Agenda Report - March 1, 1989 PH (4)3
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TO: THE CITY ODUNCIL, COUNCIL., MELIM DATE: MARCH 1, 1989
FROM: THE CITY MANACERS OFFICE
SUBJECT: REQUESTS OF MARC SIEGAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN , A REZONING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION
INDICATED ACTION: That the City Council conduct public hearings to reconsider
the following requests of Marc Siegal, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group:
—� 1. to amend the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by
redesignating the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN
029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from Office -Institutional to
Commercial.
2. to rezone the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN
029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -
Professional to C -S, Commercial Shopping Center.
3. to certify the filing of a Negative Declaration by the
Community Development Director as adequate environmental
documentation on the above projects.
The public hearings may be conducted concurrently, but the items must be acted on
separately.
BACKGROUND MORMATION: At the January 18, 1989 City Council meeting the
Council denied the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning by a 2 to 2 vote with
Councilman Snider abstaining because of a conflict of interest. The Council
failed to certify the Negative Declaration and Expanded Initial Study because
Councilman Reid's motion died for lack of a second.
At the request of the applicant's attorney the Council voted to reconsider the
above matters at this session and asked the developer present additional
information which he felt was important.
The purpose of this request is to provide the zoning so that the developer can
build a 9.6 acre shopping center with 116,960 square feet of building area. At
the Planning Commission public hearing the proponents indicated that the center
would be anchored with a 42,000 square foot, full-service Safeway and a 19,000
square foot Thrifty Drug Store. A full service supermarket is similar to Fry's,
Raley's or the newest Lucky's in the types of departments within the market.
At the Planning Commission hearing the developer offered to assist in paying for a
traffic signal at the major street intersection. Presumably this same offer will
be made at the Council hearing.
if the City Council approves the requests, the Public Works Department should be
authorized to negotiate with the developer on the amount of sewer capacity that
will be available to the center pending the completion of the White Slough
expansion.
CC89/5/TXTD.OIC February 21, 1989
The City Council
March 1, 1989
Page 2
If the request is denied, the existing SafeWay Store on East Lodi Avenue will
still close because it cannot compete with the larger, more modem markets built
around the City in the last few years. Although a sad situation for the .,eastside,,
an economic fact of life fo- the grocery chain.
M S': B. SCH EDER
C' unity Development Director
CC89/5/TXTD.01C
February 21, 3.989
ft—
Wicepress Shopping Center Pik
Conceptual Site Pl=
VICINITY MAP
t.wvm
TUMAW—" 9N -
9.06.45p 136.9"d
ica q. V-9
�i
sme Amw—
Winepress Shopping Center
Rezone & GFA
F-88-62- t-27 B$3
7�.
t
��
CJ� ,
tl
u�
1
l
y
b
1
f'
1`
a
A 15'
t
i
Winepress Shopping Center
Rezone & GFA
F-88-62- t-27 B$3
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE PLANNING- COMNIISSIONS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL
GF THE REQUEST OF MARC SIEGEL, C/O FIRST FIDE= REALTY GROUP
TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE LSI GENERAL PLAN BY
RIDE 49N AU%U THE PARCEL AT 2500 WESr TURNER ROAD
(APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. CKBAL)
FROM OFFICE- MIT11 EONAL TO COMMERCIAL
NOTICE IS HEREBY CNIN that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at the hour of 7i'30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommended
approval of the request of Maty Siegel, c/o First Fidel i ty Realty Group to
anxnd the land use element o f the Lodi General Plan by redesignati'ng the parcel
a t 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from R-C=P,
Residential -Commercial -Professional to C -S, Corrmerc i a l Shopain q:'
Information regarding this item may be obtained in'the off i c,e of the Conn -w*
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and comments on t h is matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any tiI rior..ao_the.
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made atm. said.: hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter i n court you ray be i invited=, to raisfng only`
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described"An.this
notice or i n written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 west Pine
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
By Order Of The Lodi City Council :
l
Alice M. Pe n
City Clerk
Dated: February 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney Y
N
PH/5
TXTA,02D
I
r
4s. ,"N. C
i�L1G,� ;•i.t i . �fLJ. Box 667 ' �G'�a 9624flE
CITY CLERK CITY CLERK
}
Ci!T ,, OF LM,C!T 41= L
W James Schroeder .or
Community:'Development Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Jim,
Our family would be willing to work out with
the City of Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to provide a sidewalk and/or
other inprovements across our easterly border on
Lower Sacramento Road to provide access to a new =
shopping center for the residents of Park West.
I hope that this may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing.
You Truly,
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240 4
CC Marc Siegel
�: �a�.5 �'�•i•:rF. ','.�:,rLQ:".s-+� . =_S� :!:r si+v"ati>c ...+1..w'�`SY - / � aw
I
` 1112Junewood Drive
Lodi, California 95242
_�► (209) 333-1313
;iT `+ OF LCD:
Dear Members of the City Council:
Recently you were approached by a developer who asked you .
to consider amending the general plan to rezone a parcel at 2500
West Turner Road (the old RCA building). You refused his request
e 'i to concerns about traffic, etc. ^r y
Please reconsider. I live on the north side of town near Tumer
Road. I am tired of having to drive across town to shop for groceries
that are reasonably priced. Sometimes we feel as if we are in a. part of
town which is slowly beginning to die. I realize there are vacancies -in 1
centers on this side of town, but they are for small shops. I We would
love to have a large grocery store locate on this side of town.
Since the portion *%f Turner Road which would be involved has
. just been redone, I fail to see bow traffic problems would occur. It
might even help alleviate some of the problems on Lodi Avenue and
Kettieman Lane.
We also might need to be concerned about having; major store
chains see Lodi as having an unfavorable business climate.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
4/'V42'C
Laurie Urias
1112 Junew000 Drive
Livable. loveable, Lodi
x
t
` ORDINANCE NO. 1449
AN ORDINANCE CF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE LAND USE BLBVE]VT OF THE LODI GENERAL PLAN
BY REDESIGNATING THE PARCEL LOCATED AT 2500 WEST TURNER ROAD '
(APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. GLOBAL) FROM OFFICE -INSTITUTIONAL 10 COMMERCIAL
BE I T ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:
x >;
,f
SECTION 1. The Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan is hereby,
amended by redesignating the parcel located at 2500 West Turner Road
(APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from Office -Institutional to Commercial.
SECTION 2. All ordinances and parts of ordinances i n conflict:
herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict ►aay exist.IL
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be pubiished one time i n the "Lodi
News Sentinel", a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and
published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect
thirty days from and after its passage and approval.
a
Approved t h i s day of x
JAMES W. PINKERTON, JR. a
Mayor
Attest:
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
State of California
County of San Joaquin; Ss.
I, Alice M. Reimche, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify
that Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular meetin§,bf the
City Council of the City of tod i held
and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at'.a .rp!j.ar
meeting of said Council neid Dj the foi sowing vote:
Ayes: Council Members -
Noes: Council Members
Absent: Council Members
Abstain : Council' Members - '
I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved" and signed by
the Mayor on the date o f i t s passage and t he same .has ,`baifpublished ;
pursuant to law.
ALICE M REIMCHE
City Clerk
Approved as to Foam
BOBBY W. McNATT
City Attorney
ORD1449/71XTA.0IV
-2-
t
DECLARATION OF MAILINGi.
a February 6, 1989 in the City of Lodi, Sar. Joaquin County, California, I
deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class posta e
prepaid thereon, containing a copy of the Notice attached. hereto, .'mai
Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as is more partiCU1_7.'6Y_: sho.wn",,
on Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi,
California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing i s true and correct.
Executed on February 6, 1989, at Lodi, California.
ALFC-E—K. REIMCHE
Ci y Clerk/
uy non
ep City C
lerk
s.
DEC/01
TXTA.02D
NOTICE OF, PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER
THE PLAN -,M CONOAS M RECOMMENDED APPROVAL
OF THE REQUEST OF MARC SIEGEL, CIO FIRST FIDELITY REALTY GROUP
TO REZONE THE PARCEL AT 2500 WEST TURNER ROAD
(APN 029-030-39, R.C.A.)
FROM R -C -P , RESEENTIAL-CODIMERCIALrPRRiFVSsIONAL
TO C -S, COMMERCIAL SHOPPM
1 DTCE IS HEREBY GR/EN that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at the hour` of 7.30'
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommended
approval of the request of Marc Siegel, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group tot;
rezone the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029030-39g R.C.A. Global) from
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to C -S, Commercial Shopping..
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the. Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at. anyytime prior..;_to the
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing .describedin this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 crest:. Pine;
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
By Order Cf The Lodi City Council:
%-
Alice M. imche
City Clerk
Dated: February 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
Bob W'" N" "
City Attorney
PH/4
TXTA.02D
moi^
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE FLAN* ClONkAS40NS -OMMENDED APPROVAL
OF THE REQUEST OF MARC SIEGEL, C/O FIRST FIDELITY REALTY GROUP
TO AMEND THE LAND LASE ELEMENT OF THE LODI GENERAL PLAN .BY
RIDES13NATNG THE PARCEL AT 2500 VBT TURNER ROAD
(APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. GLOBAL)
FROM OFFICE -INSTITUTIONAL TO COMMERCIAL
NOTICE IS HEREBY CMN that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, a t the hour of ,7:30:
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommended
approval of the request of. Marc Siegel, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group to
amend the ' and use element of the Lodi General Plan by redesignating the parcel '
at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from R-C=P,
Residential=Commercial-Professional to C -S, Cormne,rcial Shopping.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited toesent their views and comments on this ;matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any,time-prior:to th
ppre:
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at' said,,hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be limited to raising only`
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described, in this,
notice or i n written carrespondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 west Pine
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
Bj Order O f The Lodi City Council:
rk.
Alice M. Re�Xh�
e
City Clerk
Dated: February 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
Bobby W, McNatt
City Attorney
PH/5
TXTA.02D
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO CERTIFY
THE FILING OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
BY THE COMMUNITY DEVEIUOPIVENT DIRECTOR AS
ADEQUATE ENVIRONIVBVTAL DOCUMENTATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at the hour 'of:7i;30.
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council.
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation to certify the filing of a negative declaration by the Community
Development Director as adequate environmental documentation on the following
projects:
1. Proposed amendment of the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by
redesignating the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, R.C.R.
Global) from Office-Insti tutional to Commercial.
2. Proposed rezoning of the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39,
R CA Global) from R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to..,.C.-S,
Commercial Shopping.
Information regarding this item may be obtained i n the office of t e Community.
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and comnents on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you rray be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice or i n written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 west Pine
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
Bir Order Of The Lodi City Council:
Al ice M. Rei the
City Clerk
Dated: February 1, 1y89
Approved as to form:
- ,&(2
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
PH/6
TXTA. 02 D
... ........ ..
(Pave Of
MAILING LIST FOR 4-f 3lt' I I!:,- CC -Kr rC� r-:' FILE
ficht
9(k)
API
OWNERS NAME MAILING ADDRESS
CITY STA -TE ZIP
, (ajt4j.[N_ 5 s
jZC6Fc S%j4 W. lb p iR_ p.
jhiL_ ? &
LODI_ 95*2-4o
_t
-rc>vjwe T
t�Re4 lw--VGLQEMC-Nl 0. COPP i fre ja :2-575 6RAND r&& RL
!k-rQC-
C-l" gr Low
VA
4 m .3 pioi e s 'Po 130zr 7a7
4 1.-
7
RGA--_LQBAL- COMM
i'
c U�9� po. r
ALouT
3Z S2 DhJVIILV I-SLVI
ALAky
'4q LOP! CCCt- '1-4,mLV
44
4TW 1-0. 26452
q,� Zfa7
!SkuptjSom 24i%3, TEJ9.tj --,-r,
L00 i 95 z40
PUT DF
NJ&) q27-cl&3cf
Aj-'Z-�'�- 1A
I
m
Dear Lodi City Council: PLE C► IVSD
ON
415
�,
J
1
-«.-�............,..«._.....-..,.:..-: �:.....:..,..:u..�c»..,:.�_...,.._a..aw�,.,....,ti....r::�.:s+a.::+.�.,....ar,.,�,.+._—..,.... .s.w.`-.,_�....:.....w.._....:......................:.,,._:... ��......,.<.,�s.-.:...moo.. ... ._..,yyiay��y
TO:
FROM:
C O U N C I L
THE CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
..i-41 `tif=.'.4'...
a-
C O M M U N I C A T I O N
Y
c
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MARCH 1, 1989
KcQUESTS OF MARC SIEGAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN, A REZONING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION
INDICATED ACTION: That the City Council conduct public hearings to reconsider
the following requests of Marc Siegal, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group:
1. to amend the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by
redesignating the parcel at 2500 West Turner Roau (APN
029-030-39, R.0 A. Global) from Office -Institutional to
Commercial.
. V 2. to rezone the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN
029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -
Professional to C -S, Commercial Shopping Center.
3. to certify the filing of a Negative Declaration by the
Community Development Director as adequate environmental
documentation on the above projects.
The public hearings may be conducted concurrently, but the items must be acted on
separately.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the January 18, 1989 City Council meeting the
Council denied the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning by a 2 to 2 vote with
Councilr^?n Snider abstaining because of a conflict of interest. The Council
failed to certify the Negative Declaration and Expanded Initial Study because
Councilman Reid's motion died for lack of a second.
At the request of the applicant's attorney the Counci? voted to reconsider the
above matters at this session and asked the developer present additional
information which he felt was inportant.
The purpose of this request is to provide the zoning so that the developer can
build a 9.6 acre shopping center with 116,960 square feet of building area. At
the Planning Commission public hearing the proponents indicated that the center
would be anchorea with a 42,000 square foot, full-service Safeway and a 19,000
square foot Thrifty Drug Store. A full service supermarket is similar to Fry's,
Raley's or the newest Lucky's in the types of departments within the market,
At the Planning Commission hearing the developer offered to assist in paying for a
traffic signal at the major street intersection. Presumably this same offer will
be made at the Council hearing.
If the City Council approves the requests, the Public Works Department should be
authorized to negotiate with the developer on the amount of sewer capacity that
will be available to the center pending the completion of the White Slougn
expansion.
CC69/5/TXTD.0IC February 21, 1989
I
The City Council
March 1, 1989
Page 2
If the request is denied, the existing Safeway Store on East Lodi Avenue will
stall close because it cannot compete with the larger, more modern markets built Y`
arour.i the City in the last few years. Although a sad situation for. the eastside, t� ,
an_ecunomic fact .of life for the grocery chain. t
00,
AM runiity
CNEDER
C Development Director }
CC89/5/'XTD.OIC
Mmepee= 5hoppi= Ces¢ter
Coaceptu=1 Site Plan
VICINITY MAP
uoci+o
w+a..sr tt..e.r
aa..... V.9
a.vws u.�
Winepress Shopping Center
Rezone & GPA
2.88-02 12.27.88
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSDIR
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDED APPROVAL
OF THE RBTf�K OF MARC SIEGEL, C/O FIRST FIDELITY REALTY GROUP
TO REZONE THE PARCEL AT 2500 VaT TURNER ROAD
(APN 029-030-39, R C.A__ CLOBAL)
FROM R -C -P , RES I DENT I AL-CO�kRC iAL. PROFESS I ONAL
TO C -S, COMMERCIAL SHOPPING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at the hour .of l:X.
m., or as soon thereai eer as the matterr be heard, the Lodi City Council
e
will conduct a public hearing to consider Planning CommissiQri'!i,.6-6,
ty: MV.. 0
approval of the request of Marc Siegel, c/o First Fidelity Real
rezone the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (MN 029-030-39, R.C. A..-Al.obil) from:,
: .
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to C -S, Commercial ShoPP, tng�
Information regarding this item may be obtained - in the office of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and omments on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk -at -any. t'
i me - pri or to', t
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be"made "ait.-said hearing. T
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be-'tfintrfe'd 9 U 11 Iy
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing des"culdribela�.Ililn-this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 vest._ Ri ne
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
By Order Of The Lodi City Council
Alice M c'.
City M.
Dated: February
Approved as to form
Bobby W�)ck_tt
City Attorney
PH/4
TXTA.020
RECEIVED
R7
7 FEB S 1989
-
TO
ANC
PA Box 667 Lodi. !q0520-!-
G U -
Mr. James Schroeder
Community 'Development Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Tim,
Our family would be willing to work out with
the City of Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to provide a sidewq,lk:...#pd/pr...
other inprovem4nts across our easterly".--.66id"er'..:on
Lower Sacramento Road to provide accesis"'to -a';:new
shopping center for the residents of Pirk..'.'We'st.
I hope that this may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing,
You
You Trnly,
lint- Towng
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240
CC Marc Siegel
1112 Junewood Drive
.odi, California 95242
!
(209) 333-1313
Dear Members of the City Council.
Recently you were approached by a developerwho asked you
to consider amending the general plan to rezone a parcel at 2500
West Turner Road (the old RCA building). You refused his request
due to concerns about traffic, etc.
Please reconsider. I live on the north side cf town near Ti irner
if
Road. I am tired of having to drive across town to shop for groceries
that are reasonabyr priced. Sometimes we feel as if we are in a part of
town which is sloe ly. beginning to die. I realize there are vacancies in
centers on this side of town, but they a rt for sftall shops. We would
love to have a large grocery store Iccate on this side of town.
Since the portion of Turner Road whicli would be involved has
just been redone, I fail to see how traffic problemswould occur. It
might even help alleviate some of the problems on Lodi Avenue and
Kettleman Lane.
We also might need to be concerned about having major store
chains see Lodi as having an unfavorable business climate.
Thank you for you: time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Laurie Urias
11 " 2 Junewood Drive
Livable, loveable, Logi
ORDINANCE NO. 1450
AN ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI
AND THEREBY REZONING THE PARCEL LOCATED AT 2500 WEST TURNER ROAD (APN
029-030-39, RCA GLOBAL) FROM R -C -P,
RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL -PROFESSIONAL TO C -S, COMMERCIAL SHOPPING
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by.. .
Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code is hereby amended by rezoning the
parcel located at at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, RCA
Global) from R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to C -S,'''
Commercial Shopping. xw,
The alterations, changes, and amendments of said Official District Map
of the City of Lodi herein set forth have been approved by the: City
Planning Commission and by the City Council of this City after public -
hearings held in conformance with provisions of Title 17 of the Lodi
Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California applicable
thereto.
SECTION 2. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict
herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi
News Sentinel", a daily newspaper of genera? circulation printed and
published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect
a
thirty days from and after its passage and approval. `#
0
-i-
Approved this day of
JAMS W. PIlM URTON, JR
Mayor
Attest:
ALICE M. RPDAG E
City Clerk
State of California,
County of San Joaquin, ss.
I Alice R Reimche, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify
t� at Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular meeting of the ,
City Council of the City of Lodi held
and was thereafter passed, adopted and oderpd o riat at a regular
meeting of said Council held ty the MlFowing vote:
Ayes : Council
Noes : Council Members -
Absent: Coun(A 1 Mm -bets -
Abstain : Council Membets -
I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by
the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published
pursuant to law.
Approved as to Form
BOBBY W, McNATT
C it y Atterney
OFD1450/TXTA.01V
-2-
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
i
4
-, �.� . � %
� t ���
� �.�-�.
.�
a
� � � ��.
,. � �`
���.
_ _ _. � � �t
/ ti �
__ _ _
,�
�/vLcV/ �
d
� -'ts
�// r; J �
� � ..� a ..
`�{�+ �'.
,� � _ � i
._. �
�d-i- .. __ _�_ _ _ ____ - __ - _ _...__ �� 3��
ti
.. �_ G%v�_�-ems. � - � -B�� :.. _ �
�.�
_ ____
r .�
-. ��
.__ .:
� "
{
-- -
i.
j
l mer J,
w�r� C�s�,��
Zo(2(.%
Cova� L
ZZ! 4)f71A) st
dl C.
CITY COUNCIL
JAMES W PINKERTON. Jr.. Mayor
10I4N R. {Randy) SNIDER
Mayor Pro Tempore
DAVID M HINCHMAN
EVELYN NI. OLSONi
FRFD M. REID
S
`v
CITY OFLODI
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
CALL BOX 3006
LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(209) 334-5634
TELECOPIER • (2091333-6795
I
n!
THOMAS A. PETERSON
City Manager I
ALICE M P,EIMCHE
City Clerk
March 3, 1989
Mr. Marc Siegel
c/o First Fidelity Realty Group, Inc.
4`
1555 River Park Drive, Suite 206
s
Sacramento, CA 95815
1.
Dear W. Siegel:
This- letter will confirm action taken by the Lodi City Council whereby,
following public hearings regarding the matters, the City Council by a
3 to 1 vote denied
' al the Flanning Commission's r?commended approval of the request of
1
Marc Siegel, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group, to amend the Land
Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by. redesignating the parcel
at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, RCA Global) from
Office -Institutional to Commercial.
i
b) the Planning Commission's recommended approval of the request of
Marc Siegel, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group, to rezone the parcel
'
at 2500 West Turner Road (A?N 029,030-39, RCA Global) from
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to C -S, Commercial
i
Shopping.
c) the Planning Commission's recommendation to certify the filing of
a Negative Declaration by the community Development Director on
the above listed projects as adequate environmental documentation.
4
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not
f
hesitate to call this office.
Very truly yours,
c /
Alice M. Reirrche i
iity Clerk
AMR:jj
cc: Mr. Steve Herum
Attorney -at -Law
✓'��"`j
,�,v�y�.yw��- -�
D �` �'�`
✓� �����
,�
Mr. & Mrs. Mario Saporito
1140 W..t Turner Road
Lodr, California 95240
,•
i
i
F ;�`• 1 F li!tLl i `� r.t�iL l i y'`i. Ivii , {_ �'—_,`..,.y -
f
eFEw y
STORES, INCORPORATED
47320 Auburn Cl., Fiomont. CA (&15) ,55.2060
Mr. Marc Siegal
Senior Vice President
FIRST FIDELITY REALTY GROUP
1555 River Park Drive, Suite 206
Sacramento, CA 95815
Dear Marc;
Febr.t=ry 24 1989 Mal"nr:add►aaa:
> tweivay st=3, tocorpwatod
No -CAI C)r Won -Roar Eetate Dept.
