Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1998 0318 CC REG ITEM 10AITEM 10 • f7 /A.g'7 cm OF MppRPAR& CALIFORNIA AGENDA REPORT City Council Meeting 199e, TO: The Honorable City Council ACTION; Dr.") back+��sotu f �'on af prov1 rno o oet ion C. FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Lelopmen1 yL, Prepared by Paul Porter, Principal Planner DATE: March 6, 1998(CC meeting of March 18, 1998) SUBJECT: CONSIDER DENIAL OF MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 13 TO CPD 89 -2 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOS ANGELES AVENUE AND PARK LANE (301 W. LOS ANGELES AVENUE) ON THE APPLICATION OF SHELL OIL COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PROVIDING A CURB -CUT ON LOS ANGELES AVENUE FOR ACCESS TO THE SHELL SERVICE STATION IN THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE (APN 511- 08 -45) B,icl_ ground : This project was continued from the Council meeting on February 18, 1998 at the request of the applicant. Attached is the staff report prepared for the meeting of February 18, 1998. Re-commendation: Adopt Resolution No. denying the applicant's request for additional access from the Shell Service Station and Car Wash to Los Angeles Avenue. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Staff Report dated February 18, 1998 C: \M \CPD892 \18MAR98.CC 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA DENYING MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 13 TO CPD 89 -2 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOS ANGELES AVENUE AND PARK LANE (301 W. LOS ANGELES AVENUE) ON THE APPLICATION OF SHELL OIL COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A CURB -CUT ON LOS ANGELES AVENUE FOR INGRESS - EGRESS WHEREAS, on November 18, 1997, the applicant filed Minor Modification No. 13 to CPD 89 -2 requesting two curb -cuts along Los Angeles Avenue for ingress and egress at 301 West Los Angeles Avenue; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 18, 1998, the City Council discussed the applicant's requested Minor Modification and made a decision on the matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has determined that the requested Minor Modification is categorically exempt from CEQA requirements as a Class 1 exemption for minor alterations. SECTION 2. The Council denies Minor Modification No.13 to CPD 89 -2 and determines that the curb -cut would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare because: a) The spacing between Park Lane and an access to the Shell Service Station would be less than the City's accepted standard of 300 feet; and b) Potential conflicts will exist resulting from southbound right turning vehicles, bicycles and weaving movements in the through lanes. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 1998. Patrick Hunter Mayor ATTEST: Debbie Traffenstedt City Clerk PP04:17:96 18:22pmA: \1MAY96.RES 2 000051S TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Paul Porter, Principal Planne� Nelson Miller, Director of Community Developme DATE: January 30, 1998(CC meeting of February 18, 1998) SUBJECT: CONSIDER DENIAL OF MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 13 TO CPD 89 -2 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOS ANGELES AVENUE AND PARK LANE (301 W. LOS ANGELES AVENUE) ON THE APPLICATION OF SHELL OIL COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PROVIDING A CURB -CUT ON LOS ANGELES AVENUE FOR ACCESS TO THE SHELL SERVICE STATION IN THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE (APN 511- 08 -45) Summar-y: The applicant is requesting a curb -cut for ingress, egress on Los Angeles Avenue for an existing gas station and car wash in the Mission Bell Plaza shopping center. The original approved plan for Mission Plaza did not provide for direct access from the Shell Station to Los Angeles Avenue. Access was provided from Park Lane to the East and through the shopping center to the West. No direct access was allowed at that time because spacing between Park Lane and the proposed curb -cut to the Shell location did not adhere to the 300 feet separation criteria. Background: On February 10, 1994, Shell Oil Company submitted Minor Modification No. 8 for CPD 89 -2 for approval of a thirty -five (35) foot wide driveway to be located on Los Angeles Avenue easterly of the existing Carl's Junior Restaurant. The applicant was informed that a raised median along Los Angeles Avenue from Park Lane to Liberty Bell Road would be appropriate to prevent vehicles from making left -hand turns to, or from the site. The Director of