HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-02-16 Agenda Packet I declue under penalry of perjury that I am employed
by t6e City of Chult Vista in the aflia of the City Clerk
and that 1 posted the document accarding to Brown Act
requ¢�b.
D�ted: 2 I 81p�W: � LL
� ��{//
� c-��
CHULA VISTA
/� ������1i��
/ �
�
Mary Casillas Salas, Mayor
PaVicia Aguilar, Councilmember Gary Halbert, Ciry Manager
Pamela Bensoussan, Coundlmember Glen R. Googins, City Attomey
John McCann, Councilmember ponna R. Norris, City Clerk
Steve Miesen, Councilmember
Tuesday, February 76, 2016 5:00 PM Council Chambers
276 4th Avenue, Building A
Chula Vista, CA 91910
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CALLTO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers AguiJar, Bensoussan. McCann, Miesen and Mayor Casillas Salas
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
A. 16-QOS9 OATHS OF OFFICE
Mayra Swanson, Board of Library Trustees
Carlos Jaime, Resource Conservation Commission
Jennffer Carbuccia, Civil Service Commission
B. 16-0023 EMPLOYEE SERVICE RECOGNITION HONORING STAFF
WITH MILESTONE SERVICE ANNIVERSARIES
C. 16-0025 PRESENTATION BY SHARP HEALTHCARE CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER PABLO VELEZ AND VICE
PRESIDENT OF FACILITIES PAT NEMETH ON THE NEW
OCEAN VIEW TOWER, A $239-MILLION,
170,000-SQUARE-FOOT HOSPITAL PROJECT ON THE
SHARP CHULA VISTA CAMPUS
cxy or cn�r.v�x v,w+ v�xK.a an vr trmte
!" #&.0 '+,-./(B-23&(3!";6 "4<;6
JINDIA" +GDIM+C"PH -1*";"Q"RS
34%) !"#)5"##)% ,!6)64%) (% 6) ,#% 0,')(6,77)'%! $$% 0,6" ()&1) %)$ 6" -)5"64 6)
0"(! ((" -) #%((),) !"#$%$&%'-),)$%$&%') 7)64%)8 &#"!-) ')(6,77)'%9 %(6()64,6), )"6%$)
&%)'%$ :%0)7 ')0"(! ((" ;))<7)1 )5"(4)6 )(8%,=) ) %) 7)64%(%)"6%$(-)8#%,(%)7"##) 6),)
>?%9 %(6)6 )28%,=@)7 '$)A,:,"#,&#%)" )64%)# &&1B), 0)( &$"6)"6)6 )64%) "61) #%'=)8'" ')6 )64%)
$%%6" +;))<6%$()8 ##%0)7' $)64%) (% 6) ,#% 0,')5"##)&%)0"(! ((%0)"$$%0",6%#1)7 ## 5" +)
64%) (% 6) ,#% 0,';
;O GHIJJLY,))9>N,F!>@! A<S?B&!(E!@12 . !P'!Y'! /D!L'!PJGH:
GHIJJLY
"(./+$%! ZZ (61!*51!0$/.*1#:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
>9;A<,<"B!>@!?8B!"A?M!>@!"8SF,!NA&?,!,;;A<7!
4O GHIJJLG
GHIJJLG
"8SF,!NA&?,! S<A"A),F!">;B!"8,)?B9!P:YV!I!
\[8B,F?8M!"8SF,!NA&?,!,;NA&>9M!"> A&&A><\\!
\]&B"><;!9B,;A<7!,<;!,;>)?A><^
;161%(Z01/*!&1 6$+1#!;1Z *01/*
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51! +*$6$* !$#!/(*! !\[) (_1+*\\! #!D1E$/1D!./D1 !&1+*$(/!GXQVK!(E!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#`!*51 1E( 1'!
Z. #. /*!*(!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXJHJ\]+^\]Q^!/(!1/6$ (/01/* %!
16$1C!$#! 1a.$ 1D:
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51!( D$/ /+1:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
RO GXIJHVV9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!>@!
GXIJHVV
"8SF,!NA&?,!,))9>NA<7!,<!, B<; B<?!?>!?8B!
BRA&?A<7!,79BB B<?!@>9!;BNBF>)A<7!,!
?BFB79,)8!",<M><!"8,<<BF!<BRS&!&?S;M'!
3B?OBB<!?8B!"A?M!>@!"8SF,!NA&?,!,<;!,?bA<&!
<>9?8!, B9A",'!A<":`!,<;!,))9>)9A,?A<7!UGJH'HHJ!
@9> !?8B!,N,AF,3FB!3,F,<"B!>@!?8B!?BFB79,)8!
",<M><!;9,A<,7B!@BB!@S<;!?>!"A)!;9PJQ!
\[?BFB79,)8!",<M><!"8,<<BF!"> )FA,<"B!
@B,&A3AFA?M!&?S;M\\!\]YcX!N>?B!9BWSA9B;^
).2%$+!O( =#!;1Z *01/*
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51! +*$6$* !$#!/(*! !\[) (_1+*\\! #!D1E$/1D!./D1 !&1+*$(/!GXQVK!(E!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#`!*51 1E( 1'!
Z. #. /*!*(!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXJHJ\]+^\]Q^!/(!1/6$ (/01/* %!
16$1C!$#! 1a.$ 1D:
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51! 1#(%.*$(/:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
HAD@N"CD@J)DM"BCJ@"AKD" JINDIA" +GDIM+C
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !1! .$/% 0!'/!12""213"4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 2
!" #&.0 '+,-./(B-23&(3!";6 "4<;6
?F9GH " J@@DIAN
C%'( ()(8%,=" +)0 '" +)C &#"!) $$% 6()$,1),00'%(()64%) !"#) ), 1)( &D%!6)$,66%')
5"64" )64%) !"#E()D '"(0"!6" )64,6)"() 6)#"(6%0),(), )"6%$) )64%),+% 0,;))26,6%)#,5)
+% %',##1)8' 4"&"6()64%) !"#)7' $)0"(! ((" +) ')6,=" +),!6" ) ), 1)"(( %) 6)" !# 0%0)
)64%),+% 0,-)& 6-)"7),88' 8'",6%-)64%) !"#)$,1)(!4%0 #%)64%)6 8"!)7 ')7 6 '%)0"(! ((" )
')'%7%')64%)$,66%')6 )(6,77;)) $$% 6(),'%)#"$"6%0)6 )64'%%)$" 6%(;
+ AHJI"HAD@N
34%)<6%$A(B)#"(6%0)" )64"()(%!6" ) 7)64%),+% 0,)5"##)&%)! ("0%'%0)" 0":"0 ,##1)&1)64%)
!"#), 0),'%)%F8%!6%0)6 )%#"!"6)0"(! ((" ), 0)0%#"&%',6" ;))<7)1 )5"(4)6 )(8%,=) ), 1)
"6%$-)8#%,(%)7"##) 6),)>?%9 %(6)6 )28%,=@)7 '$)A,:,"#,&#%)" )64%)# &&1B), 0)( &$"6)"6)6 )64%)
"61) #%'=)8'" ')6 )64%)$%%6" +;
7O GXIJPYG9B)>9?!><!?8B!"A?M!>@!"8SF,!NA&?,! ,9bB?A<7!
GXIJPYG
,<;!"> S<A",?A><&!)9>79, !,<;!
)9B&B<?,?A><!><!?89BBIMB,9! ,9bB?A<7!,<;!
"> S<A",?A><&!)F,<
"$* ! / -1
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51! +*$6$* !$#!/(*! !\[) (_1+*\\! #!D1E$/1D!./D1 !&1+*$(/!GXQVK!(E!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#`!*51 1E( 1'!
Z. #. /*!*(!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXJHJ\]+^\]Q^!/(!1/6$ (/01/* %!
16$1C!$#! 1a.$ 1D:
"(./+$%! ZZ (61!*51!Z% /:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
=O GXIJHYK"><&A;B9,?A><!>@!,;>)?A<7!?8B!3AbB!F,<B&!><!
GXIJHYK
39>,;O,M!@B,&A3AFA?M!&?S;M
9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!>@!
"8SF,!NA&?,!,;>)?A<7!?8B!3AbB!F,<B&!><!
39>,;O,M!@B,&A3AFA?M!&?S;M!,<;!,S?8>9ATA<7!
?8B!A )FB B<?,?A><!>@!?8B!&?S;M!
9B"> B<;,?A><&!,&!@S<;A<7!,FF>O&!?89>S78!
@S?S9B!",)A?,F!A )9>NB B<?!)9>79, !
)9>4B"?&
).2%$+!O( =#!;1Z *01/*
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51! +*$6$* !$#!/(*! !\[) (_1+*\\! #!D1E$/1D!./D1 !&1+*$(/!GXQVK!(E!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#`!*51 1E( 1'!
Z. #. /*!*(!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXJHJ\]+^\]Q^!/(!1/6$ (/01/* %!
16$1C!$#! 1a.$ 1D:
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51! 1#(%.*$(/:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !?! .$/% 0!'/!12""213"4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 3
!" #&.0 '+,-./(B-23&(3!";6 "4<;6
6O GHIJJHV"><&A;B9,?A><!>@!,))9>NA<7!?8B!4SFM!Y'!PJGH!
GHIJJHV
A<;B)B<;B<"B!;,M!@A9BO>9b&!@B&?AN,F!,&!,!
"A?MI&)><&>9B;!BNB<?
9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!>@!
"8SF,!NA&?,!,))9>NA<7!?8B!4SFM!Y'!PJGH!
A<;B)B<;B<"B!;,M!@A9BO>9b&!@B&?AN,F!,&!,!
"A?MI&)><&>9B;!BNB<?!@>9!@A&",F!MB,9!PJGHcPJGV
"$* ! / -1
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51!) (_1+*!a. %$E$1#!E( ! !" *1-( $+ %!Bd10Z*$(/!Z. #. /*!*(!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXQJY!
"% ##!Y!\] $/( !,%*1 *$(/#!*(!F /D^! /Dc( !&1+*$(/!GXQPQ!"% ##!PQ!
\]<( 0 %!>Z1 *$(/#!(E!@ +$%$*$1#!E( !).2%$+!7 *51 $/-#^:
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51! 1#(%.*$(/:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
"><&A;B9,?A><!>@!,))9>NA<7!F,bB@B&?!,&!,!
5O GHIJJHK
GHIJJHK
"A?MI&)><&>9B;!BNB<?
9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!>@!
"8SF,!NA&?,!,))9>NA<7!\[F,bB@B&?\\!?>!3B!8BF;!><!
,M!GY'!PJGH!,&!,!"A?MI&)><&>9B;!BNB<?!@>9!
@A&",F!MB,9!PJGXcPJGH!,<;!,FF>",?A<7!UGJ'JJJ!A<!
&)B"A,F!BNB<?!&)><&>9&8A)!@S<;A<7!?>!?8B!
BNB<?
"$* ! / -1
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51!) (_1+*!a. %$E$1#!E( ! !"% ##!PQ!" *1-( $+ %!Bd10Z*$(/!Z. #. /*!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
*(!&1+*$(/!GXQPQ!\]<( 0 %!>Z1 *$(/#!(E!@ +$%$*$1#!E( !).2%$+!
7 *51 $/-#^!(E!*51!" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!
7.$D1%$/1#:
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51! 1#(%.*$(/:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
TO GHIJJHX"><&A;B9,?A><!>@!,))9>NA<7!8,93>9@B&?!,<;!
GHIJJHX
?8B!&?,9FA78?!),9,;B!,&!"A?MI&)><&>9B;!
BNB<?&'!,<;!,))9>NA<7!?8B!@AFA<7!>@!,<!
,))FA",?A><!,<;!)>&&A3FB!,79BB B<?!@>9!,!
"> S<A?M!B<8,<"B B<?!79,<?
,:9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!
>@!"8SF,!NA&?,!,))9>NA<7!8,93>9@B&?!PJGH!,<;!
?8B!PJGH!&?,9FA78?!),9,;B!,&!"A?MI&)><&>9B;!
BNB<?&!@>9!@A&",F!MB,9!PJGHcPJGV
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !@! .$/% 0!'/!12""213"4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 4
!" #&.0 '+,-./(B-23&(3!";6 "4<;6
3:9B&>FS?A><!>@!?8B!"A?M!">S<"AF!>@!?8B!"A?M!
>@!"8SF,!NA&?,!,))9>NA<7!?8B!@AFA<7!>@!,<!
,))FA",?A><!@>9!,!UQJ'JJJ!"> S<A?M!
B<8,<"B B<?!79,<?!@9> !?8B!">S<?M!>@!&,<!
;AB7>'!,))9>NA<7!,!9B&>FS?A><!@>9!?8B!79,<?!
,))FA",?A><!9BWSA9B;!3M!?8B!">S<?M`!,<;'!
&8>SF;!?8B!"A?M!3B!,O,9;B;!79,<?!@S<;A<7'!
,S?8>9ATA<7!?8B!"A?M! ,<,7B9!>9!;B&A7<BB!?>!
BRB"S?B!,<!,79BB B<?!,<;!9BF,?B;!;>"S B<?&!
3B?OBB<!?8B!"A?M!>@!"8SF,!NA&?,!,<;!?8B!
">S<?M!>@!&,<!;AB7>!@>9!?8B!79,<?
"$* ! / -1
!: ; .%8 /%9
?51!) (_1+*!a. %$E$1#!E( ! !" *1-( $+ %!Bd10Z*$(/!Z. #. /*!*(!*51!
!</=$.'/8 /% +!>'%$7 9
" %$E( /$ !B/6$ (/01/* %!W. %$* !,+*!&* *1!7.$D1%$/1#!&1+*$(/!GXQJY!
"% ##!Y!\] $/( !,%*1 *$(/#!*(!F /D^! /Dc( !&1+*$(/!GXQPQ!"% ##!PQ!
\]<( 0 %!>Z1 *$(/#!(E!@ +$%$*$1#!E( !).2%$+!7 *51 $/-#^:!!
"(./+$%! D(Z*!*51! 1#(%.*$(/#:
!5% ((!6 7'88 /0 %$'/9
HAL"@+I+EDCUN"CD?JCAN
@+LJCUN"CD?JCAN
9,?A@A",?A><!>@!,))>A<? B<?!>@!N,FB9A,!
:O GHIJJLP
GHIJJLP
8B9<,<;BT!?>!?8B!M>S?8!,"?A><!">S<"AF
JFI HG@D@9DCNU" J@@DIAN
GJNDM"NDNNHJI
* !%$% 6() 7),!6" ()6,=% )" ) # (%0)2%((" )(4,##)&%)$,0%),:,"#,&#%)&1) ) )
G%0 %(0,1)7 ## 5" +)64%) !"#)/%%6" +),6)64%) "61)*66 ' %1E() 77"!%)" ),!! '0, !%)5"64)
64%)?,#84)/;).' 5 )*!6)AH :%' $% 6) 0%)IJKIL;LB;
"><@B9B<"B!OA?8!F,3>9!<B7>?A,?>9&!)S9&S,<?!
;<O GHIJJLQ
GHIJJLQ
?>!7>NB9< B<?!">;B!&B"?A><!XYLXV:H
,-1/+ !D1#$-/ *1D! 1Z 1#1/* *$61#e!!"(. */1 !"5 #1'!; 6$D!
3$%2 '!&$0(/!&$%6 '!8 ! ./#'!7 !8 %21 *'!7%1/!7((-$/#!
/D!b1%%1 !3 +(/
B0Z%( 11!( - /$f *$(/e!A/*1 / *$(/ %!,##(+$ *$(/!(E!@$ 1!
@$-5*1 #!\]A,@@^'!F(+ %!PGKJ
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !A! .$/% 0!'/!12""213"4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 5
!" #&.0 '+,-./(B-23&(3!";6 "4<;6
+MVJFCI@DIA
< )$%$ '1) 7) ,86," )26%:%)/"##"=" -)M "6%0)26,6%()N,:1)A?%6"'%0B
6 )64%)?%+ #,') "61) !"#)/%%6" +) )O%&' ,'1)PQ-)PRST-),6)IURR)8;$;-)" )64%) !"#)
4,$&%'(;
/,6%'",#()8' :"0%0)6 )64%) "61) !"#)'%#,6%0)6 ), 1) 8% V(%((" )"6%$) )64"(),+% 0,),'%),:,"#,&#%)
7 ')8 &#"!)'%:"%5),6)64%) "61) #%'=E()W77"!%-)# !,6%0)" ) "61)X,##),6)PLT)O '64)*:% %-). "#0" +)*-)
0 '" +) '$,#)& (" %(()4 '(;
< )! $8#", !%)5"64)64%
*/Y?< *N2)G<3X)Z<2*.<\[<3<Y2)* 3
34%) "61) 7) 4 #,)\\"(6,)'%9 %(6()" 0":"0 ,#()54 )'%9 "'%)(8%!",#),!! $$ 0,6" ()6 ),!!%((-),66% 0-)
, 0\] ')8,'6"!"8,6%)" ),) "61)$%%6" +-),!6":"61-) ')(%':"!%-)! 6,!6)64%) "61) #%'=E()W77"!%),6)ATSKB)
TKSVIRJSA ,#"7 ' ",)?%#,1)2%':"!%)"(),:,"#,&#%)7 ')64%)4%,'" +)"$8,"'%0)&1)0",#" +)LSSB),6)#%,(6)
7 '61V%"+46)4 '()" ),0:, !%) 7)64%)$%%6" +;
/ (6) 4 #,)\\"(6,) "61) !"#)$%%6" +(-)" !# 0" +)8 &#"!)! $$% 6(-),'%):"0% )'%! '0%0), 0),"'%0)#":%)
)*3^3)MV:%'(%)!4, %#)KK)A64' +4 6)64%) 61B-) ) F) ,&#%)!4, %#)PJ)A #1)" ) 4 #,)\\"(6,B-)
, 0) #" %),6)555;!4 #,:"(6,!,;+ :;)?%! '0%0)$%%6" +(),'%),#( ),"'%0) )G%0 %(0,1(),6)L)8;$;)
A& 64)!4, %#(B), 0),'%),'!4":%0) )64%) "61_()5%&("6%;
2"+ ) 8),6)555;!4 #,:"(6,!,;+ :)6 )'%!%":%)%$,"#) 6"7"!,6" ()54% ) "61) !"#),+% 0,(),'%)
8 &#"(4%0) #" %;
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !4! .$/% 0!'/!12""213"4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 6
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0089, Item#: A.
OATHS OF OFFICE
Mayra Swanson, Board of Library Trustees
Carlos Jaime, Resource Conservation Commission
Jennifer Carbuccia, Civil Service Commission
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 7
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0023, Item#: B.
EMPLOYEESERVICERECOGNITIONHONORINGSTAFFWITHMILESTONESERVICE
ANNIVERSARIES
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 8
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0025, Item#: C.
PRESENTATIONBYSHARPHEALTHCARECHIEFEXECUTIVEOFFICERPABLOVELEZAND
VICEPRESIDENTOFFACILITIESPATNEMETHONTHENEWOCEANVIEWTOWER,A$239-
MILLION,170,000-SQUARE-FOOTHOSPITALPROJECTONTHESHARPCHULAVISTA
CAMPUS
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 9
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0094, Item#: 1.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 2, 4, and 9, 2016.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council approve the minutes.
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 10
!"#$" %&'(") * (
+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($
D&,*@(! "<,81&(1!"9 "94C;2344"5+
#&-6 '" %(78,1*
9:;"<#&1 %"=>,-&, "?'@.A"=
%&'(") * ( " ="BCBC4
D,',6#-$,1,-6 -."'#6( #-3
CC29"='6!#-"5'(6, "E- #-@(', "FG"CC22H
IJKEL=I"+JJDMFK"N<"DOJ" MDG" NEF ML
=LL"DN"NI0JI
!"#$% & '()! *+ ', -('. -*")/(# *+ ', -('. *+ -,"#$ 0(1'$ 2$1 /$## 3 '* *%3 % $' 4567 89:9 () ',
-*")/(# -,$:; %1< #*/$' 3 () -('. =$##< >?@ A*"%', B )" < -,"#$ 0(1'$< -$#(+*%)($9
INLL" =LL3
!"#$%$&%'()* "#+',( !"#$%$&%'(-% . ..+ ,( !"#$%$&%'(/! + ,(
51,*,- 3
0%1 23(/+3 '(/"%.% (+ 4(/+3 '( +."##+.(5+#+.
-('. -# %C D*%%(1 $))*")/ 3 ',$' -*")/(#: :; % !"(#$% 2$1 8$%'(/(8$'()! B($ B(3 */*)+ % )/ +%*: ',
+*##*2()! #*/$'(*)5 EE4> #/.*) F#$/ < G)(*)3$# < DH EE44IJ $)3 ',$' $## B*' 1 2*"#3 ; '$C ) ;. %*##
/$##9
-*")/(#: :; % !"(#$% 1'$' 3 1, /*:8#( 3 2(', $## % K"(% : )'1 *+ ', L%*2) /'< ()/#"3()! 8*1'()! ',
$! )3$ $)3 $11"%()! 8";#(/ $// 11(;(#('. '* ', #*/$'(*)9 M, 1'$' 3 )* : :; %1 *+ ', 8";#(/ 2 %
8% 1 )' $' , % #*/$'(*)9
#1* F% 1 )'5 -('. &$)$! % =$#; %'< -('. ''*%) . N**!()1< -('. -# %C D*%%(1< $)3 11(1'$)' -('. -# %C
L(! #*2
5LJ0KJ"N<"=LLJKM=F J"DN"DOJ"<L=K"=F0"+N+JFD"N<"PMLJF J
-*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$) # 3 ', F# 3! *+ ## !($)/ 9
NFPJFD" =LJF0=I"QM ,7*"C"/"RS
6789979)::;<=)>(<?(/@ABCD5( E(F+ +'3(G7,(G967H
CA
I,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(TT1#>," %,"7 -& ,*A
67899IJ
<;0@A)A D(A<H(KK7G(<?(CLD( @CM(<?( LB>)(=@5C)()/DA0@AN(
9A
L):CD;(6JH9G(<?(CLD( LB>)(=@5C)(/BA@ @:)>( <0D(C<(
)??@;/(:D;/@55@=D(O<A@AN(:;@A @:>D5()A0(C<( >);@?M(CL)C(
B5D5(:;<L@-@CD0(D>5DPLD;D(@A(CLD(/BA@ @:)>( <0D();D(
)>5<(:;<L@-@CD0(>)A0(B5D5(Q5D <A0(;D)0@AN()A0(
)0<:C@<AR
I,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#T " %,"#1@ -(-6,A
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !"
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 11
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ <,81&(1!"9 "94C;
67899IS
<;0@A)A D(A<H(KK7K(<?(CLD( @CM(<?( LB>)(=@5C)()/DA0@AN(
HA
/BA@ @:)>( <0D(5D C@<A(G9H9THI9(8(U-B5@AD55(;D5<B; D()A0(
DAD;NM(D=)>B)C@<A5,V(5C;D)/>@A@AN(-B5@AD55D5W(
;DXB@;D/DAC5(?<;(:);C@ @:)C@<A(@A(;D5<B; D()A0(
DAD;NM(D=)>B)C@<A5(Q5D <A0(;D)0@AN()A0()0<:C@<AR
I,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#T " %,"#1@ -(-6,A
67899TJ;D5<>BC@<A(A<H(G9678966(<?(CLD( @CM( <BA @>(<?(CLD( @CM(
RA
<?( LB>)(=@5C)()::;<=@AN()(N;)AC()::>@ )C@<A(?;</(CLD(
@CM(<?( LB>)(=@5C)(C<(CLD(BA@CD0(5C)CD5(0D:);C/DAC(<?(
C;)A5:<;C)C@<A(?<;(U-DM<A0(C;)??@ Y(CLD(5/);C( @CM(
L)>>DANDV
I,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#T " %,"1,*#'& #-A
88%*B$# *+ ', -*)1 )' -$# )3$%
= DMNF3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"
?,-*#&**(- " #"(TT1#>,"* ($$V*"1,6#77,-@( #-*"#-" %,"(8#>," #-*,- "
(',-@(1" ,7* "%,(@ -.*"1,(@ " ,W "U( >,@A"D%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."
># ,3
I(8()* "#+',(-% . ..+ ,(/! + ,(/"%.% (+ 4( +."##+.(5+#+.
G,*3
9(((
F#3
9(((
=8* ( -3
MDJ+P"IJ+N)J0"<IN+"DOJ" NFPJFD" =LJF0=I
O, % 2 % )*) 9
5E?LM " N++JFDP
O, % 2 % )*) 9
5E?LM "OJ=IMFKP
6I897SK <A5@0D;)C@<A(<?()A()::D)>(<?(CLD(:>)AA@AN(
2A
<//@55@<AW5(0D @5@<A(;DN);0@AN(0D5@NA(;D=@DP(:D;/@C(
0;6I899K(
;D5<>BC@<A(A<H(G967896G(<?(CLD( @CM( <BA @>(<?(CLD( @CM(
<?( LB>)(=@5C)(0DAM@AN(CLD()::D)>()A0(B:L<>0@AN(CLD(
:>)AA@AN( <//@55@<A(0D @5@<A(N;)AC@AN()::;<=)>(<?(
0;6I8999K(?<;()A(SZ8BA@C(/B>C@8?)/@>M(;D5@0DAC@)>(
:;<FD C()C(Z96(U0V(5C;DDC
P 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) 1'$' 3 , 2*"#3 $;1'$() +%*: 8$%'(/(8$'()! $)3 B*'()! *) ', (' : 3" '* $
8*' )'($# /*)+#(/' *+ ()' % 1' % #$' 3 '* $ ;"1() 11 )'('. () 2,(/, , ,$3 $ +()$)/($# ()' % 1'9 = # +' ',
3$(1 $' 456Q 89:9
D*'(/ *+ ', , $%()! 2$1 !(B ) () $//*%3$)/ 2(', # !$# % K"(% : )'1< $)3 ', , $%()! 2$1 , #3 *) ',
3$' $)3 )* $%#( % ',$) ', '(: 18 /(+( 3 () ', )*'(/ 9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 12
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ <,81&(1!"9 "94C;
11*/($' F#$)) % M' (/, ) !$B $ 8% 1 )'$'(*) *) ', (' :9
&$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 1'$' 3 ',$' ', -*")/(# 2*"#3 ; % K"(% 3 '* 3(1/#*1 RS8$%' /*::")(/$'(*)1 3"
'* ', K"$1(ST"3(/($# )$'"% *+ ', (' :9
&$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 1'$' 3 1, ,$3 B(1(' 3 ', 8%*T /' 1(' 9 M, $#1* 1'$' 3 ',$' 1, ,$3 $ : '()! 2(',
U$"%$ =")' % *+ ', V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', -*$#('(*) 2,* 8%*B(3 3 , % ', V)B(%*): )'$# = $#',
F %18 /'(B 1 1'"3.< 0*#9 E>7< D*9 >< 3$' 3 A ;%"$%. >6E@< 2,(/, 2*"#3 ; 8%*B(3 3 '* ', -('. -# %C9
-*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$) 1'$' 3 1, ,$3 $#1* % / (B 3 ', 1'"3.< V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', F %18 /'(B 1
1'"3. $)3 ,$3 8%*B(3 3 (' '* ', -('. -# %C '* ; ()/#"3 3 () ', % /*%3< $#*)! 2(', 1*: *', %
3*/": )'1 1, % / (B 3 +%*: ', V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', -*$#('(*)9 M, 1'$' 3 1, 18*C 2(', ',
% 8% 1 )'$'(B *+ ', 8%*T /'9 M, 1$(3 1, 2$1 B %. +$:(#($% 2(', ', 1(' $)3 ,$3 )*' B(1(' 3 (' % / )'#.9
-*")/(#: :; % &/-$)) 1'$' 3 , ()3 8 )3 )'#. B(1(' 3 ', 1(' 9 = 1$(3 , ,$3 % $3 ', :$(# +%*:
', V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', -*$#('(*) $)3 ,$3 18*C ) 2(', ', $88#(/$)' *+ ', 8%*T /'9
W) % 18*)1 '* $ K" 1'(*) +%*: -*")/(#: :; % !"(#$%< -('. ''*%) . N**!()1 1'$' 3 , ,$3 $3B(1 3 ',
-*")/(# '* 3(1/#*1 RS8$%' /*::")(/$'(*)1 % #$' 3 '* ', (' : '* )1"% 3" 8%*/ 119
-*")/(#: :; % !"(#$% 1'$' 3 1, : ' 2(', ', $88 ##$)'< &%9 M8**) %< $' ', 1(' 9 M, 1$(3 1, : '
2(', ', $88#(/$)'< &%9 N %; %< () , % *++(/ < $)3 ,$3 $ 8,*) /*)B %1$'(*) 2(', U$"%$ =")' % *+ ',
V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', -*$#('(*)9
P B #*8: )' M %B(/ 1 P(% /'*% L%*"!,'*) 8%*B(3 3 ()+*%:$'(*) *) ', +()3()!1 :$3 ;. ', F#$))()!
-*::(11(*)9
&$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 *8 ) 3 ', 8";#(/ , $%()!9
P $) M8**) %< $88 ##$)'< V# -$T*) % 1(3 )'< 18*C () *88*1('(*) '* 1'$++X1 % /*:: )3$'(*)9 = 18*C ()
1"88*%' *+ :$R(:(Y()! 8$%C()! *) P M'% ' $)3 )1"%()! $ 1$+ )'%$)/ $)3 R(' '* ', 8%*T /'9
Z*1 \[ 8 3$< -,"#$ 0(1'$ % 1(3 )'< 1";:('' 3 $ % K" 1'< ;"' 3 /#() 3 '* 18 $C9
U$"%$ =")' %< % 8% 1 )'()! ', V)B(%*): )'$# = $#', -*$#('(*)< 18*C () *88*1('(*) '* 1'$++X1
% /*:: )3$'(*)9
U(1$ -*, )< % 8% 1 )'()! ', -,"#$ 0(1'$ -,$:; % *+ -*:: %/ < 18*C () 1"88*%' *+ 1'$++X1
% /*:: )3$'(*)9
F#$))()! &$)$! % L$'/, #3 % % 18*)3 3 '* K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(#9
0$#*%( O,*:81*)< -*)1"#'$)'< % 8% 1 )'()! M/( )'(+(/ 1*"%/ 1 11*/($' 3 \\M \]< $)12 % 3
K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(# % !$%3()! ', , $#', %(1C $11 11: )'9
F#$))()! &$)$! % L$'/, #3 %< -('. &$)$! % =$#; %'< $)3 P(% /'*% *+ P B #*8: )' M %B(/ 1 L%*"!,'*)
% 18*)3 3 '* $33('(*)$# K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(#9
)3. N %; %< % 8% 1 )'()! -('. 0 )'"% 1< /*)1"#'$)' '* ', $88#(/$)'< % 18*)3 3 '* K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ',
-*")/(# % !$%3()! ', +(#' %1 ',$' 2*"#3 ; "1 3 +*% ', 8%*T /'^1 B )'(#$'(*) 1.1' :19
L(## &$33"R< % 8% 1 )'()! /*) V)B(%*): )'$#< /*)1"#'$)' '* ', $88#(/$)'< 8%*B(3 3 $33('(*)$#
()+*%:$'(*) % !$%3()! ', , $#', %(1C $11 11: )' ',$' 2$1 8 %+*%: 39
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !/
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 13
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ <,81&(1!"9 "94C;
&%9 N %; % % 18*)3 3 '* K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(# % !$%3()! 8*' )'($# /,$)! 1 '* ', 8%*T /' 3 1(!)9
M'$++ % 18*)3 3 '* $33('(*)$# K" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(# % !$%3()! ', 8%*8*1 3 8%*T /'9
' ', % K" 1' *+ -*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$)< ', % 2$1 /*)1 )1"1 *+ $ :$T*%('. *+ ', -*")/(# '*
3(% /' 1'$++ '* % B( 2 /"%% )' , $#', %(1C 1'$)3$%31 $)3 8*#(/( 1 '* 3 ' %:() (+ ; '' % : ',*31 R(1' 3 +*%
$11 11()!< ")3 %1'$)3()!< $)3 :('(!$'()! 8*' )'($# %(1C1 +*% +"'"% 8%*T /'19
&$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 /#*1 3 ', 8";#(/ , $%()!9
-('. ''*%) . N**!()1 % /*:: )3 3 ',$' ', 8%*8*1 3 % 1*#"'(*) ; $: )3 3 '* ()/#"3 $ +()3()! ',$'
', 8%*T /' : ' ', % K"(% : )'1 *+ ', -('.^1 #$)3 "1 8*#(/( 1 $)3 ', P 1(!) B( 2 &$)"$#9
= DMNF3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!"+(!#1" (* ''(*"
P('(* " %( "I,*#'& #-"F#A"94C;/4C9"8,"(@#T ,@ "(*"(7,-@,@" #" -6'&@," %,"
$ -@ -." %( " %,"T1#X,6 "7, " %,"1,Y& 1,7,- *"#$" %," !V*"'(-@"&*,"T#' 6 ,*"(-@"
%,"0,* .-"I,> ,U"+(-&('A"D%,"%,(@ -."U(*"1,(@ " ,W "U( >,@A"D%,"7# #-"
6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
T(8()* "#+',(-% . ..+ ,(/! + (+ 4( +."##+.(5+#+.
G,*3
9(((
F#3
6(8(/"%.%
=8* ( -3
MDG"+=F=KJIZP"IJ5NIDP
O, % 2 % )*) 9
+=GNIZP"IJ5NIDP
&$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 18*C % !$%3()! ', +*##*2()! B )'15 *8 )()! *+ ', ) 2 L(C 2$. 0(##$! ()
W:8 %($# L $/,< ', !%*")3;% $C()! *+ ', -%*2) F*()' P B #*8: )' 8%*T /'< ', *8 )()! *+ ',
= %('$! &"1 ": R,(;(' *) ', $))(B %1$%. *+ ', N% $' A#**3 *+ EQE@< $)3 _#.:8(/ 0( 2 V# : )'$%.
M/,**#^1 >6', $))(B %1$%. / # ;%$'(*)9 M, $#1* 18*C % !$%3()! ', _) +*% ## 8%*T /' () ', M$) P( !*
$% $< % #$' 3 '* $33% 11()! : )'$# (##) 11 () ', ,*: # 11 /*::")('.9 M, 18*C % !$%3()! $ )*)S8%*+('
1 %B(/ 1 % 1*"%/ +$(% $' -,"#$ 0(1'$ =(!, M/,**#9 M, % /*!)(Y 3 F";#(/ `*%C1 1'$++ : :; %1 +*% ', (%
2*%C '* /# $) "8 3*2) 3 '% 1 $)3 ;%$)/, 1 +*##*2()! ', % / )' 1'*%:9
P 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) % '"%) 3 '* ', 3$(1 $' @5IQ 89:9
NEF ML+J+?JIPZ" N++JFDP
P 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) $)3 &$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 18*C % !$%3()! ', % / )' ,*: # 11 /*")' B )'9
-*")/(#: :; % &/-$)) 18*C % !$%3()! ', _#.:8(/ 0( 2 V# : )'$%. M/,**#X1 >6', $))(B %1$%.9 =
$#1* $))*")/ 3 ', "8/*:()! N* 3 +*% `*: ) B )' '* 1"88*%' , $%' 3(1 $1 $)3 1'%*C 9
-*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$) 18*C % !$%3()! ', % / )'#. *8 ) 3 % 1'$"%$)'< >?? -*/()$ %' 1$)$#9
-, +1 *3%(!* &$%'() Y $)3 P$)' A %% %*< % 8% 1 )'()! >?? -*/()$ %' 1$)$#< 18*C % !$%3()! ',
% 1'$"%$)' $)3 "8/*:()! B )'9
-*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$) $))*")/ 3 ', "8/*:()! *8 )()! *+ ', -(B(/ - )' % U(;%$%. $"3('*%(":
% )*B$'(*)9
' ', % K" 1' *+ -*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$)< ', % 2$1 /*)1 )1"1 *+ ', -*")/(# '* $33 $) (' : '* ',
) R' -*")/(# $! )3$ '* /*)1(3 % -('. )3*%1 : )' *+ ', -*::")('. _8"1 F%*T /' B )'< 0(B$ &"1(/$9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !0
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 14
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ <,81&(1!"9 "94C;
-*")/(#: :; % !"(#$% ',$)C 3 ', -*")/(# +*% $##*2()! , % '* 8$%'(/(8$' % :*' #.9 M, 18*C ()
1"88*%' *+ -*")/(#: :; % L )1*"11$)X1 % + %%$# '* 1'$++ '* % B( 2 8*#(/( 1 % #$' 3 '* ', , $#', (:8$/'1
*+ +"'"% 8%*T /'19
-('. ''*%) . N**!()1 $))*")/ 3 ',$' ', -*")/(# 2*"#3 /*)B ) () /#*1 3 1 11(*) '* 3(1/"11 ', (' :1
#(1' 3 ; #*29 = 1'$' 3 P 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) 2*"#3 $;1'$() +%*: 8$%'(/(8$'(*) *) W' : @ < 1()/ , ,$3
; ) $88*()' 3 '* ', -*")/(# $)3 ', :$'' % 2$1 % #$' 3 '* ', $88*()': )' 8%*/ 119
' @54? 89:9< ', -*")/(# /*)B ) 3 () -#*1 3 M 11(*) 2(', -*")/(#: :; %1 L )1*"11$) $)3 &/-$))<
$)3 &$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 8% 1 )'9
LNPJ0"PJPPMNF
: '. + 2(2 (;%. # 2" (A H(6KZ97(+ 4( !"#(: #"!3(A H(KT789K,(<EE"!"+#(/" 2%.(+ 4(
'%! '4.( E(+!2" (2+\[% (4 '" *( # .%4(5%.." .(+'%($+" 2+" %4(&3(2\\%( "23()22 ' %3H
6789976 <A?D;DA D(P@CL(>DN)>( <BA5D>(;DN);0@AN(D\]@5C@AN(
;A
>@C@N)C@<A(:B;5B)AC(C<(N<=D;A/DAC( <0D(5D C@<A(
ITJI7HJ(Q4RQ6R
A+$%.( E(!+.%.Y
Q)R(( \\'".(5\\"##" *,(%2(+#H(^H( "23( E( \\ #+(=".2+,(%2(+#H,(5+ (0"%* (
5 1%'" '( '2,( +.%(A H(KZ8G96I8999979JZ8 B8/ 8 C>_
Q-R((0"+$+ 2" +(/+!\[%4.3(^H( "23( E( \\ #+(=".2+,(5+ (0"%* (5 1%'" '(
'2,( +.%(A H(KZ8G96I89999ZGI6,( B8:<8 C>
= DMNF3M ,7";=3"F#"1,T#1 (8',"(6 #-A
M ,7";?3"I,T#1 (8',"(6 #-" *"T,-@ -." %,"$ -(' \[( #-"#$" %,"*, ',7,- A
=0\\NEIF+JFD
' ?544 89:9< &$.*% -$1(##$1 M$#$1 $3T*"%) 3 ', : '()! '* ', M8 /($# -('. -*")/(# & '()! *)
A ;%"$%. 7< >6E@< $' 7566 89:9< () ', VR /"'(B -*)+ % )/ **:< L"(#3()! J $)3 ', )/ '* ',
!"#$% -('. -*")/(# & '()! *) A ;%"$%. Q< >6E@< $' 4566 89:9< () ', -*")/(# -,$:; %19
```````````````````````````````
a%''3(aH(-"*%# b,()..".2+ 2( "23( #%'\[
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !1
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 15
!"#! $%&'!( ) '
*++ ,-!* ,% +)!.!/0'#
E$%0)B' @!F+G0%'0 !1@!<3D>1233!4*
!5'&&!.!67+8% 9+! ",#+0+,8+!:"";
<=>!1 $!?9+,%+@!A% &B ,-!?
$%&'!( ) '@! ?!CDCD3
H46 I?J!*66EIKL!MF!E56! IEN! MOK IJ
?JJ!EM!M:/6:
!"#$% &!!'#() *+ ',! -#'. -*/("#% *+ ',! -#'. *+ -,/%$ 0#1'$ 2$1 "$%%!3 '* *43!4 $' 5678 9:9 #( ',!
;<!"/'#=! -*(+!4!("! >**:? %*"$'!3 #( -#'. @$%%? AB8 C*/4', =!(/!? -,/%$ 0#1'$? -$%#+*4(#$9
:MJJ! ?JJ2
!"#$%$&%'()% * **+ ,( !"#$%$&%'(-! + ,(.%/ 01(-+1 '(-"%*% (+ 2(
40+)+, 2
-+1 '( +*"##+*(3+#+*
!"#$%$&%'(45 "#+'
?G)+, 2
-*/("#%:!:D!4 &"-$(( $44#=!3 $' 567B 9:9
%1* E4!1!('6 F! /'. -#'. ''*4(!. #%=$ $(3 -#'. -%!4G H*44#1
? EIMK!IE6*H
678996:;<=>?@;>A3(4<.(4BBC;<=-><=(=C(D;EE(@4 4< F(C<(=G>( ;@;E(
DP
3>?@; >( C--;33;C<
C (< H%$&%'(69,(I96J,(0K%(L ## M" 5(" 2"H"2 +#*('%!%"H%2(0M ( '($ '%(
$" +0" *(0 (&%(" 0%'H"%M%2(L '(0K%(H+!+ 0(*%+0( (0K%( "H"#(3%'H"!%(
$$"**" N(O% "L%'( +'& !!"+,(=K $+*(. 1#%,(-%#"**+(P+'!K"%,(
-"!K+%#(.Q(O+!R* ,(E" 2+(<+H+'' ,(4$1(?%%H%,(? 2%'"!R(?%" K+'0,(+ 2(
O *%(3%''+0 Q
I,! -*/("#% 3#1"/11!3 ',! #('!4=#!2 J/!1'#*(1 ',$' 2*/%3 D! $1G!3 *+ !$", "$(3#3$'!9
&$.*4 -$1#%%$1 $%$1 $1G!3 +*4 $(. :!:D!41 *+ ',! /D%#" 2,* 2#1,!3 '* 1 !$G '* ',! #'!:9 I,!4! 2!4!
(*(!9
I,! -*/("#% "*(3/"'!3 #('!4=#!21 +*4 ',! -#=#% !4=#"! -*::#11#*( =$"$(".9
&$.*4 -$1#%%$1 $%$1 $1G!3 +*4 $(. :!:D!41 *+ ',! /D%#" 2,* 2#1,!3 '* 1 !$G '* ',! #'!:9 I,!4! 2!4!
(*(!9
I,!4! 2$1 "*(1!(1/1 *+ ',! -*/("#% '* ($44*2 ',! %#1' *+ +#($%#1'1 '* '2* $ %#"$('1? K!((#+!4 -$4D/""#$
$(3 :. >!!=!9 ;$", -*/("#%:!:D!4 1/D:#''!3 $ 24#''!( =*'! '* (*:#($'! *(! *+ ',! '2* +#($%#1'19
-*/("#%:!:D!4 L!(1*/11$(? F! /'. &$.*4 &#!1!( $(3 &$.*4 -$1#%%$1 $%$1 =*'!3 +*4 K!((#+!4
-$4D/""#$9 -*/("#%:!:D!4 &"-$(( =*'!3 +*4 :. >!!=!9
9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !"
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 16
! "%,8 &*++ ,-!* ,% +)!.!/0'# F+G0%'0 !1@!<3D>
? EIMK2?!;" ",!Q')!;'B+!G !*' "0! ') &&')!H'&')@!)+8",B+B!G ! "%,8 &;+;G+0!
A+,)"%))',@! $' !R+,, #+0! '0G%88 '!G+!'SS" , +B! "! $+!9'8', !)+' !",! $+! 9 &!