47400 Kato Road.
i:omant, CA 94539
RE: PROPOSED SAFEWAY STORE 111244
WINEPRESS SHOPPING CENTER
NWC WEST TURNER U. & LOWER
SACRAMENTO RD
LODI, CALIFORNIA
This corfirnc Safeway's commitment to the fully executed leaaa between us
fox a new superntore in your proposed Winepress Shopping Center. in our
analysis of the potential for a uew site in Lodi, 1 hed a i.iscussion with a
Lodi City Planner. It was stated at that time 1 y him, that there were only
433 vacant lots within the City of Lodi. That included all types of vacant
property within the city. None of them were individually Large enough or in
eombiustion commercially zoned to accoirwodate a new Safeway. Therefore, we
made a decision to negotiate for your proposed shopping center. We understood
that your property Was within t:e city limits and zonkd for office commercial.
It is only logicsl that a change in toning from offtce to retail commercial is
better planning than to rezone from agricultural or residential. We sincerely
hope that the City of Lodi will agree with this analysis,
As you know, we would like you to conmence construction of the shopping
celiter at soon as possible. We are committed to your development. M are not
considering any other site, You advise there are rumors that Safewey is
negotiating for another site in town and, Let me xeassute you, that that i s
not the case, We understand that Lincoln Property Company has a potential
site in another area of Ic i, and that they are seeking anchor tenants.
Although we axe aware of the property, we have not negotiated to be included
as an anchor tenant.
Sincerely,
\� SAFEWAY STORES, INCORPOPATED
Laurie A. Benner
Area Ilea? Estate Manager
LAB:v
cc: Gary Oswald
b. C. Kallenberg
JCC Zichichi
FF1DELiir kEHLiY l No659 F 28,89 14:02 P.01 �
3
'1 SIE= 1 = <4 SFaFEWAY F._ F__ F'. 4T_12
LINCOLN PROP£RlY COMPANY
14 j
......_—.... i.. -.�I; `f.
.. .•:a. }. A.. �::• �A��' �i/a.
Fartiary 28, 1989
Ms. Laurie Benn(--J:
Real Estate Managor
sAFLWAY STORES
47400 Nat(-) (toad
Vremunt, M 94538
RE: 18 ACRE PROPERTY - LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD AND
KETTLEMAN LANE IN LODI, CALIFORNIA
Deur bis. Benner:
1� Lincoln Property Company has not and is not presently
negotiating with Safeway Stores; for tha location of
Safeway Stores on Lincoln Pr ert C m an's Lodi
project. it is Lincoln's unsgr.stinding tyhat Safeway
Stores has a fully exocut•ed lease with another developer
for a project on lower Sacramento Road and Turner Road.
At the presont time, Lincoln Property Company is
negotiating with a n=ber of different anchor tenants
fox location i,n tris prol)ose d shopping canter.
if you have any questions regardincs the above, !Meese
do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Darryl Brownian
D:i.r.ccLor, RC%ILDil,t�ivs.f ie�n
v
JLOW.Nre
RAD-ITC0
P.O. Box 667 Lodi, Ca 95241
Mr. James Schroeder
Community Development Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Jim,
our family would be willing to work out with
the City of Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to provide a sidewalk and/or
other inprovements across our easterly border on '
Lower Sacramento Road to provide access to a new
shopping center for the residents of Park West.
I hope that this may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing.
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240
CC Marc Siegel
xF
3
You Truly, / t
uce Towne
RECAP OF LETTERS RECEIVED HY CITY CLERK'S OFFIM
REGARDING PROPOSED PROJECT AST 2500 WEST TURNER RQ
Tota: of 36 3dMers received
17 letters received supporting Safe*W Stores in Lodi
13 letters received concerning the ming of the east -
side Safeway Store
4 letters ill support of the proposeb project
2 letters opposed to the proposed prrect
1
RECAP OF LETTERS RECEIVED BY CITY. CLERK'S TFICE
REGARDING PROPOSED PROJECT AT 2500 WEST TURNER ROAD
Total of 36 letters received
17 letters received supporting Safeway Stores in Lodi
13 letters received concerning the closing of the east -
side Safeway Store
4 letters i n support of +,heproposed project
2 letters opposed to the proposed project
To THE LODI CTT'Y
WE, THE UNDER3IGN, ARE OPPOSED TO AMENDING TH-, LAND US-;,' ELEMENT
OF THE GENERAL PLAN BY REDESIGNATING TH4' PARCEL AT 2500 TURNER
ROAD 'APN 029-030-39 R.C.A. GL.)BAL) F710M OFFICE-JNSTTTUTIONAt TO
COMMERCIAL Bt=USE:
1. THE ADVERSE TRAFFIC C0NQ-.JSTTnN TT ',qT LL CAUSE IN THE AREA.
2. THE STIMULATION IT WILL CAUSE ON PRIME FARM LAND IN THE AREA.
3. THE ADVERSn EFFECT IT WILL CAUS% ON THE OTHER BUSINESSES THAT
ARE ALREADY IN THE AREA.
4. THERE ARE TOO MANY COMMERICAL VACANCIES TO ZONE M')RF,.
ADDRESSA-7MI01-
1-
3
C
/ Y�
--V-
n.,
TA
�All /011—if
v
kli ZZ6 � .o
gq
7.,
WfiAn MR -PIAOed W-PYfQ iZO
0-,-xs c �l
1
2
K
4
S
O
SAVE OUR SAFEWAY
SAVE OUR SAFEWAY. WE WANT THE CITY (7pt7NCILTOVOTE FORA ZONING
CHANGE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TURNER AND SACRAMENTO ROADS
FOR A SAFEWAY SHOPPING CENTER.
WE DONT WANT LODI TO LOSE ITS
SAFEWAY
i
IGNA E
ADDR " S
•
G
lm�A
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS
hollf
PRINT VME
L'
67
WKEK
ZIP CODE
TORE
. ��,�.� j�
'(1.
ADDRESS'
/O2
P16 NAME
D I
J
ZIP CODE
S=IG
ADDRESS
�.
4:::
PRINT NAME
ZIP CODE
J'` _
SIGNATURE
/
ADDRESS
t
PRINT NAME
ZIP CODE
1:1,7
9 S -
DATE
v2_
F ihc• i r 1 Ur_Ll I L i'r ( i_ IJP, 2;14
_ ... _ ... _..... ..DECEIVED _ R.
MICE M. REIMCHE
SAFEWAYFebrtc��Y �a89 tyr,teN�y Storos,'ttnco8poratvd
STORES. INCORPORATED CITY Or' LODI NOICA1 DcAllon•Roa: Eetate post.
e 47320 Aubun Ct., frcmonl, GA (415145&2060 c,.......,, 47400 Kato Rood
Mr, Marc Siegal
Senior Vice President
FIRST FIDELITY RPALTY GROUP
1555 River Park Drive, Suite 206
Sacramento, CA 95815
RE: PROPOSED SAFEWAY STORE #1244
WINEPRESS SHOPPING CENTER
NPC 14BST TURNER RD. t, LOWM
SACRAMENTO RD,
LODI, CALIFORNIA
Dear Marc: _
This cor.firmc Safewa 's commitment to the full executed lease between 1.16
Y y t• .,-
for a, new superrttore in your proposed Wineprese Shopping Center. In our
analysis of the potential for a uew site in Lodi, I hed a discussion with a
Lodi City Planaer. It was stated at that time by him, that there were only
433 vacant lots within the City of Lodi. That included all types of Vacant
property with",. the city. None of them wfre individually large enough ox In
combi;tation co=erci.*lly zoned to accotanodate a now Safeway. Therefore, we
made a decision to negotiate for your proposed shopping center. We ut%dersCood
that your property was within t; -.e city limits ant? zoned for office com-tercial.
It is only logical that a change in zoaiug from office to retail tometercial is
better planning thast to rezone from agricultural or residential. We sincerely
hope that the City of Lodi will agree with this analysis.
As you know, we would like you to commence construction of the shopping
center as soon as possible. We are eotmnitted to your development. We are not:
considering any other site.. You advise there are rumors that Safeway is
negotiating for another site in town and, let me reassure you, chat thai is
not the case, We understand that Lincoln Property Company has a potential
site in another area of Lodi, and that they are seeking anchor tenants.
Al.thouph we are aware of the property, we have not negotiated to be included
as an anchor tenant.
Sincerely,
SAFL-,40 STORES, INCORPORATED
Lavrie A. Berner
eros G. ai Fcrare tfanaeer
LAB :v
cc: Gary Ost•:sld
D. C. Kal?enbertr
Joe Ztchichl
............
F I R S T t' 1L,EL1 1 Y RiEHL (Y ,Vo .927-96J9 rf .. .!b+8'y 14;u2 P.01
-—------------------------------------- ?
1 _ :14-AFEWAY F'_ E_ F. t+2
i.INCUL.V PK0PE 11' CUiviPAN; y
Fobzuary 28, 1989
MS. Laut io Bonn( - J:
Real Estate ManagE:r
SAP inti AY STORES
47400 Xato Road
Vrcmu ,,nt , Ch 94538
RE: 18 ACRE PROPERTY L0WER SACRAMENTO ROAD AND
KETTLEMAN LANE IN LODI, CALIFORNIA
` Dear Ms. Benner:
i 1 Lincoln Property Company has not and 1 s not preseritly
ne otiatinq with Safeway Stores for, the location. of
Sa eway Stores on i�incol,n Prcperty Company's Lodi.
proje:.t. it is Lincoln's vneer.standing that Safeway
Stores has a fully exocut•e-d lease with another developer
for a project on lower Sacramento Road and Turner Road.
At the present time, Lincoln Proporty Company is
negoti-sting with a number of different anchor tenants
fox location 3.n the pro=rosea shopping center.
if you have any questions regarding the above, pler+Sc
do not hositate to cal1.
Sincerely,
Darryl 11rcw,%an
Di.recLor, RCLDil hivjjion
J
TUwNE R, H
P.O. Box 667 Lodi, Ca 95241
�%WIAT 10 1 P".
. . . . . . . . . . . .
IC:
Mr. James Schroeder
Community''Development
Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
"--ml: 7
Dear Jim,
Our family would
be willing to work out with
.`h-
the City df Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to
provide a sidewalk and/or
other inprovements across our easterly border on
Lower Sacramento Road
to provide access to a new
shopping center for the residents of Park West.
I hope that this
may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing.
You Truly,
-104 We �-
✓
�uc
Tt
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240
(:CC MarcSiegel
i
F iKb i F IiILL1 i 1 h_tHL I -i 1
F
I � 11�&W-1
Mr. Mare Siegal
Senior Vice president
FXRST FIDELITY REALTY GROUP
1555 River Pork D•_ iv e , Suite 206
Sacramento, CA 95$15
D e w Narc:
PE: PROPOSED SAFEWAY STORE 81244
WINEPRESS SHOPPING CENTER
NWC WEST TURNER RD. 6 LOWER
SACRAM 910 RD.
LODI. CALIFORNIA
This cot:firna Sa!eway`s commitment to the fully executed lease between ue
for a new supe,•ntore in your proposed Winepress Shopping Center, In our
analysis of the potential for a new site in Lodi, I had a discussion with a
Lodi City Planner. It was stated at that time by him, that there were only
433 vacant lots within the City of Lodi. That included all types of vacant
property within the city. None of them were individually Large enough or in
combitiation co=erci.ally zoned to accousodate a new Safeway. Therefore, we
sack a decision to negotiate for yout proposed shopping center. We understood
that your property was within t::e city limits and zoned for office commercial.
it is only logica3 that a change in toning from office to retail conmercial is
better planning thaLn to rezone from agricultural or residential. We sincerely
hope that the City of Lodi will agree with this analysis.
As you know, we would like you to co=ence coustruction of the shopping
center at Soon as possible. we are committed to four development. We ere not
considering say other site., You advise there ore rumors that Safeway is
negotiating for anothct site in town and, let me reassure you, chat that is
not the case. we understand that L1.ncoln Property Company has a potential
site in another area of Lodi, and that they are seeking anchor tenants.
Although we are aware of the property, we have not negotiated to be included
as an anchor tenant.
Sincerely,
SAVVRAY STORES, I\CORPOR.ATED I,
Laurie A. Benner
Area Real Estate Manager
LAB,v
cc: Gary 06%-!ald
D. C. Rallenberp.
Jcc Zichichi
A -
k1,kST hiDEL3.1`lf 1`triLii I- 14 02 P.01 '
tL iJ0 . �� �-•'�i��'� F`o� .2�d.9 moi` :
------
t
-: y ! t:- i : U 1 a. :14 SAFEWAAY R. E.
P. 4212
LINCOLN YROPLRIV CUhiPA' y
Fcbru ry 26, 1989
Ms. Laurie Bonn( -
Reel Estate Managor
SA ;WAY STORES
47400 Kato (toad
Vremont, Ch 94530
BE: 18 ACHE PROPERTY - LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD AND
KETTLEMAN LANE IN LODI, CALIFORNIA
Dear Ms. Donner:
Lincoln Property osrpany has not and is not presently
} negotiating with Safeway Stores tor the location of
Safeway Stores on Lincoln Property Company's Lodi
project. it is Lincoln's understanding that Safeway
Stores has a fully exoCut•ed. least: with another developer
for a project on lower Sacramento Road and Turner Road.
At tha negotS.AtAngcnt withi a numberoof cPiIPp�ir4�►tCancany is
hor tenants
for loc; ation i.n the proposed shopping, center.
if you have any questions regazai.ncj the above, please
do not hositate to ca32.
Sincerely,
Darryl urowr;an
Di.rcctor, ROLO.i, Mvi.sion
a
1.
P.O. Box 667 Lodi, Ca 95241
Mr. James Schroeder
Community -Development Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Jim,
0 7 q
Our family would be willing to work out with A
the City of Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to provide a sidewalk and/or
other inprovements across our easterly border on.
Lower Sacramento Road to provide access to a new -,..M.
shopping center for the residents of Park West"..
I hope that this may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing.,
a 'I
You Truly,
.r
Ice Towne
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240
CCC Marc Siegel
NOTICE. OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY QJL.IIL OF THE CITY OF LM
M CONSIDER THE OP GO S ASSESSMENT REPORT, GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
:4::
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, March 15, 1989 at thei
Ord
hour of 7:30 pm., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the
hearing
"
Lodi City Council will conduct a public in the Council Chambers
of the Loch City Council at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California, to
`.
consider the Options Assessment Report, General Plan Update, as
prepared by Jones and Stokes Associates and J. Laurence Mintier and
Associ ate s
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the
Community Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi,
California. All interested persons are invited to present their views
and comments on this matter. Written statements may be fi 1 e d with the
City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein and oral
statements may be made a t said hearing.
't
Ifchallenge the subject matter in court you be limited to
Y, g J Y �'
.you
raising only those issues you ,r someone else raised at the Public
.
Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered
to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California, at or prior
a
to,. the Public Hearing.'
W Order Of the Lodi City Counc
Alice M. Reunche
City Clerk
Dated: March 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
v6 - A .
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
TXTA.02D
CITY COUNCIL
JAME SW. PINKERTON. I Mayor
J O H N R. (Randy) SNIDER
Mavor Pro Tempore
DAVID M.HINCHh1AN
EVELYN M.OLSON
FRED M. REID
Mr. Dante J. Nomellini
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
CALL BOX 3006
LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(203) 334.5634
TELECOPIER (209) 333-6795
March 16, 1989
Chairman, Advisory Wat r Commission
County of San Joaquin
Department of ribl is Works
P. 0. Box' 1.810
Stockton, CA 95201
Dear Mr. Nomellini:
BOB McNATT
City Attorney
This is to advise you that at its regular meeting of March 1, 1989
the City Council of the City of Lodi took action to nominate the
following persons for consideration for appointment to the
Advisory Water Comission of the San Joaquin County Flood Control
and Water Conservation Cistrict:
James W. Pinkerton, Jr., Mayor
Evelyn' M. 01 ,on, Councilmember
Please don't hesitzte to contact rre should you have any questions.
The City of Lodi appreciates the opportunity -to participate.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Peterson
City Manager
TAP :b r
C UNC524
THOMAS A LL
TERSON
'ty Manager
CITY
OF L O D I
ALICE REIMCHE
U E M. R
CHE
Citv Clerk
Mr. Dante J. Nomellini
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
CALL BOX 3006
LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(203) 334.5634
TELECOPIER (209) 333-6795
March 16, 1989
Chairman, Advisory Wat r Commission
County of San Joaquin
Department of ribl is Works
P. 0. Box' 1.810
Stockton, CA 95201
Dear Mr. Nomellini:
BOB McNATT
City Attorney
This is to advise you that at its regular meeting of March 1, 1989
the City Council of the City of Lodi took action to nominate the
following persons for consideration for appointment to the
Advisory Water Comission of the San Joaquin County Flood Control
and Water Conservation Cistrict:
James W. Pinkerton, Jr., Mayor
Evelyn' M. 01 ,on, Councilmember
Please don't hesitzte to contact rre should you have any questions.
The City of Lodi appreciates the opportunity -to participate.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Peterson
City Manager
TAP :b r
C UNC524
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO CCRTIFY
THE'FILING OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AS
ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, April 5, 1989, at the hour of 7;30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation to certify the filing of a negative declaration by the Community
Development Director as adequate environmental documentation on the following
projects:
1. Recommended that the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan be amended
by redesignating the sguth 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on
tentative parcel map 89 P 001 from Residential -Low Density to Office
Institutional and the north 335 feet + (Southwest corner of West Vine
Street and Interlaken Drive) of Parcel 3 of the same map from
Office -Institutional to Residential -Low Density (i.e. 2414 West Vine
Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road - APN
027-040-49).
2. Recommended that the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on
Tentative Parcel Map 89 P 001 be rezoned from P -D (25) Planned Development
District No. 25 to R -C -P, Residential- Commercial -Professional and to
rezone the north 335 feet + of Parcel 3 as shown on the same map from
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to P -D (25) Planned Development
District No. 25 conforming to Residential Single -Family (i .e. 2414 blest
Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road - APN
027-040-49).
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street. Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject ratter in court you may
be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing described in this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the
City Clerk,, .221 West Rint
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
BY Ord r Of The Lodi City Council:
Alice i the
City Clerk
5
Oated Mm -ch 1, 1989
Approved as t o form:
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
PH/11
TXTA.02D
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING COKMISSIONS THAT THE
SOUTH 127.7 FEET OF PARCELS 1 AND 2 AS SHOWN ON TINTAMVE PARCEL MAP 89
_
P 001 BE REZONED FROM P -D (25) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DZS'IRICT N0. 25 TO
i
R -C -P RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL -PROFESSIONAL AND TO REZONE THE NORTH, 335':.,:'.VO
FEET + OF PARCEL 3 AS SHOWN ON THE SME MAP FROM R -C -P, RESMTIAL.-
>
TO P -D (25) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT'.,NO. 2.5
CONFORMING TO RESIDENTIAL S1NGLBFAMLY (I.E.' 2414 WEST VM_ STREET
APN 027-040-40 AND 1000 SOUTH LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD - APN 027-040-49)
tthe
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, April 5, 1989 at'.
hour of 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,,
i
the Lodi City Council will conduct a public hearing to consider.'the
Planning Commission's recommendation that the south 127.7 Veet of
Parceis I and 2 as shown on Tentative Parcel Map 89 P 001 be rezoned
from P -D (25) Planned Development D''strict No. 25 to R -C -P,
Residential- Commercial -Professional and to rezone the north 333 feet
i
of Parcel 3 as shown on the same map from R -C-°; Residential;-
esidential=Commercial-Professional
Commercial-Professionalto P -D (25) Planned Development District No.29
conforming to Residential Single -Family (i.e. 2414 West Vine Street -'
APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49).
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the o ffi cc of the
..
Community Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi,
I
California. All interested. persons are invited to present their views
and comments on this matter. Written statements n y be filed with the
City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein and oral
statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be limited to
raising only those- i slues you or someone else raised at the Public
Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered
to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California, at or prior
to, the Public Hearing.
Hy Order 0 f the Lodi City Council
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
Oated: Mach 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
N/9
TX71 A.020
NOTICE GF PUBLIC HEARING
TO C9,8M THE RiAl�M 00MMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION THAT THE LAND USE ELEMENT
OF THE L0U1 GENERAL PLAN BE AMENDED BY REDESIGNATING THE SOUTH -1 7.7 FEET'OF
PARCELS 1 AND 2 AS SHOWN ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 89 P 001 FROM RESIDENTIAL '
LOW DEN91Y TO OFFICE INSTII 0NAL AND THE NORTH 335 FEET +(SOUTHWEST. CORNER :
OF WEST VM STREET AND KRRRLA EN DRIVE) OF PARCEL 3 OF THE SAME :MAP, FRON
OFFICE -INSTITUTIONAL TO RES'DRi1Z14,LOW DENSITY (I.E. 2414 WEST VINE STREET -
APN 027-040-40 AND 1000 SOUTH LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD - APN 027-040-49)
NUUICE IS HEREBY CAEN that on Wednesday, April 5, 1989` at the hour of` 7:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's,
recommendation that the Land Use Element of the Lodi Geral Plan be amended by
redesignating the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on tentative
parcel nap 89' P 001 from Residential -Low Density to Office Institutional and
the north 335 feet ± (Southwest corner of West Vine Street and Interlaken
Drive) of Parcel 3 of the same map from Office -Institutional .to'.Residerltial4ovr
Density (i.e. 2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South 'Lower
Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49) .
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the off'ce of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. 11 Al:l interested
persons are invited to present their views and comr nts on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing described in this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine
Street, todi, California, at or prior to, the Public Hearing.
Ray Order 0 f the Lodi City Cou nc i 1 :
16,
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
Dated: March 1, 1989
Approved Qas�to form:
e (moi 1 W (&(UQ&C.
y-
Bobby -W. McNatt
C i t y Attorney
PH/10
TXTA.02D
I
C O U N C I L C OM M U N I C AT I O N
T0= THE CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MARCH 1, 1989
FROM: THE CITY MANAGER'S OFF,ICF
SUBJECT: REQUESTS OF MARC SIEGAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN, A REZONING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION''`''`
INDICATED ACTION: That the City Council conduct public hearings to reconsider
the following requests of Marc Siegal, c/o First Fidelity Realty Group:
1. to amend the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by
redesignating the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN
029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from Office -Institutional to
Commercial.
