SlideShare a Scribd company logo
OVERVIEW
• Introduction   • Environmental Impacts

• Background     • Cost Estimation

• Demand         • Alternatives

• Design         • Final
                   Recommendation
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
• County can determine proposed onramp’s necessity


• Helps County prioritize where the onramp fits in the
  implementation of Community Plan (if it fits at all)


                 NOT A PROPOSAL
BACKGROUND
Population and Surrounding Land
Uses
• Existing population of 1,835


• Projected population of 5,182

• Surrounding land uses
  • Currently: SF Residential & Commercial
  • Community Plan will increase amount and types
    of land
BACKGROUND
Existing Onramp Conditions
• Four connections to Highway 101
  • Northern and Southern Mission
  • 10th Street
  • Cemetery Road
BACKGROUND
Existing Onramp Conditions
• Current Onramps are not ideal
• S. Mission southbound onramp enters into fast
  lane
• 10th Street not a complete interchange
  • Does not comply with Caltrans standards
  • Lacks southbound onramp
BACKGROUND
Existing Onramp Conditions
• Cemetery Road:
  • Drivers must travel over a mile to enter freeway
  • No speed limit signs
  • Treated as one, large onramp
  • Prevalent cracking and deterioration in asphalted
    pavement
BACKGROUND
Existing Onramp Conditions
Onramp Distribution:
 • S. Mission is more popular despite safety concerns
                   Caltrans Traffic Volumes for 2008
             Onramp/Direction            Average Daily Trips
           Cemetery Road/ SB On                  850
           S. Mission St./ SB On                1700
            S. Mission St./ NB Off              1800
               10th St./ NB Off                  800
               10th St./ SB Off                  300
DEMAND
Social Demand
• Shorter travel distance preferred

• Safer conditions
  • Cemetery Road treated as one, large onramp

• Reduces traffic off Cemetery Road
  • Preferred for future residential development west of
    Cemetery Road
DEMAND
Social Demand
• 87% community workshop feedback in favor of
  improved onramp interchange
DEMAND
Technical Demand
• Ultimate goal to find Cemetery Road future Level
  of Service (LOS)

• Trip generation based on land use and land use
  area
DEMAND
     Technical Demand
     • Trip Generation

                                   Total Trip Generation
Daily Trips   AM Peak Hour   PM Peak Hour   AM In    AM Out   Pass By   PM In   PM Out   Pass By

 128,091         7,062          13,853      10,110   1,916     444      4,570   6,197     3,086




           •Focus is on PM Out trips
DEMAND
Technical Demand

• Where are these trips going?
  • How many are leaving San Miguel?
  • Of these, how many are using Cemetery
    Road?
DEMAND
Technical Demand
• Trip Distribution
                             Distribution Analysis

          Distribution     2000 ADT     2003 ATD    2008 ATD    Average

          Northbound        24.09%       20.83%      22.15%     22.36%

          Southbound        75.91%       79.17%      77.85%     77.64%


                     Southbound Distribution Analysis
            Distribution     2000 ADT    2003 ATD    2008 ATD   Average

          Cemetery Road       42.31%      44.74%      33.33%     40.13%

           South Mission      57.69%      55.26%      66.67%     59.87%
DEMAND
Technical Demand
• Level of Service
  • Based on Transportation Research Board’s
    Highway Capacity Manual (2000)
  • Volume-Capacity Ratio
      • Cemetery Road capacity at 1,600 vehicles
        per hour per lane
DEMAND
Technical Demand
• Level of Service C Threshold
   • To cross threshold of Level ofTrips Using Cemetery
                            # Trips Leaving San
                                                LOS Service
                                                  #
                                                     C, trips leaving must
 % Trips Leaving San Miguelabout 60% (v/c threshold at 0.71) Level of Service
      at exceed Miguel                            Rd               V/C Ratio
             75                        4,648              1,448      0.91    F
   • 60% on the conservative side based on land
             70                        4,338              1,352      0.84    D

      uses providing internal trips 1,255
             65
             60
                                       4,028
                                       3,718              1,158
                                                                     0.78
                                                                     0.72
                                                                             D
                                                                             D

   • Range likely under 55%
             55                        3,408              1,062      0.66    C
         50                3,099               965           0.60       C
         45                2,789               869           0.54       C
         40                2,479               772           0.48       B
         35                2,169               676           0.42       B
DEMAND
Technical Demand