H+09 8+! ";; )) ",P!E$+!;" ",!8'00 +B!G ! $+!#"&&"Q ,-!9" +2
S(8()% * **+ ,(-! + ,(-"%*% (+ 2( +*"##+*(3+#+*
N+)2
9(((
K"2
9(((
?G) ' ,2
? EIMK2?!;" ",!Q')!;'B+!G !/+S% !*' "0!* +)+,@!)+8",B+B!G ! "%,8 &;+;G+0!
*8 ',,@! $' ! $+!;++ ,-!G+!'BT"%0,+BP!E$+!;" ",!8'00 +B!G ! $+!#"&&"Q ,-!
9" +2
S(8()% * **+ ,(-! + ,(-"%*% (+ 2( +*"##+*(3+#+*
N+)2
9(((
K"2
9(((
?G) ' ,2
?/RMO:K*6KE
' M6N8 9:9? &$.*4 -$1#%%$1 $%$1 $3O*/4(!3 ',! :!!'#() '* ',! >!)/%$4 -#'. -*/("#% &!!'#() *(
C!D4/$4. P? A7N8? $' M677 9:9? #( ',! -*/("#% -,$:D!419
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
U%''1(UQ()"5%# M,(4**"*0+ 0( "01( #%'R
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 17
!"#$" %&'(") * (
+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($
C&,*@(! "D,81&(1!"A "94B;2344"5+
#&-6 '" %(78,1*
9:;"< %"=>,-&, "?& '@ -."=
%&'(") * ( " ="ABAB4
EFGHI=E"+FFCJKG"LD"CMF" JCN" LHK JI
=II"CL"LE0FE
!"#$% & '()! *+ ', -('. -*")/(# *+ ', -('. *+ -,"#$ 0(1'$ 2$1 /$## 3 '* *%3 % $' 4567 89:9 () ',
-*")/(# -,$:; %1< #*/$' 3 () -('. =$##< >?@ A*"%', B )" < -,"#$ 0(1'$< -$#(+*%)($9
ELII" =II3
!"#$%&%'&()*+ #$,(-) !"#$%&%'&().&!/ //,!-) !"#$%&%'&()0" ,!!-)
51,*,- 3
1&2 34)0,4 ()0#&/&!),!5)0,4 () ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
#1* C% 1 )'5 -('. &$)$! % =$#; %'< -('. ''*%) . D**!()1< -('. -# %E F*%%(1< $)3 11(1'$)' -('. -# %E
G(! #*2
5IF0GF"LD"=IIFGJ=K F"CL"CMF"DI=G"=K0"+L+FKC"LD"OJIFK F
H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) # 3 ', C# 3! *+ ## !($)/ 9
O5F J=I"LE0FEO"LD"CMF"0=N
789::8;
<=>6>?@*@AB?)BC)*)<=B D*0*@AB?)@B) EFD*)GA6@*)<F.DA )
=P
HB=I6)1><*=@0>?@)<F0<)@> E?A A*?)I>??>@E)@EAD@J>?-)
B?)KL)M>*=6)BC)6>=GA >)@B)@E>) A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*
&$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 % $3 ', 8%*/#$:$'(*) $)3 -*")/(#: :; % G )1*"11$) 8% 1 )' 3 (' '* &%9
J,(#'! )9
789::NO<=>6>?@*@AB?)BC)*)<=B D*0*@AB?)@B)E>*D@E)P)EF0*?)
?P
6>=GA >6)*J>? M-) >?@=*D)P)6BF@E)=>JAB?)1A=> @B=)
.*=.*=*)QA0>?>R)*?1)6H>>@H*@>=)F?AB?)EAJE)6 EBBD)
1A6@=A @)6F<>=A?@>?1>?@)CB=)>SFA@M-) FD@F=>)P)6F<<B=@)
6>=GA >6)1=T)QB>)CFD E>=-)<=B D*A0A?J)@EF=61*M-)
C>.=F*=M)77-)K:78-)*6)DBG>)MBF=)E>*=@)1*M)A?) EFD*)GA6@*
&$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 % $3 ', 8%*/#$:$'(*) $)3 -*")/(#: :; % !"(#$% 8% 1 )' 3 (' '* &19 K(: ) L
$)3 H%9 A"#/, %9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !"
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 18
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ D,81&(1!"A "94B;
LKOFKC" =IFK0=E"QJ ,7*"B"/"<R
M' : N 2$1 % :*B 3 +%*: ', -*)1 )' -$# )3$% $' ', % O" 1' *+ &$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$19
7L9:L;U=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7U)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>) A@M)
BP
BC) EFD*)GA6@*)* ><@A?J).A16V)=>Q> @A?J)@E>).A1)BC)@E>)
CA=6@)*<<*=>?@)DBH).A11>=-)<A<>=A?) B=<B=*@AB?-)*6)
?B?9=>6<B?6AG>V)*H*=1A?J)*) B?@=* @)CB=)@E>)W6>H>=)
=>E*.ADA@*@AB?)<=BQ> @-)CA6 *D)M>*=)K:7KXK:7U)*@)G*=ABF6)
DB *@AB?6)Y A<Z)6HKN8\[\\)<=BQ> @)@B)6BF@EH>6@)<A<>DA?>)
*?1)@=>? ED>66) B=<T)A?)@E>)*0BF?@)BC)\]L:^-OL:V)H*AGA?J)
A@M) BF? AD)<BDA M)?BT)LNO9:7V)*?1)*F@EB=ARA?J)@E>)
1A=> @B=)BC)<F.DA )HB=I6)@B)>_> F@>)*DD) E*?J>)
B=1>=6
E,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#S " %,"1,*#'& #-P
7L9:877=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7O)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>) A@M)
9P
BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*<<=BGA?J)*?)*J=>>0>?@)CB=)<*G>0>?@)
@>6@A?J)*?1)0*?*J>0>?@)6>=GA >6).>@H>>?)@E>) A@M)BC)
EFD*)GA6@*)*?1)?A EBD6) B?6FD@A?J)>?JA?>>=6-)
E*=@>=>1
E,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#S " %,"1,*#'& #-P
789::KO=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7L)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>) A@M)
TP
BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*<<=B<=A*@A?J)\]7-7::-:::)C=B0)@E>)
*G*AD*.D>).*D*? >)BC)@E>)J*6)@*_)CF?1)@B)@E>)W6@B=0)
1=*A?)=><*A=6)*@)G*=ABF6)DB *@AB?6)Y A<Z)1=K:O\[\\)<=BQ> @)
*?1)=>1F A?J)@E>)W6@B=0)1=*A?)=>E*.ADA@*@AB?)<=BQ> @-)
CA6 *D)M>*=)K:7LXK:78)Y A<Z)1=K:K\[\\) A<).F1J>@).M)\]K8;-:::)A?)
@=*?6?>@)CF?16-)*?1)*<<=B<=A*@A?J)@E>)>SFAG*D>?@)
*0BF?@)@B) A<Z)1=K:O)YOXL)GB@>)=>SFA=>1\[
E,6#77,-@,@"=6 #-3" #&-6 '"(@#S " %,"1,*#'& #-P
M' : N 2$1 % :*B 3 +%*: ', -*)1 )' -$# )3$%9
88%*B$# *+ ', -*)1 )' -$# )3$%
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!"0,S& !"+(!#1"
+ ,*,- " #"(SS1#>,"* ($$V*"1,6#77,-@( #-*"#-" %,"(8#>," #-*,- " (',-@(1"
,7* "%,(@ -.*"1,(@ " ,W "U( >,@P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
L)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!-)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
:)))
=8* ( -3
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 19
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ D,81&(1!"A "94B;
JCF+O"EF+L)F0"DEL+"CMF" LKOFKC" =IFK0=E
789::7U
B=1A?*? >)BC)@E>) A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*11A?J) EFD*)GA6@*)
<P
0F?A A<*D) B1>) E*<@>=)KTON)9)WE>*D@EM) EFD*)GA6@*)
*1GA6B=M) B00A66AB?\\)YCA=6@)=>*1A?J\[
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"
=.& '(1 " #"S'(6," %,"(8#>,"#1@ -(-6,"#-"$ 1* "1,(@ -. "(*"(7,-@,@" #"* ( ," %( "
7,78,1*"$1#7",(6%"#$" %,"$#&1" #&-6 '"@ * 1 6 *"*%(''",(6%"8,"-#7 -( ,@"8!" %,"
+(!#1"($ ,1" %,"+(!#1"6#-*&' *"U %"(-@"1,6, >,*"("1,6#77,-@( #-"$1#7" %,"
#&-6 '7,78,1"1,S1,*,- -." %," #&-6 '"@ * 1 6 P"C%,"%,(@ -."U(*"1,(@ " ,W "
U( >,@P"C%,"7# #-"S(**,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
L)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!-)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
:)))
=8* ( -3
5H?IJ " L++FKCO
J, % 2 % )*) 9
= CJLK"JCF+O
7L9:8UO
=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:78)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>) A@M)
2P
BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*<<=BGA?J)@E>)@>=06)CB=)*)@=*?6C>=)
*J=>>0>?@)*?1)B<>=*@A?J)*J=>>0>?@).>@H>>?)@E>)
F?A@>1)6@*@>6)BDM0<A ) B00A@@>>)YF6B \[)*?1)@E>) A@M)BC)
EFD*)GA6@*)Y A@M\[)<=BGA1A?J)CB=)F6B )@=*?6C>=)@B) A@M)
BC)@E>) EFD*)GA6@*)BDM0<A )@=*A?A?J) >?@>=)<=B<>=@M)
*?1)C* ADA@A>6-)*?1) A@M)B<>=*@AB?)BC)@E>)C* ADA@M)HA@E)
@E>)F6B )*6)A@6)<=A0*=M)@>?*?@)CB=)*)<>=AB1)BC)CBF=)
M>*=6)YHA@E)>_@>?6AB?6\[
H 8"'. -('. &$)$! % G$/*)< (/E 3$:1< % 8% 1 )'()! ', P9I9 Q#.:8(/ -*::('' < $)3 K* R$'E()1<
% 8% 1 )'()! ', C*()' S*:$ F$L$% ) P)(B %1('. J%"1' 8% 1 )' 3 ()+*%:$'(*) *) ', (' :9
J, +*##*2()! : :; %1 *+ ', 8";#(/ 18*E () 1"88*%' *+ 1'$++T1 % /*:: )3$'(*)5
U S V D(## '' < C$%$#.:8(/ $',# ' $' ', Q#.:8(/ J%$()()! - )' %
U K ++ C,$(%< -,"#$ 0(1'$ % 1(3 )'< $)3 , $#1* 18*E () 1"88*%' *+ $33('(*)$# "1 1 $' ', - )' % +*% .*"',
18*%'()! B )'1 $)3 *', % B )'1 ',$' 2*"#3 *8 ) ', - )' % '* ', 8";#(/
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!"+(!#1" (* ''(*"O('(* "*,6#-@,@"8!"0,S& !"+(!#1"+ ,*,-"
(-@" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- " %( "E,*#'& #-"K#P"94B;/4B;"8,"(@#S ,@ "%,(@ -."
1,(@ " ,W "U( >,@P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
L)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!-)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
:)))
=8* ( -3
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !/
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 20
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ D,81&(1!"A "94B;
7L9:8^O
B?6A1>=*@AB?)BC)>6@*.DA6E0>?@)BC) B00F?A@M)
;P
C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @) C1)?BT)7N9A-)H>6@>=?) EFD*)GA6@*)
1>G>DB<0>?@)A0<* @)C>>)Y1AC\[)CA?*? A?J)<=BJ=*0)Y@E>)
WCB=0*@AB?)<=B >>1A?J6\\\[)
*\[=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7N)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>)
A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*1B<@A?J)*)0*<)6EBHA?J)@E>)
.BF?1*=A>6)BC)@E>)@>==A@B=M)<=B<B6>1)@B).>)A? DF1>1)
A?) B00F?A@M)C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @)?BT)7N9A)YH>6@>=?) EFD*)
GA6@*)1AC)CA?*? A?J)<=BJ=*0\[
.\[=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7^)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>)
A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*)1> D*=A?J)A@6)A?@>?@AB?)@B)>6@*.DA6E)
B00F?A@M)C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @)?BT)7N9A)YH>6@>=?) EFD*)
GA6@*)1AC)CA?*? A?J)<=BJ=*0\[)*?1)@B)*F@EB=AR>)@E>)D>GM)
BC)*)6<> A*D)@*_)@E>=>A?)@B)CA?*? >)@E>)<*M0>?@)BC)
>=@*A?)1>G>DB<0>?@)A0<* @)C>>)B.DAJ*@AB?6-)B=1>=A?J)
*?1)1A=> @A?J)@E>)<=><*=*@AB?)BC)*)=><B=@)CB=)6F E)
<=B<B6>1) B00F?A@M)C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @-)*?1)6>@@A?J)
@E>)<F.DA )E>*=A?J)@B) B?6A1>=)>6@*.DA6E0>?@)BC)6F E)
1A6@=A @
H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) 1'$' 3 , 2*"#3 $;1'$() +%*: B*'()! *) ', (' : 3" '* $ 8*' )'($# 8%*8 %'.U% #$' 3
/*)+#(/' *+ ()' % 1'9 = # +' ', 3$(1 $' @5W7 89:9 -('. ''*%) . D**!()1 /#$%(+( 3 ',$' H 8"'. &$.*%
&( 1 )T1 8*' )'($# /*)+#(/' *+ ()' % 1' 2$1 % #$' 3 '* $ ;"1() 11 )'('. () 2,(/, , ,$3 $ +()$)/($# ()' % 1'9
H(% /'*% *+ X/*)*:(/ H B #*8: )' -%*/E '' $)3 C%()/(8$# X/*)*:(/ H B #*8: )' I8 /($#(1' "(L !$B
$ 8% 1 )'$'(*) *) ', (' :9
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!"+(!#1" (* ''(*"O('(* "*,6#-@,@"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"
+6 (-- " %( "E,*#'& #-"K#*P"94B;/4B:"(-@"94B;/4BX"8,"(@#S ,@ "%,(@ -.*"1,(@ "
,W "U( >,@P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
O)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
7)9)0#&/&!
=8* ( -3
H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) % '"%) 3 '* ', 3$(1 $' @577 89:9
789::7; B?6A1>=*@AB?)BC)*F@EB=ARA?J)@E>)*??>_*@AB?)A?)@E>)
:P
CF@F=>)BC)*) >=@*A?)@>==A@B=M)@B) C1)?BT)7N9A)Y@E>)
WCF@F=>)*??>_*@AB?)*F@EB=AR*@AB?)<=B >>1A?J6\\\[
*T=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:7;)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>)
A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*)*1B<@A?J)*).BF?1*=M)0*<)6EBHA?J)
@>==A@B=M)<=B<B6>1)@B).>)*F@EB=AR>1)@B).>)*??>_>1)A?)
@E>)CF@F=>)@B) B00F?A@M)C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @)?BT)7N9A)
YH>6@>=?) EFD*)GA6@*)1AC)CA?*? A?J)<=BJ=*0\[
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !0
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 21
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ D,81&(1!"A "94B;
.T=>6BDF@AB?)?BT)K:789:K:)BC)@E>) A@M) BF? AD)BC)@E>)
A@M)BC) EFD*)GA6@*)1> D*=A?J)A@6)A?@>?@AB?)@B)*F@EB=AR>)
@E>)*??>_*@AB?)A?)@E>)CF@F=>)BC)*) >=@*A?)@>==A@B=M)@B)
B00F?A@M)C* ADA@A>6)1A6@=A @)?BT)7N9A)YH>6@>=?) EFD*)
GA6@*)1AC)CA?*? A?J)<=BJ=*0\[-)*?1)6>@@A?J)@E>)<F.DA )
E>*=A?J)@B) B?6A1>=)6F E)*??>_*@AB?
-('. ''*%) . D**!()1 1'$' 3 ',$' H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) ,$3 $ 8*' )'($# /*)+#(/' *+ ()' % 1' % #$' 3 '* $
;"1() 11 )'('. () 2,(/, , ,$3 $ +()$)/($# ()' % 1'< $)3 ',$' -*")/(#: :; % G )1*"11$)<
-*")/(#: :; % &/-$)) $)3 &$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 ,$3 8*' )'($# 8%*8 %'.U% #$' 3 /*)+#(/'1 *+ ()' % 1'9 =
1'$' 3 ',$' ', #$2 $##*2 3 ()3(B(3"$#1 '* ; 1 # /' 3 ;. %$)3*: '* 8$%'(/(8$' 1* ',$' $ O"*%": 2*"#3
V(1' '* B*' *) ', (' :9
-*")/(#: :; %1 G )1*"11$) $)3 &/-$)) 2 % 1 # /' 3 ;. %$)3*: #*' ;. 11(1'$)' -('. -# %E G(! #*2
'* 8$%'(/(8$' () B*'()! *) M' : ?9 &$.*% I$#$1 $)3 H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) # +' ', 3$(1 $' @574 89:9
H(% /'*% *+ X/*)*:(/ H B #*8: )' -%*/E ''< C%()/(8$# X/*)*:(/ H B #*8: )' I8 /($#(1' "(L< &(E
& 3B < % 8% 1 )'()! R(##3$) A()$)/($# I %B(/ 1< $)3 R$%% ) H(B )< % 8% 1 )'()! G 1' G 1' Y Z%( ! %<
% 18*)3 3 '* O" 1'(*)1 +%*: ', -*")/(#9
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"
?,-*#&**(- " %( "E,*#'& #-"K#*P"94B;/4BA"(-@"94B;/494"8,"(@#S ,@ "%,(@ -.*"
1,(@ " ,W "U( >,@P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
U)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!),!5)0" ,!!
N,*3
:)))
K#3
K)9)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
=8* ( -3
H 8"'. &$.*% &( 1 ) $)3 &$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 % '"%) 3 '* ', 3$(1 $' @54@ 89:9
JCN"+=K=GFEYO"EF5LECO
J, % 2 % )*) 9
+=NLEYO"EF5LECO
789::NU
=*@ACA *@AB?)BC)*<<BA?@0>?@6)@B)@E>)CBDDBHA?J)
XP
B00A66AB?6`
90,4(,)6a,!/ !-). ,(5) b)D#'(,(4)@( /3&&/
9 ,($ /)Q,#%&-)=&/ ("&) !/&(c,3# !) %%#//# !
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"+6 (-- "*,6#-@,@"8!"0,S& !"+(!#1"
+ ,*,- " %( " %,"(8#>,"(SS# - 7,- *"8,"1( $ ,@P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"
$#''#U -."># ,3
L)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!-)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
:)))
=8* ( -3
&$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 1'$' 3 ',$' ', ) V' -*")/(# : '()! 2*"#3 ; $3\[*"%) 3 () : :*%. -$8'$() I' B
&(##(E()9 I, 18*E % !$%3()! $ ,*: *2) %1,(8 !%$)' 8%*!%$: ',%*"!, R ##1 A$%!*9 I, $#1*
$))*")/ 3 ', *8 )()! *+ ', -(B(/ - )' % S(;%$%. % )*B$'(*) $)3 ', ) 2 -$%()$T1 % 1'$"%$)' $' Q'$.
$)/, J*2) - )' %9 I, /*)!%$'"#$' 3 ) 2#. $88*()' 3 -(B(# I %B(/ -*::(11(*) % K ))(+ %
-$%;"//($9
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !1
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 22
!" #&-6 '+,, -."+ -& ,*"/"01($ D,81&(1!"A "94B;
LHK JI+F+?FEOY" L++FKCO
-*")/(#: :; % &/-$)) 8$(3 '%(;"' '* -$8'$() I' B &(##(E()9 = ',$)E 3 ', A%( )31 *+ ', S(;%$%. $)3
1'$++ +*% ', (% ++*%'1 '* % )*B$' ', -(B(/ - )' % S(;%$%.9 = $#1* 18*E % !$%3()! $) "8/*:()!
% +"%;(1,: )' 8%*\[ /' 2(', : %(/$) S !(*) C*1' N7N9
789::NN !/#5&(,3# !) b) #34) !"#$)&!5 (/&%&!3) b)3d&) %% !#34)B2 /)
AP
<( e&"3)G#c,)0f/#",)&c&!3-)0,4)N-)K:78T
-*")/(#: :; % G )1*"11$) % O" 1' 3 -*")/(# 1"88*%' '* )3*%1 ', -*::")('. Q8"1 C%*\[ /' 0(B$
&"1(/$ B )'9
= CJLK3="7# #-"U(*"7(@,"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"=.& '(1 "*,6#-@,@"8!" #&-6 '7,78,1"
+6 (-- " %( " %," #77&- !"LS&*"51#Z,6 ") >("+&* 6(",>,- "8,",-@#1*,@"8!" %,"
!P"C%,"7# #-"6(11 ,@"8!" %,"$#''#U -."># ,3
L)9)*+ #$,(-).&!/ //,!-)0" ,!!-)0#&/&!),!5) ,/#$$,/)6,$,/
N,*3
:)))
K#3
:)))
=8* ( -3
=0\[LHEK+FKC
' ?567 89:9< &$.*% -$1(##$1 I$#$1 $3\[*"%) 3 ', : '()! '* ', !"#$% -('. -*")/(# & '()! *)
A ;%"$%. W@< >6W@< $' 4566 89:9< () ', -*")/(# -,$:; %19
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
I&((4)IT).#+&$ a-)*//#/3,!3) #34) $&(h
#$%&!'(!#)*+ !,$-% !2
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 23
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0091, Item#: 2.
ORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAADDINGCHULAVISTAMUNICIPALCODE
CHAPTER2.47-“HEALTHYCHULAVISTAADVISORYCOMMISSION”(SECONDREADINGAND
ADOPTION)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the ordinance.
SUMMARY
OnJanuary5,2016theCityofChulaVistaadoptedthefirstHealthyActionPlaninclusiveofa
strategytodevelopanadvisorycommissiontoguidefutureprogramsandpoliciesrelatedtothe
healthandwell-beingofChulaVistaresidents.Atthistime,staffisbringingforwardanordinanceto
adopt the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental
review is required.
Environmental Determination
TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe
CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”as
definedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysical
changeintheenvironment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,
the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
Citiesplayacriticalroleinsupportingthehealthandwell-beingoftheircommunities.Recognizing
theimportanceofhealthtoacommunity,theChulaVistaCityCounciladoptedSection3.1.1ofthe
City’sStrategicPlan,whichsupportstheimplementationofpoliciesandprogramsthatsupportthe
goalofcreatingaHealthyCommunity.ConsistentwiththeStrategicPlan,onJanuary5,2016the
firstHealthyChulaVistaActionPlanwasadopted,providingasetofstrategiestoreview,createand
evaluatepoliciesandprogramswithinthecityanddevelopkeycommunitypartnershipstopromote
wellnesswithinourcommunity.AkeycomponentofthePlanincludesthedevelopmentofan
advisory board to aid the City with future decisions related to health policies.
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 2Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 24
File#:16-0091, Item#: 2.
TheproposedHealthyChulaVistaAdvisoryCommissionwouldincludefiveexpertsinoneormoreof
theActionPlan’sfocusareasofLandUse,Transportation,Nutrition,HealthCare,PhysicalActivity
and/orEnvironment;andthefourremainingseatsshallincludearesidentfromeachofthefourCity
Council districts.
Next Steps
Once the Ordinance is approved and takes effect, staff will seek applications for the commission.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhasdeterminedthattheactioncontemplatedbythisitemisministerial,secretarial,manual,or
clericalinnatureand,assuch,doesnotrequiretheCityCouncilmemberstomakeorparticipatein
makingagovernmentaldecision,pursuanttoCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,Section18704
(d)(1).Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentaconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany
other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Thisitemsupports
Section3.1.1-Implementpoliciesandprogramsthatsupportahealthycommunity,byprovidingfor
an advisory board on health related policies.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
StaffsupportfortheremainderoftheyearwillbeprovidedunderexistingHealthyChulaVista
Initiative funding sources.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Future year staffing expenses will be requested during the annual budget cycle.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Ordinance Adopting CVMC 2.47 Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission
Staff Contact:Stacey Kurz, Senior Project Coordinator
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 2Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 25
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.47-
“HEALTHY CHULA VISTA ADVISORY COMMISSION”
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista adopted the Healthy Chula Vista Initiative in 2013
to promote the healthand wellbeing of residents through partnerships, programs and policies;
and
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2016 the City Council adopted the Healthy Chula Vista
Action Plan which identifies a strategy of creating a health advisory commission to help guide
the City with policy and programs under the Initiative; and
WHEREAS, the City staff recommends that the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory
Commission be established, and has prepared a draft ordinance to add Chapter 2.47 to the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, establishing rules and procedures for the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory
Commission.
NOW THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows:
Section I.
That Chapter 2.47 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code, to
read as follows:
Chapter 2.47
HEALTHY CHULA VISTA ADVISORY COMMISSION
Sections:
2.47.010Creation.
2.47.020Purpose and intent.
2.47.030Functions and duties.
2.47.040Membership.
2.47.050Meeting schedule.
2.47.010 Creation.
TheHealthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission was created as a result of the Healthy Chula
Vista Action Plan adopted January 5, 2016.The general rules governing boards and commissions
set forth in CVMC Chapter2.25, shall govern the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Board, except
as specifically provided below.
2.47.020 Purpose and intent.
It is the purpose and intent of the City Council, in establishing the Board, to create an advisory
and coordinating body which is to serve as a resource, to advise and to make recommendations
to the City Council, and City Manager on health related policies and opportunities under the
Healthy Chula Vista Initiative that would benefit the community.
C:\\Users\\GRANIC~1\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\BCL Technologies\\easyPDF 7\\@BCL@2C066F26\\@BCL@2C066F26.doc
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 26
Ordinance
Page 2
2.47.030 Functions and duties.
The functions and duties of the Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission shall be as follows:
A. Serve as an advisory body to the City Council and City Manager.
B. Periodically assess the health needs of the residents of Chula Vista and review health related
policies and strategies, including the general plan and Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan to make
recommendations to improve said plans to address identified community health needs.
C. Perform such others functions or duties as may be delegated by the City Council.
2.47.040 Membership.
A. The Healthy Chula Vista Advisory Commission shall consist of nine voting members, to be
appointed in accordance with Article VI of the City Charter, CVMC Chapter 2.25, and this
chapter.
B. The voting members shall be appointed according to the following specifications:
Five members shall have expertise and experience in at least one of the focus areas of the
Healthy Chula Vista Action Plan: Land Use, Transportation, Nutrition, Health Care, Physical
Activity and/or Environment; and the four remaining seats shall include a resident from each of
the four City Council districts developed by the Chula Vista Districting Commission and
approved by the Chula Vista City Council on July14, 2015, and shall, throughout their terms,
maintain their residency and elector status. The aforementioned four members from each of the
four council districts shall each be nominated by the Mayor after the Mayor consults with and
receives a recommendation from the councilmember representingthe council district.
2.47.050 Meeting schedule.
The Commission shall hold regular meetings monthly on the second Thursday at 4:00 p.m., in
the Council Conference Room (C-101), located in Building 100 (City Hall) in the Civic Center at
276 Fourth Avenue. The Commission may change its regular meeting day, time or location by
written resolution in accordance with CVMC section 2.25.200.
Section II.Severability
If any portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for
anyreason held to be invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional, by a court of competent
jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed severable, and such invalidity, unenforceability or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining portions of the
Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of
Chula Vista hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, sentence, clause or phrase
of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, sentences, clauses
or phrases of the Ordinance be declared invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional.
Section III. Construction
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to
duplicateor contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in
light of that intent.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 27
Ordinance
Page 3
Section IV. Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day after its final passage.
Section V. Publication
The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published or posted according to law.
Presented byApproved as to form by
_________________________________________________________________________
Kelly BroughtonGlen R. Googins
Director of Development ServicesCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 28
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:15-0677, Item#: 3.
RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGAN
AMENDMENTTOTHEEXISTINGAGREEMENTFORDEVELOPINGATELEGRAPHCANYON
CHANNELNEXUSSTUDY,BETWEENTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAANDATKINSNORTH
AMERICA,INC.;ANDAPPROPRIATING$106,660FROMTHEAVAILABLEBALANCEOFTHE
TELEGRAPHCANYONDRAINAGEFEEFUNDTOCIPDR203“TELEGRAPHCANYONCHANNEL
COMPLIANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY” (4/5 VOTE REQUIRED)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the resolution.
SUMMARY
OnAugust11,2015,theCityCouncilapprovedanagreementwithAtkinsNorthAmerica,Inc.
(Atkins)intheamountof$175,000toprovideconsultantservicesfordevelopingaTelegraphCanyon
ChannelNexusStudy.Astheworkonthestudyprogressed,itbecameevidentthatadditionalwork
wouldbeneededbeyondtheoriginalscopeofwork.Asaresult,staffrecommendsanappropriation
of$106,660toincreasetheAtkinsagreementtoaccountfornecessaryadditionalconsultantservices
and to cover land surveying and staff costs.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental
review is required.
Environmental Determination
TheproposedactivityhasbeenreviewedforcompliancewiththeCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
Act(CEQA)andithasbeendeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection
15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysicalchangeinthe
environment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,theactivityis
not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 29
File#:15-0677, Item#: 3.
OnAugust11,2015,byResolution2015-193,theCityCouncilapprovedanagreementwithAtkins
NorthAmerica,Inc.(Atkins)intheamountof$175,000toprovideconsultantservicesfordeveloping
anexusstudy(SupplementalStudy)toidentifyTelegraphCanyonDrainageFeeeligiblefacilities
(FeeFacilities)thatmaybeneededwithinthebasin.ThecontractwithAtkinsisforthecompletionof
the following major efforts:
1.IdentifyDeficiencies:ToidentifyrecommendedimprovementswithintheSupplementalStudy
areasaddressingdeficienciesidentifiedwithrespecttoconveyance,flooding,erosion,
sedimentation, and public health and safety.
2.EnvironmentalAssessment:Toidentifykeyenvironmentalconstraintslikelytoimpactthe
feasibilityofimplementingtherecommendedimprovements;andrecommendmitigation
measures for impacts to sensitive biological resources, if necessary.
3.CIP:Todevelopacapitalimprovementplan(CIP)byidentifyingexistingdrainagedeficiencies
and recommending facility improvements of the Supplemental Study areas.
4.AlternativeComplianceProgram:Toprovidealternativecompliancestrategies
recommendations for the Telegraph Canyon Channel (Channel).
5.RegulatoryRequirements:Toidentifyexistingandpendingregulationsthatimpactthe
Supplemental Study areas.
6.AutoCADDrawings:TodeliverpreliminarydesignplanscompatiblewithAutoCADCivil3D
2015.
Proposed Cost Change and Contract Amendment
TheFeeFacilitiesaresubjecttocurrentregulatoryenvironmentalrequirementsrequiringthe
approvaloftheResourceAgenciesforanyproposedworkwithinthewetlandareasoftheChannel.
TheResourceAgenciesconsistoftheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,U.S.FishandWildlifeService,
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Thecostchangeisneededtoincorporateadditionalchannelimprovementoptionsinresponseto
commentsfromtheResourceAgenciestomitigatetheimpactsofFeeFacilitiesoccurringwithinthe
basin.Theadditionaldrainagesystemanalysisiterationsandcreationof30%leveldesignplansfor
theidentifiedFeeFacilitieswillbeneededtogainconsensusfromtheResourceAgenciespriorto
permit application submittals (Attachment 1).
Inapre-applicationmeetingwiththeResourceAgencies,theyrecommendedtheincorporationof
engineerednaturalchanneloptionstotheFeeFacilities.TheResourceAgenciesrequested
additionalanalysisexploringpotentialoptionsthatmayallowfortheexistingvegetationandnatural
bottomchanneltoremaininplace.Theseoptionsmayincludeaddingdetentionbasinstoreducethe
flow,alternatealignments,andmodifiedearthenconfigurationsofthechannel.Thecompletionof
30%leveldesignplanswillassistinpresentingtheResourceAgencieswithdetailedoptionsto
determineviableprojectimplementationoftheFeeFacilitiesforthesubsequentpermittingprocess.
The 30% level design plans will also be utilized for project construction planning purposes.
CitystaffconcurswithAtkinsinthatadditionalimprovementoptionswouldrequireworkbeyondthe
approvedbudget.Thefollowingmatrixcomparestheoriginalcontractscopeofworkcostwiththe
proposedincreaseinscopeofworkcost,andshowsthetotaladditionalfundsrequiredforthis
contract cost increase.
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 30
File#:15-0677, Item#: 3.
Citystaffrecommendsappropriatinganadditional$106,660toCIPDR203.Theconsultantcost
increaseisduetoadditionalworkneededtoadvancefromthe10%leveldesignplanstoamore
detailedwork(30%leveldesignplans).ThePublicWorksincreaseisrelatedtoadditionalCitystaff
workrelatedtositeinvestigation,right-of-wayworkandlandsurveyingstaffcostsinorderfor
consultant to deliver the necessary 30% level design plans.
Todate,theconsultanthasbeenresponsivetoCityissuesandprojectneeds.Staffissatisfiedwith
Atkins' performance and recommends amendment approval.
AtkinsiscurrentlyworkingontheTelegraphCanyonChannelmodelingeffortinpreparationfor
meetingswiththeResourceAgenciestodiscusstheadditionalimprovementoptions.Oncethe
improvementoptionsarediscussedwiththeResourceAgencies,theSupplementalStudywill
incorporatethepreferredoptions.TheSupplementalStudyisexpectedtobecompletedinthefallof
2016.
City of Chula VistaPage 3 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 31
File#:15-0677, Item#: 3.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
StaffhasreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilmembersandhasfoundthatMayorMary
CasillasSalasandCouncilMembersJohnMcCann,PatriciaAguilarandPamelaBensoussanhave
realpropertyholdingswithin500feetoftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubjectofthis
action.However,itisnotreasonablyforeseeablethatthedecisionwillhaveaneffectontheCouncil
Members’financialinterests.Totheextentthatanydecisionwouldhaveareasonablyforeseeable
financialeffectonthemember’srealproperty,theeffectwouldbenominal,inconsequential,or
insignificant.TheTelegraphCanyonDrainagefeeisaconnectionfeethatwaspaidatthetimeof
developmentofthesubjectparcels.ThepropertiesownedbytheidentifiedCouncilmembersare
existingresidences,thus,theCouncilmemberswillnotbesubjecttothefee.Inaddition,the
propertiesownedbytheCouncilmemberswerenotidentifiedaspropertiessubjecttothefeewhen
theTelegraphCanyonDrainagefeewasadopted.Finally,thefacilitiestobeconstructedwillreplace
andservethesamepurposeaspreviouslyapproveddrainagefacilities.Consequently,pursuantto
CaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,sections18700,18701(b),18702(b),and18702.2(c)(1),this
itemdoesnotrepresentarealproperty-relatedconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal.
Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCouncilmember,ofanyother
fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.TheSupplemental
StudysupportedtheEconomicVitalitygoalintheCity’sStrategicPlan.Itprovidesforplanning
drainage infrastructure of new development, which is a key City function in supporting new growth.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
Allcostsassociatedwiththisprocurementandpreparationoftheamendmentwillbebornebythe
Telegraph Canyon Drainage Fee Fund.
Approvalofthisresolutionwillappropriate$106,660fromtheavailablebalanceoftheTelegraph
CanyonDrainageFeeFundtoCIPDR203.ThereissufficientfundbalanceintheTelegraphCanyon
Drainage Fee Fund for this appropriation.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
ThecurrentlyavailableTelegraphCanyonDrainageFeeFundfundsofapproximately$5.1millionwill
beusedtoconstructtheremainingprojects.Basedoncurrentproposedprojectestimatesandthe
limitednumberofacresremainingtopayintotheTelegraphCanyonDrainageFeeprogram,itis
anticipatedthatfutureappropriationsfromtheTelegraphCanyonDrainageFeeFundwillneedtobe
augmentedwithotherfundingsources(GasTax,Transnet,grants,etc.)inordertocompleteall
projects identified in the Supplemental Study.
Annual routine maintenance will be required after completion of identified Fee Facilities.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1:Atkins Request for Amendment dated January 5, 2016
City of Chula VistaPage 4 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 32
File#:15-0677, Item#: 3.
Staff Contact: Luis Pelayo, Associate Civil Engineer
City of Chula VistaPage 5 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 33
Atkins North America, Inc.
3570 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300
San Diego, California 92130
Telephone: +1.858.874.1810
Fax: +1.858.259.0741
www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica
January 5, 2016
Job # 100046838
City of Chula Vista
Department of Public Works
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attention: Luis Pelayo
RE: Request for Contract Cost Increase - Telegraph Canyon Channel Nexus Study
DESCRIPTION OF TASK:
This Request for Amendment is for a contract cost increase and will be performed in
compliance with the agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Atkins North
America, Inc. to develop a Telegraph Canyon Channel Nexus Study.
Amendment for Atkins to perform multiple iterations of hydraulic analysis, prepare 30%
design level preliminary design plans, and attend two resource agency meetings in
February and March as directed by the City of Chula Vista is requested.
The following scope of study objectives and detailed costs are requested:
Identify Deficiencies: Cost amendment to increase fee by $15,640 to perform
·
additional multiple iterations of hydraulic analysis in response to resource agency
comments and assess multiple recurrence intervals.
Environmental Assessment: Attend two additional resource agency meetings.
·
Cost amendment to increase fee by $3,100.
AutoCAD Drawings: Provide 30% level design plans for three proposed projects.
·
Cost amendment to increase fee by $27,920.The City will provide all pertinent
surveying and hydraulic input data, in addition to as built plans for existing utilities
within the project areas. This task will include the development of 30%
specifications and cost estimate.
The original amount of this agreement was $175,000. This agreement is being
amended to add $46,660. The total amount of this agreement including this
amendment shall not exceed $221,660. A copy of the detailed fee for the agreement
amendment is attached.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 34
Amendment - Telegraph Canyon Channel Nexus Study
January 5, 2016
Page 2 of 2
ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS SHALL REMAIN THE SAME.
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES:
Atkins North America, Inc. and City of Chula Vista agree that these services will be
performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement between the
City of Chula Vista and Atkins North America, Inc. to develop a Telegraph Canyon
Channel Nexus Study.
Please give Ann Bechtel a call at (858)514-1026 if you have any questions.
Atkins North America, Inc. Atkins North America, Inc.
____________________________________ ____________________________________
Ann Bechtel 1/5/2016 Glenn McPherson 1/5/2016
Project Manager Associate Vice President
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 35
0 ¦¤ 36
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 37
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 38
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 39
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 40
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 41
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 42
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 43
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 44
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 45
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 46
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 47
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 48
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 49
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 50
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 51
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 52
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 53
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 54
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 55
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 56
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 57
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 58
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 59
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 60
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 61
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 62
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 63
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 64
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 65
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 66
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 67
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 68
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 69
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 70
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 71
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 72
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVINGAN AMENDMENT TO THE
EXISTING AGREEMENT FOR DEVELOPING A TELEGRAPH
CANYON CHANNEL NEXUSSTUDY, BETWEEN THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTAAND ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC.;
AND APPROPRIATING $106,660 FROM THE AVAILABLE
BALANCE OF THE TELEGRAPH CANYON DRAINAGEFEE
FUND TO CIP DR203“TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL
COMPLIANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY”
WHEREAS,on August 11, 2015, by Resolution 2015-193, the City Council approved an
agreement with Atkins, North America, Inc. in the amount of $175,000 to provide consultant
services for developing a Telegraph Canyon Channel Nexus Study; and
WHEREAS, as the consultant proceeded with the contract and study progressed, it
became evident that additional work would be needed beyond what was defined in the original
scope of work; and
WHEREAS, theadditional cost of $46,660 for a total amount of $221,660 of additional
services proposed by the consultant to be performed under this first amendment areneeded to
incorporate additional improvement options in response to comments from resource agencies,
perform additional drainage system analysis iterations and create 30% level design plans for the
proposed drainage facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Atkins North America, Inc.’s team have been responsive to City issues
and project needs, and staff is satisfied with Atkins North America, Inc.’s performance; and
WHEREAS, staffrecommends appropriating an additional $106,660 to CIP DR203.
From this amount,$46,660 is related toadditionalconsultant costs and $60,000 to additional
staff work in order for consultant to deliver the necessary 30% level design plans.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, that it approves theamendment to the agreement for developing a Telegraph Canyon
Channel Nexus Study, between the City of Chula Vista and Atkins North America, Inc., inthe
form presented, with such minor modifications as may be required or approved by the City
Attorney, a copy of which shall be kepton file in the Office of the CityClerk, and authorizesand
directstheMayor to execute same.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that it
appropriates $106,660to the CIP expense category of the Telegraph Canyon DrainageFee Fund
to CIP DR203.
Presented byApproved as to form by
Richard A. HopkinsGlen R. Googins
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 73
Director of Public WorksCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 74
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:15-0241, Item#: 4.
REPORTONTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAMARKETINGANDCOMMUNICATIONSPROGRAM
AND PRESENTATION ON THREE-YEAR MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council approve the plan.
SUMMARY
StaffwillupdateCouncilonmarketingandcommunicationsactivitiesimplementedandplannedfor
FY 2016. Staff also will present the three-year Marketing and Communications Plan (2016 - 2019).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental
review is required.
Environmental Determination
TheproposedactivityhasbeenreviewedforcompliancewiththeCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
Act(CEQA)andithasbeendeterminedthattheactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection
15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitwillnotresultinaphysicalchangeinthe
environment;therefore,pursuanttoSection15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,theactivityis
not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION
TheCityofChulaVistaimplementsacreativeandinnovativemarketingandcommunications
program.TheOfficeofCommunicationscoordinatesthisprogramwhichsupportswide-ranging
initiativesandactivitiesfortheCityofChulaVista.AMarketingandCommunicationsPlanguides
theseefforts,andelementsoftheplanalsoareincludedandtrackedaspartoftheCity’sStrategic
Plan.
Key activities underway and ongoing include:
•Coordinating and attracting special events
•Maintaining and updating City website
•Developing and implementing advertising and promotion activities
•Coordinating media relations
•Providing graphic design services
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 75
File#:15-0241, Item#: 4.
•Enhancing community outreach and civic engagement efforts
•Advancing strategic alliances with local and regional agencies and organizations
The goals of the Marketing and Communications Plan are to
1)Increaselocal,regionalandnationalawarenessofthebenefitsofliving,working,
investing and visiting Chula Vista
2)EnhancecommunicationswithChulaVistaresidentsaboutCityissues,projectsand
services.
Threestrategicprioritiesdescribehowthegoalswillbeaccomplished.Foreachstrategicpriority,a
set of actions is outlined to be implemented to help meet the goals of the Plan.
1)Enhance City of Chula Vista’s image and brand
2)Promote and market Chula Vista’s assets, signature projects, programs and services
3)Expand community engagement and partnerships
ThePlanisupdatedeverythreeyearstokeepactivitiescurrent,respondtonewinitiativesandreflect
changing priorities.
Staffwillreviewmarketing,advertisingandcommunicationsactivitiesaswellasprovideanoverview
of the three year Marketing and Communications Plan.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhasreviewedthedecisioncontemplatedbythisactionandhasdeterminedthatitisnotsite-
specificandconsequently,the500-footrulefoundinCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section
18702.2(a)(11),isnotapplicabletothisdecisionforpurposesofdeterminingadisqualifyingreal
property-relatedfinancialconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct(Cal.Gov'tCode§87100,
et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanycouncilmember,ofanyotherfact
that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Initiativesfromthe
MarketingandCommunicationsProgramareincludedintheConnectedCommunityandEconomic
Vitality goals.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
TheMarketingandCommunicationsbudgetincludesapproximately$110,000formarketing,
advertising,promotionandspecialeventactivities.Thereisnoadditionalfiscalimpactasaresultof
this action.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
ThereisnofiscalimpactasaresultofapprovingtheMarketingandCommunicationsPlan.Staffwill
submitthemarketingandcommunicationsbudget,whichwillincludeadditionalfundingrequestfora
marketing consultant to develop an advertising campaign, as part of the FY 2017 budget process.
