Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2015 0415 CCSA REG ITEM 09A ITEM 9.A. CITY OF MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA City Council Meeting MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL of ACTION: Qna Lj-v./zi aZLaAGENDA REPORT BY: yh TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Dave Klotzle, City Engineer/Public Works Director DATE: April 3, 2015 (CC Meeting of 04/15/15) G I SUBJECT: Consider Feasibility Study of a Second Vehicular Access to Arroyo Vista Community Park (Project 8089) BACKGROUND On March 19, 2014, the City Council authorized the City Manager to sign a consultant agreement with J.L. Patterson & Associates, Inc. (J.L. Patterson) to complete a feasibility study of a second vehicular access to Arroyo Vista Community Park (AVCP). A second access would not only improve circulation and ease traffic congestion into and out of the park, but it would also improve the ability of emergency and public safety vehicles to access the park during "high use" events. Previously, the City Council directed staff to include the following alternative second access locations in the feasibility study: 1) An extension of Leta Yancy Road through the southeast corner of the proposed Pacific Communities development. 2) An extension of the central north-south road in the proposed Pacific Communities development in approximate alignment with Shasta Avenue. 3) An extension of Mesa Verde Drive east of the park, across SCE property and down the slope to the park. The first two locations would require the construction of a new bridge across the Arroyo Simi. The current pedestrian/equestrian/emergency access bridge was not designed to accommodate vehicular traffic from regular park use. In addition, the access easement granted by Southern California Edison south of the existing bridge, across their property, does not allow for such traffic. It was not recommended to study second access locations from the vicinity of Moorpark Avenue or Beltramo Road due to the extensive right-of-way, grading and street improvement requirements that would be involved with these locations. 32 Honorable City Council April 15, 2015 Page 2 DISCUSSION J.L. Patterson has completed the attached feasibility study. The study evaluated each second access alternative including traffic impacts, right-of-way and permitting requirements, required environmental documentation and estimated costs. Traffic Impacts Representative traffic volumes for existing conditions were obtained on the roadway segments directly connected to the studied second access locations including Leta Yancy Road, Mesa Verde Drive and both east/west and north/south directions of Peach Hill Road. Traffic volumes were also obtained at the intersections of Los Angeles Avenue and Shasta Avenue; Los Angeles Avenue and Leta Yancy Road; Peach Hill Road and Mesa Verde Drive; and Peach Hill Road and Spring Road. Additionally, during a large soccer tournament at AVCP, traffic volumes were obtained on the AVCP access driveway and at the intersection of the access driveway and Tierra Rejada Road to provide an understanding of the traffic volumes generated by large events at the park. The traffic volume data was analyzed to compare the existing conditions to the condition of half of the traffic from a large event using the second access. This analysis was completed separately for each of the alternative second access locations. The analysis resulted in minor increases to the amount of traffic and no change to the level of service at the study locations as summarized in the table on the following page. While each studied alternative would result in increased traffic on the adjoining streets, the level of service on each road and at each intersection would remain at an acceptable level, which is level of service C or better. Impacts to traffic on streets adjoining any of the second access locations would be expected to increase further during large events, such as the City's July 3`d event, where most all attending vehicles enter and exit during a short time span. This is expected to occur only once or twice per year. The extent of these occasional traffic impacts is also limited by the fixed number of total parking spaces available. There are 798 parking spaces within AVCP including the parking lots, interior access road, and the future spaces that are planned to be added with the AVCP trail and parking lot improvement project. There are an additional 43 parking spaces along the access road leading into AVCP and the three Moorpark High School (MHS) parking lots along the access road have a total of 254 parking spaces. The total number of possible parking spaces accessed from the entrance to AVCP from Tierra Rejada Road is 1,085. The intersection of the AVCP access road and Tierra Rejada Road is controlled by law enforcement during significantly large events to improve the flow of traffic in and out of the events. While a major traffic collision at this intersection during a large event would further impact the flow of traffic, the officer-controlled traffic movements and the relatively low vehicle speeds during periods of traffic congestion, lower the possibilities S:\Public Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\2015V1pril\4-15-2015(AVCP 2nd Access 8089 Feasibility Study).doc 33 Honorable City Council April 15, 2015 Page 3 of a major collision. There has been a relatively low occurrence of six documented collisions of varying degree at this intersection over the past two and a half years. None of those collisions were reported to have closed the access to AVCP. In the unlikely event that access is closed at the intersection, an alternative emergency access route exists from the MHS administrative parking lot to the school driveway exiting onto Tierra Rejada Road, in addition to the existing pedestrian bridge. Traffic Impact Analysis Peak Hour Volume w/ Roadway Segment Existing Peak Hour Volume Second AVCP Access Increase (vehicles) during Large Event in Traffic (vehicles) Leta Yancy Road 86 107 24.4% Mesa Verde Drive 83 103 24.1% Peach Hill Road e/w 540 669 23.9% Peach Hill Road n/s 322 399 23.9% Existing Peak Hour Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Level of Service w/ Second AVCP Access L.A. Ave. & Shasta C C L.A. Ave. & Leta Yancy A A Peach Hill & Mesa Verde A A _ Peach Hill & Spring A A Right-of-Way and Permitting Ownership of the properties that would be affected by each of the second access • alternatives was determined, as well as permitting requirements from several agencies. Acquisition of right-of-way, slope easements and permits would be required for each alternative as summarized in the following table. S:\Public Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\2015\Apri1\4-15-2015(AVCP 2nd Access 8089 Feasibility Study).doc 34 Honorable City Council April 15, 2015 Page 4 Second Access Alternative Right-of-Way/Easement Permits SCE VCWPD • VCWPD RWQCB Leta Yancy Road Pacific Communities CAF&W USF&W USAGE SCE VCWPD VCWPD RWQCB Pacific Communities/Shasta Ave. Pacific Communities CAF&W USF&W USACE Mesa Verde Dr. SCE None SCE — Southern California Edison VCWPD —Ventura County Watershed Protection District RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board CAF&W — California Fish and Wildlife USF&W— U.S. Fish and Wildlife USACE — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coordination with Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1 and SCE will also be required with each alternative location to determine the impacts to any existing water, sewer and electrical utility facilities. Environmental Documentation All of the second access alternative locations would require the preparation of environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is anticipated that an Initial Study leading to a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be the appropriate CEQA documentation for each alternative. Each alternative may have varying degrees of environmental impacts resulting in the need for varying levels of required documentation and technical studies. S:\Public Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\2015\April\4-15-2015(AVCP 2nd Access 8089 Feasibility Study).doc 35 Honorable City Council April 15, 2015 Page 5 Cost Estimate The estimated costs associated with each of the second access alternative locations are listed in the following table. While these costs provide a general comparison between the alternatives, it should be noted that they are very preliminary study level costs and the actual costs may be different. Description Leta `fancy Rd. Pacific Communties Mesa Verde Dr. Shasta Ave. Design $400,000 $550,000 $150,000 Right-of-Way $540,000 $1,875,000 $515,000 Environmental/Permitting $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Construction $4,950,000 $6,800,000 $1,760,000 Inspection/Testing $500,000 $700,000 $180,000 Total $6,640,000 $10,175,000 $2,855,000 Note: For comparison purposes, the costs listed for the Pacific Communities/Shasta Avenue alternative includes the right-of-way and road construction costs within the proposed residential development project. If the development project dedicates the necessary right-of-way and constructs the road within the project, the cost for this alternative would be approximately $8,175,000. Conclusion The feasibility study has determined that all three alternative locations for a second access to AVCP are feasible with varying levels of constraints and costs. The connection to Mesa Verde Drive requires less right-of-way and easements than the other two alternatives, and is the least expensive alternative, largely because a bridge and associated permitting is not required. However, the Mesa Verde Drive alternative would increase the amount of traffic on residential streets with more homes than the other two alternatives. The connection through Pacific Communities aligning with Shasta Avenue is the most expensive alternative, requiring more right-of-way and easement area, and a greater length of roadway than the other alternatives. This alternative would also be dependent on modifications to the layout of the Pacific Communities development to accommodate the proposed alignment, and the development project moving forward to construction, the timing of which is not certain at this point. Even if the development project was required to dedicate the right-of-way and construct the road within the development, this alternative would still be the most expensive alignment. S:\Public Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\2015\April\4-15-2015(AVCP 2nd Access 8089 Feasibility Study).doc 3 6 Honorable City Council April 15, 2015 Page 6 The connection to Leta Yancy Road is the least expensive of the alternatives requiring a bridge over the Arroyo Simi. The additional traffic from this alternative would affect fewer streets and residences than the other two alternatives. Additionally, this alternative would utilize the existing signalized intersection at Leta Yancy Road and Los Angeles Avenue. The impacts of additional traffic from any of the second access alternatives may be cause to consider limitations on when the second access is available for use. For instance, gates could be installed to restrict the use of the second access to only heavily attended events at AVCP such as the City's 3rd of July event, large sporting events or on a case by case basis. The gates could be configured to restrict vehicle access only, allowing pedestrians and bicycles to use the second access at all times. The second access would be available for use at any time for emergency response. The existing pedestrian bridge at Villa Campesina Park continues to be available for emergency access to and from AVCP, however, the bridge has rarely been used for those purposes. FISCAL IMPACT The feasibility study level of estimated costs for a second access to AVCP range from approximately $10 million to $3 million. The cost of right-of-way, easements and a bridge over the Arroyo Simi are the largest cost factors of the second access. A funding source has not been identified for proceeding with a second access to AVCP. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the cost of a second access, and the relatively infrequent occurrence of large events, it is not recommended to pursue a second access to AVCP. Attachment: Feasibility Study of a Second Vehicular Access to AVCP, February 3, 2015 S:\Public Works\Everyone\Reports\Staff Reports\20151April\4-15-2015(AVCP 2nd Access 8689 Feasibility Study).doc 37 sat C4 elskiwiri ( elt { Feasibility Study for a Second Vehicular Access to Arroyo Vista Community Park City of Moorpark, CA February 3, 2015 Prepared for City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark,CA 93021 Telephone:(805)517-6200 Prepared by: iPATTERSON a RSSOCIRTES,INC. • • 725 Town and Country Road,Suite 300 Orange,CA 92868 714.835.6355 38 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 ALTERNATIVE ROUTES...