Loading...
Attachment 1 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 201 SANTA ROSA, CA 95401 707.542.9500 505 17th Street, 2nd Floor OAKLAND, CA 94612 510.444.2600 1276 Lincoln Avenue, Suite 204 SAN JOSE, CA 95125 650.314.8313 w-trans.com Final Draft Report State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis for the Town of Los Gatos August 15, 2018 i State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 29 Study Participants and References ................................................................................................................................... 30 Figures 1. Study Area and Lane Configurations ................................................................................................................................... 8 2. Existing Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 3. State Route 9/Massol Ave Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 18 4. State Route 9/Santa Cruz Ave Recommendations Without Right Turn Lane Reconstruction ....................... 23 5. State Route 9/State Route 17 Ramps Recommendations .......................................................................................... 24 6. State Route 9/Alberto Way Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 25 7. State Route 9/Los Gatos Boulevard Recommendations ............................................................................................. 26 8. Bicycle Connections ................................................................................................................................................................ 28 ES Tables 1. Qualitative Comparison of Alternatives of Traffic Signal Network Measures of Effectiveness ........................ 2 2. Summary of Cost Estimates .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Tables 1. Collision Rates at the Study Intersections .......................................................................................................................... 9 2. Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ......................................................................................................... 13 3. Existing Network Measures of Effectiveness ................................................................................................................... 14 4. Removal of Northbound Channelized Right-Turn Network Measures of Effectiveness .................................. 17 5. Implementation of HAWK Network Measures of Effectiveness ................................................................................ 19 6. Implementation of Traffic Signal Network Measures of Effectiveness ................................................................... 20 Appendices A. Traffic Counts – Unadjusted B. Collision Rate Calculations C. Level of Service Definition Tables D. Intersection Level of Service Calculations E. Synchro Measures of Effectiveness F. Signal Warrant Analysis G. NCHRP Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet H. Cost Estimations I. SIMTRAFFIC Corridor Functionality Analysis 1 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Executive Summary Within the Town of Los Gatos safety is paramount for all roadway users including motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. State highways transect the southern boundaries of Town, including State Routes 17 and 9. The issue of safety along State Route 9 (SR 9) has increasingly become a concern as residents have asked for safety enhancements in various public meetings such as recent meetings held while developing the Town’s safe routes to school plan, and a recent pedestrian fatality has created a strong push for public safety improvements. This report recommends improvements along SR 9 which include infrastructure improvements that directly address pedestrian safety, and design features that promote driver-awareness of pedestrians and bicycles. The goal of the project is to upgrade streets to encourage safe vehicles speeds and enhance safety for all modes of travel. For this report, safety for all roadway users was analyzed along the segment of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (a large part of which is designated as State Route 9) between the western most Town limits and Los Gatos Boulevard. During the most recent five-year study period a total of 93 collisions were reported along the approximately one- mile section of SR 9 and Los Gatos-Saratoga Road which provides regional access to various locations within Santa Clara County. Further, it should be noted that vehicle-only collisions associated with the interchange SR 17/SR 9 were not analyzed as their exact location is difficult to determine due to the State Wide Integrated Traffic Records System reporting method. The intersection located at SR 9/Massol Avenue has received significant attention from residents, Town staff, and local stakeholders. The intersection is an unsignalized tee intersection near the west Town limit with a pedestrian- activated flashing beacon to alert motorists of the presence of pedestrians crossing SR 9. A total of sixteen collisions were reported between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017, half of which consisted of injuries to one or more parties involved. Additionally, half of these collisions involved cyclists at the intersection, while one involved a pedestrian who was fatally struck by a vehicle on September 1, 2017. The fatal collision occurred at approximately 6:30 a.m. when a pedestrian using the western crosswalk was struck by an eastbound traveling vehicle. Of the eight intersections analyzed for this report, five included either collision rates, injury rates, or fatality rates higher than the average of similar intersections statewide. Most notably the intersection at Massol Avenue exhibited collision, injury, and fatality rates higher than statewide averages for similar facilities. A total of 28 collisions were reported at the signalized intersection of SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017. Similarly, injury rates were calculated to be higher than average at intersections along the corridor: specifically at Massol Avenue, Tait Avenue, Monterey Avenue, and Alberto way. As a result, Town Staff has requested that W-Trans develop a list of specific recommendations with the goal of improving safety along the corridor for all roadway users, and specifically at the intersection at Massol Avenue. Recommended safety and operational improvements along the corridor were developed in response to collision data provided by the Town of Los Gatos, the California Highway Patrol, as well as field visits. Evaluation methods included industry-standard traffic engineering practices such as collision analysis, speed surveys, and signal warrant analysis, etc. Reported collisions involving cyclists and pedestrians occurred more often compared to similar facilities statewide, thus higher than average collision and injury rates were recorded at various locations along the corridor, specifically at conflict points, and the Massol Avenue intersection. Recommendations at the intersection of SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue include removing the channelized right-turn lane, installing green bike paint, and continental crosswalks. Recommendations associated with the intersection at SR 9/University Avenue include updating the current bicycles facilities to consist of green paint at conflict points. Safety at the western interchanges of SR 9/SR 17 could be enhanced by trimming of foliage which obstructs the view of motorists. Similarly, foliage could be trimmed to enhance safety in addition to the 2 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 installation of ‘crosswalk ahead’ signs on the eastern SR 9/SR 17 interchange ramps. Recommendations at the intersection of SR 9/Alberto Way include trimming foliage and installing radar speed feedback signs along SR 9, in addition to installing a curb ramp at the southeast corner. Safety improvements recommended for the intersection located at Los Gatos Boulevard consist of installing yield markings, crosswalk warning signs, and removing the channelized right-turns. Table ES-1 below provides a summary comparison of each alternative recommendation as it relates to the expected benefits. Table ES-1 – Qualitative Comparison of Alternatives of Traffic Signal Network Measures of Effectiveness Alternative Safety Enhancement Use* Acceptance Highway 9 Traffic Impact* Neighborhood Access Cut-Through Traffic Impact Cost Existing Conditions N/A Easy N/A N/A N/A N/A RRFB (Alt. #1) Medium Easy Low No No Low HAWK (Alt #2) High Moderate Medium No No Medium Traffic Signal (Alt #3) High Easy High Yes Yes High Note: * = Use Acceptance refers to ease of comprehension for the driver; Highway 9 Traffic Impact refers to an increase in delay, stops, congestion as a result of implementation of intersection control alternatives Based on an analysis of signal warrants and pedestrian crossing treatments as recommended by the Federal Highway Administration, safety for pedestrians could be enhanced by installing traffic control at the unsignalized tee intersection at Massol Avenue. As stated above several design features which affect drivers’ behaviors were considered for the signalization of the intersection including the current Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons with enhanced roadway signage, a pedestrian hybrid beacon, and a traffic signal. Of the three alternatives, it was determined that a pedestrian hybrid beacon, also known as a HAWK, would be most appropriate for the intersection. The hybrid beacon was chosen due to a combination of factors such expected safety enhancement, cost, impact on pedestrian delay and vehicle delay, impact on neighborhood access, and cut-through traffic. Recommendations for State Route 9 Corridor Study will help shift the focus away from motor vehicles to a more balanced approach of incorporating all roadway users, with more attention directed to the safety of those most vulnerable, pedestrians and cyclists. Safety and operations along the corridor could be improved by implementing the following recommendations:  Install a HAWK beacon at the crosswalk on the west leg of the SR 9/Massol Avenue intersection along with other complementary improvements  Install green bike lane markings at conflict points  Provide Continental crosswalk markings at intersections  Remove channelized right-turn lanes as a long-term improvement  Trim foliage along the corridor  Provide bicycle facility improvements to enhance connectivity A summary of the costs associated with recommended safety improvements are provided below in Table ES-2. 3 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table ES-2 – Summary of Cost Estimates SR 9/Massol Avenue Intersection Improvement Improvement Type Detail Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Intersection Control RRFB HAWK Signal $111,900 $476,400 $721,900  Speed Reduction RRFB HAWK Signal  Adv'd Speed Hump Marking Raised Median Raised Median Raised Median Beacons Beacons Beacons $136,400 $72,200 $72,200 Bike and Ped Improvements   Install Green Bike Lanes $213,200 $213,200 $213,200 Remove NB Channelized Right-turn Intersection TOTAL $461,500 $761,800 $1,007,300 SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue HSIP Improvement Cost Non-HSIP Improvement Cost Total Near-to-Mid Term Install Green Bike Lanes $42,500 Install/Paint Traffic Bars $4,000 $46,500 Install Continental Crosswalks $20,700 $20,700 Long Term Remove Channelized Right-turns $750,000 - $750,000 Intersection TOTAL $813,200 $4,000 $817,200 SR 9/University Avenue HSIP Improvement Cost Non-HSIP Improvement Cost Total Install Green Bike Lanes $20,000 - $20,000 Intersection TOTAL $20,000 $20,000 SR 9/SR 19 Interchange HSIP Improvement Cost Non-HSIP Improvement Cost Total Foliage Trimming $5,000 - $5,000 Install Crosswalk Ahead Signs $1,600 - $1,600 Intersection TOTAL $6,600 $6,600 4 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 SR 9/Alberto Way HSIP Improvement Cost Non-HSIP Improvement Cost Total Foliage Trimming $2,700 Install Curb Ramp $8,900 $12,100 Install Radar Speed Sign $53,400 $55,500 Intersection TOTAL $2,700 $62,300 $65,000 SR 9/Los Gatos Boulevard HSIP Improvement Cost Non-HSIP Improvement Cost Total Near-to-Mid Term Install Yield Markings $200 - $200 Install Warning Signs $3,600 $3,600 Long Term Remove Channelized Right-turns $647,500 - $647,500 Intersection TOTAL $651,300     $651,300 5 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Introduction This report presents an analysis of safety and traffic operations of the Los Gatos-Saratoga Road corridor from Los Gatos Boulevard to the western Town limits. The western portion of that corridor, between the Town limit and SR 17, is designated SR 9. The safety and traffic operations analysis was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the Town of Los Gatos and the California Department of Transportation and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques. Prelude The purpose of this safety and traffic operations analysis is to provide the Town Los Gatos staff and policy makers with data they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential safety and traffic operations impacts along State Route 9 between Massol Avenue and Los Gatos Boulevard. SR 9 is maintained and operated by Caltrans. The Town has received input from residents and stakeholders regarding safety along the corridor, specifically citing issues with speed, collisions, and visibility. Recommendations at key locations along the corridor have been identified based on data collected during field observations, review of collision data, analysis of traffic operations, and data provided by local agencies. 6 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Project Setting Project Location Between the west Town limits and State Route 17, Los Gatos-Saratoga Road is a section of State Route 9 (SR 9). The full length of SR 9 extends from State Route 1 in Santa Cruz to State Route 17 in Los Gatos. The majority of SR 9 has a north-south alignment, even though the portion studied for this report has an east-west alignment. East of State Route 17, Los Gatos-Saratoga Road is a City street that ends at a “T” intersection with Los Gatos Boulevard. The roadway segment has four travel lanes with a raised median between State Route 17 and Tait Avenue, reduced to two lanes at the west and east ends. Left turns are permitted onto side streets when there are breaks in the median. The roadway segment between Tait Avenue and Montgomery Street is a three-lane arterial with one lane in each direction plus a two-way center left-turn lane. The roadway provides access to SR 17 via on-ramps and off- ramps in a cloverleaf interchange. Land uses along the corridor are comprised of residential neighborhoods and commercial buildings. The study area includes the following intersections: 1. SR 9/Massol Avenue 2. SR 9/San Benito Avenue 3. SR 9/Tait Avenue 4. SR 9/Monterey Avenue 5. SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue 6. SR 9/University Avenue 7. Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Alberto Way 8. Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Los Gatos Boulevard Safety and operating conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods were evaluated to capture the potential impacts for the proposed recommendations and to present a thorough description of traffic flow on the local transportation network. The morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and reflects conditions during the home to work or school commute, while the p.m. peak hour occurs between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. and typically reflects the highest level of congestion during the homeward-bound commute. Traffic volumes were collected for the study intersections during spring when school was in session. The unadjusted, raw, traffic count data are provided in Appendix A. Study Intersections The tee intersection located at SR 9/Massol Avenue includes stop control on the northbound approach on Massol Avenue. Pedestrian activated flashing beacons are present at the intersection, facing eastbound and westbound vehicles. Class II bike lanes are present along SR 9 as well as a yellow “ladder” crosswalk on the west leg. The speed limit on Massol Avenue is 25 miles per hour (mph) and on SR 9 is 35 mph. The tee intersection of SR 9/San Benito Avenue has two-way stop-control on the minor approach (San Benito Avenue) in addition to Class II bike lanes on SR 9. San Benito is closed to through traffic as there is a traffic barricade approximately 70 feet north of the intersection. The posted speed limit on San Benito Avenue is 25 mph. The intersection of SR 9/Tait Avenue also includes stop controls on the minor approach (northbound Tait Avenue). Similarly, the intersection of SR 9/Monterey Avenue is a tee intersection with stop control on the minor street (southbound Monterey Avenue). The posted speed limit on both Tait Avenue and Monterey Avenue is 25 mph. 7 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 The intersection of SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue is a four-legged signalized intersection including channelized right turns at all approaches, also known as “free” right turns. The intersection includes standard (parallel stripes) crosswalks on all four legs in addition to diagonal crosswalks connecting the pedestrian refuge islands to the street corners. Curb ramps, pedestrian signal heads and push buttons are present for all crossings excluding the right- turn lanes. The posted speed limit on Santa Cruz Avenue is typically 25 mph, but decreases to 15 mph about one block south of SR 9. The intersection of SR 9/University Avenue is also a four-legged signalized intersection. Standard crosswalks are present on all four legs in addition to pedestrian signal heads, push buttons, and curb ramps at each corner. The posted speed limit on University Avenue is also 25 mph. The intersection at Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Alberto Way is a signalized four-legged intersection including a signalized driveway providing access to the Los Gatos Inn. The intersection includes crosswalks at the north and east legs, as well as push buttons located at the southeast, northeast, and northwest corners. Curb ramps are located only at the northwest and northeast corners. The intersection of Los Gatos Boulevard/Los Gatos-Saratoga Road is a signalized tee intersection. Channelized right-turn lanes are present for the southbound and eastbound right turns. Standard crosswalks are present across the south and west legs. Additionally, standard crosswalks provide access from the northwest and southwest corners to the channelized pedestrian refuge islands. The posted speed limit on Los Gatos-Saratoga Road is currently 35 mph within the Town limits. The locations of the study intersections and the existing lane configurations and controls are shown in Figure 1. Collision History The collision history for the study area was reviewed to determine any trends or patterns that may indicate any safety issues. Collision rates were calculated based on records available from the California Highway Patrol as published in the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) reports. The most current five-year period available is January 01, 2013 through December 2017. For the purposes of this study, collisions associated with the SR 17/SR 9 interchanges were omitted. The specific location of reported collisions associated with the interchanges could not be determined with accuracy due to the reporting method of the SWITRS database. As presented in Table 1, the calculated collision rates for the study intersections were compared to average collision rates for similar facilities statewide, as indicated in 2014 Collision Data on California State Highways, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 1 – Study Area and Lane Configurations 6 West Dwy East Dwy 1 Two-Way LT Lane Two-Way LT Lane 8 2 State Route 9 & Massol Ave 3 State Route 9 & San Benito Ave 5 State Route 9 & Monterey Ave State Route 9 & N Santa Cruz Ave 7 State Route 9 & University Ave State Route 9 & Los Gatos Blvd 4 State Route 9 & Tait Ave State Route 9 & AGPC Dwys/Montgomery St Study Intersection LEGEND 9 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table 1 – Collision Rates at Study Intersections Study Intersection Number of Collisions (2013-2017) Calculated Collision Rate (c/mve) Statewide Average Collision Rate (c/mve) Injury Rate Statewide Average Injury Rate 1. SR 9 (SR 12)/Massol Ave (TWSC) 16* 0.43 0.14 50.0% 38.0% 2. SR 9/San Benito Ave (TWSC) 1 0.03 0.14 0.00% 38.0% 3. SR 9/Tait Ave (TWSC)** 3 0.08 0.14 66.7% 38.0% 4. SR 9/Monterey Ave (TWSC)** 1 0.03 0.14 100% 38.0% 5. SR 9/Santa Cruz Ave (SIG) 28 0.51 0.43 32.1% 37.9% 6. SR 9/University Ave (SIG) 24 0.41 0.43 37.5% 37.9% 7. SR 9/Alberto Wy (SIG) 10 0.29 0.43 40.0% 37.9% 8. Los Gatos Blvd/SR 9 (SIG) 9 0.20 0.27 22.2% 37.3% Note: c/mvm = collisions per million vehicles miles; * = fatal collision occurred at intersection; **/Gray = Limited Data and subject to change; Bold = collision rate above statewide average; SIG = Signalized Intersection; TWSC = Two-way Stop Control A total of 16 collisions were reported at the intersection of SR 9/Massol Avenue. Of the reported collisions, half included one or more parties involved sustaining injuries. The injury rate was calculated to be 12 percent higher than the statewide average for similar facilities. Additionally, a fatality occurred at the intersection on September 1, 2017. Reported collisions associated with the tee intersection primarily consisted of broadside collisions. It should also be noted that eight collisions involving bicycles and motor vehicles were reported at the intersection during the five-year study period. Three collisions were reported at the intersection of SR 9/Tait Avenue including broadside, vehicle-pedestrian, and rear-end collisions. Trends of note at this intersection concern the degree of injury as two of the three reported collisions included severe injuries to one of more parties involved. A total of 28 collisions were reported at the four-legged signalized intersection at SR 9/Santa Cruz Avenue. The collision rate for the intersection was calculated to be nearly twice that of the statewide average at similar facilities. Of the 28 reported collisions, nine involved injuries to one or more parties. Predominate collisions types reported at the intersection included broadside, rear-end, and sideswipe collisions. It should also be noted that while the calculated collision rate was significantly higher than the statewide average, the injury rate was calculated to be approximately ten percent less than that of similar facilities statewide. Of the 28 reported collisions 20 incidents resulted in property damage only, in addition to four incidences of visible injury resulting from the collisions, and five collisions resulting in complaints of pain. The intersection at University Avenue had a total of 24 reported collisions. Of these, nine resulted in injuries to one or more parties involved. The most common collision types included rear-end, broadside, and sideswipe collisions. The most prevalent primary collision factor was unsafe vehicle speed. Ten collisions were reported at the signalized intersection of Alberto Way during the five-year study period, four of which caused injuries to one or more parties involved. The most common collision factors reported included unsafe speed (6), and traffic signals (3). It should be noted that the calculated injury rate associated with this intersection is slightly above the statewide average injury rate of similar facilities. Nine collisions were reported at the signalized tee intersection located at Los Gatos Boulevard. Two collisions consisted of injuries to one or more parties involved while the most common collision types included rear-end (4), hit object (2), and broadside (2) collisions. 