Community Development reviewed the proposed Minor Modification and denied it, because the applicant informed staff that they had received a letter from A &S Engineering dated March 30, 1994 indicating that Caltrans would not approve a median. The applicant filed Appeal No. 94 -2 on May 3, 1994 (within the statutory time limit) indicating that the proposed driveway had C: \M \CPD892 \18FE398.CC 1 000060 City Council Staff Report February 18, 1998 Minor Modification 13 to CPD 89 -2 Shell Oil Company been reviewed and considered acceptable to the City Engineer and Caltrans with minor modifications. The appeal was heard by the City Council on July 6, 1994 and continued to August 17, 1994 and then to August 22, 1994. Since August 22, 1994, this matter has been continued several times at the request of the applicant and subsequently removed from the Council agenda at the request of the City Council. DLscuss.ion On November 18, 1997, the applicant filed Minor Modification No. 13 to CPD 89 -2 requesting two curb -cuts along Los Angeles Avenue for ingress and egress. The applicant's alternative for the proposed curb -cuts on Los Angeles Avenue would remove 637 square feet the existing landscaping directly along Los Angeles Avenue, however approximately 644 square feet of replacement landscaping would be placed elsewhere on the gas station site as noted on the site plan exhibit. The applicant proposes to add approximately 644 square feet which would increase the landscaped coverage on -site from 17.99° to 18 %. The applicant has referred to several traffic studies relating to this project indicating the original report dated August of 1995 and a subsequent study prepared by WPA Traffic Engineering dated September 12, 1997 (copy attached). The September 12 report concentrates on comparing recent traffic volumes at the Park Lane /Los Angeles intersection with the 1995 traffic volumes. The report indicates that the existing traffic to Los Angeles Avenue is very low. However, even with a low volume of existing vehicles there will be conflicts from those right turn and left turns from eastbound traffic along Los Angeles Avenue. The 1995 traffic volume information showed generally the same volumes and it was readily apparent in 1995 that right turn volumes were low. In the City's Traffic Engineer's opinion, the September 12, 1997 report provides no new information on which to reevaluate access issues regarding The Shell Station. C: \M \CPD892 \18FE998.CC 2 0000 6Q 0 City Council Staff Report February 18, 1998 Minor Modification 13 to CPD 89 -2 Shell Oil Company The original approved plan for Mission Plaza had no direct access from the Shell Station to Los Angeles Avenue. The facility was constructed as a part of the Mission Bell Plaza commercial development project. Access was provided from Park Lane to the East and through the shopping center to the West. The two major reasons for no direct access were: 1. Spacing between Park Lane and an access to the Shell location would be less than the generally accepted standard in Moorpark of 300 feet, and 2. Potential traffic conflicts will result from southbound exiting right turning vehicles, bicycles and weaving movements in the through lanes. The following three alternative methods of providing access were discussed in the 1995 study: A. Right turn in, right turn out; B. Right turn in only; and C. Right turn out only. Based on earlier discusgions, each of the three alternative methods have been modified. Alternative A no longer is proposed to have a deceleration lane. All three alternatives have been redesigned to further restrict left turn movements onto Los Angeles Avenue. However, none of the three alternatives address the reasons that access %,ias originally not permitted (spacing of curb cuts conflicting vehicle movements). If the City Council concludes to grant additional access, Alternative C is the least impacting to traffic flow because the driveway can be placed farthest from Park Lane thereby reducing conflicts; drivers would be in a stopped condition to evaluate acceptable gaps in traffic; and the configuration prevents left turns onto Los Angeles Avenue. Alternative B is not recommended because: a) the driveway would be closer to Park Lane, b) drivers entering the Shell Station would be moving with traffic while evaluating three potential conflicting movements (choice of two pump islands or car wash) and perhaps, crossing through traffic lanes, and c) the configuration of the C: \M \CPD392 \18FE398.CC 3 000061 City Council Staff Report February 18, 1998 Minor Modification 