Page 2

district 3

transportation concept report

Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS About the Transportation Concept Report ...................................................................... ...4

TCR Purpose……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5

Stakeholder Participation ................................................................................................... 5

State and Local Responsibility ............................................................................................ 5

Strategic Management and Performance .......................................................................... 5

State Route 153 Corridor Summary .................................................................................... 5

Key Corridor Issues ............................................................................................................. 5

Economic Drivers and Traffic Generators ........................................................................... 6

State Highway Operational Protection Program (SHOPP) Asset Management………………..6

State Route 153 Segments ………………………………………………………………………….………………...6

State Route 153 Segmentation Map ................................................................................... 7

Concept Facility and Corridor Performance ...................................................................... .8

Data Sources ....................................................................................................................... 9

State Route Segment 1 Summary .................................................................................... 10

State Route Segment 2 Summary .................................................................................... 11

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: SR 153 Segment Map .......................................................................................... 7

Figure 3: SR 153 Segment 1 .............................................................................................. 10

Figure 4: SR 153 Segment 2 .............................................................................................. 11

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: SR 153 System Characteristics and Concept Facilities ....................................... 8-9

Table 2: SR 153 Segment 1 Route Destination & Characteristics ..................................... 10

Table 3: SR 153 Segment 1 Project List ............................................................................. 10

Table 4: SR 153 Segment 2 Route Destination & Characteristics ..................................... 11

Table 5: SR 153 Segment 2 Project List ............................................................................. 11

Page 4

district 3

ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION CONCEPT REPORT

System Planning is the long-range transportation planning process for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The System Planning process fulfills Caltrans’ statutory responsibility as owner/operator of the State Highway System (SHS) (Gov. Code §65086) by evaluating conditions and proposing enhancements to the SHS. Through System Planning, Caltrans focuses on developing an integrated multimodal transportation system that meets Caltrans’ goals of Safety and Health; Stewardship and Efficiency; Sustainability, Livability and Economy; System Performance; and Organizational Excellence.

The System Planning process is primarily composed of four parts: the District System Management and Development Plan (DSMDP), the Transportation Concept Report (TCR), the Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP), and the DSMDP Project List. The district-wide DSMDP is a strategic policy and planning document that focuses on maintaining, operating, managing, and developing the transportation system. The TCR is a planning document that identifies the existing and future route conditions as well as future needs for each route on the SHS. The CSMP is a complex, multi-functional, multi-jurisdictional planning document that identifies future needs within corridors experiencing or expected to experience high levels of congestion. The CSMP serves as a TCR for segments covered by the CSMP. The District System Management Plan (DSMP) Project List is a list of planned and partially programmed transportation projects used to recommend projects for funding.

District 3 System Planning continues its efforts to streamline and expedite short-range to long-range project needs by creating focused documents such as:

The District 3 State Highway Bicycle Facility Plan (SHBFP) is a comprehensive plan that identifies a vision and framework for bicycle facility improvements on the SHS in District 3. It provides information regarding bicycling on the SHS along with recommended changes to improve connectivity and convenience.

The Intelligent Transportation Systems and Operations Plan (ITS/Ops Plan) provides critical guidance to optimize the State Highway System within the District by identifying and managing ITS and other operational strategies that yield a very high return on investment. The ITS/Ops Plan identifies an inventory of prioritized projects and a process for continuously updating the inventory.

The District 3 Goods Movement Study is a district-wide gap analysis of the district goods movement network, proposing methodologies to identify and prioritize freight projects. Findings and recommendations from this study will be incorporated into the forthcoming District 3 Goods Movement Plan, and will inform local, regional, and statewide planning efforts

The district is in the process of developing a Complete Streets Plan which will assess existing conditions and opportunities to identify, prioritize, and implement complete streets enhancements to be included in transportation improvement projects on the SHS corridors.

The District 3 Regional Concept of Transportation Operations (RCTO) Plan was completed in May 2016. This is a strategy document developed by Caltrans and its local and regional partners that articulates the District’s strategic planning approach for major transportation corridors within the District, consistent with the boundaries identified in the District’s CSMPs. The Plan defines Goals and Objectives, Concepts, and Roles and Responsibilities for the United State (US) 50, State Route (SR) 51, Interstate (I)-80, SR 65, I-5, and SR 99 corridors. The Plan proposes short (1-5 years), medium (5-10 years), and long (10-20 years) range concepts related to system management, highway and arterial management, incident management, traveler information, operational improvements, and alternative modes. Specific projects are not proposed in the RCTO, but will guide project proposals in future CSMPs and the ITS/Ops plan.