10 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 It should also be noted that a total of 13 bicycle-involved collisions were reported along the corridor during the five-year study period. Of the 13 reported collisions, eight occurred at the intersection at Massol Avenue, three at Santa Cruz Avenue, and one each at San Benito and Tait Avenues. The collision rate calculations are provided in Appendix B. Intersection Level of Service Methodologies Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. Each Level of Service ranking can also be described in terms of delay to the average vehicle as described in Appendix C. The study intersections were analyzed using methodologies published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2010. This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle. The Levels of Service for the intersections with side street stop controls, or those which are unsignalized and have one or two approaches stop controlled, were analyzed using the “Two-Way Stop-Controlled” intersection capacity method from the HCM. This methodology determines a level of service for each minor turning movement by estimating the level of average delay in seconds per vehicle. Results are presented for individual movements together with the weighted overall average delay for the intersection. The study intersections that are currently controlled by a traffic signal including Alberto Way and Los Gatos Boulevard were evaluated using the signalized methodology from the HCM. This methodology is based on factors including traffic volumes, green time for each movement, phasing, whether the signals are coordinated or not, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity. Average stopped delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation in this LOS methodology. For purposes of this study, delays were calculated using signal timing obtained from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. A unit of measure that indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation. The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Appendix C. The intersections located at University Avenue and Santa Cruz Avenue were evaluated using the signalized intersection methodology published in the Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines, Santa Clara County Transportation Authority, Congestion Management Program, 2015. This methodology is based on the signalized methodology published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2010, which has been modified for use in Santa Clara County. This methodology is based on factors including traffic volumes, green time for each movement, phasing, whether the signals are coordinated or not, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity. Average stopped delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation in this LOS methodology. Traffic Operation Standards The Town of Los Gatos has adopted level of service standards in addition to the Santa Clara County VTA standards. Los Gatos-Saratoga Road is designated as a Highway in the Town’s General Plan (Los Gatos 2020 General Plan, Transportation Element, 2010). The VTA guidelines are included in the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (October 2014). For local intersections not a part of the CMP network, a traffic impact is considered significant if: 11 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018  The addition of project-generated traffic causes operation of an intersection to deteriorate from an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) to LOS E or LOS F For intersections in the CMP network, a traffic impact is considered significant if:  The addition of project-generated traffic causes operation of an intersection to deteriorate from an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better) to LOS F, or  For intersections operating at LOS F under background or cumulative conditions, the project condition increases the average control delay for critical movements by four seconds or more and project traffic increases the critical volume-to-capacity (v/c)1 ratio by 0.01 or more. There is no level of service standard for unsignalized intersections with stop control on the minor street only. It is fairly typical for this type of intersection to have a poor LOS on the minor street approaches, but also typical for the overall intersection LOS to be acceptable because the major street approaches have no control delay and operate at LOS A. LOS results presented in this report are for information and for explanation of the overall corridor operations, and are not intended to lead to recommendations for operational improvements. Existing Conditions The Existing Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation based on existing traffic volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. Traffic volume data was collected in May 2018 while local schools were in session. Intersection Levels of Service Under existing conditions, all intersections operate acceptably during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. The existing traffic volumes and lane configurations are shown in Figure 2. Because traffic counts were collected on different days, the volumes in Figure 2 reflect adjustments made to the raw count data (see Appendix 1) so the volume leaving one intersection would match the volume arriving at the subsequent intersection. A summary of the existing intersection level of service calculations is contained in Table 2, and copies of the Level of Service calculations are provided in Appendix D. 1 Volume-to-Capacity (v/c) is a measure that reflects the mobility and quality of travel within a roadway facility. It compares the number of vehicle using the roadway to the theoretical capacity of that facility. For example, a v/c of 1.00 indicates the facility is operating at its theoretical capacity. State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 2 – Existing Traffic Volumes State Route 9 & Massol Ave State Route 9 & San Benito Ave State Route 9 & Monterey Ave State Route 9 & N Santa Cruz Ave State Route 9 & University Ave State Route 9 & Los Gatos Blvd State Route 9 & Tait Ave State Route 9 & AGPC Dwys/Montgomery St 1( 2 ) 0( 0 ) (0) 0 (1303)675 1 (4) 1520(754) 3 32 2 ( 1 7 5 ) (888)465 132 (104) 1030(336) 5 61 6 ( 4 7 7 ) 34 1 ( 3 3 7 ) (578)332 (374)469 (3 1 7 ) 3 3 3 (3 9 8 ) 3 3 3 8 (1164)497 (80) 42 (1 3 ) 4 0 (1 3 9 ) 1 8 7 1359(625) 156 (131) 2 (1256)645 (58) 27 (5 9 ) 7 9 1423(715) 4 21 ( 6 ) 0 ( 0 ) 3 ( 6 ) (37) 6 (1238)537 (0) 0 8 (20) 1359(618) 0 (0) 1 32 2 ( 1 7 5 ) 17 4 ( 2 8 1 ) 10 3 ( 2 0 6 ) (273)172 (888)465 (142) 84 (1 1 6 ) 1 1 2 (1 5 4 ) 1 5 3 (1 1 3 ) 5 2 132 (104) 1030(336) 104 (187) 6 27 ( 2 6 ) 15 5 ( 1 8 0 ) 13 3 ( 2 7 1 ) (34) 49 (1125)518 (91) 50 (8 2 ) 5 9 (1 4 3 ) 1 7 6 (3 8 3 ) 2 0 9 184 (145) 1198(497) 259 (226) 7 (xx)PM Peak Hour Volume xx AM Peak Hour Volume Study Intersection LEGEND 13 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table 2 – Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection Approach AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1. SR 9/Massol Ave Northbound Approach 51.8 F 48.6 E 2. SR 9/San Benito Ave Southbound Approach 117.1 F 14.4 B 3. SR 9/Tait Ave Northbound Approach 11.1 B 14.4 B 4. SR 9/Monterey Ave Southbound Approach 11.0 B 10.0 A 5. SR 9/Santa Cruz Ave* 39.5 D 33.2 C 6. SR 9/University Ave* 26.3 C 27.2 C 7. SR 9/Alberto Wy 11.6 B 13.2 B 8. Los Gatos Blvd/SR 9 32.3 C 25.6 C Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; * = Congestion Management Plan Intersection; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics Measures of Effectiveness Performance Index is typically incorporated as a method to compare project alternatives to one another, and it was applied in this study to compare recommendation outcomes. A performance index is calculated for each alternative by combining multiple measures of effectiveness into a single score which allows practitioners to compare and contrast alternatives more easily. Measures of effectiveness can include control delay, the number of vehicle stops, fuel consumption, queue lengths, and operating costs. For the purposes of this study, the Performance Index takes the total delay into account in combination with the number of vehicle stops over the course of an hour along the corridor. A low performance index is good, and indicates a corridor with higher vehicle through put. For example, if the signalization of an intersection increases the calculated performance index of a corridor, the stop delay caused by the new signal would be the cause of the increase. Under Existing Conditions, the network has a performance index of 135.2 during the a.m. peak hour and 178 during the p.m. peak hour. A summary of the network measures of effectiveness is shown in Table 3. Measures of effectiveness reports from Synchro are provided in Appendix E. 14 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table 3– Existing Network Measures of Effectiveness Measure of Effectiveness AM Peak PM Peak Total Delay (Hours) 117 114 Stops (Total Number of Stops) 6,598 8,086 Average Speed (mph) 13 14 Total Travel Time (Hours) 197 198 Distance Traveled (Miles) 2,625 2,751 Unserved Vehicles (Total Number) 0 0 Performance Index 135.2 136.5 Notes: mph = Miles per Hour; Performance Index = [(D * 1) + (St * 10)]/3600 where D = Total Delay (in seconds) and St = Stops Traffic Signal Warrants A signal warrant analysis was performed to determine potential need for a traffic signal at the intersection of SR 9/Massol Avenue. Chapter 4C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) provides guidance on when a traffic signal should be considered. There are nine different warrants, or criteria, presented, as follows:  Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume  Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume  Warrant 3, Peak Hour Volume  Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume  Warrant 5, School Crossing  Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System  Warrant 7, Crash Experience  Warrant 8, Roadway Network  Warrant 9, Intersection Near a Grade Crossing Warrant 3, which is often the first warrant to be met, has a unique comment in the description that this signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases with unusually high and short traffic peaks from adjacent land uses, such as manufacturing plants. It is also used as a test at unsignalized intersections to further explore whether signalization of the intersection is warranted. Under the Peak Hour Warrant the need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met: A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day: 1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach; or five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach, and 2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, and 15 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches. B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes. Based on the peak hour volumes collected at the intersection, Warrant 3 was met during the a.m. peak hour only. Satisfaction of only one warrant justifies the installation of a traffic signal but is not considered a mandate. For this location where the crosswalk is slightly removed from the intersection, it also justifies installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon, also known as a HAWK. Traffic Signal Warrant worksheets are provided in Appendix F In addition to Warrant 3, the Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet provided in Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 112 – National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 562 was utilized to assess pedestrian safety at the unsignalized crossing. The worksheet provides guidelines which can be used to select pedestrian crossing treatments based on quantitative measures including pedestrian volumes, vehicular traffic volumes, and walking speeds. Based upon the requirements of the worksheet, 20 pedestrians must use a crosswalk during the peak hour. While a maximum of 18 pedestrians used the crosswalk during the a.m. peak period, it should be noted that this crosswalk is situated between several commercial businesses. Two additional pedestrians using the crosswalk during the a.m. peak period could easily occur. As a result, NCHRP Report 562 recommends implementing a HAWK based on average daily traffic, observed pedestrian volumes, as well as the intersection crossing width. The number of vehicles entering an intersection plays an important role in determining the vehicular gap associated with a roadway segment. Vehicular gap can be described as the headway in seconds between consecutive vehicles traveling along a segment in the same direction. The NCHRP Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet is provided in Appendix G. Safety Recommendations and Outcomes With the intent of improving safety for all roadway users along the corridor including pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists, recommendations for improvements have been developed for several specific locations. The safety improvements are based on observed conditions in conjunction with data provided by the Town of Los Gatos and Caltrans. As reported above, the data analyzed during the formulation of safety-related alternatives include speed survey data, intersection turning movement counts, collision history, pedestrian counts, as well as site visits during peak periods. In addition, qualitative data was also considered, including anecdotal reports from community members, Town Staff, and local news reports. Speed survey data collected for this report show a generally good compliance with posted speed limits with one exception: eastbound vehicle speeds near the west Town limits are higher than posted limits, likely due to the downhill grade of eastbound SR 9 and the higher posted speed limit west of the Town limits. Cost estimates for the recommended improvements include construction as well as design, mobilization, traffic control, construction management, administrative, and detour costs. Additionally, a contingency of 20 percent was included in the calculation to allow for miscellaneous and minor items of work typically not identified in planning-level studies. Detailed cost estimations are provided in Appendix H. State Route 9 from Town Limits to Massol Avenue Safety could be enhanced by adding design elements intended to slow travel speeds. These include the construction of a raised median along SR 9 adjacent to 331 Los Gatos Saratoga Road for a distance of approximately 100 feet. The raised median should be accompanied by upgrading the existing speed feedback 16 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 signs for motorists traveling eastbound to reduce vehicle speeds when entering Los Gatos Town limits, and approaching the crosswalk located at Massol Avenue. State Route 9/Massol Avenue Recommended safety improvements to be implemented at the tee intersection located at SR 9/Massol Avenue include intersection control, speed reduction, and bicycle facilities. Traffic signal Warrant 3 (peak hour) was met during the a.m. peak period based on vehicle volumes. As a result of both the signal warrant being met and the enhanced pedestrian crossing guidance provided by NHCRP Report 562, three intersection control alternatives were developed. Additional measures such as the elimination of the channelized right turn, speed reduction markings, and updated bicycle facilities are also recommended, but implementation can occur at a later date than the intersection control devices. Intersection Control Alternative #1 – Install a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Pedestrian volumes observed at the intersection were slightly lower than the volumes needed to recommend a pedestrian crossing treatment as provided by NCHRP Report 562. Guidance provided in the report expresses that 20 pedestrians warrant the implementation of an enhanced pedestrian crossing at an intersection or midblock crossing. The marginally low pedestrian volumes observed accessing the crosswalk at Massol Avenue (18) could however be a result of various factors including weather, time of day, seasonal travel patterns, and perceived safety. The apparent danger associated with the intersection in conjunction with the recent pedestrian fatality could also have reduced pedestrian volumes observed at the intersection, thus skewing the overall count. For this reason, the counted pedestrian volume of 18 was rounded up to 20 and used as input to the NCHRP Report 562 Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet. Assuming 20 pedestrians cross SR 9 during the a.m. peak hour, the Pedestrian Crossing evaluation in NCHRP Report 562 recommends an active control device based on the posted speed limit, crossing distance, and the vehicular volume entering the intersection. The output recommends a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) only if driver compliance with the warning device is expected to be high. However, since the recent pedestrian fatality occurred when the driver had the sun in his eyes, it is not possible to make a finding that driver compliance is high, even though this driver may typically be very attentive to pedestrian right-of-way. Safety could be incrementally improved at the intersection by replacing the existing flashing beacons with RRFBs approved by the Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans. Motorists are more likely to reduce travel speeds upon viewing the flashing lights atop of the yellow rectangular signs which can be activated by pedestrians and cyclists crossing SR 9. The implementation of RRFBs would be expected to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists while resulting in little to no delay for vehicles traveling along SR 9 compared to the existing beacons. Long-Term Addition #1 – Removal of Northbound Channelized Right Turn Addition #1 consists of eliminating the channelized northbound right-turn lane and removing the on-street parking space on Massol Avenue at the southeast corner of the intersection to increase safety for all roadway users. Removal of a channelized right turn is a common safety improvement as implementation has the potential to reduce the number of conflict points, pedestrian crossing distance, and vehicle speeds, and was also recommended by the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission in a memo dated October 31, 2016. Further study would be required so this suggestion is not included in the list of improvements to be made as part of this study, other than as a long term concept. This addition applies to all Alternatives. Upgrading the existing flashing beacon to an RRFB and eliminating the northbound channelized right turn would result in the corridor operating with a performance index of 150.5 during the a.m. peak hour and 130.6 during the p.m. peak hour. A summary of the network measures of effectiveness is shown in Table 4. Measure of effectiveness 17 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 reports from Synchro are provided in Appendix E and the recommended measures are shown graphically in Figure 3. Table 4 – Removal of Northbound Channelized Right-Turn Network Measures of Effectiveness Measure of Effectiveness AM Peak PM Peak Total Delay (Hours) 130 110 Stops (Total Number of Stops) 7,227 7,310 Average Speed (mph) 13 14 Total Travel Time (Hours) 223 195 Distance Traveled (Miles) 2,931 2,751 Unserved Vehicles (Total Number) 0 0 Performance Index 150.5 130.6 Notes: mph = Miles per Hour; Performance Index = [(D * 1) + (St * 10)]/3600 where D = Total Delay (in seconds) and St = Stops Alternative #2 - Install a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK) This alternative includes recommendations described above except that instead of RRFBs, installation of a HAWK is included. A HAWK is also recommended by NCHRP Report 562 when driver compliance with a more inexpensive control device such as the RRFB could be low. Speed reduction markings are also recommended on SR 9 in each direction, separate from intersection control. The pedestrian hybrid beacon would only control eastbound and westbound traffic and pedestrian traffic crossing SR 9. Additionally, the hybrid beacon would provide safety benefits equal to that of a traffic signal. It should be noted that a beacon would have an advantage for through traffic on SR 9 as it would only activate for pedestrians using the crossing. It would not change travel times for vehicles on Massol Avenue, except for a slight reduction in delay for northbound left-turning vehicles, as drivers could take advantage of any pedestrian actuations and start their left-turn move sooner than with no traffic control of SR 9 traffic. Constructing a HAWK at the intersection would include mast arms which include more flashing displays than the existing beacon, and position them directly in the line of sight of drivers. Additionally, sidewalk along the north side of SR 9 adjacent to the existing commercial businesses should be reconstructed to comply with Town and State standards. Although the current geometry and existing right of way would allow for the implementation of a HAWK at the intersection, the potential to acquire right-of-way for the installation of pedestrian signal hardware and sidewalk reconstruction is a constraint The corridor would operate with a performance index of 158.5 during the a.m. peak period and 141.0 during the p.m. peak period. A summary of the network measures of effectiveness is show in Appendix E and Table 5. Measure of effectiveness reports from Synchro are enclosed. Long-Term Alternative #2 - Removal of Northbound Channelized Right Turn Similar to Alternative #1, removal of the northbound channelized right-turn is recommended to enhance safety at the intersections for all roadway users. State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 3 – State Route 9/Massol Ave Recommendations Existing radar speed sign Add 100’ median STATE R O U T E 9 MA S S O L A V E M a s s o l A v e T a T T i t A v e Remove island Install HAWK Beacon STO P {Re-align crosswalk 12” white stop bar 12” white stop bar Reconstruct corner Add parking Add red curb Add green bike lane (typical) Paint raised bars yellow 19 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table 5 – Implementation of HAWK Network Measures of Effectiveness Measure of Effectiveness Existing Conditions Implementation of HAWK AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Total Delay (Hours) 117 114 137 116 Stops (Total Number of Stops) 6,598 8,086 7,897 9,157 Average Speed (mph) 13 14 13 14 Total Travel Time (Hours) 197 198 229 201 Distance Traveled (Miles) 2,625 2,751 2,931 2,785 Unserved Vehicles (Total Number) 0 0 0 0 Performance Index 135.2 136.5 158.5 141.0 Notes: mph = Miles per Hour; Performance Index = [(D * 1) + (St * 10)]/3600 where D = Total Delay (in seconds) and St = Stops Alternative #3 - Install a Traffic Signal This alternative includes implementation of recommendations from previous paragraphs such as speed reduction marking and bicycle facilities, but installation of a traffic signal controlling the full intersection instead of the HAWK. Speed reduction markings are also recommended on SR 9 in each direction. A traffic signal would include the crosswalk and the Massol Avenue intersection, where the morning peak hour traffic volume includes 45 left turns. The average delay, according to the traffic model built by W-Trans for this project, is 215 seconds for the average vehicle corresponding to LOS F conditions. However, pedestrian and vehicle volumes are only high enough in the morning peak hour to justify a signal installation. In contrast, in the evening peak the northbound left-turn volume is only 13 vehicles per hour with a delay of 26 seconds (LOS D). A traffic signal at the intersection could result in increased northbound left-turn traffic volumes on Massol Avenue, as the delays for making the left-turn movement would be considerably lower with a traffic signal. It could also result in increased southbound traffic, as completing the westbound left turn from SR 9 would be easier with a protected arrow. The cost of a signal is significantly higher than other alternative largely due to the hardware associated with mast arms and signal poles. Additionally, the sidewalk along the north side of the intersection would need to be reconstructed adjacent to the existing commercial businesses to accommodate for traffic signal hardware. This work would include reconfiguring or possibly removing the drive-through in front of the business, which may present a significant design challenge to minimize right of way issues. Implementation of a traffic signal would result in the corridor operating with a performance index of 187.8 during the a.m. peak period and 147.1 during the p.m. peak period. A summary of the network measures of effectiveness associated with installation of a traffic signal is provided in Appendix E and Table 6. Long-Term Alternative #3 - Removal of Northbound Channelized Right Turn As recommended for Alternatives #1 and #2, removing the northbound channelized right-turn is also recommended when signalizing the intersection. The removal of the channelized turn is expected to increase safety for all roadway users including, pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. 