My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2016-01-25 Closed and Interview and Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
AgdaPkt 2016-01-25 Closed and Interview and Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2016 10:03:08 AM
Creation date
1/21/2016 6:15:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
1/25/2016
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
522
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />8 | Page <br /> <br />Table 7 Average Intersection Vehicle Delay during Morning Peak Hour (seconds) <br />Average Vehicle Delay (seconds) <br />Intersection Pre-Pilot <br />During <br />Pilot <br />Absolute <br />Change <br />Percent <br />Change <br />Farm Hill at Emerald Hill 36.6 28.9 -7.7 -21% <br />Farm Hill at Glennan 7.7 30.6 22.9 297% <br />Farm Hill at McGarvey 9.8 19.9 10.1 103% <br />Farm Hill at Jefferson 9.1 17.1 8 88% <br />Sources: City of Redwood City, Synchro model (December 2015) <br />Quality Traffic Data (May 27-28, 2015 and October 27-28, 2015). <br /> <br />Average vehicle delay increased at each of the signalized intersections during the pilot as <br />compared to May 2015. Increases ranged from eight to twenty-three seconds, with the largest <br />increase at the intersection of Farm Hill and Glennan. <br />Although a reduction in delay is shown for the intersection at Emerald Hill, this is more likely <br />due to software limitations than an actual reduction due to the pilot project. The pilot <br />configuration at this intersection maintains four travel lanes through the intersection, thereby <br />maintaining the capacity of the intersection. <br />Note that these results are different than the travel time results because average vehicle delay <br />is: 1) only capturing intersection delays (as opposed to delay experienced between <br />intersections), and 2) it accounts for delays to vehicles on side streets while the travel times <br />studies only reflect conditions for vehicles travelling on the pilot corridor. <br />Next Steps: Continue to monitor travel times and average vehicle delays. <br />Objective 4: Monitor the number of vehicles traveling along the pilot corridor <br />during the peak hour to determine if drivers are shifting their travel patterns <br />Why: Drivers may change when they make trips to avoid congestion. There is concern that <br />overall vehicle volumes would simply drop as drivers opted for alternative routes to avoid <br />congestion. There is also concern within the community that the project would not <br />accommodate growth in traffic associated with downtown development. <br />Measurement: Traffic volumes were collected on three midweek days in May 2015 and in <br />October 2015 at three locations within the pilot corridor by a traffic data consultant using <br />standard tube counters installed across the roadway. <br /> <br />8.A. - Page 19
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.