„ 2 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS: 4 AGENCY COORDINATION _ 6 RIGHT-OF-WAY NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATE: 7 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 8 APPENDICES 9 • VICINITY MAP APPENDIXA • AVCP PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX B • RIGHT OF WAY NEEDS-BRIDGES APPENDIX C • COST ESTIMATE APPENDIX D • TRAFFIC DATA APPENDIX E MON TTEAS B A60cwTEs,INC Page I ii 39 Introduction This report will study three alternatives for a second access route into the Arroyo Vista Community Park(AVCP).Currently,the only access into the AVCP is provided from a driveway connected to the Countrywood Drive and Tierra Rejada Road intersection. Secondary access for pedestrians,equestrians, and emergencies is currently provided via a bridge crossing the Arroyo Simi, located near the south end of Leta Yancy Road. However, the bridge currently cannot accommodate regular vehicular access due to its narrow width. An alternative access would improve circulation and ameliorate traffic congestion, as well as improve access for emergency vehicles during park events. This report identifies three alternatives for the establishment of a second vehicular access to AVCP. The following three access alternatives are evaluated in this study: • Alternative 1:Extension of Leta Yancy Road (including a new bridge) • Alternative 2: New street access from the south extension of Shasta Avenue through the proposed Pacific Communities development(including a new bridge) • Alternative 3: Extension of Mesa Verde Drive through the park MnENSON • Page� 1 •SSOCAM INC 40 Alternative Routes Three alternatives were selected for full secondary access to the AVCP as shown on the following page. Alternative 1:Extension of Leta Yancy Road This alternative would construct a bridge across the Arroyo Simi, downstream and west of the existing pedestrian/equestrian/emergency bridge, and include a roadway extension of Leta Yancy Road into the AVCP. It would be effective from a traffic circulation perspective, as it would provide the most direct connection to the roadway system when compared to the other alternatives. However, park traffic would need to use Leta Yancy Road, which is an existing residential street, and furthermore, it would directly impact the residential streets connecting to Leta Yancy Road. In addition, construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi would require procurement of permits. Finally, other right-of-way and easement issues and potential impacts to water and/or sewer lines would also need to be addressed. Alternative 2:Shasta Avenue Extension through Pacific Communities Development This alternative would construct a bridge across the Arroyo Simi at the south extension of Shasta Avenue, and include a roadway extension of Shasta Avenue to the intersection with Los Angeles Avenue, then continue through the Pacific Communities subdivision (proposed development) and into the AVCP. This alternative is similar to Alternative 1, except that it would pass traffic through the proposed Pacific Communities subdivision rather than an existing neighborhood. This would require coordination with Pacific Communities to accommodate park access through their property. Alternative 3:Extension of Mesa Verde Drive This alternative would construct a roadway from the east end of the AVCP property to the western terminus of Mesa Verde Drive. This alternative does not require construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi, so impacts associated with the Arroyo Simi can be avoided. However, park traffic would be introduced to the existing neighborhood east of the park. In addition, this alternative would be less desirable from a traffic circulation perspective,as park users from the north side of the city would need to travel a more circuitous route from Spring Road to access the park as compared to the more direct access from Los Angeles Avenue. JrmTMSON e usocwru,INC. Page 2 41 • r`-j '...• I_' ' 1101 ' I_ II ,1_ _ .1 s E trv� �---ti• t' t r1114 4=1E 3 \ JLt ) ilial- 4 a . 4_ \ 1 1.. ! fr-I:::-.5 --- wia. . "c-, 1 JI..2..' rt ].x,17.. = I , o:--iiI lo�,� m. g �, .Ts1 t Y,., , I+ 1 • it ._._F:„ _ I I _ ___-- _.• ,... J r �, .W��. ° 1 Z .,v, I �r+ ' 6 t , ,_ iL m M Q i1 ' IMM 9� .0 Ir� �� >_ ` O N a, ,.0 O f�JJ ut syv� l- V Q 2,0p0 N O2 8 ,- a .!-1-� O /,'.1• -� A ' i i t .�� OW O I Z h ,c., .n ill �jl�lllp /'' �r ..../..; / � t Tamils ' ...--1_111-,, � ..,,,u, . . livrelma i// / E7.-.. -- ,1111,., , Oa IaNVA YUl l� t1 N , -- 0 /.' Rig .64'..t. � , �. ; 1f �� Q IJ1,' � btrL I l_ �_ - _•.. -T- —• nil 11 . ' ` `• / P� I P. s IT Ail/ ' yr, 1'11V } a !Milli - + . • ill' lo , a t • tillfiY ”' M\`i , � VIII ;� • rn •d O Iairell � I6",^ S6Z0£00905 C z L , c �,_ I mit', ,,a101100' 11 InNdV a �` •2 o LI Ill T\ . -.. i '! ;':: � .yE , 1,r : '. _[.!_...i h .,-,,,_ , fr, . ,.. ,,, 4iiity luipl d \v , iliiii-• tfu� \g _a • III1�iul- 1 0 dio •_. J - so All II�( \\.\ \\ 2 i a § gi111 c, a wct ` a v. C_1_1711. rr CC) G�h73]7 c?X 1! Q 4 P " I U S•w,V.., ,-'q:,,Wwn, ,.,'I^ .n F .M1."ynh� .Yn.+�.. p iiI Mi 1r nviu PATTERSON 6 ASSOCIATES,INC. Page 13 42 Traffic Analysis: Traffic data was collected and analyses were completed for the 5 intersections and 4 road segments listed below for the purpose of determining if the second AVCP access improvements would have any adverse effect on traffic circulation near and around the park. These locations were studied for Volume/Capacity (V/C or delay in seconds) and Level of Service (LOS), for AM, NOON and PM peak hours, and the results are shown below. These analyses were done for the existing traffic conditions, the Future 2030 conditions without a second access, and for the Future 2030 conditions with a second access. It should be noted the City of Moorpark's threshold for LOS is C. Existing Year 2030 Year 2030 Plus Roadway Segments: LOS LOS Project Traffic 1. Leta Yancy Road (N/O Unidos) C C C 2. Mesa Verde Drive C C C 3. Peach Hill Road between Mesa Verde C C C Drive and Spring Road 4. Peach Hill Road between Mesa Verde C C C Drive and Christian Barrett Drive Intersections 1. Intersection of Los Angeles Avenue and C C C Shasta Avenue 2. Intersection of Los Angeles Avenue and Leta Yancy Road A A A 3 Intersection of Peach Hill Road and Mesa Verde Drive A A A 4. Intersection of Peach Hill Road and Spring Road A A A 5. Intersection of Tierra Rejada Roadand, existing driveway to AVCP A A> _ A Based on the existing traffic volumes and the projected volumes for the year 2030, both with and without the proposed second access, it can be stated that none of the second access alternatives for this project will have any significant impacts on traffic circulation. The studied roadway segments and intersections will be operational at an acceptable LOS and no mitigation measures are needed at this time. PATTERSON ASSOCIATES,INC. Page 14 43 " � o Q r Fe' 441 a I a i9 .Rd ¢ g a 5P o a 1n 2 C 4, = a Q m to > "a. 'd:; d w `-'oa Christian Ba N 0 V Y v 1, U a Spring Rd O 6. Co ' E to 1so,0 p C.. > rn - (if) Cl. • R• Jj 4 CC '� o = ,_ it, w = • a° .ar y Fremont S: v ' Bla:rwoo h= a av O. a UlN Fi T 0 N /�R C 0 V Is aarl4sy N °o r c d c �� MI 3 — 2 v c NCI O ° 3 a Li 13 m : cc 3 o o � Brookhursl Gt w x a) Zam O a 43 r 5s F p� n actli N E) eadn� W N 2. �J J Pb a 121 y 'V '.0 e.• thil va !mureM a ° 0. O ac aPv x s.. a1 \ae r o e<< •i.e. e: w meet? a v o rE `^ o a• 3 c o a= 3 a a. U rio ;a N -- . 7gio C a 'v e E to Maureen In a 3 a. a N.G t Q _c J O [ T •Y U JCO U Ptl 9311E8 owe,IlaB o e cedar Springs St 0eu Elderberry Ave a`m t r 5. ii O y ai J h c cc a o r Reae\\o Tierra Rejada Rd Y o© PATTERSON ASSOENOES,INC Page I 5 44 Agency Coordination Alternative 1-Extension of Leta Yancy Road: This alternative would require coordination with the following agencies: • Southern California Edison (SCE): A roadway easement and an aerial easement for the proposed access road and bridge, respectively, would be required from SCE. In addition, this alternative would potentially result in a conflict with two SCE power poles, resulting in coordination/relocation efforts necessary to resolve the power pole conflicts. • Ventura County Watershed Protection District(VCWPD):Construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi would require an encroachmentpermit and an aerial easement from VCWPD since the creek is located within the VCWPD's jurisdiction. • Environmental Regulatory Agencies: Coordination with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and California Department of Fish and Game would be necessary to obtain environmental project approval. See a later discussion on the forecasted necessary environmental documentation for details,as contributed by BonTerra Psomas. • Other Utility Companies:Some local utilities such as water and sewer lines operated by Ventura County Waterworks, Southern California Gas lines, AT&T telephone lines, and Time Warner cables may be in conflict with the proposed alternative and coordination with these companies would be required in the next phase. Alternative 2-Shasta Avenue Extension through Pacific Communities Development: This alternative would require similar coordination efforts with the various agencies as Alternative 1. Alternative 3-Extension of Mesa Verde Drive: Coordination with SCE to obtain a roadway easement and a slope easement would be necessary for the proposed access road. However,no VCWPD coordination will be required as this alternative will not include a bridge over the Arroyo Simi, and this exclusion may also have the effect of a much simpler environmental approval process. tRTTERSON P Rssonares,me Page 6 45 Right-of-Way Needs and Cost Estimate: Property acquisitions and various easements—roadway,slope,aerial,etc—would be needed for the different alternatives. Exhibits showing the right of way needs are shown in Appendix C. A summary of the required right of way and cost estimates is shown below for each alternative. Detailed cost estimates are attached in Appendix D. Summary of Required Right of Way Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Shasta Avenue Extension Alternative 3 Description Extension of Leta Yancy through Pacific Extension of Mesa Road Communities Verde Drive Development Property Acquisition(SF) 580 34,700 0 Roadway Easement(SF) 11400 17,040 16,990 Aerial Easement(SF) 14,275 20,830 0 Slope Easement(SF) 0 0 27,625 Summary of Cost Estimates Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Shasta Avenue Extension Alternative 3 Description Extension of Leta through Padfic Extension of Mesa Yancy Road Communities Verde Drive Development Final Design $395,000 $544,000 $141,000 Environmental/ $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Permitting Right of Way Acquisition $539,200 $1,666,300 $510,900 Construction $4,931,150 $6,791,600 $1,755,150 Construction Management/Inspection $494,000 $680,000 $176,000 Total Project Cost $6,609,350 $10,131,900 $2,833,050 PATTEPSON nsscto INC., Page I 7 46 Environmental Documentation The following environmental overview prepared by BonTerra Psomas describes the environmental documentation that would be required for each alternative. its..�ass«wrEs•INC. Page 8 47 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW The City of Moorpark is evaluating three alternative access routes to provide a second vehicular access to the Arroyo Vista Community Park. Located on Tierra Rejada Road in the City of Moorpark,the approximately 69-acre park includes a Recreation Center, multi-use grass play and ball fields,picnic and barbeque areas, lighted tennis, volleyball and basketball courts, baseball/softball fields, and surface parking areas. The park is open from 6:00 AM until sunset with lighted facilities operational until 10:00 PM.There are two points of access into the park. There is driveway access on Countrywood Drive at Tiara Rejada Road. Countrywood Drive runs generally southwest to northeast through and terminates within the park to the east. Bicycle and pedestrians paths traverse the park. The second point of access is an existing bridge over the Arroyo Simi is limited to pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians; it also provides emergency vehicle ingress/egress to the park. The bridge can be accessed from Villa Campesina Park located on Villa Campesina Avenue at Leta Yancy Road. Located north of the Arroyo Simi and Arroyo Vista Community Park, Villa Campesina Park is a '/:-acre park with multipurpose fields and a surface parking area. Three vehicular access alternatives are under consideration by the City. The purpose of the additional access route would be to accommodate two-way traffic and would improve circulation, and traffic congestion, as well as improve access for emergency vehicles during park events. Alternative 1.Alternative 1 assumes the construction of a new bridge across the Arroyo Simi approximately 140 feet west of the existing pedestrian/equestrian/emergency access bridge. The existing bridge would be retained. Leta Yancy Road would be extended from its existing terminus at Villa Campesina Park, across the Arroyo Simi,through the Southern California Edison(SCE)easement and into Arroyo Vista Community Park. The new bridge would provide for two-way vehicular traffic. Alternative 2.Alternative 2 also assumes the construction of new bridge across the Arroyo Simi approximately 990 feet west of the existing pedestrian/equestrian/emergency access bridge. The existing bridge would be retained. Shasta Avenue would be extended south from New Los Angeles Avenue through the proposed Pacific Communities subdivision,across the Arroyo Simi and SCE easement, and into Arroyo Vista Community Park. Alternative 3.Alternative 3 does not include the construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi. Instead, East Mesa Verde Drive would be extended east from its existing terminus east of North Isle Royale Street, across the SCE easement,and connecting to Countrywood Drive within Arroyo Vista Community Park. Alternatives 1,2, and 3 would require the preparation required environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)(California Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.) and its Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000 et seq.). Each access alternative may have different or varying degrees of environmental impacts which would dictate the type of CEQA documentation and/or technical studies that 2 Executive Circle,Suite 175 Irvine,CA 92614 T:(714)444-9199 F:(714)444-9599 48 Page 2 would be required. It is anticipated that all of the potential