These System Planning products are also intended as resources for stakeholders, the public, and partner, regional, and local agencies. This TCR includes projects identified in the previously discussed focused documents. For more information and to access all System Planning products, please visit:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/planning/systemplanning.htm.

transportation concept report

Page 5

TCR PURPOSE

California’s State Highway System needs long range planning documents to guide the logical development of transportation systems as required by CA Gov. Code §65086 and as necessitated by the public, stakeholders, and system users. The purpose of the TCR is to evaluate current and projected conditions along the route and communicate the vision for the development of each route in each Caltrans District during a 20-year planning horizon. The TCR is developed with the goals of Safety and Health; Stewardship and Efficiency; Sustainability, Livability and Economy; System Performance; and Organizational Excellence, and meeting community and environmental needs along the corridor through integrated management of the transportation network, including the highway, transit, pedestrian, bicycle, freight, operational improvements and travel demand management components of the corridor.

STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

Stakeholder participation was sought throughout the development of the TCR for SR 153. Outreach efforts involved internal and external stakeholders, tribal governments, and regional and local agencies. During the initial information resource gathering for the TCR, stakeholders were contacted for initial input related to their particular specializations, and to verify data sources used and data accuracy. As the document was finalized, stakeholders were asked to review the document for comments, edits, and for consistency with the intent of existing plans, policies, and procedures. Written comments were received and incorporated into the final document. The process of including and working closely with stakeholders adds value to the TCR, allows for outside input, provides an opportunity for ideas to be reflected in the document, increases credibility, and helps strengthen public support and trust.

STATE AND LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY

Improvements to the SHS are the responsibility of both Caltrans and local agencies. Developments that add cumulative impacts to this route and the regional State Highway System may necessitate that local jurisdictions provide nexus based, proportional fair-share funding for future highway improvements. Developments or local circulation changes that will have significant traffic impacts to the highway should provide improvements to mitigate those impacts.

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE

The Department’s Strategic Management Plan is the road map of Caltrans’ role, expectations, and activities; and includes performance measures to bring about transparency, accountability, sustainability, and innovation. The Plan highlights the Department goals which are: Safety and Health, Stewardship and Efficiency, Sustainability, Livability and Economy, System Performance, and Organizational Excellence.

STATE ROUTE 153 CORRIDOR SUMMARY

SR 153 is California’s shortest State Highway. SR 153 serves primarily as a recreational traffic route near Coloma in El Dorado County. The Route is approximately one-half mile that leads to the historical James Marshall Monument Gold Discovery State Historic Park. SR 153 is classified as a maintenance only route, with rehabilitation projects as needed. Caltrans may pursue relinquishment of this route to El Dorado county since it does not serve as a major interregional travel route.

KEY CORRIDOR ISSUES

Improving accessibility and connectivity for all modes of transportation and maintaining or exceeding the minimum acceptable Level Of Service (LOS) on each corridor segment are key issues for SR 153. These issues can be addressed by implementing targeted on/off-system projects and travel demand management strategies. The projects listed under each segment summary will help to improve performance measures, including LOS which is a tool used to assess free flow of vehicle traffic on road segments. Minimizing conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles by implementing Complete Streets and Context Sensitive projects and strategies, will help to improve multimodal accessibility and increased connectivity along the corridor.SR 153 connects Coloma and James Marshall’s monument. The route does not support any freight transportation/large truck movements since it is a recreational route to the monument and does not connect the major cities nearby.

Page 6

district 3

ECONOMIC DRIVER AND TRAFFIC GENERATORS

SR 153 is California’s shortest State Highway route. SR 153 within District 3 travels through rural areas toward The James Marshall monument. The route operates at a slow speed because it’s a narrow two-lane route used for recrea-tional purposes. Traffic is generated by local visitors that use the route to visit the monument and the Olde Coloma Theater. SR 153 also provides access to two trail heads for recreational purposes where visitors can park and hike to the State Historic Park.

STATE HIGHWAY OPERATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM (SHOPP) ASSET MAN-AGEMENT

Caltrans began implementing a Multi-Objective Decision Analysis (MODA) approach for project prioritization. The MODA framework for project prioritization was first piloted in parallel with the 2014 SHOPP. In the initial pilot effort, the focus was on evaluating if the MODA framework could be effectively applied to SHOPP project evaluation.

