and 22 seconds (3 percent increase) in the P.M. Using the 2007 volumes and the revised signal timings, including the added 6 second delay at the Nelson/Charleston intersection, delay was reduced by 29 seconds (minus 4 percent) overall in the a.m. and increased by 22 seconds (3 percent) overall in the p.m. The greatest increase in delay occurred in the p.m. at Middlefield!Nelson which operates al Level of Service A. The increase is attributable to changes in signal coordination and sig-nal timing changes. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table I1: Comparison of Before and After Critical Movement Delays (2007 Volumes and Revised Signal Operations After) Intersection Charleston/Fabian Way Charleston/Middtefield Charleston/Nelson Charleston/Carlson Ct. Charleston/Alma Total Delays Critical Movement Delay in Seconds Critical A.M. P.M.Movements Before After I Difference Before I After Difference¯ East-West 7 7 0 /29 29 0 Total 55 55 I !100 100 0 North-South 128 I I 0 - 18 I 41 /141 0 East-West I I 5 14 i 6 23 17 North-South 46 33 - 13 14 /14 0 L East-West I 6 5 I 2 5 3 Total 38 27 -II 22 I,25 3 East-West 141 104 0 130 130 ~0 North-South 136 148 0 322 !322 0 Total 277 252 0 400 400 0 East-West 251 203 18 306 326|20 North-South 395 287 -47 438 438 0 Combined 646 490 ii -29 744 764 1 20 Source: Charleston Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, April 2008 This analysis confirms that the changes in overall delay along the Charleston Corridor due to the trial project are insignificant and the criterion for no increase in critical movement delay is satisfied. TJKM cautions that critical movement delay can be misleading when only few vehicles on a critical movement experience high delay. As an example, TJKM notes that at the Carlson/Charleston intersection only 5 vehicles per hour experience an average delay of 20 seconds. TJKM recommends that the better measurement of delay would be Level of Service (LOS), which is a weighted average of intersection delay. In terms of LOS, there were no changes in LOS or significant increases in intersection delay associated with the three-lane conversion, as indicated in Table III, below. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Table II1: Road in 2006 (using May 2007 Volumes as Constant) ICharleston as 4-Lane Undivided Signalized Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Delay Delay (see)LOS (sec)LOS C.~.~ ......o. and Fabian 11.7 B 29.2 ~ Levels of Service Summary - Before and After Striping Changes on Charleston Charleston as Three-Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Delay LOS(see) 11.7 B Charleston and Midd!efieid 46.7 D 5!.’~-.D 42.8 D Char!esZon and Nelson 4 x T,5 3 I.....I A 8.0 A Charleston and Carlson Ct.i.i A 1.8 I A 3.2 A Charlesnon and Alma 6!.0 E 60.0 E 61.0 E Charles:on and Wiikie 5.5 A 3.9 A 5.5 A Charieszon and E1 Camino Real 61.2 E 40.6 D 61.2 E Delay LOS 29.2 C 5!.~~ 9.2 A 3.0 A 60.0 E 3.9 A 40.6 D Source: Charleston Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, April 2008 Performance Measure #3: Reduce the 85’~ percentile speeds by at least 20% along the Corridor Sig-nificant data was collected in spring 2007, measuring avera2e speeds rather than 85t~ percentile speeds. TJKM estimates 85t~ percentile speeds are @pically 4 mph higher than average speeds. The average speed in 2006 near Carlson Court was 31 mph compared with 28 mph in May 2007, a 10 percent reduction. However, the trial does not include the permanent physical improvements, including median islands, trees and landscaping that would be expected to reduce drivers’ speeds to the approximate performance measure of 20 percent speed reduction. The City will be updating the Engineering and Traffic surveys for the purpose of establishing posted speed limits on collector and arterial streets later this spring. The report, including full data on 85~ percentile speeds, will be presented to the Commission and Council later this 5,ear. Performance Measure #4 Reduce crash rates by at least 25%. It is too soon to evaluate the crash rates. Ts~ically, to get a statistically valid sample at least three full years of crash data is needed. Performance Measure #5: Increase pedestrian volumes by at least 20% by 2010 and 40% by 2020 Performance Measure #6: Increase bicycle volumes by at least 20% by 2010 and 40% by 2020 Performance Measure #7: hmrease public transit boarding by at least 50% by 2010. These performance measures cannot be measured until 2010. Conclusions for Phase 1 Charleston Road Trial The evaluation shows that the reduction in travel lanes on Charleston Road did not increase travel time to a significant level nor lead to increased congestion. It can be expected that with the implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing this summer, the delays will be reduced an City of Palo Alto Page 8 additional 15%-20%. There were no significant changes in critical movement delays as a result of the striping changes. The average speeds along the corridor decreased by 10 percent, and could be expected to decrease further when the permanent streetscape and safety improvements are installed. The quantitative measures do not fully address the objectives and goals the City Council established for the Charleston/Arastradero corridor with regard to the aesthetic and quali~, of life benefits derived from implementing the streetscape, pedestrian/bike safety and urban design features of the ultimate project on this residential arterial corridor. In this regard, one major accomplishment of the new striping was the completion of the bike lane network on Charleston between Fabian and Middlefield. The pre-existing undivided four-lane roadway with volumes over 12,000 ADT is the worst and most dangerous configuration for pedestrians crossing the corridor. On an undivided four-lane road, pedestrians have no median refuge and are in danger of the "multiple threat" of being hit by a car in the second lane when the car in the first lane stops, but the car in the second lane does not. The configuration change to a three-lane and a modified four-lane striping with median refuge areas on Charleston Road enhances pedestrian safet)~ crossing the corridor at signalized intersections and between signals. The three-lane configuration also reduces the number of through lanes at the minor intersections, provides left turn pockets at intersections, which will help reduce rear end and left turn crashes. In summary, after weighing the trial outcome against the performance measures and the corridor project objectives including improving safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, improving the quality of life, and visual enhancements, staff concludes that the trial has been successful. Staff recommends that the three-lane striping on East Charleston and modified four-lane striping on West Charleston should be retained on a permanent basis. With the conclusion of the formal trial, staff will be able to seek gant funding to implement the full streetscape improvements envisioned in the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan. Phase 2 Arastradero Road Improvements The Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan envisions restriping Arastradero Road to the three- lane configuration similar to that of East Charleston Road. An alternate modified four-lane cross- section (the West Charleston confignration) was also identified in the plan. Arastradero Road carries approximately 18,000 vehicles per day, which is 5,000 more vehicles/day than East Charleston Road. Arastradero Road experiences significant congestion between 7:40 a.m. and 8:10 a.m. due to the concentrated commute to Gunn High School. With the existing two westbound lanes, traffic routinely backs up one half mile between Gunn High School and Donald or Coulombe. TJKM evaluated a number of other alternatives, including the a hybrid plan with two through lanes westbound and one lane eastbound, adjusting the start time at Gunn High School by 30 minutes (earlier or later) to create a geater separation between the Gunn High commute and the later Terman commute traffic. The latter option was discussed with Gunn administrators, but found to be infeasible because the start times relate to scheduling of after school activities and City of Palo Alto Page 9 conflicts with labor agreements, etc. A detailed discussion of the alternatives and their feasibility is discussed on pages 13-21 of the TJKM evaluation report. When the Gunn/Arastradero traffic signal and right turn lane improvements were implemented in 2006, the two-inbound driveway lanes were extended approximately 150 feet into the campus. However, field observ-ations and the modeling have confirmed that the queuing on Arastradero Road is due largely to the continuing insufficient lane capacity in the driveway. TJKM performed extensive simulation modeling of existing conditions and the performance of the two primary striping alternatives. TJKM concluded that the alternatives would perform about the same during most periods of the day, except during the Gunn High morning peak period when the traffic delays and congestion soar. The modified four-lane alternative, without improvements to the Gunn High driveway, would operate comparably to the current striping, with significant congestion for the 30-minute period between 7:40 a.m. and 8:10 a.m. Under the three-lane alternative, significant congestion would occur for up to two hours in the morning, and could not be recommended unless the Gunn driveway problem is resolved. It was determined that the only three-lane alternative that would accommodate the morning traffic flow requires: Striping and signal phasing changes at the Terman/Arastradero Road intersection, including a new eastbound right turn lane at the school, lengthened westbound left turn lane, changing to protected-permissive left turn signal phasing for westbound left turns, maintaining the all-pedestrian signal phase Implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing with longer cycle lengths Extending two inbound lanes of traffic further into the Gunn High School campus to improve traffic flow and reduce queuing on Arastradero Road Staff, consultants and the stakeholders Koup have concluded that in order to move forward with the preferred three-lane cross-section, rather than the modified four-lane alternative, the Gunn High morning commute problem must be addressed before a decision on the preferred striping plan can be made. Over the past several months, staff and the stakeholders group, and representatives from Gunn High Administration and PAUSD administrative offices have observed Gunn driveway morning and afternoon traffic conditions. TJKM developed an alternative driveway circulation plan that would extend the two inbound driveway lanes approximately 500 feet into the campus. The plan is shown on Figure 5 of the Evaluation Report. PAUSD and Gunn High administrators have agreed to implement a signing and striping trial of this configuration this summer. Gunn High administrators concur that the changes will benefit the morning commute, but want to observe if any problems develop at school dismissal time, as all traffic will be required to exit the campus in front of the administration building and adjacent to the carpool and school bus drop off areas. The Gunn Parent Teacher Student Association (PTSA) discussed this plan and endorsed the trial of the circulation changes at the April 10, 2008 PTSA meeting (see Attachment D). City of Palo Alto Page 10 A thorough evaluation of the impact of Gunn High circulation changes will be conducted in the fall. Staff will return to the Commission and City Council with a final recommendation on the Arastradero Phase 2 trial striping plan by the end of the year. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This request does not represent a change to existing City policies. The recommendations are consistent with the Council-approved Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Improvement Plan. The project furthers Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Goals, T-1, Less Reliance on Single Occupant Vehicles; T-3, Facilities, Services and Progams that Encourage and Promote Walking and Bicycling; T-5, a Transportation System that Minimizes Impacts on Residential Neighborhoods; and T-6, a High Level of Safety for Motorists, Pedestrians and Bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. RESOURCE IMPACT Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project PL-05002 provided funding for the implementation of the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Phase 1 Trial and Gunn High School Driveway and intersection improvements. The Street Maintenance CIP Project PE-86070 will fund the Phase 2 resurfacing and restriping trial on Arastradero Road in 2009. The trial installation of the driveway circulation improvements on the Gunn High School campus will be funded by the Palo Alto Unified School District. The estimated cost for the complete streetscape and safety improvements along the entire corridor as detailed in the Corridor Plan was approximately $6.2 million. The Charleston!Arastradero Road Pedestrian and Bicyclist Traffic Impact Fee is estimated to generate over $800,000 over 10 years. Approximately $375,000 of this amount was spent on the Phase 1 improvements. The balance of the estimated funding will be available as local match contributions for future federal state and local grant applications. Potential ~ant funding sources include the following grant progams: VTA Local Streets and County Roads fund and Community Design and Transportation, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transportation for Livable Communities, Caltrans Safe Routes to School, Federal Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancements. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan on January 20, 2004 (Resolution 8395). The plan included mitigation that would reduce the identified environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The MND covered the implementation of the full Charleston/Arastradero Corridor project including the trial and Gunn High School intersection improvements. The trial project has not changed or worsened traffic conditions to a level of si~ificance and the conditions are consistent with the previous CEQA analysis. City of Palo Alto Page 11 ATTACHMENTS: A. Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Evaluation Report, TJKM Transportation Consultants, Ap~:il 2008 (with Appendices only for Commissioners) B. Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plan, January 2004 C. Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Stakeholders Group roster D. Letter from Gunn High School PTSA, dated April 12, 2008 COURTESY COPIES: Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Stakeholders Group Noreen Likins, Principal, Gunn High School Palo Alto Bicycle Advisov Committee Prepared by: Reviewed by: Department/Division Head Approval: Gayle Likens, Transportation Manager Julie Caporgno, Chief Planning and Transportation Official Curtis Williams, Assistant Director City of Palo Alto Page 12 ATTACHMENT A T~KM Transportation Consultants Vision That MovesYour Community FINAL Charleston° Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation In the City of Palo Alto April 23, 2008 Pleasanton ~ Fresno Sacramento Santa Rosa www.tjkm.com TJKM Transportation Consultants ATTACHMENT A Vision That Moves Your Communi~7 FINAL C harleston-/~,rastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation In the City of Palo Alto April 23, 2008 www.tjkm.com Prepared by: TJKM Transportation Consultants 3875 Hopyard Road Suite 200 Pleasanton, CA 94588-8526 Tel: 925.463.0611 Fax: 925.463.3690 J:\JURISDICTION~P\Palo Alto\042-02 7 Charleston_Arastradero Trial Plan\Report\R 042308.docx TJKM Transportation Consul~n:s Table of Contents introduction and Summary .................................................................................................I Introdu~ion .........................................................................................................................................................I The Concept of "Road Diets" as Related to Charleston and Arastradero Roads ............................I Current Status ....................................................................................................................................................3 !. Optimization of the Right Turn Lane Operation at Gunn High School ......................................3 2. Access to Hoover Elementary School .................................................................................................3 3. Mid-block Crosswalk on to Briones Park near the Fire Station ....................................................3 4. Adaptive Signal Control ...........................................................................................................................3 5. Coordination of Arastradero Signals with Santa Clara County Signals at Foothill Expressway Mid-Term Evaluation of Charleston Road Trial Striping Trial ..............................................................I 0 Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations ............................................................................................I 0 I. Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives ............................................................................................I 0 2. Hoover Access ........................................................................................................................................I I 3. Midb!ock Crosswalk at Briones Park .................................................................................................I I 4. Adaptive Signal Control .........................................................................................................................I I 5. Coordination of Arastradero Signals with Santa Clara County Signals at Foothill Expressway Evaluation of Charleston Road Striping Trial ............................................................................................12 Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives ...........................................................................14 Improve Operations at DonaidiTerman, Two-Lane ingress at Gunn High with only Three Lanes from east of Gunn to McKeller ....................................................................................................14 Provide Two Through Lanes Each Direction, with 6-Foot Medians and Below-Standard Lef~ Turn Openings at Minor Side Streets .....................................................................................................I 5 Discussion ......................................................................................................................................................15 Optimization of Right Turn Lane Operation at Gunn High School ..............................:2:2 Access to Hoover Elementary School ..............................................................................24 Mid-Block Crosswalk Near Briones Pare .........................................................................28 Adaptive Traffic Signal Coordination/Coordination with Foothill Expressway ............30 Mid-Term Evaluation of Charleston Road Trial Striping Operations ...........................32 Recommendations ..............................................................................................................37 Study Participants ...............................................................................................................39 TJKM Transportation Consultants ...............................................................................................................39 City of Palo Alto ...............................................................................................................................................39 List of Appendices Appendix A: 2006 and 2007 Traffic Volume and Speed Data Appendix B: Simulation Modeling Appendix C: Pedestrian Safety and Design/Road Diet Reports Appendix D: BiTrans Adaptive Traffic Signal System TJKM Tr~nsDor~tion ~onsuitants List of Figures Figure I: Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................................S Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 2A: Signing and Striping ............................................................................................................................6 2B: Signing and Striping .............................................................................................................................7 2C: Signing and Striping ............................................................................................................................8 2D: Signing and Striping ............................................................................................................................9 3A: Conceptual Plan - Three-Lane Alternatives .............................................................................16 3B: Conceptual Plan - Three-Lane Alternatives .............................................................................17 4A: Conceptual Plan - Four-Lane Alternatives ...............................................................................18 4B: Conceptual Plan - Four-Lane Alternatives ................................................................................19 5: Interim Improvements to Gunn High School Ingress ................................................................23 6: Aerial View of Hoover School on Charleston Road .................................................................24 7: Outbound Traffic, Hoover School in a.m. Peak ..........................................................................25 8 Limitations on Sight Distance, Hoover Elementary Exit Driveway .........................................26 9: Comparison of Performance, With/VVithout Gaps at Exit Drive ..........................................27 I 0: Comparison with Gaps for Hoover School Exit with No Gaps ...........................................27 I I: Mid-Block Crosswalk Design, Arastradero Road Near Clemo ............................................29 List of Tables Table h Comparison of Travel Times on Charleston Road ......................................................................32 Table I1: Comparison of Before and After Critical Movement Delays (2004 Volumes) ....................34 Table Ill: Comparison of Before and After Critical Movement Delays (2007 Volumes and Revised Signal Operations After) ............................................................................................................................35 Table IV: Levels of Service Summary - Before and After Striping Changes on Charleston Road in 2006 (using May 2007 Volumes as Constant) .......................................................................................36 Table V: Levels of Service Summary - Estimated Before and After Striping Changes on Arastradero Road in 2009 (using May 2007 Volumes as Constant) ...............................................36 TJKM Transpo~-~adon Consultants Introduction and Summary Introduction The City of Palo Alto is completing a multi-year effort to address transportation and urban design issues along the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor from San Antonio Road on the east to Foothill Expressway on the west, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles. Charleston Road extends east from El Camino Real (SR 82) to San Antonio Road and carries approximately IS,500 vehicles daily. Arastradero Road extends west from the Charleston/El Camino intersection to Foothill Expressway, and carries 18,300 vehicles daily, a volume 18 percent higher than Charleston Road. At the outset both roads were four lane undivided streets with signals at major intersections. Planning work in 2003-2004 resulted in a decision to initiate a trial of reducing the number of through lanes between signals from four to two on Charleston Road from Fabian to Alma, one through lane in each direction plus a center median with left turn lanes at selected locations. The Palo Alto City Council approved a one-year trial program to assess the performance of the alternative designs. The revision of Charleston Road, reducing the four through lanes to two with a median, was completed in 2006. It should be noted that two through lanes in each direction are maintained through three major signalized intersections (Alma, Pliddlefietd, Fabian), and then the two lanes merge back to one once past the signal. Changes on Arastradero Road have not been decided, and currently there are two optional designs under consideration: I) a two-lane design with a center median/two-way left turn lane similar to Charleston Road, and 2) a four-lane design with a median and left turn lanes at signalized intersections. Figure I shows the corridor, the signalized intersections and locations of schools, the fire station and park in the vicinity. Figure 2 (multiple pages) shows the trial installation of striping along Charleston Road that is in place and operating. In addition to the striping alternatives, the city has installed the hardware and software for adaptive signal control along the entire corridor including system detectors and advanced 2070 controllers. Adaptive signal timing wiii be instituted within the next two months, as the system is now ready for complete adaptive operation. A specific improvement to the driveway at Gunn High School on the western end of the corridor was the construction of a westbound right turn lane into the Gunn High School driveway, the site of noticeable congestion in the morning and afternoon school peak periods. Additional improvements to the entrance drive into Gunn High School are planned for implementation this summer. The merge from two to one lane just 150 feet north of Arastradero after entering Gunn High School still causes significant a.m. peak hour congestion, even though approaches to the traffic signal have adequate capacity. The ability of the forthcoming Gunn High School improvements to eliminate or minimize westbound queuing of right turns into the high school is the key factor in the determination of whether Arastradero Road can be reduced from four through lanes to two plus a median or left turn lane, the same cross section as has been implemented on Charleston Road. Ultimately there are needed landscaping and other improvements to complete the project with the permanent traffic controls and striping. The Concept of "Road Diets" as Related to Charleston and Arastradero Roads The improvements on Charleston and Arastradero Roads are examples of"road diet" improvements that have been ~aining acceptance throughout the world. Four-lane, undivided arterial roads are especially vulnerable to operations and safety problems when average daily traffic volumes are much above t2,000 to 14,000 vehicles daily. In many instances such roads traverse residential areas, or community business centers. As traffic volumes increase, congestion quickly Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements EvaluatJon Page I April 2.3, 2008 TJKM TransportaOon Consultants rises, and traffic collisions increase faster than do the traffic volumes. Surveys in many cities with such roads also indicate that livability along the roads deteriorates rapidly. One reason for the congestion is that the left-most through lane becomes a de facto left turn lane because a single left turning vehicle can often block the lane for up to a minute or more as the driver waits for a gap in oncoming traffic to complete the turn. Drivers behind the stopped vehicle trying to make a left turn then merge into the right lane with resulting sideswipe accidents. Likewise, because vehicles stop unexpectedly in the left lane to make a turn, they are more commonly involved in rear end accidents. Of special concern when volumes on a four-lane road increase beyond 12,000 vehicles daily, is that it becomes very difficult to impossible for a pedestrian to find gaps in traffic long enough to safely cross the road. On a 60-foot wide roadway, the pedestrian needs at about I S seconds to make it al! the way across. With high traffic volumes pedestrians become impatient and enter the road regardless, and they try to force the traffic to stop. The problem with this is that while one driver in a lane may stop, another may bypass the stopped vehicle and hit the pedestrian as they move across the adjacent lane. Pedestrians cannot always be seen by oncoming motorists when they are hidden by a stopped vehicle. Because of the ambiguity of whether the stopped motorist is waiting for a left turn or stopped for a pedestrian, many bypassing drivers decide that the reason is for a left turn resulting in greatly increased risks for the crossing pedestrian. Because of these congestion and traffic safety problems, many cities have evaluated the feasibility of reducing the four through lanes to two, and adding left turn lanes, bike lanes, on-street parking and improving pedestrian crossings. Additionally, the space not needed for the through lanes can be landscaped, such as landscaped medians. The research to date shows that road diet treatments, if implemented carefully, can achieve many positive results including: Reductions of 30 to 70 percent of the drivers traveling in excess of the speed limit, and even outright reductions in average speeds: o Reductions in all types of accidents from I 0 to 60 percent; Improved bike mobility; Improvements in the appearance of the neighborhood through landscaping and amenities for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit; Better access and mobility into abutting neighborhoods as well as for crossing the arterial street; and Enthusiastic acceptance by 80 to 90 percent of the residents and businesses along the arterial placed on a road diet. During the planning of the corridor evaluation and trial improvements, the above goals and objectives played a major part in planning for the ultimate design of both Charleston Road and Arastradero Road. Along the way detailed traffic operations issues have emerged since 2004. This report describes the analysis, results and planning to date, and on the basis of findings and conclusions, recommendations for a final cross section that is contingent upon solving the congestion related to the Gunn High School entrance drive. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 2 April 23, 2008 TJKM Tr~nspor~ion Consul~n.~s Current Status Work by the consultant, city and stakeholders group has been proceeding for about 18 months. In a November 30, 2006 stakeholders meeting, city public works staff described a utilities replacement and rehabilitation project going to construction in December 2007 through spring 2008 (subsequently postponed to late 2008 and early 2009). The utilities construction schedule was determined to significantly impact the test of any alternatives on Arastradero Road, and the trial for the striping alternative has been postponed to summer 2009. The fundamental decision is whether Arastradero can be striped with one through lane in each direction with left turn/median elements and bike lanes. This decision is contingent upon showing that the Gunn High School driveway improvements are effective in reducing or eliminating the westbound a.m. peak hour congestion on Arastradero Road. Queues of vehicles at the Gunn High School driveway have been determined as the primary bottleneck along Arastradero Road, and unless this driveway-related congestion can be significantly reduced for a.m. peak entering traffic, only one Arastradero Road striping alternative appears feasible, the four-lane/narrow median alternative. Implementation of the three-lane alternative, the two through lanes plus left turn lane/median is the preferred alternative. There are several additional issues that have been analyzed that are somewhat independent of which Arastradero striping alternative is implemented. These issues are concerned with safety, efficiency and convenience and are described below. I. Optimization of the Right Turn Lane Operation at Gunn High School Even with the westbound right turn lane, morning entering traffic queues significantly for right turns into the Gunn High School driveway causing over $ I million in added delay to all traffic annually. The queuing occurs because two entrance lanes on the driveway merge to one lane about 150 feet north of Arastradero Road. 2. Access to Hoover Elementary School The median along Charleston Road prevents direct eastbound left turns into the driveway at Hoover Elementary. Eastbound drivers proceed further east to the signal at Nelson to make a U-turn. The geometry for U-turns is very tight, and there are questions whether a modification in the striping is feasible to enable easier U-turns. An additional concern is that the U-turns are permissive (e.g., they are made when there is a gap in oncoming traffic), and the volume of westbound traffic from Middlefield Road is high enough to delay these turns. The second question in this access issue is whether signal retiming at Nelson can work to facilitate the U-turns, as well as right turns out of Hoover Elementary during school peaks. In the fall of 2007, traffic queued completely around Hoover Elementary for over 30 minutes every a.m. peak hour. 3. Mid-block Crosswalk on to Briones Park near the Fire Station There is a signal at Arastradero Road and Coulombe Drive west of Briones Park. There are bus stops on both sides of Arastradero Road near Clemo Avenue (on the north) and Suzanne Drive (on the south). Many people and children cross between the signals to get to the park. The issue is how to facilitate pedestrian crossings of Arastradero Road, because the signalized intersection is too far west to be of convenient use to many who cross to and from the park. 4. Adaptive Signal Control The amount of traffic on Arastradero Road is close to the capacity of a two-lane road (with median and left turn lanes). While adaptive traffic signal coordination of traffic signals does not necessarily increase capacity, it does work to reduce delay, the basic measure of level of service at signalized intersections. Adaptive traffic control effectively reduces delay by I 0 to 30 percent over the performance of a well-timed, coordinated signal system that uses coordination plans based on the Page 3 Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation April 23, 2008 TJKM T~-anspor~don Consutz~n:s time of day. Implementation of adaptive operation is possible within the corridor, because the city has already installed the necessary controllers and software to implement adaptive signal coordination. The idea is that if reduction of lanes results in additional congestion and delay, adaptive signal coordination might offset the added congestion and more easily allow a reduced lane alternative to perform acceptably. Adaptive signal coordination can be implemented without waiting for a striping alternative to be installed on Arastradero Road. S. Coordination of Arastradero Signals with Santa Clara County Signals at Foothill Expressway Santa Clara County operates two signals on Arastradero Road with one at Miranda just east of Foothill Expressway and Arastradero Road and Foothill Expressway itself. Because Santa Clara County operates these signals, the question is whether coordination with the Gunn High School signal and other city signals to the east would be of benefit. final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements EvalucrtJon Page 4 April 23, 2008 City of Palo Alto - Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Study Corridor and Segments Figure I H oover Elementary School 41DDLEFIELD Fire Station Briones Park Gunn High School 10 ~ Terman Middle School LEGEND ¯ Study Intersection 42-027 - 4F//08 - GK NORTH Not to Scale u v HOOVER ENTRANCE . ::::::::::::::::::::::: C/RCLE MUMFORD pLACE >. TJKM Transportation ConsuJtants Mid-Term Evaluation of Charleston Road Trial Striping Trial Extensive traffic volume and speed data were collected in May 2007 for the implementation of adaptive signal coordination as well as for the evaluation of traffic operations on Charleston Road with just two through lanes and the median and two-way left turn lane. The data allows a comparison of actual performance on Charleston Road after the striping change with performance prior to any changes. Summary of Conclusions/Recommendations TJKM in working with City staff and the Stakeholders Committee has completed sufficient analysis and research to make recommendations with respect to the final design and operation of the Charleston Road/Arastradero Road Corridor. I. Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives The striping alternatives evaluation looked at several designs. All alternatives maintain the current lane configuration from the Gunn High School driveway west to Foothill Expressway. East of the Gunn High School driveway, the alternatives were: I.One lane each way + median/two-way left turn lane + two through lanes each way at Donald and Terman 2.One lane eastbound and two lanes westbound + median/two-way left turn lane 3.One lane each way with added lanes on Donald and Terman + eastbound right turn lane 4.Two lanes each direction with narrow median + left turn lanes at signals 5.Do Nothing Of these only Alternatives 3 and 4 have been determined to be effective improvements. However, unless the Gunn High School inbound driveway capacity can be solved by making it two-lanes inbound, it is unlikely that the one through lane in each direction (Alternative 3) is feasible, because the Gunn High School congestion on westbound Arastradero would be exacerbated and would result in intolerable congestion for almost two hours each weekday morning. At other times of the day, Alternative 3 appears to operate satisfactorily. Alternative 4, the two through lanes in each direction with a narrow median and left turn lanes at signals will operate as well and perhaps better than existing conditions in terms of congestion. With this alternative, parking must be prohibited at all times, however, and problems remain with pedestrians crossing Arastradero between signals. Either Alternative 3 or 4 is far preferable to the Do Nothing Alternative. The driveway at Gunn High School is currently one lane southbound (towards Arastradero) and one lane northbound into the parking and loading areas on campus. At Arastradero Road, there are two northbound (inbound) lanes that then merge to one lane. This merge is the primary reason that traffic queues on Arastradero Road from Gunn High School all the way to the Coloumbe signal, about one-half mile to the east. When this traffic queues, all westbound traffic on Arastradero is slowed to an average of five mph from El Camino Real to Foothill Expressway. In other words, it takes drivers about eleven minutes to go just over one mile. The current Gunn High School driveway divides around a landscaped median and large oak tree with only one lane inbound and one lane outbound. The new plan will make the inbound driveway two lanes northbound with one lane on either side of the island and oak tree. Return southbound traffic will exit the campus through the current administration building parking area requiring minor construction. The school district has agreed to implement the new plan in mid-summer 2008. If the Final Report- Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page ! 0 April 23, 2008 TJ KM Trsnspor~uon Consui~n~s new operation works as expected, the payoff would be a reduction in delay by at least 50 percent or more on Arastradero Road, even during the a.m. peak hour. The restriping of Arastradero Road with only one through lane in either direction then becomes feasible. 2. Hoover Access A full day of observations of traffic coming to and leaving Hoover Elementary School occurred on April 25, 2007. There was significant congestion both entering the school grounds for the drop off of elementary school children as well as long queues of parents trying to leave the school grounds. In fact traffic queued all the way around the school from the exit drive back to the entrance drive, and at times inbound traffic had to wait to enter the campus because the entrance drive was queued all the way to Charleston Road. The length of this queue grew to approximately 1,400 feet. In the afternoon, the problems are not as severe, because the entry of parents to pick up their children is less concentrated in time. The main problem was found to be the lack of sight distance at the exit driveway as well as the absence of adequate gaps in westbound traffic. In addition pedestrians walking across the exit driveway also reduced gaps in traffic, and exiting drivers were significantly delayed. The signal at Nelson was retimed to provide additional gaps in traffic, and the queues have been reduced to about a third of their former extent. 3. Midblock Crosswalk at Briones Park The recommended design for the unsignalized crossing of Arastradero Road near Briones Park has a I 0-foot median refuge island with pedestrian crosswalks across half the road at a time, with an offset between the crosswalk across the eastbound lane(s) and the crosswalk across the westbound lane(s). In this way, the pedestrian will only need to cross half the road at a time, and will walk facing oncoming traffic along the median refuge island. Gaps in traffic in one direction or the other are sufficient so that pedestrians will be able to easily cross half the road at a time. Without the median refuge, there are virtually no safe gaps in traffic for crossing. In other words, pedestrians currently have to get oncoming traffic to stop for them in order to cross between signalized intersections. Because there are two lanes in each direction so that four lanes need to be crossed _n ~,~l w~ ~ a car in one4,, at once, it is ~-- more hazardous for the --J ....: .......:-’" " "iJ~u~u ,~ll, ~F=L~n7 in iRStaRCeS ...L___ - lane stops for the pedestrian only to be passed in the other lane by a driver that does not stop. Four lane roads without medians are the most h~ardous ~pe of road design for pedestrian crossings at unsignalized interse~ions. Added signs, more prominent crosswalk markings and other devices such as flashing beacons and in-pavement crosswalk lights have been found to only be pa~ially effective. 4. Adaptive Signal Control Extensive count and speed data were collected in May 2007 for the development of adaptive signal coordination plans. Attempts to implement adaptive timing have been thwarted to date because of software and communications problems with the system. The system vendor, McCain, has corrected the technical problems recently so adaptive timing can now be implemented. The implementation of adaptive traffic signal coordination on College Avenue in Santa Rosa in 2007 resulted in a 30 percent decrease in signal delay over operations with well-timed, up-to-date "time of day" coordination plans. Similar success has been achieved in Sunnyvale with adaptive timing on Mathilda Avenue. The McCain adaptive system is similar to those in Santa Rosa and Sunnyvale. Time of day coordination is the standard technique for coordinating traffic signals, and this technique has been proven to be very effective. The timing plans are based on historical traflqc patterns, and are called into operation during specific hours of the day. Most systems have a morning peak hour plan, a midday peak hour plan, and an evening peak hour plan. However, traffic Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page II April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants volumes during peak hours change from day to day, sometimes as much as 20 percent. Adaptive timing resets its timing plan for minute-by-minute changes in traffic volumes and congestion as measured by detectors at the signalized intersections. Generally, high traffic volumes require longer green times for all the movements at an intersection, while low traffic volumes require much less green time to adequately serve approaching traffic, in time-of-day coordination, the green times are set on the basis of the highest volumes during a peak hour, while adaptive coordination changes the green times to more closely match current volumes as they vary during the peak hour. The resulting savings in time waiting for a green light act to reduce overall delay in a corridor to the extent that the system operates at better levels of service without actually increasing capacity. It is expected that adaptive coordination will be up and running in the corridor by late May 2008. 5. Coordination of Arastradero Signals with Santa Clara County Signals at Foothill Expressway Detailed analysis of the need to coordinate the Santa Clara County signals at Foothill and at Miranda with the city’s signals to the east on Arastradero Road shows that while coordination might be desirable, there is no ability to do so because the city’s adaptive system is incompatible with the county’s system. Implementing adaptive coordination on Arastradero Road is far more effective than the potential benefits of coordinating the county’s signals with city signals. Similarly, the Caltrans signal at El Camino Real and Arastradero/Charleston Road cannot be coordinated with the city’s signals east and west of El Camino Real. This is acceptable, because the Caltrans signal effectively meters traffic in the corridor to the extent that even in the future, it is unlikely that a significant growth in peak hour traffic on either Charleston Road or Arastradero Road will occur, because of the capacity constraint represented by the El Camino Real signal. In effect, TJKM recommends that this signal not be coordinated in the corridor, but rather, should run free, Evaluation of Charleston Road Striping Trial The mid-term evaluation of the trial striping of Charleston Road shows that the expected performance among evaluation criteria that can be applied at this time has been almost as good as hoped. The evaluation criteria are: I.No increase in peak, off-peak corridor travel time 2.No increase in delay or critical movement delay at all nine signalized intersections 3.Reduce off-peak 85th percentile speeds by at least 20 percent 4.Reduce crash rates by at least 2_.£ percent 5.Increase pedestrian volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 6.Increase bicycle volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 7.Increase public transit hoardings by at least 40 percent by 2010 Only the first three criteria can be used at this time, because the remainder depend upon implementation along the entire corridor, or are intended for 2_010, not 2008. It is too soon to evaluate the before-afLer changes in crashes, because there has not been enough time for a statistically valid comparison. So, only the first three have been applied to results to date. Travel times along Charleston Road between Alma Street and Fabian (the only section that has been modified to date) show that westbound travel times have increased by 44 seconds in the a.m. peak and I second in the p.m. peak. Eastbound travel times did not change in the a.m. peak and Final Report- Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 12 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consul~an~s actually were reduced by I 0 seconds in the p.m. peak. The average of both directions over both a.m. and p.m. peak hours is a 9 second increase in overall travel times in the corridor, a change that is not statistically significant. The reduction in lanes did not lead to an increase in congestion and travel time overall for traffic on Charleston Road. This is because the reduction in lanes at signals only occurred where the level of service was excellent, and signal coordination offset the effects of the reduced number of through lanes. Critical movement delays show no significant change due to the change in striping. Holding volume constant in order that only the effects of the striping and signal timing are measured, we find only a one to three percent change in critical movement delay in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, using either 2004 volumes as a constant, or the newer 2007 volumes as a constant. The restriping of Charleston Road appears to have successfully met the goal of not increasing critical movement delays. The May 2007 data collection only measured average speeds, not 85th percentile speeds. The 85th percentile speeds are typically 4 mph greater than average speeds, so in 2005 the average free speeds on the four-lane undivided Charleston Road near Carlston Court was 31 mph. Average free speeds measured in the midday at this same location in May 2007 are 28 mph, a 3 mph reduction. The reduction in average speeds on Charleston is only 10 percent, not 20 percent. Speed surveys will be conducted in Spring 2008 to update the engineering and traffic surveys necessary for radar speed enforcement. These data will be used to analyze whether there are differences in the 85th percentile speeds and the size of any differences. The changes in traffic operations on Charleston Road are generally consistent with the desired objectives of the trial restriping. Not measured is the ease in which pedestrians can cross between signals. Over time the presence of the two-way left turn lane should result in a reduction of left turn and rear end types of collisions. However, evidence from a number of similar types of projects in other cities along with the analysis completed by TJKM up to this point indicates that the expected benefits will be realized, in part or in full throughout the corridor. One through lane in either direction with a left turn lane or median will work on Arastradero Road if the Gunn High School driveway congestion is controlled, and the current operation of Charleston Road is indication that the present three-lane operation works as intended. Over time the remainder of the goals should be realized. It is important that landscaping and other amenities that are planned be implemented. TJKM recommends that the plans developed in 2004 be made permanent once Gunn High School access congestion is resolved. Final Report- Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements EvaluatJon Page 13 April 23, 2008 TJKM Tr~ nspor~l:ion ConsuiLants Arastradero Road Striping Alternatives The congestion resulting from the merge of two lanes to one lane on the Gunn High School driveway approximately 150 feet north of Arastradero Road backs up for approximately one-half mile in the morning. The westbound right lane on Arastradero becomes a queuing lane between Coulombe and Gunn High School. Drivers in the left lane then try to cut into the queue closer to the driveway, thus blocking that lane as well. If Arastradero Road were to be striped with one through lane in each direction, the queue from Gunn High School would routinely back up through El Camino Real each morning. This was determined to be unacceptable by the Stakeholders Committee and City staff. Because this is the major capacity and congestion problem on Arastradero Road, several alternatives were developed and evaluated. These included the provision of two westbound through lanes and one eastbound through lane with a normal-width median/two-way left turn lane. Coupled with improvements on Donald and Terman (adding one lane on each approach), and an eastbound right turn lane on Arastradero Road onto Terman, this alternative proved to be less effective than desired. The measures of effectiveness in the corridor could not be met, nor could the performance of this alternative even come close to meeting the need. Another early alternative was starting Gunn High School arrival times 30 minutes earlier so that the peak arrival times at Gunn High School and at Terman Middle School had less overlap. This also was found to be ineffective, because by the time congestion eases for Gunn High, it starts again for Terman with congestion lasting for over 90 minutes overall. A second consideration was that the school district would find it very difficult to implement because of the related schedules for extracurricular activities, labor agreements and other considerations. Another alternative was tried that is similar to the Charleston Road design where one lane is carried through minor signalized intersections, but approaches at major signalized intersections were widened to two through lanes in each direction. On Arastradero Road, the only intersection where this was tested was Donald/Terman. The extra capacity on Arastradero did not solve the congestion problem from the Gunn High School driveway. Other modifications on these designs were tried, but no progress was made; the Gunn High School driveway congestion and resulting queue makes all but a four-lane alternative unfeasible and unacceptable. Clearly, the only way to implement a lane reduction on Arastradero Road is to solve the Gunn High School driveway merge by making two inbound lanes continuous further into the Gunn High School parking lot. Modeling suggests that this is sufficient to clear the current congestion. The two alternatives that survived the preliminary analysis are: Improve Operations at Donald/Terman, Two-Lane Ingress at Gunn High with only Three Lanes from east of Gunn to McKeller In this alternative, several improvements are proposed for Donald/Terman along with adaptive traffic signal control. These improvements include: a)lengthening the westbound left turn lane on Arastradero; b)restriping southbound Donald to provide one southbound through-right lane and one southbound left turn lane; c)restriping northbound Terman to provide one 10-foot right turn lane for 40 feet~ one I 0-foot through lane, and one 10-foot left turn lane for 50 feet on the approach; Page 14 Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements E.valuatJon April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants d) e) g) h) changing to protected-permissive left turn phasing for westbound left turns and permissive left turn phasing for eastbound left turns; provision of an eastbound right turn lane; using a westbound left turn/northbound right turn signal phase overlap; not allowing pedestrian movements other than during the exclusive pedestrian phase during the times of peak traffic at Terman Middle School; and Gunn High School two-lane ingress is assumed to be in place and effective in minimizing or eliminating the a.m. peak queuing extending outside the school grounds and beyond the new westbound right turn lane into Gunn High School. Provide Two Through Lanes Each Direction, with 6-Foot Medians and Below.Standard Left Turn Openings at Minor Side Streets In this alternative, no changes are needed for Gunn High ingress, nor is there a need to modify and improve Donald/Terman to maintain current day performance while adding some urban design and safety features to the present cross section. This is the alternative that was implemented on the western end of Charleston. The improvements include: a) Left turn lanes, 10-feet wide, provided at Gunn High School, Donald/Terman, Coulombe; b)Median between side streets at 6-feet wide, widening to I 0 feet at intersections of side streets, with no or limited tapers. Left turns would be made from I 0-foot wide area that is only as long as the width of the cross street - this alternative has been provided throughout the process. c)Signals would be timed with adaptive control to reduce signal delays as much as possible, with shorter cycle lengths generally than the three-lane alternative above. The two alternatives are shown graphically in Figures 3a through 4b on the following pages. Discussion Model Calibration Evaluations of alternatives were made with Synchro 6.0 and SimTraffic 6.0 software. It is important that the models be credible and are able to accurately estimate current conditions. When a model closely estimates current traffic conditions, it is calibrated. It follows that the model is able to give good estimates of the effects of each alternative in terms of overall travel time, stops at signals, delays, and average speeds by each direction, for the a.m., midday and p.m. peak periods. Peak periods were analyzed rather than just the peak hour. The peak periods are 7:00 to 9:00 a.m., I I:00 a.m. to I:00 p.m., and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. The modeling output for existing conditions for the a.m., midday and p.m. peak closely coincides with the GPS floating car studies conducted in May 2007 (Appendix A). In the a.m. peak, during the Gunn High School peak from 7:40 a.m. through 8:10 a.m., the modeled and observed average speeds agreed within I mph in each direction, while the model estimated greater congestion outside the Gunn High School peak. During the midday, the observed speeds of 20 mph in either direction are in close agreement with the 19 mph eastbound and 20 mph westbound model estimates. Likewise, the 23 mph observed eastbound and 21 mph observed westbound p.m. peak speeds are reasonably close to the model estimates of 20 mph eastbound and 19 mph westbound. Appendix B shows the comparisons of travel speed surveys and model estimates, and they are very closely matched. The model can confidently be used to assess alternative designs. Page 15 Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation April 23, 2008 TJKM Transpor~ion Consui~nts We would-expect that actual performance with three lanes will be at least as good as is estimated in the spreadsheets for each of the alternatives. E~ects of Longer Cycle Lengths and PlatoonslQueues The conversion to one through lane in each direction results in a lengthening of the average cycle lengths at all times of the day. Longer cycle lengths are needed to enable comparable capacity with the reduction from two lanes to one lane in either direction. The action alternatives do take left turns out of the through traffic lanes, and the improvements at Donald/Terman significantly improve performance in the entire corridor, because this intersection is the main bottleneck outside of the Gunn High School a.m. inbound peak congestion in the corridor. The longer cycle lengths in each of the alternatives will also result in higher delays for left turns out of, and even left turns into the side streets, because the resulting platoons and queues will be roughly twice as long and even longer than with the current striping on Arastradero Road. Delays for side street traffic are expected to increase from the current 20 to 35 seconds in the a.m. peak to between 60 and 180 seconds depending upon the location of the various side streets and signals along Arastradero Road. For nearby streets, the queues at the signals prevent reaching the left turn lanes on Arastradero as well as turning left from the side streets due to the much longer queues and platoons. However, adaptive signal coordination will minimize the increases in cycle lengths for most cycles during the day. Measures of Effectiveness Without solving the Gunn High School congestion problem in the a.m. peak, for about 30 minutes from 7:40 to about 8:10 a.m., westbound traffic will be virtually at a standstill, and should then return to acceptable operating conditions for the four-lane alternative. The three-lane alternative will have westbound congestion for up to two hours each weekday morning and cannot reasonably be implemented until this problem is resolved. The described improvements at DonaldFFerman offset many of the potential performance reductions of the corridor and should be pursued with any of the alternatives. The longer cycle lengths, even using adaptive signal timing, will reduce the performance of the entire network with sometimes significant increases in delays, especially for a.m. peak traffic on Pomona, George and perhaps Clemo. Just going with Donald/Terman improvements results in 8 percent to 14 percent reductions in travel time in the a.m. peal~ Retention of four through lanes plus turning lanes at DonaldFFerman allows shorter cycle lengths and less overall delay all day long, even less delay than today, and allows for reduced travel times. All comparisons between operations alternatives assume equal volumes. Volumes have changed over the course of the planning, and the changes in volume are the primary reason for significant changes in delays and increased travel times, not the changes in the number of lanes. Benefits and AdditJonal Problems Other than longer cycle lengths, the following benefits accrue to the three-lane alternative: ¯Two-way left turn lane provides safer left turn access into side streets; ¯One through lane in each direction ensures 3 to 5 mph reductions in maximum speeds and 85th percentile speeds throughout the day; Adequate room for parking and for bike lane; Page 20 April 23, 2008Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements EvaluatJon TJKM Transportation Consu!tants ¯Median provides pedestrian refuge at non-signalized crossings; and ¯The median can be Landscaped. Some of the additional problems that may occur with a three-lane cross section: ¯Rear-end accidents may rise due to longer queues that surprise motorists; ¯Pedestrian accidents may increase with directional volumes above 950 to 1,000 vehicles per hour, because of the excessively long queues and platoons where some pedestrians may walk through standing queues - a very unsafe practice; Motorists have been observed to accept less than adequate gaps after about a 60 second or more delay in turning left into and out of side streets; Backing from residential driveways will be more difficult due to the long platoons and queues; Queues blocking side streets near signals will be common for some hours of the day; An accident or any blockage of the through lane in busy times will lead to extensive queuing and gridlock, and this can also materially affect emergency access times unless the design ensures there is 20 feet clear between the median and curb; and There is limited capacity for an increase in peak hour volumes. However, the capacity bottlenecks of El Camino Real and Foothill Expressway ensure that actual peak hour demand volumes probably cannot get to Arastradero, but will most likely queue on the approaches on El Camino Real and on Foothill Expressway. Some of the benefits of the four-lane median alternative are: ~Shorter cycle lengths, and the potential for even better performance because fewer vehicles will block the through lanes waiting for a turn; ¯Safer, but not ideal storage of vehicles waiting to make a left turn; o Pedestrian refuge in the median island; ¯Median can be landscaped; ¯Lane widths of I 0 feet may likely result in additional accidents - mainly sideswipe; and Queues will not be longer than they are today, and can be shorter due to adaptive signal control and left turn storage at minor intersections. Some of the potential additional problems with the four-lane median alternative are: *Speeds will not be reduced from today’s relatively high 85th percentile speeds; ¯Bike lanes are extremely narrow and less safe - vehicles may more readily encroach on bike lanes because the vehicle lanes are only I 0 feet wide; ~ Many vehicles trying to turn left will not adequately be clear of through lane traffic, and there could actually be an increase in rear-end accidents over today; and ¯Parking removal is mandatory. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluat3on Page 2 I April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Optimization of Right Turn Lane Operation at Gunn High School Simulation models have been developed and calibrated for Arastradero Road. TJKM believes that spending additional resources to develop a model of Gunn High School driveway operations is unnecessary. TJKM has found that except for the peak arrivals at Gunn High School in the morning, the two alternatives are about the same, albeit with longer queues and a little additional delay for the three- lane alternative. However, during the Gunn High School peak. the three-lane alternative breaks down and traffic delays soar. In TJKM’s opinion, the public will not tolerate such delays, even if they are only during the morning peak hour. TJKM has analyzed the overall delays without and with Gunn High School improvements. With no further changes for traffic entering Gunn High School, the total vehicle hours of delay from 7:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m. for all traffic in the corridor is 1,320 hours. Assuming that the Gunn High School ingress improvements work, the delay in the a.m. peak period (7:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m.) would drop to 758 hours. At $12/hour, a standard value of an hour of travel time, this translates to an additional delay of $6,700 per a.m. peak period, $33,720 per week" and a little over $1.2 million annually. The cost of travel time has been researched widely, and it is the apparent value of time by motorists when comparing alternative modes, routes, etc. Where there are charges such as HOT lanes versus adjacent free lanes, or toll roads versus parallel, but slower facilities, the $12/hour value is quite valid. It is apparent that improvements to Gunn High School ingress would pay off quite rapidly, and would be widely noticed by the traveling public. No detailed measurements of inbound traffic have been made, nor has the actual operation of the entire site been modeled. However, it is probably less expensive to try a new layout than it would be to model tot operations. Actual experience would be far stronger and more persuasive than modeling in any event. Again, without Gunn High School working correctly, it is unlikely that the public will accept the reduced mobility and poorer operations of Arastradero as a three-lane arterial route. Figure S shows a concept plan for providing two inbound lanes into the Gunn High School parking lot. The right lane will proceed all the way to the back of the parking lot while the left lane becomes a left turn lane into the Administrative building parking lot area. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 22 April 23, 2008 ~_ bJr~ b- b- Z Z v 0 ~ .~_ W Zn- W Q7VNO0 /- ~i ODINA LU t.-- <Zn- LUI--J < ILlZ <J 0 ~i-- <~ 0< 0 0J< m-r’, u.0 r,-" :_ ICity of Palo Alto - Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Conceptual Plan Figure L ÷I÷ 42-,02,7 - 4f8i08 - GK TJKM Transportation Consultants Access to Hoover Elementary School Hoover Elementary School suffers from extreme congestion during morning arrival of parents dropping off students for class. Detailed observations were made on April 25, 2007 including videos of driveway operations as well as the time it takes to drop off children at the rear of the school. Figure 6 below is an aerial view of the school site. Figure 6: Aerial View of Hoover School on Charleston Road Traffic enters the school grounds on the driveway to the left of the school. Children are dropped off at the rear of the school (both by parents and school buses), and then drivers exit with a right turn only from the driveway at the right side of the figure. The sight distance at the driveway is quite limited as shown in Figures 7 and 8 on the next page. Additionally, parents and children walking to school further reduce available gaps for exiting drivers turning right onto westbound Charleston Road from the driveway. The a.m. peak counts show I 19 entering vehicles from 7:41 a.m. to 7:51 a.m. while during that same time, only 13 exit. The accumulation of vehicles adds to 106, where vehicles are stacked up in two lanes along almost the entire length of the access drive around the school. It takes 30 minutes to clear the school grounds of all cars entering in the a.m. peak. In the afternoon, arriving vehicles take over 30 minutes to arrive, and another 30 minutes to leave. However, queuing again occurs along the entire access drive length, primarily because parents need to wait for their children to reach their vehicle, and less because of unavailable gaps on Charleston Road. However, provision of additional gaps on Charleston Road in the a.m. peak will also help clear the school grounds in the afternoon peak as well. Signals are not warranted at either drive. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 24 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Figure 7: Outbound Traffic, Hoover School in a.m. Peak Gap studies were taken to verify the perception that there are insufficient gaps to clear exiting traffic. Figure 9 shows that drivers need close to a five second gap to exit the driveway. Data were collected for the following traffic characteristics in both the a.m. and afternoon school arrival and departure hours: ¯Minute by minute vehicle arrival and departure counts ¯Video gap rejection and acceptance to the nearest 1/10th second ¯Pedestrian and bicycle counts, minute by minute ¯Measurements of sight distance ¯Queuing on the school grounds ¯Drop-off and pickup time in seconds per vehicle We found that the sight distance is adequate for 25 mph, but speeds on Charleston Road are higher than that. It takes, on average, 20 seconds for a parent to discharge their children in the morning, and about 20 seconds in the afternoon to load them back into the vehicle. To create gaps at the exit drive, the addition of an exclusive pedestrian phase was implemented at Nelson Drive, with 23 seconds every 100 seconds for pedestrian crossings with no vehicle movements, currently Nelson Drive is coordinated with Middlefield Road, but a new coordination Page 25 Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluat3on April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants plan has not been implemented. A new coordination plan will work to reduce or eliminate the queue from Nelson back onto Middlefield excepting for short periods in the morning and afternoon during school crossing times. The provision of gaps was found to be sufficient to minimize queuing at the exit drive. Figure 8 Limitations on Sight Distance, Hoover Elementary Exit Driveway However, adding 23 seconds per cycle stopping all traffic on Charleston Road at Nelson Drive increases delay for eastbound traffic (the heavy movement). Figure 9 below shows the comparison. Note that the delay for Hoover traffic on site is reduced by half. The "VMT" and "VHT" headings are directly from the model and indicate vehicles miles of travel (VMT) and vehicle hours of travel (VHT). Speed can be derived by dividing VMT by VHT (miles per hour). A vehicle mile of travel is one vehicle traveling one mile. A vehicle hour of travel is one vehicle traveling for one hour. If a vehicle travels 40 miles in one hour, it is averaging 40 miles per hour. The use of VMT and VHT is a way to directly estimate performance in simple terms as opposed to the more elaborate and detailed performance measures used in modeling traffic operations. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements EvaluatJon Page 26 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transporr.ation Consultants Figure 9: Comparison of Performance, With/Without Gaps at Exit Drive Optimized Coordination Gaps at Nelson for Hoover Exit Percent ChangeDirection or Approach VMT VHT SPe~d I)elayNel~ VMT VHT Speed DelayNeh VMT I VHT IsPeedJDe, l~yNeh GOAL>>>>>>>>same lower higher lower Westbound 364,4 77.3 4.7 386.5 357.1 57.9 6.2 296.5 98% Eastbound 236 14.2 16.6 39.0 240.2 16.5 14.6 52.3 102%: Hoover Circulation 18.9 9.5 . 2"0 .. 81.8 21.5 6,5 3,3 42.2 ~ Figure I 0:Comparison with Gaps for Hoover School Exit with No Gaps One-second gap interval graph for outbound right-turn at Hoover Elementary School driveway 35 25 20 !5 10 0 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Time in Seconds Signal timing was changed for operations in fall 2007. Observations of driveway operations in November 2007 indicate that the queues on site have been reduced to about 35 percent of the queue length in spring 2007 when the study was made. One other change was made: westbound traffic is delayed approximately six seconds to provide an initial gap for eastbound U-turns at Nelson. The changes in the signal operations at Nelson and at Middlefield have not resulted in queues backing from one signal through the other in the a.m. peak. No observations have been made for the afternoon peak, but since it occurs away from commuter peaks, it is not likely a problem. TJKM recommends that the new signal timing strategy be made permanent and included in adaptive coordination yet to be implemented. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 27 April 23, 2008 TJKM Tra ns po rta~ion Consult~n~.s I~iid-Block CrosswalE Near Briones Pare Field checks in January 2007 showed very few pedestrians crossing Arastradero from 3:15 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. between Suzanne and Coulombe. All of the pedestrians except one (plus one bicyclist) crossed at the signal at Coulombe Drive. The weather was sunny and near 60 degrees. Mothers with their young children were present at the playground on the north side of Briones Park. One man crossed just east of Suzanne from the bus stop to his house on the southeast corner of Suzanne and Arastradero. During the summer it is likely that crossing volumes increase, but pedestrian counts were not collected in summer. A review of the Palo Alto Mid-block Crosswalk Guidelines shows that a mid- block crosswalk at this location falls outside of the guidelines because: Maximum volume is 12,000 vehicleslday, and Arastradero Road is approximately 18,300 vehicles daily. Pedestrian volumes are far under the minimum 40/hour or 2S/hour for each of 4 hours However, there are several uncontrolled intersections along this segment of Arastradero, and each is a legal, unmarked crosswalk. However, the four-lane, undivided cross section of Arastradero with 18,300 vehicles/day represents a pedestrian mobility and safety problem. If we assume that pedestrian volumes across Arastradero are at least 25/hour for at least each of four hours, there appears to be a need for some kind of directed location for safe crossings between the signals at Coulombe and El Camino Real. Under the General Conditions portion of the warrant, a marked crossing would clarify where pedestrians need to cross, will position them to be better seen by motorists, and if the design su~:~ested by TJKP1 is employed (see Figure I I), ensures they will encounter fewer vehicles, because they will only be crossing half of the street at a time where gaps are plentiful for any one direction, but almost nonexistent if both directions must be crossed at once. The number of points is 2 for volume, 4 from General Conditions, and I 0 by the Gap Time Warrant for a total of 16 points. The detailed midbiock pedestrian crosswalk warrant calculations are in Appendix C. TJKM also reviewed the MUTCD warrants for the installation of a pedestrian signal (Section 4C-05, Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume). This warrant requires that pedestrian volumes/hour need to exceed 100 for each of any four hours, or exceed 190 for any one hour coupled with less than 60 adequate gaps per hour in traffic. The street width is 62 feet, which requires a 16 second gap to cross. The probability of a 16 second gap each 60 seconds is only I I percent (it must equal 100 percent). The location of the signal would likely be near Clemo, and this is at least 600 feet away from the signals at either Coulombe or Et Camino Real. Our findings are that pedestrian volumes are too light to consider installation of a pedestrian signal. TJKM recommends installation of a marked crosswalk as described in Figure I I Final Report- Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvement~ Evaluatu’on Page 28 April 23, 2008 City of Palo Alto - Charleston-Arastradero Trial Traffic Improvements Offset Mid Block Crosswalk Near Clemo Figure II Gap Availability to Cross Arastradero s/o Clemo, a.m. peak hour Assumption: Ped Refuge Island, No direct crossing, but wait in center on D (width of street) t (time to cross street Vc (critical volume) Actual Volume Prob. 16 second gap each 60 seconds source: Poisson and Traffic, pages 27-29 island 22 feet 5.5 seconds 1291.261 or less 1200 vehicles/hour in one direction = 1.076051 ARASTRADERO ROAD Ped Barrier-.x~ 1 1’ Lane 1 1’ Lane ilivvl/~ait for Break in Tra~- ~..[~. to Cross Lanes ~ Ped Barrier NORTH 42.027 -118108 - GK TJKM Transportation Consultants Adaptive Traffic Signal Coordination/Coordination with Foothill Expressway The city has already installed the advanced traffic signal controllers (McCain 2070), adaptive software (BiTran QuicTrac), system detectors, and communications throughout the corridor. However, throughout 2007 there were problems with the system, primarily communications. So far this has prevented TJKM from completing adaptive traffic signal coordination plans for the system. Recently the technical problems have been resolved, and adaptive signal coordination will be implemented by late May 2008. Appendix D has details regarding the system. An evaluation of operations before and after adaptive operations will be made by turning off adaptive operation one day while making speed and delay runs, and then turning it back on the second day and making "after" speed and delay runs. The effectiveness of adaptive control should be clear through comparing the before and after operations in terms of travel times, stops and delays. The QuicTrac adaptive system monitors traffic conditions on a cycle-by-cycle basis. A signal cycle is the time it takes a signal to go through all the movements at an intersection, such as: Eastbound and westbound left turns Eastbound and westbound through and right turns Northbound and southbound left turns Northbound and southbound through and right turns Signal cycles generally range from 50 seconds to as much as !50 seconds, with longer cycle lengths needed for heavy traffic and especially for very wide streets (primarily because it takes pedestrians longer to cross the streets). Normal signal coordination (the synchronizing of several signals so that a driver can proceed through a series of green lights along the street) is based on observed traffic patterns at various times of the day. In the a.m. peatq most traffic may be heading in one direction, and in the p.m. peak, traffic is headed in the opposite direction. During the midday, traffic flows in either direction are more typically balanced. To achieve coordination, a cycle length is chosen for all signals to be coordinated, and then they are timed to start a coordination plan at a specific time and end that plan at a specific time, such as from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. for the morning peak plan. In adaptive signal timing, cycle lengths can change each cycle, although only up to a set amount, say 15 to 20 seconds. Traffic varies from minute to minute, so at some times, a shorter cycle length is needed because there is a low volume of traffic for the moment, and at other times, longer cycle lengths are needed because traffic is quite heavy. The adaptive system can adjust cycle lengths to better match current traffic conditions, while time-based coordination cannot. Time is wasted in a time-based system when a long cycle length is used for a small amount of traffic. Less wasted time is a prime feature of adaptive signal coordination. However, the system needs strong computing power to monitor traffic each minute and then determine what cycle length and other timing parameters are needed for the next minute or two. The Pato Alto system has these capabilities, so we expect that once adaptive coordination is turned on, the time savings will be noticeable to drivers in the corridor. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 30 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants The City of Polo Alto has a McCain QuicNet/QuicTrak signal system that uses Type 2070 controllers and specific software for the controllers. San~ Clara County uses a Naztec Streetwise signal system and will not change to match that of the City of Polo Alto. There is a basic incompatibility between the two systems that cannot be bridged if Arastradero Road is to operate in adaptive mode. If just time-based coordination were to be implemented, the two systems could be coordinated if the county agreed to do so. However, the benefits from adaptive control on Arastradero Road far outweigh the benefits of coordinating county and city signals. Similarly, the signal at El Camino Real at Charleston Road/Arastradero Road is yet a third type of signal system: Caltrans CTNet using C-8 software and Type 170 controllers (the standard Caltrans software and controller throughout the state). If Caltrans were to upgrade to a Type 2070 controller, it could use the same adaptive signal software used by the city. However, the signals along El Camino Real are in an existing coordinated system, and Caltrans is very unlikely to agree to changing this one controller so that it can work with the city’s system. There is another aspect of the Caltrans signal at El Camino Real. Of all the intersections along the corridor, this is the most heavily used and saturated. It runs near capacity in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. As such, there is very little additional traffic that can reach Arastradero Road through this intersection, so future traffic volumes are not likely to increase, at least in the peak hours, because of the capacity limitations at El Camino Real. In fact, this intersection can be considered to "meter" traffic on both Arastradero Road as well as Charleston Road to the east. As such, the improvements made to the corridor today are likely to remain valid for a long time, because the traffic levels cannot significantly increase due to El Camino Real limitations. TJKbl recommends that the signal at El Camino Real not be coordinated with signals on either Charleston Road or Arastradero Road, even if they could. Final Report- Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial improvements Evaluation Page 3 I April 23, 2008 TJKM Tr~nspor~ion C.onsuitants Mid-Term Evaluation of Charleston Road Trial Striping Operations Extensive traffic volume and speed data were collected in May 2007 for the implementation of adaptive signal coordination as well as for the evaluation of traffic operations on Charleston Road with just two through lanes and the median and two-way left turn lane. Tables I, II and III below show the comparison of before and after conditions for ~wo of the evaluation criteria. Table !: ,Comparison of Travel Times on Charleston Road Travel Times in Seconds Segment Direction A.M,P.M. Beforet After Difference Before A~ter Fabian Way --> Alma Street Westbound 204 248 44 212 213 Alma Street --> Fabian Way Eastbound 198 198 0 175 165 Average of Both Directions Both 201 223 22 193.5 189 Notes:Before is May 23, 2006 After is May 9, 2007 Difference -I0 The evaluation criteria are seven, but only three can be compared at this time. The other comparisons will need to wait until there is adequate before-after data on crashes, and until the entire range of changes is made on both Charleston Road and Arastradero Road. Finally, several of the criteria define 2010 as the year for measurements, and because the implementation of the trial corridor improvements on Arastradero Road have been delayed by two years, it may be more appropriate to do the full evaluation in 2012. The following are the evaluation criteria adopted by the Polo Alto City Council. I.No increase in peak, off-peak corridor travel time 2.No increase in delay or critical movement delay at all nine signalized intersections 3.Reduce off-peak 85~h percentile speeds by at least 20 percent 4.Reduce crash rates by at least 2.£ percent 5.Increase pedestrian volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 6.Increase bicycle volumes by at least 20 percent by 2010 7.Increase public transit hoardings by at least 40 percent by 2010 No direct data exists for criterion #3 for before and after observations. The before data reports on the 85~ percentile speeds, while the 2007 data collected for adaptive signal coordination reports on average speeds. However, when 85~ percentile speeds are between 30 and 35 mph as they were on Charleston Road in 2003, the average speeds are approximately 4 mph less. The average free speeds (e.g., vehicles not trailing a vehicle in front of them) are estimated to be 31 mph. In 2007 the average free speed is 28 mph or 3 mph less. This represents a I 0 percent reduction most likely due to the change in striping from four through lanes to two through lanes ¯ plus the median/two-way left turn lane on Charleston Road between Fabian and Alma. The second criterion is critical movement delay. Prior to presenting the results, it is important that critical movements, and critical movement delay be clearly defined. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 32 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Critical movements essentially consist of the vehicular trips that cause a signal to stay green for a street. When there is enough green time for critical movements on a street (typically a left-turn movement and the opposing through movement), there is automatically enough green time for the non-critical movements (the other left-turn and through movement) on the same street. When the critical movements of one street are being served, the cross street has a red light and thus experiences delay. Average delay (in seconds) per vehicle approaching (and typically stopping at) an intersection during the peak hour is the basis of "Level of Service" designations "A" through "F". Critical movements are calculated on a per-lane basis, or "critical lane volumes." Critical lane volumes are calculated by the addition of through plus opposing left turn volumes on a per-lane basis to determine which of the sums is highest. For example, if, on a per-lane basis, there are 400 westbound through vehicles opposed by 100 eastbound left turns, the sum is 500. This can be compared, say, with 500 eastbound through vehicles per lane and 50 westbound left turn vehicles with a sum of 550. The critical lane volume for east-west traffic is 550. A similar calculation is made for north and southbound volumes. Tables II and III show two different comparisons with respect to critical movement delay. There has been a significant increase in volume from 2004 to 2007, and this increased volume is primarily responsible for additional critical movement delays in the corridor. To separate out the effects of volume changes from the changes in striping and signal operation, one analysis was conducted using 2004 volumes for both striping conditions (Table II), and the second analysis was conducted using 2007 volumes for both striping conditions (Table III). The reason both comparisons are made is because the striping changes need to be able to accommodate future volumes, not just those of 2004. Signal operations have changed with the striping, primarily longer cycle lengths at the affected intersections of Carlson Court and Nelson where there is only one through lane in each direction. An additional change for 2007 conditions is the added delay at Nelson to provide gaps at the Hoover School exit driveway and to also facilitate U-turns. However, through coordination changes, it was possible to reduce this effect, because the additional red time for Charleston Road comes at a time when very few vehicles are approaching the signal. In Table II there are very few differences in the a.m. peal~ with a slight increase in critical movement delays at Carlson Court due to the longer cycle lengths. In the p.m. peak the differences are a little more pronounced at the intersections with changes in striping and traffic signal timing. There is a 6 second additional delay in critical movements at Carlson Court, no real changes at Nelson, and surprisingly, a 16 second increase at Middlefield, even though there were no changes in either signal timing or striping. The difference is how traffic arrives at Middlefield from Nelson with the longer cycle length there. The increase is modest with about I 0 seconds of added delay along Charleston Road. Overall, the increase in critical movement delays is 7 seconds in the a.m. peak (I percent increase), and 22 seconds in the p.m. peak (3 percent increase). These are insignificant increases so we may conclude the criterion of no increase in critical movement delays is fully met using 2004 volumes for both Before and After conditions. In Table III there was a 29 second decrease in critical movement delay in the a.m. peak, and this is primarily due to signal coordination changes at bliddlefield and timing changes at Carlson Court. In the p.m. peak there is a 20 second increase overall in critical movement delay, primarily at Nelson, and this is due to the change in striping upon a detailed assessment of intersection operation. Table Ill indicates that the critical movement delay criterion is met. Final Report - Charteston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 33 April 23, 2008 Table I1: Comparison of Before and After Critical Movement Delays (2004 Volumes) Intersection CharlestonlFabian Way Charleston/Middlefield Charleston/Nelson Charleston/Carlson Ct. Charleston/Alma Total Delays Critical Movement Delay in Seconds Critical A.M.P.M.Movements Before After Difference Before After Difference East-West 8 9 I 18 14 -4 North-South 24 24 0 33 37 4 Total 32 33 I 51 51 0 East-West 78 78 0 92 102 I 0 North-South 89 89 0 lOS III 6 Total 167 167 0 197 213 16 East-West 2 6 4 5 7 2 ...... ~-;’;i-~:~;-~i~ ............i’i- ...........~ ................~; .................i-;- ..........~ .................:i- .......... Total 15 14 - I 15 15 0 East-West 2 6 4 6 6 0 North-South 15 18 3 12 18 6 East-West 104 104 0 196 196 0 North-South 148 148 0 204 204 0 East-West 194 203 317 325 8 North-South 289 287 -2 364 378 14 Combined 483 490 7 681 703 22. Table II1: Comparison of Before and After Critical Movement Delays (2007 Volumes and Revised Signal Operations After) Intersection CharlestonlFabian Way CharlestonlMiddlefield Charleston/Nelson Charleston/Carlson Ct. Critical Movements Critical Movement Delay in Seconds Before After Eas~-West 7 7 North-South 48 48 To~al SS 5S East-West I 01 I O0 Nor~h-Sou~h 128 I I 0 Difference 0 0 0 -I -18 71 I00 139 141 P,Mo A#erI 29 71 100 139 141 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Total 229 East-West I North-South 46 Total 47 East-West I North-South 37 210 IS 33 48 6 21 280 280 0 6 23 17 14 14 0 20 37 17 2 5 3 20 20 0 Charleston/Alma Total Delays Total East-West North-South Total East-West 38 148 252 214 27 104 148 252 232 -It 0 0 0 18 22 130 322 452 306 25 130 322 422 326 3 0 0 0 20 North-South 407 360 -47 568 568 0 Combined 621 592 -29 874 894 20 TJKM Transportation Consultants Table IV: Levels of Service Summary - Before and After Striping Changes on Charleston Road in 2006 (using May 2007 Volumes as Constant) Charleston as Three-Lane Signalized Intersection Charleston as 4-Lane Undivided A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS#ec)#ec) A.A4. Peak Hour Delay(sec) LOS P.M. Peak Hour Delay LOS(’sec) 61.0 5.5 61.2 Charleston and Fabian Charleston and Middiefield Charleston and Nelson Charleston and Carlson Ct. Charleston and Alma Charleston and Wilkie Charleston and El Camino Real 11.7 46.7 4.4 B D 29,2 51.4 5.3 1.8 60.0 3.9 40.6 C 11.7 D 42.8 A 8.0 A 3.2 E 61.0 A 5.5 D 61.2 B A A E A E 29.2 C 51.4 D 9,2 A 3.0 A 60.0 E 3.9 A 40.6 D Table V: Levels of Service Summary - Estimated Before and After Striping Changes on Arastradero Road in 2009 (using May 2007 Volumes as Constant) Arastradero as 4-Lane Undivided Signalized intersection 7 Arastradero and El Camino Real 61.2 8 Arastradero and Coulombe 7.6 9 Arastradero and Terman/Donald 43.0 10 Arastradero and Gunn High School*14.3 B I I Arastradero and Miranda 124.1 F * Assumes Gunn High School Driveway congestion i~ eliminated A.A4. Peak Hour PoM. Peak Hour Delay Delay (sec)LOS (sec)LOS E 40.6 D A 7.2 A D 29.9 C 10.6 B 36.4 D Aras’tradero as Three-Lane A.M. Peak Hour P.M, Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS(see)(see) 56.9 E 35.6 D 17.5 g 6.2 A 31.4 C I 1,4 B 30.4*C*12,3*B* 121.4 F 24.0 C It is clear that the reduction to two through lanes with the center lane being a left turn lane or median is feasible along almost the entire corridor, and that once the Gunn High School driveway is improved, it is possible to have just two through lanes along Arastradero from just east of Gunn High School to McKeller just west of El Camino Real. There is no reason to provide more than one through lane in either direction through the Terman/Donald and Coulombe signalized intersections. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 36 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Recommendations TJKM concludes, on the basis of the extensive set of data collected in this corridor from 2004 through 2007 and discussions with the Stakeholders Committee and City staff, that the road diet design recommended for trial in 2004 is valid and should be permanently implemented, and ultimately improved further with landscaping and additional amenities including curb extensions, lighting, improved signage, additional pedestrian crossings and traffic adaptive signal system operation (with the change in cross section along Arastradero, it will be necessary to modify the existing signals). TJKM expects that the Gunn High School access drive improvements will serve to significantly or completely eliminate the a.m. peak hour congestion on Arastradero due to queuing from the school access drive onto westbound Arastradero Road. However, if these improvements are insufficient to eliminate the school traffic queues, then the four-lane alternative would be the default choice if the three-lane alternative is infeasible due to the driveway congestion. In any case, the Do Nothing Alternative is least preferable, because the four-lane undivided cross section is subject to congestion from left turns into unsignalized side streets, continues the difficult and hazardous pedestrian crossing environment, and provides no opportunities for better integrating the traffic corridor into the community abutting the street. Either Alternative 3 or Alternative 4 is far preferable to Do Nothing because either of the action alternatives makes significant improvements that are critically needed. Of the two alternatives, the three-lane alternative on Arastradero is preferable, because contrasted with the four-lane alternative, it provides improved pedestrian crossing opportunities, maintains on-street parking, provides optimum width bike lanes, offers the opportunity to reduce travel speeds, and will best reduce overall accidents of all kinds. The specific design details for the recommended permanent improvements are to be defined during the design process, with continued public input, especially those with property abutting the street, the Polo Alto Unified School District, VTA transit, and other stakeholders in the design and operation of this corridor. This means that specific widths of bike lanes, locations of crosswalks, and other details will be refined during design. The specific recommendations are: I.Make the trial cross section on Charleston from Alma to Fabian permanent. 2.Closely monitor and work with school district efforts to improve access and capacity for the Gunn High School access drive including coordination with traffic monitoring and on- site direction of traffic during the first four weeks of operating the modified access drive. 3.In the fall of 2008 after implementation and verification of the Gunn High School access drive improvements in reducing congestion, complete the final design of the revised striping of Arastradero Road to be one through lane in each direction from east of Gunn High School to McKeller. Restripe and redesign the Donald and Terman approaches to Arastradero Road to provide a left turn southbound lane and a shared through-right lane on Donald, and a right turn, through and left turn lane on Terman as described in this report, and modify the signal operation and configuration to be consistent with the new approach design on these side streets. Implement these changes at the same time that Arastradero Road is changed to a three-lane cross section. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 37 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Design and construct the mid-block pedestrian crossing on Arastradero Road near Suzanne and Clemo including the raised pedestrian refuge island, and include this as a part of the redesign of the cross section on Arastradero Road to be implemented in the summer of 2009. Implement adaptive signal coordination in May 2008, and revise as necessary once signals are modified along Arastradero Road after implementation of the three-lane cross section. Design and construct the small, landscaped 6-foot wide median islands in the four-lane section of Charleston Road from El Camino Real to Alma, and use the same general type of design as the pedestrian refuge island recommended for Arastradero Road near Clemo and Suzanne, with crosswalks across each half of Charleston Road offset so that pedestrians only cross one-half of the road at a time. The additional Charleston Road island/pedestrian crossings would go at Ruthelma, and between El Camino Real and Wilkie. Additional pedestrian crossings should be constructed near Georgia Avenue, Mumford Place, and near Louis Road. Do not attempt to coordinate city signals in the corridor with either Santa Clara County signals at Foothill Expressway or Miranda, nor with the Caltrans signal at El Camino Rea!. Retain the exclusive pedestrian phasing for school hours at the signal on Charleston Road and Nelson Avenue, but otherwise, eliminate exclusive pedestrian phasing at all other times. The exclusive phasing is for accommodating vehicle egress from Hoover Elementary School. Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 38 April 23, 2008 TJKM Transportation Consultants Study Participants TJI~M Transportation Consultants Gary Kruger, P.E. Vishnu Gandluru Manish Parmer Stephen Au, P.E. Geri Foley Margie Pfaff Principal Project Engineer Project Engineer Design Engineer Graphics Word Processing City of Palo Alto Gayle Likens Steve Emslie Stakeholders Committee Transportation Manager Director of Community Development Final Report - Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Improvements Evaluation Page 39 April 23, 2008 Appendix A: 2006 and 2007 Traffic Volume and Speed Data | BI Tran Systems, Inc. PHASES Eight volume/density vehicle phases =Eight pedestrian phases ¯Split ring operation ¯Three phase timing banks, select- able by TOD/DOW or inputs ¯Variable phase sequence ¯Exclusive pedestrian phase o Alternate timing for special vehi- cles or pedestrians ¯Advance and delayed WALK COORDINATION o Thirty-two plans o Thirty-two TOD/DOW events o Thirty-two holiday events ~Traffic responsive plan selection when used with QuicNetTM or field master ¯Three permissive periods ¯Phase sequence selection by plan o Recall selection by plan OVERLAPS ~Eight overlaps ¯Three overlap parent phase sets, setectable by TOD/DOW or inputs o Negative vehicle and pedestrian phases DETECTION Thirty-two local and system detec- tors Phase assignments configurable per detector Each detector function configur- able as count, calling, or extension ~ Delay and carryover configurable per detector ¯Three detector function sets, se- lectable by TOD/DOW or input ¯Advance warning beacons ¯Detector failure monitoring (stuck INTERNAL LOGIC GATES on and off)~Two-input AND COMMUNICATIONS Two- and four-input OR ¯Internet protocol lIP)¯Two-input NAND ~QuicC°mmV~o NOT AB3418E Delay timers ~RS-232/422 TIME OF DAY/DAY OF WEEK =Belt 202T (four wire FSK)FUNCTIONS ¯Dial-up/dial-back (PSTN)¯Red and yellow lock PRIORITY AND PREEMPTION ¯Minimum, maximum, and soft =Four transit priority early and ex-recall tended green o Pedestrian recall =Four emergency vehicle preemp-¯Rest in walktion sequences ¯Double entryeTwo railroad preemption se-Second maximumquences Conditional serviceeTwo special event sequences of 16 steps each, suitable for light ¢Phase sequences rail ~Eight seasons INPUTS o Eight outputs ~Real-time input status display MISCELLANEOUS ~General purpose alarm ¢Fast output flashing ~Special functions =Automatic download of timing da- ~Pre-timed tabase when used with QuicNetTM o NEMA functions: max inhibit, for-central software ceoff, CAN, hold o Four flash patterns o Phase banks o Overlap sets ~Detector sets ¯External permitted phases OUTPUTS ¯Real-time output status display ¯Coordination plan =Time of day/day of week (TOD/DOW) = Detector failure BI Tran Systems is a wholly-owned subsidiary of McCain, a fully-integrated transportation solutions provider and the largest manufacturer of traffic control devices in the USA. For additional information on any of our products, contact your local McCain representative or visit www.mccaintraffic.com, © BI Tran Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BI Tran Systems reserves the right to change product specifications without notice. 2005-05 Appendix D: BiTrans Adaptive Traffic Signal System Figure 12. Green Street with bio-fiherlng stormwa- sidewalks, bLke lanes, narrows s,xe~ts, !~d- scaping and other features r_har improve accessibiiw, walkabkl.itT and aesthetics. Trajfic Calming Options Traffic calming measures can be impleo merited as parr oE road diet projec’~. The ITE Tra~c Calming Sm.~e af she provides u’affic calming opdons rkar can be considered.~3 The handbook presents e,:amptes of traffic calming measles. In addition, roundabouts can be used for tersecr.ion traffic conr_ml to bor.h slow tra~c speeds and keep traffic moving. FHWAS Roundabaurs: An In~rwarion Guide is an import.ant resource to use when consider- ing the implementation o£a roundabouv)4 Roundabouts have a~o been used to serve as mansir_ion points Detwce,n ti~- or two-lane street se~o~-nents ~d four-lane segmenu. Gre~ S~ree= A green street meets the transporta- tion need and applies environmen*al stewardship to improve the natural, built and social environments (see Figure 12). A few examples of green street dmign solutions are provided in this chapter of the handbook as option~ enhancemenu lot r.he road die~ application. As identi~ed i.n Macro’s (re~onal gov- ernment agency, for Portland Metro) Gre~ Sweets Handbook, the appropriate green streets design solutions and/or combination of" solutions &pen& on the desired fi.mc- tions (e.g., runoff reduction, detention, ~e- tention, conveyance and water quality mid- Dtion) and site/w~tershed conditions.35 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was funded by the FB William Barclay Parsons Fellowship. I~ 1. Zegeer, C.V.., ].R. Stewart," H.E Hung and P. Lagerwey. SafeFt g.~crs ~f Marked vs. Unmarked Cros~wa!ks at Uneon."rolled Locariotz’, Execunve Su mmawj and Recomm~aed Gu~aeunes. Report No. FE"WA-R.D-01-075. Federal High- way AdmiMsuadon (FHWA), U.5. Depar rxv.enr of Transportation (U.S. DOT), February.. 2002. 2. Huang, H., R. Stewart and C. Zegeer. =Ev£uation o~[ane Reduction ’Road Diet’ Mea- sures on Crash.as and ~.njurles." Transportation ir~esearch P~cord, No. ~784 (2002). 3. Appl~ard, D. Livab~ Sereers. Universig" of CaliforMa Press, 1981. P~ain BouL’vard Re-Swipln~.~oject. City of Van- couver, WA, USA, June 2004. ). Clark, D. ,~aad Dte~" Am.,’m-Ckw~e Coung;s F~erience in Conver=ng gkne ~nd~cys into 3-tar~, Roa~a’ys. Presmted at the Im~tute oFT~nsporta- tion Engi.neer~ riTE)Annual Meedng, 2001. 6. Ibid. 7. Ciw ol:Vancouver, note 4 above. 8. C[~k, note 5 above. 9. Data provided by Tom Wdch and Tim Sirnodynes, Iowa Department oFTran~porrarion, 2004. 10. Data provided by Na.zareno Capano, Ci%y of Toronto, Canada, 2004. 1 I. Data provided by ROn Minnema, City of Dunedin, New Ze£and, 2004. 12. Crash data provided by the Land Transpor~ Safecy Aur.horicy, Dunedin, New Zealand, 2004. 13.Ci.ty of Vancouver, note 4 above. ~4o Clark, note 5 above. 15.Wdch and Simodynes, note 9 above. 16.Capano, note ?tO above. I7.Minnema, note !! above. 18.Huang, Stewart and Zeg~er, nora 2 above. 19.Knapp, K. and K. Giese. Cmi~Iimsford;e Conversion ofb}ban Four-Lane Undddded £oadww:5 ro Three-Lar~ Two-Way L~- 7~*rn Lane Faci~t;m Fi- na2’Rtporr. Center ForTrampon:ation Researda and FAuca6.on, Iowa Smtc Unirersig; April 2001. 20. Creating Livable Streets, Sweet Desi~ Guideline~for 2040, METRO, June 2002. 21. A Polic~ on Geome.~ic Design of H~hways and Sweets. Washin~on, DC, US~ ~anerican Association of State Highway and Transpmxa6.on Officials (AASHTO), 2004. 22. Comew SensiAve So&dons in Desio~ning Major Urban Thoroughflres j~r WMkabie Com- muniEes, An 1TE Pmposed Recommexded Praaice. Washington, DC: ITE, 2006. 23. Guidej~r the De~dopmom of Big’tie Fa- ci6des. \’~hshin~on, DC: AASHTO, 1999. 24. Innova,"ive Bicycle Trearmen=: A n informa- tion Report. Washington, DC: ITE, 2002. 25. Manual on Uniform Tra~’~c Control De- vices ~r Streets and Highways. Washin~on, DC: FHWA, 2003. 26. [TE, nora 22 above. 27. Parrtand Pedestrian De;ign Guide, Ci~of Por’dand, OR, USA, June 1998. 28. Alternative Trearmen~" for Ar-Grade Pedes- trian Crossings Infornmriona! R~o~. Washin~on, DC: ITE, 2001. 29. Zegeer, Ste’.var~, Huang and Lagerwey, note 1 above. 30. Design and Safi~7 of Pedeserian Facilities. Washin~on, DC: [TE, Mazck ! 998. ~ I. Guide for the Planning, Design and Op- eration of Pede*rrian Facilities. Washingtoo, DC: AASHTO, 2004. 32. Draft Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way. ",,Vashin~on, DC: United Sra~m Accesa Board, 2005. 3£ Ewi.ng, R. Traffic Calming Stare of the Practice. FHWA-RD-99-I3 5. Washington, DC: ITE, 1999. 34- 2~oundabour*: An Informa~ona! Guide. FHWA-RD-00-67. Washing ton, DC: FHWA, 2000. 35. Green Srreez, Innovative Solutions for &ormwater and Stream Cro*dngs, METRO, June 2002. 41 Figure 9. Pedestrian signal. Figure 10. Curb extensian. Provide a minimum 1.5-foor (0,46- meter) offset between face of curb and edge ofporentia! obstructions such as poles and trees. Parking should be prohibited w~thin 20 feet (6.1 meters) of fire hydrants or per Jocal codes. Parking should be at least 20 to 50 feet (6.1 to i5.2 meters) from mid-block crosswalks and at least 20 feet (6.1 meters) from the curb return of intersections (30 feet [9.1 meters]) for signalized intersections). Curb extensions can be used to reduce this distance. Pedestrian Rearm Streets have multiple uses, and ap- propriate solutions should be selected to improve pedestrian safety and access. In addition, walkabie streets promote healthy communities and safe neighbor- hoods. Sidewalks a.re important elements of street design (see Fiomare 9). Key attri- butes of good sidewalk corridors are:27 ¯Accessibil~tTo Adequate travel width o Safety ° Continuity o Landscaping o Social space for people to interact Figure 11. Example food diet cross section with medi~zn/tum lane, bike lanes, k~ndscaping an~ sidewalks. Quali ,ty of place to stre%~hen the character of neighborhoods and business districts W~nen implementing a road diet con- version project, the following are key issueslacrions to be addressed and/or undertaken: o Identification of pedestrian crossing locations and exposure to potential hazards. ¯Identification of missing sidewaiks o r pathways. ¯Identification of transit zones and stop locations and provision of adequate pedestrian access.°Both pedestrian and bicycle faciii- ties designed to be compatible with and faciiitate transit use. o Design and maintenance of land- scaping to provide good visibitigy between pedestrians and approach- ing vehicles. °Provision oFadequate lighting for pedestrian safety at nigrht.°Comfortable sidewalks for pedes- trians, with a minimum width of 5 feet, and routinely maintained. Other sources for effective design of pedestrian facilities include: ITE’s A!rer- native Treatments ~r At-Grade ~edestrian Crossing;, Sa.~O, £~;c~ of Marked wrsus Unmarked Cross’walks at Unconrro~ed Loca- ~olu for F HNVA; ITE’s Desiy~ and &fig of Pedertrian Fadlirieg and AASHTO’s Guide for Planning, Design and Operation gfiPe- -desrrian Fadtides.28-31 Pedestrian facilities need to be accessibie to at1 users and, in the United States, meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Ac~. An additional resource is the U.S. Ac- cess Board’s Draft Guiddine; for Acres- sible Public Righrs-of-~¢~s,.~2 Guidelines for instal.ling maked crosswalks and otb_er needed pedestrian improvements at tmcontro!led (unsignalized) locations are provided in the handbook. To reduce the effective street crossing dismp.ce for pedestrians, the following design options can be considered: ¯ Narrow the street width; o Provide curb extensions (see Fi~m~re 10); andlor dp° Add raise edestrian refuge ~s~ancls at intersections. Pedestrian refuge islands as raised medians can be added at intersections between center le~ turn lanes, if designed appropriardy. Typical Road Diet Cross-Sections (Two-Lane Streets) Severa! road diet cross sections are provided in the handbook for reference. The selection of cross sectional elements is project-specific. The width of street, ~ave[ lanes, bike lanes, on-s~reet parking, sidewalk and landscape areas can be adjusted within the right-of-wa.y (see Fibre l!). T’i~ese de- risions will likely be b~sed on modal priori- rim, adjacent land uses and speeds, should be made on a case-by-case basis and may vary along a proiect corridor. Screetscaping may be initiated by a community visioning or planning process that establishes guidelines for streetscape design. ImpIementation may involve special published guidelines, plans and funding for streetscape improvements on a particular street or in am area. Streetscape improvements c.an also be incom, orated into subdivision and roadway desi~ standar&, for c’xarnple, by encous- aging or requiring shorter blocks, wider 40 tie ,fOURN~L / NOVF.~BER 2007 Desi~ Conce?t~ Street desig’n is a key" element of smart growr_h development and direcdy affects quali%y of life, D~i~e~s ~e en~ur~ed in~eg~e s~ree~ dosdy w[~ pi~ned l~d ~e. From Metro’s (region~ government agen~ for Pord~d Metro, O~, USA) doc~ent, Creadng Li~abk Sweet~0 A Iivabk re~o~lswe~sh~pmv~ those envimnmmm[ co~i~m rhar s~R- ?o~ in~ce and~ee~m of thole. ~rov~ o~en~on, safiff and ~courage a swae ~communiF avo~ d~rbin~ n~sances; av~ ~hance the ec~om~ u~ The road diet design concepts pre- sented in this chapter are focused on the conversion o~’a four-lane undivided road- way co a twodane roadway. A center turn lane is recommended when drivma, ays are present, and a landscaped center median in areas where driveways are uncoramon or absent. The remaining roadway widrk can be converted to bike lanes, on-sr.reer parking, landscaping, sidew£ks and/or turned back to the properg owners. A PoaU on the Geometric Design of High- waysardSwewz (the Ggeen Book), published by r_he America: Association of State Hb~h- way and Transportation Offidals (AAS- HTO) provides geometric desi~ma criteria for roadways. As noted in the Foreword: The intent of this policy is w ?rovide guidance ro the designer @ r{ferencing a ’ recommended range of vanes for cHdca[ dimensions. It is nor in~ended m be a de=iled design manual that could super- cede the need for the application of sound 2orindples @ the knowledgeable desi~ pr@xsionaL Sufficienr fiexibil@ is per- mitred ro encourage independent designs tailored ro yarti~dar riw.adons.2: The road diet design concepts pre- sented in the handbook complement the AASHTO guidelines. The handbook provides general design parameters for major urban arterial and collecmr r.horoughfares with varying con- texts. General guidance on dimensions and cross-section elements criteria, in- ¯eluding lane widths, is included for urban streets with two to four through lanes. T:avd lane and turn ~ne widrks can ~’y depending on £~,e projea contract, land use, modal use and speed, from a minimum of 10 feet to 14 feet (3 meters co 4.3 meters). Suggested Lefi- Tu~ Treawnents.~r Road Diet Sweets Based on previous research, the hand- book provides guidance on the selectio~ of left-turn treatments for specific conver- sion alternatives and factors. Transitions When the number of ~ravel lanes is reduced and/or width of the street is changed, a smoor_b, transition needs to occur. The principles for designing tire transitions include:22 °Properly design, stripe and sign geometric transitions using es:ablished guidance (.Manua~ on Un;.farra Trajfic Control Devices [MUTCD]). ¯Transitions should occur on a tangent roadway section and avoid areas wkh horizontal and vertical si~t distance constraints. °The entire transition length should be visible to the driver. ,~ien roadways widen or lanes are added, a transition taper of 10:1 is surT~cient. ¯Transitions to left:- or right-turn lanes typically require a shorter taper. AASHTO recommen& 100 feet (30.5 meters) for sinCe-turn lanes. k should be noted that choosing the tran- sit.ion locations for road diec projects needs special attention and thorou~ eva~uadon. Major driveways and intersec~ons sMuld be avoided along a transition. Intersection and roan&bout :ocaxions can be ideal b~inning transition locations to &op lanes. Bigde Facifides Biq,cle travel is an important element of multimodal, livable streets. Bike lanes are practical and often essential for road diet projects. They" not only improve the bicycling environment, but also provide a buffer to pedestrians (see Figure 8). In addition, bike lanes allow space for vehi- cles to ~emporarily store while emergenq~ Figure 8. ~io/cle lane on raad-~ieted street, vehicles pass, add to turning radii and improve sight lines. Important sources for bicycle facility design and treatments are the .<~HTO Guide for ~he De~do?men~ of Bicyck Facilities, ITE innovative Bi~;ck 7"rearments and MUTCD.23"24’25 Gener~ considerations for biq’cie cilkies include the following: ¯Smoor.k surfacm are needed for the safety." and comfort o~bi~-dlsts. o Regular maintenance and street sweeping axe required, and pave- ment should be free oflaxge crad "ks and potholes. ¯Curb inlets for &ainage or bicycle- safe inlet grates should be provided. Recommended lane widths and typi- cal lane markings for biwcle tanes are presented in the handbook. On-Street Parking On-s~ree~ parking provides a buffer to pedestrians from traffic and is found to de- crease :’afl:ic speeds. In addition, on-street parking meets the needs of adjacent uses and stimulates street acdvit?: On-stree~ parking should be imp!emented based on project context, u-afl:ic volume and speed; adjacent land uses; and local parking man- Nement plans and policies. General consid- erations for on-street parking axe:26 "Paxal[e: parking should be considered on urban arterials and collectors, o.amgied parking may be considered on low-speed and low-volume com- mercial collectors and main streets. ¯On-street parking shouIa not be considered on major streets with speeds greater ~an 35 mph due to potential maneuvering conflicts. "Consider the use of a curb lane for on-street parking during off-peak hours when tra~c capacky needs ro be balanced with on-street parking needs. °Coordinate with other corridor improvements. ¯Install a grass median or other median treatment. ¯Increase police enr’orcement of speeds and the proper use of the center turn ian.e. Both the road diet pilo~ project and interim solution can be enhanced by add- ing landscaping, sign£ timing improve- ments, sidewalk connecrivkT, improved pedestrian crossings and other enhanced design features. The implementation of a road diet project can result in sm~et?; operational and livabiliry benefits for all modes of uanspomadon. CHAPTER ,4: ROAD DIET GUIDELINES Road dievz~ when implemented properly’ and in the appropriate contecc, can enhance the livabiliV of a street and contribum to the n-airs that can make a street great, iflxis chapter provides gui&ance to the practitio- ner regarding how to de,ermine if a street is a good candidate rZr a road diet and best practices for road diet implementation. When determining the appropriate- hess of a road diet conversion project, the proj¢c~ .context and slte-specific conditions such as tral~c flow characteristics, vehicle capaciD; traffic operations, sa£ety, environ- mental impacts (sodaI, built and namra!) and iivabi~ity need to be considered. This chapter will help practitioners identify and evaluae potential road diet candidate sitm by taking them through the processes of planning, analysis, design and implementation of road diets. It includes general recommendations for road diets that take into account the project context .and site-specific conditions that need to be considered. This &aFter includes: ,Guidelines for identifying and evaluating potential road die: sites o FeasibilW factors ¯Desi~a guiddines and considerations ¯Typical cross-sections for design oncep~ ¯’:Greening" road diet options o Other considerations Identficarion and Evatua~on af ~orenria! Road Diet Candidates A road diet proSect can improve walk- ability." and community iivabiiiry and eco- 38 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A ROAD DIET PROJECT CAN RESULT IN SAFETY, OPERATIONAL AND LIVABILITY BENEFITS FOR ALL MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. nomics. The road diet is an alternative to widening the cross section of roadway and, when appropriate, it can have lower overall impacts than widening the road- way, can be a more cost-effective option and can result in acceptable operations and improved safeq.’. Recent researcah has recommended tha~ road diet conversion be ~aluated in terms of safety and operation effects, espedally ve- hicle spee&, congestion, traffic volume and wa~c flow. Road diet conversions should be made on a case-by-case basis consider- ing ~a_ffic flow, vehicle cap, aciD’ and s~ety goals. 18 Each potentia! mad diet implemen- tation should id~r.gS.; compare and analyze ~ feasible alternative improvements that meet the pr0jec~ goals and obiectives. Feasibiliej Factors Several fe~asibiliry faaors were identi- fied in research conducted by Knapp to evaIuate the feasibiliW of road diets:19 ¯Roadway fimction and environment ¯Over~ traffic volume and level of SePgiCe ° Turning volumes and patterns o Frequent-stop and slow-moving vehidm {agriculture, buses, mai!, buggies) °Weaving, speed and queues ,Crash types and patterns °Pedestrian and bicycle activity Right-of-way availability, cost and acqmsmon ~mpacts Presence ofpa~alld routes Other cont~tual considerations 2oad Diet Design So&dons This section in the handbook provides a toolbox for design of road diet projects, including optional enhancements such as landscaped medians; improvements to pedesrxian crossings and r~acilities; street trees and curbside planters; improved transk user facilities; and green street op- tions. For cost-effectiveness and natural resource conservation, road diet projects can be designed and constructed by sim- ply re-striping the roadway and re-using the existing pavement width and curbs. A context-sensitive solutions approach is recommended for potential road diet projects. From. "Thinking beyond the Pavement," Maryland Stare Highway Administration WorMhop, 3.998: Context sensitive design asks first about the purpose and need of the transporta- tion project, and th~ equally addresses safety, mobili~ and the ?~__wrvarion af scenic, aesthetic, historic, enuironrnenra~ and other communi~ values. Context sensitive design invdves a collaborative, inwra’~;-d~linary a~proach in which ciff- zens are part of a aessgn ream. It is important to recognize that every project is unique. Design solutions for road diet project alternatives ne£d to: o Provide a safe and efficient trans- portation corridor for vehicles, buses, bicycles and pedestrians. ,Balance the needs of the transporta- tion ~stem with th~ interests o~ the surrounding communiDr and the environment.°Create a transportation facility that is an asset to the community. Road diet project ob}ectives could include: " Improved safety and operations ¯Enhanced neighborhood character ¯Improved access to businesses, transit, parks, etc. ¯Preserved and improved environ- mental conditions throughout proi- oct lirnks by reducing pavement area and treating water run-off ate adequatdy without significant queu- ing and operational impacts. For severn] road diet pro]ects, pedestrian and bi~de activities were measured and observed. Improved pedestrian and bicycle condi- tions resulted. On Fourth P!ain Boulevard, the traF- fic operationl impacts after the road diet project implementation were as follows: z~ °No significant negative impacts to trafiqc operation; no reports of queuing vehicl~ interrupting adja- cent business and residential access on Fourth Plain Boulevard. °Bi~clists and pedestrian activity increased. The bicycle operational safety along the corridor improved, and the bicycle [evd of service im- proved significandy since the road diet project was implemented. ¯Other operational ben~ts, such as the bicyde lane providing space for police enforcement and a refi.g~ area for vehides temporarily broken down. o There was no si~ificant traffic di- version as part of the Fourth Plain Boulevard road diet project. On Baxter Street, the traf£c opera- tional impacts resulting from the road diet project were as follows:34 o No significant impacts to the traffic volumes or~ Baxter Street or on adjacent streets after the road diet conversion project. o Traffic diversion e.xperienced from the project was about 4 percent of the Baxter Street traffic to Broad Street, a parallel arterial street north of Baxter Street. After the road diet project, ~e trai~c operation along U.S. 18 remained acceot- able with good mobility. The resultant operating speeds were more uniform and closer ro the posted speed limit,z5 On St. George Street, the road diet project resuked in the following traffic operational impacts:16 ¯Adequate traffic operations along St. George Street. ¯Increase igi pedestrians and bicyclisr~. ¯Trafiqc volumes along St. George Street remained relativdy consistent before and after the narrowing of IN ALL FIVE CASE STUDY SITES WHERE THE ROAD DIET WAS IMPLEMENTED, THE NUMBER OF CRASHES AND MEASURED SPEEDS DECREASED, RESULTING IN SIGNIFICANT SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS. the travel lanes as part of the road diet project, from 7,300 vehicles per day in 1994 to about 7,400 vehicles per day in 2003. ° No traffic diversion impacts. On Kaikorai Valley Road, the traffic operations resulting from the road diet follows:l/project were as ~- °Adequate traffic opera~ions along Kaikorai V£1ey Road. ¯Traffic volumes were not impacted from the road ctier project and remained rdatively constant. In addition, the vehicle classification and percent of truck remained relatively constant. ¯Tr~i:ic volumes showed a small amount of growth, which indicates that traffic diversion was not expe- rienced from the road diet project on Kaikorai Valley Road. At all locations, impacts to overall traffic operations were negligible, if not positive. Zessona Learned. The following sec- tion summarizes the lessons learned from the road diet case studies: ¯Consider road diet projects when multiple opportunities arise, such as a pavement reconstruction proj- ect, presence of an adjacent par~lel route and jurisdictional roadway" transter. ¯Consider communi~ requests to evaluate and implement road diet project. With technical ev£uarion and community involvement " ’Wltn stakeholder groups, road diet proj- ects are more likdv to be successful. °A public education campaign that goes along with a road diet project needs to emphasize the notion that this is a safety enhancement project and that it mgv require trade-offs in capacity, and speed. Increase public education regard- ing the use of the two-way le~- mrn lane. ¯Manage community expectations with clear communication and documentation. ~dentify project goals, performance measures and ~pectations and conduct follow-up evaluation. ¯Coordinate road diet projects with concurrent pavement overlay pro)- ects, if possible. A road diet striping plan on new pavement results in less driver , .conDJ.sIOn. "By impiementing a road diet as a piJot project study, the effects on safety and operations can be measured before deciding whether to keep it permanently and/or whether to fund enhanced design features and a more permanent solution. A temporary., solution may not provide all of the benefits that a permanent solution would provide. "Add bus pul!-our bays when neecled. ¯ tndude access management plans with appropriate spacing and/or elimination of &iveways to reduce confiic~ points. ¯Improve stormwarer grates across catch basins to improve bike operations. ¯Repair sidewalks, ra~mps and drive- ways in poor condition. ¯Improve landscaping to "sof~eff’ the corridor. Figure 7. R~ diel impacts. avaiiabl.e. The City of Vancouver plans to study Grand Boulevard ai%er the road diet project is constructed to evaluate its ef~ectiveness. Recommendations for a road diet project on Grand Boulevard include the following: o Re-stripe r.he roadway from a four- lane roadway to a two-lane roadway, with a center left-turn lane or median channeiizadon (minimum, 11-feet wi&h for center turn lane). ¯Provide a dedicated bike lane in bor_h directions. ¯ i[nstitute a speed monitoring and enforcement program to reduce vehicle speeds. -Improve pedestrian facilities by adding curb ramps, crosswalks, lighdng and sidewalks where needed to provide connectivity, comfort and safety. -Implemen= the road diet project with pavement overlay o[street. Case Studies Summary Sa’~ty. Significant safety benefits suited from the road diet projects (see Fig- ure 7). The overal! number of crashes was reduced in the range of 10 to 65 percent. Also, traffic speeds were reduced at the case svudy locations as a re.suit of the road diet projects. The safeg impacts of the road diet case studies are summarized as follows. On Fourr.£. Piain Boulevard, the follow- ing safe .w impacts resulted:7 °The number of reported collisions along Fourth Plain decreased by 52 percent afxer ~e road diet project was constructed. ¯Pedestrian safety, improved. There were no reported pedestrian colli- sions along Fourth Plain after the road diet project compared to six reported pedestrian collisions for the three years prior to the road diet project. ¯Traffic speeds along Fourth Plain decreased about 18 percent after the road diet project was constructed, from 29.4 mph to 24.2 mph. On Baxter Street, the road diet project resulted in r_he following safety impacts:8 O~ crashesnumoer¯The reported was reduced by 53 percent from the implementation of the road diet project. ¯The reported number of crashes at unsignalized locations was reduced by 60 percent. "The number of rear-end crashes was significanrl!’ reduced by 45 percent because left-turning ve- hicles had a center turn lane to use instead of stopping in the through lane. On U.S. 18 in Clear Lake, the safety" impacts resulting from the road diet proj- ect included the following:9 32 Number of crashes per yeax decreased by 65 percent from 40 crashes per year to 14 crashes per year after the project was imple- mented. Travd speeds were reduced with. before and after speed data showing a 52-percent reduction in aggressive speeding. In addition, the number of vehicles driving over the speed limit was reduced by 32 percent. On S:. George Street, significant saz%ty improvements were realized as a resuit of r, he road diet lane reduction and narrow- ing project:l 0¯The number or collisions was es - mated to be reduced by about 40 percent, ~om about 33 collisions per year before the lane reduction to about 20 collisions per year after. °By narrowing the pavement and lane widths on St. George Street, the number o~" collisions was ’dfurmer reduce to about 19 col- lisions per yeax for the six years folJowing the pavement and lane widrA narrowing. On Kaikorai Valley Road, sar%ty ben- enrs were also aci’~e~’ed:11’!2 *The road diet project on Kaikorai "v~[ey Road resuJted in a 30-percent crash reduction, from 10 crashes per year before the road diet project to al3out 7 crashes per year after. o Traffic speeds along Kaikorai Valley Road were also reduced. Approxi- mately 88 percent of the speeds be- fore the road diet project c-va:eeded 50 km/hr. (30 mph) compared to approximately 69 percent of the spee& after the road diet project. Despite the diverse se~tings, in all five case study sites where the road diet was implemented, the number of crashes and measured speeds decreased, restfidng in sigrtmcanr safer3 improvements. Operations. As shown from the case studies, there were no significant changes to traffic volumes on the road dieted streets. In addition, no significant traf- fic diversion impacts were found. The road dieted st_rents continued to oper- dents desired additional aesthetic enhance- ments such as ~eenery and replacement of concrete planters~ cobblestones and pavers. The handbook provides complete smwey findings for each case study. Lessons Learned. A road diet project through am urban universi~! setting has both perceived behests by users of all transportation modes as well as actual measured safety and operational bene- fits. An urban university, environment is an ide£ Iocarion to consider a road diet project because of the high number o~" pedestrians and bi~dists who benefi~ from projects of this type. gaikorai Valid., Road, Dunedin,~v~ew Zealand Kaikorai Valley Road is located in Dunedin, an eastern coastal ci.ty in New Zealand. Kaikorai Valley Road is classi- fied as a regional arterial road, defined by the Dunedin City District Plan ~s one that serves as a link ofsrsaregic im- portance between or within regions and between districts. Ic serves as an alter- nate route into and out of the Dunedin central business district from the south and serves a variety of rransportarion uses. Parking is provided on borh sides of the road. The average daily traffic along Kaikorai Valley Road is about 10,000 vehicles per da~ with approxi- mately 1,000 vehicles per hour during the peak hour. The road diet project on Kaikorai Val- ley Road was completed in 2003, about one year before this study. The len~h o~c the road diet pro ect was 9.4 km (1.5 miles), on the northern end of section two of Kaikorai Valley Road. The road diet project entailed reducing the road (section two) from a four-lane roadway with on-street parallel parking to a two- lane roadway- wirk on-street parking and cycle (bicycle) lanes (see Figure 6). The project included: ¯Planting the existing median wir2~ low growing shrubs °Improving pedestrian crossings by converting a crossir~g to a pedes- trian crossing point, constructing disabled crossing ramps and install- ing floodlighting°Upgrading an existing pedestrian crossing by installing floodlighting Figure S. St. George Street--after ra~d diet. Figure 6. I(eikorai Valley Road-after road diet Extending the length of turn pockets to accommodate queuing vehicIes without impeding the flow of through traffic L~vabiliry Survey. A door-to-door survey method was used for the Kaiko- tai Valley Road project to solicit public input to the [ivabilicy survey. Respon- dents had mixed perceptions regarding the results of the project, but almost half recommended this- project ~or other streets in the city. The handbook pro- vides complete suwey findings for each case stud> Lessons Learned. The following sum- marizes the lessons learned for the Kaiko- rai Valley Road Case Study: ¯The road diet resulted in safety improvements for all transportation modes, with a significant reduction in ttar~fic speeds and crashes. °Traffic continued to operate ad- equateIy with no traffic diversion impacts. °From the livability survey, the majority of the respondents on Kai- korai Valley Road concluded that the road diet resulted in positive transportation improvements. Grand Bou!evard, Vancouver, WA This case study differed from the oth- ers in that the roadwW was surveyed be- t%re the implementation of a road diet project. Grand Boulevard, an undivided ~’oar-lane arterial located in the City of Vancouver, is an example of an ideal road diet candidate. The City of Vancouver has been challenged by neighborhoods and special interest groups to re-assess the operational and capacity needs on many undivided fottr-iane corridors. The moti- vations behind these requests are varied, and often revolve around the perceived trade-offbetween ma~portation capacity and community" livability. Livabilio, Survey. Overall, the survey respondents seemed as or more concerned ~ith non-traffic issues such as aesthetics and crime. Perceptions of safety were cor- related with perceptions of traffic speed; respondents who felt the street was unsafe tended to say that rrai:fic moved too fast. The handbook provides complete survey findings for each case study. Recomrawadations. G;and Boule- vard is an ideal fadliry for a road diet project, and the City of Vancouver pians to convert it to a two-lane with center left-turn lane Facility as funding becomes corridor. Before the conversion, U.S. 18 was a four-lane undivided roadway. It was converted to two lanes plus a two-way left-turn lane and painted shoulders. The purpose of this project was primarily to improve safety along the corridor. Livability Survey. A door-to-door survey method was used for the U.S. ! 8 case study to solicit public input to the livability survey. The respondents indi- cated that they would like more lanes to travel faster and to rdi~’e some con- gestion during the peak hour. However, these respondents also Nought that speed- Ing remained a problem at rimes. The respondents wanted to see more police enforcement to stow speeds and keep mo- torists from using the center turn lane as a passing lane. The handbook provides the survey findings for each case study. Lessons Learned The project was implemented primarily to improve safety; and an assessment of crash statistics in- dicates that safev has improved. How- ever, many respondents believed that the road was less safe following the inkial phase of the road diet implementavJon. There may be a number of reasons for this perception, Including unctear lane striping, misuse of the center turn lane and several complementary improve- mencs still to be added to the project, including improved signal timing and right-turn lanes. Depending on the levd of community acceptance of the project, a public involvement/education effort may be beneficial to show the resulting safety benefits of the project. The cost of a road diet project can be minimal by simply re-striping a roadway, and it can be completed as an interim solution or as a pilot project for a short length of free, such as 6 months. By im- plementing a road diet as a pilot project study, the effects on safety and operations can be measured before deciding whether to keep it permanently and!or whether to fund enhanced d&ign features and a more permanent solution. When evaluating a temporasT solurion, ic is important to note that it may not provide all of the oenents of a permanent solution. On U.S. 18, the transition areas from the four-lane to two-lane section with a two-way left-turn lane was confusing for &ivers, and the survey respondents 30 RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES IN THE VICINITY OF EACH CASE STUDY WERE SURVEYED TO EXAMINE HOW A ROAD DIET AFFECTS THE LIVABILITY OF AN AREA. indicated that better [ane markings were needed. A lesson learned for a prior project or re-striping project is to ensure that lane markings are clear and r~hat old lane mark- in~ are not still visibte. Both the road diet pilot project and the interim solution cap. be enhanced by adding landscaping, sig- nal timing improvements, sidewalk con- nectiviry, improved pedestrian crossings and or_her enhanced design features. St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada St. George Street, a multimodal street through the St. George campus of the University oiCToronto, was put on a road die~ in the 1990s. St. George Street is alas- sifted as a minor arterial road by the City of Toronto and serves vehides, deliver}, trucks, bicyclists, pedestrians and even skateboarders. An extremdy high number of pedestrians use St. George Street, and continuous sidewalks on both sides of the street are provided in the pedestrian zones. TheADT along St. George Street is about 7,400 vehicles, with approximately 700 vehicles per hour during the peak hour. The posted speed on St. George Street is 25 mph (40 krn/hr.). The St. George Street road diet project was complet~ in 1996, about 8 years be- fore this study. The project was enhanced incrementally be~nning in 1993, with the most si~ificant construction occurring in 1996. Prior to 1993, the s~reer operated as a four-lane road during peak hours and as a two-lane road wlr.h on-street parking permitted during non-p~ak hours. In 1993, r2ae number of lanes on St. George Street was reduced to two by per- mi~ng parking during all hours. Bicycle lanes, a narrow painted median and turn lanes were provided at key intersections as part of the lane reduction project. The road diet project also narrowed the pave- ment width and reconstructed the curbs along St. George Street in 1996. Before the road diet project, the pavement width was wide considering the street function and surroundings. As part of the road diet project, the pavement width was narrowed from 46 feet (14 meters) to a varying width of 31 to 40 feet (9.5 to !2.2 meters). The sidewalk area was widened to increase the pedestrian zone. The narrowing of the pavement and widening of the sidewalk significantly enhanced pedestrian crossing areas. The majoritT of pedestrian crossings occur at uncontr0Iled mid-block locations that correspond to campus pedestrian routes. Alternative roadway pavement materials were used to highlight mid-block crossing areas. Curb extensions at specific loca- tions in coordination with on-street park- ing have reduced vehicle travel speeds. By narrowing the pedestrian crossing areas, pedestrians have been encouraged to cross at specific locations with shorter crossing distances. Lan&caping has been added to provide a buffer and enhanced urban environment to the mad diet project. Figure 5 provides photographs of St. George Street. Livabiliry Survey. A Web survc7 was used to solicit public input on the livabil- ity of the street. Surv~ respondents indi- cated satisfaction with the street width and number of lanes, bur some respondents indicated a desire to remove nil cars. Sur- veT respondents recognized the benefits the road diet project produced, induding slower speeds and improved sas~ety, but stil! desired ful-daer improvements su& as more crosswalks and more greenery. The respon- the implementation of the road diet proj- ect and during a recession r_hat affected ail portions of the ciq: When comparing gross receipts before and after tb.e road diet project, r_he commercial area in the Fourth Plain projec~ area had a positive increase of 3.1 percent compared to ne~tive declines of-9.8 percent to -25 percen: in two other comparable communi ,ty commercial zones in the cig~. Lessons Learned. ¯Sarety map:ovements remlred from the implementation of the road diet with a sign~cant redu~on in crashes. ¯Traffic along Fourth Plain Bottle- yard continued to operate ad- equately without queuing issues and with improved operations for bicyclists and pedestrians. ¯From the livabiiiri survey, the major- iV of the respondents concluded that the road diet improved traffic issues. -The [ivabillty survey suggests that the implementation of a mad dier creates a street environment that is calmer and safer, althou~h respondents don’t treat the street as a residential street (for ~_,ample, nor iec’d_ng their children play in the street). Baxter Sweet, A;hens-Ctarke Count; GA, USA. Baxter Svseet is iocated in Athens and is classified as an arterial that connects the University of Georgia on the east to a major shopping center on the west. Baxter Street runs parallel to State Highway 78 and serves a variety of transportation uses. Characteristics of Baxter Street include the r%llowing: o ADT is 18,000 to 20,000 vehicies, with 1,500 vehicles per hour dur- ing the peak hour. o Posted speed is 35 mph (55 kin/hr.). o Three bus routes serve 10 bus stops along its road diet section. ¯The land use is primarily corn- inertial along Baxter Street with res;idential and university facilities in the surrounding project area. The community in the project area is highiy educated. The road diet project started as a safety demonstration project when Baxter Street needed resurfadng. The purpose of the project was to: ¯Reduce the crash frequency, along the corridor (especially rear-end and sideswipe). increase mavd now by separating through vehicles from left-turning vehicles. ¯Designare an arm within the road- way for bicycle travel. ¯Further separate vehicles from the sidewalk edge. Ba=er Street has a 40-foot (12-meter) right of way (see Figure 4). The before and a~er dimensions are as follows: "Before the road ~er, the facility consisted of four I 0-foot-wide (3- meter) lanes. o After the road diet, the facility consisted of two 14-foot-wide (4.2-meter) lanes to be shared be- tween vehicles and bicycles and one 12-foot-wide (3.6-meter) two-way left-turn iane. In the initial design, Baxter Street was considered too narrow for full bike lanes, so the 14-foot travel lanes were striped wirk a d~hed line to create an 1 travd lane and 3-foot shared vehicle/bike lane. In 2003, the 3-foot shared areas were striped as biwde-use-only lanes.5 Livability Survey, An oniine Web survey was chosen for this case stud), to solicit public input to the livabitity survey. The majority of respondents indicated that the street width and the number of travd lanes was "just right." Most also indicated that the street was "safe," "very safe," or "comfortabie." This response dicates that the road diet projec~ resulted in a positive change. The handbook pro- vides complete survey findings for each case study. Lessons Learned. After the implemen- tation of the Baxter Street road diet, Ath- ens-Clarke County staff recommended the following for road diet projects:6 ¯Add bus pult-out bays so buses do not block through traffic. ¯Include access management plans with appropriate sparing and/or diminate driveways to reduce conflict points. Figure 4. Baxter Street--crfter road diet. Improve grates across catch basins to improve bike operations (for example, improve stormwarer collection systems to remove water from. curb lanes where bikes travd). Repair sidewa~ and driveways in poor condition. Improve landscaping to "soften" r_b.e corridor. Coordinare with other corridor improvements. U.S. 18, Clear Lake, IA, USA U:S. 18 is a state highway in Iowa and the primary east-west route through the City of Clear Lake. Railroad tracks rue. paralld to U~S. 18 on the south side. U.S. 18 serves traffic travding in, through and out of Clear Lake and a variety of trans- portation uses in Clear Lake, including freight movement. U.S. !8 provides access to the downtown business and tourist area. Characteristics of U.S. 18 include the following: o ADT is approximately 12,000 ve- hicles per day, with 1,200 vehicles per hour during the peak hour. ° Posted speed is 45 mph (70 "kin/hr.). o Sidewal "ks do not exist in the project area. o Land use is primariIy commercial, with residential, commercial and recreational uses adjacent to the project ar~. U.S. 18 provides ac- cess to a disabled care community and facility. The U.S. 18 toad diet project con- sisted of simply re-striping the highway with the road conversion, installing one tra~c signal and upgrading an e.xisting traffic signal. A second phase of the proj- ect will include the installation of right- turn lanes at key intersections along the JOURNAL / ~OVE~BER 2007 Rgure 3, Fourth Plain Eoulevard lane ~nfiguration-before an=l after. rke streets with factors directly related ro their iivabiliry.3 The survey included questions on: o Household/business characteristics °Perceptions on the street’s traffic, safety, activities (street life) and friendliness o Recommended improvements ¯ Reactions to the road diet The surveys evaluated the tivabiiiV impacts of road diet projects, addressing issues such as: °Comr%rc and safe9- r%r pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users °Increased landscaping and beantifi- cation opportunities ¯Improved qualiv ofli£e and street character The survey medium varied for each case study depending on the case study location and availability of current Web technologies. The surveys were adminis- tered either through a door-to-door carn- pai~ or using a Web-based survey toot. The resuks of the survey were intended to be used as an indication of livability factors for each case study. The local agen- cies for the case studies were contacted for participation and provided data for the project (see Figure 2). Four& Plain Boulevard, Vancou~’er, gi~, USA Fourth Plain Boulevard is designated as ?rincipal arterial and serves a variety of transpor’~adon users, including wuck tra5 through west Vancouver. Fourth Plain 28 connects Interstate 5 to "k~sr "vancouver neighborhoods, recreation and industry, inciudlng the Port of Vancouver. Bet%re ~e road diet projec~ was implemented on Fourrk Plain Boulevard, this facility was designated a state truck route. Wnen Fourth Plain was converted, a parcel fa- cility, Mil! Plain Boule~d, was converted to a txuck route bypass (see Figure 3). This new bypass conr_ributed to the success oF the project by removing some truck traFFic from Fourr_h Plain. Characteristics o[ the project corridor include the following: °Average daily traffic (ADT) along Fourth Plain is about 17,000 ve- hicles, ~4rk 1,300 vehicles per hour during the peak hour. ¯Postedspeed on FourrS. Plain is 30 miles per hour (mFh) (50 kilome- ters per hour [km/hr.]). ¯The land use adjacent to Fourth Plain is primarily residential and commer- d~, will: msidenr.ial homes ffondng Four-& Plain on the west end. The purpose of the road diet conver- sion project on Fourth Plain was to: ¯Cost-effectively enhance the envi- ronment for all stseet users while minimizing operational or spillover o Develop a safe and efficient trans- portation system. ¯Reduce the crash frequency and number along the corridor. o Improve pedestrian and biq,cie mobility. °Establish a balance between vehicle operations, port height access and neighborhood livability. Zivabilio, Survey. In April 2004, an online Web survey was used to solicit public input on livabiliD,. Most of the respondents were pleased ~4th ~e results of the road diet project on Fourth PMn Boulevard and noticed irnprovemen~ to traffic, safety and Iivability. The hand- book provides complete survey findi.ngs for each case study. Retail sies analysis found that the com- mercial area on, adjacent to and near the Fourth Plain Boulevard road diet project performed better than comp~able arms in the city.4 This gro~w_h occurred after NOVEMBER 2007 ¯Roadway and business acdviD, data were collected both before and ~er the roadway ~ converted to furlher llvabm~; s=ety and opera- tion~d effe~ of road Nets. The data col- lected included twA~c voiumes; vdfide speed and flow characteristics; collkion rates and types; congestion; delay and queuin~ cross-section desL~’n; ~--&tence of muldmodat facilities; pedestrian crossings; and rerail sales ac’dv~ty. This research represents a srate-of-the- practice analysis and provides a snapshot of the current state of the art in the imple- mentation of roadway diets. Ultimate[> however, each road diet project is unique to its context, and its designers should strive to make the built, social and natural environments better than before. HANDBOOK ORGANIZATiOH The handbook is divided into four chapters intended to provide guidance on planning, analysis, design and implemen- tation of road diets. The handbook also is intended to provide information on the effects of road diets, including safer-); op- erational and livabili .ty benefits. Applicable local ordinances, design requirements and codes must be consulted r%r impacts to the planning and aesi=n process. Chapter 2: Previous Szw~ties This chapter summarizes the existing road diet research and Iiterature, includ- ing studies of saferT and operationa! im- pacts of road diets, and includes citations of other literature that can be rdated to road d~ets, such as pedestrian crossing sa.feV studies. Gaps in previous research are identified and summarized. Chapter3: C~se Studies This chapter includes case study amples of road diet projects that have been implemented at iocations around the world. Sb~ sires in the United States and inrerna- fion~y were &osen for :he surv~ and data co!~ecdon. For each case study, ~i:~c, safegr and surv~ data were analy-md ro evalu- ate factors rdated to the [ivabilig of these streets bet%re and after the road diet was implemented. The metho& used to co!lect and analyze the survey., dam are described and lessons learned are summarized. BEFOR!~ Roed Diet Figure I. Representative road diet. Chaprer 4: Practice Guidelines This chapter helps practitioners iden- tify and evaluate potential road diet can- didate sites by taking them through the 3rocesses of planning, analysis, design and implementation of road diets. It includes general recommendations for the plan- ning, an~ysis, design and implementation of road diets that take into account the project context and site-specific condi- tions. This chapter includes: o Guidelines for identifying and evaluating potential road diet sites o General considerations including roadway characteristics and safev, operational and livability benefits o An evaluation checklist .Typical cross sections for dest~ concepts¯Implementation strategies CHAPTER 2: PREVIOUS STUDIES This chapter summarizes previous re- seasch on road diets and includes safety and operational data from these studies. Related research r_hat supports road diets is included in the literature review: An example of such research is Safe~; Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks, by’ the Federal Highway Administra- tion and the UniversitT of North Caro- lina, which shows that collision ra~es are s{gnificantly higher on multi-lane undivided toadwaysJ Safety and operational studies under a variety of traffic volumes a~d road- way conditions are needed to quand~y the conditions for which road diets a.re appropriate.2 This chapter also identi- ties gaps in previous research resuks as well as the significant gap in non- safety benefir~, induding livabiiky ben- efits, which have not been examined in past research. This chapter includes past studies on several types of road diet projects and is organized into the follow- in sections:¯Economic effects and walkabiliV¯Safety ’Operations¯Road site project types and examples¯Lessons learned ’Research gaps CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDIES T.his chapter, which illustrates the ap- pl2cadon of a road diet at six case study locations, incIudes evaluations of factors related to the livabiiity of the streets at each location. The road diec case stud- ies are diverse geographically and with respect to their surroundings, scale, char- acter, ~unction and form. Six case stud- ies were chosen for the survey and data collection in Dunedin, Toronto, Athens, Clear Lake and Vancouver. They repre- sent a wide range of project contexts, from an urban street in Toronto to a ru- r£ street in Iowa, with vauing project lengths, designs and magnitude. Residents and businesses in the cinity of each case study were surveyed to e.vamine how a road diet affects :he livabitity of an area. The public opin- ion survey, which was modeled from surveys conducted by Appleyard in Liv- able Sweets, solicited information from people living and working adjacent to 27 Past Presidents’ Award for Merit in Transportation Engineering: Road Diet Handbook IHTRODUCTiOE Increased traffic volumes on fo~-lane undivided roadways degrade service and safety. In cities throughout the world, the livability, of neighborhoods is improved by putting roadways on road diets. A road diet entails removing travel lanes from the roadway and utilizing the space for other uses and travd modes. Improvements have generated benefits to users of all modes of transportation, induding transit riders, bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists. The focus of the Road Diet Handbook: &rdng Trends for Liv- able Sweets is the road die~ conversion of four-lane undivided roadways to pro- lane roadways plus a t’wo-way left-turn lane by removing a travd lane in each d2rection (see Figure 1). The remaining roadway- width can be converted to bike lanes, on-street parking, landscaping and/or sidewalks. The resulting benefits include reduced vehicle speeds; improved mobility and access; reduced collisions and injuries; and improved livability and quality of life. The handbook is intended as a com- prehensive guide for planners, engineers and designers to hdp them make deci- sions on the appiicabi.[ity of road diets. It contains information on planning, analysis, design and implementation, including: ¯Results ~rom previous resea& efforts -Identification of significant gaps in the field ¯,~malyses of safety and rra~’~c operations ¯Livability considerations o Case study evaluations o Lessons learned from ~perience °Guidelines for idenfi.fi,.,ing and m-aluating potential road diet sites and design 9oncepts, such as typical cross sections o Overa~ guidelines for implem~radon The handbook also evaluates the [iv- abi~9’ impacts of road diet projects, ad- &essing issues such as comfort and sa£et7 for pedestrians, bi~cles and transit users; increased landscaping and beautification opportunities; and improved quality of life and street chazacter. To determine how specific road diet strategies affect liv~bility, case studies of six sites (Vancouver, WA, USA (t~vo sites); Clear Lake, IA, USA; Athens, GA, USA; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and Dunedin, New Zealand) were analyzed. At each site: ¯ A public opinion survey was admin- istered along comparable four-lane undivided and three-lane streets ei- ther before or after road diec strate- gies were implemented. ITEJOURN~/NOVEMBER 2007 Gap Availability to Cross Arastradero s/o Clemo, a.m. peak hour D (width of street)64 feet t(timeto cross street)16 seconds -- ~ ~ Vc (critical volume)233.7309 or less Actual Volume 2000 vehicles/hour Prob. 16 second gap each 60 seconds =0.116865 source: Poisson and Traffic, pages 27 - 29 Page 4C-6 2003 Edition 2.The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour [’or one moving lane of traffic or 15t) vehicles per hour Ibr two moving lanes, and 3.The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches. B.The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction nnly) for 1 hour (any four consecutive 15-minnte periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve iu Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes. Option: If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th-percentile speed on the major street e×ceeds 7,0 km/h or exceeds 40 mph. or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10.000, Figure 4C-4 may be used in place of Figure 4C-3 to satisfy the criteria in the second categor3: of the Standard. Section 4C.05 Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume Support: The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Standard: The need for a traffic control signal at an intersection or midblock crossing shall be considered if an engineerin~ study finds that both of the following criteria are met: A, The pedestrian volume;.crossing the-major street at an intersection or midblock location during an average day is 100 or more for.each of any 4 hours or 190 or more during any 1 hour; and B. Thereare fewer~than 60 gaps per boutin the traffic stream of adequiit~ length to allow pedestrians to cross during the same period when the pedestrian volume criterion is satisfied. Where there is a divided street having a median of sufficient width for pedestrians to wait, the requirement ~pplies separately to each direct:onof vehicular traffic. The Pedestrian Volum-e signal @arrant s~ali not be applied at locations where the distance to the~. " nearest traffic control signal ~’lon g the major :Stia~et is i{ss-thafi 90 m (300-ft), Unless the proposed traffic control signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic: If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is justified by an engineering study, the traffic control signal shall be equipped with pedestrian signal heads conforming to requirements set forth in Chapter 4E. Guidance: If this warrant is met and a traffic control signal is .justified by an engineering study, then: A. If at an intersection, the traffic control signal should be traffic-actuated and should include pedestrian detectors, B. If at a nonintersection crossing, the traffic control signal should be pedestrian-actuated, parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 30 m (100 ft) in advance of and at least 6.1 m (20 ft) beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. C. Furthermore, if installed within a signal system, the traffic control signal should be coordinated. Option: The criterion for the pedestrian volume crossing the major roadway may be reduced as much as 50 percent if the average crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 1.2 miser {4 ftJsec). A traftSc control signal may not be needed at the study location if adjacent coordinated traffic control signals consistently provide gaps of adequate length for pedestrians to cross the street, even if the rate o~" gap occurrence is less than one per minute. Section 4C.06 Warrant 5. School Crossing Support: The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that school children cross the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. The following guidelines for installation of mid-block crosswalks were adopted by the Palo Alto Ci7 Council on July 31, 2000 Mid-block Crosswalk Guidelines Traffic Volumes - Traffic volumes for a two-lane roadway should not be greater than !2,000 vehicIes per day. UncontrolIed mid-block crosswalks should not be considered for four-lane undivided roadways carrying more than I2,000 vehicles per day. 2.Speed.- Uncontrolled mid-block crosswalks should not be considered where the 85~n percentile speed is greater than 40 mph. 3.Pedestrian Volume - The pedestrian volume should have a minimum of 40 pedestrians per hour or 25 pedestrians per hour for each of 4 hours. Location - Mid-block crosswalks should be located, as much as possible, midway be~veen stop or signal controlled intersections. Exceptions may be made based on the following: presence of special pedestrian trip generators/attractors directIy across from each other on both sides of a street that otherwise meeting criteria 1 through 3 above. Exampies of special pedestrian trip generators/attractors are schools, senior citizen facilities, and community facilities such as communit3, centers or iibraries. These exceptions should be made only when enhanced or special treatments are made to the Iocation to ensure safer crossing. Types of Treatment - SioeciaI enhanced treatments include one or more of the foliowing wil! be implemented at all qualifying mid-block crosswalks: raised crosswalks, bulbouts, median refuges, and actuated warning systems. The following guidelines for installation of crosswalks at uncontro!led intersections were adopted by the Palo Alto City Council on December ! 8, 2000 City of Palo Alto Vv’arrants for Marked Crosswalk at Uncontrolled Intersections (A) Basic Warrants (i) Pedestrian Volume VCarrant I Pedeswian volume at proposed crosswalks shouId be more than 20 pedestrians per hour (pph) during the peak pedestrian, hour or 15 pph for each of 4 hours. I(ii) Approach Speed Warrant The 85~h percentile speed at the proposed marked crosswalk locations should be Iess than ’40 mph. (iii) Visibility Warrant iThe unrestricted view for motorists to the proposed marked crosswalk site should have a distance =mreater than 200 feet approaching from each direction. This wil! be a special concern at sites with grades, curwes and other potential significant si~t restrictive features. (ix’) Illumination Warrant Proposed marked crosswalk site must have adequate street lighting near the crosswadk in existence orlscheduled for installation prior to the installation of the marked crosswalk. (B) Warrant Point System of Criteria (need to compile at least 16 points) i, ,(i) Pedestrian Volume Warrant Point Assignment Criterion ]Pedestrian Total t Points The mtai number of pedestrians crossing the street under the study during the peak pedestrian hour. This includes pedestrian volumes at both crosswalks, Crosswalk will not be installed where the ped volume is less than !0. 0-20 t 021-40 I 2 41-60 l 4 61-90 {6 9!-100 t 8 Over 100 !10 Maximum (ii) General Conditions Warrant (a) Will clarify and define pedestrian routes across complex intersections (b) Will channelize pedestrians into a significantly shorter route (c) Will position pedestrian to be seen better by motorists !d) WiIl pgsition and ensure pedestrian meets fewer vehicles (iii) Gap Time Warrant The number of unimpeded vehicle time gaps Ave. # gaps_per ,5 rnin’, peri°d equal to or exceeding the required pedestrian 0 - 0.99 crossings time in an average five-minute t - 1.99 period during the peak vehicle hour 2 - 2.99 3 - 3.99 4 - 4.99 5 or more Maximum Computations 10 Points 2 2 2 2 Points 10 8 6 4 2 0 !0 (!)Pedestrian Crossing Time = street width from curb-to-curb divided by 4 feet per second (2)Average number of gaps per five-minute period = Total usable gap time in seconds divided by pedestrian crossing time multiply by I2. Note: All the warrants need to be met for installation of marked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections. Appendix C: Pedestrian Safety and Design/Road Diet Reports Timings 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed a.m Peak Satd. Flow (perm) Satd. Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Protected Phases- Permitted Phases Detector Phases Minimum Initial (s) Lane Configurations ~i ~’~"~i~~{t~"~i "~~ Total Lost Time(s). .4.0 ~ 3.0 3,0 4.0 " 4.0 4.0 --.30. -3,0 Satd. Flow (prot)1787 4730 1599 3467 5084 0 1787 3236 0 1787 Fit Permitted -0.950 ".0.950 .... :. 0,950 1787 4730 1599 3467 5084 0 1787 3236 0 1787 -,177 10 112 670 163 324 1287 89 219 534 67 121 190 .728_I77 506 1448 0.,322 -727 Prot Prot Prot Prot 5 2.--:2-! 3141 0 3141 0 432 148 0.i53 .- 961 0 Prot 5 2 2 1 6 "3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (s). 8,0 " 25.0 25,0 Total Split (s)16.0 30.0 30.0 23.0 37.0 0.0 22.0 36.0 0.0 21.0 35.0 0.0 TotalSp!it (%)_ : 14.5% 27.3%27.3% 20.9% 33.6% ’0.0% 2&0% . 32.7%0,0% .19.1%3i.8%. 0,0% Yellow Time (s)2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 3.5 0:5 05 :- -..0~5 ...0.5.- Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?.Yes___Yes Yes_ .Yes . Yes.. " . Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None None None None Act EffctGreen(S).. ....:_. 12,0.27.9 2719 . !8.~! .:33.0._ _i Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.25 0.25 0.16 0.30 0.17 0.34 v/cRatio .- - .- . 0.97-0.61.0,33 .:0.88 -0.95 ._1,04 0.66 Control Delay 108.1 39.0 6.8 63.1 50.9 107.6 34.8 Queue Delay .-:. ,. " 0.0 0.0 0~0 0.9 Total Delay 108.1 39.0 6.9 64.0 50.9 None None 0.12 0.29 65.8 66.3 .0.o-o.o._-. 107.6 34.8 65.8 72.8 A--E i :D.I F - C._._ :E " E . 54.3 57.1 71.9Approach Delay Approach LOS. _: 45.8 Actuated Cycle Length: 110 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 56.g Intersection LOS: E Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 1 4/22/2008 Timings 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 3-lane Arastradero, L~unn r~9~,, a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~~~1~ Total Lost Time (s) Satd FIow(prot)1536 0 1646 1881 1874 0 Fit Permitted -0.972 Satd. Flow (perm)1536 0 128 1881 1874 0 Sat&Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph)58 44 43 802 1004 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) _ !09 : 0 - Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases Detector Phases Minimum nitial (s) Minirnum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split (%) Yellow Time (s) 2 -4 .....- 2. 4.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 -20.0 20.0 "20.0 :_, .....": : . . 30.0 0.0 !68.0 168.0 168,0 0,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode None C-Min C-Min C-Min Act Effct Greer~.(s). :. 23:9 _ :--’ !68.1 168:~.!68.t Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.85 0.85 0.85 v/cRatio_ i .0.55 :.- 0.42.~:-0.54--0.87 :-: Control Delay 79.3 17.1 6.0 17.5 Total Delay Approach Delay 79.4 17.1 7.3 19.0 79.4 7.8 19.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 198 Natural Cycle: 120 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.1%ICU Level of Service C Splits and Phases: 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 2 4/22/2008 Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd.n 3-lane Arastradero, L~unn n,yl,, a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i Total Lost Time (s) Satd. Flow (prot)1646 Satd Flow (perm)1282 Satd. Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph)32 Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Detector Phases Minimum Initial (s)6,0 Minimum Split (s).27,0 Total Split (s)40,0 Total Split (%) "" 24.8% Yellow Time (s)3,0 1267 1267 54 6.0 40.0 3.0 Lead/Lag 0 1536 1756 1375 1646 0 674 1756 1375 237 55 92 23 99 18 Perm pt+ov Perm 4 2 6.0 6.0 6.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 56.0 105.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lag Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.27 0.69 0.69 0.69 Control Delay 52.8 87.0 102.9 50.9 59,5 13.1 20,0 22.4 Total Delay 52.8 87,0 102.9 50.9 59,5 13.1 20,0 22.4 Approach Delay 81.7 71.1 20.6 1881 1473 1646 1830 0 1881 798 251 1830 0 774 140 115 913 20 Perm pm+pt 2 6 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 105,0 105.0 16,0 121.0 0.0 3,0 3.0 3.5 3.0 Lag Lag Lead None C-Max 0.77 0.77 11.1 17.5 11.1 2!.9 20.7 Actuated Cycle Length: 161 Natural Cycle: 90 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82 Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.3%ICU Level of Service E Splits and Phases: 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 3 4/22/2008 Timings 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn,,,,,,Hi~h 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i ’~’~ ’~’~i~~i~’t~ Total Lost Time(s) i-- " " 4.0 . 4,0 _~_ 4,0..4.0 4.0 _4.0 .. _- ..., -, -,-- ...- Satd. FIow(prot)1805 3574 2709 1105 2797 0 Fit Permitted . " 0,950 Satd. Flow (perm)1805 3574 Satd, Flow (RTOR), Volume (vph)148 811 Lane Group Flow (vph)260 !Turn Type Prot 2709 1002 2797 0 823 320 221 99 Free Permitted Phases Detector Phases Minimum Initial (s) Free 8.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 Total Split (s)52.0 149,0 97.0 0.0 49.0 Tota! Split(%)... : -. Yellow Time (s)3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 AIl.:RedTime (s):_:.,~.~~. ,2.0._: : 2 0 -_: 2:0.--:.. ..~ .2:0, Lead/Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None C-Min C-Min None Actuated g/C Ratio 0,17 0.80 0.61 1.00 0.16 Control Delay !02.7 6.4 27.3 2.3 89.5 Total Delay 102.7 7.0 27.3 2.3 89.5 Approach Delay 26.3 18.0 89.5 Actuated Cycle Length: 198 Natural Cycle: 80 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.85 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60,7%ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases:10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High --’~ 61 62 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 4 4/22/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High P~xeu a.m Peak Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted. _ .. Satd. Flow (perm) Satd, Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Lane Configurations 4{ Tota Lost Time (s) . ’- .3.0 0 34gg 0 0 3574 1473 0 1881 1599 3467 0 2814 . :-0613. . - 0 2191 0 0 3574 1473 0 1881 1599 3467 0 2814 ....- -:i: " ,,269 296 436 0 0 485 458 3 464 280 259 0 153 Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot custom Protected Phases " : ’- 947 . - .....1 i2 , " ~10 .~ 11 : -- Permitted Phases 9 4 7 12 10 10 11 Detector Phases -947. 947 . "-, " 12 :-’12 : ;10-. 10 " 10: :il -. 11 Minimum Initial (s)8.0 8,0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Total Split (s)8g.0 89,0 0.0 0.0 39.5 39,5 41.5 41.5 41.5 15.0 0.0 15.0 Total Split (%)... ,59.3%, 59.3%0 0% .0 0%_,26-3% 26.3%27-7%,27-7% 27~7% 10:0%: 0.0% 10,0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3,5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 :_:" " " -’L;I.0-i 1.0-: 1.0 ;i.0 ’ .1:0 .1:0 -1.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Recall Mode None None None None None None None ActEffctGreen(s):_-_,51,0 ’ _ : _-, ~:~ 3&5 36.5 , :- i: _ ~i 37,5 ¯ 37~5i Ii.01;, " ,.1i,0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34 0,24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.07 vtc Ratio -. Control Delay 143.3 56.1 65.6 155.4 22.9 187.1 13.1 66.9 i -.,:- 1,0 t 0~0 " ;0,0 i, 00 ....0.0 : -~1,! Total Delay 210.2 57.0 65.6 155.4 22.9 187.1 14.2 LOS".-:-_ " ’..- .:..-: -F.,. :.-.: :: : E:_ :, E .( : _ .: :.... . F :.~ .....C-: : :E ,.* :,"._"B Approach Delay 210.2 61.2 105.8 Approach LOS " ’ :, " :, ,F ~ . !.:i_::_::~ ~E,-:::, ~:: "---~_, F_;:: i ::-i:-"--: _: ",: _.: - Actuated Cycle Length: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 121.4 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: F TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 5 4/22/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Splits and Phases:12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. tt22 tt22 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed a.m Peak tt12 tt22 822 #22 822 #12 822 La~Configurations Satd, Flow (prot) Sat& Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 32.5 43.0 39.5 35.0 25.0 50.5 35.0 39.5 19.0 3.5 4.3 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.3 3.5 3.5 3.5 Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead None Min None None None Min None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 6 4/22/2008 Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express W~’. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i 4"~"~~i 4~’i~~{~ Satd. FIow(prot)1626 3253 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3410 Satd. FIow(perm)1626 3253 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3410 Volume (vph)114 510 88 79 462 100 202 373 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Permitted Phases 7 8 Minimum Initial (s)8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 Total Split (s)35.0 35.0 35.0 39.5 39.5 39.5 32.5 50.5 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.3 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.15 0.34 Control Delay 54.6 66.5 12.6 18.2 25.8 1.6 79.5 38.0 Total Delay 54.6 103.7 12.6 21.5 31.3 3.6 85.2 38.0 Approach Delay 84.5 25.7 50.9 0 1787 3546 0 0 1787 3546 0 164 140 359 20 Prot 8.0 12.0 0.0 25.0 43.0 0.0 3.0 4.3 Lead Lag None Min 0.11 0.30 84.0 43.6 84.0 43.8 54.6 Actuated Cycle Length: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 52.5 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 7 4/22/2008 Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express W~/. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed a.m Peak Splits and Phases: 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. :I:1:22 #22 I#22 #12 #22 ~ ~2 ~ S3 #22 #22 #22 #12 #22 I ~ s9 sl0 s12 Lane Configurations Sat& Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) LeadlLag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 41,5 15.0 39.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3,5 Lead Lag None None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 8 4/22/2008 SimTraffic Performance Report 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn High OK, Terman Signal Improves 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)60.4 29.8 10.8 46.4 31.0 28.7 55.5 28.5 10.2 56.2 46.0 45.5 StopNeh 1.01 0.70 0.63 0.89 0.71 0.76 1.14 0.69 0.29 1.09 0.91 1.03 Travel Time (hr)4.5 19.7 3.4 10.6 37.4 2.7 7.0 10.5 0.6 4.7 14.7 4.9 AvgSpeed(mph)10:15 24 11 i 14 i 13 5 8 : 13 9 10 9 7: El Camino Real & CharlestonRd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s) 34.9 St De Neh (s)28.9 StopNeh 0.78 Travel Time (hr)120.8 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)67.2 52.1 36.5 6.7 13.2 14.4 13.5 Stop/Veh 0.92 0.92 1.02 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.27 Travel Time (hr)2.5 1.5 0.8 4.7 10.1 0.2 19.9 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)69.7 62.0 63.2 127.1 96.8 113.9 24.9 11.1 12.9 22.6 11.0 14.9 StopNeh 0.94 0.87 0.88 1.25 1.14 1.24 1.03 0.26 0.32 0.88 0.27 0.46 Travel Time (hr)1.6 2.2 2.1 6.2 1.4 4.9 0.3 7.0 1.2 2.0 9.2 0.2 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)22.7 StopNeh 0.42 Travel Time (hr)38.4 Avg Speed (mph)8 with improvements at Terman TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 1 SimTraffic Performance Report 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn High OK, Terman ~lgnai ~mpiuv== 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)90.2 6,9 18,4 10.2 57.4 37.4 15.2 20.2 StopNeh 1.02 0.21 0.37 1.12 0,51 0.43 0.68 0.46 Travel Time (hr)6.1 6.9 13.5 3.4 6.7 0.4 1.0 38.0 11: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movemen~ Delay / Veh (s)1.1 1.0 20.6 613.0 52.4 19.3 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.92 1.05 0.22 Travel Time (hr)3.5 0.1 15.0 8.5 0.3 27.4 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)26.7 20.8 49.0 33.5 84.2 82.6 16.3 262.8 36.5 53.3 StopNeh 0.23 0.19 0.65 0.71 1,29 1.05 0.90 1.84 1.09 0.71 Travel Time (hr)5.1 6.8 15.5 9.9 0.2 27.1 6.3 22.0 2,1 94.9 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)80.3 84.2 11.8 22.1 25.7 2.1 83.6 36.6 StopNeh 1,18 1,08 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.19 1.03 0.67 Travel Time (hr)5.8 30,2 1.5 1.0 7.2 0.4 11.0 12.0 6.0 65.7 57.6 56.3 0.05 0.96 0.83 0.84 2.2 5.8 13.3 0.8 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)50.0 StopNeh 0.68 Travel Time (hr)91.1 with improvements at Terman TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn Higlq 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)3.6 94.6 91.7 65.7 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.42 0.60 0.37 Travel Time (hr)4.1 29.7 43.9 77.6 47: Gunn High & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)0.8 6.7 3.3 StopNeh 0.00 0.16 0.07 Travel Time (hr)0.9 2.5 3.4 69: Hubbartt Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)26.6 8.8 11.2 1.8 0.6 0.0 1.3 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.2 0.1 3.7 1.8 0.0 6.0 74: McKeller Lane & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)14.4 5.4 4.6 25.1 49.9 4.2 12.5 1.7 0.3 11.0 2.8 1.8 StopNeh 1.00 !.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.70 0.01 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 3.3 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 74: McKeller Lane & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s) 2.5 St DelNeh (S)0 StopNeh 0.02 Travel Time (hr)10.9 with improvements at Terman Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 3 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn High OK, Terman Signal Improves 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 77: Arastradero Rd. & Suzanne Dr. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)0.3 0.0 7.1 2,2 55.4 39.3 2.2 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 0.03 Travel Time (hr)0.9 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.8 0.3 6.8 78: Arastradero Rd. & Clemo Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)5.1 0.7 0.8 0,4 32.2 12.1 1.1 StopNeh 0.67 0.00 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 Travel Time (hr)0.0 2.3 1.8 0~0 0.1 0.4 4.6 82: Pomona Ave. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)63.3 16.5 2.4 1,3 15.2 4.6 4.8 Stop/Veh 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.09 0.07 Travel Time (hr)1.5 0.1 4.4 0,1 0.1 6.0 12.2 84: Willmar Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)52.4 16.2 7.9 2.8 2.9 1.5 3.0 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.4 0.0 3.0 5.2 0.1 8.8 with improvements at Terman TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn High OK, Terman Signal Improves 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 86: Arastradero Rd. & George Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)9.4 1.9 1.4 0.2 35.2 21.2 2.4 Sto p/Veh 1.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 Travel Time (hr)0.0 5.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 1.7 10.9 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s)184.0 Stop/Veh 1.53 Travel Time (hr)1076.8 Avg Speed (mph) with improvements at Terman TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 5 Arterial Level of Service 3 Lane Alternative, Gunn High OK, I erma~l o,u,,,~ ..... 7 - 9 a,m,, with Peaking Engaged Arterial Level of Service: NB Arastradero Rd. Miranda Ave,5.6 9.9 0.0 181.5:.i ...._- .....Gunn High 6.9 15.9 0.1 19 "" 5.5 ’" 1&9::0.1 . 22 " ....:- . -,_.. .-....-._,:. .......:. .. - ..-._ . . ............ -. George Ave, Hubbartt Dr. Wiltmar Dr,-" Terman Dr. Pomona Ave. Coulombe Dr. . Clemo Ave. Suzanne Dr. 1.9 9.6 0,1 29 1.2 3.9 0.0 25 .-i. ,, _-2.81 ~-..6.0. ": .-0.O --!.8 ... .- :- .... 11.0 16.7 0.1 13 2.3 8.5 0.1 24 1.5 7.1 0,1 27 0.3 2.3 0,0 44 El CaminoReal Total 1.7 8.0 0,1 28 28.5:~.:- 37i1.- ....0,!t 9-:’~-~- ......: 168.2 298.4 1.3 15 Arterial Level of Service: SB Arastradero Rd. 2.7 9.2 Clemo Ave.0.8 3.3 Coulombe Dr.13.2 18,5 Pomona Ave.4.6 10.6 Willmar Dr.3.1 9.1 Hubbartt Dr.0.6 3.3 2.0 10.1 Miranda Ave.21.0 30.3 Foothill Express Wy.16.4 20.2 0.1 0,0 0.1 0.1 0,1 0.0 0,1 0.1 0,0 24 30 16 21 25 29 26 10 7 with improvements at Terman TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 6 Timings 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i tt’~i~~i~J {t~ ~J "~ ~J Total Lost Time (s). , . 4.0 Satd FIow(prot)1787 4730 1599 3467 5074 0 1787 3174 0 1787 3223 0 Fit Permitted ..0.950 " ,0.950-. _,--!3:950 " _ . --0~950 . - Satd FIow(perm)1787 4730 1599 3467 5074 0 1787 3174 0 1787 3223 0 Satd. FIow(RTQR).."156, ...." I4 ’ .45 " " "19. Volume (vph)145 1479 145 199 801 71 159 369 115 97 418 67 Lane Group Flow (vph)156 1590 156 226 - 99!: .:,: 0 !87 569 0 . I17 585 " 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases "5 - _ 2 . .:2 .! . " 6 .- ,. - 3. _ 8 ._ ~7 ~ Permitted Phases 5 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Sptit (s)." 8.0 25.0 25,0 ’ ;80;250 " _;:.20.0.35,0 ......,~,8.0 .34,0 "_ Total S01it (s)16.0 35.0 35.0 11.0 30.0 0.0 20.0 37.0 0.0 17.0 34,0 0.0 Total Split(%)- ., -16.0% 35.0% 35.0%11.0% 3&0%- 0.0%-’20.0%370% 0.0% 17:0% 34.0% 0,0% Yellow Time (s)2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 3,5 ~0.5 ....0.5L’-0.5 ~ 0;5 . 0~5--" -. .0.5."015 -i ".: 05 0.5" Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode None Max Max None None None None None None Act EffctGreen (S) _. 10.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.32 0,15 0.30 0.11 0.25 v/cRatic~. 1 -. 0.73 0.91 0.23 0.81-;0,61 "" 0,68 0,57;" 0.64,0.72 Control Delay 59.4 37.1 5.0 64.4 28.6 49.2 26.7 52.8 34.9 Queue Delay Total Delay 59.4 37.1 5.0 64.4 28.6 49.2 26.7 52.8.34.9 LOS Approach Delay 36.3 35.3 32.2 37.9 Cycle Actuated Cycle Length: 87.5 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 35.6 Intersection LOS: D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 1 4/22/2008 Timings 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn H~gn p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~~{~ Satd. FIow(prot)1521 0 1646 1881 1865 0 Satd. FIow(perm)1521 0 392 1881 1865 0 Volume (vph)17 21 75 750 790 42 Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases 2 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split(s)30.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode None C-Min C-Min C-Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.83 0.83 0.83 Control Delay 25.3 3.7 3.3 7.9 Total Delay 25.3 3.7 3.4 7.9 Approach Delay 25.3 3.4 7.9 Actuated Cycle Length: 130 Natural Cycle: 80 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.0%ICU Level of Service C Splits and Phases: 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. ~ ~4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 2 4/22/2008 Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i ~ ~i Total Lost Time (s) .......3.0-. Satd. Flow (prot)1646 1169 0 1646 1881 1473 1646 1881 1473 1646 1875 ....0.757_. -" . :0.738 Satd. Flow(perm)1312 1169 0 1279 I881 1035 657 1881 922 215 1875 Volume (vph)3 1 15 27 1 51 17 g60 22 53 648 Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Perm Perm pm+ov Perm Perm pm+pt Protected Phases ...... Permitted Phases 4 4 4 2 2 6 Minimum Initial (s)6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 Total Split (s)27.0 27.0 0.0 27.0 27.0 8.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 8.0 103.0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead head-Lag.Op’dmize? .~i. i.-i_:>-.~: -:-~i .ii:.ii.~ Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act EffctGr&en(s) - " :.I. .:!7::4 1 : ~!.7,~~02~08 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.84 0.84 Control Delay 44.0 49.2 49.6 43.0 49.2 5.3 11.5 5.1 5.0 3.9 Total Delay 44.0 49.2 49.6 43.0 49.2 5.3 11.5 5.1 5.0 3.9 Approach Delay 48.3 49.3 11.3 4.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 130 Natural Cycle: 90 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.7%ICU Level of Service D Splits and Phases: 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 3 4/22/2008 Timings 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i {’I’{{i~~i~t~ Satd. FIow(prot)1805 3574 3574 1105 2713 0 Satd. FIow(perm)1805 3574 3574 !002 2713 0 Volume (vph)91 9!9 641 64 138 89 Turn Type Prot Free Permitted Phases Free Minimum Initial (s)8.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 Total Split (s)20.0 100.0 80.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None C-Min C-Min None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.83 0.69 1.00 0.11 67.7 3.7 7.5 0.2 43.0Control Delay Total Delay 67.7 3.9 7.5 0.2 43.0 Approach Delay 9.3 6.5 43.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 130 Natural Cycle: 75 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.1%ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High -’~ ~1 ~2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 4 4/22/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Lane Configurations 4"~tt i~4’i~’~i~i i~i~ Satd. FIow(prot)0 3571 0 0 3574 1473 0 1868 1599 3467 0 2814 Satd. FIow(perm)0 2699 0 0 3574 1473 0 1868 1599 3467 0 2814 Volume (vph)10 475 0 0 450 250 2 15 163 273 0 170 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Prot custom Permitted Phases 9 4 7 12 10 10 11 Minimum Initial (s)8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Total Split (s)82.5 82.5 0.0 0.0 39.5 39.5 30.0 30.0 30.0 13.0 0.0 13.0 Total Sp it (%)- . ....63.5%6&5%..-0.0%0.0%30.4%. 3&4~/~ 23L!%23~i% 2.3.1% "t0~O% ,0:00/o! 0.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Recall Mode None None None None None None None ActEffctGr_een(s)_-. __ i 40.9..-._ ¯ ~ .-~ .....36,.6.:_~ 36.6. ,_::.- ....-i_~ 9,5 9,5~ 20x0.~ _ 20,0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.30 0.30 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 Control Delay 7.7 38.4 13.2 57.2 18.0 51.6 7.8 Queue Delay.. :-.. ¯-0.0 :-,, .-- 01;1 0:0~ " ....0.0 " 0.0 ~-0.0 ""0.2 Total Delay 7.7 38,5 13.2 57.2 18.0 51.6 8.0 LOS . - - " -.~-- -,~. A .-:- D B-;:.E-iv:- B ~: D :A Approach Delay 7.7 29.5 21.7 Actuated Cycle Length: 124 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 24.0 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: C TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 5 4/22/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Splits and Phases:12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. I~22 ~22 #22 #12 #22 #22 La~Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Sat& Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 15.0 40.5 39.5 35.0 18.0 37.5 35.0 39.5 12.5 3.5 4,3 3,5 3.0 3.0 4.3 3.5 3.5 3,5 Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag None Min None None None Min None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 6 4/22/2008 Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i Satd. Flow (prot)1626 Satd. Flow (perm)1626 Volume (vph)112 Turn Type Prot Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s)8.0 Total Split (s)35.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24 Control Delay 42.1 Total Delay 42.1 Approach Delay 3253 3253 383 8.0 35.0 3.5 1599 1626 3424 1599 1599 1626 3424 1599 64 68 496 58 Perm Prot Perm 7 8 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 35.0 39.5 39.5 39.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 None None None None None 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.29 44.4 9.7 17.2 21.9 1.0 44.4 9.7 18.4 23.5 1.8 40.0 20.9 1787 3453 0 1787 3553 1787 3453 0 1787 3553 66 441 130 99 422 Prot Prot 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 15.0 37.5 0.0 18.0 40.5 3.5 4.3 3.0 4.3 Lead Lag Lead Lag None Min None Min &08 0.24 0.09 0.28 69.1 47.8 71.1 39.3 69.1 47.8 71.1 39.3 50.0 45.2 0 0 16 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 124 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 38.3 Analysis Period (rain) 15 Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 7 4122/2008 Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. &,, F,oo,!hill Express W)/:,., 3-lane Arastradero, Gunn High Fixed p.m Peak Splits and Phases: 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. ~22 ~422 ...... it22 #22 ~ff22 ft22 ........~.~-,-~ ,~ ...........~ ~,~z., #12 ~12 #12 ~12 ~’~::"~ ~10 "~ ~11 ~112 #22 Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.5 30.0 13.0 39.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 Lag Lead None None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 8 4/22/2008 SimTraffic Performance Report Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)50.0 36.1 13.1 51.9 28.7 14.5 47.5 29.3 StopNeh 0.99 0.83 0.71 0.98 0.70 0.50 1.09 0.76 Travel Time (hr)3.2 26.2 1.9 4.9 12.3 1.0 2.3 3.8 7.2 46.7 28.3 19.5 0.31 0.94 0.72 0.76 0.5 2.2 6.7 1.0 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)32.8 StopNeh 0.79 Travel Time (hr)65.8 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)33.1 17.0 20.3 4.7 7.4 8.2 7.4 Stop/Veh 0.75 0.93 0.87 0.15 0.16 0.22 0.21 Travel Time (hr)0.3 0.3 0.5 1.7 3.0 0.3 6.0 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)51.5 30.7 57.5 71.6 86.7 53.2 15.6 10.9 Stop/Veh 0.83 1.00 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.71 0.26 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.0 1.2 0.1 3.5 7.5 22.0 6.1 0.3 0.80 0.76 0.21 0.00 0.0 0.4 2.9 0.0 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)12.9 StopNeh 0.31 Travel Time (hr)10.0 TJ KM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 1 SimTraffic Performance Report Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)122.3 109.3 9.4 5.0 134.5 17.8 35.4 63.0 StopNeh 0.96 0.32 0.29 1.00 0.80 0.50 0.91 0.42 Travel Time (hr)2.7 25.6 4.1 0.4 4.9 0.0 0.8 38.6 11: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)27.2 0.4 9.0 5.9 15.5 Stop/Veh 0.02 0.00 0.38 0.12 0.08 Travel Time (hr)6.8 0.0 0.0 3.6 10.5 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)3.6 42.6 43.2 6.6 61.8 55.3 168.1 119.0 29.4 55.3 StopNeh 0.17 0.20 0.77 0.78 1.00 0.83 1.01 0.93 0.87 0.68 Tra~ei Di~t (~i)0:2~-- i5-~22-8 ~ .1~~i.~1~i.~1 ~i’ ~1~~&6. 8 Travel Time (hr)0.0 5.1 6.4 1.3 0.0 0.2 7.1 7.6 1.5 29.2 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)167.3 224.9 147.0 17.5 19.9 1.8 225.3 41.1 7.4 56.2 48.3 258.8 StopNeh 0.81 0.95 0.32 0.29 0.23 0.13 1.13 0.79 0.17 0.90 0.74 0.62 Travel Time (hr)5.5 23.8 2.9 0.4 4.0 0.1 4.8 8.4 1.0 2.2 7.3 0.6 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)73.7 StopNeh 0.61 Travel Time (hr)61.1 TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)4.0 9.0 77.7 14.7 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.02 Travel Time (hr)2.4 3.4 4.1 9.9 47: Gunn High & Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)6.1 286.5 114.5 StopNeh 0.95 1.04 0.99 Travel Time (hr)0.7 14.9 15,6 69: Hubbartt Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)18.3 7.5 8.7 2.4 0.5 0.0 1.6 Sto pNeh 1.00 1.00 0.80 0°05 0.00 0.00 0.04 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.6 0.0 2.4 74: McKeller Lane & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)16.6 4.3 4.6 28.6 3.5 6.6 1.4 0.7 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 6.9 2.9 2.9 2.5 0.50 0.00 0.07 0.02 0.1 3.5 0.1 5.0 TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 3 SimTraffic Performance Report Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged 77: Arastradero Rd. & Suzanne Dr. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)0.3 0.0 5.5 1.6 70.5 4.1 1.5 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 Travel Time (hr).0.4 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.2 0.1 2.6 78: Arastradero Rd. & Clemo Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)9.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 22.7 7.9 1.5 StopNeh 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.2 82: Pomona Ave. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)58.7 31.3 3.6 2.0 19.4 1.4 4.4 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.05 Travel Time (hr)0.9 0.4 2.3 0.2 0.2 1.7 5.7 84: Willmar Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)84.9 21.3 8.0 5.3 2.1 1.1 4.8 Stop/Veh 1.00 1.00 0.65 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.09 Travel Time (hr)0.5 0.2 0.1 1.7 1.7 0.1 4.2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged 86: Arastradero Rd. & Georqe Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)6.5 3.0 0.9 0.0 20.9 5.9 2.5 StopNeh 0.49 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 Travel Time (hr)0.3 2.3 1.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 4.3 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s)114.5 Stop/Veh 1.29 Travel Time (hr)372.2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 5 Arterial Level of Service Three Lane Alternative, Terman Signal Improves p.m. Peak, with Peaking Engaged Arterial Level of Service: NB Arastradero Rd. Miranda Ave.29.5 33.9 0.0 Gunn High 109.3 118.0 0.1 George Ave.3.0 10.5 0.1 25 Hubbartt Dr. 1.6 4.2 0.0 22 Willmar Dr. Terman Dr.10.9 16.9 0.1 14 Pomona Ave. 2.4 8.7 0.1 24 Coulombe Dr. 1.4 7.0 0.1 27 Suzanne Dr,0.3 2.3 0.0 44 1.4 7.8 El Camino Real :.""~. " 29~3 Total 526.2 656.6 1.3 8 Arterial Level of Service: SB Arastradero Rd. Clemo Ave. Coulombe Dr. Pomona Ave. Willmar Dr. Hubbartt Dr. Miranda Ave. Foothill Express Wy. 2.1 8.6 0.1 26 0.9 3.4 0.0 32 7.4 12.7 0.1 16 1.4 7.5 0.1 28 2.2 8.4 0.1 25 0.5 3.1 0.0 31 1.1 9.1 0.1 29 6.2 15.3 0.1 20 14.2 17.9 0.0 8 TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 6 Appendix B: Predicted 3-Lane Arastradero Simulation Arterial Level of Service Existing with Gunn High Adjustment 4 - 6 p.m. with Peaking Engaged Arterial Level of Service: NE Arastradero Rd. Miranda ..............: ~ ~ ~ .......... 23 Arterial Level of Service: SB Arastradero Rd. 3O 21 11 Arterial Level of SerwcePage 4 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report Baselinei,i iii1 ,,11 111 , ii11 , i Existing with Gunn High Adjustment 4 - 6 p.m. with Peaking Engaged 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)3.4 0.5 1.9 2.0 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)4.0 1.1 3.0 8.1 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s) 47.7 St De Neh (s)610 StopNeh 1.08 Travel Time (hr)374.5 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report Page 3 SimTraffic Performance Report Baseline Existing with Gunn H~gn 4 - 6 p.m. with Peaking Engaged 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)46.9 5.1 23.1 3.2 38.6 13.3 15.6 StopNeh 0.95 0.20 0.64 0.05 0.84 0.85 0.45 Travel Time (hr)3.0 7.5 11.9 0.6 3.2 1.1 27.2 11: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.1 0.6 8.7 5.0 25.5 5.1 3.1 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.06 0.86 0.42 0.04 Travel Time (hr)4.3 0.1 0.1 6.0 0.5 0.1 11.0 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)7.8 15.7 31.6 1.5 24.2 1.4 9.6 40.6 18.1 18.6 StopNeh 0.12 0.16 0.63 0.70 1.00 0.02 0.91 0.84 0.86 0.44 Travel Time (hr)0.1 6.0 12.4 0.4 0.0 6.3 3.1 7.4 2.3 38.0 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)29.6 33.6 2.3 27.1 13.6 0.9 59.0 37.1 3.5 59.0 36.9 25.0 StopNeh 0.70 0.76 0.21 0.34 0.22 0.14 0.84 0.74 0.02 0.97 0.76 0.72 Travel Time (hr)2.5 9.2 0.4 1.1 5.9 0.3 2.2 11.8 0.9 4.0 10.4 0.3 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)27.9 StopNeh 0.55 Travel Time (hr)48.9 AvgSpeed(mp.h)~7 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report Baseline Existing with Gunn High Adjustment 4 - 6 p.m. with Peaking Engaged 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)48.1 34.4 14.4 48.3 22,5 13,9 45.7 22.9 14.9 44.2 28.1 15.3 Stop/Veh 0,94 0,76 0.66 0,95 0.64 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.32 0,91 0.72 0.74 Travel Time (hr)5.1 35,4 2.2 6,4 13.5 0.9 7.2 15.2 3.2 3.6 11.1 1.5 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)30.1 StopNeh 0,72 Travel Time (hr)105.3 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)37.8 6.0 18.1 6.3 8.7 7.1 7.8 StopNeh 0.83 0.84 0.75 0.!4 0.21 0.22 0.20 Travel Time (hr)0.4 0.1 0.9 13.0 21.4 0,9 36,8 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)47.7 0,1 3.2 37.2 5.5 51.4 11.7 9.7 45.4 6.6 12,2 11.0 StopNeh 1.00 0.00 0.76 0,86 0.82 1.27 0,32 0.44 0,88 0.17 0.67 0,31 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.7 21.3 0.4 2.0 11,1 0.1 36.6 ~vg Speed (raph)25 ~-.~~~2 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report Page 1 Arterial Level of Service Arterial Level of Service: WB Arastradero Rd. Existing Conditions: May 200/ p.m. Peak 3.7 9.0 0.0 18 Louis Rd 1.8 3.8 0.0 19 ChartestonCt.~ t .:_.._: - ~- "- 3l~5:50:5 0.2 18.6 21.6 0.0 5 Middlefield Rd. _ 3.1 9.1 0.1 21 Nelson Dr. _- --. ,._.: , i-- .’. 4.9:::-. : -_ 9.0.