impacts associated with each access alternative can be fully mitigated,and that an Initial Study leading to a Mitigated Negative Declaration(IS/MND)would be the appropriate CEQA documentation. However,this final determination cannot be made until further definition of the selected alternative is prepared and technical analyses are initiated. If it is determined that the selected alternative may result in significant unavoidable impacts, an environmental impact report(EIR) would be required. The following describes the anticipated work effort to assess the potential environmental effects relative to each CEQA Environmental Checklist topical issue. Where different analyses would be a particular alternative, these differences are noted. Agricultural and Forestry Resources Each of the three access routes would cross the SCE easement which is being used as a landscape nursery. The SCE property is categorized as "Unique Farmland" on the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Unique Farmland is defined as "Farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state's leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but may include no irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date". The potential effects on Unique Farmland would need to be evaluated to determine if the construction of a road the area would be a significant impact. The analysis would be the same for each alternative. Aesthetics and Visual Resources Changes in the visual character of the area would need to be addressed. Each alternative site and the surrounding area would need to be photographed. The focus would be on determining if the alternative would result in aesthetic impacts relative to the introduction of new sources of light and glare and changes in the visual character of the area. Depending on the sensitivity of the affected community,the City could choose to prepare visual simulations to most accurately address pre-and post-development conditions. It is anticipated that aesthetic impacts would be less than significant or could be mitigated to a less than significant level. Although the introduction of a bridge and/or a road into Arroyo Vista Community Park,the park site is in a developed area. The park is an existing land use and contains lighted tennis and basketball courts; lighting is provided in the parking area and near the Recreation Center. It is assumed that the bridge would be designed to be visually compatible with the surrounding area. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions An air quality analysis and a greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions analysis would be required to evaluate construction phase and operational emissions associated with each of the three alternatives. The level of effort would be similar. The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District(VCAPCD) is the agency responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in Ventura County. As a regional agency, the VCAPCD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures though educational programs or fines, when necessary. The VCAPCD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. BonTerra Psomas 49 Page 3 Fir air quality,the construction phase and operational criteria pollutant regional(mass)emissions would need to be calculated and it is recommended that the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) be used. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction and operation(including vehicle use),as well as indirect emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The modeling results would be compared with the VCAPCD's thresholds to determine if the project would have significant short-term or long-term air emissions impacts. It is expected that a screening calculation would demonstrate that the project would not cause severe congestion at a major intersection resulting in a local carbon monoxide"hotspot"; therefore,carbon monoxide "hotspot"dispersion modeling is not expected to be necessary. Exposure to toxic air contaminants and odors could be addressed qualitatively. If potential significant impacts are identified,mitigation would be required. It is anticipated that impacts could be mitigated to a less than significant level. As noted above,the CalEEMod is recommended to be used to estimate GHG emissions. The VCAPCD has not established a quantitative threshold for GHG emissions and recommends the use of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD)suggested, but not approved thresholds. Each alternative should also be assessed by considering whether implementation of the project would conflict with an applicable plan,policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. It is not expected that any of the alternatives would have significant GHG impacts that could not be mitigated. Biological Resources Each of the three access route alternatives have the potential to impact biological resources and waters. The following analysis and studies would need to be prepared: • Vegetation Mapping/Impact Analysis (All alternatives) o Jurisdictional Delineation(Alternative 1, Alternative 2). A jurisdictional delineation documents the presence of"Waters of the U.S."under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB) and"Waters of the State"under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife(CDFW). • California Rapid Assessment Method(CRAM)Analysis (Alternative 1,Alternative 2). The CRAM is a wetland monitoring tool that was developed in response to a monitoring framework recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to help States meet monitoring requirements stated in the Clean Water Act. CRAM scores four attributes. The score is a relative measurement to indicate how an individual site compares to the best achievable conditions for that wetland type in the State. It is assumed that the same scores for different wetlands of the same type represent the same overall condition and functional capacity. Therefore, these scores may be used to track the progress of restoration efforts over time; to compare impacted sites to their in-kind mitigation sites; or to compare an individual wetland to the status and trends in ambient condition of its wetland type. BonTerro Psomas 50 Page 4 • Focused survey for Special Status Plants (marginally suitable habitat associated with Alternative) and Alternative 2; suitable habitat associated with Alternative 3). During vegetation mapping, it is usually possible to better determine if focused surveys are required. • Focused survey for Burrowing Owl. (All Alternatives with Alternative 2 having the highest potential). During vegetation mapping, it is usually possible to better determine if focused surveys are required. • Focused survey for Least Bell's Vireo. There is possible marginally suitable habitat associated with Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. There is no suitable habitat visible from an aerial view of the sites but this fact would need to be verified while on the site. • Focused survey for California gnatcatcher(Alternative 3) • Focused survey for special status fish. There is possibly marginally suitable habitat associated with Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. More research would be required but it should be noted that there are arroyo chub and steelhead in this watershed. The following permits are expected to be needed: • USACE Section 404 Permit(Alternative 1 and Alternative 2) • CDFW Stream or Lakebed Alteration Agreement—Section 1602 (Alternative I and Alternative 2) • RWQCB 401 Water Quality Certification(Alternative 1 and Alternative 2) • Biological Assessment(only if gnatcatcher, Least Bell's Vireo, or steelhead would be impacted) • USFWS Section 7 Consultation(only if the gnatcatcher,vireo, or steelhead would be impacted) • CDFW Consistency Determination or Incidental Take Permit(only if vireo would be impacted) Cultural Resources For each alternative,a cultural resources records search would need to be conducted in the California Historical Resources Information System(CHRIS) at the South Central Coastal Information Center(SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. The SCCIC is the State-designated repository for records concerning archaeological and historic resources in Ventura, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties. The purpose of the CHRIS records search is to determine if any previously recorded cultural resources are known to exist within or near the project site. Data sources at the SCCIC include historic maps; reports from previous studies;and the Historic Resource Inventory maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation for Ventura County. Additionally, a paleontologic records search and literature review for the BonTerro Psomos 51 Page 5 project site from the Vertebrate Paleontology Section of the Los Angeles County Museum would be required. A walk-over survey would also need to be conducted. The results of the literature searches will be summarized in the IS. BonTerra Psomas will respond to the CEQA checklist questions based on the literature reviews and identify mitigation measures, as required. Given the disturbed nature of the project area, it is not expected that archaeological,historic, or paleontological resources will be identified on the project site. The City of Moorpark has Standard Conditions and Requirements that would be applicable to the project and are intended to mitigate any potential impacts to cultural resources. It should be noted that Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 may require a Section 404 Permit under the Clean Water Act from the USACE associated with potential impacts to "Waters of the U.S". Should a Section 404 permit be required, the proposed project would have a federal nexus which requires compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The USACE cannot issue a Section 404 Permit without the agency's fulfillment of its Section 106 responsibilities. This Cultural Resources Assessment is typically done as a part of the permit application not the CEQA document. Geology and Soils Sufficient soils and geotechnical data would need to be prepared to address the CEQA Environmental Checklist questions including but not limited to seismic activity,soil stability, and geological conditions. It is not expected that the construction of the two-lane road associated with all of the Alternatives would have significant geological or soils impacts and there may be sufficient existing City information to substantiate that conclusion. However,Alternative 1 and 2 include the construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi. It is assumed that the bridge would be designed to span the Arroyo Simi. As a part of the design of the bridge,preliminary geotechnical, soils,seismic evaluations would need to be conducted to determine the appropriate bridge structure and foundation. This additional technical analysis is related to ensuring the engineering feasibility of the bridge and would therefore be used as a part of the CEQA analysis. Hazards and Hazardous Materials For each alternative, a regulatory records search would need to be prepared to identify whether there are recognized environmental conditions located within the project site or adjacent properties that could present material risk of harm to public health or to the environment. If the report identifies potential contamination, additional technical review would be required. Due to the proximity of the three access route alternatives, it is anticipated that a similar level of effort would be required for each of the three alternatives. Hydrology and Water Quality The CEQA analysis must address the potential for impacts associated with surface water runoff and water quality. This includes pre- and post-development site drainage; available capacity of existing storm drain infrastructure and whether new or upgraded infrastructure is required; and drainage and water quality Best Management Practices that would be installed as part of the project for both short-term construction and long-term operations. The project would have to show compliance with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board's Stormwater BonTerra Psomas 52 Page 6 Quality Management Plan as a part of the City's MS4 Permit. The potential for impacts to the Arroyo Simi associated with Alterative 1 and Alternative 2 would require more analysis than Alternative 3 which would extend an existing road onto the park site. Assuming that each alternative would disturb one or more acre, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP)would be required as a part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Program. Land Use and Related Planning Programs Unlike many of the environmental topics addressed above,Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 would have distinct effects on existing and planned land uses. Because none of the alternatives would require a General Plan Amendment or a zone change, the focus would need to be on the compatibility of the bridge and/or road alignment with adjacent land uses,particularly residential development. "Compatibility" would need to be considered in context to whether the project would cause impacts including but not limited to noise and night lighting that would significantly impact sensitive receptors including residents. While each route alternative may affect different users,the level of CEQA analysis would be similar. For Alternative 1, the focus of the analysis would be expected to be to residents in the single-family residences located along and abutting LetaYancy Road between New Los Angeles Avenue and Villa Campesina Park. For Alternative 2, Pacific Communities has proposed the construction of 