2. to rezone the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN
029-030-39, R.C.A. Global) from R -C -P, Res idential-Commercial-
Professional to C -S, Commercial Shopping Center.
3. to certify the filing of a Negative Declaration by the
--� Community Development Director as adequate environmental
documentation on the above projects.
The public hearings may be conducted concurrently, but the items must be acted on
separateiy.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the January 18, 1989 City Council meeting the
Council denied the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning by a 2 to 2 vote with
Councilman Snider abstaining because of a conflict of interest. The Council
failed to certify the Negative Declaration and Expanded Initial Study because
Councilman Reid's motion died for lack of a second.
At the request of the applicant's attorney the Council voted to reconsider the
above matters at this session and asked the developer present additional
information which he felt was important.
The purpose of this request is to provide the zoning so that the developer can
build a 9.6 acre shopping center with 116,960 square feet of buildifig area. At
the Planning Commission public hearing the proponents indicated that the center
would be anchored with a 42,000 square foot, full-service Safeway and a 19,000
square foot Thrifty Drug Store. A full service supermarket is similar to Fry's,
Raley's or the newest Lucky's in the types of departments within the market.
At the Planning Commission hearing the developer offered to assist in paying for a
traffic signal at the major street intersection. Presumably this same offer will
be made at the Council hearing.
If the City Council approves the requests, the Public Works Department should be
authorized to negotiate with the developer on the amount of sewer capacity that
will be available to the center pending the completion of the White Slough
expansion.
CC89/5/TXTD.OIC February 21, 1989
The City Council
N>atd► 1, 1989
Page 2
If the request is denied, the. existing Safeway Store on East Lodi Avenue will
still close because it cannot -compete with the larger, more modern markets built
around the City in the last few years. Although a sad situation for the eastside,
an economic fact of life for the grocery chain.
ZJS'' B. EDER
CC munity Development Director
CC89/5/TXTD.01C February 21, 1989
iOw
■
Mr1■�/
yfhwPmff shaPPicc Ctatr ti
Concept== Site PF=
VICINITY MAP
LBOO O
TbsM■sp fN�w
miMMsp INlI�i
%CPMW A!
�■moi
RpWae Kites
7M■e Aims
I -J,-au ,
i
.
r; -R Eli
5.
Winepress Shopping Center
Rezone & GPA
Z 88-02 12.27.88
NOTICE OF PUBLIC FEAO TCT TO C
THE PLANNING C ONOAS4ONS RBJJVA4NDkTEN TO CERTIFY
THE FNING CF A NBCrkUvE DICLARA ON •
BY THE 0 vNL1W DEVELOPMENT D03ZIOR AS
ADEQUATE ENVIOWEIT& DOaAlNTAIYN
NOME IS HEREBY CST that on Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at the hour of 7:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the PlanningCommission's
recommendation to certify the filing of a negative declaration by the Community
Development Director as adequate environmental documentation on the following
projects :
1. Proposed amendment of the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan by
redesi nating the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39, R.C.A.
Global from Office -Institutional to Commercial.
2. Proposed rezoning of the parcel at 2500 West Turner Road (APN 029-030-39,
R. C.A. Global) from R -C -P, Residential -Commercial-Professional to C -S,
Commercial Shopping.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited toppresent their views and comnents on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 west Pine
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
Bj Order 0 f The Lodi City Courci I:
Alice M. Rei the
City Clerk
Dated:
February 1, 1989
Approved
as to form::
Bobby W.
McNatt�--
City Attorney
PH/6
TXTA. 02D
KECI: 1
,�.,•;....Y .,,;; - :. FEB G 51989
TO
10% cOMWIN.n
VV NE NC DEVELOPmOn .
R.O. Box 667 L6& Ca,:95241==
Y.
Mr. James Schroeder
Community -Development Director
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Jim,
Our family would be willing ta' work out with`
the City of Lodi and Mr. Marc Siegel an agreement,
acceptable to all, to provide a sidewalk and/or
other inprovements across our easterly border on
Lower Sacramento Road to provide access to a new
shopping center for the residents of Park West.
I hope that this may provide an answer for
some of the objections that I heard at the last hearing.
Vntsre Tru 7 v . _ s
L/7001Y�-�
nce wne
CC Terry Piazza
323 W. Elm
Lodi, Ca 95240
CC Marc Siegel
1112 Junewood Drive
Lodi, California 95242
(209) 333-1313
Dear Members of the City Cou«cil:
Recently you were approached by a deveioper who asked you
to consider amending the general plan to rezone a parcel at 2500
West Turner Road (the old RCA building). You refused his request
due to concerns about traffic,etc.
Please reconsider. I live on the north side cf town near Turner
Road. ! am tired of having to drive across town to shop for groceries
that'are reasonably priced. Sometimeswe feel as if we are in a part of
town which is slowly beginning to die. I realize there are vacancies in
centers on this side of town, but they are for small shops. We would
love to have a large grocery store Iccate on this side of town.
Since the portion of Turner Road which would be involved has
just been redone, I fail to see how traffic problems wouid occur. It
might even help alleviate some of the problems on Lodi Avenue and
Kettieman Lane.
We also might need to be concerned about having major store
chains see Lodi as having an unfavoraole business climate.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Laurie Urias
1112 J u n ewood Drive
Livable, ioveabie, Lodi
V
Civil and Transportation Engineering
gym:
r Civil and Transportation Engineering
64 P 9� 9
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
WINEPRESS CENTER
LODI j CALIFORNIA
February 27, 1989
Prepared for —
t First Fidelity Realty Group
1555 River Park Drive
Suite 213
R Sacramento, CA 95815
Lj
i�
w.:
:;
978 DESOTO LANE FOSTER CITY. CA 94404 (415) 572-0978
I
m
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i
SECTIO
PAM
PREFACE**iii
I.
SETTING.
11.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
6
III.
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION.
Ci
IV.
PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS
V
ALTERNATIVE PROJECT - OFFICE BUILDING
V 1.
ALTERNATIVE PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS
VIII.MITIGATION
MEASURES
27
APPENDICES
A.
OFFICE BUILDING TRAFFIC GENERATION
B.
LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS
C.
SIGNAL WARRANT'S WORKSHEETS
Dm
TRANSPORTATION TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
i
M
In October cf 1988 TJKM Transportation Consultants,' Fair Oaks,
prepared a traffic impact report on the proposed )XirxqpYpsj1
Center. That traffic study was included in the
impact report for the project prepared by E I P
mento.
�7-
This report acknowledges and uses the traffic data developed: by
TJKI\4 for the existing, existing with Chestnut St, bridMeand:.
,
cumulative IM peak hour conditions. Analysis methodologies used
in this report are similar to those used by TJKMO,:.b4t the fi iid
ings vary slightly due to assumptions made,
The report evaluates the proposed Winepress Center as w e 11 as ali
alternative office building on the sarne site and compares the
impacts of the two land use alternatives.
I
ii
Lt#.l I
W -VW 6
SECTION I.
SETTING
The project site is located at the southwest corner of Turner
road and Lower Sacramento Road/Woodhaven Lane in the City of
Lodi. See Figure 1, Location Map, page 3. Study area streets
include Turner Road, Lower Sacramento Road, Woodhaven Lane,
Eilers Lane, W. Elm Street and West Lodi Avenue. Five intersec-
tions are included in the study area for which levels of service
J (LOS) have been determined:
E i l e r s Lane & Woodhaven Lane
. Turner Road & Lower Sacramento Road
Turner Road & Lower Sacramento Road/Woodhaven Lane
Lower Sacramento Road & W. Elm Street
Lower Sacramento Road & W. Lodi Ave. /Sargent Road
The existing IM peak hour traffic volumes on the study area
streets and at the study area intersections are shown in Figure
2, page 4. These volumes reflect the current circulation system.
Chestnut Street in the unincorporated Woodbridge area is to be
connected to Woodhaven Lane providing a direct connection between
i Woodbridge Road and Turner Road. The bridge needed for the
connection is virtually complete and the roadway work should be
completed within the next few months. Figure 3, page 5, shows
the PM peak ho,ir volumes after the Chestnut -Woodhaven link has
�= b e e n made.
LOS calculations for the five study area intersections have been
made and the worksheets are included as Appendix B. Intersec-
tions controlled by STOP signs have been analyzed by the methodo-
logies presented in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 10.
Signalized intersections have been analyzed by use of the "crit-
ical movement" methodology developed by Henry McInerney and
Stephen ^=!tersen as presented in the Institute of Transportation
Engineer: -)ublication, Traffic Engineering, January 1971.
Capacity volumes are determined using the Messer-Fambro formula C
= 1800(c-nl)/c where C is the capacity of the intersection in
vehicles per hour per lane, c is the cycle length in seconds, n
is the number of critical phases and 1 is the lost time per
critical phase (taken at 4.0 sec.) . Cycle length is based on the
work by Roger Roess, Polytechnic Institute of New York, for the
-- critical movement technique of analyzing signalized intersec-
tions. Levels of Service are defined in Appendix D, Transporta-
tion Terminology Definitions. The LOS for the five intersections
for the existing and existing with Chestnut St. bridge included
are shown in Table A on the fcllowing page.
--
W/O Bridc e
W/ Bridge
Intersection VAC
LOS
V/C
LOS
Signalized Intersections
Turner Road & 0.52
A
0.48
A
Lower SacramentoOR
`
4 -Way STOP Intersections
f
Turner Road & 0.37
A
0.40
A
Lower Sacramento/
Woodhaven
{
Lower Sacramento 0.60
A/B
0.60
A
i
�-
& W. Lodi/Sargent
j
2 -Way STOP Intersections
R/C
LOS
R/C
LOS
Woodhaven Lane
{
& Eilers Lane
i
southbound 1 e ft not
941
A
westbound Ei lers analyzed
506
h
! '
Lower Sacramento
& W. Elm St.
southbound 1 e ft 586
A
586
A
westbound Elm 159
D
159
D
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity
Ratio.
See
Appendix D.
R/C = Reserve Capacity.
See Appendix D.
Comparison of project added and cumulative conditions are com-
pared to the existing conditions with the Chestnut -Woodhaven
conne:tion in place because by the time the project is built and
occupied, this street link w i 11 have been opened to through
traffic. As can be seen, the intersections are operating at goad
levels of service with little or no congestion or delay. The
Chestnut -Woodhaven connection will minicnally effect the LOS of
the affected intersections.
2
® INTERSECTION STUDIED
MAP COURTESY LODI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
3 LOCATION MAP
FPGURE 1
EXISTING PN PEAL: N00R TRAFFIC YOLum :ITNOOI CBES= STREET BRIDGE
FIGURE 2
0
0
1
1
T
L 1 OR
t
1
0
0 1 184 L <--•- 184 EILERS LANE I 1
I----------------------------------------1
1 0 145
145 ---->
I s
I T R
1
i
184 I
440 1
i l i
v 1 145
i l l
r I S30
TQRKER ROAD
1 21 R
1 3941 TIiRNER ROAD
R
T
L 1 153 T
R
t
L 1 158 T ;
<---- 226 18
139
27 I 183 L <----
357 94
3
343 1 6 L <-•--'S58 .
- --
-----------------------------------I-------------------------
219 ---->
L
11 1 SS 113 166
------•----1..........
328 ---->
L
-
106 t $4 30 $5 619 _----a
T
139 1 L T R
T
221 1 L T R
R
691
R
11
BItiEPRF�S
I
1 .
CENTER
391 1 '
SITE
i I t
v 1 334
T
I
L 1 80 R
347
49 1 82 L
c•--- 162
VES! ELN MIMT
I--------------------------------------------------------
1 434 149
198 ---->
I T R
1
446 1 •
1 I I
1 1 I
r 1 681
SARGENT ROAD
I
1 1101
R
t
L 1 133 T
<---- 279 122
283
41 1 61 L
<---- 304
VEST LODI AVEWE
-----------------------------------i--------------------------------------------------------
386 ---->
L
208 1 24 363 140
346 ---->
T
165 1 L T R
R
13 1
1
LOWER SACRANENTO ROAD
4
EXISTING PN PEAL: N00R TRAFFIC YOLum :ITNOOI CBES= STREET BRIDGE
FIGURE 2
EIISTING P8 pUt ROOK TRAFFIC "LUNES VITR CBESTRIR STREET BRIDGE
VTMR s
LOW SACRAKEBTO ROAD
1
VOODBRIDGE ROAD
---------------------------------
NKELMINE STREET
---------------------------
CHEiTBt1T STREET
I
I
I
1
1r"r4r .
t
L 1 2S R
184
30 I 56 <----
81 FILERS LAN t
---
--I _L
_------ -.........
«... I
------------------
1161 45
75 - .>
!
r W.
249 1
t
375 I
I l t
1220
t i l
1455
T9RRBR ROAD
t so R
1
1 335, R Tm ROAD
R
T
L 1153!
78 i 169 L <----
R
402 80
T L 1 217 T
3 292 I 6 L < S58
'
---- 226 226 18
153
--- ...._..».-.--•----
����
-----------------------------------I--------...........
219 ---->
L
----•-------
11 1 55 129 1%
......
363 _---
.I _
L 90 1 S4 30 55 619
T
139 1 L T R
T 272 I L T R
R
69 1
R 1 i
CISTER
391 1
SITE
I I 1
f
. 1 334
T
L 1 80 R
347
49 1 62 L
--------------
<---- 162
VEST am STREET
---------------------
1 434 149
196 ....>
I T R
446 1
I
I I 1
1 681
'
'
SAR681t ROAD
I
1 110 R
R
T
L 1 133 T
s
c---- 279 122
283
41 1 61 L
c---- 304
---•--------------------------
VEST LODI OWE
I
i
...................................
386 ---->
L
I --------------------------
208 1 24 363 140
346 ---->
1
T
165 1 L T R
'
R
13 I
'
i
I
LOW SUCRAMM ROAD
5
EIISTING P8 pUt ROOK TRAFFIC "LUNES VITR CBESTRIR STREET BRIDGE
VTMR s
SECTION 11.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Winepress Center is planned to be a 114,555 square foot
neighborhood shopping center containing a 45,800 square foot
supermarket, 42,580 square feet of retail/drug store use an2
26,175 square feet of restaurant use. Access to the site w i 1 1 be
via three driveways on Turner Road and three driveways on Lower
Sacramento Road. [Scheme "D" , Musil Perkowitz Ruth, Inc., arch-
itects, 7/26/88 l
SECTION 111.
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION
Using the data developed by TJKM in its October 1988 report, the
Winepress Center can be projected to generpl:i about 8000 drivmvaY
vehicle trips a day. However, such retail �k:nters attract a good
portion of their traffic from existing traffic. The Institute of
Transportation Engineers in its 1987 publication, "Trip Genera-
tion, 4th Edition, estimates that shopping centers of the size
proposed w i 1 1 attract over 40% of its daily driveway trip s from
existing passing traffic.
For purposes of this study only the net new vehicle trips -will be
considered for impact analysis purposes. Using ITE' s "Trip
Generation" the project is projected to generate nearly 400 new
vehicle trips during the EM peak hour of �-he day, almost evenly
divided between incoming and outgoing movements.
How these net new trips are distributed on the surrounding street
system is primarily a function of the "service area" of the
shopping center. The service area is determined by driving time,
location of competing centers and customer distribution. The
assumed distribution of new vehicle trips to the shopping center
is shown in Figure 4, page 7, and is based on the TJKM report.
Net new driveway traffic volumes, based on the distributions
shown in Figure 4, are shown in Figure 5, page 8. For ease of
presentation, the three driveways on each of the abutting streets
have been consolidated intc one driveway on each street.
Figure 6, page 9, shows the project's net vehicle trips through
each of the five study area intersections during the EM peak
hour.
6
` LOM SACRi!lBNTO ROAD
1 -
IIOODBRIDGE Ron !l0>ISLD!!!fB STREET 1
----------------------------------- t ----------------------------------------I
i 1
CNFam STREET 1
III 1 +'ter\
\ 1 -`
1 !
1 FILERS LANE I`.
si----------------------------------------' zr
q ;
201 101
TURIN ROAD
Y �v
--- -151 .......... ............ I•--.......... 201 --------------------I---- -------- l01 • --r--- ��F.
NImvESS t i jot
cow i
SITE ----------I
451
I VEST Us STREET
1--------------- SS -----------------------------------
i
I
401
i
I
SARm ROAD i YEST LODI AT=
-----------------------------------i--------------- SS -----------------------------------
351
i
Lom SACRANENTO ROAD 7
SHOPPING CATER VEHICLE TRIP DISTRIBUTION ASSIGMM
FIGURE 4
8
NET PROJECT ONLY PN PEAT BOOR DRIYEY►Y POLVKES
FIGURE 5
A
1
WOR►tiER UNK
..J
i
38.1
I I t
11 i
1
YORKER ROAD
1 0 R
0T
R T L 1 19T
---- 30 38 L
19 19 0.1 19 L <---- 38
—1
-----------------------1-----------------------------•
--
28 ----> T 0 1 30 90
-------------��...-----�... ....
L 201 0 20 20 90 --•->
R 28 1 L R
T 201 L T R
I
I tlIRi3P�SS
i
t
I cum
1 SITB
I
I
DRIM" t1
1
I
R T I
38 0 1
DRIYEYAY t2 ---------------I
L 40 1 88 O
R 90 1 L T
1
RET DRIMlY TRIPS
I
---------•--------
IK OUT TOTAL
i
90 1 •
---- ---- ----
192 200 392
I i t
1 1 1
r i Be
1
LOVER SICRAKENTO ROAD
8
NET PROJECT ONLY PN PEAT BOOR DRIYEY►Y POLVKES
FIGURE 5
I---------------------------------------------------
1 78 0 10 ---->
I T R
80 i •
i 1 1
I 1 I
v 1 78
1
Sam ROAD 1 10 R
R T L 1 OT
<---- 0 0 70 10 1 0 L <---- 10 !LEST LODI ITIM
-----------------------------------I--------------------------------------------------------
0----> L 0 1 0 68 0 10 ---->
T 01 L T R
R 01
1
LOVER SACRAll1 M ROAD 9
w PROW OR.T Pd PEAK HOUR TUFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 6
i!I
i
T
L I
0R
i
1
I
19
0 !
19 L
c---- 19 FILERS LA66
I
I
I----------------------------------------
1
20 20
20 ---->
1
{
T R
I
i
-
1
38 1
1 1
t
19 1
1 1
v 1
40
v 1
20
TURKER ROAD
1
0 1
1
0 2 TORM ROAD
R T
L 1
19T
R T
L 1
191
19 19
0 1
19 L
<---- 38 19 0
0 1
0 L c-=-- 19
•---•---•----------------------1-----------•----------------•---•-------1•--•-------------
L
20 1
0 20
20 40 •---> L
20 1
--
0 0 0 20 -=>
T
201
L T
R T
20 1
L T R
R
01
R
01
VIREPM
I
I
CEIM
901
•
SITE
i I
I
1 I
v 1
88
T
L 1
10R
60
101
0 L
<.... 10 VEST ELN STREET
I---------------------------------------------------
1 78 0 10 ---->
I T R
80 i •
i 1 1
I 1 I
v 1 78
1
Sam ROAD 1 10 R
R T L 1 OT
<---- 0 0 70 10 1 0 L <---- 10 !LEST LODI ITIM
-----------------------------------I--------------------------------------------------------
0----> L 0 1 0 68 0 10 ---->
T 01 L T R
R 01
1
LOVER SACRAll1 M ROAD 9
w PROW OR.T Pd PEAK HOUR TUFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 6
SECTION I V.
PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS
Existing Conditions
The project will add traffic to the streets and intersections Mx
within the study area. How much traffic is expected to be added}--
is shown i n Table B below. --
TABLE B:
PROJECT ADDED TRAFFIC
PSI PEAK HOUR - EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Existing
Project
Percent
Intersection
Traffic
Only
Increase
Woodhaven Lane &
501
78
16%
Eilers Lane
Turner Road &
1435
78
5%
Lower Sacramento Road
Turner Road & Lower
1204
156
13%
Sacramento Rd./Woodhaven
Lower Sacramento Road
1141
178
16%
`-
& W. Elm Street
Lower Sacramento Road
& W, Lodi Avenue/Sargent
1663
158
10%
How these projected increases affect LOS at the intersections is
shown in Table C, page 8, Existing + Project traffic volumes are
shown in Figure 7, page 12.
10
TABLE C: LEVELS OF SERVICE
PM PEAK HOUR ' - EXISTING CONDITIONS
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound 1 e ft
941
with
E isting
A
Project
Intersection V C
LOS
VAC LOS
-----------------
Signalized Intersections
Lower Sacramento
_
Turner Road & 0.48
A
0.50 A
Lower Sacramento
4 -Way STOP Intersections
southbound left
586
Turner Road & 0.40
A
0.45 A
Lower Sacramento/
159
D
Woodhaven
E
Lower Sacramento 0.60
A/B
0.68 B
& W. Lodi/Sargent
2 VVay STOP Intersections
R/C
LOS
R/C LOS
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound 1 e ft
941
A
899
A
westbound E i l e r s
506
A
432
A
Lower Sacramento
& W. Elm S t .
southbound left
586
A
522
A
westbound Elm
159
D
88
E
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity Ratio. See Appendix D.
R/C = Reserve Capacity. See Appendix D,
As can be seen in Table C, the project w i 11 have minimal effect
on the intersection LOS. This is primarily due to the fact that
the existing volumes are low and the IROS are high.
11
s
EXISTING • PR03ECT PM PEAK HOOK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 7
LORlIit UCRAM81T0 am
!
All
ROODBRIDGH ROAD
----------------------•------------
MOKELUNK STREET
f---------------------------- -----•-•.••-
!
w.r
CHISM MEET
1
�It
I
1
I
T
L 1 251
i
203
30 1 75 L <- - 100 EILERS
LAMB
----•--••-----
----------------------------------------
�-
1 181 65 95 -- --
I T R
287 1
I t !
3941 •
r„
1 1 1
v 1 260
11 I
r 1 475
TURNER ROAD
I 80 R
1 335 R TOM ROAD
�<
i
R
T
L 1 172 T R
T L 1 236 T
<- - 264 37
172
78 1 188 L <---- 440 99
3 292 1 6 L < -- $77
-----=----..........»..:
-----------------------------------1------•---------------------------------I------
259 ---->
L
31 1 SS 149 170 403 ---->
L 110 1 54 30 S5 639
T
159 I L T R
T 292 1 L T S
R
691
R 11
..-
RI118PRESS
!