~. _:.": 0.O1--~-._.!8 ,:.:.. i):.: ~-’!-~: ~.i.1 .g 13.0 0.1 29 ~-:.::-_.-:. :11!3 --. :10~2 U. : 0.1 .....i.~ : 30~~--:~-. i: - "-..--.. Carlson Cir.1.0 4.9 0.0 29 2.4 11.8 0.1 29 Alma St.67.3 70.8 0.0 3 El Camino Real 29.4 46.0 0.2 15 Donald Dr.19.3 37.3 0.2 18 Gunn High 13.5 23.8 0.1 16 Miranda Ave.37.4 42.8 0.! Total .422.6 666.8 2.6 15 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 9 Arterial Level of Service Arterial Level of Service: EB Arastradero Rd. 12 16 31 Tetal 604.2 857.6 2.5 10 Without Adjusting for Gunn High School QueuingPage 8 TJKM Transportation Consultants SimTraffic Performance Report 60: Arastradero Rd. & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)9.9 0.7 2.4 0.7 1.5 StopNeh 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.8 1.7 0.2 2.7 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s)99.3 StopNeh 1.44 Travel Time (hr)559.3 Existing Conditions: May 2007 p.m. Peak TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 7 SimTraffic Performance Report 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Existing Conal1:lons. p.m. Peak Delay / Veh (s)3.4 0,6 2.0 2.0 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)2.0 0.6 1.5 4.1 29: Mumford PI, & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.4 0.4 6.7 1.8 1.9 StopNeh 0,00 0o00 0.41 0.00 0,02 Travel Time (hr)1.8 0.0 0.3 2.0 4.1 52: Arastradero Rd, & Charleston Ct. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)31.1 1.2 31.5 568.7 522.1 91.5 StopNeh 0,71 0.03 0.63 0.99 1,01 0.44 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.6 8.3 11,3 17,6 38.0 57: Arastradero Rd. & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)0.6 1.3 0.0 1.0 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)0.7 2.0 0.0 2,7 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 6 SimTraffic Performance Report 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. Performance by movement Existing Conditions: May 2007 p.m. Peak Delay / Veh (s)1.3 1.3 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)4.1 4.1 16: Arastradero Rd. & Louis Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)22.9 3.7 1.9 1.8 0.5 4.9 19.5 6.9 3.6 Stop/Veh 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 1.01 1.03 0.14 Travel Time (hr)0.1 4.2 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 6.4 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)48.5 45.8 1.1 15.7 12.5 0.4 80.6 46.0 4.1 59.5 40.8 19.9 StopNeh 0.77 0.81 0.15 0.22 0.17 0.00 0.97 0.77 0.05 0.86 0.73 0.67 Travel Time (hr)1.7 5.8 0.2 0.4 2.8 0.1 1.5 7.0 0.4 2.1 6.0 0.1 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)33.3 Stop/Veh 0.55 Travel Time (hr)28.2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 5 SimTraffic Performance Report 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Existing Uonciii;iul~. ~v,~,), .... p.m. Peak Delay/Veh (s)73.6 6.2 49.7 6.2 115.2 30.4 28.1 StopNeh 1.00 0.87 0.88 0.90 1.53 0.57 0.67 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.6 16.0 0.3 73,0 19.2 2.1 27.3 1.08 0.39 1.00 0.53 1.3 7.9 0.0 26.8 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)30.0 3.7 13.5 2.7 21.5 8.6 9.4 StopNeh 0.94 0.16 0.48 0.05 0.82 0.83 0.37 Travel Time (hr)1.0 3.4 4.0 0.3 0.9 0.4 9.9 1 1 Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.2 0.9 11.6 4.5 24.9 15.8 3.2 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.07 0.74 0.60 0.05 Travel Time (hr)2.2 0.1 0.1 2.7 0,3 0.1 5.5 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)11.8 18.3 36.9 1.5 1.7 9.7 60.0 30.4 23.5 StopNeh 0.08 0.15 0.58 0.62 0.02 0.89 0.82 0.81 0.42 Travel Time (hr)0.1 3.3 6.9 0.2 3.2 1.7 5.2 1.9 22.3 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 6: Wilkie Wy. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Existing Conditions: May 2007 p.m. Peak Delay/Veh (s)88.3 47.5 28.1 19.9 7.9 171.3 StopNeh 0.95 0.91 0.88 0.76 0.83 1.64 Travel Time (hr)0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 3.0 60.0 9.8 16.5 8.1 7.5 34.7 0.64 0.32 0.79 0.21 0.27 0.47 11.2 0.5 0.2 5.3 0.1 21.6 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)58.7 28.0 12.0 55.0 22.2 10.4 71.0 33.2 17,9 62.6 29.8 36.9 StopNeh 0.93 0.66 0.63 0.89 0.56 0.42 1.18 0.53 0,32 1.01 0.53 0.83 Travel Time (hr)2.6 15.1 0.8 3.7 6.4 0.4 4.9 9.3 1,7 2.1 7.4 1.3 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)31.6 StopNeh 0.65 Travel Time (hr)55.7 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)29.8 8.8 20.3 8.8 10.4 11.0 10.0 StopNeh 1.00 0.88 0.74 0.19 0.25 0.44 0.25 Travel Time (hr)0.2 0.1 0.4 7.2 10.4 0.5 18.9 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 3 SimTraffic Performance Report p,m, Peak 3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)9.2 4,8 1.5 12.1 4.9 5.5 25.9 StopiVeh 0.75 0.15 0.38 0.63 0.16 0.20 0.94 Travel Time (hr)0.1 2.1 0.1 0.5 1.8 0.0 0,1 6.0 24.1 20,8 11.8 5.8 0,88 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.24 0.3 0,1 0.0 0.0 5.0 4 Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)5.8 1.3 0.0 2.1 1.0 9.2 3,0 3,5 1.2 Stop/Veh 0.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 1.00 1,00 1.00 0.02 Travel Time (hr)0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.9 0,0 0,0 0.0 2.7 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)234.3 42.3 26.0 134.2 141.4 138.7 378.4 341.5 142.5 55.5 67.3 43.5 Stop/Veh 2,48 0.86 0.88 1.20 0.98 1.01 3.11 3.13 2.72 0.82 0.80 0.85 Travel Time (hr)13.8 11.6 0.6 4.2 44.5 2.9 5.1 33.6 5.6 1,4 7.0 2.9 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)128,5 Stop/Veh 1.31 Travel Time (hr)133.2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions: May 2007 p.m. Peak 1: Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)53.7 17.6 8.7 106.4 97.3 49.9 34.9 Stop/Veh 1.15 0.57 0.59 1.86 1.37 0.73 0.90 Travel Time (hr)0.8 4.0 0.2 0.9 20.1 2.9 0.1 22.3 19.0 67.3 68.3 33.1 0.85 0.98 0.84 0.82 0.82 0.1 0.3 13.2 2.6 0.7 1: Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)58.7 Stop/Veh 0.92 Travel Time (hr)46.0 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)47.7 34.4 7.8 79.1 44.3 17.0 98.9 Stop/Veh 1.08 0.79 0.72 1.11 0.71 0.81 1.60 Travel Time (hr)2.3 3.5 0.5 3.3 4.6 1.0 8.4 35.4 27.5 81.5 47.3 41.8 0.90 0.84 1.62 0.96 0.98 10.0 0.5 4.9 13.9 1.5 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)47.3 Stop/Veh 0.99 Travel Time (hr)54.4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 1 Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express W~,. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p. m Peak Splits and Phases: #22 ~22 #12 ~22 ~12 ~t12 -’~ ~£~ ~10 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. #22 #12 #22 #22 #12 #22 ~ ~7~t e8 ~12 ~12 <’~ ell ~ ~12 Lane Configurations Sat& Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 21.2 32.2 29.6 61.6 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 Lead Lag None None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 16 4/23/2008 Timings 22 Arastr,adero Rd. & Foothill Express W~,. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Total Lost ~ime (~) ~.. .0 ,0~~ ~~:,~O Satd. FIow(prot)3467 3396 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3453 0 1787 3553 0 Fit Perm --~ C0.950~:~ ~~ .O.950 ~0.950 Satd. Flow (perm)3467 3396 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3453 0 1787 3553 0 Satd. Flow (RTOR),:.._- Volume (vph)112 383 64 68 496 58 66 441 130 99 422 16 Lane Group_FIow(~ph[ i.26 5 2. L Z5.~649 ~ :,.~ 0 .0 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Prot Permitted Phases 7 8 Detect0rPhases - -:- !4-. ~:7 7 :~-~3"-~- 8~,-8, i --6 --: 5 "~2-- Minimum Initial (s)8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 Minimum Split (s): ::-~ _- Total Split (s) 35.4 35.4 35.4 61.6 61.6 61.6 19.0 61.0 0.0 22.0 64.0 0.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0,32 0.32 0.32 0,07 0.33 0.08 0.34 Control Delay 63.6 76.3 13.6 12.7 14.2 0.6 98.0 50,1 101.6 45.5 QueUe Delay " i:.;:-:0.0 0.8 0~0 ~:2.8- : 3~~~~-~7~- 0.0 " O~0~ -~ : .:~ 0.0~- 0i0 Total Delay 63.6 77.1 13.6 15.4 18.1 2.4 98.0 50,1 101.6 45.5 Approach Delay 67.1 16.4 55,0 55.9 Actuated Cycle Length: 175.2 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 46.8 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 15 4/23/2008 Timings 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Total Lost Time Satd. FIow(prot) 1881 3574 0 1881 3574 0 3650 3574 0 1881 4853 1618 Satd Flow (perm)1881 3574 0 1881 3574 0 3650 3574 0 1881 4853 1618 Satd Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group FIow(vPh)0- .:,-"0 ,- .0 ..~:.:=0.:~.., .~0 .., 0.:_ 0.::: :0"~ 0 -.0 :~,0 -~ 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Perm Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase~ Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Spl~ (s) , .:,_ .: _ 8:0[.. 3~-0 ....,: L- ....&g ,31:0 :[ :~...-,&0,24:q__. : 8~0-:i~4.0 24.0 Total Split (s)19.0 37.0 0.0 19.0 37.0 0.0 19.0 25.0 0.0 19.0 25,0 25.0 Tota Split (%). Yellow Time (s)3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Recall Mode None None None None None Min None Min Min Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay Intersection LOS: A Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 0,0 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. ~’~ ~1 -:~r ~2 ~f" ~3 ~ ~4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 14 4/23/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastraaero p.m Peak Splits and Phases:12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. ~22 #22 tt22 :I:1:22 #12 #22 #22 #22 #22 Lat~Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 64.0 61.6 35.4 22.0 35.4 61.6 21.2 3.5 4.3 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 Lead Lag Lead Lead None Min None None None None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 13 4/23/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 0 10 Perm 947! 92.0 0 3556 3343 531 92.0 0.27 17.4 18.2 18.2 0 0 0 15 10 Perm 12 8.0 0.0 61.6 3.5 None 0 3571 2516 566 8.0 61.6 3.5 None 0.33 59.7 59.9 54.! 1473 0 1868 1599 1698 1705 2814 1473 0 1825 1599 1698 1287 2814 73 2 15 163 273 6 170 Perm Perm Perm Prot custom 12 10 10 11 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 61.6 32.2 32.2 32.2 29.6 61.0 29.6 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.3 3.5 Lag Lag Lag Lag None None None None None Min None 0.33 0.06 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.27 8.7 84.2 23.8 55.7 56.0 7.1 8.7 84.2 23.8 55.7 56.0 7.1 29.6 37.4 Actuated Cycle Length: 175.2 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 36.4 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 12 4/23/2008 Timings ,!,,,0: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn Hi~lh 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~ Satd. Flow (prot)1787 Satd. Flow (perm)1787 Volume (vph)91 Turn Type Prot Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s)8,0 Total Split (s)22.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 Lead/Lag Lead Recall Mode None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 Control Delay 25.1 Total Delay 25,1 Approach Delay 3574 2709 3574 2709 919 641 1599 1566 64 Free Free 15.0 15.0 67.0 45.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 Lag Min Min 0.60 0.45 1.00 6.0 14.5 0.0 6,0 14.5 0.0 7.7 13.2 3238 3238 138 8.0 33.0 3.0 None 0.23 14.3 14.3 14.3 0 0 89 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 50.7 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 10.6 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases:10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High "~ ~1 ~2 Intersection LOS: B TJKM Transportation Consultants Page11 4/23/2008 Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd.p.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Detector Phases ...."" .-Minimum Initial (s)4.0 Minimum Split (s); Total Split (s)39.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 AlI-RedTime (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lead-Lag-Optimize?i. Recall Mode Ped Act Effct Green Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 10 4/23/2008 Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations 4,~ Satd. Flow (prot)0 1607 Satd. Flow (perm)0 1564 Volume (vph)3 I Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases 4 Minimum Initial (s)6.0 6.0 Total Split (s)29.0 29.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Recall Mode None None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 Control Delay 22.4 Total Delay 22.4 Approach Delay 22.4 0 0 0 15 27 Perm 4 6.0 0.0 2g.0 3.0 Lag None 4 0 1795 1394 1 6.0 29.0 3.0 Lag None 0.13 52.2 52.2 27.4 1473 1646 3556 1402 1595 3556 51 17 960 Perm Prot 4 6.0 4.0 6.0 29.0 11.0 59.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 Lag Lead Lag None None Max 0.13 0.06 0.46 13.9 67.1 31.9 13.9 67.1 31.9 32.5 0 1646 3569 0 1617 3569 22 53 648 Prot 0.0 4.0 6.0 15.0 63.0 3.5 3.O Lead Lag None Max 0.08 0.50 70.0 23.2 70.0 23.2 26.7 0 0 4 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 126.5 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 29.9 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: Intersection LOS: C 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 9 4/23/2008 Timings 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~4"{{~ Satd. Flow (prot)1550 0 0 3564 3543 Satd. Flow (perm)1550 0 0 3088 3543 Volume (vph)17 21 40 750 827 Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases 2 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s)38.0 0.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode None Min Min Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.75 0.75 Control Delay 8.8 7.3 6.9 Total Delay.8.8 7.3 6.9 Approach Delay 8.8 7.3 6.9 0 0 42 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 96.5 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 7.2 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: Intersection LOS: A 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 8 4/23/2008 Timings 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak ,, ,11I,ii I II II Lane Configurations ~tit i~"~i {t~a Satd, FIow(prot)1787 4730 1599 3467 5074 Satd, Flow(perm)1787 4730 1599 3467 5074 Volume (vph)145 1479 145 199 801 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Split (s)24.0 55.0 55.0 17.0 48.0 Yellow Time (s)2.5 4.5 4.5 2,5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None Max Max None None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.44 0.44 0.09 0.40 Control Delay 72.2 33.1 4.7 66.1 29,0 Total Delay 72.2 33.1 4.7 66.1 29.0 Approach Delay 34.0 35.9 0 1787 3174 0 1787 3223 0 1787 3174 0 1787 3223 71 159 ~369 115 97 418 Prot Prot 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 24.0 38.0 0.0 20.0 34,0 2.5 4.5 2.5 3,5 Lead Lag Lead Lag None None None None 0.14 0.25 0.10 0.22 69.3 43,2 72.8 54.1 69.3 43,2 72.8 54~1 49,7 57,2 0 0 67 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 119.6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 40.6 Analysis Period (rain) 15 Splits and Phases:7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. ~ ~1 ~, ~2 ~ ~3 Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 7 4/23/2008 Timings 6: Wilkie..,Wy. &,.Arastradero..,..,Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. FIow(prot)0 1581 0 0 1762 0 0 3517 0 0 3556 Fit Permitted Satd. FIow(perm)0 1440 0 0 1687 0 0 2783 0 0 3307 0 0 Volume(vph)22 2 22 15 21 22 53 505 49 20 735 22 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Permi~ed Phases Minimum Initial (s)6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Minimum Split(s): " Total Split (s)46.0 46.0 0.0 46.0 46.0 0.0 54.0 54.0 0.0 54.0 54.0 0.0 TotalSplit(°/o)-. " " i. : :.46.0%:4&0%.0.0% 46.0%~6.:0%.ii 0.0%5:4._0 .0%% ~4.0%-. 0.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.14 0.76 0.76 vlc Ratio .,. :.:-~ ’,~.: ."i- Conirol Delay 12.8 14.2 3.1 3.2 Total Delay I2.8 14.2 3.1 3.2 Approach Delay 12.8 14.2 3.1 3.2 Approach LOS_: ~--._ . -~ ,,~. B_.i" :: ~11:,~ i-:?.:.-_~.!B~,-,...~,:..I:..:_.IA ....., ~.~i .~!... . A_~. ¯ Actuated Cycle Length: 64.1 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 3.9 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: Intersection LOS: A 6: Wilkie Wy, & Arastradero Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 6 4123/2008 Timings 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rdo 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~t’~i~’’~i~i t~ Satd. Flow (prot)1646 3574 1473 3193 3546 Satd. Flow (perm)1646 3574 1473 3193 3546 Volume (vph)186 804 48 105 1139 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Permitted Phases 6 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Split (s)16.0 47.5 47.5 11.0 42.5 Yellow Time (s)3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.41 0.41 0.07 0.36 Control Delay 123.0 27.8 6.4 56.8 68.6 Total Delay 123.0 27.8 6.4 56.8 68.6 Approach Delay 43.8 67.7 0 0 3446 0 0 3400 0 0 0 3446 0 0 3400 0 68 50 388 117 76 403 190 Split Split 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 26.0 26.0 0.0 25.5 25.5 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lag Lag Lead Lead None None None None 0.20 0.21 56.3 73.5 56.3 73.5 56.3 7315 Actuated Cycle Length: 109.3 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 60.0 Intersection LQS: E Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. ~ ~7 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 5 4/23/2008 Timings 4: Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i ~ Satd. Flow (prot)1646 1881 Satd. Flow (perm)277 1881 Volume (vph)3 539 Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases 2 Minimum Initial (s)12.0 12.0 Total Split (s)28.0 28.0 Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode C-Min CoMin Actuated g/C Ratio 0.95 0.95 Control Delay 1.0 1.3 Total Delay 1.0 1.3 Approach Delay 1.3 0 1787 1881 0 399 1881 2 5 689 Perm 2 12.0 12.0 0.0 28.0 28.0 4.0 4.0 C-Min C-Min 0.95 0.95 2.4 4.0 2.4 4.0 4.0 0o0 0 0 1753 0 0 0 1719 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 Perm Perm 4 4 4.0 4.0 4.0 27.0 27.0 0.0 27.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 None NoneNone 0.09 20.0 20.0 20.0 0 1691 1691 1 4.0 27.0 3.0 None 0.09 16.8 16.8 16.8 0 0 3 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 55 Natural Cycle: 60 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.43 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.3%ICU Level of Service A Splits and Phases: 4: Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 4 4/23/2008 Timings 3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 1787 1870 0 1646 278 1870 0 334 6 529 21 89 Perm Perm 2 2 6.0 6,0 6.0 31.0 31.0 0.0 31.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 C-Min C-Min 0.73 0.74 5.7 6.6 5.7 6.6 6.6 1879 1879 747 6.0 31.0 4.0 0.0 0 0 1665 0 0 0 !608 0 0 3 16 2 67 8 Perm Perm 4 4 4.0 4.0 4.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 24.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 C-Min C-Min None None None 0.74 0.74 0.18 15.8 10.4 8.6 15.8 10.4 8.6 11.0 8.6 0 1770 1599 3 4.0 24.0 3.0 None 0.18 13.9 13.9 13.9 0 0 4 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 55 Natural Cycle: 60 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7%ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases: 3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 3 4/23/2008 Timings 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations Total Lost Time (s) Satd. FIow(prot)1646 3463 0 1646 3417 0 1787 3542 0 1787 3521 0 Fit Permitted . . - Satd. FIow(perm)1646 3463 0 1646 3417 0 1787 3542 0 1787 3521 0 Satd. Flow (RTOR) Volume (vph)182 359 93 142 404 167 255 790 49 187 916 104Lane Group Flow (vph) _ 249 " 6!9 !::L0: --!_56 :, ,628-.,,, ’. ,O-.-, :283.~ : 932 O...2!_0, - 1i46 0 Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Permitted Phases Detector Phases Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Spli~ (s) Total Split (s) Total Split(%): Yellow Time (s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 8.0 4.0 8.0 4.0 6.0 8.0.: 27,0.__ .,: - !. &0 :25.0- ::-- , :8:0 25.0 ~ ~ . -8,0 .25.0 18.0 28.0 0.0 16.0 26,0 0.0 20.0 37.0 0.0 19.0 36.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag .-.,-Yes._ .Yes-._.’,yes ... None None None None None Min None Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.24 0.12 0.21 0.16 0.35 0.15 0.33 Control Delay 94.7 38.1 67.4 43.9 85.9 32.9 65.1 55.1 Total Delay 94.7 38.1 67.4 43.9 85.9 32.9 65.1 55.1 Approach Delay 54.3 48.6 45.3 56.7 Actuated Cycle Length: 97.2 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 51.4 Intersection LOS: D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 2 4/23/2008 Timings 1 Arastradero Rd. & Fabian 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero p.m Peak Lane Configurations 4’[,*4’~i~4*’~4’i~’ Satd. FIow(prot)0 3535 0 0 3417 1455 0 1704 0 1698 1728 1599 Satd. FIow(perm)0 2666 0 0 2862 1455 0 1704 0 1698 1728 1599 Volume (vph)40 698 42 27 736 180 15 10 41 614 122 74 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Split Split Perm Permitted Phases 2 2 2 1 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Total Split (s)41.0 41.0 0.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 12.0 12.0 0.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min None None None None None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.11 0.29 0.29 0.29 Control Delay 28.7 23.0 3.0 20.9 46.5 50.0 6.3 Total Delay 28.7 23.0 3.0 20.9 46.5 50.0 6.3 Approach Delay 28.7 19.1 20.9 44.5 Actuated Cycle Length: 71.6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 29.2 Intersection LOS: C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases:1: Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. ~ ~1 ~ ~2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 1 4/23/2008 Arterial Level of Service Arterial Level of Service: NB Arastradero Rd. Existing Conditions 7 o 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged Miranda Ave.9.4 13.7 0.0 16 Miranda Ave,.."-.i--: ’ -:.:.:l.t, .i:..6:3 _’.: ’ .::- 0.:1 v.:: i-:-31 :-.":- Gunn High 8.9 18.0 0.1 I7 George Ave.8.7 16.4 0.1 17 HubbarttDr. Willmar Dr.5.3 11.2 0.1 18 Terman Dr. Pomona Ave.2.6 10.1 0.1 26 Coulombe Dr. Los Palos Clemo Ave. Suzanne Dr. El Camino Real 13.2 17.7 0.1 11 0.1 2.0 0.0 50 Arterial Level of Service: SB Arastradero Rd. Suzanne Dr.1.1 14.9 0.1 31 Los Palos 1.0 6.0 0.0 26 Pomona Ave.4.5 15.4 0.1 25 Willmar Dr.4.2 10.3 0.1 21 George Ave.8.5 13.9 0.1 14 Gunn High 81.4 91.3 0.1 8 Miranda Ave.48.3 53.2 0.1 4 Total 236.5 344.2 1.0 13 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 6 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 84: Willmar Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)21.0 13.6 8.8 5.4 4.0 2.4 4.8 Stop/Veh 1.00 1.00 0.41 0.12 0.05 0.1!0.10 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.4 0.1 5.4 5.8 0.1 12.1 86: Arastradero Rd. & George Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)43.4 8.7 8.4 2.3 161.2 199.1 15.4 StopNeh 0.65 0.08 0.13 0.00 1.43 1.19 0.15 Travel Time (hr)0.7 8.3 7.9 0.0 1.2 7.5 25.5 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s)196.7 StopNeh 1.75 Travel Time (hr)1168.1 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 5 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 77: Arastradero Rd. & Suzanne Dr. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)0.1 6.1 1.1 25.7 11.0 1.1 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 Travel Time (hr)0.8 0.0 7.5 0.7 0.1 9.1 78: Arastradero Rd. & Clemo Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)11.7 3.3 0.3 0.2 27.3 6.1 2.0 StopNeh 0.71 0.02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Travel Time (hr)0.3 3.5 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 5.8 80: Arastradero Rd. & Los Palos Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)12.8 11.2 0.3 1.0 4.1 0.1 6.2 StopNeh 0.99 1.00 0.00 0.01 0.29 0.00 0.44 Travel Time (hr)7.2 0.3 0.0 3.2 0.3 0.0 11.0 82: Pomona Ave. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)27.5 6.9 2.4 2.1 8.6 4.5 3.8 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 0.41 0.06 0.06 Travel Time (hr)0.4 0.3 4.3 0.2 0.3 8.6 14.1 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)3.9 11.7 48.3 24.4 StopNeh 0.00 0.29 0.78 0.40 Travel Time (hr)4.0 9.7 29.9 43.6 47: Gunn High & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)0.9 0.5 43.6 85.3 36.0 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.77 1.03 0.52 Travel Time (hr)1.9 0.1 10.9 12.5 25.3 69: Hubbartt Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)88.3 82.9 69.7 3.7 6.5 4.2 6.9 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.10 Travel Time (hr)0.4 1.0 1.0 4.5 7.0 0.0 13.9 74: McKeller Lane & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)21.1 23.4 5.5 14.6 4.5 6.5 7.0 1.1 StopNeh 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.56 0.01 Travel Time (hr)0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 6.2 0.0 7.4 1.8 2.0 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 74: McKeller Lane & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.6 StopNeh 0.02 Travel Time (hr)13.3 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 3 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)101.1 8.9 81.4 100.9 19.5 6.4 13.0 53.1 StopNeh 1.03 0.37 0.80 0.5!0.65 0.44 0.81 0.62 Travel Time (hr)7.4 7.3 42.6 17.9 2.4 0.1 0.9 78.6 11 Arastradero Rd, & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.2 0.7 16.3 11.6 67.2 3.8 7.5 St Del/V eh ( s )_0i3 ]~0 ..:: StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.25 0.91 0.39 0.14 Travel Time (hr)3.4 0.1 0.2 10.4 1.1 0.1 15.3 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)33.4 23.8 48.3 27.1 97.9 94.8 25.4 217.1 1!4.2 55.6 StopNeh 0.25 0.19 0.66 0.64 1.33 1.04 0.93 1.57 1.48 0.70 Travel Time (hr)6.1 7.3 14.2 8.8 0.1 29.6 7.5 16.8 5.7 96.2 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)45.3 69.3 1.7 30.6 26.6 1.7 67.7 37.5 5.8 59.6 50.3 57.6 StopNeh 0.79 0.95 0.08 0.26 0.21 0.02 0.90 0.69 0.06 0.93 0.81 0.95 Travel Time (hr)4.2 25.5 1.2 1.3 6.8 0.3 9.8 12.2 2.2 5.7 11.8 0.4 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)43.5 StopNeh 0.62 Travel Time (hr)81.5 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. Performance by movement 7 - 9 a.m., with Peaking Engaged Delay / Veh (s)77.2 31.2 10.1 51.3 32.4 23,9 60.6 Stop/Veh 1.09 0.71 0.65 0.95 0.72 0.63 1.11 Travel Time (hr)5,0 16.9 2.7 11.3 35.6 2,4 7.4 29.6 11.9 53.2 38.5 31.4 0.69 0.36 1.00 0.79 0.90 I1.0 0.7 4.5 12.9 3.7 7: El Camino Real & Charleston Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)35.4 StopNeh 0.77 Travel Time (hr)113.8 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)22.3 13.7 23.4 12.8 5,9 3.5 9.5 StopNeh 0.75 0.87 0.72 0.39 0.24 0.22 0.34 Travel Time (hr)1.3 0,7 0.6 9.6 6.1 0.1 18.5 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)89.7 90,5 59.2 78.3 75.3 5.4 101.4 StopNeh 1.09 1.06 1.07 1.04 0.94 0.84 1.35 Travel Time (hr)1.8 3.1 2.2 3.9 1.3 1.2 1.2 32.9 27,1 84.7 28.0 23,5 0.60 0,61 1.22 0.58 0.68 15.2 2.8 5.3 17.3 0.4 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)37.2 StopNeh 0.68 Travel Time (hr)55.8 Gunn High Congestion Adjustment TJKM Transportation Consultants Arastradero Road, Palo Alto Page 1 Arterial Level of Service Arterial Level of Service: WB Arastradero Rd. Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak Louis Rd. Charleston Ct. 1.5 6.8 0.0 24 0.8 2.8 0.0 25 26i4..~8:0 5 1 15.7 18.7 0.0 5 3.1 9.1 0.1 21 Carlson Cir. Mumford PI. Alma St. Wilkie Wy... El Camino Real 2.1 13.2 0.1 28 1.1 4.9 0.0 28 2.5 12.2 0.1 27 47.9 51.8 0.0 3 51.8 70.8 0.2 10 Donald Dr. 31.7 51.6 0.2 13 Gunn High 19.2 29.3 0.1 13 Miranda Ave. Miranda Ave.56.5 61.8 0.1 3 Foothill ExpressWy.:- " ......7- 7.2 ’~:’~11~2-0:0 ,~-~12->2 i .... Total 361.3 620.2 2.6 15 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 9 Arterial Level of Service Arterial Level of Service: EB Arastradero Rd. Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak Miranda Ave.2.5 6.7 Gunn High 4.9 14.5 Terman Dr.30.2 55.5 El Camino Real 49.2 86.2 Alma St.443.7 464.7 0.6 4.6 2.6 12.7 5.5 14.3 7.8 12.1 2.3 6.1 Montrose Rd.3.4 24.4 1.1 4.7 Total 2881.0 3141.1 0.0 20 0.1 21 0.2 16 0.4 15 0.2 2 0.0 29 0.1 27 0.1 21 0.0 12 0.0 20 0.2 30 0.0 25 2.5 7 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 8 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak 52: Arastradero Rd. & Charleston Ct. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)3.4 1.2 26.9 199.1 235.5 42.6 StopNeh 0.43 0.03 0.59 0.89 0.92 0.35 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.8 6.5 4.9 8.5 20.7 57: Arastradero Rd. & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.0 1.4 0.0 1.1 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 Travel Time (hr)1.0 1.7 0.0 2.7 60: Arastradero Rd. & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)5.1 0.6 2.5 1.0 1.3 StopNeh 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)0.0 0.9 1.6 0.2 2.7 Total Network Performance Delay / Veh (s)230.2 StopNeh 1.76 TraVel D St (mi). 5234!3 " : " Travel Time (hr) 953.2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 7 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)2058.52019.81722.5 26.2 19.1 0.8 599.4 178.3 137.9 75.3 70.2 125.3 Sto p/Veh 0.67 0.91 0.00 0.30 0.20 0.05 2.86 0.33 0.00 1.03 0.73 1.00 Travel Time (hr)36.8 149.2 26.5 0.7 2.8 0.3 29.9 17.9 6.0 2.5 6.8 0.7 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)476.8 Stop/Veh 0.65 Travel Time (hr)279.8 24: Miranda Ave. & Foothill Express Wy. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)1.9 426.8 430.6 292.6 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.02 0.24 0.10 Travel Time (hr)1.5 50.8 71.3 123.6 29: Mumford PI. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.5 0.9 5.4 2.0 1.8 Stop/Veh 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.01 Travel Time (hr)2.1 0.0 0.2 1.8 4.1 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 6 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak 11 Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh (s)0.9 0.5 34.3 8,6 30.6 14.5 6.0 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.19 0.69 0.44 0.13 Travel Time (hr)1.5 0.1 0.1 4.6 0.4 0.!6,7 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)34.5 31.4 57.2 21.5 134.7 142.3 27,2 118.5 74.1 62.4 StopNeh 0.27 0.27 0.72 0.71 1.00 1.20 1.18 0.90 1.01 0.78 Travel Time (hr)2,5 2.6 8.0 4.1 0.1 16.6 3.1 7.4 3.3 47.6 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.3 1.3 StopNeh 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (hr)2.8 2.8 16: Arastradero Rd. & Louis Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)7.2 3.4 3.4 0.8 0.1 4.7 16.1 4.9 3.3 StopNeh 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 1.00 1,00 1.00 0.16 Travel Time (hr)0.1 5.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 7.1 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 5 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing uorl(]l[IOllb, ivl¢~)~ a.m. Peak 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)20.1 5.7 21,6 9.6 11.7 8.3 11.2 Stop/Veh 0,76 0.78 0.79 0.27 0.31 0.20 0~32 Travel Time (hr)0.4 0.2 0,5 5.6 I3.!0.1 19.8 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movemenl Delay / Veh (s)60.6 68.0 53,8 87.4 72.5 20.9 87.2 Sto pNeh 0.81 1.02 1.00 0.63 0.64 0.76 1,38 Travel Time (hr)0.6 1.1 0.9 2.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 30.2 30.4 85.5 31.6 44.4 0.59 0.81 1.15 0,59 0,75 10.2 1.7 3.0 12.8 0.3 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)38.3 StopNeh 0.67 Travel Time (hr)34.6 10: Arastradero Rd, & Gunn High Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)32.2 4.9 19.2 7,5 21,1 7.6 14,3 Stop/Veh 0.95 0.27 0.61 0.09 0.80 0,67 0.49 Travel Time (hr)1,4 2.2 6.6 1.6 1.6 0.3 13,7 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak 6: Wilkie Wy. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)131.9 197.2 145.5 97.9 50.0 112.8 275.0 223.7 116.8 20.2 8.8 4.4 Stop/Veh 0.95 1.14 1.02 0.87 0.73 0.82 1.44 1.60 1.32 0.77 0.24 0.23 Travel Time (hr)1.4 0.4 2.2 1.1 0.2 0.9 1.3 33.8 1.1 0.3 4,7 0.2 6: Wilkie Wy. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)111.9 StopNeh 0,90 Travel Time (hr)47.7 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)91.9 32.!13.7 90.0 76.2 89.0 78.8 48,6 25.4 113.8 49.8 37.7 StopNeh 1,00 0.72 0.75 0.92 0.75 0.71 1.2!0.85 0.45 1.43 0.79 0.81 Travel Time (hr)2.4 7.6 1.1 7.7 28.8 2.7 6.2 9.5 1.2 4.8 8.1 2.3 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)61,2 Stop/Veh 0.82 Travel Time (hr)82.4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 3 SimTraffic Performance Report 3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr. Performance by movement Existing Conditions: May 2007 a.m. Peak Delay / Veh (s)20.6 23.8 21.7 12.4 5.8 1.5 30.1 24.6 19.1 10.5 16.2 St Del~e.h (S)~:i0StopNeh0.72 0.65 0.71 0.91 0.26 0.14 0.95 0.92 0.75 0.88 0.52 Travel Time (hr)0.2 6.3 0.2 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.0 9.5 4: Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)1.9 2.6 0.0 6.1 1.1 0.0 17.2 2.0 32.0 8.0 2.1 StopNeh 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.75 0.04 0.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.05 Travel Time (hr)0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.3 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay/Veh(s)124.6 56.3 35.4 66.5 42.4 42.8 506.5 433.8 205.7 55.8 47.9 30.2 StopNeh 1.58 0.85 0.92 0.98 0.80 0.94 3.36 3.55 3.11 0.88 0.91 0.89 Travel Time (hr)11.6 18.8 0.2 4.7 9.4 1.0 9.9 42.8 6.0 0.6 4.9 1.0 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)111.4 Stop/Veh 1.32 Travel Time (hr)110.8 TJKM Transportation Consultants Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 2 SimTraffic Performance Report 1 Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. Performance by movement Existing Conditions: May 2007 am. Peak Delay / Veh (s)28.2 8.9 4.1 11.8 6,9 1.5 22.2 32.2 12.9 19.0 22.3 2.1 St De!/Veh (s)5: 4, 5:8 3:2,.09 2~4 :,30~~2 6 ;!i Stop/Veh 1.12 0.41 0.33 0.89 0.36 0.32 1.00 0.89 0.92 0.79 0.79 0.66 Travel Time (hr)0.9 3.0 0.1 0.1 1.6 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.3 0.1 1 Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)8.6 St Del~e~ (s);;6i6 StopNeh 0.46 Travel Time (hr)9.7 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)47.4 36.9 7.9 64.5 37.2 7.2 52.1 30.9 21.0 75.3 31.2 23.4 StopfVeh 1.11 0.81 0.74 1,21 0.64 0.91 1.15 0.79 0.84 1.37 0.81 0.80 Travel Time (hr)3.2 5.1 0.4 1.9 4.4 0.4 2.1 6.9 0.5 5.5 8.1 0.7 2 Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s)37.1 Stop/Veh 0,87 Travel Time (hr)39.4 Without Adjusting for Gunn High School Queuing Page 1 TJKM Transportation Consultants Timings 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Exp[ess Splits and Phases: #22 #22 22: Arastradero Rd. & Foothill Express Wy. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak #12 tt22 #12 #22 Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 45.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 Lead Lag None None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 16 4/23/2008 Timings 22: Arastradero, Rd. & Foothill Express W~’. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Total LostTime (s)... ’ 4:0 -4.0 . :#.O.. :410.._:4].0,!": 4.0-~/.4:0 140 : ~:0 .- .4:0 : :.-:i&0,. ._-4..0 Satd. Flow (prot) 3467 3396 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3410 0 1787 3546 0 Satd. Flow (perm)3467 3396 1599 1626 3424 1599 1787 3410 0 1787 3546 0 Satd. Flow (RTOR). Volume (vph)114 510 88 79 462 100 202 373 164 140 359 20 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot Perm Prot Prot Protected Phases .. ~.~!4 :-7_: i. :.~ 3_.8~., i,-~ i,~k~!:.:6 :..i~-’. ~~.5-.- . 2~i-Permitted Phases 7 8 Minimum Initial (s)8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8,0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s)35.0 35,0 35,0 45.0 45.0 45.0 35.0 65.0 0.0 35.0 65,0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.3 3.0 4.3 All-Red Time(s).. ! Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None Min Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.18 0,23 0.23 0.23 0.15 0.39 0.11 0.35 vlc Ratio Control Delay 63.3 88.8 14.9 21.5 30.1 1.8 96.6 38,1 96.2 42.6 Total Delay 63.3 186.5 14.9 25.7 37.9 4.2 107.9 38.1 96.2 42.7. Approach Delay 145.5 31.2 57.1 57.1 Actuated Cycle Length: 175.5 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 71.7 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: E TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 15 4123/2008 Timings 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Detector Phai Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) 1881 3574 0 1881 3574 0 3650 3574 0 1881 1881 3574 0 1881 3574 0 3650 3574 0 1881 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prot Prot Prot Prot 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 19.0 37.0 0.0 19.0 37.0 0.0 19.0 25.0 0.0 19.0 4853 1618 4853 1618 0 0 Perm 2 10.0 10.0 25.0 25.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag None None None None None Min None Min Min Approach Delay Actuated Cycle Length: 120 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 0.0 Intersection LOS: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 13: Arastradero Rd. & San Anthonio Rd. ~ 61 ~ 62 ~ o3 ~ ~4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 14 4/23/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. Splits and Phases: 1~22 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. #22 #22 #12 #22 #22 #22 Lai~Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 35.0 65.0 45.0 35.0 35.0 65.0 35.0 45.0 30.0 3.5 4.3 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.3 3.5 3.5 3.5 Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead None Min None None None Min None None None TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 13 4/23/2008 Timings 12: Arastradero Rd. & Miranda Ave. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations 4"{ tt ~ 4’ ~ ~i~ i~if Satd. FIow(prot)0 3499 0 0 3574 1473 0 1881 1599 3467 0 2814 Fit Permitted 06iSatd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 0 296 Perm 947 2180 0 0 3574 436 0 0 485 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.35 123.1 190.5 190.5 8.0 45.0 3.5 None 0.24 66.1 66.7 53.3 1473 0 1881 1599 3467 0 2814 458 3 464 280 259 0 153 Perm Perm Perm Prot custom 12 10 10 11 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 45.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 30.0 0.0 30.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 Lag Lag Lag None None None None None None 0.24 0.21 0.21 0.12 0.12 39.1 265.9 43.4 85.2 10.1 39.1 265.9 43.4 85.2 11.2 182.6 Actuated Cycle Length: !75.5 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 124.1 Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: F TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 12 4/23/2008 Timings 10: Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~f "~’~}’~i~~i~’ Satd. FIow(prot)1787 3574 2709 1599 3308 0 Satd. FIow(perm)1787 3574 2709 1566 3308 0 Volume (vph)148 811 823 320 221 99 Turn Type Prot Free Permitted Phases Free Minimum Initial (s)8.0 15.0 15.0 8.0 Total Split (s)21.0 55.0 34.0 0.0 45.0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None Min Min None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.69 0.44 1.00 0.19 Control Delay 32.0 5.4 24.6 0.6 23.1 Total D.elay 32.0 5.4 24.6 0.6 23.1 Approach Delay 9.5 15.7 23.1 Actuated Cycle Length: 68.3 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 14.3 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: Intersection LOS: B 10:Arastradero Rd. & Gunn High ~2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 11 4/23/2008 Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Total Lost Time (s). Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Satd. Flow (R~O.R_) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases ¯ Detector Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s)37.0 Total Split (%)" - " -26% Yellow Time (s)3.0 Lead/Lag Lead Recall Mode Ped Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 10 4/23/2008. Timings 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations 4*4’i~’~i "~"~i "~ Satd. Flow(prot)0 1729 0 0 1810 1473 1646 3440 0 1646 3556 0 Fit Permitted _ Satd FIow(perm)0 1461 0 0 859 1402 1617 3440 0 1616 3556 0 Volume (vph)32 54 55 92 23 99 18 774 140 115 913 20 Lane Group Flow (vph) Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Prot Prot Minimum Initial (s)6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.0 Total Split (s)27.0 27.0 0.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 18.0 60.0 0.0 18.0 60.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Recall Mode None None None None None None Max None Max Actuated g/C Ratio 0,17 0.17 0,17 0.06 0,40 0.10 0.48 Control Delay 59.8 118.6 11.6 69.0 39.8 93.4 30.9 Total Delay 59.8 118.6 11.6 69.0 39.8 93.4 30.9 Approach Delay 59.8 69.2 40.4 37.8 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 140.8 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 43.0 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 9: Donald Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Intersection LOS: D TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 9 4/23/2008 Timings 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~ Satd. Flow (prot)1569 Satd. Flow (perm)1569 Volume (vph)58 Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s)4.0 Total Split (s)30.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 Control Delay 13.2 Total Delay 13.2 Approach Delay 13.2 0 0 0 44 43 Perm 2 15.0 0.0 50.0 3.0 Min 0 3564 2813 762 15.0 50.0 3.0 3561 3561 1004 15.0 50.0 3.0 Min Min 0.73 0.73 6.8 7.7 6.8 7.7 6.8 7.7 0 0 20 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 78.2 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 7.6 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8: Coulombe Dr. & Arastradero Rd. Intersection LOS: A TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 8 4/23/2008 Timings 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay 1787 4730 1599 3467 5084 0 1787 3236 0 1787 3141 1787 4730 1599 3467 5084 0 1787 3236 0 1787 3141 112 670 163 324 1287 89 219 534 67 121 432 Prot Prot Prot Prot Prot 0 0 148 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 16.0 32.0 32.0 26.0 42.0 0.0 33.0 54.0 0.0 18.0 39.0 2.5 4.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 3.5 Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag None Max Max None None None None None None 0.09 0.24 0.24 0.16 0.30 0.21 0.38 0.10 0.29 155.7 46.9 7.7 71.6 56.2 71.5 32.7 90.4 79.0 0.0 Total Delay 155.7.46.9 7.7 71.6 56.2 71.5 32.7 90.4 79.0 Approach Delay 59.4 60.2 44.6 80.6 Actuated Cycle Length: 126.4 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 61.2 Intersection LOS: E Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7: El Camino Real & Arastradero Rd. ~5 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 7 4/23/2008 Timings ,.6...: Wilkie W)/..& Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, L;narles~u~,-,-,, ~,o, ...... a.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. FIow(prot)0 1577 0 0 1753 0 0 3531 0 0 3546 0 Satd. FIow(perm)0 1412 0 0 1502 0 0 3167 0 0 3222 0 Volume (vph)36 11 56 45 16 30 36 652 47 23 545 25 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s)~ .:--: 2.0 :-~ 2.0 : --!i:"2~0:~;_:2~0’ -:<: ’.. : -: 2(0 -.-~ 2.0 U.-:.L :_-. 2:0: ~:-;:2.0 :.. Lead/Lag Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.1g 0.68 0.68 Control Delay 12.1 14.9 4.4 4.0 Total Delay 12.1 14.9 4,4 4.0 Approach Delay 12.I 14.9 4.4 4.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 58.1 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 5.5 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 6: Wilkie Wy. & Arastradero Rd. Intersection LOS: A TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 6 4/23/2008 Timings 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd, Flow (prot) Satd, Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay Total Delay Approach Delay 1646 3574 1473 3193 3531 1646 3574 1473 3193 3531 301 1033 15 222 684 Prot Perm Prot 6 4,0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4,0 30.0 51.5 51.5 13.0 34.5 3,0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag None Min Min None Min 0.23 0.41 0.41 0.08 0.26 84.9 39.1 13.5 97.2 56.0 84.9 39.1 13.5 97.2 56.0 49.0 65.5 0 0 3464 0 0 3457 0 0 0 3464 0 0 3457 0 57 98 504 116 50 356 94 Split Split 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 0.0 30.0 30,0 0.0 25,5 25,5 0.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 Lag Lag Lead Lead None None None None 0.23 0.18 75.4 65.7 75.4 65,7 75.4 65.7 Actuated Cycle Length: 119.6 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 61.0 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Alma St. & Arastradero Rd. Intersection LOS: E TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 5 4/23/2008 Timings 4: Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i ~ Satd. Flow (prot)1646 1881 Satd. Flow (perm)298 1881 Volume (vph)4 837 Turn Type Perm Permitted Phases 2 Minimum Initial (s)12.0 12.0 Total Split (s)28.0 28.0 Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Recall Mode C-Min C-Min Actuated g/C Ratio 0.95 0.95 Control Delay 1.0 2.7 Total Delay 1.0 2.7 Approach Delay 2.7 0 1787 0 314 2 3 Perm 2 12.0 0.0 28.0 4.0 1881 1881 598 12.0 28.0 4.0 C-Min C-Min 0,95 0.95 2.7 3.6 2.7 3.6 3.6 0.0 0 0 1711 0 0 0 1666 0 0 1 3 0 3 3 Perm Perm 4 4 4.0 4.0 4.0 27.0 27.0 0.0 27.0 3.0 ,3.0 3.0 0 1746 0 1678 0 0 1 4.0 27.0 3.0 None None None None 0.09 0.09 19.0 20.8 19.0 20.8 19.0 20.8 0.0 Actuated Cycle Length: 55 Natural Cycle: 75 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.56 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.2%ICU Level of Service A Splits and Phases: 4: Arastradero Rd. & Carlson Cir. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 4 4/23/2008 Timings 3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr, 2007 Existing, L, nal~u,,-,-, ......... a.m Peak Lane Configurations ~i ~~i ’~4,~~1% Total Lost Time.(s) : -, . 4,0.: 3:0,. 3,0..iii3!0 i: 1 3i0 _~ .-. 4:0 . 3:0., i 4,0-3,0 _&O ~..-,.~4:0- .:-/4.0 Satd. FIow(prot) 1787 1872 0 1646 1870 0 0 1677 0 0 1752 0 Satd. Flow(perm)404 1872 0 256 1870 0 0 1587 0 0 1546 0 Satd. Elow(R_TOR) ......: . .: :.:_.;4 ......:, :5 ~ i ¯ _ ~": :: :79 - , ~~ 5 Volume (vph)32 785 26 29 571 23 29 0 73 14 0 5 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Permitted Phases 2 2 4 4 Detector Phases " ~2:-~2 : -:’.-:: 2.~: -:2:- ,:.,~¯4 i-i. 4 i~::4 4- Minimum Initial (s)6.0 6,0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split.(S) i-" .: =22.0.22o0f ; --22,0 22;0 -:..t :,-:.--24.01: +24~.0.;: ..!::24,0 ~ 24:0 .. Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 25.0 25,0 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0All,Red Time (s)-i!., _,::-2~0- 2:0 .,~,i. :i_:~. ! 2.01__ :_,!2:0-- -!ii~;i-/:-’. 2,0-~ .i.~Z0 -i_2r0._::;.2.0:i: ,;~, Lead/Lag Recall Mode C-Min C-Min C-Min C-Min None None None None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.78 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.18 0.18 Control Delay 6.6 9.1 7,9 6.0 9,6 13,9 Total Delay 6,6 9.1 7.9 6.0 9.6 13.9 Approach Delay 9.0 6.1 9.6 13.9 Actuated Cycle Length: 55 Natural Cycle: 60 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.5%ICU Level of Service B Splits and Phases:3: Arastradero Rd. & Nelson Dr. TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 3 4/23/2008 Timings 2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations Satd. Flow (prot) Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Turn Type Permitted Phases Minimum Initial (s) Total Split (s) Yellow Time (s) Lead/Lag Recall Mode Actuated g/C Ratio Control Delay 7otal Delay Approach Delay 1646 3481 0 1646 3467 1646 3481 0 1646 3467 272 495 105 121 416 Prot Prot 0 1787 0 0 1787 0 104 123 84 Prot 3528 0 1787 3517 3528 0 1787 3517 628 62 236 " 721 Prot 4.0 6.0 4.0 8.0 4.0 8.0 4.0 6.0 25.0 32.0 0.0 19.0 26.0 0.0 15.0 28.0 0.0 21.0 34.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag None None None None None Min None Min 0.21 0.32 0.13 0.21 0.10 0.24 0.18 0.34 59.2 29.2 53.5 41.0 67.2 48.8 60.9 32.8 59.2 29.2 53.5 41.0 67.2 48.8 60.9 32.8 38.5 43.3 51.6 39.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 89 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 42.8 Intersection LOS: D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases:2: Arastradero Rd. & Middlefield Rd. ~ ~1 t ~2 ~ ~3 ~ ~4 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 2 4/23/2008 Timings 1 Arastradero Rd. & Fabian W~/. 2007 Existing, Charleston-Arastradero a.m Peak Lane Configurations 4’~4’~i~~ Satd. FIow(prot)0 3542 0 0 3263 1455 0 1729 Satd. Flow (perm)0 2681 0 0 3051 1455 0 1729 Volume (vph)97 873 25 11 440 594 17 6 Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Split Permitted Phases 2 2 2 Minimum Initial (s)4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 Total Split (s)35.0 35.0 0.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 12.0 12.0 Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min None None Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.12 Control Delay 13.6 7.4 2.5 18.6 Total Delay 13.6 7.4 2.5 18.6 Approach Delay 13.6 5.5 18.6 0 1698 0 1698 23 206 Split 0.0 4.0 23.0 3.0 Lead None 0.15 29.1 29.1 1725 1599 1725 1599 34 42 Perm 1 4.0 4.0 23.0 23.0 3.0 3.0 Lead Lead None None 0.15 0.15 29.6 9.3 29.6 9.3 26.3 Actuated Cycle Length: 62.1 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Intersection Signal Delay: 11.7 Intersection LOS: B Analysis Period (rain) 15 Splits and Phases:1: Arastradero Rd. & Fabian Wy. :~ ~1 ~ ~2 TJKM Transportation Consultants Page 1 4/23/2008 Appendix B: Simulation Modeling =__= i d’~’d’d’d’d’~’d’d’d~d’d’N O~ O0 I~ (.0 ~ ~" O~ (~ ~-- o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 eLunloA ,.~ c c~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 auJnlOA r.- o ooo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 euJnlOA 00 I 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 00 auJnlOA 0 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000~0~1 0 O0 GO ~0~1 auJnlOA ~0 0 auJnlOA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 00 eu nlOA (~D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000O0I~(.0 1..0 ~03 0~1 ~-- 0 0 auJnlOA ~0 0 ~"0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 auJnlOA 0 0 O~ 0 0 0 00 0 0 000 !~ ~3 LO 0 00 0 0 0 0 00~1 ~ eLunlOA (D 0 0c~©0 :>0 0 0 I euJnlOA Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summary of Foothill Expresswa¥/Arastradero Project #: 07-7101-012 3> I TOTAL AM NOON 225 88 73 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N PM 112 ~ 383 AM NOON PM TOTAL 117 55 58 230’"J ~ NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day Date COUNT PERIODS am 7:00 AM -9:00 AM noon 10:00 AM -2:00 PM p~3:00 PM -7:00 PH AM PEAK HOUR 800 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 1115 AM PM PEAK HOUR 445 PM Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: NDS National Data & Surveying Services TMC SummarF of Miranda/Arastradero Project #: 07-7101-011 m TOTAL AM NOON PM 1236 I 436 I 269 I 531 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOON PM TOTAL 458 193 73 724 495 417 566 1478 I io1 i I lOI 21 I oi~" TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) 5/2/07 Day Date COUNT PERIODS j am 7:00 AM -9:00 AM noon 10:00 AM -2:00 PM pm 3:00 PM -7:00 PH AM PEAK HOUR 700 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 1215 PM PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM Intersection Turmng ~ovemen~ Prepan~d by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summary of Gunn Hiqh/Arastradero Project #: 07-7101-010 TOTAL AM NOON PM 489,919, SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOON PH TOTAL NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection N ~’me) Day ,pm Date COUNT PERIODS ] 7:00 AN -9:00 AH 10:00 AM -2:00 PM 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR 730 AM 1215 PM 500 PM Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summary of Donald/Terman/Arastradero Project #: 07-7101-009 TOTAL AM NOON PM SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOCW P~TOTAL i~ 20 15 4 39 ~ ~1~5~o~215!t~ NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day ~m Date COUNT PERIODS [ 7:00 AM -9:00 AN 10:00 AM -2:00 PM 3:00 PM .7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR 730 AM 1215 PM 515 PM Intersection Turning plovem~nL Prel:~ red by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summarv of Coulombe/Charleston Project #: 07-7101-008 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOON PM TOTAL .~’~1 o ( o I o I o NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day ;5110107 Date COUNT PERIODS I ;m 7:00AM -9:00AM n"~-~i0:00 AH -2:00 PM ,m 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR 715 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 1215 PM PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services TAlC Surnmary of E1 Camino Real/Charleston/Arastradero Project #: 07-7101-007 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) U z F- Da~e COUNT PERIODS ........) 7:00 AM -9:00 AM 10:00 AM -2:00 PM 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR 745 AM 1200 PM 445 PM Pr~r~d by: National Data & Surveying Services Tt4C Summary of Wilkie Wav/Charleston Project #: 07-7101-006 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES E N E NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name} Day Date COUNT PERIODS :o~n 7:00 AM-9:00 AM 1O:00 AM -2:00 PM LP~3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR 745 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 1245 PM PM PEAK HOUR 530 PM Intersecl::lon i Urlllll~j Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services TMG SummarF of Alma/Charleston Project #; 07-7101-005 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOON PM TOTAL 94 ’" 79 190"363 [ 0 ..... 3s6I3o6 ’ ~0~ ....~0’I 77 I 76 " 203 © 0 TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection i~lame) Day ! 4130107 Date COUNT PERIODS am 7:00 AM -9:00 AM noon 10:00 AM -2:00 PH Pm 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR 745 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 11’15 AM PM PEAK HOUR 530 PM P~e~a~ b~ National Data & Surveyin9 Services TMC Summary of Carlston Ct/Charleston Project #: 07-7101-004 NOON SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES + +1 1l NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AN NOON PM TOTAL I :+ ....I ~,,ls ......I +-~ ,l .....r~Z 0 "TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day pm Date COUNT PERIODS ] 7:00 AM -9:00 AN 10:00 AM +2:00 PM 3:£)0 PM ¯7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAKHOUR 745 AN 1100 AM 500 PN Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summary of Nelson/Charleston Project #: 07-7101-003 m SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N AM NOON PM TOTAL !s ’ 3,9 t 7-9 J 3 ~9 ’ ~Z " NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day n~n pm 5/1/07 Date COUNT PERIODS J 7:00 AH -9:00 AN 10:00 AM -2:00 PN 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AN PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR 730 AN 1230 PM 530 PM National Data & Surveying Services TMC 5ummarv of Middlefield/Gharleston Project #: 07-7101-002 AM 272 495 .... 105 NOON 143 340 PM 182 J 359 ~ SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES E NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day Date COUNT PERIODS ampm 7:00 AM -9:00 AM noon 10:00 AM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR 745 AM NOON PEAK HOUR 100 PM PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM by: National Data & Surveying Services TMC Summary of Fabian/Charleston Project #: 07-7101-001 TOTAL AM NOON PM.... o I ~13 II wl ...... 76 I 4o SOUTHBOUND APPROACH LANES NORTHBOUND APPROACH LANES N A.M NOON PM TOTAL 3qJRNING MOVEMENT COUNT (Intersection Name) Day [ amnoo. pm Date COUNT PERIODS ] 7:0Q AM -9:00 AM 10:00 AM -2:00 PM 3:00 PM -7:00 PM AM PEAK HOUR NOON PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR 800 AM 1200 PM 430 PM Appendix A: 2007 Volumes / Speeds o ~5i~5 ~5~5 ~55 ~5d5 ~5~5 ~5~5 o o co o o oo OD ,~Z"J I0") C".,J (’~ ~0 o’~ OD ~ 0 ~ 0 C:C) ~" o o c) 0 0 << oo C0© C0 0 co nn Z o~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000 au~nlOA oo E o oo ooo oo seLunloA oo o oo Volumes for: Thursday, December 07, 2006 Location: Arastradero Rd S/O Coulombe Dr AM Period EBNBSB 00:00 14 30 00:15 10 17 00:30 8 13 00:45 4 36 9 69 01:00 2 7 01:15 2 2 01:30 5 9 01:45 2 11 2 20 02:00 2 5 02:15 2 2 02:30 2 2 02:45 1 7 4 13 03:00 1 0 03:15 1 1 03:30 0 0 03:45 2 4 1 2 04:00 4 5 04:15 2 1 04:30 6 2 04:45 7 19 1 9 05:00 6 2 05:15 20 9 05:30 20 14 05:45 37 83 12 37 06:00 31 20 06:15 42 26 06:30 58 30 06:45 94 225 50 126 07:00 127 76 07:15 175 103 07:30 329 242 07:45 324 955 303 724 08:00 236 306 08:15 238 201 08:30 233 207 08:45 246 953 168 882 09:00 218 179 09:15 198 149 09:30 186 124 09:45 174 776 160 612 10:00 143 139 10:15 138 137 10:30 118 95 10:45 112 511 113 484 11:00 123 121 11:15 151 143 11:30 128 219 11:45 144 546 214 697 City: Palo Alto Project #: 06-7272-002 WB PM Period NB SB 12:00 145 232 12:15 147 213 12:30 174 204 105 12:45 185 651 180 829 13:00 187 147 13:15 186 118 13:30 184 101 31 13:45 !64 721 81 447 14:00 243 150 14:15 239 227 14:30 176 143 20 14:45 192 850 129 649 15:00 211 235 15:15 216 296 15:30 234 190 6 15:45 190 851 156 877 16:00 182 175 16:15 185 178 16:30 226 255 28 16:45 227 820 271 879 17:00 222 251 17:15 276 301 17:30 275 310 120 17:45 230 1003 258 !120 18:00 175 278 18:15 218 264 18:30 158 232 351 18:45 151 702 199 973 19:00 164 163 19:15 126 109 19:30 96 105 1679 19:45 88 474 97 474 20:00 94 95 20:15 69 92 20:30 74 66 1835 20:45 75 312 107 360 21:00 58 62 21:15 54 72 21:30 41 40 1388 21:45 38 191 60 234 22:00 40 39 22:15 31 37 22:30 25 51 995 22:45 22 118 15 142 23:00 14 21 23:15 14 13 23:30 22 6 1243 23:45 18 68 21 61 EB WB 1480 !168 1499 1728 !699 2123 1675 94~ 672 425 260 129 Total Vol.4126 3675 AM Split %52.9%47.1% Peak Hour 07:30 07:30 Volume 1127 ~ 1052 P.H.F,0.86 0.86 7801 36.1% 0 i3o’ 2179 0,87 6761 7045 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 10887 49.0% 10720 PM 51.0% 17:00 i7:15 10031 1147 0.95 0.93 13806 Combined 21607 63.9O/o 16:45 2133 0,91 Volumes for: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 Location: Arastradero Rd S/O Coulombe Dr AN Period NB SB EB WB 00:00 20 34 00:15 8 9 00:30 5 i0 00:45 6 39 14 67 01:00 5 9 01:15 2 8 01:30 3 4 01:45 2 t2 2 23 02:00 2 3 " 02:15 2 2 02:30 2 2 02:45 1 7 1 8 03:00 1 1 03:15 3 4 03:30 1 0 03:45 1 6 2 7 04:00 6 3 04:15 2 0 04:30 8 0 04:45 7 23 3 6 05:00 10 4 05:15 15 6 05:30 27 10 05:45 36 88 21 41 06:00 34 17 06:15 50 17 06:30 55 27 06:45 94 233 43 104 07:00 134 62 07:15 207 116 07:30 307 189 07:45 302 950 314 681 08:00 234 264 08:15 255 166 08:30 246 178 08:45 233 968 173 78! 09:00 210 181 09:15 178 164 09:30 182 131 09:45 150 720 140 616 10:00 119 138 10:15 154 124 10:30 !11 114 10:45 115 499 142 518 11:00 124 145 11:15 128 141 11:30 138 191 11:45 !38 528 165 642 Total Vol.4073 3494 AM Split %53.8%46.2% Peak Hour 07:30 07:30 Volume 1098 933 P.H.F.0.89 0.74 City: Palo Alto PM Period 12:00 12:15 12:30 !06 12:45 13:00 13:15 13:30 35 13:45 14:00 14:15 14:30 15 14:45 15:00 15:15 15:30 13 15:45 16:00 16:15 16:30 29 16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 129 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 337 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 1631 19:45 20:00 20:15 20:30 1749 20:45 21:00 21:15 21:30 1336 21:45 22:00 22:15 22:30 1017 22:45 23:00 23:15 23:30 1170 23:45 7567 34.8% 07"30 2031 0.82 NB SB 138 202 141 177 150 186 178 607 149 714 164 134 176 141 174 151 190 704 174 600 167 151 134 138 146 126 174 621 142 557 199 141 242 314 213 197 211 865 165 817 228 218 186 165 195 237 229 838 251 871 210 279 230 302 242 286 245 927 292 1159 192 264 213 260 253 205 266 924 192 921 166 168 150 116 113 ]~09 146 575 138 531 126 208 85 100 95 119 65 371 88 515 68 82 95 212 41 45 38 242 49 388 39 55 36 39 32 2O 26 133 19 133 18 22 20 21 22 15 18 78 17 75 7281 SB 10775 51.4% 17:00 1159 0.96 6885 Project #: 06-7272-002 EB WB 48.6% 17:00 927 0,95 1321 1304 1178 1682 1709 2086 1845 1106 886 630 266 153 14166 Daily Totals NB EB WB Combined 10958 21733 PM 65.2% 17:00 2086 0.97 oo ooo 0000 oo auanl0A o oo o E se~unloA o%~ ,,, 0o. o Oo.~ % % % % % % o% % Oo.~ Volumes for: Thursday, December 07, 2006 City: Palo Alto Location: Arastradero Rd btwn Hubbartt Dr & Georgia Ave AM Period NB EB WB 00:00 4 24 12:00 00:15 4 20 12:15 00:30 3 8 12:30 00:45 2 13 11 63 76 12:45 01:00 1 4 13:00 01:15 3 3 13:15 01:30 2 8 I3:30 01:45 2 8 2 17 25 13:45 02:00 0 4 14:00 02:15 1 2 14:15 02:30 2 1 14:30 02:45 0 3 3 10 13 14:45 03:00 1 0 15:00 03:15 0 1 15:15 03:30 0 0 15:30 03:45 2 3 1 2 5 15:45 04:00 2 3 16:00 04:15 2 3 16:15 04:30 10 1 16:30 04:45 10 24 1 8 32 16:45 05:00 9 2 17:00 05:15 21 4 17:15 05:30 26 11 17:30 05:45,51 107 8 25 132 17:45 06:00 41 16 !8:00 06:15 60 23 18:15 06:30 77 22 !8:30 06:45 116 294 41 102 396 18:45 07:00 151 78 19:00 07:15 208 94 19:15 07:30 375 228 I9:30 Project #: 06-7272-001 PN,~edod NB ......SB EB WB 118 198 123 209 165 188 197 603 162 757 1360 208 155 177 132 162 133 190 737 109 529 1266 199 192 165 288 136 170 160 660 !92 842 1502 177 254 210 220 !98 206 153 738 177 857 1595 147 190 155 192 168 238 182 652 249 869 1521 172 257 217 285 192 300 164 745 271 1113 1858 121 275 148 252 102 219 108 479 184 930 1409 142 153 102 113 63 109 07:45 382 1116 329 729 08:00 284 218 08:15 285 174 08:30 272 157 08:45 30!1142 168 717 09:00 252 156 09:15 251 134 09:30 202 120 09:45 202 907 147 557 10:00 140 138 10:15 161 116 10:30 131 97 10:45 122 554 10!452 11:00 134 108 11:15 165 136 11:30 131 182 11:45 114 544 217 643 Total Vol.4715 3325 ,, Split %58:6% ...........41.4% Peak Hour 07:30 07:30 Volume 1326 949 P.H.F.0.87 0.72 1845 19:45 73 20:00 86 20:15 53 20:30 76 1859 20:45 70 21:00 54 21:15 45 21:30 38 1464 21:45 35 22:00 31 22:15 30 22:30 20 1006 22:45 15 23:00 7 23:15 14 23:30 18 1187 23:45 15 8040 38.8% 38O 8O 455 835 88 70 59 285 81 298 583 64 73 36 172 38 211 383 34 4O 41 96 19 134 230 26 Ii 14 54 23 74 128 5601 7069 12670 Daily Totals NB SB FB WB Combined 10316 10394 20710 PM 44.2%55,8%61.2°/o 17:15 ":t7:00 763 1131 1858 0.91 0.94 0,93 AM 07:30 2275 0,80 Volumes for: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 City: Palo Alto Location: Arastradero Rd AM Period ,,: NB ....... btwn Hubbartt Dr & Georgia Ave SB EB WB 00:00 8 30 00:15 6 9 00:30 4 8 00:45 2 20 8 55 75 01:00 4 9 01:15 0 7 01:30 1 5 01:45 1 6 2 23 29 02:00 0 4 02:15 3 2 02:30 2 2 02:45 !6 1 9 15 03:00 0 0 03:15 i 3 03:30 1 0 03:45 2 4 2 5 9 04:00 4 3 04:!5 3 0 04:30 12 1 04:45 10 29 3 7 36 05:00 12 4 05:15 19 3 05:30 32 7 05:45 43 106 15 29 135 06:00 45 17 06:15 63 15 06:30 74 24 06:45 104 286 41 97 383 07:00 172 64 07:15 242 102 07:30 371 214 07:45 356 1141 303 683 1824 08:00 244 222 08:15 274 150 08:30 311 124 08:45 284 1113 173 669 1782 09:00 238 180 09:15 210 134 09:30 224 110 09:45 185 857 128 552 1409 10:00 139 119 10:15 i65 123 10:30 110 113 10:45 1!2 526 122 477 1003 11:00 128 i39 11:15 124 141 11:30 96 183 11:45 122 470 164 627 1097 Total Vol.4564 3233 7797 AM PM Period NB SB 12:00 116 192 12:15 125 152 12:30 162 164 12:45 195 598 138 13:00 192 132 13:15 180 131 13:30 146 178 13:45 218 736 125 14:00 147 170 14:15 123 147 14:30 130 145 14:45 171 571 146 15:00 201 188 15:15 210 310 15:30 148 211 15:45 t38 697 217 16:00 162 240 16:15 143 193 16:30 151 242 16:45 !72 628 239 17:00 178 266 17:15 166 292 17:30 169 262 17:45 156 669 268 18:00 138 260 18:15 165 249 !8:30 267 197 18:45 212 782 207 19:00 119 163 19:15 131 122 19:30 i01 Iii 19:45 148 499 135 20:00 136 129 20:15 59 91 20:30 70 119 20:45 60 325 85 21:00 52 100 21:15 50 191 21:30 30 47 21:45 22 154 43 22:00 30 50 22:15 26 38 22:30 22 22 22:45 26 104 20 23:00 18 23 23:15 17 17 23:30 20 10 23:45 15 70 17 Project #: 06-7272-001 EB WB 646 1244 566 1302 608 1179 926 1623 914 1542 1088 1757 913 1695 531 1030 424 749 381 535 130 234 67 137 SPlit % ,,SB.5% ........41.5%37.4% Peak Hour 07:30 07:30 i 07:30 Volume 1245 889 2i34 P.HoF.0.84 0.73 0.81 5833 NB 10397 7194 13027 Daily Totals SB EB WB Combined 10427 20824 PM 44.8%55.2%62.6°/0 18:00 17:00 17:00 :782 1088 1757 0.78 0.93 0.96 TJKM Intersection Turning Movement Summary Proje,Ft:...........27-079 Control Speed Limit ......Survey Date:10/5/2005 DAY:Wednesday N-S Approach: El Camino Signal ......35 Survey Time:7:00 AM To 9:00 AM E-W Approach: Arastradero Signal 25 City: PaiD Alto Recorder: PEAK HOUR 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM’ 212 J 447 ~ 171 110 217 523 El Camino 185 540 TOTAL 66 365 1370 28 Eastbound Noah 1073PHF = , 0,8278 830 Arrival / Departure Volumes PHF =1 835 1799 7:00 AM --7:15 AM 7:15 AM ---7:30 AM 7:30 AM --7:45 AM 7:45 AM --8:00 AM 777 1763 PHF =0.9461 806 585 PHF = 0.6534 PHF = 1.0014 Time Period Northbound Westbound SouthbOund ..... [From ......To ,,, Left Left Thru ....Ri~,,~t Left Thru Right TotalThru Right Left Thru Right SURVEY DATA 110 ~ 79 108 50 _ 135 ! 