20 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Table 6 – Implementation of Traffic Signal Network Measures of Effectiveness Measure of Effectiveness Existing Conditions Implementation of Traffic Signal AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Total Delay (Hours) 117 114 164 125 Stops (Total Number of Stops) 6,598 8,086 8,621 7,961 Average Speed (mph) 13 14 11 14 Total Travel Time (Hours) 197 198 256 214 Distance Traveled (Miles) 2,625 2,751 2,931 2,923 Unserved Vehicles (Total Number) 0 0 0 0 Performance Index 135.2 136.5 187.8 147.1 Notes: mph = Miles per Hour; Performance Index = [(D * 1) + (St * 10)]/3600 where D = Total Delay (in seconds) and St = Stops Alternative Comparison Each alternative as well as existing conditions was compared based on qualitative measures such as relative cost, expected safety enhancement, pedestrian delay, traffic delay, etc. Implementation of RRFBs is expected to enhance safety as compared to existing conditions while still exhibiting a relatively high delay for users of the of the intersection and a low impact on vehicle traveling along the corridor. It should also be noted costs associated with implementing RRFBs at the intersection are expected to be low when compared to a HAWK and traffic signal. Implementation of a HAWK is expected to provide increased pedestrian and cyclist safety enhancements as compared to existing conditions or implementation of RRFBs. While safety and delay are expected to improve, the delay for vehicles traveling along the corridor and costs are both expected to increase with the implementation of a HAWK. Installation of a traffic signal is expected to provide the highest safety improvement and the lowest pedestrian delay as compared to the other alternatives. Conversely, a traffic signal is expected to cause notably increased delays for vehicles traveling along the corridor and the expected costs associated with implementation are the highest of any alternative. Further, installation of a traffic signal has the potential to increase traffic volumes on Massol Avenue. The current lack of intersection control can create significant delay for northbound left-turning vehicles during peak periods. Installation of a traffic signal would provide a phase specific for the movement, thus reducing the delay. A technical comparison of each alternative including SIMTRAFFIC output is provided in Appendix I. Corridor Travel Time Corridor travel time runs were analyzed via the SIMTRAFFIC software within the Synchro Application. Microsimulations based on existing and proposed roadway geometry as well as turning movement count data during the a.m. and pm. peak hours provided average travel time and vehicle speed along the corridor. Appendix I provides summaries of modeled travel time and average speed from the microsimulation model, and the modeled travel time and average speed along the corridor with the proposed signalization alternatives at Massol Avenue. Further any proposed recommendations which have the potential to negatively impact vehicle traffic traveling on SR 9 would require additional detailed evaluation and approval from Caltrans. It should be noted that the signal timing provided by Caltrans at signalized in tersections along the corridor was retained and incorporated in the simulation, thus signal timing was not optimized for the corridor. SIMTRAFFIC reports from Synchro are provided in Appendix I. 21 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Speed Reduction The following safety improvements are recommended as they designed to encourage motorists to travel at safe speeds, particularly eastbound motorists near the west Town limits:  Add speed reduction markings on SR 9 in the eastbound direction approaching the crosswalk (improves safety by reducing travel speeds)  Replace the existing radar speed feedback sign facing eastbound traffic with a new sign with 18-inch numbers (improves safety by reducing eastbound travel speeds)  Install a raised median near the west Town limits The speed reduction markings and improved radar speed-sign have the potential to enhance pedestrian safety by slowing travel speeds and providing an audible noise warning to pedestrians when the tires of an approaching vehicle strike the transverse stripes, but would not provide the same level of benefit as the traffic signal or hybrid beacon. Additionally, implementation of this safety measure would not result in a notable change in travel time for vehicles along the corridor. Bicycle Facilities Safety could be enhanced by installing green bike lanes on SR 9 at the intersection and conflict points to increase driver-awareness of bicycle activity. The driveway located on the southeast corner that currently provides direct access to SR 9 should be modified to reduce the number of vehicle-bicycle and vehicle-pedestrian conflicts associated bicyclists traveling eastbound and drivers making northbound right turns from the driveway onto SR 9. State Route 9/Santa Cruz Avenue Recommended safety measures for the intersection located at Santa Cruz Avenue include implementing green bike lanes at conflict points on SR 9. Additionally, the following improvements are recommended to enhance safety at the intersection:  Update the standard crosswalks to continental crosswalk striping (creates a more pedestrian-friendly atmosphere).  Paint yield lines at all channelized right-turn approaches (creates a more pedestrian-friendly atmosphere).  Restore a set of approximately 20 traffic bars along the north median to prevent vehicles from making left turns in and out of the shopping center east of the roadway. The traffic bars should be painted yellow as well as replaced as a portion appear to be damaged (addresses a maintenance issue). It should be noted that removing the channelized right turns at the north and south approaches has the potential to enhance safety at the intersection. Like the channelized right turn at Massol Avenue, removal reduces conflict points, shortens pedestrian crossing distances, and reduces vehicle speeds. Recommended measures are shown in Figure 4. State Route 9/University Avenue Safety improvements recommended for the intersection at University Avenue include implementing green bike lanes at conflict points on the northern side of SR 9. Specifically, green markings should be applied to the northwest corner as well as the northeast corner to the intersection of close by Wraight Avenue. These measures are shown in Figure 4. 22 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 State Route 9/State Route 17 Interchange Short-term recommended safety improvements for the SR 9/SR 17 interchange include trimming foliage with the intention of improving sight distance of pedestrians using the crosswalks. Additionally, implementation of “Crosswalk Ahead” signs prior to the ramps along the north side of SR 9 are recommended to improve pedestrian safety. Measures are shown in Figure 5. Long term recommendations include reconstruction of the interchange as provided through the Measure B program. Gaps in bicycle facilities along SR 9 should be should be addressed as the can deter cyclists from using the roadway. As stated earlier the focus of this study is to ensure that all modes of travel along the corridor are taken into account especially those most vulnerable with respect to safety. Implementing roadway modifications including continuous striped bike lanes with green markings at conflict points will promote higher bicycle volumes, higher driver awareness of bicyclists, and reduced numbers of collisions involving bicyclists along the corridor. Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Alberto Way Safety at the intersection of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Alberto Way could potentially be improved via the implementation of a curb ramp at the southeast corner. Additionally, foliage should be trimmed along SR 9 approximately 200 feet west of the intersection for eastbound traveling vehicles exiting the northbound SR 17 off- ramp. Radar speed signs should be implemented on SR 9 approximately 350 feet west of the intersection for eastbound traveling vehicles, and 200 feet east of the intersection in the median for westbound traveling vehicles. These safety measures are shown in Figure 6. Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Los Gatos Boulevard Safety improvements recommended for the intersection of Los Gatos-Saratoga Road/Los Gatos Boulevard include installing yield markings prior to both channelized right turns. Additionally, yield and crosswalk warning signs should be implemented at the northwest and southwest corners for vehicles entering the channelized lanes. Removing the channelized right turns is also recommended to improve safety. The recommended safety measures are shown in Figure 7. State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 4 – State Route 9/Santa Cruz Ave Recommendations Without Right Turn Lane Reconstruction New green bike lanes New green bike lanes New yield markings (typical) New green paint Replace crosswalks Existing bike lane END sign Optional reconstruction to eliminate right turn islands (typical) Repair raised traffic bars in median STATE R O U T E 9 N S A N T A C R U Z A V E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E T State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 5 – State Route 9/State Route 17 Ramps Recommendations Existing pedestrian crossing sign New crosswalk ahead sign Trim foliage Trim foliage Trim foliage STATE ROUTE 9 ST A T E R O U T E 1 7 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 6 – State Route 9/Alberto Way Recommendations Clear out foliage New radar-speed sign New radar-speed sign Existing speed limit sign (35 mph) Install new ramp A L B E R T O W A Y STATE ROUTE 9 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 7 – State Route 9/Los Gatos Boulevard Recommendations Existing yield sign and crosswalk sign Add new crosswalk sign New yield markings Existing yield sign STATE R O U T E 9 LO S G A T O S B L V D 27 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Bicycle Lanes near State Route 17 Bicycle facilities along Los Gatos-Saratoga Road between Alberto Way and Los Gatos Boulevard are only in place between Los Gatos Boulevard and the Bella Vista Avenue overcrossing. Various opportunities and constraints related to bicycle access are present along this segment of the corridor. There is an opportunity to extend the existing Class II bike lanes, including green paint from Bella Vista Avenue to Alberto Way, to enhance safety for cyclists while simultaneously making motorists more aware of the potential presence of cyclists. Implementing bike lanes along the westbound portion of the segment would include reducing the vehicle lane widths from 12 feet to 11 feet and reducing the width of the 12-foot raised median by six feet and removing it completely alongside the westbound left-turn lane. Additionally, it should be noted that it may be possible to implement a bicycle connection between Los Gatos High School and intersection at Alberto Way in the future, provided that the Los Gatos Lodge dedicates right-of-way for a Class I Bike Path between Los Gatos-Saratoga Road and the campus vicinity. Constraints on the corridor can be described in the context of Level of Traffic Stress, a common classification method used to provide ratings for roadway sections to indicate the stress imposed on cyclists (Level of Traffic Stress, Northern University, 2017). Ratings for level of traffic stress along the studied segment of Los Gatos- Saratoga Road west of Alberto Way generally consist of Level of Traffic 4 which involves interaction with higher speed traffic or close proximity to high speed traffic. This high level of traffic stress the roadway imposes on cyclists is evident along Los Gatos-Saratoga Road between Alberto Way and the interchange which provides access SR 17. In addition to the merges associated with SR 17, the lane drop east of the intersection at Alberto Way also creates potentially unsafe conditions for cyclists. This constraint is imposing enough to classify installation of bike lanes west of Alberto Way as a long-term recommendation, to be completed only after the interchange is reconstructed. Bike lane recommendations are shown in Figure 8. Measure B includes funding to reconstruct this interchange, and installation of Class 2 bike lanes through the interchange is included in the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (April 2017) as a Phase 1 project, to be completed in about five years. Upgrading bicycle facilities along the corridor to incorporate streets designed to affect driver behavior will ultimately encourage safe vehicle speeds and driver awareness of bicyclists. On the west side of the interchange, the Town has received “One Bay Area” Grant funding to design a connection between the Los Gatos Creek bicycle trail and Los Gatos-Saratoga Road (SR 9). There is one proposed connection on the north side of SR 9 where a dirt path currently exists. It would allow cyclists as well as pedestrians using the trail to ride to westbound SR 9 toward downtown Los Gatos. A second proposed connection on the south side of SR 9 would mirror the connection on the north side. This connection would be solely for bicyclists riding eastbound along SR 9 to reach the Los Gatos Creek trail. Adequate pavement width currently exists between these two proposed trail connections and University Avenue to create a Class 2 bike lane with new striping. Making the needed connection is recommended, and the timing of the installation is recommended to match the installation of the bike trail connector ramps. State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis lga004-4.ai 8/18 State Route 9 L o s G a t o s B l v d M a s s o l A v e Mo n t g o me ry S t Sa n B e n i t o A v e Mo nt e r e y A v e Ta i t A ve N S a n t a C r uz A v e Un i v e r s i t y A v e A l b e r t o W y 17 Project North Not to Scale North Not to Scale Figure 8 – Bicycle Connections Extend Class 2 Bike Lanes Extend Class 2 Bike Lanes Proposed Trail Connections STATE ROUTE 9 STATE R O U T E 9 UN I V E R S I T Y A V E A L B E R T O W Y LO S G A T O S B L V D 29 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Conclusions and Recommendations Conclusions & Recommendations  A review of collisions rates along SR 9 within Town limits has revealed that collision rates are higher than the average rates observed at similar facilities statewide.  Safety could be enhanced with implementation of various countermeasures at conflict points and intersections along the corridor.  The intersection of SR 9/Massol Avenue exhibited collision, injury, and fatality rates higher than that of similar facilities statewide.  Recommendations to improve safety at the intersection of SR 9/Massol Avenue include removing the channelized right turn and implementing advanced yield markers and a pedestrian hybrid beacon. Due to the similar benefits expected from the implementation of a HAWK or a traffic signal, a HAWK is the preferred alternative at the intersection of SR 9/Massol Avenue. The HAWK is expected to introduce less delay along the corridor during both the a.m. and p.m. peak periods.  Implementation of a HAWK would result in an increase in travel time along the corridor as well as slower vehicle speeds along SR 9.  Green bike lanes should be implemented along the corridor at conflict points adjacent to intersections, especially those with channelized right-turn pockets. 30 State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 15, 2018 Study Participants and References Study Participants Principal in Charge Mark Spencer, PE Task Manager Steve Fitzsimons, PE, TE Traffic Engineer Smadar Boardman, PE Assistant Engineer Nick Bleich, EIT Assistant Planner Andre Huff Graphics Hannah Yung-Boxdell, Alex Scrobonia Editing/Formatting Hannah Yung-Boxdell Report Review Dalene J. Whitlock, PE, PTOE References 2014 Collision Data on California State Highways, California Department of Transportation, 2017 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, California Department of Transportation, 2014 Google Earth, http://earth.google.com/ Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010 Level of Traffic Stress, Northern University, 2017 Los Gatos 2020 General Plan, Transportation Element, 2010 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, http://www.vta.org/ Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), California Highway Patrol, 2012-2017 Town of Los Gatos General Plan, 2020 Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines, Santa Clara County Transportation Authority, Congestion Management Program, 2015 Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, 2014 LGA004-4 A State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix A Traffic Counts – Unadjusted Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-005 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 21030 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 6061 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 20 0 8 0 637 0 1426 000 00000 6037 0 TEV 2044 0 1955 0 000 537 0 1238 0 PHF 0.91 0.96 000 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0307PM NOON 0000NOON AM 0420 1 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 0 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) Montgomery St/Almond Grove Professional Center Dr & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 541 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:30 PM - 06:30 PM 14 58 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D mery St/Almond Grove Professional C 0 0 Montgomery St/Almond Grove Professional Center Dr SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 1251 0 S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 1489 0 646 NOONAM PM 2 5 7 4 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 1426 8 0 537 6 21 0 3 4 2 0 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 637 20 0 1238 37 6 0 6 3 0 7 0 5 1 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-105 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 0000 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 0000 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 000 0 000 000 00200 000 0 TEV 22 0 4 0 000 000 0 PHF 0.50 0.33 000 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0002PM NOON 0000NOON AM 0211 0 AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 2 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) Montgomery St/Almond Grove Professional Center Dr & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 0 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:00 PM - 06:00 PM 1 0 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D mery St/Almond Grove Professional C 0 0 Montgomery St/Almond Grove Professional Center Dr SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 2 0 S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 21 0 0 NOONAM PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM MASSOL AVE DWYLOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 MASSOL AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) AM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:07:45 AM - 08:45 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:45 AM - 08:00 AM 1 2 1,517 684 228199 539 1,400 0.88 N S EW 0.25 0.93 0.79 0.81 (3)(1) (3,008) (1,174) (2,863) (931) (381)(281) 1 0 0 2 1,359 156 42 497 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 8 7 1 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) MASSOL AVE DWY 4 0 8 1 7 N S EW 0 0 53 4 0 6 1 1 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 4 0 0 0 0005904361 453 2 3 3 02,13430220 7:15 AM 0 10 0 0 0 00079018379 521 4 0 0 32,22840310 7:30 AM 0 14 0 0 0 0009609361 513 7 0 5 12,26470260 7:45 AM 0 10 0 0 0 000146062354 647 4 0 3 02,285210540 8:00 AM 1 15 0 0 0 000115029326 547 3 0 0 42,18740561 8:15 AM 0 10 0 0 0 000120043329 557 3 0 1 0121420 8:30 AM 0 5 0 0 0 000116022350 534 4 0 1 051350 8:45 AM 0 7 0 0 0 000137130327 549 4 0 2 071390 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0010130 50000 Lights 40 0 185 0 0 10490391481,332 2 2,2380010 Mediums 0 0 2 0 0 00637240 420000 Total 0 497 42 156 1,359 2 40 0 187 0 0 1 2,2850010 MASSOL AVE DWYLOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 MASSOL AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) PM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:00 PM - 05:15 PM 3 0 679 1,273 143213 1,222 561 0.97 N S EW 0.38 0.87 0.84 0.97 ()(3) (1,271) (2,494) (1,037) (2,402) (287)(432) 1 0 0 0 547 131 80 1,142 0 1 0 2 1 3 0 1 3 0 0 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) MASSOL AVE DWY 19 0 3 1 3 N S EW 0 0 30 11 8 9 4 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 6 0 0 0 000258031100 452 5 0 1 