HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-Public Works
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
File No.O.141-K ctJij)./
- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTI~
Date:
5-20-88
.:; I. ~ .'." "') I,
'..' .,,{ t."
S b' t. Adoption of Negative Declaration --
u 18C. Approval of Plans' & Authorization
,,;:,. Jr.... to Advertise for Bids - Installation
.. of New Lighting Standards for
'llJ: L{Fiscal ini Field
From:
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE
Publ ic Works/Engineering' :.'.:.'
Dept:
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
June, 1987 - Allocation of $117,090 from 1987/88 CDBG Program, for
installation of new lights at Fiscalini Field, approved.
Finding made that installation of new lights is needed
for health and safety reasons.
Directed that a full environmental impact report be conducted.
Staff directed to prepare an environmental assessment, and
$5,000 authorized for preparation of technical studies.
Report entitled, "Noise Assessment Study of Spirit Baseball
Games," accepted.
9-21-87
9-21-87
10-05-87
03-21-88
Recommen<:led motion:
1. That the Negative Declaration for installation of lights for Fiscalini
Field, Public Works Project No. 87-23, be adopted.
2. That the plans for installation of new lighting standards for
Fiscalini Field, in accordance with Plan No. 7332, be approved; and
the Director of Public Works/City Engineer authorized to advertise
for bids.
cc: City Administrator
City Attorney
Ann Siracusa
Ken Henderson
Annie Ramos
Signature
Contact person: RODer Hardgrave
. h' Staff Report & Neg. Dec.
Supportmg data attae ed. _. _____.
Phone:
5025-_
2
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Fiscalini Field
Amount: $107,000
Source:
Acct. No. 121-544-57596 -
(1..J~ )~ .~
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Agenda Item No. 9
. .
CITY OF SAN BERN"'DINO - R.QUEST pQ. COuNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
At their meeting of 5-5-88, the Environmental Review
Committee recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration for
installat~ of new lighting standards for Fiscalini Field.
The public comment period will run from 5-19-88 to
6-1-88. Responses to any public comments received will be
available for review at the Council meeting.
The study prepared by J. J. Van Houten and Associates,
Inc., entitled, "Noise Assessment Study of 'Spirit' Baseball
Games," was accepted at the Council Meeting of 3-21-88.
We recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
Plans for installation of these new lighting standards
have been prepared by the Engineering Division and the project
is ready to be advertised for bids. The project will consist,
in general, of removing the existing lighting towers and in-
stalling new lighting standards and fixtures.
Removal of the 4 infield towers and installation of 4
new lighting standards are included in the Basic Bid. Removal
of the 4 outfield towers and installation of new standards
will be included as Additive Alternate "A." This method will
ensure that the lighting in the infield will be upgraded, and
the outfield facilities will be included in the contract, if
a favorable bid is received or if a source of supplemental
funding can be identified.
Listed below is an estimate of the total project cost:
Construction Contract (Basic Bid) $ 90,300
Engr. & Insp. (W.O. #1809) 11,700
Sub-Total $ 102,000
Contingencies (5%):t 5,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 107,000
Additive Alternate IlAII $, 63,500
An amount of $117,090 has been allocated, under Account
No. 121-544-57596, from the 1987/88 CDBG Program to finance the
costs incurred for this project.
5-20-88
.
o
o
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Initial Study
Public Works No. 87-23
To replace fixtures at Fiscalini Field
in perris Hill Park on Highland Avenue
May 5, 1988
Prepared by: Valerie C. Ross
Planning Department
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
.
o
o
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.1 Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.2 Project Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.2 Site and Project Characteristics . . . . . 3-1
3.2.1 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.2.2 Project Characteristics . . . . . . . . . 3-1
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS . . . 4-1
4.1 Environmental Setting . . . . 4-1
4.2 Environmental Effects . 4-1
4.2.1 Transportation/Circulation . . . . . . . . 4-1,4-2
4.2.2 Lighting . . . . . . . . 4':'2,4-3
5.0 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
Appendix A - Environmental Impact
Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2
Appendix B - Location Map . 5-10
Appendix C - Traffic Study . . . . . . . 5-11
Appendix 0 - Lighting Analysis . . . . 5-49
.
o
o
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by
Bernardino as an Initial Study
Project No. 87-23, to replace
Fiscalini Field, Perris Hill
Avenue.
the
for
light
Park
City of San
Public Works
fixtures at
on Highland
As stated
California
Guidelines,
to:
in Section 15063 of the State of
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
the purposes of an Initial Study are
1.
Provide
use as
prepare
the Lead
the basis
an EIR or a
Agency with information to
for deciding whether to
Negative Declaration.
2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a
project, mitigating adverse impacts before an
EIR is prepared, thereby, enabling the project
to qualify for a Negative Declaration.
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is
required by:
a.
Focusing the EIR on the
determined to be significant.
effects
b. Identifying the effects determined not to
be significant.
c. Explaining the reasons for determining
that potentially significant effects
would not be significant.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in
the design of a project.
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for
the finding in a Negative Declaration that a
project will not have a significant effect on
the environment.
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIR's.
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR
could be used with the project.
1-1
,
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fiscalini Field
May 5, 1988
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1 Proposed Project
To replace the existing 60', 1000W light fixtures
with 80-100', 1500W light fixtures at Fiscalini
Field at perris Hill Park. Potential. circulation
impacts were also addressed.
2.2 Project Impacts
Impacts
. . .
9.a. An increase in traffic that is greater than
the land use designated on the General Plan.
9.b. Use of existing. or demand for new, parking
facilities/structures?
9.d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation.
9.f. Increased safety hazards
bicyclists or pedestrians.
to
vehicles,
2-1
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fisca1ini Field
May 5, 1988
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Location
Fiscalini Field is located at perris Hill Park,
1007 E. Highland Avenue.
3.2
3.2.1
Site and Project Characteristics
Existing Conditions
The site is an 80 acre City park that
ballfield, tennis courts, bowl area,
and other facilities.
contains the
YMCA, library
3.2.2
Project Characteristics
Fiscalini Field is an existing ballfield at Perris
Hill Park.
3-1
..
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fisca1ini Field
May 5, 1988
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
4.1 Environmental Setting
Fiscalini Field is an existing ballfield located at
perris Hill Park. No changes to land use or the
environment are proposed.
4.2.1
A traffic study was prepared to determine impacts
to the area from ballfield generated traffic. The
study looked at the existing setting without a ball
game in process and the impacts from ball game
related traffic considering full attendance (worst
case scenario). The study addressed traffic and
parking impacts.
The traffic study looked at the Level of Service
(LOS) for adjacent streets without a ball game in
progress. Level of Service is a measure of
congestion or delay. The study determined that the
LOS for adjacent intersections would be B or C with
A, Band C levels determined to be good operating
conditions. LOS 0 is below average, LOS E is at
capacity and LOS F is stacked up conditions.
The study determined that with a ball game in
progress the LOS would remain at B or C with only
one intersection decreasing from B to C. The
Baseball games will not create unacceptable levels
of service to the circulation network. The study
recommends that the timing for signals at Highland
Avenue and Waterman Avenue and Highland Avenue and
Valencia Avenue be modified to accommodate
increased traffic. Also recommended was restriping
of the entrance to the Fiscalini Field parking lot
at Harrison Street.
The traffic study also looked at impacts to parking
with ball games in progress. It was determined
that approximately 950 parking spaces would be
needed for a full attendance game. There are 436
parking spaces on site (316 marked and 120 unmarked
spaces). Approximately 520 additional spaces are
available off site at adjacent locations.
Activities at the Roosevelt Bowl are scheduled so
as to not conflict with ball games. Activities at
the tennis courts could conflict with the ball
games because they aren't spaces reserved
4-1
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fiscalini Field
May 5, 1988
specifically for that use.
It is recommended
parking attendants
appropriate spaces.
that temporary signage and
be used to direct people to
Impacts
and can
above.
related to circulation are not significant
be mitigated through the measures listed
4.2.2
Lighting
The request is to replace the existing 60', 1000W
light fixtures with 80',1500W light fixtures at
Fiscalini Field. Changing the light fixtures and
wattage are necessary to bring the field up to
Class A, ball club standards and relieve the City
frOm liability due to below standard light levels.
The purpose for increasing the pole height is to
direct more light on to the playing field and
reduce spillover light from reaching other adjacent
uses. The fixtures themselves will have a shield
attached to further redirect light onto the playing
field. Light readings were made adjacent to the
field with and without the existing ball field
lights. These readings were compared to the new
light fixture readings on poles of 80' to 100'
arrived at by means of a computer projection. The
readings measured both horizontal and vertical foot
candles which are standard measures of light.
Horizontal is the amount
horizontal plane such
Vertical is the amount
vertical plane such as a
of light directed onto the
as the playing field.
of light directed onto a
street light.
Horizontal is the amount of light directed onto a
horizontal plane such as the playing field.
Vertical is the amount of light directed onto a
vertical plane such as a street light or a light on
the side of a building. Horizontal is the light
required to adequately light the playing field with
little vertical light generated. The vertical
light from the playing field is considered
spillover and is what causes impacts to adjacent
uses. The Existing ball field lights do spillover
onto and across Highland Avenue to the north of the
4-2
.
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fiscalini Field
May 5, 1988
ball field. However, it should be noted that a
street light creates more foot candles than
spillover lighting from the ball field. The same
is true of the security lighting at the Bank of
Redlands, located west of the left field fence,
across Elks Drive.
The proposed poles and fixtures will decrease foot
candle spillover north of Highland Avenue due to
more light being directed onto the playing field.
4-3
.
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works Project No. 87-23
Light Fixtures at Fiscalini Field
May 5, 1988
5.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A - Environmental Impact Checklist
Appendix B - Location Map
Appendix C - Traffic Study
Appendix 0 - Lighting Analysis
csj/5-l9-88
DOC:MISC
ISPW8723
5-1
.