                 New interchange not necessary


                                                   Level of Service
                             # Trips Leaving San         # Trips Using Cemetery
% Trips Leaving San Miguel   Miguel                      Rd                       V/C Ratio   Level of Service
           75                          4,648                       1,448            0.91             F
           70                          4,338                       1,352            0.84             D
           65                          4,028                       1,255            0.78             D
           60                          3,718                       1,158            0.72             D
           55                          3,408                       1,062            0.66             C
           50                          3,099                       965              0.60             C
           45                          2,789                       869              0.54             C
           40                          2,479                       772              0.48             B
           35                          2,169                       676              0.42             B
DESIGN
Dimensions
• Length at 700 feet
  • Average acceleration time and
    necessary length to reach 65mph (465
    feet)
  • Distance at which drivers can clearly
    see traffic on highway (additional 245   Cemetery
                                             Road
    feet)
  • Consistent with northbound onramp


                                             Cemetery
                                             Road
                     Cemetery
                     Road
  Cemetery
  Road
DESIGN
Dimensions
• Width at 24 feet
  • Based on Caltrans Highway Design
    Manual
  • 12 foot single lane width
  • 8 foot paved right shoulder
  • 4 foot paved left shoulder         Cemetery
                                       Road




                                       Cemetery
                                       Road
                   Cemetery
                   Road
  Cemetery
  Road
DESIGN
Additional Considerations
• Relocation of Cemetery Road
   Intersection
  • Based on Caltrans Highway Design
    Manual
  • At least 400 feet westward         Cemetery
                                       Road




                                       Cemetery
                                       Road
                   Cemetery
                   Road
  Cemetery
  Road
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Air Quality
• Temporary rise in particulate matter

Habitat
• Threatened and endangered
   species within 1 mile radius of San
   Miguel
  • San Joaquin Kit Fox – Not near
    onramp site
• Soil:                                   Legend
  • Valuable agricultural soil may pose
    as a constraint for development
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Topography &
  Hydrology
• Onramp site not affected
   by topographical and
   hydrological constraints
  • Not within 100-year
    floodplain
• Slope on project site
   permits development
• Drainage ditch partially
   paved over
COST ESTIMATION
• From numerous sources:
  • Rene’ Walker, Office Engineer
  • Colin Jones, Chief of Public Affairs
  • Willow Road Interchange Project
• Cost                      • Caltrans Budget for
  • $400 - $600 thousand District 5
  • Considers construction,   Highway Projects
    labor, equipment,             •$350-400 million
    environmental review
ALTERNATIVES
                 Alternative                Total Cost         Extra Cost

10th Street Interchange Improvement     $400,000 - $600,000         -

S. Mission Improvement                  $300,000 - $400,000    $65,000 / yr

Cemetery Road Improvement                    $195,200               -

Cemetery Road Improvement W/ Meter      $495,200 - $ 595,200   $65,000 / yr
S.Mission & Cemetery Road Improvement   $495,200 - $595,200    $65,000 / yr

No Build                                         -                  -
RECOMMENDATION
• Consider alternatives
  • Alleviates more immediate issues
  • Demand not met
THANK YOU

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

QuéBec (J..
QuéBec (J..QuéBec (J..
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
Arsenalgroup
 
iCollabMobile
iCollabMobileiCollabMobile
iCollabMobile
Armando Carrasco
 
Mobile Apps
Mobile AppsMobile Apps
Mobile Apps
Armando Carrasco
 
Presentation1
Presentation1Presentation1
Presentation1
Binod57
 
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatah
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatahSyahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatah
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatahDiana Pusfita
 

Viewers also liked (20)

Edinburgh
EdinburghEdinburgh
Edinburgh
 
Hogmanay
HogmanayHogmanay
Hogmanay
 
Test
TestTest
Test
 
Mosaicultures Internationales Cb
Mosaicultures Internationales CbMosaicultures Internationales Cb
Mosaicultures Internationales Cb
 
R A M A D A N I A T E S 04
R A M A D A N I A T E S 04R A M A D A N I A T E S 04
R A M A D A N I A T E S 04
 
La Vie 3s
La Vie 3sLa Vie 3s
La Vie 3s
 
Invento
InventoInvento
Invento
 
Hpv (5)
Hpv (5)Hpv (5)
Hpv (5)
 
QuéBec (J..
QuéBec (J..QuéBec (J..
QuéBec (J..
 
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
Monsanto's Eric Sachs on supporting Monarch habitat restoration on a produciv...
 