I
CEI M
429 1 •
SITE
t
71
r 1 374
-
T
L I 90 R
417
59 1 82 L c••-- 172
REST ELM STREET
I--------------------------------------------------------
I S12 149 208 ---->
1 T R
=�
$26 1
I 1 1
f
_
r 1 759
SARGEMT ROAD
f
1 120 R
R
T
L 1 133 T
---- 279 122
353
S1 1 61 L <---- 314
REST LORI AVENUE
wr
------------------ -----------------
386 ---->
L
i--------------------------------------------------------
208 1 24 431 140 356 ---->
T
16S I L T R
R
13 1
1
LORFJI SACRAMEMTO ROAD 12
-
EXISTING • PR03ECT PM PEAK HOOK TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 7
i
C u ml-ative Conditions
The projections of cumulative traffic during the IM peak hour ark.;:
taken from the October 1988 TJKM report. The cumu"va LLaffi.c
projections are shown in Figure 8, page 16 and in Figure 9.: page y
17, with the project traffic added. The relative effect. the ;
project w i 1 1 have on these cumulative traffic volumes. is sfiown ;in
Table D below,
TABLE D: PROJECT ADDED TRAFFIC
FM PEAK HOUR - CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
Intersection
-
Woodhaven Lane &
Filers Lane
Turner Road &
Lower Sacramento Road
Turner Road & Lower
Sacramento Rd./Woodhaven
Lower Sacramento Road
& W. Elm Street
Lower Sacramento Road
& W. Lodi Avenue/Sargent
CumulativeProject
Traffic
Only
920
78
2498
78
2176
156
1616
2825
178
158
Percent
Increase
8%
r
3$
�N
t
�a
t;
7%
"
11$
t;
6%
As can be seen in Table D the project's portion of cumulative
traffic volumes is about half of what it is in proportion to
existing traffic volumes, The effects of projsct traffic on
intersection LOS will also be proportionately less. The
effects on LOS are shown in Table E on the following page.
13
TABLE E: LEVELS OF SERVICE
FM PEAK HOUR WITH EXISTING C C NIROLS
Woodhaven L am
& Eilers Lane
With
Cumulatite Project
V/C LOS V/C LOS
0.70 B 3.72 C
0.73 C 0.78 C
1.05 F 1.13 F
R/C LOS
southbound left
947
With
899
E isting
Project
Intersection VC
LOS
V/C
LOS
-----------------
Signalized Intersections
A
240
C
Lower Sacramento
Turner Road & 0.48
A
0.50
A
Lower Sacramento
& W. Elm St.
4-waV STOP Intersections
Turner Road & 0.40
A
0.45
A
Lower Sacramento/
447
A
westbound Elm
Woodhaven
D
88
E
Lower Sacramento 0.60
A/B
0.68
B
& W. Lodi/Sargent
2 -Way STOP Intersections
R/C
LOS
R/C
LOS
Woodhaven L am
& Eilers Lane
With
Cumulatite Project
V/C LOS V/C LOS
0.70 B 3.72 C
0.73 C 0.78 C
1.05 F 1.13 F
R/C LOS
southbound left
947
A
899
A
703
A
westbound E i l e r s
506
A
432
A
240
C
Lower Sacramento
& W. Elm St.
southbound l e ft
586
A
522
A
447
A
westbound Elm
159
D
88
E
0
F
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity Ratio, See Appendix D.
R/C = Reserve Capacity. See Appendix D.
R/C LOS
668 A
179 D
392 B
0 F
Table E paints out the problems that two of the intersections
w i 1 1 experience in the future without a higher level of control.
The intersections of Lower Sacramento Foad & W/ Elm St. and Lower
Sacramento Road & W. Lodi Ave. have been programmed by the City
for signalization, Table F, page 15, shows the effects of what
signalizing will do for these t w c intersections,
Cumulative conditions w i 1 1 precipitate the need for signalization
of the two intersections. Project added traffic w i 11 have a
minimal effect on intersection LOS.
15
��
}
TABLE
F:
LEVELS OF SERVICE
PM PEAK HOUR WITH PROPOSED
MZROLS
With
with
E isting
Proj ect
Cumulative
P oject
„I
Intersection VC
LOS
V/C LOS
V/C
LOS
V�C
LOS
Signalized Intersections
Turner Road & 0.48
A
0.50 A
0.70
B
0.72
C
Lower Sacramento'':'r`~;
Lower Sacramento -----
---
----- ---
0.52
A
0.58
A
& W. Elan St.
Lower Sacramento -----
---
----- ---
0.74
C
0.77
C
�>
& W. Lodi/Sargent
} 6 '
i.
I -Way STOP Intersections
Turner Road & 0.40
A
0.45 A
0.73
C
0.78
C
Lower Sacramento/=:=Y,
Woodhaven
2-WaV STOP Intersections
V/C
LOS
V/C LOS
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound l e ft 941
A
899 A
703
A
668
A
westbound E i l e r s 506
A
432 A
240
C
179
D
WC = Volume -to -Capacity
Ratio. See Appendix
D.
R/C = Reserve Capacity.
See
Appendix D.
Cumulative conditions w i 1 1 precipitate the need for signalization
of the two intersections. Project added traffic w i 11 have a
minimal effect on intersection LOS.
15
��
C01l9uns PN FRAK NODR TRAFFIC YOLOIIES
FIGORE 8
ft_
LOW SACRAtI M ROAD
VOODBRIDGB ROW
-----------------------------------
----------------------------------------i
"nuns STREET
I
1
I
CRRSfliIT STREET
I
I
I
I I t
1
I
111
/1\
f
i
t
T
I
L 1 761
I
f
256
911 115 L
---- IQ* VIT_M LYR 1
i ----------------------------------------i
1 171 209
WO ----�
t
I T R
1
i
1
3921
587 I •
i l i
v 1 403
i t l
v 1 607
�
1
i0RR8R ROW
1 89 R
I 524 R TORR ROAD
R
T
L 1285 T
R
T
L 1 $47 T
40
244
108 1 236 L
----- I ----------------------------------------
�••-- 610 49
5
483 1 10 L a---1081
t- .-----w-w-----w-•w.w ww
---w----w--�----------- ------
521 ---->
L
39 1 195 275
183 675 ---• ).
L
48 1 60 35 60 1165 ---->
T
317 1 L T
R
T
622 1 L T R
R
165 1
R
S I
YIREPRBSS
I
I
CBRTER
645 1
9179
I I 1
1 1 !
v 1 653
T
1
L i 9SR
600
64 1 B5 L
<---- 180
VEST SIX STREET
I--------------------------------------------------------
1 617 155
219 ----�
t T R
1
BOB I •
1 1 i
f 1 1
v 11046
SARMT RUD
1
1 22S R
R
T
L 1 171 T
<---- 404 12S
532
151 1 204 L
<---• 600
VEST LODI AI1ENR
-----------------------------------
SOO ---->
L
I--------------------------------------------------------
210 1 108 611
198 SO ----�
T
170 1 L T
R
R
120 I
1
LOM SlC[Al�RO itO1O i
C01l9uns PN FRAK NODR TRAFFIC YOLOIIES
FIGORE 8
ft_
CUMULATIVE • PROJECT PN PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 9
LOVER SACR1l1m VOID
VOODBRIDGE ROD
----------------------------------
NOI;ELUNRE STREET
I ----------------------------------------I
i
t
CHiSTM STREE!
1
1
1
1
III
1
T
L 1 78 R
1
-_
275
91 1 134 L <---- 212 FILERS Lin 1
----------------------------------------
---------------------------------------1191 229
1191
i T
i
430 1
i i l
6061
t t l
v 1 443
v 1 627
1
TIIRRER ROAD
I
1 89 R
15242 TBRIER ROAD
-
I
R
T
L 1 304 T R
T L 1 566 T
c---- $58 59
263
108 1 255 L c---- 648 118
S 483 1 10 L
-------------- - ----
-----------------------------------i-----
561 ---->
L
-----------------------------------1--
59 1 19S 295 203 71S ---->
L 68 t 60 35 60 1185 ---->
T
337 1 L T R
T 6421 L T R
R
165 1
R 5 1
YIREPRESS
1
1
1 _
CERM
683 t
SITE
i f 1
v 1 693
T
1
L 1 105 R
680
74 1 85 L <---- 190
VEST ELN STRW
I--------------------------------------------------------
1 69S 155 229 ---->
I T R
'
1
888 I '
I I i
i
r 11124
SARGER ROAD
1
1235 R
R
T
L 1 171 T
<---- 404 125
602
161 1 204 L <---- 610
VEST LODI ►VERGE
-----------------------------------I--------------------------------------------------------
500 ---->
L
210 1 108 679 198 529 ---->
T
170 1 L T R
R
120 1
I
LOVER SACRANM ROAD 17
CUMULATIVE • PROJECT PN PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 9
SECTION V.
ALTERNATIVE PROJtCT - OFFICE BUILDING
The project site could support a commercial office building with
a gross floor area of 202,000 square feet. [Scheme "A," Musil
Perkowitz Ruth, Inc., architects, 1/26/89] The site would
contain parking spaces for 810 vehicles.
SECTION V 1.
ALTERNATIVE PROJECT TRAFFIC IlVIPACTS
Unlike the proposed retail center, a commercial office building
would generate all "new" traffic. Traffic generation for a
202,000 sq. ft. office building is shown in Appendix A. Such a
building would generate an estimated 325 vehicles trips in the
morning peak hour and 302 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak
hour. The comparison of hourly traffic volumes for the proposed
shopping center and the office building is made in Figure 10,
page 21. The comparison is for "net" new trips.
When considering both peak hours of the day, the office building
will generate slightly more new trips than the shopping center
$625 vs. 600). However, because only the A4 peak hour traffic
volumes are available, this study is confined to looking at just
the IM peak hour during which time the shopping center will
generate about 100 new vehicle trips more than the office build-
ing.
While neighborhood shopping center trips come from a relatively
close by area (travel time 5-10 minutes), commercial office
buildings of the size potential that this site could accommodate
would easily attract vehicle trips from as far away as the south
side of Stockton (15 miles). Mize than half of the work trips
will come from distances greater than five miles away. [Transpor-
tation Research Board, NCHRP Report #187, 1978 ] The distribution
of peak hour work trips to and from the office building is shown
in Figure 11, page 22. The distributions are based on the
distribution of potential employee residences by distance and
titre within a 20 mile radius of the site.
A4 peak hour, office traffic only driveway volumes are shown in
Figure 12, page 23. The office traffic volumes through the five
intersections are shown in Figure 13, page 24. Figures 14 and
15, pages 25 and 26, show the stady area traffic volumes with the
office traffic added to the existing and cumulative volumes.
18
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound left 941
A
099
A
925
A
The relative effects of the shopping center
vs. the office
432
A
building on intersection LOS
can be seen
in Table G below,
TABLE G:
& W. Elm St.
LEVELS OF SERVICE
EXISTING CONDITIONS - LAND USE
ALTERNATIVESs>.
southbound left 586
A
522
A
558
A
westbound Elm 159
D
88
E
99
With
With
See
Appendix D.
E fisting
Project
Office'.
Intersection VC LOS
VAC LOS
VAC LOS
` .
---;'
-'
Signalized Intersections
Turner Road & 0.48 A
0.50 A
0.51 A
Lower Sacramento
4 -Way STOP Intersections
Turner Road & 0.40 A
0.45 A
0.44 A
r
Lower Sacramento/
Woodhaven
Lower Sacramento 0.60 A/B
0.68 B
0.68 B
W. Lodi/Sargent
2 -Way STOP Intersections
R/C LCS
R/C LOS
R/C LOS
17---
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound left 941
A
099
A
925
A
westbound Eilers 506
A
432
A
492
A
Lower Sacramento
& W. Elm St.
southbound left 586
A
522
A
558
A
westbound Elm 159
D
88
E
99
E
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity Ratio.
See
Appendix D.
R/C = Reserve Capacity.
See Appendix D.
The office building has about the same relative effect as the
shopping center with the excep}ion of the Lower Sacramento & W.
Elm intersection, The relative effects on cumulative traffic
conditions is shown in Table H on the following page,
19
TABLE H LEVELS 4 OF SERVICE
CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS - LAND USE ALTERNATIVES
With
Office
V/C LOS
0.73 C
0.54 A
0.78 C
.0.78 C
R/C LOS
690 A
230 C
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity Ratio. See Appendix D.
it/C = Reserve Capacity. See Appendix D.
Again, the relative effects of the shopping center vs. the office
building on cumulative traffic conditions are minimal.
20
with
Cu ulative
Project
Intersection
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
Signalized Intersections
Turner Road &
0.70
C
0.72
C
Lower Sacramento
Lower Sacramento
0.52
A
0.58
A
& W. Elm St.
Lower Sacramento
0.74
C
0.77
C
& W. Lodi/Sargent
4 -Way STC►P Intersections
Turner Road &
0.73
C
0.78
C
Lower Sacramento/
Woodhaven
2 -Way STOP Intersections
R/C
LOS
R/C
LOS
Woodhaven Lane
& Eilers Lane
southbound 1 e ft
703
A
668
A
westbound E i l e r s
240
C
179
D
With
Office
V/C LOS
0.73 C
0.54 A
0.78 C
.0.78 C
R/C LOS
690 A
230 C
V/C = Volume -to -Capacity Ratio. See Appendix D.
it/C = Reserve Capacity. See Appendix D.
Again, the relative effects of the shopping center vs. the office
building on cumulative traffic conditions are minimal.
20
400
350
ffi
250
ISO
100
al
COMPARISON OF HOURLY STREET VOLUMES
YlWlG CENTER vs. Offlt[ BUILDING
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 19 20 21 22
HOUR OF DAY, 7 AM TO IQ PM
SHOPPING UNTER NN OFFICE BUILDING
21
FIGURE 10
LOVER SACRRNEM ROAD
; •.: i `.
(
151
VOODBRIDGE ROAD BOIELUlfNE STREET
----- 51------------------------- I----------------------------------------I
CRESTNUT STREET
11I
t FILM UK 1
----------------------------------------i L
SN Isz
-..
TIIRIIfiR ROAD i
.....-----------.
51-------------i------•-------- 351 ..._-----•----------I-....------ 201-------------------
{°
! 0
OFBICE 80ILDIN3 1
SITE
----------
S51
I VEST ELM STRBBT
i--------------- 51 -----------------------------------
}
1
SO1
1
�
1 .
SARCE>fi ROAD i VEST LODI AVENUE
-----------------------------------i-------------- 101 -----------------------------------
401
LAVER SACRANIM ROID 22
3
OFFICE BUILDING MICLE TRIP DISTRIBUTIONlASSIGNNENT
FIGURE 11
A
s
i
1
"1
.i
{fi
_
{
I
IIOODIIIIIEM LING
S !
TURM ROAD 1 0 R
s
O!
R T L 1 5T
i.........................
10 10 L
I----------------------------------------t---
S 0 0 1. 1S L
------------- ------
r
--
S •---> T 0 1 10
SS L 10 1 0 S 40 d5 ---->
R S i L
R T 45. 1 L T R�^,
1
R 01
f
OFFICE BUILDIMG SITE
1
DRIVEMAT #1
1
1
R T I
i
15 0 1
DRI MIT 42--------------I
L 45 ! 30 0
R 1301 L T
'
DRIVEIIIT !RIPS I
i
---------------
IM
1
M TOTIL 130 1
---
---- ----
60
----
240 300 1 1 1
r 1 30
t
23
OFFICE BUILDING OILY PN PEA[ HOOP DRIVEPAT VOLUIM
1
FIGUIE 12
OFFICE BUILDING ORLI PH PEAK HOW TRAFFIC VOLURS
PTOPP 13
LOVER UCRIMITO ROAD
VOODBRIDGE ROD
...................................
BOMAR STREET
-----------•----------------------------
CHESTNUT STREET
I
L 1 02
5
0 1 0 L 0 FILERS UK
I
------------- ---------.............
10 5
I T R
S I
I IS
r 1 35
TOM ROAD
OR
TURNER ROAD
R
T
L I ST
is T
5
0
0 1 15 L ---- 20 5 0
0 1 0 L.
I ---------------------------------------- I ------------- — -
...................................
L
10 1 0 5 0 85 ----Y L
35 1 0 0
0 so
T
45 1 L T I T
so I L T
1
0 1
OFFICE BVILDIN
SITE
130 1
1 30
T
L 1 6 R
J20
lo J 0 L
VEST Elm STREET
------------------
1--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
I 2S 0 10 ....
I
I T P
120 1 •
2S
SARGENT ROAD
I 5 I
P
T
L 1 OT
0 0
95
251 0 L < 5
VEST LODI kVM
-----------------------------------
0 .... >
L
I --------------------------------------------------------
0 1 0 20 0 25
T
01 L T 2
R
01
1
LOVER SACRAMENTO ROAD 24
OFFICE BUILDING ORLI PH PEAK HOW TRAFFIC VOLURS
PTOPP 13
LOVER SACRANM ROAD
VOODBRID66 ROAD
-•---------------------------------1---------------------------
NOKBLtiM
STREET
.............
I
I
CRESTNOT STREET
•
i
1
ry�,R
T
L i 2S
189
30 1 56 L
<••--
81 BILERS
Ull !
1 171 SO
_• •
80 -- >---•-•---•-•--
2% 1
380 !
v 1 23S
♦ 1 490
Tom ROAD
1 80 R
13351 : TDRVIaR ROAD) .
R
T
L 1158 T
R
T L 1232 T
x r,
<»-- 236 23
1S3
78 1 164 L
<----
422 85
3 292 1 6 L <-.=-- 573_:,"
................................... I ----------------------------------------
t------......... »----._..........__
...
274 ---->
L
21 1 SS 134
190
448 ---->
L 125 1 S4 30 SS 669----.%
T
184 1 L T
R
T 322 1 L T R
R
691
R 11
OFBICR BUILDING
Sm
406 !
i I i
• 1 379
2
L I 8S R
467
S9 I 82 L
<---- 167
VEST EW STREET
--------------------------------------------------------
I 4S9 149
200 •--->
1 T R
i
t
S66 I `
1 1 t
1 706
mE!!T ROAD
I
I 1151
R
T
L 1 133 T
5---- 279 111
378
66 1 61 L
<---- 309
VEST LODI AVEWK
-----------------------------------i-----------------------------------------------------•--
386 ---->
L
208 1 24 383
140
371 ---->
T
16S I L T
R
R
13 1
1
LOW SACUNENTO ROAD
25
EXISTING q- OFFICE BUILDING PN PEAK 80UR TRAFFIC VOLO!!ES V1T8 CHESTBOT STREET BRIDGE
FIGDRE 14
CURULATIYE • OFFICE BUILDING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 15
LOVER SACRAMENTO 8016
VOODBRIDGE ROAD
-----------------------------------I----------------------------------------
NOKEL= STREET
-------- -------------•--------------CBESM
i
CHUMSTREET
T
L 1 78 R
i
g
261
91 1 115 L <---- 193 FILERS LANE I
------>-•------------
1 181 214 305 _ -
T R
1
397 1
5921
v 1 418
v 1 642
s -
{
r
TURNER ROAD
1
1 89 R
1 524 R TURNS IDAD
`
R
i
L 1 290 T R T
L 1 562 S
y
<•--- 530 45
244
108 1 251 L <---- 630 104 5
483 1 10 L
-----------------------------------
576 ---->
L
1 ---------------------------------- --
49 1 195 260 223 760 ----> L
---- i ............... -------. --------
83 1 60 35 60 12 5 -=-->
T
362 1 L T R T
672 I L T R
R
165 1 R
S I
OFFICE BUILDING
I
i
SITE
660 1
1
_-
v 1698
T
I
L 1 100 R
720
74 1 85 L <---- 185
VEST ELK STREET
1
I------------------------------------------------------
1 642 155 229 ---->
I T R
1
'
928 t
I 1 1
r
i 1 !
v 11071
SARGENT ROAD
I
1 230 R
R
i
L 1 171 i
<---- 404 125
627
176 1 204 L <---- 605
VEST LODI AVENUE
---------------------------•-------1--------------------------------------------------------
500 ---->
L
210 1 108 631 198_44 ---->
T
170 1 L i R
R
120 1
I
LOVER SACRAKENTO ROAD 26
CURULATIYE • OFFICE BUILDING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 15
SECTION V I I.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Existing Conditions
A 1 1 of the study area intersections operate at acceptable levels
of service during the PM peak hour. The intersections of Lower
Sacramento Road & W. Elm St, and Lower Sacramento Road & W. Lodi
Ave. /Sargent Road do, according to the TJKM study meet warrants
for signalization and the City has these intersections on its
r, signalization priority list ,
is
`- The only other intersection that could possibly require a higher
level of control is the intersection of Turner. Road & Lower
Sacramento Road/Woodhaven Lane. Warrants analyses prepared as
part of this report follow the warrants requirements specified in
the State of California Traffic Manual, Chapter 9, Figure 9-1D,
traffic signal warrants based on estimated average daily traffic,
and Figure 9-2C, peak hour volume warrants for urbanized areas.
r, Warrants analyses for the Turner Road & Lower Sacramento Road/-
! ! Woodhaven Lane intersection are contained in Appendix C. Under
existing conditions the intersection does not meet signalization
warrants based on either the projections of daily traffic or peak
hour volumes. (It is assumed that the PM peak hour volumes are
10%of the daily traffic volumes. )
Mitigation measures attributable specifically to the project
would, therefore, be those associated with site access. Lower
Sacramento Road south of Turner Road is planned to be a median
divided street, The site plan indicates three driveways are to
be located on Lower Sacramento Road. A median break should be
-- allowed for only one of the driveways and that break should occur
as far back from the intersection as possible. The driveway
closest to the intersection and the driveway serving the rear of
the buildings should be right -turn only driveways in the ultimate
configuration of Lower Sacramento Road,
The access off of Turner Road is likewise planned with three
-" driveways. A center, two-way left turn lane should be provided
the length of the project along Turner Road, except at the inter-
section where the turn lane should be designated for eastbound
left turn movements for a distance of at least 50 feet.