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 76
File#:15-0241, Item#: 4.
ATTACHMENTS
Marketing and Communications Plan
Staff Contact: Anne Steinberger
City of Chula VistaPage 3 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 77
Office of Communications
Marketing & Communications Plan
2016 - 2019
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 78
2
Overview
This Marketing and Communications Plan is designed to Three strategic priorities describe how the goals will be
support the Citys strategic goals to enhance revenues, accomplished. For each strategic priority, a set of actions
improve business and economic development, promote is outlined to be implemented to help meet the goals of
a positive City image, and attract people to live, work, the Plan.
invest and play in Chula Vista. The Marketing and
Communications Plan includes an overview of marketing The Plan is updated every three years to keep activities
research, goals, as well as strategic priorities and the
necessary action steps that will help meet the goals of the priorities.
plan. The Plan also connects to the Citywide Strategic Plan.
Goals of the Plan
12
Increase local, regional and national awareness of Enhance communications with Chula Vista residents
about City issues, projects and services.
visiting Chula Vista
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 79
Background
The City of Chula Vista is located at the center of one of establish thousands of new jobs, create new public parks,
the richest cultural, economic and environmentally protect natural coastal resources, provide conference
diverse zones in the United States. It is the second-largest
and visitor-serving amenities and build an important
City in San Diego County with a population of asset for the entire San Diego region.
approximately 260,000. Residents enjoy a multitude of
amenities, including award-winning public schools,
The University & Innovation District in Eastern Chula Vista
established neighborhoods, parks and trails, shopping will provide a collaborative learning and research
and dining opportunities and attractions, including environment for engaging students, faculty and
Aquatica, SeaWorld's Waterpark; the Olympic Training
corporations in the creation and application of
Center; the Living Coast Discovery Center; and Sleep knowledge for cross-border economic, social and cultural
Train Amphitheatre, San Diego Countys premiere development. Chula Vista is making strides as a Smart
outdoor music venue.
City and working to provide businesses, institutions and
residents with access to state-of-the-art technology and
Chula Vista is also advancing a number of major communications systems which will improve the quality
initiatives that will continue to showcase the City. A
of life in the City, support prosperity and provide a more
regional leader in conservation and renewable energy,
tremendous opportunity to assume operations of the
county to adopt a climate action plan in 2000. The City Olympic Training Center. The City has entered into a joint
also is advancing a plan for incorporating smart agreement with the United States Olympic Committee
infrastructure in the Bayfront development to become (USOC) to analyze the feasibility of an operations transfer,
including determining alternative compatible uses for
communications, and other critical infrastructure. The the facility.
that will set the stage for planning future development. A number of development and redevelopment projects
The City also is dedicated to promoting job development are underway that will enhance and revitalize established
and supporting existing business and residential
neighborhoods as well as create new urban communities
communities. with a mix of housing with quick access to restaurants
and sidewalk cafés, hotels, stores and shops, parks,
Chula Vista is advancing several signature projects that
schools and jobs. The Millenia community in the Otay
provide exciting opportunities for the City to capitalize Ranch area is envisioned as the new urban hub of the
on. Major land use, regulatory, and environmental
planning hurdles have been cleared and the 535-acre
and employment opportunities. Millenia is located on
Chula Vista Bayfront project is moving forward. The 207 acres near Otay Ranch Town Center.
largest development project on the west coast will
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 80
4
Several special events highlight Chula Vista and attract
thousands of residents and visitors to the city. economic downturn. Even during the tough economic
HarborFest in August and the Starlight Parade in times, the City never stopped planning for the future
December have become popular city-sponsored events. and kept the momentum going on projects that have
The Third Avenue Village Association, Port of San Diego, brought the City to this historic time. The City now is
and myriad event organizers bring thousands of others pursuing new opportunities as projects in eastern Chula
to the city for festivals, running and cycling events, and Vista are developed and established communities are
bayfront activities that show participants the assets and redeveloped. This additional growth will boost
attractions in Chula Vista from the bay to the mountains.economic development and provide the opportunity to
market the 21st century Chula Vista.
The City has done an outstanding job managing record
growth over the past 20 years, and has persevered
Updating the
Marketing & Communications Plan
I
III
Research, outreach, and community input
Target Audiences:
helped shape this update of the Marketing and
The Target Audiences are the groups that the City
Communications Plan. An overview of the
will be directing its marketing and communications
activities.
IV
Strategic Priorities
The Strategic Priorities describe how the goals will
II
Goals:
be accomplished. For each Strategic Priority, Actions
The goals describe what we are striving to achieve.
are outlined to be implemented to help meet the
goals of the Plan. Through the Actions, we will track
and measure results.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 81
5
Research
I:
Two public surveys, a strategic marketing activation plan developed by
MJE Marketing, a civic engagement program, and feedback from the City
Council provided input into the update of the plan. All of this research was
residents and was designed to gauge overall awareness of and public
poll targeted audiences outside of the City to assess perceptions of Chula
Vista in the region. The City also secured consultant services from MJE
Marketing to provide analysis, develop creative and design concepts, and
recommend branding strategies for the City. These recommendations
were implemented as part of the development of the new City of Chula
Vista website. In addition, two public workshops were coordinated by the
Chula Vista Public Library as a civic engagement project that focused on
securing public opinion about the reputation and image of the City.
Nearly 150 individuals participated.
The vast majority (87%) of residents have favorable opinions about the
quality of life in Chula Vista.
communicate through newsletters, the Internet, television and other means.
Eighty-seven
Almost 50 percent of regional respondents reported visiting Chula Vista
percent of
more than once a year.
residents have
The top reasons for visiting Chula Vista amongst regional respondents are
visiting family and friends (39%), shopping (34%), dining (25%),
favorable
entertainment (21%) and work/business (18%).
opinions about
About one-third of county residents have a positive perception of Chula Vista
(35%), one-third negative perceptions (35%), and one-third neutral (31%).
the quality of
Chula Vista ranked eighth in perception among 10 cities in the County.
life in
The most positive perception of the City among regional respondents is that
Chula Vista.
the City is becoming revitalized.
about activities and things to do in San Diego County.
The marketing analysis recommended the City capitalize on attributes of the
City such as award-winning schools, array of housing choices and
recreational opportunities.
A citywide awareness campaign should educate business decision
businesses, about Chula Vistas assets and opportunities.
ways to improve Chula Vistas image are to:
- Rebrand/market - Clean up Chula Vista
- Restore community events - Attract businesses and jobs
- Create a sense of community
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 82
6
Marketing &
Communications Plan
II: Goals
following goals:
1
working, visiting, and investing in Chula Vista.
2
Enhance communication with Chula Vista residents about City issues,
projects and services.
III: Target Audiences
Audiences targeted in this plan:
Chula Vista residents
Business leaders
community groups
San Diego County residents
Visitors and tourists
IV: Strategic Priorities
of Communications will focus on three strategic priorities:
1
Enhance City of Chula Vistas image and brand
2
Promote and market Chula Vistas assets, signature projects, programs
and services
3
Expand community engagement and partnerships
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 83
Enhance City of
Chula Vistas image
and brand
The City of Chula Vista has made progress over the past several years focusing on providing a high
quality of life for residents and visitors. This includes maintaining and enhancing outdoor amenities,
such as parks, trails, and bike routes. Other progress made includes downtown redevelopment and
enhancements, progress on major projects, and growth in local business and retail sales revenues. While
survey results indicate the vast majority of residents believe the City has a good quality of life, this
referenced by those who live in the northern communities of our region. This
Seventy five special
positioning strategy and messages that support the marketing goal to promote
events – large and
and reinforce that the City is a great place in which to live, work, invest and play.
small – attracted
135,000 people to
this approach and the positioning and theme developed by MJE Marketing was
Chula Vista in 2015.
incorporated into the new City website. The research also provides additional
input and feedback to focus positioning and messaging. The positioning strategy
describes how Chula Vista should be perceived based on reality and not myths
and messages will be crafted to support that positioning. Key messages will be incorporated into fact
can easily communicate (e.g., safe city, opportunity for business success, landmark development
projects, great housing communities, etc.). These messages will be validated by the research data and
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 84
8
1 - Enhance City of
Chula Vista’s image
and brand
Recreation, as well as others who also will be called upon for feedback and input as
needed. Involving stakeholders encourages them to take ownership of the messages and
helps inspire them to become brand ambassadors, communicating the Citys messages
genuinely on behalf of Chula Vista. With a strong positioning strategy and message, the
City can proceed with new promotion opportunities to advance the positioning and
promote the Citys image through existing communication channels and with actions
such as the new website Explore Chula Vista, arts and culture assets, new collateral, new
media angles and new community partnerships.
Actions
a)
Finalize citywide positioning strategy and key messages A citywide positioning
key opinion leaders to create a positioning strategy and the messages to support it. The
elements of the positioning strategy and messages will be developed from themes in the
existing research and tested among key stakeholders. For example, the theme of
revitalization could be used as the focal point of the positioning strategy. Another
describe and emphasize the real Chula Vista and will be developed to resonate with
target audiences. These messages will be woven into all City communications, including
news releases, the website, collateral and social media. The messages also will be shared
with stakeholders so they can help communicate on behalf of Chula Vista. The following
First class resident services
One of the safest cities in the country
Leader in renewable energy and conservation
Major development projects underway
Re-emerging downtown
Quality business opportunities
Mix of housing opportunities
Chula Vista is close to home/easy to get to
Premier visitor attractions
Smart City
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 85
9
1 - Enhance City of
b)
Expand internal communications City employees are vital to projecting a positive
Chula Vista’s image
and brand
image of Chula Vista. It is essential that the City provides employees with the tools and information
they need to become brand ambassadors for Chula Vista. Employees should
be knowledgeable about City issues, services and developments, both existing
In 2015, nearly 150
with residents, visitors and
the business community. An internal Communications Steering Committee will
press releases were
distributed resulting
in more than 750
important information, such as resident concerns, development updates and
local, regional and
national TV and print
news items.
c)
Implement proactive media relations program
Communications is proactive in providing media information and
responding to media calls on numerous City projects and developments,
media with fast, accurate information in order to meet deadlines. In
activities, events, services, Council information, emergency
media response plan will be prepared to establish a protocol for interacting
with the media and include aspects such as a designated spokesperson,
posts and a response time allotment. City message points will be incorporated
into all speaking points and quotes. Being prepared to provide the media with
the information they need on a timely basis will foster solid relationships with
reporters who can help share the Citys messages with residents and visitors.
d)
Update the Citys website on a regular basis
the lead working with all City departments to create and launch a vibrant, user-friendly,
Citys website provides quick and easy access to City services, information, City Council
meetings, Board and Commission meetings, agendas and minutes, public notices, public
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 86
10
1 - Enhance City of
input opportunities and other information. The website is one of the Citys main two-way
Chula Vista’s image
channels of communication that helps citizens and the City of Chula Vista stay informed and
and brand
Online access to Council meetings is emphasized on the site in order to encourage public
participation in the decision-making process. News releases about City issues and new photos
keep the content fresh and encourage more frequent visits. News releases will include links to other
pages and social media to increase ease of use for site visitors.
e)
Coordinate editorial calendar
coordinates an editorial calendar to ensure key information is
distributed to local media. This has resulted in weekly coverage in local
and regional (as well as occasional national news coverage) in print and
TV news. The calendar provides the opportunity to focus on key times
such as the holidays when local media is looking for news stories. It is
updated every six months to promote the positive stories occurring in
Chula Vista. News releases are posted on the Citys website and
distributed to the local and regional media. Key
stories will be further distributed when there is
opportunity for national coverage (e.g.,
New City
national environmental awards, bond ratings,
website: Year
etc.) The editorial calendar also focuses on Chula
Vistas services and existing and planned assets
over year,
and projects to ensure that residents and visitors
visitors are
are getting regular updates on what is
happening in Chula Vista. Content also includes
spending 16%
economic development activities, arts and
longer on the
culture events, resident programs,
environmental news and public policy updates.
website and
engaging
f)
Coordinate a social media calendar The
more with the
social media program on Facebook and Twitter that
content.
focuses on generating engaging content that users
will want to Like, comment on, share, retweet
and/or favorite to more widely disseminate
information about Chula Vista. Online access to
Council meetings is emphasized on social media in order to encourage
public participation in the decision-making process. Additionally, economic
development, recreation, construction and other updates are included. The
regional research states that social media is also the number one
communications channel San Diegans use when looking for things to
do in the county. A monthly social media update calendar will highlight upcoming events,
promote attractions and arts and culture activities, provide development updates and
community partnerships to generate new content for this channel. Social media also will
Communications monitors social media closely in order to respond to resident concerns,
visitor questions and stay abreast of potential problems that may require attention.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 87
11
1 - Enhance City of
g)
Continue Community Connection newsletter
Chula Vista’s image
and brand
produces the monthly Community Connection newsletter in order to provide news and
throughout the content. The newsletter is promoted on the City website and through
social media channels. Currently the distribution list includes 2,500 emails. Promotion and
online advertising will be implemented to expand the distribution list.
h)
Create dynamic marketing collateral
across departments to produce high quality and inspired materials including newsletters,
developments, services and initiatives. Working closely with project managers to ensure
messages into all materials. The City also provides graphic design support for
i)
Conduct Public Opinion Surveys Conduct public opinion surveys with City
residents as well as with those outside of the City. The research will be used to
track gains in awareness of City attractions and events as well as to secure
NEW Action Items
j)
Develop Explore Chula Vista website and marketing campaign The goal
of the Explore Chula Vista marketing campaign is to promote and expand
also will cross-promote recreation, healthy communities, and other activities. The
target audiences are residents, visitors and tourists. A vibrant, creative,
informative and accessible website (ExploreChulaVista.com) will provide a
platform to promote and expand awareness of the myriad of activities in Chula
Vista. The website will use photos, videos, links and information to highlight
assets and attractions in Chula Vista. The Explore Chula Vista website will provide
Explore Chula Vista website to create another communications channel to promote Chula
Vista amenities such as art and culture activities, trails, parks, businesses, tourist
attractions and special events. The best way to improve the image is to have people visit
pursuing enhanced partnerships with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Third
Avenue Village Association, South County Economic Development Council and others to
provide information for the website.
k)
Create a special events promotion plan The City of Chula Vista is committed to
holding special events that bring communities together, promote the City and attract
residents, visitors and tourists. With leadership from the Council, the number of events
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 88
12
1 - Enhance City of
held in the City has increased annually since 2011. Two signature events, HarborFest and
Chula Vista’s image
and brand
proposes to expand awareness and participation in existing signature events and attract
spaces to promote, pricing details, and marketing opportunities. The plan also
will outline communications and marketing support for existing signature
events. A key component of the plan will be to implement the City Council
In 2015, Office of
Sponsorship and Endorsement program to provide customer service and
Communications
support for key events. Finally, the plan will address customer service to ensure
that special event organizers have a positive experience in Chula Vista and are
produced nearly
likely to return.
350 graphics
l)
Establish banner program Banners are a creative way to promote the City
projects including
and its attractions. The City has been approached by businesses and community
organizations about opportunities to use banners to market events, support
logos, brochures,
economic development and promote community pride. A policy and a process
newsletters, web
will be developed for displaying promotional banners in key areas of the City.
Guidelines, including who is eligible for banner space and installation costs and
designs and
procedures, will be established and distributed through City communication
more.
channels. The Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA) has used banners to
promote merchants on Third Avenue. Representatives at local shopping centers
have expressed interest in using banners to attract business. Banners also
provide the opportunity for the City to promote signature events.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 89
Promote & market Chula Vistas
assets, signature projects,
programs & services
could be considered the best kept secret in the county. Regional research shows that once San Diegans
hear about activities and attractions in Chula Vista, they are more likely to visit. The City will capitalize on
results; engaging residents, community groups, and businesses to address critical
climate change issues; and serving as a sustainability resource for other
municipalities in our region and nationwide. The City is placing renewed focus on
arts and culture assets by adding new resources to revitalize the Cultural Arts
Program and complete and implement the Arts Master Plan. The Marketing Plan
will support these and other programs via citywide and regionwide (and beyond
the region, if feasible) communications. This can be accomplished through a
number of ways, including City communications (website, social media, direct
mail, etc.), media relations, advertising and word of mouth.
Actions
a)
Create master list of assets and projects
Communications will identify which assets, projects, programs and services should
be highlighted in communications. The list could be prepared based on a number
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 90
14
2 - Promote & market
of factors, including key milestones occurring in that year, elections or regulatory
Chula Vista’s assets,
signature projects,
programs & services
the editorial and social media calendars.
b)
Maintain updated targeted media list A list of preferred publications and media
outlets will be updated. The list will be organized by areas in San
Diego County (e.g., North County, East County, etc.). In addition to
publications, the list will include potential media angles based on
the research. For example, the research showed that residents of
North County inland are most interested in tourist attractions, such
as Aquatica, SeaWorld's Waterpark.
c)
Collaborate with community and business partners
Collaboration with regional and local organizations such as the
Port of San Diego, South County Economic Development
Council, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Third Avenue
Village Association, the Eastlake Business Association,
Southwestern Community College, and others is essential to
Chula Vistas goal of improving business and economic
development. The list will be expanded to include the Regional
Chamber of Commerce, Regional Economic Development
of Communications will partner with the Economic
Development Department to communicate with these groups
on a regular basis to provide input, lend support and promote
of existing and potential partners to approach for cross
d)
The
Citys website, Intranet, newsletters, social media channels and the
new Explore Chula Vista website will be used to provide regular
updates on pressing issues and community developments. News
releases detailing progress on these fronts are prepared at key
milestones to increase public awareness and knowledge of Chula
Vistas continued revitalization.
e)
Expand multicultural marketing and cross-border outreach
The City has taken initial steps to increase multicultural outreach
and civic engagement among residents. Other activities include
providing communications and graphics to promote opportunities
or expand in Chula Vista. The Communications team also works with the Economic
Expand multicultural community and media outreach on key issues and across the border
to capitalize on opportunities for cross-border economic, education, social, and cultural
connections.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 91
15
2 - Promote & market
f)
Provide support to Economic Development team
Chula Vista’s assets,
signature projects,
programs & services
businesses, educate regional and binational leaders and industry partners on Chula Vista
economic development assets, and provide media relations and graphic design services.
Collaborate with Chamber of Commerce, TAVA, and other organizations to promote Chula
Vista as a destination for shopping, dining, and recreation. Assist with updating Economic
Development web pages and keeping the messaging current and relevant for marketing
Chula Vista.
NEW Action Items
g)
Develop and implement advertising program Research shows that once
San Diegans know about Chula Vistas assets and attractions, they are more likely
campaigns, but a more strategic, robust plan can create better results. Placing
advertisements in targeted publications, travel sites and social media, and linking
to the Explore Chula Vista website will encourage regional residents, visitors and
Communications will develop an expanded media plan, create advertising, and
implement plan based on budget and priorities. Request an additional $100,000
in the FY 2017 budget to prepare and release a Request for Proposals to retain a
highlight Chula Vistas assets and build awareness of current and emerging reality
of the City.
h)
Establish an internal Communications Steering Committee An
meet monthly to share the latest information on projects, issues and events
press releases and more.
i)
Promote Olympic Training Center
recognition as an Olympic City. Communications will pursue opportunities to
incorporate the Olympic message into the Citys overall messaging strategy.
the Citys potential takeover and operation of the facility with the goal of having
the facility remain an elite Olympic training center. There is a tremendous
opportunity to utilize this change as a marketing tool where events and other
activities will build awareness for the City and the OTC and draw people from
throughout the region and beyond to Chula Vista.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 92
16
2 - Promote & market
j)
Chula Vista is making strides as a Smart City. The City is
Chula Vista’s assets,
signature projects,
working to provide businesses, institutions and residents with access to state of the art
programs & services
technology and a communications system, which will improve the quality of life in the
communications infrastructure system to help disseminate important information to
broadband that will drive economic, healthcare, education and innovation sectors to
levels that distinguish Chula Vista as a national Smart City leader.
k)
Utilize Explore Chula Vista website Once the Explore Chula Vista website is
launched, it can be used as another communication channel to promote everything the
accessible website (ExploreChulaVista.com) will provide a platform to promote and
expand awareness about City trails, parks, arts and culture, businesses, shopping and
recreational activities.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 93
Expand community
engagement & partnerships
The City of Chula Vista is committed to engaging its communities and keeping stakeholders informed
communications activities to provide information about City services such as libraries, parks, recreation,
environment, asset management, healthy communities, recycling, and animal care
than 60 large and small events held each year in the City. The City Council has led
that are attracting thousands to the City in the summer and during the holiday
season.
The City also is working to promote opportunities for resident involvement in the
decision-making processes. Although the research showed that residents are
City issues and projects from secondary sources (Internet, television news and San
Diego Union Tribune). To the extent that the City can increase readership of its
newsletters and direct mail, attract more frequent visits to its website and
resident satisfaction with the Citys communication, but also their knowledge and
understanding of City issues, activities and important infrastructure challenges.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 94
18
3 - Expand
community
engagement &
partnerships
Actions
a)
Utilize a variety of communication platforms The research shows that residents
are getting the majority of their Chula Vista news through third party sources. This
demonstrates the City has an opportunity to enhance its own communication channels,
which will enable it to better communicate its message to stakeholders. The new City
releases are all valid means to communicate City messages. While the research states
outreach platforms at its disposal while considering new channels that may arise.
On average
b)
Enhance civic engagement program
more than
a number of civic engagement activities. The Districting Process involved tremendous
12,000 people
community and media outreach, workshop coordination, advertising and promotion
to ensure residents were aware of the opportunity to participate in the historic
engage with the
City via social
of Communications proposes to build on that momentum by creating a civic engagement
program to regularly obtain feedback from residents and other stakeholders on life and
media per
business in Chula Vista. A civic engagement program will coordinate various City activities
month.
(e.g., asset management, healthy communities, development projects, input
opportunities, community events) and provide the opportunity to promote and raise
notices of upcoming projects, community meetings, and public hearings.
c)
Coordinate a speakers bureau
Information about the speakers bureau will be posted in the Citys communications
channels and promoted through media outreach.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 95
19
3 - Expand
d)
Prepare easy-to-understand communications materials
community
engagement &
partnerships
formats using easy-to-understand language and concepts. This ensures that residents and
visitors are able to access Chula Vista services and assets, as well as take part in the
decision making process. Materials are prepared in other languages as needed.
e)
Communications keeps in close contact with local groups and businesses such as the
Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Third Avenue Village Association, South County
Economic Development Council, Southwestern College, Sweetwater Union High School
District, Chula Vista Elementary School District, water districts, health care providers,
opportunities to positively promote Chula Vista.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 96
20
V: Timeline
quarterly and adjusted as necessary.
VI: Evaluation
Progress made on the Actions in this plan will be used to evaluate the plans success.
to the City Manager. Budget expenditures and timeline also will be reviewed.
VII: Budget
Funding is approved as part of the annual budget process. Funding supports ongoing marketing and communications
activities and Special Event seed money supports City-sponsored signature events.
Marketing & Communications Resources FY 2015-16
Activity Budget
Operations
$693,298
Supplies/Services $4,390
Subtotal $697,688
Contracted Services
City Council Broadcast Services $20,000
Public Opinion Survey $11,000
Explore Chula Vista Website $4,000
Subtotal $35,000
Special Events
Facebook $1,110
Chula Vista promo video $4,500
Subtotal $5,610
Special Events
HarborFest $15,000
Starlight Parade $15,000
Sponsored Special Event TBD $10,000
Subtotal $40,000
Communications
Multi-Cultural/Binational Outreach $25,000
Civic/Community Engagement $5,000
Subtotal $30,000
TOTAL FY 2015-16 Budget $808,298
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 97
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:15-0648, Item#: 5.
CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING THE BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY
RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAADOPTINGTHEBIKE
LANESONBROADWAYFEASIBILITYSTUDYANDAUTHORIZINGTHEIMPLEMENTATIONOF
THESTUDYRECOMMENDATIONSASFUNDINGALLOWSTHROUGHFUTURECAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the resolution.
SUMMARY
Duringthepreparationoftheupdated2011BikewayMasterPlan,thecyclingcommunity’smost
frequentlyrequestedfacilitieswerebikelanesonBroadway.TheCityhashiredaconsultantto
analyzeanddocumentthefeasibilityandimpactsofimplementingaClassIIbikefacilityon
BroadwayfromCStreettoMainStreet.Twoseriesofpublicmeetingshavebeenheld.OnJanuary
6, 2016, the report was presented to the Safety Commission and approved.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
Theactivityisnota“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelines;therefore,pursuanttoStateGuidelinesSection15060(c)(3)noenvironmental
review is required.
Environmental Determination
TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedactivityforcompliancewiththe
CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andithasbeendeterminedthattheactivityisnota
“Project”asdefinedunderSection15378oftheStateCEQAGuidelines;therefore,pursuantto
Section15060(c)(3)oftheStateCEQAGuidelines,theactivityisnotsubjecttoCEQA.Thus,no
environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
ThedraftreportwaspresentedtotheSafetyCommissiononJanuary6,2016.Thevotewas4-0-3
(threecommissionersabsent)toacceptthestaffreportandrecommendthatCounciladopttheBike
LanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudyandauthorizetheimplementationofstudyrecommendationsas
funding allows (Attachment 1).
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 98
File#:15-0648, Item#: 5.
DISCUSSION
Inthe2005BikewayMasterPlan,thesectionofBroadwaybetweenCStreetandPalomarStreetwas
notindicatedasabikeway.DuetothehighervolumeoftrafficonBroadway,staffhopedto
encouragecycliststotravelonparallelrouteswithlesstraffic,suchasFifthAvenue(designatedasa
ClassIIIBikeRoute).However,thisapproachdidnotmeettheneedofcyclists.Bicyclistscontinue
totravelonBroadway,sinceitisadirectroutethroughthecityandhasmanycommercialandretail
destinations.
Yearslater,duringthepreparationoftheupdated2011BikewayMasterPlan,staffheldseveral
publicmeetings.ThemostfrequentrequestreceivedwastoinstallclassIIbikelanesonBroadway.
Bikelaneswouldalsobeconsistentwiththeultimatelong-rangeplanningforBroadwayintheUrban
CoreSpecificPlan(UCSP),whichnarrowsvehiclelanes,addsaraisedmedianandprovidesfor
bicyclelanes.TheUCSPcoversthenorthwesterlyportionofChulaVistaandincludesBroadway
fromCStreettoLStreet.Sinceadditionalstudieswouldbeneededtoevaluatethefeasibilityof
installingbikelanesandtheimpactonstreetparking,theapproved2011BikewayMasterPlanended
upshowingaClassIIIBikeRoute.BikeRoutesignageandpavementmarkingscalled“sharrows”
were installed.
In2011,theCityalsoreceivedagrantfromtheRails-to-TrailsConservancythatpaidforahighlevel
evaluationofthepotentialforbicyclefacilitiesalongBroadway.Theevaluationrecommendedthat
bikelaneswerefeasibleandcouldbeinstalledalongBroadway(Attachment2).Theevaluation
notednoconvenientandcontinuousparallelroutesthatwouldprovideamoredirectandeasy
accesstothemanydestinationsforcyclistsalongBroadway.Alsonotedwastheprobableneedto
removeparkingsouthofLStreet,duetotheexistingmedian,inordertoaccommodatebikelanes.
This study had very minimal outreach to the public and business owners.
Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study
DuringFiscalYear2014-15,CouncilapprovedfundingtheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudy
todevelopviablealternativesandconfigurationsforbikelanesalongBroadway.Thestudywould
also include robust outreach to the public, businesses and interested parties.
ChenRyan&AssociateswasselectedastheconsultanttopreparethisstudyinApril2015.The
Consultantperformedbicyclecountsandinvestigatedtrafficaccidentsinvolvingbicyclistsandtraffic
volumes.Thebicyclecountsindicatedthatabout2/3rdsofcyclistsareridingonthesidewalkinstead
oftheroadway.Bicycleaccidentreportsindicatedthatthetwomostfrequentcausesofaccidents
were when bicyclists are riding on the wrong side of the road and making improper turns.
Sincesomeoftheoptionsincludetheeliminationofon-streetparking,theConsultantconducteda
parkingstudy.ThestudyindicatesthatthestreetsegmentbetweenFStreetandLStreethadthe
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 99
File#:15-0648, Item#: 5.
highestutilizationofon-streetparking.Thestudyalsodeterminedthatthefollowingthreesegments
had the most limitations for off-street parking:
D Street to Davidson Street (0.37 miles)
E Street to F Street (0.25 miles)
I Street to J Street (0.25 miles)
Twosetsofthreepublicmeetingswereheldonthisproject.Thefirstthreepublicmeetingswere
heldintheCouncilChambersandwereintendedtosolicitgeneralcommentsregardingbicycle
facilitiesalongBroadway.Localandregionalorganizationsandcommunitygroupswerecontacted
andnotifiedofthemeetings.Additionally,approximately1700meetingnoticesweresenttoproperty
andbusinessownersalongtheroute.TheConsultantprovidedalargeaerialphotographofthe
properties along Broadway and participants were invited to make comments along the route.
Thesecondsetofthreepublicmeetingsincludedthepresentationoftwoorthreealternativesforeachofthethreestreet
segments.Someofthealternativesinvolvedeithertheeliminationofparkingora“roaddiet”(fewerand/ornarrower
travelandparkinglanes).Inordertoobtainagreatervarietyofattendees,staffcontactedthepressandheldthe
meetingsinvariouslocations-onemeetingintheCouncilChambers,oneintheSouthChulaVistaLibrary,anda
presentation to the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce.
Participants were invited to vote on their favorite alternative. The following were the results:
CStreettoFStreet:Bufferedbikelanes,on-streetparkingonbothsides,andreductionofthenumberoftravel
lanes from four through lanes to two through lanes.
FStreettoLStreet:Bikelanes,on-streetparkingonbothsides,acentertwo-wayleftturnlane,andfourtravel
lanes. All vehicle lanes are at a reduced width to accommodate the bike lanes.
LStreettoMainStreet:Thiswasalmostevenlydividedbetweentheoptionthateliminatedon-streetparkingand
onethatreducedthenumberoftravellanes.Duetothehightrafficvolumes,aminimumoffourtravellanesare
needed south of L Street.
Recommendations
ThereportpreparedbyChenRyan&Associatesisattached(Attachment2).TherecommendationsareshowninPart5
andbasedondividingBroadwayintothreesegments.Thesegmentingisbasedontrafficvolumesandthecenterofthe
roadway use (a two-way left turn lane or a raised median).
C Street to G Street (curb to curb width = 70 feet to F Street)
Duetothelowertrafficvolumes(lessthan25,000AverageDailyTrips(ADT)pertheFederalHighwayAdministration
(FHWA)),aroaddietthatwouldreducethenumberofthroughlanesfromfourtotwoisappropriateuntilsuchtimethat
thevolumesexceedthetwo-laneroadwaycapacity.AssouthboundBroadwayapproachesGStreet,theroadway
stripingwouldtransitionfromthe“roaddiet”(twolanes)toafourlanecross-sectionatapointsouthofParkWay.Inthe
northbounddirectionBroadwaytransitionsfromafour-laneroadtoatwo-laneroadnorthoftheGStreetintersection.
The recommended alternative includes the following:
A five-foot bike lane with a three-foot bike lane buffer area on each side
A single 12-foot vehicle travel lane in each direction
City of Chula VistaPage 3 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 100
File#:15-0648, Item#: 5.
A 14-foot center two-way left turn lane (TWLTL)
Retaining 8-foot wide parking lanes on each side
G Street to L Street (curb to curb width = 80 feet)
Thissegmentisapproximately80-feetwideanddoesnothaveafullwidthraisedmedian.Thedailytrafficvolumesare
higher than the northern segment of Broadway. The recommended alternative includes the following:
A five foot bike lane on each side (includes a northbound buffer between H and I Streets)
Two minimum 11-foot travel lanes in each direction
A 10-foot center two-way left turn lane (TWLTL)
Retaining 8-foot wide parking lanes on each side
L Street to Main Street (curb to curb width = 82 feet)
Thissegmenthasthehighesttrafficvolumes,whicharegenerallyover25,000ADT.Caltransrecommendsthatstreets
withover20,000ADThavefourtravellanes.Removingand/ormodifyingtheexistingraisedmedianismorecostlythan
restriping.Muchofthissegmenttodayislinedwithlargeon-siteparkinglotsandtherearesomeareasalreadywhereon
-street parking is prohibited. Therefore, the recommended alternative includes the following:
A five-foot bike lane with a four-foot buffer on each side of the street
Two minimum 11-foot wide travel lanes in each direction
Retaining existing raised median with left turn pockets
Prohibiting on-street parking
Conclusion
StaffisrecommendingthatCouncilaccepttheconsultant’sreporttitled“BikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibility
Study”(Attachment3)andpursueimplementationoftheserecommendationsinfutureCapitalImprovementPrograms
(CIPs).
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
StaffhasreviewedthepropertyholdingsoftheCityCouncilmembersandhasfoundnopropertyholdingswithin500feet
oftheboundariesofthepropertywhichisthesubjectofthisaction.Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresenta
disqualifyingrealproperty-relatedfinancialconflictofinterestunderCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section
18702.2(a)(11), for purposes of the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §87100,et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofanyotherfactthatmay
constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,HealthyCommunity,Strong
andSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.ThegoaloftheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudyisto
supporttheStrongandSecureNeighborhoodStrategy.Thegoalofthestudyistofindwaysofprovidingasafer
environment on Broadway for cyclists, pedestrians and drivers.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of this report will have no fiscal impact to the General Fund, TransNet or Gas Tax Funds in the current year.
City of Chula VistaPage 4 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 101
File#:15-0648, Item#: 5.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Sincetheimprovementsaregenerallylimitedtostriping,markingsandsignage,themostcosteffectivewaytoimplement
thesealterationswillbeinconjunctionwiththenextpavementresurfacingCIPprojectsforeachsegment.Projectswill
be proposed for funding in the Fiscal Year 2016/17 CIP process.
FundingrecommendationsfortheprojectswillcomefromTransNetorGasTaxfunds.Staffwouldcontinuetoseekother
funding (grants, etc.) to accelerate the schedule. Once installed, the bike lanes will require routine maintenance.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Safety Commission Action
2.Rails to Trails Conservancy Memorandum
3.Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study
Staff Contact: Elizabeth Chopp, Senior Civil Engineer
City of Chula VistaPage 5 of 5Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 102
ACTION SUMMARY OF
CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION
JANUARY 6, 2016–ITEM 1
1.RESOLUTION OF THE SAFETY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT
COUNCILADOPT THE BIKE LANES ON BROADWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY AND THAT COUNCIL
AUTHORIZE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS AS FUNDING ALLOWS
THROUGH FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS
Motion made by Commissioner Marroquin seconded by Commissioner Hidinger to recommendthat Council
adoptthe Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study and that Council authorize the implementation of the
study recommendations as funding allows through future Capital Improvement Program Project.MOTION
PASSED 4-0-3(Marshall,Munoz, Navarro absent).
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 103
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 104
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 105
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 106
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 107
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 108
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 109
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 110
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 111
Bike Lanes on Broadway
Feasibility Study
DraftReport
January2016
CityofChulaVista
276FourthAvenue
ChulaVista,CA91910
39005 th Avenue,Suite210
SanDiego,CA92103
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 112
TableofContents
1.0
Introduction............................................................................................................................................4
1.1BackgroundInformation.....................................................................................................................4
1.2TheNeedforBikeLanes.....................................................................................................................5
1.3ReportOverview.................................................................................................................................5
2.0CommunityInput....................................................................................................................................7
2.1CommunityWorkshopSeries#1........................................................................................................7
2.2CommunityWorkshopSeries#2......................................................................................................13
3.0ExistingConditions................................................................................................................................21
3.1PostedSpeedsandTrafficVolumes.................................................................................................21
3.2CurbtoCurbWidths........................................................................................................................21
3.3RightTurnOnlyLanes.......................................................................................................................23
3.4DualLeftTurnLanes.........................................................................................................................23
3.5BusStops...........................................................................................................................................23
3.6RaisedMedians.................................................................................................................................25
3.7VehicularArterialSegmentLevelofService....................................................................................25
3.8OnStreetParking..............................................................................................................................26
3.9BicycleCollisions...............................................................................................................................31
3.10BicycleCounts...................................................................................................................................32
4.0AlternativeDevelopment......................................................................................................................35
4.1CStreettoEStreetAlternativeDesigns...........................................................................................35
4.2EStreettoFStreetAlternativeDesigns...........................................................................................36
4.3FStreettoLStreetAlternativeDesigns...........................................................................................36
4.4LStreettoMainStreetAlternativeDesigns.....................................................................................37
5.0PreferredAlternative............................................................................................................................38
5.1CStreettoGStreet...........................................................................................................................38
5.2GStreettoLStreet...........................................................................................................................39
5.3LStreettoMainStreet.....................................................................................................................39
5.4AdditionalConsiderations................................................................................................................40
ListofTables
Table21CommunityPreferredDesignAlternativebySegment.......................................................18
Table31StreetSegmentPerformanceStandardsandVolumes......................................................25
Table32BroadwaySegmentADTandLOS........................................................................................26
Table33BroadwayParkingInventoryandOccupancyStudy...........................................................27
Table34PMPeakPeriodBicycleCounts(4PM6PM).......................................................................32
Table35HStreettoIStreetCountComparison(2010vs.2015).....................................................34
Page2
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 113
ListofFigures
Figure11UrbanCoreSpecificPlanCrossSection................................................................................6
Figure21CommunityWorkshopSeries#1ΑPublicInputCStreettoFStreetSegment....................9
Figure22CommunityWorkshopSeries#1ΑPublicInputFStreettoLStreetSegment..................10
Figure23CommunityWorkshopSeries#1ΑPublicInputLStreettoMainStreetSegment............11
Figure24CStreettoEStreetDesignAlternatives..............................................................................14
Figure25EStreettoFStreetDesignAlternatives..............................................................................15
Figure26FStreettoLStreetDesignAlternatives..............................................................................16
Figure27LStreettoMainStreetDesignAlternatives........................................................................17
Figure31ExistingCurbtoCurbWidths,VehicularVolumes,andIntersectionDiagrams................22
Figure32NACTOCombinedBikeLaneΑRightTurnOnlyLaneConfigurations................................24
Figure33ObservedOnStreetParkingOccupancyalongBroadway..................................................28
Figure34BusinessesPotentiallyAffectedbyLossofOnStreetParking...........................................29
Figure35BicycleInvolvedCollisions(2009Α2013)...........................................................................30
Figure36PrimaryCollisionFactorCategory(2009Α2013)...............................................................31
Figure37BicycleInvolvedCollisionsbyYear(2009Α2013)..............................................................31
Figure38BroadwayBicycleCounts(June2015)................................................................................33
Figure51CStreettoGStreetPreferredAlternative..........................................................................38
Figure52GStreettoLStreetPreferredAlternative..........................................................................39
Figure53LStreettoMainStreetPreferredAlternative.....................................................................40
Figure54RoadDietImplementationThresholdsbyAgency..............................................................40
Figure55ExistingandFutureVehicularVolumes..............................................................................41
Appendices
AppendixAΑRailstoTrailsMemo:AccommodatingBicycleonBroadway
AppendixBΑParcelAddressesPotentiallyImpactedbyOnStreetParkingLoss
AppendixCΑBicycleCountSheets
AppendixDΑPreferredAlternativeStripingPlan
AppendixEΑFHWARoadDietInformationalGuide
Page3
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 114
1.0Introduction
Cyclingandbicyclefacilitiesareincreasinglygainingattentionfromlocalandregionalagenciesas
onemethodforaddressingcomplexurbanissues,suchastrafficcongestion,greenhousegas
emissions,communityhealth,andeconomicrevitalization.TheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibility
StudybuildsonpreviousandongoingeffortstomaketheCityofChulaVistamorebicyclefriendly,
includingthe2011BikewayMasterPlanwhichrecommendedimplementingaClassIIIBicycle
RoutealongBroadwaythroughChulaVista.TheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudyis
intendedtoreviewpotentialoptionsandmakerecommendationsforinstallingbicyclefacilities
alongtheBroadwaycorridorinChulaVista,fromCStreettoMainStreet.
1.1Background Information
2011BikewayMasterPlanComments
RelatedtoBroadway
BroadwaywasclassifiedasaBikeRoutefollowing
theadoptionofthe2011BikewayMasterPlan,and
enhancedwithsharedlanemarkingsorͻƭŷğƩƩƚǞƭͼ
andverticalsignagetohelpalertmotoriststo
anticipatecyclists.Thisclassificationwasassigned
largelyduetotheconstraintsposedbya
combinationofexistinglanewidthsandthecurbto
curbdimensionsalongBroadwaywhichmakes
implementingacontinuousbicyclelanedifficult
withoutroadwaymodifications.However,the
outreachconductedinsupportofthe2011Bikeway
MasterPlanindicatedaneedanddesirefor
improvedbicycleconditionsalongBroadway.
In2011theRailstoTrailsConservancy,fundedbyaHealthyTransportationNetworkTechnical
AssistanceGrant,conductedafieldvisitofBroadwaytodeterminetheneedandfeasibilityof
implementingbicyclelanesalongBroadway.Theresultsofthefieldvisitweresummarizedina
memorandumtitleAccommodatingBicyclesonBroadway,whichisincludedasAppendixA.
TheConservancyconcludedͻƷŷĻCityofChulaVistawillimprovetrafficsafetyandneighborhood
livabilitybyaccommodatingbicyclingon.ƩƚğķǞğǤͼandultimatelyrecommendedtheinstallation
ofbicyclelanesalongBroadway,fromCStreettoMainStreet.Therecommendationswerebased
onthefollowingobservations:
ͻ.źĭǤĭƌźƭƷƭarealreadytravelingalongBroadway,bothforthepurposeofthroughtravelas
theparallelroutesarenotcontinuous,andtoaccesstheservicesandbusinessthatare
locatedonBroadway;
TrafficvolumesandvehiclespeedsaretoohighonBroadwayforbicycliststosharethe
lanewithmotorists,andnobikelanesexisttoprovideasaferspaceforbicycling;
Therefore,bicyclistsmostoftenrideonthesidewalkswhichpresentsserioushazardsat
intersectionsanddegradesthepedestrianĻƓǝźƩƚƓƒĻƓƷͼ
Page4
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 115
1.2The Need for Bike Lanes
BroadwayisaheavilytraveledcorridortraversingwesternChulaVista.Broadwayconnectstothe
CityofNationalCitytothenorth,andtotheCityofSanDiegotothesouth.Thecorridorprovides
accesstomanycommercialandindustrialbusinesses,shoppingcenters,multifamilyresidential
complexes,residentialneighborhoods,andtwoelementaryschools.Additionally,thecorridoris
atransitroutefortheMTS932Bus,whichservestheSouthBayfromthe8StreetTransitCenter
th
inNationalCitydowntotheIrisAvenueTransitCenter,justnorthoftheSR905.