The MODA approach is the state of the art practice for multi-criteria decision analysis applied to transportation asset management. The MODA approach allows agencies to evaluate project benefits across multiple assets and competing investment decisions. As applied to the SHOPP, MODA will allow project benefits ranging from condition improvement to safety improvement and sustainability efforts to be evaluated in a common framework. When fully implemented, the MODA project evaluation will provide the following benefits:

The benefits in each of the five Department Strategic Goal areas will be determined at a project level. This will effectively tie SHOPP project prioritization to the broader goals of the Department.

Allow the department to prioritize projects from highest to lowest benefit cost ratio across the entire SHOPP re-gardless of asset composition and will incorporate condition improvement, safety, operations, and sustainability objectives among others.

Ability to measure the benefits of projects that involve multiple objectives and shift our project development cul-ture from one of a largely silo based funding centered on a single objective to more comprehensive transportation solutions. This change in approach will provide the opportunity for greater economies of scale, better local partner coordination and less disruption to traffic.

A byproduct of the MODA implementation is a comprehensive documentation of how projects are prioritized and selected in the SHOPP. This documentation will provide a level of transparency that has been desired by external partners and oversight agencies.

The implementation of asset management will inevitably require business process changes in Caltrans system and pro-ject planning to support the new requirements. In 2015, a number of efforts were initiated to begin the process of defining necessary changes and to develop plans for the implementation of these changes. The Caltrans’ Division of Planning initiated “Planning Forward” and “Planning to Programming” reviews. These consultant assisted reviews take a fresh look at the products of system planning and how these products meet the current needs of Caltrans and exter-nal partners. The Planning to Programming effort is looking at how system planning efforts can better support asset management and project level programming of projects.

STATE ROUTE 153 SEGMENTS

The following pages include a map and summary of each SR 153 segment.

Segment summaries provide a segment overview including route designations, traffic analysis data, existing Trans-portation Management System (TMS) elements, bicycle and pedestrian access, and freight and airport facilities. Infor-mation that covers more than 3 segments is described in the corridor summary. Needed improvement projects for each segment is also discussed and listed in one of three categories—Planned, Programmed, or Conceptual.

A Planned improvement or action is a project in a long-term fiscally constrained plan such as an approved Regional Transportation or Metropolitan Transportation Plan (RTP or MTP), Capital Improvement Plan, or measure.

transportation concept report

Page 7

A Programmed improvement or action is a project listed in a near-term programming document identifying fund-ing amounts by year, such as the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or the State Highway Opera-tions and Protection Program (SHOPP).

A Conceptual improvement or action is a project that is needed to maintain mobility or serve multimodal users, but is not currently included in a fiscally constrained plan and is not currently programmed. Conceptual projects are all fiscally unconstrained projects derived from documents such as local and regional General Plans, and Cal-trans System Planning Documents.

The segment map provides information on the segment location and locations of improvement projects (planned, programmed, and conceptual). The called-out project identification numbers corresponds to the Project Table under the Segment Summary Information section.

ROUTE SEGMENTATION MAP

Figure 1: State Route 153 Segmentation Map

Page 8

district 3

TABLE 1 SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS & CONCEPT FACILITY

Segment County, PM

Existing Facility (BY) Concept Facility- Build Facility (HY)

Facility Type General Purpose

Lanes Lane Miles

Centerline Miles

Designated Lane

Facility Type General Purpose

Lanes Lane Miles Centerline Miles

Designated

1 ELD_0.00/0.12 C 2 0.24 0.12 - C 2 0.24 0.12

2 ELD_0.12/0.55 C 2 0.86 0.43 - C 2 0.86 0.43

PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC DATA

Segment County, PM

Volume Directional Split Volume/Capacity (V/C)

BY No Build (HY) Build (HY) BY No Build (HY) Build (HY) BY No Build (HY)

1 ELD_0.00/0.12 260 312 312 60% 60% 60% 0.11 0.13

2 ELD_0.12/0.55 20 24 24 60% 60% 60% 0.01 0.01

1. 20-Year LOS (No Build)–The LOS that would be expected at 20 years with no improvements. 2. 20-Year Concept LOS-The minimum acceptable LOS over the next 20 years. 3. Facility Type Codes-C = Conventional Highway; E = Expressway; F = Freeway; HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle lanes;