Appendix A
n
r CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ""'
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT CHECKLIST
Ilo.. ~
~ ""
A. BACRGRO!l~
Application Number: Public \'lorks No. 87-23
Project Description: To replace the existino 60' hi9h liQht
towers with 80-100' high towers and to increase the wattaoe from
1000W to l500W. Also. to address circulation r'nn("'~rn!'":..
Location: Fiscalini Field. Perris Hill Park. 1007 E. HiQhlanil
AVP-nne.
Environmental Constraints Areas: -
General Plan Designation:
Zoning Designation: "0" Open Space
-
B. ~~Yl~Q~~NI~y-IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. EaI~h Re~ources Will the proposal result in:
Yes No Maybe
a. Earth movement (cut and/or
fill) of 10,000 cubic yards or
more? X
b. Development and/or grading on
a slope greater than 15%
natural grade? X
c. Development within the
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone? X
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature? X
"'" ~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 1 OF 8
VCR/csj
5-2
.
,
o
o
PW 87-23
Yes
No
Maybe
'"
I
e.
Soil erosion
project site?
on
or off
the
___x_
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
x
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
x
h. Other?
x
2. ~IR_RESOURCES: Will the proposal
result in:
a.
Substantial
an effect
quality?
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
x
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
x
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
x
3.
W~TEB RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
will
the
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
x
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
x
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
x
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. other?
x
x
x
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 2 OF 8
.
r
Jl
"""
4 .
BIOLOGICa~_~~~9URC~~:
proposal result in:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
b.
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of animals or their
c. Other?
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result
in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to exterior
noise levels over 65 dB or
interior noise levels over 45
dB?
c. Other?
6.
LAN'_~:
result in:
will the
proposal
a.
A change in
designated
Plan?
the land use as
on the General
b. Development within an Airport
District?
c. Development within "Greenbelt"
Zone A,B, or C?
d. Development within a high fire
hazard zone?
e. Other?
-....
o
Yes
PW 87-23
No Maybe
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 8
.
c
o
PW 87-23
Maybe
"ll
~
7.
MAN-MADE HAZARDS:
project:---' ._---
Will
the
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8. HOUSING: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. :!'Ml'IJ;;!,QBTATIOl'lL~!B~!!};.ATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
b.
Use of existing,
new, parking
structures?
or demand for
facilitiesl
c. Impact upon existing public
transportation systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
'"
REVISED 10/87
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
.J
PAGE 4 OF 8
, .
o
o
PW R7-23
r
No
Maybe
"""
g.
h.
A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
of
Other?
10. FP~~J~_SERVICES will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
b.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
c.
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.l?
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e.
Medical aid?
f.
Solid waste?
g.
Other?
11. U~lLITIES: Will the proposal:
lio..
REVISED 10/87
a. Impact the following beyond
the capability to provide
adequate levels of service or
require the construction of
new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4. Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
Yes
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
PAGE 5 OF 8
o
o
PW 87-23
r
Maybe
"
12. AESTHE~ICS:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
b. Will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
c. Other?
13.
Could the
~p~rU~~--F~~QYRCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
c. Other?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
(Section 15065)
\..
The California Environmental
Quality Act states that if any of
the following can be answered yes
or maybe, the project may have a
significant effect on the
environment and an Environmental
Impact Report shall be prepared.
a. Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 601'8
.
o
o
PW 87-23
r
Yes
No
Maybe
"""
important examples of the
major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the
potential to achieve short
term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the
future.)
x
x
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on
the environment is
significant. )
d. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
x
x
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
See Attached.
~
\..
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 7 OF 8
.
o
o
PW 87-23
, ~
D. DETERMI~~~J9~
On the basis of this initial study,
o
the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, although there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measur.es described above have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
!21
o
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
("VI N>>JUfi1JT1r1, fi?fi'lIEi"fJ {,/)/o/ufrTl::rf'
Name and Title
~C,RH+-
Signature
Date:
A17/'Y, I"'~
\..
j
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 8 OF 8
.
o
o
~U~lLI :~~~9~~li , - .. "l~,~.' ~
.. ~
. cIA eaol".... I ,I' ,
......
l!limii ' I' ~ ;;: 1-1000
. I'" I~ ~ 1
~ I" 'm8' o' ~'. tn- ~ ,
ftol -.' .... 1-'
m 1 ' .
'" .. - 1 *0 I"
., "~1~ i . 11.1.' . ....
J -.. = .',
I ....,. , . I
-... - ?IOO .......
, I.' ., [I"
,t,,,,, . ' - .:"..~,
,
.. . i== . .
.....- ... c". C,"
C"' ... tI.
Il!el~~ 't1to' -!If c~.. I
'rJ' c-" . ....
-"""~'./'. [~ c-"
sIre . . L-. '".
II ,
- ,--..., 0 _~.t ..... ."1- I_ tal;
.
.', ~
)r, III""
~m . "" ~.... , . -.
" . ~ r" E
. ."' I~ ~ 1-' I" ,
"
r. MH H" ~" ' , I .... .....
--.,.. iE-:'
A' .-1 .. II I" , .. ,
, . r~ ~'" ' a I i. Il
- .II' ... .
, .,
.
Il i-..oo .,
3~' ~ I: "'
,. ~ .. '.
I; I, ~,
. .. " -
, ..- , . I \ '
, C'2 .
_:- . ,
~EI. C'. pu, ,
, 0 ,. ,
8liJJ iE I ...
mm Ii. 0 ...,.. .. . .. ,
0-' ~ i ~, D~
IJ~ . \
."' B c ~ . .' '10. ,I.
c., .. .. II,.. -l'
~ '1j;) , . , o' . "4_'
OJ .....'. 'T 1m ..
~lillI '-
" ~ I C'II u_ 1t'. " j '_'L
0" ~ ~ U CoM foJO , . . I ' ~[][I'
M" M-' ; ~~ .
..'ff ~ [J ~ , .. R
ji'" C'M / _. I" ..
,
. ., I ..
'0' o . .., . no ~
ith ... ""/1
"..I;;
'ff I ,r7{ '~D llth 1I't i " M.tA
IJ3 =~
111 . C3BE3DL. . 1'" ill ~I ' 'II' M-IA
,"' '0" ~br I[]D ! ~[W
~~',I~ . ./.. ...,
. . "";ff ',-
jj .. .. -- ' .
D~ M-' .... e -M ............... NORTON AIR F'
. 1
. - I
..a
'-!oIll'- .., B _, A I -..
-y~. III "" . .., ~
5-10
LOCATION MAP
PW '6]-1;3
A ppf)/PI X B
.
o
o
TRAFFIC IMPACT AND PARKING ANALYSIS
FOR
BASEBALL GAMES AT FISCALINI FIELD
IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
HAY 1988
Prepared for
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
by
OKS ASSOCIATES
411 West Fifth Street. Suite 500
Los Angeles. CA 90013
P87274xO
APPI:;NDI't. c..-
. .
o
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..... . . . . . . . . , .
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . .
1.2 REGIONAL AND LOCAL ACCESS TO PROJECT.
1,3 CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS. . . . . . , . . . . .
2, I FREEWAY ACCESS . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREET ACCESS.
2.3 INTERSECTION ANALYSES
3.0 TRAFFIC/PARKING IMPACTS. .
3.1 TRAFFIC IMPACTS .. .
3,2 PARKING IMPACTS . . .
.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .
APPENDIX
o
.
.
1
I
1
4
5
5
5
7
12
12
19
23
.
o
o
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 - LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
B
TABLE 2 - ESTIMATED EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE AT STUDY AREA
INTERSECTIONS .,. . . . . . . . . . , . . .. .,., 11
TABLE 3 - OBSERVED VEHICLE OCCUPANCIES AT FISCALINI FIELD
"SPIRIT" GAME .,. . . . . . . . . . 13
TABLE 4 - ASSUMED TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES . . . . . 15
TABLE 5 - ESTIMATED LEVELS OF SERVICE AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIOIIS
(WITH AND WITHOUT BASEBALL GAMES . . . . . . . . . . , IB
TABLE 6 - ADDITIONAL PARKING AVAILABLE FOR FISCALINI FIELD
BASEBALL GAME ATTENDEES . . . . . . . . . . . . .
, . .
20
..
o
o
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - PROJECT LOCATION . . .
FIGURE 2 - CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS.
FIGURE 3 - EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 4 - EX I STI NG PM PEAK HOUR (6 :00-7 :00) I NTERSECTION TRAFFIC
VOLUMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FIGURE 5 - ASSUMED INBOUND (OUTBOUND) TRIP DISTRIBUTION . . . . . .. 16
FIGURE 6 - EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC PM PEAK HOUR (6:00-7:00)
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES. . 17
FIGURE 7 - AVAILABLE PARKING. . . . . . . . . 21
2
3
6
10
.
o
o
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Thls report documents the results of an evaluatlon of the traffic and
parklng lmpacts of expanslon of the seatlng capaclty at Flscallnl Fleld ln
the City of San Bernardlno. Flscallnl Field. located withln Perrls Hill
Park, 11es on the south slde of Hlghland Avenue between Valencla Avenue
and Elks Drive. The "Splrit." the baseball team based at Flscallnl Field.
was recently upgraded from seml-pro to a professlonal team. Ant 1 cl pated
lncreased patronage from thls change ln team status requlred expanslon of
the seating capaclty at the existlng facility. Thls work focused on the
trafflc and parklng lmpacts associated with expanding Fiscallnl Fleld to
lts current level of development.
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Flscallnl Fleld. referred to as "the project" throughout thls report. ls
located ln the northeast corner of Perris Hill Park. a multl-use facility.
