Bridge Street Corridor Study Report

Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Prepared for: Prepared by:

BRIDGE STREET CORRIDOR STUDY REPORT PREPARED FOR: CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CA 93420 PREPARED BY: OMNI-MEANS, LTD. ENGINEERS & PLANNERS 943 RESERVE DRIVE, SUITE 100 ROSEVILLE, CA 95678 916.782.8688 MARCH 2014 25-1275-25 R1831TIA002.DOCX

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Existing Transportation Setting... 3 Identification of Study Locations and Data Collection... 4 City Policies & standards... 7 Existing Conditions... 8 Near-Term Conditions... 10 Bridge Street Bridge Modification Alternatives... 11 Alternative #1 - Maintain Existing Two-Way Bridge... 11 Alternative #2A - Convert Bridge to One-Way Movement (Northbound)... 11 Alternative #2B - Convert Bridge to One-Way Movement (Southbound)... 11 Alternative #3 - Close Bridge to Through Traffic... 11 Near-Term Alternative #1 Conditions... 12 Near-Term Alternative #2A Conditions... 14 Near-Term Alternative #2B Conditions... 17 Near-Term Alternative #3 Conditions... 19 Long-Term Conditions... 21 Long-Term Alternative #1 Conditions... 21 Long-Term Alternative #2A Conditions... 23 Long-Term Alternative #2B Conditions... 25 Long-Term Alternative #3 Conditions... 27 Conclusion... 30 Near-Term Summary... 30 Long-Term Summary... 30 Nelson Street / Traffic Way... 30 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way... 30 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street... 31 Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page i

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map... 2 Figure 2 Existing Intersection Lane Geometrics and Controls... 5 Figure 3 Existing Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 6 Figure 4 Near-Term Alternative #1 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 13 Figure 5 Alternative Intersection Lane Geometrics & Controls... 15 Figure 6 Near-Term Alternative #2A Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 16 Figure 7 Near-Term Alternative #2B Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 18 Figure 8 Near-Term Alternative #3 Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 20 Figure 9 Long-Term Alternative #1 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 22 Figure 10 Long-Term Alternative #2A Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 24 Figure 11 Long-Term Alternative #2B Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 26 Figure 12 Long-Term Alternative #3 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 28 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Existing Intersection LOS... 8 Table 2: Existing Roadway Segment LOS... 8 Table 3: Approved / Pending Projects... 10 Table 4: Near-Term Alternative #1 Intersection LOS... 12 Table 5: Near-Term Alternative #1 Roadway LOS... 14 Table 6: Near-Term Alternative #2A Intersection LOS... 14 Table 7: Near-Term Alternative #2A Roadway LOS... 17 Table 8: Near-Term Alternative #2B Intersection LOS... 17 Table 9: Near-Term Alternative #2B Roadway LOS... 19 Table 10: Near-Term Alternative #3 Intersection LOS... 19 Table 11: Near-Term Alternative #3 Roadway LOS... 21 Table 12: Long-Term Alternative #1 Intersection LOS... 23 Table 13: Long-Term Alternative #1 Roadway LOS... 23 Table 14: Long-Term Alternative #2A Intersection LOS... 25 Table 15: Long-Term Alternative #2A Roadway LOS... 25 Table 16: Long-Term Alternative #2B Intersection LOS... 27 Table 17: Long-Term Alternative #2B Roadway LOS... 27 Table 18: Long-Term Alternative #3 Intersection LOS... 29 Table 19: Long-Term Alternative #3 Roadway LOS... 29 Level of Service Worksheets APPENDIX Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page ii