23 187 i 33 33 ! 84 4365 t 1351 37 66 I 1291 63 48 j 99 I 28 TOTAL BY PERIOD 8:00 AM --8:15 AM 8:15 AM ---8:30 AM 8:30 AM --8:45 AM 8:45 AM --9:00 AM 7:15 AM ---7:30 AM 7:30 AM --7:45 AM 7:45 AM --8:00 AM 8:00 AM ---8:15 AM 8:15 AM --8:30 AM 8:30 AM ---8:45 AM 8:45 AM ---9:00 AM 7:00 AM -- 7:15 AM -- 7:30 AM 7:45 AM --- 8:00 AM 95 i 316 78 } 362 92 i 321 100 t 371 t 4 I 11 i 9 12 200 [ 34 i 2711 ~-~-~--i 54 t 28 33 I 99 69 I 1610 i101 i 60 i 41 110 [ 640 ! 185 110 i 540 j 185 83 [ 430 i 106 57 i 322 i 56 HOURLY TOTALS 1""447 i .171_~ 365 I 1370{ 28 66 523 I 217 447 I 171 365 t 1370f__28 66 ~! 217 270 I 1054 I_ 24 54~ ~2__~__[ 183 192 { 692I 20 43{ 200 I 129 100 I 371 ! 9 10 ! 101 ! 60 8:00 AM 212 8:15 AM 212 8:30AM 179I 363 _L_12___~8 8:45AM 114l 228 1 91 9:00AM 48 ] 99 i 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,037 1,053 1,057 1,087 0 0 0 41234 4,234 3,197 2,144 1,087 Lane Configuration t I i t #"’:! ....!!I ......’O’:"~erall Peak Hour Factor 0.80 II 0.83 i 0.6~ ,0.96 i 0.95 i 0.64 0.50 i 0.65 ’~I’ 0.~’9 1.02 I 1.00 i 0.59I I i.00 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED S UR VE Y S UMMA R Y PROJECT NAME: PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY DATE:9/11/2002 PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 DAY:THURSDAY LOCATION :ARASTRADERO WEST OF DONALD WEATHER : FAIR DIRECTION :WESTBOUND MACHINE # : S-6954 JURISDICTION: PALO ALTO FILENAME : ARWDNPA 2 BEOIN ’ TOTALI 1-14 15’19 20-24 25-"29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54" 55"991 TIME [ ,,,VOLI[ M~H ] MPH ] MPH ] MPH’"[ MPH 1,, £lP~l M~H,,,I M,PH I MP,H i "MPH [I AVG !2:’00 AM 76 I 3 4’14 42 7 4 1 0 0 31 01:00 AM 48 1 0 3 17 19 6 2 0 0 0 30 02:00 AIM 41 0 1 1 14 19 5 1 0 0 0 31 03:00 AM 31 0 0 1 13 11 3 3 0 0 0 31 " 04:00 AM 37 1 2 2 15 10 .......4"3’’0 ....0 0 29 05:00 AIM 142 2 2 20 47 55 14 2 0 0 0 29 06:00 AM 275 12 7 46 115 70 20 5 0 0 0 28 07:00 AIM 647 30 45 105 232 181 49 5 0 0 0 27 08:00 AM 614 24 43 112 ’"190 179 ’"6~’ 4 0 0’0 27 ..... 09:00 AM 487 15 40 97 146 !42 40 7 0 0 0 27 10:00 AM 384 18 38 89 108 81 46 4 0 0 0 27 11:00 AM 412 20 34 80 t29 86 57 6 0 0 0 27 12:00 NN .......456 I3 35 ...............~i’"151 121 53 2 b 0 ...............0 28 01:00 PM 405 9 31 88 138 87 50 2 0 0 0 27 02:00 PM 379 17 32 73 124 91 38 4 0 0 0 27 03:00 PM 511 15 41 87 180 14l 42 5 0 0 0 27 ’ 04:00 PM .....589 14 35 ’86 i96 183 68 7 .......1 ’ 0 ’0 0 28 05:00 PM 641 15 38 104 219 193 67 5 0 0 0 28 06:00 PM 429 9 32 83 151 t05 43 6 0 0 0 27 07:00 PM 326 9 20 74 82 89 43 9 0 0 0 28 08:00 PIM 256 5 18 50 "7g 60 40 5 0 ’0 0 28 09:00 PM 192 8 .15 33 50 54 26 5 I 0 0 28 10:00 PIM I37 7 9 15 47 30 18 10 1 0 0 29 11:00 PM II0 4 9 10 25 33 20 8 1 0 0 30 ........’TOTAL:’"7,625 249 530 I’i’34’~’ 2,48i"2,082 821 ’11’4’"4 0 0 28 PERCENT: ......i"00.0%3.3%7.0°/o 1’7.6%~32.5%27.3%10.8%i.5%"0.1%"0.0%0.0% PER~E~ILE:" ’: ’:’:l ::i6% I 25°/o: !’: 10%)1’9S%:1 ......................... SPEEDS:] i711! 20.9 ] 2"6.5 ] 33.1 ] 38.6 ] 10 MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE: 4,563 PERCENT IN PACE:59.8% SPEED EXCEEDED:125 MPH 30 MPH 35 MPH] TOTAL:] ~,502 3021 93~ [PERCENTAGE:] 72.2%39.6%12.3’/o ] Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510) 232-1271 SF/Peninsula:(415) 750-1317 BA YMETRICS TRAFFIC SPEED S UR VE Y S UMMA R Y PROJECT NAME: PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY DATE:9/11/2002 PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 DAY:THURSDAY LOCATION :ARASTRADERO WEST OF DONALD WEATHER : FAIR DIRECTION :EASTBOUND MACHINE # : S-6954 JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO F1LENAME : ARWDNPA 2 TI!vIE 1 yOL .].l .MPH I MPH I .M.PH [ MPH ] MPH I MPH’[ ’MPH I MP’H I MPH.’!. MPf~I’"|1 AVG 12:00 AM’87 0 1 6 ’ .30 ’29 13 6 ....2 0 0 ......31 ’ 01:00 AM 50 0 0 10 15 12 8 3 2 0 0 31 02:00 AM 32 1 1 5 9 9 5 1 1 0 0 30 03:00 AM 28 0 1 4 9 9 4 1 0 0 0 30 04:00 AM 28 ......0 .....0 3 8 9’7 1 0 .....0 ’"0’31 05:00 AM 48 2 1 3 18 I4 9 0 1 0 0 30 06:00 AM 176 4 3 20 58 68 19 2 2 0 0 29 07:00 AM 484 I5 16 83 172 151 43 2 2 0 0 28 08:00 .....~M 611 25 29 98 233 184 37 ....4 1 0 0 27 09:00 AM 347 14 40 42 125 96 27 2 1 0 0 27 10:00 AM 344 I7 33 56 108 92 35 3 0 0 0 27 11:00 AM 504 22 35 100 169 122 50 6 0 0 0 27 ......... i2100 NN 530 ’26 36 106 ’ 180 ....128 ......4-5 6 3 0 0 27 01:00 PM 360 19 29 92 103 66 46 3 2 0 0 27 02:00 PM 376 24 40 80 119 77 34 2 0 0 0 26 03:00 PM 51S 16 38 86 205 117 50 2 1 0 0 27 04:00 PM ’"666’"I’’’28 58 i04’’ 230 171 73 1 I 0 0 27 05:00 PM 582 29 6I 106 187 140 57 2 0 0 0 27 06:00 PM 406 18 42 85 I 18 93 45 4 1 0 0 27 07:00 PM 383 23 29 70 103 122 30 4 2 0 0 27 .... 08i’00"PM 297 17 22"46 96 85 22 "5 .........4 " 0 0 27 09:00 PM 220 5 18 34 64 69 23 5 2 0 0 28 10:00 PM 148 2 8 22 44 38 27 2 5 0 0 30 11:00 PM 106 2 4 16 27 29 17 6 5 0 0 39 TOTAL: .............7,328 "309 545 ’i 19-.7~i,430 1,930 ’~2’ ~’"73 38 0 0 27 PERCENT:100.0%4,2%7.4%17.4%33.2%26.3%:9.9%1.0%0.5%0.0%0.0% PERCE TI E i’1°%I 25%I 50,0 I I 9.0%1SPEEDS:[ 16.2 I 20.1 ’1 2~.,I,,,[,,,~3’.8’[,.~9.5’1 10 1MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE: 3,743 PERCENT IN PACE:51,1% ’ SPEED EXCEEDED:]25/v1pH 30 MPH 35 MPH] TOTAL:[ 5,197 2767 . 83~o [PERCENTAGE:] 70.9%37.8%11,4 % ] Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510)232-1271 SF/Peninsula:(415) 750-1317 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED SURVEY SUMMARY PROJECT NAME: PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 LOCATION :ARASTRADERO WEST OF DONALD DIRECTION :WESTBOUND JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO DATE:9/10/2002 DAY:WEDNESDAY WEATHER:FAIR MACHINE # : S-6954 FILENAME :ARWDNPA 1 BEGIN TOTALI 1-14 15-19 20.24 ~.5-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-99I’ TI M E VOL ~ MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH IvIPH MPH MPH MPH [ AVG 12:00 AM 46 1 4 3 15 15 5 3 0 0 0 29 01:00 AM 28 0 1 2 11 9 3 2 0 0 0 30 02:00 AM 26 0 0 1 7 12 6 0 0 0 0 31 03:00 AM 19 0 0 0 5 9 4 1 0 0 0 32 04:00 AM 45 1 0 1 18 17 6 2 0 0 0 30 05:00 AM 129 4 1 19 45 45 13 2 0 0 0 29 06:00 AM 266 13 2 45 105 66 30 5 0 0 0 28 07:00 AM 665 26 45 84 254 170 76 10 0 0 0 28 08:00 AM 606 19 33 94 210 166 75 9 0 0 0 28 09:00 AM 544 20 31 106 187 150 44 6 0 0 0 27 10:00 AM 352 19 42 62 106 85 33 5 0 0 0 27 l 1:00 AM 371 16 35 67 112 90 43 8 0 0 0 27 12:00 NN 433 15 25 81 151 97 60 4 0 0 0 28 01:00 PM 414 18 20 106 126 103 35 6 0 0 0 27 02:00 PM 379 14 34 80 117 80 39 15 0 0 0 27 03:00 PM 412 7 29 80 133 101 52 10 0 0 0 28 04:00 PM 478 15 35 87 153 128 51 9 0 0 0 28 05:00 PM 488 9 31 77 177 134 56 4 0 0 0 28 06:00 PM 449 6 20 92 157 120 43 11 0 0 0 28 07:00 PM 355 5 18 67 137 88 30 10 0 0 0 28 08:00 PM 219 7 15 34 61 58 35 9 0 0 0 29 09:00 PM 170 .4 13 22 58 43 20 10 0 0 0 29 10:00 PM 119 2 5 18 39 37 13 5 0 0 0 29 11:00 PM 92 3 4 13 20 28 15 9 0 0 0 30 TOTAL:7,105 224 443 1,241 2,404 1,851 787 155 0 0 0 28 PERCENT:100.0%3.2%6.2%17.5%33.8%26.1%11.1%2.2%0.0%0.0%0.0% PERCENTILE [ 10%[25%[50%[ 85%[ 90%[ SPEEDS:I 16"71 22"31 27"81 38"41 41.3[ 10 MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE: 3,812 PERCENT IN PACE:53.7% SPEED EXCEEDED:2~ MPH 30 MPH 35 IvlPH[ TOTAL:I 5,197 2793 -9-~-I PERCENTAGE:[73.1%39.3%13.3% [ Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510)232-1271 SF/Peninsula:(415) 750-1317 BA YMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED SURVEY SUMMARY PROJECT NAME:PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 DATE:9/10/2002 DAY:WEDNESDAY LOCATION :AIL~kSTRADERO WEST OF DONALD WEATHER :FAIR DIRECTION :EASTBOUND MACHINE # : S-6954 JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO FILENAME : ARWDNPA 1 BEGIN TOTAL] 1-14 15- 19 20- 24 25- 29 30- 34 35-39 40- 44 45-49 50-54 55- 991 T IIVl E VOL~1 MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH- .[. MPH I MPH .] MPHI MPH MPHII AVO 63 1 2 10 .....1’3 .....]8 10 ’5 29 0 2 5 4 11 4 2 19 0 1 3 2 8 2 1 21 0 0 3 2 16 0 0 22 !1 2 5 .......1’0 3 0 52 0 2 6 17 17 6 4 190 5 9 a-60 57 24 2 429 12 29 64 125 156 36 5 566 ....18 39 95 ....205 147 60 2 312 18 32 50 99 79 31 3 323 20 39 66 85 75 30 7 409 26 42 90 II5 96 32 7 472 30 46 106 145 §2 39 12 360 25 26 80 90 95 30 10 347 20 52 88 76 72 26 11 514 18 37 110 165 128 50 4 636 26 42 136 205 146 73 5 562 26 46 109 186 131 60 2 438 20 33 86 140 101 55 3 376 15 35 75 92 133 20 2 ’222 15 28 40 46 64 20"4 234 14 25 46 60 50 28 6 147 4 7 19 43 45 22 6 95 1 2 I8 30 21 16 3 ~838 315 577 1,339 2,010 1,768 677 106 100.0%’"~.6%8.4%19.6%29.4%’25.9%9.9%’i.6% 12:00 AM 01:00 AM 02:00 AM 03:00 AM 04:00 A’M 05:00 AM 06:00 AM 07:00 AM 68:oo AM 09:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 N~-N 01:00 PM 02:00 PM 0~.00 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 06:00 PIM 07:00 PM 08:00 PM 09:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM TOTAL: PERCENT: 1 2 0 0 0 I 2 0 0 1 1 2 4 2 2 3 2 0 4 5 5 1 4 46 0.7% "o M 0 0 30 0 0 32 0 0 30 0 0 29 0 0 30 0 0 28 0 0 28 0 0 27 0 0 27 0 0 26 0 0 26 0 0 26 0 0 27 0 0 26 0 0 27 o o 27 0 0 27 0 0 27 0 0 27 0 0 27 0 0 27 0 0 29 0 . 0 30 0 0 27 0.0%6.0% PERCENTILE I l°%t 25% l-50%[ 85°/ [ 96%ISPEEDS:I 14"91 I8"9! 23.3 [ 33.1( 4’6.2I10 IvlPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE: 3,778 PERCENT IN PACE:55.3% SPEED EXCEEDED:125 MPH ’ 30 MPH 35 MP_H] TOTAL:[ -~,6T 2597 --89-~- .] PERCENTAGE:~ 67.4%38.0%12.1%| Alamed a:(5 1 0) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510)232-1271 SF/Peninsula:(4 15) 750-13 17 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED S UR VE Y S UMMA R Y PROJECT NAME:PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY DATE:9/10/2002 PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 DAY:WEDNESDAY LOCATION :ARASTRADERO WEST OF ALTA MESA WEATHER : FAIR DIRECTION :WESTBOUND MACHINE # : S-6954 JURISDICTION: PALO ALTO FILENAME : ARWAMPA 1 BEGIN @OTALI 1-14 15-19 2~-24 25.=913oi3 ,,135:39 40 - 44145 - 491, ,50 - 54 55-’99ITIME I ,VOL I MPH I MPH I MPH [ MPHI MPH I MPHI MPH [ MPH { MPH I MPH I AVO ............ 12:00 AM 84 2 3 4 26 20 .........18 7 4 0 0 32 01:00 AM 47 I 2 2 13 !2 10 5 2 0 0 32 02:00 AM 31 1 2 2 9 4 6 5 2 0 0 32 03:00 AM 33 1 2 3 4 9 9 2 3 0 0 32 04:00 AM 39 2 4 3 7 13 5 3 2 0 0 30 05:00 AM 82 4 2 7 28 23 12 5 1 0 0 30 06:00 AM 216 10 6 41 55 68 25 9 2 0 0 29 07:00 AM 794 30 52 166 259 223 52 11 1 0 0 27 08:00 AM 739 37 76 152 233 170 66 ~0 0 0 26 09:00 AM 511 16 43 99 167 125 52 8 1 0 0 27 10:00 AM 402 13 32 82 !33 94 40 7 1 0 0 27 11:00 AM 476 19 29 100 155 112 47 12 2 0 0 27 ..... 12:00 ~’"509 2~ ....48 63 179 111 "’ 76 ’~" ~ ....0 0 27 01:00 PM 387 I5 26 70 113 82 72 8 1 0 0 28 02:00 PM 449 18 28 83 144 101 64 9 2 0 0 28 03:00 PM 470 20 38 75 175 91 53 14 4 0 0 28 04:00 PM ......599 29 52 111 198 144 56 7 2 0 0 27 05:00 PM 661 34 56 108 230 163 62 5 3 0 0 27 06:00 PM 527 9 22 89 192 160 44 9 2 0 0 28 07:00 PM 439 6 15 93 140 108 62 15 0 0 0 29 08:00 PM 292 5 9 53 98 61 .........59 ~1 0"0 29 09:00 PM 285 4 5 42 112 75 36 9 2 0 0 29 10:00 PM 184 2 - 8 22 64 44 28 12 4 0 0 30 11:00 PM 121 2 4 22 34 26 20 8 5 0 0 30 TOTAL: .......~37Z 307 564’"’"[1,492 2,768 2,039 974 1~’6 47 0 .....0 28 PERCENt:t00.0%3.7%6.7%I 17.8%33.0%24.3%11.6%2.2%0.6%"0.0% 0.0% SPEEDS:I 184~ .....235 ~ )86’""’~362 ~ 39):-~I0 MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER N PACE:3,812 PERCENT ~ PACE:45.5% SPEED EXCEEDED:125 ~H 30 MPH 35 MPHITOTAL:[ ..~,014 3,246 1~207 [ PERCENTAGE:~ 71.8%38.7%14.4% ] Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510)232-1271 SF/Peninsula(415) 750-1317 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED SURVEY SUMMARY PROJECT NAME:PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076. LOCATION :ARASTRADERO WEST OF ALTA MESA DIRECTION :EASTBOUND JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO DATE:9/10/2002 DAY:WEDNESDAY WEATHER : FAIR MACHINE # : S-6954 FILENAME :ARWAMPA 1 BEGIN TOTAL ],,,,) -14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-4~ 45-49 50-54 55-99II ITIME ] VOL I MPH I MPH I MPH I MPH I MPH I MPH ] MPH I MPH I MPH ! MPH I AVO 12:00 AM 106 ’ 3 "1 9 26’34 14 15 4 ’0 01:00 AM 55 1 1 2 15 12 9 10 5 0 02:00 AM 34 0 2 1 7 13 4 5 2 0 03:00 At’vl 29 0 4 4 4 5 6 4 2 0 04:00 AM 40 2 5 6’10 6 3’7 .....l 0 05:00 AM 81 5 15 26 5 12 8 8 2 0 06:00 AM 172 9 16 37 3I 43 19 13 4 0 07:00 AM 576 22 43 131 168 138 52 20 2 0 08:00 AIVl 739 25 56 151 206 "200 76 22 3 0 09:00 AM 423 13 34 85 119 94 44 29 5 0 10:00 AM 409 19 32 77 86 99 63 31 2 0 11:00 AM 444 14 38 80 129 105 50 25 3 0 !2:00 NrN 523 25 44 8_3 140 128 56 45 2 0 01:00 PM 464 !6 32 83 126 107 67 33 0 0 02:00 PM 582 27 26 111 179 131 75 29 4 0 03:00 PM 819 33 52 140 !84 233 t31 39 7 0 04:00 PM 812 33 41 149 190 197 150 45 7 0 05:00 PM 711 24 30 162 161 182 104 43 5 0 06:00 PM 557 25 42 97 156 97 92 42 6 0 07:00 PM 438 19 33 70 122 64 88 33 9 0 08:00 PM 308 15 35 57 65 43 56 32 5 0 09:00 PM 254 8 20 35 6_5 33 62 26 8 0 10:00 PM 169 1 5 32 34 24 43 22 8 0 11:00 PM 117 I 4 16 32 16 32 10 6 0 TOTAL:8,862 340 611 1,644 2,257 2,016 1,304 .......588 1"02 0 PERCENT:100.0%.,.8%1 6.9%18.6%25.5%22.7%14.7%6.6%1.9.2%0.0% 0 32 0 34 0 33 0 31 0 29 0 26 0 28 0 27 0 28 0 28 0 29 0 28 0 28 0 29 0 28 0 29 0 29 0 29 0 29 0 29 0 29 0 30 0 32 0 32 0 290.o% PERCENTILE I1°%I 25% ’!50%I 85%"1 90%ISPEEDS:[,,,,,15.7I 19.8 [24.1 [ 34.9’’"! 38.6 [ 10 MPH PACE SPEED:. 25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE:4,273 PERCENT IN PACE:48.2% SPEED EXCEEDED:!25 MPH 30 MPH 35 MPH[ TOTAL:1.6,267 4,010 1,994IPERCENTAGE:[ 70.7%45.2%22.5% I Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510) 232-1271 SF/Peninsula(415) 750-1317 BA YMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED SURVEY SUMMARY PROJECT NAME: PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 LOCATION :AIL~STRADERO WEST OF ALTA MESA DIRECTION :EASTBOUND JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO BEGIN TIME DATE:9/11/2002 DAY:THURSDAY WEATHER : FAIR MACHINE # : S-6954 FILENAME :ARWAMPA 2 12:00 AM 01:00 AM 02:00 AM 03:00 AM 04:00 AM 05:00 AM 06:00 AM 07:00 AM 08:00 AM 09:00 AM !0:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 NN 01:00 PM 02:00 PM 03:00 PM 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 06:00 PM 07:00 PM 08:00 PM 09:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PIM TOTAL: PERCENT: ! TOTALI 1-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35 ! VOL I MPH I MPH I MPH I MPH ! MPH,, N !-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-991 ![PH MPH MPH MPH MPH I AVG ....... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 113 0 1 4 36 39 18 10 5 0 0 32 72 1 1 3 21 24 12 7 3 0 0 32 46 1 2 3 9 15 8 5 3 0 0 32 35 0 2 2 7 9 7 4 4 0 0 33 41 1 2 5 10 9 6 3 5 0 0 32 82 4 9 20 20 17 6 3 3 0 0 27 192 6 18 34 56 45 22 9 2 0 0 28 503 20 50 96 143 126 46 17 5 0 0 27 672 35 67 122 195 157 64 26 6 0 0 27 419 15 41 94 109 83 52 22 3 0 0 28 406 14 33 86 101 93 49 28 2 0 0 28 497 17 35 75 149 123 60 34 4 0 0 29 526 26 38 92 151 112 62 40 5 0 0 28 430 19 42 86 107 70 58 46 2 0 0 28 444 28 36 65 134 84 55 35 7 0 0 28 635 29 40 122 172 126 106 33 7 0 0 28 752 26 26 139 215 171 133 37 5 0 0 29 641 30 33 134 176 143 90 29 6 0 0 28 489 18 35 76 146 91 78 36 9 0 0 29 452 22 25 64 135 -72 81 42 11 0 0 30 372 14 20 47 112 89 52 33 5 0 0 30 2~5 4 15 34 68 54 46 20 4 0 0 30 156 1 5 22 42 30 34 15 7 0 0 31 129 0 5 20 36 26 26 8 8 0 0 31 8,349 331 581 1,445 2,350 1,808 1,171 542 121 0 0 29 100.0%4.0%7.0%17.3%28.1%21.7%14.0%6.5%1.4%0.0%0.0% PERCENTILE [10%25%I 50%I 85%! 90%[ SPEEDS:I t6.3 18.7 23.5 I 34"0 ! 37.8 I 10 MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUMBER IN PACE:4,158 PERCENT IN PACE:49.8% SPEED EXCEEDED:125 MPH 30 MPH 35 MPHITOTAL: I 5,992 3,642 1,834 I PERCENTAGE:71.8%43.6%22.0% ~ Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510) 232-1271 SF/Pefiinsula:(415) 750-1317 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES SPEED S UR VE Y S UMMA R Y PROJECT NAME:PALO ALTO SPEED SURVEY PROJECT NUMBER : 2309076 LOCATION :AI~&STIL~DERO WEST OF ALTA MESA DIRECTION :WESTBOUND JURISDICTION:PALO ALTO DATE:9/11/2002 DAY:THURSDAY WEATHER:FAIR MACHINE # : S-6954 FILENAME :ARWAMPA 2 BEGIN TOTALI 1-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-99 !T I M E VOL ] MPH MPH MPH IvIPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH MPH ::i i:. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: !:: :: :: i l :::::,i::i i i::::::::i:: i:::::: i:: i:::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: i!::i::i:::: if:::::::::: ::i!i:.i::i::::! ~i~i~ ~s~iii !~iiiii!i!i~i~i ~i~i ~s~sii~ii!i~iii~:¢:: i iii!::~i~::~ii i i:¢ ::~::i ::iiii~i~::iii::~::~:: ~ ~ i si i2:00 AM 112 1 4 10 27 35 24 8 3 0 01:00 AM 64 0 2 7 17 16 15 4 3 0 02:00 AM 55 0 2 4 15 19 9 6 0 0 03:00 AM 43 1 1 6 7 9 12 6 1 0 04:00 AM 40 2 0 6 9 8 8 5 2 0 05:00 AM I26 3 1 I2 43 49 14 4 0 0 06:00 AM 255 9 7 38 76 93 22 7 3 0 07:00 AM 731 22 56 155 239 186 66 5 2 0 08:00 AM 688 26 63 142 206 152 93 6 0 0 09:00 AM 520 20 55 132 137 97 73 6 0 0 10:00 AM 443 18 42 119 120 86 52 5 1 0 11:00 AM 426 15 35 92 127 103 43 9 2 0 i2:00 NN 472 20 42 85 149 107 62 5 2 0 01:00 PM 409 20 30 67 119 73 84 12 4 0 02:00 PM 394 14 32 70 124 91 56 5 2 0 03:00 PM 556 17 46 86 198 134 67 8 0 0 04:00 PM 672 23 52 122 220 187 58 7 3 0 05:00 PM 753 21 56 147 246 197 75 9 2 0 06:00 PM 501 15 38 104 167 108 62 6 1 0 07:00 PM 405 9 ,~o_86 12!106 44 5 2 0 08:00 P!M 270 9 18 64 78 47 46 4 4 0 09:00 PM 226 5 13 50 72 40 34 7 5 0 10:00 PM 160 0 9 34 56 29 25 5 2 0 11:00 PM 95 0 9 26 19 16 18 4 3 0 TOTAL:8,416 270 645 1,664 2,592 1,988 1,062 148 47 0 PERCENT:100.0%3.2%7.7%19.8%30.8%23.6%12.6%1.8%0.6%0.0% 0 31 0 32 0 31 0 32 0 31 0 30 0 29 0 27 0 27 0 27 0 27 0 27 0 27 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 27 0 27 0 27 0 28 0 28 .............. 0 28 0 29 0 29 0 28 0.0% Alameda:(510) 233-2292 Contra Costa: (510)232-1271 SF/Peninsula(415) 750-1317 PERCENTILE I 10%I 25°/°I 50°/°! 85%I 90%ISPEEDS:[ 17.6 I 23.0 [ 27,1 [ 34.9 I 38.8 [ 10 MPH PACE SPEED:25 - 34 NUIvlBER IN PACE:4,580 PERCENT IN PACE:54.4% SPEED EXCEEDED:125 MPH 30 MPH 35 MPHITOTAL:I 5,837 3,245 1,257 I PERCENTAGE:[ 69.4%38.6%14.9% [ ATTACHMENT B © 0 © O © ¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯ ~ .zaIztoD uoz. IvurzofuI~’z~t~!s ~ uvHl~apod :aoano9 "~)A!jG UBIJJ.l~)j, spJgA~O~ S~IOOlq IgJOAOS JOAO pUO1XO SOUJ!IOtUOS pu~ gUOI o~!nb oq plnoo sononb 0~1 olntutuoo looqos gu!uJouJ Otl1 gu!Jn(] "looqoS olpp!IN ugttUO.L puu looqos qg!H uunD tlloq soaJos pgo}t oaopgJlsgJV "(u~!qg.q ol gmlV) p~okI uo)solJ~qo ls~t oql uJoaj luoao~!p oa~ lgql so!ls!JOlOuauqo iguo!lmodo pug £g~xpuoJ l~JO,xos sopnloU! osF )uotugos s!ql ’sotunlo~ Joq~!q gu!X.uuo sop!soa "poonpoa oq plnoo sttg!alsopod Jo.I sd~ oonpoa jo logdtu] oql ’sug!alsopod ao3 ~u!ssoJo ojus olgl]lpg.l lgql loJluo3 ~A!l!sod JOJ sop!Aoad u~!sop oJnlnot j! ’Jo~ohxoH "~u!ssoao ug!Jlsopod Joj sd~ o~npoa o~ onp uo!loos OU~l-oo~ql g olgpotutuooou £lqul~o.ltuoo olotlOSl! puoI lou soop otunlo^ ~oq~!q s!q.L "qd~ 00E’I puu 006 uoo~a-loq so!JJ~o ,(llVaouoff tlo!looJ!p ~t~od oql u! (p~okl ou!tug~) [~jo lso~) p~o’~, oJopgJlsuJV uo sotunlo^ anoq ~t~od ~u!~s!xo oq.L "poonpoJ qonm oq plnot, gmssoJo uu!Jlsopod JoJ sdgg olqul!g~ oql lnq ’somnloa aOq~!q gJJ~;:) plnoo !ooJls aolnOllOO Igo!dgl V ’suo!lnosJ~lu! ~ ouu[ mm-t/Ol u~!potu qlpa uo!loos oUgl-ooaql ~ ol~oao ol £l!unlJoddo lsom oql sop!^oad ~uotu~os s!q~ ’Jnoq Jod oug] aod qda 000’ l ol 006 glOlgm!xo~ddg £JJ~o £11~Jouo~ ugo looals aoloolloo lm.luop!soa g oou!s ¯Jnoq ~lgod tud oql gu!,np 06L pu~ anoq )l~od tu~ oql ~u!Jnp qd;~ OLL £!oleua!xoJdde s! a~eaa~ aq~L "uo!laoa!p )Iliad aql u! qd~ 006 ~oloq ,~[ll~JolJa~ o.119 IooJ1S Ulll[V pub XuAX u~!qed uaa~Alaq luouJgas Xe~peoJ aq.L "qdA 00E’[ £/alem!xoJddujo sqg!q ot (qdA) Jnoq aad Sala!qaA 00~¢ £laletU!xoJddt~jo ~o1 ~ tuoJj sa!J~a Jop!Jaoa £pnls aql Joj samnloA a[ktm! uo]laaJ!p >lead gu!ls!×a aq± uoD!puoD a~JJuaZ ~u!ls!x3 s!SX’leUV SO~I pug om!J~ [o*m.L ’oA!lumolIV ,(ua*puo~d aanln~q :~aa[qns ollV Olgd :uo!la!ps!anf d;DlV ’~Id ’Xguq± aoqdols!aqD :moazl ~cEO-E# :’oN ,aa.foad ollv Oled~O £!!D ’Ilo~ ~of :oZ I’OOZ ’~1 14KI(INW~IOIAI3]IAI "I V D I ~ H D ~ ~ J~d V ~I (l s;ue;insuo:) uo!)~e~odsue~j. UUld dmoD ~lOg "s~,o~.ro~d posodoad u~ou~[ ql!~ ~IOg pue Ueld dtuoD ~IOZ; ’£1otu~u :£pms s!ql u! p~z£1~uu ~Jo~ so!aeu~s oanlnj o~L "s~suooJoj [opotu otl~ dolOAOp ol ~JoJ3o jo lunotu~ OA!SU~lX~ U~ pO1oA~p IN~Af.L jotuls X!!D ql!~a ~u!~laoAk ¯£~uana~jo I~AOI q~!q ~ ql!m pololdtuo~ se,~ uo!leaq!luO |opotu oql popnlouo~ I~Mf£ "slunoo pomosqojo sluooJod oA,4 u!ql!A~ Ol S~tmlOA o[J-J~J1 lUOLU~AOUl ~tquan1 pu~ ~u]I oq] pol~aq!l~o s~q IN)If~L ’sonl~A ~ pu~ V aoJ SJOI~LUI~JI~d ,¢,JO~,OI3oIS]~,I~S ~u!u!elqo ol uo!l[pp~ uI 86"0 £691,66"0 £9"61,- 660 I.E"IzE 66"0 £6:0 809~’1,66’0 L ’~Z":"~’-" 860 9L’L£~0" I.86~-tlanJ. ~1 OLS ’8 ’q atunloA po!Jed sllnsaH uotjuaq!lu;D ppol~,[ I ¯Axopq I olq~± u! u~oqs oa~ uo!lraq!Fo [opom ano jo sllnsoa ~q± "possoappu pue poolsaopun glaodoad oq uro sonss! Ig~J oq! luql os ’uo!luoluoo jo lu!od ~ otuoooq !ou slool s!sgl~u~ oql lgq! lu~odtu! s! II "slopotu ~u!lsg~oJoj oq1jo &!l!q!p~Jo oql uo snooj sloo.foJd pug sutqd luomdolo^op olgA!ad pu-~ AI!o ~utuaoouoo s~up, oom pu~ s~u!Juoq o![qnd ~(ugmjo lu!od luJ1uoo V "loo!’oad ~ uo posn ~u.toq oaojoq uo]lgJq!lgo lopotu aolju ~[q!poJo pug o[qg!foJ £[qualsuotoop oq o1 poou slopotu ~u!ls~ooaoj pugtUOCl "lopoua VlND oq~, tuoa$ pou!ulqo su~ osn pugI luuo!~oa oql ol!q~ osn pugI I~ooI gEOE oqa pop!Aoad fil!D oq± "AI!D oloq~ oql souoz JouU ol~oao o!Jj~ls ~]D ql!~ ~Jo~ IAi~If± ’~lao~lou oql oluo ~u!pgoI pug sso~og osn pugI pug lUOOl oql looUoJ Jolloq o± "osgq g sg lOpOtU pugtuop ]~A~.I1 V],~) ll~UO!~-I ~ql posn IAixAfJ~ ’lo~.foJd s!ql JO~l ¯uo!l!puoo ~jj~al ~u!ls!xo oql sol~o!ldoa dlOl~ano~ lopotu ~q~ leql oarlsu~ o~, sso~oad u s] uoD~aq!l~ lopoIN ’pol~aq!l~ oq o! spoou loPOtU oq! ’lsl~ooJoot lopotu ,~u,~ o~tutu ol olq~ s! IAi~if± ~Jo,~o~ "lopoIN ~u]tsuooaod ]~AUJ.L s,Xl!~) oq! uo sq:luotu l~a~A~s ls~d ~q! aoj ~u!>[ao~ u~q suq INMf,L suo!lao.foad a~t~a& oan~,n~l E "~d *EOOE ’~007. ’I~OOE ’~ I L~nuef ’:O.o".’.’A oof s~mnloA pa!ao.fOad oq! uo p#sgfl suo!laoS #Ug-l-aaaqx lg!!u~!od "s~lU!l ~13A~pl3oJ lSOUJ aoj 1uooJ~d tl;~l O100att! dlOmtu!xoJddg jo zs~Jou] ]qff!ls g filleaOuz~ s] ;~J;~L]] mql p~l~.foJd s! 1! ’o!a~uzos Ugld dtuo0 g I0~ zq~ o~ pzaedtuo3 ’1I ~Iqe± u! u~oqs sV "zl!s unS zql pue qnl3 s~II3 s!o~road posodoJd uh~otr"4 ~ql I1~ s~PnlOu! ou~uoos s!qj. lao.l’oJd pasodoad u~ou~l q!!~t ~lOi~ "I olqrJ, u! uhxoqs oJg stuotu~os osoq! aoj slseooao.~ lopotu oqljo sllnsoa oqj~ I~gJtS ~uJIV o! p130~[ plo~jolpp[D/:~ luaut~a~ p~o~l plZgzlpp!lN o! deNk u~[q~:t :I lu~utg~U ~ "~d ’c~OOE ’~OOE "¢OOE "~I £aunurf ’~zoxA oof "sls~3oao3 l~sodoad uA~ouN ~ I0~; oq! uo pos~q podoloA~p uooq S~A[I~UaOI[~ [~UO!!!pp~ OA~I ’SOU~UOOS SlS~JO3 l~sodoad Uh~OUXA ~ I O~ pu~ UNd dtuoD 9IOE ~q~ s~p!so~] ¯smnu!tu ooaqa o! ouo tuo~j poonpoa oq [l!,~ so!a~uoos anoj oql aopun aop!.uo~ £pms oql q~noaql ~tu!! lOAm1 oql ’suo!l!puoo gu!ls!xo oql ol poa~dtuo~ l~q! st, xoqs ,(~OlOUqam oA!ld~p~ ai.Ltml JO suowa!ldd~ ’s!sXl~U~ ano uo posset "III olq~.L u! UA~oqs Oa~ S!S,q~U~ Oql JO sllnso, oq± "(u~!q~d ol ~tUlV tuoa3 uo!l~os OU~l ooaq1) [~sodoad umouN ~ iO~ pu~ (~!am!aa opotu mn~ -uou s!ootu) l~sodoad u~otr’A ~; tOE ’I~sodoad g I OE ’UNd dtuoD ~; I0~; :POZXl~u~ OaOX~ so!a~uoas mmn3 ano._4 "V x!puoddv u! pou!muo~ oa~ SllmOp oqj. "~u!tu!l l~u~!s ,~p3o om!l luo:una JOAO lu~oaod 0E Sl~ q~ntu s~ fiq ,~uo!3No l~U~!S ;~SI3~JOU! O1 UOAOJd u~oq s~q g~iolouqoo! ~A!ld~p~ I~U~!S oUjmJ. "aop.tJAo3 o[oqA’~ ~q~, tlo ~!l!qud~3a Ivu~!s aUJml IlmSu! ol spun$ aoj p~!lddv s~q X1!D oql l~ql ~u!pu~ls~opun ~no s! 1! ’£pms oqljo 1J~d ~3 sv "£~g~sgoad×~ [l!q!ood at[1 O1 puo’d o]uoluv uuS uJoJj om!] [OAt~J1 Ottl tlO pos~q S! uo!lgnI~Aa oq.L "palanpuoa aaam slsgoaJoJ g I 0E aql ao.~ s~Nap pu~ satu!l IaAP-a4 OR1JO uosugdmoa V sam!,L IoA~J.L palaa.fOad JO UO!II~ttlJQ.IU! aaqlo uo pas~q aop!aaoa aloq~ aql u! luatu:Sas auN-aaaql g llglSU! ol ap!aap lq~!tu £tgls ao t!aunoD AI!D ’osanoa JO "alqN!gA~ uo!l~tua%lu! oR1 uo pas~q luatm3pnf lsaq ano s! lint± "pgo~l oaapmls~av uo paaap!suoa oq plnoa uo!laas au~l-aaaql ~ ’o!a~uaas s!ql aapufl "sdg:8 alqgl!~Xg oqljo Ssalpa~aa !OaalS oR1 ssoaa Xlajgs ol olqg aq plno~ sls!la~a!q pug su~!alsapod ’S~llgA~ssoaa aofgm i|~ lg PallmSu! aaa~ SlgU:8!s u~!alsopad$I "SlgU:8!s ug!alsapad $o uo!lNl~lSU! aap!suoa ltl~!tu ffl!D aq! ’S~[[g~ggOaa palq~q!l 3o p~alSUl "~ll~assoaa PalqS!l g ql!t~ pall~ aq pu~ luatul~aal luamamd paaoloa I~!aods oPnlau! AIq~qoad PlnOt~ S~ll~SSOaa asoq± "aop!aaoa aql o! popp~ aq plnom S~ll~SSOaa I~UO!l!pp~ ano$ ao aaaql uo!l!pp~ Ul ¯uo!!aaSaalU! aq! 1~ sUO!lt~aado aql OAoadtu! ll!~ uo!loasaalu! aql 1~ sluatuaAoadm! iguo!l!ppv "q:8!H uunD OlU! mnl-lq:8!a g a>lgtu ol Bu!l!g~ Sala!qaA aoJ aaugls!p :~umanb ap!aoad [[!a~ l~ql ~aaa.~p q~!H uunD ~ P~O~l oaaP~aas~av uo au~1 uanl-lq~!a punoqlsa~ g apnlau! o! uop.aasamu! aql u~!sapaa ol posodoad uaaq s~q u~!sop ~ ’laafoad s!qljo lagd sV "paaop!suoa aq plnoa luotu~os OU~l-ooaql ~u~ oaojoq paAlOSOa oq plnoqs Iooqas q~!H uunD ol ssaaa~ aql pu~ aaq~!q qantu s~ p~oa oaap~als~av uo atunloA luaaana oq.L "p~o~ uolsalagq~) ls~ uo m~!adoadd~ motu s! uo!laas augl-aaaql g lgql uo!u!do ano ll!ls s! 1! ’aaoq~ pauo!luotu s~ sa!ls!aalam~qa £g~p~oa lua, ajj!p aql uo pas~q ’aaAaA~OH "luatulraa! OUgl-aaaql g ao3 opum oq lq~!tu osga ~ a~!l stuoas 1! aUOl~ atunloa aql uo pasgq ’oaoJaaatl~L ~’ "~d "~:OOE ’~OOE "~00~ ’£ I Lmnu~f ’UoN oor %9Z-I-g~Z %Z"0 %IZ-I" %L-0 %~-0 ()0~ %hi-I-18Z %~1 I 19~ %El I a~uuqD (u!m) SUOS!JDdwoo AoIOCI puo ew!L IOAOJI APn+S Jopp~oo poo~l o~epoJ~O~,iuo+selJo4O III ~lqel "fiZ~A~ ue!q~3 o! looalS gmlV tuoaj pgo~l uolsolagqD ls~3 uo lO~lood uanl -~oI ql!A~ lU0tU~0S OU~l-00aq:~ ~ omnss~ o!aguoos (uo!poS ~ugq ~oaq.L) lgSOdOad u~ou~l q!!Nt $I0[ ~q,l. ¯poaop!suo3 lou oao~ oUj~al Jolntutuo~ at~In~oa oql tuoaj pu~ looqos olpp[lN uettuoj. 1~ soseoazu! le!luolod oq~L "q~!H uunD !~ luo3Jod 0E unql oaom ou ,¢q os~oazu[ plno.,~ osn l[su~al pu~ ~lll~ ’a~l[q Jo posl3oJ::)tl[ pau[qtuo3 043, l~ql pol~tu[lso XlUO IA[~II’± ’aAllnAaaSUO3 oq o& "llOaX s~ pop[AoJd aq plnOA~ SI~U~IS tmplsapod ao S~tl~t~ssoa3 pzlq$[I aaq!]o pu~ aoplaao3 aloq~ aq! moqSnoaql pap[aoad aq plno~ sou~l a~t!q lln~l "paAoadtu[ ~ll~!luglsqns aq plnoA~ ~I!ApZOUUO3 ~II~A~ pu~ a~llq ’Spins slqljo lzgd sv g "$d ’Z00Z "£00Z ’~00Z "£ t Lmnu~f ’Uo>I oof ¯ aop!aaoo oql u[ s~uotuoAoadtu! X~IOp l~aOuo~ aoq~o pu~ O SOq o~, ~t SOq tuo~ suogoosaolu[oa~_l ~ sluotuoAoadtu! $Oq s~oqs loo.l’oad gpms posodoad oql ’tuo~s,~s oh.tld~p~ o~eal3o sloo33o oql ~noql!ax oseq oamnJ ~ I 0E oql ol poagdtuoD "A olq~± u! uaxoqs s! SOq ~U!llnsoa oq! ’tuols~s lgU~!S oUJ~Jt rjo s!ooJJO oql ffu!aolog.4 "~u!tu!l IrU~/!s ,(gp jo otu!l ~,uo.uno JOAO ]LIOOJ;~I 0E S13 qontu su Xq ,¢ouo!oUJo l~U:ff!s oq! osgoJou! ol UOAoJd uooq sgq £dffOlOUqOol OA!ldepe [gU~!s O~gJ1 ’aO!lJ~3o pouo!luotu sV "ulols,qs OAp, d~p~ o~J~3.I1 t3 ~to uo!l~luotuoldtu[ oql opnlou! 11!~ ~,gq~, Xpms posodoad oq~, ~,noq!!~a os~q oarunj oq~ oq PlnO~ s!qj. "tuols,(s OAp, dep~ o~v2a g ~u!luotuoldtu! jo sloojjo ,¢ouo!o~o l~U~o!s oq~, opnlou! !ou op AI olqg,L u! umoqs oo!~os jo gIOAOl oqJ, "AI olq~J, u! umoqs oau sllnsoJ s!s£1gu~ (SOq) oo!~osjo sloAoI uop, oosao~u! lgsodoJd u~ouxA ~;IOE pug Ueld dtuoD ~;I0g oq~L ¯aop!.uoo oql u! otu!l [OA[~J] ~IOOlq pftu oql S~ 110,~ S~ uo[laosaolu! oq! qloq opnlou! sX~lop pu~ or!!! loA~J1 tl! 8~Ugtto oq! ’qons sv "aop!.uoz ,(pnls ~IOqm oql aoj ,~lZp l~U~!S pu~ otu!l l~A~al oq! sI!~lop ,qsno!Aoad UA~oqs S~ III Olq~± SlS£1guv aa!~oS jo sioaoq uo?.~aosao.~Ul ¯ lugou[u~!s u~q! ssoI oq glO~l[l plno~a sug?alsopod uo la~dtu[ oql ’SlgU~!S ug[alsopod [gaoAos ~llg!Iuolod sg 11~ sg spuglS! o~njoa ql[~ S~llgmSSOaO ug!alsopod oaout opnlou[ tl[~ loo.foad oq! oou[s "poonpoa oq plnot~ loo.lls oql ssoao ol ug[alsopod ao.,t sd~ ~lqgl[gag oql lgql oq lq~[tu oouoaoJJ[p 1so~[q oq± u~3[qg,q ol looalS gtUlV tuoa3 uo!!~os ou~I-ooaq! oql oto SllnSOa oql aOAO XIl~Ul~aetu os~zoaou! ~,q~[tu ,(~iop pug Ottl!l IOA~al l13ql poloodxo s[ 1! "(~A~ u~!q~zl ol OnUOAV ~puI3J!IAI ttlOaj popuo~.xo s[ uogoos OU~l-ooaql oql.~I ¯s~3,nu!tu o~ljo uo!aonpoa ~ ol osgoaou! olnu!tu ouo tuoaj offu~a aop!JAoo ~q3, aoj fiul~p l~U~!S i~3.o3, oq~, 3,uq! p~la~dx~ osl~ s! 1I -s~3,nu!tu ~Jq3, ol ~uo tuoJoI ~tma s~u~A~s ~tu!! lOAgJ3, oqj. "~gAoadm! plno~a sou~u~s ~Ji ;MnllqJ oq111~ Joj Jop!JJO3 ;~LI3, JOj soud!3, IOAI~J! oq! !l~ql p~lo~dx~ s! 3,! ’tu~ls,(s ~^!3,d~p~ l~Uff!s ~al Xq pop!AoJd uo!l~u!pJooo ltlu~!s p~AoJduJ! oql ol ~np ’III ~lq~J. u! u~aoqs sv 9.~d’~00E’E00E’~00E’~iXa~nu~f ’~o~ oof 0 ~~ 0 "S’!’) oql u! ~,( pogoldop uooq lou sgq ’oougad u[ p~oloAOp ’~GO~d "o~a~ ~ood q~noaql Olqgl~gAg 0ag ’~1~11 U[ p0do!0A0p ’VIdO&~ pug ~OdS "molsgs ZSI~ s,ougp~ fldJO ~ol~ls loaluoo lgUo[ldo ug sg 01q~I[~AU S~ SDV~L’&~ "~ODSNV~ q~noaq~ olq~l~ag s~ S~VDS "os~a~oluo O~gA]ad ~u~jo ~l~l~qgd~3 oql puogoq gla~lo s~ax ~ol~als OA[ld~p~ o~l ~ uo pos~q molsgs In.Is ~lqglo~aem ’~lqg[A ’01q~aO~ ~ ~u[onpoad Jo ~sel oql osn~ooq ~I[SSZ3ZH Jo lno s[ 1[ ’azql~ "~3u~p[oH~O3 1OH s[ d~qsaosuods lUOm~OhO~ jo loodse uommoo oq& "(molsgS lO~UOD leu~s 0A]ld~pv o~ea~ om[l-I~) SD~’~ POlI~ glsn°[A~ad ’SDV ’so~meals lOalUOO oAgd~p~ 0~ ~ugod~oo ooaqljo uogoollOO g ~o lu0mdOloAOp oq~ popun$ Xllg[~rd sgq V~Hd oql ’s0661-P~m oq1 u[ ~u[~lS "lUOm~0AO~ sp~o~ U[~ $o luom~do0 golg~ qlnoSmoN oql gq ~]lgalsnV u[ podoloAOp sgm SZVDS "luommOAO~ "~’~ oql$o ~olgaoqgq qoa~oso~ uo[lg~odsugaZ oq] Xq puel~U3 u~ podolOAop Sg~ ZOODS "(~O0~d) pug ’(SONO~3) S~0AOqOl[mS Jo uo~1~m~1dO dq s~ao,~ON$O IO~lUO3 ’(&OdS) ~°l°uq°°x u°]l~]m~Ido u°~ssoa~°ad Iru~[s ’(VIdOZ~) uo~lgmolnv uo[l~a~oluI gq uo~l~[m[ldo o~ga& ugqa~ opnlou~ s~o~gId umo~-llO~ ssoq "(SDV) sm~1sgS loaluoD °Agdgpv gllUOOOa oaom pu~ ’(~u[qlgug ao$ mguo~og u~ ~ou) SZVDS ’(onb]uqoo~ uo~!~z]m]IdO los~O pug ologD l~lds) ~OODS zpnlou~ ~o~oleo s[ql u[ saOgeld u~r~ oq& "[oatuo3 oA[ldgp~ 3~jg]l Sg U~IOU~ XIOAgO01100 S[ ~m~S .aOqlO. 1uru~mop~d oqz "s0861 oq1 ooms euoa~ mmsXs IOalUOO o~Jga! m~oa~su[gm oql~o so~u~aj oql uo ~u~anl uooq OA~q s~doouo~ put so~ol~s IOa~UO~ ~oN NOIZVNI(IHOOD 5L&LLdV!3V V XION~IddV s),uetlnsuoo uop,~;~odsue-j. 0 [ "~d ’~00~ ’~00~ ’I~00E "£ 1 ~nugf ’lao~l aof "saalndtuoa [euo!~aa luaaajj!p aql o! ~u!aol!uotu a~al pug andu! gagp SlOalUOa dwnsn aalndmoo ~u!aol!uotu [~aluaa ~ mq ’~aa~ u,~o a!aql u} a~jml IOalUOa leql saamdtuoa I~UO!~aa ~alxojo uo!l!pp~ aql £q pu~dxa uea stuals£S "suo!!oasaalu! ual o1 dn 1~ Sl~U~!S IOalUOa Ulna aalndttloa ll~UO!~aa g pue Jaqla~Ol padnoa~ aa~ stuols~s-qnS "Jaou[~uo o~.Lt. ~J! oql £q pau]aads s! tuols~sqns qogo aoj uo!laosaalu! l~O!l!Ja oql oJaq~- ’stualsas-qns sg UA~OU~1 ’sdnoa~ u! Sl~Ug!S SlOalUOa tualsgs S±VDS aq± .’u~alav(9 ~LVOg aqlfo uo!aoaad0 "lOaOload d[D.LN pu~ tuals,(s 1uatua~gumu asgqg,gp aA!lguaall~ u~ aZ~l~ln [l{~ 1~ql SO~$-Z~jo UO~SaaA aanlam~qaag uado ug ’S~O~ ’sad~moad asaR1jo auo lSal pla~ pug dolaAgp o1 pamgm guoz~av~o ~l~sagA~u~ gR! pug V~Hd aql gu~sn sgd~loload asaR1 gu~lgnlgAg aOJ glq~suodsaa s~ uo~l~odaoD saauaDs ugmg~ "q~snqs~d jo ~I~SagA~U~/pugI~JO ~I~SSaA~U~ gql pug ’o~qO U~ ~!~SaaA~U~ sllaSntlagSS~~ JO ~SaOA{Ufl aql ’glosouu{~ Jo ~I[SaOA[U~ sla~aluoa aqg "sa[ffa!~als ad~oload am]!-l~aa asaql doIaAap ol slamluoa al~a~das ¯ m~a~oad SD~ -~ aql u~ asn aoj palgnlgAa pu~ padOlaAap ~u~aq | [ "~d ’EOOE ’~OOE ’t, O0~. ’£1 ~ntmf ’1-lo)I oof uaols~S VIdO±fl oq12o ~O!AO~t ¯glqmo!poadun MgA pug ×o[dmoo s~o~ aNno~qoA oaoq~ l~ouoq lsom Jo oq o! glO~I s~ £OODS ’oouo~aodxo luonbosqns pu~ sgomns oql jo s[s~q oql uO "oBu~qo s~o~ qo~q~ ql~*t ~p~dea oql uo pue uNd om~l pox~ sno~aoad oql3o o~ pug ~lgnb oql uo Su~puodop o~om ao luooaod 0EJo suo~l~mls lgO~!ogad gugm ut S~UtA~S OAo!q0g plnoqs £OO3S lgql s~olloJ ~ ’suNd om~l pox~jo Igo~d~ ge~ oql u~ .o~% lou soop £OODS °ou~s "suNd om~l pox~ poo$ ql~x poa~dmoo luoo~od El moq~ jo ~Nop u~ SutAgs O$~OAe Ur poAo[qog £OODS leql popnlouoo IlmOao mq ’g~p jo om~l pug goag £q SO~A &~DS Jo SSOUOAgOODO Oa~lglOa oq£ "mOlSgS Om~l p~x~ poo$ g gq poAo~qo~ oq plnoo l~ou0q slq! ao ~rd ’osanoojo ’mq uog~nlo~ OlONOA pm~lOS~ qll~ uoslagdmoo poao~qo~ oa~ sl~ouoq lsoSagI oql lgql s~oqs olqm Su~OllOJ oq£ "£XSNV~L gq poonpmd ~llgnsn ’Sueld om~l poxU olgp ol dn jo pJ~pu~ls poo~ ~ lsu~g~g op~m ,Jo~ suostJgd~oo ’sosg3 1so~ ’£1~Joqlne ogjml IgOOl oql pu~ ’~SJOA~un ~ ’slu~llnsuo3 Xq uopuo3 pug uoldm~qlnoS ’JOlSOOao~ u~ osoql pu~ 3B£ £q polonpuoo o~o~ ~luoaoD pu~ ~o~s~/D u~ s[~ oq£ "[-O olq~£ u~ u~oqs oA~ u~ sl~ ao[~m gq possoss~ uooq seq ~olmls £OODS oqljo ssouoA~loojjo oq£ :uo/!nnln~ [’VD ’ua!oq~uv pu~ ’NIAI ’s!Iod~3ouu!IN ’VA ’UO:~U!laV :suo!tgllmSU! ~oaql SlS![ OOUOaOolOJ olgaudos V] "VSfl oql u! ~!tuoJ!l~2) ’paguxO pug 03p~uuD) xuJ!lgH pug aooCl po~l ’oluoJo± oa~ osoql ’.go!Jotuv qlaoN u! suaolsgs Jnoj oJg oJoq± "(spuNJoqloN) uo$otu[!N pug shad,(D ’P!JPNN u! posodoad oJ~ smolsgs Joqlan3 ’q!oqgz!13 l~Od pug ugqancl ’o~g!lugS ’BuoH ~uoH ’ffu!.~ofl u! suaols,(s os[~ oJ~ oJoq£ "uopuo~l ao!uoJO jo sL~ud Joqlo pu~ uopuo~I jo l~gd lmluo3 oql ~u!lloJluoo lso$1g[ oq~, ql!A~ ’"Afl oql u!ql!A~ suo!lglUOUloldtu! gt~oJ punoJu ,uou oJu oJoq.l. "~1uoAoD u! 0~61 oou!s I"A!-I oql u! IgUO!lmodo uooq suq £OODS :u°!~va°dof° °8uvu ¯ so!u~dtuoo leU$!S xAf-1 oo~ql tuo~j ~oqlo~ol £aolp~oqgI qo~oso-d peon pu~ 1.~odsug~± oq! Xq tuopSu!N p~!!u(1 oql u! podoloAop s~m !1 "sdols pu~ s,(glop olo!qoA oonpoa ol s~ os sSu!Llos lgu~!s ot.jj~31 oz!m!ldo ol sao!oolop ol3!qoA mo.tj glgP sosn qo!qA~ molsXs lO.Iluo3 ot.J~g31 oA!ld~p~ ,(llnj ~ s! ,LOODS .’u°!l~nP°’quI molsXs ±OODS ¯Xouo!ogjo u,,aou’4un jo o~o~ smolsXs I~u!$!~o oql o! poz~dtuoo mq sotu!l loAml u! sluotuoAo.~dtu! po!~o!pu! oA~q so!pros ~oqlO "sp~oa ii~!.loLlg uo luoo,lod ~;E pul3 goal3 [13aluoo oql u! luooaod 6 omos ’sdols jo ~oqtunu oql u! uo!!onpo~ o~gl ~ s~ o~oql aOAO,,Aoq ’.±ASNV~t± Smsn uogmodo ql!A~ poa~dtuoo sotu!l lOAm1 U! uo!~onpo~ lugog!u$!s ou poA~oqs pa~O[l qoa~Oso~I p~O~l m3!l~alsnv oql Xq I861 u! g~tu~gd u! mo po!.u~o Xotons V :u°!mnlv’t3 "3N ’ttmqancI pu~ ’(Sl~U~!S t L) NJN ’~uno3 u!douuoH ’(Sl~U$!S +Og~) llAl ’KlunoD pu~pl~O :sol,iS pol!uf-I oql u! suo!l~llmSU! ooaql oa~ oaoql (£u~dtuoo ~u!l[nsuoo) DIVS ol ~u!p.looov "(pu~lOal) U!lqnCI pu~ andtun~I ~!ne~I ’(~!sX~l~I~) u~t~pu~s El’gd’~OOE’£OOE’~OOE’El&mnu~f ’~oN ~of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -r "t’661 pu~ 166I uooh~loq sau~1 9 ol t, tuoajpouap!~ s~ 089-I somnlo~ po~a~d-~od lmOl ~ql ol~q~ uo~o posooaaop l~ql alan "m’~ 00:L pu~ "m’~ 00:g uo~loq p~n33o ql~o~ O~ml s~ql$o 11~ ~ll~luass~ "(oS~O~OU~ luao~d t~ g) 869’1E ol ~g’~I mo~j pasga33u~ "m’g 00:6 put O0:g uoo~oq omnlo, punoqqmos Og9-I oql ’L661 pug ~661 ~o puo aql ~o~ ~l~p L661 as ’00:8 1~ papua sluno3 L66 I jo ~ls $u!~o~$ OSl. somnlo* 3~! ql~ ’O0:OI lsgd Ila~ popuolxo pgq ~od oql alEalpu~ m~p 9661 aqz "~66 I put 1661 ul 00:6 ~o~g am!lamas ol O0:L mo3$ palsgIglt~lluosso pol~od ~gad ’m’g punoqqlnos o~ ’089-I uo $u!puoads ~i~Od g x!puoddv stu~,lnsuo:) uo!let~odsue-.L ¯ o ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ Attachment C Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Trial Project 2006-2008 Stakeholder Group Name ......~Affiha ion ..... D~borahJu Charleston-Meadows Neighb~rhood Assn. P--~nny and Rich Eils0n Green Meadow Community Assn. ..... Lydia Tan ....BUiLD/Bridge Housing Corporation .... Henry Lum Palo Alto Orchards Neighborhood Assn. Kerry Wagner ........HooverSchool PTA Betsy Allyn Green ~cres IIImproVement Assnl Lynnie Meiena .....Barr0n ParkNeighborhood Assn. Nina Bell Greenacres I Neighborhood Assn ..... Christine Fawcett Gunn High PTA -Tom Jacoubowsky ....Gunn High School Administration Sally Probst : League of Women Voters, Palo Alto chapte~ ........... Pete Pearne PAUSD Main Office ’ Philip Melese .......Arastradero Road resident K~thy D~rkin PAUSD Main Office Tom crystal ........walnut G)ove Neighborhood " Jeff Rensch Resident ...... Sandra L~nn~uist .......Pa!o Alto Chamber of commerce Steve Emsiie ............CPA Planning andC~mmunity Environment GayleLikens ..........CPA Transportation ........ Sgt. Steve Herrera CPA Police T amcDivision .... Gary Kruger ......TJKM, Transportation Consultant ...... Rich Swent ’ ’ Palo Aiio Bicycle Advisory Committee .................... Parent Teacher Student Association Gunn High School 780 A~ast~adero Road Palo Alto~ CA 94306 gunn.pa!oaltopta.org ATTACHMENT D April 12, 2008 Dear Honorable City Council Members and Members of the Planning & Transportation Commission; The following resolution was approved by the Henry M Gunn High School PTSA on February 2005 and delivered to City Council: "We urge the City of Palo Alto to move forward with the Gunn segment of the Charleston-Arastradero Plan without further delay because the traffic situation is currently untenable." Consistent with our 2005 support of the Charleston Arastradero Plan, Henpj M Gunn High School PTSA urges City Council to support the staff’s recommendation to implement a trial of the proposed Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements and use the data from this trial to determine in December 2008 whether a 3-1ane or 4-lane configuration is appropriate for the Phase II Arastradero tda!. The Gunn PTSA thanks Council for your previous support of the Charleston,/Arastradero Corridor Plan, for your traffic-related cooperation, and recognition of the safety needs of our school-commuting students and families Sincerely yours, Darice Koo President, Parent Teacher Student Association Henry M Gunn High School 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 o Charleston-Arastradero Improvements Update: Review and Recommendation on the Evaluation of Phase 1 Trial Improvements on Charleston Road and Plan for Phase 2 Trial Implementation on Arastradero Road. Ms. Gavle Likens. Transportation Manager: Yes, good evening Chair Holman and members of the Commission. I am Gayle Likens, the Transportation Manager. We are here tonight to present to you our evaluation of the first phase of Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Trial Project that is meaning the improvements that have been implemented on Charleston Road from Fabian to E1 Camino. Then we want to discuss with you are next steps for Phase 2 of the trial including planning for how to implement the improvements on Arastradero Road. At tonight’s meeting we are really not prepared to make firm recommendations about Arastradero Road. We are here to give you our planning and our thought processes about that. We are here to make a firm recommendation about the evaluation of the first phase of the trial on Charleston Road. Before I begin, I would like to introduce Gary Kruger of TJKM Associates, the Senior Associates with TJKM and who has been our consulting traffic engineer on this project for the evaluation of the trial and looking toward Arastradero Road. We are very, very pleased to have him working on this project he brings a wealth of experience, he is a former city traffic engineer for the cities of Campbell and San Leandro. He was involved in the road diet that was implemented, and designed the road diet for the East 14th Street in San Leandro so he does know about downsizing on an arterial street. He teaches the fundamentals of traffic engineering and advanced traffic signal design through the Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Berkeley. So he brings a wealth of knowledge of traffic adaptive technology and expertise in that regard. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 25 of] 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 So he has been a wonderful asset to our team, we are very pleased to have him, and he is going to make a follow up presentation on more of the details of the evaluation after I present this overview. So my presentation is just going to cover a background on the corridor project especially for Commissioners who were not involved on the Commission when this plan went through the Commission and Council in 2003-2004, to review the overview of the project objectives and a summary of the recommendations. Then I am going to pass the baton to Gary who is going to go into much more detail about all of the work that is included in the technical report that you received. So this project, the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project, was initiated by the City Council in April of 2003 at which time they directed Staff to prepare a corridor plan of streetscape and urban design improvements to address basically school commute and safety issues along the corridor, and looking at the future development that would be occurring in South Palo Alto along the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor and the anticipation of major projects coming online. At the same time they approved an Urgency Ordinance establishing a nine month moratorium on approvals of new development projects in the area which was about a half mile radius of the corridor. So during the time from April 2003 to basically January 2004 we had time to work on developing the corridor plan. After that nine-month period, the Counci! would allow development to occur. So that is the context. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 26 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 In June of 2003, the Council approved the land use projections to be used for the study. I didn’t bring that with us but it included all of the planned development an anticipated development in the corridor including the major projects that are under construction now. So there was a whole list of land use assumptions that were approved. Then in September 2003, the Council approved the performance measures that are included in your Staff Report, the seven performance measures. Then we get to January 2004 when the Council approved the corridor plan, which we included in your packet. I do apologize for the quality of some of the Appendixes. It was downloaded from our website so unfortunately the quality was not good. At places you have more legible copies of the Appendixes that were not terribly readable. Then in September of 2005 the Council adopted the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Streetscape Impact Fee that is assessed against new residential and commercial development in the corridor anticipating that those funds would cover a small portion of the cost of the full implementation of the corridor plan and would be used more or less as seed money and local match money that we would go out and seek for implementation of the project. In December of 2005, the Council approved funding for the whole trial including the Gunn High School Improvements and the driveway improvements that were implemented at the Gunn High driveway. That was composed of borrowing against future revenues coming into the impact fee for the Charleston corridor and also the funds from the Stanford Research Park for the Gunn High improvements. So with the funding approved we designed the Phase 1 improvements on CiO, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 27 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ., Charleston Road and the Gunn High improvements, both of which were implemented during Phase I, not Arastradero Road because that became too big of a project to actually accomplish before school started in September. We were given our marching orders in December and there was quite a bit of design work associated with both projects so we bifurcated the Charleston portion as Phase 1 from the Arastradero Road portion as Phase 2. So here we are now. We have had a year or more trial of what has happened on Charleston Road from Fabian to E1 Camino and we are here to report on those findings. We will be taking your recommendations to the Council in May. As indicated in the report there is quite a bit of work we still need to do to determine what the recommended plan will be for Arastradero Road. It is contingent upon us doing some work internally to the Gunn High campus, which we will discuss. The plan is then for us to go to Council with a recommendation in December or January and then design the Phase 2 improvements so they can be incorporated into the resurfacing of Arastradero Road, which is scheduled for next summer. That way there is no real additional cost in implementing. You have to tear out all the striping and it is a cost effective way to do it. Public Works has held off on implementing that project until we were really ready with a design. Just to cover briefly the corridor objectives, they were to maintain existing travel times in the corridor; to reduce accidents on the corridor; to improve conditions for bicycles and pedestrians, and this is very key because there are so many schools along the corridor that the concern was really to make sure that that corridor would serve the needs of the school commute and all the children who were walking and crossing or biking upon it or crossing the corridor. Since both these streets are residential arterial streets, as designated in the Comprehensive Plan, that we Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 28 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 improve the quality of life on the corridor because these are not just straight arterial streets they are residential in nature, and to enhance visual amenities for people who live and work a!ong the corridor. This is just a map of the corridor from Gunn High School to Fabian. I think everybody is very familiar with it. Just briefly, I want to go over the three performance measures that we were able to evaluate. There are four others that we have not had enough experience or time with to evaluate. Basically, these three measures one of which involves no increase in travel time. There was a small increase in travel time on the corridor. We feel that with the implementation of traffic adaptive technology, which will occur in the next two months that that will be reduced even further but it was not substantial in our opinion in terms of not meeting this objective measure. The second measure was no increase in delay or critical movement delay and Garry will talk about this. That measure was satisfied. Measure three was reduce the 85th percentile speeds by at least 20 percent along the corridor. To date we have achieved pretty much a ten percent reduction in average speeds. That is not exactly 85th percentile speed and Gary will talk a little bit about that. We do believe that with the implementation of the physical improvements which are envisioned the concrete curbs and median islands that just the streetscape alone will help reduce those speeds even further. We will be updating our citywide traffic and engineering surveys that are used every seven years to determine the posted speed limit, or to make recommendations to the Council on posted speed limits, and we will have more exact information on the 85th percentile speeds within a few months. We will report that out to the Council in the fall. (’itv of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 29 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 I want to call your attention to the project benefits, which are not necessarily quantitative measures. We were able to, as part of the restriping going from four lanes to three lanes on Charleston Road, complete the bike lane system between Middlefield and Fabian that did not exist before because there were four lanes. So that is one concrete benefit that we derived by downsizing the road. We have improved the safety for pedestrians and bicycles. I think you can tell because speeds are lower, there are fewer lanes of traffic to cross when you are crossing the streets, but we have not gotten the full benefit of the full streetscape improvements, however, that is a benefit. Having left turn pockets at the intersections where they didn’t exist before because there were four lanes and you made a left turn from the innermost travel lane takes that turning traffic out of the through movements is very much a safety improvement. We do have the opportunity for streetscape and urban design enhancements with the full build out which under the preexisting four-lane configuration really wasn’t going to be feasible. So our recommendations for you tonight are to approve the permanent retention of the Phase 1 striping and lane configurations on Charleston Road. That is the three-lane cross section from Fabian to Alma and a modified four-lane cross section from Alma to E1 Camino. That is really maintaining four lanes of traffic with a six-foot median so not much really changed there but there is a median refuge for pedestrians crossing the street. We are going to implement traffic adaptive signal timing in the next couple of month and we will monitor and report out on that in December when we go back to the Council. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 30 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Our main recommendation at this point for Arastradero Road is that we work with Gunn High School administrators and the Unified School District staff to implement a capacity improvement internal to the Gunn High campus that will bring more traffic off of Arastradero and hopefully reduce congestion in queuing on Arastradero, which would give us more options of what lane configuration to recommend. The school district is prepared to implement that plan over the summer as part of their summer improvements. We have met several times with the Gunn High administrators and also with the school district public works people who will be implementing it and they are ready to go. Gary’s group is going to develop the final signing and striping plan in the next month or so. Our recommendation is to report back by the end of this year on our plan for how to implement Phase 2 on Arastradero Road, what striping plan would be recommended whether it be a three- lane configuration like we have on East Charleston or a four-lane configuration such as we have on West Charleston. Gary wii! discuss the pros and cons of those alternatives for you. Then we will pursue grant funding for the permanent improvements now that they are no longer trial. If the Council approves permanent retention then we have a much better opportunity to go out and seek funding for a project that has been approved. So with that I am going to let Gary go through his presentation and then I want to acknowledge the questions that were asked by Commissioners Keller and Fineberg and respond to a few of those. Also, I want to acknowledge the members of the stakeholder committee who worked very closely with us, the roster is included in your report, but we have met for the past 18 months and before that, this group was very involved in the original corridor plan. I would like members of the stakeholder group to Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 31 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 standup and be acknowledged by the Commission if you would. Their assistant has been invaluable in this process. Chair Holman: Thank you so very much. City Attorney you have returned just in time. We have currently 22 cards. It is the Commission’s preference to allow members of the public the full five minutes to speak but with 22 speakers that is two hours of speakers and some speakers may have more to say than others. So if the City Attorney would allow we have a process where speakers can cede their time to another speaker in terms of collecting their voices. So I guess what I am saying is that most of the emails that we received were of the same voice so if you filled out a card and don’t feel the need to speak you can collect your card or turn in other card saying take my name out. I don’t want to make this complicated but I want to give the people who need five minutes the full five minutes to speak otherwise we will need to limit speakers to three minutes. Commissioner Keller. Commissioner Keller: I think it might be worthwhile pointing out that at least I and maybe most of the members of the Commission read every comment that was emailed to us and I think that might be worthwhile imparting to the public. Mr. Larkin: It is the Chair’s discretion whether to limit comments or not. I think your suggestion if there are people who really don’t feel the need to speak and we can reduce the number of speakers is good. The other option is that the Commission has a rule that says essentially that if three or more speakers want to collaborate and appoint one person to speak on their behalf that they would get an extra few minutes of time. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 32 of 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: It is difficult in this venue to try to do that but if you all want to commiserate amongst yourselves otherwise we will pretty much be required to limit the time to three minutes. Given that, Gary. Mr. Gary Kru.~er. TJKM Transportation Consultants: Thank you members of the Planning and Transportation Commission. Since the trial striping of Charleston Road a mmaber of traffic operation issues have emerged. The City’s request to my firm was to look at the Gurm High School driveway, there was a right turn lane that was striped, the signal was modified, and it still didn’t solve the congestion. Look at access and circulation at Hoover School there are some lingering problems there. How would a mid-block crossing be implemented near Briones Park because it is very far between signals? Really get this adaptive signal control moving if possible and also to evaluate the Charleston trial striping and signal operation improvements that were made in 2006. Also, conduct an extended analysis of various options for striping Arastradero Road and then finally what are our conclusions and what would we recommend in terms of traffic engineering. The first issue we looked at actually is one of the largest issues in the corridor. This is Gunn High School and the right turn queue still extends back almost to Coulombe at the peak of the high school entrance around 7:55 in the morning. That is about a halfa mile. We have looked at this thing, we have been out to Gunn High many different times, and we have determined that the merge about 150 feet north of Arastradero is very likely the culprit. Our firm does a lot of modeling but I suggested that we should not do modeling because one, I didn’t think it would be City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 33 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 credible even if we came up with answers, and it would be just as inexpensive for the school district to implement a trial restripe and a trial change, and if it works so much the better. So this is sort of what we have come up with. This is not a complete plan. This is based upon the school district’s AutoCAD files for the parking lot. It does not include the current right turn lane from Arastradero into Gunn High but as you can see instead of the merge we now have two lanes, one goes on the right side of the big oak tree and the island, and the other goes on the left side, which is currently an outbound lane. So that provides two lanes all the way back to the turn into the administrative area for the parking lot. So we go from about 150 feet to a little over 500 feet. the fact that there is less of a merge may, I am not promising but it may, actually reduce the queue to a manageable proportion on Arastradero Road or if there is a queue that extends out of the right turn lane it won’t extend as far and it won’t last as long. We have not modeled this. I do not have detailed information on the parking lot operation. It just costs a lot of money to develop that information. This will be tried this summer and we have our fingers crossed that it will actually work. That is really traffic engineering I suppose. Hoover School access we did a lot of data collection but it was a very simple problem. We wanted to find out how long it took people to load and unload their kids and also what the gaps were out on Charleston Road in this case. We found that there was a sight distance problem for traffic exiting. They would wait for sometimes five, six, seven, eight seconds before they decided to turn right and there was a continuous stream of cars. When cars weren’t moving there were pedestrians moving across the path. So we got rid of some of the traffic by putting in an exclusive pedestrian phaser, a scramble system, up at Nelson, which provides a little extra delay Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 34 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 for oncoming traffic. That appears to have reduced the queues and the delays onsite at Hoover to about one-third of what they used to be. The queue still goes all the way back to the loading area but it doesn’t go all the way around the school nor does it congest the inbound right turn lane any more. So there has been an improvement there. It is not ideal. School access is one of the most difficult problems that traffic engineers face. There is some additional delay but the delays apparently have been cut and the school district or the people at Hoover believe that it has helped them quite a bit, not a full success story but it works. Mid-block crosswalks are very difficult. On a street such as Arastradero with 16,000 to 18,000 vehicles a day, four lanes undivided, it is pretty dangerous to cross that street as a pedestrian because there are no gaps at all. So we looked at the Palo Alto City mid-block crossing warrants and it is not met because the volumes are far too high. You need a 16-second gap in traffic to cross and you are only going to get about one every nine minutes or too many times during the hour, only maybe eight or nine times during the hour people have a safe time to cross. Otherwise, a pedestrian has to enter the traffic stream and literally force the traffic to stop for them to get across. However, if you only have to cross half the street you can get a safe gap in a little under a minute on average. Now sometimes it is going to take two minutes. There is a lot of traffic on Arastradero but if they only have to cross half the street they can get a fairly safe gap every minute. The principle of this, I was impressed by crossings in London where they don’t let you cross directly. What they make you do, and by the way, the traffic drives on the wrong side so I almost died several times but they have these nice little stencils out in the street that say traffic this way or this way. So several times ! found myself looking and there is a car. Essentially this does the same thing. People cross to the island and then they have to walk facing Cirv of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 35 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 traffic to get to the other half of the street. This does two things, the pedestrians don’t believe that they have the right to cross the street in one fell swoop because they can’t do it, and two, they make eye-contact with cars that would potentially hit them. So this is what I would recommend for a mid-block crossing. If we implement a four-lane design on Arastradero Road the median would shrink to about six feet and it would be a little different shape but essentially it will work with either design. Adaptive signal coordination, I just finished implementing an eight signal adaptive system up in Santa Rosa. It is state-of-the-art. We turned it off one day and did travel time studies. We turned it back on the second day, this was a well-timed signal system on College Avenue intersecting 101 up there, and literally the traffic delays were reduced by about 30 percent. That is just incredible. What happens is if you have a coordinated signal system, signals operate at the same cycle length and you know that traffic going down a street there is a whole bunch of traffic and then all of a sudden there will be relatively little traffic. If you have a constant timed signal system with a 90-second cycle or a 120-second cycle every time when you really need it it comes in handy but when you don’t need it essentially you have a lot of blank green time that is not being used very effectively. Adaptive signal coordination can take advantage of a good amount of that excess green time. So that is how it reduced delay. It does not increase capacity it just makes better use of the time that is out on the street. I am working basically with McCain, the vendor that the City has, it is an advanced traffic system. Everything is in place. They had some communications issues over the last several Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 36 of l ] 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 months but that is not uncommon in many systems. So essentially tomorrow I am meeting with their chief technology guy, he is in our office, and tomorrow we are going to put the whole thing together and we hope to implement it in the next couple of weeks. Then we will need to fine- tune it and everything but I think in a couple of months we will have good traffic adaptive coordination in operation on Charleston and Arastradero Road. So we have all the necessary information that we need to go ahead and try this system out. It is not the same system as in Santa Rosa but it operates on somewhat the same principles. So I have every belief that this is going to work pretty wel!. We will tell you either way. Then the mid-term evaluation. Essentially Gayle did review the results and everything. We only had three criteria to look at. Travel time and we have done travel time before and after. We had to sort of equalize the traffic volumes because they have changed substantially since 2004. We looked at critical lane delay and we looked at off-peak speeds. All the rest, accidents, transit, bike-ridership, and all that kind of stuff is going to have to wait until 2010. We have seen no statistically significant increase in critical movement delays assuming equal volumes but the delays have gone up substantially because the traffic in the corridor has gone up a lot in the last several years to almost 250 to 300 vehicles an hour westbound. Speeds have probably been reduced in real terms about three miles per hour. One thing about the single lane in each direction with the left turn lane and everything is that the excessively high speeds are truncated. In other words, they are really depressed so basically, the people that want to do 50 or 60 miles an hour along the street can no longer do that easily because they can’t pass as easily. So we believe that the trial striping has met the measures of effectiveness criteria that were established by the City Council in 2004. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 37 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 This is the big topic, what to do about Arastradero. It does have higher volumes and especially peak direction volumes in Charleston Road. So it is a greater problem to take one lane in each direction away. In the road diet information that the traffic engineer has been compiling for the last several years throughout the world actually not jus the United States, essentially, when your volumes get as high as they are on Arastradero Road the left lane sort of turns into a de facto left turn lane because people have to stop for a long time before they can find a gap in traffic to make their left turn. So that extra capacity as the volumes gets higher and higher, the actual capacity of the four-lane undivided road seems to go down. We have modeled it and all this type of stuff but again the proof is in the actual operation. Before and after there is really no difference on Charleston Road but on Arastradero there would be a difference if Gurm High Schoo! continues to congest westbound Arastradero Road in the AM peak. If you read the report you see that it would not be maintainable. In other words, I don’t think the public would accept the kind of delays that would exist with Gunn High School and just one lane because everybody would stop for that congestion with no way to get around it. So hopefully we are going to fix the delay into Gunn High, We did expensive modeling on five alternatives. The first is do nothing, which we have pretty good information on. One lane in each direction with the median and left turns and then we went out to two lanes in each direction and Donald and Terman because that is a secondary bottleneck in the corridor. This is similar to the treatment at Middlefield on Charleston Road and then you have to merge back into one lane after you get past that intersection. That didn’t seem to work as well as we had hoped. We really found other ways to find capacity at that intersection by modifying both Terman and Donald and adding a left turn lane and those types of things. We looked at one lane in each way with added lanes at Donald Ci.ty of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 38 of l 17 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 2 3 4 5 and Terman plus the median left turns, that is the three-lane alternative that we are talking about. Then we look at the same type of thing as Charleston between Alma and E1 Camino which is the two lanes each way plus a narrow median left turn lane, that is the four-lane alternative. We also looked at rescheduling school arrival and departures. We found at least in the model that I prepared on Gunn High School, we started them earlier and they didn’t have any vote on that, that by the time the congestion receded for Gunn High Terman picked up. So all in all in the corridor the average travel times increased quite a bit and essentially staggering school schedules did not seem to work as effectively as we had hoped, so the only two that really made the cut are the three-lane and four-lane alternatives. The three-lane alternative has several advantages. It provides protected left turns. It retains all the parking. Parking can be looked upon as a buffer. Even though there is not a lot of parking on Arastradero Road parked cars are sort of a buffer between pedestrians, and the sidewalk, and all that kind of stuff, and traffic moving along the road. The bike lane has adequate width. We can provide a very generous bike lane. Median provides for safer pedestrian crossing by almost definition. Speeds will likely be reduced from three to five miles per hour especially with the physical changes. There is also space for median and margins on the margins of the road and in the median. But a three-lane street does create longer lines of cars moving through the system. So sometimes cars may stop 1,000 or more feet away from an intersection. This surprises people and so there will be rear end accidents located where there are no rear end accidents today. So those kinds of accidents could increase. Pedestrian accidents could occur if people are walking between the queued up cars, maybe one or two intersections away from a signal where you have Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 39 of l 17 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 these long queues during the peak. Motorists will accept less than adequate gaps for left turns 2 after you wait for along time basically they are going to go for it. Backing from residential 3 driveways will be worse. There is no doubt in my mind that you will have to wait at least twice 4 as long if not more to back out of a driveway, especially during the peak hours. 