157 single-family residences and 300 condominiums on 37 acres south of New Los Angeles Avenue. Alternative 2 assumes the extension of Shasta Avenue south from New Los Angeles Avenue through the proposed Pacific Communities subdivision and across the Arroyo Simi and SCE easement, and into Arroyo Vista Community Park. If the currently proposed the Pacific Communities project does not accommodate a road in this location,the City will need to work with Pacific Communities to determine if the residential development plan can be modified. The City will need to have an agreement with Pacific Communities in order to provide park access through the property Alternative 3 does not include the construction of a bridge over the Arroyo Simi which would limit land use compatibility issues to the existing residential neighborhood east of the park. Where there is no existing vehicular,pedestrian, or bicycle access into Arroyo Vista Community Park from the east,the extension of East Mesa Verde Drive to the east into the park would create a continuous roadway connection from Tierra Rejada Road at the west to East Mesa Verde Drive to the west. Noise A noise study would be required for each alternative. The level of analysis associated with each alternative would be similar. Noise-sensitive receptors would need to be identified and short- term existing ambient noise measurements would need to be taken. The analysis would need to address noise and vibration impacts from construction and construction traffic as well as vehicular traffic using the road and bridge. Although roads and bridges do not create noise,the project would allow for a redistribution and/or increase in vehicular traffic in new locations with BonTerra Psomas 53 Page 7 existing and planned sensitive land uses where vehicular access into the park is currently not provided. Population and Housing The proposed project would not result in the displacement of any existing residences or businesses. It is assumed that should the City pursue Alternative 2,the City would work with Pacific Communities prior to the initiation of CEQA documentation associated with Alternative 2 to assume that the access road would be permitted through the property.No impacts would be expected. Public Services and Utilities:Fire,Libraries,Parks,Police Protection,Schools, Wastewater, Water, Stormwater Drainage,and Solid Waste The alternatives would not be expected to negatively impact libraries,schools,or parks due to the nature of the project. Should utilities need to be relocated or placed on the bridge across the Arroyo Simi, it is anticipated that additional coordination with the affected utilities would be required. Potential impacts to public services and utilities would need to occur through outreach to City and County agencies and service providers. Traffic It is our understanding that a traffic impact study has been prepared for each of the proposed alternatives. The traffic study would need to include all information necessary to adequately address the Checklist questions related to traffic and parking. R:1ProJec a1GLRGrp J0009Merno-070714ducx BonTerro Psomas 54 APPENDICES • iP ATTERSON N HOOPOES,INC Page I9 55 APPENDIX A Vicinity Map PATTERSON td sHKIRTES,INC. Appendix I A 56 ct a 19-v e a- t ,:. co .0 { 'Orme CCC 0 - Moorpark 0 as Poindexter Ave - � en 29 h = `l' EnsignABick �' Kfrosi a Los Angeles Ave (ni) Project Location g m 3- kW fl) Y 03 rroyo Vista cu xCommunity Park Z 0. D Se' 1.1) sr ' Laorelhurst Rd ?. 3o *1* z (n 3 N C. a tn 9laaand Tierra ? moo. Tie aPejada Wain a 19v*, do gar` S Creeke' a Rd t 0 0 Vicinity Man thl_ Mnnsox asoaara,iac Appendix I A 57 APPENDIX B AVCP Second Access Preliminary Alignment Alternatives Exhibits it linaINC Appendix I B 58 -,. ... .._ ____[ ,:-4./.: .,irLEr , Lila. I -,.r --40 L -, - ..-,,,,' I i, - ,. . ,;, 1 rt i' :,.. ,--...-Is. ,,,.,- .s - .. g , g I u i . ./ , ..., g 1 cm_ _ .„,/ ;Li:.to - 1. - , ft .„ \ • • '; a c,..,,i ur- ,::. --1 . zin 0 - - ".. • sY Pig gaVg(g,-,Mga ilUCT\\ - -; $ • I ...1. ,, „,,,„„„, 2 . ...L. _ji, = .flV) 1 ' 'I. II i ',a •ma f•, ,.. • .•••,, S-71Fff - 2-,,,!- V ,A.%,_ „4 .. t -.1 . a 8 ,.... , ‘ -. - ir.,_,- .-., t---iw v- Ili _ zmT, Li. I. ' a7"1. 777--r st • i t62,. . --I—1—_--- ----1* I 1 k°Nu Ir!LI- rfi: - ,-.4- - g .N gi— r — I /1 i i. I9 ,k---5?'. :1_1:, . 1 = i , :"G.. 11 .Z I 8 — — e - ,-...., „", -,--- , i - , • if ,— ••)“.. -•'' 1 — en / ... ' '• 11111111 }! ' 1 i rthii II' t-X2 / /,,, ' 1 ------4-- 0.,-, 0 `8 / /8 .,\ _ r... l.0 --) Z/t- IkaITI a. / i /7.0 /' i--4? /•'' .,---,.‘- Airt g ., 0110, ..c ••:, -L - ,, ;V z ...,- i • !LI • I Ln -cc tr. ' 7 ‘1 / - -4*-'0.Ai,,,.• .111 1 iiii-r AV I .11' q IFF •. V.0 • . .:....,-1 • ili&. ' '' . • I 'T :. . , ari . - Or# H 1.3NVA V.131 .:,. a_ g3 4 „ • ' (-) 8 , ii.t... ,:'-1-4/;,_---,:v, i, „, , > a . 'rr ',..1ir -- •7'••-•,T,... ilit.44 in ,. ,,,/ z I ow ...— ".•••:.,, ; i -- / ,/ 4_If •••••• 17- , / • - -•-•-N:-, ''' :_.'• / 1 . ,..••N..2.2// A •-•, , 7-7-----. - - ---.1 :11111 I% ' '• Ili (-11"---- " , tra MIIIINIr i h , •II 10) .•,, ri i 1 P 4'",.1 I 1...'-••-=r'' { +. L S 1 •27--——j1101)1111 I r I : :*,',' I ilZ. 0 - ' II Z'i-IV ' \\\ I, , '5b' '4' ihlitill I jilt 4' R ,r, —: Iitl,t1...111101.: 1 9 •1 III \\\\ a CD Z CD I 0.'..• 2_,.' it,'11114011 .4, Ilil %too S ,g 2i.I IOM 005 SH £ 09Vhisoest..41" 40411r a. . itt 11111!. Ars'il,V I NciV ' .'. ' ' •% \.0-.. fp* : 1 Wt i le - -. i' I. T n . [ -2 7- .0'>ftii /V ig . II Mil•• n, ilk § V dr. • lArl .. . 11111111111 4- ‘\ .... _, il gi mil& .."•s„ ______Is: I. fild I I i Ill I" r i 7-,-: . .i, _____\ \ -.4-4, . i MI 19111 .- I , .2 5 I iliA Ili II \\ \ 1=. =!. IIII \\\. . / / .4 .. ; ._,,..."1.' • ,‘ '. , 7...7„..y . \. \ UR Dm . •,\ \ \ ......-.. ...."- ...• - •...m.ugg \____\%1 -... ..-- " ""'" u., II 11111111111. 1. :..- %,,...4 co zxxxxo cnakz, or.. N,.......Es.(3:.-4' a--, ii I FT 77-------------,-., :o \ :. _•?It-- ; ,-..• • , cE Z; n ... ...,_ ...-- . 1-1-1 * CD ' i ..,.., 2 _1 T-. 1.1T I 7fQ 0 --,--- --- -- .- A '• . ,./Vi‘A' tr i ivoieloZ, i iSAST1:7: J ,INC. • • Appendix I B 59 4 -.:\•" ,'1% C\e- . ,---- � _ _ ` 's , § 6 ur 3 o Go be�r � or — Q ►' W �a a W 2 ' 0aLL w W( )f / ....1 m6N rr ,,.., •` 1� U C-) d iteeft a fP A V6�14Nt ;-..25:W ~.$ > V1 I Q \ . t dLa/V 4 ` Z Ovi a ; • is NKI 4 U O W CD Q . cr- z Q cc W l ~ t►�/MV f.nM i� i KT dl 14"a. l.'tk.....1A.,r7 E. ......~.moi E. p ap O WO.S I^y1 ce • a �NI •43.-AZ W & O.OZ d _°` yu ...r*il 4 ..0'.' oW i 'NIIIIIIIII El 1- f- WO I gg II Wa. CC I 111/ IP �� c a 1,-.0....." "1 VENTS 0. �' II c._ C..5 1 t''Ii b p t- tl( to ce.N I' o 'giii • 2 0. < i•Pi i PI1 .rU U O , I 13 1V. a o vII 70 N I CL UJ d tv rl �. S ai O 1 J L 11� U { I T. __ I • 4 — 13 Y ",.'- MM. ..1, n . •ia.•ti.•^anv,,,..Fro . .o 1-.n.thhs.lnY'a de1ixo a-uf.± 411`I..N..�4...0. �PATTERSON } nszoc ATEs,INC. Appendix I B 6 0 LOS ANGELES AVENUE STA EMP 0.00 _ p r END IMPROVEMENTS £ 1 �) _ I ;r III ' I' ' ,SI- IR ..... 1 �. :.iv ' :ii "r i � I r .- 3H N zrt �= w 1— a 0-....., z m Z . I L. Boa" er 1� Q. __ ,1 a l_U Q i :Lti_1' .1 _ 1—,�O (-) U CC.ez C ICA 1, L • 6M I � P,N V A W'• I f CL 171:3 Li:, U CC I u .17:....1'4-:j _= ,,; : . U . 'i I' III ,.�,t ra i ), w^. 1.11 --- - . ,. � , :Ili . . ''_.,t .7, 1 1 tir. 1 1 + • N 1 I 4_� 1 CJ. �•r .. 1 2 1- 12f /I py 6»,', i �. ¢ gge5 'NI Qaz I a� F.1 ao �4 d •oo r INS i`..e `_ _ I I U V1 Gr'm Z LId C�i1 t 'T ""r"fb'r' I LAI ILII w a o & II w r o _ 3 E s N I g u a `. & (;{I;fit I ¢a �EI(, �1 rl CO GI CC"IC 1 1 t C/ (-3C.> 0 04 Q. — a o I • �T'f' ,, I li 1 &r°g-'" 5' iI � N CC 20' •i 1 i mi, 20' a • 010! ,,,. STA 9f00.0 0 _,FA IMPROVEMENTS c_.) > .Et.-a 1.e iu•Jaf..nuw..a 0,01,.a,1 40....e.a•-. axarr : xly arNr... PATTEASON ASSOCIATES,INC. Appendix 18 61 f j ` \ . d0 ' J \ 9 4011,,, ..''''' <,... i ,c, , , :\ . ..‘w, . '• S -:::\I). QC66". .‘ le J1 \ ./ Sew U " � aowQ/� 1 g �_ruce�2oy o WN,,„, A m II Qa y 1 > \ J \`n o j W o- W \ \ k o j ut a a 1 K Z 141).",...\ psi}ji , J' } Y Y Q sc 1 W J C 4 V 3c O = 1 v, 4 f -� _ d1 1 p ¢ pW in� `.. U 1 cc W fl . r a0 j a 9 U 3 II W o La ' I Ow m :nil t. N 111 Zil I el O II d O O s o C o 0 iii N N d piijc_ 1 d nl 6 t, c He ¢ ^V) pe O a 1, 1\ 1 11�`€0 a I u ` No ` .. 1\ 111 of �Hl wa o • `•\\ • a a oo a 1 \ d N ` N N NI II a tL �4 Y \\ e`'.%•:`%) •I� 4 N ki \. ‘ i , CC i} 1 a Y4 0_, \ ‘ k. ‘ \ : Y F PATTERSON SSOCIRTES,INC. Appendix I B 62 APPENDIX C Right-of-Way Needs iAppeasoaxns.ixc ndix I C 63 • ,,. .ifi-r_i_L, 14 __,mBji.46.K-o---- �_ .2a. �� ri "" '. It 1`• •^j _. ����J)1 � __.cam. 6 i v Y yt F 1 W �t11 1 t 1—�, .9 1_.1.._R .� t V1 Vl r0 1 fat Q 1a�1 Z I " .\ o , v I1 • J 1 --_�.�- .moi , t---lVh "'�``,•'t.._..- 21-6-Ln i fit`, ' I t i_Milli) it"III! 11 '}._ "/•]�{(/ Iif O F u „ aNi ,,, M M O • I / �•Tl'illl i) y� •n 1•J '.T li rI ;§` 4 M J 1.1 O O tn ' /al N_ OO O Z Z ! , IO �;t1 -I- .r;—� 1 I '1 O,, O ,....v.., g .... }:"._ d in t i j I f`i.E /• --//• '`-./ - = ,,. .-, y�f #R • lit ..., a+ /i /. �� , „ lye, ��, / )- r� } r' 1.::::-. 08 A 1WA 713 it N , / ��'�t •:-,,- :-...1.),fjf /:I f d 2ct r- 1 G r s! r rtiii i Xkc" ;a. --- /, / a �• I ;Z'ilV .51ti 'e 8 ' _• 11111111111 /, mit } ry 6g� Moi _ � �... 1y11 O 1 1 S O Z O !, ,.s.loso ^a .31 - p '�`\tit .o N ca lPO �1111{�y� IS: �,r� !III z _ a Ci. VillItIlli\%O. a_.. SOZ0c0090S a Vil � Q•^.. .�,f a c , - Nd' ( \) yA t - S z 111 b }}y^��. ` !l,� • 1, k 5 '..\o .\\ )2, i a` wii ifiP f ill icir i ,11 6 =.. '\,. 'd\ . ii> W W O J 'I Jt )i 11 911111I f _ ��_, �- �, t 0. �� CO + 2721172-021 JYEN o.-'— �lII�M •fi �` • �� ' .2u.A,un•••.1 S.n u.Un. a.. ::,O,n Jon n r....,.rh,....h... „wiri,-� -.4:::::^:=17::. ..1. . . ATTERSON ASSOCIATES,INC. P1Appendix I C 64 z y A x z .........+1 , ,. .,. ',.,: )11 t7 _:' 311N3/0/ S3-13ONV soil g,- Oma I .n K.W ' O c, OCI-LL K O N g F p. H� ZaO� ,.o a ; �� �� 4V Lc, t...0 ` n Oz4 0 W ow U Fis g .',,- r, MY L. Q - N in �, .y. , OWN LLO LL LLQ 'r' O ' Z CD � J .< no 1I r 4 c_� � a eii Low W J ioo 141111 NJQ �4 Om ••I ale a w W d W O N 'XS' ..Qa a4 if i" - z3 T Url 9 rN3 , � �. O Q �p]�� ` N^ . FN• ti W 47. ):....-- +``' / o w � --.w.. 0,.(Q!, N., :Ii 4 { �9( awA r�: �'L, 4 4 { •• 4 i iiiii U o 1�tF�Rc� a s a W 1,J 4., 4 VI W W 4 W Q J N .4% d !! .F" ...�. 1-,., ♦ h". cid - ,.,. • „ , , 4..... 0,001,11101 ... «,": • jMftEASON it soatna.ic. Appendix I C 65 Z k o S ? t1 P RR'A J n I N rM • • 1 4 le : .. :r 4 F sib rQ -, •' w a;;^.; V�CIN ~ 4T < i:i•.. J W • • fL m M , �S2N • a C24 N LOS ANGELES AVENUE . , _ oN Q 'I- '--I I— . i r t.•r O a .' I I T - - I , - m I 1' vn -!' l�/f..- .n a W 3 I— I i v I 2 ao d WI• IN_ I -L.-,, • - O - O/I V i I l/) , • W• o w IOW a oIoI a _-wU _ o !" . - . • ..71:i i 1.x'1 , ' 4' 1 R N - Y- • �,. o I - o Z .' N: rif r5Ci. .ItFy� o Is 'rya 7 y�`"INN ,.i u+w-ai �e-4,, 141)• dt�Y.t E, o Y. ,l s.-.4. �oa rgNW i _ /� d ZZ d.is ZZ&Q ...f :ice ,4y �4 - Cj yx .a lLe [ 4 IV• iiiiIj I r/`yll N W ,to 4 L. 4 9 1- 4 tz u Z C e I- - — .a— C G gt C C Wo �' v r a"i,r y,, '4. .« d i. J = I' tai r' ' +# 4i, y .,r..-=--'y._ a -Maw r r '�. EY w� ..a I'.MI • • j •RTTERSON SSOCIATES� ,INC. Appendix I C 66 • Z -, 3 n 1\ x _ .. 4 1 i , o y 1 - b : �. III Y o � p UlY "-_1 / J ce l Z YVm • • / / / oa hurLr oma a LI / i/ / --- Fe',%C- Ill w • v u I r iiu0-w a -4 j { a f1t1,• v 1 / ii _/� a K J -o '; .../. .1,,,-•,t . NW �T NZ • r r,Z cm Y t , IF ir . x w , . ,,c'i ... . . ow .47� { �o �o .., moo v a� , .stA.0- • , .,.._ �� '~ anti a. 4.41114 cn pr *9-.. --.1 6 O 1Jff i/ O U ii IR S 4 a. wI 11 a. �I Q I. !1!((-1((/1/1'4{1 5 z 11 L_i- r L..., ▪ z W L, ."•r F Y 4Q CC 1,1,X ,epl !„,,,t. ,„ 1 Idi Th1T ' W is i▪ i ,i ... Ior..... .3...»i ... PATTERSON AssocrnT s,INC. Appendix I C 67 APPENDIX D Cost Estimate 888 § 888888888 82a4 § 88 8888 a E m0 N O O O O Co T O 0 0 0 0 0 n N b H n .i a m vi 4 O el ti O N .i N W ,y j. 1Q{ n �Mg11 .ai .ni O 1p T '5ic $u VNi NV4� N to to et NN in to co tri N Cy O p : d > 8888888 ° 88 oboe c ,.i tel m T a' n N ,0+, .b +1/46 n & a ssBSs ggssaal 0 1 VI$ oa sse � sos 0008 0 1� a t n T TN n OI m 0 0 8 N n b a �N. T N N74 ap� o!$�• Oo Q O n •m N E •u —N N N N N N to Q N N ,n N V V, N V1 �.j N N VN c4 a e1 1 4 s in N N N N N N N F EE b gige N p ; O O8 S N O O 2 8 8 8 v m O QQ a gO W a+ .+ N 0. O O n O W 2 = NTN_N VONO NO O en T w 3 O O O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N N O 0000 �S B, oTs2 2888R04 s � nCn ,R 888in in vn ud d a al''uian room 4 ti u5 or dao�maa o.ri< ii ,—e M N N N N N N O N N n .T- N `#) V N I N T N N N "T1 E 382 NN NNN b F N N VI N N a Saw F .§ a YIdi ° ig� 2z '. ,.a00o IC4288 Fna n CI 6 y N Q u, t Y P a N Cr.4 6 O6 N N e y =` m J c T IA N - Q Y a 3. V 3 C UtE $ Z' OF. tiOOT OO LnLO 3! G NNN N N N N N N N N N N N C Z E q s" - — 0n 2 I ET a > o > ,_ ,. u. ., u, ,n T ,n ,n � � ou „ � f 0 0 E p ,, _Xy' � _gg E nc R r o i bF E c NDF as b 8 c 5 q c 9 E c t E ret e L' E '7, ' L. H gcgt.