41,972210360 4:15 PM 0 2 0 0 0 000280041125 498 1 0 1 22,046210290 4:30 PM 0 4 0 0 0 000283137125 510 3 0 1 22,047190410 4:45 PM 0 4 0 0 0 000286028134 512 4 0 1 32,017290301 5:00 PM 0 4 0 0 0 200274039160 526 1 0 0 61,991150320 5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 000299027128 499 5 0 1 7170270 5:30 PM 0 5 0 0 0 000289026115 480 0 0 3 3220230 5:45 PM 0 4 0 0 0 000267035119 486 0 0 0 0220390 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 00000 Lights 13 0 130 0 2 101,138 80 130 541 0 2,0360100 Mediums 0 0 0 0 0 0040160 110000 Total 0 1,142 80 131 547 0 13 0 130 0 2 1 2,0470100 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-004 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 1000 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 2000 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 401 0 740 0 1556 000 00000 000 0 TEV 2198 0 2055 0 000 640 0 1309 0 PHF 0.90 0.96 000 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0000PM NOON 0000NOON AM 0000AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 0 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) San Benito Ave & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 640 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:30 PM - 06:30 PM 1 4 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D San Benito Ave 0 0 San Benito Ave SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 1309 0 S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 1557 0 742 NOONAM PM 0 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 4 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 1556 1 0 640 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 740 4 0 1309 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-003 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 0000 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 1000 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 000 0 744 0 1555 000 00000 000 0 TEV 2268 0 2118 0 000 607 0 1256 0 PHF 0.90 0.95 27058 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 00059PM NOON 0000NOON AM 00079AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 58 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) Tait Ave & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 686 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:30 PM - 06:30 PM 0 0 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D Tait Ave 27 0 Tait Ave SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 1315 0 S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 1555 0 745 NOONAM PM 1 0 0 6 3 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 1555 0 27 607 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 744 0 58 1256 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-002 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 88000 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 34000 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 16027 0 704 0 1423 000 00000 000 0 TEV 2271 0 2070 0 000 733 0 1316 0 PHF 0.92 0.94 000 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0000PM NOON 0000NOON AM 0000AM Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 0 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) Monterey Ave & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:45 AM - 08:45 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 733 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:30 PM - 06:30 PM 27 16 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D Monterey Ave 0 0 Monterey Ave SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 1316 0 S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 1511 0 738 NOONAM PM 0 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 7 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 1423 27 0 733 0 88 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 704 16 0 1316 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM N SANTA CRUZ AVE N SANTA CRUZ AVELOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 N SANTA CRUZ AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) AM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:07:45 AM - 08:45 AM Peak 15-Minutes:08:00 AM - 08:15 AM 599 430 1,266 625 317357 721 1,491 0.93 N S EW 0.96 0.92 0.89 0.90 (693)(1,136) (2,415) (1,109) (2,980) (1,210) (628)(607) 3 2 2 0 1 0 3 132 1,030 99 84 465 145 5 27 1 7 4 1 1 2 1 5 3 5 2 0 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) N SANTA CRUZ AVE N SANTA CRUZ AVE 4 1 0 0 1 1 N S EW 6 4 00 0 4 7 4 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 54 28 0 16 3031849112228 547 3 3 0 02,5191016775 7:15 AM 0 35 26 0 23 2931785220288 646 0 0 0 02,74910141480 7:30 AM 0 32 17 0 25 3542875011244 594 1 2 0 02,81911191677 7:45 AM 0 22 42 0 21 571028136121255 732 4 3 0 02,90325221577 8:00 AM 0 31 44 0 29 52844122319262 777 1 4 0 02,87026421877 8:15 AM 0 34 46 0 25 39136111126240 716 2 1 0 022301392 8:30 AM 0 25 21 0 28 2683796033273 678 2 1 0 11138676 8:45 AM 0 33 38 0 27 41022132119254 699 3 2 2 022201179 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 1010252 110000 Lights 108 152 52 102 169 3191404578495999127 2,83627500 Mediums 4 1 0 1 5 25702263 560000 Total 145 465 84 99 1,030 132 112 153 52 103 174 322 2,90327500 N SANTA CRUZ AVE N SANTA CRUZ AVELOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 N SANTA CRUZ AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) PM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:04:45 PM - 05:45 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:00 PM - 05:15 PM 662 506 627 1,232 383585 1,303 652 0.98 N S EW 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.93 (993)(1,264) (1,191) (2,424) (1,275) (2,547) (794)(1,104) 1 7 5 0 2 0 6 104 336 162 142 888 248 25 25 2 8 1 1 1 6 1 5 4 1 1 3 0 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) N SANTA CRUZ AVE N SANTA CRUZ AVE 11 2 1 4 2 6 N S EW 1 2 9 22 7 4 1 3 1 3 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 29 40 0 32 6654323162970 697 5 4 0 22,88025404140 4:15 PM 0 40 38 0 51 7445222283775 734 5 6 1 12,94534232452 4:30 PM 0 39 53 0 40 7175320342263 708 6 12 2 52,96748362544 4:45 PM 0 28 38 0 48 6475522293578 741 3 7 0 12,97551312550 5:00 PM 0 33 37 0 45 6447024953094 762 10 7 1 62,91628243049 5:15 PM 0 29 39 0 57 8665820764892 756 4 2 2 235282936 5:30 PM 0 26 40 0 56 6786521054972 716 7 3 1 128212940 5:45 PM 0 19 34 0 39 5584423342690 682 3 4 0 132312938 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 0 0120011 60000 Lights 116 152 113 205 279 172245880141162334100 2,949252500 Mediums 0 1 0 1 2 3261013 200000 Total 248 888 142 162 336 104 116 154 113 206 281 175 2,975252500 UNIVERSITY AVE UNIVERSITY AVELOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 UNIVERSITY AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) AM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:07:45 AM - 08:45 AM Peak 15-Minutes:08:00 AM - 08:15 AM 315 396 1,641 871 444453 617 1,297 0.92 N S EW 0.88 0.89 0.71 0.87 (585)(538) (3,045) (1,517) (2,480) (1,085) (648)(734) 2 7 0 1 3 3 184 1,198 248 50 518 36 11 13 1 5 5 5 9 1 7 6 2 0 9 0 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) UNIVERSITY AVE UNIVERSITY AVE 5 1 8 0 2 N S EW 2 1 6 00 2 3 2 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 14 7 0 12 70266441265 469 2 2 0 02,357722184 7:15 AM 0 9 14 0 35 1701107339312 590 1 1 0 02,712520244 7:30 AM 0 14 19 0 40 354390123256 555 0 3 0 02,839925333 7:45 AM 0 13 38 0 30 5218151342282 743 0 9 0 13,0171740579 8:00 AM 0 18 71 0 33 48613138362283 824 0 3 0 02,9591660694 8:15 AM 0 21 50 0 27 31212110267290 717 0 5 0 11041468 8:30 AM 0 7 17 0 43 2443119377343 733 0 1 0 0743376 8:45 AM 0 12 15 0 32 2622153355276 685 0 2 0 11759258 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 2 0 0000070 90000 Lights 56 174 204 124 153 2636509492391,163 183 2,940131100 Mediums 3 2 5 7 2 10919281 680000 Total 36 518 50 248 1,198 184 59 176 209 133 155 27 3,017131100 UNIVERSITY AVE UNIVERSITY AVELOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 UNIVERSITY AVE & LOS GATOS-SARATOGA RD (HWY9) PM Tuesday, January 30, 2018Date and Start Time: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - All Vehicles Traffic Counts Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Peak Hour:05:00 PM - 06:00 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:00 PM - 05:15 PM 477 316 868 1,783 608493 1,250 611 0.96 N S EW 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.92 (541)(911) (1,636) (3,399) (1,156) (2,449) (1,058)(958) 2 6 0 2 7 1 145 497 222 91 1,125 28 4 6 1 8 0 8 2 1 4 3 3 8 3 0 LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) LOS GATOS-SARATOGA R D (HWY9) UNIVERSITY AVE UNIVERSITY AVE 20 2 0 0 1 5 N S EW 1 2 8 00 12 8 9 6 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrain Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 16 20 0 45 4408302143115 731 1 2 0 42,85119228214 4:15 PM 0 15 23 0 67 4407270059117 731 1 4 0 32,95623217312 4:30 PM 0 18 25 0 61 49210247365103 700 5 6 0 63,0401723734 4:45 PM 0 12 28 0 57 3018265552109 689 3 5 0 33,1092030657 5:00 PM 0 19 44 0 76 4407308052122 836 4 3 0 33,20322281068 5:15 PM 0 23 45 0 63 6336259244141 815 1 6 0 42639956 5:30 PM 0 23 29 0 70 4306257171111 769 5 5 0 91741946 5:45 PM 0 17 25 0 62 3039301155123 783 5 5 0 42637886 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0010010 20000 Lights 81 142 382 271 180 25281,116 91 222 493 144 3,1856400 Mediums 1 1 1 0 0 1080031 160000 Total 28 1,125 91 222 497 145 82 143 383 271 180 26 3,2036400 www.idaxdata.com to to Two-Hour Count Summaries Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Total 3 2 6 11 4 3 4 9 42 2415001702 3 31 Peak Hour 28 16 1 0 45 0 1 1 0 0 2 8 0Count Total 58 38 2 0 98 1 0 1 70000018:45 AM 15 8 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 8:30 AM 9 5 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 8:15 AM 9 6 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 8:00 AM 2 5 1 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 0 1 2 2 7:30 AM 3 4 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 0 EB WB NB SB Total East 7:45 AM 14 1 0 0 15 0 0 3 -3%-HV%0%0%3%5%0% 0 3 7:15 AM 2 6 1 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West North South 7:00 AM 4 3 0 0 37 0 10 0 16 12223947110 0 Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total 0%-0%0%0%2%0%2%0% Peak Hour All 15 54 796 27 0 90 1 26 0 0 0 0 0 45 01600100 62 1,976 0 HV 0 0 27 1 0 Count Total 20 105 1,422 59 3 15 1,745 33 2 124 3,672 0 493 1,8491404014032277015 4 1 25 447 1,883 8:45 AM 2 16 197 3 8 0 25 0 4 0 470 1,976 8:30 AM 2 20 138 6 0 0 214 0 4 0 5 0 14012542010 4 1 17 439 1,933 8:15 AM 2 20 157 1 4 0 4 0 2 0 527 1,823 8:00 AM 7 13 150 7 1 0 229 0 3 0 3 0 19022423012 4 0 12 540 0 7:45 AM 2 12 219 10 2 0 11 0 1 0 427 0 7:30 AM 4 9 270 4 1 0 222 0 5 0 6 0 1414204003 3 0 9 329 0 7:15 AM 0 10 167 13 1 0 10 0 3 07:00 AM 1 5 124 15 0 5 153 UT LT TH RT UT LT Rolling One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound UT LT TH RT Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min TotalUTLTTHRT Date: 05/13/2015 Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM SB 0.0%0.90 TOTAL 2.3%0.91 TH RT WB 1.7%0.94 NB 2.1%0.78 Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM HV %:PHF EB 3.2%0.77 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 2 15 0 7 N Alberto Way Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Dr i v e w a y Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Al b e r t o W a y 1,976TEV: 0.91PHF: 62 1 16 79 65 0 11 947 3 963 8242 10037 4726 0 22 796 54 887 1,061 15 Deon Fouche: 415 - 757 - 7714 Deon.fouche@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 010 0 1 0 0000 0 0 0 01 0 THLT 00000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THLT 1000000 2 00000 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0Count Total 0 000000000 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 0000000 0 2 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 1000 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 10000007:15 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 07:00 AM RT 45 0 Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 0 0 0 0 0 00016001 RTTHLT RTTHLTRT 0 0 0 98 0 Peak Hour 0 0 27 1 0 0 1 0 1 0Count Total 0 2 55 1 0 0 38 23 60000000008000 0 0 0 14 52 8:45 AM 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 45 8:30 AM 0 1 8 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0006000 0 0 0 8 39 8:15 AM 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 15 38 8:00 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0001000 0 0 0 7 0 7:45 AM 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 7:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0006000 0 0 0 7 0 7:15 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TH RT 7:00 AM 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 UT LT TH RT UT LT Northbound Southbound UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min Total Rolling One HourEastboundWestbound SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound Deon Fouche: 415 - 757 - 7714 Deon.fouche@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com to to Two-Hour Count Summaries Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Total 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 4 9 91011305 5 1 Peak Hour 5 6 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 1 2 3 0Count Total 8 10 0 1 19 0 0 1 10001125:45 PM 2 4 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 5:30 PM 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 EB WB NB SB Total East 4:45 PM 1 2 0 1 4 0 0 0 -0%-HV%0%0%0%3%0% 0 0 4:15 PM 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West North South 4:00 PM 2 0 0 0 15 0 11 0 32 034118783230 0 Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total 0%-0%-0%1%0%1%4% Peak Hour All 8 60 807 56 0 43 1 20 0 0 0 0 0 11 0510000 71 1,863 0 HV 0 0 4 1 0 Count Total 20 123 1,514 63 1 32 1,615 60 1 160 3,709 0 500 1,8630301102607179602 2 0 12 466 1,829 5:45 PM 3 22 230 11 6 0 3 0 2 0 457 1,804 5:30 PM 2 14 210 10 0 5 200 0 2 0 9 0 1504191305 10 0 18 440 1,804 5:15 PM 2 13 206 7 8 0 5 0 4 0 466 1,846 5:00 PM 1 11 161 6 1 2 213 0 4 0 13 0 29032011205 6 0 23 441 0 4:45 PM 4 22 170 3 4 0 9 1 0 0 457 0 4:30 PM 2 16 157 11 0 4 208 0 3 0 4 1 1905201601 5 0 18 482 0 4:15 PM 2 16 190 9 11 0 13 0 2 04:00 PM 4 9 190 6 0 2 222 UT LT TH RT UT LT Rolling One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound UT LT TH RT Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min TotalUTLTTHRT Date: 05/13/2015 Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM SB 0.0%0.70 TOTAL 0.6%0.93 TH RT WB 0.7%0.92 NB 0.0%0.72 Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM HV %:PHF EB 0.6%0.85 0 0 0 1 0 0 000 0 0 0 5 1 0 3 N Alberto Way Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Dr i v e w a y Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Al b e r t o W a y 1,863TEV: 0.93PHF: 71 0 32 10 3 83 0 23 783 18 825 8511 11015 2652 0 34 807 60 909 877 8 Deon Fouche: 415 - 757 - 7714 Deon.fouche@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 1 0000 0 0 0 00 0 THLT 00000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THLT 1000100 2 01000 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0Count Total 0 110000001 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 1 5:30 PM 0000000 0 1 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 1000 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 00000004:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 04:00 PM RT 11 0 Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0005100 RTTHLT RTTHLTRT 1 0 0 19 0 Peak Hour 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 7 1 0 0 8 6 11000000003100 0 0 0 3 9 5:45 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 2 8 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0002000 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0001100 0 0 0 2 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TH RT 4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 UT LT TH RT UT LT Northbound Southbound UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT Interval Start Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Los Gatos Saratoga Rd Driveway Alberto Way 15-min Total Rolling One HourEastboundWestbound SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound Deon Fouche: 415 - 757 - 7714 Deon.fouche@idaxdata.com Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:18-08165-001 Day: City:Los Gatos Date: AM 616 341 0 0 AM NOON 0000 NOON PM 477 337 0 0 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0000 0 000 0 000 000 00000 332 0 578 0 TEV 2424 0 2481 0 000 000 0 PHF 0.93 0.99 469 0 374 0 0000 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0 317 398 0 PM NOON 0000NOON AM 0 333 333 0 AM S R 9 07:00 AM - 09:00 AM NONE 949 0 794 Los Gatos Blvd 810 0 Los Gatos Blvd SOUTHBOUND 05:00 PM - 07:00 PM NORTHBOUND 0 0 PE A K H O U R S Total Vehicles (AM) NONE 05:00 PM - 06:00 PM 665 976 0 0 SR 9 EA S T B O U N D Peak Hour Turning Movement Count 711 Total Vehicles (PM) Bikes (PM) Los Gatos Blvd & SR 9 Tuesday 04/17/2018 CONTROL W E S T B O U N D 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Total Vehicles (Noon) Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Bikes (NOON) 0 C O U N T P E R I O D S Bikes (AM) NOONAM PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 27 16 0 6 PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 34 0 1 1 6 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 0 0 469 0 332 61 6 34 1 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/ A N/ A N / A N / A N / A 0 0 0 374 0 578 47 7 33 7 0 3 1 7 3 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 1 7 0 NO O N PM AM NO O N AM PM NO O N AM PMNO O N PM AM B State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix B Collision Rate Calculations Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 16 Number of Injuries: 8 Number of Fatalities: 1 ADT: 20400 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Tee Control Type: Stop & Yield Controls Area: Suburban 16 x 20,400 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.43 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.14 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 1 Number of Injuries: 0 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 20600 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Tee Control Type: Stop & Yield Controls Area: Suburban 1x 20,600 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.03 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.14 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans SR 9 Corridor Safety Study Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Tuesday, January 30, 2018 38.0% Intersection Collision Rate Calculations January 1, 2013 December 31, 2017 Intersection #SR 9 & Massol Avenue collision rate = 1,000,000 SR 9 & San Benito Avenue 38.0% ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection January 1, 2013 365 Intersection # December 31, 2017 Number of Collisions x 1 Millioncollision rate = 1: Collision Rate Injury Rate 0.0% Collision Rate Fatality Rate collision rate = 365 2: Number of Collisions x 1 Million 0.7% collision rate = ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years 50.0% 1,000,000 Injury Rate Fatality Rate 6.3% ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years 0.0% ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection 0.7% W-Trans 8/8/2018 Page 1 of 5 Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 3 Number of Injuries: 2 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 21200 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Tee Control Type: Stop & Yield Controls Area: Suburban 3x 21,200 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.08 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.14 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 1 Number of Injuries: 1 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 20700 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Tee Control Type: Stop & Yield Controls Area: Suburban 1x 20,700 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.03 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.14 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans collision rate = Collision Rate Tuesday, January 30, 2018 0.7% 0.0% 100.0% 1,000,000 365 ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years Number of Collisions x 1 Million SR 9 & Monterey Avenue ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection 0.7% Tuesday, April 17, 2018 66.7% 4: 0.0% December 31, 2017 collision rate = ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection Intersection Collision Rate Calculaions Intersection # Fatality Rate 365 Collision Rate 3: SR 9 & Tait Avenue collision rate = 1,000,000 Number of Collisions x 1 Million ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years Injury Rate December 31, 2017 SR 9 Corridor Safety Study January 1, 2013 38.0% Fatality Rate Injury Rate January 1, 2013 collision rate = Intersection # 38.0% W-Trans 8/8/2018 Page 2 of 5 Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 28 Number of Injuries: 9 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 29800 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Four-Legged Control Type: Signals Area: Suburban 28 x 29,800 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.51 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.43 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 24 Number of Injuries: 9 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 32000 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Four-Legged Control Type: Signals Area: Suburban 24 x 32,000 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.41 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.43 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans Tuesday, January 30, 2018 ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection 0.0% Injury Rate 32.1% ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years collision rate = 1,000,000 365 Collision Rate Fatality Rate 37.9% Intersection # 6: SR 9 & University Avenue 0.4% SR 9 & Santa Cruz Avenue Number of Collisions x 1 Million 0.4% 37.9% collision rate = 1,000,000 365 ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection Collision Rate Fatality Rate Injury Rate Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Intersection # 5: January 1, 2013 December 31, 2017 0.0% collision rate = Number of Collisions x 1 Million 37.5% ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years SR 9 Corridor Safety Study January 1, 2013 December 31, 2017 collision rate = Intersection Collision Rate Calculaions W-Trans 8/8/2018 Page 3 of 5 Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 10 Number of Injuries: 4 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 18600 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Four-Legged Control Type: Signals Area: Suburban 10 x 18,600 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.29 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.43 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans Date of Count: Number of Collisions: 9 Number of Injuries: 2 Number of Fatalities: 0 ADT: 24300 Start Date: End Date: Number of Years: 5 Intersection Type: Tee Control Type: Signals Area: Suburban 9x 24,300 x x 5 Study Intersection 0.20 c/mve Statewide Average* 0.27 c/mve c/mve = collisions per million vehicles entering intersection * 2013 Collision Data on California State Highways, Caltrans ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection collision rate = 1,000,000 365 Collision Rate Fatality Rate Injury Rate 0.0% 22.2% 0.6% 37.3% January 1, 2013 collision rate = Number of Collisions x 1 Million ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years ADT = average daily total vehicles entering intersection Intersection # 8: Los Gatos Boulevard & SR 9 Tuesday, April 17, 2018 collision rate = 1,000,000 365 Collision Rate Fatality Rate Injury Rate 0.0% 40.0% 0.4% 37.9% January 1, 2013 December 31, 2017 collision rate = Number of Collisions x 1 Million ADT x 365 Days per Year x Number of Years Intersection Collision Rate Calculaions SR 9 Corridor Safety Study Intersection # 7: SR 9 & Alberto Way Wednesday, May 13, 2015 W-Trans 8/8/2018 Page 4 of 5 C State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix C Level of Service Definition Tables Table 8- Intersection Level of Service Criteria LOS Two-Way Stop-Controlled Signalized A Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Gaps in traffic are readily available for drivers exiting the minor street. Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Most vehicles arrive during the green phase, so do not stop at all. B Delay of 10 to 15 seconds. Gaps in traffic are somewhat less readily available than with LOS A, but no queuing occurs on the minor street. Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, but many drivers still do not have to stop. C Delay of 15 to 25 seconds. Acceptable gaps in traffic are less frequent, and drivers may approach while another vehicle is already waiting to exit the side street. Delay of 20 to 35 seconds. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many still pass through without stopping. D Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. There are fewer acceptable gaps in traffic, and drivers may enter a queue of one or two vehicles on the side street. Delay of 35 to 55 seconds. The influence of congestion is noticeable, and most vehicles must stop. E Delay of 35 to 50 seconds. Few acceptable gaps in traffic are available, and longer queues may form on the side street. Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. Most, if not all, vehicles must stop and drivers consider the delay excessive. F Delay of more than 50 seconds. Drivers may wait for long periods before there is an acceptable gap in traffic for exiting the side streets, creating long queues. Delay of more than 80 seconds. Vehicles may wait through more than one cycle to clear the intersection. Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010 D State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix D Intersection Level of Service Calculations HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Massol Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 497 42 156 1359 40 187 Future Volume (Veh/h) 497 42 156 1359 40 187 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 Hourly flow rate (vph) 565 48 177 1544 45 213 Pedestrians 17 8 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.5 3.5 Percent Blockage 2 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL None Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) 868 pX, platoon unblocked 0.69 vC, conflicting volume 621 2512 597 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 597 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 1915 vCu, unblocked vol 621 2977 597 tC, single (s) 4.1 *6.5 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 81 13 57 cM capacity (veh/h) 952 52 501 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 613 177 1544 45 213 Volume Left 0 177 0 45 0 Volume Right 48 0 0 0 213 cSH 1700 952 1700 52 501 Volume to Capacity 0.36 0.19 0.91 0.87 0.43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 17 0 93 52 Control Delay (s) 0.0 9.6 0.0 214.5 17.4 Lane LOS A F C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.0 51.8 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: State Route 9 & San Benito Avenue 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 675 1520 1 0 1 Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 675 1520 1 0 1 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 750 1689 1 0 1 Pedestrians 5 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.5 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 752 pX, platoon unblocked 0.42 0.42 0.42 vC, conflicting volume 1695 2070 1694 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1967 2863 1965 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 121 6 33 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 375 375 1690 1 Volume Left 0000 Volume Right 0011 cSH 1700 1700 1700 33 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.22 0.99 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft)0002 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 117.1 Lane LOS F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 117.1 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.1% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Tait Avenue/Monterey Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 645 27 0 1423 27 0 0 79 0 0 88 Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 645 27 0 1423 27 0 0 79 0 0 88 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 717 30 0 1547 29 0 0 88 0 0 96 Pedestrians 4 Lane Width (ft)12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s)3.5 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 578 pX, platoon unblocked 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 vC, conflicting volume 1580 747 1602 2312 374 2012 2312 792 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1163 747 1191 2110 374 1722 2111 144 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 *6.2 7.5 6.5 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 87 100 100 86 cM capacity (veh/h) 459 857 95 39 674 38 39 696 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 478 269 1031 545 88 96 Volume Left 000000 Volume Right 0 30 0 29 88 96 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 674 696 Volume to Capacity 0.28 0.16 0.61 0.32 0.13 0.14 Queue Length 95th (ft)00001112 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 11.0 Lane LOS B B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 11.1 11.0 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Santa Cruz Avenuea/Santa Cruz Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 5 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 27 145 465 84 5 99 1030 132 112 153 52 103 Future Volume (vph) 27 145 465 84 5 99 1030 132 112 153 52 103 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.2 4.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3446 1770 3461 1770 1772 1770 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3446 1770 3461 1770 1772 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 29 156 500 90 5 106 1108 142 120 165 56 111 RTOR Reduction (vph)004000400500 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 185 586 0 0 111 1246 0 120 216 0 111 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 10 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot NA Prot Prot NA Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 1 6 3 8 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 30.4 154.0 17.8 141.4 19.1 32.8 17.8 Effective Green, g (s) 30.4 154.0 17.8 141.4 19.1 32.8 17.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.64 0.07 0.59 0.08 0.14 0.07 Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.2 4.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 224 2211 131 2039 140 242 131 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.17 c0.06 c0.36 c0.07 c0.12 0.06 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.83 0.27 0.85 0.61 0.86 0.89 0.85 Uniform Delay, d1 102.2 18.6 109.8 31.7 109.1 101.9 109.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 20.4 0.3 32.1 1.2 36.1 30.3 35.7 Delay (s) 122.7 18.9 131.2 21.6 145.2 132.2 145.5 Level of Service F B F C F F F Approach Delay (s) 43.6 30.6 136.7 Approach LOS D C F Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 63.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.72 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 240.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Santa Cruz Avenuea/Santa Cruz Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 6 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 174 322 Future Volume (vph) 174 322 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.2 4.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1510 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1510 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 187 346 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 202 Lane Group Flow (vph) 187 144 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 11 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Turn Type NA Perm Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.5 31.5 Effective Green, g (s) 31.5 31.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 4.2 4.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 244 198 v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.73 Uniform Delay, d1 100.7 100.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.1 10.6 Delay (s) 112.8 110.7 Level of Service F F Approach Delay (s) 117.3 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: University Avenue/Univerity Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 7 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 13 36 518 50 11 248 1198 184 59 176 209 133 Future Volume (vph) 13 36 518 50 11 248 1198 184 59 176 209 133 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1548 1770 3539 1511 1770 1863 1494 3433 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1548 1770 3539 1511 1770 1863 1494 3433 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 14 39 563 54 12 270 1302 200 64 191 227 145 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 26 0 0 157 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 53 563 31 0 282 1302 174 64 191 70 145 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 18 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 1 6 3 8 7 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.9 136.3 136.3 41.7 167.1 167.1 13.9 28.3 28.3 14.1 Effective Green, g (s) 10.9 136.3 136.3 41.7 167.1 167.1 13.9 28.3 28.3 14.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.57 0.57 0.17 0.70 0.70 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.06 Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 80 2009 879 307 2464 1052 102 219 176 201 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.16 c0.16 c0.37 0.04 0.10 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.12 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.28 0.03 0.92 0.53 0.17 0.63 0.87 0.40 0.72 Uniform Delay, d1 112.7 26.6 22.9 97.5 17.5 12.5 110.5 104.1 98.0 111.0 Progression Factor 0.97 0.85 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.2 0.3 0.1 30.3 0.8 0.3 8.4 28.7 0.5 10.3 Delay (s) 123.7 23.1 24.5 127.8 18.3 12.8 118.9 132.7 98.5 121.3 Level of Service F C C F B B FFFF Approach Delay (s) 31.1 35.0 114.8 Approach LOS C D F Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 56.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 240.0 Sum of lost time (s) 19.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.6% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: University Avenue/Univerity Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 8 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 155 27 Future Volume (vph) 155 27 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Frt 0.98 Flt Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1815 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1815 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 168 29 RTOR Reduction (vph) 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 194 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Turn Type NA Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 28.5 Effective Green, g (s) 28.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 Clearance Time (s) 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 215 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.90 Uniform Delay, d1 104.4 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 35.5 Delay (s) 139.9 Level of Service F Approach Delay (s) 132.0 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: Alberto Way & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 69 796 22 5 947 11 37 1 10 16 1 62 Future Volume (vph) 69 796 22 5 947 11 37 1 10 16 1 62 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.89 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3522 1770 3532 1776 1556 1625 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3522 1770 3532 1371 1556 1560 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 75 865 24 5 1029 12 40 1 11 17 1 67 RTOR Reduction (vph)0200100090520 Lane Group Flow (vph) 75 887 0 5 1040 0 0 41 2 0 33 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4444 Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.1 48.9 1.1 38.9 18.5 18.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 11.1 48.9 1.1 38.9 18.5 18.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.60 0.01 0.47 0.23 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 239 2100 23 1675 309 351 351 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.25 0.00 c0.29 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0.00 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.42 0.22 0.62 0.13 0.01 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 32.0 8.9 40.0 16.1 25.3 24.6 25.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.20 0.54 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.6 2.9 1.1 0.9 0.0 0.5 Delay (s) 32.8 9.6 51.0 9.8 26.2 24.7 25.7 Level of Service C A D A C C C Approach Delay (s) 11.4 10.0 25.9 25.7 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 11.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 82.0 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Los Gatos Blvd & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 10 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 332 469 333 333 341 616 Future Volume (vph) 332 469 333 333 341 616 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1398 1770 1863 1863 1336 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1398 1770 1863 1863 1336 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 361 510 362 362 371 670 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 369 0 0 0 453 Lane Group Flow (vph) 361 141 362 362 371 217 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 43 43 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 1 36 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 22.7 22.7 21.1 50.3 24.7 24.7 Effective Green, g (s) 22.7 22.7 21.1 50.3 24.7 24.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.28 0.26 0.61 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 489 387 455 1142 561 402 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 c0.20 0.19 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.36 0.80 0.32 0.66 0.54 Uniform Delay, d1 26.9 23.9 28.4 7.6 25.0 23.9 Progression Factor 0.73 2.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.1 2.5 9.3 0.7 6.0 5.1 Delay (s) 28.6 53.4 37.7 8.3 31.0 29.0 Level of Service C D D A C C Approach Delay (s) 43.1 23.0 29.8 Approach LOS D C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 82.0 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Massol Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1164 80 131 625 13 139 Future Volume (Veh/h) 1164 80 131 625 13 139 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1200 82 135 644 13 143 Pedestrians 13 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.5 3.5 Percent Blockage 1 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type TWLTL None Median storage veh) 2 Upstream signal (ft) 868 pX, platoon unblocked 0.91 vC, conflicting volume 1285 2171 1244 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 1244 vC2, stage 2 conf vol 927 vCu, unblocked vol 1285 2240 1244 tC, single (s) 4.1 *6.5 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) 5.5 tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 75 93 33 cM capacity (veh/h) 538 183 213 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 NB 2 Volume Total 1282 135 644 13 143 Volume Left 0 135 0 13 0 Volume Right 82 0 0 0 143 cSH 1700 538 1700 183 213 Volume to Capacity 0.75 0.25 0.38 0.07 0.67 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 25 0 6 104 Control Delay (s) 0.0 13.9 0.0 26.1 50.6 Lane LOS B D F Approach Delay (s) 0.0 2.4 48.6 Approach LOS E Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: State Route 9 & San Benito Avenue 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1303 754 4 0 2 Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 1303 754 4 0 2 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1357 785 4 0 2 Pedestrians 7 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.5 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 752 pX, platoon unblocked 0.89 0.89 0.89 vC, conflicting volume 796 1472 794 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 710 1469 708 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 783 105 386 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 678 678 789 2 Volume Left 0000 Volume Right 0042 cSH 1700 1700 1700 386 Volume to Capacity 0.40 0.40 0.46 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft)0000 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 Lane LOS B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 14.4 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: Tait Avenue/Monterey Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1256 58 0 715 16 0 0 59 0 0 34 Future Volume (Veh/h) 0 1256 58 0 715 16 0 0 59 0 0 34 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1322 61 0 761 17 0 0 62 0 0 36 Pedestrians 26 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 3.5 3.5 Percent Blockage 0 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 578 pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 vC, conflicting volume 784 1385 1771 2138 694 1498 2160 395 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 644 1385 1694 2084 694 1404 2108 231 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 *6.2 7.5 6.5 *6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 86 100 100 95 cM capacity (veh/h) 876 489 54 49 444 80 47 757 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 881 502 507 271 62 36 Volume Left 000000 Volume Right 0 61 0 17 62 36 cSH 1700 1700 1700 1700 444 757 Volume to Capacity 0.52 0.30 0.30 0.16 0.14 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft)0000124 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 10.0 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 14.4 10.0 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 * User Entered Value HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Santa Cruz Avenuea/Santa Cruz Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 5 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 25 248 888 142 25 162 336 104 116 154 113 206 Future Volume (vph) 25 248 888 142 25 162 336 104 116 154 113 206 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.2 4.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.94 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3448 1770 3361 1770 1707 1770 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3448 1770 3361 1770 1707 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 26 253 906 145 26 165 343 106 118 157 115 210 RTOR Reduction (vph)00700015001800 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 279 1044 0 0 191 434 0 118 254 0 210 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 11 21 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot NA Prot Prot NA Prot NA Prot Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 1 6 3 8 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 27.5 73.2 19.0 64.7 14.3 25.5 20.7 Effective Green, g (s) 27.5 73.2 19.0 64.7 14.3 25.5 20.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.47 0.12 0.41 0.09 0.16 0.13 Clearance Time (s) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.2 4.2 4.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 312 1617 215 1393 162 279 234 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 c0.30 0.11 0.13 0.07 c0.15 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.89 0.65 0.89 0.31 0.73 0.91 0.90 Uniform Delay, d1 62.8 31.5 67.5 30.7 69.0 64.1 66.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.13 0.73 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 25.5 2.0 31.3 0.6 12.9 31.3 31.9 Delay (s) 88.3 33.5 107.3 22.9 81.9 95.4 98.5 Level of Service F C F C F F F Approach Delay (s) 45.0 48.1 91.3 Approach LOS D D F Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 57.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 156.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.2% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: Santa Cruz Avenuea/Santa Cruz Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 6 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 281 175 Future Volume (vph) 281 175 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.2 4.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1863 1491 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1863 1491 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 287 179 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 142 Lane Group Flow (vph) 287 37 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 26 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Turn Type NA Perm Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 31.9 31.9 Effective Green, g (s) 31.9 31.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s) 4.2 4.2 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 380 304 v/s Ratio Prot 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 58.4 50.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.4 0.1 Delay (s) 65.8 50.7 Level of Service E D Approach Delay (s) 71.9 Approach LOS E Intersection Summary HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: University Avenue/Univerity Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 7 Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 6 28 1125 91 4 222 497 145 82 143 383 271 Future Volume (vph) 6 28 1125 91 4 222 497 145 82 143 383 271 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 1547 1770 3539 1451 1770 1863 1512 3433 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3539 1547 1770 3539 1451 1770 1863 1512 3433 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 6 29 1172 95 4 231 518 151 85 149 399 282 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 61 0 0 249 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 35 1172 53 0 235 518 90 85 149 150 282 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 4 4 Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot Protected Phases 5 5 2 1 1 6 3 8 7 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.2 74.7 74.7 25.9 93.4 93.4 13.4 21.2 21.2 14.6 Effective Green, g (s) 7.2 74.7 74.7 25.9 93.4 93.4 13.4 21.2 21.2 14.