Broadwaycurrentlyhasadesignated
ClassIIIBikeRoute,identifiablebyvertical
signageandsharedlanearrowmarkings
orͻƭŷğƩƩƚǞƭͼonthepavement,however,
thismaynotbeanappropriatebicycle
facilityduetothevehicularspeedsand
volumes.DuringtheBicycleMasterPlan
updateprocessseveralyearsago,many
communitymembersexpressedthe
desireforabicyclelaneorotherfacility
typethatwouldprovideformore
protectionthanabicycleroute.Bike
routesindicatetomotoristsandcyclists
thattheoutsidetravellaneshouldbe
shared.Manycyclistsorpotentialcyclists,however,maybedeterredfrommixingwithvehicles
alongBroadwayduetohightrafficspeedsandvolumes.TheUrbanCoreSpecificPlan(UCSP)
adoptedbyCityCouncilshowsthatBroadwaywillultimatelyhaveClassIIBikeLaneswithinthe
UCSParea,fromCStreettoLStreet.Figure11isacrosssectionexcerpttakenfromtheChula
VistaUrbanCoreSpecificPlanproposingbikelanesonBroadway,betweenCStreetandLStreet.
1.3Report Overview
Thisreportpresentsananalysisofexistingconstraintstobeconsideredwhenevaluatingpotential
bicyclefacilityalternativesalongtheBroadwaycorridor.summarizesthepublic
engagementeffortsconductedinsupportoftheproject.examinestheexistingroadway
characteristicsalongBroadway.Additionally,thischapterdescribesavailableonstreetparking
andprovidesasnapshotofparkingutilizationalongthecorridor.Theexistingconditionsanalysis
concludeswithareviewofbicycleinvolvedcollisions(2009Α2013)andexistingbicycledemand
alongthecorridor.describesthealternativesdevelopmentprocessanddescribesthe
differentalternativesthatwereconsidered.concludesthereportbypresentingthe
preferredalternative.
Page5
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 116
82
*
*At intersections, parking is removed to allow for 14Ô median
Proposed Broadway from C Street to L Street (Source: Kimley-Horn and
Fg. 5.34
Associates)
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 1-1
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Urban Core Specific Plan Cross-Section
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 117
2.0Community Input
Communityparticipationisanimportantcomponentoftheplanningprocess.Assuch,twoseries
ofworkshopswereheldinsupportoftheBikeLanesonBroadwayFeasibilityStudytopresent
projectinformationtothepublic,solicitfeedbacktoshapetheStudy,andtoassistwithselecting
thepreferredalternativedesignconcepttomoveforwardwith.ThisChapterprovidesasummary
ofthetwocommunityworkshopsandtheinputcollected.
2.1Community Workshop Series #1
Thefirstworkshopseriesincludedthreeidenticalsessions,heldonJuly29 th,30 th andAugust3 rd
attheChulaVistaCityHallCouncilChambers.Threesessionswereheldondifferentdaysofthe
weektomaximizeopportunitiesforpublicattendance.Theinitialserieswasscheduledtooccur
shortlyaftercompletionofoneofthefirstkeydeliverables,theExistingConstraintsReport.The
workshopintroducedtheprojecttothecommunity,presentedtheworkcompletedtodate,and
allowedfortheprojectteamtolearnfromcommunitymembersandBroadwayusersabouttheir
futurevisionforBroadway,perceivedbicycleconflicts,onstreetparkingconcerns,and
recommendationsformovingtheprojectforward.
Theworkshopflyerwasmailedtoover1,700propertyownersalongandadjacenttotheBroadway
corridorandadvertisedthroughthefollowingstakeholdersidentifiedbytheprojectteamandCity
staff:
SanDiegoMTSChulaVistaCommunityCollaborative
SANDAGChulaVistaFireDepartment
SouthwestCivicAssociationChulaVistaChamberofCommerce
CrossroadsIICivicAssociationNormanParkSeniorCenter
BikeWalkChulaVistaSanDiegoCountyHealth&HumanServices
SanDiegoCountyBikeCoalitionCityofNationalCity
CirculateSanDiegoOtayMesaNestorCommunityPlanningGroup
ChulaVistaSchoolDistrictCityofSanDiego
Additionally,flyersweredistributedtoandpostedatlocalbikeshopswithinChulaVista,including
thefollowinglocations:
BajaBikesPulseEnduranceSports
BicycleWarehouseREIChulaVista
ChulaVistaBikesSouthBayBicycles
PerformanceBicycleTrek
TheworkshopopenedwithaPowerPointpresentationreviewingtheprojectandworkshop
purposeaswellasinformationalcomponentsregardingthebenefitsofbicyclingandComplete
Streetsandanoverviewofbicyclefacilities.TheExistingConstraintsReportwasalsopresented,
summarizingcurbtocurbwidths,presenceofrightturnonlylanesanddualleftturnlanes,raised
medians,onstreetparkinginventoryandutilization,bicyclecountsandbicyclecollisions.
Page7
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 118
Followingthepresentation,participantswereaskedtoassisttheprojectteaminidentifying
existingissuesalongthecorridoronalargesatelliteimageryplotoftheentire3.9milelongproject
area,withafocusonbicycleconflicts,parkingconstraints,andgeneralrecommendationsto
improvethecorridorforbicyclemobility.Figure21throughFigure23displaythepublicinput
recordedoneachofthethreeidentifiedBroadwaysegments,distinctbythevaryingcurbtocurb
widths.
Additionally,participantswereprovidedtheoptiontorecordgeneralcommentsontocomment
cardsorsubmitthroughemail.Thefollowingcommentswerecollectedviacommentcardsor
emails:
ͻ
Page8
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 119
Community Workshop #1 - Public Input C Street to F Street Segment
120
Add protected intersection
0 ¦¤
In support of F Street
at F Street & Broadway
TS F
Promenade
Bike parking at bar at
Davidson Street &
DAVIDSONST
Broadway
Add protected intersection
at E Street & Broadway
Statistically dangerous & the
Trolley station attracts trips.
improvements for E Street.
is a great plan, we still need
While F Street Promenade
TS E
TS REW
OLF
Bike Parking @ Zorbas
destinations for food
& Fillippis, regional
T
S D
T
S NAMLESSAC
ALUHC
TS ATSIV
Physical ped refuge
TS H
SOTNI
CM
@ CV Street
narrowing for bike lanes.
scary. Vehicle lanes need
Bridge over SR-54 is very
Packet
E
TS ELAVAS
(National Citys)
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
TS C
Community Workshop #1 - Public Input F Street to L Street Segment
121
a regional destination.0 ¦¤
Bike parking needed inparking at thrift shop
front of Amvets. This is
T
SL
High demand for
Sierra Way & Broadway
Crosswalks needed at
YW
A
RR
EI
S
bikeway \[bikeway against
Flip the car parking and
T
S K
J Street is a critical east/west
the curb\]
corridor for biking. Safe
crossing needed.
High visibility crosswalks
TS J
needed at all signalized
intersections
TS Y
ESLAH
Bike parking in front
TS I
of the steakhouse
Make the most dangerous
protected bicycle facility
parts of the corridor a
needed at Roosevelt Street
Ped refuge and crossing
T
S H
TS
SITO
throughout Broadway
TS TLE
VESOOR
Protected bikeway
TS ECNAV
T
S G
Add protected intersection
YW KRAP
at F Street & Broadway
In support of F Street
Packet
!¦¤£
Promenade
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
TS F
Community Workshop #1 - Public Input L Street to Main Street Segment
122
0 ¦¤
Main & Broadway is a very
conrete transit pads -
\[Asphalt\] uplift at the
cyclists
Lead pedestrian interval
signal at Palomar Street
bike corridor within SDG&E
Make pedestrian trails and
transmission line corridor
Apartments dont have enough
parking from Oxford Street to
needed at Palomar Street
TS RA
MOLAP
Palomar Street
is very busy, lots of peds too,
TS
DR
OFX
O
Palomar Street & Broadway
Excess on-street parking
intersection to avoid
from Naples Street to
Informal car sales from
Oxford Street
Palomar Street to
Naples Street
TSSELPAN
TS
ET
TU
B D
ETS
ER
C
the opportunity for participation
business owners were provided
Business owners will show up
when recommendations are
City Council needs to know
TS
SSOM
General Comment:General Comment:
Packet
on the table.
!¦¤£
TS A
NOZIRA
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
T
S L
Page12
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 123
2.2Community Workshop Series #2
Thesecondworkshopseriespresentedconceptualdesignstothepublicforreviewandcomment.
Thecommunityinputwasusedtohelpidentifythepreferreddesignalternativeforbicyclefacilities
alongBroadway.Thesecondworkshopseriesincludedtwopublicsessionsandonepresentation
totheChulaVistaChamberofCommerce.ThetwopublicsessionswereheldSeptember21and
st
October1,attheChulaVistaCityHallCouncilChambersandtheSouthChulaVistaLibrary,
st
respectively.Inadditiontotheworkshopadvertisementmethodsusedforthefirstworkshop,
flyerswerehanddeliveredtobusinessesalongBroadway,withanemphasisonthoseidentifiedas
havinglimitedoffstreetparking(furtherdescribedinChapter3).
TheworkshopopenedwithaPowerPointpresentation
reviewingsomeofthekeyexistingconditionsfindings
relatedtocurbtocurbwidths,onstreetparkingavailability
anddemand,bicyclecounts,andbicyclecollisions.
Followingtheexistingconditionsreview,conceptualdesign
alternativeswerepresentedtothepublicforconsideration.
TheBroadwaycorridorwasdividedintofoursegmentsby
varyingroadwaycurbtocurbwidthsandpresenceofa
centertwowayleftturnlanes.Thedesignalternativesfor
eachsegmenttooktheroadwaycharacteristicsinto
considerationinthedevelopmentofproposedbicycle
facilities.Thefoursegmentsandthenumberofdesign
alternativesarelistedbelow.
CStreettoEStreet(0.50miles)Α3designs
EStreettoFStreet(0.25miles)Α2designs
FStreettoLStreet(1.50miles)Α2designs
LStreettoMainStreet(1.63miles)Α2designs
Eachdesignalternativewaspresentedbyidentifyingthetypeofbicyclefacility,numberoftravel
lanes,typeandpresenceofamedian,andpresenceofonstreetparking.Followingthe
presentation,largegraphicsofthealternativesweredisplayedonboardsandattendeeswere
invitedtoreviewandcomparethedesigns.Projectteamstaffwerepresentateachalternativeto
assistwithquestions.Attendeeswerethenencouragedtoidentifytheirpreferreddesign
alternativeforeachsegmentbyplacingastickeronit.
Figure24throughFigure28displaytheconceptualdesignalternativespresentedatthesecond
workshop.Table21displaysthetotalnumberofvoteseachalternativereceivedforeach
segment.Thealternativethatreceivedthemostvotesforeachsegmentishighlightedinblue.It
shouldbenotedthatthetotalnumberofvotesforeachsegmentarenotequaltooneanotheras
someparticipantschosenottovoteoneverysegment.Additionally,thenumberofvotesreceived
bythemostpopulardesignwasnotanoverwhelmingmajorityforanyofthesegments.
Page13
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 124
C Street to E Street Design Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 2-4
Feasibility Study Draft Report
C Street to E Street Design Alternatives
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 125
E Street to F Street Design Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 2-5
Feasibility Study Draft Report
E Street to F Street Design Alternatives
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 126
F Street to L Street Design Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 2-6
Feasibility Study Draft Report
F Street to L Street Design Alternatives
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 127
L Street to Main Street Design Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 2-7
Feasibility Study Draft Report
L Street to Main Street Design Alternatives
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 128
Table 2-1 Community Preferred Design Alternative by Segment
SegmentAlternative1Alternative2Alternative3
CStreettoEStreet49
EStreettoFStreet37NA
FStreettoLStreet96NA
LStreettoMainStreet56NA
Source:ChenRyanAssociates,December2015
Asshown,themostpopulardesignalternativefromCStreettoEStreetwas#3,whichincludes
bufferedbikelanes,onstreetparkingoneachsideofBroadway,acontinuoustwowayleftturn
lane,andreducestheroadwaytotwotravellanes.
FromEStreettoFStreetthemostpopulardesignalternativewas#2,whichincludesbufferedbike
lanes,onstreetparkingoneachsideofBroadway,acontinuoustwowayleftturnlane,and
reducestheroadwaytotwotravellanes.
FromFStreettoLStreetthemostpopulardesignalternativewas#1,whichincludesbikelanes,
onstreetparkingoneachsideofBroadway,acontinuoustwowayleftturnlane,andmaintains
fourtravellanes.
FromLStreettoMainStreetthemostpopulardesignalternativewas#2,whichincludesbuffered
bikelanes,onstreetparkingoneachsideofBroadway,araisedmedianwithleftturnpockets,
andreducestheroadwaytotwotravellanes.
Additionally,participantswereprovidedtheoptiontorecordgeneralcommentsviacomment
cardsorsubmitthroughemail.Thefollowingcommentswerecollected:
Page18
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 129
ͻ
Page19
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 130
Page20
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 131
3.0Existing Conditions
ThisChapterdescribestheexistingroadwayconditionsalongBroadway.Thepotentialconstraints
posedbytheexistingroadwayconditions,particularlycurbtocurbwidths,wereimportant
considerationstoinformthedevelopmentofbikelanealternativesrequiringminimalroadway
modifications.Additionally,thisChapterprovidesareviewofexistingonstreetparkingavailability
andparkingutilization.Chapter3concludeswithadescriptionofbicycleinvolvedcollisions(2009
Α2011)andexistingbicycledemandasidentifiedbybicyclecountsconductedinsupportofthis
project.
3.1Posted Speeds and Traffic Volumes
ThepostedspeedlimitalongBroadwayis35MPH,
whichmaymaketheexistingClassIIIBikeRoute
undesirableformanycyclistsorpotentialcyclists.
Additionally,highvehicularvolumescontributeto
theunfavorableperceptionoftheBroadway
bicyclingenvironment.Figure31showsexisting
vehiclevolumes,curbtocurbwidths,andmajor
intersectiongeometrics.Asshown,averagedaily
trafficvolumesrangefromahighof29,200from
AnitaStreettoMainStreetand27,500fromMoss
StreettoNaplesStreet,toalowof18,200fromC
StreettoDStreet.Asafourlaneroadway,Broadway
couldaccommodate30,000to33,750ADTandstill
maintainLOSDaccordingtothecurrentlyadoptedTransportationElement.
3.2Curb-to-Curb Widths
Curbtocurbwidthsvaryfromapproximately70feet,betweenCStreetandFStreet,to82feet,
betweenLStreetandMainStreet.AsshowninFigure31,thereareapproximatelythreemajor
sectionsofBroadway,definedbytheircurbtocurbwidth:
70FeetΑFromCStreettoFStreet
80FeetΑFromFStreettoLStreet
82FeetΑFromLStreettoMainStreet
ThetransitioninwidthsouthofFStreetprovidesanadditional4feetfortheoutsidelane/parking
areaineachdirection,aswellasawidercenterleftturnlane.SouthofLStreet,wherethecurb
tocurbhasthegreatestwidth,araisedlandscapedmedianispresent.Thechangesincurbto
curbwidthwereimportantconsiderationsastheycouldnecessitatechangesinbicyclefacility
designs.Examplesofvariationsconsideredbasedonchangingcurbtocurbwidthsincludevarying
vehicularlanewidths,presenceofonstreetparking,varyingbikefacilitywidths,andpresenceof
abufferedbikelaneinsomelocations.
Page21
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 132
Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths
70Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center
Left-Turn Lane and Parking)
.
.
.
.
.
80Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center
.
.
.
Left-Turn Lane and Parking)
.
.
.
0.75 Miles
.
82Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with 18Ô raised
median)
.
.
.
.
.
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
XX.X
.
.
.
(in thousands)
.
.
.
.
Source: City of Chula Vista Traffic Volumes Years 2009, 2013,
.
.
2014 & 2015; SANDAG Series 12 Regional Model Base
.
.
Year 2008 Unadjusted Volume
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.5 Miles
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.7 Miles
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Main St
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 3-1
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths, Vehicular Volumes, and Intersection Diagrams
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 133
3.3Right-Turn Only Lanes
Figure31includesintersectiondiagramsforthe
Broadwayapproachesof16intersections,including
9intersectionswithrightturnonlylanes.These
dedicatedturnlanescreateanadditionalconstraint
forbikefacilityimplementation.Intersections
withoutrightturnonlylanesgenerallyhave
sufficientwidthtocarrythebikelaneuptothe
intersection,however,rightturnonlylanesrequire
additionalconsiderations.Examplesofoptions
consideredtoaccommodatebikefacilitiesatthese
constrainedintersectionsinclude,butarenotlimited
to,thefollowing:
Droppingthebikelanewhentherightturnonlylanebegins,
Removaloftherightturnonlylaneandmaintainthebikelane,
Transitionthebikelanetoabikeroutebyimplementingsharedlanearrowmarkingson
theturnlanepavementandmountverticalsignage,and
Stripingthelaneasacombinedbikelane/rightturnonlylane(showninFigure32).
3.4Dual Left-Turn Lanes
Dualleftturnlaneslimittheabilitytoacquirespaceforbicyclefacility,similartorightturnonly
lanes.Theydifferinthattheleftturnlanecannotbesharedwiththebikefacilityduetoitscentral
locationintheroadway.AsdemonstratedbyFigure31,theintersectionsofBroadwayandH
Street,andBroadwayandPalomarStreetincludedualleftturnlanesatbothnorthboundand
southboundBroadwayapproaches.Bothoftheseintersectionsalsoincludededicatedrightturn
onlylanesalongeachBroadwayapproach,furtherlimitingtheabilitytoacquirespaceforbicycle
facilities.
3.5Bus Stops
Busstopsrequireadditionalattention,duetothe
infrastructureinplacethatmaylimittheabilityto
moveoralterastoplocationinacosteffective
manner.Busstopsareidentifiedonthepreferred
designstripingplan.ManybusstopsalongBroadway
haveabuspadinplacetoindicatetotheoperator
wheretheappropriateplacetostopislocated.
Additionally,busstopsmayinterrupttheoperationof
bicyclefacilities,forcingcycliststoeitherwaitforthe
bustocontinueortochangeintotheadjacentlaneto
pass,andcreatingapotentialconflictwithvehicles.
Page23
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 134
Figure32NACTOCombinedBikeLaneΑRightTurnOnlyLaneConfigurations
Source:NACTOUrbanBikewayDesignGuide(2014)
Source:NACTOUrbanBikewayDesignGuide(2014)
Page24
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 135
3.6Raised Medians
ThesouthernmostsegmentoftheBroadwaystudycorridor,fromLStreettoMainStreet,isunique
inthataraisedlandscapedmedianispresentthroughout.ThemedianisgenerallyЊБwide,
narrowingtoallowforleftturnpocketsandturnmovementsatintersections.Themedianlimits
theabilitytomodifytravellanesforthepurposesofbicyclefacilityimplementation.
Narrowinglanesisanoptionforacquiring
additionalwidthtoimplementabicycle
facilityalongthissegmentofBroadway,asis
parkinglaneremoval.Narrowingorremoving
thelandscapedmedianisanotheroptionto
gainthewidthrequiredtoimplementa
bicyclefacility.
Anadditionalconsiderationassociatedwith
medianremovalisthelossoflandscaping.
Whilemedianremovalmayreduce
maintenancecostsitwillalsoresultinlosing
theaddedvisualbenefitsprovidedbythe
existinglandscaping.
3.7Vehicular Arterial Segment Level of Service
Vehicularlevelofservice(LOS)isaquantitativemeasurerepresentingthequalityofservicefrom
theķƩźǝĻƩƭperspective.TheanalysisofroadwaysegmentLOSisbasedonthefunctional
classificationoftheroadway,themaximumcapacity,roadwaygeometrics,andexistingor
forecastedaveragedailytraffic(ADT)volumes.Table31showsacceptableLOSandvolumesfor
ChulaźƭƷğƭstreetclassifications.
Table 3-1 Street Segment Performance Standards and Volumes
StreetClassificationAcceptableLOSAcceptableVolume(ADT)
ExpresswayC70,000
PrimeArterialC50,000
MajorStreet(sixlanes)C40,000
MajorStreet(fourlanes)C30,000
ClassICollectorC22,000
TownCenterArterial(fourlanes)D43,200
GatewayStreet(sixlanes)D61,200
GatewayStreet(fourlanes)D43,200
UrbanArterialD37,800
CommercialBoulevardD33,750
DowntownPromenadeD14,400
Source:CityofChulaVistaLandUseandTransportationElement(2005)
Page25
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 136
Broadway,fromCStreettoLStreet,isclassifiedasa4laneCommercialBoulevard.FromLStreet
tothe/źƷǤƭsouthernlimit,Broadwayisclassifiedasa4laneMajorStreet.Table32displaysthe
existingADTvolumesalongBroadwayarterialsegmentandwhetherornotthesegmentcurrently
operatesatanacceptableLOS.Asshown,allBroadwaysegmentsarecurrentlyoperatingatan
acceptableLOS.
Table 3-2 Broadway Segment ADT and LOS
BroadwaySegmentADT(2013)Acceptable?(YesorNo)
FromCStreettoEStreet18,243Yes
FromEStreettoFStreet20,550Yes
FromFStreettoIStreet22,033Yes
FromIStreettoLStreet22,985Yes
FromLStreettoMainStreet27,529Yes
Source:CityofChulaVistaTrafficVolumes(2013)
3.8On-Street Parking
Onstreetparkingisanimportantconsiderationwhenevaluatingroadwaychanges,evenmoreso
whenthestudyareaisheavilycommercial,asisthecasefortheBroadwaycorridor.Aparking
inventorywasperformedtoestimatethetotalnumberofonstreetparkingspacesavailablealong
thethreesegmentsoftheBroadwaycorridor,includingfromCStreettoFStreet;fromFStreetto
LStreet;andfromLStreettoMainStreet.
Additionally,aparkingoccupancyorparkingutilizationstudywasconductedtoinformtheproject
teamofexistingparkingdemandalongthecorridor.Afterconsultingwithbusinessownersto
determinewhentheirgreatestparkingdemandisexperienced,theoccupancystudywas
performedonaSaturdayfrom2:00PMto3:00PM.
Table33summarizestheparkinginventoryfieldreviewandoccupancystudyconductedinJune
2015.Asshown,thereareapproximately703parkingspacesalongBroadwayfromCStreetto
MainStreet.TheFStreettoLStreetsegmentwasfoundtohaveapproximately48%ofcurblength
allocatedtoparking,thegreatestofthethreesegments,whileCStreettoFStreethadtheleast
curbavailableforparkingwith35%.
Theoccupancystudyfoundthegreatestparkingoccupancytobe58%ofavailablespacesforthe
segmentofFStreettoLStreet.Slightlylowerparkingoccupancyrateswereobservedalongthe
segmentsbetweenLStreetandMainStreet(41%),andbetweenCStreetandFStreet(44%).
Thesefindingsgenerallydemonstratethatexistingparkingsupplyexceedsdemandduringthe
peakparkingdemandperiod,asidentifiedbybusinesseswithlimitedornoonsiteparking.
Page26
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 137
Table 3-3 Broadway Parking Inventory and Occupancy Study
CStreettoFStreettoLStreetto
DataCategoryTotal
FStreetLStreetMainStreet
RoadwayMileage(miles)0.751.501.703.95
TotalCurbLength(feet)7,03714,16015,59536,792
NoParkingLength(feet)4,5507,3489,74221,640
ParkingLength(feet)2,4876,8125,85315,152
ParkingSpaces(19feeteach)115313275703
PercentofCurbAvailableforParking35%48%38%41%
1
PercentOccupied44%58%41%49%
Note:
1.TheoccupancystudywasperformedonSaturday,June27,2015from2:00PMΑ3:00PM
Figure33displaystheparkingoccupancyanalysisresults,depictingparkingutilizationalongthe
threesegmentsforboththewestandeastsidesofBroadway,aswellaslocationswhereparking
isnotpermittedatanytime.AsshowninFigure33,bothsidesofBroadwayfromFStreettoL
Streetexhibitrelativelyhigheroccupancyrates,55%occupancyontheeastsideand60%onthe
westside.BothsegmentsofBroadway,fromCStreettoFStreetandfromLStreettoMainStreet,
experiencedgreaterparkingdemandontheeastsideofBroadwaycomparedtothewestside.
Duetolargeshoppingcenterfrontagesatseverallocations,thereisnoonstreetparkingtoday
fromHStreettoIStreet(eastside),fromOxfordStreettoPalomarStreet(westside),andfrom
AnitaStreettoЍЉЉnorthofMainStreet(eastandwestside).
Figure34displaysparcelswithzeroorlimitedoffstreetparkingspaces.Parcelswithlimitedoff
streetparkingwereidentifiedashavingparkingaccessibleonlyviathealley,whichiscommonly
usedforemployeesandhaslimitedvisibilityfromthestreet.Theparcelswithoutoffstreet
parkingwerefurthercategorizedbythedistancetothenearestonstreetparking.Asshown,one
parcelwasidentifiedashavingzerooffstreetparkingspacesandthenearestonstreetparkingat
adistancegreaterthan300feet.Sixparcelswereidentifiedashavingzerooffstreetparking
spacesandonstreetparkingwithin300feet.Twentyeightparcelshavelimitedoffstreetparking.
AlistoftheparceladdressesandbusinesstypesareprovidedinAppendixB.Theseinstanceswere
foundtobelargelyconcentratedinthreeareas:
DStreettoFlowerStreet
WestsideofBroadway:4parcelswithlimitedoffstreetparking;1parcelwithzero
-
offstreetparkingandonstreetparkingwithin300feet.
EastsideofBroadway:1parcelwithoutoffstreetparking
-
DavidsonStreettoFStreet
WestsideofBroadway:1parcelwithoutoffstreetparking
-
EastsideofBroadway:7parcelswithlimitedoffstreetparking
-
IStreettoJStreet
WestsideofBroadway:2parcelswithlimitedoffstreetparking
-
EastsideofBroadway:5parcelswithlimitedoffstreetparking;2parcelswithout
-
offstreetparking
Page27
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 138
West Side of StreetEast Side of Street
ParkingPercentParkingPercent
t
S
C
Broadway Segment SpacesOccupiedSpacesOccupied
C Street to F Street5538%6049%
t
S F Street to L Street15560%15855%
D
L Street to Main Street15132%12452%
t
S
E
t
S
F
t
S
F
t
S
G
t
S
H
City of
t
S
I
5
Chula Vista
t
S
J
t
S
K
t
S
L
t
S
s
s
o
M
t
S
s
e
l
p
a
N
t
S
d
r
o
f
x
O
P
a
l
o
m
a
r
S
t
Percent Occupancy of Street Parking
53% - 60%
39% - 52%
Anita St
32% - 38%
No Parking Any Time
Main St
Data Collected between 2pm and 3pm on 6-27-15
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 3-3
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Observed On-Street Parking Occupancy along Broadway
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 139
1
t
S
C
1
t
S
D
t
S
D
City of
t
S
2
E
Chula Vista
t
S
F
t
S
F
2
t
S
G
t
S
H
3
t
S
I
5
t
S
Jt
S
F
t
S
3
K
t
S
L
t
S
s
s
o
M
t
S
s
e
l
p
a
N
t
S
J
t
S
d
r
o
f
x
O
P
a
l
o
m
a
r
S
t
Anita St
Businesses without Off-Street Parking (8 Businesses)
Main St
Businesses with Limited Off-Street Parking (28 Businesses)
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 3-4
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Businesses Potentially Affected by Loss of On-Street Parking
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 140
t
S
C
t
S
D
t
S
E
t
S
F
t
S
F
t
S
G
t
S
H
City of
t
S
I
5
Chula Vista
t
S
J
t
S
K
t
S
L
t
S
s
s
o
M
t
S
s
e
l
p
a
N
t
S
d
r
o
f
x
O
P
a
l
o
m
a
r
S
t
Numbers of Collisions
Anita St
2
1
Main St
Source: SWITRS (2013)
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 3-5
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Bicycle-Involved Collisions (2009-2013)
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 141
3.9Bicycle Collisions
BicycleinvolvedcollisiondatawasobtainedfromtheStatewideIntegratedTrafficRecordsService
(SWITRS)forthe5yearperiodfrom2009Α2013.Thedatawasgeocodedandmappedtohelp
identifylocationswherecollisionshaveoccurredandmayrequireadditionalsafetyconsiderations.
Duringthe5yearperiod,33bicycleinvolvedcollisionswerereportedalongBroadwaywithinthe
studyarea.
Figure36PrimaryCollisionFactorCategory(2009
Figure35(ontheprecedingpage)
Α2013)
displaysthedistributionofcollisions
alongtheBroadwaycorridor.As
OtherBicycleViolation
Other
3%
shown,themajorityofthecollisions
Hazardous
WrongSide
Violation
occurredatintersectionsorinclose
ofRoad
15%
proximitytointersections.The
34%
intersectionofNaplesStreetand
Traffic
Broadwayexperiencedthehighest
Signalsand
Signs
numberofcollisionsduringthe5year
6%
period,with4collisionsoverthis
period.Theblockwiththegreatest
totalcollisionswasBroadwayfromH
Pedestrian
StreettoIStreet,where6collisions
RightofWay
wererecorded.Thissegmentis
Automobile
6%
RightofWay
adjacenttotheChulaVistaCenter
ImproperTurning
15%
shoppingcenterwhichhasfiveaccess
21%
pointsto/fromBroadway,likely
Source:SWITRS(2015);ChenRyanAssociates,2015
attractinghighvolumesofvehiclesand
cyclists.
Figure36summarizestheͻtƩźƒğƩǤ
Figure37BicycleInvolvedCollisionsbyYear
CollisionFactor/ğƷĻŭƚƩǤͼassignedto
(2009Α2013)
thecollisionsbythereportinglaw
10
enforcementofficer.Theleading
9
collisionfactorwasattributedtoriding
Involved
8
onthewrongsideoftheroad,
7
Collisions
representing34%ofallcollisions,
6
Bicycle
potentiallyindicatinganeedfor
5
increasededucation,andclarification
4
Total
3
ofwherecyclistsshouldberidingalong
2
thiscorridor.Twocollisionswere
1
categorizedasviolatingthepedestrian
0
rightofway,potentiallyindicatingthe
20092010201120122013
bicyclistwasridingonthesidewalkdue
Source:SWITRS(2015);ChenRyanAssociates,2015
todiscomfortmixingwithtraffic.
Page31
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 142
Figure37displaysthetotalcollisionsbyyear.Collisionspeakedin2010with9bicycleinvolved
collisionsandhavesteadilydeclinedeachyear,with5collisionsin2013,themostrecentyearof
availabledata.
3.10Bicycle Counts
Manualscreenlinebicyclecounts,whichrecordbicyclistspassingapointalongasegment,were
performedatsixlocationsalongBroadway,betweenintersections,from6/4/2015Α6/11/2015
duringtheeveningpeakperiod(4:00PMΑ6:00PM).OnlybicycliststravelingalongBroadway
(northsouth)werecounted.Weekdaypeakperiodswerechoseninanattempttoreflect
utilitarianbicyclecommuters.Thefollowingvariableswererecordedduringthecounts:
Location(trafficlaneoronsidewalk)
Wrongwaycycling(againstthedirectionoftraffic)
Gender
Figure38displaysobservedbicyclevolumesateachofthesixcountlocations.Asshown,the
greatestvolumeswererecordedinthenorthernportionofthestudyarea,whilethelowest
volumeswererecordedinthecentralportion.AppendixCincludesthecompletedcountsheets.
Table34summarizesthebicyclecountsingreaterdetail.Asshown,approximately68%ofcyclists
wereobservedridingonthesidewalk,anindicationthatthemajorityofcyclistsdonotfeel
comfortablemixingwithtrafficalongBroadway.
Table 3-4 PM Peak Period Bicycle Counts (4PM-6PM)
TrafficLaneSidewalk
Total
CountLocationTrafficLaneSidewalkWrongWrongMaleFemale
Observed
WayWay
FlowerStreetto819
11024327
EStreet(30%)(70%)
HStreetto818
0923326
IStreet(31%)(69%)
HalseyStreettoJ43
02707
Street(57%)(43%)
LStreetto57
0612012
ArizonaStreet(42%)(58%)
OxfordStreetto56
0511011
PalomarStreet(45%)(55%)
PalomarStreet214
0816016
toAnitaStreet(13%)(88%)
3267936
TOTAL14099
(32%)(68%)(94%)(6%)
Source:ChenRyanAssociates,December2015
Page32
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 143
t
S
C
t
S
D
27
t
S
E
t
S
F
t
S
F
t
S
G
26
t
S
H
City of
t
S
I
5
Chula Vista
7
t
S
J
t
S
K
12
t
S
L
t
S
s
s
o
M
t
S
s
e
l
p
a
N
t
S
d
r
11
o
f
x
O
PM Peak Period Bicycle Counts
P
a
l
o
m
a
r
S
t
26 - 27
16
11 - 16
Anita St
7
Counts conducted on a weekday between 4pm and 6pm.
Only north-south movements along Broadway counted.
Main St
Source: Chen Ryan Associates (2015)
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 3-8
Feasibility Study Draft Report
Broadway Bicycle Counts (June 2015)
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 144
Interestingly,thethreesiteswiththehighestobservedsidewalkcyclingrateswerefoundto
includeonesiteineachofthethreecurbtocurbwidthcategories:
88%sidewalkcyclingrateΑfromPalomarStreettoAnitaStreetΛБЋcurbtocurbwidth)
70%sidewalkcyclingrateΑfromFlowerStreettoEStreetΛАЉcurbtocurbwidth)
69%sidewalkcyclingrateΑfromHStreettoIStreetΛБЉcurbtocurbwidth)
Intotal,acrossthesixcountsites,43cyclistswereridingonthewestsideofBroadway,while56
wereseenridingontheeastsideduringthe4PM6PMpeakperiod.
Onlyoneofthe32cyclistsridinginthetrafficlanewasobservedridinginthewrongdirection,
whereas40ofthe67cyclistsridingonthesidewalkwereobservedridinginthewrongdirection.
Additionally,asignificantgenderdiscrepancywasobserved,with94%ofcyclistsidentifiedasmale.
ThefindingsrelatedtosidewalkcyclingandgenderarestrongindicatorsthattheBroadway
corridorisgenerallyuninvitingtothebroaderpopulationandthatbicyclefacilityimprovements
areneeded.
Oneofthecountlocations,BroadwayfromH
StreettoIStreet,waspreviouslycountedin
August2010insupportoftheCityofChulaźƭƷğƭ
2011BicycleMasterPlan.Thecountwas
performedduringthesameweekdaypeakperiod
(4:00PMto6:00PM),allowingforasimple
volumeandgendercomparison.Table35
displaysthecomparisonbetweenthe2011and
2015count.Asshown,volumeshavegrownfrom
19cyclistsin2010to26cyclistsin2015,a37%
increase.Maleswerebyfarthemajorityduring
bothcountperiods.Whileasinglecountlocation
providesaverysmallsamplesizeforcomparison,
thisdemonstratesgrowthincyclingdemand
whichisalsoexhibitedinregional,state,and
nationaltrends.
Table 3-5 H Street to I Street Count Comparison (2010 vs. 2015)
Date/TimeCountedMaleFemaleTotalObserved
8/31/2010
18119
1600Α1800
6/5/2015
23326
1600Α1800
Source:ChulaVistaBikewayMasterPlan(2011);ChenRyanAssociates,(2015)
Page34
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 145
4.0Alternative Development
DraftalternativedesignsweredevelopedforfoursegmentsalongBroadway.Thesegments
generallyfollowthevaryingcurbtocurbwidths,withtheexceptionofthenortherly(CStreetto
FStreet)segment,whichwasdividedintotwosegmentsduetochangingmediancharacteristics.
Thesegmentsandnumberofdesignalternativesdevelopedincludethefollowing:
CStreettoEStreetΑ3alternatives
EStreettoFStreetΑ2alternatives
FStreettoLStreetΑ2alternatives
LStreettoMainStreetΑ2alternatives
Eachofthealternativeswasdesignedtakingintoconsiderationtheopportunitiesandlimitations
describedinthepreviouschapterandpublicinput.Additionalemphasiswasplacedon
maintainingtheexistingcurbtocurbwidthsinanefforttoavoidpotentiallycostlyconstruction.
Eachofthedesignalternativeswaspresentedduringthesecondworkshopseriestosolicit
communityinputandidentifythepreferredalternative.
4.1C Street to E Street Alternative Designs
ThefollowingthreealternativedesignsweredevelopedfortheCStreettoEStreetsegment:
CStreettoEStreet#1
ЎbikelaneswithЌbuffers
TwoЊЊtravellanesineachdirection
ContinuousЊЉtwowayleftturn
lane
Noonstreetparkingoneitherside
CStreettoEStreet#2
Ўbikelanes
TwoЊЊtravellanesineachdirection
Ѝpaintedcentermedian
Бparkinglaneoneastside;noon
streetparkingonwestside
Page35
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 146
CStreettoEStreet#3
ЎbikelaneswithЌbuffer
OneЊЋtravellaneineachdirection
ContinuousЊЍtwowayleftturn
lane
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
4.2E Street to F Street Alternative Designs
ThefollowingtwoalternativedesignsweredevelopedfortheEStreettoFStreetsegment:
EStreettoFStreet#1
Ўbikelanes
TwoЊЊtravellanesineachdirection
Nomedian
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
EStreettoFStreet#2
ЎbikelaneswithЌbuffer
OneЊЋtravellaneineachdirection
ContinuousЊЍtwowayleftturn
lane
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
4.3F Street to L Street Alternative Designs
ThefollowingtwoalternativedesignsweredevelopedfortheFStreettoLStreetsegment:
Page36
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 147
FStreettoLStreet#1
Ўbikelanes
TwoЊЊtravellanesineachdirection
ContinuousЊЉtwowayleftturn
lane
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
FStreettoLStreet#2
ЏbikelaneswithАbuffer
OneЊЋtravellaneineachdirection
ContinuousЊЍtwowayleftturn
lane
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
4.4L Street to Main Street Alternative Designs
ThefollowingtwoalternativedesignsweredevelopedfortheLStreettoMainStreetsegment:
LStreettoMainStreet#1
ЎbikelaneswithЍbuffer
TwoЊЊtravellanesineachdirection
ExistingЊБwideraisedmedianwith
leftturnpockets
Noonstreetparking
LStreettoMainStreet#2
ЏbikelaneswithЏbuffer
OneЊЋtravellaneineachdirection
ExistingЊБwideraisedmedianwith
leftturnpockets
TwoБonstreetparkinglanes
Page37
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 148
5.0Preferred Alternative
Identificationofthepreferredalternativewaslargelybasedonthecommunityinputcollected
duringthesecondworkshopseries,engineeringfeasibility,andCitystaffinput.Thepreferred
designtakesintoconsiderationmanyoftheconcernsvoicedbycommunitymembersandother
stakeholderswherefeasible,suchasseparationfromvehiculartrafficprovidedbybuffers,
preservationofonstreetparking,andbikelane/busstopinteraction.Thepreferredalternative
includesthreedifferentcrosssectionsforaccommodatingbikelanesalongBroadway,reflecting
thevaryingcurbtocurbwidthsandtrafficvolumes.Thepreferredalternativestripingplanis
providedinAppendixD.Thedefiningcharacteristicsforthethreesectionsaredescribedinthe
followingpages.ThisChapterconcludeswithasummaryofadditionalconsiderations.Notethat
Broadwayisatruckroute.PerMTS,thelanesneedtobeaminimumof11feetwide.
5.1C Street to G Street
Thenortherlysegment,CStreettoGStreet,isthemostconstrainedsegmentintermsofcurbto
curbwidth(approximatelyАЉbetweenCStreetandFStreet).However,therelativelylowtraffic
volumes(17,500Α22,000ADT)providegreaterflexibilityfortheroadwayconfigurationthan
offeredbytheothersegments.Aroaddietisrecommendedforthissegment,enablingthe
preservationofexistingonstreetparkingandtheabilitytoprovidebufferedbicyclelanes.Figure
51displaysthepreferredalternativefortheCStreettoGStreetsegment.Notethatthissegment
hasbeenextendedtoGStreetinordertotransitionbetweentwolanestofourlanesnorthofG
StreetratherthanattheGStreetintersection.
Figure51CStreettoGStreetPreferredAlternative
ЎbikelanewithЌbuffer
SingleЊЋvehiculartravellaneineachdirection
ЊЍtwowayleftturnlane
RetainexistingБonstreetparkinglanes
Page38
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 149
5.2G Street to L Street
TheGStreettoLStreetsegmentiswide(approximatelyБЉΜcomparedtothenorthernsegment,
andisnotconstrainedbythepresenceofaphysicalmedianlikethesoutherlysegment.Astandard
bikelanecanbeimplementedwithintheexistingcurbtocurbwhilepreservingonstreetparking
andallvehicularlanes.Figure52displaysthepreferredalternativefortheGStreettoLStreet
segment.
Figure52GStreettoLStreetPreferredAlternative
Ўbikelane
ЎbikelanewithБbufferbetweenHStreetandIStreet(northboundonly)
-
TwoЊЊvehiculartravellanesineachdirection
ЊЉtwowayleftturnlane
RetainexistingБonstreetparkinglanes
5.3L Street to Main Street
Thesoutherlysegment,LStreettoMainStreet,hasthewidestcurbtocurbwidth(approximately
БЋΜ͵However,thissegmentisconstrainedbyanЊБwidelandscapedmedianwithleftturn
pockets.Onstreetparkingisintermittentthroughoutthissegmentwithparkingprohibitedalong
someblocks,suchasthewestsideofBroadwayfromOxfordStreettoPalomarStreet.Buffered
bikelanesarerecommendedforthissegment,whichcanbeimplementedbyprohibitingonstreet
parkingthroughoutthesegmentandnarrowingvehiculartravellanes.Thenumberofvehicular
travellanesandtheexistinglandscapedmedianareretained.Figure53displaysthepreferred
alternativefortheLStreettoMainStreetsegment.
Page39
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 150
Figure53LStreettoMainStreetPreferredAlternative
ЎbikelanewithЍbuffer
OneЊЊinside(#1lane)vehiculartravellane,oneЊЋoutside(#2lane)vehiculartravellane
ineachdirection
Retainexistingmedianwithleftturnpockets
Noonstreetparking
5.4Additional Considerations
FutureTrafficVolumes
Forecasttrafficvolumeswereconsideredwhileevaluating
thedesignalternatives.Specifically,theforecastvolumes
alongBroadwayfromCStreettoGStreetwereanalyzedto
determinewhetherremovalofatravellaneineach
directionwouldbefeasible.Inthe
(November2014),providedasAppendixE,theFHWA
advisesroadwayswithADTof20,000vehiclesperday(vpd)
maybegoodcandidatesforaroaddiet.Thedocumentalso
referencesthewiderangeinthresholdsestablishedby
otheragencies,displayedasFigure54,notablySeattleset
25,000astheADTthreshold.
Figure55displaystheexistingandforecastBroadwaytraffic
volumesfortheyear2035.
Figure54RoadDietImplementation
ThresholdsbyAgency
Page40
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 151
Existing Curb-to-Curb Widths
70Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center
Left-Turn Lane and Parking)
.
.
.
.
.
0.75 Miles
80Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with Center
.
.
.
.
.
Left-Turn Lane and Parking)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
82Ô Curb-to-Curb (4-Lane with 18Ô raised
.
.
.
median)
.
.
.
.
.
.
Existing & Forecast Vehicular Volumes
.
.
.
.
.
.
XX.XAverage Daily Traffic Volumes
.
.
.
.
(in thousands)
.
.
.
.
.
XX.X2035 Forecast Traffic Volumes
.
.
.
.
(in thousands)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.Source: City of Chula Vista Traffic Volumes Years 2009, 2013,
.
.
.
.
2014 & 2015; SANDAG Series 12 Regional Model Base
.
.
.
Year 2008 Unadjusted Volume & Year 2035 Forecast
.