Cumulative Conditions
Following the same procedures described above for determining
whether or not a traffic signal is warranted, analyses were made
27
of the cumulative and cumulative + project traffic volumes for
the intersection of Turner Road & Lower Sacramento Road/Woodhaven
Lane. The analyses, contained in Appendix C, indicate that the
intersection under cumulative conditions would not meet warrants
based on projections of daily traffic but would meet peak hour
volume warrants. • In this particular case, there is no clear cut
indication that signalization w i 1 1 be needed. However, the
intersection should be designed to accommodate a future traffic
signal i f need be. Routine monitoring of traffic volumes and
accidents at the intersection should be done as the area con-
tinues to develop.
Mitigation measures not associated directly with the project were
identified in the TJKM report and are listed here for information
purposes.
Woodhaven Lane & Eilers Lane
Provide a new right -turn lane northbound on Woodhaven Lane.
Turner Road & Lower Sacramento Road
Provide a new right -turn only lane for westbound Turner
Road, making the approach four lanes wide.
Lower Sacramento Road & W. Elm St.
Signalize the intersection.
Provide two through lanes each way on Lower Sacramento Road
with the outside lane northbound being a through -right
lane.
Provide a left -turn lane southbound on Lower Sacramento
Road.
Lower Sacramento Road & W. Lodi Ave. /Sargent Road
Signalize the intersection.
On both approaches of Lower Sacramento Road provide three
lanes: a left -turn lane, a through lane and a through -right
lane .
Lower Sacramento Road between W. Lodi Ave. and Ket ti err an Lane
Widen to four lanes.
M r►
28
APPENDICES
A - OFFICE BUILDING TRAFFIC GENERATION
B - LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS
C - SIGNAL WARRANTS WORKSHEETS
D - TRANSPORTATION TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
APPENDIX A
OFFICE BUILDING TRAFFIC GENERATION
1
COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING TRAFFIC GENERATION AND PARKING DEMAND
Location. -Alternative land use to Winepress Center, Lodi
PARKING DMO
% AWDT
HOUR IN OUT TOTAL
IM -IAN O.OD 0.00 0.0
1-2
0.00
0.00
OA
2-3
0.00
0.00
0.0
3-4
O.OD
0.00
OA
4-5
0.00
0.00
OA
5-6
0.00
0.00
080
6-7
0.80
02)
lA
7-8
5.00
2.00
7.0
8-9
12.00
2900
14.0
9-10
7.00
2M
9.0
10-11
4.D7
2.50
6.5
11-12"
3.50
5.50
9.0
12WIPN
5.OD
5.00
10.0
1-2
4.50
3.50
8.0
2-3
300
3.00
6.0
3-4
2.00
3.00
5.0
4-5
2.50
10.50
13.0
5-6
OM
6.30
7.0
6-7
0.00
2.50
2.5
7-8
0.00
L00
10
8-9
O.OD
0.50
0.5
9-10
O.OD
0.;
0.5
10-11
O.OD
0.00
0.0
11-12MN
0.00
0.00
0.0
TOTAL: 50.00 50.00 100.0
References:
NOT
HOUR IN OUT TOTAL
INHAN
0
0
0
1-2
0
0
0
2-3
0
0
0
3-4
0
0
0
4-5
0
0
0
5-6
0
0
0
6-7
19
5
23
7-8
116
46
163
8-9
219
46
325
9-10
163
46
209
10-11
93
58
151
11-12N!
81
128
209
i2NN-1PN
116
116
232
1-2
105
81
186
2-3
70
70
139
3-4
46
70
f%
43
58
244
302
5-6
16
146
163
6-7
0
58
58
7-8
0
23
23
8-9
0
12
12
9-10
0
12
12
10-11
0
0
0
11-12"
0
0
0
TOTAU 1162 1162 2324
Caltrans 6th, 9th b 10th Trip Ends Generation Proq-ass Reports
ITE "Trip Generat ion, ` 4th Edition, 1987
ITE ' wi* Generat ion, " 2nd Edition, 1987
Shared Parking, Urban UM Institute, 1983
Office Parldng Desand Survey, DK8 Associates, 1985
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
TOTAL
HOUR
SPACES
GROSS
FLOOR AREA:
202000 SF
i2Ml-IAN
0
1-2
0
NET LEASw.E
' ..
2-3
0
FLOOR AREA:
161600 SF
3-4
0
(Assumed at •
80 x of GFA)
4-5
0
5-6
0
6-7
16
MAXIMUM
7-8
95
PARKING
8-9
359
DDMI
M 1lKGFj GFA
9-10
491
3.3 IIKSF, NLFA
10-11
531
11-12"
478
12NN-1PN
478
TRIP ENDS/
1-2
504
iKSF,GFA:
115
2-3
504
3-4
478
4-5
267
54
119
6-7
53
7-8
26
8-9
13
9-10
0
10-11
0
11-12NN
0
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
V7 V9 Grade
HCM85 WOkKSHEET
FOR
ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERS&M-O-NS
V9 -a
-----------
----------------------------------------------------------
1
62
28
LOCATION:
Woodhaven Lane &
Eilers
Lane i BY: RKH
CITY:
Lodi
a lane? yes
1
capacity = Csh)
DATE:
Existing w/ Chestnut
St. Bridge i
Csh
TIMES
PM Peak Hour
V2
1
V5 V7 V9
Volume(vph)=
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES:
161
--::
I VOLUMES IN PCPH:`
184 56 25
_-
Major:
Woodhaven Lane
33
i
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
862
Grades
0% (--V5
184
1 (--V51184
vph
y
N =
1 v --V4
30
1 v --V4. " 33
'
ri
161 V2--)
N =
1
1 161 VS-->
Act_aal Capacity, Cm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
45 V3 --v
pcph
1 45 V3--v'�
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
V7 V9 Grade
0%
1
V7
V9 -a
56 25
1
62
28
N 1
1
pcph
Minor: Eilers Lane
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
----------------------------------------------------------------------
a lane? yes
(If yes,
capacity = Csh)
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
(LoS)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Movement No.
LoS
V2
V3 V4
V5 V7 V9
Volume(vph)=
7 62 519
161
45 30
184 56 25
Volume(pcph) s
595
==m==s==ms
33
::.=as 62 ...-._28;-
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
862
4 33 974
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc
183.
vph
_----------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
-----------------------
- Foster
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
889
pcph
Act_aal Capacity, Cm
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
889
pcph
.
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
Conflicting Flow, Vc
206
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
974
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized
3
%
Impedance Factor:0.97
Actual Capacity, Cm
974
pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
Conflicting Flow, Vc 397.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc 6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 530
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 519
pcph
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
----------------------------------------------------------------------
a lane? yes
(If yes,
capacity = Csh)
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr
LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
----------
7 62 519
457
A
7+9 89
595
506
O
9 28 889
862
4 33 974
941
A
_----------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
-----------------------
- Foster
City, California
......................................................................
HCM85 WORKSHEET
FOR
ANALYSIS OF "T"
INTERSECTIONS
LOCRTION:
Woodhaven
Lane
& Eilers Lane
I BY: RKH
CITY:
Lodi
N = 1
I
I
DRTE:
Existing
(w/ bridge)
+ Project
I
TIME:
PM Peak Hour-
Movement No.
I
HOURLY VOLUMES:
Vo1ume(vph) :
I VOLUMES IN PCPH:
Major =
Woodhaven
Lane
sarrszammasa=
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
Grade:
0%
(--V5
203
1
(--V5 203
N=
1
v --V4
30
I
v --V4 33
101 V2-->
N =
1
1 181 V2--)
65 V3 --v
1 65 V3 --v
246
I i
I
1 I
V7 V9 Grade
0%
1
V7 V9
75 25
1
03 28
N = 1
I
Minor: Eilers Lane
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
V2 v3
V4 V5 v7 V9
Vo1ume(vph) :
181 65
30 203 75 25
Vol ume ( pcph) i
sarrszammasa=
33 83. 28
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
----------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 213.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
857
pcph
Rct ual Capacity, Cm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
857
pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
----------------------------
Cunf 1 ict ing Flow, Vc
246
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
932
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized
3
% Impedance Factor:0.97
Actual Capacity, Cm
932
pcph
...---------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 446.
vph
Critical Gap, Te
6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
494
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
483
pcph
----------------------------------------------•------------------------
Do minor street movements share
a lane? yes
(If yes, capacity = Csh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)----------
7 83 483
400 A
7+9 110
542
432 0
9 28 857
830
4 33 932
899 A
--------------
--------------------------------------------------------
R K H •- Civil and Transportation Engineering
- Foster City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCATIONs Woodhaven Lane & Eilers Lane I BY: RKH
CITY: Lodi i
DATE: Existing + Office Building t
TIME: PM Peak Hour I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES: I VOLUMES IN PCPH:
Majora Woodhaven Lane 1
Grade: 09 (--V5 189 1 <--VS 189
N= 1 v --V4 30 1 v --V4' 33. ,
171 V2--) N 1 1 171 V2-->
50 V3 --v 1 50 V'' --v
V7 V9 Grade
0%
1
V7 V9
56 25
I
62 28
NCu.
Minor: Ei lers Lane
I
-----
------------------------------------------------------_---------.r..
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
V2 V3
V4 V5 V7 V9
Vo 1 ume ( vph) s
171 50
30 189 56 25
Volume ( pcph) :
33 -===- 62 28 .
rTURN -FROM
----------------------------„---------
* �"*
RIGHT MINOR STREET-'
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc
196
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
876
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
876
pcph
s;;....
.---------------------------------------------r-----_-__r____--_r------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
--_---__---_-r--------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc
221
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
958
pcph
i
Percent of Cp Utilized
3
X Impedance
Factor:0.97
Actual Capacity, Cm
__.-------------r---__--_-___------_----_--____-_-----_-_----rr-_------
958
pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
j
ConfliQting Flow, Vc
415
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
517
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
506
pcph
;
--------------------------r_----------------------__-__-_______-----_-_
Do minor street movements share
a large? yes
(If yes, capacity = Csh)
-_r_.______________rr---_-__-__________rr_-_----__---------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)
__--.____________________________________
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)----------
7 62 506
7+9 89
581
444 A
492 O
9 28 876
848
4 33 958
925 A
__-----_____-__-_-----_
-------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
- Foster City, California
1 i
V7 V9 Grade 0%
115 78
N = 1
Minor: Eilers Lane
1 1
V7 V9
127 86
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
Volume(vph):
Volume (pcph) a
V2 V3 V4 V5 V7 V9
171 209 91 256. 415 78-
mm��aaz�ma za��ac
I00 127 86
F
-------------------------------------------------------
------------------------- - -----------RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
RIGHT
% Impedance Factors0.91
-
ConflictingFlow, -Vc 275.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.5
HCM85 WORKSHEET
FOR ANALYSIS
OF '.'T" INTERSECTIONS
Potential Capacity, Cp 795
LOCATIONS
Woodhaven Lane &
Eilers
Lane i BY: RKH
pcph
CITY:
Lodi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
I
- --------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 380
DATE:
Cumulative(w/ bridge)
pcph
t
sec.
TIMES
PM Peak Hour
(If yes,
!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
=.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES:
1
VOLUMES IN PCPHs
Cr
LoS
Major:
Woodhaven Lane
I;
----------
127 350
7+•9 212
453
Grades
0% (---VS
256 1
(--V5 256
709
N=
1 v --V4
91 1
v --V4 100._
----------------------•-------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
- Foster
171 V2--)
N =
1 1
171 V2--)
r
209 V3 --v
1
209 V3 --v
1 i
V7 V9 Grade 0%
115 78
N = 1
Minor: Eilers Lane
1 1
V7 V9
127 86
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
Volume(vph):
Volume (pcph) a
V2 V3 V4 V5 V7 V9
171 209 91 256. 415 78-
mm��aaz�ma za��ac
I00 127 86
F
-------------------------------------------------------
------------------------- - -----------RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
RIGHT
% Impedance Factors0.91
-
ConflictingFlow, -Vc 275.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.5
sec.
'
Potential Capacity, Cp 795
peph
Actual Capacity, Cm 795
pcph
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
pcph
- --------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 380
vph
Actual Capacity, Cm 350
pcph
Critical Gap, Te 5.0
sec.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
a lane? yes
Potential Capacity, Cp 803
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized 11
% Impedance Factors0.91
Actual Capacity, Cm 803
pcph
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
Conflicting Flow, Vc 622.
vph
Critical Gap, Te 6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 381
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 350
pcph
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
a lane? yes
(If yes,
capacity = Csh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LOS)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Crr,
Csh
Cr
LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
----------
127 350
7+•9 212
453
224
240
C
OC
9 86 795
709
4 100 803
703
A
----------------------•-------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
- Foster
City, California
HCM85 BEET FCR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
LOCATIONt Woodhaven Lane & Eilers Lane I BY: RKH
CITY: Lodi I
DRTE: Cumulative(w/ bridge) + Project
TIME: PM Peak Ho -!.r I
HOURLY VOLUMESt
Majors Woodhaven Lane
Gradet OX (--V5 275
N 1 v --.-V4 91
191 V2--) N 1
29 V3 --v
\101-1-11VES IN PCPH:
(---V5 275
Y --V4,- 100
191 V2--)
229 V3 --v
I { I 1 1
V7 V9 Grade OX I V7 V9
134 78 1 147 06
N = 1 1
K.anr. Eile.rs Lana .I
-----------------• ----------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No. V2 V3 V4 V5 V7 V9
Volume(vph): 191 229 91 275 134 78
Volume(pcph)t ===_-_====-100 =a=== 147-: 86
----------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET -
---------------------------
Conf 1 ict ing Flow, Vc 305. vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.5 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 767 pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 767 pcph
-----•-------.-.-_.-------•----------.-.------------..-.----- -
• rrT TURN - FRCM Mn TAR STREET
-------------••--------------
Conf li c t i n g Flow, Vc 420 vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.0 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 768 pcph
Percent of Cp Ut i1ized 12 % ImpAdance Factor: 0.91
Actual Capacity, Cm 768 pcph
------------------ ----------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN R;CM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 671. vph
Critical Gap, Tc 6.5 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 355 pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 324 pcph
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share a lane? yes (If yes, capacity = Csh)
......................................................................
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE (Lo-)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm Csh Cr LOS
Nu. (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)-----------
7 147 324 177 D
7+9 233 412 179 O
9 86 767 681 A
4 100 760 668 O
-__,._-------------------------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET
FOR
ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
---_--- --- -------------------------------------------------------------.:
1
BY: RKH
LOCATION: Woodhaven Lane &
Eilers
Lane
CITY: Lodi
4
DRTE: Cumulative + Office
Building
i
TIME: PM -Peak Hour.
-_ __-------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES:
1 VOLUMES IN
PCP-:
____ _--_
Major: Woodhavan Lane,
<---V5:.261
, k..
Grade = 4X (--VS
261
N 1 v -.-V4
91
v= va too
�
181 V2--) N =
n
181 V2--)
)
y t j3--�
214
�1� V3 r�
V7 V9 Grade
0% 1
V7 V9
�
115 70
1
127 77
$ „R
N
Minor: Eilers Lane
------------------
-------------
----------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement NO.
V2 V3
V4 V5
V7 V9
Vol ume(vph):
181 214
91 261
115 74-
Vol urne (pcph) :
100 7.
__w___wr-___www--__--_.r_----_--w------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
_ -
Conflicting Flaw, VC
288
vph
#
e
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, CP
783
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
783
pcph
---------- -'
>-
__-___.___________________________w____--_--_
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
-________________________-
Conflicting Flow, Vc
395
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, CP
790
pcph
s
Percent of Cp Utilized
lc
% Impedance Factor:0.9i
I
Actual Capacity, Cm
790
pcph
-__._..-------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
{
--------------.----______-_r
Conflicting Flow, Vc
640
vph
E
Critical Gap, Te
6.5
sec.
t
Potential Capacity, CP
372
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
341
pcph
--------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
-------------------------------
a lane? yes
(If yes,
----------------------
capacity = Csh)
s
------------------------------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LOS)
------------ -----------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr
LOS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
-_____----
7 127 341
2214
C
7+9 204
433
230
C
9 77 783
706
4 100 790
690
�.J
-
R K H- Civil andTransportationEngineering
•- Foster
City, California
TRRFFIC SIGNQL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
=xssxxxssassoaxx:ssassaaxxaxs=xzassnx;sxsxx=tassssxssxxa�asxsxss.sxx==xoas
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower Sacramento
CITY=Lodi
DRTE: Existing (1988)
DAY = Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour --------------------------------------------------
Southbound Approach I
I I
Rt. Thru Lt. I
-N- 1
I
94 3 343 1
I I
Lt. 106 ---_^
^____ 394 Rt.
Thru 021
____ 158 Thru
Rt. 1 ----V
V-___ 6 Lt.
Eastbound Approach
West bound Approach
I I I
I
54 30 55 I
I
Lt. Thru Rt. I
Northbound Approach
APPROACH
I
--------------------------------------
STREET NAME DIR
VOLUME LANESI
LANE VOLUMESr
�aoa�esa�xmsxaaasmmxs:asoaaasssx�x�asasaa�xaa(��sm�:s:asmseessema:�zxsassasasaaim::asp+,. '
54 L I
a
84 L+T 1 1
84
Driveway NB
139 L+T+R 1 0
30 T 1 0
85 T+R 1 0
55 R 1 1 49
--------------------------------------
I ----------------
106 L 1 1
-----�---- ------
106
327 L+T i
0
Turner Road ES
328 L+T+R 1
0
221 T 1
0
222 T+R 2 1
111
1 R t
0
--------------------------------------
i ------------
343 L 1 1 343
•-------------------
346 L+T 1 0
Lower Sacramento SB
440 L+T+R 1
0
3 T 1
0
97 T+R 1 1
97
94 R 1
0
--------------------------------------I--------------------------------
6 L 1 1
6
164 L+T I
O
Turner Road WB
558 L+T+R 1
0
158 T 1
0
* adjusted for
552 T+R 2 !
276
turn on red
394 R 1
O
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE? LANE
VOLUME TOTALS: 392
181 117
382
NB -S8
-------------------------------
E.B--WB CRITICAL
VOLUMES: 392
382
!
----------------------------
I ----------------------------------------
1 CRITICAL LANE VOLUME TOTAL: 774
I
CYCLE LENGTH: 40
sec_ 1
CAPACITY: 1485
I
V/C: 0.52
I
C.RJTICQI PHQSEG: _
I
LoS: A
-----------------------------i-----------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
COMMENTS:
---------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEf�T
(Critical Movement Methodology
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower Sacramento CITY:Lodi
DATE: Existing (1988) wl Chestnut St. Bridge DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.. I Southbound Rpproach
I I Rt. Thru Lt.
-N- 1 80 3 292
I
Lt. 90 -----^
Thru 272 ----->
^-- 335 Rt
<____ 217 Thru
Rt. --V
Westbound
6
Lt.
Eastbound Rpproach
Approach
-
1
54
34
55
1
I
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
I
I
Northbound
Approach
I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROACH
I
--------------------------------------i
STREET NAME
DIR
VOLUME
LANESI
LANE
VOLUMES
54
L I
0
84
L+T 1 1
64
Driveway
NB
139
L+T+R 1
0
30
T I
0
85
T+R 1
0
55
R 1 1
49
---------------------------------------I---------------------------------
90
L 1 1
90
362
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
EB
363
L+T+R 1
0
272
T 1
0
273
T+R 2 1
137
1
R 1
0
----------------------------------------
292
I
L 1 1
_-__-__-__________-______------
292
295
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
375
L+T+R 1
0
3
T 1
0
83
T+R 1 1
83
80
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
6
I
L 11
- _______-_--_--------_----------
6
223
L+T l
0
Turner Road
VSB
558
L+T+R 1
0
217
T 1
0
a� adjusted for
552
T+R 2 1
276
turn on red
335
R 1
0
-- ---------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME TOTALS:
341
167
143
366
NB -SB
----------------------366------
EB -WB
-----------------------------
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
i -•----------------------------------------
341
I
CRITXCFIL LRNE VOLUME TOTFIL: 707 I
CYCLE LEh'.GTH: 40 sec. I CRPRCITY: 1485 I
I V/C: 0.48 I
CRITICAL PHASES: a { LoSi A i
-------------------•----------- I------------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
-------_-------------------------------- COMMENTS:
-_.--------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster, City; California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
os=ss=s=a.=cc==sosns.osao=c=a=�axasam=======sxsm==osa==:=ssoa=s=soo-ss s
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower, Sacramento CITY:Lodi
DATE: Existing (w/ bridge) + Project DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------- !.
•~ i Southbound Approach I
I I Rt. Thru Lt. I i
-N- 1 99 3 292 1 1
<-- V --)
Lt. 110 ----^ ^---- 335 Rt. .;
Thru 292 ----) <---- 236 Thru '.
Rt. 1 ----V
V---- 6
Lt.
Eastbound R p p r o a c h
Westbound
Fipproach
I
I
1
I
I
1
54
30
55
i
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
1
I
-------------------------------
Northbound
Approach
--------------------------------
i
APPROACH
I
---------------------------------------
STREET NAME DIR
VOLUME
I
LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
-1
54
L
0
04
L+T 1 1
04
Driveway NB
139
L+T+R I
0
30
T I
0
85
T+R 1
0
-
55
R 1 1
49*
-- ----
.____________________________
110
-._-_-_____I_________-____--_____---
L 1 1
r110
402
L+T I
0
Turner Road EB
403
L+T+R 1
0
292
T 1
0
293
T+R 2 1
147
1
R 1
0
---------------------------------------I
292
L 1 1
_______-_-______________-______
292
295
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento SB
394
L+T+R 1
0
3
T 1
0
102
T+R 1 1
102
99
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
6
I-___-_-___-___-_______----------
L 1 1
6
242
L+T 1
0
Turner Road WB
577
L+T+R i
0
236
T I
0
adjusted for
571
T+R 2 1
286
turn on red
335
R 1
0
----------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE? LANE
.-_-____-------------_-____-__________
VOLUME 'TOTALS:
341
186 153
396
NB -SB
_.______________________________
E:B-WB CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
341
396
I
----.-----------------------
_
t ------•---------------------------------
I- CRITICRL
LONE
VOLUME TOTAL:
737
CYCLE LENGTH: 40
sac.