~ r v ark— - cc K Q u a1 m0Y U N LL K-c V1 K U 6 W u 8au = i .. NT a Li, en co T0 PATTERSON at700NTtS,INC. Appendix D 68 APPENDIX E Traffic Data • Average Daily Data • Intersection Data • Roadway Volumes tmrawn INC Appendix I E 69 Ro HCS+: Two-Lane'Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway LETA YANCY From/To N/0 UNIDOS Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level t No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down 9 Two-way hourly volume, V 86 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adj usLment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 86 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 43 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.3 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 OCR for RVs, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 86 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 43 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 7.3 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, £d/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 7.3 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT6O 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 70 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway LETA FANCY From/To N/O UNIDOS Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 98 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0• PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 98 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 49 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.2 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0` Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 98 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 49 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 8.3 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 8.3 E Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS Ye Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h • Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. ' 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. R These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 71 I !^Oa,ol Vat", HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway LETA YANCY From/To N/0 UNSOOS Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 @ Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 8 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 107 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, EG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0" PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 107 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 54 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS. 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.2 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, EG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0" Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, £HV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 107 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 54 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 9.0 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 9.0 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS 'C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. " These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 772 I V.o 11 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING ^ Highway LETA YANCY From/To N/0 UNIOOS Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 % Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 9 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 % Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down % Two-way hourly volume, V 79 veh/h . Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0' PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 79 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 40 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - ' mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 79 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 40 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 6.7 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 6.7 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures \ Level of service, LOS ( C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.02 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VNT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >- 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 73 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway MESA VERDE From/To ASHTREE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft 8 Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi I Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level S No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down I Two-way hourly volume, V 82 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 8 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0• PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-i) vp 82 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 41 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SEM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 82 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 41 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 7.0 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 7.0 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. • These itefis have been entered or edited to override calculated value 74 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Ca. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway MESA VERDE From/To ASHTREE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 4 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles - D Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 103 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 S Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1* • PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 103 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 52 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. far access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.2 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 103 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 52 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 8.7 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 8.7 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. • These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 75 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway MESA VERDE From/To ASHTREE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 103 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 8 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 103 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 52 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SEM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.2 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (mote-1) vp 103 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 52 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 8.7 a Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 8.7 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0,03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >- 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 76 a HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Tvo-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway MESA VERDE From/To ASHTREE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 8 Segment length 0.0 mi 8 Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level 8 No-passing zones 0 8 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down 8 Two-way hourly volume, V 83 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 8 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 83 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 42 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, REFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FES 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, flip 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 83 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2( 42 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 7.0 8 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 7.0 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.03 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >- 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. • These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 77 HCS+: Onsignalized Intersections Release 5.2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period: EXISTING Intersection: LOS ANELES/SHASTA Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2014 Project ID: NOON PEAK HOUR East/West Street: North/South Street: SHASTA Intersection Orientation: EW Study period Ihrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 z ! I. 4A C i L T R 1 L T R Volume 25 1138 1118 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, RFA 25 1138 1118 15 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 10 25 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 25 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / / Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 I 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L I 1 L R v (vph) 25 10 25 C(m) (vph) 624 158 478 v/c 0.04 0.06 0.05 95% queue length 0.13 0.20 0.17 Control Delay 11.0 29.3 12.9 LOS 8 D B Approach Delay 17.6 Approach LOS C 78 HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period: EXISTING Intersection: LOS ANELES/SHASTA Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2014 Project ID: NOON PEAK HOUR East/West Street: North/South Street: SHASTA Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I 1. T R Volume 25 919 903 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 25 919 903 13 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / AT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration I. T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 8 20 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / / Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach ED WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L I I L A v (vph) 25 B 20 C(m) (vph) 753 • 127 560 v/c 0.03 0.06 0.04 95% queue length 0.10 0.20 0.11 control Delay 9.9 35.2 11.7 LOS A E B Approach Delay 18.4 Approach LOS C 79 i HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period: EXISTING Intersection: LOS ANELES/SHASTA Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. customary Analysis Year: 2014 Project ID: NOON PEAK HOUR + PROJECT TRAFFIC East/West Street: North/South Street: SHASTA Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs) : 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R 1 L T R Volume 25 919 903 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 25 919 903 13 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 8 20 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / / Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L I I L R v (vph) 25 8 20 C(m) (vph) 753 127 560 v/c 0.03 0.06 0.04 95% queue length 0.10 0.20 0.11 Control Delay 9.9 35.2 11.7 LOS A E B Approach Delay 18.4 Approach LOS C 80 a HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.2 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period: EXISTING Intersection: MESA VERDE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2014 Project ID: NOON PEAR HOUR East/West Street: MESA VERDE North/South Street: PEACH HILL Worksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics 1 Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound 1 I L T R I L T R I L T RILTRI I I I I 1 Volume 10 26 7 1109 27 0 110 0 89 10 0 0 1 8 Thrus Left Lane Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 LI L2 L1 L2 Configuration TR LT LR PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flow Rate 33 136 99 % Heavy Veh 0 0 0 No. Lanes 1 1 1 Opposing-Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting-lanes 1 1 1 Geometry group 1 1 1 Duration, T 1.00 hrs. Worksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 LI L2 Flow Rates: Total in Lane 33 136 99 Left-Turn 0 109 10 Right-Turn 7 0 89 Prop. Left-Turns 0.0 0.8 0.1 Prop. Right-Turns 0.2 0.0 0.9 Prop. Heavy Vehicle0.0 0.0 0.0 Geometry Group 1 1 1 Adjustments Exhibit 17-33: hLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 hBV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 hadj, computed -0.1 0.2 -0.5 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Flow rate 33 136 99 hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 x, initial 0.03 0.12 0.09 hd, final value 4.12 4.30 3.76 x, final value 0.04 0.16 0.10 Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 Service Time 2.1 2.3 1.8 Worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Flow Rate 33 136 99 Service Time 2.1 2.3 1.8 Utilization, x 0.04 0.16 0.10 Dep. headway, hd 4.12 4.30 3.76 Capacity 283 386 349 Delay 7.26 8.13 7.19 LOS A A A Approach: Delay 7.28 8.13 7.19 LOS A A A Intersection Delay 7.68 Intersection LOS A 81 3 HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.2 ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period: 2030 Intersection: MESA VERDE/PEACH HILL Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2014 Project ID: NOON PEAK HOUR East/West Street: MESA VERDE North/South Street: PEACH HILL Worksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics 1 Eastbound 1 Westbound I Northbound I Southbound 1 IL T RILTRIL T R I L T RI I I I I 1 Volume 10 32 9 1135 34 0 112 0 110 10 0 0 1 8 Thrus Left Lane Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Configuration TR LT LR PHF 1.0D 1.00 1.00 Flow Rate 41 169 122 % Heavy Veh 0 0 0 No. Lanes 1 1 1 Opposing-Lanes 1 1 0 Conflicting-lanes 1 1 1 Geometry group 1 1 1 Duration, T 1.00 hrs. Worksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Flow Rates: Total in Lane 41 169 122 Left-Turn 0 135 12 Right-Turn 9 0 110 Prop. Left-Turns 0.0 0.8 0.1 Prop. Right-Turns 0.2 0.0 0.9 Prop. Heavy Vehicle0.0 0.0 0.0 Geometry Group 1 1 1 Adjustments Exhibit 17-33: hLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 hadj, computed -0.1 0.2 -0.5 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 1.2 L1 L2 Flow rate 41 169 122 hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 x, initial 0.04 0.15 0.11 hd, final value 4.20 4.36 3.86 x, final value 0.05 0.20 0.13 Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.0 Service Time 2.2 2.4 1.9 Worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Ll L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Flow Rate 41 169 122 Service Time 2.2 2.4 1.9 Utilization, x 0.05 0.20 0.13 Dep. headway, hd 4.20 4.36 3.86 Capacity 291 419 372 Delay 7.42 8.48 7.43 LOS A A A Approach: Delay 7.42 8.48 7.43 LOS A A A Intersection Delay 7.96 Intersection LOS A 82 4 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway PEACH HILL From/To W/0 SPRING Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 6 Segment-length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 % Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 /mi Grade: Length mi Access points/mi Up/down 4 Two-way hourly volume, V 540 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 8 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 . PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 5.0000 pc/h Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 270 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field.Measurement: Field measured speed, SFR 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, ELS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, EFS 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 45.8 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, £G 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0' Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 540 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 270 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 37.8 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 37.8 8 Level of Service and other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.17 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. . These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 83 4- HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway PEACH HILL From/To W/0 SPRING Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 626 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 626 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 313 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 50.