Volume
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.5 Miles
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.7 Miles
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Main St
Bike Lanes on Broadway Figure 5-5
Existing and Future Vehicular Volumes
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 152
Asshown,existingvolumesalongtheCStreettoGStreetsegmentrangefromalowof18,500
ADTtoahighof22,000ADT,whileforecastvolumesrangefromalowof18,000ADTtoahighof
26,600ADT.
TheroaddietmaybeinplaceforalimitedtimealongtheFStreettoGStreetsegment,dueto
forecastvehicularvolumesexceedingrecommendedthresholds.Asvolumesapproachthe25,000
ADTthreshold,theroaddietmaybegintonegativelyimpactLOS,atwhichpointintersection
approachstripingmodificationsmaybeconsideredinordertoimproveLOSattheintersections.
IntersectionApproaches
Effectiveintersectionapproachesimprovethevisibilityofcycliststomotoristsandhelpfacilitate
predictablemovementsbycyclistsandmotorists.ThepreferredalternativedesignusesaͻƭƉźƦ
ƭƷƩźƦĻͼ(ordashedstripe)atintersectionapproacheswithoutadedicatedrightturnlane,to
indicatetorightturningvehicleswhereitispermittedtocrossintothebikelane.Greenpaintis
recommendedtofillthebikelaneapproximatelyЌЎpriortotheintersectiontoreinforcethearea
asabikelaneandtoindicatetheappropriatelocationforcycliststowaitforthesignaltochange.
RightTurnLaneApproaches
Nineofthe16signalizedintersectionsalongBroadway,betweenCStreetandMainStreet,have
dedicatedrightturnlanes.Additionally,rightturnlaneswillbeaddedatbothBroadway
intersectionapproachestoFStreet.Thepresenceofadedicatedrightturnlanelimitsthe
roadwayspaceavailabletorepurposeforabicyclefacility.
Insomeinstances,thereisadequaterightofwaytomaintainboththebikelaneandtherightturn
lane.Attheselocations,greenpaintisusedonthebikelaneapproachtotherightturnlaneto
alertcyclistsaconflictpointisapproaching.Thegreenpaintisthendiscontinuedandthebike
laneincludesaskipstripetoindicatetorightturningvehiclestheappropriatelocationtocross
overthebikelaneandentertherightturnlane.TheskipstripeisdiscontinuedapproximatelyЌЎ
beforetheintersectionandthebikelaneisagainfilledwithgreenpainttoreinforcetheareaasa
bikelaneandtoindicatetheappropriatelocationforcycliststowaitforthesignaltochange.The
methoddescribedaboveisrecommendedforthefollowingintersectionapproaches:
CStreet(northbound)
DStreet(northbound)
EStreet(southbound)
FStreet(bothdirections)
IStreet(northbound)
JStreet(southbound)
Thereisnotsufficientwidthtomaintainthebikelaneandtherightturnlaneatthreesignalized
intersectionswithadedicatedrightturnlane(s).Intheseinstances,thebikelanetransitionstoa
sharedbikelane/rightturnlane.Sharrowsareusedtoguidecycliststhroughtheturnlaneandup
totheintersection.Thesharedlaneisrecommendedfortherightturnlaneconsideringthat
turninglanestendtohaveslowerspeedsandlowertrafficvolumesthantheadjacentthrough
Page42
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 153
lane.Thesharedbikelane/rightturnlanemethoddescribedaboveisrecommendedforthe
followingintersectionapproaches:
HStreet(bothdirections)
LStreet(southbound)
PalomarStreet(bothdirections)
BusStops
Maintainingefficientbusoperationsiscriticaltothetransportationnetwork.Busstopsare
accommodatedinthepreferredalternativedesignbyskipstripingthebikelaneapproachto
permitthebustocrossingoverthebikelane.Thelocationofbusstopsaredenotedonthe
preferredalternativestripingplanbygreenboxesforreference.
Page43
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 154
AppendixA
RailstoTrailsConservancyMemo:
AccommodatingBicyclesonBroadway
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 155
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 156
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 157
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 158
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 159
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 160
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 161
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 162
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 163
AppendixB
ParcelAddressesPotentiallyImpactedbyOnStreetParkingLoss
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 164
BroadwayBusinessesPotentiallyImpactedbyLossofOnStreetParking
SegmentNumberParcelNo.AddressPhoneBusinessType
1
565040150048Broadway(619)4225882Cleaners
2
565060050076Broadway(619)4255880Awnings
3
5651623100110Broadway(619)9464102Flooring
4
5651623000118Broadway(619)4767277AutoRepair
5
5651622100120Broadway(619)4262797AutoRepair
6
5651702300131Broadway(619)4101869WholesaleFitness
7
5651621800132Broadway(619)5854748ComputerRepair
8
5651621800134Broadway(619)4253006TheNailsStop
9
5651621800136Broadway(619)4274247Barber
10
5670411500245Broadway(619)6918341Florist
1:CStFSt
11
5670321700246Broadway(619)4253536PawnShop
12
5670411500247Broadway(619)4200824Bar
13
5670530200259Broadway(619)4269423DanceStudio
14
5670530300261/263Broadway(619)6911657LeatherGoods
15
5670530400265Broadway(619)4761338AutoGlass
16
56705304002651/2Broadway(619)4074180MediaServices
17
5670531200273Broadway(619)5853119AutoRepair
18
5670530700277Broadway(619)4270348Furniture
BelievedtobeOut
19
5670531300281Broadwayn/a
ofbusiness
20
5670531000283Broadway(619)5858122Tattoo
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 165
BroadwayBusinessesPotentiallyImpactedbyLossofOnStreetParking
SegmentNumberParcelNo.AddressPhoneBusinessType
BelievedtobeOutof
21
5670902300380Broadwayn/a
business
22
5672000900408Broadway(619)4251966TaxServices
23
5672001300424Broadway(619)9610408VideoGameStore
24
5672001300428Broadway(619)4207090LandSurveyor
25
5710501100568Broadway(619)4252660Furniture
26
5711230800632Broadway(619)5858128AutoRepair
27
5720803100633Broadway(619)2712846Barber
28
5720803100635Broadway(619)4251823Restaurant
29
2:FStLSt5720803000639Broadway(619)4074338MattressStore
BelievedtobeOutof
30
5721310100667Broadwayn/a
business
31
5721310200669Broadway(619)5644264FabricStore
32
5721310300671Broadway(619)5851352Restaurant
BelievedtobeOutof
33
5721312100679Broadwayn/a
business
34
5721312100681Broadway(619)7375975Salon
BelievedtobeOutof
35
5721312000683Broadwayn/a
business
36
5721803300725Broadway(619)4763470Bar
37
5722705100801Broadway(619)5853115AutoRepair
38
6180211300924Broadway(619)6918325AutoRepair
3:LStMain
39
61815204001077Broadway(619)4762231A1AutoBodyandPaint
St
40
62209132001510Broadway(619)4276785AutoRepair
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 166
AppendixC
BicycleCountSheets
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 167
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 168
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 169
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 170
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 171
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 172
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 173
AppendixD
PreferredAlternativeStripingPlan
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 174
175
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
176
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
177
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
178
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
179
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
180
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
181
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
182
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
183
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
184
0 ¦¤
Packet
!¦¤£
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ
AppendixE
FHWARoadDietInformationalGuide
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 185
Road Diet
Informational Guide
FHWA Safety Program
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 186
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No.2. Government Accession No.3. Recipients Catalog No.
FHWA-SA-14-028
4. Title and Subtitle
5. Report Date
Road Diet Informational GuideNovember 2014
6. Performing Organization Code
8. Performing Organization Report No.
7. Author(s)
Richard Retting, Stacey Meekins, Eric Widstrand, and R.J. Porter.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
Leidos
11251 Roger Bacon Drive
Reston, VA 20190
11. Contract or Grant No.
Subconsultants: Iowa State University, Sam Schwartz Engineering, University of
Contract No. DTFH61-10-D-00024,
Utah
Task Order No. T-12-004
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Federal Highway AdministrationInformational Guide Book
August 2011 to July 2014
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
HSA
15. Supplementary Notes
working group members, reviewers and/or provided input or feedback to the project at various stages: Peter Eun, David Morena,
16. Abstract
A classic Road Diet converts an existing four-lane undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two
severity. Additionally, the Road Diet provides an opportunity to allocate excess roadway width to other purposes, including
con-
siderations from research and practice, and guides readers through the decision-making process to determine if Road Diets are
17. Key Words18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions.
turn-lane, cross section, safety, operations,
19. Security Clasif. (of this report)20. Security Clasif. (of this page)21. No. of Pages21. Price
N/A
Form DOT F 1700.7
(8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 187
Acknowledgements
Many State and local agencies made signicant contributions to this project. Special thanks to the following:
LocationContributors
Chicago
Nathan Roseberry, T.Y. Lin International
Des Moines, IA
Mark Parrington, Snyder and Associates
Jennifer Bohac and Mike Ring, City of Des Moines, Iowa
New Hampton, IA
David Little, Iowa DOT
City of New Hampton Police Department
Manchester, IA
Tim Vick, City of Manchester
Ryan Wicks, TeKippe Engineering
Waterloo, IA
Eric Thorson and Dennis Gentz, City of Waterloo
Las Vegas, Nevada
OC White, City of Las Vegas
Los Angeles, CA
Tim Fremaux and Pauline Chan, LADOT Bike Group
Pasadena, CA
Mike Bagheri, Pasadena DOT
Santa Monica, CA
Sam Morrissey, City of Santa Monica
Grand Rapids, MI
Dave Morena and Andrea Dewey, FHWA
Genesee County, MI
Tracie Leix and Mike Premo, Michigan DOT
Lansing, MI
Christopher Zull, City of Grand Rapids
Carissa McQuiston, Michigan DOT
Derek Bradshaw and Jason Nordberg, Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission
Ken Johnson, Genesee County Road Commission
Jill Bauer, City of Flint
Tom Svrcek, City of Swartz Creek
Andy Kilpatrick, City of Lansing
New York City
Ryan Russo, New York City DOT
Ann Marie Doherty, New York City DOT
Seattle, Washington
Dongho Chang and Brian Dougherty, City of Seattle
Reston and Dunn Loring
Randy Dittberner, Virginia DOT
Cover Photo Credits
Left: Randy Dittberner, Virginia Department of Transportation
Upper Right: City of Seattle
Lower Right: Virginia Department of Transportation
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 188
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .........................................................................................................1
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................3
1.1. What is a Road Diet? ..................................................................................................................................3
1.2 History of Road Diets .................................................................................................................................5
1.2.1 History of Road Diet Installations .........................................................................................5
1.2.2 History of Road Diet Safety Evaluations ...........................................................................5
1.3 Purpose and Objectives of the Informational Guide .........................................................6
1.4 Organization of the Guide ....................................................................................................................6
2 Why Consider a Road Diet? ......................................................................................7
2.1 Benets of Road Diets...............................................................................................................................7
2.1.1 Improved Safety ..............................................................................................................................7
2.1.2 Operational Benets ....................................................................................................................9
2.1.3 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Benets .......................................................................................9
2.1.4 Livability Benets .........................................................................................................................10
....................10
3 Road Diet Feasibility Determination ...................................................................13
3.1 Safety Factors ..............................................................................................................................................13
3.2 Context Sensitive Solutions and Complete Streets .............................................................14
3.3 Operational Factors ..................................................................................................................................15
3.3.1 De Facto Three-Lane Roadway Operation ..................................................................15
3.3.2 Speed ...................................................................................................................................................15
3.3.3 Level of Service (LOS) .................................................................................................................15
3.3.4 Quality of Service ........................................................................................................................16
.......17
3.3.6 Peak Hour and Peak Direction ...........................................................................................17
3.3.7 Turning Volumes and Patterns ............................................................................................18
3.3.8 Frequently Stopping and Slow-Moving Vehicles ....................................................18
3.4 Bicycles, Pedestrians, Transit, and Freight Considerations ...............................................19
3.4.1 Bicycle Considerations ............................................................................................................19
3.4.2 Pedestrian Considerations ...................................................................................................20
3.4.3 Transit Considerations .............................................................................................................20
3.4.4 Freight Considerations ...........................................................................................................21
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 189
ii
Road Diet Informational Guide
3.5 Other Feasibility Determination Factors ....................................................................................22
3.5.1 Right-of-Way Availability and Cost ....................................................................................22
3.5.2 Parallel Roadways .........................................................................................................................22
3.5.3 Parallel Parking ...............................................................................................................................23
3.5.4 At-Grade Railroad Crossings ..................................................................................................23
3.5.5 Public Outreach, Public Relations, and Political Considerations ....................23
3.6 Case Studies: Feasibility Determination Decision-making ...........................................24
3.7 Funding Road Diets ..................................................................................................................................28
4 Designing a Road Diet ...........................................................................................29
4.1 Geometric Design .....................................................................................................................................29
4.1.1 Road Function and Context ..................................................................................................29
4.1.2 Design Controls .............................................................................................................................30
4.1.3 Elements of Design .....................................................................................................................32
4.1.4 Cross Sectional Elements ........................................................................................................33
4.1.5 Intersection Design .....................................................................................................................37
4.2 Operational Design ..................................................................................................................................40
4.2.1 Cross-Section Allocation ..........................................................................................................40
4.2.2 Crossing Pedestrians ..................................................................................................................41
4.2.3 Intersection Control Changes ..............................................................................................41
4.2.4 Pavement Marking and Signing .........................................................................................42
4.2.5 Intersection Design Elements ..............................................................................................42
5.1 Safety Analysis of a Road Diet ............................................................................................................45
5.1.1 Data Needs .......................................................................................................................................45
5.1.2 Observational Before-and-After Studies of Road Diets .......................................46
5.1.3 Surrogate Measures of Safety for Road Diets .............................................................47
5.2 Operational Analysis ................................................................................................................................48
5.2.1 Analyzing Vehicle Operations ..............................................................................................48
5.2.2 Non-Motorized Operations ...................................................................................................49
5.2.3 Tools and Methods to Evaluate Impacts .......................................................................50
6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................51
Appendix A Road Diet Safety Assessment Studies .............................................53
Appendix B Feasibility Determination Factors, Characteristics,
and Sample Evaluative Questions ......................................................59
References .....................................................................................................................62
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 190
iii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Road Diet .................................................................................................................................................................................
......1
Figure 2. Typical Road Diet Basic Design.........................................................................................................................................3
Figure 3. Focus of Each Informational Guide Chapter ............................................................................................................6
Figure 4. Mid-Block Conict Points for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section ......7
Figure 5.
Roadway and a Three-Lane Cross Section ...............................................................................................................8
Figure 6. Major-Street Left-Turn Sight Distance for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and
Three-Lane Cross Section ....................................................................................................................................................8
Figure 7.
Figure 8. Mid-block Pedestrian Refuge Island .............................................................................................................................9
Figure 9. Pedestrian Refuge Island on a Road Diet Corridor in Chicago ..................................................................10
Figure 10. Road Diet in Flint, Michigan, Central Business District ....................................................................................13
Figure 11. Four-lane Undivided Roadway Intersection Operating as a de facto
Three-lane Cross Section ..................................................................................................................................................15
Figure 12. Road Diet Implementation Maximum Volume Thresholds by Agency ..............................................17
Figure 13. Bus Loading Zone in Seattle, Washington ..............................................................................................................18
Figure 14......19
Figure 15...................19
Figure 16. 55th Street in Chicago: Transit and Bicycles Share an Area at the Intersection (left);
Transit Stop and Bicycle Lane (right); .........................................................................................................................20
Figure 17. City of Seattle Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diet Feasibility Determination ...............................25
Figure 18.
Figure 19. Bicycle Lane on Rural 3-Lane Section, Lawyers Road, Reston, VA .........................................................34
Figure 20. Typical Bike Lane Illustration ...........................................................................................................................................35
Figure 21. Paired Parking Cross Sections (Adapted from AASHTO) ..............................................................................35
Figure 22. Example Parking Lane Transition at Intersection (Adapted from AASHTO, 2011) .........................36
Figure 23. Transition from 3-lane to 2-lane Cross Section, Oak Street, Merrield, VA ........................................37
Figure 24......43
List of Tables
Table 1. Problems Potentially Correctable by Road Diet Implementation ............................................................2
Table 2. Practitioner Interview Results Summary: Road Diet Installation Observations .............................12
Table 3. Road Diet Implementation Considerations by Agency ...............................................................................28
Table 4. Quantiable Characteristics of Land User Contexts (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) .........................30
Table 5. Regional Arterial Design Matrix (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008) .......................................................................31
Table 6. Maximum Allowable Travel Distance in TWLTL ................................................................................................38
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 191
iv
Road Diet Informational Guide
Acronyms
3R Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation
CRF Crash Reduction Factor
CSS Context Sensitive Solutions
DOT Department of Transportation
GCMPC Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission
FDF Feasibility Determination Factor
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
HSM Highway Safety Manual
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
KTC Kentucky Transportation Center
LOS Level of Service
MPH Miles Per Hour
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
NHS National Highway System
PDO Property Damage Only
TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program
TRB Transportation Research Board
TWLTL Two Way Left Turn Lane
VPHPD Vehicles Per Hour Per Day
VPD Vehicles Per Day
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 192
v
Executive Summary
Four-lane undivided highways have a history of relatively high crash rates
One option for addressing this safety concern is a Road Diet. A Road
Diet involves converting an existing four-lane undivided roadway
segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two through lanes and a
center two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). The reduction of lanes allows the
roadway cross section to be reallocated for other uses such as bike lanes,
Conversion of a four-lane
1
pedestrian refuge islands, transit stops, or parking (see Figure 1).
undivided road to a three-
lane undivided road made
Benets of Road Diet installations may include:
up of two through lanes
An overall crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent.
and a center two-way-left-
Reduction of rear-end and left-turn crashes through the use of a dedicated left-turn lane.
Fewer lanes for pedestrians to cross and an opportunity to install pedestrian refuge islands.
turn-lane.
The opportunity to install bicycle lanes when the cross-section width is reallocated.
BEFOREAFTER
Figure 1. Road Diet
Photo Credit: Virginia Department of Transportation
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 193
1
if they occur.
The opportunity to allocate the leftover roadway width for other purposes, such as on-street parking or transit stops.
Encouraging a more community-focused, Complete Streets environment.
Simplifying road scanning and gap selection for motorists (especially older and younger drivers) making left turns from or
onto the mainline.
A Road Diet can be a low-cost safety solution, particularly in cases where only pavement marking modications are required
t may be planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple
overlay projects, and the change in cross section allocation can be incorporated at no additional cost.
Geometric and operational design features should be considered
volume, signing, pavement markings, driveway density, transit routes and stops, and pedestrian and bicyclist facilities should be
2
carefully considered and appropriately applied during the reconguration for appropriate Road Diet implementation. As with
any roadway treatment, determining whether a Road Diet is the most appropriate alternative in a given situation requires data
analysis and engineering judgment.
o
users. Evaluation of Road Diets will provide practitioners the
information needed to continue implementing reconguration projects in their jurisdictions.
Table 1. Problems Potentially Correctable by Road Diet Implementation
CategoryProblemRationale
Rear-end crashes with left-turning Removing stopped vehicles attempting to turn left from the through lane could
reduce rear-end crashes
Sideswipe crashes due to lane changesEliminating the need to change lanes reduces sideswipe crashes
Safety
een opposing left-turn vehicles and
left turns from the inside lanesincreasing available sight distance can reduce left-turn crashes
Bicycle and pedestrian crashesBicycle lanes separate bicy
and can use a refuge area, if provided
Delays associated with left-turning
intersections
Side street delays at unsignalized
Operational
intersectionsconsolidation of left turns into one lane
Bicycle operational delay due to shared Potential for including a bike lane eliminates such delays
lane with vehicles or sidewalk use
Bicycle and pedestrian Opportunity to provide appropriate or required facilities, increasing accessibility
accommodation due to lack of facilitiesto non-motorized users
Other Unattractive aestheticProvisions can be made for traversable medians and other treatments
Vehicles speeds discourage pedestrian Potential for more uniform speeds; opportunity to encourage pedestrian activity
activity
3
Adapted from Kentucky Transportation Centers Guidelines for Road Diet Conversions
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 194
2
1 Introduction
Improving safety is a top priority for the U.S. Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) remains committed to reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on our Nation's roadways through the use of
proven safety countermeasures, including Road Diets.
Sideswipe crashes caused by frequent and sudden lane changing between two through lanes;
Rear-end crashes caused by left-turning vehicles stopped in the inside travel lane;
Left-turn crashes caused by mainline left-turning motorists feeling pressure to depart the shared through/left lane by
following motorists and making a poor gap judgment;
turning left across two lanes;
Bicycle crashes due to a lack of available space for bicyclists to ride comfortably; and
Pedestrian crashes due to the high number of lanes for pedestrians to cross with no refuge.
roadways experience the above safety concerns. Additionally, as active transportation increases, communities desire more
livable spaces, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and transit options. One solution that benets all modes is a Road Diet.
1.1. What is a Road Diet?
A Road Diet is generally described as removing travel lanes from a roadway and utilizing the space for other uses
4
and travel modes. This informational guide will focus on the most common Road Diet reconguration, which is the
conversion of an undivided four lane roadway to a three-lane undivided roadway made up of two through lanes and a
center two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). The reduction of lanes allows the roadway cross section to be reallocated for other
5
uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, transit uses, and/or parking (see Figure 2).
BeforeAfter
Will a Road Diet
Increase Costs?
We planned our Road
Diet installation as part of
the overlay, so there was
no additional cost to the
construction budget.
-
Robert Rocchio, Managing
Highway Safety, Rhode Island DOT
Figure 2. Typical Road Diet Basic Design
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 195
3
In addition to four- to three-lane congurations, other roadway recongurations, such as those depicted below, can also
provide safety benets:
4-lane to 5-lane:
In some cases it is necessary to keep two lanes in each
direction for capacity purposes. Narrowing lane width
to provide a TWLTL introduces the benets of separating
turning vehicles and reducing operating speeds.
2-lane to 3-lane:
If a capacity expansion of an existing two-lane road is
desired, in some cases a three-lane cross section can provide
similar operational benets to a four-lane cross section
while maintaining the safety benets of the three-lane
conguration.
3-lane to 3-lane:
In some cases practitioners could reduce the width of each
lane instead of reducing the number of lanes. Converting
an existing three-lane roadway to a three-lane cross section
with narrowed lanes can accommodate bicycle lanes or
parking, and provide some
5-lane to 3-lane
In some cases jurisdictions have recongured ve-lane
sections to three lanes, adding features such as diagonal
parking and protected bicycle lanes with the extra cross
section width.
Other Combinations:
(e.g., two in one direction, one in the other), separated left turn lanes for opposite directions, or providing shoulders for other
uses (e.g., parking, bicycle lanes, sidewalks). The basic concepts of Road Diets still apply, although in some cases there may be
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 196
4
1.2 History of Road Diets
The focus of roadway projects during the 1950s and 1960s was on system and capacity expansion, not contraction. Whenever
in roadway design in most cases was to increase the cross-section to 4 lanes. No engineering guidance during that period
encouraged consideration of a three-lane alternative.
Consequently, four-lane roadways became the norm throughout the country. Some of these roadways accommodated high
simply had not been considered.
1.2.1 History of Road Diet Installations
Lane reduction projects have occurred for many years; they simply have not been recorded or studied. One of the rst known
installations of a Road Diet occurred in 1979 in Billings, Montana. Here, 17th Street West was converted from a four-lane
undivided highway to three lanes (including a two-way left-turn lane, or TWLTL). The roadway width was 40 feet, and the
6
indicated a reduction in crashes with no appreciable change to vehicle delay.
Road Diets increased in popularity in the 1990s, with installations occurring in Iowa, Minnesota, and Montana, among many
7
other states. In some instances the appreciation for Road Diets was shown rst in urban areas, such as Seattle, Washington,
and Portland, Oregon. More recently, FHWA deemed Road Diets and other roadway recongurations a Proven Safety
Countermeasure and promoted it as a safety-focused alternative cross section to a four-lane undivided roadway.
1.2.2 History of Road Diet Safety Evaluations
sections with TWLTLs. The majority of treatment sites and crash data in these studies come from California, Iowa, and
Washington, with additional analysis of Road Diets in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, and New York. Several studies used
the same, or virtually the same, treatment sites in Iowa. Avera
from 2,000 to 26,000, with most sites having an ADT below 20,000.
In the late 1970s, Nemeth conducted a research study focused on TWLTLs that included one eld study location that was a four-
lane undivided highway converted to three lanes in a commercial district. Results included a reduction in operating speed and
8
increased delay.
The safety analysis methods and the reliability of the ndings vary widely. Some studies considered multiple treatment sites
and used advanced statistical techniques such as the empirical Bayes methodology to estimate the change in total crashes and
crash rates. Other studies were conducted using simple before-and-after analysis without controls, did not account for potential
implementation.
Pawlovich, et al., (2005) conducted a Bayesian data analysis of 15 Iowa Road Diet treatment sites and 15 control sites over a 23-
9
produced a 25.2 percent reduction in crashes per mile of roadway and an 18.8 percent reduction in the crash rate.
A study by Noyce et al. (2006) rst analyzed data using traditional approaches, which involved a comparison of before-and-after
crashes. Crash data were analyzed by yoked-pair comparison analysis and the empirical Bayes approach. The traditional before-
and-after approach estimated a reduction in total crashes of approximately 42 percent. A yoked-pair comparison analysis found
a 37 percent reduction in total crashes and a 46 percent reduction in property damage only (PDO) crashes (both statistically
signicant). The estimated reductions in crash rates (per vehicle mile traveled) were 47 percent for total crashes and 45 percent for
PDO crashes (both statistically signicant), and the empirical Bayes approach estimated a 44 percent reduction in total crashes.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 197
5
In 2010, FHWA conducted an empirical Bayes evaluation of total crash frequency before-and-after Road Diet implementation.
Results indicated a statistically signicant reduction in crashes due to the Road Diet treatment in two separate data sets (one data
set for 15 sites in Iowa and one set for 30 sites in California and Washington), as well as for the results of all 45 sites combined.
The Iowa data indicate a 47 percent reduction in total crashes while the California and Washington data indicate a 19 percent
10
decrease. Combining both data sets results in an estimated 29 percent reduction in total crashes.
ere the Road Diets were implemented. Annual average daily
through small towns; AADT for the sites in California and Washington ranged from 6,194 to 26,376 and were predominately on
corridors in suburban environments that surrounded larger cities. Sites with lower crash modication factors (CMFs) generally
recommended that the choice of which CMF to use should be based on characteristics of the site being considered. If the
proposed treatment site is more like the small-town Iowa sites, then the 47 percent reduction found in Iowa should be used.
If the treatment site is part of a corridor in a suburban area of a larger city, then the 19 percent reduction should be used. If the
proposed site matches neither of these site types, then the combined 29 percent reduction is most appropriate.
Based on the history of safety studies presented in this section, installing a Road Diet can lead to an expected crash reduction of
lumes,
and the urban or rural nature of the corridor.
Appendix A provides summaries of the key ndings from Road Diet safety assessments and additional detail about the individual studies.
1.3 Purpose and Objectives of the Informational Guide
The Road Diet Informational Guide provides safety, operational, and quality-of-life considerations from research and practice that
readers through the decision-making process to determine if Road Diets are a good t for a certain corridor. The guide will also
discuss Road Diet feasibility, design, and post-implementation evaluation.
Chapter 3:Chapter 5:
Chapter 2:Chapter 4:
Should a Road How do I know if
Why consider aHow do I design a
Diet be used the Road Diet is
Road Diet?Road Diet?
here?working?
Figure 3. Focus of Each Informational Guide Chapter
1.4 Organization of the Guide
The Road Diet Informational Guide is organized in the following manner, as illustrated in Figure 3 and described below:
Chapter 2 presents a high-level overview of how a Road Diet can improve safety and maintain operations for motorized and
non-motorized road users along a corridor, enhance the quality of life and livability, and be implemented at a low cost.
Chapter 3 takes an in-depth look at impacts that a Road Diet may have on safety and operations for motorists, pedestrians,
bicyclists, and transit along a corridor. This chapter includes feasibility determination factors that assist practitioners with
selecting corridors that may be candidates for Road Diets and presents guidance for discussing Road Diets with a community.
Chapter 4 leads practitioners through the Road Diet design process. This chapter provides geometric design, operational
design, and both Complete Street and system-wide considerations. The intent of this chapter is to walk a practitioner through
the design process for the corridor that will be converted to a Road Diet design.
Chapter 5 details post-implementation evaluation processes to measure Road Diet performance. Several evaluations exist for
ns, non-motorized transportation modes, and transit.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 198
6
2 Why Consider a Road Diet?
Road Diets have the potential to improve safety, convenience, and quality of life for all road users. Road Diets
can be relatively low cost if planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects since applying
11
Road Diets consists primarily of restriping.
arch support for achieving safety benets through converting
four-lane undivided roads to three-lane cross sections with TWLTLs. Operational and design changes associated with Road Diets
that promote safety include reduced vehicle speeds, reduced vehicle-pedestrian, -bicycle, and -vehicle conicts. For detailed
information about the research behind the safety impacts of Road Diets, see Appendix A.
2.1.1 Improved Safety
As noted previously, Road Diets reduce vehicle-to-vehicle conicts that contribute to rear-end, left-turn, and sideswipe crashes
reduction in overall crashes when a Road Diet is installed on a previously four-lane undivided facility as well as a decrease in
12,13
crashes involving drivers under 35 years of age and over 65 years of age.
travel lanes, and drivers frequently slow or change lanes due to slower or stopped vehicles (e.g., vehicles stopped in the left lane
th
can reduce the number and severity of vehicle-to-vehicle crashes. Reducing operating speed decreases crash severity when
crashes do occur.
The gures below illustrate conict points and safety issues related to turning movements for four-lane undivided roadways and
three-lane cross sections.
Four-Lane Undivided
Three-Lane
Figure 4. Mid-Block Conict Points for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section (Adapted from , 1999)
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 199
7
Four-Lane UndividedThree-Lane
Figure 5.
(Adapted from , 1999)
Four-Lane UndividedThree-Lane
(No Hidden Vehicles)
Inside Lane Vehicle)
Figure 6. Major-Street Left-Turn Sight Distance for Four-Lane Undivided Roadway and Three-Lane Cross Section
(Adapted from , 1999)
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 200
8
Additionally, a Road Diet can provide the following operational benets:
Separating Left Turns.
lanes to cross. This can reduce side-street delay.
and less accordion-style slow-and-go operations along the corridor.
On some corridors the number and spacing of driveways and intersections leads to a high number of turning movements. In
these cases, four-lane undivided roads can operate as de fact
the inside shared through and left-turn lane. In these cases a
Road Diets can be of particular benet to non-
motorized road users. They reallocate space from
travel lanes space that is often converted to bike
lanes or in some cases sidewalks, where these facilities
were lacking previously. These new facilities have a
tremendous impact on the mobility and safety of
bicyclists and pedestrians as they ll in a gap in the
existing network. Even the most basic Road Diet has
benets for pedestrians and bicyclists, regardless
of whether specic facilities are provided for these
modes. As mentioned above, the speed reductions
that are associated with Road Diets lead to fewer and
less severe crashes. The three-lane cross-section also
makes crossing the roadway easier for pedestrians,
Figure 7.
as they have one fewer travel lanes to cross and are
Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson
Uncontrolled and midblock pedestrian crossing
locations tend to experience higher vehicle travel
speeds, contributing to increased injury and fatality
rates when pedestrian crashes occur. Midblock
crossing locations account for more than 70 percent
14
of pedestrian fatalities. Zegeer et al. (2001) found
a reduction in pedestrian crash risk when crossing
two- and three-lane roads compared to roads with
15
four or more lanes. With the addition of a pedestrian
refuge island a raised island placed on a street to
separate crossing pedestrians from motor vehicles
(see Figure 8) the crossing becomes shorter and less
complicated. Pedestrians only have to be concerned
with one direction of travel at a time. Refuge islands
have been found to provide important safety benets
Figure 8. Mid-block Pedestrian Refuge Island
16
for pedestrians.
Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 201
9
Road Diets often include either on street parking or a bike lane, which create a
Lessons Learned
In one case in Grand
For bicyclists, the biggest benet of Road Diets is through the addition of bicycle
Rapids, Michigan, the
to travel along to a comfortable route that attracts many more bicyclists. When
transit agency moved a bus
bicycle lanes are striped, bicyclists are more visible and motorists know where to
route that had become too
look for them, speeds are reduced, and bicycle safety can be improved. In some
slow and unpredictable
between modes of travel (e.g., adding exible delineators on the lane line between
after a Road Diet.
motor vehicles and bicycles.) This further enhances the comfort of the route and
may encourage increased usage.
ne
on a three-lane roadway when approaching a bicycle. A motorist on a four-lane undivided roadway will have less opportunity to
move over to the left as it is an active travel lane.
Added to the direct safety benets, a Road Diet can improve the quality of life in
Pedestrian Refuge
the corridor through a combination of bicycle lanes, pedestrian improvements,
Pedestrian refuge islands can
reduce pedestrian-related crashes
Livability is, about tying the quality and location of transportation facilities to
18
by up to 46 percent.
17
schools, and safer streets and roads. Road Diets can help achieve desired livability
on certain roadways.
Interviews with agencies that have implemented Road Diets found many synergies
between improvements for one mode and their impacts on another. The City of
Chicago found that the addition of pedestrian refuge islands, as illustrated in Figure 9,
was a signicant benet of their Road Diets. In some cases, improving pedestrian safety
was the main objective of the Road Diet, but in other cases, the original intent was to
add bicycle lanes or to simply address gene
Table 2 summarizes the positive and negative potential impacts of various features of
Road Diets based on ndings from researcher eld visits and agency interviews.
Some of the treatments for one mode have obvious synergies with other modes,
such as bicycle lanes that not only provide added comfort for bicyclists, but also for
pedestrians by increasing their separation from vehicles. Other relationships are not as
obvious. For instance, Road Diets in Iowa and Chicago generated increased vehicular
the unexpected benet of a Road Diet to a pedestrian crossing (the pedestrians were
Figure 9. Pedestrian Refuge Island on a Road Diet Corridor
in Chicago
Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 202
10
The impacts on transit varied among the Road Diets studied. In some cases, the
Road Diet was seen as a positive by the transit agency. In other cases, particularly in
A Road Diet on Ingersoll
Avenue in Des Moines,
behind buses loading and unloading at the curb. A similar consequence as a result
of mail delivery was also found in less urban areas. Prior to the Road Diet, vehicles
were able to pass stopped buses or mail carrier vehicles using the inside lane. The
buses: instead of stopping
back-ups that occurred after the conversion resulted in some vehicles making illegal
in a through lane and
maneuvers to pass the bus in the two-way left turn lane (TWLTL). Some Road Diets
include measures to address this issue, such as shoulders or dedicated pull-outs that
had done before the
allow buses and mail trucks to make their stops outside the travel lane.
design accommodated
by pedestrians of TWLTLs as a refuge, which could make pedestrians vulnerable to
transit buses with a bus
being struck by vehicles traveling in the TWLTL. However, as evidenced in published
turn out.
assessments of Road Diet implementations, pedestrian safety is generally enhanced
by this type of roadway reconguration, especially if a pedestrian refuge island is
included.
Some impacts are seen as a positive by some agencies and a negative by others,
which may be dependent on the context and users of the roadway. In Iowa, a
Road Diet along a truck route narrowed lanes from 13 feet to 10 feet; these seemed
too narrow to commercial vehicle drivers. Meanwhile, in Chicago and Michigan,
to keep travel lanes to 12 feet wide or less. In these cases, the wider lanes were
undesirable because they encourage faster speeds.
In addition, a common concern in implementing Road Diets is that drivers on cross-
and gaps were easier to nd.
used as the measurement to calculate budgets for maintenance activities, dened
other uses. When a Road Diet is introduced, one-quarter of the motor vehicle lane-
miles are removed, which can equate to a similar reduction in maintenance funds.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 203
11
Table 2. Practitioner Interview Results Summary: Road Diet Installation Observations
Secondary/Unintended Impacts
Road Diet Primary/Intended
FeatureImpacts
PositiveNegative
Bike lanes Increased mobility and safety Increased property values Could reduce parking,
for bicyclists, and higher bicycle depending on design
volumes
Increased comfort level for
bicyclists due to separation from
vehicles
Fewer travel lanes Reallocate space for other uses Pedestrian crossings are easier, Mail trucks and transit vehicles
less complex
Can make nding a gap easier for May reduce capacity
In some jurisdiction, maintenance
Allows for wider travel lanesfunding is tied to the number
of lane-miles, so reducing the
number of lanes can have a
negative impact on maintenance
budgets
Similarly, some Federal funds may
be reduced
If travel lanes are widened, can
encourage increased speeds
Two-Way Left Turn
Lane
roadway areaaccess left turn lane if demand
for left turns is too high
Pedestrian refuge Increased mobility and safety for Makes pedestrian crossings safer May create issues with snow
island
pedestriansand easierremoval
Prevents illegal use of the TWLTL
congestion by preventing illegal
upstream turn lanemaneuvers
Provide barriers and space Increases comfort level for
median, plastic
between travel modesbicyclists by increasing separation will necessitate ongoing
delineators)
from vehiclesmaintenance.
Barrier can prevent users entering
a lane reserved for another mode
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 204
12
3 Road Diet Feasibility Determination
While Road Diets can improve safety and accommodate motorized and non-
Low-Cost Solution
motorized transportation modes along a corridor, they may not be appropriate or
feasible in all locations. There are many factors to consider before implementing a
The vast majority of Road
Road Diet. Agencies should consider the objective of the Road Diet, which could
Diets are installed on existing
be one or more of the following:
pavement within the
Improve safety
right-of-way.
Reduce speeds
Improve pedestrian environment
Improve bicyclist accessibility
Enhance transit stops.
Identifying the objective(s) will help determine
whether the Road Diet is an appropriate
alternative for the corridor that is being
evaluated.
Driveway density, transit routes, the number
and design of intersections along the corridor,
as well as operational characteristics are
some considerations to be evaluated before
deciding to implement a Road Diet.
Other considerations include roadway
function and access control, turning volumes
and 85th percentile speed, crash type and
Figure 10. Road Diet in Flint, Michigan, Central Business District
Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson
patterns, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and
19
right-of-way availability and cost.
3.1 Safety Factors
One of the primary reasons for a Road Diet installation is to address an identied crash problem. Four-lane undivided highways
have inherent design aspects that make them susceptible to crashes. Left-turning and through movements sharing a single
lane contributes to rear-end crashes, left-turn crashes, and speed discrepancies. In most cases, current four-lane undivided cross
When a Road Diet is considered for safety reasons, practitioners must determine if the crash patterns are those that can be
addressed with this alternative.
s
determining Road Diet conversion feasibility. A more detailed discussion of expected safety improvements from a Road
Diet conversion is contained in Chapter 2. The reduction in conict points at intersections, improved sight distance, easier
maneuverability for vehicles turning left, and the elimination of weaving are also contributors to the safety improvements at
case study Road Diet conversion locations. It is speculated in the Iowa Road Diet guidelines that the only crash type that might
increase with this type of conversion would be those related to the additional stop/start conicts occurring between through
20
and right-turn vehicles and due to the potential increase in congestion.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 205
13
3.2 Context Sensitive Solutions and Complete Streets
Complete Streets
FHWA denes a context sensitive solution (CSS) as a collaborative, interdisciplinary
Commitment
approach that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that
ts its physical setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental
More than 600 State,
resources while maintaining safety and mobility. CSS is an approach that considers
regional, and local
21
the total context within which a transportation improvement project will exist.
jurisdictions have adopted
The topic of CSS comes into play when determining whether or not a Road Diet
Complete Streets policies
is right for a specic location. FHWA and the American Association of State
or have made a written
commitment to do so.
level support for context-sensitive design. According to FHWA, CSS includes the
following seven qualities of design excellence:
1. The project satises the purpose and needs as agreed to by a full range of stakeholders. This agreement is forged in the
earliest phase of the project and amended as warranted as the project develops.
2. The project is a safe facility for both the user and the community.
3. The project is in harmony with the community, and it preserves environmental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, and natural
resource values of the area.
4. The project exceeds the expectations of both designers and stakeholders and achieves a level of excellence in people's
minds.
6. The project is designed and built with minimal disruption to the community.
22
7. The project is seen as having added lasting value to the community.
When considering whether to implement a Road Diet, part of the practitioners evaluation process should include whether it will
meet these qualities.
The concept of Complete Streets is similar to CSS in that it suggests that the street network should be planned, designed,
maintained, and operated in a way that accommodates all road users and those who use the surrounding environment; not
doing so will result in incomplete streets. The concept impacts the planning and design phases of a roadway as well as the day-
to-day operations.
function, what types and volumes of road users it should accommodate, the destinations it serves, and the right-of-way available.
Many communities have embraced this concept by adopting Complete Streets policies, establishing the expectation that all
future roadway projects will adhere to the principle that streets should be designed with all users in mind rather than simply
providing enough capacity for vehicle through-put. To aid in implementing the policy, many communities are also developing
Complete Streets design guidelines, which address the examples listed and other intricacies of how the design of a roadway
should relate to the surrounding context.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 206
14
3.3 Operational Factors
Consider the following common operational issues when determining the feasibility of a site for a Road Diet.
3.3.1 De Facto Three-Lane Roadway Operation
The traditional denition of a roadway function is based on vehicular mobility and access. The functional goal for a potential
Road Diet corridor should consider impacts on the mobility and access of all road users. Practitioners should also consider the
adjacent land uses along a corridor. For example, a Road Diet is likely to succeed operationally if the roadway is already operating
as a de facto three-lane roadway. A de facto three-lane roadway is one in which the left-turning vehicles along the existing four-
objective of the Road Diet is to match the design with the intended or preferred function of the roadway for all road users.
3.3.2 Speed
When possible, match vehicle speed to the context of surrounding land uses, such as through central business districts and
neighborhoods, and to all road users. Sometimes this means that lower vehicle speeds are more desirable. These areas often
have higher pedestrian and bicycle volumes in addition to younger pedestrians and bicyclists. The need to calm or reduce
23
vehicle speeds is often cited as a reason for Road Diet conversions.
Converting Four-
Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three-Lane Cross Section - Factors to Consider show that 85th percentile and average speed along
24
conversions are likely to decrease by 3 to 5 mph. Anecdotal evidence from several case studies has shown that this type of
conversion can result in lower vehicle speed variability.
If speeding was documented in the four-lane undivided conguration, a Road Diet can be a useful tool for reducing speeds,
25,26
especially high-end speeders. Studies have shown a reduction in 85th percentile speed of less than 5 mph and in reducing
27
the number of vehicles speeding excessivelydened as those going over 36 mph in a 30 mph speed zone. Another study
28
also reported a 7 percent reduction in vehicles traveling over the posted speed limit. A greater reduction in speed was
29
3.3.3 Level of Service (LOS)
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure
stratication of a performance measure or
measures. Consider LOS for two components:
intersections and arterial segments. Corridors
with closely spaced signalized intersections may
have a larger impact on the Road Diet operation
intersections. This impact could be mitigated by
signal timing and coordination between adjacent
signals, allowing the corridor to be ushed with
each green cycle. The City of Lansing, Michigan,
goes a step further, considering updates to
everything along a new Road Diet corridor,
signal removal, roundabout installation).