13 to CPD 89 -2 Shell Oil Company parkway island landscaping would not physically prevent left turns onto Los Angeles Avenue. Alternative A is the least acceptable and most impacting of the three because: a) the entry driveway would be significantly closer to the Park Lane intersection than Alternative B (less than 100 feet from Park Lane) , b) the confitguration would not physically prevent left turns onto Los Angeles Avenue, c) there is the likelihood of more potential conflicting movements than with any of the other alternatives, and d) there would be more weaving movement on Los Angeles Avenue within the intersection to reach the entry, thereby, creating more points of conflict between vehicles. The Council specifically approved the Shell Service Station without • curb -cut on Los Angeles Avenue on the basis that the placement of • curb -cut would potentially increase traffic hazards on Los Angeles Avenue. The installation of a raised median with landscaping along Los Angeles Avenue from Park Lane to Liberty Bell Road to prevent vehicles from making left -hand turns to or from the site has been suggested as a possible solution, however Caltrans has not approved a median and has recently informed the City that current Caltrans policy will prevent a raised median from even being installed. No new information or viable solution has been identified. Therefore this request should not be approved. If it is the conclusion of City Council to approve this request, the City Engineering recommends that City Council approve a right turn out only (Alternative C) and the access point be located as far from Park Lane as is possible. Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. , denying the applicant's request for additional access from the Shell Service Station and Car Wash to Los Angeles Avenue. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Alternatives A,B and c. 3. WPA Traffic Study 9 -12 -97 C: \M \CPD892 \18FEB98.CC 4 00®061 5— RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA DENYING MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 13 TO CPD 89 -2 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOS ANGELES AVENUE AND PARK LANE (301 W. LOS ANGELES AVENUE) ON THE APPLICATION OF SHELL OIL COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A CURB -CUT ON LOS ANGELES AVENUE FOR INGRESS - EGRESS WHEREAS, on November 18, 1997, the applicant filed Minor Modification No. 13 to CPD 89 -2 requesting two curb -cuts along Los Angeles Avenue for ingress and egress at 301 West Los Angeles Avenue; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on February 18, 1998, the City Council discussed the applicant's requested Minor Modification and made a decision on the matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has determined that the requested Minor Modification is categorically exempt from CEQA requirements as a Class 1 exemption for minor alterations. SECTION 2. The Council denies Minor Modification No.13 to CPD 89 -2 and determines that the curb -cut would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare because: a) The spacing between Park Lane and an access to the Shell Service Station would be less than the City's accepted standard of 300 feet; and b) Potential conflicts will exist resulting from southbound right turning vehicles, bicycles and weaving movements in the through lanes. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1998. ATTEST: Debbie Traffenstedt City Clerk PP04:17�96 16:22pmA:\1MAY96.RES Patrick Hunter Mayor 5 0000( ;$% -"f ..&tit. .Y.MY[ OPTION "A" N i 7 i :i i i N W ®E s - ��1 GRAPHIC Cfac SHELL OIL COMPANY NOUSfON. iQU9 PROPOSM ONIVNIMAV PLAN 301 W. LOS ANGELES k PARK LAW RAMS PREPE -N- pr, r MOORPARN. GUJFORNN A k S ENGINEERING ©9Q1 Q COVN". NL RY.nis .!3(Jf� IMi. i SO MW 00 ----------------------- 0����0 — _-------- - - - --- V [ o f A f a –.7 - — - — - - -_ - -- OPTION 'S" N W E 9 w.�w WGRAPHIC_ <ruE s WVISIONS r M� AwRwlus SHELL OIL COMPANY HOUSTON. T6%A3 -,x- PIx6 PREPMED Br: 4 PROPOSED DINVEW" PLAN 301 W. LOS ANGELES O PARK LANE MOORPARK. CALIFORNIA OONTMOTOO TO OOri [O TROCE KI RI �rGY Y]I1 / •, �f �tt[yff nom& S ENGINEERING [ Oro WNA.cIO YA 11 . 9) A� �1 J. 1OM �U1]IM- �T M •. +.rm� �.f. ACL1 OAWI G H!O! u: nf- wt -ltfo ---- -- -- -� Qalru a CDVAMY. Ju wcnn AExlt.