INTRODUCTION This report provides transportation analysis relating to the Bridge Street corridor, and in particular the Bridge Street Bridge over Arroyo Grande Creek. Figure 1 presents the project vicinity map. This corridor study evaluates four corridor alternatives, including reconstruction or rehabilitation of the existing bridge for two-way traffic, and proposed closure or one-way conversion of the Bridge Street Bridge. The study includes an assessment of existing, near-term (addition of approved / pending projects) and long-term traffic conditions. The Bridge Street corridor alternatives were analyzed as follows: Alternative 1 Maintain two-way traffic on Bridge Street Bridge Alternative 2A Restriction of Bridge Street Bridge to northbound vehicular traffic only Alternative 2B Restriction of Bridge Street Bridge to southbound vehicular traffic only Alternative 3 Closure of Bridge Street Bridge to vehicular traffic The following scenarios were analyzed: Existing Conditions Near Term with Bridge Street Alternative 1 Conditions Near-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 2A Conditions Near-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 2B Conditions Near-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 3 Conditions Long-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 1 Conditions Long-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 2A Conditions Long-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 2B Conditions Long-Term with Bridge Street Alternative 3 Conditions Average vehicular delay estimates for signalized and four way stop controlled intersections, and side street delay conditions for two way stop controlled intersections, along with roadway segment conditions have been included in the study. Typical weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions were analyzed at all selected study locations. Intersection traffic operation conditions were quantified using Trafficware s Synchro Version 8, implementing HCM 2010 (Transportation Research Board) methodology. Appendix A contains a summary of all technical analysis methodologies. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 1

EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SETTING The is an incorporated community located within the Five Cities area of San Luis Obispo County, California. The current population estimate as of 2012 is 17,543 people 1. The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 15 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo, along the US-101 coastal corridor. Bridge Street is located east of US-101 and connects East Branch Street with both Nelson Street and Traffic Way. The area directly surrounding Bridge Street is predominately commercial. East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street is a popular commercial corridor that also includes the City offices, parks and community events. The following roadways provide primary circulation within the study area: East Branch Street extends East Grand Avenue to the east of US-101 and serves as the City s main downtown commercial thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US-101 and SR 227. East Branch Street currently carries ± 18,490 ADT (east of East Branch Street) and includes sidewalks and on street parking on both sides of the street. Traffic Way provides an important connection to US-101 south of Nelson Street to East Branch Street. The roadway runs north/south east of 101 and has four travel lanes and is classified as an arterial. Traffic Way carries ± 13,900 and includes sidewalks and on-street parking along certain sections. Bridge Street is a two-lane north-south local street with approximately 55 right-of-way that connects Branch Street to Traffic Way. Bridge Street currently carries ± 3,544 ADT (south of East Branch Street) and includes sidewalks and on street parking on both sides of the street. Mason Street is a two-lane north-south local street with approximately 55 right-of-way that connects Le Point Street to Allen Street. Mason Street currently carries ± 4,040 ADT (south of East Branch Street) and includes sidewalks and on street parking on both sides of the street. Short Street is a two-lane north-south local street with approximately 55 right-of-way with a discontinuous section between East Branch Street and Nelson Street. A short segment of Short Street connects East Branch Street with Olohan Alley. Short Street includes sidewalks and no on-street parking between East Branch Street and Olohan Alley. South of Arroyo Grande Creek, Short Street has sidewalks and on street parking on both sides of the street. Nelson Street is a two-lane east-west local street with approximately 55' right-of-way and connects Traffic Way with Mason Street. Nelson Street currently carries ± 3,238 ADT and includes sidewalks and on street parking on both sides of the street. 1 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population Estimates Program. Updated Annually. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 3

IDENTIFICATION OF STUDY LOCATIONS AND DATA COLLECTION Transportation study locations are comprised of all existing vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities in the vicinity of Bridge Street that would reasonably be impacted by this project. Vehicular transportation facilities (roadways and intersections) to be included in this study are provided below. To provide a database of existing and future conditions, available relevant transportation related data was collected from the City. This data include traffic counts, existing development, planned development proposals, improvement plans, transit schedules, pedestrian counts, and other data as deemed necessary. Weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement counts were obtained from previous studies in the area, and new counts were taken on February 2014, at the following locations: Intersections: 1. East Branch Street / Traffic Way/Wesley Avenue 2. East Branch Street / Bridge Street 3. East Branch Street / Mason Street 4. Nelson Street / Mason Street 5. Nelson Street / Bridge Street 6. Nelson Street / Traffic Way Roadway Segments: 1. Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St 2. Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3. Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4. E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5. Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St Figure 2 presents the existing intersection lane geometrics and controls. Figures 3 present the existing intersection traffic volumes for weekday AM and PM peak periods. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 4