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 45.1 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fC 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for Rye, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 626 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 313 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 42.3 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 42.3 S Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.20 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 84 4 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway PEACH HILL From/To W/0 SPRING Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description P M PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 669 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 $ Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 669 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 335 pc/h • Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 55 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 55.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.8 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, 10 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0' Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 669 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 335 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 44.5 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 44.5 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.21 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 85 l r HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway PEACH HILL From/To W/0 SPRING Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAR • Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 & Grade; Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 506 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 506 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 253 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SEM 50 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLB - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 50.0 mi/la Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 46.1 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0* Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 506 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 253 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 35.9 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 35.9 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.16 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0,0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 86 S HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Tine Period EXISTING Highway COtMfUNITY PARK RD From/To Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 4 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 % Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 % . Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down % Two-way hourly volume, V 722 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 722 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 361 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 55 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, ELS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FF5 55.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, £G 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0• Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, DIV 1.000 Two.-way flow rate,.(nate--1) vp 722 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 361 Base percent time-epeat-following, aersr 47.0 % Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 47.0 4 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS ',...C_, Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.23 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1, If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >- 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. • These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value . 87 5 HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period 2030 Highway COMMUNITY PARK RD From/To Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description AM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 894 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 % Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0* PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 894 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 447 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFW 55 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS - mi/11 Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 55.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fop 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 48.1 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0• Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, FRO 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 894 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 447 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 54.4 % Adj..for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-apent-following, PTSF 54.4 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS j C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.28 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT6O 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 88 S HCS+: Two-Lane Highways Release 5.2 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 10/25/2014 Analysis Time Period EXISTING Highway COMMUNITY PARK RD From/To Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2014 Description PM PEAK Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 0 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 0 Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 0 /mi Up/down Two-way hourly volume, V 715 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 8 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0• PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 715 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 358 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM 55 mi/h Observed volume, Vf 0 veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS - mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, ELS - mi/h Adj. for access points, fA - mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 55.0 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fop U.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 49.5 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following. Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 0.0• Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 715 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 358 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 46.7 % Adj.fnr directional distribution and no-passing zones, £d/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 46.7 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.22 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >- 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. • These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value 89 t (ki ts r_3 IALE. 4hi e3/44., pm per._--> 3 r (3 (Ar). / 1 fr&R-DsE. � 4,9H72E ! 70 Age Pia(/),) ("IQ_ 21-x' 90 FES kia pm amu. -- ‘ (so e- z 9 636,) t //tic w7c `9I'om1/e7 r �Q e Jam/ fe) Imo-- � n� -ylic- d via/P4 91 1 P--a .N Litt' ) . epta) N/0 14)0.9 ensea 60 (3e ti 707-41-3 -, -22, (ft) Mil P 3,' jig, ` B SE — -C-zf-4r) pm p _ sginss2 ') ((o) Z /4'R 207 Virr�. � .i e rr rcpnC R o� (z,9 J9 �49$) �,0 ST - 1t3- 77370 -- 3S G N� 336 9 > SB- 7)380Sit.g) Pin r— 300 N., 4N- 3 Roa�. rwCC � 9� 614--) 1118° ' VIZ . J , ie tf) 4 2- CSS) t'" / — 4E5, 39' 9 -- 4-81402) P/4 P11--- ) _23, WS (6 0 it 4 d tv sat-at hid" Q/3vn . 204a 40 3 / (-3/14) frn'Pnt— (SWX82 2 /ill ( gq) r, ' ®,: _ r "'r ' r _r- 92 s „ ei pp. ►M • [wit( 406A 300 (, 'f/ ) 1 � *R0y0 &mvwzy pa Acca- p 93 I till 0 11 0) 0 CO LINT" S OOA C � 2 , 3 agfCI> V.I 4--- 903 Los invact 0 '—h • 'me es / 3O S 4030 7 ,. ExtsznAty- nett 7 yes I• 'FA / INv*C wriatoac War? Parc /rtegsAsz or 7/1W/C //v Ipme Y Uo3o �(/S�/N� (�aCvr+ X /. 238 94 N P ese of (3U�� ins tot f 9°-3 /lel !� q/70) / ateran .fnanft f fU1, �'ROsT TR( ' /�I ,f �3° ?we5 rsz3(j ar... A frive- 95 fzs14- %\froltie Protei Aen� c(1\ oio rA%R /-//Lt ch,(2 AC M pcR fl e" zowzisign lU%<y-.lL. rick 96 2 t(\k fetC1 e ff' RS) V off- \ C) 21 s9) ( 2? "� _ qo CHI) fre731 - --��' 983644 /oS hatswo c (6 Of) - *.°) • 97 Peak Traffic Hour(Worst Condition) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) For GosIif 1VQ AvJ /- 74 '4w cy / Voce Peak Traffic Lane Traffic Volumes Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Capacity No. Total Existing p.- :, lireviag Existing p 1t Lane Traffic `2x ; , l&a:tage Traffic 'amliy + fl les Capacity Traffic Traffics Traffic Traffic+ Project Project _ Traffic / Traffic f1/.L 1600 2Ze 32 3Z 0-•.o/b 0.0 20 0.020 T_ 1 1 / /J- / 9 (y 0.0,e 4o o/z ao/zc JY _RR - j 1600 Li. 77 o. a3 0. i O. `sL Y 1600 77 / c1 91F O.o+ O. O,r'. a 04'9 .117" l % ! ao _ L o ( •!2 2 0.gtil00; i 0.00-8 OA _/ 1600 pg / Z2.- 12Z o. o0-/ 0.0. I I o dry=6 J 1600 /Z9 /.c;-7 ►r9 O. 099 0. 098 I_ °it --�'T— Z asap 9a7 94ET_/oo¢ o.z2 8 Mfr d. 2/3 W "J/ E R j 1600 3cr' 4a 4.3 ,o.0 2 z. 4. Z 0.027 V✓L / 1600 ,6 R 9 9+ 0.03(.34r0.0 o- ✓` A/ W�^o r Q 3 /no , /8 2o_Z d ;L Yellow Clearance 0.100* 0.100* J.1Ti1 Intersection ICU O. f-25 a. s07 a X38 Level of Service ical volume to capacity ratio utilized to determine intersection ICU =n ;i; • 98 3 Peak Traffic Hour(Worst Condition) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) For ® S Alloc Si;Rixt ,pleak NO0/r/ Traffic Lane Traffic Volumes Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Capacity >. Total Existing t' getyreng Existing Warn Lane TrafficIfEgar s Traffic ' ,:s Capacity Traffic Traf c+ Traffic Traffic+ Project Project Traffic Traffic -NL I_ 1600 CSD a ozr. oa3Jff. 0. 03_ N:T . s q 30 €3 31.3 0-/�-6DJ93 et• /y, - NR 1 1600 Ai- .3/ 3I o- o/6 0.0/9 . 0/ St 1 1600 "7-.0 7_1/4r- +4 4- O.°Is 0/� o. v24 s7` 1 /sac B6 zso _ o-//.b moo. /4-Fiscitiesk 8R / , 1600 S-/ /8/�j /t7 _a.og¢ I D./ L o�/ �L i 1600 (33 / — /�J' 0. 0 o.l&3a o./o.� .- E7 _f : 1600 CI Z Lr-_ IJ— 0.033. 0. OlI L moan — E / ' 1600 2 t _ �s o. 03.3 �. of-/ _ 0 04/ __ WL ' _j 1600 3 / - 3 < O. 0- • a•' etaIt/79Q r co i A Zj a- 44,(,; e..023 o. ems., Yellow Clearance 0.100* 0.100* 0.100* Intersection ICU Level of Service 0. eir 0. 0-0/ , ;cal volume to capacity ratio utilized to determine intersection ICU f 99 N --- 27 (34) .)121vz W—Thlag6 3,)\ Ar\0 �I 0 Q , 1 �� peat 100 s � ps I'• Poop 18jtCY ( ) 01' '' sl 4c(33 3z. (44,. r /?31 361) oat %is ra oe) 101 24-Hour Roadway Segment Counts(Classification) Prepared by Pacific Traffic Dala SeMces Date: Saturday,Am.07,2008 City: Mootpark Job 0: CA08-05236 Localism: Los Angeles Ave(SR-118)test of Moorpark Ave Direceae: Westbound AM PM Rowdy T1n.o class Class Class CIass4 Classy Class Total Time Class1 Class Class Chas 4 Class Clash Total Vol..,;. Westbound 1290 AM 41 5 1 47 1200 PM 152 51 3 210 8:00 AM 531 1215 AM 38 4 0 41 12:15 PM 153 40 4 202 5:15 AM 614 12.30 AM 18 3 0 21 12:30 PM 147 32 8 109 6:30AM 613 12:45 AM 15 1 2 18 12:45 PM 148 20 8 y 182- 645 AM 813 1:00 AM 20 5 0 25 1:00 PM 132 23 7 188 9:00 AM 689 1:15 AM 21 5 2 28 1:15 PM 119 15 5 143 9:15 AM 700 1:30 AM 17 2 0 10 1:30 PM 108 31 3 145 9:30 AM 729 1:45 AM 16 2 .........__._.:a._2......_._..._.___.�..20, 1:45 PM .._ 12_-.._..-�._ 2.__ __ ................ ..._...., It 246 AM 760 2:00 AM 15 2�• 1 18 200 PM 92 23 4 121 10:00 AM 753 2:13 AM 18 7 1 25 2.15 PM 99 21 3 121 10:15 AM 829 230 AM 12 2 1 15 230 PM 02 18 2 105 10:30 AM 878 246 AM 13 1 3 20 245 Pae 72 10 10:45 3.90 AM 11 1 1 14 3:00 PM 78 19 1 08 11.90 AM 904 3:15 AM 12 2 1 16 3:15 PM 03 13 3 104 11:15 AM 877 3:30 AM 15 1 1 18 3:30 PM 85 16 2 104 11:30 AM 837 3:45 AM 182 „ 0 21 3:45 PM 91 16 „ 1 1109 11:45 AM 824 4:00 AM 8 3 3 15 410 PM 131 22 3 181 12:00 PM 733 4:15 AM 15 6 2 23 4:15 PM 135 26 7 173 12.15 PM 741 4:30 AM 18 2 2 23 4:30 PM 145 26 5 181 1230 PM 882 445AN 19 7 3 27 IAS PM _�. 140 .� .. 