[n IN]. v v p�µs PNEPMEO !n. k S ENGINEERING a — 9� - ---- ---- ------ --- -- -- -� --- -- ------ -- -- -- - - - - -- PROPOSED DRIVSwAV PLAN 301 W. LOS ANGELES k PARK LANE YOORPARK. CALIFORNIA ------------- --- - Te�L�itTEi �rTiYT - - - - -9 - - - - -- FO NION 'C' N W B D, GRAPHIC SC/LE s NENsiuNs p�µs PNEPMEO !n. k S ENGINEERING a SHELL OIL COMPANY T9 NOVSN. TDGS PROPOSED DRIVSwAV PLAN 301 W. LOS ANGELES k PARK LANE YOORPARK. CALIFORNIA FTW"TOO TO OOMT uu —:a ses� w. '0'E� ']0' -Q wa M nAEz ©511[LL CLL CON/M]. Kl ti. KYIMD iH1 e LP ow. WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. September 12, 1997 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING RECEIVED NOV 1 8 1997 Mr. Ahmad Ghaderi c „y of M.0orp"'k A & S Engineering, Inc. 207 W. Alameda Avenue, Suite 203 Burbank, CA 91502 SUBJECT: SHELL STATIONACCESS -LOS ANGELES & PARK LANE, MOORPARK Dear Mr. Ghaderi: This letter report updates our previous analyses on the subject project to reflect 1997 traffic conditions. A report, dated August 7, 1995, was prepared which addressed traffic engineering factors related to providing vehicular access to the Shell Service Station on the northwest corner of Los Angeles Avenue and Park Lane in Moorpark. An additional letter was prepared, on October 16, 1995, to respond to issues raised by Mr. John Whittman in a memorandum of September 11, 1995. These previous analyses examined traffic conditions and alternative methods of providing direct access to Los Angeles Avenue from the existing Shell Station. Since additional development and activities have occurred in the area tributary to Park Lane, it was felt that current traffic data should be obtained. Traffic counts were conducted on Friday, August 22, 1997 from 4:00 PM to 9:00 PM to quantify existing conditions. 23421 South Pointe Drive • Suite 190 • Lacuna Hills. CA 92653 • (714) 460.0110 • FAX: (714) 460 -0113 -2- The count data are contained in Appendix A and summarized in Table 1. For comparison purposes, the 1995 count data are also contained in Table 1. Review of the data in Table 1 indicates that traffic volumes have remained relatively constant bn Los Angeles Avenue and increases have occurred in the southbound left turn movement. Also indicated in Table 1 are the volumes for the hour when the southbound movement is the greatest. For the southbound direction, they are comparable to the overall peak hour; however, volumes are reduced on all other approaches. An Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis was completed for the intersection for both peak hour conditions. (The ICU methodology and relationship of ICU to Level of Service are contained in Appendix B.) These ICU analyses are provided in Appendix C and summarized in Table 2. The ICU and Level of Service (LOS) data from 1995 are also included in Table 2. Review of Table 2 indicates that the intersection is operating at LOS B (ICU = 0.65) during the overall PM peak hour and at LOS A (ICU = 0.57) during the southbound approach peak hour. All of these are good and indicate no operational concerns at this intersection. Review of these data indicates a heavy southbound left turn volume, as compared to other southbound and northbound volumes. This would suggest providing dual southbound left turn lanes and splitting the north -south signal phases. The ICU analyses were recalculated for this condition for both periods. As indicated in Table 2, this would achieve reduced ICU values and some improvement in Level of Service. It is also noted that operations are very good without this modification and the major benefit is reduced delay for southbound left turns. A concern expressed previously was the potential conflict between vehicles entering the station at a new access and right turning vehicles from southbound Park Lane. As indicated in Table 1, the southbound right turn volume is relatively minor, with a volume of 3 8 vehicles during the southbound peak hour. Since conflicts would only occur with a right turn on red movement, this is not felt to be a significant concern and could be mitigated by posting a "NO RIGHT TURN ON RED" prohibition. WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. Traffic Analyses Update - Shell Station Access Job #950740.upd Los Angeles do Park Lane - Moorpark TABLE I INTERSECTION TRAFFIC SUMMARY Los Angeles & Park Lane k 5♦ 'Z ] -. '_T�.