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.48 0.48 0.17 0.60 0.60 0.09 0.14 0.14 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 81 1694 740 293 2118 868 152 253 205 321 v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.33 c0.13 0.15 0.05 0.08 c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.06 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.69 0.07 0.80 0.24 0.10 0.56 0.59 0.73 0.88 Uniform Delay, d1 72.4 31.7 21.9 62.6 14.7 13.4 68.5 63.3 64.7 69.8 Progression Factor 1.40 0.65 0.32 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 1.8 0.1 13.8 0.3 0.2 2.5 2.3 11.0 22.1 Delay (s) 102.6 22.4 7.2 76.4 15.0 13.6 71.0 65.6 75.7 91.9 Level of Service F C A EBBEEEF Approach Delay (s) 23.5 30.7 72.7 Approach LOS C C E Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 44.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 156.0 Sum of lost time (s) 19.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 97.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: University Avenue/Univerity Avenue & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 8 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 180 26 Future Volume (vph) 180 26 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Frt 0.98 Flt Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1819 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1819 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 188 27 RTOR Reduction (vph) 3 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 212 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 15 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Turn Type NA Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 22.4 Effective Green, g (s) 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 Clearance Time (s) 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 261 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.81 Uniform Delay, d1 64.7 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.3 Delay (s) 81.0 Level of Service F Approach Delay (s) 87.2 Approach LOS F Intersection Summary HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: Alberto Way & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 68 895 34 19 765 23 15 0 11 32 0 71 Future Volume (vph) 68 895 34 19 765 23 15 0 11 32 0 71 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3516 1770 3521 1770 1556 1644 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.92 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 3516 1770 3521 1299 1556 1533 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 74 973 37 21 832 25 16 0 12 35 0 77 RTOR Reduction (vph)0300300090830 Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 1007 0 21 854 0 0 16 3 0 29 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4444 Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 11.0 43.8 2.2 35.0 20.5 20.5 20.5 Effective Green, g (s) 11.0 43.8 2.2 35.0 20.5 20.5 20.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.55 0.03 0.44 0.26 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 243 1925 48 1540 332 398 392 v/s Ratio Prot 0.04 c0.29 0.01 c0.24 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.00 c0.02 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.52 0.44 0.55 0.05 0.01 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 31.1 11.5 38.3 16.7 22.4 22.2 22.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.18 0.54 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 1.0 4.6 1.1 0.3 0.0 0.4 Delay (s) 31.8 12.5 49.9 10.0 22.7 22.2 22.9 Level of Service C B D B C C C Approach Delay (s) 13.8 11.0 22.5 22.9 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.42 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Los Gatos Blvd & State Route 9 05/15/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 10 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 578 374 317 398 337 477 Future Volume (vph) 578 374 317 398 337 477 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1521 1770 1863 1863 1511 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1521 1770 1863 1863 1511 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Adj. Flow (vph) 584 378 320 402 340 482 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 234 0 0 0 371 Lane Group Flow (vph) 584 144 320 402 340 111 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 9 9 Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 4 Turn Type Prot Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 30.5 30.5 17.5 40.5 18.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 30.5 30.5 17.5 40.5 18.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.38 0.38 0.22 0.51 0.23 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 674 579 387 943 430 349 v/s Ratio Prot c0.33 c0.18 0.22 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.25 0.83 0.43 0.79 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 22.9 16.9 29.8 12.4 28.9 25.5 Progression Factor 0.55 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.8 0.9 13.5 1.4 13.8 2.4 Delay (s) 25.4 5.2 43.3 13.8 42.7 27.9 Level of Service C A D B D C Approach Delay (s) 17.5 26.9 34.0 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 25.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.83 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group E State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix E Synchro Measures of Effectiveness Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/18/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 9 10 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 9 10 Total Delay (hr) 22 31 52 Stops / Veh 0.22 0.20 0.21 Stops (#) 1610 2422 4032 Average Speed (mph) 18 18 18 Total Travel Time (hr) 44 64 108 Distance Traveled (mi) 779 1121 1901 Fuel Consumed (gal) 58 83 141 Fuel Economy (mpg) 13.5 13.4 13.5 CO Emissions (kg) 4.04 5.83 9.87 NOx Emissions (kg) 0.79 1.13 1.92 VOC Emissions (kg) 0.94 1.35 2.29 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 69 89 158 Performance Index 26.1 37.2 63.3 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 17 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 17 Total Delay (hr) 117 Stops / Veh 0.26 Stops (#) 6598 Average Speed (mph) 13 Total Travel Time (hr) 197 Distance Traveled (mi) 2625 Fuel Consumed (gal) 228 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.5 CO Emissions (kg) 15.95 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.10 VOC Emissions (kg) 3.70 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 158 Performance Index 135.2 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/19/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM - Hawk @ 120 Cycle Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 15 13 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 12 15 14 Total Delay (hr) 24 49 73 Stops / Veh 0.25 0.31 0.29 Stops (#) 1806 3700 5506 Average Speed (mph) 17 14 15 Total Travel Time (hr) 46 82 128 Distance Traveled (mi) 781 1121 1902 Fuel Consumed (gal) 61 105 166 Fuel Economy (mpg) 12.9 10.7 11.5 CO Emissions (kg) 4.24 7.35 11.60 NOx Emissions (kg) 0.83 1.43 2.26 VOC Emissions (kg) 0.98 1.70 2.69 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 105 147 252 Performance Index 28.5 59.4 87.9 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 19 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 20 Total Delay (hr) 137 Stops / Veh 0.31 Stops (#) 7897 Average Speed (mph) 13 Total Travel Time (hr) 229 Distance Traveled (mi) 2931 Fuel Consumed (gal) 265 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.0 CO Emissions (kg) 18.55 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.61 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.30 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 252 Performance Index 158.5 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/19/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM - HAWK @ 240 Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 14 13 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 3 2 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 17 15 Total Delay (hr) 23 55 78 Stops / Veh 0.24 0.31 0.28 Stops (#) 1767 3656 5423 Average Speed (mph) 17 13 14 Total Travel Time (hr) 46 88 134 Distance Traveled (mi) 781 1121 1902 Fuel Consumed (gal) 60 109 169 Fuel Economy (mpg) 13.0 10.3 11.2 CO Emissions (kg) 4.21 7.64 11.85 NOx Emissions (kg) 0.82 1.49 2.30 VOC Emissions (kg) 0.98 1.77 2.75 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 100 142 242 Performance Index 28.1 65.1 93.3 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 19 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 1 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 20 Total Delay (hr) 142 Stops / Veh 0.31 Stops (#) 7806 Average Speed (mph) 13 Total Travel Time (hr) 234 Distance Traveled (mi) 2931 Fuel Consumed (gal) 269 Fuel Economy (mpg) 10.9 CO Emissions (kg) 18.79 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.66 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.35 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 242 Performance Index 163.8 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM - Full Signal Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 12 16 15 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 5 3 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 12 21 18 Total Delay (hr) 24 71 94 Stops / Veh 0.25 0.36 0.32 Stops (#) 1831 4329 6160 Average Speed (mph) 17 11 13 Total Travel Time (hr) 46 104 150 Distance Traveled (mi) 781 1121 1902 Fuel Consumed (gal) 61 125 186 Fuel Economy (mpg) 12.8 8.9 10.2 CO Emissions (kg) 4.27 8.76 13.02 NOx Emissions (kg) 0.83 1.70 2.53 VOC Emissions (kg) 0.99 2.03 3.02 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 107 140 247 Performance Index 28.8 82.6 111.3 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 21 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 3 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 23 Total Delay (hr) 164 Stops / Veh 0.34 Stops (#) 8621 Average Speed (mph) 11 Total Travel Time (hr) 256 Distance Traveled (mi) 2931 Fuel Consumed (gal) 290 Fuel Economy (mpg) 10.1 CO Emissions (kg) 20.29 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.95 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.70 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 247 Performance Index 187.8 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 AM Remove Slip Turn Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 10 11 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 10 11 Total Delay (hr) 23 34 57 Stops / Veh 0.24 0.24 0.24 Stops (#) 1730 2848 4578 Average Speed (mph) 17 17 17 Total Travel Time (hr) 46 68 113 Distance Traveled (mi) 781 1121 1902 Fuel Consumed (gal) 60 89 149 Fuel Economy (mpg) 13.1 12.5 12.7 CO Emissions (kg) 4.18 6.25 10.43 NOx Emissions (kg) 0.81 1.22 2.03 VOC Emissions (kg) 0.97 1.45 2.42 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 87 126 213 Performance Index 27.9 42.2 70.1 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 19 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 19 Total Delay (hr) 130 Stops / Veh 0.29 Stops (#) 7227 Average Speed (mph) 13 Total Travel Time (hr) 223 Distance Traveled (mi) 2931 Fuel Consumed (gal) 256 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.4 CO Emissions (kg) 17.92 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.49 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.15 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 213 Performance Index 150.5 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 10 11 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 11 10 11 Total Delay (hr) 41 19 60 Stops / Veh 0.29 0.24 0.27 Stops (#) 3897 1617 5514 Average Speed (mph) 17 17 17 Total Travel Time (hr) 82 39 121 Distance Traveled (mi) 1415 673 2089 Fuel Consumed (gal) 113 52 165 Fuel Economy (mpg) 12.5 13.0 12.6 CO Emissions (kg) 7.93 3.63 11.56 NOx Emissions (kg) 1.54 0.71 2.25 VOC Emissions (kg) 1.84 0.84 2.68 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 121 57 178 Performance Index 51.7 23.9 75.6 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Total Delay (hr) 114 Stops / Veh 0.32 Stops (#) 8086 Average Speed (mph) 14 Total Travel Time (hr) 198 Distance Traveled (mi) 2751 Fuel Consumed (gal) 243 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.3 CO Emissions (kg) 16.96 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.30 VOC Emissions (kg) 3.93 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 178 Performance Index 136.5 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM - Hawk Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 8 10 9 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 8 10 9 Total Delay (hr) 32 21 53 Stops / Veh 0.22 0.43 0.29 Stops (#) 3216 3195 6411 Average Speed (mph) 20 16 18 Total Travel Time (hr) 73 42 115 Distance Traveled (mi) 1438 685 2122 Fuel Consumed (gal) 102 63 165 Fuel Economy (mpg) 14.0 10.9 12.9 CO Emissions (kg) 7.16 4.38 11.54 NOx Emissions (kg) 1.39 0.85 2.25 VOC Emissions (kg) 1.66 1.02 2.67 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 122 60 182 Performance Index 40.6 30.4 70.9 Network Totals Number of Intersections 11 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 15 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 15 Total Delay (hr) 116 Stops / Veh 0.34 Stops (#) 9157 Average Speed (mph) 14 Total Travel Time (hr) 201 Distance Traveled (mi) 2785 Fuel Consumed (gal) 249 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.2 CO Emissions (kg) 17.43 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.39 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.04 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 182 Performance Index 141.0 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/28/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM - Full Signal Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 9 10 10 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 9 10 10 Total Delay (hr) 35 19 54 Stops / Veh 0.26 0.19 0.23 Stops (#) 3403 1309 4712 Average Speed (mph) 21 17 20 Total Travel Time (hr) 91 39 129 Distance Traveled (mi) 1950 673 2624 Fuel Consumed (gal) 126 49 175 Fuel Economy (mpg) 15.5 13.6 15.0 CO Emissions (kg) 8.78 3.45 12.23 NOx Emissions (kg) 1.71 0.67 2.38 VOC Emissions (kg) 2.03 0.80 2.83 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 160 49 209 Performance Index 44.2 22.4 66.6 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Total Delay (hr) 110 Stops / Veh 0.29 Stops (#) 7349 Average Speed (mph) 16 Total Travel Time (hr) 210 Distance Traveled (mi) 3286 Fuel Consumed (gal) 255 Fuel Economy (mpg) 12.9 CO Emissions (kg) 17.80 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.46 VOC Emissions (kg) 4.13 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 209 Performance Index 130.5 Detailed Measures of Effectiveness 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos 04/30/2018 PM - Remove Right Turn Lane Synchro 10 Report W-Trans Page 1 State Route 9 Direction EB WB All Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 9 10 10 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 0 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 9 10 10 Total Delay (hr) 34 19 54 Stops / Veh 0.21 0.26 0.23 Stops (#) 2816 1737 4553 Average Speed (mph) 19 17 18 Total Travel Time (hr) 75 39 114 Distance Traveled (mi) 1415 673 2089 Fuel Consumed (gal) 100 53 153 Fuel Economy (mpg) 14.1 12.8 13.6 CO Emissions (kg) 7.02 3.68 10.70 NOx Emissions (kg) 1.37 0.72 2.08 VOC Emissions (kg) 1.63 0.85 2.48 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 0 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 119 57 176 Performance Index 42.0 24.3 66.3 Network Totals Number of Intersections 10 Control Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Queue Delay / Veh (s/v) 0 Total Delay / Veh (s/v) 16 Total Delay (hr) 110 Stops / Veh 0.29 Stops (#) 7310 Average Speed (mph) 14 Total Travel Time (hr) 195 Distance Traveled (mi) 2751 Fuel Consumed (gal) 233 Fuel Economy (mpg) 11.8 CO Emissions (kg) 16.30 NOx Emissions (kg) 3.17 VOC Emissions (kg) 3.78 Unserved Vehicles (#) 0 Vehicles in dilemma zone (#) 176 Performance Index 130.6 F State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix F Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Los Gatos Street Name: Direction: Number of Lanes: Approach Speed: Community with population < 10,000? No No Major Minor Condition A ― Minimum Vehicle Volume:No 1 N/A N/A Condition B ― Interruption of Continuous Traffic:No 2 N/A N/A Combination of Conditions A & B:No Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . .500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84 2 or more . . 1 . . . . . . . . .600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 2 or more 2 or more . .600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112 1 . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . .500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112 Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . .750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42 2 or more . . 1 . . . . . . . . .900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42 2 or more . . 2 or more . .900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56 1 . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . .750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56 Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor- street approach (one direction only) a Basic minimum hourly volume. b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. c May be used when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Warrant Met Num. Hrs Met WARRANT MET?8th Highest Hr Table 4C-1 of MUTCD. Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor- street approach (one direction only) E-W N-S 22 35 25 Major Street Minor Street State Route 9 Massol Avenue Date of Count: AM Existing Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Project Name: Intersection: Scenario: Highway 9 Corridor Study 1 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Project Name: State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Los Gatos Intersection: Street Name: Direction: Number of Lanes: Approach Speed: Community with population < 10,000? No No Hour 1 2 3 4 Highway 9 Corridor Study 1 WARRANT MET? 2 35 2 25 Scenario: Date of Count: Major Street Minor Street Highest Approach Minor Street AM Existing 1/30/2018 State Route 9 E-W Massol Avenue N-S 1380 — — 227 107 — — 2056 Both Approaches Major Street 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MI N O R S T R E E T ―HI G H E R V O L U M E A P P R O A C H ( V P H ) MAJOR STREET―TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) Warrant 2, Four-Hour Volumes 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 3: Peak-Hour Volumes and Delay Street Name Direction Number of Lanes Approach Speed Population less than 10,000?No Date of Count: Scenario: Warrant 3 Met?: Met when either Condition A or B is met Yes Condition A: Met when conditions A1, A2, and A3 are met Not Met Condition A1 Not Met 3.27 Condition A2 Met 227 vph Condition A3 Met 2283 vph Condition B Met Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Massol Avenue 22 35 The total delay experienced by traffic on one minor street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one lane approach, or five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach The volume on the same minor street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic of 150 vph for two moving lanes The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more appraches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches The plotted point falls above the curve Minor Approach Delay: vehicle-hours Minor Approach Volume: Total Entering Volume: State Route 9 AM Existing Highway 9 Corridor StudyProject Name: Intersection:1 Los Gatos State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Major Street Minor Street 25 E-W N-S 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MI N O R S T R E E T ―HI G H E R V O L U M E AP P R O A C H ( V P H ) MAJOR STREET―TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) Warrant 3, Peak Hour 2 ORMORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Los Gatos Street Name: Direction: Number of Lanes: Approach Speed: Community with population < 10,000? No No Major Minor Condition A ― Minimum Vehicle Volume:No 0 N/A N/A Condition B ― Interruption of Continuous Traffic:No 2 N/A N/A Combination of Conditions A & B:No Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . .500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84 2 or more . . 1 . . . . . . . . .600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 2 or more 2 or more . .600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112 1 . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . .500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112 Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . .750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42 2 or more . . 1 . . . . . . . . .900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42 2 or more . . 2 or more . .900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56 1 . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . .750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56 PM Existing Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Project Name: Intersection: Scenario: Highway 9 Corridor Study 1 Major Street Minor Street State Route 9 Massol Avenue Date of Count: E-W N-S 22 35 25 Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Warrant Met Num. Hrs Met WARRANT MET?8th Highest Hr Table 4C-1 of MUTCD. Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor- street approach (one direction only) Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor- street approach (one direction only) a Basic minimum hourly volume. b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures. c May be used when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000. Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Project Name: State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Los Gatos Intersection: Street Name: Direction: Number of Lanes: Approach Speed: Community with population < 10,000? No No Hour 1 2 3 4 State Route 9 E-W Massol Avenue N-S 1341 — — 135 118 — — 1854 Both Approaches Major Street Highest Approach Minor Street PM Existing 1/30/2018 Highway 9 Corridor Study 1 WARRANT MET? 2 35 2 25 Scenario: Date of Count: Major Street Minor Street 0 100 200 300 400 500 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MI N O R S T R E E T ―HI G H E R V O L U M E A P P R O A C H ( V P H ) MAJOR STREET―TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) Warrant 2, Four-Hour Volumes 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis Warrant 3: Peak-Hour Volumes and Delay Street Name Direction Number of Lanes Approach Speed Population less than 10,000?No Date of Count: Scenario: Warrant 3 Met?: Met when either Condition A or B is met No Condition A: Met when conditions A1, A2, and A3 are met Not Met Condition A1 Not Met 1.93 Condition A2 Not Met 143 vph Condition A3 Met 2043 vph Condition B Not Met PM Existing Highway 9 Corridor StudyProject Name: Intersection:1 Los Gatos State Route 9 & Massol Avenue Major Street Minor Street 25 E-W N-S Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Massol Avenue 22 35 The total delay experienced by traffic on one minor street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one lane approach, or five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach The volume on the same minor street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic of 150 vph for two moving lanes The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more appraches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches The plotted point falls above the curve Minor Approach Delay: vehicle-hours Minor Approach Volume: Total Entering Volume: State Route 9 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MI N O R S T R E E T ―HI G H E R V O L U M E AP P R O A C H ( V P H ) MAJOR STREET―TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) Warrant 3, Peak Hour 2 ORMORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 8/8/2018 Signal Warrant Analysis G State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix G NCHRP Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet Major Street: Minor Street or Location: Peak Hour: 2a 2a 3a 3a 3b 3b 3c 3c 3d 3d 4a 4a 4b 4b 4c 4c 4d 4d 4e 4e 4f 4f 4g 4g 4h 4h 5a Expected motorist compliance at pedestrian crossings in region, Comp = high or low 5a RED Active When Present Enhanced/High Visibility • In-Street Crossing Signs • High Visibility Signs/Markings • Pedestrian Refuge Islands • Raised Crosswalks • Curb Extensions • Advanced Signage • Advanced Stop/Yield Lines • Constant Flashing Yellow Beacons b) Worksheet 2- exceeds 35 mph, communities with less than 10,000, or where major transit stop exists a) Worksheet 1 - 35 mph or less Step 1: Select worksheet (speed reflects posted or statutory speed limit or 85th percentile speed on the major street): Step 2: Does the crossing meet minimum pedestrian volumes to be considered for a TCD type of treatment? 