CITY POLICIES & STANDARDS The General Plan Transportation Element contains the following information relevant to this study: OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Streets and Highways Standards Level of Service CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS) C or better on all streets and controlled intersections. CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS D at a minimum and plan improvement to achieve LOS C (Los E or F unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable construction within a reasonable period of time. Alternative Circulation and Transportation Systems CT3. Maintain and improve existing multi-modal circulation and transportation systems and facilities, to maximize alternatives to new street and highway construction. CT3-1 In cooperation with SCAT and CCAT or other operators, provide for safe and efficient transit system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or disabled persons. CT3-1.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts, park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in connection with new developments. CT3-1.2 The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management. CT3-2 Cooperate with Lucia Mar Unified School District to plan improved school bus transportation system, including parking and loading, maintenance and storage, bike ad sidewalk access facilities. CT3-2.1 Consider shared corporation yard to relocate existing maintenance and storage from residential neighborhoods. CT3-2.2 Program a priority system of school bus routes, stops/shelter, sidewalks and bike lanes to serve schools and parks and link with other transit and alternative transportation. CT3-3 Promote non-motorized bike and pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of the City and linking with regional systems, with priority coordination with school, park, transit and major public facilities. CT3-3.1 Improve bike lanes and sidewalks serving all school, parks, and selected transit and community facilities as priority system, including neighborhood connections in addition to conventional streets. CT3-3.2 Plan and prioritize Village Core and E. Grand Avenue Mixed Use corridor improvements. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 7

CT3-3.3 Update City Bikeway Plan to meet State guidelines to seek increase regional and state funding assistance. CT3-4.4 Plan and prioritize greenway trail network along Arroyo Grande, Tally Ho and Meadow Creeks and linking with other open space or recreational trails within the City and region. EXISTING CONDITIONS Vehicular Traffic Existing AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified utilizing the existing intersection lane geometrics (Figure 2) and control and the existing traffic volumes (Figures 3). Table 1 contains a summary of the existing intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 2. TABLE 1: EXISTING INTERSECTION LOS Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 21.2 C -- 18.5 B -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street TWSC C 15.2 C -- 12.6 B -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 23.6 C -- 16.0 B -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 9.5 A -- 9.1 A -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 9.3 A -- 9.8 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 93.2 F No 25.3 D No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 2: EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 3,544 0.30 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,040 0.34 A C 13,900 0.77 C C 18,490 1.03 F C 3,238 0.27 A Notes: The Traffic on Bridge Street is the average of Tuesday and Wednesday volumes(and not Thursday because construction was going on) at south of Branch Street. As presented in Tables 1 and 2, all of the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable LOS C conditions, or better, with the exception of Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that is operating at unacceptable LOS F conditions during the AM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street is also operating at LOS F. The daily LOS F conditions on E. Branch Street indicate that the facility is approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 8

indicates, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. Microsimulation of E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Although intersection LOS indicates acceptable operations at the intersection of E. Branch Street / Traffic Way, observations in the field indicate that issues currently exist at this location during peak travel times. Specifically, the existing westbound left turn pocket has inadequate storage to support demand for that movement. The queues as identified in the SimTraffic microsimulation analysis of this intersection indicate that they extend about 85 in both the AM and PM peak hours, exceeding the available 55 storage pocket. This queuing analysis confirms field observations and is particularly problematic because when it backs into the westbound through lane, westbound vehicles attempting to travel further west on E. Branch Street are prevented from reaching the intersection. East Branch Street at Bridge Street In considering either the closure or one-way conversion of the Bridge Street Bridge, the lack of westerly circulation creates very circuitous travel pattern options. Additionally, the intersection vehicular delay analysis completed at the intersection of East Branch Street/Bridge Street indicated that unacceptable vehicular delays, and vehicular, pedestrian, and bicyclist safety hazards, would occur with removal of existing left-turn restriction, without signalizing the intersection. Furthermore, the option to signalize this intersection was examined based upon the existing intersection north/south offset between Bridge Street and Nevada Street. With this offset, intersection clearance times and turn limitations may limit safety and benefits of signalization. All approaches would require separate signal phases and drivers would likely experience a minimum 60 second delay whenever reaching the signal, due in part to high pedestrian activity in the vicinity. Therefore it is recommended that Bridge Street and Nevada Street be realigned to form a standard intersection with four opposing approaches. This would require removal of the existing building directly north of Bridge Street on the north side of East Branch Street. Realigning Bridge Street and Nevada Street would provide the ability to signalize the intersection standard vehicular phasing. Currently this intersection meets peak hour signal warrants. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 9