Slnce the expanslon of its seatlng capacity. Flscallnl Fleld has 2.800
flxed seats and 316 paved parklng spaces. An addltlonal 120 unpaved parklng
spaces are also available on-site ln the lnmediate vicinity of Flscallnl
Fleld.
In additlon to Flscallni Fleld, Perris Hill Park has the follllt/lng facil-
itles: Roosevelt BQo/l (with 1.800 seats plus restrooms and snack bar). 7
tennls courts. Coddlngton Library. Perrls Hl11 Park Ceramlcs Studlo. Perrls
Hill Plunge (736 particlpants capacity). a wading pool (2S partlcipants
capaclty). a group plcnic area (3S0 participants capaclty). and horseshoe
pits (48 partlclpants capaclty) and bleachers (50 seats).
1.2 REGIONAL AND LOCAL ACCESS TO PROJECT
The project ls located ln the City of San Bernardlno approximately one-half
mil e south of the State Route 30 freeway and about three mil es east of
1-215 (refer to Flgure 1). Reglonal access to the project slte is provlded
by the above mentloned freeways as well as several major arterial routes
lncludlng Hlghland Avenue. Basellne Avenue. "E" Street. Sierra Way and
Waterman Avenue. Local trafflc is served by a grld of north/south and
east/west streets (refer to Flgure 2).
Local access to the project site, as illustrated ln Flgure 2. ls provlded
at the Hl ghland Avenue driveway to the parkl ng lot. dl rectI y oppos ite
Harrlson Street. Spectators enter the baseball fleld through two maln
gates: 1) the west gate. faclng the main parklng lot. and 2) the east
gate. at the northeast corner of the fleld.
- 1 -
.
~
.~
(..)
~
~
Q
~
Ii
u
I
JAY ONI,..1I11
JAY YlOK ,~
III
~
t;
III
a
II:
Cl.
JAY NJO'1OD
11 NOI..VYN
.
.
Ii
lAY YIONJ1YA !
..
..
J:
..
.
..
lAY NY"lIIlY.
..
..
..
..
~
..
A'fM ....v..
..
l
i
~
i
I
11 I
"'z
.,2
!;~
.2'0
11.0
oJ
t-
o
W
.,
o
It
lL
Ii
~
.
..
~
Ii
I
i
.
~
]
~~
Q
..
.
%
..
o
"
IA'I """"11'1.
=
=
;;
,"VIA YIYHII
.
~
i
j
%
"
!
\;
%
..
.
!!
Ii
I
::;
!
.
11 I
o
o
1.3 CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS
Five intersections in the vicinity of the project were chosen by City
staff for detailed analysis. The five intersections along Highland Avenue
(identified in Figure 2) that would likely be Impacted by this project are:
o Waterman Avenue
o Valencia Avenue
o Harrison Street
o Golden Avenue and.
o Oel Rosa Avenue
This report documents the traffic impact analyses and subsegment mitigation
measures identified for these intersections along Highland Avenue.
- 4 -
. .
o
o
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing freeway and arterial network serving
the project site, An analysis of existing traffic conditions and intersec-
tion operations is also presented. Current average daily traffic volumes
(ADT's) on the streets surrounding the project are illustrated in Figure 3.
Traffic volumes for the City-maintained arterial and collector streets
were obtained from the current City of San Bernardino Traffic Counts Map.
Counts taken previous to 1988 were expanded by 2.5 percent per year to
account for traffic growth through 1988.
2.1 FREEWAY ACCESS
1-215 - I -215. which runs north-south through the western half of the
City. is located approximately three miles west of the project site. The
freeway serves as a major north/south route for regional traffic having an
origin or destination in the City of San Bernardino. It al so provides a
di red connecti on to the San Bernardi no Freeway (I -10). and subsequent
access to downtown Los Angeles and other major freeways in the Los Angeles
Basin. 1-215 has three lanes in each direction and currently carries an
ADT of about 40.000 near the project site.
State Route 30 - State Route 30 is an east-west six lane freeway located
approximately one-half mile north of the project site. Though Route 30 is
eventually planned to continue west and beyond 1-215 to Los Angeles County.
it currently terminates as a freeway, at 1-215. It. therefore, provides
access to 1-215 and al so carries an ADT of approximately 40,000 near the
project site.
2.2 ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREET ACCESS
Highland Avenue - Highland Avenue (State Route 30-Business) is an east-
west arterial facility that runs from Riverside Avenue to Mountain Avenue
in the San Bernardino/Highl and area. It has two through lanes in each
direction plus a continuous two-way left-turn lane in the median along
most of its length. Curbside parking is generally not allOl,ed in the
vicinity of the project. Highl and Avenue. which has excl usive left-turn
lanes at all major intersections near the project. carries an ADT of ap-
proximately 27.000 near the project. The only direct access to the project
site is the southerly leg of the Highland Avenue/Harrison Street inter-
section.
Waterman Avenue - Waterman Avenue is a north-south arterial with four
through lanes from 1-10 to Route 30 and beyond. Traffic volumes on Waterman
Avenue average approximately 24.000 trips a day near Highland Avenue. On-
street parking is not permitted near Highland Avenue.
- 5 -
.
o
o
Valencia Avenue - Valencia Avenue Is a north-south collector that runs
from 21st Street to Route 30 and beyond. It has two through lanes In each
direction and carries an AOT of approximately 8.000 near Highland Avenue.
On-street parking Is permitted on both sides near Highland Avenue.
Harrison Street - Harrison Street Is a local facility that begins at
Highland Avenue and runs northerly I nto a resl dent I a1 nel ghborhood from
Highland Avenue. It has one through lane In each direction and parking Is
permitted on both sides of the street near Highland Avenue. Current traffic
volumes are about 1.000 vehicles per day at Highland Avenue.
Go1 den Avenue - Go1 den Avenue I s a north-south co11 ector that begl ns at
Highland Avenue and runs northerly from Highland Avenue to Route 30 and
beyond. It has two lanes In each direction and parking Is permitted on
both sides. Current traffic volumes on thiS facility are about 3.000
vehicles per day at Highland Avenue.
Del Rosa Avenue - Del Rosa Is a north-south arterial that connects Baseline
Avenue to Route 30 and beyond. It has two through lanes In each direction
In the vicinity of Highland Avenue and carries an ADT of about 23.000 near
Highland Avenue. Parkl ng I s not permitted along Del Rosa Avenue near
Highland Avenue.
2.3 INTERSECTION ANALYSES
An evaluation of existing conditions was performed at the five Intersections
Identified for detailed analysis to estimate the traffic operating condi-
tions without baseball games at Flsca11nl Field. All five Intersections
are currently Signalized.
To corre1 ate numerical traffic vol ume data to subjective descriptions of
traffic performance at Intersections. the concept of "Leve1-of-Servlce"
(LOS) I s utilized. Level of Service 15 an operational measure of effec-
t I veness recommended by the Transportation Research Board I s 1985 Highway
Capacity Manual for the evaluation of Intersection operating conditions.
It Is a standard measure of average operating conditions at intersections
during any given time frame. Defined service levels range from A through
F. with each level associated with a range of delays anticipated to be
experienced by motorists passing through the intersections.
Tab1 e 1 prOVides a summary of the 1 eve1 of service concept as I t relates
to average stopped vehicle delay. Levels of Service A. Band C are consid-
ered good operating conditions with only minor delays of up to 25 seconds
expected to be experienced by motorists. At level of service D. delay per
vehicle at an Intersection averages 25 to 40 seconds, with motorists
occasionally being forced to walt more than 60 seconds. LOS D. where
drivers occasionally must walt through more than one red signal phase. Is
typical of urban peak hour conditions and usually accepted as the standard
- 7 -
.
o
o
TABLE 1
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
A
B
C
D
E
F
Stopped Delay
per Vehfcl e
(sec)
, 5.0
5.1 to 15.0
15.1 to 25.0
25.1 to 40.0
40.1 to 60.0
) 60.0
Level of Servfce
Source: Hfghway Capacfty Manual. 1985
.
o
o
operating condition for design
cons i dered to be at capacity
conditions.
purposes. A roadway operating at LOS E is
and LOS F represents extremely congested
Peak period turning movements at the five study intersections were completed
during January 1988. Since weekday baseball games start at 7 :05 PM. traffic
for the games will mostly impact normal traffic between 6:00 PM and 7:00
PM in the vicinity of Fiscalinl Field. Consequently, traffic counts were
taken for the 6:00-7:00 PM period. These counts are provided in Figure 4.
Intersection LOS estimates were then developed for non-event weekday PM
periods using microcomputer software developed for the Fedenl Highway
Admi ni strati on (FHWA) call ed "Hi ghway Capacl ty Software.. (Raw program
outputs are provided as an Appendix.) This software employs as its algo-
rithm the methodology recommended by the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual.
These analyses, summarized in Table 2. suggest that the intersections
studied for this work currently operate at acceptable Levels of Service,
with Waterman and Del Rosa's junctions with Highland Avenue operating at
LOS C. The other three intersections currently operating at LOS B during
the 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM period on a typical weekday.
- 9 -
.
.., -CI)
gw
. ..:e
~~h .. ...;:)
.11 "--U ::I 1-,
J!l. _ne CII go
-
regl IL ..>
CO
I^Y YIOIl 110 .elJ ~1( -u
llOt_ ex:-
ztl, ;:)IL
;!..~ OIL
:I:~
~...
Cz
..~ Wo
e>hN "-- . 0.-
)1'- -e :el:i
re o.W
I^Y NI0100 t9J ')tf CJCI)
l_ zffi
n, :o:nr> -...
h tiz
- -
><
W
N
lUI" "--Ol
J!l. -I
rcz
.it NOSlIlIlYH llJ )l(
l_
tc, Nff-
e.~ "--eol
J!l. _1'tI
r.e
J^Y YI:>NI1Y^ KIJ ')1('
tOI_
'., .~8
....