(1H� ©yf �. �' ♦may^ � F k l s « ,�� /�R �Ml /y /y/ •flpy.i. fK LF:i'} } } 7/ *t��6'/yldktMkryry/` ywIylK. y� Northbound Lett 25 35 20 Northbound Through 2 15 6 Northbound Right 29 33 14 Southbound Left 135 202 206 Southbound Through 2 S 5 Southbound Ri ht 19 30 38 Eastbound Lett 27 51 26 Eastbound Through 1,162 1,045 912 Eastbound Right S 18 7 Westbound Lett 43 56 25 Westbound Through 1,049 1008 ' 974 Westbound 1U lri 178 170 196 (1) 4:30 PM - 5:30 PM. (2) 5:15 PM - 6:1S PM. *TA Traffic Engineering, Ina Ti*BkAnelysu Updats- Sbdl Station Acc= !ob #950700. wpd L" Anplm & Pork 14wa - bloorpork -3- 000 ()C15 -4- TABLE 2 ICU SUNDIARY Los Angeles & Park Lane (1) With dual southbound left turn lanes and split north -south phasing. WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. Traffic Analysts Update - Shell Station Access Job #950740.upd Los Angeles & Park Lane - Moorpark _5_ Other factors related to bicycle lanes and design of any ingress or egress are unchanged from previous analyses. We trust that this updated information will be of assistance to you and the City of Moorpark. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, "A TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, ING 4/ � Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP:cc 9950740.upd WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc. Traffic Analyses Update - Shell Station Access Job R9S0740.upd Los Angeles & Park Lane - Moorpark 0000G6 APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS ����� t INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: WESTON PRINGLE ASSOCIATES PROJECT: MOORPARK DATE: AUGUST 22, 1997 PERIOD: 4:00 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M. INTERSECTION: N/S PARK LANE EJW LOS ANGELES AVENUE FILE NUMBER: 1 PM 15 MIN COUNTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT 400 -415 12 1 27 40 278 10 7 2 17 4 263 11 415 -430 7 1 47 35 215 12 6 4 6 7 234 13 430.445 7 1 51 45 257 12 5 5 8 7 336 12 445 -500 5 0 56 39 227 23 7 4 12 3 265 16 500 -515 6 0 38 39 264 11 15 4 11 5 219 9 515 -530 12 4 57 51 260 10 6 2 8 3 225 14 530 -545 8 0 40 42 228 7 1 0 8 2 251 4 545 -600 7 1 56 49 259 5 4 2 3 2 243 6 600-615 11 0 53 54 227 3 3 2 3 0 193 2 615.830 8 2 32 35 220 6 9 2 5 0 176 6 6304345 7 1 40 26 187 4 1 0 7 3 187 11 645 -700 10 3 44 35 190 6 3 1 3 0 170 7 700 -715 4 0 46 32 179 2 1 1 7 0 141 9 715 -730 5 1 47 39 193 5 4 1 3 3 140 11 730 -745 7 2 45 33 165 4 4 2 4 2 122 7 '45 -800 2 0 41 30 127 0 0 0 0 0 122 3 800-815 4 0 49 26 154 7 4 1 0 1 125 3 815 -830 4 1 29 18 106 2 1 0 0 0 81 3 830 -845 3 0 30 18 94 2 1 0 3 0 78 3 645 -900 7 0 23 10 128 3 0 0 4 0 78 4 HOUR TOTALS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WELT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT ESTH EBLT TOTAL 400 -500 31 3 181 159 977 57 25 15 41 21 1098 52 2660 415 -515 25 2 192 158 963 58 33 17 35 22 1054 50 2609 430 -530 30 5 202 174 1008 58 33 15 35 18 1045 51 2672 445 -545 31 4 191 171 979 51 29 10 37 13 960 43 2519 500 -800 33 5 191 181 1011 33 26 8 28 12 938 33 2499 515 -015 38 5 206 196 974 25 14 6 20 7 912 26 2429 530 -630 34 3 181 180 934 21 17 6 19 4 883 18 2280 545 -645 33 4 184 164 893 18 17 8 18 5 799 25 2166 600 -700 38 6 172 150 824 19 16 5 18 3 726 28 2001 615 -715 29 6 165 128 776 18 14 4 22 3 674 33 1872 630 -730 26 5 180 132 749 17 9 3 20 6 638 38 1823 645 -745 26 6 182 139 727 17 12 5 17 5 573 34 1743 700 -800 18 3 179 134 664 11 9 4 14 5 525 30 1596 715 -815 18 3 182 128 639 16 12 4 7 6 509 24 1548 730 -830 17 3 164 107 552 13 9 3 4 3 450 16 1341 745 -845 13 1 149 92 481 11 6 1 3 1 406 12 1176 100 -900 18 1 131 72 482 14 6 1 7 1 382 13 1108 WILTEC (818) 564 -1944 DRIVEWAY COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: WESTON PRINGLE ASSOCIATES PROJECT: MOORPARK DATE: AUGUST 22, 1997 PERIOD: 4:00 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M. LOCATION: SHELL STATION AT PARK LANE FILE NUMBER: 1 2PM 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 MIN COUNTS TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NSTH NBLT EBRT EBTH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT 400.415 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 415 -430 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 0 0 430 -445 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 5 0 2 445 -500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 500 -515 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 5 0 1 515 -530 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 9 0 1 530 -545 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 0 1 545 -800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 0 2 6004315 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 0 0 615 -630 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 2 630 -845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 1 645 -700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 9 0 1 700 -715 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7 0 1 715 -730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 0 0 730 -745 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 10 0 1 745 -800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 0 1 800 -815 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 0 815 -830 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 830 -845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 1 845 -900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 HOUR TOTALS WILTEC (818) 5841944 nnflf)C7 R. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NSTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400 -500 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 22 0 2 57 415 -515 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 23 0 3 65 430 -530 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 27 0 4 75 445 -545 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 27 0 3 70 500-000 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 26 0 5 71 515-615 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 27 0 4 66 530 -630 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 26 0 5 61 545 -645 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 25 0 5 56 600 -700 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 27 0 4 58 615 -715 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 28 0 5 62 630 -730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 27 0 3 58 645 -745 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 33 0 3 70 700 -800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 27 0 3 83 715 -815 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 27 0 2 58 730 -830 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 23 0 2 48 745 -845 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 22 0 2 43 800 -900 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 24 0 1 41 WILTEC (818) 5841944 nnflf)C7 R. APPENDIX B EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION AND LEVEL OF SERVICE 000068 EXPLANATION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections and less at intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continuously between intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To study intersection capacity, a technique known as Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) has been developed. ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the proportion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement; (b) summing the times for the movements; and (c) comparing the total time required to the time available. For example, if for north -south traffic the northbound traffic is 1,000 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 800 vehicles per hour, and the capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then the northbound traffic is critical and requires 1,000/2,000 or 50 percent of the signal time. If for the east -west traffic, 40 percent of the signal time is required, then it can be seen that the ICU is 50 plus 40, or 90 percent. When left -tum phases exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. As ICUs approach 100 percent, the quality of traffic service approaches Level of Service (LOS) E, as defined in the Higbw_4y Capacity Manual. Special Report 87, Highway Research Board, 1965. Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service A to C operate quite well. Level of Service D is typically the Level of Service for which an urban street is designed. Level of Service E is the maximum volume a facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration Level of Service F occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop- and -go traffic with stoppages of long duration A description of the various Levels of Service appears on the following page. The ICU calculations assume that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally timed. It is possible to have an ICU well below 1.0, yet have severe traffic congestion. This would occur because one or more movements is not getting enough time to satisfy its demand, with excess time existing on other moves. Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized intersection is not necessarily valid, it can be performed with the presumption that a signal can be installed and the calculations show whether the geometrics are capable of accommodating the expected volumes. Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lanes have approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot lanes. Our data indicates that a typical lane, whether a through lane or a left -turn lane, has a capacity as high as approximately 2200 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual found capacities of 1800 vehicles per lane per hour of green time. These studies show that values in the 1600 to 1700 range should result in a conservative analysis. 