NEAR-TERM CONDITIONS The near-term scenario was derived by adding the approved/pending project generated trips to the existing conditions peak hour traffic. A list of approved/pending projects was provided by the City staff to derive the approved/pending project generated traffic. ITE Trip Generation. Manual, 9 th Edition was utilized to derive the AM and PM peak hour trip rates. The trip distribution was based on the local knowledge and existing traffic travelling pattern. Table 3 contains a summary of the approved/pending projects. TABLE 3: APPROVED / PENDING PROJECTS Daily Trip Unit 1 Rate/Unit 2 AM Peak Hour Trip Rate/Unit PM Peak Hour Trip Rate/Unit Land Use Category (ITE Code) Total In % Out % Total In % Out % Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 12.99 2.09 25% 75% 1.47 64% 36% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 11.63 1.05 25% 75% 1.25 64% 36% Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230 DU 7.74 0.69 17% 83% 0.78 67% 33% General Office Building (710) KSF 25.30 3.31 88% 12% 13.19 17% 83% Shopping Center (820) KSF 176.77 4.53 62% 38% 14.77 48% 52% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 12.44 1.51 25% 75% 1.38 64% 36% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 12.53 1.59 25% 75% 1.39 64% 36% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 13.90 3.95 25% 75% 1.63 64% 36% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 12.85 1.92 25% 75% 1.45 64% 36% Shopping Center (820) KSF 181.80 4.67 62% 38% 15.16 48% 52% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 10.87 0.85 25% 75% 1.13 64% 36% Single Family Detached Housing (210) DU 12.53 1.59 25% 75% 1.39 64% 36% Automobile Sales (841) KSF 32.30 1.92 75% 25% 2.62 40% 60% Quantity AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Daily Trips Project Name (Units) Total In Out Total In Out May St Residential Project 7 91 15 4 11 10 7 4 E. Cherry Ave Residential Project 28 326 29 7 22 35 22 13 415 E. Branch St Townhouses 24 186 16 3 14 19 12 6 415 E. Branch St Office Space 6.5 164 21 19 3 86 15 71 415 E. Branch St Retail Space 6.5 1,149 29 18 11 96 46 50 Huasna Road Residential Project 12 149 18 5 14 17 11 6 Corbett Canyon Residential Project 11 138 17 4 13 15 10 6 250 Ridgeview Way Residential Project 3 42 12 3 9 5 3 2 Pearwood Ave Residential Project 8 103 15 4 12 12 7 4 150 El Camino Real Commercial Project 6 1,091 28 17 11 91 44 47 E. Cherry Ave & Traffic Way Residential 65 707 55 14 41 73 47 26 E. Cherry Ave (Cherry Creek) Residential 11 138 17 4 13 15 10 6 E. Cherry Ave Auto dealership 17 557 33 25 8 45 18 27 Net Approved/Pending Project Trips 4,840 308 127 181 519 251 267 Notes: 1. 1 ksf = 1,000 square feet DU = dwelling unit 2. Trip rates based on ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th edition average rates when equations are not mentioned Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 10

BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE MODIFICATION ALTERNATIVES Three alternative traffic conditions were analyzed in this report regarding potential modifications to the Bridge Street Bridge across Arroyo Grande Creek. Each of these three alternatives is discussed below along with traffic redistribution assumptions associated with each alternative. Alternative #1 - Maintain Existing Two-Way Bridge Alternative #1 assumes that Bridge Street Bridge remains as a fully-accessible northbound and southbound transportation facility. The intersection at Bridge Street & E. Branch Street is assumed to operate with current turning restrictions. The existing bridge over Arroyo Grande Creek could be either rehabilitated or replaced. However, from a traffic operations perspective, overall traffic flows would be similar to those today. Alternative #2A - Convert Bridge to One-Way Movement (Northbound) Alternative 2A assumes that the Bridge Street Bridge is converted to a one-way northbound only facility. The intersection of Bridge Street & E. Branch Street would be realigned and signalized to operate as a full-access intersection. Nevada Street (on north side of E. Branch Street) would be re-aligned to oppose Bridge Street in order to accommodate the full-access configuration. All movements at this intersection would be allowed. The redistribution of traffic under this alternative is summarized as follows: Southbound traffic from E. Branch Street, west of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way Southbound traffic from E. Branch Street, east of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Mason Street and Traffic Way. Two thirds of this traffic was assumed to use Mason Street. Southbound traffic from Olohan Alley parking lots was redistributed to the full-access E. Branch Street/Bridge Street intersection. A portion of northbound traffic previously using Mason Street from Nelson Street, to get to the E. Branch Street corridor, was redirected to Bridge Street and the improved and full-access E. Branch Street intersection. Alternative #2B - Convert Bridge to One-Way Movement (Southbound) Alternative 2B assumes that the Bridge Street Bridge is converted to a one-way southbound only facility. As with Alternative 2A, the intersection of Bridge Street & E. Branch Street would be realigned and signalized to operate as a full-access intersection. Nevada Street (on north side of E. Branch Street) would be re-aligned to oppose Bridge Street in order to accommodate the full-access configuration. All movements at this intersection would be allowed. The redistribution of traffic under this alternative is summarized as follows: Northbound traffic from Bridge Street, south of Nelson Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way and Mason Street. Three fourths of this traffic was assumed to use Traffic Way. Northbound traffic from Nelson Street, west of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way. Northbound traffic from Nelson Street, east of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Mason Street. A portion of southbound traffic previously using Mason Street from E. Branch Street, to get south of the project area, was redirected to Bridge Street via the improved and full-access E. Branch Street intersection. A portion of southbound traffic from Nelson Street and Mason Street, north of E. Branch Street, was redistributed to the improved and full-access E. Branch Street and Bridge Street intersection. Alternative #3 - Close Bridge to Through Traffic Alternative #3 assumes that access on the Bridge Street Bridge is prohibited for both the northbound and southbound traffic over Arroyo Grande Creek. Similar to Alternative #2, the intersection at Bridge Street Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 11

& E. Branch Street would operate as a full-access intersection. Nevada Street (Street on north side, currently offset to the intersection of E. Branch Street and Bridge Street) will be full-access and realigned to be one intersection with Bridge Street under this alternative. All movements at this intersection would be allowed. The redistribution of traffic under this alternative is summarized as follows: Southbound traffic from E. Branch Street, west of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way Southbound traffic from E. Branch Street, east of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Mason Street and Traffic Way. Two thirds of this traffic was assumed to use Mason Street. Northbound traffic from Bridge Street, south of Nelson Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way and Mason Street. Three fourths of this traffic was assumed to use Traffic Way. Northbound traffic from Nelson Street, west of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Traffic Way. Northbound traffic from Nelson Street, east of Bridge Street, was redistributed to Mason Street. Inbound and outbound traffic from Olohan Alley parking lots was redistributed to the full-access E. Branch Street/Bridge Street intersection. NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the existing intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 2, and the Near-Term Alternative #1 traffic volumes contained in Figure 4. Table 4 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 5. TABLE 4: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 INTERSECTION LOS Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.5 C -- 21.7 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street TWSC C 17.0 C -- 14.3 B -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 24.2 C -- 20.6 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.0 A -- 9.7 A -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 9.5 A -- 10.3 B -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 166.4 F No 33.2 D No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 12

1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 5: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 3,840 0.32 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,550 0.38 A C 14,715 0.82 D C 20,690 1.15 F C 3,270 0.27 A As presented in Tables 4 and 5, all of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better under the Near-Term Alternative #1 conditions, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions during the AM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Near-Term Alternative #2A traffic volumes contained in Figure 6. Table 6 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 7. TABLE 6: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.0 C -- 21.6 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 26.6 C -- 22.1 C -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 27.9 C -- 22.6 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.9 B -- 10.6 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 9.7 A -- 10.0 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 112.9 F No 31.2 D No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 14

1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 7: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 1,993 0.17 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,960 0.41 A C 15,581 0.87 D C 19,597 1.09 F C 4,088 0.34 A As presented in Tables 6 and 7, all study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS D in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes, or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Near-Term Alternative #2B traffic volumes contained in Figure 7. Table 8 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 9. TABLE 8: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.2 C -- 20.7 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 22.4 C -- 20.2 C -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 26.5 C -- 20.4 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.0 A -- 10.2 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 8.7 A -- 9.4 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 209.2 F No 42.0 E No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 17

1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 9: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 2,673 0.22 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,368 0.36 A C 15,187 0.84 D C 20,690 1.15 F C 3,724 0.31 A As presented in Tables 8 and 9, all study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS E in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street also continues to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes, or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Near-Term Alternative #3 traffic volumes contained in Figure 8. Table 10 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 11. TABLE 10: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.0 C -- 21.6 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 16.7 B -- 14.4 B -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 26.0 C -- 22.3 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.2 B -- 11.3 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 8.8 A -- 9.0 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 140.5 F No 35.0 D No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 19