I
CAPACITY:
1485 1
V/C:
0.50 I
CRITICAL PHASES: 2
I
I ------------------------------------------I
LoS:
A I
--- -------------------------
COMMENTS:
-^-
RKH -- Civil and Transportation
Engineering --
Foster City,
California
Rt. 1 ----V
V---- 6
Lt..
TRRFFIC SIGNRL RNRLYSIS WORKSHEET
Eastbound Approach
(Critical Movement Methodology)
Approach,:_
:s==axeasaaocsaxx¢xs.sxa-.-ac.acacax==xccocs`xansa=x=zsoaacxsxs=s=ao=xcczx
is
INTERSECTION:
Turner Road & Lower Sacramento
CITY:Lodi
DATE:
Existing
+ Office Building
DAY:Weekday
1
TIME:
.......................................................................
PM Peak
Hour
-
A
I Southbound Rpproach
Lt.-
Thru
Rt.
I
I Rt. Thru Lt. I
I
-N-
1 85 3 292 1
I
---------------
I
I ! I I I
I i I I
y=Ca
------------ -------------------------I
STREET NAME
L t.
125 ----"
LANESI
^---- 335 R t 9
LANE VOLUMES _.
Thru
322 ----)
I ara-xxc:aasoaxsx==�=xxssm�raxsa:xsxm
<---- 232 Thru
Rt. 1 ----V
V---- 6
Lt..
Eastbound Approach
Westbound
Approach,:_
1
54
30
66
-
I
Lt.-
Thru
Rt.
I
I
Northbound
Approach
I
---------------
-----------------------=---------------------------------
APPROACH
!
------------ -------------------------I
STREET NAME
DIR
VOLUME
LANESI
LANE VOLUMES _.
xoxcxx___xxs_xcs_x_oxxasxoxxx_xasxaxaa
I ara-xxc:aasoaxsx==�=xxssm�raxsa:xsxm
54
L 1
a
84
L+T 1 1
84
Driveway
NB
150
L-!r+R 1
0
30
T 1
0
9P,
T+R 1
0
EE
R 1 1
60
--------------------------------------I--------------------------------
12 5
L 1 1
125
447
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
EB
448
L+T+R 1
0
322
T 1
0
323
T+R 2 1
162
1
R 1
0
--------------------------------------1--------------------------------
292
L 1 1
292
295
L+T I
O
tower Sacramento
SB
380
L+T+R 1
0
3
T 1
0
88
T+R 1 I
88
85
R 1
0
--------------------------------------I--------------------------------
6
L 1 1
6
238
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
WB
573
L+T+R 1
0
232
T 1
0
adjusted for
567
T+R 2 1
284
turn on red
335
R 1
0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME
TOTALS:
352
172 168
409
NB -SB
-------------------------------
EB-WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
352
409
!
-----------------------------
I -----------------------------------------
I CRITICAL.
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
761
I
CYCLE LENGTH:
40
sec.
1
CAPACITY:
1485
f
1
V/C:
0.51
1
CRITICAL PHASES:
?
I
LoS:
A
I
COMMENTS:
_----------.---------------------------------------------------------------
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
x=spa=ams:se=smasxmaxasxxmoortsmaaeaaxs:sxemeaasaaaacesxasa=as.axxaxaasmaxxsme
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower Sacramento CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Figur
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I Southbound Approach I
I I Rt. Thru Lt.
-N- 1 99 5 483 1
1 I I 1 I I
<-- V --)
Lt. 48 524 Rt.
Thru 6222 ----) <---- 547 Thru
Rt. 5 ----V
V---- 10
Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound
Approach.
1
1
1
60
I
35
I
60
1
1
I
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I
Northbound Approach
I
APPROACH
I
-----------------.--__----._----_-----_--
STREET NAME
DIR
!
VOLUME LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
xx-=a-,nnxos;===sza__xcxaoxsoassaaassasm 1 ffixaaamsxa=smsseaxs3ssasasssmmassxsas
60
L t
0
95
L+T 1 1
95
Driveway
NB
135
LST +R 1
0
95
T+R 1
0
60
R 1 1
50
----------- -----------------------------
48
I --------------------------------
L 1 1
48
670
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
EB
675
L+T+R 1
O
622
T 1
0
627
T+R 2 1
314
5
R 1
0
----------------------------------------1
483
L 1 1
-------------------------------
483
488
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
587
L+T+R 1
0
5
T 1
0
104
T+R 1 1
104
99
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
10
1--------------------------------
L 1 1
10
557
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
WB
1081
L+T+R {
0
547
T 1
0
* adjusted for
1071
T+R 2 1
536
turn on red
524
R 1
0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME TOTALS:
533
199 324
584
NB -SB
-------------------------------
EB--WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
533
584
----------------------------{
- ----------------------------------------1
ICRITICAL
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
1117
I
CYCLE LENGTH:
60
sec.
I
CAPACITY:
1590
i
1
V/C:
0.70
!
CRITICAL PHASES:
2
1
---------------------------------------
I-----------------------------------------
LoS:
B
!
-------------------------------
COMMENTS:
COMMENTS:
-- - - -
H -CivilandTransportation Engineering -
R K Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
_�....ox;sa¢sxzxxssaacxscsxaacaaaaa-;xsasxxxs==ssssxx.�axxxcsxxxxaxxss^xxs=xx
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower Sacramento CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative + Project DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour
-------------------------------------------------------------------- -
^ I Southbound Approach I
I I Rt. Thru Lt. i
-N- 1 116 5 483 1
I ! 1 1 1
V
Lt. 68 ____•• ^---- 524 Rt.
Thru 642 ----' (---- 566 Thru
Rt. 5 ----V
10
Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound
Approach
1
1
60
I
35
I
60
1
!
I
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
I
I
Northbound
Approach
•1
----------------------
APPROACH
1
_------------------------------------
STREET NAME
DIR
__---_-_____-
VOLUME
I
LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
�=�:=aa-__so.�=-aamc=axxnx=a..,x_xxo_ I•xxa_a��assmmaemssaaxz.:aa�asmasxsozs
60
L 1
0
95
L+T 1 1
95
Driveway
NB
155
L+T4R 1
0
35
T 1
0
95
T+R 1
0
60
R 1 1
50
--------------------------------------
68
--------------------------------
L I t
68
710
L+T I
0
Turner Road
EB
715
L+T+R 1
.O
642
T 1
.0
647
T+R 2 t
324
5
R 1
0
_____________________________________
483
I--_--_--_-_--______-_-_-_-_-_---
L 1 1
483
488
L+T !
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
606
L+T+R t
0
5
T t
0
123
T+R 1 1
123
118
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
10
I -_-.___-__-_------___------------
L 1 1
10
576
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
WB
1100
L+T+R 1
0
566
T 1
0
adjusted for
1090
T+R 2 1
545
turn on red
524
R 1
____-___.-.-
0
-----------------------------------__-_
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
__--________-__-_---___
VOLUME TOTALS:
533
218 334
613
NB -SB
_____________________________.-_
ED -WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
533
613
1
-----------------------------
I --------------------------------------
-
I CRITICAL
--
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
1146
t
CYCLE LENGTH:
60
sec.
I
CAPACITY:
1590
I
I
V/C:
0.72
l
CRITICAL PHASES:
2
I
----------------------------------------i
LoS:
C
i
------------------------------I
COMMENTS:
.--_..---._----------------------------.-.-----__---_ _
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
0
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
-sssaan;sssssox==na=cs.asmxaa=asa;sscamaasxasraxeasaaxasaxaaaxsxmaaasmaaaax �
INTERSECTION: Turner Road & Lower Sacra.nanto CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative + Office Building DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour `-
.«--- ----------------.----.-- --.--.----- -._ -----r.----.--------------.. ----_------ j
I Southbound Approach
I i Rt. Thru Lt.
-N- 1 104 5 483 1
1 I t 1
Lt. 83 ---- "----- 524 Rt..
Thru 672 ----> t--_- 562 Thru
Rt. 5 ----V
V---- 14
Lv.
Eastbound Approach
West bound
Rpproach
t
1
I
60
1
35
I
60
I
t
I
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
1
I
Northbound Approach
I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROACH
i
---------------------------------------
STREET NAME
DIR
VOLUME LANESI
LANE VOLUMES,.:
aa==sam.:x========aa.�:==a=z=sasaaaoxaeasea
1 axaasxmaaaasmam=aacaxrs�oa:�aaasxssa
60
L 1
0
95
L+T 1 1
95
-
Driveway
NB
155
L+T+R 1
0
35
T 1
0
95
T+R 1
0
60
R 1 1
50
--------------------------------------
Sa
--------------------------------
L 1 I
83
755
L+T 1
0
Turner Road
Eta
760
L+T+R 1
0
672
T 1
0
677
T+R 2 1
339
5
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
483
I--------------------------------
L 1 1
483
488
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
592
L+T+R 1
0
5
T 1
0
109
T+R 1 1
109
104
R 1
0
-------------------------------------
10
I --------------------------------
L 1 1
10
572
L+T I
0
Turner Road
V1B
1096
L+T+R 1
0
562
T I
0
adjusted for
1086
T+R 2 1
543
turn on red
524
R 1
0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME
TOTALS:
533
204 349
626
NB-SB
-------------------------------
EB-WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
533
626
----------------------------
I------------------------------------------
----.-------------------------------------- I CRITICAL
I
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
1159 1
CYCLE LENGTH:
60
sec.
I
CAPACITY:
1590 t
I
V/C:
0.73 1
CRITICAL PHASES:
2
I
I -----------------------------------------
LoS:
C I
-------------•-----------------
COMMENTS:
---
R K H - Civil and
Transportation
Engineering
- Fester City,
California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
_ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi 18: Woodhaven Lane I N
DATE:Existing I I
DAY:Weekday 1 18 139 27 1 --1--
T IME:PM Peak Hour I I I I I
v_-----
`-- 21
11 (--- 153 :A
A: Turner Road 139 --> v-- 183
63 --v
1 55 113 166 1
113:Lower Sac. Road I
1
.. ---.-- -------.--.-------..------------------.---.---.----------.-.-----------
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 53 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 47 % S = 0.53
c
MAJOR: Tu-ner Read MINOR: Woodhaven/Lower Sacrament
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb) 2861 veh./hour
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
-------------------- t ----------------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 274 vph I Downtown = 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V):1094 vph I Intermediate 0.9 I= 1.0
R = 1.05 1 Other areas 1.0
----.------------------------------- -----------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
---------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 X
T = 0.98
------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2944 veh./hour
-------.--.-.--------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
----------------------------------------------- - €
I V/Cp LoS
I----------- ------
V/Cp=0.37 1 <0.61 A
! 0.61-0.70 B
LoS= A I 0.71-0.80 C
I o.81-0.90 D
1 0.91-1.04) E
1 ) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
----------- -----------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Fester City, California
:j
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
--------------------------------------------------------------- :
tB:Woodhaven Lane I N
DATE:Exist. w/ Chestnut St. 1 i i
DAY:Weekday 1 18 153 78 1 --1--
TIME:PM Peak Hour i ! I I I I
v --> I _
^-- 80
11 --^ <-- 153 :A
A: Turner Road 139 --> v-- 169
69 --v
1 ! 1 1 1
1 55 129 150 1
1 1
IB:Lower Sac. Road 1
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 52 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 48 % S = 0.52
MAJOR: Turner Road MINOR: Woodhaven/Lower Sacrament
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2901 veh./hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
-------------------- I --,___------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 317 vph 1 Downtown = 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V)t1204 vph I Intermediate 0.9 I- 1.0
R = 1.05 1 Other areas = 1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
--------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2992 veh./hour-
----._-----------_.-----------------------------------------------------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
--------------------------------------------------------
1 V/Cp LoS
1 _-__---_--
V/Cp=0.40 1 (0.61 A
1 0.61-0.70 B
LoS= A 1 0.71-0.80 C
1 0.81-0.90 D
1 0.91-1.00 E
1 ) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 279 HRB, 1963.
-.---------------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
r-;
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
---------------------------------------------------------------------- j
CITY:Lodi IB:Woodhaven Lane I N t
DATE:Existing + Project I I I
DAY:Weekday 1 37 172 78 1 --1--
E
TIME:PM Peak Hour
^-- 80
31 --" <-- 172 :A
R: Turner Road 159 --) v-- 188
69 --v
1 55 149 170 1
I
IB:Lower Sac. Road I
...................................................................... I
;
"A'{ APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTQL: 51 % j
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTQL: 49 % a = 0.51
MAJOR: Turner, Road MINOR: Woodhaven/Lower Sacrament
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2908 veh./hour
-------------------------------------------------------------------__--
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
-------------------- t _____--_------____--
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 356 vph I Downtown s 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V):1360 vph I Intermediate 0.9 I= 1.0
R = 1.05 1 Other areas 1.0
...-._-------------------------------------------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
--------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
_._-----_.______________________________________________________________
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2999 veh./hour
--------.--------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
--------------------------------------------------------
V/CP LoS
I_____-___-
V/Cp=0.45 1 <0.61 A
I 0.61-o.7( B
LoS= A 1 0.71-0.80 C
t 0.81-0.90 D
f 0.91-1.00 E
1 ) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lased upon "A Study of Four -Jay Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster- City, California
0
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS {
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------- i
CITY:Lodi 19:Woodhaven Lane I N 6
DATE:Existing + Office Bldg. 1 I 1
DAY:Weekday 1 23 153 78 1 --1-- !
TIME:PM Peak Hour
RKH ••• Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
^--
80
^' 21 --^
(--
158 t A
A: Turner Road 184 -->
v--
184
1 t
1
I I 1 !
M 134 190 1
1B:Lower
Sac. Rd. i'
---------------------------------------------------------------
- "A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL:
52 %
------
t
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL:
48 % S =
0.52
c..
MAJOR: Turner Road
MINGRt Woodhaven/Lower Sac.
.� BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2871 veh./hour
-.----------------------------------------------------------------
'" RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R)
1 INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
.
----------------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNSt 362 vph
I--_----------------�-
I Downtown =
0.9
�i TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V):1329 vph
I Intermediate
0.9 I= 1.0
R - 1.05
1 Other areas =
1.0
.y -----------------------------------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
I
,.a.
----------------------
.
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFICS 2 %
o
T = 0.98
}
__-.-.._-------------.----------------------------_---_____-__-__-_-------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T =
2967 veh./hour
1
�
----------------------------------------------------------------------
. VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
-------------------------------.-_-__-_-____-------_-----
- 1
V/Cp LoS
t
1
- V/Cp-0.44 1
---------- -----
(0.61 A
1
0.61-0.70 B
LoS- A 1
0.71-0.80 C
t
1
0.81-0.90 D
i
1
0.91-1.00 E
i
1
) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered
to be at a V/Cp
of 0.80
--------------------------------------------------------------------•--
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop
Intersection Capacities" by
t
- Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27, NRS, 1963.
RKH ••• Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
'.
--------------------------�N-------- ------
CITY:LodiIB:Woodhaven Lane
DATE:Cumulative I I I
DAY:Weekday 1 40 244 108 1 --1--
TIME:PM Peak Hour.
39 --^
A: Turner Road 317 -->
165 --v
l-- 285 to
v-- 236
I l I I I I
1 195 275 183 I
1 I
IB:Lower Sac. Road I
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 52 %
"B" RPPRORCHES AS PERCENT OF TOTRL: 48 % S = 0.52
MAJORt Turner Road MINORt Woodhaven/Lower Sac.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2886 Yoh./hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR (1)
---------------------- I ----__-_------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 477 vph I Downtown - 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME (V) _2176 vph I Intermediate= 0.9 I- 1.0
R = 1.04 1 Other areas = 1.0
_.._--------------------------------------------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
--------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 Y.
T = 0.98
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2952 veh./hour
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
-------------------------------------------- .------------_
I V/Cp LoS
I__-.---_-_-
V/Cp=0.73 I (0.61 A
! 0. 61-0. 70 B
LoS- C 1 0.71-0.80 C
I o.81-0.90 D
1 0.91-1.00 E
I ) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
RKH -- Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4-LRNE x 4 -LANE, FOUR -WRY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION:,
---__.--------------------.-----__-__---_----___--___-___---------------
C ITY :Lod i I H: Woodhaven I N
DATE:Cumulative + Project I I I
DAY:Weekday 1 513 263 108 1 __1--
TIME:PM Peak Hour I I I I I I
(-- v --) I
59 --"
A: Turner Road 337 —)
165 --v
^-- 89
<-- 304 : A
255
I I I I
1 195 295 203 1
I, I
I€l Lower Sac. Road I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF 'TOTAL: 52 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 48 % S = 0.52
MAJOR: Turner Road MINORS Woodhaven/Lower Sacrament
-
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 22891 veh./hour
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
---------------------- 1 ____----------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 516 vph I Downtown = 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V):2332 vph 1 Intermediate 0.9 I- 1.0
R = 1.04 1 Other areas = 1.0
--_.--------------------------------------------------_-----------__---_
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
----------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
---------------------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2958 veh./hour
___ ______________________________---_---_------___-__----___-_------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
------------------------------------------------------------
I V/Cp LoS
1 _--_---___- _----
V/Cp=0.78 1 (0.61 A
I
0.61-0.70 8
LoS= C 1 0.71-0.80 C
1
o.61-0.90 D
1 0.91-1.00 E
I ) 1. o0 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
--_---._----------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Fr_,ur-Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRH, 1963.
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineer -Ing -- Foster- City, California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
-------------------------------- --------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi IB:Woodhaven Lane 1 N
DATE:Cumulative + Office Bldg.- I I 1
DAY:Weekday 1 45 244 108 1 --1--
T I ME : FSM Peak Hour I I I t I I
49 --^ <-- 29.0 .A .
A: Turner Road 362 --> v-- 251.
165 --v
l 1 l 1 I
1 195 280 223 t
I 1
1 B : Lower• Sac. Rd. I
--------------.__----------_-- ------ _-----------_-----------_----
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 52 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 48 % S = 0.52
MAJOR: Turner Road MINOR: Woodhaven/Lower Sac.
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2869 veh./hour
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(1)
--------------------- 1' ------------------_- .
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 522 vph I Downtown - 0.9
'TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V):2301 vph I Intermediate 0.9 1- 1.0
R = 1.04 1 Other areas = 1.0
-...--------------------------------------------------------------------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
-----------.------- ----------------------------------------------------
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2940 veh./hour
--- - --- -
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
-------------------------------------------------------
I V/Cp LoS
I---------- -----
V/Cp-0.78 I (0.61 A
1
0.61-0.70 B
LoS- C I 0.71-0.80 C
I
0.81-0.90 D
I 0.91-1.00 E
1
)1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
---- _------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Step Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
LOCATION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St. I BY; RKH
CITY: Lodi t
DATE: Existing I
TIME: RM Peak Hour
-----------------
HOURLY VOLUMES:
Major: Lower
Grade: 0%
N 1
434 V2-->
149 V3 --v
-----------=-------------------------------
I VOLUMES IN PCPH t
Sac. Rd.
C --VS 347
Y --V4 49
N = 1
i
V7 V9 Grade 0%
82 80
N = 1
Minor: W. Elm St.
-----------------------------
VOLUME RDJUSTMENTS:
(--VS 347
v --V4 54
434 V2-->
149 V3 --v
I I
v7 V9
90 88
I
------------------------------------
Movement No. d2 V3 v4 V5 v7 V9
Vo 1 urge ( vph ) = 434 149 49 347 82 80
Volume ( pcph) : 54 s= -a 90 88
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 508. v ph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.5 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 598 pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 598 pcph
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
----------------------------
Corif li c t i n g Flow, Vc
583
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
640
pcph
Percent of Cp Uti lized
a
X Impedance Factor -.0. 94
Acti.tal Capacity, On
640
pcph
---r-------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
----------------------------
Conf listing Flow, Vc 904.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
251
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
237
pcph
Do minor street movements share
a lane? no
(If yes,
capacity = Csh)
RESERVE CQPQCITIES (Cr) QND
-----------------------------------------
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(Lo-)
Movement Volume Cro
Csh
Cr
LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
7 90 237
1487
D
739 t88 598
338
5I0
A
4 54 640
586
V ------
R I-. H - Civil and Transportation Engineering
- Foster-
City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCATION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St. 1 BY: RKH
CITY; Lodi 1
DATE: Existing + Project 1
TIME: PM Peak Hour I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES: I VOLUMES IN PCPH:
Major: Lower Sac. Rd. 1
Grades 0% (--V5 427 1 (--VS-427.
N= 1 v --V4 59 I
512 V2--> N = 1 1 512 V2--)
149 V3 --v 1 149 V3 --v
1 1 t 1 i
V7 V9 Grade 0% 1 V7 V9
82 90 1 90 99
N 1 1
Minor: W. Elm St. t
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No. V2 V3 V4 V5 V7 V9
Volume(vph): 512 149 59 427 82 90
Volume(pcph): _________= 65.= _== _90 99-.:
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 586. vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.5 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 543 pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 543 pcph
.-------------•--------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
------------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 661 vph
Critical Gap, Tc 5.0 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 586 pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized 10 % Impedance Factor:0.92
Actual Capacity, Cm 586 pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 1072 vph
Critical Gap, Tc 6.5 sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp 195 pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm 180 pcph
Do minor street movements share a lane? no (If yes, capacity = Csh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE (LoS)
----------------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm Csh Cr LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)----------
90 ISO 90 E
7+9 189 277 88 O
9 99 543 444 A
4 65 586 522 AQ
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
---------------------------------------------------------------------•-
LOCATION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St. I BY: RKH
CITY: Lodi I
DATE: Existing + Office Building !
TIME: PM Peak Hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES:
1 VOLUMES IN
PCPH:
Major: Lower Sac. Rd.
I
:w
Grade: 0% <--V5
467
1
(---V5 467
N= 1 v --V4
59
1
V --V4 65
459 V2---) N =
1
1 459 V2-->
149 V3 --v
1 149 V3 --v
V7 V9 Grade
0%
1
V7 V9
{
82 85
1
90 94
3
N
Minor: W. Elm St.
I
t�r.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
t
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
VOLUME
1
Movement No.