.....,,. "-- .Il
....~
~ J1'. _lite
rlOl
.~ J^Y NYIlIlJJ.YM ll/lIJ ~t(
u eel_
~ tv, ~e>~
":s
w
~
a
z
~ .
~ ...
2:
0
Q i
.
o
o
TABLE 2
ESTIMATED EXISTING
LEVELS OF SERVICE
AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
Delays
Intersection VIC (Sec./Veh.) LOS
Waterman Ave. and Highland Ave. 0.57 17 C
Val enci a Ave. and Highland Ave. 0.48 9 B
Harrison St. and Highland Ave. 0.53 10 B
Golden Ave. and Highland Ave. 0.44 7 B
Del Rosa Ave. and Highland Ave. 0.66 18 C
. .
o
o
3.0 TRAFFIC/PARKING IMPACTS
This section presents the results of the analysis of traffic impacts on
the five Intersections studied when traffic associated with arriving at
baseball games is added to background traffic. Since no baseball associated
events were in progress during the time that exist.ing counts were taken.
these counts were assumed to be appropriate for non-event background data.
Vehicular traffic associated with arriving at ballfield events was then
superimposed on this background traffic for the project impacts analysis.
This is an overestimation of the true level of project impacts. since some
traffic activity associated with baseball events at Fiscalinl Field has
occurred in the past. However. other activities in the park such as tennis
and other recreational traffic is also encountered. It. therefore. should
enable the identification of the impacts of a worst case scenario. This
methodology is thus acceptable for this work.
Traffic departing the area at the end of field activity should pose few
operational problems on average weekday evenings due to the lot hour of
anticipated departure. However. some local exiting problems may exist and
unwanted vehicular noise could also experience some minor. localized
probl ems.
3.1 TRAFFIC IMPACTS
Standard tri p generati on. di s tributi on and assignment methodol ogi es were
applied in this work. A modal split evaluation was not considered relevant
in view of both the insignificant use of transit in the area and the non-
existence of special transit lines for activities at the ball field. Th@
use of transit may. nevertheless. be a viable traffic and/or parking mitiga-
tion measure if further development should occur at the project site and/or
background traffic levels grew to the level that attendance to the games
caused severe traffic and/or parking problems.
Trip Generation
To forecast traffic vol umes generated by attendance at Fi scali nl Fiel d
baseball games. the number of vehicle trips generated by each game attendant
were estimated. Trip generation rates were obtained from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers' document entitled. Traffic Considerations for
Special Events. as well as a specific field survey conducted at the site.
Trip generation rates suggested in the ITE report range from 0.33 to 0.40
auto trip/field seats. The field survey completed by others at one of the
games at Fiscalinl Field. yielded the results shown in Table 3.
Developing a weighted average of the data collected at Fiscalini Field
suggests a rate of 0.34 auto trips/field seats. This is coincident with
the trip generation rates suggested by HE. Since more than four people
- 12 -
1::.
.
o
o
TABLE 3
OBSERVED VEHICLE OCCUPANCIES AT
FISCALINI FIELD "SPIRIT" GAME
Car Occupants
1 Vehicl e
1
2
3
4 or more
71
231
401
301
Source: Telephone conversation
with Mr. Bill Shanahan.
General Manager of
Fiscalini Field. 1/19/BB.
.
o
o
sometimes arrive in the same vehicle. a reasonable estimate of a worst
case scenario shoul d be real I zed If thi s rate is used. Therefore. the
rate of 0.34 auto trips/field seats was therefore used for these analyses.
The maximum number of vehicle trips associated with Fiscalini Field would
be generated during an evening when there was full attendance at the base-
ball field (2.800 people). At a rate of 0.34 auto trips/field seats. the
maximum number of Inbound vehicular trips generated during a given baseball
game should be about 950 trips. This figure assumes full attendance at the
park. From past experience. only about two or three of the currently
sChedul ed 67 games fill the park. In fact. the average attendance was
around 1.930 persons (about 650 Inbound vehicular trips). To nccom~date
possible fluctuations In vehicular occupancy rates. a total of 1.000 Inbound
vehl cuI ar trl ps was assumed to be generated durl ng this one-hour tI me
frame for these analyses.
Trip Distribution
The traffic generated by the baseball games will take many different routes
to and from Fiscalinl Field. The San 8ernardlno City Travel Model. recently
developed for the City by OKS Associates. was used to estimate origins and
destinations of projected trips. The trip table In the model developed to
estimate 1987 traffic conditions was compressed Into four areas around
Flscallnl Field: north. east. south and west. The distribution of these
trips were as shown In Table 4 and Figure 5.
Trip Assignment
The traffic generated and distributed above was then assigned to the
existing street system based on the logical travel routes for each type of
trip. This consisted of superimposing projected trips over existing traffic
based on the distribution identified in Table 4. Existing plus project
traffic volumes for the five study area intersections were then evaluated
in detail to enable identification of the impacts of the upgraded Fiscalini
Field. Existing plus project traffic volumes used for these analyses are
provided in Figure 6.
Comparative results of non-event and adding baseball game traffic to the
background traffic are shown In Tabl e 7. Traffic with and without the
baseball games are compared to evaluate the cumulative effect of baseball
games on existing traffic. Signal. timing. striping and signing mitigation
measures along Highland Avenue are all that appear necessary to enable
these fIVe intersections to operate at above desired levels of service.
Therefore. from a traffic operations perspective. the impacts of this
project are nominal and can be fully mitigated at a relatively low cost.
- 14 -
. .
o
o
TABLE 4
ASSUMED TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES.
Direction
Percentage
North
South
East
West
401
151
201
251
.City of San Bernardino Travel
Demand Hodel. Special run.
January 1988.
o
..
l
JAY YIOIt 110
ii,
p..
"p
ll.
JAY NiOl00
I,
AI NOllltllYH
J!!I!l!
..
~
o
z
..
..
:It
CI
i
II) ~z
00
z-
. ::) I-
~O::)
DI ID ID
- ....-
IL ::) a:
O~
--
00
ZI1.
::)-
Oa:
ID....
Z
rl
~lr
~..o;:
pN-
--
-
o
w
:I
::)
CI)
CI)
-c
~ICII
rlOll
~Ir
-~o
~5"
=. 1l
-~ '-IUl
1\ rlOCl
If
..0
....
~
_0
!!!
Jl
JAY YI:)NnYA IJ f
~ 0
..
.~
U
~ ~-
....- "'- .
~....
---
,)1\
~ JAY NYRltUYM ilJ I
..
Q ..
IU
00 en
U)-OW
u...::E
...... 11.,..::)
0"0 ~U ~CI...J
....r
)1\ r=Ui :3a:oo
.2'''~>
lAY Y8011 1110 "' --" ~t(, 11...10
10C_ oi~
10C, ...... W::)II.
......
r..r "'011.
O:r:C
a: a:
a..~..
:.. C
"0" enwz
.rr '-t
)1'- _c :)0.0
,r-' ...J -
a..::E"
lAY NI0100 ..--" ~t(, Oo.~
1_ Z en
CIl, rrr - a:
....0 ..
..r W
en
- ..
)( z
W
"r
..... '-01
....r
)1\ _"
rn
18 N08l1lllYH I I --" ~t('
1--+
Ie...... ......
......
....
r
......
0.0 '-101
r"r
)1\ _tel
rle
lAY YI:>N1I1YA HI --" ~t('
tOI_
It ...... ....0
......
..
r
..... '-III
..rr
"r
)1'- -...
~ r"OI
IA. 1I.III1IlYM ..I --" )1(
.~ IU_
t) ce...... ......
~ .0.
W
~
0
z
~ ~
~ ~
x
"
Ci i
-
o
o
TABLE 5
ESTIMATED LEVELS OF SERVICE AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
(WITH AND WITHOUT BASEBALL GAMES)
Without With
Baseball Game Baseball Gamel
Intersecti on V/C Delay2 LOS V/C Delay2 LOS
Waterman Ave. & Highland Ave. 0.57 17 C 0.72 22 C
Valencia Ave. & Highland Ave. 0.48 9 8 0.68 12 B
Harrison St. & Highland Ave. 0.53 10 B 0.82 23 C
Golden Ave. & Highland Ave. 0.44 7 B 0.62 8 B
Del Rosa Ave. & Highland Ave. 0.66 18 C 0.79 20 C
lAssumes maximum attendance at Fiscalini Field for 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM
period prior to one evening game. Mitigation measures identified to improve
traffic operations were also assumed.
2sec.lveh.
.
o
o
3.2 PARKING IMPACTS
Fiscalini Field currently has a maximum on-site parking capacity of about
436 parking spaces (316 marked spaces plus about 120 unmarked spaces in
the unpaved areal. Assumi ng that "drop-off" vehicl es woul d offset staff
vehicles. full attendance at a baseball game would require about 950 parking
spaces. thus generating a deficit of about 520 parking spaces. Since
nearly all of the Spirit's games are during evening periods. or on Sundays.
parking lots of neighboring businesses can also provide parking for events.
The total number of available parking spaces within short walking distance
are summarized in Table 6.
c.
Locations of available parking sites are shown in Figure 7. All of these
lots are within short walking distance from either the east or west gates.
Since the first three lots east of Elks Drive are enough to accommodate
parking spillover needs for the average game attendance. the Shearson/Amer-
ican Express lot is normally not needed. In fact. the Shearson/American
Express lot has only been used on rare occasions (two or three games during
the season). However. should the vacant lot immediately east of Elks Drive
be developed or the informal "agreement" between Fiscalini Field and these
landowners be lost. parking could become a serious issue.
Potential for Neighborhood and Other Intrusions
On-site and nearby off-street parking supply for baseball games appears to
be adequate at this time. Thus little. if any, Ilarking problems should
arise.