Aux = Auxiliary lanes. 4. Operational Improvements are included in future facilities for all segments. Examples of operational improve-

ments include Traffic Operations Systems improvements and Auxiliary Lanes. 5. Concept Facility-The future roadway with improvements needed in the next 20 years. If LOS “F”, no further deg-

radation of service from existing “F” is acceptable, as indicated by delay performance measurement. 6. Ultimate Facility-The future roadway with improvements needed beyond a 20 year timeframe. 7. Peak Directional Split-The percentage of total traffic in the heaviest traveled direction during the peak hour. 8. Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)-The average number of vehicles per day in both directions. 9. Volume over Capacity (V/C)-The volume of traffic in the Peak Hour compared to the capacity of the roadway.

System Characteristics for Two-Lane Highways Level of Service

Note: For Class I highways, LOS is determined by the worse of ATS-based LOS and PTSF-based LOS.

From: HCM 6th Edition Exhibit 15-3 Three service measures are used to determine vehicle LOS depending on the highway class: ATS – Average Travel Speed. Reflects mobility. The highway segment length divided by the average travel time for vehicles to traverse it during the analysis period.

Class II Class III

Class I Highways Highways Highways

LOS ATS (mi/h) PTSF (%) PTSF (%) PFFS (%)

A >55 ≤35 ≤40 >91.7

B >50-55 >35-50 >40-55 >83.3-91.7

C >45-50 >50-65 >55-70 >75.0-83.3

D >40-45 >65-80 >70-85 >66.7-75.0

E ≤40 >80 >85 ≤66.7

F Demand exceeds capacity

CONCEPT FACILITY, AND CORRIDOR PERFORMANCE

Base Year (BY) = 2015 Horizon Year (HY) = 2035

transportation concept report

Page 9

BASIC SYSTEM OPERATIONS

Concept Facility Ulti-mate Facility- (HY)

Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Level of Service (LOS) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

Centerline Miles Designated

Lane

General Purpose Lane/Facility Type (project to achieve LOS-ultimate

concept)

Base Year (BY)

No Build Horizon

Year (HY) Build (HY) BY

No Build (HY)

Build (HY) Ultimate Concept

BY No Build

(HY) Build (HY)

- 2C 2,000 2,400 2,400 D E E D 240 288 288

- 2C 90 108 108 D D D D 39 46 46

TRUCK TRAFFIC DATA Volume/Capacity (V/C) VMT

No Build (HY) Build (HY) BY No Build (HY) Build (HY) Average Annual Daily

Truck Traffic (AADTT) (BY) Total Trucks (% of

AADT) (BY) 5+ Axle AADTT

(BY) 5+ Axle Total Truck

(% of AADT) (BY)

0.13 31 37 37 71 3.54% 5 0.25%

0.01 9 10 10 4 3.64% 0 0.00%

PTSF – Percent Time Spent Following. The average percentage of time that vehicles must travel in platoons behind slower vehicles due to the inability to pass. PFFS – Percent of Free-Flow Speed. The ability of vehicles to travel at or near the posted speed limit. Two-Lane Highway Class Types: Class I – Speed and delay due to passing restriction are both important to motorists. LOS is defined by ATS and PTSF. Class II – Travel speed not a significant issue to drivers. LOS is defined by PTSF only. Class III – Passing restrictions and high speeds are not a major concern. Drivers travel at or near the speed limit. LOS is defined by PFFS. Two other characteristics that have a significant impact on actual operations and driver perceptions of service: Passing Capacity – The ability to pass is limited by the opposing flow rate and distribution of gaps in that flow. Passing Demand – As platooning and PTSF increase in a given direction, the demand for passing maneuvers increases. LOS A – Motorists experience high operating speeds, little difficulty passing, and platoons of three or more vehicles are rare for Class I highways. Class II highways have a small amount of platooning and speeds are controlled by roadway conditions. For Class III, drivers are able to maintain close to free flow speed (FFS). LOS B – Passing demand and passing capacity are balanced. Some platooning on Class I and II. Some speed reductions on Class I. Class III it is difficult to maintain FFS, but speed reduction is small. LOS C – Most vehicles are traveling in platoons. Noticeable drop in speeds for all three Classes. LOS D – Significant increase in platooning. Passing demand is high for Class I and II. For Class III the drop in FFS speed is significant. LOS E – Demand is approaching capacity. For Class I and II passing is virtually impossible, PTSF is more than 80%, and there is an extreme drop in FFS. For Class III speed is less than two-thirds of the FFS. LOS F – Demand flow in one or both directions exceeds the capacity of the segment. Operating conditions are unstable, and heavy congestion exists on all classes of the two-lane highway.