0000 es 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF NOMINAL RANGE SERVICE OF ICU (a) A Low volumes; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; 0.00-0.60 all signal cycles clear with no vehicles; all signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. B Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; 0.61-0.70 between one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other 0.11-0.80 traffic; between 11 and 30 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; recommended ideal design standard. D Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles 0.81-0.90 have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban areas. E Capacity; the maximum traffic volumes an intersection can 0.91-1.00 accommodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. F Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages of long duration; Not Meaningful traffic volume and traffic speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will be less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service E. (a) ICU ( Intersectidn Capacity Utilization) at various Levels of Service versus Level of Service E for urban arterial streets. 000009 APPENDIX C ICU ANALYSES 0©00695 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS PROJECT: SHELL ACCESS, MOORPARK INTERVAL: PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION: LOS ANGELES & PARK LANE - EXISTING EX +OTHE1 EX.+OTHE MOVEMEN EXIST PROP EXISTING PROPOSE EXISTING OTHER PROJECT EXISTING + OTHER +PROJECT +PROJECT LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME V/C V/C V/C V /C-W IMP NL 0 0 0 0 35 NT 1 1 1600 1600 15 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 ' NR 0 0 0 0 33 SL 0 2 0 3200 202 0.06 • ST 1 0 1600 0 5 0.13 0.13 0.13 • SR 1 0 1600 0 30 0.02 0.02 0.02 EL 1 1 1600 1600 51 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 ET 2 2 3200 3200 1045 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 ' ER 1 1 1600 1600 18 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 WL 1 1 1600 1600 56 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 • WT 3 3 4800 4800 1008 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 WR 0 0 0 0 174 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.11 M ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME LA&P1 - - - - - - - - - - - EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND - - - - - - - - - - - E = EASTBOUND, W = WESTBOUND CLEARANCE= 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 L = LEFT, = THROUGH, R =RIGHT --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - - - - -- N.S. = NOT SIGNALIZED ICU VALUE = 0.65 0.65 0.65' 0.58 LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE - -- - -- - -- -- • DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS LOS = B B B A INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS PROJECT: SHELL ACCESS, MOORPARK INTERVAL: PM PEAK HOUR (PEAK SB MOVEMENT/ 5:15 -6 :15) INTERSECTION: LOS ANGELES & PARK LANE - EXISTING EX. +OTHE ' EX +OTHE MOVEMEN EXIST PROP EXISTING PROPOSE EXISTING OTHER PROJECT EXISTING + OTHER +PROJECT +PROJECT LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME V/C V/C V/C V /C-W IMP NL 0 0 0 0 20 NT 1 1 1600 1600 6 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 ' NR 0 0 0 0 14 SL 0 2 0 3200 206 0.06 • ST 1 0 1600 0 5 0.13 0.13 ' 0.13 ' SR 1 0 1600 0 38 0.02 0.02 0.02 EL 1 1 1600 1600 26 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 ET 2 2 3200 3200 912 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 • ER 1 1 1600 1600 7 0 -00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WL 1 1 1600 1600 25 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 ' WT 3 3 4800 4800 974 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 WR 0 0 0 0 196 , --- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- - -- NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.09 ICU SPREADSHEET FILE NAME LA&P2A - - - - - - - - - - - EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 N = NORTHBOUND, S = SOUTHBOUND - -- - -- - -- -- E = EASTBOUND, W = WESTBOUND CLEARANCE= 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 L = LEFT, T = THROUGH, R = RIGHT- -- N.S. = NOT SIGNALIZED ICU VALUE = 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.50 LOS =LEVEL OF SERVICE - -- - -- - -- -- ' DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS LOS= A A A A d tit \\ h LOJ' Ait/Cl�rC A1 sir N \ N zer��/ AP .owl,1,Pv 000071