For example. parking impacts on the Senior Citizen's Center are expected
to be minimal. In fact. since the distance the Senior Citizens Center is
from Fiscalini Field is a key factor. Its location on 21st Street in the
southwest corner of Perris Hill Park. which is further from the park gates
than other available parking. suggests that it is unlikely that it will be
considered a viable parking alternative for baseball game attendees.
Similarly. though available on-street parking in the residential neighbor-
hood to the north of Fiscalini Field may seem attractive to some. through
traffic levels on Highland Avenue. coupled with readily available off-
street parking on the south side of Highland Avenue. suggest that this
will not likely be a problem. Nevertheless. at those times that relatively
high attendance is anticipated at the park. orientation signs and/or traffic
orientation personnel are recommended to help game attendees park and
improve safety of the entry/exit operation at both Harrison Street and
Elks Drive.
Cumulative Parking Needs at Perris Hill Park
Other activities at the Park that require substantial parking in the
vicinity of Fiscalini Field are activity at the Roosevelt BCM1. water
- 19 -
M
JJ<lL
o
o
TABLE 6
ADDITIONAL PARKING AVAILABLE
FOR FISCALINI FIELD BASEBALL GAME ATTENDEES
Location
Park I ng Spaces
Redlands Bank 50
Austin Cooper 90
Dirt Lot (Vacant) 200
Shearson/American Express 240
Total
5BO
.
.
(/) ,...CJ
. Z
t- II -
. . .. lIl:
. .
iil Z &0:
a.. - c(
Ii! IL D.
1M NJCI'1OO 1< \II
J
.. ...I
>
~ ID
c(
...I
-
c(
. ~
.
as . .
- :: 4 DO 9 .
.... 0 t ::
-ll .... .- =- ~ 01
.... .
-C ~ EIDf i 2r
I " 1_0
.. -- > a
..
JS NOSIIIIMl
,
..
;:
I
I
1<
J
~
~
o
.
I
r
.
I
.
..
.
~
.~ I ~
u I ~
~ ;;
~ ~
c:i
lI!II.
. . .
o
o
related areas and tennis courts. Roosevelt Bowl events and bas~all games
at Flscallnl Field are coordinated each year to avoid conflicts.
However. activity at the tennis courts and water activity are'as are usually
more Informal In nature. The tennis facility (7 courts) requires about 40
parking spaces and. since much of the activity Is Informal In nature. is
difficult to coordinate with the baseball games. In fact. some conflicts
have been Identified during peak attendance games In the past. Similarly.
the water related activities can require substantial parking needs. partic-
ularly on Sunday afternoons. Since parking availability at the facilities
Identified In Figure 7 Is enough for all baseball related activities.
parking for water related activities and tennis courts could be !.lade avail-
able near these facilities by traffic orientation people (already recom-
mended for peak attendance games). That Is. these people could direct
baseball game oriented vehicles to the additional parking sites shown
above. at equal or less distance to the baseball field than available
parking near either the water related activities or tennis courts.
~
- 22 -
. .
o
o
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The recent upgrading of Flscalinl Field is anticipated to have few impacts
on traffic and parking. The relatively late or off-peak times of ballgames
coupled with substantial unused roadway capacity In the vicinIty of the
park during expected activities accommodates most of the anticipated traffic
associated with ballfield activity. Readily available off-site parking
that Is both free and nearby also accommodates anticipated parking needs.
However. to ensure smooth traffic flow and minimize parking intrusion into
local residential neighborhoods. the following mitigation measures are
recommended:
Highland Avenue at Waterman Avenue
The maximum green extension for the southbound left-turn phase should be
increased from 16 seconds to 20 seconds.
Highland Avenue at Valencia Avenue
To realize a V/C ratio of 0.80 for eastbound through movements. an average
of 40 seconds of green time per cycle may be needed. The existing timing
provides a maximum of 23 seconds of east/west green in the presence of a
north/south vehicular call (provided that pedestrian signal has not been
actuated). Minimum east/west green times may thus need to be increased.
Highland Avenue at Harrison Street
Fiscallnl Field driveway exit should be restriped to provide an exclusive
right turn and a shared thru/left-turn lane. This will facilitate vehicular
exit after the games and can be accomplished within the existing driveway
width.
Parking/Site Access
Portable traffic control signs and orientation personnel to monitor parking
lot Ingress/egress activities are suggested for those days that off-site
parking may be reqUired.
8644.p7274ff.rpt
- 23 -
. .
o
tI
o
APPENDIX
-
.
o
o
1985 ~CM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMM,<:l~Y REPORT
***....*******************************************.*****4*********.*****..
INTE"'SECTION. .highland ave./WATERMAN
AFEA .,.YF'E..... OTHER
ANAL~ST.. .....TXJ
DAT~.. ........3/22/88
T I ME. . . . . . . . . . PM
COM~E \IT . . . . . . .
---------------------------------------.-----------------------------------
VOLUMES . GEOME:;'rR'
.
EB WEt NEt SEt : EEt I~B I\IB SE<
:_ T 91 119 201 126 L. 1:.1) L 12. (I ~ 12. t) L. 1-' (.
., ,
TH ~86 516 348 2.;.9 T 12.0 T 1 ::. (! T 1~.(1 T t:. ')
F'T ::'0 97 218 63 T 12.1) fR 1:. (l T 12.0 TR 1 ~. ','
Rf;' 23 10 ..,.., 7 R 12.0 ~::. (, S. 1'2.0 12. ':1
~..
12.0 1:: . :) 12.0 1'" '
.,.
12. ,) 12.0 12. f) 1" "
-' ,
- ..------------------. .-----------------------------------.-- .------.-----.-----------
ADJIJST:1ENT FACT'JRS
GRADE HV ADJ F'KG BUSES F'IolF F'r::DS PE['. BUT. {\f;:R. TYFE
('/,) ( ~/~ ~ '(IN Nm Nb Y: ~~ mln T
O. 'X. 2.01) N 1) r:; 1).90 10 Y 22.0 ~
'.'
0.00 2.(1) N I) 0 0.90 1 ~:; y 20.0 3
0.00 2.0t) N (\ l) f). ~I) 10 , 21.0 ...;.
O. ~)O ~.Of) N (1 0 (\ ~I'l 1 (~ , 21.0 7
0"' '-. -
EEl
we
NE.
~E~
-----------------------------------------------------------------~
EB
PH-I
X
F'H-2
SIGNAL SETTING'::
PH-3 F'H-4
~:~: L T
- ,
.,
.::r
=J
x
x
TH
\oJE'
x
J;'T
F'D
SE: L T
'rH
RT
F'!)
G~.'~EN
'fELL::JI~
."" X
=:T X
-"'
- ~
GJ:'E:'. 9.0 28.0 0.0 o. ~)
vE~~: W 4.0 4.1) 1).1) 0.0
C',:',E L!::NGT"i ., 8'). ;)
PH-l F'~-'-2 F'H-3 F'1-I-4
X X
X X
I: x
x
,1
X
o. :) t.O 12.0 0.0
~.f) 4.0 5.0 O. (1
-----------------------------------------------.---------------------------
LE'v'EL OF SERVICE
LANE GRF'. vie G/C DELAY LOS AF'P. DELAY APF'. LOS
EB L. 0.434 o. l:::Fl :4.9 C t:.8 Et
, e.S12 0.375 1:.7 B
R n.4i)4 0.375 12. I E<
'lIE' ~ O.~6e f). 138 26.9 D 1~.2 C
TR (~. 5:.9 0.375 12.9 E<
NE' l. 0.660 0.200 25.7 D 1<;.4 C
T 0.456 0.::50 16.6 C
,
F~ 0.576 0.250 18.3 C
SE' L O.t~)l O. 1.::8 27.7 D :;;::.9 .~
w
TS~ i). 5 ,,!. 0 O. 188 19.5 C
I:J;~= 3ECTION:
Delay = 16.9 (sec/veh!
-----------------------------------------------------------------.----------
V/C = ').56E:
LOS = C
~~e~ HGM: SIGNALIZED ~TERSECTIONS <:)
SU!~~ARY REF'ORT
......*.*..*.******I*.******.*..*~*..****.***.****.*********************..
!'lTERSECTION..HIGHLAND AVE./VALENCIA AVE.
a~E~ TYPE.....OTHER
~.Ju~ VST. . . . . . . TXJ
~AiE..........3/22/88
- !""E. . ........ F'M
~: O!~~E ~T . . . . . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOL'./MES
EB WB ~JB Sl~
- 74 l('5 -~ 114 L
- ._,.-;;J
-~ -49 687 134 104 r
- 60 109 IO? 41 T'''''
,,'
. - ,!, (, c. ,,'
...
GE D~lE Tf;:Y
EEl WEe NB SB
.~ ~:l L 1""'1 ,., L 12. l) L 12. ",
.....
I" I) T 12.0 T 12.0 T I:. ':;
~.
~ 2. I) TF: 1::. (t TR t:. c) TR 1:. "
12. I) 12.0 l~.O t:.')
12. I) 1:. (, 1'"::- (, I:.
-. .'
12.0 1 :".l. ( 12.0 I:.
-------------------------------..
.------------------------------------.--
,:iP.rI.JE'.r.~1ENT c "~CTO~'S
GRADE 'IV ADJ F'f,:,G BUSE:;S ~HF r:'CDS PCD. BUT. ARr,. Tvj:-::
('l.) ('l.\ y ..' t.~ NIT! Nt. Y/N min T
::.::. c. 00 :.0(; .. I) () o. 90 10 Y 20.5 '-'
"
. ,~, 0.00 2.00 N I) 0 0.<:;>0 1.0 Y 20.5 -
"'- .,;.
'- 0. ('\) '2.00 N I) I) (l.'~O 10 y ::(~. 5 .,;.