1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 11: NEAR-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 437 0.04 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 5,506 0.46 A C 16,682 0.93 E C 19,452 1.08 F C 3,270 0.27 A As presented in Tables 10 and 11, all study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS D in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street also continues to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS E. The intersections of Nelson / Bridge Street and the realigned intersection of E. Branch Street and Bridge Street do not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal these intersections would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed at each of these locations to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes, or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS E conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. LONG-TERM CONDITIONS The long-term scenario was derived by building on the near-term scenario, which incorporated approved/pending projects, by adding background growth as projected by the City s Travel Demand Model. The growth between near-term and long-term conditions is less significant than the growth between existing and near-term conditions. This is due to the fact that there is not a large inventory of vacant land remaining to be developed in the City. Therefore, the addition of approved/pending projects in the near-term condition approaches buildout conditions for the City. The growth increment between near term and long term conditions is therefore representative of some additional infill growth in the project area, rather than large-scale development increases. LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the existing intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 2, and the Long-Term Alternative #1 traffic volumes contained in Figure 9. Table 12 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 13. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 21

TABLE 12: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS PM Peak Hour Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 25.7 C -- 22.6 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street TWSC C 17.6 C -- 14.5 B -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 26.4 C -- 21.2 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.9 B -- 10.8 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 10.2 B -- 10.9 B -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 209.9 F Yes 39.0 E Yes Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 13: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #1 ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 3,990 0.33 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,825 0.40 A C 15,030 0.84 D C 21,055 1.17 F C 3,590 0.30 A As presented in Tables 12 and 13, all of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better under the Long-Term Alternative #1 conditions, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS E in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Long-Term Alternative #2A traffic volumes contained in Figure 10. Table 14 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 15. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 23

TABLE 14: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS PM Peak Hour Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.9 C -- 22.3 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 32.8 C -- 22.1 C -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 27.9 C -- 23.3 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 12.0 B -- 11.1 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 10.4 B -- 10.5 B -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 157.3 F No 36.9 E No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 15: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2A ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 2,090 0.17 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 5,233 0.44 A C 15,817 0.88 D C 20,034 1.11 F C 4,405 0.37 A As presented in Tables 14 and 15, all of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better under the Long-Term Alternative #2A conditions, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS E in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Long-Term Alternative #2B traffic volumes contained in Figure 11. Table 16 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 17. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 25

TABLE 16: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS PM Peak Hour Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 25.0 C -- 21.5 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 24.8 C -- 22.3 C -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 27.7 C -- 21.0 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 10.8 B -- 10.6 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 9.0 A -- 9.7 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 256.2 F Yes 48.3 E Yes Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 17: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #2B ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 2,722 0.23 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 4,823 0.40 A C 15,502 0.86 D C 21,127 1.17 F C 3,860 0.32 A As presented in Tables 16 and 17, all of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better under the Long-Term Alternative #2B conditions, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS E in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS D. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 CONDITIONS AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations for this scenario were quantified utilizing the alternative intersection lane geometrics and control contained in Figure 5, and the Long-Term Alternative #3 traffic volumes contained in Figure 12. Table 18 contains a summary of the intersection LOS conditions, with roadway segment LOS conditions contained in Table 19. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 27