Figure 11. Four-lane Undivided Roadway Intersection Operating as a de facto Three-lane Cross Section
Photo Credit: Tom Welch
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 207
15
What about
The LOS on urban arterials would provide a more accurate view of conditions for
Capacity?
roads with longer distances between signalized intersections or no signalized
intersections in the corridor. The arterial LOS as measured by vehicle speed is
There is often concern
and number of lanes.
about apparently reducing
the capacity of a four-lane
the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion. After the conversion, the through vehicle
undivided roadway in half
lly decrease. The delays for left-turning
by converting it to a three-
vehicles, however, may increase because a similar through volume is now using
lane cross section with a
one through lane rather than two. Through-vehicle delay and queuing along the
Road Diet. Practitioners
main line and minor street approaches may also increase and should be considered
have found some cases of
these measures can be small if the existing four-lane undivided roadway is generally
the four-lane undivided
operating at or close to that of a de facto three-lane roadway. Several measures
road operating as a de
that also can be used to mitigate and minimize these operational impacts include,
facto three-lane roadway
but are not limited to, signal optimization and coordination, turn lane additions,
due to turning movements
and driveway consolidation. Of particular interest and focus should be minor street
and driver behavior.
delays and queues at signalized intersections and the available gaps at unsignalized
intersections or driveways. Practitioners should consider the mitigation of any
negative impacts during the more detailed alternative analysis and evaluation and
capacity reduction is much
weigh them against benets for non-motorized road users.
less than the theoretical
reduction assumed before
3.3.4 Quality of Service
implementation..
Quality of service is dened as a "quantitative indicator of the operational conditions
30
of a facility or service and users' perception of these conditions." Agencies
have used a number of objective and subjective measures, including "perceived
level of safety and comfort" in Florida's bicycle and pedestrian level of service
31
methodologies.
Practitioners should consider user quality of service for individual intersections and
arterial segments as well as the overall facility. New methodologies for urban street
facilities in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) allow analysts to determine
quality of service measures for automobiles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit.
The HCM 2010 notes that automobile mode quality of service is based on
performance measures that are eld-measurable, while the pedestrian and bicyclist
qualities of service are based on traveler-reported scores based on perceived quality
of service. Transit quality of service is based on changes in transit patronage that
come from changes in service quality. In this context, a multimodal LOS (MMLOS)
analysis is included to evaluate the LOS of each travel mode simultaneously (note
that a combined LOS is not calculated). Strengths of the MMLOS analysis include the
32
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 208
16
Pasadena, CA
Lansing, MI
Some of the following general trends are expected.
Pedestrian LOS scores are likely to improve due to the lane reduction, speed Seattle, WA
reduction, and the reallocation of traveled way width to bicycle lanes and on-
street parking.
Bicycle LOS scores will improve as a result of some of the same factors, as well as
the addition of a bicycle lane.
Applying a Road Diet conguration on a corridor with frequent signalized
intersections will have a larger impact on automobile operations than it would
on a corridor with more infrequent signal spacing. Frequently spaced signals are
causing congestion issues at multiple intersections. In some cases this impact
can be mitigated by optimizing the signal timing and coordinating between
signals. The arterial automobile LOS will provide a more accurate view of
conditions when there are longer distances between signalized intersections or
only unsignalized intersections in the corridor.
Maximum Volume for Road Diet (ADT)
Figure 12. Road Diet Implementation Maximum
signal spacing, access point frequency, number of left-turning vehicles, and
Volume Thresholds by Agency
number of lanes.
One study conducted a sensitivity analysis to determine at what hourly volume the arterial LOS would decline. It found that
a two-way peak hour volume of 1,750 vehicles per hour (875 each direction) was the threshold when a decrease in LOS was
3334
observed. It also found this could be mitigated by signal timing optimization.
The ADT provides a good rst approximation on whether or not to consider a Road Diet conversion. If the ADT is near the upper
limits of the study volumes, practitioners should conduct further analysis to determine its operational feasibility. This would
include looking at peak hour volumes by direction and considering other factors such as signal spacing, turning volumes at
intersections, and other access points. Each practitioner should use engineering judgment to decide how much analysis is
necessary and take examples from this report as a guide.
35
A 2011 Kentucky study showed Road Diets could work up to an ADT of 23,000 vehicles per day (vpd).
36
In 2006, Gates, et al. suggested a maximum ADT of between 15,000 and 17,500 vpd.
37
Knapp, Giese, and Lee have documented Road Diets with ADTs ranging from 8,500 to 24,000 vpd. The FHWA advises that
roadways with ADT of 20,000 vpd or less may be good candidates for a Road Diet and should be evaluated for feasibility. Figure
12 shows the maximum ADTs used by several agencies to determine whether to install a Road Diet. Road Diet projects have
3.3.6 Peak Hour and Peak Direction
The peak hour volume in the peak direction will be the measure of volume driving the analysis and can determine whether the
s
or the arterial corridor.
Peak-hour volumes along urban roadways typically represent 8 to 12 percent of the ADT along a roadway. The Iowa guidelines
suggest, from an operational point of view, the following volume-based Road Diet feasibility conclusions (assuming a 50/50
38
directional split and 10 percent of the ADT during the peak hour):
Probably feasible at or below 750 vehicles per hour per direction (vphpd) during the peak hour.
Consider cautiously between 750 875 vphpd during the peak hour.
Feasibility less likely above 875 vphpd during the peak hour and expect reduced arterial LOS during the peak period.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 209
17
3.3.7 Turning Volumes and Patterns
The volume and pattern of turning vehicles inuences roadway safety and operation. Practitioners should assess turn volumes
and patterns when considering the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion. In general, four-lane undivided roadways begin to
operate in a manner similar to a three-lane roadway as the number of access points and left-turn volumes increase. In this
situation the four-lane undivided roadway begins to operate as a de facto three-lane roadway and the operational impacts of
a Road Diet conversion may be smaller. This type of situation, if expected during the entire design period, would be more likely
39
to dene a feasible Road Diet conversion location. If it is determined that the four-lane undivided to three-lane conversion is a
feasible option along a roadway corridor, a more detailed operational analysis of the existing and expected through and turning
volumes is necessary (see Chapter 4).
The operation of each corridor is unique and requires an evaluation to determine if a Road Diet cross-section conversion is
feasible. For example, if a major driveway exists along the corridor, it could change the potential impacts of a Road Diet by
introducing another (often closely-spaced) opportunity for additional vehicular turning movements. If motorists are trying to
turn into driveways opposite each other, opposite-direction vehicles could end up in the TWLTL and have potential conicts.
desiring the same space from which to make their turn. Depending on the design of intersections and driveways, along with the
3.3.8 Frequently Stopping and Slow-Moving Vehicles
The number and frequency of slow-moving and frequently
stopping vehicles using a roadway corridor is a factor to
consider when evaluating the application of a Road Diet
conversion. Some examples of these types of vehicles include
agricultural equipment, transit buses, curb-side mail delivery,
trash pick-up, and horse-drawn vehicles. These types of
vehicles have a greater impact on the operation of a three-lane
roadway than a four-lane undivided roadway. The primary
reason for this increased impact is the inability of other vehicles
to legally pass frequently stopping or slow-moving vehicles.
When determining the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion,
practitioners should take into account the number and
duration of vehicle stops along the corridor (particularly during
peak hours), as well as the enforcement levels needed to deter
illegal passing. One potential mitigation measure to minimize
the impact of frequently stopping vehicles is to provide pull-
out areas at specic locations along the corridor. Another
Figure 13. Bus Loading Zone in Seattle, Washington
potential mitigation is to use some of the existing cross section
Photo Credit: City of Seattle
for these types of vehicles (e.g., a transit lane). Improvements to
intersection and driveway radii or pavement markings to serve these types of vehicles should also be considered if the Road Diet
is selected as a feasible option.
percentages of heavy vehicles, one to two bus stops, and various headways and dwell times (with a set amount of entering
volumes, number of access points, and turning volumes) showed that the impact of these vehicles on average arterial travel
40
speed was much higher along the three-lane cross section than that of the four-lane undivided roadways. Vehicles illegally
passing stopped or slow-moving vehicles in the TWLTL did not appear to be a regular problem in the Iowa case studies. If this
does occur, consider enforcement and education about the use of TWLTLs as appropriate.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 210
18
3.4 Bicycles, Pedestrians, Transit, and Freight Considerations
Embarking on a Road Diet presents an opportunity to dedicate more space to other roadway users and create a more balanced
transportation system. For bicyclists in particular, Road Diets often include adding bicycle lanes to a street with little or no
accommodation for bicyclists. The bicycle lane makes that route an option for many who would have been too intimidated to
use the street previously. For pedestrians, Road Diets help reduce vehicle speeds and speed discrepancies midblock, making
41
crossings easier and safer. Transit vehicles may nd more space available for bus stops but may also face new challenges, such
as blocking the single through lane along a corridor when stopped. Freight operators have special needs, especially for delivery
of goods to businesses, that should be accommodated along the corridor.
Community members feel Road Diet conversions improve their quality of life. Iowa case study results found that pedestrians
and bicyclists, along with adjacent land owners, often preferred the three-lane cross section. Conicts between bicyclists,
pedestrians, and vehicles can be reduced and the complexity
42
life are discussed in more detail in Road Diet Handbook: Setting Trends for Livable Streets.
If corridors have existing or planned transit routes, the interrelation between transit operations (e.g., number of dedicated stops
and frequency of trips) and other roadway users (i.e., vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians) should be assessed before determining
whether or not to implement a Road Diet. The following sections present considerations and examples of how Road Diets may
be implemented with pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and freight operations in mind.
3.4.1 Bicycle Considerations
Bicycle routes should be part of an overall network. One of the things to consider when determining whether a street is
appropriate for a Road Diet is whether it lls in a gap in the overall network, or if it is part of a planned network. Many agencies,
including the Los Angeles, Seattle, and Chicago DOTs, have sought out potential locations for Road Diets to complete the
networks identied in their bicycle master plans.
If a formal bicycle network has not been identied, the roadway in question may still benet from bicycle facilities. The street
should rst be studied to determine if there is any existing bicycle activity along it. If bicyclists are already using the roadway
without a facility, signicantly more bicyclists will likely use the route after a Road Diet. Whether or not there is existing activity,
demand for a bicycle facility should be estimated. In cases where there are already bicycle facilities, a Road Diet may be an
wer
(see Figure 14).
Figure 14.Figure 15.
Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins Photo Credit: Richard Retting
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 211
19
3.4.2 Pedestrian Considerations
The primary items for consideration
for pedestrians are similar in nature
to those for bicyclists is there
already a sidewalk available; what
is the level of pedestrian activity;
could the activity be expected to
increase with the addition of facilities?
If there are no sidewalks currently
lining the roadway, designers should
consider adding them with the Road
Diet. In rural contexts, a sidewalk
may not be necessary, but in these
situations, a paved shoulder should
Figure 16. 55th Street in Chicago: Transit and Bicycles Share an Area at the Intersection (left);
at least be considered as a pedestrian
Transit Stop and Bicycle Lane (right);
accommodation. Along a section of
Photo Credit: Stacey Meekins
Soapstone Road in Reston, Virginia, a
Road Diet converted the road from two travel lanes in each direction to one lane of travel and a bicycle lane in each direction,
separated by a TWLTL. Pedestrians can be observed walking in the road at locations that lacked sidewalks near the transition
into the three-lane section, as shown in Figure 15. In this case the Road Diet treatment provides a safety benet by increasing the
separation between pedestrians and motor vehicles.
The history of pedestrian crashes should factor into the decision as to whether to implement a Road Diet and what the
components of the Road Diet ought to be. Crashes can be reduced by adding sidewalks or a shoulder, adding pedestrian refuge
islands, and simply by slowing cars and reducing the number of lanes pedestrians must cross.
Pedestrian refuge islands should also be considered. The land use and the intended pedestrian environment will also factor into
the decision as to whether to implement a Road Diet.
3.4.3 Transit Considerations
It is important to consider transit operations along a corridor being evaluated for a Road Diet, and also to consider the impacts of
ld not result in transit causing undue additional delay to general
only through lane after the Road Diet is installed. Bus stops are typically located along the curb with on-street parking removed,
Agencies should work with transit providers in the corridor to make sure their needs are being addressed. This is also a good time
to have the transit provider look at bus stop spacing and location. Some stops could potentially be eliminated or moved from
either near-side or far-side locations at intersections to provide a better pedestrian connection or to prevent buses from blocking
the line of sight between pedestrians and motorists. If buses end up partially blocking the through lane after a Road Diet
conversion, then vehicles may end up passing the bus in the two-way left turn lane. This issue can be remediated by applying
physical barriers (e.g., channelizing devices along the outer edge line of the TWLTL) to prevent the maneuver, depending on the
frequency and severity of the violation.
On 55th Street in Chicago, the City installed a Road Diet from Cottage Grove Avenue to Woodlawn Avenue. This corridor served
as an existing transit route, and the City also wanted to incorporate bicycle facilities. Signicant coordination with the Chicago
Transit Authority was necessary to address the needs of the transit providers, while also accommodating the new bicycle lanes.
Figure 16 shows how transit and bicycle lanes are both accommodated on 55th Street.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 212
20
The City of Seattle works closely with transit providers in corridors where Road Diets are proposed. The transit agency reviews
the proposed geometry and comments on needed changes to accommodate buses. In addition, Seattle has developed transit
priority corridors with the following attributes:
Queue jump lanes for buses at signalized intersections. Pedestrian safety treatments for transit users and on-time
bus service.
Diet would be a low-cost solution. If not, it would be very expensive to move the wires. After testing the
situation they determined that the buses could reach the wires, so the Road Diet project was installed.
3.4.4 Freight Considerations
There are instances where a corridor proposed for a Road Diet will need to accommodate truck movements. Freight operations
on corridors are largely driven by demand-induced truck volumes, the proximity of alternative or parallel corridors, and the
land use characteristics along or near the corridor. Freight operations can range from routine deliveries along the corridor to
throughput of freight generated within and outside a region. When evaluating a corridor for a Road Diet, current and future
freight operations should be considered.
While there is limited information available on freight considerations when compared to other areas addressed in this section,
the Complete Streets guide published by The New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (NYSAMPO)
notes that, Complete streets are often used to stimulate economic development, ideally as compact mixed-use with retail,
commercial, and residential spaces. Designers must consider how stores and restaurants will receive deliveries, and where visitors
and residents will park their cars without interfering with the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, or transit. Concepts include rear
43
delivery access and strategically placed loading zones with time restrictions.
Road Diets can appropriately accommodate freight movements while also serving other transportation users if some key factors
are considered during the planning process. The NYSAMPO has identied the following considerations that should be factored
44
in when addressing truck movements in complete streets settings.
1) Current Land Use.
restaurants may generate relatively high volumes of trucks, while lower density residential typically will not. Keeping the
land uses along a corridor in mind will help agencies appropriately design Road Diets to meet local needs.
2) Truck Size. Corridors that serve or connect to larger industrial properties may serve larger trucks that cannot easily
3) Delivery Parking Areas. Some urban areas can accommodate deliveries via alleys or side streets, thereby avoiding trucks
to nd parking and increasing conicts for all users.
4) Intersection Design. Intersections where large trucks are often making turns should be designed with wider curb radii
to accommodate truck movements. Intersections that experience few truck movements, few truck turns, and/or almost
exclusively serve smaller trucks have lesser intersection turning radii requirements.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 213
21
Engaging freight stakeholders early in the project planning and development process provides an opportunity to align freight
mobility with the goals of a planned Road Diet. Outreach to stakeholders such as business owners, commercial and industrial
property owners, and local carriers can be useful to identify potential issues with a Road Diet implementation. While engagement
with freight stakeholders does not guarantee all conicts will be resolved, it increases the likelihood of agreement on a Road Diet
approach that balances freight mobility, safety, economic growth, and community needs to enhance quality of life.
3.5 Other Feasibility Determination Factors
The feasibility of converting a four-lane, undivided roadway to a three-lane cross section as a possible alternative along a
particular corridor can be evaluated, at least partially, through the consideration of several feasibility determination factors (FDFs),
as discussed earlier in this chapter. If the existing or preferred characteristics of the FDFs match the objectives or goals for the
corridor under consideration, the Road Diet conguration should be included as one option in a more detailed alternative cross-
section analysis and comparison.
Overall, Road Diet feasibility is tied to the ability to design the facility within the existing roadway cross section or right-of-way.
However, in some cases, the corridor FDFs may require some mitigation to achieve a desirable outcome after a Road Diet
conversion. The acceptability and impacts of this type of mitigation should be considered in general when determining the
feasibility of the Road Diet option. A more detailed analysis would need to be completed when all feasible corridor cross section
alternatives are evaluated and compared. Planning/policy, geometrics, safety, and operational details for Road Diets are discussed
in other sections of this guide.
The factors discussed in this section include the following:
Right-of-Way availability and cost. Parallel roadways.
Parallel parking. At-grade railroad crossings.
Public outreach, public relations, and
political considerations.
The content of the discussion that follows was generally derived from Converting Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three-
Lane Cross Section: Factors to Consider
experience with Road Diet implementation and evaluation. Appendix B includes a summary table of feasibility factors, their
characteristics, and a series of sample evaluative questions.
3.5.1 Right-of-Way Availability and Cost
Practitioners frequently consider the conversion of a four-lane, undivided cross section to three lanes when additional right-of-
way or project funding is limited. Many Road Diet conversions can be completed within the existing curb-to-curb or roadway
pavement envelope. However, changes in width at specic locations and occasionally additional right-of-way may be necessary
(e.g., at intersections for right-turn lanes). A Road Diet conversion may be less feasible when these types of activities increase. In
many cases a Road Diet conversion may only consist of changes in pavement markings. The inclusion of a Road Diet conversion
as a feasible option for further consideration is more likely if there are limitations on available right-of-way.
3.5.2 Parallel Roadways
A determination will be needed to establish whether the parallel
routes would be desirable by through vehicle drivers on the corridor of interest. This can be established through discussions
with those that travel the roadway or the application of appropriate simulation software. The distance between parallel arterials
should also be considered. It is less likely that vehicles will divert to parallel routes that are farther away or that are just as
ore-
ring. Some community members may be more sensitive to this, so
having data can help clearly dene whether this is a problem. Ifher
mitigation measures on parallel streets may be warranted.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 214
22
3D Visualization
3.5.3 Parallel Parking
The existence of parallel parking (full-time or only during part of the day) and
its impact on the feasibility of a Road Diet conversion should be evaluated. The
The use of 3D visualization
versus the three-lane cross section need to be compared. In addition, if a bicycle
tool to help local
lane is added after the conversion, the interaction between bicyclists and vehicles
stakeholders visualize a
being parked should be considered. Parallel parking can be and has been included
along three-lane roadways.
proposed Road Diet and
assess impacts associated
3.5.4 At-Grade Railroad Crossings
with the installation.
An important consideration in the feasibility of converting four-lane, undivided
Design visualization
roadway to three lanes is the existence of railroad crossings. Vehicles queued at an
allows viewers to see
at-grade rail crossing will need to be served by one through lane after the Road
the corridor from several
Diet conversion. This could result in queues that are approximately twice as long. If
vantage points, such as
this type of queuing is not acceptable along the three-lane cross section, it could
a commercial vehicle, a
closely parallel the corridor of interest. In the case of a nearby parallel railroad, the
motor vehicle, a bicycle, or
additional queuing due to a train would occur in the TWLTL in one direction and the
a pedestrian.
through lane in the other direction. If operation of the converted corridor is needed
while a train passes, the addition of a right-turn lane with adequate storage may be
necessary for mitigation. The consideration of the signalization at these intersections
(if it exists) also requires special attention both before and after the Road Diet
conversion (if it occurs).
3.5.5 Public Outreach, Public Relations, and Political Considerations
According to the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissions Regional Road
Diet Analysis Feasibility Assessment, Education and outreach play a critical role in the
success of a Road Diet. Many projects have demonstrated that public opposition can
be strong in the early stages of a project. However, with committed stakeholders
and an organized education and outreach program, the public can be better
45
informed about the advantages and disadvantages of Road Diets.
Road Diet conversions have been implemented for more than three decades. Their
implementation, however, can still be very challenging. This type of conversion is
relatively unusual and new to most transportation professionals, local jurisdictions,
and the traveling public. In some cases the consideration of or proposal for a Road
Diet can lead to some concern due to unfamiliarity.
A temporary trial basis implementation of a Road Diet conversion has been used
to address public concerns. This approach requires the restriping of the pavement
within the proposed Road Diet area for a period of time before a determination is
made to continue with a permanent Road Diet installation. Temporary pavement
marking materials similar to those used in construction work zones can be
considered for this purpose.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 215
23
23
Consider signalization adjustments and any potential issues related to turning vehicles. During the trial basis time period, a series
of before-and-after operational studies can be completed; some preliminary crash analysis can be performed; and surveys can
be conducted among adjacent land owners, rst responders, etc. If the trial yields positive results, consider implementing a more
permanent Road Diet conversion. If it is determined that a Road Diet is not the best option for the corridor, the roadway can be
changed back to its original lane conguration.
Michigan DOT (MDOT), with support from FHWA, has implemented Road Diets using the trial basis approach to appeal to
have objected to an MDOT-proposed Road Diet, MDOT has tempered its proposal with a guarantee: the agency will install the
Road Diet on a trial basis, and will return the road to four lanes at the end of the trial if the community requests it. The evaluation
criterion in this case is simple: what does the community want? As a result, many corridors have retained their Road Diet
conversion with only two corridors being returned to four-lane undivided sections in Michigan. MDOT and FHWA believe that
3.6 Case Studies: Feasibility Determination Decision-making
Several agencies apply general rules of thumb when rst considering Road Diets. This section summarizes the factors and
design parameters agencies should use when considering a Road Diet.
Seattle DOT considers the following facets of transportation operations, mobility, and safety in the selection of a
46
Road Diet corridor:
Vehicle speed Number of lanes
Freight usage Bus stops and routing
Travel time Accessibility.
To guide Road Diet implementations, Seattle DOT developed the ow chart shown in Figure 17 to support its Road Diet
decision-making process. First, the city calculates the ADT of the roadway segment in question, combined with signal spacing.
In some cases this will lead to additional operational analyses of the entire corridor or key intersections. Depending on the results
of this additional analysis, further modeling may be required (e.g., via Highway Capacity Software or Synchro). Those results may
Manager and Signal Operations Manager must formally approve the Road Diet project to move forward.
Chicago DOT (CDOT) has started developing guidelines for when and where to implement Road Diets at the time of this
writing. Crashes are the most important reason for them to consid
the current number of lanes.
CDOT considers a roadway up to 15,000 18,000 ADT to be a good candidate for a Road Diet. However, the agency believes that
the design hourly volume (DHV) may be a better parameter to use than ADT. A Road Diet would be feasible with a peak hourly
volume of 1,000; at higher volumes, signal modications may be necessary, and implementing left-turn phases is important
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 216
24
Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diets
\[from 4/5 lanes to 3 lanes\]
NO
25K+
30%+ Travel Time
Modify Design
2+ LOS Change
Corridor
16K+
Synchro
ADT
Analysis
<30% TT Change
TO Manager Approval
Or mile spacing
Model
Required
Corridor LOS = D or better
SO Manager Approval
between signals
LOS E at critical approaches
YES
Tweak
<10K
Proceed with
Community Process
10 - 16K or
mile
signal spacing
LOS & Critical
>700 vphpd
Key Intersection Synchro
Approach E
YES
Analysis RequiredModel
TO & SO Manager
>200 vphLT
LOS F or Critical
Approval
Approach F
Modify Design
<700 vphpd
No Model
Required
<200 vphLT
NOTES: vphpd = Vehicles per hour per direction
vphLT = Left-turning vehicles per hour
LOS = Level of Service
Figure 17. City of Seattle Modeling Flow Chart for Road Diet Feasibility Determination
Michigan DOT gives the following outline for guidance related to reducing lanes when considering implementation of a Road Diet:
1. Planning and Policy Includes information on the purpose and need for the Road Diet, planning considerations for the local
community and regional planning agency, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) processes, etc.
ling, turning movements, level
of service, crash analysis, etc.
3. Operational Criteria Includes information regarding acceptable Level of Service (LOS) and improvements related to certain
crash types.
4. Geometric Design Criteria Describes maintaining proper geometrics using major road standards.
5. Systems Considerations Includes considerations regarding parking, pedestrian and bicycle issues, school routes, etc.
6. Project Costs Describes nancial arrangements for cost-share projects.
47
7. Public Involvement Describes the communication process prior to implementation.
Michigan DOT has chosen to view all existing four-lane, undivided roads as potential implementation sites. Many local Michigan
agencies believe that a three-lane cross-section is the desirable road section compared to two-lane and four-lane undivided
sections, and they actively work to identify which four-lane undivided roads are good candidates for Road Diets.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 217
25
The City of Grand Rapids, MI takes a holistic view of Road Diet implementations by rst identifying all four-lane, undivided
facilities within their jurisdiction. For each road or segment identied, the agency then reco
corridor use (whether a commercial route, incident bypass route,
48
the corridor operates under existing conditions.
The City of Lansing, MI has established the following minimum post-implementation lane width guidance:
11-ft. through lanes
49
5-ft. bike lanes
10-ft. turn lanes (left and right).
This guidance was established based on the
citys experience; at some vehicle lane widths
some bicycle lane widths can encourage parking.
Where undesignated pavement width exists,
lane and bike lane, as shown in Figure 18. This
without creating wide lanes.
Figure 18.
Photo Credit: Jennifer Atkinson
The Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission (GCMPC) in Michigan is both progressive and aggressive in its
approach to installing Road Diets. Although the rst Road Diet in the GCMPC area occurred in 1990, the real boost to widespread
implementation of Road Diets within this area occurred in 2009. The catalyst was the completion of a technical study in which
the GCMPC assessed more than 140 miles of four-lane undivided road in its jurisdiction for potential conversion to three lanes.
This study provided a summary of operating features and crash re
50
comparative assessment ranking the desirability of all remaining four-lane sections for Road Diet consideration.
The local agencies within the region rst targeted routes with low ADTs that would allow for easy conversion and result in safety
benets; routes carrying 6,000 8,000 AADT were selected for the rst conversions. After several conversions and positive public
opinions of Road Diets, GCMPC began selecting implementation sites with higher volumes up to 15,000 AADT.
Each year, GCMPC selects competitive road improvement projects submitted by its 32 local agencies. Potential Road Diet
locations are scored and prioritized on criteria such as the following:
Existing level of service;
Lane width (existing and proposed);
Number of driveway approaches within the Road Diet segment; and
Crash types that may be mitigated by installation.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 218
26
stakeholders are involved from the beginning of the planning process and collaborate through the Road Diet installation.
GCMPC feels that working together with these stakeholders gives a sense of project awareness and buy-in. It also helps to
overcome obstacles or concerns that arise along the way, leading to smoother implementation. GCMPC encourages local
agencies within their jurisdiction to restripe existing four-lane undivided segments as three-lane Road Diets as a part of their
ongoing annual or bi-annual restriping plans. During the Road Diet study, GCMPC looked at several parameters to determine
conversion suitability. Using these criteria, a 4-scale rating system was developed to measure compatibility of each road
segment. These included:
Crash data.
that are higher than the average for roadways with similar functional classication can be a good indicator for compatibility.
Lane width. Four-lane roadways with lanes widths less than 12 feet may be good candidates as the narrow lanes can cause
conicts for passing vehicles.
Speed limits and operating speeds.
Surface type. A road that has concrete on the inside lanes and asphalt on the outside lanes (or the other way around) may
markers. This is especially true during inclement weather events or evening/morning driving as a result of sun glare.
ADT. GCMPC considers ADT less than 10,000 feasible, between 10,000 and 20,000 potentially feasible depending on site-
specic conditions, and more than 20,000 likely not feasible.
This is one of the many factors used to determine compatibility and is site specic.
Land use. A Road Diet may be benecial on corridors that have a lot of turning movements such as a block-style street grid,
shopping areas, school zones, etc.
proposal from a local agency would have been unusual, but they are common now in GCMPCs annual call for projects. From the
ts of the planning agency and subsequent educational follow-up
by GCMPC have facilitated implementation at the local level.
Based on recent interviews with practitioners, agency considerations for Road Diet implementation are shown in Table 3.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 219
27
Table 3. Road Diet Implementation Considerations by Agency
Road Diet Implementation Considerations
Maximum Volume, ADT
Minimum Lane
Presence of Bicycles
Presence of Transit
Width, ft.
Travel Time or LOS
Number of Lanes
Turning Volumes
Maximum Peak
Volumes, DHV
Vehicle Speed
Freight Usage
Crash History
Accessibility
Left/Right
Through
Bicycle
Chicago DOT
Seattle DOT
City of Lansing, MI
Michigan DOT
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission
City of Las Vegas, NV
Genesee County (MI)
Metropolitan Planning
Commission
3.7 Funding Road Diets
eligible for Surface Transportation Program (STP), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or other Federal-aid funds where
data support the expenditure.
However, there are other benets of Road Diets and other reasons for their installation, so the other funding sources available
vary widely from Federal, State, and local sources. For example, the Seattle DOT (SDOT) has used funding from such sources as
Safe Routes to School grants, Washington State DOT pedestrian and bicycle funds, and transit grants. The agency also monitors
the citys road resurfacing projects to see whether upcoming streets scheduled for upcoming roadway overlay projects are good
candidates for Road Diets. This allows Seattle DOT to use the annual paving program funds for some installations.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 220
28
4 Designing a Road Diet
As with any project development process, practitioners designing a Road Diet should take into account the
principles and practices that guide design decisions, including geometric design and operational design.
4.1 Geometric Design
Geometric design includes identifying details of the project in plan, prole, and cross section. It is necessary to apply the
standard principles and practices of geometric design. Geometric designers are guided by standards and policies that include
design criteria. The criteria serve as a guide to design and provide uniformity, but are not intended to be inexible. Designers
need exibility to achieve context-specic needs and objectives. This is particularly true for Road Diet implementations. FHWAs
Flexibility in Highway Design
51
values for the corridor and broader location. AASHTOs A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design also shows how
52
community and environmental issues can be integrated into decision-making throughout the project development process.
Additional information about design exibility pertaining to pedestrian and bicyclist facilities can be found in FHWAs August
53
2013 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility memo.
The practice of designing roads geometrically is evolving towards more performance-based approaches to analysis, where the
expected transportation outcomes of geometric design decisions are quantied and used to support informed design decision-
making. Performance-based analysis complements the ideas of design exibility, context sensitive design, and practical design.
Performance-prediction tools, such as the Highway Safety Manual, Highway Capacity Manual and others quantify how geometric
design decisions impact measures of user accessibility, mobility, quality of service, reliability, and safety. A framework for
conducting performance-based analysis is provided in the nal report for NCHRP 15-34A, Performance-Based Analysis of Geometric
Design of Highways and Streets.
4.1.1 Road Function and Context
The functional classication system described by FHWAs Functional Classication Guidelines and Updated Guidance for the
Functional Classication of Highways often serves as a basis for establishing design criteria for a Road Diet project. AASHTOs Green
Book, for example, includes chapters organized by functional classication, with arterials divided into freeway and non-freeway
facilities (e.g., Chapter 5, Local Roads and Streets; Chapter 6, Collector Roads and Streets; Chapter 7, Rural and Urban Arterials; and
Chapter 8, Freeways). Alternative road classications also exist. These alternative classication systems guide designers towards
establishing design criteria that are complimentary to location-specic context where the Road Diet is being implemented.
54
For example, the Smart Transportation Guidebook, jointly published by the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DOTs, more explicitly
considers project setting by dening seven context areas from least to most developed:
1) Rural
2) Suburban neighborhood
3) Suburban corridor
4) Suburban center
5) Town/village neighborhood
6) Town center
7) Urban core.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 221
29
Table 4. Quantiable Characteristics of Land User Contexts (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008)
CharacteristicRuralSuburban Suburban Suburban Town/Village Town Urban
NeighborhoodCorridorCenterNeighborhoodCenterCore
a b
Density Units (DU) 1 DU/20 ac1-8 DU/ac2-30 DU/ac3-20 DU/ac4-30 DU/ac8-50 DU/ac16-75 DU/ac
per acre (ac)
c
Building Coverage NA< 20%20-35%35-45%35-50%50-70%70-100%
Lot Size/Area in 20 ac5,000 - 80,000 sf20,000- 25,000-100,000 2,000-12,000 sf2,000-20,000 25,000-
square feet (sf)200,000 sfsfsf100,000 sf
d
Lot Frontage NA50 -200 ft.100-500 ft.100-300 ft.18-50 ft.25-200 ft.100-300 ft.
Block Dimensions NA400 ft. wide x 200 ft. wide x 300 ft. wide x 200 ft. wide x 400 200 ft. wide 200 ft. wide x
variable lengthvariable lengthvariable lengthft. longx 400 ft. long400 ft. long
Max. Height 1-3 stories1.5 -3 stories1 story retail; 2-5 stories2-5 stories1-3 stories3-60 stories
Min./Max. Setback Varies20-80 ft.20-80 ft.20-80 ft.10-20 ft.0-20 ft.0-20 ft.
a
The guidebook does not dene a density unit and may instead be referring to a dwelling unit; dwelling units per acre are used in the guidebook to dene high-, medium-, and
low-density areas.
b
acre
c
not applicable
d
The distance measured between points where side property lines meet road right-of-way lines
The guidebook includes a set of quantiable characteristics for each of the seven context areas and a recommendation that the
land use context be identied based on this information. The quantiable characteristics are summarized in Table 4. Land use
contexts are broadly dened for road segments greater than 600 feet in length due to practical limitations on the frequency of
changing the roadway typical section over a short stretch of road.
Once the context area of the Road Diet is dened, the Smart Transportation Guidebook includes a matrix of design values with
arterial, 3) community collector, 4) neighborhood collector, and 5) local road. An example for regional arterials is shown in Table
capture the actual role of the roadway in the surrounding community. Access, mobility, and speed are considered on the road
segment of interest as opposed to using only one functional classication for an entire highway. This alternative approach to
classifying the context area of the Road Diet beyond more traditional functional classication will encourage design criteria that
are consistent with broader project surroundings and area characteristics.
4.1.2 Design Controls
Design controls are xed factors outside of the design process, but may dictate the result. Examples include vehicles, environment,
Diet locations may be identied due to the characteristics of these design controls at that location (see, for example, discussion
in Chapter 3 of this guidebook). More broadly, designers should understand the intended project outcomes as well as the
characteristics of the stakeholders that the Road Diet implementation is intended to serve. A thorough discussion of design
55
controls appears in AASHTOs A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. This section summarizes some key points.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 222
30
Table 5. Regional Arterial Design Matrix (NJDOT & PennDOT, 2008)
Suburban Suburban Suburban Town/Village Town/Village
Regional ArterialRuralUrban Core
NeighborhoodCorridorCenterNeighborhoodCenter
Lane Width11 to 1211 to 12 (14 to 11 to 12 (14 11 to 12 (14 10 to 12 (14 10 to 12 (14 10 to 12
15 outside lane to 15 outside outside lane outside lane if outside lane if (14 outside
if no shoulder or lane if no if no shoulder not shoulder or not shoulder lane if not
bike lane)shoulder or or bike lane)bike lane)or bike lane)shoulder or
bike lane)bike lane)
Paved Shoulder 8 to 108 to 108 to 124 to 6 (if no 4 to 6 (if no 4 to 6 (if no 4 to 6 (if no
Roadway
Widthparking or parking or bike parking or parking or
bike lane)lane)bike lane)bike lane)
Parking LaneNANANA8 parallel8 parallel; see 8 parallel; see 8 parallel
7.2 for angled7.2 for angled
Bike LaneNA5 to 6 (if no 6 (if no 5 to 65 to 65 to 65 to 6
shoulder)shoulder)
Curb Return30 to 5025 to 3530 to 5025 to 5015 to 4015 to 4015 to 40
Number of Travel 2 to 62 to 64 to 64 to 62 to 42 to 42 to 6
Lanes
Clear Sidewalk NA55 to 65 to 66 to 86 to 106 to 12
Roadside
Width
Shy DistanceNANANA0 to 20 to 222
Total Sidewalk NA55 to 69 to 1410 to 1612 to 1812 to 20
Width
Speed
Desired 45-5535-4035-5530-3530-3530-3530-35
Operating Speed
(mph)
Design Vehicles. Geometric designers should consider the largest design vehicle that is likely to use \[a\] facility with
considerable frequency or a design vehicle with special characteristics appropriate to a particular location in determining
56
the design of such critical features as radii at intersections and radii of turning roadways. Given that Road Diets are
likely implemented as part of an overlay and restriping project, the design vehicle for the location has likely already been
predetermined. Design vehicle characteristics are important when considering the new lane and shoulder widths (including
possible traveled way widening on horizontal curves), storage lengths, and turning radii. Given that Road Diet implementation has
reduced the number of lanes to one in each direction, design vehicle performance will have a greater impact on overall vehicle
operations and the grade and critical length of grade may become more inuential features impacting performance than for the
four-lane, undivided cross section.
Drivers. Considering driver performance remains as critical for Road Diet design as for any other facility type. Road Diet designs
should be compatible with driver capabilities and limitations and should be laid out to meet driver expectations. Designers
should consider positive guidance to all road users (e.g., pavement marking, signing, delineation) to make the desired path clear.
Driver considerations in highway design are covered in FHWAs A Users Guide to Positive Guidance and NCHRPs Human Factors
57, 58
Guidelines for Road Systems.
Road Diets can be particularly benecial for older drivers who have slower reaction times and reexes. According to FHWAs
Public Roads, The safety potential of conversion to a three-lane cross-section (also called Road Diets) was so compelling to Iowa
59
its agency's older driver program at the program's inception in 1999. Additional guidance on highway design, operational, and
Handbook for Designing Roadways
for the Aging Population.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 223
31
Non-motorized Users. When appropriately applied, Road Diets have generated benets to users of all modes of transportation,
including bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists. Specic benets to non-motorized users were covered previously. Pedestrian
d
for designing roadways to accommodate pedestrians as well as
designing pedestrian facilities themselves is contained in AASHTOs Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian
Facilities. Road Diets also provide the opportunity to add bicycle lanes to roads on which bicyclists previously shared lanes with
motor vehicles or navigated between travel lanes and the edge of pavement. Bicycle dimensions and operating characteristics
60
inuence the design of bicycle facilities, as identied in AASHTOs Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities.
Furthermore, the FHWA supports the consideration of additional design options found in the National Association of City
Urban Bikeway Design Guide and the ITE Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares manuals in
addition to the AASHTO bicycle and pedestrian guides to aid in designing safe and comfortable bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
61
These resources expand practitioners options in how to accommodate these users.
Speed. Speed is one of the most important and complex factors that both inuences and is inuenced by road geometrics.
Drivers select travel speeds based on their perceptions of the road. Sometimes geometric design criteria can lead to operating
speeds that are higher than design speeds for design speeds less than 55 mph. Road Diets have the potential to reduce
moving vehicles. Changes in the road cross section may also inuence drivers perceptions of appropriate free-ow speeds.
Geometric designers should seek to achieve speed harmony, dened in FHWAs Speed Concepts: Informational Guide, as the
condition that results when:
The designated design speed is within a specied range (i.e., ± 5mph) of the observed 85th percentile operating speed;
The 85th percentile operating speed is within a specied range (i.e., ± 5mph) of the posted speed limit;
The inferred design speed is equal to or greater than the designated design speed; and
62
The posted speed is less than or equal to the designated design speed.
4.1.3 Elements of Design
Principal elements of geometric design include sight distance, horizontal alignment, superelevation, and vertical alignment.
Conversions do not generally involve signicant changes in sight distance and alignment, but these characteristics may require
additional assessment due to changes in cross-section allocation and use.
Sight Distance.
objects in the travel way. Stopping sight distance, decision sight distance, and intersection sight distance are most relevant to
Road Diet locations. Stopping sight distance, or the distance required for a vehicle to stop before reaching a stationary object
in its path, should be available at all points on the road. Decision sight distance should be provided at complex locations where
needed. Signicant changes in alignment are not expected during Road Diet conversions, so changes in sight distance due to
the alignment design are likely to be insignicant. Changes in vehicle position due to the cross section changes may have some
impact on horizontal sight distance (i.e., available sight distance while traversing a horizontal curve, limited by sight obstructions
on the inside of the curve). Critical sight distance analysis for Road Diet conversions will include pedestrian crossings, transit
stops, and locations where on-street parked cars serve as possible sight obstructions.
Road Diets can provide sight distance improvements for mid-block, left-turning drivers at entrances due to the conversion of the
distance to make a safe movement.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 224
32
Grade. Designers select grades to provide uniform operation and enable operating speeds near the design speed of the
roadways. Grades at locations with Road Diet conversions will likely already be determined. Maximum grades typically range
cross section to one through lane in each direction, design vehicle performance will have a greater impact on overall vehicle
operations and the grade and critical length of grade may become more inuential features impacting performance than they
were for the four-lane undivided cross section.
Horizontal Curvature and Superelevation. Road Diet conversions are not likely to involve any signicant changes in horizontal
curvature and superelevation. Basic design speed, side friction, and superelevation relationships apply, and guidance is available
in AASHTO's A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
Access Management. Given the operational change that will occur through a lane reduction in each direction of travel as well
as the addition of a TWLTL, access management should be analy
low-volume intersections.
The re-analysis should consider:
Access to property
Sight distance between vehicles and pedestrians
How driveways are used (e.g., backing out vs. forward-out-only)
Sidewalk continuity for pedestrians
Accessibility requirements
Accommodating bicycle lanes
Potential conicts with bus stop locations.
FHWA provides additional resources related to access management, including Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections
63
Technical Summary.
4.1.4 Cross Sectional Elements
There are a number of cross sectional elements to consider for a Road Diet conversion. For example, practitioners need to
consider the commonly accepted range of lane widths, but the design must also t within the existing curb-to-curb distance
using exibility in commonly used design manuals. The sections below discuss individual cross sectional design criteria.
Lane widths. Lane width inuences operations, safety, quality of service, and the security felt by road users. Widths of 10 to 12
feet are typically used in practice. Auxiliary lanes (i.e., turn lanes) at intersections are often the same width as through lanes, and
seldom less than 10 feet. The width of the TWLT lane provided as part of a lane width conversion typically ranges from 10 to 16
64
feet. The width for a bus lane along these roadways is usually 11 to 15 feet.
Median.
should expect crossing and turning movements in and around the
65
median.
Pedestrian Refuge Island. A pedestrian refuge island both shortens the time and distance that a pedestrian is exposed to moving
ted space in the roadway, allowing the pedestrian to make the
crossing in two stages if necessary. In this situation, the pedestrian only has to focus on nding a gap in one direction of travel at
a time. The refuge island should be a minimum of 6 feet wide, in the direction of pedestrian travel, with 8 to 10 feet preferred. The
island should include detectable warning tiles where it meets the roadway. On streets with a TWLTL, pedestrian refuge islands can
use the turn lane space where turns are prohibited, such as at an intersection with a one-way street, or can be installed adjacent to
the TWLTL where space allows.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 225
33
Cross Slope. Generally, the crown or highpoint of the converted cross section is located in the center of the TWLTL, with the
slope of the pavement the same as the adjacent through lanes. Typical cross slopes are 1.5 to 2 percent, and may be as high as
2.5 percent in areas of intense rainfall. Additional information on minimum accessibility standards is available in the Draft Public
Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).
Shoulders. Shoulders are the portions of the roadway adjacent to the traveled way. In most Road Diet applications, curb-to-
ed
between the traveled way and bicycle lanes.
Curbs. Curbs may already be present at the Road Diet conversion location, as they are commonly used in lower speed urban
and suburban areas. Curbs have multiple functions, including drainage, delineation, right-of-way reduction, and delineation of
pedestrian walkways.
Drainage. Drainage facilities include bridges, culverts, channels, curbs, gutters, and various types of drains. Road Diet
conversions usually do not require signicant changes in drainage design, as pavement widths and slopes remain relatively
unchanged. AASHTOs Highway Drainage Guidelines and Model Drainage Manual are two key drainage references used by
66, 67
designers.