" - o. (il) :: . ~::(I foJ (: (. o. 90 1<) '( :0.5 .,;,
--------------..-----------------------.---------------------------------------
-;
SIGNAl.. SETTINGS CYCLE L.ENGTH = 60. .,
I='H-l r:'i-1--2 F'LI-::' r-1.l..4 FI-'-I F'H-2 F'H-3 PI-'-4
l( NB LT X
X TH X
X RT X
F'D
\ ':':9 ~T X
,( TH X
't RT X
F'D
7 .0 ,",C', f, (', I) 0.0 G"'EEN 1'5.0 0.0 0.0 I). :::
-'-1. .'
7.0 5. i) 0.0 (1. (, YELLOW 5.0 0.0 0.0 o. ,)
!:.~ _ T
-i-i
~T
.'1=
T
=T
=':1
GR!::~':
iE:.._:'W
------------.----------------------.------------------------------------------
LE',/EL OF SERVICE
LAtJE G!=:'P. V:C G/C DELAY LOS AF'P. DELAY AF'P. LOS
0 ':", ,3b'~ ... 1.33 1'3.5 C 8. I 8
..
T=\ 0.569 (l. 4t-7 7.8 P
~.'= , :).517 O. . -- 20. 1 C 9. ~ Et
~ -L'_"_' "-
TR (:. ~.7~) (, . 4'~ , 9 Ee
~,
. '0 :... C'. ':~8,~ o. 3::~':' 1 ~ 5 p 8.5 B
~R (1.284 O. 300 ie. 4 F!
-- :... I:', .::.a. O. 300 ,- " B I I I B
,-. .
TF\~ O. 158 O. 300 1 (', (1 9
--------------------------------..-------------------.------------------------
:'.-;::='SECTImi:
Delay =
8.8 (;:;,;:,c,",/;::'"',>
\'/C = ~). 480
LOS = B
o
1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMMARY REF'ORT
*4********.***.*.....****.**.*******~4.*,*****4*..*.......*************..,.
INTERSECTION..HIGHLAND AVE./HARlS90N ST.
AREA TYPE.....OTHER
ANALYST. ......TXJ
DATE. . . . . . . . . .3/24/88
TI!-tE........ .'.. F'f"1
COf-1MENT...... .
o
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUI"ES GEOMETRY
EB WE! NE< 51:< Ell WE: Nfl ~;E:
L T ',.. 21 ~- l~ L 1'2. (I L t~. ~:' '_ -I;' 1~. (l LW 1'7. ~)
-,;) - -'
TH I::..!' '10...., , ~' 1:. (I T . ,- r) 1:.0 1:'. ,.,
;"..:. .. , , ~ ,
f\'r 4c) ::..!, "",., 38 Tf;' .~ !) TR ~:. ;) 1::. 0 t '2. ::'
':".' ...::..
RR ~' 4 ,- 4 \ 2.0 1~. . 12.0 1:~ . :.
oJ -
1':::'. (t t-' :) 1 - (I L:.
. ~ .
'.2.0 , - (~ 12. (' 1:',
__.._..__ .~_.________ ___________ _ ________ __ ___ .__ . "'n_..' ..'__'. ______ _______ .____,.____."._____.____
.~r.Ju'?:t1Et.~T :"ACT(j!;'S
GRADE H'.,. All,] n::G BU~.l s F'HF J:'EDS "~D. E'UT. ARR. TV"!:;
("I.) ,.,. Y.'N Nm ~'Jb Y ,~ min T
" '.
EB 0.00 2.(:':) N (I 0 0.90 50 .. I 1 .3 -.
.
WEt 0. (U) 2.')0 N (J 0 O. 90 50 ~. 1 1 ~ 3
. '-'
NE' o. ::'0 '2. C(, N " 1) O. 90 -:;(1 . 20.5 3
SEI o. (l() ~ ,',,'. ''I "){', .) (\ . .;:.1(\ 50 . 20.5
~.
-----------------------------.--------.-.-.-----..--------------------------
S I ~?f'J~IL SFTTJN13S
PH..l C:"-f--;-' ~'H, "; ~'~ I n
.,.t
EB LT " NB L.T
T"l 'I.. TH
~'T , r~~T
[:.'~ , F'f:
W8 L.T X SE< ~T
fH l TH
RT 'i ,..1
PD ~ r'D
GREEN 4 ,', ,1. ~, ~ '~.' C'. r <\. I:' .:~ f:' ~~ F ~\I
.....
YELLOW 3.0 . " (l. :) 0.0 YELLCW
.~ . '.1
LArlE GF,'~. ',.//C
EP L .' ~::e
TP " L . ,-
. . ~
l~B L " ~ .:;.::;
TR " . 4c3
N~: L ;r:.~ (, 2!:1
~:.F.' LTR (~ . 305
LE','t':L OF SER\'l SE
r.C.AY LOS
GiG
,) . ~:.,.., 1
....,. r.o"
.~. .;, ~ .:
f: '~ b:3.~ 4 , ! ~...
,', :)7 1 - ,. ,"
.'. .~ . . -' '.
0 ,!:8~ .' . 4 G
0. I 'S7 I ,L, ,~: C'
(I. I ~,7 ! " 1 ,.
, .
1'; ~'?-'O'-=ECT IOtJ:
Dela)' - 10.3 (se~ 'veh)
PH-I
~
)
X
SYCLE LEllGTH =
~'H-2 PH- c;
}::'.:,;
F'I '
,
9.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
o. (~
0.0
(J.
:). ;:1
A~'P. DELAY
AF'F'. LOS
Po
6.2
.~.. 6
B
:':'.5
C
C
2('.2
I.J -: ::: O. ~30
LOS = B
hI
o
o
:c;! HCM: SIGNALIZED IN'E~SECTIONS
~~ ~-,':'RY REF'ORT
...........**...***.....***.***.*********..***.....***..**...***.....**...
11_ -~::'SECT ION. . HIGHLAND AVE./GOLDEN AVE.
,\c:;:. TYF'I:.... . OTHER
..v..:..._"ST....... rX:J
~~-E.. ........3/24/88
- :-::. . . . . . . . . . F'M
.:~ ~"~::'''T. I.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLU~lES : GEOMETRY
EB WE< NEt SEt EB WE< NB SE<
81 .., ;, 64 l. 12.0 L 1:.0 LTR 12. (I L 12.
751 754 " .., T 12.0 T 1:.0 12.0 1R 1 :,
',' ~
c,- t 64 4 83 TR 12JJ TR l~.O 1. 2. f) ,.., "
. ~.
- - 0 7 0 9 12. f) 1:. (l 12.0 1-'
12.0 1.... ..... 1.2.0 I:.
....1 '.'
12.1) t~.(1 l2.0 I:,
-- ,. - --.- --.-----------------------.-----..--------------------------------------------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV ADJ F'I'G BUSES F'HF F'EJS F'ED. BUT. ARR. T ,;: ~
Ii'.) (i'.) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T
1::= 0. 00 2.00 N t) I) 0.90 1(' Y 22.0 -
.~.
:...:= l). (H) 2.00 N (J l) 0.90 If) Y 20. 0 -.
'.'
'0 O. (\I) 2.00 N (I 0 0.90 10 Y 21 .0 3
') . ;)0 :2.(J(1 y 10 I) ('. C?':' 1 (, Y ::.?t ,', '.
- . .'.' -
-----------------------------------------------------------------.-------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYSLE LENGTf-' = 5(:.
FH' : r'H - F'H-.3 F'H-4 F'!-'-t F'H-2 F'H-3 PI-'-"
~< - X X NB LT t
-'
-H X X TH 1
::'T X X fn "
:'0 F'D
, " T X S8 L " X
".
-H X TH (
<;:T X RT X
, .
='D PD
s:r:: ~~._~ 5.0 1 . (l 21.0 0.0 Gt;,EEN 1':'. {) 0.0 0. (- (!.:l
'-'::__~W 3.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 YEl.LOl~ - 0 o. (I 0.0 c. "
.'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SEF:V I CE
LANE GRF'. V'~ GIC DELAY LOS AF'P. DELAY !'oPP. L02
, ~
E~ L 0.2':6 0.200 12.9 B 5.0 Et
Tr.... o. 456 0.540 4. 6 '"
~...= L 0.011 O. 12C 14. 7 B 6.13 B
rc:;' 0.5;.33 (~. 460 6.9 9
, L ;r.~ 0.1).34 0.220 9.9 B 10.9 Et
- , L n 181 0.::0 12. 1 B 11.3 Et
."
T:-:: ('.297 l).~2(i 10.7 B
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
l.,-~='SECT~:JN:
C"el';'f' =
b.8 (see/ven)
vIe = 0,439
LOS = E'
.
o
o
1~85 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMI"'ARY REPORT
************-**************._***.-******-************************.*-*****..
INTERSECTION..HIGHLAND AVE./DEL ROSA AVE.
AREA TYF'E.....OTHER
ANALYST.......TX]
DATE. ........ .3/24/88
T I ~E. . . . . . . . . . F'M
r.'Clf1MENT. . . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EEt WE< NEt SEt EEt WEt NB SB
. T ~C'~ 10"7 1 Co'"",: 196 L 1~.t) L I"" ,., L 12.0 L 1~. ':~
", , ... _I., oJ'_
TH 159:; 479 -C'~ 309 T 12. (. T 12.0 T 12.0 T 1:'.
_...J,., ,
" 16~, 202- 78 132 T 12. (' T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 1'7' r
, , 17 :?1 :) 14 R 12.0 R 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
I'" l) 1:.0 12. (l 1::. ':
-.
12.0 12.0 12.0 12. :)
- - - --- -.,. -- ---- ,".-- -..----.-.....--...--.-.------. -. .....-- ..- - --_...-_._--------~.__...- _..- -.--.--.-----------
ADJUS-;-:1E:rH r: c..CTor~'s.
f3F'.:-iL'E HV {,OJ F'KG 13USES F'~'F F'EDS F'ED. BUT. Ar,R. TYH:
(~~ ) (~~ ) YIN Nm Nb Y/N min T
EE: 0.00 2.00 Y 20 (1 (l 9(' 50 N 1,'.3 ..
." '-'
WB 0.00 2.00 Y 20 (1 O.9i) 50 N 14.3 ~
'-'
I\jE' ('.00 2.00 Y 20 I) ('.90 50 N 20.5 ~
SE (.00 2. (H) Y 20 t) ("'. '::'0 se N 20.5 -
"
---.---------------.--------------------.-----.----------------.--.--------------
S 1 GN':~L SETT!".lC'3 CYCLE ~ENGTH '" 8('. "
F'H-I F'I-l-~: PH-3 F'H-4 F'H-l F'11-2 F'H-3 F'P-.1
EB LT X X NB LT X
n, X X TH X
=;.T X x ~:T X
C'" PD
"
l.JE-' '{ SP LT X
TH v TH 'I-
RT X RT X
F'r F'['
f3~~''::E:t,J 9.0 l.e 1. ..... (, ':". (, sr,EEN 14.0 17.0 0.0 ('. ~:
Y E.i_ ,_ CJW -t.o -'1.0 5.0 0.0 VELLOW 4.0 5.0 0.0 (1.
--------------------------------------.------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
l.ANE GRF'. vie G/C DEL~Y I. OS AF'P. DELAY QF'F'. Lee:
':'.2 L 0.502 0.2(1r) 22.6 C 16. 7 C
T I). 621 0.31:, 1~.8 c
p 0.425 (l.31~ 14.5 ['
l'JB L ('.51 ! o. 1.38 25.9 D 17. :~ c
T O.,~27 0.250 11::. 1 "
~
" (:.:'69 0.450 c;- ~ B
" oJ
..IC' L 0.5:)2 0.200 22.6 c: 18.0 C
T~-\~ 0.652 0.250 18. ~. C
,- ,-. L (1.643 0.200 2S. .. ~'. 19. 1 C
T 0.405 0.250 16. .:. c
R 0.431 0.250 1'>.3 C
..-----.,..----------------------------------------------------.---------------
[" -=::::''':EST ION:
Delay = 17.7 (sec/~eh)
'/ 'e = 1).655
LOS = C
.
o
o
r'~;:S ~CM: SIGNAL! ZED INTERSECTIONS
SUM~ARY REF'ORT
4.....~*...*..*..*....***...**.......*....*....*..*.......................
1~.EFSECTION..highl~nd aVR./WATERMAN
AR~~ TYF'E.....OTHER
QNALyST.......TXJ
~A~~... .......3/22/88
T!ME... .......F'M WIADDED VOL.
CC,~:""~t'JT . . . . . . .
------.--------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WEt NEt SB : EB WE< NB
, . 91 119 201 296 l. 1:.0 L 12.0 l 12. /)
.... 936 516 348 239 T 1 ':. (J T 12.0 T 12. I)
F:-:- ....~.., 97 298 63 T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 1.... I"'
___d. O~.. .
F,F ,"'\"':"' 10 30 7 R 1:.0 12. I) R 1.2.(-
..:.. -'
, ~ .', ....... .~. .t~.O
4'::". '.'
1:. (~ 12. :) 12.0
SB
L
r
. - ,",
l _' .
TP
1:. ,)
1:. )
1- ,',
12. ('
I:. ,:-
. .'__ ._ ._____ ___________________ n _ ____ ... __________.__. ".__ -___________ --.... --... ---. --.----
AD-'IJST'~ENT F ""~C TCF"':~-
GRADE HV ADJ F'I'G BUSES F'HF F'EDS F'ED. BUT. ARR. T ,0'0:
(",'\ (i~ ) Y/N Nm ~lb Y/N lTlln T
,,'.'
Er 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 2~.:) '-'
w= 0.00 2.00 N f) I) ".90 10 Y '20. C' -
N: 0.00 2.00 N (1 I) o.qo 10 Y 2~. :'"; ~
"~'
~2 (I. (H) 2.00 N 0 (I (".ge 10 Y ~, ,', ~
-. ",' c'
-----------------------------.----------.-----------.-----------------------------
SII?Ni=>L SE'-T HK:S
F'H-l F'H.2 F'H-3 F' -'..-.:]
E= _T X NEt LT
- -1 X 'H
='T X RT
- F'D
.- X ,":~, LT
.... .""~,
- ~ X ~H
=, T X Rl
oD PO
'::,c~~'. 11.0 37.0 O. (i (\ , (, GREEN
yE_....:W 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW
CYC~E LEtJGTH =
F'H-I F'H-2 F'H-3
X
11:--: . I)
F'I ,-I
,~
,
x
X
X
X
~
)
18.0
4.0
1.0
4.0
1=.0
5.0
~:-. . '.'
(l.:)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GRF'. V/C GIC DELAY LOS APF'. DELAY AF'P. LOS
EE. L 0.459 (I. l:?,(l 31- 7 D 18. I C
T (\.702 o. .?,q~:: .-, ~ f'
'I....J
R 0.389 .:~. 3~f) 14. 4 B
~? , 0.601 0. 130 :"4. 4 Tl 18.3 C
~
TR 0.517 0.390 15.3 ,-
~'JE: L 0.660 0.200 .31. .:;. D 28.3 D
T o. 759 o. 150 30.0 [,
'-, 0.703 0.280 23.q C
~
'3:: , o. 777 0.250 32.6 D 27.9 D
-
'T'~. 0.497 0.200 '23.4 C
",\
I',-:;::=ECTION:
Delay = 22.4 (sec/veh)
---- ------.-----------------------------------------------------------------
V/C = 0.71-'
u:'s = C
o
o
178~ HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUM~ARY REPORT
*...*.****.**.*.******.****..**~**,*******.".**4*************.********...
I N II:. ""SEer tuN. . H IGIlLAND AVE. I'JALENC I A AVE.
r.r,'Et- ;-YPE..... OTHEJ;:
ANAL.;T.......TXJ
DATE. .........3/2~/88
T I ~E. . . . . . . . . . F'~ W/I\DD"-D VfJl..
COM~E h'T . . . . . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
veLUMES
Eft WE: NEt SEt EEt
~T 74 t(IS ~~ 144 ~ 12. l)
,'u
TH ~49 687 1-::.1.1 104 r I:. "
FT 6(1 t",.,-;, ~ ~~'9 41 Tn 1 ~.
"
'='.r: /; (, (. ;; 1 ... ,'.
~.
1:. "
1"'" 1'1
. , ,
L
I' ~"
-.-.----- ._"- ...-...-.-.... .,.-.-.-----.----... .---.-
WE<
:~. ,)
1 :~. (I
!::. (,
~ :'. ::'
1-. ,',
......
1 :.:. -:.
GI::OMEfRY
L
T
TR
NEt
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
1'2.0
1 :". (1
':F
1:, :
L
T
TR
" .
1:, ::
1:. .
I" '
1, '
-.
AD._fUSTMEr.J -r '=;~ .~ '.'(:f=.":;.
GF.t:~r;c: :..~V ADJ F'vG BUS~S F' -iF PEDS F'ED. BUT. APR. T' 7:E
t, ~~ " ,'.\ Y/N NT, Nb Y/N min 1
. ..'
EE o. (1(' 2.00 N 0 I) " 9::: 10 Y 20.5 ,
.... ...;.
WB 0.0':' 2. (H) N 0 0 O.C?I) 10 Y 20.5 7
~JE 0. ,....., -, (I(J N l) ':) f). 9':' I':' Y 20. 5
-
et:- C'. (1':' 2. :.:.(, N I) 0 O. 0,.., 1 (\ v 20.5 "
- "
----------------- .-----------------------.--.---.------.----------------------
J:"'-'-1
:-'~-2
".IGNAL SETT:NG<:
J"H-3 F'H-4
EB _;
NB LT
"
"
- '-~
y.
X
Tt-l
~'T
J"(i
'::::' ~ T
~f-l
k"C
1:'['
I.:REEN
YELLOW
=T
t..JE' _ T
- -1
\.
'.
, ,
,
= !"\
::~ :::=:-
~ ..... ,-.
<1,(). ~)
0.0
0.0
0.0
C.O
'::.-- ,-~
:.. I)
5. ~}
------------------------------.--------------------...------------------.--------
~.O
LEVEL OF SEf;:': I CE
DELAY LOS
~ANl:: "~~.r:" 'JlC G/C
C~ L (' ~99 (l. I 62
T1" O. 7C7'8 ('. ~,:.8
wr. .~~4 O. 162
TO.' , ; 495 ;) f:"':".:;>
-.,..'--'
"J:' L ,', 1 ~f.' (l '"7'"":'0::
~. .......-..J
TF' 0 '":""..,.,~ O. 225
-'j,
, 1-' C:9 , (~ :225
~. - -
TP : 2! 1, o. 225
~~ b ,-
...... . ~
I . ~ B
. . -
~~ C
.....-' . -
7 . 7 B
. '" 'J C
. -- .
17 : C
""'":'" c: C
~ ,',
1 6. "
CYCLE LENGTH - e:,.
P~-l PH-2 PH-3 pL_~
x
"
(
(
,(
t ':" ;)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1)
I- .::;
,-- .',
.. -'
AF'P. DELAY
11.0
AF'F'. L:::
B
9.5
B
13.6
1':
IQ,9
c
P'..-=:= 3ECTItJ".J:
Del~y = 11.8 cs~c:veh'
---------------------------------------.----------------------------------------
LOS = B
V/C = 0.682
a
.
o
o
1995 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SlJ~"'ARY REF'ORT
~..4..4.,*"...,..,...*,.*.*4.<<'*"*'*4...*."."*.****....**..*..*.......
I 'JT~:<;'SECT ION. . HI GHL(\ND AVE. IHArdSSON ST.
~RE~ TvF'E.....OTHER
{}~,;~_"ST....... TXJ
DATE..........3/24/88
Tl~E..........PM W/ADDED VUL.
COP-'f"'lENT. . . . . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
','OLUMES GEOMETRY
EB WE< NEt SE: EEt W8 NEt Sf
L, "".,::- 161 ~.~ 1: L 12. (1 L 12.0 LT 12.0 L T~' 1':. :>
~.J ~-'
TU 1466 9.:.2 I " : T 12.0 T 12.0 R 12.0 1:, "
I,
P" 345 .36 20 -:'!'.P Tn 15.0 TR 15.0 12.0 1- "
FF' 35 4 2 4 12.0 1::. I) 12.0 I: ,
12.0 1'" n 12.0 I - ,
-' , -
12.0 1:. (\ 12.0 , - :
----------..------------------.---..-------.------- -----------------------------
EB
l~~:
GHAlJC
(%)
0.1)0
0.00
O. (11)
~:!. 00
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
HV ADJ r'll'.G BUSES F'HF ~'El)S F'ED. BUT. A~:<.'. T' =::
(i.: Y/N Nm Nb 'fIN min T
2.00 N .. c) 0.90 50 Y 15.0 ,
" -
2. (J.:: N (, 0 0.90 'jl) Y 15.0 -
~, 00 N (; (, O. 90 50 Y 21.6
..::..
2. (H) Y :'0 c) 0.91) 51) Y 21.6 ~
-
ce.
-'-'
'2 I StJAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 7::, ,
F'H-l Pf-J-2 F'H-"; F'H-4 F'H--! ~'H-2 F'H-'3 F'!---.l
el:.. . T X N8 Ll X
~- ~ ,
TH X T!"l X
pT " RT ,~
,.
F'O F'D
\A:E' L ,- ,( ! :?B L ,. X,
-,
T~ X X TH '(
RT x, X RT X,
r:'D ;( F'I:'
GREE:N 4.0 2.0 4~.. 0 O. I) GREEN 9.0 0.0 0,0 I.'.
vc. ~m~ ::..0 3.1) 4.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LANE GF'F'. V/C GiC DELAY LOS Ct!='P. DELAY AF'F'. L -:
E: L 0.2'46 f).(!.~7 :25.5 D 1'-' ., E:
..:;......
TR O.8'.y2 O. ,~.4f) 1('.3 B
.t':,. L (l.793 " . ~~ :'::5.6 0 7.5 E:
"- '- . .....;....:'
TF: 0.428 0.707 3.0 A
~.1 c: LT o. 1(:\2 ... 147 17.9 ,- 17.Q C
1:, 0.091 O. 147 17.9 C
.-:~, LTR 0.297 O. 147 18.7 18.7 C
-_....'
--------------------------.---.--.------.----------.----------------------------
: ", - =:r,SECT I ON:
DElay = 10.~ (see/v.hl
vIe = 0.78.3
LOS = Et
1
o
o
1985 HCM' SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
SUMM~RY REF'ORT
**.4~.4*****.***.********..**'.******************..*******************..**
IWEC:'~=:CTlON. . HIGHLAND AVE./GOLDEN AVE.
ARE~ -yPE.....OTHER
At~;':.... '. = - . . . . . . . TXJ
D~TE.. ........3/24/88
TIME., ........F'M W/ADDED VOL.
COt"'r~E"T. . . . . . .
"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES GE'JMETf;'Y
:::B WEt NEt SB EEt WE< NB c -,
LT 31 132 "' 64 L 12.0 L 12. I) LTR 15.0 L ~ : . :;
-
TH -51 1064 "' 2 T 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 TR 1:. (1
'-'
RT : ,) I 64 4 113 TR 15.0 Tf;' 15. (, 12.0 ~:. I)
RR I I 7 (I I~ 12. (, 12.0 1~.C) ~ : . ~.
'"
12.C 12. r) 12.0 1:. (i
12. (, 12.0 12.0 . -, "
.- - --- _._.~ .-----.--.----..-...--- .--..-.- .--.." --.- - -. -----.- -------------------- ------- ---
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
GRADE HV AOJ F'KG EtUSES F'HF F'EDS F'ED. [<UT. ARR. ; ,f''E
(~-:. ) (%) ON Nm Nb Y/N min T
EB 0.00 2.1)0 N (I (I (:.'~(I 10 Y 15.0 .:\
WEt 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 f).qo 10 Y 1.5.0 "
-
NEt ('.00 '2. ~~H) N I) 0 (.9:) 10 Y 21.6 3
Sf' 0.00 2.0<) Y 10 l) O.9(J 10 Y 21.6 "
'-'
---.------------------------------------------------------------------------
PH-"
EEl '- X
F:
~E.
c;-
Gr-.EE~. 5,0
,'ELL:...; 3.0
x
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = ~). (:
F'H-:~ F'f:-3 PH,.4 ~'4-.1 F'H-2 F'H-3 f.4-4
"~B LT X
X fH X
X RT X
X F'D
X SEt LT X
X )( TH X
X X RT X
X F'D
1.0 21.0 I). I) Gf;'EEN IC.O 0.0 0.0 :'. I)
.~.. I) 4.0 0.0 vELLOW 3.0 0.0 0.0 .:~. 0
----------------------------------------------------------.----------------.-
LEVEL OF SE:",,'..'ICE
_ANE GRF'. vIe G:C DELAY LOS !'oF'F'. DELAY APF'. I -c
~_J
Ee L ').443 O. 1:2') 16.6 C 9 . '7 E:
TR l).~80 O. 46(\ 6.7 B
WE< L 0.433 f). 21)0 13. c; P 6.6 B
TR 0.652 0. 540 ~ 7 B
..J.
'" NB LTR (\.1).31 0.2'20 9 ,~ B 9.8 El
SEt L O. 181 0.2:0 12. 1 B 11. 6 E-
.'
T~ 0.404 0.220 11. - Et
-
INTE~ SECTION:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delaoy =
8.3 (secl..-~h)
'//C = 1).562
LOS = Et
.
o
o
1~95 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
'SUMMARY REPORT
.'
**.**.***.***.I.******".**'****~***********'******'.*.**.._*_**____*__...
INTERSECTION..HIGHLAND AVE./DEL ROSA AVE.
AREA TYF'E.....OTHER
ANALvST.......TXJ
O,)'"S..........3/24/88
TIME:;. ..... ....F'M WIADDED VOL.
Car-1MENT. . . . . . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUMES : GEOMETRY
EEl WB NEt SB EEt WB NEt SE<
, ;- 1 C':i~: 1(17 22~5 196 L 12.0 L 1:.0 L 12.0 L t::. ~:-
TH '::.,93 679 ":<'C"'7 3;)9 T 12.0 T 12.0 T 12.0 T I:. ':-
...~-.:..
f;'T 1.~2 202 78 302 T 12.0 T 12.0 TR 12.0 T 1..... (,
,
<;'C: 17 21 (I 31 R l~.O F( 1.~.O ]2.0 f" 1:,
t2.0 12. t) 12.0 1 :.
12.0 12. ( 12.0 ~.:. .
...- ..---.,.... ...--- ._----_._- -- .-.
"f"{I DE HV (.OJ PLG
(i() 00 YIN Nm
EE' 0.00 2.00 Y 20
WE: 0.00 2.00 Y 20
~;'E 0.0') 2.00 V 21)
SB f). 00 2. (H) Y 2')
ADJUS,t1ENT F!'''I;:~';Jr-''s
BUSES F'HF F'EOS F'ED. BUT. ARR. T - -
Nb V:N min T
I) I). 90 50 N 14. 3 ~
"
0 0. 90 50 N 14.3 T
.,:.'
',I (l. 1.,'0 50 N 20.5 .3
(I (.:. ~~) ~' N 2(1.5
,j', -
-----------------------------.-.-- .-------.-----------------------------------
-\\
S I GNAt SS:TI~-JGS CYCLE LENGTH = 9(i. .:;
F'H"'I F'H-2 F'H,..3 F'H-tl F"~I-l PH-2 F'H-3 P!-,-J
X X ;~8 LT X
X X TH X
X X F~:T X
PC
x '38 LT ,(
~ :H x
~, f"T X
F'D
Q. <~ 1. l) 27.0 o. (1 13~'E.EN 14.0 17.0 (i. I) (. "
4.e 4.0 5.0 0.0 '(E:L~OW 4.0 5.0 0.0 c.::
EB Li
--i-!
;:'T
.:...,
, ~
"IE' ~T
c:-;'
OJ
I3F'EE' :
"F.~L,::W
LEVEL OF 2ERVICE
LANE GRF'. V/C G/C DELAY LOS
~B L 0.565 O. 178 ....~ .5 D
~,
T 0.499 0.389 13. 7 E<
F: 0.342 O. 389 12. "7 8
~:= L 0.575 !). 1== :::1 . 2 D
T 0.667 O. .~...;;,.~ 1~ =- C
. ".)
n 0.325 0.51 1 8. 4 P
'I~' 0.1323 I). 1"'8 ~,... . D
,,' .;,.~. '..
TR O. ..,~~ ').222 ~~ 4 C
f '_"_' ...."
,n ~ L O. 724 O. ! 78 "':'"'., .... D
T f). 455 /) . ............ 19. 8 C
.....:.~
R 0.722 '). 344 20. .... C
...
AF'P. DELAY
1'5.8
AF'F'. Le::
c
17.3
~
'~
'"'\C' ~
...w....
:)
23.0
c
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
~ ~J~ C-'SEcn ON:
Delay = 20.2 (sec/veh)
V/C = 0.788
LOS = C