Grammar
GrammarGrammar
Grammar
 
iCollabMobile
iCollabMobileiCollabMobile
iCollabMobile
 
Mobile Apps
Mobile AppsMobile Apps
Mobile Apps
 
Cursos
CursosCursos
Cursos
 
Farm animals
Farm animalsFarm animals
Farm animals
 
Presentation1
Presentation1Presentation1
Presentation1
 
Flower
FlowerFlower
Flower
 
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatah
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatahSyahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatah
Syahwat kekuasaan di garut by mustafa fatah
 
Fast food restaurant
Fast food restaurantFast food restaurant
Fast food restaurant
 
About myself
About myselfAbout myself
About myself
 

Similar to Final presentation

Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
marcus evans Network
 
Second Semester Final Presentation
Second Semester Final PresentationSecond Semester Final Presentation
Second Semester Final PresentationThomas Crandall
 
Capstone Final Presentation
Capstone Final PresentationCapstone Final Presentation
Capstone Final PresentationChris Schultz
 
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322Mark Politi
 
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di TuriDeccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
pdituri
 
. Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
.   Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro.....   Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
. Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
IndraNathMishra2
 
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
Robert Byrd
 
Seymour Johnson AFB
Seymour Johnson AFBSeymour Johnson AFB
Seymour Johnson AFB
NC Military Business Center
 
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basinHydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Water, food and livelihoods in River Basins: Basin Focal Projects
 
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basinHydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
guest471c677
 

Similar to Final presentation (11)

Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
Taking the Bull by the Horns with Reliability Centered Maintenance - Trino Pe...
 
Second Semester Final Presentation
Second Semester Final PresentationSecond Semester Final Presentation
Second Semester Final Presentation
 
#27 Road Diets – Improving Safety for Everyone - Dougherty
#27 Road Diets – Improving Safety for Everyone - Dougherty#27 Road Diets – Improving Safety for Everyone - Dougherty
#27 Road Diets – Improving Safety for Everyone - Dougherty
 
Capstone Final Presentation
Capstone Final PresentationCapstone Final Presentation
Capstone Final Presentation
 
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322
Synchro Project Presentation_Rt 322
 
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di TuriDeccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
Deccan UGC 2011 Chiefs Forum - Seattle Fire Presentation - P Di Turi
 
. Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
.   Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro.....   Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
. Narmada Canal ExPresentation for Extradose Bridge for Gandhi Nagar Metro....
 
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
2010 04 14 Proserv Mms Pocsr Rotac Presentation
 
Seymour Johnson AFB
Seymour Johnson AFBSeymour Johnson AFB
Seymour Johnson AFB
 
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basinHydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
 
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basinHydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
Hydrology and Water Resources of the Indo-Gangetic basin
 