5 I live in San Leandro on a street with 17,000 cars a day, it is two lanes in each direction, it is not divided or anything but the people that live on that street in very nice fine homes they complain constantly about how long it takes them to get out of their driveway. There is nothing that can be done the street is only 46 feet wide and there is parking on both sides and bike lanes. So that is a con. Queues may block side streets longer because they are longer. Emergency vehicles, the design can be developed that allows 20 feet of clear space for fire and emergency equipment to get through if there is a blockage of the lane or something like that. That would be a consideration so the fire department would need to sign off on any final design plans. There is limited ability to carry additional peak hour traffic. You have taken a lane away from each direction, but I have concluded that Foothill, Miranda, and E1 Camino are essentially metering intersections for the corridor. There is not much ability at those intersections to put more traffic onto Arastradero or onto Charleston in one hour. They can do it over the day’s time so traffic can continue to increase but it would be done with peak spreading. The actual volumes that we are experiencing out there today are not likely to go significantly higher. They will line up on the cross streets like E1 Camino and Foothill but they won’t get on because there is a capacity limitation at those major intersections. CiO, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 40 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Four-lane pros, you are going to have shorter cycle lengths and it would even be better today with adaptive signal timing. It is safer but it is not ideal because the left turn storage is really skinny and so some people will not completely go into the left turn refuge area and the back of their car may stick out into oncoming traffic and they may get clipped. That is property damage but essentially it is still an accident hazard, but it is better than today. There is a pedestrian refuge with a median island. You can landscape the median and street margins and the queues will be the same or shorter than today. So those are the pros. The cons are fairly substantial. The narrow lanes will probably, I say may, but they will probably increase sideswipe accidents. I have dealt with streets with nine and a half foot lanes, ten-foot lanes, with transit and all that kind of stuff and there is an increase in sideswipe accidents when you reduce lane width. You also reduce speed. Speeds are not likely to be significantly reduced during the off-peak though. Even though you have narrower lanes, there is less traffic and so people can pass each other. Bike lanes will be very narrow. They will be five feet, which is the minimum requirement in the MUTCD, but they will be very narrow and less safe than with the three-lane alternative. There is not an ideal left turn storage, it may result in continued rear end accidents, and parking removal is absolutely mandatory. There are only 60 plus or minus feet out there and you can slice and dice it anyway you want but there is very little room to design around that. You probably have this in your book. This is primarily for the people in the audience. The three-lane alternative, and don’t take this - it is a conceptual design, it is almost back of the napkin kinds of engineering. The four-lane alternative as you can see Gunn High School no City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 41 of l 17 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 changes with either the three or the four-lane alternative and then essentially we have very narrow medians, very limited ability to get into left turn lanes and all that kind of stuff along the corridor. On balance, either the three or the four-lane with a median alternative is better than do nothing. The do nothing is the current cross section of Arastradero is one of the most hazardous kinds of streets, one of the most problematic kinds of arterial streets in urban America today. If Gunn High drive queues can be reduced or eliminated the three-lane actually will work fairly well. You will have better pedestrian movement. There will be slower traffic in the off-peak hours as well. Traffic will go fairly slow during the peak. Wider medians with more landscaping without Gunn congestion we can probably maintain performance to equal standards of what you see today. In other words, one of the goals is to not increase travel time. If we get rid of the Gunn High School congestion we can probably meet that objective and then some. So the recommendations, these are fairly detailed but make the Charleston striping permanent, Gunn High School basically the City and I and Gurm High staff are going to have to really work hard to make that thing work after they restripe and reconfigure their parking lot. It will need officer or traffic flagging kinds of assistance because it will be something new. So the parents that come to the school and the kids that come to the school won’t be familiar with the new traffic pattern. So it will take maybe three or four weeks before it all settles down and we can determine whether it worked adequately. Design Arastradero only after the Gunn High School changes because if Gunn cannot be improved sufficiently then there is really only one alternative to the do nothing which is the four-lane alternative. I think the mid-block crossing similar to the Briones concept should be put where they were recommended in the original plan back in 2004 because there is a long distance between signalized intersections in this corridor, and a pedestrian CiO, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 42 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 would have to walk more than 400 or 500 feet. That is five or six minutes or so to get back to where they need to go. Report on adaptive results later this year. We will know by this summer whether it all works. I believe that it will work fine. Some of the questions dealt with the operation of the signal at Foothill and Miranda. The person at the county is [anon persaud] he is an associate or senior engineer there. He has changed the signal timing. I do know him personally and I think I can ask him. We need to consult with the county and find out what they did but they have one controller managing both intersections. It is an advance controller and it has 16 - you don’t need to know all this. Essentially, it is very complicated. Then retain the Nelson signal operations even though they do provide a little bit of additional delay in the corridor. So that is it. Chair Holman: Commissioners are there any burning, clarifying questions or can we go to the members of the public? I still have 21 cards from members of the public. I see no lights so we will go to the public. You will have three minutes. Our first speaker is Henry Lum to be followed by Carlin Otto. Thank you all for coming. Mr. Henry Lum. Palo Alto: Hi, we have been living in our neighborhood since 1964 and we understand a lot of the problems associated with Arastradero. In fact, we have lived with a lot of those problems since we first moved in back in 1964. We would strongly recommend that the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements be initiated so that we can decide whether a three-lane or a four-lane configuration is feasible. Certainly, we would like a three-lane configuration but if that is not possible then we could live with a four-lane configuration City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 43 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 provided we had three items. One is that we had wider bike lanes on the east side of Arastradero. Right now cyclists riding on the east side of Arastradero ride on the sidewalk because they are terrified of getting into the bike lane, the traffic is moving too fast. So when pedestrians get on the sidewalk they compete with the cyclists, the cyclists suddenly dart into the bicycle lane, and that causes the motorist to get confused. So motorists either veer or they start honking their horns at a cyclist so it creates panic on both sides. The second is that we do need that crosswalk to Biones Park especially during the summer. There are a lot of grandmothers, nannies and young children going across to the park. There are a lot of seniors that also walk to the neighborhood stores. So if we want a walking type of neighborhood we need that crosswalk. You will certainly encourage the use of public transportation because the two VTA stops are right about the intersection of fire station and the park. You are not going to get seniors walking all the way up to the traffic signal and then walking back down again. The last item is we do need dedicated turn lanes for in and out of our neighborhood. Our neighborhood is actually locked in. We have no way of getting out of our neighborhood except getting in and out of Arastradero. Even my wife had a rear end accident because somebody just plowed into her and didn’t realize that she was stopped there waiting to get into the neighborhood. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 44 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 So I would suggest that we proceed with this to find out if we can do a three-lane configuration. I think that with these improvements it would improve our quality of life and make our neighborhood a much better walkable neighborhood. Thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you Mr. Lum. Carlin Otto to be followed by Dave Ramsey. Ms. Carlin Otto. Palo Alto: I am President of the Charleston Meadows Neighborhood Association and I am here to speak on behalf of my neighborhood with a letter that we drafted. The Charleston Meadows Neighborhood urges the City of Palo Alto to move forward with the traffic improvements for Charleston-Arastradero. We voted on the 19th of April to support this, the entire Board unanimously supports this. One, we want to encourage you to make the Charleston Phase 1 improvement permanent and two, to implement a trial of the proposed Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements, and use data from this trial to determine which configuration to use on the Arastradero trial. We support the planned improvements on the Gunn campus that are designed to move cars off Arastradero faster. We are hopeful that this change will alleviate congestion on Arastradero and pave the way for a three-lane configuration. Arastradero serves 11 schools, no one has actually told you guys that but you probably should know that fact. The children in our neighborhood must travel down this for both Terman and Gunn and the other nine schools. It is currently not safe and the proposed three-lane configuration is needed in order to provide pedestrian medians and a continuous and wider bike lane for safe biking and walking to school. Thank you. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 45 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman:Thank you Ms. Otto.Dave Ramsey to be followed by Nina Bell. Mr. Dave Ramsev. Palo Alto: Hi, I live in the fourth house on the north side of the East Charleston intersection. Most of my concerns are of the Carlson-Charleston intersection. I think the study rightly identified the problems at Nelson and the illegal U-turns that were causing a problem. A similar condition also exits on the two short segments of Carlson on either side of Charleston in that the parents who choose not to go into the school grounds continue to come into those short segments, block our driveways, do illegal U-turns, children get out of the cars, doors flying open, crossing in mid-block not going to the end, and I really think this a potential for a very serious accident to occur here. I have called the police to come out and monitor. They come out the first day of school, issue a few traffic tickets, they will disappear, and then the insanity continues from then on. So I was wondering if there was something that could be done to study this intersection and the effect of the spillover traffic that comes and parks and does illegal U-turns there. My second issue is that there is a double yellow line configuration so that cars cannot turn left into the Hoover although this really does not prevent people from doing that. I understand that a permanent solution with a raised curb or concrete barriers is not going to happen. So I was wondering if some plastic pylons can be put up temporarily at least to keep people from turning in there. I walk that every day. I am almost hit often crossing that entryway with cars turning left into it and not watching. So that is a danger also. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 46 of l 17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Another issue I have is the City shuttle bus stops at the Stevenson House, blocks the bike lane and also impinges out into the one lane that exists now and it causes bicycles to go out into the traffic. The last thing is I wonder if the bicycle lanes could be extended from Fabian onto San Antonio. I know there is a lot of construction going on there but I bicycle there too and it is very dangerous on both sides with not having a bicycle lane. Thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you very much. Nina Bell to be followed by Philip Melese. Ms. Nina Bell, Palo Alto: Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I live in the Green Acres I Neighborhood, which is next to Terman Middle School on Arastradero. I have been actively involved in the Charleston-Arastradero project since the very beginning and have participated as a representative for my neighborhood at the stakeholders committee. There have been major concerns for my neighborhood with regard to the existing conditions on Arastradero. The speed of traffic, the safety of the children that use this school corridor for both walking and biking to school, the unprotected crossing to Juana Biones Park, the vulnerability of cars waiting on Arastradero in their attempt to turn into neighborhood streets. Last year my son’s car was rear ended while he was trying to turn into the neighborhood. Many of my neighbor’s cars have also been hit and some numerous times. Most tragically a number of years City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 47 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ago my friend’s 15-year old son was killed on Arastradero next to Gunn while riding his bicycle to school. There have been no safety improvements on the roadway for years. The proposal that you have before you addresses our concerns and offers the best remedy for the problems on Arastradero. Traffic adaptive lights are a key factor to the success of the project, thy have been included. A safe crossing to Juana Briones Park has been added to the design. This is important because there is too much space between safe crossings. We frequently see people dashing across the street, dodging cars, to get to the park often with children in tow. The plan adds left turn pockets to protect cars turning into neighborhoods. Left turn pockets will also reduce the friction created by uncontrolled turning and passing, allowing a more efficient flow in the through lanes. Also, key is the trial proposed with Gunn High School. This test is imperative to determine the striping of Arastradero. If it works as well as expected it will resolve the morning commute backup and enable the safer three-lane striping configuration on Arastradero. That would be the ideal solution for all users of the corridor. This plan provides wider bike lanes, slower but efficiently flowing traffic, adaptive lights, safe turn pockets, a protected mid-block crosswalk, pedestrian refuges at intersections, improved flow of traffic with Gunn and thereby on Arastradero. It is time for this plan to move forward. Much thought and careful analysis has gone into the recommendations that you have before you. It offers the best solution for the original goals and objectives for the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor. I urge you to improve them. I ask you to make sure also that the protected mid-block City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 48 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 crossing proposed for Juana Briones Park is installed as part of the summer 2009 paint trial. thank you. Chair Holman: You had four seconds left, very good job. Philip Melese, and I am sorry ifI have your last name incorrect, and the next speaker will be Jeff Lipkin. Mr. Philip Melese, Palo Alto: I live on Arastradero so I can guarantee you that Arastradero has at least one resident. I am on the corner of Donald across the street from Terman. I have kids who went to Terman. I have kids who went and are going to Gunn. I ride my bike to work most of the time so I kind of represent - I am very positive towards the pedestrian and bike friendly nature. I am very happy about that about Palo Alto. That is one of the reasons I moved here. I am very happy about this whole discussion here because I think it is really important that we are setting the stage for our residents and how we want the city to go. To that extent, I would like to encourage the Gunn improvements and I hope that they are successful so we can have the three- lane solution to Arastradero. I am concerned about the bicyclists, the children, making Arastradero less of a freeway and more of a residential street, encouraging people to walk and ride rather than drive. So let me see what I missed here. You said that you read my email so I am not going to repeat that. The few things I want to point out, there are a few comments we talk about flow a lot. I just want to say from my perspective that faster is not better necessarily. I am very encouraged by the results I am hearing for the top speeds being reduced and three-lane solution because we constantly see people going very, very fast. There is nothing to stop them. During the off hours Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 P%~e 49 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 the lights are always green down Arastradero it is a straight shot, they use it to get to the freeway, they are anxious to get from E1 Camino to Foothill as fast as they can, and it is arbitrary speeds. I think it is dangerous and really sets a poor tone for where we live. So let me just end by reading a few of the things that I really like about the three-lane, just hitting the bullet points. Safer left turn access into side streets. Reducing speeds overall, three to five mile an hour estimation. Adequate room for parking and bike lane, which I am really happy about. A pedestrian refuge and having the median landscaped. I think that is all great stuff so I would really like to encourage you to support this if at all possible. Thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you. Jeff Lipkin to be followed by Don Nielson. Mr. Jeff Lipkin. Palo Alto: I lived for 24 years on Georgia Avenue. I live on the stretch between Juana Briones and the cut-through to Gunn High School. I only have three minutes so I will be very blunt. Right now, both the Staff work and the consulting work and the Council’s consideration are materially defective because you have an unsatisfactory traffic situation on Georgia Avenue, which you are not addressing, and this will exacerbate it. I don’t believe you can go ahead without addressing the Georgia Avenue situation as a legal matter. If you look at page three, I can point to the cut-through. There is sort of a hump that is Georgia Avenue that goes all the way from Juana Briones where Georgia is broken down and joins Arastradero. In the morning rush hundreds of students are dropped off there by car. In the afternoon hundreds leave as well. Probably several hundred additional walk there by foot. A lot Cio, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 50 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 of Terman students and a lot of Juana Briones students walk there by foot. So one might ask why aren’t there any speed bumps there like there are on Maybell near Juana Briones. If anything, the situation is much worse on that stretch of Georgia than it is on Maybell. I sit in my computer and overlook the street. I do a lot of work in my home office. I have noticed cars regularly going 40 miles an hour down the street. There needs to be at least three speed bumps on Georgia to stop this and there need to be some street signs. Also, what happens when they get momentum going is they only slow down to 20 miles an hour at the stop sign and roll right on through. I have reported this to the police department including license plates and they say I can’t make the arrest, they have not increased patrols, and all they did was put one of those blinking signs in the neighborhood. Right now, it is an accident waiting to happen. It is also clearly a planning consideration because of the cut-through that has to be taken into account. I don’t believe that either the Staff work or the Council’s consideration right now is adequate. That is all I have to say. Chair Holman: Thank you very much. Can Staff help him with that, please? Perhaps what we could do while that is warming up and being put into place perhaps we could go to the next speaker and come back to you if that’s okay. Mr. Don Nielson. Palo Alto: I will talk while it is going. I live on Miranda Green and I represent a neighborhood association at the end of Mirada Avenue as you go south. I am here I Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 51 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 think as another stepchild of the analysis. You can see on this the segment between Gunn and Foothill Expressway. Our street enters - there is Arastradero right there. Chair Holman: Is there a portable mike that he can have? We need to keep you on microphone, sir. Mr. Nielson: Fifty-five residents use this. This is our only means of entrance and exit. We don’t have any other alternative it is just this single road. This is about 650 feet from here to here. There are several problems. One is that we now know that you can’t coordinate the light signaling with the Foothill Expressway light system, which is right here. With this free right turn here off from Foothill Expressway there is essentially a continuous flow of traffic eastward commute. We can’t even turn right out of this street at the early Gunn morning. In both the level of service and the grade, I think that we get an F in the report. It is the highest and the worst level you can get. So the question is if you reduce this to a three-lane segment right in this area here with all the queue that goes up to making left turns into Gunn. Then it is almost certain that we won’t be able to get out of our neighborhood. So I just really want to direct your attention to this particular stepchild I think in the analysis. As far as I can see there is very little in the report that addresses it adequately. I think that is about all I had. The platoons that form as they go down the corridor don’t have time by - this is only a few hundred feet from the Foothill intersection, so they don’t have time really to form and so getting in and out between cars that are randomly appearing in front of us is a pretty tough thing. So I am not for or against three lanes on the major corridor. This particular segment here is I think on Miranda Avenue that is neglected. The other Miranda Avenue, which is mentioned before, goes actually north to City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 52 of I ] 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 the hospital. So please look at this south entrance that we have from Arastradero it really needs examination. Thank you. Chair Holman: You have another minute if you need it. Mr. Nielson: What I would propose to do with regard to the whole three and four-lane situation is to do the Gunn thing well. It certainly was not done well the first time, was it? I mean to really make that change as much as you can this summer and then please let us look at the whole situation again rather than saying well, we will proceed with the three-lane if the Gunn situation is somehow tolerable. So I am really in favor of doing it in a stepwise process, which I think is probably the consultant’s suggestion anyway. There is one other representative of the neighborhood who will talk a little bit later, thank you. Chair Holman: If you are referring to Ms. Smiley, she actually ceded her time to you, which is why I said you had another minute. Our next speaker is Michael Fischer to be followed by Bil! Witt. Mr. Michael Fischer. Pato Alto: I live on East Charleston. I just want to point out three problems I have not heard addressed in any of the reports or the comments tonight and offer possible solutions to them. One of the main objectives of this whole process was traffic calming. My personal measure of the calmness of the traffic is how often I hear horns honk. On the four-lane version the honking Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 53 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 rate was about once per day. With the new striping the honking rate is about once per hour, a i2 to one increase for the 12 hours from seven in the morning to seven at night. So I can’t claim that the traffic is any calmer. One of the main sources of all this honking is the ill-conceived shrinkage from two lanes to one lane on westbound Charleston on the curve between Fabian and Louis. Doing this on a curve is asking for confusion, anger, and accidents. The shrinkage should be accomplished one block earlier between San Antonio and Fabian on that straight section of Charleston, which was not part of the project but it should have been to solve this problem. The second one is the original plan clearly promised a U-turn pocket on Charleston midway between Louis and Grove, which is a very long block. That was not implemented in the actual striping and now it is very common to see drivers making illegal U-turns across all four yellow lines in the area where the U-turn pocket was promised but not implemented. That is on Attachment B, page 19, you can find that and that U-turn pocket was not striped in there. It is just solid. The last point is the left turn pocket from eastbound Charleston onto northbound Louis is too short. Overflows during the commute times forces traffic into the bike lane to go around the cars stopped waiting for a left turn. That pocket needs to be lengthened by at least two car lengths. Thank you. Chair Holman: Sir, could you please state again where the U-turn pocket was? City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 54 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Fischer: It is midway between Louis and Grove. Chair Holman: Okay. Bill Witt to be followed by Caren Chappell. Mr. Bill Witt. Palo Alto: I live on Carlson Circle and have been a resident there for 24 years now. My neighbor, Mr. Ramsey, came up with some concerns of his regarding traffic on Carlson which I heartily second. That is a problem on the street. Regarding the Charleston corridor, I wish I could share the rosy conclusions of Ms. Likens. I drive that corridor twice a day, I’m sorry, I make four trips a day on that and the worst situation occurs at Fabian where there is usually at five o’clock a drag race to see who is going to get to the curve section first. In my opinion, there are two risks at that particular point. The straight section there from the intersection to the beginning of the curve is only about 60 to 90 feet and you are asking somebody to take a risk in merging and not only that but merging on a curve. That is very dangerous. I have been driving for over 50 years now but I consider that super dangerous. I don’t think there has been any concern with the striping of the bike lane in front of Hoover School. The condition that I have noticed is that on a rainy night, admittedly, there is not much bike traffic there but I have seen it. It is very difficult to see the striping with a wet surface. That is quite dangerous. I have seen cars go straight off the light at Nelson and drive right over that bike lane. That is about all I have. Thank you. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 55 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: Thank you very much Mr. Witt. Caren Chappell followed by Faith Hastings. Ms. Caren Chappell, Palo Alto: I live on Charleston between Mumford and Alma. This is the piece where if you want to get into your driveway going westbound you have to make a U-turn at the right intersection. It is not bad. I thought it was going to be a problem but people do actually slow down and sometimes they even stop behind me as I sit there with my hand out and my turn signal flashing. They have stopped trying to overtake me in the median, which is good. They do occasionally overtake on the right in the bike lane. I am not sure what I can do about that. On the whole I like it a whole lot. There is less noticeable traffic. There is only one line of cars stacked up before Alma rather than two at least as far as down where my house is. The pedestrian crossings are great. Some people even stop when I am in the middle of the street waiting for them, some of them barrel on past, but at least I am in the middle and not getting run over. Because it is only one line of cars each way I don’t have the situation where one stops and the other one keep going. It would be nice if we could do something to discourage people from driving in the median. There is nothing now. At night it is hard to see if you are not familiar with the area that it is a median and many people don’t care anyway. They do U-turns in the median. They drive out of driveway. Some of them drive down the middle of it. Bumps, we can’t have a curb yet until it is officially approved of and money appears from the sky but maybe we could put some plants in there or the diagonal stripes that make it a wall so that people won’t have the excuse of oh, I thought it was a third lane. Other than that I think it is great. Chair Holman: Thank you very much. Faith Hastings to be followed by John Elman. Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 56 of l 17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 Ms. Faith Hastings, Palo Alto: I have lived on Grove Avenue for 43 years. I am in the Meadow Park Residents Association and I was on vacation when some people from the Planning Department came out to meet with our folks. We are very opposed to the three-lane arrangement it hasn’t been an improvement for us or safe. It is a nightmare. The two areas that cause a lot of trouble are where it goes from four lanes to two lanes. The Fabian one has been addressed and the other one is when you are coming east on Charleston and you have to merge at Middlefield. It is particularly a problem for us because we right away turn left onto Grove Avenue. So we can barely get merged and then we don’t have a long enough left turn space and it is really dangerous to do that. What has happened, as you well know Sutherland and Grove are offset and that is a really bad situation. So here they come and put a left turn lane, if I turned left where the arrow is I would go right into the curb and into my neighbor’s house on the comer. Historically the residents had worked it all out with the people coming to turn onto Sutherland came past the people that were going to go onto Grove. We had always turned that way. Now with these arrows and not a long enough left turn lane it is very dangerous. If you think you are going to be putting curbs in there where we can’t even get any wiggle room to get on top of some of the painted area it is really a very unfortunate situation. I really request that you look at that particular intersection because I have had situations where I have had to change and go straight ahead. I was turning left, I had to go straight to Louis and clear around the block to my house, and I only live one house off of Charleston. So if the City is planning to put physical barriers down that middle lane I just beg you to please make a longer left turn lane and just take those arrows out so that people won’t be crossing into each other. So we hope the engineers can make some changes that might alleviate this situation. Thank you. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 57 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 Chair Holman: Thank you Ms. Hastings. John Elman to be followed by Betsy A11yn. Mr. John Elman. Palo Alto: Thank you. I think what you heard in the last few minutes is just a preliminary report for what you are going to hear from the Arastradero people a year from now. 6 I don’t know if anybody up there is a physicist but if you grab one hose that has a leak here you 7 are probably going to get some leak some place else. Or as we tried to say when this whole thing 8 was thought up you can’t get water through a one-inch pipe at the same speed, as we were told 9 by the former Traffic Director, as in a two-inch pipe. Oh, yes he is going to adjust the lights he 10 told us. Well at Foothill it is a - first of all, do any of you use Arastradero in the morning or any 11 time during the day? You know the six or seven way light at Foothill could be a seven to eight 12 minute project. Well, seven or eight minutes doesn’t take too much time ifI am eating cereal but 13 if I am sitting in my car it is a long time. I am retired now so I use Arastradero four, six, seven 14 times a day. I am in and out of the car but I don’t use it during the early morning. For instance, 15 the other morning I had a meeting. I was lucky to get across and got down to E1 Camino and that 16 was backed up three lights. E1 Camino is a four-six way light too. It took forever to turn left 17 there. Now, they talk about 18,000 cars a day. The whole discussion from these folks here at the 18 table has been about Gunn. Gunn is less than ten percent of that traffic. Without it we would 19 have a lot of traffic on Arastradero at those times of the day at one end or the other. It is hard to 20 get out there. I live on Hubbard where I have lived for about 45 years, three months from now it 21 will be 45 years, and in the morning I don’t try to go places before 9:30 or so because I can’t get 22 out on there so I am unfortunately going to have to use Georgia and Maybell. Now the City 23 knew that this was going to happen to divert traffic to the side streets because they paved City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 58 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Maybell. I have been driving up Maybell on and off and going for walks on it for years but it was gravel. Now it is paved. It is a nice street. They did that in anticipation of the traffic that was going to be diverted off of Arastradero for this project. So the very least you should consider is that it is going to be four lanes not three because boy oh boy is there going to be trouble. I can’t get out and other streets can’t get out onto Arastrader0 we are going to have to use the side streets. So these other things you have heard about, the traffic on Georgia, and Donald, and Maybell, and the problems on Miranda Green, and so forth and so on. You are going to have different problems and you are going to make a lot of people angry. You are going to spend all this money. You could have a policeman out there enforcing the speed limit, which is everybody’s complaint for a !ot less than this project is going to cost over the next few years. Is my time up, by the way? Chair Holman: Wagner. It is, sir.That also was good timing.Betsy Allyn to be followed by Keri Ms. Betsy Allvn. Palo Alto: Thank you. I am a resident of Green Acres II Neighborhood and a member of the infamous stakeholders group since its inception. I believe it is close to 14 years now since this project was initiated by the Palo Alto City Traffic Staff based on an analysis of a rather large number of planned and started housing developments in South Palo Alto and Stanford. This corridor is not just about traffic it is all about efficiency and safety. It is absolutely necessary to view the corridor as a neighborhood arterial, two designations given by both the school district and the City as a Safe Routes to School Corridor, c lose to 10,000 children cross it a day. Three heavily used nearby parks for neighborhood gatherings, recreation Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 59 of I 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 for young children, soccer and baseball practices, 11 neighborhoods from Fabian Way to Palo Alto Hills and probably 15 schools on the corridor if you include the childcare, public, and private schools, and the most popular and heavily used library in the city. Walkable, bikable, child-oriented neighborhoods. IfI belabor the issues, it is because they are obvious and true. The tree lane plan does not stall traffic it modifies it due to the traffic adaptive signalization. It is al! about safety and efficiency. The three-lane sections would be in the residential portions of the corridor as in the Charleston end of the corridor the City would maintain lane capacity at major intersections Donald, E1 Camino Real, and others to provide storage capacity. They would provide left turn pockets at other intersections allowing for more efficiency throughout. The corridor plan was part of the mitigation for the Hyatt housing development and the Campus for Jewish Life. The three-lane configuration also contains the most necessary planned crosswalk design near Susan Drive where pedestrian and children and grandparents to access Juana Briones Park and school in a more heavily congested area. We hope that you will make the three-lane designation permanent with the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements thus working toward the implementation of the complete Charleston-Arastradero Corridor. I would like to take a moment to thank the City Staff, Steve Emslie and Gayle Likens, for their patients and advice, Gary Kruger, TJKM the consultant who translated his statistics in an easy manner understandable to most of us, and the staff from Palo Alto School District, Gunn High School, and the PTA associations. I would also like to say that I like Maybell. I drive there all Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 60 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 the time even in the morning when it is car to car traffic going to and from Georgia and the problem on Georgia. I like it because now it is safe for the children. I used to see children on bicycles coming up from E1 Camino dodging in and out of the cars and the trucks. There was no place for them to ride their bikes safely. There was no place for them to walk safely. Now there is. They have four or five speed bumps on Maybell, it is smooth, and it is safe for children. Chair Holman: Rinsky. Thank you Ms. Allyn.Our next speaker is Keri Wagner to be followed by Sue Ms. Keri Wagner. Palo Alto: Hi. First, I want to speak as the PTA President of Hoover Elementary School, which is on Charleston Road. On Apri! 15, the Hoover Elementary School PTA held our general membership meeting and discussed the striping plan on Charleston Road. The Hoover PTA voted to support the three-lane configuration and urges the Planning and Transportation and the City of Palo Alto to make the striping plan permanent. Now I want to take my PTA hat off and speak as a Hoover parent and as a resident of Charleston Meadows. The three-lane configuration on Charleston works. Now cars actually travel closer to the speed limit. My husband bikes with our two boys to Hoover every morning and I bike home with them every afternoon. We can do this because the wider bike lanes and the slower traffic speeds make this route safe. Now we need to make Arastradero Road safe. Along with making permanent the three-lane configuration of Charleston, I urge you to please approve the proposal for fixing the Gunn driveway and parking lot. Then we can examine how to make Arastradero Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 61 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Road safer so parents will allow their children to walk and bike to Terman and Gunn. you. Thank Chair Holman: Thank you. Sue Rinsky is our next speaker. Ms. Sue Rinskv. Palo Alto: I live on Oak Avenue and for those of you who have no idea where it is it is on the other side of Foothill Expressway, one of the few streets that are still Palo Alto before the hills. I think I am probably the only one from our neighborhood and we have no official group but most of our neighborhood feels strongly that we would like to see Arastradero stay four lanes. I guess it certainly makes sense from what I have heard tonight that you do something about Gunn’s driveway before you go any further. As a resident coming first of all across Foothill Expressway at that long light I travel on Arastradero during the day and if you forget about just the morning rush hour traffic Arastradero is terribly busy up until 9:30 or ten o’clock. If you are trying to get to 101 from Foothill, it takes forever to get across the light at Alma right now and that is without having all these go doyen to one or two lanes. Half the time I end up going down Foothill to San Antonio Road through downtown Los Altos because I can make better time on San Antonio than I can going up Arastradero. So the thought of making it narrower just doesn’t make much sense to us. Also, I just want to comment I didn’t realize you were planning on a crosswalk at Briones Park, which I think would be very nice except I think a crosswalk is just inviting people to hit pedestrians. People in California don’t stop anymore for pedestrians like they are supposed to. I walk up in the hills all the time and I stand there with very little traffic I stand at Old Trace or Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 62 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Old Adobe waiting for the cars to stop or at least get past me so I can cross the street. So that kind of scares me that you are going to have a crosswalk with no light for people crossing to Briones Park. Thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you. John McMurray to be followed by Penny Ellson. Mr. John McMurrav, Palo Alto: I live on Los Palos Avenue, which is about a block and half off of Arastradero. I have lived there for almost 40 years. Forty years ago, I was a little more agile than I am today and so playing dodge ball with two tons of steel crossing Arastradero to the park and all of that even before it was called Briones Park. Today I am not that agile and it is a problem, a serious problem, and I am really surprised that somebody feels that some type of structured crosswalk is less safe than just an open street. But so be it. I would like to see something solved there. If the Gunn situation you still backup and you have driveways and side streets that create a problem for making a right turn lane in there, so if you can get that flow moving that will help. Terman and Bowman schools are problems because you have right turn backups at those places in the morning and in the afternoon. I am not sure the side streets were part of the study and we have a smaller problem, not as bad as Georgia and that, but people dropping students off at the back gate of Terman and that is a dead end little place in there. You ought to see them stack up in there and then try to get out and also lined up on Pomona waiting for them after school. Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 63 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 I would like to see us move forward and at least try to resolve some of these problems because it is just going to get worse if we don’t try. So I would encourage you to complete the study at Gurm with the restriping or reconfiguring, see what that does to traffic, and then look at what solutions we can have on Arastradero. I have been rear ended four times in those 40 years. It is basically because people are coming down there and you are trying to make a left turn into an area. We have the same problem Henry has we are basically locked Arastradero is our only outlet to the world. So thank you very much and somebody else can have the rest of my time if they need it. Chair Holman: Thank you so much. Penny Ellson to be followed by Rich Ellson. Ms. Penny Ellson, Pa!o Alto: Hi. I want to start by thanking Staff and TJKM for moving forward with this plan. They have followed the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan and they have worked very hard using good analytical work to find solutions to every challenge that came forward with this project. So thank you for that excellent work. I just want to say in the words of one of my neighbors, a former opponent of the project, he said, I was glad to see how well the simulations predicted the actual three-lane performance. So well done. Thank you. I had sort of a speech planned but a lot of what I wanted to cover has already been talked about so I am going to skip around a little bit. In addition to the 11 public and private elementary and middle schools on Charleston there is also Mitchell Park Library the most heavily used library in City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 64 of l 17 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 the City of Palo Alto. There are multiple parks and there will soon be three community centers 2 on this street, a neighborhood shopping center, several senior residences, and CAR a lot of the 3 disables clients of CAR cross back and forth between the shopping center and Cubberly and their 4 facility as part of their programming. None of these facilities were designed for high auto 5 volumes. None of them has enough parking or driveway capacity to support a major shift to automobiles and that is what will happen if we don’t have safe connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. From the beginning the design of this area, especially around the super block, depended on walkable/bikable connections and this is becoming more important as land use is intensifying and population is increasing. I don’t have to tell you how many Comprehensive Plan goals, policies, and programs this plan addresses you all know them. Actually, I am noticing that only one member of this PTC remains from the group that unanimously approved the plan a long time ago. What year was that? Gayle did a little bit of historical summary and I just wanted to add to that that in fact Green Meadow has been working on Charleston since the 1990s before I was involved in this. In 2000, there was a study that recommended a road diet on this plan and it was never implemented. After the 2003 aggregate impact analysis that was done it became very, very clear we needed a plan to address all of the traffic impacts from all of the projects that were coming on this corridor. I think this plan does that very welt. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 65 of l 17 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ., 2 3 4 5 I also want to mention really quickly that the Hoover campus problem was an existing condition. This is not something new as a result of plan. In fact, when we originally did our observations before - I guess I have to turn it over to Rich. Mr. Rich Ellson. Palo Alto: Hi, I am the closer. I just wanted to say that this has been a very long road for only being a couple of miles long. The time has been long. When we started this project my oldest child was in preschool and this year she is about to graduate middle school. We have new neighbors moving into the finished DR Horton units, which were just sort of a plan back at that time, and this planned mitigation for their added trips is only in its first phase of its tria!. So we are still a long way from getting to the safety improvements we wanted to have on the corridor and particularly to get them completed before the other projects which are under construction are done. So please help us move the corridor plan forward with your support this evening and recommendations to Council. We hope that you will support Staff’s recommendations and ask Staff to working on finding grants and making the grant applications necessary to make this a reality and not just a long road but physically a !ong road with safety improvements. So with that I will conclude and just remind you that one of the reasons that we got involved with this project was that I was actually hit by a car. If you have ever been hit by a car it is a very unpleasant experience. I wouldn’t wish it on any adult and I certainly wouldn’t wish it on children. So please make the safety improvements so that my kids can bike to high school before they get there in a safe manner. Thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you. Our next speaker is Bill Filler to be followed by Richard Geiger and then our final speaker Jean Wilcox. Bill Filler? He appears not be here. Okay, Mr. Geiger. Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 66 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 !4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Richard Geiger. Palo Alto: Good evening. Thanks for having the opportunity of speaking. I turned in my comments earlier so I will be brief in my comments now. I have been involved in this to some degree with Mr. Kott’s committee years ago and have supported it all along. I think it is really good that it has been implemented. It does reduce the speed especially during the commute times and when traffic is heavy. I live on Charleston between Middlefield and Louis so I walk it a lot. I am retired and I drive it a lot and there are issues. Primarily the speeding when there isn’t heavy traffic and this stretch of the road between Middlefield and Louis or beyond Louis is a straightaway. There is nothing restricting the speed of the cars. Even when I pull in my driveway and I am going slow cars will use the median to pass me because they don’t slow down. I will go through some of the comments I made here. A positive change is it has eliminated drag racing, which occurred occasionally when young people are out trying to see who can go the fastest. I think one solution in this area would be the use of speed humps because this is a straightaway there needs to be something to slow down traffic and speed humps are one of the things. Also, the planting of trees or shrubs or something in the median in the interim of any final plan, this would be a fairly simple thing to do so that people can’t just drive down the medians. Even installing four-way stops at Grove and Louis would do something somewhat to slow down the traffic. These merging lanes have been mentioned and I think they are all a real problem because the cars cut in when they cross Middlefield going east they simply cut in. The rest of it is written down. I could talk about right turn only. I think there should be right turn only at the intersections of Middlefield and Charleston because most people are turning right. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 67 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Chair Holman: I need to ask you to wrap up Mr. Geiger. Mr. Geiger: Okay, thank you. Chair Holman: Thank you very much for coming. Our final speaker is Jean Wilcox. Ms. Jean Wilcox. Palo Alto: Good evening Planning and Transportation Commission. I would first of all like to support the lady who spoke about the intersection of Grove and Sutherland. I think she has quite a point that there is not enough left turn lane area for those turning left onto Grove. I would like to point out to the Commission that we have a little problem on Sutherland. In the morning the traffic backs up from Fabian Way all the way back up to Middlefield and we cannot get out of Sutherland. This could possibly be resolved with just a sign on the street that says, "keep clear." It would help us. To solve the problem of traffic traveling east on Charleston prior to Fabian Way where they have to turn left and narrow down to one lane before you reach Fabian Way it might be an idea to put right hand turn arrows there sort of encouraging people who turn down Fabian Way to get into the right lane and therefore encouraging those to continue on Charleston to stay in the left lane. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 68 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 My last little thing that I have noticed is at Nelson. Sometimes there is a backup at Nelson because it singles down to one lane traveling west right before the light there and traffic has backed up over Middle field and this is a problem. So I can understand why people use the bike lane there. It is a problem and I think it is solvable. Thank you very much. Chair Holman: Thank you Ms. Wilcox. We will close the public hearing and thank you all very much for coming. We will take a seven-minute break and be back. We will reconvene our meeting. Members of the public if we could get your attention, please. City Attorney if you would care to restate just for clarity our purpose here this evening. Mr. Larkin: There was a lot of information that has been provided as background so I think it would help to focus the discussion just to go back over what it is the Commission is being asked to do tonight. The recommendation is that the Commission approve the permanent retention of the Phase 1 trial striping and lane configurations of Charleston Road. That is the demonstration project or the trial project that is continually going. Direct Staff to continue monitoring of traffic conditions on Charleston Road after implementation of the traffic adaptive signal timing along the entire Charleston-Arastradero Corridor and Staff would come back and provide an update in December of 2008 on the effectiveness of that signalization. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 69 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 Direct Staff to work with the Gunn High School administration to implement a trial of Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements and to return to City Council by January 2009 with the recommendation of the Phase 2 trial striping plan for Arastradero Road. The Commission is not being asked at this time to make a recommendation on the three-lane or four-lane options or any of the improvements on Arastradero Road that is outside the scope of this meeting. Some of that information has been provided as backup. Then the fourth recommendation is to direct Staff to pursue available grant funding opportunities for the design and construction of the permanent safety and streetscape improvements and those are listed. So in terms of what is happening on Arastradero Road most of what has been provided ~vith the exception of the Gunn driveway improvements was provided as background and the Commission is not being asked to make recommendations on the specifics of those but only whether or not Staff should come forward with a more specific proposal in January 2009. Chair Holman: Thank you that should help move us along. Questions, Commissioner Keller and Commissioner Sandas. Commissioner Keller: Mr. City Attorney, I think you mentioned this. I am not sure of the right person for the question but you mentioned this as after the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements have been made that it comes back to the Council in January 2009. Does it come back to the Commission before going to Council? City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 70 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Larkin: Yes, it would come back to the Commission first. Commissioner Keller: Okay, so presumably that would come back along with the update in December 2008, is that the idea? Ms. Likens: Yes. Commissioner Keller: I assume that there is sufficient time after retraining the parents of Gunn High School to actually have an adequate trial between when it comes back to us. Ms. Likens: Absolutely. Actually, the Assistant Principal feels there will be a lot of kids coming onto campus even during the summer before school starts and they will get used to the new driveway configuration. Then we will have adequate time at the beginning of school - the first month or month and a half to evaluate it. Commissioner Keller: Do you know whether the summer school program for the Pato Alto Unified School District is going to be at Gunn or not? Ms. Likens: Yes, it is going to be at Gurm. So these improvements will be implemented after the summer school ends and before the new term begins. Commissioner Keller: Great. There was a comment that was made by the traffic engineer, Mr. Kruger, and that was with respect to the potential need for a sign off by the fire department for a Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 71 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 three-lane approach on the Arastradero portion. I am wondering if there has been a similar sign off by the fire department with respect to the three-lane portion on the Charleston side. Ms. Likens: I was not involved when - I believe we reviewed everything internally, yes, but I can’t speak to exactly how that occurred. That was part of the approved plan that was vetted internally as well as with the Counci!. Commissioner Keller: Thank you. I will ask more questions later. Chair Holman: Commissioner Lippert. Commissioner Lippert: Mr. Kruger, with regard to Gunn High School and the improvements are there any sort of numbers or counts in terms of how many students drive to Gunn everyday? Mr. Kruger: I don’t have the breakdown between parents delivering children to the school versus students driving in but it looks much heavier toward the student side. There are approximately 350 to 400 right turns in 20 minutes from Arastradero into Gunn High and another 100 to 125 left turns coming from Foothill Expressway. So there are about 500 cars trying to merge into that one lane in 20 minutes and that is sort of the equivalent of 1,500 or 1,600 cars per hour, which is very high. Commissioner Lippert: Yes, and do we know what the capacity of the Gunn parking lot is? City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 72 of l17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Kruger: capacity. It exceeds whatever can get in there in terms of traffic moving in or the parking Commissioner LippCrt: Parking capacity? Mr, Kruger: It is not full right now but I am sure that with the additional students it will start to max out. Commissioner Lippert: We don’t know how many cars are parked there on an average. Mr. Kruger: I had not counted them but it is about 70 to 80 percent full. Commissioner Lippert: Wow. Okay. Then one last question and this goes back to the whole number 88 bus deal. Do we know what percentage of students take the 88 bus on a daily basis? Ms. Likens: I don’t have the ridership count for the 88 bus, no. That is going to greatly change this fall when we have basically four VTA buses running on the 88 during the school commute hours. So it is going to be greatly expanding the capacity of VTA to carry students to Gunn. Commissioner Lippert: for the time being. Okay.I have a couple more questions but I will cede to someone else Chair Holman: To Commissioner Fineberg. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 73 of l l 7 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 Commissioner Fineber~: Thank you. So from my own personal experiences and from many of the comments we have heard from the public tonight there are problem spots throughout the whole corridor. Can you just talk a little bit about what the process will be for addressing those, where the fixes get made, where the determination is if there are to be fixes made? Ms. Likens: Well we did hear concerns from the public and some of those issues are part of the plan. The fact that there is more queuing and there is more delay and there is more difficulty getting out of side streets and things that is part of going to a three-lane. I think Gary talked about what the pros and cons of a four and a three-lane are. We have been discussing the issue of the merge from Fabian further and looked at the plan. I think that we used the best engineering judgment to come up with the best striping plan that addresses some of the issues both merging and also we made some improvements that allow easier access out of Louis going east or going toward 101. So there is not a long distance between Louis and Fabian to get all of the things in plus to provide some parking for residents in the corridor. So there was a tradeoff between what was possible and what was not. In the best of all worlds, would we have merged it further down? Yes, but we would have had to sacrifice parking for residents and then there would have been some issues with the improvements that we made at Louis. So we can take a look at the Sutherland-Grove intersection. I do recall going out with our engineers and that was looked at in great detail to do the best we could given the geometry of where those streets come in, and the proximity to Charleston Court, and the left turn lane in there. So it is something we could continue to look at and refine certainly before City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 74 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 anything permanent and structural goes in. I think there are some issues but some of them are just endemic to the plan that are tradeoffs in the plan that you are getting safety benefits and there are some tradeoffs with access and that. Commissioner Fineber~: Some of the problems people have described are caused by certain things we have no control over like the number of cars in the corridor, the physical geometry of certain spaces. Some of the problems are also a result of the way people drive. Do we need to consider or do we have any mechanisms to get additional enforcement in the corridor? Ms. Likens: The police do give high priority to the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor. It is one of our premier school commute routes. There is quite a bit of enforcement by the traffic team during school commute hours on that corridor as well as many other schools. We can ask for targeted enforcement of specific issues but I do think the police are fairly active in this corridor. Commissioner Fineber~: If members of the public have issues where they would like that kind of enforcement who would they call? Ms. Likens: The best would be to call the sergeant in charge of the traffic team that does regular enforcement Monday through Friday. I could provide that information to you or to the members of the public. Commissioner Fineberg: I do have additional questions but I will cede. Cir. of Palo Alto April 3 O, 2008 Page 75 of 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: Commissioner Tuma. Commissioner Tuma: First, a clarification, the mid-block crosswalk near Briones is that part of what we are being asked to make a recommendation about tonight? I was unclear as to when that would be implemented. Would it be part of the Gunn plan or the trial? Ms. Likens: Our intention is to include that as part of the Phase 2 Arastradero Road project. It hasn’t been designed yet. When we get into design it will be but our intent at this point is to do that because it is a concern of the neighborhood and we spent a lot of time looking at how we could make that safer. Commissioner Tuma: I have a follow up question to that. I have seen these work well in urban environments particularly where there are a lot more adults. Is there data on how well they work with children? I just have some concern about kids running out there. They are a little bit more difficult to control in the middle of an intersection and I wonder if there is any data about that. Mr. Kruger: I do know that there has been research on how well children can use a traffic signal and until they are about 11 years old they don’t really understand, most of them do, but you can’t depend on a child up to 11 years old being able to properly understand the walk/wait and when traffic can go and when they can go. With respect to crossing at an unmarked crosswalk which all of the crosswalks along Charleston and Arastradero are legal unless there is a barricade that says ’do not cross here use crosswalk.’ City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 76 of l ] 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 When I actually went out there and looked at Briones Park and the behavior the children actually went down to Coulombe and used the signal to cross. So there were a few people that walked across, this was in January or February so it wasn’t all that good of weather. With respect to children crossing the street I really don’t think that you want to encourage unsupervised crossing by children up to about ten or 11 years old. So I can’t answer that other than that. Commissioner Tuma: Let me clarify what I am asking. I have two relatively small children myself and I see often times a parent walking with a couple of kids. The idea of walking to the middle of the road and standing there and you hold onto them but they can be slippery at times. I just don’t know if there are for example different designs where there is a high level of kids involved. Are there gates? Is there a third bar? Are there other things other than what we see here that are specifically designed for situations where you have high volumes of children as opposed to in London where I have experienced this as well, where it is mostly adults? Do you see what I am getting at? Mr. Kruger: Yes I do. In that diagram I indicated that there would be a pedestrian barrier. So basically, it is a refuge area that is essentially fenced. You can hop the fence, but essentially, you are forced to walk down the median to the designated crossing. The specific design is anybody trying to cross young or old to not just dash across the entire roadway. They have to stop in the middle, walk ten to 15 feet down facing traffic and then cross the other half. That sets them up to at least wait for oncoming traffic to clear. Essentially, there is no perfect solution because it is unprotected. I can’t answer your question any better than that other than the fact that younger CiO, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 77 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 children, ten to 11 years old and younger, are not completely competent crossing an arterial. That research I am familiar with and they are hit very often. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller. Commissioner Keller: First, I didn’t take this opportunity last time so I will do it now to thank Gayle, the traffic engineer, and the stakeholder committee for all the work that has been done in putting this together. I think that obviously there are no perfect solutions but clearly a lot of time and energy has gone in over the years to producing this. Part of our process here is sort of to do another, if you will final version of vetting before this goes to the City Council. So I think that is important. I am wondering with respect to the Gunn High School capacity, as that is planned to grow by somewhere on the order of 400 or more students over the next five years, to what extent do you think the sensitivity of the empirical trial that we are going to do in determining whether there might be problems as Gunn High School grows with the respect to the backups and the potential for determining whether there might be future issues with respect to the three- or four-lane consideration on Arastradero. Mr. Kruger: That is one of the best questions I have heard. It is not a fear of mine necessarily because if the trial works we will videotape that thing and we will have sufficient information to then model it. Then I could answer your question after that. In other words, not all the people at Gunn drive to Gunn. In fact, they have a very high percentage of people walking and then City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 78 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 bicycling especially. So I think I could answer that question after the trial and I am telling you that I intend to but I can’t answer it tonight. Commissioner Keller: Great, I appreciate that. so that will be something that you will be able to give us as part of the Gunn High School trial because I think that will be very useful in terms of the longevity of the Arastradero portion of the trial. Also, with respect to potential issues of increased sensitivity will you be able to sort of think about the potential of increased traffic on the Charleston portion and sensitivity of that with respect to the delays when you have done the adaptive traffic control? Mr. Kruger: The original plan looked at 2015 volumes, which are quite a bit higher than the volumes that we are working with. That was one of the reasons for moving to adaptive. Without adaptive timing you cannot maintain the same travel time in the corridor it will deteriorate just because you have fewer lanes. With the adaptive timing essentially you are reducing that delay. The chokepoints in the corridor, you have chokepoints at every end. Fabian is a chokepoint, it is really near capacity and San Antonio Road. Middlefield is not as much of a problem but E1 Camino is a huge problem. Alma is in the middle but essentially things weren’t all that much changed at Alma. E1 Camino is tapped out just as a couple of the speakers mentioned. They had to wait two or three times for the light to cycle for him to turn left onto E1 Camino. I don’t expect there will be, as I said, a significant amount of new traffic in the peak direction on Arastradero or Charleston just because of these capacity issues. Foothill is a nightmare. There is no easy way to fix that without relocating it or grade separation. So with respect to additional City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 79 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 peak hour traffic in the corridor I think we are almost looking at the max. The other direction could increase a little bit and then cause more problems but I don’t think we are going to see even a ten percent increase in peak hour traffic in the corridor in one direction. So I think Charleston will able to withstand any growth, people are going to be waiting to get onto it if there is growth. The corridor itself I think will handle that traffic. In the modeling that we have done through 2015 suggests it will but it is modeling. So far everything that we have predicted seems to be coming almost true, not quite, but the things that we predicted in the earlier report I was not part of that but essentially they have been born out by actual experience. So we have some degree of confidence in our planning. Commissioner Keller: Thank you. I would also like to thank Gayle for giving written comments to my questions. It saves the necessity to ask some of those questions and it made it a lot faster so I thank you for that. I will come back later. Chair Holman: Commissioner Lippert. Commissioner Lippert: Continuing with my line of questioning, does the Palo Alto Unified School District have any kind of Transportation Demand Management program? Ms. Likens: District wide I don’t think that there is a universal program but at Gunn High School, they have an extremely active program for alternative transportation options. On the campus they support bicycling and walking, they subsidize transit passes, they charge for parking, they discount carpool parking, so they are doing a lot and it is very active. I think one City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 80 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 of the reasons why their parking lot is empty and it wasn’t empty about four years ago when so many people were parking over on Georgia because the parking lot was full that they have really taken great strides. I think they should take great pride in what they have been doing. Commissioner Lippert: Do they charge students for parking? Ms. Likens: Yes they do. Commissioner Lippert: Okay. With regard to the Transportation Demand Management program at Gunn, it is for students and faculty? Ms. Likens: I can’t answer that question. I don’t know that. Commissioner Lippert: Okay. Then one last question is what about school buses? Does the district use their own buses to bring students to Gunn? Ms. Likens: The district has limited busing. They bring students down from the hills it is subscription busing and there are other buses. I don’t think that there are a large number of buses. There are a lot of small buses that queue up at the administration building, shuttle size buses or van size buses. There are school buses but there is no school busing to Gunn per se. As you may know people from near 101 there is no busing except from the hills. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 81 of ll 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Lippert: One last question if I might. Can you just explain to me about the parent drop off, how they drop off the kids? Is it along Arastradero? Do they pull into the parking lot? How does that happen? Ms. Likens: Let me see if we can pull that PowerPoint. If you can refer to your drawing of the circulation, I think it is Figure 5. This is the proposed improvement but currently the drop off occurs similarly to what it would do in this. So even though currently the driveway is two-way people enter the campus and they come to the point where you have to make a left turn. That whole area starting from where the left turn occurs by the [gourd] area, that loop along the curb is the drop off for carpool drop off not for people who are not in carpools. So that whole area is for student drop off and pickup for carpools and for small school buses. The large school buses go all the way to the back of the campus. So that is the current configuration and I don’t know if that answers your question. Commissioner Lippert: Yes. I just wanted to understand what flow was. Chair Holman: I think Commissioner Keller said he had some information about that. Commissioner Keller: Yes, the small school buses are primarily for the students who are in special ed. I believe is the correct term, so that is what the small school buses are for and disabled kids as well. So there are relatively few of those. The schoo! district does not provide busing in general. It hasn’t since Proposition 13. The non-carpoolers go all the way back over by the gymnasium and the theater and then come around back. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 82 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 i4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: Commissioner Fineberg. Commissioner Fineberg: One quick comment on page six of the Staff Report you have a word ’every’ and I believe it should be ’very.’ Using the 2004 data as a constant the critical movement delays resulting from only the restriping only showed every little change. Ms. Likens: That should be very. Commissioner Fineber~: Accident data, I understand you have two years worth of it and that it has not been analyzed to its full glory. Have you done any seat of the pants, eyeball checks? If there was a location that had two accidents a month, is there a location that has 200 a month and you don’t need to do analysis to know that is a problem? Ms. Likens: I would hope not. In response to your question and I think we mentioned that we don’t have enough data to do any real valid accident analysis because there has been a little over a year’s worth of data that we have access to from the state reporting system on accidents since the trial began. But we did have a list and I was able to run a report showing for the prior year, from July of 2005 to June of 2006 more or less and then from July of 2006 to June of 2007. These are reported accidents and not withstanding any problem with the way we tried to access the data, we have not seen an increase in accidents. There were 12 reported accidents in the corridor for the prior year before the trial was implemented and only eight since. So we are not talking about a lot of accidents. They are up and down the corridor. They are different types of Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 83 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 accidents and we have not done any analysis to determine why they occurred. We haven’t looked at the accident reports but the trend line is going in the right direction at least for this first year, and there were no pedestrian involved accidents. There were mostly property damage only accidents. Commissioner Fineber~: That is great. That is very reassuring. I want to take a step back and reiterate earlier comments thanking Staff, thanking consultants and our stakeholders, and also the members of the public some of whom are still here, some of whom are with us remotely, and to all the members of the public who have been sending us email. That kind of feedback is just so invaluable and much, much, much appreciated. The last question I have is whether or not we have any information on how much of the traffic on the first segment along Charleston and the second segment on Arastradero is bound for Stanford or Stanford Research Park and whether or not we are seeing any, I don’t know if you can call them perturberences, but people that drive on the corridor, park along Arastradero and then hop on Marguerite to Stanford. Do we have any way of identifying that? Ms. Likens: No we don’t have any data on origin and destination in terms of where people are driving to and we haven’t really focused on Arastradero in terms of any analysis in terms of what is going on in that segment other than the work that Gary has done, exhaustive modeling. We don’t have that information. Commissioner Fineber~: Okay, thank you. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 84 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: Commissioner Tuma. Commissioner Tuma: During the public comment there were a number of specific issues raised by different members of the public including at Nelson, Georgia Avenue, Miranda, Grove, and I am sure there were others. I just didn’t know if you wanted to take this opportunity in a public context to address any of those specific issues. It seems like it would be a good opportunity to do it publicly if there are thoughts or explanations about any specific issues that you think should get aired. Ms. Likens: There are a couple I did want to cover. One was the question about Miranda Green, the segment of Miranda close to Gunn High School. I wanted to clarify for the record that we are not proposing any changes in the lane configuration basically from just east of Gunn High School through to Foothill. That is not part of our plan with the potential change in the three- lane or modified four-lane would be east of Gunn High School. There was some concern voiced about what is happening on Georgia Avenue and the impact on Georgia Avenue. We will have a better idea of not necessarily what is going on on Georgia but what has been happening on Maybell and Donald because we are in the midst of beginning the evaluation of the Maybell-Donald Bicycle Boulevard Trial Implementation. It is an eight-month trial, which included five speed tables along that school commute route and bike route. We will be gathering speed and volume data to see whether there has been a change in either with the implementation of the improvements, which are traffic-calming measures. So there is a ripple Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 85 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 effect in that most of the traffic that enters Georgia comes from Maybell or Donald I mean, or Arastradero but basically people who may be using Georgia as a bypass for Arastradero would be coming down Maybell. So we will have more information about that. I did want to comment on that one. Let me look at my notes and see if there is anything else. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller. you, Gayle, was that your intention? Did you want to look those up and then come back to Ms. Likens: Locate some other comments I wanted to respond to. Commissioner Keller: I think it would be better to pause for a moment and let her respond to that. Chair Holman: What is your preference Gayle? Ms. Likens: Please go ahead and I will come back to them. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller. Commissioner Keller: Yes, thank you. One thing that was asked in particular was the pylons at the Hoover entrance to prevent left turns there. Is that something that is easy to do or reasonable? Cir. ofPalo A Ito April 30, 2008 Page 86 of 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2! 22 Ms. Likens: We wouldn’t recommend doing anything short of a full curb improvement. The standard for striping is a double double yellow. I checked with the police today who do regular enforcement in the area. They say there are some U-turns that occur there but it isn’t a major problem. They can enforce against illegal U-turns. You can’t make a U-turn legally unless you have 200 feet between you and an oncoming car and they do actively enforce that type of thing. We could if we needed to post ’no U-turn’ signs if it becomes a problem. We have done that in front of JLS and Fair Meadow School on East Meadow where there had been a prolific U-turn problem. From what I understand, it is not that type of problem in front of Hoover. We are getting some compliance with making the U-turn at Nelson rather than people going into the Green Meadow neighborhood. That is something we could continue to monitor but in terms of putting some kind of physical improvement in the median we wouldn’t recommend that. Commissioner Keller: So you are not suggesting anything needs to be done about people turning left directly into the Hoover driveway as opposed to going al! the way to Nelson? Ms. Likens: Not at this time. We certainly can ask the police for more enforcement but to date I don’t think we have a major problem. We know it occurs from time to time but we also know people go up to Nelson and now make the U-turn. Commissioner Keller: Will we have before and after traffic for Maybell to see whether a trial on Arastradero pushes traffic to Maybell? CiO, ofPalo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 87 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 Ms. Likens: Yes I believe that our before counts are before the implementation of the tria~//O/n Arastradero Roa~ ~/will have before and after counts for the Maybell project and our after counts could be the before counts for Arastradero as well. Commissioner Keller: I think that would be helpful to do in general when we do an optimization on one road to see whether it causes traffic or problems on another road. Were there any thoughts about the ’keep clear’ on Sutherland, which I think was one of the other things that was alluded by Commissioner Tuma. Ms. Likens: I think we could look at where ’keep clear’ legends would be appropriate. I would be happy to take a look at that. Commissioner Keller: As a somewhat more catchall question regarding that if we were to make the changes permanent would that still allow for incremental improvements along the lines that people in the public suggested considering? So that if you made improvements such as the left turn lanes onto pockets and things like that that you could still expand those even after making this permanent. Ms. Likens: Yes. There is going to be some lag if the striping is made permanent and then when the permanent improvements to in. That is going to take some time to gather the funding and develop the plans and that is some time off. So in the interim we certainly always have the opportunity to refine and tweak things, which we would do even if this were just a regular Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 88 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 striping and not part of a trial. So we can take a look at those things. Whether we have a better solution or not for some of them than what we have already implemented I can’t say right now. Commissioner Keller: So there will be another bite at the apple when the street improvements are made assuming funding is created for those. Ms. Likens: Yes. Commissioner Keller: Okay, thank you. Chair Holman: I have a small handful of questions and then when you have a chance to find your comments. We are asking you questions so you don’t really have a chance here. I will go ahead and see if we can do double duty. Before the City Attorney leaves I actually have a clarification. I just want to make sure when a motion is made assuming that Staff recommendation is the motion that the Staff Report says ’direct Staff to’ and I think it is recommend Staff, just so that we all have the same information and the same expectation. Then Council will direct Staff. Can you confirm that? Mr. Larkin: That is absolutely correct. The Commission is recommending to the Council that the Council direct Staff. Chair Holman: It was just pointed out to me that it is written correctly and I was just looking at the bottom part. So thank you for that. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 89 of l l 7 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 I have a clarification question has to do with the grant funding. Number four under the recommendations says pursue all grant funding and it lists a number of things. It doesn’t specifically say grant funding for median landscaping. So I am just wondering if there is funding that might be available for that because I look at what we do with our roundabouts and our medians and we really fall short of many, many other communities. So I want to see if we can explicitly include that or if that money might be available. Ms. Likens: It is implicit that we would be implementing the streetscape improvements as envisioned in the plan, which include landscaping the medians, the trees, and all of that. We would look for funding sources that would provide funding for those types of improvements. So we are not proposing to downsize those types of improvements. Chair Holman: Thank you for the clarification. Akin to Commissioner Lippert’s questions about Gunn High School cars, I would agree kudos are definitely in order at the same time the volume of cars is still causing problems and is really a pretty remarkably high number. So I was really actually hoping that there would be a Gunn representative here tonight to speak to some of these questions. Do you happen to know if they have considered any other kinds of fees, fines, or whatever to say if you don’t have three people in your car or three students in your car or how much they try to encourage walking? There is a wonderful access to the school from the back through Boll Park. This is for drop off because obviously the students have been driving less since the parking lot is freed up which they could use for open space. Do you know what other Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 90 of l 17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 approaches they might be considering? I am sorry to ask you this I really was hoping a Gunn person was going to be here. Ms. Likens: A thought just left my mind. I am trying to recall. Could you restate the question? Chair Holman: What other mechanisms have they considered or are they pursuing to get the number of cars down further? Kudos for what has been accomplished to date. What else are they trying to accomplish or working towards accomplishing given the number of cars is still quite remarkably high? Ms. Likens: I don’t have an answer to that per se other than I think they are very aggressive in all of their programs to encourage alternative transportation. There is a problem that all the schools are facing in that when a student first gets his or her driver’s license they cannot have another young person in the car with them currently. So that means that the opportunities for carpooling are less now than they were when the law changed. I know I think Senator Simidian is trying to introduce some legislation to change that. So there are some constraints that they have just because students can’t carpool the way they used to. You can only have a sibling in your car. Chair Holman: That is if that student is going to drive to school. Ms. Likens: We can provide further information to the Commission later on or when we come back to you in the fall. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 91 of l l 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 Chair Holman: That would be really helpful. Fineberg have lights on. Are these questions? I see Commissioner Keller and Commissioner Commissioner Keller. Commissioner Keller: Yes in response to my question 13, you said that revised Tables 2 and 3 are attached but I can’t seem to find them. I am not sure what they are attached to. Ms. Likens: They should have been attached to the responses but I can give you a copy or send you a copy via email. I have one here for you if you would like it. Commissioner Keller: Okay, thank you. They were not attached to my copy. And in response to Chair Holman’s question, I have actually taken on the job for the Parent/Teacher/Student Association as Transit Coordinator for Gunn High School and split up the Traffic Safety Role because I felt that would be a good way of doing that. So I thought that you would be interested in doing that. I asked some questions regarding Alma intersection, to what extent would it make sense to have further study of that, and if so, would that make sense to be part of this motion or not? Ms. Likens: I think that is beyond the scope of this actual plan. That could be done independently as something we could look at but we have not analyzed it yet and we are not prepared to say whether or not we would recommend changing the phasing at Alma and City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 92 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Charleston at this time. change. It is something that this project does not depend upon making that Commissioner Keller: Would it be worthwhile studying it, I am not saying make the change now, but how do we get that to be studied? Ms. Likens: We can look into it. Commissioner Keller: Thank you. In response to my question about 101 entrance from San Antonio Road, you said that that would have to be done in concert with closing the entrance from Charleston onto 101 and therefore done in concert with Mountain View. I am wondering why it can’t be at both and if Mountain View wants to close their intersection they can but we create our entrance to allow Palo Alto residents to not have to drive through a dangerous arrangement in Mountain View? Why can’t we push on that independent of Mountain View? Ms. Likens: The question related to whether there is a plan to add a southbound onramp to Highway 101 at San Antonio as opposed to the Charleston onramp that we have now. When this was considered about a decade ago, the reason that Caltrans was interested in doing that was because of all the congestion and the flow on Highway 101 and the problems that were created by the Charleston onramp being so close to the next onramp and they wanted to separate them. So right now, I think that the VTA is maybe taking a second look at that as part of the auxiliary lane project on Highway 101 but the reason people were interested in an onramp was because they were interested in closing the Charleston onramp. So they are kind of looked at as a Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 93 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 !0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 tandem. I don’t know what the outcome is going to be but right tl:r4"re is no plan to add the onramp at San Antonio. We had some issues with the impact on our own surface streets if that were to occur that were not fully satisfied about a decade ago when Caltrans looked at it. So I don’t have an answer for you right now but that was the plan. Maybe Gary has some further information. Mr. Kruger: I don’t have information explicitly on this. I do know Caltrans frowns on adding ramps and interchanges because they have a one-mile spacing requirement and of course, none of their interchanges along the old freeways meet those. But to try to add something like that is sort of like trying to get a new rail grade crossing. It is almost impossible. Caltrans would be very discouraging and I think VTA would probably go along with that. So adding another ramp that close, that proximate to Charleston would be a very difficult technical sell policy-wise to Caltrans. Commissioner Keller: At the risk of making a comment I just want to close off this issue. I would very, very, very emphatically strongly encourage the City to work with Caltrans and VTA to put an onramp there regardless of whether Mountain View wishes to close the Charleston intersection. It is a clear and present danger that intersection and if Mountain View wishes not to close it because they wish to have our traffic going by their stores at Costco and the new Charleston center, fine so be it. I would like a way of getting onto 101 southbound and so would a lot of people in South Palo Alto without having to go through that highly dangerous intersection. I think that we should do that for our citizens. I wish it had been part of the TK!CJL mitigation but apparently ~vas not. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 94 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 One last question with respect to the merge coming eastbound from Fabian. I am wondering if you have any thoughts on how that can be improved. That was mentioned by several speakers and also alluded to in some of my questions. Ms. Likens: Gary and I have been talking about that. I think it is not ideal but there are some constraints about changing it. We need two lanes on the other side of the intersection between San Antonio and Fabian. We need two through lanes there because there is a right turn lane, a through right, and through lane. So there is not the ability to go down to one through lane before you get to Fabian. So we do have to have the merge after Fabian. It is not ideal but there are other reasons why it was placed where it was because of the proximity to Louis I think I was mentioning and also the parking issues. I think merging is always an issue whether it is there or other place. We have lots of places where you merge from one to two lanes at other intersections throughout the city. On balance I don’t think it is a problem. We don’t seem to have an accident problem related to it since the striping changes. We will continue to monitor it. If it turns out that it isn’t working well or we observe problems that need to be corrected then we would have to revisit that striping plan. Commissioner Keller: I think that is reasonable and perhaps based on the question that I had where you have the ’right lane ends’ sign in question one if you could also add a ’do not pass’ sign maybe it would discourage people from racing to get past that curve by themselves. Thank you. Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 95 of ll 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Chair Holman: Commissioner Fineberg and then I believe we are ready for a motion. Commissioner Fineberg: In the letter from Betsy Allyn, the last kind of a postscript indicates that she has also included email sent to her from other residents of GAII. Are those items included separately individually or are we not in receipt of what Betsy is mentioning? Can we ask Betsy? Chair Holman: Can you repeat the question, please? Commissioner Fineber~: Betsy Allyn’s letter to us the last sentence says, I have included emails sent to me by residents of Green Acres II., the neighborhood association. Are those letters included in the packet of responses individually or did they fail to make it into the public record? Chair Holman: I know I have a set of them and I am presuming that these are from .....I know Staff has a copy of them too. I am happy to circulate these. Almost all of the speakers that I note here - I didn’t know everybody didn’t have these, many of the names here were speakers but some of them were not. Commissioner Fineberg: Can we just make sure those get into the public record then? Chair Holman: They will be Staff has them too. I am happy to pass these down if you would care to look through them too. Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 96 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Fineberg: Okay. Then I would also like to echo Commissioner Keller’s comments. I know it is a little a field of the Charleston Corridor but I think it does impact what happens. Chair Holman: It is a question, right? Commissioner Fineber~: Yes. That is all I am going to say about that. I mean at the 101 - San Antonio exit. On the Gunn bus, do we have any either opportunities for grants or funding mechanisms or any positive inducements that we can offer to PAUSD to help, recognizing that if there is even 1,000 car trips in a very condensed period of time it is a heavy amount of traffic but it is less than 20 percent of the traffic on the corridor. There are going to be some students walking and biking. It won’t work. In the winter when it is dark before student activities are over, it is raining, it is cold, young women may not feel safe. They may live four miles or five miles from school. There are going to be kids for whom walking and biking just isn’t going to work. What can the City do to help the school district with those kids? Ms. Likens: Well, I think one of the most positive outcomes over the past several months has been the community bus program that VTA is going to implement with four large buses going to Gunn High School from the Midtown and South Palo Alto neighborhoods, which is going to greatly increase the potential ridership for kids who do not want to drive, be driven, walk, or bike. We meet regularly with the City School Traffic Safety Committee to discuss issues about student traffic safety at all of the schools including Gunn. Gunn has a representative on our stakeholders group and we meet regularly with the Assistant Principal and the manager of City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 97 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PAUSD transportation. Kathy Je/r.tdn is also on the stakeholder group. So I think we will have the opportunity over the course of the next several months working out the solution for Arastradero to raise that issue and see what more we can do to help them. Chair Holman: Before we hear a motion, I should give you a chance if there are some other questions or comments from the public that you wanted to respond to. Ms. Likens: I think I covered most of them. The only other comment that I wrote down was a concern at Carlson Court and U-turns that occurring and drop off. We can certainly work with the speaker and the Carlson Court neighborhood if they are experiencing issues related to the school commute. I think most of the other issues were covered. Chair Holman: Georgia speed bumps I am hearing from my right. Ms. Likens: Well, I was mentioning that we would evaluate the impact of the Maybell improvements that will have a ripple effect on Georgia. The neighbors could come forward to us and request traffic calming. We would have to make sure that that is part of our school commute network corridors because we are giving priority to the school commute corridor network. That is always a possibility in the future. Chair Holman: Okay. Commissioner Tuma, motion. MOTION City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 98 of 117 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Tuma: I would like to make a motion that the Planning and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council approve the permanent retention of Phase 1 trial striping and lane configuration on Charleston Road consisting of a three-lane cross section from Fabian to Alma as described in Staff recommendation as well as a modified four-lane section from Alma to E1 Camino again as described in the Staff recommendation. Second, that City Council direct Staff to continue monitoring traffic conditions on Charleston Road after implementation of traffic adaptive signal timing along the entire Charleston-Arastradero Corridor, provide an update in December of 2008; that City Council direct Staff to work with Gunn High School administration to implement a trial of the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements and return to City Council by January of 2009 with a recommendation on the Phase 2 trial striping plan for Arastradero Road between E1 Camino Real and Gunn High School to be implemented in the summer of 2009; and, to direct Staff to pursue all available grant funding opportunities for the design and construction of the permanent safety and streetscape improvements, including street tree, landscaping, lighting, median island, bike lane improvements on Charleston Road as described in the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor plan. SECOND Commissioner Keller: Second. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller beat the clock there with a second. So Commissioner Tuma do you need to speak to your motion or would you like to? City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 99 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Tuma: I would as a matter of fact. Without belaboring the point I am thrilled that so much work has gone into this project, all the stakeholders and everybody that is involved. I travel this is a corridor personally quite a bit. My office is at one end and my home is at the other. I would like to joint Commissioner Keller and maybe push just a little bit on what I call the kamikaze merge, which happens just west of Fabian. It is simply unbelievable to me that there are not more accidents there because that happening on a curve is just a game of chicken. I see it all the time. That aside I am just stunned at how much better this whole area, particularly between E1 Camino and San Antonio flows, I think the improvements that have been made are dramatic and I am looking forward to seeing hopefully similar dramatic improvements down Arastradero. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller, speak to your second? Commissioner Keller: Yes. I am coming to this having been frankly a Charleston-Arastradero Road skeptic. I was unsure how well it would work. I can say that I think it actually works pretty well. I think one of the considerations is that there is something about flow of traffic and flow of particles through space. The issue is that when you have what seems like more capacity by having two lanes in each direction and yet you have blockages because people are trying to make left turns those blockages actually cause traffic to slow down even more than if traffic can get out of the lane by going into a left turn lane. That is precisely because the left lane backs up, people are trying to get from the left lane into the right lane, which causes the right lane to block up, and then no traffic moves until that left turn car can get out of the way. So I think that in Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 100 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 some sense it seems weird that you can put more traffic in less space by doing this but it does actually work and we have empirical evidence that it works pretty well. I am pleased that we will be doing the adaptive traffic signalization that will improve capacity as well as decrease traffic transit times. I think that is on the whole a good thing. So I think that I am pleased to continue this recommendation and I would like to see it move forward. I am looking forward to this coming back to us in the December-January timeframe so that we can look at the Arastradero portion of this corridor. Thank you. Chair Holman: Commissioner Lippert. Commissioner Lippert: I support my colleagues’ comments here. I would just like to add some thoughts here. One thought is I think the elephant in the room is really the Gunn High School traffic. It is the students. Chair Holman: Can I ask you a question? Are these comments or would you like to make amendments? Commissioner Lippert: They are strictly comments. I was a teenager during the Arab oil embargo and I remember the time I was just learning how to drive, in fact, I learned how to drive using my mother’s Cadillac and shortly thereafter we bought a Volvo 164 to economize, but I was really appalled at the cost of gasoline and what was going on then. I at that point became an avid bicyclist. What I see here is an incredible opportunity for us to work with the school district. We are becoming a green city. We are trying to reduce the carbon footprint and wean CiO, of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page I Ol of I 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 people off the automobile and into public transit, and getting there under their own power, and carpooling and whole other variety of things. The tragedy here is that because of the Field Act school districts are not subject to local regulation. So what has to happen is there needs to be some sort of a negotiation or an understanding between the City and the school district as to how this is going to be managed. I don’t know how to get those two groups to agree but I think that they have made significant progress in beginning to go there. Maybe as gasoline approaches the five dollar a gallon it will be a self-regulating process. Maybe more teenagers wiIl begin to say to themselves, I would rather take the car out on a date instead of taking it to school every day. I believe that there are opportunities to improve and enhance a Transportation Demand Management program with students. I think that is key to making this work. I think that there are opportunities here for maybe the school district increasing fees. The positive result, and unintended consequence as City Council Member Burt puts it, is that maybe in reducing the number of cars there that the school district will find in fact they don’t need all that surface parking and will find that they can use that land for other purposes like increasing playing fields. I know that they are under the gun to begin to find ways of increasing or adding more classroom spaces. So by freeing up land, these are all land use decisions, a way of enhancing the school and being able to kill two birds with one stone so to speak. Then just in closing, the very first neighborhood that I lived in was Barron Park. We were living with some friends when we first moved here. It is an incredible neighborhood. It has a very rural characteristic to it. So I am a little concerned about the whole idea of cut-through traffic through Barron Park and through Georgia. Maybe there is a way of managing traffic with no left turn as students are leaving Gunn High School with no left turn off of Arastradero to cut-through. Those hours could be managed CiW. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 102 of ll 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 to the times that the school lets out so that the students have to continue along Arastradero Road. Then by the time people who are working come home, of course those no left turn hours have been lifted. Then with regard to coming to school, of course, that is not a problem that is not an issue. So that is just my thoughts there. I hope that they will be heard and maybe incorporated into some of the solutions here. Chair Holman: Commissioner Sandas. Commissioner Sandas: Just briefly I want to say that I am completely in support of the Staff recommendation and hence the motion. I think the Staff, the consultants, and the stakeholder group has done just a wonderfully thorough job on this trial on this project. Clearly, the positives of Phase 1 outweigh any negatives in efficiency and safety. I think that is what we were looking for. Additionally, we have learned definitively through this trial that counterintuitive traffic plans can and do work. The thought of reducing lanes and improving traffic flow is pretty counterintuitive but it did happen so that is great news. So I am looking forward to seeing ~vhat happens at Gunn in the fall. Thank you. Chair Holman: Commissioner Fineberg. CiO, of Palo Alto April 3 O, 2008 Page 103 of 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Commissioner Fineber~: I fully support the recommendations before us tonight. I too started as a skeptic when I personally had to negotiate all those funny merges it felt funny. They were very different from what I was used to and I was convinced somebody had lost their marbles. I have been driving on them now and they are comfortable because I know them. I think there are some problem spots that you really do need to fix. Fabian is one of them. I would like to add into the mix that I go through that curve and I turn right onto Louis. So my speed is dropping and I don’t know if it is a bulb out but there is something that makes you do a wide hard right onto Louis, which means I really have to drop my speed to negotiate that turn and the car behind me is still looking over his shoulder to negotiate the merge on the curve. I don’t know how many times I have been honked at. I am not overly conservative on that curve I am driving as a prudent reasonable driver, I have been honked at, and I have almost had cars rear end me. So I think that that is a safety concern and it is lucky that no one has experienced problems. There are also pedestrians and bikes trying to cross there. That is an access route from the area on Louis to Montrose over to Cubberly. So there are a lot of kids and morns with bikes and pedestrians. It is an issue because you have to keep track of things behind and people darting out in front of you and other cars that are trying to merge left and right, and you are not trying to sideswipe or have somebody hit you from behind. So if there could be some focus on that. I would echo Commissioner Keller’s comments that an entrance ramp onto 101 from San Antonio I think that might long-term help the corridor. There is going to be a lot more traffic residential and folks from TK/CJL that could use that as opposed to getting onto Charleston. Right now to get to ! 01 you are going to come down Louis more often than not from that Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 104 of ll 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 neighborhood and you could access it from Fabian and hang a left on San Antonio. reduce some of the traffic just on that last little stretch. So it might I would also like to encourage Staff to look at some of the solutions for increasing throughput. One example was Commissioner Keller’s fifth question where he is asking if there could be a left turn from Alma onto Charleston. Obviously that would have to be coordinated with Caltrains but I would encourage you to do the analysis to see if that would be feasible. My last thing, I don’t know how any other Commissioners would feel but I wish that there were some stronger language that with the Phase 2 trial striping that either highly encourage or support, and the Council know we support, the mid-block crossing at Juana Briones Park. I think the quicker that that could be implemented the safer the kids, grandparents, and people in that area will be. So I don’t know if anybody else would want to consider that as a friendly amendment or if it just needs to go into the record as people supportive comments that might be adequate. Ms. Likens: This is going to be coming back to you with the recommendation on the implementation of Phase 2 in the fall before it goes to Council. Perhaps that would be the more appropriate opportunity when we have more information about how that would look and what the plan for Arastradero is but that certainly is the purview of the Commission to decide. Chair Holman: Commissioner Keller, did you have other comments? City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 105 of l 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Keller: Quickly, I think that most of the cut-through traffic on Georgia is parents dropping their kids off and leaving as opposed to students using that for parking or trying to get away from Arastradero Road. So as was mentioned by one of the speakers there is this way to walk through from Georgia onto Gunn High School campus to parents dropping their kids off and then they are walking through onto campus as opposed to dealing with the half-mile long backup to try to get into the Gunn driveway. Hopefully with the Gunn driveway improvements that issue will be diminished but I am assuming it won’t completely go away. One of the things that is worthwhile considering when this goes to a permanent, permanent solution meaning street improvement I am wondering whether if you were to slightly relocate the median on Charleston at the Louis-Montrose intersection that median was designed for two lanes of traffic going in an eastward direction. If that median were moved closer to Montrose it might allow for one straight through lane to go in a westbound direction and then a right turn lane to go toward Louis Road allowing that traffic to slow down some. That is something to be considered down the road so to speak but that might allow you to avoid having the crazy merge and I think it is worthwhile considering in a subsequent permanent, permanent phase. Chair Holman: Commissioner Lippert. Commissioner Lippert: Just one last follow up comment and this is sort of in response to my colleague Commissioner Fineberg’s comment with regard to the crossings. Maybe there might be some incentive since Palo Alto Police has made this a priority in terms of their patrolling maybe it might be an opportunity to have a dedicated uniformed police presence as some sort of City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 106 of l 17 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 crossing guard at certain crossings thereby slowing down the traffic even more and seeing to it 2 that it flowed a little more smoothly. What I am thinking of is Commissioner Tuma’s comment 3 with regard to kids not really knowing whether they should cross or not. Even with the 4 disjointed crossing, which I am familiar with also, if you had a uniformed presence in the way of 5 a crossing guard that individual would see to it that the kids crossed properly. As well as drivers 6 seeing that there is police presence there and if there is daily dedicated police presence all they really care about is that the cars are obeying the speed limits and slowing down appropriately in the school zones, etc. So it is just a though there and that might be enough incentive to get the school district to buy in a little bit more to the whole corridor process. That might even clean up the intersection down at Miranda in front of Gunn High School. Chair Holman: Well I will certainly support the motion and want to also, as other Commissioners have done and members of the public as well, acknowledge the work of Staff, the study group, and Gunn High School, and members of the public who have been involved for a very long time and offered their assistance and involvement. It is not perfect as has also been acknowledged. There have been many, many improvements but in those places where there have been challenges, let’s call them, it is not a happy situation if it happens to be your block or your street. I think we would be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge that that is the case, take responsibility for it, and acknowledge that some people are not having the wonderful experience that others are. I think it is important to have that kind of acknowledgement for people. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 107 of I 17 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 1 Speaking again just to my earlier comments about Gunn High School and Commissioner 2 Lippert’s many comments tonight about Gunn High School there are it would seem many things 3 that they could do and I really want to encourage the City Staff to work very aggressively with 4 them to make improvements there. These are people who are parents setting examples or 5 students who are establishing life-long patterns. So I think given those kinds of criteria I think we can still make much more improvement in reducing the number of cars I hope going to Gunn High School. If you look at the quality of life that is being impacted of other people because of the number of cars that are going into Gunn I hope they ~vill take that seriously and continue to take that seriously, obviously they have made great strides. I think those are the only comments I have to say except I do feel like I do want to stress the importance, and I know the language is including but I do want to stress, that I hope Staff will pursue making sure that we can get median landscaping because it makes such an enormous difference in the success and streetscape. So I just want to get last plug in. So with that I see Commissioner Keller has a light on. Commissioner Keller: I just want to put into the record as a comment, that the next time the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee comes up for reconsideration for a new- nexus study I would recommend that that nexus study include both AM and PM traffic impacts as opposed to only PM traffic impacts so that the fee money could be used for school transit improvement. Right now the school doesn’t impact the PM traffic and by looking at AM it could. So I think that is one thing that is worthwhile putting in the hopper for the next time. Thank you. City of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 108 of I 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 MOTION PASSED (6-0-0-1, Commissioner Garber absent). Chair Holman: Seeing no other lights it looks like we are ready for a vote on the motion. So all those in favor of the motion, which I will not repeat but is essentially the Staff recommendation, say aye. (ayes) Opposed? That passes on a six to zero vote with Commissioner Garber absent. So thank you all very much for coming and for your participation and engagement for hanging in there until a quarter to eleven. Our next item on the agenda is Approval of Minutes for the meeting of April 9, 2008. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of April 9, 2008. Chair Holman: I do have some little nits word changes because it doesn’t flow quite right. I don’t need to take airtime to do that I will get those to you Diana or Zariah. Anyone else have comments or corrections? Commissioner Keller. Commissioner Keller: One important comment is on page 54, line 46 it is LEED for New Developments not LEED for existing buildings. Chair Holman: Which line, sir? Ci& of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 109 of I 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Commissioner Keller: Page 54, line 46, the second and third words. The second comment is that Professor Koseff spells his name K-O-S-E-F-F and I know that because he is a friend of mine. Chair Holman: Okay. So do we have a motion to approve then as corrected? MOTION Commissioner Keller: So moved. Chair Holman: Second? SECOND Commissioner Fineberg: Second. MOTION PASSED (6-0-0-1, Commissioner Garber absent). Chair Holman: Okay. All those in favor say aye. (ayes) That passes on a six to zero vote with Commissioner Garber absent. Next is Reports From Officials or Committees. Julie, do you want to make Commissioner Garber’s report from the last Council meeting since he is not here? Cir. of Palo Alto April 30, 2008 Page 110 of I 17 ATTACHMENT C CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: HSGolden@aol.com Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:45 AM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Subject: Re: Charleston/Arastradero Plan Dear Commission Members: In my view, the trial traffic strategy has had a positive impact on the Charleston Road Corridor situation. I use that corridor every day and at varying hours; sometimes I am on foot and more often in an automobile. I have observed that those using the road now behave better than before the experiment; they are more orderly and seem to be moving along closer to the speed limit and this was NOT the case before. I feel safer on the corridor now and in discussions with neighbors most seem to agree with me that they feel the situation is more under control. There appears to be substantial evidence that experimental goals have been met and the evaluations are positive. I would urge that the Charleston/Arastradero Plan now be implemented and I suggest that staff be directed to finding funding sources to underwrite the project. I would like to see lane striping made permanent and further improvements made such as pedestrian refuges, improved crosswalks and continuous bike lanes. I was once hit by a vehicle and severely injured on that street and I am pleased to see that improved safety improvements are within reach. Sincerely yours, Helen S. Golden 460 El Capitan Place P~,lc Alto, CA 94306 Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/used? NCID=aolcmp00300000002851 ) 4/30’2008 t FAIRMEADOW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 500 East Meadow Road, Palo Alto, CA 94306 Phone: (650) 856-0845 April 23, 2008 City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Planning & Transportation Commission Members, Fairmeadow ElementalT School Site Council supports the recommendation to make the Charleston/Arastradero Phase I trial restriping permanent. The Phase I paint trial has demonstrated that the three-lane striping plan can provide efficient vehicular traffic flow. We encourage City Council to begin working toward implementing the Charleston/Arastradero Plan’s safety improvements: crosswalk improvements, pedestrian re%ges, street trees and median landscaping, and sidewalk bulb-outs to make this corridor that serves Fairmeadow and ten other public and private elementary, middle and high schools safer for school commuting children and families. Thank you for your efforts to make our community safe for all. Sincerely, Karen Easton, Chair Fairmeadow School Site Council Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Gloria Pyszka [gpyszka@yahoo.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 5:39 PM Planning Commission Charleston Corridor Input We Iive at the corner of Mumford & East Charleston - 284. We continue to support the traffic calming that is taking place along Charleston, despite some drawbacks to those of us who live on Charleston. Definitely, the traffic moves more calmly and sanely, which is a BIG plus. And, it moves in waves between lights. We have to wait between waves in order to back out or go "head first" into traffic. The traffic is very heavy at the end of the day and also in the early morning. After that, the volume decreases. Going toward Alma, we always have to make a quick U-turn in the Mumford-Charleston intersection in order to get into our driveway on Charleston. And, when backing out to go toward Alma, we have to make a quick "around the block" and enter Charleston from Mumford. Or, make a U-turn at the Carlson-Charleston light. None of these is a big bother. Problem: However, if 1 had to exit my driveway regularly about 5-6:30 PM on any weekday (which 1 don’t), I’d be up a creek. The traffic volume is high, and there is barely any space between waves of traffic. And, if the "Alma toward Middlefield" direction clears, ithe "Middlefield-Alma" direction begins and halts left turn onto Charleston at Mumford.The lights along the corridor really have to be in sync to avoid this problem. Gloria and Ron Pyszka Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: laura lawson [lauralawson@comcast.net] Monday, April 28, 2008 6:14 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle FW: Arastradero Improvements Dear N[embers of the Palo Alto Planning Commission: in reference to your upcoming meeting this Wednesday, April 30~h to discuss the Arastradero Con-idor, we would like to share our experience as fairly new residents to Suzanne Drive. Both Suzanne and McKellar Drives open into Arastradero, which is a heavily trafficked thoroughfare. From the start, we found turnil~g from Arastradero into these drives is extremely dangerous at night since there is barely any street lighting at these comers. We are actually surprised to see such dark city comers, especially given the multi resident housing at the McKellar Comer. On several occasions we found ourselves starting into a turn from Arastradero before we noticed a pedestrian crossing McKellar or Suzanne. Secondly, the Suzalme Drive, Arastradero intersection is not a squared comer and making a left turn from Su/.anne into Arastradero is always difficult. One must edge out quite far in order to see if there is oncoming traffic. We have a son attending Gunn who uses the bike lane daily. We know that crossing from Suzarme to the opposite side of Arastradero is fairly dangerous as traffic picks up speed about this point. It would be sound sat~tv to add a pedestrian crosswalk at or near our Suzarme intersection. We woulct hope that improvements to Arastradero would start as soon as possible. We witness the heavy traffic on tlnis road daily and know that improvements will prevent accidents. Thank you for your work on this project. Sincerely, Dou,~ and Laura Lawson 427! Suzanne Drive, Palo Alto 9~4306 650-714-8387 Betten, Zariah Sent: To: Cc: Subject: ealexis@gmail.com on behalf of Elizabeth Alexis [elizabeth@alexis-palmer.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 11:58 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero reconfiguration I understand the Commission will be deciding whether or not to make the striping plan permanent. I would urge you to do so and have staff begin the process of finding funding for the safety improvements, that are currently envisioned. I would also strongly encourage you to begin the process for implementing similar changes to the Arastradero section. Our family uses the Charleston corridor on a daily basis, both in cars and on bicycles. As a motorist, I appreciate the designated turn lanes. Making turns feels much safer and I like not being stuck behind someone waiting to make a turn during busy times of the day. As a bicyclist, I like the three lane plan as it is easy to make a left turn onto Charleston or cross Charleston at several places. I notice the difference on the Arastradero section where I would like to go left onto Charleston near Juana Briones Park but there is no practical way to do so unless you are at Gunn or El Camino. As a parent of two young bicylists, I am grateful for the slower speeds that cars are driving at and look forward to the additional features that will make bike commuting to Gunn a safe option for them and all our kids. Regards, Elizabeth Alexis 349 Diablo Court Palo Alto, CA 94306 Betten, Zariah From:Debbie Clark [dixiedebsue@yahoo.com] Sent:Monday, April 28, 2008 10:25 PM To:Planning Commission Cc:Likens, Gayle; Nina Bel! Subject:Gunn High School driveway Dear planning commission, I am a south Palo Alto resident who has to make a left hand turn onto Arastradero every morning in the midst of Gunn High School students going to school as I am on my way to work. Traffic can really be a nightmare at that time. 1 understand there may be a way to make the Gunn driveway more efficient which will reduce some oftl~e back-up on Arastradero. I fully support any efforts to improve the Gunn High School driveway capacity. In I~ct, i ask that you take this matter very seriously as it affects the quality of life for many south Palo Alto residents. i am also greatly concerned about the safety of the many children I encounter riding their bikes to Terman and Gl.lllll il? the morning. They flequently ride on the wrong side of the road which increases the danger. Any efforts to improve safety for the children on their way to school in the morning is of paramount importance. It could very well save a life. Thank you [’or yotlr attention to this matter. Sil?cel-ely, Debt;rain Clarl< 4218 Pomona Ave. Palo Alto 4/30/2008 Better, Zariah Sent: To: Subject: Elisabeth Vandenberg [emvanden@mac.