1215 PM 638 »�690 AM 30—�7 I 39 5.90 PM 153 32 0 --- 105 1:08 PM 573 6:16 AM 31 5 2 39 5:15 PM 159 33 6 203 1:15 PM —IA sw-e AM 37 5 1 43 5:30 PM 175 32 7 223 1:30 PM .. WI ..._ 38 9 ... ..__....� 0 48 5:45 PN 190 40 _ ,,,,,,, 6 243 _1146051. AM 57 X15 0 77 6:00 PM 198 39 1 7 258 200 PM 449 ens AM 62 24 6 94 0:15 PM 215 47 9 282 6:30 AM 59 24 7 94 6:30 PM 108 40 5 1 267 645AM 42 18 2 B3. 645 PM. 778 25 3 210 1:00 AM 100 24 '2 135 7:00 PM 165 33 4 211 7:15 AM 112 31 5 151 7:15 PM 125 20 7 154 7:30 AM 104 22 2 132 7:30 PM 121 20 5 150 _ 7A5 AM ,)0,5 ...,121 2 130 . 7:45 PM 111 20 3 8:00 AM ._._..111 33 9 159 890 PM X98 14 2 ...._._. 118 8:15 AM 118 42 11 174 8:15 PM 88 13 1 101 8:30 AM 118 35 3 160 8:30 PM 73 15 2 92 9:46 AM. 105 2{ B 139 9:43 PM 70 12 ,.,___ 2 e6 .._ _ 8..__.._�_._.._.��.__......_...._ .��._......141..._..8:0P_........._.«.es__._.._.......__. _............_..� �.._.�___ 8:00 AM 108 29 1 141 8:00 PM B6 12 3 N 215 AM 133 28 7 173 8:15 PM 55 11 3 73 810 AM 129 24 4 180 9:30 PM 60 0 1 71 045 AM 171 28 10 215 945 PM. 39 9 1 51 ._..__.�_._..__�..181 10:0 PM _..._..._1_ _..-.-.__.__..__.—_—..—.._.57 1090 AM 131 24 2 181 10:00 PM 38 10 2 SI 10:15 AM 152 29 7 193 1015 PM 28 7 1 37 10-70 AM 140 30 8 191 10:30 PM 27 5 1 33 10:45 AM 188 30 5_ 208 10.45 PM 26 5 ..a.. 34 11:00 AM 179 12 6 — 237 11:00PM 30 ,,3 1 38 11:15 AM 185 43 7 242 11:15 PM 29 5 0 34 11:30 AM 145 41 1 5 202 11-.30 PM . 28 4 0 30 1145AM . 159 51 ... 7 223 11:45 PM 18. 1 23 AM Total 3,389 793 123 155 4,476 PM Total 5,052 1.000 160 166 6 11 8,403 AM Pak Hr 10:30 AM 11:15 AM 11:00 AM 8:00AM 11:45 AM 11:30 AM 11:00AM PM Peak la 5:45 PM 5:45 PM 5:30 PM 5:30 PM 9:00 PM 6:00 PM 5:45 PM M1 Peak Vol 678 186 29 29 1 3 904 PM Peak Vol 799 172 35 29 2 6 1.038 Class 1 Passenger Velddee 8.451 77.7% Class 2 2Atde Tnnoks 1,801 16.6% Class 3 3-Ade Trucks 283 2.6% Class 4 4 or mats lode tucks 321 3.0% Clsw 5 ReaeatIonal Venites 8 0.1% _ 6 Busses 15 0.1% A 10.879 100.0% 102 Los Angeles Ave(SR-118)east of Tierra Rejada Road Saturday,June 07,2008 Hourly Traffic Volume Hour Eastbound I Westbound I Total 8:00 AM 615 607 1,222 8:15 AM 706 577 1,283 8:30 AM 747 571 1,318 8:45 AM 743 575 1,318 9:00 AM 693 647 1,340 9:15 AM 616 663 1,279 9:30 AM 542 661 1,203 9:45 AM 477 676 1,153 10:00 AM 434 672 1,106 10:15 AM 433 745 1,178 10:30 AM 460 780 1,240 10:45 AM 452 781 1,233 11:00 AM 451 790 1,241 11:15AM 449 758 1,207 11:30AM 473 752 1,225 11:45 AM 548 775 1,323 12:00 PM 628 740 1,368 12:15 PM 692 720 1,412 * 12:30 PM 723 658 1,381 12:45 PM 722 586 1,308 1:00 PM 703 512 1,215 1:15 PM 739 466 1,205 1:30 PM 746 460 1,206 1:45 PM 732 428 1,160 2:00 PM 730 415 1,145 ' Peak hour of traffic 103 Los Angeles Ave(SR-118)east of Moorpark Ave Saturday, June 07, 2008 Hourly Traffic Volume Hour Eastbound Westbound] Total 8:00 AM 671 631 1,302 8:15 AM 762 614 1,376 8:30 AM 808 613 1,421 8:45 AM 823 613 1,436 9:00 AM 778 689 1,467 9:15 AM 699 709 1,408 9:30 AM 647 729 1,376 9:45 AM 573 760 1,333 10:00 AM 528 753 1281 10:15 AM 521 829 1;350 10:30 AM 517 878 1,395 10:45 AM 497 889 1,386 11:00 AM 486 904 1,390 11:15 AM 494 877 1,371 11:30 AM 534 837 1,371 11:45 AM 620 824 1,444 12:00 PM 710 783 1,493 12:15 PM , 772 741 , 1,513 • 12:30 PM 815 682 1,497 12:45 PM 822 638 1,460 1:00 PM 836 573 1,409 1:15 PM 884 526 1,410 1:30 PM 885 510 1,395 1:45 PM 857 470 1,327 2:00 PM 817 449 1,266 * Peak hour of traffic 104 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: • National Data &Surveying Services Project ID:CAI3_5017_001 Day: SATURDAY City:City of Moorpark Date: 1112/2013 NOON NS/EW Streets: NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 • 12:00 PM 8 110 43 17 73 20 22 0 13 37 1 25 369 12:15 PM 13 88 59 37 76 22 21 0 13 14 1 13 357 12:30 PM 10 76 44 26 74 24 27 3 11 17 1 14 327 12:45 PM 13 81 35 28 76 20 21 2 13 90 3 53 435 1:00 PM 18 72 42 26 75 12 17 3 18 119 4 46 452 1:15 PM 15 96 41 21 86 10 14 2 20 33 0 21 359 1:30 PM 19 96 68 26 75 15 12 0 13 16 0 10 350 1:45 PM 14 78 46 28 81 23 17 1 11 26 2. 14 341 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES: 110 697 378 209 616 146 151 , 11 112 352 12 196 2990 APPROACH%'S: 9.28% 58.82% 31.90% 21.52% 63.44% 15.04% 55.11% 4.01% 40.88% 62.86% 2.14% 35.00% s ( ..1�.�.:._... .. CONTROL: • 105 TTM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: NS National Data&Surveying Services Tierra Rejada Rd and Countrywood Dr, City of Moorpark Date: 1112/2013 SOUtltboti id Approach Project#: CA13_5017_001 Day: Saturday v -i_ A W ,E,,,w l®t'l 101 . 539 `1"7', AM Peak Hour m t(`Y� ll ! ': : NOON Peak Hour 1245 PM 1— r•r l,` -;".+ 1 .aim + �.F_, 101`1 0 ��I n ks) 0 i.,,,, PM Peak Hour Co d Dr f 1 ,, mt .. .ro '.1 •:,�w o al .I pi' i 10 0 130 • 0 •Ir re ._ OCONTROL 1° of ° - � Q ® � :. ^ -- I1 - ... a _....y.a-- s...W.,..of re ,g1 1 ....Periods Start End 0 - 0 I'.:.I 0 I 0 rfF AM - - :O :.r ' ®. 1® ®it#: 8. NOON 12:00 PM 2:00 PM i l' i PM II ,I - 4.:',.----", Northbound Approach Total Ins&Outs Total Volume Per Leg .o'h1,l, —1j 1-.-'__j ._..1 NOON ('.'_ .11'.1.- NOON .. _:..I...._.yJ � PM AM NOON PM r' AM NOON PM 1-i%r I,0 ,• .,l: AM NOON PM M.,1 L40 AM NOON PM AM I '?' ..,.,=:3 AM -qtr: � -: :, f NOON 1 _ I'77- NOON:.,.I �i� PM I --- ---: ..•a.u•Lrq Sau1:r t cq 106 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data &Surveying Services Project ID:CA13_5117_002 Day:SATURDAY City:Clty of Moorpark Date: 1112/2013 NOON NS/EW Streets: NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 12:00 PM 2 3 5 250 216 3 479 12:15 PM 3 4 7 197 233 3 447 12:30 PM 2 3 5 241 240 4 495 12:45 PM 1 10 8 231 214 3 467 1:00 PM 2 1 4 224 207 2 440 1:15 PM 0 1 2 210 218 7 438 1:30 PM 3 4 2 229 278 4 520 1:45 PM 1 4 5 215 197 2 424 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES:I 0 0 0 I I 14 0 30 38 1797 0 0 1803 28 3710 % APPROACH s: #DN/0! #DN/0! #DN/0! 31.82% 0.00% 68.18% 2.07% 97.93% 0.00% 0.00% 98.47% 1.53% CONTROL: 107 ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: NDS National Data&Surveying Services Shasta Ave and Los Angeles Ave,City of Moorpark Date 1/12/2013 i SOuthl70tl nc1 Approach Project M' CA13_5012 002 Day. Saturday 7.._ -i+._:. n; *.x t_I 0 0 :1 ° `i 41 ° +$,04 > a i `3w?tL ni ''r';.,1 20 j 0 {� � � , 38 NooNj AM Peak Hour A *7� t §, ;' ::4:„..,,,- , r= NOON Peak Hour 1200 PM 0 :'®ll ^0 PM Peak Hour Los Antoleo Ave A�+''� rte' g.:`m1. r'''. 4 7 � « ++ •�• CA 0 t ate' ' CONTROL t��o • e°3 j t 0 +O -.,,, rr r . . n: ti+, , 4,. 11 -�1�� 1 .+.. `P"�-fiSW` +F;( - :,.art .iw Noah PN�" r•, e.+.Kr enn, Stan End , '43.4 ._ 0 0 :IIO i + Jd AM 0 ! ( O .o 0 1 ° r,,.•.Y NOON 12:00 PM 200 PM „ f ° I.FI ° 0 '�l 0 � PM + :7':: 1 ' .. Northbound Approach Total Ins&Outs Total Volume Per Leg ,. _._.I AM __ + AM } 'I �jj1 NOON E. .--.1 NOON _.� ./ PM L -. r:.,1 PM AM NOON PM � AM NOON PM ,•41, ' 5 1 'r:71 i w :,x[�i.A1w t 8 ' .i 1a. r' AM NOON PM ;•ie'd 144il AM NOON PM AM '. .1 ;jr',.:-"i AM ,+„ wF&l";.,.+.+., rO0NTT 7.I 1. PM ,..+.. _..{ ._-.1 PM I'__—_ 71 100 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data &Surveying Services Project ID:CA13_5017_003 Day:SATURDAY City:City of Moorpark Date:1/12/2013 NOON NS/EW Streets: NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 12:00 PM 3 3 14 12 1 23 32 204 6 14 183 24 519 12:15 PM 7 4 18 20 3 25 19 160 17 23 206 22 524 12:30 PM 6 4 15 17 2 24 34 186 5 19 209 33 554 12:45 PM 10 4 15 28 4 26 42 181 7 12 185 11 525 1:00 PM 6 6 12 16 5 23 27 180 3 11 190 19 498 1:15 PM 4 4 1.5 12 5 28 23 173 4 11 190 17 486 1:30 PM 10 4 15 18 3 26 25 188 10 20 247 14 580 1:45 PM 9 3 15 13 4 30 36 173 5 12 165 11 476 NL NT NR 1r( SL ST SR 11 EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES: 55 32 119 1 136 27 205 1 238 1445 57 122 1575 151 4162 % APPROACH 's: 26.70% 15.53% 57.77%I 36.96% 7.34% 55.71% 13.68% 83.05% 3.28% 6.60% 85.23% 8.17% :,..__.—._..:___.._,_.._..:tet._...._._.. ..::.. . ......,._..._ .L........._> ...,... _: ....�i .._ _.� _' .._ _. CONTROL: 109 ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: NDS National Oata aSurveying Services Leta Yancv Rd and Los Angeles Ave.City of Moorpark ''''''1'."'z;:." ' r i_ Date: 1/12=13Southbound Approach Project a: CA13_5017 003 Day: Saturday �—.., .t.--,!1,----A4 c<.�` dYjtx .h 1,--,,,:-.-tr3 e;.�. 0 0 i 10 ®A )!1 _ , �_ �1 t_ yyr }x'�p•--'�] t 1.4{�� i NOON Peak Hour 1200 PM Y"1 1®�1,ri,:i 0 i • -;p 0 'fpi.,`.I PM Peak Hour G Lan An.ales Ave - r VPolr,; y 0 7 907 N �?�-' ` D ' 90 Yw 0 �j{^ re O CONTROL ' 0 , 0---.-4.-''',''.,' C L.sem.v--74:i'- I2 rt <X o „'®1 0 i 1 o �`1 0 'u `0 .) .t ,1 670 4 0 VI 11 1 • 'n/1 i CY 11• _ - AM NOON + PrM,t^, .?; i4f t E i 1'1'4•� cwnrcnoa. Start End in �r'f( 0 r 0 )'.. 0 1 . >.1:1'r AM 7r. 113` 1 i® ICI l ® 2, NOON 12;00 PM 2:00 PM I 1 21 1111 a PM Northbound Approach Total Ins&Outs Total Volume Per Leg • ` 1 AM r ;J_ ,:7 NOON ‘-``Y NOON e 1 ��: t,PM :7-1(';'..-'.4.i':',i PM AM NOON PM F'''e`•-e1 AM NOON PM Ease"r) -:i ice^'•-r 7_1 71:71:]W1.A....-- -V,4�� F1M k;• 0 lsC ^I yt.. r l ' 0.1 l Y:v.,l r1 AM NOON PM :e-,r L.co AM NOON PM AM 1--1-.-.:.----1 ? - .._.1 AM Il f;*•vat -' I NOON L r. r71 NOON I. Yt .-j- PM L 1' _'1:-� PM -'-1 • 110 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data &Surveying Services Project ID:CA13 5017_004 Day:SATURDAY City:City of Moorpark Date: 1/12/2013 NOON NS/EW Streets: NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 12:00 PM 7 21 7 0 27 2 0 64 12:15 PM 0 26 8 3 10 9 0 56 32:30 PM 0 14 9 2 23 7 0 55 12:45 PM 3 25 7 2 28 9 0 74 1:00 PM 2 17 3 0 25 7 0 54 1:15 PM 2 29 9 3 23 8 0 74 1:30 PM 3 18 7 2 33 3 1 67 1:45 PM 6 19 12 5 19 7 0 68 NL NT NR SL ST SR i EL ET ERWL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES: 23 0 169 0 0 0 0 62 17 188 52 1 512 APPROACH Ws: 11.98% 0.00% 88.02% #DIV/0! #DIV/01 #DIV/0! 0.00% 78.48°/0 21.52%I 78.01% 21.58% 0.41%� CONTROL: 111 ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared by: NDS National Data&Surveying Services Peach Hill Rd and Mesa Verde Dr.City of Moorpark t Dale: 1112/2013 :7-22,,_-!_:- Approach Project it CA13 5017_004 Day: Saturday iii.:11:; � ' I - 2p'.SW' fY1�' ° io fit,:.%)'''It'''''.,4' ±L..'._ ; .•,i''' '''',.„, A0 0 i i 0 I c 1 AM Peak Hour _ 4 L ��"v�'_=+ "�7 �� ',,t°y +nY NOON Peak Hour 1245 PM �3u. V: . 0 + 0 {l 0 ,=11 0 til ;,I PM Peak Hour r` . , LI 'I Masa Verde Dr V2 a) ..ill's fl Ell r =' m or v CONTROL 1 0 0 _ 1....0 if 0 r 0 l - 1 r 0 �I 109 I~ 0 - 1 -`3 f 1/1111 .. w �.t;a r o +®; 0 r Li) •��T�!r• Y= : irk-_.J y _ .z.,..--,7,6- TJt-.7-7 �c.3 G.A.'raaa. Slam End Fri] 0 • !r, 0 1-1 o ' i o IL ,:;'` .a-,7 -f 10 116• �I .��� AM Y�•,�fM1 0 liar- -,.. NOON 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4ry` ° ° ° ° PM Northbound Approach Total Ins&Outs Total Volume Per Leg i .'__J NOON _J_ '�.1 PM k:;..;.:.Sy _a; PM. AM NOON PM C3•t 1 cq AM NOON PM t'''1 l•-.: .,••,t lcu AM NOON PM 2:est L.:9 AM NOON PM AM F ' 1 T L ".1-p AM .:1,4',17':"?-x NOON 1 G;1 • [' .. ..1.T _ NOON„ ..._.r, PM _ '1... ' 1 PM . . ' _`- 112 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data &Surveying Services Project ID:CA13_5017_005 Day:SATURDAY City:City of Moorpark Date: 1/12/2013 NOON NS/EW Streets NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 12:00 PM 13 61 7 6 38 23 38 15 7 11 16 11 246 12:15 PM 12 79 5 5 46 27 35 16 11 3 11 13 263 12:30 PM 11 57 10 4 48 26 28 14 17 12 17 5 249 12:45 PM 5 66 5 5 43 48 46 7 11 7 17 7 267 1:00 PM 12 47 5 6 49 50 24 15 13 9 17 7 254 1:15 PM 13 63 9 4 47 23 36 11 16 5 20 5 252 1:30 PM 10 43 6 6 34 34 35 12 13 3 17 5 219 1:45 PM 12 61 11 8 54 36 33 11 16 7 14 7 270 NL NT NR SL ST SR lEL ET ER I WL WT WR 1 TOTAL I TOTAL VOLUMES: 88 477 58 44 359 267 276 101 104 57 129 60 2020 Wats s: 14.13% 76.57% 9.31% 6.57% 53.58% 39.85% 57.38% 21.00% 21.62% 23.17% 52.44% 24.39% i I „ 1 j.L� R 4 CONTROL: 11. 3 ITM Peak Hour Summary Prepared yt N National Data&Surveying Semen Spring Rd and Peach Hill Rd.City of Moorpark Dale 1f1212013 Southbound Approach ProjectX: CA13 5011 005 Day: Saturday h .7 _ r ..., yt ' ' It a ?. MMt u a 1 "14 Ti a ••�® c ,. 20 , 414 f ;,' AM Peak Hour A ,, NOON Peak our 1215 PM Y, 0 , 0 0 �•I 0 PM Peak Hour l is v Peach Hlll Rd i t 1''�'�y3 �• i 1,. 1 -'',','•i • t c:-.1 .,....-�-'4 ,1 u • Cri CONTROL ° ®` - a ., t. ... , 0 i.�® t ° f '0^71..•., S4.,A' r;.Y.'''t`- C A ,' 0 r,®;. 0 r--5. , , .. 0 ;mi,t ae. to ..fin...viii.-.t.-:t,_ .," 1 ->i..?,=,l' ,.. _ 1 `'`-' i F _ Co. •.r. Stan End :,`..,t a -i: 1 a :_._0 �... r• 0 _rt.. AM 1 269 I; E. -40 .I®'1 NOON 1200 PM 21 �00 PM ► I - 1• - PM Northbound Approach Total Ins&Outs Total Volume Per Leg,. 1 1 i% _ NOON _- ! . 1 NOON �{ PM ,..£a.. AM NOON PM F^1i t F'.'r AM NOON PM fist 1 c0 t'tea Lcg AM, 'NOON PM „c ,Lcg AM NOON PM - t�J NOON., f~T~-`.] NOON I ..- ..I PM A _._. _ 114 Prepared by NOS/ATD VOLUME Leta Yancy Rd N/o Unidos Ave Day:Saturday Oty:Moorpark Date:1/12/2013 Project I:CA13 5016_001 tib SB EB '.•1E> Total DAILY TOTALSI 329 421 0 0 f 753 AM I'+:nad NB SB Eli 1.NB TOTAL PM P,11od NB 513 EB 41.18 TOTAL 00:00 1 0f 12:00 4 7 ,, 00:15 0 2 }� ,r• 12:15 9 15 y 00:30 2 1f. r•' 12:30 8 16 '+ 00:45 0 3 2 5 __t _:'_I 12:45 7 28 8 46 R' , 01:00 0 0 "".1' 13:00 5 9 01:15 2 0 13:15 3 9 01:30 0 0 . + 13:30 8 9 �1 01:45 0 2 1 1 A. 13:45 4 20 5 32 02:00 2 0 - - 14:00 6 8 ' ,4-� 02:15 0 114:15 4 5 `, 02:30 1 1 14:30 12 7 02.45 2 5 1 3 14:45 8 30 4 24 03:00 0 0 r,, ! 15:00 9 9 1,7.- ' 03:15 0 0 3 - I 15:15 9 9 " .j 03:30 0 0 I 15:30 2 9 + ;,I 03:45 0 0 " 15:45 6 26 5 32 7I 04:00 0 0 13,', 16:00 3 5 • «1 04:15 0 0 wt+ 16:15 7 8 i_::., s! 0430 0 0 ' 16:30 2 10 j ' :45 3 3 0 16:45 4 16 12 35 +: _ ; 05:00 0 0 17:00 6 13 05:15 0 0 17:15 8 3 +I 05:30 2 1 17:30 10 4 F•'• i 05:45 2 4 0 1 `= 17:45 1 25 7 27 :` 06:00 2 1 c_. 18:00 5 6 t 06:15 1 0 - - 18:15 3 5 '; 06:30 6 3 .•"" 18:30 3 5 fi 06:45 0 9 2 6ri 18:45 4 15 6 22 07:00 1 0 -- - 19:00 1 5 - —" 07:15 3 1 °':'. 19:15 1 5L. .. 