Final presentation

  • 1.
  • 2. OVERVIEW • Introduction • Environmental Impacts • Background • Cost Estimation • Demand • Alternatives • Design • Final Recommendation
  • 3. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE • County can determine proposed onramp’s necessity • Helps County prioritize where the onramp fits in the implementation of Community Plan (if it fits at all) NOT A PROPOSAL
  • 4. BACKGROUND Population and Surrounding Land Uses • Existing population of 1,835 • Projected population of 5,182 • Surrounding land uses • Currently: SF Residential & Commercial • Community Plan will increase amount and types of land
  • 5. BACKGROUND Existing Onramp Conditions • Four connections to Highway 101 • Northern and Southern Mission • 10th Street • Cemetery Road
  • 6. BACKGROUND Existing Onramp Conditions • Current Onramps are not ideal • S. Mission southbound onramp enters into fast lane • 10th Street not a complete interchange • Does not comply with Caltrans standards • Lacks southbound onramp
  • 7. BACKGROUND Existing Onramp Conditions • Cemetery Road: • Drivers must travel over a mile to enter freeway • No speed limit signs • Treated as one, large onramp • Prevalent cracking and deterioration in asphalted pavement
  • 8. BACKGROUND Existing Onramp Conditions Onramp Distribution: • S. Mission is more popular despite safety concerns Caltrans Traffic Volumes for 2008 Onramp/Direction Average Daily Trips Cemetery Road/ SB On 850 S. Mission St./ SB On 1700 S. Mission St./ NB Off 1800 10th St./ NB Off 800 10th St./ SB Off 300
  • 9. DEMAND Social Demand • Shorter travel distance preferred • Safer conditions • Cemetery Road treated as one, large onramp • Reduces traffic off Cemetery Road • Preferred for future residential development west of Cemetery Road
  • 10. DEMAND Social Demand • 87% community workshop feedback in favor of improved onramp interchange
  • 11. DEMAND Technical Demand • Ultimate goal to find Cemetery Road future Level of Service (LOS) • Trip generation based on land use and land use area
  • 12. DEMAND Technical Demand • Trip Generation Total Trip Generation Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM In AM Out Pass By PM In PM Out Pass By 128,091 7,062 13,853 10,110 1,916 444 4,570 6,197 3,086 •Focus is on PM Out trips
  • 13. DEMAND Technical Demand • Where are these trips going? • How many are leaving San Miguel? • Of these, how many are using Cemetery Road?
  • 14. DEMAND Technical Demand • Trip Distribution Distribution Analysis Distribution 2000 ADT 2003 ATD 2008 ATD Average Northbound 24.09% 20.83% 22.15% 22.36% Southbound 75.91% 79.17% 77.85% 77.64% Southbound Distribution Analysis Distribution 2000 ADT 2003 ATD 2008 ATD Average Cemetery Road 42.31% 44.74% 33.33% 40.13% South Mission 57.69% 55.26% 66.67% 59.87%
  • 15. DEMAND Technical Demand • Level of Service • Based on Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (2000) • Volume-Capacity Ratio • Cemetery Road capacity at 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane
  • 16. DEMAND Technical Demand • Level of Service C Threshold • To cross threshold of Level ofTrips Using Cemetery # Trips Leaving San LOS Service # C, trips leaving must % Trips Leaving San Miguelabout 60% (v/c threshold at 0.71) Level of Service at exceed Miguel Rd V/C Ratio 75 4,648 1,448 0.91 F • 60% on the conservative side based on land 70 4,338 1,352 0.84 D uses providing internal trips 1,255 65 60 4,028 3,718 1,158 0.78 0.72 D D • Range likely under 55% 55 3,408 1,062 0.66 C 50 3,099 965 0.60 C 45 2,789 869 0.54 C 40 2,479 772 0.48 B 35 2,169 676 0.42 B
  • 17. DEMAND Technical Demand New interchange not necessary Level of Service # Trips Leaving San # Trips Using Cemetery % Trips Leaving San Miguel Miguel Rd V/C Ratio Level of Service 75 4,648 1,448 0.91 F 70 4,338 1,352 0.84 D 65 4,028 1,255 0.78 D 60 3,718 1,158 0.72 D 55 3,408 1,062 0.66 C 50 3,099 965 0.60 C 45 2,789 869 0.54 C 40 2,479 772 0.48 B 35 2,169 676 0.42 B
  • 18. DESIGN Dimensions • Length at 700 feet • Average acceleration time and necessary length to reach 65mph (465 feet) • Distance at which drivers can clearly see traffic on highway (additional 245 Cemetery Road feet) • Consistent with northbound onramp Cemetery Road Cemetery Road Cemetery Road
  • 19. DESIGN Dimensions • Width at 24 feet • Based on Caltrans Highway Design Manual • 12 foot single lane width • 8 foot paved right shoulder • 4 foot paved left shoulder Cemetery Road Cemetery Road Cemetery Road Cemetery Road
  • 20. DESIGN Additional Considerations • Relocation of Cemetery Road Intersection • Based on Caltrans Highway Design Manual • At least 400 feet westward Cemetery Road Cemetery Road Cemetery Road Cemetery Road
  • 21. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Air Quality • Temporary rise in particulate matter Habitat • Threatened and endangered species within 1 mile radius of San Miguel • San Joaquin Kit Fox – Not near onramp site • Soil: Legend • Valuable agricultural soil may pose as a constraint for development
  • 22. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Topography & Hydrology • Onramp site not affected by topographical and hydrological constraints • Not within 100-year floodplain • Slope on project site permits development • Drainage ditch partially paved over
  • 23. COST ESTIMATION • From numerous sources: • Rene’ Walker, Office Engineer • Colin Jones, Chief of Public Affairs • Willow Road Interchange Project • Cost • Caltrans Budget for • $400 - $600 thousand District 5 • Considers construction, Highway Projects labor, equipment, •$350-400 million environmental review
  • 24. ALTERNATIVES Alternative Total Cost Extra Cost 10th Street Interchange Improvement $400,000 - $600,000 - S. Mission Improvement $300,000 - $400,000 $65,000 / yr Cemetery Road Improvement $195,200 - Cemetery Road Improvement W/ Meter $495,200 - $ 595,200 $65,000 / yr S.Mission & Cemetery Road Improvement $495,200 - $595,200 $65,000 / yr No Build - -
  • 25. RECOMMENDATION • Consider alternatives • Alleviates more immediate issues • Demand not met