TABLE 18: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 INTERSECTION LOS AM Peak Hour Control Target # Intersection Type 1,2 LOS Delay LOS Met? 3 Delay LOS PM Peak Hour Met? 3 1 E. Branch Street / Traffic Way Signal C 24.9 C -- 22.3 C -- 2 E. Branch Street / Bridge Street Signal C 17.1 B -- 15.9 B -- 3 E. Branch Street / Mason Street Signal C 27.3 C -- 23.1 C -- 4 Nelson Street / Mason Street AWSC C 12.4 B -- 12.0 B -- 5 Nelson Street / Bridge Street AWSC C 9.2 A -- 9.3 A -- 6 Nelson Street / Traffic Way TWSC C 178.3 F No 40.2 E No Notes: 1. TWSC = Two Way Stop Control 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections 3. = Based on California MUTCD 3 1 Bridge St between Traffic Way & E. Branch St TABLE 19: LONG-TERM ALTERNATIVE #3 ROADWAY LOS # Roadway Roadway Type Target LOS ADT Volume V/C LOS C 486 0.04 A 2 Mason St between Nelson St & E. Branch St 3 Traffic Way between Bridge St & E. Branch St 4 E. Branch St between Traffic Way & Mason St 5 Nelson St between Mason St & Bridge St C 5,779 0.48 A C 16,997 0.94 E C 19,889 1.10 F C 4,496 0.37 A As presented in Tables 18 and 19, all of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS C or better under the Long-Term Alternative #2B conditions, with the exception of the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection that would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F conditions in the AM peak hour, and worsen to LOS E in the PM peak hour. The roadway segment of East Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street will also continue to operate at LOS F, and the segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street will worsen to LOS E. The intersection of Nelson and Bridge Street does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants. However, with the installation of a traffic signal the intersection would operate with acceptable LOS conditions. Additional traffic signal warrants should be completed to determine if a signal is warranted based upon safety, pedestrian volumes or 8-hour traffic volumes. The daily LOS F and LOS D conditions on E. Branch Street and Traffic Way indicate that the facilities are approaching typical planning level capacities. However, as the more detailed peak hour intersection traffic operations analysis indicate on these corridors, acceptable conditions would be maintained during the critical peak hours. No improvements are warranted. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 29

CONCLUSION As presented through this report, the closure of or one-way conversion of the Bridge Street Bridge has a redistributive effect on traffic within the City but does not result in changes in LOS letter grades in most cases. That said, there are a few notable changes that occur with the redistribution of traffic as expected by the various alternatives. Near-Term Summary Under all alternatives analyzed in near-term conditions, the intersection of Nelson Street/Bridge Street operates at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour. However, under Alternative #2B, which restricts travel on the Bridge Street Bridge to southbound only, this intersection worsens to LOS E in the PM peak hour, in contrast to LOS D under the other alternatives. Under all alternatives analyzed in the near-term conditions, the roadway segment of E. Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street operates at LOS F. However, under Alternative #3, which closes all vehicular traffic on the Bridge Street Bridge, the roadway segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street worsens to LOS E, in contrast to LOS D under the other alternatives. Long-Term Summary Under all alternatives analyzed in the long-term conditions, the intersection of Nelson Street/Bridge Street operates at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS E in the PM peak hour, although Alternative #2B introduces the most additional delay over Alternative #1. As under near-term conditions, the roadway segment of E. Branch Street between Traffic Way and Mason Street operates at LOS F under all alternatives analyzed in the long-term conditions. However, under Alternative #3, which closes all vehicular traffic on the Bridge Street Bridge, the roadway segment of Traffic Way between Bridge Street and E. Branch Street worsens to LOS E, in contrast to LOS D under the other alternatives. Nelson Street / Traffic Way Under all analysis scenarios this intersection fails during the AM peak hour, and under all scenarios except existing conditions, it operates at LOS D or worse during the PM peak hour. The condition is worsened when Bridge Street Bridge traffic is restricted to southbound only (Alternative #2B), as this alternative introduces the most additional traffic to this location. When Bridge Street Bridge is restricted to northbound only (Alternative #2A), a reduction in traffic at this location is expected, resulting in slightly lower amounts of delay. Under any alternative, the deficiencies at the Nelson Street / Traffic Way intersection can be mitigated with the installation of a traffic signal or construction of a modern roundabout. E. Branch Street / Traffic Way As previously mentioned in the existing conditions analysis, the traffic operations at this intersection are worse than represented in the LOS reports produced by Synchro and HCM-2010 methodologies. However, when a microsimulation was performed, field observations of queue spillback from the short westbound left turn pocket into the westbound through lanes were confirmed. When Bridge Street Bridge is restricted to northbound only (Alternative #2A) or closed to vehicular traffic (Alternative #3), more traffic is added to the westbound left turn movement than when Bridge Street Bridge is restricted to southbound only (Alternative #2B). That said, under all scenarios, the westbound left turn movement, and subsequent queuing, will increase relative to existing or baseline (Alternative #1) conditions. Limited right of way restricts the ability to widen the signalized intersection. Construction of a modern roundabout can mitigate this deficiency. Bridge Street Corridor Study Report Page 30