Pedestrian Facilities. Road Diet conversions will not typically involve changes to the pedestrian sidewalk facilities outside the
curb. They do benet pedestrian performance in a number of other ways that have been noted throughout this document. For
vehicles. The change in the roadway cross section also results in fewer travel lanes for pedestrians to cross. Separating opposing
directions of travel by a TWLTL can provide space for a refuge island at pedestrian crossing locations, if necessary. Adding
dedicated bike lanes to a roadway can positively impact pedestriFor
any changes to the pedestrian facilities, including the addition of pedestrian refuge islands, designers can reference AASHTOs
68, 69
Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities and the Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines.
Bicycle Facilities. Road Diets allow the addition or expansion of bicycle facilities. On roads where bicyclists previously shared
lanes with motor vehicles or navigated between travel lanes and the edge of pavement, the opportunity to provide a separate
facility arises. Where bicycle lanes already existed, the Road Diet presents an opportunity to provide even more separation by
bollards, or curb. Bicycle lane widths should be determined
based on context and anticipated use, including the speed,
volume, and types of vehicles in adjacent lanes. AASHTOs
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities covers the design
70
of these bicycle lanes. Under typical circumstances, the
width of a one-way bicycle lane is 5 feet. A minimum width
of 4 feet can be used on roadways with no curb and gutter.
Wider bicycle lanes should be considered when feasible, and
especially at locations with narrower parking lanes (e.g., 7
feet), high bicycle volumes, and higher speed roadways or
roadways with a signicant number of larger vehicles. When
protected bike facility should be considered. Typical bicycle
lane cross sections are illustrated in Figure 20. The presence
of a bicycle lane inuences the recommended design of on-
Figure 19. Bicycle Lane on Rural 3-Lane Section, Lawyers Road, Reston, VA
street parking accommodations as well.
Photo Credit: Virginia DOT
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 226
34
Optional Normal Solid White Line*
Normal Solid White Line
Width Varies5-6 ft.Travel Lanes Width Varies5-6 ft.
Parking LaneBike LaneBike LaneParking Lane
On Street Parking
Normal Solid White Line
5-6 ft.Travel Lanes 5-6 ft.
Bike LaneBike Lane
Parking Prohibited
Figure 20. Typical Bike Lane Cross Sections (Adapted from AASHTO)
On-street Parking. Road Diets provide the
opportunity for parallel or diagonal on-street parking.
The desirable minimum width of a parallel parking lane
is 8 feet, as most vehicles will occupy approximately
7 feet of actual street space when parallel parked. A
parking lane width of 10 to 12 feet may be desirable
to provide additional clearance from the traveled way
20 ft6 ft
6 ft20 ft
and accommodate transit operations, though some
8 ft
jurisdictions have used parking lane widths as narrow
as 7 feet, particularly where only passenger cars need
71
to be accommodated in the parking lane. As noted,
Figure 21.Paired Parking Illustration
parallel parking lanes may also be separated from
bicycle lanes by an optional solid white line. Where parallel parking and bike lanes are present, but a parking lane line or stall
markings are not used, the recommended width of the shared bicycle and parking lane is 13 feet. In addition, practitioners could
consider paired parking to reduce conicts and delays with vehicle parking (see Figure 21).
The treatment of a parking lane approaching an intersection requires special consideration. If the lane is carried up to the
intersection, right-turning vehicles may use it in the absence of parked vehicles, potentially leading to undesirable operations.
using a parking lane transition (i.e., a bulb out, as shown in Figure 22) or prohibiting parking a certain distance from the
intersection.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 227
35
No Parking
22 to 26 ft8 ft
20 ft20 ft
8 ft
Property Line
Figure 22. Example Parking Lane Transition at Intersection (Adapted from AASHTO, 2011)
Bus Turnouts. One potential concern with a Road Diet installation is that stopped buses in the now-singular through lane block
all downstream vehicles while loading and unloading. The paved width available with the installation of a Road Diet provides
space for potential accommodations for bus operations (e.g., stopping, loading, unloading) away from the traveled way by using
a turnout. Bus stop locations should provide about 50 feet in length for each bus. In some cases, there may be room to provide
deceleration and entry tapers using a combination of pavement markings. A taper of about 5:1, longitudinal to transverse, is a
desirable minimum. When the stop is on the near or far side of an intersection, the width of the cross street is generally adequate
Keep in mind, however, that most transit operators prefer in-l
ingress from the turn-out.
Bus stops located at the near side or far side of intersections provide pedestrian access from both sides of the street and
connections to intersecting bus routes. The presence of curb extensions also facilitates passenger access. Additional discussion
can be found in Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 19, Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops, ITEs
Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, and agency guidance on bus stop placement and design.
72
Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops provides additional information on the location and design of bus stops.
Cross Section Transitions. The starting point and ending point of a Road Diet conversion may require a transition from or to
cally a function of the width of the lane to be dropped and the
posted or design speed at the lane drop locations. The s provides additional detail. Taper
ratios for lane additions are typically around 15:1, longitudinal to transverse.
Another important decision with respect to the cross section transitions that are part of the Road Diet is the location of the
transitions. Overall, continuity of the two through lanes and one TWLTL lane is important, and transition points should occur at
locations where the only decision a driver needs to make is related to the lane drop or addition. The objective when selecting a
transition point location is to minimize the complexity of the transition area and the number of decisions or potential conicts
that could occur while a driver is merging or diverging. For this reason, transitions should not occur at or near intersections
or major driveways (within their inuence area). The Iowa guidelines further propose that Road Diet conversions should be
questioned if additional through lanes are needed at the signalized intersections along the corridor. This type of transition may
have a negative result on safety and lessen the benets of the Road Diet conversion.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 228
36
Some transitions are less complicated
than others. For example, the transition
from a two-lane undivided roadway to
a three-lane roadway is relatively simple
and straightforward (see Figure 23). The
general concerns noted above about
the selection of transition point locations
should still be taken into account. The
transition from a four-lane undivided to
a three-lane roadway requires dropping
the outside through lanes in advance of
the complete cross section conversion.
This type of transition requires closer
attention and involves the potential
for through-vehicle conicts. Overall,
the lane drop and the introduction of
the TWLTL should be installed in close
Figure 23. Transition from 3-lane to 2-lane Cross Section, Oak Street, Merrield, VA
proximity to each other. The transition
Photo Credit: Virginia DOT
from a ve-lane roadway to a three-lane
roadway is a similar situation but the introduction of a new TWLTL is not necessary. The same issues will also be encountered
when transitioning from a three-lane roadway to some other type of cross section.
Overall, it is also important to look at the roadway cross sections near the end of the project limits for a Road Diet conversion.
The overall objective is to minimize the number of transitions within a short distance. In other words, it may sometimes be
more appropriate to extend the project limits to avoid this situation. Through lanes should also not be dropped as a turn lane
at an intersection. This type of lane drop is not good design. It will often catch vehicles that want to continue through the
intersection and drivers may then make inappropriate maneuvers.
4.1.5 Intersection Design
Basic principles of intersection design apply to intersections bordering or within the Road Diet area. Given the cross sectional
change during Road Diet implementation, practitioners should perform a new operational analysis at each intersection (see
Chapter 5). New lane arrangements and signal phasing are also possibilities, as discussed in other sections of this guide. The
remainder of this section will include an overview of some design considerations for intersections bordering or within the Road
Diet area with references to other documents as appropriate.
Intersecting roads should meet at or nearly at right angles and the grades
should be as at as possible. These characteristics are likely predetermined at locations experiencing a Road Diet conversion,
implement possible countermeasures.
Intersection Sight Distance. Check intersection sight distance at each intersection bordering or within the Road Diet area.
Drivers of approaching vehicles should have an unobstructed view
the intersecting road to allow the observance and avoidance of potential conicts with other vehicles. Drivers of stopped
oss
it. These design objectives are achieved by providing sight triangles. Approach and departure sight triangles are discussed in
detail in AASHTOs A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. It is likely that the sight distance needs for minor streets
intersecting the new three-lane cross section decrease following the Road Diet conversion due to entering vehicles needing to
cross fewer lanes. Other sections of this document also note how available sight distance for vehicles turning left from the TWLTL
is likely greater than that along a four-lane, undivided cross section.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 229
37
State Laws Regarding Driver Use of TWLTLs
related to two way left turn lanes and center turn lanes, the research team identied laws in 18 States that dene and
govern driver use of TWLTLs. Six types of laws were identied and are labeled a through g below. More than half of
the 18 States specify the following:
- (a) Where a TWLTL is provided, motorists may not turn left from any other lane
- (b) Vehicle shall not be driven in a TWLTL except when preparing for or making a left turn/U-turn
Ten States have enacted laws that (c) limit the distance a motorist may travel in a TWLTL either a specied maximum
distance, or the shortest distance practicable and safe, as summarized in Table 6:
Table 6. Maximum Allowable Travel Distance in TWLTL
DistanceState
150 FeetVirginia
200 FeetCalifornia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island
300 FeetGeorgia, Washington
500 FeetMissouri
Shortest practicable distance/safe distanceMaryland, Tennessee
Four States have enacted laws that (d) stipulate that TWLTLs shall not be used for passing/overtaking another vehicle.
Tennessee is unique in passing laws that specify the following:
- (e) When vehicle enters turn lane, no other vehicle proceeding in opposite direction shall enter that turn lane if that
entrance would prohibit the vehicle already in the lane from making the intended turn
- (f) When vehicles enter the turn lane proceeding in opposite directions, the rst vehicle to enter the lane shall have
the right-of-way
Arkansas is the only State to enact the following provision:
- (g) It is permissible for vehicle making a left turn from an intersecting street or driveway to utilize TWLTL to gain access
le to use the center left-turn lane as an acceleration lane
In terms of guidelines, the six types of TWLTL laws identied in the 18 States provide reasonable instructions to drivers
and can help promote safe driver actions on corridors with TWLTLs. Although it is unclear what factors or data the
States used to determine the maximum allowable travel distance in TWLTL, limiting the distance drivers are permitted
to travel in TWLTLs if not overly restrictive can enhance safety by reducing opportunities for opposing-direction
crashes, as well as crashes involving pedestrians that use TWLTLs as a crossing refuge. One concern about stipulating
short maximum travel distances is the risk of failing to account for the need for drivers to decelerate from highway
speeds when entering TWLTLs.
Regardless of the specic TWLTL laws enacted, it is suggested that State driver manuals dene proper use of TWLTLs,
including information regarding laws that govern TWLTLs.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 230
38
Right Turn Lanes. With the Road Diet conversion, it may be possible and desirable to provide an exclusive lane for right-turning
evaluated and a decision made about whether a right-turn lane is
needed. Some cases may require additional right-of-way or pavement width. The volume of turning vehicles and the types
of vehicles to be accommodated govern the widths of turning roadways. Always consider pedestrian safety when deciding
whether to add a right-turn lane at intersections. If the right-turn lane is free ow, yield controlled, or if right turn on red is
Turning radii are functions of turning speed and vehicle type. There are three types of designs for right-turning roadways at
intersections: 1) minimum edge of traveled way, 2) design with a corner triangular island, and 3) free-ow design using a simple
radius or compound radii. A detailed discussion is provided in AASHTOs A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
Where pedestrians and bicyclists are present and trucks are only occasionally present, it may be desirable to use smaller turning
radii to decrease the intersection area and reduce turning speeds.
However, the designer should analyze likely turning paths and encroachments when a larger vehicle does use the intersection
d
nsider larger radii to accommodate these road users.
73
Driveway geometrics are also the focus of NCHRP 659 Guide for the Geometric Design of Driveways. The inside and outside turning
radius of design vehicles should also be considered when the corridor being converted is not straight (e.g., the main designated
route that is converted is two legs of an intersection that are at right angles to each other). Pavement marking and corner radii
should be designed in combination to serve the left- and right-turn movement of the design vehicle at these locations.
Roundabouts. A single-lane roundabout can be a good t geometrically as part of a Road Diet installation. A roundabout will
provide additional opportunities for improved safety by eliminating most angle and head-on crash types, and by reducing
intersection operating speeds.
Care should be taken, however, regarding public reaction to installing a Road Diet and roundabout(s) on the same corridor.
Depending on public sentiment, adding a roundabout to the discussion could create additional concerns from nearby residents,
business owners, and road users if they are not familiar with navigating roundabouts.
Bicycle Design Considerations. Where the Road Diet includes on-street bicycle lanes, intersection designs should be modied
accordingly. The bicycle facility should be carried up to and through the intersection. Where right- turn lanes are added, lane
markings will be needed to channelize and separate bicycles from right-turning vehicles. Additional considerations include
provisions for left-turn bicycle movements, use of
Details related to these intersection design features are contained in AASHTOs Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and
NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
Curb Ramp Design. Pedestrian facilities must also accommodate all users, including those with mobility, vision, cognitive and
other impairments. Curb ramps must land within the width of the pedestrian street crossing they serve, and wholly outside the
parallel vehicle travel lane. A distinct curb ramp should be provided for each crossing direction. Where possible, aligning the
sidewalk and the curb, and adding curb extensions are all strategies that aid in being able to achieve two distinct ramps at a
corner that are compliant with the design requirements per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additional guidance on
curb ramp design is available from the Draft Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines. While these guidelines are still in draft
form, they and their successors are considered to be the leading guidance on the subject.
Curb Extensions. On roadways with on-street parking, curb extensions at intersections can be added to shorten pedestrian
crossing distances and make the pedestrian waiting at the corner more visible to drivers. Similarly, it gives the pedestrian a better
is permitted and should be slightly narrower than the parking lane, so that the extension is not bumping out into the traveled
way for either bicyclists or motor vehicles.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 231
39
Other Pedestrian Design Considerations. Intersection design should facilitate safe and convenient crossings. Curb radii
should be kept as low as practical in order to slow vehicle speeds as they turn. The radius will also impact the crossing distance,
making it shorter as the radii get smaller. The addition of on-street parking or bicycle lanes may enable a smaller curb radii at
e
lanes provide. Additional discussion is provided in AASHTOs Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities
and FHWAs Maintaining Pedestrian Facilities.
4.2 Operational Design
The success of a Road Diet cross-section conversion is often based on whether the operation and safety of the roadway are
maintained or improved for all road users. The operational impacts of a Road Diet conversion, as noted in previous chapters, can
be relatively small if properly implemented in an appropriate location (e.g., a four-lane undivided roadway that already operates
similar to a de facto three-lane roadway). Past experiences with this type of conversion, however, have also shown that there
a number of decisions that users of these guidelines may want to consider closely before the design and implementation of a
Road Diet conversion in order to increase its potential success.
This section includes a brief description of some of the factors to consider in decisions related to:
Cross section allocation
Pedestrian crossings
Signalization changes
Transition points
Pavement marking and signing
Intersection design elements.
The list above should not be considered exhaustive. Each corridor will have its own unique issues and needs. Engineering
judgment and expertise need to be applied to each corridor design in order to respond to these situations. In addition, not all
of the situations listed above are applicable to every corridor. The objective of this section, however, is to discuss the subjects
above; note what has been learned in the past about how or why they need to be addressed; and, if applicable, identify some
of the resources that could be used to respond appropriately. This section assumes that the Road Diet conversion option has
already been selected through the input and involvement of all road users, adjacent land owners, and the appropriate public
agencies and jurisdictions.
4.2.1 Cross-Section Allocation
Road Diet conversions typically require the reallocation of the existing curb-to-curb or pavement-edge-to-pavement-edge
distance, and the decision of how to allocate these distances can be complex. In fact, in many cases the Road Diet conversion
option is selected because of its minimal impacts on the general footprint of the roadway and because there is typically no
need for right-of-way acquisition (although spot locations of widening may occur). The reallocation of an existing cross section
should take into account the objectives for the existing corridor as well as the needs of the road users it serves. In addition,
practitioners must choose the type and width of each lane. The lane types along three lane roadways have included, but not
been limited to, through lanes, TWLTLs, bike lanes, transit lanes, and parking lanes. Each corridor that is being converted should
be individually evaluated and designed. Before installation, the TWLTL was used illegally for loading due to lack of other available
space. Seattle DOT added Load Zones on Dexter Avenue in Seattle, Washington, to address delivery truck needs.
In NCHRP Report 282, the authors suggest that there are situations with high left-turn volumes and lower through volumes in
which conversion of a four-lane, undivided roadway to a three-lane cross section might be accomplished without lowering
74
In NCHRP Report 330 the authors suggest an eight-step process to select curb-to-curb cross section
75
design alternatives.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 232
40
4.2.2 Crossing Pedestrians
may result in conicts with motorists who do not expect to see pedestrians in that travel lane. This issue can be mitigated with
pedestrian refuge islands. Pedestrian refuge islands should be used with caution, and care should be taken with their design,
because they introduce a potential obstacle for vehicles in the TWLTL.
Corner or midblock curb bulb outs can reduce the length of the pedestrian crossing, and this may also allow a reduction in
signal timing to serve pedestrians. Care should be taken in the design of the bulb out. Bulb outs should not extend into the path
of a bicyclist and, therefore, are best used in conjunction with on-street parking. Also consider the reduction in turning radius at
intersections if a pedestrian bulb out is installed.
The addition of a pedestrian refuge island at an intersection may also result in the need for more pavement width. There are
a number of other measures that can also be applied to improve the experience of crossing pedestrians. One reference that
includes a discussion of several pedestrian crossing treatments at unsignalized locations is TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562
76
Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (a guideline for pedestrian crossing treatments is in the appendix).Another
77
resource that may be of value is the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. The FHWA
webpage for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety also includes many resources including an article entitled Proven Countermeasures
78
for Pedestrian Safety in the March/April 2012 issue of Public Roads.
4.2.3 Intersection Control Changes
operational analysis to evaluate the acceptability of the potential impacts of the existing and proposed cross section and
signalization on major and minor street vehicle and pedestrian delay and queue lengths. This evaluation should also consider
the potential impact of heavy vehicles. In general, signal timing and phasing, along with the type and number of lanes on all
intersection approaches, may need to be altered to minimize the operational impact of the Road Diet conversion. Specically,
mainline level of service. This could increase side-street delay during those time periods.
It is also important to adjust the positioning of the signal heads for a Road Diet conversion so the signal heads align with the
new lane conguration, and there is a minimum of one signal head in
signalization information in the (MUTCD), particularly Part 4, which focuses on highway
n
the MUTCD. Another document that may be of value to the readers is the FHWA Signalized Intersections Informational Guide. The
FHWA intersection safety website also includes a number of resources.
Experience has indicated that it may not be appropriate to complete a Road Diet conversion when new signalization locations
are needed along the same corridor. This is especially true if a Road Diet conversion is a new option within a jurisdiction. In
general, it is important for the road users to understand what type of delays, if any, may be due to the Road Diet conversion. The
source of additional delays is not clear when a Road Diet conversion is implemented along with new signalization location(s).
Each corridor is unique, however, and the success of a Road Diet conversion is based on the objectives for each roadway. The
two improvements might also be implemented separately (e.g., the signalization could be done before or after the Road Diet
conversion).
Roundabouts can be considered as well. In some cases a mini-roundabout will t within the existing right-of-way and footprint
of the previously stop-controlled or signalized intersection. Roundabouts can provide operational improvements to the
intersection by reducing queues and providing more consistent ow. Additional information is available in NCHRP Report 672,
Roundabouts Informational Guide, 2nd Edition.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 233
41
4.2.4 Pavement Marking and Signing
The signing and markings for a three-lane roadway should follow the requirements and suggestions in the MUTCD. Many of
the parts in the current MUTCD apply to three-lane roadways (e.g., Parts 2, 3, 4, 9). These parts focus on signing (e.g., regulatory,
warning, and guide), pavement markings (e.g., lane lines, edge lines, and the TWLTL), signals, bicycles, and pedestrians. It is
necessary to provide proper pavement markings and signing for, among other things, the TWLTL, right-turn lanes, pedestrian
crossings, and refuge islands.
Pavement markings can also be used to properly position both stopped and turning vehicles so they can safely make turning
maneuvers. The proper positioning (e.g., at a stop line) and turning radius of the design vehicle should be considered. Edge
lines and/or parking space pavement markings may also sometimes be used to position through vehicles. Finally, if a Road Diet
conversion only involves the re-marking of lane lines along an existing roadway cross section, it is extremely important that the
old pavement markings are completely removed. More than one Road Diet conversion has resulted in unintended consequences
and driver confusion because ghost markings (remnants of paint or other material) remained after implementation.
4.2.5 Intersection Design Elements
Intersection design guidance may also be found in the AASHTO Green Book and local or State roadway design guidance
documents. The guidance contained in these documents should be followed when designing a three-lane roadway. Agencies
considering a Road Diet may want to consider several intersecti
The signalization discussion in this chapter noted that timing, phasing, and approach lane arrangements
may need to be adjusted with a Road Diet conversion. Minor street volumes are a critical input to this activity. More generally, the
all minor streets and driveways need to be closely evaluated.
The delay and queuing changes that may occur due to changes in signalization timing and phasing, and the availability of
quantify and compare any additional delays and queues to what is considered acceptable along the corridor of interest. The
delay, safety, and through-vehicle impacts of vehicles backing on to the converted roadway should also be discussed.
Corner Radii. Corner radii and right-turn lanes are both part of intersection design. Right-turn lanes may need to be added
along three-lane roadways at intersections and major driveways. Evaluate the delay impact of vehicles turning right and decide
if a right-turn lane is needed. Some cases may require additional right-of-way or pavement width. Practitioners should consider
the radii or turning radius of the design vehicle at each corridor intersection and driveway. The AASHTO Green Book includes
information about the proper design of turn lanes and corner radii. Driveway geometrics are also the focus of NCHRP 659, Guide
79
for the Geometric Design of Driveways. The inside and outside turning radius of design vehicles should also be considered when
the corridor being converted is not straight (e.g., the main designated route that is converted is two legs of an intersection that
are at right angles to each other). Design pavement markings and corner radii in combination to serve the left- and right-turn
movement of the design vehicle at these locations.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 234
42
concerns may be introduced if there is a signicant amount
through vehicles turn right onto the main roadway, there is a greater possibility that opposing vehicles may want to travel in
situation occurs when one of the minor street vehicles entering
80
the mainline may stop in the TWLTL and negatively impact other vehicles or make another unsafe maneuver.
Figure 24.
Source: FHWA-SA-10-002
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 235
43
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 236
44
Post-implementation evaluation of the Road Diet will determine safety, operational, and livability impacts. Impacts associated
with roadway conversions include the following:
Safety (e.g., crash frequency/type/severity, pedestrian-vehicle conicts)
Travel speeds (e.g., average travel time, mean/85th percentile speeds, percent of vehicles traveling at high speeds)
Arterial level of service, delay, queuing
Intersection operations (e.g., turn delays; v/c ratios; signal operations)
Corridor operations including transit operations and similar, the two-way left-turn lane operations, and the ability to evaluate
Pedestrian and bicycle safety and operations
Economic impact / livability.
81
Specically, the department compares the before-and-after conditions for the following:
Volume of the principal street's peak hour capacity
Speed and collisions
Travel times
Bicycle volumes.
5.1 Safety Analysis of a Road Diet
The process of implementing signicant (and often controversial) changes in roadway geometry such as Road Diets often
incorporates a formal safety evaluation plan to
5.1.1 Data Needs
Practitioners typically use police-reported crashes for periods before and after changes have been implemented to conduct
observational before-and-after studies. Typically a minimum of 3 years of crash data before and after treatment is preferred,
although shorter time periods may be used to assess initial crash outcomes. Crash data can either come from State or local
for vehicle exposure, thus allowing the safety analysis to compute crash rates before and after treatment. Beyond crash studies,
safety analysis can include eld evaluations of pedestrian-vehicle conicts and bicycle-vehicle conicts, in which case the data
needs include well-dened and reliably collected observational measures of road user behavior.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 237
45
82
Two basic types of observational evaluations are used to estimate associated safety impacts:
Before-and-After Studies.
evaluation. An observational before-and-after study requires crash data and volume data from both before and after
implementation. These studies can be conducted for any site where changes have been made; however, if a site was selected
for an improvement because of an unusually high short-term crash frequency, evaluating this site may introduce the regression-
to-the mean (RTM) bias. It is likely that even if no improvement was made, the crash experience would decrease (regress to the
ash countermeasures. Empirical Bayes techniques account for the
83
The Highway Safety Manual has been
developed to assist practitioners and researchers to conduct robust observational before-after studies that provide results to
84
support decision-making.
Cross-Sectional Studies. Cross-sectional studies involve studying a treatment where there are few sites where a treatment
was implemented, but there are many sites that are similar except they do not have the identied treatment. In some cases,
evaluations have been performed only after the fact, and all data were not available for the performance measure during
the before period. In such cases, cross-sectional studies may be necessary. These studies might also be necessary when the
rather than a single value for a CMF. Limitations exist when using a cross-sectional study; for example, condence in the results
may not be high since trends over time are not taken into account, and the inability to account for RTM, which threatens the
validity of the results, especially if treated sites were selected because they were identied as high-crash locations. The Highway
Safety Manual has been developed to assist practitioners and researchers to conduct robust cross-sectional studies.
5.1.2 Observational Before-and-After Studies of Road Diets
This section focuses on observational before-and-after studies, which are most applicable to State and local evaluations of Road
Diet implementations.
as a Road Diet. The change in crash occurrence is estimated from the change in crash frequency between the periods before
and after the implementation of the Road Diet. Before-and-after safety analyses can also consider changes in crash rates,
implementation can include the following:
Change in the annual number of crashes on the corridor
Change in the crash rate per million vehicle miles traveled
Change in the severity of crashes that occur (e.g., percent of crashes that involve either any type of injury, or serious injuries)
Change in certain targeted crash type(s) associated with Road Diet implementation
Sideswipe
Left-turn related
Pedestrian-related or bicycle-related
Right angle
Changes in the number of crashes occurring during the peak-hours.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 238
46
weather, economic conditions), a proper before-and-after study should incorporate an untreated comparison group that is
similar in nature to the treatment group. For a before-and-after evaluation of a Road Diet, the comparison group might be
comprised of one or more similar, untreated (four-lane, undivided) roads located in the same geographic region.
to enable the expected change in safety to be statistically detectable. Four variables impact the sample size requirements:
1. The size of the treatment group, in terms of the number of crashes in the before period
2. The relative duration of the before and after periods
3. The likely crash reduction (CR) value (expected crash reduction or desirable reduction)
4. The size of the comparison group in terms of the number of crashes in the before and after periods.
After the treatment and comparison sites have been identied and the before-and-after crash data assembled, the next step is
to conduct the crash analysis. A number of methodologies and statistical procedures are available to analyze before-and-after
crash data. These range in complexity and ease of use. Note that some basic forms of before-and-after studies (e.g., naïve before/
after, before/after with yoked pairs) are not recommended due to issues with the statistical soundness of results.
Observational Before-and-After Evaluation Using a Comparison Group. Observational before-and-after studies can
incorporate non-treatment sites into the evaluation by using a comparison group (or control sites). A comparison group typically
tes
85
period for both the treated sites and the comparison group.
Safety data analysis statistical techniques are available to address regression-to-the-mean and other limitations of before-and-
after evaluations. Regression-to-the-mean is the natural variation in crash data. If regression-to-the-mean is not accounted for,
the conclusions of a before-and-after study could be erroneous. Many of the methods in the Highway Safety Manual account for
86
corridor.
Empirical Bayes (EB) Before-and-After Safety Evaluation Method. From the Highway Safety Manual, \[This\] method can be
used to compare crash frequencies at a group of sites before and after a treatment is implemented. The EB method explicitly
addresses the regression-to-the-mean issue by incorporating crash information from other but similar sites into the evaluation.
This is done by using a Safety Performance Function (SPF) and weighting the observed crash frequency with the SPF-predicted
87
average crash frequency to obtain an expected average crash frequency. Recommended data include 10-20 sites at which
the treatment has been implemented, 3-5 years of before-installon
mance Functions for the treatment site types.
5.1.3 Surrogate Measures of Safety for Road Diets
In addition to conducting formal safety assessments of Road Diets using data-driven analysis techniques based on pre- and post-
installation crash data, surrogate measures of safety can provide valuable feedback to State and local agencies regarding both
actual and perceived safety outcomes. A surrogate measure of safety can provide information on the level of safety of a location
or system using information other than crash data.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 239
47
o or more road users, at least one of
88
whom takes evasive action such as braking or swerving to avoid a collision.Examples of pedestrians taking evasive action to
avoid crashes include pedestrians jumping back or running out of th
regard to conducting conict analyses for Road Diets, agencies might focus on before-after changes in the numbers/rates of
rear-end conicts, sideswipe conicts, and motor vehicle conicts involving pedestrians and bicyclists.
Speed. Both speed magnitude and speed variability can have an
data, provide information to determine relative safety of the corridor. Because high travel speeds increase the risk of crashes as
well as crash severity, it is important to determine whether Road Diets help to reduce speeding. Likewise, because inconsistent
travel speeds between vehicles can increase the risk of rear-end and sideswipe crashes, it is important to determine whether
Road Diets help to reduce speed variation.
Level of Comfort. Another surrogate measure of safety involves level of comfort, a subjective measure which is especially
applicable for bicyclists and pedestrians for Road Diet projects. The concept of road user comfort in transportation engineering
is not new. For example, the parameters used to establish the minimum horizontal curve radius are the maximum side friction
factor and maximum rate of superelevation. Values for the maximum side friction factor are based on driver comfort, not on
89
physical side friction supply and demand relationships. The result is a signicant margin of safety. With regard to assessing
the level of comfort for Road Diets, options include conducting systematic visual assessments of pedestrian and bicyclist
5.2 Operational Analysis
operations. The general objective of this section will be to discuss ways in which Road Diet operation can be measured.
5.2.1 Analyzing Vehicle Operations
potential changes to determine if there was diversion as a result of a Road Diet installation or if variations from year to year
patterns going back several years should also be examined for longer-term trends.
Level of Service. Evaluate the level of service of arterial segments and intersections. The facility type that carries the most
leverage is based on factors such as signal spacing and segment length. For intersections, the overall LOS should be considered,
but the analysis should also drill down to determine how LOS changes for individual movements at an intersection approach.
Consider the LOS guidelines for each jurisdiction when determining whether a certain level of vehicular LOS degradation is
acceptable. This requires weighing safety benets as well as improved LOS or QOS for pedestrians and bicyclists. Corridor LOS is
generally determined by
Speed. Practitioners should evaluate the actual speed change (if any) as a result of the Road Diet. Data are collected through the
use of before-and-after speed studies using radar, tubes or a pace car. It is important to collect and compare average speed, 85th
percentile speed and speed paces in 10 mph increments. This last group is important to determine if the number of high-end
speeders has been reduced.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 240
48
Two-Way Left-Turn Lane Operation. The addition of a TWLTL will improve operations for through vehicles by removing
e
-
street parking maneuvers, and vehicles stopping for pedestrians crossing the street.
Queue Lengths. This measure is closely related to signalized intersection LOS described above. It may increase due to only one
to be considered so that queues do not extend to the upstream intersection. This may only be a concern for higher volume
corridors with closely spaced signalized intersections. Modeling the before and after conditions can provide guidance as to
expectations relating to vehicle queue lengths. Signalized intersections in the corridor may need to be re-timed to provide
optimal progression.
Trucks, Slow-Moving Vehicles, and Buses. Reducing the number of through lanes from two to one in each direction may
create an impact if there are grade changes or if heavy vehicles such as buses, semi-trucks or farm equipment are present. Bus
stop placement and the transit policy for whether or not to stop in-lane is also a consideration for Road Diet operation. Give
special consideration to these heavy vehicles driving through a corridor and also using the Road Diet corridor circulation to side
streets. This is described further in the section below.
. The Road Diet may make it easier for larger vehicles to make right turns with small curb radii by increasing the
s
an issue. The land use type and demand for smaller single unit type vehicles should also be considered.
5.2.2 Non-Motorized Operations
Non-motorized operations can be measured with respect to pedestrian accessibility and bicyclist use along the corridor. Three
90, 91, 92
studies reported increased bicycle and pedestrian usage along the corridor after a Road Diet conversion.
Pedestrian Wait Time. Study the wait time for pedestrians crossing at unsignalized intersections and pedestrian comfort with
crossing the corridor. A before-and-after study of pedestrian crossing behavior can be challenging because many pedestrians
may avoid crossing a four-lane undivided arterial due to the level of discomfort or perceived safety issues. Pedestrians may
choose to cross exclusively at signalized intersections if there are
Vehicle Yield/Stop Compliance Rate for Pedestrians Crossing the Street. The Road Diet eliminates the risk of the multiple
scenario in which the rst vehicle stops for the pedestrian but a vehicle in the second adjacent lane does not or fails to see the
pedestrian in enough time to stop. The prevalence of this problem can be measured in the before and after conditions.
Increased Bicyclist and Pedestrian Volumes. Pedestrians and bicyclists may avoid traveling on a four-lane undivided arterial
due to discomfort or perceived safety concerns with no dedicated bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities. They may switch to a
street that has been recongured due to increased comfort or perception of improved safety that clearly delineated bicycle lanes
and pedestrian facilities (e.g., sidewalks, fewer lanes to cross, or pedestrian refuge islands) can provide.
form of either a painted barrier between the bike lane and the vehicle lane, a raised barrier, or, in some cases, by placing the bike
lane against the curb and placing the parking lane between the bike lane and the vehicle through lane.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 241
49
5.2.3 Tools and Methods to Evaluate Impacts
Input Requirements.
by direction, and operating speed information. If these volumes have been observed to create delay in the before condition,
at driveways. The physical characteristics and complexity of
corridor determine how detailed the analysis should be; some corridors may only require corridor analysis while others will need
along the corridor, transit operations, and the number of access
points will all help determine whether the analysis procedures presented in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual
whether a macro- (such as Synchro) or micro-level computer simulation (such as VISSIM) is needed to determine the projected
outcome of a Road Diet.
Output Provided. The output provided will depend on the tool used for analysis. The factors to consider depend on the type of
analysis and the questions posed.
Complexities with Analyzing Three-lane Sections. The intersection analysis should be straightforward, but practitioners
must ensure eld conditions are accurately analyzed between signalized intersections, too. Some of the factors to consider are
parallel parking maneuvers using a through lane, buses maneuvering into and out of a bus stop (whether it is along the curb or
in the lane), left-turning vehicles (from stopping in the through lane to slowing to enter the two-way, left-turn lane), cross-street
helpful
to observe the corridor operating conditions in the four-lane, undivided conguration to determine a baseline condition and
see where existing conict points are and what causes them prior to evaluating the corridor in the after condition to determine
how overall conditions have changed.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 242
50
6 Conclusion
The most common Road Diet involves converting an existing four-lane, undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment
consisting of two through lanes and a center two-way, left-turn lane (TWLTL). Road Diets can be used to address safety concerns
is shared by high-speed and left-turning vehicles. The reduction of lanes allows the roadway cross section to be reallocated for
90
other uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, or parking.
to create on-street parking, bike lanes, or transit stops. Based on the history of safety studies presented in this guide, practitioners
can expect a crash reduction of 19 to 47 percent after installing a Road Diet. Variables include pre-installation crash history,
installation details, and the urban or rural nature of the corridor.
When planning for or designing a Road Diet, it is important to be aware of the opportunities and potential drawbacks that
one type of treatment may have on other travel modes. When deciding whether a particular element is appropriate for an
individual street, or whether a Road Diet in general is appropriate, the surrounding context should be taken into consideration,
including the extended roadway network. Each decision will have to be made on a case-by-case basis and will depend on the
desired operation of the street in question. Consider coordinating with non-motorized advocacy groups, transit agencies, freight
stakeholders, and emergency responders as necessary to understand their needs through the design of a Road Diet. Common
feasibility factors include the following:
The need for improved safety for all road users
A desire to incorporate context sensitive solutions and Complete Streets features
Operational considerations, such as:
o Whether the existing roadway operates as a de facto three-lane roadway
o Multimodal level of service
o Peak hour volumes and peak direction
o Turning volumes and patterns
o The presence of slow-moving or frequently stopping vehicles, such as transit, curb-side mail delivery, and others
A desire to better accommodate bicycles, pedestrians, and transit service
Right-of-Way availability and cost
The existence of parallel roadways, parallel parking, and at-grade railroad crossings.
Public outreach, public relations, and political considerations.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 243
51
Geometric and operational design features are important during the design of a Road Diet reconguration. Geometric design
includes identifying details of the project in plan, prole, and cross-section. Important issues include overarching principles of
design, design controls, design elements, cross-section design, intersection design, and consideration for all road users. The
following list represents just a few of the geometric design considerations one should consider during the Road Diet design
phase:
Road functional classication
Design vehicles, driver characteristics, and presence of non-motorized users
Corridor sight distance, grade, horizontal curvature, and superelevation
Cross-sectional elements, such as lane widths, cross slope, presence of curbs or shoulders, access management, and
presence of on-street parking or bus turnouts
Intersection design elements, such as alignment and prole of intersection approaches and intersection sight distance.
Practitioners must make a number of operational decisions as well, including cross-section allocation, pedestrian
accommodations, signalization changes, transition points, and pavement marking and signing. As with any roadway treatment,
data analysis and engineering judgment are required to determine whether a Road Diet is the most appropriate alternative in a
given situation.
of the Road Diet. This typically occurs through studying pre-
and post-installation crash data, operating speeds, and operational level of service. Additional tools and methods, both specic
and general, should be used to evaluate conversion impacts, including the following:
Safety (e.g., crash frequency/type/severity, pedestrian-vehicle conicts)
Travel speeds (e.g., average travel time, mean/85th percentile speeds, percent of vehicles traveling at high speeds)
Arterial level of service, delay, queuing
Intersection operations (e.g., turn delays; volume/capacity ratios; signal operations)
Corridor operations including transit operations and similar, the two-way left-turn lane operations, and the ability to evaluate
Pedestrian and bicycle safety and operations
Economic impact / livability.
In conclusion, a Road Diet can be a low-cost safety solution when the installation is coordinated with scheduled pavement
marking modications or planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects. Road Diets have the potential
to incorporate non-motorized users when applied at the most
appropriate locations.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 244
52
Appendix A Road Diet Safety Assessment Studies
The following table provides an overview of recent Road Diet sa
volume, and key safety results. Following that are synopses for each reference.
ReferenceTreatment SitesADTKey Safety Results
FHWA, 201045 sites in California, Iowa, and 3,718 to 26,376Iowa data: 47% reduction in total
Washingtoncrashes
California and Washington data: 19%
reduction in total crashes
Combined data: 29% reduction in total
crashes
Noyce et al., 20067 treatment sites throughout Minnesota8,900 to 17,400Traditional before-after approach: 42-
43% reduction in crashes.
Yoked/group comparison analysis: 37%
reduction in total crashes and 47%
reduction in crash rates.
EB approach: 44% reduction in total
crashes.
Pawlovich et al., 200615 treatment sites throughout Iowa4,766 to 13,69525.2% reduction in crash frequency per
mile; 18.8% reduction in crash rate.
Li and Carriquiry, 200515 treatment sites throughout Iowa3,007 to 15,33329% reduction in the frequency of
crashes per mile; 18% reduction in the
crash rate.
Huang et al., 200312 treatment sites in California and 10,179 to 16,0706% reduction in total crashes relative to
Washingtoncontrol; no reduction in crash rate.
Lyles et al., 201224 treatment sites throughout Michigan3,510 to 17,0209% reduction in total crashes (non-
signicant).
Stout, 200511 to 15 treatment sites in various Iowa 2,000 to 17,40021 to 38 percent reduction in total
citiescrashes; similar reduction in crash rates.
Stout et al., 2005
Stout (year unknown)
Clark, 2001One treatment site in Athens-Clarke 18,000 to 20,00052.9% reduction in total crashes; 51.1%
County, GAreduction in crash rate (rst 6 months).
City of Orlando, 2002One treatment site in Orlando, FL18,000 to 20,00034% reduction in crash rate; 68%
reduction in injury rate (rst 4 months).
Preston, 1999Minnesota Not Provided27% lower crash rate on three-lane roads
than on four-lane undivided roadways
(cross-sectional comparison not a
before-after study)
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 245
53
The table below provides additional details for these Road Diet safety assessments.
ReferenceFHWA. 2010. Evaluation of Lane Reduction Road Diet Measures on Crashes. FHWA Report No. FHWA-
HRT-10-053.
Location 45 treatment sites in California, Iowa, and Washington
ADT3,718 26,376
Safety Analysis MethodThe empirical Bayes (EB) methodology was used to estimate the change in total crashes.
treatment in both data sets and when the results are combined. The Iowa data indicate a 47% reduction in
total crashes while the California and Washington data indicate a 19% decrease. Combining both data sets
results in a 29% reduction in total crashes.
CommentsThis is arguably the strongest crash-based evaluations of Road Diet implementation.
much larger reference group than was used in the original study, and the re-analysis provided more weight
to longer sites (while the original study weighted all treatment sites equally regardless of length).
characteristics of the urban environments where the Road Diets were implemented. AADT for the IA sites
ranged from 3,718 to 13,908 and were predominately on U.S. or State routes passing through small towns;
AADT for the sites in CA and WA ranged from 6,194 to 26,376 and were predominately on corridors in
suburban environments that surrounded larger cities.
possibility of diminishing safety
The authors recommended that the choice of which CRF to use should be based on characteristics of the
site being considered. If the proposed treatment site is more like the small-town Iowa sites, then the 47%
reduction found in IA should be used. If the treatment site is part of a corridor in a suburban area of a larger
city, then the 19% reduction should be used. If the proposed site matches neither of these site types, then
the combined 29% reduction is most appropriate.
ReferenceNoyce, D.A.; Talada, V.; and Gates T.J. 2006. Safety and Operational Characteristics of Two-Way Left-Turn
Lanes. Minnesota DOT Report No. MN/RC 2006-25.
Location 7 treatment sites throughout Minnesota
ADT8,900 17,400
Safety Analysis MethodCrash data were rst analyzed using traditional approaches involving a comparison of the before and after
crashes. Crash data were also analyzed by yoked/group comparison analysis and the empirical Bayes (EB)
approach.
estimated a reduction in total crashes between 42 and 43%.
A yoked/group comparison analysis found a 37% reduction in total crashes and a 46% reduction in PDO
crashes (both statistically signicant). The reductions in crash rates (per vehicle mile traveled) were 47% for
total crashes and 45% for PDO crashes (both statistically signicant).
The empirical Bayes (EB) approach estimated a 44% reduction in total crashes.
CommentsThis is one of the stronger crash-based evaluations of Road Diet implementation, although the number of
treatment sites (7) is small. One limitation of the authors use of the empirical Bayes (EB) approach involves
the relatively small group of reference sites (17). By comparison, the EB analysis by FHWA (2010) summarized
296 reference sites.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 246
54
ReferencePawlovich, M.D.; Li, W.; Carriquiry, A.; and Welch, T.M. 2006. Iowas Experience with Road Diet Measures:
Impacts on Crash Frequencies and Crash Rates Assessed Following a Bayesian Approach. TR Record Issue
Number 1953
Location 15 treatment sites throughout Iowa
ADT4,766 to 13,695
Safety Analysis MethodA before-and-after study implemented from
study used both monthly crash data and estimated volumes over 23 years (1982 to 2004). Crash data were
analyzed at each site before and after the conversions were completed.
20.0%) reduction in crash rate. The values in parentheses represent the 95% condence interval.
CommentsThis is a relatively strong crash-based evaluation of Road Diet implementation. The methodology is a
renement from the 2005 study by Li and Carriquiry.
Unlike the use of linear regression models to estimate expected crash frequencies, this study allowed
er periods by including a change-point in the model
and for the interaction of treatment and slope. As a result, the model allows for a slight increase in crash
frequency during the months immediately preceding and following the conversion.
The number of comparison sites (15) is much smaller than the number of reference sites (296) used in the EB
analysis performed by FHWA (2010).