112.84 1896 •[(0.00021 3a² - 0.74072 3a + 734.125)/0.75] 133 133 Pedestrian crossing distance, curb to curb (ft), L Pedestrian start-up time and end clearance time (s), ts Pedestrian walking speed (ft.s), Sp ○Minimum signal warrant volume for peak hour (use 3a for Vmaj-s), SC ○If 15th percentile crossing speed of pedestrians is less than 3.5 ft/s (1.1 m/s), then reduce 3c by up to 50 percent; otherwise enter 3c. Major road volume, total of both approaches during peak hour (veh/h), V maj-s Peak-hour pedestrian volume (ped/h), vp ○If 3b< 133, then enter 133. If 3b ≥ 133, then enter 3b. •SC = 0.00021 Vmaj-s² - 0.74072 Vmaj-s + 734.125)/0.75 OR ○If 2a ≥ 20 ped/h, then go to Step 3. 50' Wide, <35 mph, Vped = 3.5 ft/sRoadway Configuration: Dp < 1.3 h (Comp = high or low) 1.3h < Dp < 21.3h and Comp = high or low) OR 5.3 < Dp < 21.3 h and Comp = high DO NOT USE ACTIVE OR ENHANCED DO NOT USE CROSSWALK ○If 2a ≥ 3d, then the warrant has been met and a traffic signal should be considered if not within 300 ft of another traffic signal. Otherwise, the warrant has not been met. Go to Step 4. Dp >21.3h (Comp = high or low) OR 5.3h<Dp<21.3 h and Comp = low Major road volume, total of both approaches or approach being crossed if median refuge island is present during peak hour (veh.h), Vmaj-d USE RED ○Total pedestrian delay (h), Dp=(dp x Vp) / 3600 OR [(4g x 2a) / 3600] (this is estimated delayfor all pedestrians crossing the major roadway without a crossing treatment - assumes 05 compliance). This calculated value can be replaced with the actual total pedestrian delay measured at the site. Step 4: Estimate pedestrian delay. Treatment Category Dp (4h) and Comp (5a) (see Descriptions of Sample Treatments for examples) ○Critical gap required for crossing pedestrian (s), tc= (L/Sp) + ts OR [(4a/4b) + 4c)] ○Major road flow rate (veh/s), v = Vmaj-d/3600 OR [4e/3600] ○Average pedestrian delay (s/person), dp = (ev tc - v tc - 1) / v OR [(e4f x 4d-4f x 4d - 1) / 4f] Total Pedestrian Delay Red Enhanced-High Visibility/Active when Present (if high compliance expected) OR Red (if low compliance expected) Signal No Treatment • In Roadway Warning Lights • Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons • Pedestrian Crossing Flags TCRP Report 112 - NCHRP Report 562 - Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Worksheet Analyst and Site Information Worksheet 1: Peak-Hour, 35 MPH or Less Data Collection Date: Analysis Date: Analyst: Massol Avenue State Route 9 DESCRIPTIONS OF TREATMENT TYPE ○If 2a < 20 ped/h, then consider median refuge islands, curb extensions, traffic calming, etc. as feasible. • Midblock Signal • Half Signal • HAWK ENHANCED-HIGH VISIBILITY/ACTIVE WHEN PRESENT Step 3: Does the crossing meet the pedestrian volume warrant for a traffic signal? 20 HIGH Step 5: Select treatment based upon total pedestrian delay and expected motorist compliance. 51.84 9331.59 0.53 1896 16.14 7 3.5 32 Study Intersection • Passive/Pushbutton Flashing Beacons Enhanced-High Visibility/Active when Present LEGEND Striped Crosswalk 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 Pe d e s t r i a n V o l u m e ( p e d / h r ) Major Road Volume - Total of Approaches (veh/hr) + H State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix H Cost Estimations Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n   A  ‐   R R F B C o s t B   ‐   S p e e d   R e d u c t i o n C o s t A + B C   ‐   H w y   9   g r e e n   b i k e   l a n e Co s t A + B + C In s t a l l   R R F B 39 , 0 0 0 $ Ad v ' d   s p e e d   h u m p   m a r k i n g 36 0 $ Re m o v e   B i k e   L a n e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g s 88 $ Pa i n t   t r a f f i c   b a r 17 0 $ 10 0 ’   o f   r a i s e d   m e d i a n   50 , 0 0 0 $ Re m o v e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g   A r r o w s   28 $  I n s t a l l   N o   P e d e s t r i a n   S i g n 1, 0 0 0 $ Sp e e d   a d v i s o r y   s i g n s   a n d / o r   b e a c o n s   12 , 0 0 0 $ Re m o v e   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 22 8 $ Re p a v e   S i d e w a l k   o n   N o r t h   s i d e   o f   I n t e r s e c t i o n 11 , 0 0 0 $ Re m o v e   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g 65 2 $ In s t a l l   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g   3, 2 6 0 $ In s t a l l   G r e e n   B i k e   L a n e 13 , 9 5 0 $ In s t a l l   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 2, 9 5 0 $ Pa i n t   C u r b   R e d 25 0 $ Re m o v e   C h a n n e l i z e d   R i g h t   T u r n 70 , 8 0 0 $ Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 15 % 7 , 6 7 6 $ 9 , 3 5 4 $ 1 7 , 0 3 0 $ 1 3 , 8 3 1 $ 30 , 8 6 0 $        Mo b i l i z a t i o n 10 % 5 , 1 1 7 $ 6 , 2 3 6 $ 1 1 , 3 5 3 $ 9 , 2 2 1 $ 20 , 5 7 4 $        63 , 9 6 3 $          7 7 , 9 5 0 $                  1 4 1 , 9 1 3 $                11 5 , 2 5 8 $ 25 7 , 1 7 0 $    Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 40 % 2 5 , 5 8 5 $ 3 1 , 1 8 0 $ 5 6 , 7 6 5 $ 4 6 , 1 0 3 $ 10 2 , 8 6 8 $    PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 1 2 , 7 9 3 $ 1 5 , 5 9 0 $ 2 8 , 3 8 3 $ 2 3 , 0 5 2 $ 51 , 4 3 4 $        RO W 10 % - $ - $ - $ 1 1 , 5 2 6 $ 11 , 5 2 6 $        Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 9 , 5 9 4 $ 1 1 , 6 9 3 $ 2 1 , 2 8 7 $ 1 7 , 2 8 9 $ 38 , 5 7 6 $        11 1 , 9 3 4 $    1 3 6 , 4 1 3 $              2 4 8 , 3 4 7 $                2 1 3 , 2 2 6 $          4 6 1 , 5 7 3 $    To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   H A W K C o s t s B   ‐   S p e e d   R e d u c t i o n C o s t s A + B C   ‐   H w y   9   g r e e n   b i k e   l a ne C o s t s A + B + C In s t a l l   s i g n a l $1 8 0 , 0 0 0 10 0 ’   o f   r a i s e d   m e d i a n   $2 1 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   B i k e   L a n e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g s $8 8 Si d e w a l k   R a m p s $1 4 , 0 0 0 Sp e e d   A d v i s o r y   S i g n s   a n d / o r   b e a c o n s   $1 2 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g   A r r o w s   $2 8 In s t a l l   N o   P e d e s t r i a n   S i g n $1 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p i n g $2 2 8 Re p a v e   S i d e w a l k   o n   N .   s i d e   o f   I n t e r s e c t i o n $1 1 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g $6 5 2 In s t a l l   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g   $3 , 2 6 0 In s t a l l   G r e e n   B i k e   L a n e $1 3 , 9 5 0 In s t a l l   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p i n g $2 , 9 5 0 Pa i n t   C u r b   R e d $2 5 0 Re m o v e   C h a n n e l i z e d   R i g h t   T u r n $7 0 , 8 0 0 Pa i n t   T r a f f i c   B a r $1 7 0 Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 15 % 3 0 , 9 0 0 $ Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 4, 9 5 0 $ 3 5 , 8 5 0 $ Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 13 , 8 5 6 $ 49 , 7 0 6 $                            Mo b i l i z a t i o n 10 % 2 0 , 6 0 0 $ Mo b i l i z a t i o n 3, 3 0 0 $ 2 3 , 9 0 0 $ Mo b i l i z a t i o n 9, 2 3 8 $ 33 , 1 3 8 $                            25 7 , 5 0 0 $                      4 1 , 2 5 0 $                      2 9 8 , 7 5 0 $                  1 1 5 , 4 7 0 $                      4 1 4 , 2 2 0 $                      Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i g e n c y 40 % 1 0 3 , 0 0 0 $ 1 6 , 5 0 0 $ 1 1 9 , 5 0 0 $ 4 6 , 1 8 8 $ 16 5 , 6 8 8 $                        PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 5 1 , 5 0 0 $ 8 , 2 5 0 $ 5 9 , 7 5 0 $ 2 3 , 0 9 4 $ 82 , 8 4 4 $                            RO W 10 % 2 5 , 7 5 0 $ - $ 2 5 , 7 5 0 $ - $ 25 , 7 5 0 $                            Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 3 8 , 6 2 5 $ 6 , 1 8 8 $ 4 4 , 8 1 3 $ 1 7 , 3 2 1 $ 62 , 1 3 3 $                            To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . 47 6 , 3 7 5 $                      7 2 , 1 8 8 $                      5 4 8 , 5 6 3 $                  2 0 2 , 0 7 3 $                      7 5 0 , 6 3 5 $                      Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t   T o t a l Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s SR 9 / M a s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A‐ T r a f f i c   S i g n a l C o s t B   ‐   S p e e d   R e d u c t i o n C o s t A + B C   ‐   P e d e s t r i a n   &   Bi k e   I m p r o v e m e n t s C o s t A +   B   +   C In s t a l l   S i g n a l $3 0 0 , 0 0 0 10 0 ’   o f   r a i s e d   m e d i a n   $5 0 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   B i k e   L a n e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g s $8 8 Pa i n t   T r a f f i c   B a r $1 7 0 Sp e e d   A d v i s o r y   S i g n s   a n d / o r   B e a c o n s   $1 2 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g   A r r o w s   $2 8 In s t a l l   N o   P e d e s t r i a n   C r o s s i n g   S i g n s $1 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p i n g $2 2 8 Re p a v e   S i d e w a l k   o n   N o r t h   S i d e   o f   I n t e r s e c t i o n $1 1 , 0 0 0 Re m o v e   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g $6 5 2 In s t a l l   Y e l l o w   S t r i p i n g   $3 , 2 6 0 In s t a l l   G r e e n   B i k e   L a n e $1 3 , 9 5 0 In s t a l l   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p i n g $2 , 9 5 0 Pa i n t   C u r b   R e d $2 5 0 Re m o v e   C h a n n e l i z e d   R i g h t   T u r n $7 0 , 8 0 0 Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 15 % $ 4 6 , 8 2 6 $ 9 , 3 0 0 $ 5 6 , 1 2 6 $ 1 3 , 8 3 1 $6 9 , 9 5 6 Mo b i l i z a t i o n 10 % $ 3 1 , 2 1 7 $ 6 , 2 0 0 $ 3 7 , 4 1 7 $ 9 , 2 2 1 $4 6 , 6 3 8 $3 9 0 , 2 1 3 $ 7 7 , 5 0 0 $ 4 6 7 , 7 1 3 $ 1 1 5 , 2 5 8 $ 5 8 2 , 9 7 0 Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i g e n c y 40 % $ 1 5 6 , 0 8 5 $ 3 1 , 0 0 0 $ 1 8 7 , 0 8 5 $ 4 6 , 1 0 3 $2 3 3 , 1 8 8 PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % $ 7 8 , 0 4 3 $ 1 5 , 5 0 0 $ 9 3 , 5 4 3 $ 2 3 , 0 5 2 $1 1 6 , 5 9 4 RO W ? 10 % $ 3 9 , 0 2 1 $ 7 , 7 5 0 $ 4 6 , 7 7 1 $ 1 1 , 5 2 6 $5 8 , 2 9 7 Co n s t r u c t i o n   &   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % $ 5 8 , 5 3 2 $ 1 1 , 6 2 5 $ 7 0 , 1 5 7 $ 1 7 , 2 8 9 $8 7 , 4 4 6 $7 2 1 , 8 9 3 $ 1 4 3 , 3 7 5 $ 8 6 5 , 2 6 8 $ 2 1 3 , 2 2 6 $ 1 , 0 7 8 , 4 9 5   To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Co n s t r u c t i o n   T o t a l Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   N o n   H S I P C o s t B   ‐   H S I P C o s t A + B Re m o v e   B i k e   L a n e   P a v e m e n t     M a r k i n g s 88 $ Re m o v e   C h a n n e l i z e d   R i g h t   T u r n s 40 0 , 0 0 0 $ Re m o v e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g   A r r o w s 28 $ Re m o v e   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 22 8 $ Re m o v e   1 2 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 1, 3 3 0 $ In s t a l l   G r e e n   B i k e   L a n e 19 , 1 5 0 $ In s t a l l   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 2, 9 5 0 $ In s t a l l   Y i e l d   L i n e 31 5 $ In s t a l l   C o n t i n e n t a l   C r o s s w a l k 9, 5 4 0 $ In s t a l l   T r a f f i c   B a r 2, 0 0 0 $ Pa i n t   T r a f f i c   B a r 21 0 $ Tr a f f i c   C o n t r o l 15 % 5 , 3 7 6 $ 6 0 , 0 0 0 $ 6 5 , 3 7 6 $ Mo b i l i z a t i o n 10 % 3 , 5 8 4 $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 $ 4 3 , 5 8 4 $ 44 , 7 9 9 $          5 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 5 4 4 , 7 9 9 $                Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 20 % 8 , 9 6 0 $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 0 8 , 9 6 0 $ PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 15 % 6 , 7 2 0 $ 7 5 , 0 0 0 $ 8 1 , 7 2 0 $ RO W 0% - $ - $ - $ Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 6 , 7 2 0 $ 7 5 , 0 0 0 $ 8 1 , 7 2 0 $ 67 , 1 9 8 $          7 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 8 1 7 , 1 9 8 $                To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   N o n   H S I P C o s t Re m o v e   B i k e   L a n e   P a v e m e n t     M a r k i n g s 44 $ Re m o v e   P a v e m e n t   M a r k i n g   A r r o w s 14 $ Re m o v e   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 49 8 $ In s t a l l   G r e e n   B i k e   L a n e 7, 7 0 0 $ In s t a l l   4 "   W h i t e   S t r i p e 2, 9 5 0 $ 11 , 2 0 6 $          Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 34 % 3 , 7 5 4 $ PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 2 , 2 4 1 $ RO W 10 % 1 , 1 2 1 $ Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 1 , 6 8 1 $ 20 , 0 0 0 $          To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   N o n   H S I P C o s t In s t a l l   C r o s s w a l k   A h e a d   S i g n 1, 0 0 0 $ Tr i m   F o l i a g e 3, 0 0 0 $ 4, 0 0 0 $              Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 20 % 8 0 0 $ PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 8 0 0 $ RO W 10 % 4 0 0 $ Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 6 0 0 $ 6, 6 0 0 $              To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   N o n   H S I P C o s t In s t a l l   C u r b   R a m p 5, 0 0 0 $ Tr i m   F o l i a g e 1, 5 0 0 $ In s t a l l   R a d a r   S p e e d   S i g n 30 , 0 0 0 $ 36 , 5 0 0 $          Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 33 % 1 2 , 0 4 5 $ PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 7 , 3 0 0 $ RO W 10 % 3 , 6 5 0 $ Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 5 , 4 7 5 $ 65 , 0 0 0 $          To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l Ma s s o l   A v e n u e   I n t e r s e c t i o n A  ‐   N o n   H S I P C o s t B   ‐   H S I P C o s t A + B In s t a l l   Y i e l d   L i n e   s o u t h b o u n d 60 $ Re m o v e   C h a n n e l i z e d   R i g h t   T u r n s 35 0 , 0 0 0 $ In s t a l l   C r o s s w a l k   S i g n   1, 0 0 0 $ In s t a l l   Y i e l d   S i g n   1, 0 0 0 $ In s t a l l   Y i e l d   L i n e   E a s t b o u n d 60 $ 2, 1 2 0 $              3 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 3 5 2 , 1 2 0 $                Co n .   &   D e s i g n   C o n t i n g e n c y 35 % 7 4 2 $ 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 4 0 , 7 4 2 $ PE   ( E n v .   +   P S & E ) 20 % 4 2 4 $ 7 0 , 0 0 0 $ 7 0 , 4 2 4 $ RO W 10 % 2 1 2 $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 $ 3 5 , 2 1 2 $ Co n s t r u c t i o n   E n g i n e e r i n g 15 % 3 1 8 $ 5 2 , 5 0 0 $ 5 2 , 8 1 8 $ 3, 8 1 6 $              6 4 7 , 5 0 0 $ 6 5 1 , 3 1 6 $                To t a l   f o r   E n g .   &   C o n . Sa f e t y   C o u n t e r m e a s u r e s Im p l e m e n t a t i o n   C o s t s Co n s t r u c t i o n   C o s t s   T o t a l I State Route 9 Safety and Traffic Operations Analysis August 2018 Appendix I SIMTRAFFIC Corridor Functionality Analysis Arterial Level of Service AM Existing 05/11/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 7 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 11 Run 11 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 1.6 14.4 0.1 34 36 1.1 Massol Avenue 2 0.6 2.4 0.0 29 30 0.5 San Benito Avenue 3 0.3 2.7 0.0 29 29 0.3 Tait Avenue 4 0.7 4.8 0.0 25 24 0.9 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 17.6 28.2 0.1 14 14 18.3 University Avenue 6 22.0 30.6 0.1 10 11 21.8 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 6.6 25.5 0.2 27 27 6.6 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.7 18.4 0.2 35 36 1.5 Alberto Way 7 7.1 13.3 0.1 17 17 7.4 Los Gatos Blvd 8 24.3 41.9 0.2 14 14 23.1 Total 82.4 182.2 1.0 20 20 81.4 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 12 Run 12 Run 13 Run 13 Run 14 Run 14 Run 16 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 36 1.0 35 1.2 36 1.2 35 Massol Avenue 29 0.6 30 0.5 30 0.5 30 San Benito Avenue 29 0.3 30 0.2 30 0.2 30 Tait Avenue 25 0.6 25 0.6 25 0.7 25 Santa Cruz Avenuea 15 15.2 13 19.2 14 18.1 15 University Avenue 10 23.7 10 22.1 11 20.3 10 SB SR 17 Ramps 27 6.4 27 6.4 28 5.5 26 NB SR 17 Ramps 35 1.6 34 1.8 36 1.3 34 Alberto Way 17 6.8 17 7.0 18 6.7 18 Los Gatos Blvd 14 22.7 12 29.0 13 26.6 13 Total 20 78.9 19 88.1 20 81.2 20 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 16 Run 17 Run 17 Run 18 Run 18 Run 20 Run 20 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1.2 34 1.6 36 1.1 35 1.3 Massol Avenue 0.5 29 0.6 30 0.5 25 1.0 San Benito Avenue 0.2 29 0.3 29 0.3 29 0.3 Tait Avenue 0.6 25 0.6 24 0.7 25 0.7 Santa Cruz Avenuea 15.6 13 19.0 14 17.7 15 15.0 University Avenue 23.6 9 25.8 11 22.0 11 20.9 SB SR 17 Ramps 7.4 27 6.8 27 6.6 28 6.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.9 34 1.8 35 1.9 34 1.9 Alberto Way 6.4 17 7.0 17 7.1 16 7.8 Los Gatos Blvd 25.6 15 21.6 15 20.8 14 24.8 Total 83.1 20 85.1 20 78.8 20 79.9 Arterial Level of Service AM Existing 05/11/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 9 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 11 Run 11 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 23.7 41.2 0.2 14 14 24.8 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 2.4 8.5 0.1 27 27 2.4 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 2.8 19.4 0.2 33 33 2.6 Univerity Avenue 6 24.7 43.1 0.2 16 16 25.7 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 12.3 21.2 0.1 15 16 11.6 Monterey Avenue 4 33.1 43.8 0.1 9 9 32.5 San Benito Avenue 3 4.8 10.1 0.0 12 12 4.6 Massol Avenue 2 1.3 3.8 0.0 21 21 1.1 Montgomery Street 1 0.6 2.5 0.0 28 29 0.5 Total 105.7 193.7 0.9 16 16 105.7 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 12 Run 12 Run 13 Run 13 Run 14 Run 14 Run 16 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 14 24.5 14 24.1 14 23.8 14 NB SR 17 Ramps 26 2.6 27 2.4 27 2.3 26 SB SR 17 Ramps 32 3.1 34 2.1 34 2.5 33 Univerity Avenue 15 27.5 16 26.1 16 25.8 18 Santa Cruz Avenue 15 11.8 16 10.9 16 11.4 13 Monterey Avenue 9 34.3 10 28.8 9 30.9 9 San Benito Avenue 12 4.8 12 4.6 12 4.5 12 Massol Avenue 21 1.3 21 1.1 22 1.0 21 Montgomery Street 28 0.6 29 0.5 29 0.5 28 Total 16 110.5 17 100.7 16 102.7 16 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 16 Run 17 Run 17 Run 18 Run 18 Run 20 Run 20 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 24.9 14 22.4 14 22.2 13 25.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 2.5 27 2.2 27 2.3 26 2.6 SB SR 17 Ramps 2.8 33 2.7 33 2.8 33 2.8 Univerity Avenue 20.0 17 23.6 16 23.7 17 23.4 Santa Cruz Avenue 15.3 15 13.0 15 12.8 15 12.7 Monterey Avenue 35.1 9 31.5 9 35.4 9 32.9 San Benito Avenue 4.8 12 4.6 12 4.8 11 5.4 Massol Avenue 1.3 21 1.1 21 1.2 18 1.8 Montgomery Street 0.6 29 0.5 28 0.6 26 0.8 Total 107.2 16 101.5 16 105.9 16 107.8 Arterial Level of Service PM Existing 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 32 Run 32 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 6.3 22.1 0.1 25 26 5.2 Massol Avenue 2 1.5 3.5 0.0 20 20 1.6 San Benito Avenue 3 0.9 3.5 0.0 23 22 1.0 Tait Avenue 4 1.0 5.2 0.0 23 22 1.1 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 45.3 56.5 0.1 7 6 51.1 University Avenue 6 35.4 44.5 0.1 7 7 38.7 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 18.2 38.0 0.2 18 17 20.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 6.5 24.1 0.2 27 27 6.1 Alberto Way 7 9.5 16.2 0.1 14 13 10.2 Los Gatos Blvd 8 29.4 47.4 0.2 12 14 24.6 Total 154.2 261.1 1.0 14 14 159.8 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 34 Run 34 Run 35 Run 35 Run 36 Run 36 Run 38 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 26 5.0 27 5.0 22 8.9 27 Massol Avenue 21 1.3 21 1.4 19 1.7 21 San Benito Avenue 24 0.7 23 0.8 22 1.0 23 Tait Avenue 24 0.8 23 1.0 23 1.0 22 Santa Cruz Avenuea 8 36.1 7 46.1 7 47.9 7 University Avenue 9 25.6 7 38.8 7 39.2 7 SB SR 17 Ramps 19 16.5 18 18.6 17 21.1 19 NB SR 17 Ramps 27 5.8 26 7.3 25 8.2 28 Alberto Way 14 9.1 14 9.8 14 9.0 15 Los Gatos Blvd 11 32.7 13 24.9 11 34.3 13 Total 15 133.7 14 153.7 13 172.5 14 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 38 Run 41 Run 41 Run 42 Run 42 Run 43 Run 43 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 4.9 24 6.5 27 4.6 19 11.7 Massol Avenue 1.4 20 1.6 22 1.3 16 2.4 San Benito Avenue 0.8 23 0.9 24 0.7 21 1.2 Tait Avenue 1.1 24 0.8 24 0.8 21 1.5 Santa Cruz Avenuea 47.0 8 36.6 6 50.3 7 43.9 University Avenue 37.0 8 32.8 6 41.7 8 31.4 SB SR 17 Ramps 17.2 18 19.0 18 18.2 19 16.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 5.6 26 7.4 27 6.0 27 5.8 Alberto Way 8.4 14 10.0 14 9.6 13 10.4 Los Gatos Blvd 25.9 12 28.2 12 31.6 12 29.7 Total 149.3 15 143.8 13 164.8 14 154.2 Arterial Level of Service PM Existing 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 8 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 32 Run 32 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 23.9 42.1 0.2 14 14 23.9 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.5 7.9 0.1 29 28 1.6 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 1.6 19.3 0.2 33 33 1.9 Univerity Avenue 6 20.3 39.8 0.2 17 18 19.5 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 24.7 33.9 0.1 9 9 25.6 Monterey Avenue 4 12.3 23.5 0.1 17 29 2.9 San Benito Avenue 3 8.7 14.7 0.0 8 9 7.2 Massol Avenue 2 1.8 4.5 0.0 17 17 2.0 Montgomery Street 1 0.5 2.5 0.0 28 27 0.5 Total 95.3 188.3 0.9 17 18 85.2 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 34 Run 34 Run 35 Run 35 Run 36 Run 36 Run 38 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 14 22.7 13 26.1 14 22.2 14 NB SR 17 Ramps 29 1.5 28 1.6 29 1.4 29 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 1.4 33 1.6 33 1.9 34 Univerity Avenue 17 21.4 18 18.3 17 20.4 18 Santa Cruz Avenue 11 20.6 9 24.7 10 22.6 10 Monterey Avenue 23 6.7 11 23.8 14 17.9 20 San Benito Avenue 9 7.6 6 15.0 7 10.4 8 Massol Avenue 18 1.7 15 2.6 16 2.2 16 Montgomery Street 28 0.5 25 0.7 27 0.5 27 Total 18 84.0 15 114.5 16 99.5 17 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 38 Run 41 Run 41 Run 42 Run 42 Run 43 Run 43 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 22.5 13 25.1 13 25.3 14 23.7 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.4 28 1.6 29 1.5 29 1.5 SB SR 17 Ramps 1.3 32 2.1 34 1.4 33 1.9 Univerity Avenue 19.7 16 25.1 18 19.9 18 19.1 Santa Cruz Avenue 24.0 10 24.1 10 21.4 9 28.5 Monterey Avenue 9.1 29 2.8 31 2.2 13 20.2 San Benito Avenue 9.3 13 3.8 13 3.9 6 15.1 Massol Avenue 2.2 19 1.4 20 1.2 16 2.1 Montgomery Street 0.6 28 0.5 29 0.4 28 0.4 Total 90.0 17 86.6 18 77.2 15 112.7 Arterial Level of Service AM Remove Slip Turn 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 7 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 1.7 14.6 0.1 34 34 1.6 Massol Avenue 2 0.9 2.6 0.0 26 26 0.8 San Benito Avenue 3 0.4 2.8 0.0 28 28 0.4 Tait Avenue 4 0.2 4.6 0.0 26 26 0.2 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 15.8 26.3 0.1 15 14 18.3 University Avenue 6 21.9 30.5 0.1 11 9 25.2 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 6.6 25.5 0.2 27 27 6.