V2 V3
V4 V5 V7 V9
Volume(vph):
459 149
59 467 82 85
Volume(peph):
_________=
65 90 94
yam_
--------------------------
----------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 533.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.h
Potential Capacity, Cp
579
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
579
pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
----------------------------
Conflicting Flew, Vc
608
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
622
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized
9
% Impedance Factor:0.93
Actual Capacity, Cm
.,.....________________________________________________________________.-_-_
622
pcph
)
1
LEFT TURNFROMMINOR STREET
-
-- -
Conflicting Flaw, Vc 1059
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
198
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
---------------------------------------_--------------________-_-------
185
pcph
Do minor street movements share
a lane? yes
(If yes, capacity = Csh)
---------------------------------------------------------------__--_-_
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)
-___-_-__...------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr LoS
4
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)-----__---
7 90 185
7+9 184
283
95 E
99 �E
9 94 579
486 A
4 65 622
558 O
R K H - Civil and Transpertatic-in Engineering
-- Foster City, California
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCATION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St. I BY: RKH,
CITY: Lodi I
DATE: Cumulative I y
TIME: PM Peau Hour 1
.-. _- -- -.------------------- ----------------------------------------------
HOURLY VOLUMES: I VOLUMES IN PCPH:
Majors Lower Sac. Rd. I
Grade: 0% (--V5 600 1 (--V5 600
N= 1 v --V4 64 1 v --V4 70
617 V2--> N = 1 1 617 V2-->
155 V3 -•-v 1 155 V3 --v
V7 V9 Grade
0%
1
V7 V9
85 95
1
94 105
N = i
Minor: W. Elm St.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
V2 V3
V4 V5
V7 V9
Vo 1 ume (vph) :
617 155
64 60C:
85 95
Volume(pcph):
70 ===== 94 105 .
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
---------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc 694.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
475
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
---
475
------------------------------------------
pcph
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
Conflicting Flow, Vc
772
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
517
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized
12
X Impedance
Factor:0.91
fi
Actual Capacity, Cm
517
pcph
_._--_-_-----------------------------------------------------------------
a
LEFT TURNFROM MINORSTREET
- -
- -
Conflicting Flew, Vc
1358
vph
i
Critical Gap, Tc
6.5
sec.
€
Potential Capacity, Cp
126
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
114
pcph
I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do minor street movements share
a lane? no
(If yes,
capacity = Csh) �
-------------------.----------------------------------------------------
Rf_SERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)--------------------------------------------
3
x
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr
LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
---------.-
'7 94 114
7-+-9 198
191
21
-0
E
O
9 105 475
370
B
4 70 517
447
OA
R K H -- Civil and Transp--rtation
Engineering
- Foster
City, California
w
HCM85 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF "T" INTERSECTIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCATIONS Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St. i BY: RKH
CITY: Lodi 1 {.
DATE: Cumulative + Project
l
TIME: PM Peak Hour
HOURLY VOLUMES: I VOLUMES IN PCPH:
Majors Lower Sac. Rd. 1
Grades OX (--VS 680 1 (--V5 680
N 1 v --V4 74 1 v --V4 81
Y
695 V2--) N = 1 1 695 V2--)
155 V3 --v 1 155 V3 --v
1 I
V7 V9 Grade
OX
I
1
1
V7 V9,
85 105
1
94 116
=
N = 1
1
Minor: W. Elm St.
1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS:
Movement No.
V2 V3
V4 V5
V7 V9
Vo1ume(vph):
695 155
74 680
85 105
Volume ( pcph) a
=,ems=�:==_
- ------
$1=ase: 94 • 116 w.
----------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
Conflicting Flow, Vc 772.
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
431
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
431
pcph
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MAJOR STREET
-----------------------------
Conflicting Flow, Vc
850
vph
Critical Gap, Tc
5.0
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
473
pcph
Percent of Cp Utilized
16
X Impedance Factor:0.88
Actual Capacity, Cm
473
pcph
--------------------
------------------------------------------------
LEFT TURN FROM MINOR STREET
___________________________
,
Conflicting Flow, Vc 1526
vph
critical Gap, Tc
6.5
sec.
Potential Capacity, Cp
97
pcph
Actual Capacity, Cm
86
pcph
_
____ ______ ___________ __
Do - minor - street - movements share
- _ __________
a -lane? no -(If
_
yes,
f
capacity = Csh)
----------------------------
RESERVE CAPACITIES (Cr) AND
------------------------
LEVELS OF SERVICE
(LoS)
...___--_._--------------------------------
Movement Volume Cm
Csh
Cr
LoS
No. (pcph) (pcph)
(pcph)
(pcph)
-----____-
7 94 86
-0
F
7+9 209
154
-0
F
9 116 431
313
B
4 81 473
392
e
'-M
R kH- Civiland TrarSDOr•t�ation
-
Engineering
- Foster
City, California
-
RK H - CivilandTransportation Engineering - Fester City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical
Movement Methodology)
'..:
-..-...==scs»ssassx=o.aa=anaasa»scssss»aa¢x»szocssxxxssasssxs»s»oax= »»== stisn
INTERSECTION: Lower
Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St.CITY:Lodi
i
DATE: Cumulative
DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
,
`
I
Southbound Approach I
I i
Rt. Thru Lt. 1
-N- 1
0 600 64 l
<--V ->
Lt. 0
---- 95 Rt.
Thru 0 ----
0 Thru
R t . 0 ----V
+--- 8S Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound Approach
1
I I 1
0 617 155 1
I
Lt. Thru Rt. I
I
---------------------------------------------------------------
Northbound Approach I
APPROACH
'
----------------------------------
----
STREET NAME DIR
VOLUME LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
_.-xasss»»»ssss»=»sssasacsasxsss»»assstas
1 asmacam»sssss=3s»xmssaxs»ffistaamstsris
'"
0 L !
0
=
617 L+T I
0
Lower Sacramento NB
772 L+T+R 1 0
617 T 1 1 617
772 T+R 1 O
155 R 1 1 70
`
-----------------------------L--------'-------------------------------
0 L+T I
0
.
EB
0 L+T+R 1
0
0 T I
0
0 T+R I
O
---------------------------------------
0 R !
!-------------------------------
0
,
z
64 L 1 1 64
1.
6b4 L+T 1 0
Lower Sacramento SB
664 L+T+R 1
0
600 T 1 1
600
600 T+R I
0
0 Ri
0
---------------------------------------
.---------------------------85
-------- - -----------------------------
L i i
85
4
85 L+T 1
0
W. Elm St. W8
180 L+T+R i
0
0 T I
0
* adjusted for
95 T+R 1
0
f
turn on red
95 R 1 1
31
---.--.----------------.--------.--------------..---------.---.--------------------
SPLIT PHASE? LANE
VOLUME TOTALS: 681
600 85
31
y
3
NB -5B
-------- -----------------------
ED-WB CRITICAL VOLUMES: 681
85
-----------------------------i-
---------------------------------------
I CRITICAL LANE VOLUME TOTAL: 766
1
CYCLE LENGTH: 60 sec. !
CAPACITY: 1485
1
I
V/C: 0.52
CRITICAL PHASES: 3
!
LoS: A
1
-----------------------------I-----------------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
-----------------------------------------------COMMENTS:
-
RK H - CivilandTransportation Engineering - Fester City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critica. Movement Methodology)
xacxxcxxaxxscx=xsx=xxo.sa==a.=s=xe=xss3x=xa==saaxx;s3ax=ox=xxxsxx=ax9mta=a
INTERSECTION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Elm St.CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative + Project DAY:Weekday
T:ME: PM Peak Hour
_---------------------------------------------------------------------
^ 1 Southbound Approach 1
1 I Rt. Thru Lt. I
-N- I 0 -680 74 1
t 1 I 1 1 1
<-- V -->
Lt. 0 ----^ ^---- 105 Rt.
Thru 0 ----)
Rt. 0 ----V
Eastbound Approach
0- Thru
V---- `85 Lt.
Westbound Approach
1
1
I t
0 695
1
155
1
I
Lt. Thru
Rt.
I
I
Northbound Approach
i
--------------------------------------=---------------------------------
APPROACH
1
--------------------------------------
STREET NAME
DIR
I
VOLUME LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
--0 ---
o L 1
-
695 L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
NB
850 L+T+R 1
0
695 T 1 1
695
850 T+R 1
0
155 R 1 1
70
---------------------------------------I------
0 L I
-------------------------
0
0 L+T I
0
EB
0 L+T+R 1
0
0 T .I
0
0 T+R 1
0
O R 1
0
--------------------------------------
--------------------------------
74 L 1 1
74
754 L+T 1
O
Lower Sacramento
SB
754 L+T+R 1
0
680 T 1 1
680
680 T+R 1
0
0 R 1
0
--------------------------------------
---------------------------------
85 L 1 1
85
85 L+T 1
0
W. Elm St.
WB
190 L+T+R 1
0
0 T 1
0
* adjusted for
105 T+R 1
0
turn on red
105 R 1 1
31
_----------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME TOTALS:
769
680 83
31
NB -SB
-------------------------------
EB-WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
769
85
I
----------------------------1-----------------------------------------
I CRITICAL
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
854
I
CYCLE LENGTH:
60
sec. 1
CAPACITY:
1485
I
t
V/C:
0.58
I
CRITICAL PHASES:
3
I
LoS:
A
i
i
----------------------------i----------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
----------------------------
R K H -- Civil and Trarosportation
---------------------------------------------
Engineering -
Foster City,
California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET;
(Critical Movement -Methodology).:
crass==c:cao=xns===cc=ncc.==s.=ccmcsyQsasm=acsosaaiscs=aacm^rsassaa=a-.asaas�
INTERSECTION: Lower Sacramento Rd. &•W. Elm St.CITY:Lodi
L<
DATE: Cumulative + Office Building
DAY;Weekday
�._:;
TIME: PM Peak Hour
-------------------------------------------------------------:----------
^ I Southbound Approach I
j
I I Rt. Thru Lt. I
-N- 1 O 720 74 1
1 1 t 1 1
I t 1 I
3 °A'
Lt . 0 ----^
^---- 100 Rt.
Thru 0 ---->
<---- 0 Thru
-` Rt. 0 ----V
V---- 85 Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound Approach
¢.-..-
O 642 155 1
F I Lt. Thru Rt. 1
Northbound Approach 1
`
_-I_--
------------------_-__----------------_---___---------------_
APPROACH I
_-__�
---------------------------------------
STREET NAME- DIR~^VOLUME---LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
_:.^-s==cmcnsxcnssasoccoczssc==ac.mYsssass 1 ascocaeaaesoaeQaetmecatsas�rass�mcsas+smss=
- a
O L l
p
642 L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento NB 797 L+T+R 1 0
642 T 1 1 642
= `
797 T+R 1 0
=i
155 R 1 1 70
--_.------_-----_---_-
k--------------------------------------- --------------------------------
QL 1
-.---- -Q
0
0 L+T I
0
} ES 0 L+T+R 1
O
0 T l
0
- 0 T+R I
0
0 R I
0
-----------------------
74 L 1 1 74
= 794 L+T 1 0
Lower Sacramento SB 794 L+T+R 1
0
- 720 T 1 1
720
m
720 T+R 1
0
¢
0 R 1
0
---------------------------------------- I ---.-----------------------------
85 L 1 1
85
85 L+T 1
0
W. Elm 9t. RB 185 L+T+R 1
O
0 T 1
0
p�
* adjusted for 100 T+R 1
O
turn on red 100 R 1 1
26
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE? LANE VOLUME TOTALS: 716
720 85 26
NB -SB -------------------------------
EH-WB CRITICAL VOLUMES: 720
85
-------------- -----------------------------------------
I CRITICAL LANE VOLUME TOTALS 805 1
I
CYCLE LENGTH: 60 sec. I
CAPACITY: 1485 1
I
V/C: 0.54 1
g
_ CRITICAL PHASESt 3 1
LoS: A I
!
'-
---------------------------- I -----------------------------------------
COMMENTS:
R -K H - CivilandTransportation Engineering - Foster City, California
CRPRCITY CRLCULRTIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR -WRY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi IB:Lower Sac. Rd. I N
DATE: Enisting I
DAY:Weekday I 122 283 41 I _-1--
T IME: PM Peak Hour- I I I I I I
208 --^
A: Sargent /W. Lodi 165 -->
13 --v
110
<-- 133 :A
v-- 61
t
1 24 363 140
I
IB:Lower Sac. Road
......................................................................
"GI" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF 'TOTAL: 41 %.
"B" AP'P'ROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTRL: 59 % S - 0.59
MAJOR: Lower Sac. Rd. MINOR. Sargent/W. Lodi...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2674 veh./hour
------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
---------------------- I ---------------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 385 vph I Downtown = 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V)s1663 vph t Intermediate 0.9 i= 1.0
R = 1.04 1 Other areae 1.0
.__.._.__________________________________.--_-___---------------_-_--------
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
-----------------------
'CRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
-------------------------------------------------------------------
POSS. BLE: CAPPCITY (Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 2742 veh. /hour
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUM TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
-----------------------------------------____-----------
I V/Cp LoS
1 ----------- --_--
V/Cp=0.6U i (0.61 A
I
0.61-0.70 B
LoS= B I 0.71-0.80 C
I
0.81-0.90 D
1
0.91-1.00 E
I ) 1.00 F
NOTE: practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
.----------------------------._--_---------------_-------------_--------
Based upon "A Study of Fear -Way Stap Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1953.
------------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - Civil and Tr•anspor•tation Engineering - Foster- City, California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
^__ -^-___,.__
CITY:Lodi 1B;L4wer Sac. Rd. 1N______
DATE:Existing + Project I i 1
DAY:Weekday 1 122 353 51 1 --1--
TIMEsPM Peak Hour 1 1 { I { {
` A: Sargent/W. Lodi
r=s
1
208 --A
165 -->
13 --v
•�__ 12Q
(-- 133 : A
v-- 61
I I f 1
1 24 431 140 1
IB:Lower Sac. Road 1°
------------------------------ ________________________________________
"A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 38 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 62 % S = 0.62
MAJORS Lower Sac. Rd. MINORS Sargent/W. Lodi
--------------------------------------------------- ----------------.-_-,
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2594 veh./hour
-..___________________________________________-.----------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) 1 INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
-------------------- 1 --------------------
TOTAL
---------------- -TOTAL RIGHT TURNS% 395 vph 1 Downtown - 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V)i1821 vph 1 Intermediate 0.9 1- 1.0
R = 1.04 1 Other areas = 1.0
-------------------------------------------------------------- __---__-
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
---------------------
'f RUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
------------------ :_____________________________________________.__-___--
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) = Cb*R*I*T = 22652 veh./hour
--------------- _--------------------------------------------- _________
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
-----_.-_-._______________..___-------------_--___--___---
i V/ Cp LoS
I---------- -_-__
V/Cp=0.68 i (0.61 A
!
0.61-0.70 B
LoS= B 1 0.71-0.80 C
1 0. 81-0.. 90 D
1 0.91-1.00 E
1 ) 1.00 F
NOTE: practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
--____-__.-------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - C i v i l and Transportation Engineering - Foster- City, Cal i f c r n i a
I
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
--._-------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi IB:Lower Sac. Rd. I N
UATE:Existing + Office Bldg. I I I
DAY:Weekday 1 122 378 66 1 --1--
TIME:PM Peak Hour I I I I I I
--I (-- v --> I_-
208 .—_
208 --^
As Sargent/W. Lodi 165 --)
24 --v
^-- 115
<-- 133 :A
v-- 61
1 24 383 140 1
r. i I
1 B s Lower Sac. Rd. I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.y "A" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 39 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 61 % S = 0.61
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
_.__--__---_.___________________________--______--------------------___-._
Based upon "A Study of FOur-Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering -- Fester City, Califot'nia
MAJOR: Lower Sac. Rd.
__________________________..___------------
MINOR: Sargent/W.
Lodi
- - ---- --
�.
L
_____
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2603 veh./hour
--------
.
+-�
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R).
I INTERFERENCE FACTOR('I)
.
---------------------
1
- -
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 401 vph
I Downtown =
0.9.
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME(V)o1819 vph
I Intermediate
0.9 I- 1.0
R - 1.04
1 Other areas
1..0
_________________________________________
__ ________________________
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
'
-?------
_----------
_-__» _-_TRUCKS
TRUCKSAND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL
TRAFFIC: 2 %
-,9g
i
_
-7___-________________-
"
____---- ______.._-_.________________________Y
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(Cp) Cb*R*I*T =
_ _
2664 veh./hour
-----.____-».____-----------------------------------------------
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND
LEVEL OF SERVIC:E(LoS)
--------------------------------------------------------
--
I
1
V/Cp LoS
_-___._____
V/Cp-0.68 1
(0.61 A
1
0.61-0.70 B
_ +
LoS- B I
0.71-0.80 C
I
0.81-0.90 D
i
1
0. 91-1. 00 E
--
I
) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
_.__--__---_.___________________________--______--------------------___-._
Based upon "A Study of FOur-Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering -- Fester City, Califot'nia
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi IB:Lower Sac. Rd. I N
DATE:Cumulative I I 1
DAY:Weekday 1 125 532 151 1 --{--
,rIME:PM Peak Hour I I I I I 1
1 (-- v --) I
210 -�
At Sargent /W. Lodi 170 --)
120 --v
225
<-- 171 :A
V__ 204
I I I 1 1
I 108 611 198 1
1 I
{BtLower Sac. Riad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"A" RPPRORCHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 39 %
s-
-
"B" FJPPROFICHES AS PERCENT OF TOTFSL: 61 % S = 0.61
j
MAJOR: Lower Sac. Rd. MINOR: Sargent/W. Lodi
('
_------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb)i 2606 veh./hour
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
-------------------- 1 --------------------
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 668 vph I Downtown= 0.9
"TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME (V) : 28^c5 vph I Intermediate = 0.9 1= 1.0
-'
R = 1.04 1 Other areas = 1.0
_----------•----------------------
,q
..._-__w.w-.--__.-___.-_...--r...__.-____.-.-.+. _.ter. _.-
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
..
._...__________________
`
'TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC: 2
T=0.98
`
POSSIBLE
rCAPACITY(Cp)_^-Cb*R*I*T_`-2675'veh./hour-�--y------------"__
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
`
--------------------------------------------
P_-__-__-_____
1 V/C LoS
I_---_-_-_-
V/Cp=1.05 I (0.61 A
'
I 0.61-0.70 B
LoS- F I C ). 71-0. 80 C
1 0.81-0.90 D
--
{ 0.91-1.00 E
! ) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Higt:way Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
RKH - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
CAPACITY CALCULATIONS
4 -LANE x 4 -LANE, FOUR-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION t`
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY:Lodi 1B:Lower Sac. Rd. I N
bATE:Cumulat ive + Project I I I
DAY:Weekday I 125 602 161 I __I--
TIME:PM Peak Hour I I I I I
210 --^
Ai Sargent/W. Lodi 170 --)
120 --v
235
<-- 171 :A
V__ 204
t t 1 f 1
-; 1 108 679 198 1
1BtLower Sac. Road 1
-----------------------------------------------.-----------------------
"A " APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 37 %
"B" APPROACHES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL: 63 % S = 0.63
J'
x
MAJOR: Lower Sac. Rd. MINOR: Sargent/W. Lodi
----------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC CAPACITY(Cb): 2565 veh./hour
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT TURN FACTOR(R) I INTERFERENCE FACTOR(I)
------------------ t ------------------•--
TOTAL RIGHT TURNS: 678 vph I Downtown 0.9
TOTAL APPROACH VOLUME (V) : 2983 vph I I nt e, -mod i at a 0.9 . I= 1.0
R = 1.04 t Other areas = 160
------------- _________________________________________________________
TRUCK/BUS FACTOR(T)
--------------------
TRUCKS AND BUSES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL -TRAFFIC: 2 %
T = 0.98
.._-_-_-___--_--_____________________________________________________
POSSIBLE CAPACITY(C:p) = Cb*R*I*T = 2628 veh./hour
____-------.______________________________________________________-___-.
VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO(V/C) AND LEVEL OF SERVICE(LoS)
_______________________________________________________
I V/Cp LoS
---------- -__--
V/Cp=1.13
LoS- F
(0.61 A
0.61-0.70 B
0.71-0.80 C
0.81-0.90 D
0.91-1.00 E
) 1.00 F
NOTE: Practical capacity is considered to be at a V/Cp of 0.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon "A Study of Four -Way Stop Intersection Capacities" by
Jacques Herbert, Highway Research Record 27, HRB, 1963.
RKH -- Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology)
...c-..=co--_.=ccox-_.a-a¢.c.sa=a;ssr..zc=sonagacccsaaacasas=ass=mcrostsassasssa
INTERSECTION: Lower Sacramento/W. Lodi CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
! Southbound Approach I
{ I Rt. Thru Lt. I
-N- 1 125 532 151 1
<-- V --)
Lt. 210 ----^ ^---- 225, Rt.
Thru 170
Rt. 120 ----V
Eastbound Approach
t---- 171: Thru
V---- 204 Lt
Westbound Approach
R I'. -N --Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster, City, California
1
1
t
1
1
108
t
611
I
198
I
1
1
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
.1
1
Northbound
Approach
t
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROACH
I
--------------- -------------------.._-_
1
STREET NAME`
AIR
VOLUME
LANESI
LANE
VOLUMES
108
L 1 i
108
719
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
NH
917
L+T+R t
0
611
T 1 1
611
809
T+R 1
0
198
R 1 1
0
---------------------------------------
210
210
I --------------------------------
L 1 1
---------------------
---
----
210
380
L+T 1
0
Sargent Road
EP
500
L+T+R I
0
70
T 1 1
170
290
T+R 1
0
120
R 1 {
--------------------------------
12
--------------------------------------
151
L 1 1
151
683
L+T I
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
808
L+T+R
532
T I
0
657
T_ +R 1 1
657
125
R 1
--------------------------------
0
--------------------------------------
204
L 1 1
204
375
L+T I
O
W. Lodi Ave.
WS
600
L+T+R 1
0
171
T 1 1
171
* adjusted for
396
T+R I
225--R--__-_1-f--------------------------------
74 �
.^-turn-on-red----------
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME TOTALS:
762
765
374
381
NB -SB
-------------------------------
EB-WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
765
381
----------------------------1
---------------------------------------_I
I- CRITICAL
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL: 1146
I
CYCLE LENGTH:
100
sec.
I
CAPACITY: 1548
I
1
V/C: 0.74
I
CRITICAL PHASES:
.4
I
---------------------------------------
LoS : C
I
----------------------.-----
COMMENTS:
COMMENTS:
I-----------------------------------------
R I'. -N --Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster, City, California
y ..
TRQFFIC SIGNFIL QNFILYSIS WORKSHEET
(Critical Movement Methodology) _
INTERSECTION: Lower Sacramento/W. Lodi CITY:Lodi
DATE: Cumulative + Project DAY:Weekday
TIME: PM Peak Hour `•
....................................................................... i
Southbound Approach I :
I Rt. Thru Lt.
-N- 1 125 602 161 1
I I I I I -
V
Lt. 210 ---- ^---- 235 Rt.
Thru 170 ----> ____ 171 fhru s_
c
Rt. 120 ----V
V____ 204
Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound
Approach
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
{
108
679
198
1
I
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
1
I
Northbound
Approach
1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROACH
i
--------------------------------------
STREET NAME DIR
VOLUME
LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
mn=aaaaamam�as�=m�amassmmaamm�smsm�smm�messsx
($masa::=mae:�:maamea��as�amatoasasas��.
108
L 1 1
108
787
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento NB
985
L+T+R 1
0
679
T 1 1
679
877
T+R 1
0
198
R 1 1
0 e
--------------------------------------i----------------.---------------
210
L 1 1
210
380
L+T 1
0
Sargent Road EB
500
L+T+R 1
0
170
T 1 1
170
290
T+R 1
0
120
R 11
12
+t
---------------------------------------1--------------------------------
161
L 1 1
161
763
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento SB
888
L+T+R 1
0
602
T 1
0
727
T+R 1 1
727
125
R 1
0
---------------------------------------
204
--------------------------------
L 1 I
204
375
L+T I
0
'W. Lodi Ave. WB
610
L+T+R {
0
171
T 1 1
171
* adjusted for
406
T+R 1
0
turn on red
235
R 1 1
74 +�
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLIT PHASE? LANE
VOLUME TOTALS:
840
835 374
381
NH -SB
-------------------------------
EB-WB CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
840
381
----------------------------1-----------------------------------------1
I CRITICAL
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
1221 !
CYCLE LENGTH: 120
sec.
I
CAPACITY:
1590 I
V/C:
0.77 !
CRITICAL PHASES: 4
1
I
LoS:
C I
----------------------------
COMMENTS
-----------------------------------------I
^_r^~ l ^
Transportation -
R K H - Civil andFoster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL ANALYSIS WORKSHEET j-
(Critical Movement Methodology)
••.-asss:xssca:=cuss- »sx=ccsasccxxxxmmaxsasxasx.:mos:ssassssaaxasax=affiezmsaataassxm
INTERSECTION: Lower Sacramento Rd. & W. Lodi AvCITf:Lodi �-
DATE: Cumulative + Office Building DAY:Weekday f
TIME: PM Peak Hour
----------^-------------------------------------------------------------
i Southbound Approach I
1 1 Rt.
Thru Lt.
-N- 1 125 627 176 1
1 1 1 ! t
1 1 I I 1 -
Lt. 210 - --^ ^---- 230. Rt.
Thru 170 ----> <----- 171 Thru.
Rt. 120 ----V
V----- 204
Lt.
Eastbound Approach
Westbound
Approach
1
1
I
108
i
631
I
198
1
1
Lt.
Thru
Rt.
I
I
Northbound
Approach
1
-------------
APPROACH
"
------------------------------------------------
______________________________________I
STREET NAME
DIR
VOLUME
LANESI
LANE VOLUMES
xa-sxxs=a:a::.-s:.sos-.csosx=.s:mosssaxmxsxss
j cacxaaasassraaa=xmaascxmm::aosxae:sax:
� .
108
L 1 t
108
739
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
NB
937
L+T+R 1
0
631
T 1 1
631
829
T+R 1
0
198
R 1 1
0
-----------------------------L--------I-------------------------------
1
210
380
L+T 1
.0
Sargent Road
EB
500
L+T+R 1
0
170
T 1 1
170
290
T+R 1
0
120
1 1
---R
176
-
L 1 1
176
____-i----
803
L+T 1
0
Lower Sacramento
SB
928
L+T+R 1
0
627
T 1
0
752
T+R 1 1
752
r
125
R 1
0
-----------------------------___Z
204
__----------------------------___
L (
204
�
375
L+T 1
0
W. Lodi Ave.
WB
605
L+T+R 1
0
�
171
T 1 1
171
adjusted for
401
T+R 1
0
turn on red
230
R 1 1
54
{
..._._...------_-_-r-----.__-_--._-__--r-w_._------__-___-_-__rte._--
SPLIT PHASE?
LANE
VOLUME
TOTALS:
807
860 374
- _.__-wr...
-__+
381
F
NB -SB
-------------------------------
EB -WB
CRITICAL
VOLUMES:
860
381
z
____________________________
I - __-_____-____-__________-________--__---
ICRITICAL
LANE
VOLUME TOTAL:
1241
i
I
CYCLE LENGTH:
120
sec.
I
CAPACITY:
1590
I
I
V/C:
0.78
I
CRITICAL PHASES:
4
1
LoS:
C
I
-------------------------------I
COMMENTS:
----------------------------------------!
-
R'K H Civil and Transportation Engineering - Fester City, California
SS3HHSXHOK SZNVHEVM UNDIS
3 XIQNHddV
r
SS3HHSXHOK SZNVHEVM UNDIS
3 XIQNHddV
TRAFFIC SISK WRANTS
URBAN LOCATION
Figure 9-1D4
INTERSECTIONt Turner Road t Sacramento
LOCATIONt Lodi
CONDITIONS: 1958 Existing
Minima Vehicular yolm karrant
BY: WH
DATEtsI-fa-$9
'
Number of lams of wyIrrj traffic
I Ainiva Ibequir*i Estirated
i kt"I or Smjetted Axer411
1
on each approach:
I Pwa ji Daily Traffic
! U I I y Traffic
Fth,
N
1
I
,
Major S#r*et Minor 5trwt
I Ujor S#r*044 Minor Strut#"
I Major Street Mur Street
2 2
9600 2240
3100 1700
1 No
or a" or DON
a
ti Total of both approach
+�+ whore approach !one direction
�: pp
plus heavier left turn Dov t
) p
rrom or Stas# if
W
left left turn sigral phase is proposed
Interruption of Continuous Tnffic
Mater of lams of moving traffic
I Minis4x Required Estir.ated
-_-_____�
I actual or Projected Avaraye,.
.. .. •:... . �.
;.i
;yds
-� on each approach:
I Pwap Daily Traffic
I Daily Traffic
�r r•.
,ems..
Major Street Minor Street
I mjor s#reti*i Minor Street+++
I Major Street Miner Stmt:
1: Mat?
2 2
1 14400 1600
1 3100 1700
I po
or Bare or Dora
1
I
I
I
!
i
*t Total of both approach iolaei
ia-* Higher w1w* apgroacfi (one direction) plus heavier left turn movement fr'7s *or Witt if surae
left left turn signal phase is proposed
Combination
Minim Vehicular Volume Want
Major S#r*et Minx str*et Total
perttnt fullfilledi I Z 3% 15,9% 54.1%
_ I
Interruption cf Contin+*d Traffic
I 14ajor str*et Minor strtet Total
I _
P e m t fullfilledl I 21.5% 10010% was
Caeb i mat i on warrant satisfied if Box of individual *arrant fulfil 1 ed
W.irrvt Met?
No
# Cal trans, "Traffic Manu 1, ' Chapter 9, dated 2-4-81,
R K H - Civil and Transportation Engir-wing - Foster City, California
Turner Road
Major street
Awowhn
Dir. Vol. Lanes
EB 0 2
Total:
Afternoon Peak Hw:54 PM
Turner Road
kjor Street
Woodhaven/Lower Sacrarento
�F
Minor Street M-
or sore I
Maxirur:
I (Max. thru +
I rax. Left turn)
I
0 219 2
A 402 2
Totals 621 2
or a"
Woodhaven/Lower Sacruento
Minor Street
MM
Dir. Vol. Lam
58 249 2
NB 334 2
EBLT 0, Minims Vnlww
WELT 0 Warrant Warrant Net?
Maxiaul: 334 2 5w No
Max. thr,i + or tura
rax. left turn)
t.altrans, 'Traffic Manual, _kVter 9, dated 2 -4 -RL____________
R K H - Ctvil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
` URBAN LOCATION
Figure 9-1Da
A .
INTERSECTION: Turner Rud t Woodhaven/Lower Sacrawto BY RM j
LOCATTOH1, Lodi DAM21-4b-�
CKITIMi Cuulativ4
Minimum Vehicular 4b 1 l ie Warrant
Nwater of lam of moving traffic I Minix Required Estlaatad
on oath approacht I f Yvap Daily Traffic
I
Najor Street Minor Street I Najor Streeti* Mir4r Strtat+++
2 2 %00 2248
or more or none
1
## Total of both ipproac� role s
h+4 Higher Ium approach (one dirt -.tion) plus,heavier left turn movement frtr xajor street if separate
left l r R t tum signal O rsa is proposed
Entempt ion of Continuous Traffic
Number of lanes of aavim traffic I AlMwA Required Estimated i P.ctual or Projected k rap I .
on each approech: I #erraje Daily Traffic 1 Daily Traffic t.
I I I {Wre+ant <t
ljor Street Minor Street I Major Street*f Minor Street"# i Najor Street Minor Street 1 Net? _
I
-
2 2 1 14400 1600 1 4500 4500 I N O
or more or more
I I I r
a* Total of both approach
*i+ Higher voluw approach tame directioi) plus heavier left tum movement from rajor street if sa,>arate
left left turn signal ixlasa is pn,pa
Coto irAt ion
Minix► Vesicular 4blu.we warrant
Major Street Alnor Street Total
I
Pttrmt fullfilledt I 411?% 100,0% 73.4%
J I
Warrant Met?
Interruption of Contir4m Traffic
- I Major Straet Mimar Street Total No
I
portent fullfilieds 1 31.3% 100.0% 65.6%
I
Coahinatian arrant satisfied if 9% of individual xarrant fulfilled
} Caltrans, 'Traffic Manual~" Chapter % dated 2-4-87.
R K H - CiviI ad Transportation Eq ireerinq - Foster City, Glifornia
PEAK HOUR VOLUME TRAFFIC SIM WARRANTS
URBAN LOCATION
Figure 9-20
W ERSEMON: Turner Road L Woodhaven/Loaar Sacramento BYt RKM
LOCATION: Lodi 'DATE:21404S
CMITIONSt Cumulative
Morning Peak Hour: 8-9 AM
Turner Road
Major shvd
Approaches
D i r. VoL Lanes
EB 0 2
uA n 1)
I
I Woodhavee/Lowmr Sacrawto
I Minor Street
Dir. Vol. Lines
SB 0 2
NB 0 2
I EBLT 0 !linimw Volt me
Total: 0 2 1 WELT 0 Warrant Warrant Met?
or mom l --
! Maximum: 0 2 ERR
I (Max. thru + or moan
1 max. left turn)
Afternoon Peak Hour:5-6 PM
I
Turner Road I Woodhaven/Lower Sacramento
-- I
Major Street I Minor Street
Total:
Rpproacles
Dir. Vol. Lanes
EB 521 2
UR z7a a
am t
or more
Qnnrr,w,hme
um v7i. Lanes
SB 392 2
NB 653 2
EBLT 0
WELT 236
Minimum Volume
Warrant Warrant Met?
!
maximum: 889 2 450 Yes
I (Max. thru + or b"
I max. left turn)
i
+ Caltrans, 'traffic Kamal," Chapter 9, dated 2-417.
R K 8 - Civil and Transportation Engirwring - Foster City, California
Total of Doth approach volumes
••+ Nigher volume approach tone direction) plus Wavier left turn mowament from ajor street if separate
left left turn signal phase is proposed
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
x,� Combination
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------
minienm VeWicular Volume Varrant
I major Street minor Street Total
T 1 ------------ ------------ -----------
Percent fullfilled: 1 50.09 100.01 75.01
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Varrant Not?
Interruption of Costianous Traffic ------------
i major Street Ninor Street Total No
t------------ ------------ -----------
Percent fullfilled: 1 33.31 100.09 66.79
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combination warrant satisfied if 809 of individual warrant fulfilled
* Caltraoa, 'Traffic manual,' Chapter 9, dated 2-4-87.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I [ 9 - Civil and Tranaportatim Engineering - Foster City, California
TRAFFIC SIGNAL tiAttRMTS
URBAN LOCATION
Figure 9-10•
zzz=az=zzzass=zz=:zz=zzzzzzzzzzzza=czzz=z=z:2822==zi==s=========5=====---=====zz=====zzz=zz==zsz=zzszzzz=zzz===a=======tz=ii9
INTE6SEC2ION: Turner Road & Voodhaven/Loner Saeruento
B:: R13I
LOCATION: Lodi
0818:21-Fab-89
CONDITIONS: Cumulative + Pro jact
Nininw Vehicular Mean Yarrant
----
labor of lanes of saving traffic
1 minim Required Eatinted
I Acced or Projected . Average
I
oa UA approach:
I Average Daily Traffic
1 Daily Traffic
t
major Street minor Street
------------ ------------
I major Strut** Minor Street***
------------------------
I major Street Visa Street
-------------------------
1 Net?
----------
2 2
i
1 9600 2240
;
1 4800 4800
i
1 No t
or son or am
m
I
•* Total of both approach volutes_
*+• Rigber volume approach Ione direction) plus Wavier left turn sovasent
frac sajor street if separate
left left turn signal phase is proposed
;
Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Number of Inns of coving traffic
I Ninixon Required Retisated
1 ActU1 or Projected Average
I
on and approach:
1 Average Daily Traffic
I Daily Traffic
I
I
I
I :arrant
A&* Street hirer Street
1 major Street- Visor Street•+•
------------
I ma j,, Street Raw Street
------ -------
I Net?
----------
------------------------
------------
I
2 2
1 14400 1600
1 4600 4800
I In
or sore or sore
!
1
I t
Total of Doth approach volumes
••+ Nigher volume approach tone direction) plus Wavier left turn mowament from ajor street if separate
left left turn signal phase is proposed
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
x,� Combination
------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------
minienm VeWicular Volume Varrant
I major Street minor Street Total
T 1 ------------ ------------ -----------
Percent fullfilled: 1 50.09 100.01 75.01
I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Varrant Not?
Interruption of Costianous Traffic ------------
i major Street Ninor Street Total No
t------------ ------------ -----------
Percent fullfilled: 1 33.31 100.09 66.79
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combination warrant satisfied if 809 of individual warrant fulfilled
* Caltraoa, 'Traffic manual,' Chapter 9, dated 2-4-87.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I [ 9 - Civil and Tranaportatim Engineering - Foster City, California
PEAK NOR VOLUNN TRAFFIC SIGNAL VAN=
URBAN LOCATION
Figure 9-2C `
t
Approacbm
Dir. Vol. Lou
EB 0 2
VB 0 2
Appromchee
Dir. Vol. Lanes
88 0 2
NB 0 2
Du 0 Ninima Volnse
Turner Road
Major Stmt
Approaches
...............
Dir. Vol. Lana
ES $02 2
YB 393 2
...............
Total: 895 2
or more
Voodha"R/Lowr S►acraeento
Niaor Street
Approach"
................
Dir. Vol. Lanes
SS 430 2
NB 693 2
EBLT 0 Ninimue Volume
VBLT 25S Varrant
----------------................
Wien: 948 2 450
(Na:. thru + or more
on. left tura)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Caltrans, 'Traffic Naval.' Chapter S, dated 2-4-87.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R f N - Civil and Transportation Engineering - Foster City, Califorair
Varrant Net?
--------------
Tes
APPENDIX D
TRANSPORTATION TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
1
TRANSPORTATION
TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
1
i
ADT
Rverapr Daily Traffic. Total volume of
traffic crossing a fixed point over a 24-hour
period averaged over • week, month, year, or
several years.
OWDT
Overage Weekday Traffic. Excluding Satur-
days and Sundays . )
a Accessibility
The relative ease with which a location can
be reached via various modes of transports-
t icn.
Rrterial Street
A major road with partial control of access,
Capacity
Maximum number of vehicles or transit riders
that can be carried during a determined
period of time, usually one hour.
�= Controlled access
Preferential treatment of through traffic by
providing connections with only selected
public roadways, prohibiting grade crossings
or direct access to abutting private proper-
ty
Design speed
The maximum safe speed that can be maintained
over a specific section of highway or street
_
when conditions ar so favorable that the
design features of the street or highway
1
govern.
s
Directional split
The difference in magnitude between volumes
of traffic in one direction and traffic
volumes in the opposite direction on a
section of road.
Freeway
A high speed roadway with complete control of
access.
- Interchange
A system of interconnected roadways providing
separated movement of traffic between two or
more roadways, usually freeways or express-
ways.
Level of Service
(toS) An expression of conditions existing
under various speed and volume conditions on
-
a street or highway. These levels are desig-
nated A through F, from best to worst, and
1
Volume -to -capacity
ratio V/C Ratio. The ratio of volume of traffic to
the capacity of the rord segment or intersec-
tion with the volumes and capacities usually
measured in vehicles per hour. The We
ratios are useful in determining levels of
service, delay and congestion.
2
i
S
i
TRANSPORTATION
TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
cover the entire range of traffic operations
that may occur. On many specific streets and
-
highways, tho better levels of service cannot
be attained. Level of Service E describes
-'
conditions approaching capacity or maximum
_
desirable delay. See pages 3-5 for detailed
definitions.
Modal split
The relative! proportion of trips by each
mode. For example, 4 out of 100 trips are
_
made by transit from point A to point B and
96 by auto. The modal split is 4%
transit and auto.
Mode of travel
The means of Transportation, whether by auto,
bus, subway or airplane, etc.
Partial access
Access to selected public roads, limited
control access to private driveways and
crossings provided at grade.
Peak hour(s)
The 60 minute period(%) in which the traffic
volume(s) is the highest for the dry, The
peak hours are typically in the period from
7-9 AM and 4-6 PM weekdays.
Peak hour factor
PHF. A ratio of the volume occurring durinq
the perk hour to the maximum rate of flow
during a given time period within the peak
hour. For intersections, the maximum rate of
_
flow is usually measured in 1S minute per-
iods. PHF = PHV/(4 x peak 15 min. volume)
Peak hour/peak
direction traffic
The highest of the directional traffic
volumes during the peak hour on a section of
road.
Peak hour volume
PHV. The volume of traffic during the peak
hour(s) of the day through an intersection or
-
on a section of roadway.
Volume -to -capacity
ratio V/C Ratio. The ratio of volume of traffic to
the capacity of the rord segment or intersec-
tion with the volumes and capacities usually
measured in vehicles per hour. The We
ratios are useful in determining levels of
service, delay and congestion.
2
i
S
i
3
Level of Service Definitions
for Urban and Suburban Arterial Streets
LoS A
Free flowing operations witn average travel speeds
about 90% of the free flow speed. Vehicles are com-
pletely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver in the
traffic stream.
LoS B
Average travel speed about 70% of the free flow speed
and the ability to maneuver in the traffic stream is
only slightly iAbstricted. Drivers experience only
slight tension.
LoS C
Represents stable operations. Average travel speeds
are about 50% of the free flow speeds. Ability to
maneuver is rime restricted and motorists experience
considerable tension while driving.
LoS D
Small changes in flow can cause substantial increases
in delay. Average travel speeds are about 40% of free,
flow conditions.
LoS E
Long delays with average travel speed about 1/3 of free,
flow conditions. Causes are a combination of high
volumes, long queues at intersections, inappropriate
signal timing, etc.
LoS F
Average travel speeds less than 1/3 free flow speeds.
Significant intersection congestion and very long
dela.s. Adverse signal progression usually contributor
to this condition.
Reference:
1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 11.
3
TRANSPORTATION TERMINOLOGY DEFINITIONS
4
Levels of Service Definitions
=
for Signalized I ntersect i ons
(Critical Movement Methodology:
LoS
A - Very low delay. Extremely good progression with most
'
vehicles arriving during the green phase. Short cycle
lengths may also contribute to low delay. Volume -to -
Capacity (V/C) ratio equal to or less than 0.6).
LoS
g - Goad progression and short cycle lengths. More vehic-
les stop than under LoS A conditions.
-
V / C range: 0.61-0.70.
LoS
C - Progression is fair and cycle lengths are ionger. The
w
number of vehicles stopping is significant although
many do not have to stop. V / C range: 0.71-0.80.
LoS
D - Unfavorable propression, long cycle lengths, and high
volume -to -capacity ratios contributr to the conditions.
The number of vehicles not having to stop declines.
V/C range: 0.81-0.90.
J
r
LoS
E - Poor progression, high v/c ratios, very long cycle
1
lengths can all contribute to this condition.
V/C ranges 0.911.00.
`-' LoS
F - Arrival flow rates exceed the, capacity of the intersec-
ntersec-tion
tion with the same contribution factors as with LoS E
V� C is variable.*
i
i'^
3
j
r
References: 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 9
I
Transportation Research Board Circular #2129 1/80.
i
" *
The V/C ratio cannot exceed 1.00 for measured traffic volume
conditionr unless the assumptions for capacity volume are
too lora. In the analyses of future traffic projections, the
demand volume may excerd the assumed capacity volume,
resulting in a V/C ratio greater than 2.OD.
4
+t
` LoS A
LoS B -
LoS C -
Level of Service Definitions
for 2 -Way STOP and YIELD controlled intersections
References
Reserve capacity greater than 400 (passenger cars per
hour). Little or no delay, less than 5 seconds.
Reserve capacity 300-399. Short delay.
Reserve capacity 200 299. Average delay, on the order
of 30 seconds.
Reserve capacity 100-199. Long delays.
Reserve capacity 0-99. Very long delays, up to 60
seconds.
No reserve capacity. Volume exceeds th o capacity.
Extremely long delays with queuing may c a u w severe
congestion affecting other traffic movements in tho
intersection. This condition usually warrants improve-
ment to the intersection.
1985 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 10.
5