Reference
and Crash Rates in Iowa Roads. Department of Statistics,
Iowa State University.
Location 15 treatment sites throughout Iowa
ADT3,007 15,333
the four to three lane conversion by comparing the average
expected annual crash frequency per mile during years preceding and following the conversion at the site
level and also as an average over all sites in each of the two groups (Road Diets and comparison sites).
p
continues to decrease faster than the number at the corresponding paired site in the control group.
For all treatment sites combined, the frequency of crashes per mile decreased an estimated 34.8%, from 23
pre-treatment to 15 post-treatment, whereas the crash frequency per mile for control sites decreased 6.2%,
from 16 pre to 15 post. This would suggest an estimated 29% net reduction in the frequency of crashes per
mile associated with the Road Diet treatments.
For all treatment sites combined, the annual crash rate per 100MVMT decreased an estimated 43.9%, from
792 pre-treatment to 442 post, whereas the crash rate for control sites decreased 25.5%, from 652 pre to 486
post. This would suggest an estimated 18% net reduction in the crash rate per 100MVMT associated with
the Road Diet treatments.
CommentsWhile the results suggest that tr
lanes, there was signicant variability in crash numbers across sites. It is not clear how much of an impact
the wide range in ADT (3,007 15,333) had on the overall safety analysis. The suitability of the control sites
may be questionable given markedly lower crash frequencies and crash rates at the control sites compared
with the treatment sites, pre-intervention.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 247
55
ReferenceHuang, H.; Stewart, J. R.; Zegeer, C.; and Tan Esse; C. 2003. How Much Do You Lose When Your Road Goes on
a Diet? Submitted to the 2nd Urban Street Symposium.
Location 12 treatment sites in California and Washington
ADT10,179 to 16,070 pre-conversion
Safety Analysis MethodThe authors conducted before-and-after analysis using a yoked comparison study of the Road Diet and
comparison sites. Further analysis used a negative binomial model controlling for possible changes in ADT,
study period, and other factors.
riod
declined by about 6%. Crash rates, however, did not change signicantly from the before period to the
after period.
CommentsAlthough the authors identied 30 Road Diets and 50 comparison sites in 8 cities, it is unclear why only
12 treatment sites and 25 comparison sites were included in this paper. ADTs were not available for some
treatment and comparison sites, and some of the ADTs were of questionable accuracy. The selection of
comparison sites is a key function of the yoked comparison study design, and little information is provided
regarding the criteria used to select comparison sites.
ReferenceLyles, R.; Siddiqui, M.A.; Taylor, W.; Malik, B.; Siviy, G.; and Haan, T. 2012. Safety and Operational Analysis of four-
lane to three-lane Conversions (Road Diets) in Michigan. Michigan DOT Report Number RC-1555
Location 24 treatment sites throughout Michigan
ADT3,510 17,020
Safety Analysis MethodSimple before-and-after crash analysis adjusted for trends of an untreated comparison group.
overall naïve (unadjusted) CMF was estimated as 0.63, and 0.91 after adjustment. While the best estimate of
importantly, there is a great deal of variation from site to site.
CommentsThe analysis was limited by the fact that good/acceptable comparison sites could be identied for only a
few of the 24 sites. The authors caution that Road Diets should not be oversold with respect to expected
benets, especially safety benets. Actual benets of a Road Diet can vary signicantly by site.
ReferenceStout, T.B. 2005. Before and After Study of Some Impacts of Four-lane to Three-lane Roadway Conversions.
Unpublished paper: Iowa State University.
Stout, T.B; Pawlovich, M.; Souleyrette, R.R.; and Carriquiry, A. 2005. Safety Impacts of Road Diets in Iowa.
Unpublished paper: Iowa State University.
Stout, T.B. Year unknown. Matched Pair Safety Analysis of Four-Lane to Three-Lane Roadway Conversions In
Iowa. Unpublished paper: Iowa State University.
Location Various Iowa cities
ADT 2,000 17,400
Safety Analysis MethodBefore-and-after study using yoked comparison pairs and a comparison to the cities in which the sites were
located.
,
with some additional locations added with the passage of time. The studies reported reductions in crash
frequency that ranged from 21 to 38 percent. The studies reported somewhat similar reductions in crash
Comments
segments than was found between the study segments and the citywide data, which the author(s)
attributed to greater variation in the changes in crashes in the yoked segments. The implied degree of
for the citywide comparisons, and according to the
author, might be an artifact of the selection of the yoked segments.
signicance were provided.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 248
56
ReferenceClark, D.E. 2001. Road Diets: Athens-Clarke Countys Experience in Converting Four-lane Roadways into
Three-lane Roadways. Washington DC. Proceedings of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Annual
Meeting.
Location One treatment site in Athens-Clarke County, GA
ADT18 20K
Safety Analysis MethodSimple before-and-after
treated corridor compared with 85 crashes during the same 6 month period for the previous year. That
corresponds to a 52.9% reduction. Crashes per million vehicles declined 51.1%, from 19.74 to 9.65.
CommentsThe results of this study support other studies that show safety benets associated with Road Diet
implementation, but the relatively short post-intervention period and the lack of robust safety analysis
methodology limit the utility of these ndings.
ReferenceCity of Orlando. 2002. Edgewater Drive Before & After Re-Striping Results. City of Orlando - Transportation
Planning Bureau.
Location One treatment site in Orlando, FL
ADT18 20K
Safety Analysis MethodSimple before-and-after
in lane conguration the annualized crash rate per MVM declined
34%, from 12.6 (for 3 years preceding implementation) to 8.4. The injury rate per MVM declined 68%, from
3.6 to 1.2 (for the same time periods).
CommentsThe results of this study support other studies that show safety benets associated with Road Diet
implementation, but the relatively short post-intervention period and the lack of robust safety analysis
methodology limit the utility of these ndings.
ReferencePreston, H. 1999. Access Management A Synthesis of Research. Report MN/RC REV 1999-21. Minnesota
Department of Transportation.
Location Minnesota
ADTN/A
Safety Analysis MethodThis was not a before-and-after study. The author presents a simple cross-sectional comparison using 1991-
1993 statewide crash data.
ur-lane undivided roads was 6.75 versus a crash rate of 4.96 for
three-lane roads. This comparison suggests that three-lane roads have a crash rate that is 27% lower than
the rate for four-lane undivided roadways.
CommentsThe number of miles of three-lane roads was small 14 miles, versus 299 miles of four-lane undivided roads.
The simple cross-sectional comparison does not take into account many confounding factors such as speed
limits, pedestrian activity, land use, intersection spacing, driveway access, etc.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 249
57
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 250
58
Appendix B Feasibility Determination Factors, Characteristics,
and Sample Evaluative Questions
FactorCharacteristicsSample Evaluative Questions
Roadway Function and Actual, Expected, and Desired Primary What is the primary current, expected, and desired
Environment
Function (Access, Mobility, or a Combination function of the roadway?
of the Two)
Is the roadway primarily a collector or minor arterial
Community Objectives or Goals for the roadway?
Roadway
Does the current roadway primarily operate as a de
Available Right-of-Wayfacto three-lane cross section?
Current and Expected Adjacent Land Use Is the goal for the roadway improvement increased
safety with somewhat lower mobility?
Jurisdictional Plan or Policy for Conversions
Is the right-of-way limited?
Jurisdictional Context Sensitive or Complete
Street Policy Will the adjacent land use remain relatively stable
throughout the design period?
Will the proposed cross section match the desired
function of the roadway?
Will the answers to the above questions remain the
same throughout the design period of the project?
Does the jurisdiction have a plan or policy related to
these types of conversions?
Does the jurisdiction have a context sensitive or
Complete Streets policy that may apply?
Crash Types and Patterns Type of Crashes Can the crashes that are occurring be reduced with a
conversion?
Location of Crashes
Will a reduction in speed and speed variability increase
Number and Location of Pedestrians and
safety?
Bicyclists
Are there safety concerns related to parallel parking
Parallel Parking Needs
maneuvers?
Do pedestrians and bicyclists have safety concerns?
Pedestrian and Bike Number and Location of Pedestrians What is the pedestrian and bicyclist friendliness of the
Activity
roadway?
Number and Location of Bicyclist Use
Do pedestrians and bicyclists have safety concerns?
Characteristics of Pedestrians and Bicyclists
(e.g., Age) Will the addition of a TWLTL assist pedestrians and
bicyclists?
Bicycle and Pedestrian Friendliness of
Roadway
How will pedestrians and bicyclists interact with parallel
parking?
Cross-section Width
Can a bike lane be added after the conversion?
Parallel Parking Need
Bus Stop Locations
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 251
59
FactorCharacteristicsSample Evaluative Questions
Total Daily Volume What is an acceptable increase in minor street or signal-
Level of Service
related delay due to the conversion?
Peak-Hour Volume (Morning/Noon/Evening)
Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 mph or less
Directional Split
acceptable?
Intersection and Arterial Level of Service
What is an acceptable reduction in intersection level of
Side Street and Driveway Vehicle Delay
service?
Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow-Moving
Vehicles
is expected in the design year?
Vehicle Classication
Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed?
Signal Timing or Phasing
Does the current roadway primarily operate as a de
Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays
facto three-lane cross section?
Existence of Turn Lanes
Turning Volumes and Number and Location of Turn Volumes and Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed
Patterns
Access Pointsor optimized?
Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly
enter or exit the roadway?
Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes
Do the access point and intersections need to be
Design of Access Points and Intersections
redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)?
Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow-
Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations?
Moving Vehicles
Does the proposed marking allow the design vehicle
Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay
(e.g., tractor-trailer) to turn properly?
Signal Timing or Phasing
What is an acceptable increase in minor street vehicle
delay and left-turning vehicle delay?
Does the current roadway primarily operate as a de
facto three-lane cross section?
Frequent-Stop and/or Volume, Location, and Time of Frequent-Stop What is the acceptable delay with respect to frequent-
Slow-Moving Vehicles
and/or Slow-Moving Vehiclesstop and/or slow-moving vehicles?
Type, Design (Length, Width, Turning Radius, Can these vehicles turn properly at the access points
etc.) and Speed of Vehiclesand intersections?
Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays Can passing prohibitions be feasibly enforced?
Level of Enforcement for Proper TWLTL Use Are there locations for pull-outs for these vehicles?
(i.e., No Passing Allowed)
Can some or all of the stop locations for the frequent-
stop vehicles be combined?
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 252
60
FactorCharacteristicsSample Evaluative Questions
Weaving, Speed, and Signal Timing or Phasing Does the signal timing or phasing need to be changed
Queues
or optimized?
Number of Existing Lane Changes
How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly
Turn Volume and Location
enter or exit the roadway?
Arterial Travel Speeds and Vehicle Delays
Do the access point and intersections need to be
Level of Enforcement for Proper TWLTL Use
redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)?
(i.e., No Passing Allowed)
Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations?
Number and Location of Turn Volumes and
What is an acceptable increase in minor street and left-
Access Points
turning vehicle delay?
Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes
Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 miles per hour
Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes
or less acceptable?
Design of Access Points and Intersections
What is an acceptable change in queues?
Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow-
Are there safety concerns related to weaving?
Moving Vehicles
Can no passing be enforced?
Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay
Can drivers be educated about proper use of TWLTL?
Queue Length
Is a reduction in speeders and speed variability
Number of Speeders
preferred?
Can all the old markings be completely removed?
Does the current roadway primarily operate as a de
facto three-lane cross section?
Right-of-Way Availability, Available Right-of-Way Is the right-of-way limited?
Cost, and Acquisition
Cost of Right-of-Way Will the cost of right-of-way acquisition be signicant?
Impacts
Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes Do the access point and intersections need to be
redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)?
Design of Access Points and Intersections
Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations?
Number of Properties Needed and
Environmental Impacts (e.g., Tree Removal) What is necessary in the cross section (e.g., bike lane,
parallel parking, etc.)?
Cross Section Width
Parallel Parking Needs
General Characteristics
Parallel Roadways Roadway Network Layout Is a decrease in arterial travel speed of 5 miles per hour
or less acceptable?
Volume and Characteristics of Through
Vehicles Diverted Does the signal timing or phasing need to change or be
optimized?
Impact of Diversion on Parallel Roadways
Will conversion divert through vehicles to parallel
roadways?
What is the impact on the parallel roadway
environment?
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 253
61
FactorCharacteristicsSample Evaluative Questions
Volume and Time of Left Turns Do left turns occur into both minor street and access
Intersections
point approaches at a similar time?
Queue Lengths
Are the left-turn volumes signicant?
Distance between Minor Street Approaches
Will the left-turn volumes produce queues in the
through lanes of a three-lane roadway?
Parallel Parking Parallel Parking Needs Does parallel parking exist?
Number of Parking Maneuvers How many parking maneuvers occur during peak travel
times?
Operational and Safety Impacts of Parallel
Parking What are the safety and delay concerns related to
parallel parking maneuvers?
Design of Existing or Proposed Parallel
Parking Is it possible to design these spaces for easy entry or exit
(i.e., to minimize delay)?
Will it be necessary to reduce the number of parking
spaces?
Does parallel parking reduce the ability of vehicles to
turn in and out of minor streets and access points?
Corner Radii Design of Access Points and Intersections How important is it that right-turning vehicles quickly
enter or exit the roadway?
Number and Location of Turn Volumes and
Access Points Do the access points and intersections need to be
redesigned (e.g., radii, approach slopes, location)?
Peak Time Period of Turn Volumes
Are right-turn lanes needed at particular locations?
Existence of Left-Turn and Right-Turn Lanes
Does the proposed marking allow the design vehicle
Turn Volume of Frequent-Stop or Slow-
(e.g., tractor-trailer) to turn properly?
Moving Vehicles
Do parallel parking spaces need to be removed to allow
Minor Street and Access Point Vehicle Delay
proper turning?
At-Grade Railroad Volume, Location, and Time of Train Crossing Do trains cross during peak travel periods?
Crossing
Length of Crossing Train What is the typical delay from a train crossing?
Delay Impacts of Train Crossing Is double the current queue length (with four-lane
undivided cross section) at a railroad at-grade crossing
Queue Impacts of Train Crossing
acceptable?
Total Daily Vehicle Volume
Is there a nearby parallel at-grade intersection where
Peak-Hour Vehicle Volume (Morning/Noon/
impacts may need to be mitigated?
Evening)
Directional Split of Vehicles
Adapted from Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 254
62
References
1. FHWA, Proven Safety Countermeasures web page. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/index.htm
2. FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Road Diet (Roadway Reconguration), FHWA-SA-12-013 (Washington, DC: 2012).
Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa_sa_12_013.htm
3. Stamatiadis, N et al. Guidelines for Road Diet Conversions. 2011.
Available at: http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/guidelines_for_road_diet_conversion_stamatiadis.pdf
4. Rosales, J., Road Diet Handbook: Setting Trends for Livable Streets, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2006.
5. Rosales, 2006.
6. Harwood, D.W. NCHRP 282: Multilane Design Alternatives for Improving Suburban Highways, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, March 1986).
7. Knapp, K., T. Welch, J. Witmer. Converting Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to a Three-Lane Cross Section: Factors to Consider.
8. Nemeth, Z.A., Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes: State-of-the-Art Overview and Implementation Guide. Transportation Research Record 681 (1978): 62-69.
9. Pawlovich, M., W. Li, A. Carriquiry, and T. Welch, Iowas Experience with Road Diet Measures: Impacts on Crash Frequencies and Crash Rates Assessed
Following a Bayesian Approach, 2005.
10. Harkey, D., R. Srinivasan, J. Baek, NCHRP 617: . (Transportation Research Board:
Washington, DC, 2008). Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_617.pdf
11. FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Road Diet (Roadway Reconguration), FHWA-SA-12-013 (Washington, DC: 2012).
Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa_sa_12_013.htm
12. FHWA Evaluation of Lane Reduction Road Diet Measures on Crashes. FHWA Report No. FHWA-HRT-10-053. (Washington, D.C: 2010)
13. Stout, Thomas B., Before and After Study of Some Impacts of 4-Lane to 3-Lane Roadway Conversions. March 2005.
14. FHWA, Pedestrian Facilities Users Guide Providing Safety and Mobility. FHWA-RD-01-102 (Washington, DC: 2001).
Available at http://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/PedFacility_UserGuide2002.pdf
15. FHWA, Safelled Locations: Executive Summary and Recommended Guidelines, FHWA-RD-01-075
(Washington, DC: 2001).
Accident Analysis and Prevention 21: 435 444.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/
18. FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures, Median and Pedestrian Crossing Islands in Urban and Suburban Areas, Washington, DC, 2012.
19. Welch, T. The Conversion of Four Lane Undivided Urban Roadways to Three Lane Facilities. 1999.
20. Knapp, K., K. Giese, Guidelines for the Conversion of Urban Four-Lane Undivided Roadways to Three-Lane Two-Way Left-Turn Lane Facilities, 2001.
21. FHWA, Context Sensitive Solutions web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/what.cfm
22. FHWA, Principles of Context Sensitive Design web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/qualities.cfm
23. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999.
24. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999.
25. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 66.
26. Gates, T., et al., , 2007, pp. 65-66.
27. City of Orlando, Edgewater Drive Before & After Re-Striping Results, 2002, p. 2.
28. Gates et al., 2007, pp. 69.
29. Gates et al., 2007, pp. 67.
30. Chu, X. and M. Baltes, Measuring Pedestrian Quality of Service of Midblock Street Crossings, Paper No. 03-5045, Transportation Research Record 1828
(2004): 89-97.
31. McLeod, D.S. Multimodal Arterial Level of Service, Transportation Research Circular E-C018 (2000): 221-233.
32. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Highway Capacity Manual (Washington, D.C.: 2010), p. 16-7.
33. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 39.
34. Knapp and Giese, 2001, p. 51.
35. Stamatiadis et al., 2011, p. 29.
36. Gates, T., D. Noyce, V. Talada, L. Hill, Safety and Operational Characteristics of Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes, 2006, p. 25.
37. Knapp, K., K. Giese, and W. Lee, Urban Four-Lane Undivided to Three-Lane Roadway Conversion Guidelines, 2003.
38. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999.
39. Knapp, Welch, and Witmer, 1999.
40. Knapp, Giese, and Lee, 2003.
41. The League of American Bicyclists, Road Diets Now Proven Safety Measure; Q&A with FHWA Associate Administrator Furst, News from the League,
February 6, 2012. Available at: http://www.bikeleague.org/content/road-diets-now-proven-safety-measure-qa-fhwa-associate-administrator-furst
42. Rosales, 2006.
43. New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, "Complete Streets Fact Sheet," New York, 2012.
44. New York State Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, "Complete Streets Fact Sheet 2.0," New York, 2014.
45. Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. Regional Road Diet Analysis Feasibility Assessment. 2008.
46. Tan, C., Going on a Road Diet, Public Roads, Sept/Oct 2011.
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 255
63
47. In-person meeting with Tracie Leix, P.E., Safety Programs Unit Manager, Michigan Department of Transportation. March 20, 2013.
49. Interview with Andrew Kilpatrick, Transportation Engineer, City of Lansing, Michigan, March 22, 2013.
50. Research team interview with Derek Bradshaw and Jason Nordberg, Genesee County Metropolitan Planning Commission, Michigan. March 21, 2013.
51. FHWA, Flexibility in Highway Design. (Washington, DC: 2012)
52. AASHTO, A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, 1st Edition, 2004.
53. FHWA, Memorandum: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility, August 20, 2013.
Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_exibility.cfm
54. New Jersey Department of Transportation and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Smart Transportation Guidebook: Planning and Designing
Highways and Streets that Support Sustainable and Livable Communities, 2008.
Available at: http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/mobility/pdf/smarttransportationguidebook2008.pdf
55. AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition, 2011.
56. Gattis, J.L. et al., NCHRP Report 659: Guide for the Geometric Design of Driveways, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2012).
57. FHWA, Users Guide to Positive Guidance, 3rd Edition, (Washington, DC: 1990).
58. Campbell, J., et al, NCHRP Report 600: Human Factors Guidelines for Road Systems, Second Edition, (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 2012).
59. Morena, D., W.S. Wainwright, and F. Ranck, Older Drivers at a Crossroads, Public Roads, FHWA-HRT-2007-002, Vol. 70, No. 4, January/February 2007.
60. AASHTO, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition, 2012.
61. FHWA, Memorandum: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility, August 20, 2013.
Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design_exibility.cfm
62. FHWA, Speed Concepts: Informational Guide, FHWA-SA-10-001 (Washington, D.C.: 2009).
63. FHWA, Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections, Washington, DC. 2010.
Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/resources/fhwasa10002/
64. AASHTO, Guide for High-Occupancy (HOV) Facilities, 2004.
65. Texas Department of Transportation, Roadway Design Manual, Section 2.6, 2013.
Available at http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/rdw/cross_sectional_elements.htm#BGBGIBAE
66. AASHTO, Highway Drainage Guidelines, 4th Edition, 2007.
67. AASHTO, Model Drainage Manual, 3rd Edition, 2005.
68. AASHTO, Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st Edition, 2004.
69. The most recent PROWAG is in draft form as of July 2014.
70. AASHTO, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition, 2012.
71. AASTHO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2011.
72. Texas Transportation Institute, TCRP Report 19: Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops, (Transportation Research Board of the National
Academies: Washington, D.C., 1996).
73. Gattis, et al., 2012.
74. Harwood, D. W., NCHRP Report 282: Multilane Design Alternatives for Improving Suburban Highways (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 1986).
75. Harwood, D.W., , (Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, 1990).
76. Fitzpatrick, K. et al., TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings, (Transportation Research Board: Washington,
DC, 2006).
77. AASHTO, Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 1st Edition, 2004.
78. Bartlett, J., B. Graves, and T. Redmon, Proven Countermeasures for Pedestrian Safety, Public Roads, FHWA-HRT-12-003, Vol. 75, No. 5, March/April 2012.
79. Gattis et al., 2012.
80. FHWA, Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections Technical Summary, FHWA-SA-10-002 (Washington, DC: 2002).
81. City of Seattle, WA
82. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Before-and-After Study, Technical Brief, (Washington DC. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2009.
Estimating Safety by the Empirical Bayes Method: A Tutorial, 2002.
Available at: http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=726704
84. AASHTO, Highway Safety Manual, 1st Edition, 2010
85. Hauer, E., Observational Before After Studies in Road Safety. (Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK: 1997).
86. AASHTO, An Introduction to the Highway Safety Manual, 2010.
87. AASHTO, Highway Safety Manual, 1st Edition, 2010
88. FHWA, 1989
89. Porter, R.J., E.T. Donnell, and J.M. Mason, Geometric Design, Speed, and Safety, Transportation Research Record 2309 (2012): 39-47.
90. Rosales, 2006.
91. Harwood, 1986.
92. FHWA, "Context Sensitive Solutions" web page. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/context/what.cfm
93. FHWA, "Proven Safety Countermeasures" web page. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/index.htm
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 256
64
For More Information:
For more information, visit http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/
Rebecca Crowe
rebecca.crowe@dot.gov
804-775-3381
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 257
FHWA-SA-14-028
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE BIKE LANES ON
BROADWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY ANDAUTHORIZING
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDY
RECOMMENDATIONS AS FUNDING ALLOWS THROUGH
FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS
WHEREAS,during the preparationof the 2011 Bikeway Master Plan, the installation of
bike lanes on Broadway was the most frequent request received by staff from the cycling
community; and
WHEREAS,the Urban Core Specific Plan alsoincludes a bike lane on Broadway from C
Street to L Street in its recommendations; and
WHEREAS, during Fiscal Year 2014-15, Council approved funding a Feasibility Study
to further develop viable alternatives and configurations for bike lanes along Broadway. Chen
Ryan and Associations was selected as the consultant to prepare this study in April 2015; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the Consultants’ research and input from City staff and the
public, the following recommendations were made in the study:
C Street to G Street: A five-foot bike lanewith a three-foot buffer on each side of
the street, with a parking lane and a single travel lane in each direction
G Street to L Street: A five-foot bike lane on each side, with two travel lanes and
parking in each direction
L Street to Main Street: A five-foot bike lane on each side, with two travel lanes
in each direction and no on-street parking; and
WHEREAS, the study was presented to the Safety Commission on January 6, 2015 and
they voted unanimously to adopt the Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, that it adopts the Bike Lanes on Broadway Feasibility Study and authorizes the
implementation of the Study recommendations as funding allows through future Capital
Improvement Program projects.
Presented by
_____________________
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 258
Resolution No.
Page 2
Richard A. HopkinsApproved as to form by
Director of Public Works
Glen R. Googins
City Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 259
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0067, Item#: 6.
CONSIDERATIONOFAPPROVINGTHEJULY4,2016INDEPENDENCEDAYFIREWORKS
FESTIVAL AS A CITY-SPONSORED EVENT
RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGTHEJULY
4,2016INDEPENDENCEDAYFIREWORKSFESTIVALASACITY-SPONSOREDEVENTFOR
FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the resolution.
SUMMARY
PerCityCouncildirection,staffresearchedtwooptionsforholdinganIndependenceDayFireworks
showinChulaVista:attheChulaVistaBayfrontandattheU.S.OlympicTrainingCenter(OTC).The
OTCprovidesthebestoptionfor2016becausetheCityisthepermittingauthority,thereisasuitable
locationforlaunchingthefireworksonOTCgrounds,andtheCitycancelebratethe2016Olympics
and the local Olympic athletes with a fantastic fireworks display.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
TheProjectqualifiesforaCategoricalExemptionpursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelinesSection15304Class4(MinorAlterationstoLand)and/orSection15323Class
23 (Normal Operations of Facilities for Public Gatherings).
Environmental Determination
TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedprojectforcompliancewiththe
CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheprojectqualifiesfora
CategoricalExemptionpursuanttoStateCEQAGuidelinesSection15304Class4(MinorAlterations
toLand)and/orSection15323Class23(NormalOperationsofFacilitiesforPublicGatherings)
becauseitisatemporaryeventthatwouldnotinvolvetheremovalofmature,scenictreesorhave
any permanent effects on the environment. Thus, no further environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION
PerCityCouncildirection,staffresearchedtwooptionsforholdinganIndependenceDayFireworks
showinChulaVista:atChulaVistaBayfrontorattheU.S.OlympicTrainingCenter.TheCityof
ChulaVistaisteamingwithLocalMediaSanDiego,aSanDiego-basedbroadcastingcompany,to
producetheIndependenceDayFireworksFestival.InordertoholdfireworksontheBayfrontin2016,
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 260
File#:16-0067, Item#: 6.
theCitywouldhavetopursueextensiveenvironmentalstudies.ThePortofSanDiegoisdeveloping
anEnvironmentalImpactReportthatwouldallowforfireworksontidelandsin2017.Becauseofthe
issuesrelatedtoholdingtheeventontheChulaVistaBayfront,staffworkedwithLocalMediato
pursue the Olympic Training Center location for a festival and fireworks on July 4, 2016.
TheOlympicTrainingCenterwelcomestheopportunitytohostafireworksshowatthefacility.
Additionally,becausethisisanOlympicyear,afireworksshowisanexcellentpromotional
opportunity for the City and the athletes training at the OTC.
LocalMediaoperatesfiveofSanDiegoCounty’stopradiostations:Z90.3,91X,Magic92.5,KFMB-
FM100.7andAM760.LocalMediawillpromotetheIndependenceDayFireworkseventonallofits
stations,holdcommunityfestivalsattheOlympicTrainingCenterandatMountainHawkParkonJuly
4th, as well as sponsor the fireworks show.
ThereturnofanIndependenceDayFireworksshowtoChulaVistain2016willbeagreatevent.
ResidentsandvisitorsalikewillenjoyabeautifuldayattheOlympicTrainingCenterandMountain
HawkPark,listeningtomusicfromlocalradiostationsandcelebratingour2016Olympichopefuls
while showing civic and national pride.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhasdeterminedthattheactioncontemplatedbythisitemisministerial,secretarial,manual,or
clericalinnatureand,assuch,doesnotrequiretheCityCouncilmemberstomakeorparticipatein
makingagovernmentaldecision,pursuanttoCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18704(d)
(1).Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentaconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany
other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.TheIndependence
DayFireworksFestivalsupportstheConnectedCommunityGoalwhichemphasizesactivitiesthat
enrichthecommunity'squalityoflife.TheIndependenceDayFireworksFestivalalsoadvancesthe
EconomicVitalitygoalbypromotingthecityaswellastheOlympicTrainingCenterbybringingnew
and returning visitors to Chula Vista.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
ThereisnocurrentyearfiscalimpactfromapprovingtheIndependenceDayFireworksasaCity-
sponsored event.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
StaffwillrecommendfundingforthiseventaspartofthedevelopmentoftheFY2017budget.Staff
estimatesCitycostswillbe$15,000to$20,000.Ifgrantsand/orsponsorshipsaresecured,this
amount will be reduced.
ATTACHMENTS
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 261
File#:16-0067, Item#: 6.
None
Staff Contact: Olga Berdial
City of Chula VistaPage 3 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 262
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THEJULY 4,2016
INDEPENDENCE DAY FIREWORKS FESTIVAL AS A CITY
SPONSORED EVENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017
WHEREAS, the City Council supports activities that attract residents and visitors
toChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, theIndependence Day Fireworks Festival on July 4, 2016 at the
Chula Vista Olympic Training Center is an event that Chula Vista residents and regional
attendees can enjoy; and
WHEREAS, thisevent willattract residents and participants from throughout the
county and promote shops, restaurants, recreational and cultural activitiesin the City of
Chula Vista; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, that it approves the Independence Day Fireworks Festival as acity sponsored
eventfor Fiscal Year 2016/2017.
Presented byApproved as to form by
Gary HalbertGlen R. Googins
City ManagerCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 263
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0068, Item#: 7.
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING LAKEFEST AS A CITY-SPONSORED EVENT
RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVING
“LAKEFEST”TOBEHELDONMAY14,2016ASACITY-SPONSOREDEVENTFORFISCAL
YEAR2015/2016ANDALLOCATING$10,000INSPECIALEVENTSPONSORSHIPFUNDINGTO
THE EVENT
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the resolution.
SUMMARY
TheCityofChulaVistaiscommittedtoholdingcommunityeventsthatpromotetheCityandattract
residentsandvisitors.TheOfficeofCommunicationsandRecreationDepartmentstaffare
collaboratingwithlocalorganizations,businessesandvolunteerstoholdtheLakeFestMusicFestival
as part of the Chula Vista Community Fun Run on May 14, 2016.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
TheProjectqualifiesforaClass23CategoricalExemptionpursuanttoSection15323(Normal
OperationsofFacilitiesforPublicGatherings)oftheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityActState
Guidelines.
Environmental Determination
TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedprojectforcompliancewiththe
CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheprojectqualifiesforaClass
23CategoricalExemptionpursuanttoSection15323(NormalOperationsofFacilitiesforPublic
Gatherings)oftheStateCEQAGuidelinesbecauseitisatemporaryeventthatwouldnothaveany
permanent effects on the environment. Thus, no further environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION
TheLakeFestMusicFestivalwillcelebratehealthyactivities,funandmusicattheOlympicTraining
Center.TheeventisscheduledforSaturday,May14andwillextendtheChulaVistaCommunityFun
Runwithmusicandentertainment.PertheSpecialEventsSponsorshipPolicy,CouncilmemberJohn
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 2Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 264
File#:16-0068, Item#: 7.
McCann has agreed to serve as the designated “leader” for the LakeFest event.
AftertheFunRun,participantscanspreadoutalongthegrasswiththeirblankets,picnicbasketsand
lawnchairsastheyenjoythefreemusicfestival.TheChulaVistaRecreationDepartmentwillprovide
fun,freeactivitiesforthechildren.OlympicTrainingCenterathleteswillbeonhandtotakephotos
withattendeesandexhibits/foodtruckswilllinetheperimeterofthegrassyarea.Themusicfestival
will include local bands playing upbeat rock, pop, and more. A DJ will “spin” tunes between acts.
TheattachedresolutionapprovesthesponsorshipofLakeFestasthethirdCityofChulaVista
Signatureeventforfiscalyear2016.Staffrecommendsallocatingthe$10,000inremainingfundsfor
City-sponsored Signature Events in fiscal year 2016 to hold the LakeFest event.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhasdeterminedthattheactioncontemplatedbythisitemisministerial,secretarial,manual,or
clericalinnatureand,assuch,doesnotrequiretheCityCouncilmemberstomakeorparticipatein
makingagovernmentaldecision,pursuanttoCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18704(d)
(1).Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentaconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany
other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Thiseventsupports
theConnectedCommunityGoalwhichemphasizesactivitiesliketheLakeFestMusicFestivalto
enrich the community's quality of life.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
Infiscalyear2016,$40,000wasallocatedtosupportCity-sponsoredevents.HarborFest2016
received$15,000andthe2016StarlightParadereceived$15,000.Thereis$10,000remainingin
fiscalyear2016foranotherCity-sponsoredevent.Theseone-timefundswillbeusedtohelpoffset
the cost of the event and therefore, there are no additional appropriations required.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Ongoing funding will be considered as part of the annual budget process.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Staff Contact: Olga Berdial
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 2Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 265
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING LAKEFEST TO BE HELD ON
MAY 14, 2016 AS A CITY SPONSORED EVENT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 AND ALLOCATING $10,000 IN
SPECIAL EVENT SPONSORSHIP FUNDING TO THE
EVENT
WHEREAS, the City Council supports activities that attract residents and visitors
toChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, theLakeFest MusicFestival on May 14, 2016 at the Chula Vista
Olympic Training Center is an event that Chula Vista residents and regional attendees
can enjoy; and
WHEREAS, thisevent willattract residents and participants from throughout the
county and promote recreational and cultural activitiesin the City of Chula Vista; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, that it approves the LakeFest MusicFestival as aCity-sponsored eventfor Fiscal
Year 2015/2016 and authorizes the allocation of $10,000 in special event sponsorship
funds to the event.
Presented byApproved as to form by
Gary HalbertGlen R. Googins
City ManagerCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 266
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0065, Item#: 8.
CONSIDERATIONOFAPPROVINGHARBORFESTANDTHESTARLIGHTPARADEASCITY-
SPONSOREDEVENTS,ANDAPPROVINGTHEFILINGOFANAPPLICATIONANDPOSSIBLE
AGREEMENT FOR A COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT GRANT
A.RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVING
HARBORFEST2016ANDTHE2016STARLIGHTPARADEASCITY-SPONSORED
EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017
B.RESOLUTIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAPPROVINGTHE
FILINGOFANAPPLICATIONFORA$30,000COMMUNITYENHANCEMENTGRANT
FROMTHECOUNTYOFSANDIEGO,APPROVINGARESOLUTIONFORTHEGRANT
APPLICATIONREQUIREDBYTHECOUNTY;AND,SHOULDTHECITYBEAWARDED
GRANTFUNDING,AUTHORIZINGTHECITYMANAGERORDESIGNEETOEXECUTEAN
AGREEMENTANDRELATEDDOCUMENTSBETWEENTHECITYOFCHULAVISTAAND
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THE GRANT
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Council adopt the resolutions.
SUMMARY
TheCityofChulaVistaiscommittedtoholdingcommunityeventsthatpromotetheCityandattract
residentsandvisitors.TheCityiscollaboratingwithlocalorganizations,businesses,agenciesand
volunteerstoholdIndependenceDayFireworksonJuly4,2016,HarborFestonAugust20,2016and
the Starlight Parade December 3, 2016.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Notice
TheProjectqualifiesforaCategoricalExemptionpursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality
ActStateGuidelinesSection15304Class4(MinorAlterationstoLand)and/orSection15323Class
23 (Normal Operations of Facilities for Public Gatherings).
Environmental Determination
TheDirectorofDevelopmentServiceshasreviewedtheproposedprojectforcompliancewiththe
CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)andhasdeterminedthattheprojectqualifiesfora
CategoricalExemptionpursuanttoStateCEQAGuidelinesSection15304Class4(MinorAlterations
toLand)and/orSection15323Class23(NormalOperationsofFacilitiesforPublicGatherings)
becauseitisatemporaryeventthatwouldnotinvolvetheremovalofmature,scenictreesorhave
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 267
File#:16-0065, Item#: 8.
any permanent effects on the environment. Thus, no further environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION
Independence Day Fireworks 2016
ThereturnofanIndependenceDayFireworksshowtoChulaVistain2016willbeagreatsuccess.
ResidentsandvisitorsalikewillenjoyabeautifuldayattheOlympicTrainingCenterandMountain
HawkPark,listeningtomusicfromlocalradiostationsandcelebratingour2016Olympichopefuls
while showing civic and national pride.
HarborFest 2016
TheCityofChulaVistaiscollaboratingwithlocalagenciesandvolunteerstoholdHarborFeston
August20,2016.HarborFestisoneoftheregion’sbiggestsummereventsbringing30,000
participantstoChulaVista;focusingthespotlightonthebeautifulSouthBaywaterfront;and
promotingshops,restaurants,recreationalandculturalactivitiesonPortTidelands.Activitiesinclude
entertainment,aKidsZone,livemusicperformances,aCulinaryFestivalandWineandCraftBeer
Garden, a Cultural Art Celebration, a car and boat show, water activities, and other events.
Starlight Parade 2016
Morethan25,000spectatorsareanticipatedtolineThirdAvenueintheVillagetowatchmorethan
100paradeentriesonDecember3,2016.Frommarchingbandstodancetroopstoflatbedfloatsand
Santaonafiretruck-theStarlightParadebringsthemagicoftheholidaystoChulaVista’shistoric
downtown.TheCitywillagaincollaboratewiththeThirdAvenueVillageAssociationtocreatea
festive day of holiday activities prior to the parade, which begins at 6 p.m.
TheattachedA)ResolutionapprovesthesponsorshipofHarborFest2016andthe2016Starlight
Parade.TheattachedB)Resolutionapprovesthefilingofanapplicationfor$30,000(Independence
DayFireworks-$5,000,HarborFest-$15,000,StarlightParade-$10,000)withtheCountyofSan
Diego for Community Enhancement Program Funding during the County’s 2017 Fiscal Year.
StaffwillidentifyfundsfortheseSpecialEventSponsorshipsaspartofthedevelopmentoftheFY
2017 budget.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhasdeterminedthattheactioncontemplatedbythisitemisministerial,secretarial,manual,or
clericalinnatureand,assuch,doesnotrequiretheCityCouncilmemberstomakeorparticipatein
makingagovernmentaldecision,pursuanttoCaliforniaCodeofRegulationsTitle2,section18704(d)
(1).Consequently,thisitemdoesnotpresentaconflictofinterestunderthePoliticalReformAct
(Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staffisnotindependentlyaware,andhasnotbeeninformedbyanyCityCouncilmember,ofany
other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision maker conflict of interest in this matter.
LINK TO STRATEGIC GOALS
City of Chula VistaPage 2 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 268
File#:16-0065, Item#: 8.
TheCity’sStrategicPlanhasfivemajorgoals:OperationalExcellence,EconomicVitality,Healthy
Community,StrongandSecureNeighborhoodsandaConnectedCommunity.Theseeventssupport
twoStrategicPlangoals.TheIndependenceDayFireworksFestival,HarborFestandtheStarlight
ParadeadvancetheEconomicVitalitygoalbypromotingtheOlympicTrainingCenter,theBayfront
andThirdAvenuebybringingnewandreturningvisitorstoenjoyactivities,shop,anddine;The
ConnectedCommunityGoalemphasizesactivities,likethesethreeeventsastheyenrichthe
community's quality of life.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
ThereisnofiscalimpactfromauthorizingtheCityManagertosignanagreementtoreceive$30,000
ingrantfundingfortheIndependenceDayFireworksFestival,HarborFestandtheStarlightParade
fromtheCountyofSanDiego.Theseone-timefundswillbeusedtohelpoffsetthecostofthe
events.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
ThegrantfundswillhelpfundtheeventsscheduledinFiscalYear2017.AnyGeneralFund
allocationstosupportCity-sponsoredeventswillberecommendedaspartofthedevelopmentofthe
FY2017budget.Thegoalisforeachoftheeventstobecomeself-supportingsignatureevents
promoting the City of Chula Vista.
ATTACHMENTS
County of San Diego Resolution
Staff Contact: Olga Berdial
City of Chula VistaPage 3 of 3Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 269
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 270
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A)RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING HARBORFEST 2016
AND THE 2016 STARLIGHT PARADE AS CITY
SPONSORED EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017
WHEREAS, the City Council supports activities that attract residents and visitors
toChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, HarborFest isanexciting regional festival, focusing the spotlight on
the beautifulSouth Bay waterfront;featuring myriad activities including music and
performances, boat tours, educational, communityand maritime activities, and
numerous booths and events that engage participants throughout the marina; and
WHEREAS, the Starlight Parade is a beloved community event that brings
thousands of people to Chula Vistas Third Avenue Village; attracts more than 100
parade entrants from marching bands, school entries, community entries, and beautiful
floats to promote the holiday season; and
WHEREAS, these community events attract participants from throughout the
county and promote shops, restaurants, recreational and cultural activitiesin the City of
Chula Vista.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, that it approves HarborFest 2016 and the 2016 Starlight Paradeas City-
sponsored eventsfor Fiscal Year 2016/2017.
Presented byApproved as to form by
Gary HalbertGlen R. Googins
City ManagerCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 271
B)RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE
FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR A $30,000
COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT GRANT FROM
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, APPROVING A
RESOLUTIONFOR THE GRANT APPLICATION
REQUIRED BY THE COUNTYAND, SHOULD
THE CITY BE AWARDED GRANT FUNDING,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTEAN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND RELATED
DOCUMENTSFOR THE GRANT.
th
WHEREAS, resuming the tradition of July 4fireworks with an
Independence Day Fireworks Festival at the Chula Vista Olympic Training Center
is an event that Chula Vista residents and regional attendees can enjoy; and
WHEREAS, HarborFest isanexciting regional festival, focusing the
spotlight on the beautifulSouth Bay waterfront;featuring myriad activities
including music and performances, boat tours, educational, communityand
maritime activities, and numerous booths and events that engage participants
throughout the marina; and
WHEREAS, the Starlight Parade is a beloved community event that brings
thousands of people to Chula Vistas Third Avenue Village; attracts more than
100 parade entrants from marching bands, school entries, community entries,
and beautiful floats to promote the holiday season; and
WHEREAS, these community events attract participants from throughout
the county and promote shops, restaurants, recreational and cultural activitiesin
the City of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, each event has activitiesthat will be supported in part from
grants and sponsorships; and
WHEREAS the County of San Diego Community Enhancement Program
provides funding for non-profit corporations or government/public agencies for
certain specified purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista wants to file an application with the
County of San Diego for Community Enhancement Program funding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista, that it approvesthe filing of an application for a $30,000 Community
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 272
Enhancement Grant with the County of San Diego andapprovesthe requisite
Resolution provided by the County, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, should the City be awarded grant funding,
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista authorizes the City Manager or
Designeeto executeanagreement between the City of Chula Vista and the
County of San Diego and Related Documentsfor the grant.
Presented byApproved as to form by
Gary HalbertGlen R. Googins
City ManagerCity Attorney
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 273
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0092, Item#: 9.
RATIFICATIONOFAPPOINTMENTOFVALERIAHERNANDEZTOTHEYOUTHACTION
COUNCIL
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 274
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 275
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 276
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 277
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 278
City of Chula Vista
Staff Report
File#:16-0093, Item#: 10.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Courtney Chase, David Bilby, Simon Silva, Harry Muns, Gary
Halbert, Glen Googins and Kelley Bacon
Employee organization:International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 2180
City of Chula VistaPage 1 of 1Printed on 2/11/2016
powered by Legistar™
ΑΏΐΕȃΏΑȃΐΕ !¦¤£ Packet0 ¦¤ 279