Definitions summarized from- HCM 6th Edition

DATA SOURCES Base Year ADT, Peak Hour Volumes, and Directional Split = 2015 Caltrans Traffic Volumes on California State High-

ways Book, Base Year & Peak Hour VMT = Calculation based on 2015 Caltrans Traffic Volumes on California State Highways Book

Horizon Year Volumes (AADT and Peak Hour) and VMT (Daily and Peak Hour) based on projected growth from the SACSIM model runs

(Build and No Build) and using the “difference method” Truck Data = 2015 Annual Average Daily Traffic on California State Highway Book LOS & V/C= Used HCS 2010 in conjunction with data from Table 1 Future Directional Split percentages are assumed to be equivalent to the Base Year Directional Split

Page 10

district 3

TABLE 3: SR 153 SEGMENT 1 PROJECT LIST

Project Number

Description PM Location Lead Agency Source Purpose

Total Cost

Estimate*

(x $1,000)

Proposed Completion

Year

Project Category

- No Project - - - - - - - -

SR 153 is known as California’s

shortest state highway. Segment 1 of SR

153 is a two-lane conventional highway

from SR 49 to Cold Springs Road by the

Olde Coloma Theatre. The 2015 Annual

Average Daily Trip (AADT) shows there

are 2,000 total vehicles traveling this

segment annually. The segment is

currently performing at LOS D due to low

average travel speeds with no shoulder

access. The segment is expected to

perform at LOS E in the future horizon

year. No capacity enhancement projects

are planned. Caltrans intends to pursue

relinquishment of this segment in the

future.

TABLE 2: SR 153 SEGMENT 1 ROUTE DESIGNATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS

Freeway &

Expressway

National

Highway

System

Strategic

Highway

Network

Scenic

Highway

Interregional

Road System

High

Emphasis

Focus

Route

Federal

Functional

Classification

Goods

Movement

Route

Truck

Designation

Bicycle and

Pedestrian Access

No No No No No No No Major Collector

5 No No No

State Route 153 Segment 1 Summary

Figure 3: Segment 1 From State route 49 (PM 0.00) to Cold Spring Road (PM 0.12).

transportation concept report

Page 11

TABLE 5: SR 153 SEGMENT 2 PROJECT LIST

Project Number

Description PM Location Lead Agency Source Purpose

Total Cost

Estimate*

(x $1,000)

Proposed Completion

Year

Project Category

- No Project - - - - - - - -

TABLE 4: SR 153 SEGMENT 2 ROUTE DESIGNATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS

Freeway &

Expressway

National

Highway

System

Strategic

Highway

Network

Scenic

Highway

Interregional

Road System

High

Emphasis

Focus

Route

Federal

Functional

Classification

Goods

Movement

Route

Truck Designation Bicycle and

Pedestrian Access

No No No No No No No Major Collector

5 No No No

SR 153 Segment 2 is a two-lane

conventional highway from Cold Springs

Road to James Marshall Discovery Park.

The AADT shows only 90 vehicles traveled

the segment in 2015. Along the segment is

the local Olde Coloma Theatre for visitors.

The segment is operating at LOS D and will

remain at LOS D for the future horizon

year. There are no capacity enhancement

projects planned. The segment ends at the

Coloma iconic James Marshall Monument

in Marshal Gold Discovery State History

Park where visitors can hike the Monroe

Ridge Trail and the Monument Trail.

Caltrans intends to pursue relinquishment

of this segment in the future.

State Route 153 Segment 2 Summary

Figure 4: Segment 2 From Cold Spring Road (PM 0.12) to Marshall’s Monument (PM 0.55).

DISTRICT 3

California Department of Transportation

Prepared by : Hau Nguyen

For questions and concerns about this Transportation Concept Report, please contact:

Caltrans District 3 Division of Planning and Local Assistance Office of System Planning Analysis, Modeling and Forecasting Branch 703 B Street, Marysville, CA 95901 Email: Susan.Zanchi@dot.ca.gov Phone: (530) 741-4199

For further Transportation Concept Report information, please visit:

Caltrans District 3 Website:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/planning

(Select System Planning, then Transportation Concept Reports)