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.7 18.4 0.2 35 35 1.5 Alberto Way 7 10.5 16.6 0.1 14 15 9.4 Los Gatos Blvd 8 33.4 50.8 0.2 11 12 31.5 Total 93.2 192.7 1.0 19 18 95.5 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 55 Run 55 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 34 2.0 34 1.7 34 1.6 33 Massol Avenue 26 0.8 26 0.9 26 0.9 24 San Benito Avenue 28 0.4 28 0.4 28 0.4 27 Tait Avenue 26 0.3 26 0.2 26 0.2 26 Santa Cruz Avenuea 15 15.8 15 14.8 15 15.3 14 University Avenue 11 19.8 11 21.9 12 19.3 11 SB SR 17 Ramps 27 6.6 27 6.7 27 6.8 28 NB SR 17 Ramps 35 1.8 35 1.7 35 1.7 35 Alberto Way 14 9.8 13 11.0 13 11.0 14 Los Gatos Blvd 11 34.5 11 35.4 12 31.9 11 Total 19 91.8 19 94.7 19 89.1 19 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 60 Run 60 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 2.0 34 2.0 33 2.2 35 1.2 Massol Avenue 1.1 25 1.0 26 0.8 27 0.7 San Benito Avenue 0.5 27 0.5 28 0.4 28 0.4 Tait Avenue 0.3 26 0.2 26 0.2 26 0.2 Santa Cruz Avenuea 16.6 16 14.0 15 15.5 15 16.2 University Avenue 21.2 10 23.0 10 23.6 10 22.6 SB SR 17 Ramps 6.1 27 7.3 29 5.5 26 7.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.7 34 2.0 36 1.6 35 1.8 Alberto Way 10.4 13 11.1 15 9.5 13 10.7 Los Gatos Blvd 33.0 11 37.2 12 31.7 11 33.0 Total 92.7 18 98.4 19 91.0 19 94.3 Arterial Level of Service AM Remove Slip Turn 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 9 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 30.2 47.7 0.2 12 12 31.5 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 3.3 9.4 0.1 24 24 3.3 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 2.8 19.5 0.2 33 33 2.4 Univerity Avenue 6 24.7 43.1 0.2 16 17 22.2 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 17.6 26.5 0.1 12 12 17.3 Monterey Avenue 4 30.9 41.6 0.1 9 10 30.7 San Benito Avenue 3 5.8 11.1 0.0 11 11 5.8 Massol Avenue 2 1.7 4.0 0.0 20 20 1.6 Montgomery Street 1 0.8 2.9 0.0 23 23 0.8 Total 117.8 205.8 0.9 15 15 115.5 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 55 Run 55 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 13 26.8 12 31.7 12 32.1 13 NB SR 17 Ramps 24 3.3 24 3.4 24 3.4 25 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 2.5 33 3.0 33 2.9 32 Univerity Avenue 17 23.0 16 24.2 17 21.3 17 Santa Cruz Avenue 13 16.1 12 16.8 12 16.8 14 Monterey Avenue 9 33.1 10 28.2 10 30.0 10 San Benito Avenue 10 6.1 11 5.6 11 5.4 10 Massol Avenue 20 1.7 20 1.6 20 1.6 18 Montgomery Street 23 0.8 23 0.8 22 0.9 23 Total 15 113.3 15 115.6 15 114.4 16 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 60 Run 60 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 26.1 13 26.8 12 30.0 12 30.9 NB SR 17 Ramps 3.2 25 3.1 24 3.2 25 3.1 SB SR 17 Ramps 3.3 33 2.5 33 2.8 32 3.0 Univerity Avenue 23.3 16 26.4 14 30.4 15 27.2 Santa Cruz Avenue 14.5 13 14.9 8 31.2 13 16.5 Monterey Avenue 27.1 10 28.7 8 37.2 9 34.3 San Benito Avenue 6.1 10 6.7 11 5.6 11 5.9 Massol Avenue 2.1 17 2.3 21 1.5 20 1.7 Montgomery Street 0.9 21 1.0 23 0.8 22 0.9 Total 106.6 16 112.5 14 142.8 15 123.5 Arterial Level of Service PM - Remove Right Turn Lane 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 17 Run 17 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 6.9 25.6 0.1 24 28 4.0 Massol Avenue 2 1.8 3.7 0.0 19 22 1.2 San Benito Avenue 3 1.0 3.5 0.0 22 24 0.7 Tait Avenue 4 0.9 5.2 0.0 23 25 0.4 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 43.3 54.4 0.1 7 9 33.1 University Avenue 6 32.0 41.0 0.1 8 10 22.9 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 18.3 38.0 0.2 18 19 16.0 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 6.7 24.2 0.2 26 27 6.2 Alberto Way 7 9.7 16.4 0.1 14 14 9.9 Los Gatos Blvd 8 29.4 47.5 0.2 12 11 33.0 Total 149.9 259.6 1.0 14 16 127.6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 19 Run 19 Run 20 Run 20 Run 21 Run 21 Run 22 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 25 6.1 26 5.8 25 5.9 24 Massol Avenue 19 1.7 20 1.5 19 1.7 18 San Benito Avenue 23 0.9 23 0.8 22 0.9 19 Tait Avenue 25 0.5 25 0.5 25 0.5 17 Santa Cruz Avenuea 8 35.3 8 38.9 7 45.9 5 University Avenue 8 29.9 8 31.1 7 37.9 6 SB SR 17 Ramps 19 17.8 19 17.1 17 21.5 18 NB SR 17 Ramps 27 6.3 27 6.3 25 8.1 27 Alberto Way 14 9.1 13 10.4 13 10.6 14 Los Gatos Blvd 12 29.5 11 32.4 12 28.2 13 Total 15 137.1 15 144.8 14 161.2 13 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 22 Run 23 Run 23 Run 24 Run 24 Run 25 Run 25 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 7.0 28 3.8 25 5.9 27 4.5 Massol Avenue 2.0 21 1.5 21 1.4 21 1.4 San Benito Avenue 1.5 24 0.7 23 0.8 23 0.8 Tait Avenue 2.5 25 0.4 25 0.5 25 0.4 Santa Cruz Avenuea 65.0 9 34.8 8 37.5 8 36.1 University Avenue 40.6 10 24.8 8 32.8 9 28.2 SB SR 17 Ramps 18.4 18 18.6 18 19.1 18 17.8 NB SR 17 Ramps 6.4 27 6.6 26 6.9 26 7.3 Alberto Way 9.4 15 9.0 14 10.1 14 9.5 Los Gatos Blvd 27.1 12 28.2 11 34.6 13 27.6 Total 179.9 16 128.3 14 149.7 15 133.7 Arterial Level of Service PM - Remove Right Turn Lane 06/21/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 8 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 17 Run 17 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 22.5 40.8 0.2 14 15 21.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.5 8.0 0.1 29 29 1.4 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 1.6 19.3 0.2 33 34 1.3 Univerity Avenue 6 22.0 41.5 0.2 17 18 19.0 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 26.7 35.8 0.1 9 10 21.5 Monterey Avenue 4 20.3 33.7 0.1 13 10 29.6 San Benito Avenue 3 12.0 18.3 0.0 7 7 12.8 Massol Avenue 2 2.6 5.1 0.0 16 17 2.1 Montgomery Street 1 0.6 2.9 0.0 24 25 0.5 Total 109.8 205.2 0.9 15 16 109.5 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 19 Run 19 Run 20 Run 20 Run 21 Run 21 Run 22 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 15 20.7 15 21.5 14 22.5 15 NB SR 17 Ramps 29 1.4 29 1.3 28 1.7 29 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 1.9 34 1.2 33 1.9 33 Univerity Avenue 17 21.8 17 22.2 14 28.7 16 Santa Cruz Avenue 10 21.5 10 23.4 9 25.0 10 Monterey Avenue 24 5.9 14 18.0 10 27.7 9 San Benito Avenue 8 10.2 7 12.2 5 16.1 5 Massol Avenue 14 3.0 17 2.3 14 3.3 15 Montgomery Street 24 0.6 25 0.5 22 0.8 23 Total 17 87.1 16 102.6 14 127.6 14 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 22 Run 23 Run 23 Run 24 Run 24 Run 25 Run 25 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 21.4 14 24.1 14 24.3 13 25.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.3 28 1.5 28 1.7 28 1.8 SB SR 17 Ramps 1.6 33 1.7 33 1.7 33 1.6 Univerity Avenue 23.2 17 20.3 18 18.0 18 19.7 Santa Cruz Avenue 21.6 10 21.9 9 26.4 9 25.3 Monterey Avenue 35.4 31 2.1 22 7.4 30 2.7 San Benito Avenue 18.6 13 4.0 9 7.4 12 4.2 Massol Avenue 3.0 22 1.2 19 1.6 19 1.6 Montgomery Street 0.8 26 0.4 25 0.5 25 0.5 Total 126.9 18 77.2 17 89.1 18 82.7 Arterial Level of Service AM - HAWK @ 240 06/19/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 7 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 3.7 16.5 0.1 30 31 3.1 Massol Avenue 2 1.8 3.5 0.0 19 20 1.6 San Benito Avenue 3 0.8 3.3 0.0 24 25 0.8 Tait Avenue 4 0.3 4.6 0.0 26 26 0.3 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 16.4 26.9 0.1 15 14 16.7 University Avenue 6 23.1 31.7 0.1 10 11 21.3 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 6.8 25.8 0.2 27 27 6.3 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.9 18.4 0.2 35 35 2.0 Alberto Way 7 10.6 16.8 0.1 14 13 11.2 Los Gatos Blvd 8 33.8 51.2 0.2 11 11 32.6 Total 99.1 198.7 1.0 18 18 96.0 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 56 Run 56 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 30 3.8 30 3.5 29 4.1 30 Massol Avenue 19 1.9 19 1.9 18 2.0 21 San Benito Avenue 25 0.7 24 0.9 23 0.9 25 Tait Avenue 26 0.3 26 0.3 25 0.3 26 Santa Cruz Avenuea 13 18.9 14 17.5 14 16.9 14 University Avenue 10 22.8 9 26.6 12 18.1 9 SB SR 17 Ramps 28 6.4 25 8.8 29 5.2 25 NB SR 17 Ramps 35 1.9 35 2.0 35 1.9 35 Alberto Way 12 12.1 15 9.5 13 11.8 15 Los Gatos Blvd 12 32.1 12 32.4 11 34.1 12 Total 18 100.9 18 103.4 18 95.3 18 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Run 63 Run 63 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 3.5 29 4.3 30 3.9 30 3.8 Massol Avenue 1.4 18 2.0 19 1.9 19 1.8 San Benito Avenue 0.6 24 0.9 24 0.8 24 0.9 Tait Avenue 0.2 26 0.3 26 0.3 25 0.3 Santa Cruz Avenuea 18.1 17 13.2 16 14.5 15 15.7 University Avenue 28.4 10 24.3 11 19.8 11 20.8 SB SR 17 Ramps 8.6 26 7.5 28 6.1 29 5.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.6 34 2.2 36 1.4 34 1.9 Alberto Way 9.5 14 10.4 13 11.4 14 10.1 Los Gatos Blvd 31.5 11 34.7 11 36.6 11 33.3 Total 103.4 18 99.7 18 96.7 19 93.7 Arterial Level of Service AM - HAWK @ 240 06/19/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 9 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 32.9 50.4 0.2 11 12 32.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 3.3 9.4 0.1 24 24 3.3 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 2.7 19.5 0.2 33 33 2.6 Univerity Avenue 6 24.3 42.8 0.2 16 19 18.8 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 20.2 29.0 0.1 11 12 17.9 Monterey Avenue 4 40.8 51.4 0.1 8 8 37.8 San Benito Avenue 3 7.8 13.1 0.0 9 10 6.9 Massol Avenue 2 2.8 5.1 0.0 16 17 2.4 Montgomery Street 1 1.4 3.5 0.0 19 20 1.2 Total 136.2 224.2 0.9 14 15 123.2 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 56 Run 56 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 12 31.0 12 32.5 13 27.9 12 NB SR 17 Ramps 24 3.2 24 3.5 24 3.3 24 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 2.8 33 2.6 33 2.6 32 Univerity Avenue 15 26.6 16 24.2 17 22.7 16 Santa Cruz Avenue 11 21.0 12 17.6 12 18.6 12 Monterey Avenue 8 37.4 8 36.9 8 38.7 7 San Benito Avenue 9 8.1 9 8.6 9 7.9 9 Massol Avenue 15 2.8 15 3.0 15 2.8 15 Montgomery Street 19 1.4 18 1.6 20 1.3 19 Total 14 134.3 14 130.5 15 125.7 14 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Run 63 Run 63 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 29.0 8 55.5 12 31.3 11 34.1 NB SR 17 Ramps 3.2 24 3.4 25 3.1 24 3.5 SB SR 17 Ramps 3.1 33 2.8 33 2.4 33 2.7 Univerity Avenue 24.2 17 23.6 17 22.9 16 25.5 Santa Cruz Avenue 18.3 12 16.9 10 24.0 12 17.3 Monterey Avenue 43.9 8 36.2 7 46.0 8 40.6 San Benito Avenue 8.1 9 7.7 9 7.9 9 7.4 Massol Avenue 2.8 15 2.9 15 2.9 16 2.7 Montgomery Street 1.4 20 1.3 20 1.3 19 1.5 Total 134.0 13 150.5 14 141.8 14 135.2 Arterial Level of Service PM - Hawk 08/08/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 47 Run 47 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 11.9 28.3 0.1 19 15 18.5 HAWK 9 2.6 4.9 0.0 15 13 3.2 Massol Avenue 2 1.2 2.6 0.0 24 20 1.7 San Benito Avenue 3 1.1 3.7 0.0 21 17 2.1 Tait Avenue 4 1.1 5.4 0.0 22 15 3.9 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 50.6 61.9 0.1 6 4 90.0 University Avenue 6 36.0 45.0 0.1 7 6 45.8 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 20.2 39.9 0.2 17 15 25.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 7.9 25.5 0.2 25 20 13.9 Alberto Way 7 4.6 11.2 0.1 20 18 6.0 Los Gatos Blvd 8 29.1 47.3 0.2 12 11 33.9 Total 166.2 275.9 1.0 13 10 244.2 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 48 Run 48 Run 50 Run 50 Run 52 Run 52 Run 54 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 21 10.1 18 13.6 18 13.4 20 HAWK 15 2.4 14 2.7 14 3.0 15 Massol Avenue 24 1.2 25 1.1 23 1.3 24 San Benito Avenue 21 1.1 22 0.9 21 1.2 22 Tait Avenue 23 1.0 25 0.6 23 0.8 23 Santa Cruz Avenuea 6 53.5 8 36.3 7 48.2 6 University Avenue 7 35.1 9 25.8 7 36.5 6 SB SR 17 Ramps 18 19.8 19 16.7 15 27.3 18 NB SR 17 Ramps 26 6.5 28 5.5 22 11.0 26 Alberto Way 22 3.8 20 4.7 20 4.7 20 Los Gatos Blvd 13 25.8 12 31.6 13 24.9 12 Total 14 160.2 15 139.5 13 172.4 13 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 54 Run 55 Run 55 Run 56 Run 56 Run 58 Run 58 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 10.9 21 10.3 20 10.6 22 8.4 HAWK 2.5 15 2.5 15 2.4 16 2.1 Massol Avenue 1.1 24 1.2 25 1.0 26 1.0 San Benito Avenue 1.0 21 1.1 23 0.9 23 0.8 Tait Avenue 0.9 20 1.6 24 0.6 25 0.5 Santa Cruz Avenuea 53.4 5 65.0 7 46.1 8 35.8 University Avenue 40.9 7 38.0 7 37.1 8 31.7 SB SR 17 Ramps 19.3 18 19.0 18 18.9 19 17.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 7.1 26 7.2 26 6.7 27 6.4 Alberto Way 4.6 22 3.6 21 4.0 20 4.5 Los Gatos Blvd 28.2 13 25.9 10 41.0 13 26.2 Total 169.9 13 175.5 13 169.4 15 134.8 Arterial Level of Service PM - Hawk 08/08/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 8 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 47 Run 47 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 10.2 28.4 0.2 20 21 9.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 0.9 7.4 0.1 31 30 1.0 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 1.6 19.3 0.2 33 33 1.6 Univerity Avenue 6 18.6 38.2 0.2 18 16 22.5 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 27.6 37.0 0.1 9 4 68.1 Monterey Avenue 4 31.5 48.9 0.1 9 3 111.5 San Benito Avenue 3 17.5 23.8 0.0 5 3 35.0 Massol Avenue 2 4.2 6.7 0.0 12 9 6.6 HAWK 9 1.5 3.8 0.0 16 16 1.6 Montgomery Street 1 0.7 2.5 0.0 29 26 1.0 Total 114.3 216.1 0.9 15 9 258.0 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 48 Run 48 Run 50 Run 50 Run 52 Run 52 Run 54 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 21 10.4 20 11.0 22 8.0 20 NB SR 17 Ramps 31 0.9 31 0.9 32 0.6 31 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 1.5 33 1.6 34 1.3 33 Univerity Avenue 18 19.3 19 17.7 18 19.6 18 Santa Cruz Avenue 10 22.4 10 23.8 10 23.7 10 Monterey Avenue 14 18.3 22 7.2 10 29.2 10 San Benito Avenue 5 20.3 7 10.8 4 24.4 5 Massol Avenue 11 4.5 12 4.0 9 6.4 13 HAWK 16 1.5 15 1.7 15 1.8 16 Montgomery Street 28 0.7 28 0.7 28 0.8 28 Total 16 99.9 18 79.4 15 115.9 16 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 54 Run 55 Run 55 Run 56 Run 56 Run 58 Run 58 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 10.1 21 9.1 21 9.8 19 11.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.0 30 1.0 31 0.9 30 1.0 SB SR 17 Ramps 2.0 34 1.1 33 1.6 33 1.4 Univerity Avenue 18.1 20 15.3 18 19.7 18 19.4 Santa Cruz Avenue 21.9 10 22.0 7 38.2 12 18.3 Monterey Avenue 28.5 17 13.2 5 61.3 13 20.6 San Benito Avenue 18.1 6 14.7 5 19.1 6 13.1 Massol Avenue 3.8 13 3.7 12 4.4 14 3.1 HAWK 1.5 17 1.3 16 1.4 17 1.2 Montgomery Street 0.7 30 0.6 29 0.7 30 0.6 Total 105.7 18 82.0 13 157.0 17 90.1 Arterial Level of Service AM - Full Signal 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 7 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 6.8 19.6 0.1 25 25 6.6 Massol Avenue 2 1.6 3.3 0.0 20 19 1.8 San Benito Avenue 3 0.6 3.1 0.0 26 26 0.6 Tait Avenue 4 0.5 4.9 0.0 24 26 0.2 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 17.0 27.6 0.1 14 17 12.2 University Avenue 6 23.5 32.1 0.1 10 10 24.6 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 6.7 25.7 0.2 27 27 6.7 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 1.7 18.3 0.2 35 35 1.7 Alberto Way 7 10.4 16.6 0.1 14 14 10.0 Los Gatos Blvd 8 33.4 50.7 0.2 11 11 33.5 Total 102.2 201.8 1.0 18 18 98.0 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 55 Run 55 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 26 6.1 25 6.7 26 5.7 25 Massol Avenue 23 1.2 20 1.7 17 2.2 20 San Benito Avenue 27 0.5 26 0.6 23 1.0 26 Tait Avenue 26 0.3 26 0.3 16 2.9 26 Santa Cruz Avenuea 18 11.9 16 14.0 6 52.3 16 University Avenue 11 21.2 11 21.1 7 35.5 9 SB SR 17 Ramps 26 7.5 27 6.8 27 6.2 26 NB SR 17 Ramps 35 1.7 34 1.8 35 1.8 35 Alberto Way 14 10.6 14 10.2 13 11.4 14 Los Gatos Blvd 11 37.2 12 32.0 11 35.0 12 Total 18 98.2 19 95.1 14 154.0 18 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Run 63 Run 63 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 7.0 25 6.7 25 7.0 26 5.9 Massol Avenue 1.7 22 1.4 21 1.4 23 1.1 San Benito Avenue 0.6 26 0.6 26 0.6 28 0.4 Tait Avenue 0.3 26 0.2 26 0.3 26 0.3 Santa Cruz Avenuea 14.7 18 11.1 17 13.2 15 15.9 University Avenue 26.3 12 19.2 12 18.7 9 26.2 SB SR 17 Ramps 8.2 27 7.2 29 5.2 28 6.2 NB SR 17 Ramps 1.7 36 1.6 35 1.5 35 1.5 Alberto Way 9.7 14 9.9 14 9.9 13 11.2 Los Gatos Blvd 31.6 11 34.0 12 32.1 12 29.3 Total 101.6 19 91.9 19 89.9 18 98.0 Arterial Level of Service AM - Full Signal 06/20/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 9 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 54 Run 54 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 34.4 51.8 0.2 11 13 27.1 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 4.6 10.7 0.1 21 25 3.1 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 15.3 31.9 0.2 20 33 2.8 Univerity Avenue 6 52.4 70.6 0.2 10 13 35.1 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 47.0 55.8 0.1 6 7 40.4 Monterey Avenue 4 54.8 65.3 0.1 6 6 57.2 San Benito Avenue 3 10.4 15.7 0.0 8 8 10.2 Massol Avenue 2 3.9 6.2 0.0 13 13 3.7 Montgomery Street 1 1.3 3.4 0.0 20 20 1.3 Total 224.1 311.4 0.9 10 12 180.9 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 55 Run 55 Run 57 Run 57 Run 58 Run 58 Run 59 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 13 28.4 11 33.0 12 28.6 12 NB SR 17 Ramps 25 3.1 24 3.5 25 3.2 24 SB SR 17 Ramps 33 2.7 34 2.4 30 4.1 22 Univerity Avenue 17 23.3 15 29.2 7 76.4 8 Santa Cruz Avenue 8 29.7 6 44.2 5 61.6 5 Monterey Avenue 6 53.0 6 52.5 6 53.7 6 San Benito Avenue 8 10.3 8 10.0 8 10.3 8 Massol Avenue 13 3.9 13 3.7 13 3.7 13 Montgomery Street 19 1.4 19 1.4 20 1.2 20 Total 13 155.9 12 179.8 9 242.8 10 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 59 Run 61 Run 61 Run 62 Run 62 Run 63 Run 63 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 28.8 13 28.6 13 26.4 6 78.8 NB SR 17 Ramps 3.3 25 3.0 24 3.3 10 17.4 SB SR 17 Ramps 13.1 14 28.9 33 2.9 6 89.0 Univerity Avenue 67.4 6 101.8 16 24.8 5 110.0 Santa Cruz Avenue 52.7 4 76.4 8 33.0 4 68.3 Monterey Avenue 55.7 5 64.9 7 48.5 6 59.9 San Benito Avenue 9.9 7 12.2 8 9.7 7 11.9 Massol Avenue 3.7 11 4.6 13 3.8 11 4.7 Montgomery Street 1.3 20 1.2 21 1.2 19 1.4 Total 235.9 8 321.7 13 153.5 6 441.4 Arterial Level of Service PM - Full Signal 08/08/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 36 Run 36 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Montgomery Street 1 31.6 89.7 0.6 23 25 23.5 Massol Avenue 2 2.2 4.1 0.0 17 17 2.1 San Benito Avenue 3 2.4 6.6 0.0 20 21 2.0 Tait Avenue 4 0.8 3.5 0.0 20 22 0.5 Santa Cruz Avenuea 5 39.3 50.5 0.1 8 8 37.8 University Avenue 6 30.0 39.1 0.1 8 8 29.0 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 19.3 39.1 0.2 18 17 21.4 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 7.1 24.6 0.2 26 25 8.1 Alberto Way 7 4.8 11.5 0.1 20 21 4.2 Los Gatos Blvd 8 30.5 48.6 0.2 12 11 33.1 Total 167.9 317.3 1.4 16 17 161.6 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 37 Run 37 Run 39 Run 39 Run 42 Run 42 Run 43 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Montgomery Street 14 91.3 27 20.2 25 24.3 23 Massol Avenue 13 3.6 18 2.1 17 2.1 18 San Benito Avenue 13 5.6 21 2.0 20 2.1 21 Tait Avenue 12 3.0 22 0.5 22 0.5 21 Santa Cruz Avenuea 6 56.5 9 34.9 10 28.5 8 University Avenue 7 35.2 9 27.8 10 22.2 8 SB SR 17 Ramps 18 19.1 18 19.0 18 18.0 18 NB SR 17 Ramps 26 7.2 26 7.3 27 6.6 26 Alberto Way 19 5.0 18 5.9 19 5.2 21 Los Gatos Blvd 13 26.9 9 45.9 14 23.8 10 Total 13 253.4 16 165.5 18 133.4 16 Arterial Level of Service: EB State Route 9 Run 43 Run 45 Run 45 Run 46 Run 46 Run 47 Run 47 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Montgomery Street 30.7 25 24.7 26 22.4 24 25.9 Massol Avenue 2.0 17 2.2 19 1.7 18 2.0 San Benito Avenue 2.0 21 2.0 21 1.8 21 2.0 Tait Avenue 0.6 22 0.5 22 0.6 21 0.6 Santa Cruz Avenuea 39.1 9 33.3 8 37.0 8 39.8 University Avenue 29.6 8 30.9 9 26.5 8 33.7 SB SR 17 Ramps 19.6 17 21.2 18 17.7 17 21.7 NB SR 17 Ramps 7.4 25 8.2 27 6.8 26 7.4 Alberto Way 3.9 21 4.1 20 4.8 19 5.5 Los Gatos Blvd 37.3 13 26.0 13 25.4 13 27.8 Total 172.3 17 153.0 18 144.5 16 166.3 Arterial Level of Service PM - Full Signal 08/08/2018 State Route 9 Corridor Study - Los Gatos SimTraffic Report W-Trans Page 8 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Delay Travel Dist Arterial Run 36 Run 36 Cross Street Node (s/veh) time (s) (mi) Speed Speed Delay Alberto Way 7 9.4 27.8 0.2 21 20 10.1 NB SR 17 Ramps 102 0.8 7.3 0.1 31 32 0.7 SB SR 17 Ramps 101 1.4 19.1 0.2 33 34 1.0 Univerity Avenue 6 20.4 39.6 0.2 18 17 21.0 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 28.5 37.8 0.1 8 9 25.4 Monterey Avenue 4 24.8 43.9 0.1 11 10 29.3 San Benito Avenue 3 10.0 13.9 0.0 5 4 12.4 Massol Avenue 2 4.9 9.0 0.0 14 13 5.7 Montgomery Street 1 0.6 2.9 0.0 24 24 0.6 Total 100.9 201.5 0.9 16 16 106.4 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 37 Run 37 Run 39 Run 39 Run 42 Run 42 Run 43 Cross Street Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Alberto Way 21 8.6 21 9.4 20 9.8 21 NB SR 17 Ramps 31 0.8 31 0.9 31 0.8 31 SB SR 17 Ramps 34 1.4 32 2.0 34 1.4 34 Univerity Avenue 18 20.4 18 19.1 17 20.3 18 Santa Cruz Avenue 5 57.7 9 25.9 9 25.2 9 Monterey Avenue 4 89.8 15 16.3 14 17.5 9 San Benito Avenue 3 20.7 5 10.5 5 8.8 4 Massol Avenue 10 8.3 16 4.2 15 4.8 13 Montgomery Street 22 0.9 23 0.7 25 0.4 22 Total 10 208.4 17 89.2 17 88.9 16 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Route 9 Run 43 Run 45 Run 45 Run 46 Run 46 Run 47 Run 47 Cross Street Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Speed Delay Alberto Way 8.6 20 10.0 21 9.4 21 9.3 NB SR 17 Ramps 0.8 31 0.9 30 1.0 31 0.9 SB SR 17 Ramps 1.2 34 1.1 34 1.5 33 1.8 Univerity Avenue 20.0 18 19.6 17 21.9 17 21.0 Santa Cruz Avenue 26.6 9 24.7 9 25.0 10 21.2 Monterey Avenue 32.8 16 13.6 17 12.7 19 10.6 San Benito Avenue 12.2 6 7.5 6 7.4 8 5.0 Massol Avenue 6.0 16 3.9 15 4.8 20 2.5 Montgomery Street 0.9 25 0.5 25 0.5 25 0.5 Total 109.1 18 81.9 18 84.2 19 72.7 Table 9 – AM Peak Hour Travel Time Direction of Travel SIMTRAFFIC - Existing SIMTRAFFIC – Alt. 1 - RRFB SIMTRAFFIC – Alt 2. - HAWK SIMTRAFFIC – Alt 3. - Traffic Signal Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed EB Montgomery Street – Los Gatos Boulevard 3:02 20 3:13 19 3:20 18 3:22 18 WB Montgomery Street – Los Gatos Boulevard 3:14 16 3:26 15 4:07 13 5:11 10 Notes: Travel Time is measured in minutes: seconds; Average Speed is measured in miles per hour (mph) Table 10 – PM Peak Hour Travel Time Direction of Travel SIMTRAFFIC - Existing SIMTRAFFIC – Alt. 1 - RRFB SIMTRAFFIC – Alt 2. - HAWK SIMTRAFFIC – Alt 3. - Traffic Signal Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed Average Travel Time Average Speed EB Montgomery Street – Los Gatos Boulevard 4:21 14 4:20 14 4:36 13 5:17 11 WB Montgomery Street – Los Gatos Boulevard 3:08 17 3:25 15 3:36 15 3:22 16 Notes: Travel Time is measured in minutes: seconds; Average Speed is measured in miles per hour (mph)