07:30 4 11930 0 3 a' ` 07:45 4 12 4 6 19:45 2 4 7 20 08:00 4 1 '_ 20:00 1 8 i -> -i 08:15 1 0 j- 20:15 2 5 ' 08:30 3 7 if - 20:30 5 6 ti-- ; 08:45 8 16 9 17 20:45 3 11 12 1 09:00 5 5 r� 21:00 3 3 - 09:15 5 4 F` 21:15 2 2 V, 09:30 6 8 ;i 21:30 4 2 09:45 8 24 5 22 �_: 21:45 2 11 3 10 10:00 5 9j 22:00 1 2 I r '; 10:15 3 8 l 22:15 2 3 1' 10:30 5 8 22:30 0 3 10:45 7 20 7 3222:45 5 8 2 10 ' `I 11:00 6 10 p,-:+ .., .. - 23:00 2 1 ,i 11:15 6 6 I • 23:15 0 6 l 11:30 9 6 23:30 3 0 I e 1. 2 . `_..: •_• _ 23:45 2 7 1e • — _ :•-='.vygS►' " der.. .aF r n....', - ::.. -',1---"T"-----7- r—"- ---,-..-.r t• ' +. :I 4 a DAILY TOTALS Nti Sr. f 6 1'1E. T;;t,)i 329 121 I) 0 f 753 ......,-_,_,_:„2..„:„0.• '•� MIM9.. �C _____ . ..— .._,,,___— 1_,3.1=�,,,-.,. ; .„...,..,__1_,_..._„._,,-• tr., ...3w7•.'S � .�.�. .. , Wit.-I yLI-,+,':i 115 Prepared by NDS/ATD VOLUME Mesa Verde Dr between Ashtree St&Peach Hill Rd Day:Saturday City:Moorpark Date:1/12/2013 Project lh.CA13_5016_002 NS Sc. t W13 • ToutDAILY TOTALS 0 c 172 -18u ` 958 A!11 Pt nod NE ,,i; i: : LVET TOTAL PM Period NG SB CB 'NB TOTAL 00:00 0 2 12:00 6 7 +=" 00:15 1 3 1 12:15 9 7 + '' 00:30 1 1 k is, i 12:30 11 7 1 ' 'rd� DORS 2 4 1 7 12:45 6 32 12 33 ` if 01:00 0 0 i -FI 13:00 2 5 7:_W 01:15 0 0 ' r , 13:15 11 9 rS•,,,,' 01:30 2 2 - r;="n' 13:30 7 5 + •}. ir_ 0145 1 •3 1 3 L ..` r, 13:45 14 34 9 22 d_"•dT i si 02:00 2 2 ,r.' 1 14:00 7 12 02:15 0 1 ; 14:15 4 12 'x" 't3 02:30 1 0 y 1',`.' 14:30 4 7 r -tc,�1'l 02:45 0 3 0 3 k'+;_':2`�t.'.'J 14:45 8 23 9 40 t._:: :r.'; `,1 03:00 0 0 h 15:00 6 14 03:15 0 1 ^, 't� 15:15 9 12 ' a., 4. 03:30 2 0 p " T 15:30 9 8 1 03:45 1 3 0 1 tf... ._ :___.J 15:45 1.1 _35 4 38 f 04:00 0 0 ,t;'_'- 16:00 9 13 04:15 0 2 ' 1"1 16:15 8 11 K� 04:30 2 0 1..' ' " '1 16:30 6 10 i 04:45 2 4 0 2 .r 7 -. i 16:45 8 31 12 46 I 05:00 2 0 -1 17:00 10 13 05:15 1 0 'l 17:15 6 6 "1 05:30 3 0 P 17:30 12 9 14. Mc - 05:45 2 8 1 1 I' - _ 17:45 10 38 16 44 J 06:00 3 0 `. - - i 18:00 8 13 i 06:15 1 0 M.,. 18:15 3 10 _ 0630 0 0 { 18:30 11 13 06:45 2 6 0 -. I 18:45 8 30 9 45 07:00 4 319:00 9 12 07:15 6 5 ,•-•, • • / 19:15 6 11 07:30 3 3 a` '=` „; 19:30 5 7 07:45 7 20 0 11 4 "'• 19:45 4 24 7 37 „- 08:00 4 1 _i 20:00 3 3 _ 08:15 8 3 , 20:15 6 8 08:30 6 0 20:30 6 6 - , 08:45 10 28 3 7 1 20:45 5 20 3 20 1 T'Ri 09:00 5 1 --. 21:00 4 5 09:15 11 6 { I; 21:15 5 4r 1: 09:30 8 5 21:30 1 7 r 09:45 6 30 4 16 _ 21:451 11 2 18 r' J 10:00 9 7 is - 22:00 2 4 10:15 13 8 22:15 0 4 10:30 6 11 _ + 22:30 1 3 10:45 13 41 4 30 _ 22:45 0 3 1 12 11:00 8 8 I 23:00 2 2 = ”-' 11:15 7 7 ' 23:15 1 3 L•� 11:30 15 1023:30 1 3 r .. I 23735 4 4 - • I r" - - - '''--7.---"7,7: - :•- �,.-:_':-•- 11:-,--"•..----- ..yam' i_ - _ _ _-, -, '.,,,,, tJ _.^--.r•. _ :ii `.:7 EB r' Total DAILY TOTALS O ,0 172 953 F. - _..te - . .� - - - - ' -� • - - _ - liti , ,:-,f•-'?n' :;.,146Aa ,€,I,4.3.1.• .f''• /^4.(-.•*, •'l.r 1:,;_,,,",„_, • -•••:-..`A '• ;M"w^E,I.-:r.4 + h k::v.�,..a Wil, Ir 116 Prepared by NDS/ATO VOLUME Peach Hill Rd W/o Spring Rd Day:Saturday city:Moorpark Date:1/12/2013 Project N:CA13_5016 003 DAII.Y TOTALS r; E lwri I Tc::i U 0 ; 1 . 3,WS 1 0.409 AF,1 4'•,iiotl NU So Ela !V.3 TO TAI 1'c.i I'i.�r:0:! N9. 5E3 LB !'1c TOTO,I 12:00 00:00 7 11 � 63 56 + 00:15 3 6 s* '' 1215 65 49 :• Y 00:30 7 5 iv 12:30 56 54 r• I,tin 00:45 4 21 9 31 4' !.1 1245 61 245 74 2.33 r e','It_ 01:00 5 9 -I 13:00 54 72 01:15 0 3 T�re a� 13:15 66 58 ` • i 01:30 3 6 a . ' €I 13:30 63 62 1 • s:` 01:45 5 13 3 21 ' 'y7j`'..- i 13:45 55 238 60 25ZI 02.00 1 3 ;,j 14:00 47 69 02:15 2 1 •'-o k 14:15 51 61 s 14:30 52 52 02:45 2 7 4 9 ,.• 14:45 45 195 66 248 4 _ 03:00 0 1 15:00 50 60 r::i 03:15 2 1 i ': 15:15 42 58 r:': - . 03:30 6 0 15:30 56 73 03A5 1 9 2 4 'P'.'` ; 15:45 59 207 71 262 ; r••2-'•• 04:00 4 1 16:00 56 58 04:15 2 1 r 16:15 49 77 04:30 5 2 -•- ;i 16:30 56 55 L. 04:45 9 20 1 5 r- . • 16:45 72 233 84 274 _ _ 05:00 7 2 17:00 69 71 1 E 05:15 11 1 pl 17:25 37 77 05:30 13 4 17:30 52 62 05:45 12 43 5 12 :; i 17:45 62 220 68 278 ; 06:00 14 2 18:00 63 85 =i 06:15 14 5 • ` 1 18:15 49 72 +) 06:30 10 2 •• _ 18:30 56 66 ` 06:45 17 55 4 1318:45 38 206 51 274 •".1,' 0700 29 7 - — 19:00 49 76 - 0715 24 16 r: 19:15 33 44 07:30 33 13 19:30 28 32 I 07:45 4 133 15 51 z,• 19:45 36 146 60 212 4 08:00 57 30 ire" '- 20:00 24 35 .- 08:15 45 28 20:15 25 47 08:30 71 1520:30 15 34 08:45 56 229 33 106 i2005 19 83 34 150 ' ..1 09:00 45 39 21:00 14 24I 09:15 56 33 iE j 21:15 19 23 S I 09:30 83 46 1: 2130 21 33 09:45 62 246 36 154 _'• 2145 12 66 25 105 . I 10:00 55 56 22:00 17 32 10:15 57 60 + 22:15 14 28 r. 10:30 59 68 22:30 10 31 10:45 68 239 56 240 22:45 5 46 15 106 :. .}'.,;I 11:00 64 40 23:00 11 14 -,..1 11:15 60 60 23:15 10 10 % I 11:30 74 53 23:30 5 13 11: .r 23:45 7 3 I x _ - DAILY TOTALS 'N,B SB I Eh ': B I Total 0 0 i.1'l I 3 3US 7,199 • 117 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 3/9/2015 Analysis Time Period PM PEAK Highway Peach Hill Road From/To CHRISTIA BARRETT DRIVE Jurisdiction Analysis Year Description Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 Segment length 0.0 mi % Recreational vehicles 1 "s Terrain type Level % No-passing zones 0 Grade; Length mi Access points/mi 5 /mi Up/down a Two-way hourly volume, V 294 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 1 Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.7 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.986 Two-way flow rate,(note-11 vp 298 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 149 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h Observed volume, Vf - veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS 49.0 mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h Adj. for access points, fA 1.3 mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 47.8 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 45.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, FR 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 0.998 Two-way flow rate, (note-1) vp 295 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 148 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 22.8 E Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 22.8 % Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, UOS C volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.09 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >e 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 118 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed 3/9/2015 Analysis Time Period PM PEAK Highway Peach Hill Road From/To CHRISTIA BARRETT DRIVE Jurisdiction Analysis Year Description Input Data Highway class Class 1 Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 Segment length 0.0 mi 8 Recreational vehicles 1 Terrain type Level 2 No-passing zones 0 Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 5 /mi Dp/down t Two-way hourly volume, V 294 veh/h Directional split 50 / 50 i Average Travel Speed Grade adjustment factor, EG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.7 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.986 Two-way flow rate.(note-1) vp 298 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 149 pc/h Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h Observed volume, Vf - veh/h Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS 49.0 mi/h Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h Adj. for access points, fA 1.3 mi/h Free-flow speed, FFS 47.8 mi/h Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h Average travel speed, ATS 45.4 mi/h Percent Time-Spent-Following Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.1 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 • Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHv 0.998 Two-way flow rate,(note-I) vp 295 pc/h Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 148 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 22.8 4 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 0.0 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 22.8 8 Level of Service and Other Performance Measures Level of service, LOS C Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.09 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT1S 0 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 0 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 0.0 veh-h Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 119 4' (A--2 i ): 7 ID _ Oil 27g 5r 120 .J Prepared try MDS/ATD VOLUME Peach Hill Rd N/o Tierra Rejada Rd Day:Saturday e...S0,..(1,,' ':F ' "•.1.,`. .' 1,1 t{ . Project N:CA13 MoorparkCity: 5016 004 Date:1/12/2013 ^:.+ -,3 j11 Lia 1111B 7J,.1 DAILY TOTALS ti ire i.;';n � (I o �-- ------ ---- I ; ;-..:i APA f'rniul N3 SR 113 :df; 1'OTAI PM Period Nit SL, LH EV13 four 0000 10 6 „1 ' • 12:00 27 32 0015 7 5 ?5! A 1233 25 37 "'•' j 0030 7 2 1 a r 12:30 37 38 00:45 6 30 2 15 2—14 52. 12:45 42 131 37 144s ` 01:00 5 4 =-9.a"•'-,ter; 13:00 26 36 7� 01:15 2 1 ~ 13:15 35 29 - 01:30 2 3 Y ; 13:30 32 48 8D, , 01:45 5 14 3 11 ". ,__ 13:45 38 131 32 1479 02110 2 5 g,, 14:00 38 31 •�.Strong 02:15 1 1 3.';_:,,i 14:15 37 30 pp 0230 2 2 -4" 1430 31 32 ) i 02:45 3 8 0 8 - " 14:45 32 138 41 134 :73 72,14 03:00 1 1 A , _4 15:00 38 30 03:15 2 1 ,... .- 1S:15 39 38 '� r ' ,w I"T . :.I 03:30 1. 4 - 1%•`` ,,11 15:30 45 23 ^68?, - 03J4S 0 4 0 6 j. 15:45 41 163 27 118 _.: :'„ 04:00 -0 2y2;'r ,: 16:00 45 36 04:15 3 1 er4sa«: M 16:15 37 28 64•=:. � y3' 0430 1 3 4 v.'1.t � 16:30 39 33 ".2 r4i 1 ' 04:45 0 4 2 8 - -.. 1, ' 16:45 3S 156 38 135 Ir 05:00 0 2 32 + 17:00 40 30T1./ 05:3.5 2 5 i'7.!y 17:15 38 37 Lys 1%-.,j 0530 0 3 3_• .r. 17:30 32 23 r'�"� 4 i"') 05:45 1 3 6 16 l.:(�r19 _ 17:45 49 159 38 128 F- t�87 06:00 1' 5 ,`6• .,,,k, 16.^00 36 37 � 06:15 3 7 130 .,; 18:15 24 25 '3• t ).►•_, y- ;dg_ ,k.wll 06:30 3 11 ', 1,. 1830 33 31 i.64: U 06:45 3 10 13 36 ¢ t:�t4 18:45 28 121 24 1175- '''',23821 07:15 8 17 :• .. 1.9:00 115 20 24 21 07:30 10 30 , T';' 19:30 17 19 1`"• •«"{ 3617 ., 07:45 11 33 22, 78 G•1` •�' 19:45 19 80 10 73 s2'g1V-h531I 08:00 23 24 .,4. 200 19 13 '32 Yr� 08:15 14 33 +47 20:15 13 11 '. 4 ,, 0830 8 29 JT3' 20:30 19 18 372•- i"1" 08:45 8 53 38 124 w �r1 .; 20:45 18 69 16 58 1'-34�127� 09:00 17 46 . ,_r::-....• 21:00 21 17 I*38'.1;— x 09:15 30 36 1(::„., 21:15 16 10 26 0930 29 56 8.,1 2130 14 11 r 25 ` y;1'� .09:45 17 93 39. .177 A .. 70'.• 21:45 11 62 6 44 -ajj i 10:00 29 36 .. 22:00 21 16 '44.. 10:15 23 35 1.:,I,^re 22:15 15 11 26..4�?'r 1030 36 34 ,D,' ;442,-;; 22:30 23 18 i '4 10'45 28 116 45 150 ,4•. .•.' 22:45 7 66 16 61 1)23.- 127J 11:00 32 36 6�,8.r ?`” 23:00 9 9 r .A: t-'r 11:15 29 35 ',64„ y,{�.i"-pi 23:15 13 8 1 r ( T+i I 11:30 28 40 `68:;';..kr? 23:30 11 7 ih '' d. 1145 .33 122 39 150 ;^p.$.n e`• 23:45 44 ; . 2- r : _ " ; r, n' it'.. . .:ti�1d0-rl '.. d£ti=_• r4 ----<-- ;d -< 9 ,rit-� `r,}14... A13201 1':- L�13::�TI4.iWkiF I 51 f-ySPttR% t�'); a o;._ +5i'4TV'1.'tii-2QP ;:ail.Z.' aitM ''',;Fi l ,I_,C *.•.f 47 96 '� �r &k�,.56- DAILY TOTALS %R 5a rn wu Taal 1,810 1,070 I (3 0 3,780 t.J r. ..„:„..... ..,,..„.,,... ,f,. .,.,,„ ....,„.r •,, .,„1”_ H F+rzw-,, '1S..,._I" 1. , �";J i • x:14 �r3lA::9j, ryl 7. t r11l)(.4-5;:v.'<I e- 202r 'it,,,;:: r+. .1‘; - --� 0 :41-1-7„-,,-'',• -c,, �pp�,��� 1 ,aY�: � it Y r i;j.,,�'Z 4 '. .� f44 J f ;r 08 00 iC:.,,Hour .rc,�17 i 1 90 rt;r 77y"9 Ng Whims •S8 A5 ">' 114 41 J, - o-„r 1 it A rr r err 3i:,.401,—at-'1.**164°12Pkt4•' j. eti �1 . w+a 1 .1 �'� M � W'm ;� 1yyl£ ,4 p r y, 5( d ' s. Lr..l 121 Prepared by NOS/ATE) VOLUME ArroyoVistaCommunityParkinternalRdway connectstotheCountrywoodDr/TierraRejadand Day:Saturday City:Moorpark Date:1/12/2013 Project 4:CA13_5016_005 DAILY TOTALS NB SB , ES INS 1 Tor;l 2.39u 2.388 I 0 0 4775 AM r• :-;1 NJr3 SB CO W3 TOTAL PM Pet od NB SB ES WO TQ'rAL 00= 0 0 ::,rr•..;L,;,•; 12:00 57 72 -.1:. 00:15 0 0 iti'�."L3.�r1 12:15 82 29 F:,:, ---1" 1 `t 12:30 84 33 .:.•;•::( 1r. 0030 0 0 Z"'' ,�,,u�,' . 0045 0 0 •cel. '•. •'r lt,f_ �T,;�.ii 12:45 63 286 129 263 Y ;r :1 0 0 ,r 13:00 71 162 ''.7:'::,-.::::,,-#1.--:-..-- 01:00 A)rP",`1'7R 13:15 63 71 T `r�r,� 01:30 0 0 l,i a , 13:30 83 29 y' 01:45 0 0 ;mitt,: 13:45 79 296 29 291 .!.'•:. -y, 02:00 0 0 . ,', /7;-P.:7 r 14100 46 170 `�:..': 02:15 0 0 J o•el /:i( 14 .- ,}.r y't 14:15 34 133 . ..t t 02:30 0 0 rx?'-;,;''Si«J 14:30 26 81 u7, ::,:,;..--41 02:45 0 0 a+'I; .-� 14:45 22 128 31 415 := 03:00 0 0 717— I' 37 15:00 15 37 T,::-- :'a 03:15 0 0 an,,( 15:15 11 155 i�``ir':'�,,,1 03:30 0 0 1, 15:30 3 88 4r,`' 03:45 0 0 ti,_•_. ; , _r 15:45 4 33 96 376L.'.(;1,e•,-it r 04:00 0 0 ;i•', :.�;•_.:d 16:00 7 44 *I:-:- - 04:15 0 0 e::r> . 16:15 3 7 0•.,• ',r 04:30 0 0 )'''; 16:30 4 5 '1'' ' '•:' 04dS 0 0 t:,i,. 16:45 1 15 9 65 j,jtr(_ ;:I:~' 05:00 0 0 I r � 17:00 1. 8 ' ,,` r, . 05:15 0 0 Lt.! '^1 17:15 1 1 ` 05:30 0 0 ij 17:30 1 3 syr) 05:45 0 0 17:45 2 5 4 16 , r. _` 06:00 6 0 • 18:00 1 3 .� 06:15 4 0 1 Ar '1 18:15 1 0 { 'Ic Al� 06:30 5 4 ''j 18 30 0 0 r,-,, ,`, 06:45 9 24 2 6 _ •-^ ": 18:45 0 2 0 3 i.r, +a• .~ 07:00 59 2 - 19:00 2 0 07:15 107 10 r- 19:15 0 1 r irt0730 85 10 .119:30 0 0 ^� . 07:45 46 297 9 33. 19:45 1 3 1 2 •r'•:i_ _:` 08:00 53 2 - 20:00 1 1 4. 08:15 80 6 20:15 0 0 al • `r7 08:30 110 7 20:30 0 0 jl+} 08:45 121 364 14 29 20:45 0 1 0 1 '%_ 09:00 68 96 - 21:00 0 0 I t a 1 , 09:15 64 106 FT/71 I 21:15 0 0 if K 09:30 85 30 21:30 0 0 I'r.. 1,.' Kr:,r�:. .,7.i 09:45 125 342 57 289 21:45 1 1 0 �r. 10:00 81 40 '_ 22:00 0 1 i7-a' i. > 10:15 95 108 I . 22:15 0 0 '.:',: • 10:30 64 79 22:30 0 0 1, 10:45 91 331 43 270 22:45 0 0 1 Ia,, 'r ': 'I 11:00 23:00 1 0 —----a 11:15 23:15 0 0 I '', ;; ;. 1130 2330 0 0 ' its' ,rr 23:45 0 1 0 i__ i 4 f a�__• ,,'+L3..s.I L.„:t ' 1 r u,e y S,�_......t,,rut. i fi ,. _1 J I I DAILY TOTALS N8 513 l en a+:u I Tura( 2,390 2.383 it 0 1.773 - 1 ' 1 ' 4l Ct.- 1 i 4 fi r '' Ij. •" 1 1 l.•� �r 1I I ,I� 1'!;11 +'i, 1,-4✓ f .' 'k. .74 °,..e, it Y.a 't tca' y, .-1: "" •,'`,0 l Zt Vh1 - .1.10.'14 .s.'a}'V..'1:+' .. :rtCi.��"�".S.i...? ,.i1 1"� �L.i Lrl.l.�:a.% • 122