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 3:30 PM Planning Commission comments on Chades[on-Arastradero Improvements Z ~.,il b,z unable to attend the Ap. 30 meeting but would like to voice my opposition to the proposal to n:rrow ,,. a~,~ a~, o Rd between :1 Comino ~nd ~unn High School to three lanes. The increasing voiu~:,e of traffic makes four lanes absolutely essential and the three lane proposal does nothing to This wiil only be solved if we ~einstated the school bus as the environmentally sound method of TrcnsporTing s~udents. Th~ improvement to the right turn lane into ~unn would b~ very h¢tpful ~tso. The st~ff evaiuation of the first phase of the project makes it clear that the effect on traffic hcs L~een little i-o nil on Charleston except on the morning commute ~.~nere times are higher. Ar:~.*:-rrodero has much higher traffic flow than Charleston and aside from the school traffic, four lane.-: and two generous bike lanes can handle it well without improvements. Compressing traffic into thr~ lanes wouid solve no problems ~nd interfere with bikes as well if the Charleston "accordion" pa~t-~rn of in and out car lanes and bik~ lan~s is followed. The n~w configuration is also ~xtrem~Jy car driver. ~ pedestrian ~nd ~ user of public transportation. ~r’oss i.,r,cs~-r~dero at cn unmarked ~n?ers~ction crosswalk ~n n-~y n~ighborhood by ~xhibiting pa~[~nce when w~iting for a break in traffic. Wh~t Z cannot do is take a bus that will take ei~h¢~ trdn station to meet th~ existing train schedule (~nd get hom~ again). Z would like -:-r~nspor?otion funds to be spent on real needs, not foolish tinkering with narrowing and t~ffic lanes. 4~9~ ",.:9’iilmcr L, rive Palo Alto 94306 Page 1 of 2 Betten, From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Zariah Michael Maurier [mmaurier@pubpow.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 2:32 PM Planning Commission Gayle.Liken@cityofpaloalto.org Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Project Dear Planning and Transportation Commission Members: I grew up and have have lived in South Palo Alto since 1949. My wife and I have lived at 646 Fairmede Ave. Pomona since 1986. Our home in the Greenacres I neighborhood is just next to Terman School and is very close to Arastradero Road. The speed of traffic along Arastradero has always deeply alarmed and concerned us, especially when our children were going to school. Although our own children are now grown and gone, we are deeply concerned for the safety of other children. As you must be aware, are at least 5 major schools, including a daycare, on or directly accessed via Arastradero .... and so many students on the road every day, especially chronically unpredictable elementary and middle schoolers, going to and from school on foot, skateboard, bicycle, etc.. Although Charleston-Arastradero has been designated a school corridor and the speed limit set at 25, drivers still speed too fast. Par’Jcularly during the periods that school children are in transit to and from school. One or more of them is going to get hurt. Or maimed. Or killed. As were, in 2003, the two little girls on Miranda Avenue, which runs directly into Arastradero. Perhaps you remember that one of these little 6-year-old school girls, Chloe McAusland, was maimed and the other, Amy Malzbender, was killed by a Palo Alto High school student speeding recklessly on her way to school? "On Jan. 28, 2003, Amy was riding her bike to Nixon Elementary School with 10-year-old friend Chloe McAusland, her father, Tom, and 8-year-old brother, Joey, when she was struck and killed by a car driven by Palo Alto High School senior Megan Coughran, 18." The scars left from thai: incident, (and, in my view, the relative ease with which the driver escaped serious consequences for her act) still are still a deeply felt and very sore point within our local south- end neighborhoods that abut Arastradero. And were foremost in many of our minds when the School Corridor Plan was being laboriously negotiated with the City. And this sore point has not been much salved with the City’s various foot-dragging excuses and delays in implementing the already agreed-upon School Corridor Plan. 4/29’2008 However valid such excuses or delays may or may not be from the City’s perspective. Page 2 of 2 Also troubling is the lack of a safe place to wait when trying to turn into our street (Fairmede Ave.) from Arastradero. We are always afraid of having my car rear-ended and like most if not all our neighbors, we have experienced a lot of near-misses. These issues need to be dealt with for the safety of all who use this roadway. We urge you to approve the proposed improvements for the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor without further delays. Sincerely, -Michael and Judith Maurier 646 Fairmede Ave. Palo Alto, CA CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message is for the sole review of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any or all of this email message is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. 4/29 200S Page 1 of 1 From: Sent: To: C¢: Betten, Zariah Lynne Russell [lynnerusselll@gmail.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 2:04 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle; Lynne Seymour Russell Subject: Charleston/Arastradero Plan Dear Planning Commission Members, I understand that you will be reviewing the Charleston/Arastradero Plan on Wednesday evening. I arn writing to encourage you to make permanent the striping plan along the Charlesto~%rastradero corridor. As rcsidems of South Palo Alto, my family and I walk, bike, and drive this corridor on a daily basis. We have found that the three-lane reduction is working! Our travel times from point-to-point are good, the traffic flows smoothly, and the clear striping plan lms improved safety along the corridor. In addition to these improvements, we look forward to the new traffic adaptive signals. Thank yOLl l’or your leadership. Sincerely, Lym~e Russell 3419 Ramona St. Palo Alto, CA -)4306 4/292008 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Calmisao@aol.com Tuesday, April 29, 2008 12:51 PM Planning Commission; Gayle.Likens@cityof palo alto.org Charleston/Arastradero Corridor I frequently travel on the Chrleston/Arastrdero Corridor. ! have Iived on Suzanne Dr. for over 50 years, and am fully aware of the changing traffic speed/pattern of these two streets. I am interested in the safe walkway from Suzanne Dr. leading into Juana Briones Park. 1 would also like to have a safe left turn into McKellar or Suzanne Dr. There is a "KEEP CLEAR" sign on Mckellar entrance, but I notice ;that drivers do not pay any attention to that sign. There were times when I sat in my car, using my left turn signal, and remain ing there for quite sometime before a courteous driver decides to let me make my left turn. Sometimes it is a matter of "Life & Death." Also would it be possible to add a street light on McKellar?. It is very dark in the evening and kinda dangerous making a left turn entrance there. I would strongly recommened wider bike lanes for benefit/safety of students commuting to Terman and Gunn. 1 do my errands, medical appointments, etc. etc. in the morning hours so that I do not encounter the dangerous traffic patlern o1: Arastradero. Thank you for your consideration and service. Misao K, Sakamoto 4275 Suzanne Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94306 Te!. 493-5508 Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. (http:/iautos.aol.com/used? NCID=aolcmp00300000002851 ) Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: James Pinsky [jayebart@yahoo.com] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 12:43 PM Planning Commission Charleston Phase I & II Support by Greenmeadow Community Association Dear Planning & Transportation Commission Members, At Greenmeadow Community Association’s April 16, 2008 Quarterly Meeting with 49 residents present, attendees voted unanimously in support of the following statement: "GMCA supports staff’s recommendation to: 1 ). make the Charleston Phase I trial permanent. 2). implement a trial of the proposed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements and use data from this trial to determine in December 2008 whether a 3-lane or 4-lane configuration is appropriate for the Phase II Arastradero trial. The Phase I paint trial has demonstrated that the Phase I plan can work. We urge Council to make the trial striping plan permanent and begin working toward implementing the complete plan with its safety improvements: traffic adaptive signals, crosswalk improvements, pedestrian refuges, street trees and median landscaping, and sidewalk bulb-outs." Sincerely, Jim Pinsky President, Greenmeadow Community Association Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Penny EIIson [pellson@pacbell.net] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 11:42 AM Planning Commission Charleston Arastradero Plan Dear Planning & Transportation Commission Members, Consistent with our previous support of the Charleston/Arastradero Plan and our subsequent review of the trial, the PTA Council Traffic Safety Committee supports staff’s recommendation to: 1 ). Approve permanent retention of the Phase 1 trial striping and lane configurations on Charleston Road. 2). Direct staff to work with Gunn High School administration to implement a trial of the high school driveway capacity improvements and develop a recommendation on the Phase 2 striping plan for Arastradero Road (El Camino to Gunn) to be implemented summer 2009. 3). Direct staff to pursue all available grant funding opportunities for the design and construction of the permanent safety and streetscape improvements. Our committee has been kept apprised by staff of the status of this project. It is clear that the positive trial results indicate that the ti~ree-lane reduction maintains point-to-point travel times and that there has been no statistically significant change in intersection level-of-service. Further, the study indicates that speeds have been somewhat reduced. We expect that speeds will be brought closer to the posted 25 mph in school zones once the safety improvements are put in place. Further, the complete plan, with al! of its proposed safety improvements, will provide a safer school commute route for the eleven public and private elementary, middle, and high schools that are served by this CPA-designated School Commute Corridor. This is critically important in the face of expected increases in traffic volumes on the corridor due to construction that is underway. ThanP: you for giving our comments your consideration. Sincerely, Steve Bennet, Middle Schools Representative, Palo Alto Council of PTAs Traffic Safety Committee PenP,7 EIlson, 2007-8 Chair, Elementary Schools Representative, Palo Alto Council of PTAs Traffic Safety Committee Richard Swent, High Schools Representative, Palo Alto Council of PTAs Traffic Safety Committee Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Walt & Kay Hays [wkhays@igc.org] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 11:39 AM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero Plan T cn ,:,,,i-~-in~ to urge you to take the actions needed to implement this Plan. ~<~,~. ii:~ a~-~,d Z live in the Gneenmeadow area. We have found the parts of the Plan finished to da:-~c to i--o a big iinprovemeni- over the fonme~ cor~c T~Cns. Z Ti~ere~ ore s~rongiy support the following further I. DLak¢ the stripin9 plan permanent. It works. 2. ~ r~:i -~i~,:~: io b~gin ~s soon as possible on identifying funding sources for the proposed safety impr..,v~ ~,znts (m.:~dicr~ iandsccping and street trees, improved cross walks, pedestrian refuges, sio~,,.’ciP, bulb-ouTs, ~r:d continuous bike lanes). Z bike the length of the corridor several tire:: :,-’w~k, ~nd s~ the need for improwments to protect the many children using it, as well as oa:Jt ~ ~r’S ii:,te he. ! npl~ment th~ proposed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements, which are necessary to wne,n~r’ ~-’ 3- or ~, i~n~s’ wil! work at the Arastradero end of the corridor. On returning ~:-~:strcdero ~n ~-~,,~ morning ~fter b;king in Los Altos Hills, _T often s~e cars b~cked up from io for you" consideration Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From:Jewel Hurt [jewethutt@sbcglobal.net] Sent:Tuesday, April 29, 2008 10:43 AM To:Planning Commission Cc:Likens, Gayle Subject:support of proposed trial of Arastradero Corridor To \,Vbom it May Concern: I aln in support of the proprosed trial for the Arastradero con’idor. My family lives on Los Palos Ave., south of Arastradero, and I wall< with my tlvee young children along Arastradero several times each day, going to and flonn school. My son is a student at Juana Briones Elementary, and my t-wo younger children attend a preschool on A~-astradero (YOUl-~g Life Christian Preschool). We enjoy our walk in the morning, but I do not feel safe walkilng on the south side of Arastradero as it is now. The space between the sidwalk and the driving lane simply is not wide enough. With tall bushes growing into the sidewalk space, pedestrians have to walk single file. There is no buffer between the sidewall< and the street, and the bicycle lane is nanow. I feel that there is very little room for pedestrians and no room to compensate for driver error (such as driving in the bike lane, which is common during that hour before school). I have seen people walking within a foot of moving cars. This is particularly true of groups of middle school children walking home from Terman. They literally walk in the street and cars drive around them. I support the planned trial as it will create more safety buffers for pedestrians. I als~.~ want to strongly encourage going forward with a crosswalk at Clemo Ave. Pedestrians always cross there when going to Juana Briones Park. Sincerely, Jewel Hutt 4281 Los Palos Ave. Patio A.ho, CA 4/29 200S Betten, Zariah Frorn: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Aditi Mukhopadhyay [aditim@stanford.edu] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 9:44 AM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Approve proposed improvement of arastra./charlsetn, corridor Dear Planning and Transportation Commission Members: Kiy husband and I have lived at 4211 Pomona since 1993. Our home in the Greenacres I neighborhood is just next to Terman School and is very close to Arastradero Road. speed of traffic along Arastradero has always concerned us, especially when our sons were going to school--it has 9otien worst now! The Although our own children are now grown and gone, I am still concerned for the safety of other children and ourselves. -[i~ere are so many students on the road every day going to and from school on foot and by bicycle. Although Ci~arleston -Arastradero has been designated a school corridor and the speed limit set at 25, drivers still speed too fast and park in wrong places to drop off/pick-up! Someone is going to get hurt. Also troubling is the lack of a safe place to wait when trying to turn into our street from Arastradero. I am always afraid o,~ having my car rear-ended and have experienced a lot of near-misses. Ti~ese issues need to be dealt with for the safety of all who use this roadway. I ask that you approve the proposed improvements for the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor. Thank you for the previous improvements and look forward to tb~e new ones. Sincerely, Aditi Mukhopadhyay 4211 Pomona Pato Alto, CA 94306 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Melese, Teri [MeleseT@medsch.ucsf.edu] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 9:30 AM Planning Commission Yeh, Yiaway (internal); Likens, Gayle; allyn4186@earthlink.net; Philip Melese Arastradero/Charleston Plan I am writing in support of the Charleston.doc [ am writing in ~upport of the.. Hi all, ! am writing in support of the plan and hopefully to convince people that we need an interim solution. Teri Teri F]elese, PhD; Associate Adjunct Professor of IVledicine] Director, Research Technologies and Alliances School of Medicine Dean’s Office [ University of California, San Francisco 2340 Sutter St. Mt.Zion Campus Box 08751 San Francisco, CA 94143v. 4:1.5.476.8824 I f. 4Z5.502.6779 I mobile 408 373-365]. ~k~ i~J e_t~ reed sci]. ucsf. ed u CONF,~DENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY: This emai/ communication may contain confidential and proprietary information intended only for the use of the intended recipients identified above, ff you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you are hereby notifi~d tl~.at any unauthorized review, use, dissemination, distribution, downloading, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. [f you are not the intended recipient and have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by reply email, delete the communication and destroy all copies. Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Schreiber, Robert Samuel [rob.schreiber@hp.com] Friday, April 25, 2008 9:53 PM Planning Commission Gayle.Likens@cityofpaloalto.org Z ~m e,~ut~l,~g to express my euproval of the chenges to dharteston, end to advocate the + ~...~:÷:-.~,, of the process, with further Qesthetic and safety improvements. Betten, From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Zariah Kathryn Latour [kathryn@latoursRus.com] Friday, April 25, 2008 11:33 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Arastradero/Charleston plan Commissioners, I have a previous appointment which prevents me from attending the April 30th meeting next week, otherwise as Bike Safety Co-Chair of Terman Middle School, I would have voiced my opinion of the Arastradero/Charleston plan strongly in favor of all aspects. I feel permanent implementation of the Arastradero/Charleston plan is essential for the safety and well-being of school-aged children in south Palo Alto. Hy personal experience is limited to the Arastradero piece of the street, having children both at Gunn and Terman, but I am aware that the temporary striping on Charleston has had a dramatic and positive affect according to my friends whose children must navigate Charleston. It is essential that funds be negotiated to permanently complete the project. In addition to helping my own children navigate Arastradero, as part of my PTA function I am constantly monitoring foot/bike traffic on Arastradero, and I feel I have some expertise which qualifies me to assess the need for better traffic conditions there. The removal of the traffic island at the entrance of Gunn has dramatically improved the egress of traffic from Gunn, but has done nothing to improve ingress traffic coming from East Arastradero. Because the traffic backs up past the Terman entrance at Donald, student bikers comr,-quting across Arastradero from Donald constantly encounter heavy and impatient traffic. In order to lessen their time in the crosswalks -- because to do so seems dangerously vulnerable in this congestion -- Terman students routinely execute a dangerous and illegal crossing prematurely on Donald from the right bike lane to the left sidewalk. This is much more dangerous to these students who risk being struck by a vehicle rounding the blind corner, but because of their perception of danger at the Donald/Arastradero intersection, they continue to ignore our warnings. Addi:ionally, every attempt should be made to give Arastradero the appearance of a neighborhood street by reducing the number of lanes, and/or constructing medians. As long as that street looks like a freeway, drivers will continue to mistake it as one and ignore the 25 mph limit. I often drive that street and while going with the flow of traffic I am stunned when I check my speed and find that I am 10 or 15 miles over the limit. Limiting the number of lanes to one in each direction would slow each lane of traffic down to its slowest driver. I know of no parent who prefers their child to bike on Arastradero in spite of it being the most direct route for many children simply because the traffic is too fast. Slowing down the traffic, while assuring that it flows, is the answer to creating a safer commute for our children. Respectfully, Kathryn Latour "Niet geschoten is altijd mis." (If you never shoot, you wilt Mways miss.) Johan Cruijff, Dutch Soccer Star 4/29 2008 Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Becky Epstein [epstein@meer.net] Saturday, April 26, 2008 8:40 AM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Subject: Please Make Charleston/Arastradero Improvements Deur Planning and Transportation Commission, 1 li\e in the Charleston Meacto\\ s neighborhood and am the parent of two elementary-school age children who, under cmTent PAUSD boundaries, xvill be headed to Tennan and Gunn in the near future. I’m taking the time to write because your decision on tl~c Charlesto~z, Arastradero improvements will directly impact whether we will allow our children to bike/walk along the corridor for school and other purposes. I believe that many others in our neighborhood will also be influenced by your decision and that by acting now, you can help people choose to become pedestrians rather than drivers. I resiTectiully request that you make the the Charleston Phase I trial permanent. I also am in l:avor of implementing a trial of the prop~,sed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements and that the City uses data from this trial to determine in December 2008 whether a B-lane or 4-lane configuration is appropriate for the Phase II Arastradero trial. The Phase I paint trial has demonstrated that fine Phase I plan can work even without the fllll scope of safety and efficiency imp.r~,vements. The trial has shown that the plan maintains point-to-point travel times for motorists while providing safer, more comli~rtable connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. I urge you to make the trial striping plar~ permanent and begin working toward implementing the complete pla_n with traffic adaptive signals, crosswalk improvements, pedestrian refuges, street trees, medi:m landscaping, and sidewalk bulb-outs. F:in:’,l’.\. it i~ also mv Ixope that you will support the planned innprovemei~ts on the Gunn campus that are designed to move cars o t’[- ,4 :ast r~dero t;aster. you lbr your consideration. Beck. I~pstein 250 t!dlec Palo .\lto. CA 94306 4/29 2008 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Michal Sadoff [michalsadoff@sbcglobal,net] Saturday, April 26, 2008 1:57 PM Planning Commission; Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero Project - Comments .Aito ,~t~nning Commission Ruth Sadoff, 43I Adobe Place, Polo Alto ~!-:s o. Ai next week’s meeting, you will be considering the Charleston/Arastradero project. As r:- f: ~,q" of sooth Poio A!to who travels this corridor dd!y - Z would !ik~ to provid~ my input. On ~-.,.z¢~:dcy; when Z ?rcve~ to San ~os¢ to work, Z am mostly in my car. Or, we~k~nds, Z cm often or, fooi or b~ke. As ~ c~r driver, my key concern is th8 c~pacity of th~ corridor. My daughter ~nd hL::L zqd us~ bfkes even more fr~qu~nt!y th~n m~, on this corridor. ,~-’~king the changes that have be~zr pi~o~ed permanent, ~nd completing the rest of the steps is impontant for retdning the cc#cc[tV improvements that have been shown thus far, and for improving th~ safety of the corrfdor for pedestrians and bicyclists.. Specifically: Zm3~en~:nt~tion of supportinF changes (median i~ndscapin9, street trees~ improved crosswalks, r~fug~s, ~,u~w~,,,~-~~,"~u bu!b-outs, continuous bike lanes) will m~k~ important, additional broho<~d Gunn H ~ driveway coDQcitv improved, ants <*as o next stun ~,rasTraoero end of the.’-;~,~ whether 3- or 4 l~ne configuration can work on the ~ " ’ this s~ction of the corridor is particul~rly *~,,,~,’v, ~nd we need to uress, ahead with believe it will be successful. for considerin9 my input. B e t___~t~£, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Jack Hamilton [jhamiltonca@earthlink.net] Saturday, April 26, 2008 3:12 PM Planning Commission Charleston/Arastradero r~_comrnsnd to dounc[l to mak,z perrnGnent the chang~.s on Charleston in the trial this last +~ of Charleston and T fr~quently ,,se th~ str~+ The ch~g~d stripping has traffic uatterns around Hoover school and going in and out of Charleston shopping Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From:Ellen Fletcher [ef@ellenfietcher.net] Sent:Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:08 AM To:Planning Commission Subject:Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Members of the Planning & Transportation Commission: [ urge you to approve the staff’s recommendations regarding the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor Improvements. The Charleston Road segment of the improvements already implemented have worked remarkably well. It’s now time to implement improvement:s for the Arastradero section. Sincerely, Ellen Fletcher 777-!08 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303-4826 4/29 2008 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: meri.gruber [meri.gruber@comcast.net] Sunday, April 27, 2008 6:23 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Subject: support for Charleston/Arastradero Plan Planning & Transportation Commission, I am writing to express my strong support of the Charleston/Arastradero Plan now in its trial phase. As a local resident with children walking and biking across Charleston, the new lane configuration has been an enormous improvement. Previously, I witnessed many cars running the red light at Nelson and at Carlson Ct, and cars traveling well over the speed limit. I also use the corridor often and I have not experienced any significant traffic delays. Thank you for testing this plan. l join with my fellow residents in asking you to make it permanent. I also strongly advocate completing the additional safety features such as landscaping and the needed improvements in crosswalks and bike lanes. I alsc ask that you implement the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements and continue with the plan for the whole corridor. Thank you for all your efforts in improving the safety of our neighborhoods. Best egards, Meri Gruber 4123 Briarwood Way Pa:o ,Alto. CA 94306 4i’29 2008 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Betty Lum [bylum@pacbell.net] Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:56 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero Plan nighn-~cr¢ fo~~ r~sidents of 5uz~nne, Los Palos, and Pomona as we try to exit end/or return to our ho~ ~. Z~ ~dditio~ to a naar impossibi~ity of making ~ I~ft turn into 5uzm~n~ during these times, T ~o/~ ~ ~’ ....~nd h~ve neon root-ended once. The "KEEP ~ "~n~c severo’, neor-m~ssas ,’CLLAR ~n~’,cctiot-; on Ar’asTredaro at McK¢llar is somewno, useless, and very raw drivers observe the DuH’,g non-school hours, when thare ape f~weP cars, the street is more like an expressway. Z urge yd.: :o ::rcceed with ?he Arastradero portion of the ptan for the peoble in this area. Z would like ~o p ’opos~ ~he ,-~-,cc:,../:,~, noa:~ the Fire Station (there is presently o ~.~m CLEA~" indication which is ~gr~o:sa mos~ of the ~~rnt) for th~ safety of ~lderty grandparents who are ~.~, ~g~,~, s Tar their gr’cr asn~m"en, xAm~y of these ela~my gronaporenTs cross at the corner to avoia having to walk to ih~ tr"a::fic iighi o? doulombe. " ’ ~’’ "’mo.v,ng o c~osswalk will also slow rrorrlc. Page 1 of 1 From: Sent: To: Cc: Betten, Zariah William Robinson [williamrobinson@goldenworld.com] Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:42 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Subject: Charleston-Arastradero Improvements Review As member and vice-chair of PABAC I heartily endorse the Staff Report received on 4/25/2008. I fully appreciate the safety improvements on the corridor Segments 1, 2 and 3 which I regularly use as a cyclist and motoist. Housing additions along the corridor underscores the urgency to embrace all recommendations. Please press forward on Segment 4, and the Terman-Gunn improvements. And please keep the momentum going so one day all the permanent improvements will make our city safer to travel. Rob Robinson, Palo Alto 416~ Wilkie Way (1-1/2 blocks from Charleston) Vice-Chair PABA C 429 2008 Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From:John Spiller [rice49er@pacbell.net] Sent:Monday, April 28, 2008 12:30 PM To:Planning Commission; Likens, Gayle Subject:Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Improvement comments from Palo Alto Orchards Neighborhood. Dear Sirs. As P:esident of the Palo Alto Orclnarcls neighborhood I xvould like to share with you some neighborhood comments regarding the CharlestorffArastradero Phase 2 project in support of your April 30th hearing. KirsL let me congratulate you on the outstandir~g success of Phase l. Traffic speeds are acceptable and considered safer. Bicycle lanes are mucln improved, especially for the numerous children that use fine route to get t{~ tln? sclnools in the area. For the section between El Camino Real and Foothill Expressway my r~eighborlnood would like to see the t~llowing improvements: Crossing tlne road to get to Juan Briones Park is a hartowing experience requiring precision timing to avoid d~e traffic, theretbre, a cross walk would be very beneficial. 2.Turning into the Pa!o Alto Orchards neighborhood fl’om Arastradero, going west, can be difficult, especially when students at Gram High School are leaving school; often traffic is backed up almost to Terman Middle School. Turn pockets would tket safer when waiting to turn and would help improve flow o f ira fl~c. 5.Turning leg flom Arastradero (going east) to E1 Camino, can require two or three light changes at busy times. Is it possible to add an additiona! left turn lane at E1 Camino or make the current left turn lane longer? 4.Speeding traft]c is alxvays a safety concenq going East on Arastradero. Other than the speed checking machine at the cemetery are there any other plans to reduce traffic speeds without causing congestion? Sidewalks are not particularly wide on Arastradero requiring pedestrians to step into the road when passing each other. Can the sidewalks be widened? 6.Traffic is still near grid lock at Gum~Foothill in the mornings when children and parents are going to school. Can additional lanes be added to improve tlne flow? 7. Can the corridor be beauti fled? A median witln trees and plants, similar to Castro Street, Mountain View would be a big improvement. S.Most importantly, bike lanes need to be widened *Br the safety of the children; Remember, children going to Elementary School, Middle School, High School and private schools all traverse this corridor. Please keep up the good work. Incorporating the ideas above into the Cl~arlestor~/Arastradero Phase 2 project would be greatly appreciated by many of our neighbors. dohn Spiller President. Palo Alto Orchards Neighborhood 4222 Suzanne drive, Palo Alto. CA 94300 Reg&wcts ,lolnlq Spiller 4/29 2008 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Raymond Wong [raymond_wong@sbcglobal.net] Monday, April 28, 2008 12:49 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle; Kishimoto, Yoriko (external); jspiller@cbnorcal.com Fwd: Re: Charleston/Arastradero corridor feedback I understand that there will be a review of the CharlestolgArastradero plan tonight and i just want to write to express support for contination of this prograln. Ph~s,t II was delayed for a year and I hope this summer we can begin with the Ar’as:adcro portion of the plan. I like the difference it has made on Charleston Road and \velcome the same benefits on Arastradero. My 3 children go to Terman and Gurm and I i~el that this plan will make it a safer route for kids going to school whether on ~\~ot or bike. In addition, it will be safer for the elderly and morns with little kids to make it across Arastradero to Briones Park. I’\e been living at 4267 Suzanne Drive in Palo Alto Orchards for 20 years this summer and really’ look forward to tMs plan and feel it’s been a Iong time coming. I look forward to the day’ wher~ I can make a left hand turn safely onto Arastradero from Suzanne or cross the street to the local parl,:. Ym’iko Ki.s’himoto <.vkishimoto@earthlink.net> wrote: from: Yoriko IQishimoto <ykist-fimoto@eartl-dink.net> Subject: Re: Charleston/Arastradero corridor feedback Da~e: \¥ed, 4 Oct 2006 18:05:59 -0700 To: Raymond Wong <raymond_wong@sbcglobal.net> Th~mks [’or sharing! I love those improvements too and can’t wait for 2rid phase on Arastradero. Or~ Oct 4, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Raymond Wong wrote: kli All- I’d like to share my feedback on the Charlestor~/Arastradero corridor project and scheduled improvements. Thanks, Ray Rto*mond t’!’ong <~:~O:n~l~¢~o,~g@s~cg~o/~t!.nd> wrote: Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:26:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Raymond Wong <~:ay.~>o~d~>vo~g~,$~gglgba~,~qe~> Subject: Charleston/Arastradero corridor feedback 4729 2008 To: pellso~_~@pacbel!,lSet Hi Penny- I live on Suzanne Drive and drive down Charleston and Arastradero all the time. i like the wider lanes and less traffic on Charlestor~ and especially the left tur~ lanes. I can’t wait until we do the same for Arastradero and provide a left turn lane into Suzanne Drive. Also I’m looking forward to pedestrian crossings on Arastradero in combination with less traffic. I don’t know how many people and kids have to dodge cars as they try to cross Arastradero trying to get to Juana Briones or the park. Thanks: Ray "foriko Kishimoto Vice N,tayor 65(t-323-5590 ykishilnoto~earthlink,net 4/292008 Betten, Zariah FFOm: Sent: To: Subject: Brian Rossi [brossi43@yahoo.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 2:06 PM Planning Commission; Likens, Gayle Arastradero Improvements must be done I am Brian Rossi and I live at 4221 Suzanne Drive off Arastradero Road. I am highly in favor of the City of Palo Alto going forward and beginning work ASAP to identify funding sources (grants) to implement safety improvements, median landscaping, improved crosswalks, sidewalk bulb-out, continuous bike lanes, etc. on the Arastradero Road between El Camino and Foothill. Please implement the Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements as a next step toward whether a 3 or 4 lane configuration can work on the Arastradeo end of the corridor (like it is on Charleson). In addition, please proceed with the Arastradero portion of the Plan to improve the safety of our our children and seniors by providing wider bike lanes, crosswalk to the Juana Briones Park, and turn pockets for safer entrance and exit from our neighborhood! This are absolutely needed and desired by all my neighbors thatltalkto, lfeelthatin the name of safety that it is only a matter of time before we have a major accident due to speeding and lack of the above. Brian Rossi Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Schreiber, Robert Samuel [rob.schreiber@hp.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 4:48 PM Planning Commission Gunn driveway and Arastradero i-i:aT ~ne r~unn commute traffic on ArastrQdero in the morning is n significant problem, widening the en?ryway to Gunn is a practical, reasonable, c~ c.~uo~ solution. Z hope that you will support ?his. Ro~ Sci~reiber Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Sonya Bradski [sonyangary@yahoo.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 5:17 PM Planning Commission; Likens, Gayle Request Approval of the Charleston / Arastradero Striping Plan ’ I’To s~ nora it May Concern: Z iiv-; in 5. Pdo Alto and walk and bike my kids back and forth on Ndson Drive across Charleston to F ~[r~’~zadow ~!ementary Schoolmu,~,me’~ times a aa,’ v. In th~ ~ast, there were four ~nas to cross .......-to, our fer;i!y Now thgr~ are ~wo lanes " ’one i? is much s~feP for us. 4~ :,:r re ~s! y~ a.l~ knc~," t}~!..m ~i:e berne_ ~b~e to walk end ~"~,,z asd ;-~,,’e’ sator" routes on cr~:~;es:on, i us~ my car to afire aown Arostradero because ! ao not feel Trim route is still not s~f~ enough for my famiJy to walk a~d bike down yet. Piea:;e do the following: u-~ake mhe Charleston / Arastrmdero striping plan perm, anent. ~h~s way Z cmn continue to " to ra~rmeadow end cross Charleston. The paint trial shows that th~ three-lane is wor~ ng~ Point-to-ooiqt travel times are good, even w Tnou~ the added efT~cienc~es that soon at intensections from the new traffic adaptiw signals. of i ~ So#STy i~r, arovsmenSs: median landscaping end strest trees, improved crosswalks, pedestrian diff :r~r~ce ir~ The comfort and safety of school commuting children and everyone else who bikes and we’.ks o~ the corridor. de~-min~na wi~ether a 3- or 4-1ane configuration can work on ¢h~ Arastrad~ro end of the cantdot. -g~e ~ngine~rs n~ed to g~t autos through ¢h~ @unn campus driwway ~ore ~ffici~ntly in order to reduce the congestion tha¢ is spilling back from tha¢ driveway onto the corridor, reducing e~:.~ncv and opportunities ?o implement safety improvements on the Arast~adero s~gmen¢. ~" ~,~ ~÷ ’~"~ ....’~safer place for pedestrians .~nd bikers. This way we can 3 Thank you for your time and consideration. 403:1:. N~slson hr. Pai~ Alto, CA 94306 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Keri Wagner [keriwl@earthlink.net] Monday, April 28, 2008 8:36 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero Plan 0;.-. , prT! ]5, the Hoover Elementary School PTA held our general m~mbe.r, ship meeting and discsscd ih¢ tria~ sttiRing p~an on Charleston ~oad. The Hoover PTA voted to support the thre~- com-~du~ a,~,~n, a~qd urn, e< the Planning end TranspoPt~tion Commission and the City aT , o~o Alto i-o ~. ~,~ i-he siripi~-~9 pl~n p~rm~ntn?.We ’~" ~~ ’v.......,uu~ TOrWard to the coming SaTST~ improvements for pcJ~ s~-r[cr, s and cyclists. Because we are an alternative school, w~ will continue to work with the C[7 Sc~:oi -~:ff~c S~f~ty dommittee on findin9 ways to encourage Hoover parents to minimize Bett~n, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Robin Wright [waywright@gmail.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 10:11 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Support the Charleston/Arastradero Plan Dear Planning & Transportation Commission, I am writing in support of the Charleston/Arastradero Plan. I would like the Commission to: - Make the striping plan permanent. Traffic is moving at a safer pace. - Work should begin to identify funding sources for the implementation of the safety improvements. This will make our important school corridor even safer for our children. - Implement the proposed Gunn High School driveway capacity improvements. Thanks for you help. -Robin Wright 521 El Capitan Place Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Subject: Mary Ann Michel [maryannm7@gmail.com] on behalf of Mary Ann Michel [mamichel@alumni.duke.edu] Monday, April 28, 2008 10:13 PM Planning Commission Fwd: Charleston/Arastradero Plan Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:47:58 -0700 To: planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.org Gayle.Likens@cityofpaloalto.org From: Mary Ann Michel <mamichel@alumni.duke.edu> Subject: Charleston/Arastradero Plan Cc: Bcc: X-Attachments: Members of the Planning Commission. The work so far on Charleston is greatly appreciated I urge you to- t~ please make the striping plan permanent. The paint trial shows that the three-lane reduction is working. The added efficiencies that are coming soon at intersections from the new traffic adaptive signals will make it even better. Please direct staff to begin work as soon as possible on identifying funding sources for implementation of the safety improvements: median landscaping and street trees, improved crosswalks, pedestrian refuges, sidewalk bulb-outs, continuous bike lanes. These are changes will enhance the comfort and safety of school commuting children and everyone else who bikes and walks on the corridor. Please implement the proposed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements as a next step toward determining whether a 3- or 4-lane configuration can work on the Arastradero end of the corridor. The engineers need to get autos through the Gunn campus driveway more efficiently i:-~ order to reduce the congestion that is spilling back from that driveway onto the corridor, r~ducing efficiency and reducing capacity. We need to implement bike/ped safety improvements on the Arastradero segment. I’.lary Ann Michel Palo Alto, CA Mar:/Ann Michel Palo Alto, CA Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Yao Zou [yaozou@mindspring.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 10:19 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle; Yao Zou Planned improvements for Arastradero Road Polo Alto Planning Comission, We sre writing to express our strong support for the planned improvement of Arastradero Road especially reducing the number of lanes from four to two with dedicated turn lanes. As d~fily users of the Arastradero/Charleston corridor, driving from and to our house on Suzanne Drive, we are expe:-iencing the benefits of reduced traffic speed and increased safety on a daily basis that the improvement of Charleston Road east of Alma has provided since its implementation in the summer of 2006. In fact, riding a bicycle from our house on Suzanne Drive to, for example, the Charleston shopping center on Middlefield Road has become quite feasible with the availability of continuous bicycle lanes on Charleston Road. The reality on Arastradero Road is in stark contrast. The four lane road has the feel of a freeway tempting drivers to go signif’,cantly beyond the speed limit of 25 mph, We estimate that cars going 40 mph or faster are quite common. Going west ,an Arastradero Road and stopping to make a left turn into Suzanne Drive is a daily gamble for us; so far we have been lucky and have not yet been rear-ended by a speeding car, Another challenge is to cross Arastradero either by foot or bike. Even on weekends when traffic is typically less dense this is not an easy but a very risky task because it is difficult to gauge Ihe speed of oncoming vehicles. We are experiencing this problem every weekend as our 6-year old son has grown fond of riding the trailer bike and going west on Arastradero is a typical route. Unfortunately, this requires turning left from Suzanne Drive onto Arastradero dealing with east and west bound traffic simultaneously. The ~:ew Juana Briones Park is such an improvement to the community life here. Both children and seniors enjoy going there for leisure and relaxation. However, the lack of a cross-walk to the park presents serious safety hazard to the families in the community. We need the cross walk to the park right now, for the safety of our seniors and children. We strongly urge you to execute the proposed changes to Arastradero Road as soon as possible. The plan is good and definitely worth the trial phase. We have been waiting for the change since last summer. The current design of the road is inconsistent with a residential area. It serves out-of-town commuters and not residents that live on or near Arastsradero Roaci. Sincerely, Wemer Goetz Yao Zou 4205 Suzanne Drive Pato &lto, CA 94306 650-$56-!022 10 Betten, Zariah Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Philip Melese [philip.melese@sri.com] Monday, April 28, 2008 10:58 PM Planning Commission Yeh, Yiaway (internal); Likens, Gayle; Elizabeth Allyn Charleston/Arastradero Plan Support. Hello, 1 am writing to support the Charleston/Arastradero Plan. My perspective is from living on the corner of Arastradero and Donald, being an active participant within the Green Acres II neighborhood, a parent of children who attend(ed) Terman Middle school and Gunn High School, and an active bike commuter (to SRI in Menlo Park). k]y opinion is that Arastradero Road resembles an expressway more than a city street on which residents live and many children go to and from schools and parks. I would love to see a calmer traffic pattern that encouraged pedestrians and bike riders. I have sat in on several Transportation Committee meetings and I have reviewed, and am in support of the suggested Charleston/Arastradero improvements. The proposed solution to the Gunn High School traffic problem has an excellent chance of success. I also believe that the suggested 3-lane configuration on Arastradero will provide much of what I hope for, based on my positive experience in driving along Ci~rleston since the re-striping. i would like to show my support for calmer, safer, bike and pedestrian-friendly streets in general. 1 know this is always a battle between people getting frustrated about getting to work faster, but I don’t want to see our residential streets treated like freeways. I’d like to point out that Arastradero also has a problem during the off hours, in that people drive the straight stretch between El Camino and Foothill, with green lights all the way, at arbitrary speeds - frequently over 50 mph (where the speed limit is 25 mph)! Flease join me in supporting the Charleston/Arastradero Plan which has been very well thought out and developed over several years. Sincerely, Philip Melese Resident: 674 Arastradero Road (650-852-1244) Philip Melese, Ph.D. Program Manager Senior Scientist SR~ in:erna:iona! - Applied Op<ics Lab 333 Ra*~’enswood Ave. Men!o Park, CA 94025 650-859-2769 (Fa:<-4894) Philip.Me!ese@sri.com 11 Betten, Zariah From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Claire Kirner [claire@kirner.us] Monday, April 28, 2008 11:00 PM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle Charleston/Arastradero Plan To \Vhom Zt May Concern, ..~ ,~zsid-~nt of the 6reenmeadow neighborhood in Polo Alto, a community directly impacted by ir, cPu~sing traffic generated by developments along the corridor. As someone living and traveling ~ or~ ~n~ ~k~, ~e~,~n, ~,ras¢ ~u~ro corridor, i am writing io ask you to please support cor~ nu~sd implementation of the dhaHeston/Arastradero Plan. Specifically, Z would ask that the ~, plan be made permar.en¢. From what T understand paint trial results have demonstrated the three !a~e reduction is working. &~ore importantly, as a resident, Z am mot experiencing deta-’s on the corridor when Z drive. Z am glad that the lane reduction has reduced speeds, making ~-tr~z~t s~f~r for school-bound children a~d all residents who walk and bike 1o the parks, Mi!-c-~,zii PaCk Library, the community centers, and shopping center on the corridor. -For i-he Arastr’adero end of th~ corridor, in order’ to reduce ibis congestion, i am asking p ]~ ~ s ~ i~plen..ent the proposed driveway capacity improvements for Gunn High School. It im~.o~t~;~t step in figu~inq out the bsst configuPation fop the APastPadePo e~d of this many of the proposed safety improvements cannot be implemented without adequate ti~a~ Polo ,gFro staff start worKmg on finding grants as soon as possible for irr_:rwem~n?s suck as meditn landscaping, better crosswalks, pedestrian refuges, sidewalk bulb- ,s~~d coniii-~uous bike lanes. As a resident of this neighborhood arid a parent of young children be i~avdb~g by b;k¢ and foot along this corridor as they get older, Z ask that you please ~his impor?a~t plan. Page 1 of 1 Betten, Zariah From:Peter K Mue!ler [pklausm@mac.com] Sent:Thursday, April 24, 2008 7:59 PM To:Planning Commission Subject:Charleston 2 lane plan l use Charleston a lot. The new anangement seems to work just fine. Peter K Mueller 3801 Magnolia Drive Palo Alto CA 94306-3232 Ph 650 856 1255 Cph 650 303 6893 pklausm@comcast.net 4/25,2008 25 April 2008 FROM: Charleston Meadows Association (CMA) TO: Palo Alto City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission RE: Statement in Support of Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Improvements The Charleston Meadows Association (CMA) urges the City of Palo Alto to move forward with the traffic and safety improvements for the Charleston / Arastradero corridor. The CMA Board voted unanimously on 19 April 2008 to support the following recommendations: 1) 2) To make the Charleston Phase I trial permanent. To implement a trial of the proposed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements and use data from this trial to determine in December 2008 whether a 3-lane or 4-lane configuration is appropriate for the Phase II Arastradero trial. The Phase I paint trial has demonstrated that the Phase I plan can work even without the full scope of safety and efficiency improvements. The trial has shown that the plan maintains point-to-point travel times for motorists while providing safer, more comfortable connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. We urge the City to make the trial striping plan permanent and begin working toward implementing the complete plan with traffic adaptive signals, crosswalk improvements, pedestrian refuges, street trees, median landscaping, and sidewalk bulb-outs. We support the planned improvements on the Gunn campus that are designed to move cars offArastradero faster. We are hopeful that this change will alleviate congestion on Arastradero and pave the way for a 3-lane configuration on Arastradero between EI Camino and Foothill Expressway. The children in our neighborhood must travel down Arastradero to both Terman and Gunn. The commute up Arastradero is currently not safe. The proposed 3 lane configuration of Arastradero is needed to provide pedestrian medians and a continuous and wider bike lane for safe walking and biking to school. Likens, Gayle From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jewel Hutt [jewelhutt@sbcglobal.net] Tuesday, April 29, 2008 10:43 AM Planning Commission Likens, Gayle support of proposed trial of Arastradero Corridor To Whom it May Concern: I am in support of the proprosed trial for the Arastradero corridor. My family lives on Los Palos Ave., south of Arastradero, and I walk with my three young children along Arastradero several times each day, going to and from school. My son is a student at Juana Briones Elementary, and my two younger children attend a preschool on Arastradero (Young Life Christian Preschool). We enjoy our walk in the morning, but I do not feel safe walking on the south side of Arastradero as it is now. The space between the sidwalk and the driving lane simply is not wide enough. With tall bushes growing into the sidewalk space, pedestrians have to walk single file. There is no buffer between the sidewalk and the street, and the bicycle lane is narrow. I feel that there is very little room for pedestrians and no room to compensate for driver error (such as driving in the bike lane, which is common during that hour before school). I have seen people walking within a foot of moving cars. This is particularly true of groups of middle school children walking home from Terman. They literally walk in the street and cars drive around them. I support the plarmed trial as it will create more safety buffers for pedestrians. I also want to strongly encourage going forward with a crosswalk at Clemo Ave. Pedestrians always cross there when going to Juana Briones Park. Sincerely, Jewel Hutt 4281 Los Palos Ave. Palo Alto, CA Charleston/Arastradero Corridor Plans Chair Holman and Commission Members, My name is Betsy Allyn, a representative of Green Acres II neigh- borhood, and a member of the infamous stake holders group since its inception. This group has included members of bicylist groups, PAUSD staff, CJL representatives, 11 neighborhoods, City Palo Alto Engineering & Traffic staffs, Park & Recreation staffand Palo Alto Police representatives. I believe it is close to fourteen years now since this project was initiated by the Palo Alto City Traffic staff based on an analysis of the rather large number of planned and started housing develop- ments in south Palo Alto and Stanford. This Corridor is not just about traffic, it is all about efficiency and and SAFETY. it is absolutely necessary to view the Corridor as a neighborhood arterial: two designations, given by both the school district and the city, as a safe- to- school corridor; close to 10,000 children cross it each day; three heavily used near-by parks for neighborhood gatherings, recreation for young children, soccer and baseball practices, and 1 | neighborhoods from Fabian Way to Palo Alto Hills and the most popular and heavily used library in the city. Waikable, bikeable, child-oriented neighborhoods. Ill belabor the issues, it is because they are obvious and true, ¯The three lane plan does not stall traffic, it modifies it due to the Traffic Adaptive Signalization Plan. It is all about safety and efficiency. The 3-lane sections would be in the residential portions of the Corridor. As in the Charleston end of the Corridor, the city would maintain lane capacity at major intersections ( Donald, El Camino Real and others) to provide storage capacity, and they would provide left-turn pockets at other intersections allowing for more efficient throughput. -2- The Corridor plan was part of the mitigations for the Hyatt Housing Development and for the Campus for Jewish Life. The 3-lane configuration also contains a most necessary planned crosswalk design near Suzanne Drive for pedestrians and children to access Juana Briones Park and School in a more heavily congested area. We hope that you will make the 3-lane designation permanent with the Gunn High School driveway capacity improivements. Thus working towards the implementa tion of the complete C/A Corridor Plan. I would like to take a moment to thank the City Staff, Steve Emslie and Gayle Lykens for their patience & advice, Gary Kruger, TJKM Consultant who translated his statistics in an easy manner understandable to most of us, the stafffrom the PAUSD and Gunn High School, and the PTA Associations. And to Penny and Richard EIIson for their energy, committment, & pushing all of us when we were discouraged, and for their intelligent analyses for all these years. All for the safety of children and bicyclists on the Corridor. Thank you for listening. Betsy Allyn Green Acres II ! have included e-mails sent to me by residents of GAll. April 30, 2008 Subject: Trial Improvements on Charleston Road Dear Planning and Transportation Commission Members, I have lived on Charleston Rd. since 1980. I am now retired and walk and drive this road almost daily. I was a volunteer member of the original Charleston Rd. traffic calming task force headed by Mr. Kott. I consider the improvements/changes as positive, but there are problems that still exist, but can be solved rather easily. The most positive change is the slowing of traffic during commuting times and other time when there is heavy use. Another positive change is the elimination of "DRAG RACING". Problems and possible solutions are as follows: Speeding does occur when traffic is light. One solution would be the use of speed "HUMPS". The major section of road where speeding occurs is between the LouisiMontrose intersection and Middlefield intersection. A few Humps in this would certainly reduce the problem. Another "Calming" thing to do would be to plant many trees and or shrubs in the median to give the feeling of a narrower roadway. Another action to reduce speeding would be to install four way stop signs at the Louis/Montrose and Sutherland/Grove intersections. Cars passing using the median do occur and the planting of trees and or shrubs would prevent this. Another problem is that the "Merging" traffic lanes at the Charleston!Middlefield intersection create a dangerous situation. Cars in the outside lane speed thru the intersection and cut in to the main traffic lane. This occurs routinely on Charleston going East and West. The outside lanes should be "Right-Turn-Only" lanes. The merging lanes would be only merging lanes for traffic from Middlefield Rd. Another problem is that cars entering and leaving driveways have a "Right-Turn-Only" situation. This result is extra driving to a U- turn location or even driving around and thru the adjacent neighborhood. Adding a U-Turn location half way between Louis and Middlefield would help reduce this extra driving in this section of the road. Much more "Traffic-Calming" is needed. As it is now bicyclist will not cross the road to drive with traffic, but will use the sidewalk going with traffic and against traffic. Bicyclists using the sidewalks create a dangerous situation as they are not expected and are silent. Small children doing this is OK, but adults do it also. Action is needed to reduce truck traffic on Charleston Rd. These trucks cause more congestion. A new truck ordinance is needed to reduce the legal size of trucks and to make the ordinance enforceable. The police state that they will not stop any trucks as the current ordinance is written in such a way that it is unenforceable. They always lose in court when it is contested. The traffic barrier at the Louis/Montrose needs to be eliminated as it causes much more traffic on Charleston Rd.. Cars are prevented from making a left turn from Montrose onto Charleston Rd. Cars going West on Charleston Rd. are prevented from making a left turn onto Montrose Rd. and must drive up to Sutherland to get to their homes in Charleston Gardens neighborhood. There is no crossing of Charleston Rd. from Louis to Montrose. Thanks for the opportunity to present my views/opinions. Sincerely, Richard Geiger, 714 E. Charleston Rd., Palo Alto, CA., 94303 , Ph 650-493-8723 Thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Nina Bell and I live at 4245 Los Palos Avenue in the GreenAcres I neighborhood which is next to Terman Middle School on Arastradero. I have been actively involved in the Charleston-Arastradero Project since the very beginning and have participated as the representative from my neighborhood on the Stakeholder’s Committee. There have been major concerns for my neighborhood with regard to the existing conditions on Arastradero: the speed of traffic, the safety of the children that use this school corridor for both walking and biking to school, the unprotected crossing to Juana Briones Park, the vulnerability of cars waiting on Arastradero in their attempt to turn into the neighborhood streets. Last year, my son’s car was rear-ended while he was trying to turn into the neighborhood. Many of my neighbors’ cars have also been hit, some numerous times. And most tragically, a number of years ago, my friend’s fifteen year old son was killed on Arastradero next to Gunn while riding his bicycle to school. There have been no safety improvements on the roadway for years. The proposal that you have before you addresses our concerns and offers the best remedy for the problems on Arastradero. >Traffic adaptive lights are a key factor to the success of the project. They have been included. > A safe crossing to Briones Park has been added to the design. This is important because there is too much space between safe crossings. We frequently see people dashing across the street, dodging cars to get to the park...often with children in tow. >The plan adds left turn pockets to protect cars turning into neighborhoods. Left turn pockets will also reduce the friction created by uncontrolled turning and passing, allowing a more efficient flow of traffic in the through lanes. Also key is the trial proposed within Gunn High School. This test is imperative to determine the striping of Arastradero. If it works as well as expected, it will resolve the morning commute back-up and enable the safer three-lane striping configuration to be used on Arastraderoo That would be the ideal solution for all users of the corridor. This plan provides wider bike lanes, slower but efficiently flowing traffic, adaptive lights, safe turn pockets, a protected mid-block crosswalk, pedestrian refuges at intersections, improved flow of traffic within Gunn and thereby on Arastraderoo It is time for this plan to move forward. Much thought and careful analysis has gone into the recommendations that you have before you. It offers the best solution for the original goals and objectives for the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor. I urge you to approve them. Further, I ask you to make sure that the protected mid- block crossing proposed for Juana Briones Park is installed as part of the summer 2009 paint trial. Thank you. Page ! of 1 Betten, Zariah From:Nimrod Megiddo [nmegiddo@yahoo.com] Sent:Friday, May 02, 2008 11:34 AM To:Planning Commission Subject:The Disimprovement plan for the Charleston-Arastradero transportation channel Dear Commissioners: It is laughable to suggest that reducing the number of traffic lanes would be an improvement (except for o~mers of property along Charleston and Arastradero). A Crucial Transportation channel. The subject transportation channel is crucial as it facilitates the access to the 101 freeway on the east, to Central expressway in the center, and to Foothill expressway and the 28o freeway on the west. For residents of Barron Park, for example, Arastradero is the only way to access any highway on the west side. For residents of the "circles" east of Alma, Charleston is the only reasonable access to lOl. Schools. The number of schools served by this transportation is astounding: eleven schools according to staffs report. This reality creates extreme demands on the channel. It becomes a mess whenever it rains, when everybody wants to access their schools by cars. Other increasing demands. The number of residents relying on this channel is increasing ~4th the new housing projects at Charlseton and E1 Camino Real and other approved increases in the area. Furthermore, the new 3CC on Charleston ~411 undoubtedly create more traffic on Charleston. Longer Travel Times. The staffs statement that travel times on Charleston were not significantly affected by reducing the number of lanes isfalse. Many drivers now avoid Charleston during peak hour because the travel time is unpredictable. They use alternate routes to access the lOl freeway and central expressway, resulting in longer commute times and hence lower quality of life. Alternate ideas: 1.Forbid parking/stopping during rush hours along Charleston/Arastradero and East Meadow. 2.Add underpasses/overpasses, signals, and lights for pedestrians crossing at key points. 3.Add lanes on East Meadow to help traffic to Fairemeadow and 3LS schools. 4.Increase the number of school buses serving those schoo!. 5.Enforce the speed limits. N. Megiddo Be a better friend, ne~vshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try_ it now. 5/6/2008 303 PARKSIDE DRIVE, PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA u, ~’,’.-,~.u ALTO, CA b,l , ~LLr~4 S OFFICE 94306 TELEPHONE (GS~) 494-3157 08 HAY -7 AH7:31 Dear Planning & Transportation Commission Members, At Greenmeadow Community Association’s April 16, 2008 QuarterIv Meeting with 49 residents present, attendees voted unanimously in support of the following statement: "GMCA supports staffs recommendation to: make the Charleston Phase I trial permanent. 2). implement a trial of the proposed Gunn HS driveway capacity improvements and use data from this trial to determine in December 2008 whether a 3-lane or 44ane configuration is appropriate for the Phase II Arastradero trial. The Phase I paint trial has demonstrated that the Phase I plan can work. We urge Council to make the trial striping plan permanent and begin working toward implementin8 the complete plan with its safety improvements: traffic adaptive signals, crosswalk improvements, pedestrian refuges, street trees and median landscaping, and sidewalk bulb-outs." Jim President, Greenmeadow Community Association, Inc. GREENMEADOW COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC.