Agenda packet — Fowler City Council, January 6, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

Fowler Ave
Northbound Westbound
Fowler Ave
Fresno St
Turning Movement Report
Fresno Street / Fowler Avenue
Fresno
Tuesday, March 25, 2025 Clear

36.6243
-119.6827
154
Section 10, Item D
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:

JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 516 W. Shaw Ave, Suite 103
www.metrotrafficdata.com Fresno, CA 93704

LOCATION LATITUDE

COUNTY LONGITUDE

JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 516 W. Shaw Ave, Suite 103
www.metrotrafficdata.com Fresno, CA 93704

LOCATION LATITUDE

COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks 7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0 45 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 38 2 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 51 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 53 4 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 64 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 41 3 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 69 0 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 41 3 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0 68 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 38 3 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 47 0 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 57 3 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 28 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 47 5 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 27 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 399 0 49 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 199 335 27 0 0 0 0 0
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks 4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 58 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 60 2 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 48 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 41 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 65 4 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 43 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 57 1 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 47 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 55 1 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 37 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 58 1 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 37 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0 28 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 39 1 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 339 0 37 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 439 11 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks U-Turn Left Thru Right Trucks 7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 252 0 30 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 173 13 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0 190 0 21 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 139 242 8 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.986 4.4% PM 0 0 0 0 #####
PM 0.961 2.9% AM 0 0 0 0 #####
PHF 0.943 0.842
AM PM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
139 93 0 0
242 173 0 0
PM AM
PHF
##### ##### PHF

0.904 0 252 0 30 AM

0.879 0 190 0 21 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound

Page 1 of 3 ends

SR 99 SB On-ramp
Northbound Westbound
Fowler Ave
Fowler Avenue
Turning Movement Report
SR 99 Southbound On-Ramp / Fowler Avenue
Fresno
Tuesday, March 25, 2025 Clear

36.6237
-119.6822
156
Section 10, Item D
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:

JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 516 W. Shaw Ave, Suite 103
www.metrotrafficdata.com Fresno, CA 93704

LOCATION LATITUDE

COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bikes Peds Peds <>
AM Peak Total 0 0 PM 0 0 0 0
PM Peak Total 0 0 AM 0 0 0 0 Peds <>
0 0
AM PM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
PM AM
Peds <>
0 0
Peds <>
0 0 0 0 AM
0 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
SR 99 Southbound On-Ramp / Fowler Avenue 36.6237
Fresno -119.6822
Tuesday, March 25, 2025 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
0 Fowler Ave SR 99 SB On-ramp
Fowler Avenue Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
157
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | C
(559) 570-8991
Appendix C: Traffic Modeling
158
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Base Year 2019 plus Project
Fowler Convenience Market
3 6
8 8
97 121
31 32
363
Sumner
ner
135
40 70
149
969
1161
Fowler/99
27 3
2 58
3120
Merced Merced
553
186
427
196
4959
2128
Fowler/9
299 237 2604
Merc Mer ed ced
284
138
216
154
2706
1629
SR 99
4890
3742
49782
Golden Sta
734
525
5184
Merc M
ed erced
284
138
216
154
2706
1629
Mer M
ced erced
278
135
208
146
2585
1532
Golden Sta
58 1
7 8
9930
Merce Me d
rced
278
135
208
146
2585
1532
Golden Sta 67
12 0
34 9392
Merced Merced
182
12 154
126
1896
1404
Golden Sta 757
554
5424
Merc Merced
ed
185
148
152
153
1776
1525 Merced Merced
185
148
152
153
1776
1525
Merc M
ed erced
185
148
152
153
1776
1525
159
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Base Year 2019 plus Project
Fowler Convenience Market
0 0
0 0
0 6
9 8
15 1
3 121
183
191
153
147
1768
1760
SR 99
3156
4441
4540
Fresno
Fresno
0 5
3 2
14 13
Fowler Fowler 350
350
339
291
3420
3322
Fowler 16
184
1674
Fowler/9 70
9 83
761
Fowler 237
26 2436
Fres Fr no esno
9 0
7 0
105
0 Fowler
Fowler 227
235
259
205
2330
2224 Fowler 246 211 2295 Fowler 235 205 2224
Fowler/99
10 7
70 Fowler 235
205
2 24
Fowler/9
70 9
83 761
Fowler 235
205
2224
Fowler 81
/99
89 832
Fowler/9
78 68
851 SR 99
4968
3810
50632
Fresno
Fresno
19 6
22 8
226
113
160
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Base Year 2019 plus Project - Select Zone
Fowler Convenience Market
0 0
2 2
31 41
0 0
0 Sumner
ner
9 7
8 10
87 96
Fowler/99
60 4
5 8
15 Merced Merced
120
110
96 71
1180
980
Fowler/9
45 46 461
Merc Mer ed ced
75 75
50 57
719
709
SR 99
0 0
0 Golden Sta
20 12
254
Merc M
ed erced
75 75
50 57
719
709
Mer M
ced erced
75 75
48 56
677
678
Golden Sta 21
2 2
0 01
Merce Me d
rced
75 75
48 56
677
678
Golden Sta 3
1 2
6 35
Merced Merced
42 54
32 36
4 2
47 Golden Sta 24
8 190
Merc Merced
ed
18 33
23 23
252
223 Merced Merced
18 3
23 23
252
2 3
Merc M
ed erced
18 33
23 23
252
223
161
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Base Year 2019 plus Project - Select Zone
Fowler Convenience Market
0 0
0 0
0 6
9 8
15 1
3 121
183
191
153
147
1768
1760
SR 9
0 9
0 0
Fresno
Fresno
0 5
3 2
14 13
Fowler Fowler 179
127
127
106
1582
1276
Fowler 24
11 163
Fowler/9 32
9 36
329
Fowler 5
4 6
49 7
2 Fres Fr no esno
0 0
0 0
0 0
Fowler
Fowler 56
12 47
20 492
179 Fowler 1220 179 Fowler 1220 179
Fowler/99
0 0
0 Fowler 12
20 179
Fowler/9
32 9
36 329
Fowler 12
20 179
Fowler 32
/99
36 329
Fowler/9
35 14
271 SR 99
35 14
271
Fresno
Fresno
9 6
15 8
121
113
162
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project
Fowler Convenience Market
12 11
16 15
145
163
33 39
386
Sumner
ner
76 47
64 118
968
1267
Fowler/99
28 2
4 46
3483
Merced Merced
469
195
371
26 4892
26 1
Fowler/9
165 192 2441
Merc Mer ed ced
346
178
2 1
205
3045
2077
SR 99
6256
5035
76905
Golden Sta
2 42
1 78
10261
Merced Merced
346
178
221
205
3045
2077
Mer M
ced erced
335
166
206
189
2882
1932
Golden Sta
86 20
8 1
43 229
Mer M
ced erced
335
166
206
189
2882
1932
Golden Sta 92
20 3
29 1
549
Merced Merced
259
14 186
15 2257
1627
Golden Sta 2263
1203
10610
Merc M
ed erced
250
157
169
163
2026
174
Merc M
ed erced
250
157
169
163
2026
1744
Merc M
ed erced
250
157
169
163
2026
1744
163
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project
Fowler Convenience Market
0 0
0 0
17 1
14 145
135
189
183
150
148
1736
1746
SR 99
4606
6232
7606
Fresno
Fresno
0 0
3 0
14 19
Fowler Fowler 384
344
358
272
4272
3319
Fowler 191
196
2 78
Fowler/99
108
98 1191
Fowler 2
2 9
93 3469
Fresno
Fresno
27 0
6 0
188
0 Fowler
Fowler 273
227
287
199
3281
2336 Fowler 244 199 2491 Fowler 227 199 2336
Fowler/99
17 0
154
Fowler 2
7 19
2336
Fowler/99
108
98 1191
Fowler 227
199
2336
Fowler/99 125
9 1
8 345
SR 99
Fowler/99
59 102
1 78
SR 99
6315
5137
78083
Fresno
Fresno
44 0
20 11
324
145
164
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project - Select Zone
Fowler Convenience Market
6 4
8 6
50 52
0 0
0 Sumner
ner
0 15
3 4
54 65
Fowler/99
58 3
5 7
03 Merced Merced
140
87 95
82 1145
961
Fowler/9
34 37 421
Merc Mer ed ced
106
75 58
61 724
696
SR 99
0 0
0 Golden Sta
20 19
2 9
Merced Merced
106
75 58
61 724
696
Mer M
ced erced
102
69 53
53 672
646
Golden Sta 13
2 1
1 90
Mer M
ced erced
102
69 53
53 672
646
Golden Sta 32
9 190
Merced Merced
70 56
4 33
483
456
Golden Sta 27
24 207
Merc M
ed erced
42 36
20 14
275
227 Merc M
ed erced
42 36
20 14
275
227
Merc M
ed erced
42 36
20 14
275
227
165
Section 10, Item D
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Trips
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project - Select Zone
Fowler Convenience Market
0 0
0 0
17 1
14 145
135
189
183
150
148
1736
1746
SR 9
0 9
0 0
Fresno
Fresno
0 0
3 0
14 19
Fowler Fowler 145
155
122
99 1518
1210
Fowler 12
19 2 1
Fowler/9 22
9 32
306
Fowler 3
5 4
1 526
Fresno
Fresno
0 0
0 0
0 0
Fowler
Fowler 34
38 51
26 526
228 Fowler 3826 228 Fowler 3826 228
Fowler/99
0 0
0 Fowler 38
26 2
8 Fowler/9
22 9
32 306
Fowler 38
26 228
Fowler 2
/99
32 306
SR 99
Fowler/99
12 21
265
SR 99
12 21
265
Fresno
Fresno
17 0
14 11
135
145
166
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | D
(559) 570-8991
Appendix D: Methodology
167
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-1
Levels of Service Methodology
The description and procedures for calculating capacity and level of service (LOS) are found in the Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The HCM 7th Edition represents the research on capacity and quality of service for transportation facilities.

Quality of service requires quantitative measures to characterize operational conditions within a traffic stream. Level of service is a quality measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such service measures as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience.

Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility that has analysis procedures available. Letters designate each level of service (LOS), from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Each LOS represents a range of operating conditions and the driver’s perception of these conditions. Safety is not included in the measures that establish an LOS.

Intersection Levels of Service
One of the more important elements limiting and often interrupting the flow of traffic on a highway is the intersection. Flow on an interrupted facility is usually dominated by points of fixed operation such as traffic signals, stop signs and yield signs.

Signalized Intersections
LOS can be characterized for the entire intersection, each intersection approach and each lane group.

Control delay alone is used to characterize LOS for the entire intersection or an approach. Control delay and volume-to-capacity ratio are used to characterize LOS for a lane group. Delay quantifies the increase in travel time due to traffic signal control. It is also a surrogate measure of driver discomfort and fuel consumption. The volume-to-capacity ratio quantifies the degree to which a phase’s capacity is utilized by a lane group. A description of LOS for signalized intersections is found in Table A-1. 168
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-2
Table A-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Description (Motorized Vehicle Mode) Level
of
Service
Description
Average
Control
Delay
(Seconds
per Vehicle)
A
Operations with a control delay of 10 seconds/vehicle or less and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is really low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If it’s due to favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping. ≤10
B
Operations with control delay between 10.1 to 20.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-tocapacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-tocapacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than with LOS A.
>10.0 to

20.0 C
Operations with average control delays between 20.1 to 35.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0, the progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures (i.e., one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle) may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping.
>20 to 35
D
Operations with control delay between 35.1 to 55.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-tocapacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-tocapacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long.

Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. >35 to 55
E
Operations with control delay between 55.1 to 80.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-tocapacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-tocapacity ratio is high, progression is unfavorable and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent.
>55 to 80
F
Operations with unacceptable control delay exceeding 80.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor and the cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue.
>80
Note: Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition
All-Way Stop Controlled Intersections
All-way stop controlled intersections are common in the United States. They are characterized by having all approaches controlled by stop sign without any street having priority. Streets intersecting at all-way stop controlled intersections can be public or private. The intersection analysis boundaries for an all-way stop controlled intersection are assumed to be those of an isolated intersection, no upstream or downstream effects are accounted for in analysis.
169
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-3
Two-Way Stop Controlled Intersections
Two-way stop controlled (TWSC) intersections are also common in the United States. A typical configuration is a four-leg intersection in which one street, the major street, is uncontrolled and the other street, the minor street, is controlled by stop signs. The other typical intersection is a three-leg intersection in which a single minor street approach is controlled by a stop sign.

For the analysis of the motorized vehicle mode, the methodology addresses special circumstances that may exist at two-way stop controlled intersections including two-stage gap acceptance, approaches with shared lanes, the presence of upstream traffic signals and flared approaches for minor-street rightturning vehicles. Table A-2 provides a description of LOS at unsignalized intersections.

Table A-2: Unsignalized Intersection LOS Description (Motorized Vehicle Mode) Control Delay (Seconds per Vehicle) LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio v/c ≤ 1.0 v/c > 1.0
≤10 A F
>10 to 15 B F
>15 to 25 C F
>25 to 35 D F
>35 to 50 E F
>50 F F
Note: Source: HCM 7th Edition, Exhibit 21-8.

Roundabout Controlled Intersections
Roundabouts are intersections with a generally circular shape, characterized by yield on entry and circulation around a central island. Roundabouts have been used successfully throughout the world and are being used increasingly in the United States, especially since 1990. Intersection analysis models generally fall into two categories: regression models and analytical models. Regression models use field data to develop statistically derived relationships between geometric features and performance measures such as capacity and delay. Analytical models are based on traffic flow theory combined with field measures of driver behavior, resulting in an analytical formulation of the relationship of driver behavior, resulting in an analytical formulation of the relationship between those field measures and performance measures such as capacity and delay. Table A-3 provides a description of LOS at roundabout intersections.

Table A-3: Roundabout Intersection Level of Service Description (Automobile Mode) Control Delay (Seconds per Vehicle) LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio v/c ≤ 1.0 v/c > 1.0
≤10 A F
>10 to 15 B F
>15 to 25 C F
>25 to 35 D F
>35 to 50 E F
>50 F F
Note: Source: HCM 7th Edition, Exhibit 22-8.
170
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-4
Segment Levels of Service
Segments are portions of roads without any interruption of flow. These typically include basic freeway segments, multilane highway segments, freeway weaving segments, freeway merge and diverge segments, two-lane highway segments and urban street segments.

Urban Street Segments (Motorized Vehicle Mode)
The term “urban street segments” refers to two elements that are found: points and segments. A point is the boundary between links and is represented by an intersection or ramp terminal. A link is a length of roadway between two points. A link and its boundary are referred to as a segment. A signalized intersection is always used to define a boundary. Only intersections, or ramp terminals, in which the segment through volumes is uncontrolled can exist along the segment. A midsegment traffic control signal provided for the exclusive use of pedestrians should not be used to define a segment boundary.

Chapter 18 of the Highway Capacity Manual categorizes each LOS as follows:

LOS A describes primarily free-flow operation. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized intersections is minimal. Travel speeds exceed 80 percent of the base free flow speed (FFS) and the volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than

1.0. LOS B describes reasonably unimpeded operation. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and control delay at the boundary intersections is not significant. The travel speed is between 67 and 80 percent of the base FFS and the volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than

1.0. LOS C describes stable operations. The ability to maneuver and change lanes in midblock location may be more restricted than at LOS B. Longer queues at the boundary intersections may contribute to lower travel speeds. The travel speed is between 50 and 67 percent of the base FFS and the volume-tocapacity ratio is no greater than 1.0.

LOS D indicates a less stable condition in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speed. This operation may be due to adverse signal progression, high volumes or inappropriate signal timing at the boundary intersections. The travel speed is between 40 and 50 percent of the base FFS and the volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than 1.0.

LOS E is characterized as an unstable operation and has significant delay. Such operations may be due to some combination of adverse progression, high volume and inappropriate signal timing at the boundary intersections. The travel speed is between 30 and 40 percent of the base FFS and the volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than 1.0.

LOS F is characterized by flow at extremely low speed. Congestion is likely occurring at the boundary intersections, as indicated by high delay and extensive queuing. The travel speed is 30 percent or less of the base FFS or the volume-to-capacity ratio is greater than 1.0. 171
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-5
Urban Street Segments LOS
Two performance measures are used to characterize vehicular LOS for a given direction of travel along an urban street segment. One measure is travel speed for through vehicles. This speed reflects the factors that influence running time along the link and the delay uncured by through vehicles at the boundary intersections. The second measures Is the volume-to-capacity ratio for the through movements at the downstream boundary intersection. These performance measures indicate the degree of mobility provided by the segment. Table A-4 provides a description of LOS for Urban Street Segments.

Table A-4: Urban Street Segment Levels of Service (Motorized Vehicle Mode) LOS Travel Speed Threshold by Base Free-Flow Speed (miles/hour) Volume-to55 50 45 40 35 30 25 Capacity Ratio A >44 >40 >36 >32 >28 >24 >20
≤ 1.0
B >37 >34 >30 >27 >23 >20 >17
C >28 >25 >23 >20 >18 >15 >13
D >22 >20 >18 >16 >14 >12 >10
E >17 >15 >14 >12 >11 >9 >8
F ≤17 ≤15 ≤14 ≤12 ≤11 ≤9 ≤8
F Any > 1.0
Note: a = Volume-to-capacity ratio of through movement at downstream boundary intersection.

Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, Exhibit 18-1.

Basic Freeway and Multilane Highway Segments
Segments of multilane highways and basic freeways outside the influence of merging maneuvers, diverging maneuvers, weaving maneuvers, or signalized intersections define LOS by density. Density describes a motorist's proximity to other vehicles and is related to a motorist's freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream. Chapter 12 of the Highway Capacity Manual categorizes each LOS as follows:

LOS A describes free-flow operations. FFS prevails on the freeway or multilane highway, and vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. The effects of incidents or point breakdowns are easily absorbed.

LOS B represents reasonably free-flow operations, and FFS on the freeway or multilane highway is maintained. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and psychological comfort provided to drivers is still high. The effects of minor incidents are still easily absorbed.

LOS C provides for flow with speeds near the FFS of the freeway or multilane highway. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted, and lane changes require more care and vigilance on the part of the driver. Minor incidents may still be absorbed, but the local deterioration in service quality will be significant. Queues may be expected to form behind any significant blockages.

LOS D is the level at which speeds begin to decline with increasing flows, with density increasing more quickly. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is seriously limited, and drivers experience reduced physical and psychological comfort levels. Even minor incidents can be expected to create queuing, because the traffic stream has little space to absorb disruptions. 172
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-6
LOS E describes operation at or near capacity. Operations on the freeway or multilane highway at this level are highly volatile because there are virtually no usable gaps within the traffic stream, leaving little room to maneuver within the traffic stream. Any disruption to the traffic stream, such as vehicles entering from a ramp or an access point or a vehicle changing lanes, can establish a disruption wave that propagates throughout the upstream traffic stream. Toward the upper boundary of LOS E, the traffic stream has no ability to dissipate even the most minor disruption, and any incident can be expected to produce a serious breakdown and substantial queuing. The physical and psychological comfort afforded to drivers is poor.

LOS F describes unstable flow. Such conditions exist within queues forming behind bottlenecks.

Breakdowns occur for a number of reasons:
• Traffic incidents can temporarily reduce the capacity of a short segment so that the number of vehicles arriving at a point is greater than the number of vehicles that can move through it. • Points of recurring congestion, such as merge or weaving segments and lane drops, experience very high demand in which the number of vehicles arriving is greater than the number of vehicles that can be discharged.
• In analyses using forecast volumes, the projected flow rate can exceed the estimated capacity of a given location.

Basic Freeway
Basic Freeway segments generally have four to eight lanes (in both directions) and posted speed limits between 50 and 75 mi/hr. The median type depends on right-of-way constraints and other factors. The performance measures include capacity, free flow speed, demand and volume-to-capacity ratio, space mean speed, average density and LOS. The following performance measures are evaluated for each segment: capacity, FFS, demand-to-capacity or volume-to-capacity ratios, space mean average, average density, travel time, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle hours of travel and vehicle hours of delay. Table A-5 provides a description of LOS for Basic Freeway Segments.

Multilane Highway
Multilane Highway segments generally have four to six lanes (in both directions) and posted speed limits between 40 and 55 mi/hr. These highways may be divided, undivided or divided by a two-way left-turn lane. The performance measures include capacity, free flow speed, demand and volume-to-capacity ratio, space mean speed, average density and LOS. The following performance measures are evaluated for each segment: capacity, FFS, demand-to-capacity or volume-to-capacity ratios, space mean average, average density, travel time, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle hours of travel and vehicle hours of delay.

Table A-5 provides a description of LOS for Multilane Highway Segments. 173
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704
(559) 570-8991
App | D-7
Table A-5: Basic Freeway and Multilane Highway Segment Level of Service Description Level of Service Density (Passenger Cars per Mile per Lane) Urban Rural
A ≤11 ≤6
B >11 to 18 >6 to 14
C >18 to 26 >14 to 22
D >26 to 35 >22 to 29
E >35 to 45 >29 to 39
F >45 or Demand Exceeds Capacity >39 or Demand Exceeds Capacity Note: Source: HCM 7th Edition, Exhibit 10-6.

Two-Lane Highway Segments
Two-Lane Highways generally have one lane per direction. The single lane in each direction may be supplemented with passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, turnouts or pullouts. If allowed, passing maneuvers are limited by the availability of gaps in the opposing traffic stream and by the availability of sufficient sight distance for a driver to discern the approach of an opposing vehicle safely. A principal measure of LOS is average speed, percent followers and follower density. Chapter 15 of the Highway Capacity Manual categorizes each LOS as follows:

At LOS A, motorists experience operating speeds near the posted speed limit and little difficulty in passing. Platooning is minimal and follower density is very low.

At LOS B through LOS D, represent gradations between the conditions for LOS A and LOS E.

At LOS E, speeds may still be reasonable, but platooning is significant and follower density is high.

Passing, if allowed is essentially impossible.

LOS F exists whenever demand flow in one or both directions exceeds the segment's capacity. When demand exceeds capacity, it is expected that there will be a reduction in the capacity at the bottleneck.

Two-Lane Highway
The performance measures include average speed, FFS and follower density. The LOS output is calculated for an establish segment boundary that includes consistent terrain, lane widths, shoulder widths, facility classification and demand flow rate. Table A-6 provides a description of LOS for Two-Lane Highway Segments.

Table A-6: Two-Lane Highway Segment Level of Service Description LOS
Follower Density (Followers per Mile per Lane)
Higher-Speed Highways
Posted Speed Limit ≥ 50 miles per hour
Lower-Speed Highways
Posted Speed Limit < 50 miles per hour
A ≤2.0 ≤2.5
B >2.0 to 4.0 >2.5 to 5.0
C >4.0 to 8.0 >5.0 to 10.0
D >8.0 to 12.0 >10.0 to 15.0
E >12.0 >15.0
Note: Source: HCM 7th Edition, Exhibit 15-6.
174
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | E
(559) 570-8991
Appendix E: Existing Traffic Conditions
175
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Existing AM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 25.6
Intersection LOS D
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 95 15 7 0 333 0 226 29 216 104 0 Future Vol, veh/h 209 95 15 7 0 333 0 226 29 216 104 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 235 107 17 8 0 374 0 254 33 243 117 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 31.1 27.3 23.5 19.9

HCM LOS D D C C
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 2% 66% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 89% 0% 30% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 11% 98% 5% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 255 340 319 216 104
LT Vol 0 7 209 216 0
Through Vol 226 0 95 0 104
RT Vol 29 333 15 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 287 382 358 243 117
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.627 0.738 0.759 0.583 0.264
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.879 6.955 7.624 8.645 8.128
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 456 516 473 415 439
Service Time 5.975 5.04 5.71 6.435 5.918
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.629 0.74 0.757 0.586 0.267
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 23.5 27.3 31.1 22.9 13.8
HCM Lane LOS CDDCB
HCM 95th-tile Q 4.2 6.2 6.5 3.6 1
176
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing AM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.3
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 23 2 143 179 567 0 0 302 154
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 23 2 143 179 567 0 0 302 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 25 2 157 197 623 0 0 332 169
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1348 1518 623 501 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1016 1016 -------
Stage 2 332 501 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 165 118 484 1058 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 348 314 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 725 541 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 135 0 484 1058 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 135 0 -------
Stage 1 283 0 -------
Stage 2 725 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 25.49 2.2 0

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 1058 - 356 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.186 - 0.518 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 9.2 - 25.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - D - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 - 2.8 - -
177
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing AM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 130 70 103 301 22 45 325 127 18 288 13 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 130 70 103 301 22 45 325 127 18 288 13 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 9 141 76 112 327 24 49 353 138 20 313 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 12 437 194 143 697 311 59 484 189 26 644 29
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.38 0.38 0.01 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1554 1753 3497 1560 1753 1258 492 1767 1762 79 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 141 76 112 327 24 49 0 491 20 0 327 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1554 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1749 1767 0 1841 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 1.9 2.3 3.2 4.2 0.6 1.4 0.0 12.2 0.6 0.0 6.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 1.9 2.3 3.2 4.2 0.6 1.4 0.0 12.2 0.6 0.0 6.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 437 194 143 697 311 59 0 673 26 0 673 V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.32 0.39 0.78 0.47 0.08 0.83 0.00 0.73 0.78 0.00 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 104 1931 858 311 2345 1046 207 0 1035 105 0 980 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.1 20.2 20.4 22.8 17.9 16.5 24.4 0.0 13.3 24.9 0.0 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.9 0.9 2.7 3.5 1.0 0.2 10.7 0.0 3.3 17.0 0.0 1.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.7 0.0 4.4 0.3 0.0 2.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 51.1 21.1 23.2 26.4 19.0 16.7 35.0 0.0 16.6 41.9 0.0 13.6 LnGrp LOS DCCCBBD BD B
Approach Vol, veh/h 226 463 540 347
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.0 20.6 18.3 15.2
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.1 11.3 6.7 23.5 5.4 15.1 5.7 24.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.0 28.0 6.0 27.0 3.0 34.0 3.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 4.3 3.4 8.9 2.3 6.2 2.6 14.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.9 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.8 0.0 4.9 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 19.0
HCM 7th LOS B
178
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.6
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 265 47 2 246 108 10
Future Vol, veh/h 265 47 2 246 108 10
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 276 49 2 256 113 10
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 326 0 562 302
Stage 1 - - - - 302 -
Stage 2 - - - - 260 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1228 - 486 736
Stage 1 - - - - 748 -
Stage 2 - - - - 781 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1227 - 485 735
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 485 -
Stage 1 - - - - 747 -
Stage 2 - - - - 779 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.06 14.54

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 500 1227 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.246 0.002 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 14.5 7.9 - - -
HCM Lane LOS B A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0 - - -
179
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing AM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.8
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 252 30 93 173 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 252 30 93 173 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 255 30 94 175 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 94 94 0 -
Stage 1 94 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 901 957 - 0
Stage 1 925 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 901 957 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 901 - - -
Stage 1 925 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 10.38 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 901 957 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.283 0.032 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.6 8.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 0.1 -
180
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Existing PM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.7
Intersection LOS B
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 118 36 19 0 217 0 118 41 230 152 0 Future Vol, veh/h 163 118 36 19 0 217 0 118 41 230 152 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 170 123 38 20 0 226 0 123 43 240 158 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 17.2 12.8 12.4 14.7

HCM LOS C B B B
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 8% 51% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 74% 0% 37% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 26% 92% 11% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 159 236 317 230 152
LT Vol 0 19 163 230 0
Through Vol 118 0 118 0 152
RT Vol 41 217 36 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 166 246 330 240 158
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.301 0.4 0.571 0.478 0.294
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.532 5.86 6.226 7.185 6.675
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 550 612 581 503 540
Service Time 4.585 3.907 4.244 4.906 4.396
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.302 0.402 0.568 0.477 0.293
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 12.4 12.8 17.2 16.3 12.2
HCM Lane LOS B B C C B
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.3 1.9 3.6 2.5 1.2
181
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing PM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.5
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 44 1 90 143 355 0 0 342 217
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 44 1 90 143 355 0 0 342 217
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 49 1 100 159 394 0 0 380 241
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1092 1333 394 621 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 712 712 -------
Stage 2 380 621 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 236 153 652 955 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 484 434 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 689 478 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 197 0 652 955 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 197 0 -------
Stage 1 404 0 -------
Stage 2 689 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 21.14 2.73 0

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 955 - 371 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.166 - 0.404 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 9.5 - 21.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - 1.9 - -
182
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing PM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 292 41 100 183 25 24 219 107 23 216 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 15 292 41 100 183 25 24 219 107 23 216 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 307 43 105 193 26 25 231 113 24 227 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 21 670 299 134 896 400 31 347 170 30 527 21
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.26 0.26 0.02 0.30 0.30 0.02 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1560 1753 3497 1560 1753 1166 570 1767 1772 70 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 307 43 105 193 26 25 0 344 24 0 236 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1560 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1736 1767 0 1843 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 3.7 1.1 2.8 2.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 8.3 0.6 0.0 5.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 3.7 1.1 2.8 2.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 8.3 0.6 0.0 5.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 21 670 299 134 896 400 31 0 517 30 0 548 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.46 0.14 0.78 0.22 0.07 0.80 0.00 0.67 0.79 0.00 0.43 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 110 2041 911 402 2625 1171 146 0 977 147 0 1037 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.6 17.2 16.1 21.8 14.0 13.5 23.5 0.0 14.8 23.5 0.0 13.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.5 1.0 0.5 3.7 0.3 0.1 16.2 0.0 3.1 15.7 0.0 1.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 1.3 0.4 1.1 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.0 3.1 0.4 0.0 2.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 42.2 18.2 16.6 25.5 14.3 13.6 39.7 0.0 17.9 39.2 0.0 14.7 LnGrp LOS D B B C B B D B D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 366 324 369 260
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.1 17.9 19.4 17.0
Approach LOS BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 14.2 5.8 19.3 5.6 17.3 5.8 19.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 28.0 4.0 27.0 3.0 36.0 4.0 27.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 5.7 2.7 7.0 2.4 4.1 2.6 10.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.5 0.0 2.4 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.3 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 18.5
HCM 7th LOS B
183
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 371 68 4 187 46 11
Future Vol, veh/h 371 68 4 187 46 11
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 403 74 4 203 50 12
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 478 0 655 441
Stage 1 - - - - 441 -
Stage 2 - - - - 214 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1079 - 429 614
Stage 1 - - - - 646 -
Stage 2 - - - - 819 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1078 - 426 613
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 426 -
Stage 1 - - - - 646 -
Stage 2 - - - - 814 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.17 14.2

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 453 1078 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.137 0.004 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 14.2 8.4 - - -
HCM Lane LOS B A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0 - - -
184
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing PM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.3
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 21 139 242 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 190 21 139 242 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 198 22 145 252 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 145 145 0 -
Stage 1 145 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 845 900 - 0
Stage 1 880 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 845 900 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 845 - - -
Stage 1 880 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 10.41 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 845 900 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.234 0.024 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.6 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 0.1 -
185
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Peak
Baseline 05/20/2025
Baseline SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 160 365 208 154 84
Average Queue (ft) 98 114 94 65 40
95th Queue (ft) 151 258 171 110 69
Link Distance (ft) 1286 894 675 275
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 128 117 113 22
Average Queue (ft) 51 41 4 4
95th Queue (ft) 93 81 37 17
Link Distance (ft) 1268 275 1106
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 94 70 61 120 120 74 52 115 261 99 188 Average Queue (ft) 6 42 15 30 58 62 40 11 26 150 18 108 95th Queue (ft) 28 78 50 54 99 105 70 38 66 248 62 173
Link Distance (ft) 2511 2511 1359 1359 1106 1071
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0 1 0 9 0 20
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 4 0 4
186
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Peak
Baseline 05/20/2025
Baseline SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement NE
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 122
Average Queue (ft) 48
95th Queue (ft) 86
Link Distance (ft) 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 134
Average Queue (ft) 44
95th Queue (ft) 82
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 12
187
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Peak
Baseline 05/20/2025
Baseline SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 210 75 73 123 69
Average Queue (ft) 73 45 45 55 38
95th Queue (ft) 148 69 66 91 63
Link Distance (ft) 1286 894 675 275
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 97 79 22
Average Queue (ft) 44 37 3
95th Queue (ft) 73 69 15
Link Distance (ft) 1268 1104
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 50 138 114 74 136 74 76 31 189 192 46 209 Average Queue (ft) 18 64 36 22 66 42 23 8 26 113 13 80
95th Queue (ft) 45 100 86 52 116 76 62 28 82 183 36 150 Link Distance (ft) 2516 2516 1358 1358 1104 1073
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 4 1 1 3 0 13
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 0 1 0 3
188
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Peak
Baseline 05/20/2025
Baseline SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NW NE
Directions Served TR L T LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 31 31 74
Average Queue (ft) 2 3 1 38
95th Queue (ft) 14 18 10 68
Link Distance (ft) 894 154 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 74
Average Queue (ft) 37
95th Queue (ft) 63
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 9
189
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | F
(559) 570-8991
Appendix F: Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
190
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 90.1
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 149 15 14 0 448 0 226 36 310 104 0 Future Vol, veh/h 209 149 15 14 0 448 0 226 36 310 104 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 235 167 17 16 0 503 0 254 40 348 117 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 95.2 144 42.2 55.5

HCM LOS F F E F
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 3% 56% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 86% 0% 40% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 14% 97% 4% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 262 462 373 310 104
LT Vol 0 14 209 310 0
Through Vol 226 0 149 0 104
RT Vol 36 448 15 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 294 519 419 348 117
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.778 1.214 1.058 0.942 0.3
Departure Headway (Hd) 10.526 8.707 9.764 10.561 10.037 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 347 420 373 345 360
Service Time 8.526 6.707 7.764 8.261 7.737
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.847 1.236 1.123 1.009 0.325
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 42.2 144 95.2 68.4 17
HCM Lane LOS E F F F C
HCM 95th-tile Q 6.3 20.3 13.5 9.8 1.2
191
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 18.8
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 58 2 143 222 639 0 0 361 154
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 58 2 143 222 639 0 0 361 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 64 2 157 244 702 0 0 397 169
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1587 1756 702 566 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1190 1190 -------
Stage 2 397 566 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 118 84 436 1001 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 287 260 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 677 506 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 89 0 436 1001 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 89 0 -------
Stage 1 217 0 -------
Stage 2 677 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 135.56 2.51 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 1001 - 206 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.244 - 1.084 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 9.8 - 135.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 - 10.3 - -
192
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project AM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 130 87 119 301 22 68 342 159 18 313 13 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 130 87 119 301 22 68 342 159 18 313 13 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 9 141 95 129 327 24 74 372 173 20 340 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 12 457 203 164 761 339 93 479 223 25 646 27
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.05 0.40 0.40 0.01 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1554 1753 3497 1560 1753 1187 552 1767 1769 73 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 141 95 129 327 24 74 0 545 20 0 354 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1554 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1738 1767 0 1842 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 2.0 3.2 4.0 4.5 0.7 2.3 0.0 15.2 0.6 0.0 8.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 2.0 3.2 4.0 4.5 0.7 2.3 0.0 15.2 0.6 0.0 8.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 457 203 164 761 339 93 0 702 25 0 673 V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.31 0.47 0.78 0.43 0.07 0.80 0.00 0.78 0.79 0.00 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 94 1687 749 282 2061 919 188 0 963 95 0 921 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.7 22.0 22.5 24.8 18.9 17.4 26.2 0.0 14.5 27.5 0.0 14.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 26.5 0.8 3.6 3.1 0.8 0.2 5.7 0.0 4.5 18.0 0.0 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.8 1.3 1.5 1.6 0.2 1.0 0.0 5.8 0.4 0.0 3.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 54.3 22.9 26.1 27.9 19.7 17.6 31.9 0.0 19.0 45.5 0.0 15.3 LnGrp LOS DCCCBBC BD B
Approach Vol, veh/h 245 480 619 374
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.3 21.8 20.6 16.9
Approach LOS C C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.3 12.3 8.0 25.4 5.4 17.2 5.8 27.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.0 27.0 6.0 28.0 3.0 33.0 3.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 5.2 4.3 10.5 2.3 6.5 2.6 17.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 3.7 0.0 5.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 20.8
HCM 7th LOS C
193
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 287 47 4 251 121 25
Future Vol, veh/h 287 47 4 251 121 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 299 49 4 261 126 26
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 349 0 594 324
Stage 1 - - - - 324 -
Stage 2 - - - - 270 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1204 - 466 714
Stage 1 - - - - 730 -
Stage 2 - - - - 773 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1203 - 464 714
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 464 -
Stage 1 - - - - 730 -
Stage 2 - - - - 771 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.13 15.51

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 493 1203 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.308 0.003 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 15.5 8 - - -
HCM Lane LOS C A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.3 0 - - -
194
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.7
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 259 30 107 196 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 259 30 107 196 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 262 30 108 198 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 108 108 0 -
Stage 1 108 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 884 940 - 0
Stage 1 911 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 884 940 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 884 - - -
Stage 1 911 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 10.58 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 884 940 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.296 0.032 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.8 9 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 0.1 -
195
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 22
Intersection LOS C
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 161 36 29 0 309 0 118 47 288 152 0 Future Vol, veh/h 163 161 36 29 0 309 0 118 47 288 152 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 170 168 38 30 0 322 0 123 49 300 158 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 27 20.8 15.1 21.4

HCM LOS D C C C
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 9% 45% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 72% 0% 45% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 28% 91% 10% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 165 338 360 288 152
LT Vol 0 29 163 288 0
Through Vol 118 0 161 0 152
RT Vol 47 309 36 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 172 352 375 300 158
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.366 0.644 0.732 0.667 0.33
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.673 6.587 7.025 8.009 7.495
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 468 549 518 453 480
Service Time 5.735 4.621 5.056 5.747 5.233
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.368 0.641 0.724 0.662 0.329
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 15.1 20.8 27 25.4 13.9
HCM Lane LOS CCDDB
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.7 4.6 6.1 4.8 1.4
196
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.8
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 58 1 90 187 403 0 0 386 217
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 58 1 90 187 403 0 0 386 217
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 64 1 100 208 448 0 0 429 241
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1292 1533 448 670 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 863 863 -------
Stage 2 429 670 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 179 116 609 916 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 411 370 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 655 454 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 138 0 609 916 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 138 0 -------
Stage 1 318 0 -------
Stage 2 655 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 39.98 3.2 0

HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 916 - 261 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.227 - 0.634 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.1 - 40 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - E - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - 3.9 - -
197
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project PM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 292 56 110 183 25 32 241 122 23 233 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 15 292 56 110 183 25 32 241 122 23 233 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 307 59 116 193 26 34 254 128 24 245 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 21 660 294 148 915 408 39 365 184 30 553 20
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.26 0.26 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.02 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1560 1753 3497 1560 1753 1153 581 1767 1778 65 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 307 59 116 193 26 34 0 382 24 0 254 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1560 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1734 1767 0 1843 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 4.0 1.6 3.3 2.2 0.6 1.0 0.0 9.8 0.7 0.0 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 4.0 1.6 3.3 2.2 0.6 1.0 0.0 9.8 0.7 0.0 5.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 21 660 294 148 915 408 39 0 549 30 0 574 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.47 0.20 0.78 0.21 0.06 0.86 0.00 0.70 0.80 0.00 0.44 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 103 1993 889 344 2474 1103 138 0 954 104 0 978 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.1 18.4 17.4 22.8 14.7 14.1 24.8 0.0 15.2 24.9 0.0 14.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 19.0 1.1 0.7 3.4 0.2 0.1 17.8 0.0 3.4 16.4 0.0 1.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 1.4 0.6 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.0 3.7 0.4 0.0 2.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 44.1 19.5 18.1 26.2 14.9 14.3 42.6 0.0 18.6 41.3 0.0 15.2 LnGrp LOS D B B C B B D B D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 382 335 416 278
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.3 18.8 20.6 17.4
Approach LOS C B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 14.6 6.1 20.8 5.6 18.3 5.9 21.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 29.0 4.0 27.0 3.0 36.0 3.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 6.0 3.0 7.6 2.5 4.2 2.7 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 19.4
HCM 7th LOS B
198
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 388 68 8 202 57 23
Future Vol, veh/h 388 68 8 202 57 23
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 422 74 9 220 62 25
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 497 0 699 460
Stage 1 - - - - 460 -
Stage 2 - - - - 239 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1062 - 405 599
Stage 1 - - - - 634 -
Stage 2 - - - - 798 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1061 - 400 599
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 400 -
Stage 1 - - - - 633 -
Stage 2 - - - - 790 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.32 15.12

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 442 1061 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.197 0.008 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 15.1 8.4 - - -
HCM Lane LOS C A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 0 - - -
199
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.4
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 21 160 250 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 209 21 160 250 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 218 22 167 260 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 167 167 0 -
Stage 1 167 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 821 875 - 0
Stage 1 860 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 821 875 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 821 - - -
Stage 1 860 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 10.8 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 821 875 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.265 0.025 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 11 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.1 0.1 -
200
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project AM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/20/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 209 149 15 14 0 448 0 226 36 310 104 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 209 149 15 14 0 448 0 226 36 310 104 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 235 167 17 0 0 520 0 254 40 348 117 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 0
Cap, veh/h 293 275 28 0 353 598 0 296 47 395 851 0
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.46 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 1643 167 0 1841 3120 0 1552 244 1753 1841 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 235 0 184 0 0 520 0 0 294 348 117 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 0 1811 0 1841 1560 0 0 1797 1753 1841 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.2 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 16.6 3.2 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.2 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 16.6 3.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.14 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 293 0 303 0 353 598 0 0 343 395 851 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.88 0.14 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 567 0 585 0 393 666 0 0 456 648 1232 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.7 0.0 33.4 0.0 0.0 34.0 0.0 0.0 33.9 32.4 13.4 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.1 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 11.7 8.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.8 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 7.6 1.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 39.8 0.0 35.4 0.0 0.0 45.1 0.0 0.0 45.6 40.6 13.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 419 520 294 465
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.8 45.1 45.6 33.7
Approach LOS DDDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.5 23.5 21.1 20.5 44.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 32.0 22.0 28.0 58.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.0 18.6 15.7 13.2 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.9 0.8 1.3 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 40.3
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 201
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project AM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/20/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 58 2 143 222 639 0 0 361 154 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 58 2 143 222 639 0 0 361 154 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 64 2 157 244 702 0 0 397 169
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 333330033
Cap, veh/h 82 3 201 306 1173 0 0 477 203
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 467 15 1145 1767 1856 0 0 1235 526
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 223 0 0 244 702 0 0 0 566
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1626 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1761
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.2 0.0 0.0 7.3 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.2 0.0 0.0 7.3 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 Prop In Lane 0.29 0.70 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.30
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 285 0 0 306 1173 0 0 0 681
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 413 0 0 609 1866 0 0 0 1055
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.7 0.0 0.0 21.8 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.9 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.7 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 27.7 0.0 0.0 26.6 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.7 LnGrp LOS C C A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 223 946 566
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.7 11.7 18.7
Approach LOS C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.7 39.4 13.5 25.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 * 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.0 55.4 19.0 * 33
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.2 14.3 9.3 18.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 5.6 0.5 3.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 16.0
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
* HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. 202
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project PM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/20/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 163 161 36 29 0 309 0 118 47 288 152 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 163 161 36 29 0 309 0 118 47 288 152 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 168 38 0 0 354 0 123 49 300 158 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0
Cap, veh/h 295 244 55 0 292 493 0 179 71 368 773 0
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.21 0.42 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1464 331 0 1856 3135 0 1261 502 1767 1856 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 0 206 0 0 354 0 0 172 300 158 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1795 0 1856 1567 0 0 1763 1767 1856 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.3 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 5.5 9.7 3.2 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.3 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 5.5 9.7 3.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.18 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.28 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 295 0 299 0 292 493 0 0 250 368 773 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.82 0.20 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 828 0 841 0 574 970 0 0 649 946 1801 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.0 0.0 23.4 0.0 0.0 23.9 0.0 0.0 24.4 22.6 11.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 4.5 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 2.4 4.1 1.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 24.7 0.0 26.2 0.0 0.0 25.9 0.0 0.0 27.8 27.0 11.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 376 354 172 458
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.6 25.9 27.8 21.6
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.3 16.4 13.1 16.0 29.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 32.0 22.0 28.0 58.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 11.7 7.5 8.5 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.4 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 24.6
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 203
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing plus Project PM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/20/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 58 1 90 187 403 0 0 386 217 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 58 1 90 187 403 0 0 386 217 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 64 1 100 208 448 0 0 429 241
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Percent Heavy Veh, % 333330033
Cap, veh/h 90 1 140 263 1248 0 0 506 284
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 Sat Flow, veh/h 638 10 997 1767 1856 0 0 1116 627
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 165 0 0 208 448 0 0 0 670
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1644 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1743
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 0.0 0.0 6.5 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 0.0 0.0 6.5 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 Prop In Lane 0.39 0.61 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 232 0 0 263 1248 0 0 0 790
V/C Ratio(X) 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 318 0 0 498 1908 0 0 0 1178
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.3 0.0 0.0 23.3 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.6 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 27.9 0.0 0.0 28.6 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.7 LnGrp LOS C C A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 165 656 670
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.9 11.9 17.7
Approach LOS C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.0 42.8 12.5 30.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 58.4 16.0 38.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 7.9 8.5 21.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 3.0 0.3 4.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 16.3
HCM 7th LOS B
204
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 244 158 165 151 359 268 198
Average Queue (ft) 122 87 46 79 157 174 50
95th Queue (ft) 207 151 97 131 270 283 124
Link Distance (ft) 1284 886 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 2 11
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 208 271 251 299
Average Queue (ft) 80 107 117 173
95th Queue (ft) 161 182 205 284
Link Distance (ft) 1268 263 263 1106
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 72 53 62 152 133 119 71 189 374 98 198 Average Queue (ft) 5 45 19 28 77 69 39 11 50 180 15 103 95th Queue (ft) 23 73 48 55 130 122 83 38 132 333 47 173 Link Distance (ft) 2511 2511 1359 1359 1106 1071
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 1 0 16 24
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 11 4
205
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NE
Directions Served TR L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 22 31 74
Average Queue (ft) 1 1 47
95th Queue (ft) 7 10 69
Link Distance (ft) 886 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 90
Average Queue (ft) 44
95th Queue (ft) 73
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 34
206
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 135 183 147 124 156 240 138
Average Queue (ft) 80 92 46 51 84 157 60
95th Queue (ft) 126 171 96 89 144 236 116
Link Distance (ft) 1284 886 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 115 182 117 307
Average Queue (ft) 49 93 63 174
95th Queue (ft) 93 150 103 270
Link Distance (ft) 1267 263 263 1104
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 138 116 61 130 140 53 101 69 212 99 214 Average Queue (ft) 18 65 58 26 67 42 19 12 21 116 25 94 95th Queue (ft) 47 103 98 53 112 89 43 46 50 191 60 159 Link Distance (ft) 2516 2516 1358 1358 1104 1073
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 4 0 0 0 3 1 18
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 4
207
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NE
Directions Served TR L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 31 78
Average Queue (ft) 2 3 41
95th Queue (ft) 19 18 73
Link Distance (ft) 886 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 91
Average Queue (ft) 40
95th Queue (ft) 68
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 12
208
Section 10, Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:18:31 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\1 Existing plus Project\1 SR 99 SB OffRamp Merced Street.sip9 209
Section 10, Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 14 4.0 16 4.0 0.551 11.2 LOS B 4.4 113.3 0.62 0.65 0.87 35.7 18x R2 448 4.0 503 4.0 0.551 11.2 LOS B 4.4 113.3 0.62 0.65 0.87 35.3 Approach 462 4.0 519 4.0 0.551 11.2 LOS B 4.4 113.3 0.62 0.65 0.87 35.3 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 310 4.0 348 4.0 0.384 6.7 LOS A 1.8 46.9 0.09 0.03 0.09 28.8 6x T1 104 4.0 117 4.0 0.384 6.7 LOS A 1.8 46.9 0.09 0.03 0.09 28.9 Approach 414 4.0 465 4.0 0.384 6.7 LOS A 1.8 46.9 0.09 0.03 0.09 28.8 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 209 4.0 235 4.0 0.436 8.8 LOS A 2.1 55.0 0.51 0.48 0.55 30.6 4x T1 149 4.0 167 4.0 0.436 8.8 LOS A 2.1 55.0 0.51 0.48 0.55 30.9 14x R2 15 4.0 17 4.0 0.436 8.8 LOS A 2.1 55.0 0.51 0.48 0.55 30.2 Approach 373 4.0 419 4.0 0.436 8.8 LOS A 2.1 55.0 0.51 0.48 0.55 30.7 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 226 4.0 254 4.0 0.391 9.8 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.69 0.71 0.75 28.8 12x R2 36 4.0 40 4.0 0.391 9.8 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.69 0.71 0.75 28.2 Approach 262 4.0 294 4.0 0.391 9.8 LOS A 2.2 57.0 0.69 0.71 0.75 28.7 All Vehicles 1511 4.0 1698 4.0 0.551 9.1 LOS A 4.4 113.3 0.46 0.45 0.56 31.0 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 29 3.0 30 3.0 0.325 6.6 LOS A 1.3 33.0 0.36 0.28 0.36 38.7 18x R2 309 3.0 322 3.0 0.325 6.6 LOS A 1.3 33.0 0.36 0.28 0.36 38.1 Approach 338 3.0 352 3.0 0.325 6.6 LOS A 1.3 33.0 0.36 0.28 0.36 38.2 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 288 3.0 300 3.0 0.378 6.6 LOS A 1.6 40.1 0.12 0.04 0.12 29.0 6x T1 152 3.0 158 3.0 0.378 6.6 LOS A 1.6 40.1 0.12 0.04 0.12 29.1 Approach 440 3.0 458 3.0 0.378 6.6 LOS A 1.6 40.1 0.12 0.04 0.12 29.0 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 163 3.0 170 3.0 0.387 8.0 LOS A 1.7 43.1 0.49 0.44 0.49 31.2 4x T1 161 3.0 168 3.0 0.387 8.0 LOS A 1.7 43.1 0.49 0.44 0.49 31.4 14x R2 36 3.0 38 3.0 0.387 8.0 LOS A 1.7 43.1 0.49 0.44 0.49 30.7 Approach 360 3.0 375 3.0 0.387 8.0 LOS A 1.7 43.1 0.49 0.44 0.49 31.2 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 118 3.0 123 3.0 0.202 6.3 LOS A 0.9 22.7 0.54 0.48 0.54 30.1 12x R2 47 3.0 49 3.0 0.202 6.3 LOS A 0.9 22.7 0.54 0.48 0.54 29.5 Approach 165 3.0 172 3.0 0.202 6.3 LOS A 0.9 22.7 0.54 0.48 0.54 29.9 All Vehicles 1303 3.0 1357 3.0 0.387 7.0 LOS A 1.7 43.1 0.34 0.27 0.34 31.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:55:00 AM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\1 Existing plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
212
Section 10, Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 58 3.0 64 3.0 0.316 9.0 LOS A 1.6 42.0 0.71 0.70 0.71 36.6 8x T1 2 3.0 2 3.0 0.316 9.0 LOS A 1.6 42.0 0.71 0.70 0.71 36.8 18x R2 143 3.0 157 3.0 0.316 9.0 LOS A 1.6 42.0 0.71 0.70 0.71 36.1 Approach 203 3.0 223 3.0 0.316 9.0 LOS A 1.6 42.0 0.71 0.70 0.71 36.3 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 361 3.0 397 3.0 0.530 9.7 LOS A 3.1 78.7 0.45 0.40 0.51 28.8 16x R2 154 3.0 169 3.0 0.530 9.7 LOS A 3.1 78.7 0.45 0.40 0.51 28.2 Approach 515 3.0 566 3.0 0.530 9.7 LOS A 3.1 78.7 0.45 0.40 0.51 28.6 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 222 3.0 244 3.0 0.765 15.5 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 2x T1 639 3.0 702 3.0 0.765 15.5 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.5 Approach 861 3.0 946 3.0 0.765 15.5 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.5 All Vehicles 1579 3.0 1735 3.0 0.765 12.8 LOS B 3.1 78.7 0.24 0.22 0.26 31.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [Existing + Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 58 3.0 64 3.0 0.184 5.8 LOS A 0.7 18.9 0.50 0.44 0.50 38.4 8x T1 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.184 5.8 LOS A 0.7 18.9 0.50 0.44 0.50 38.6 18x R2 90 3.0 100 3.0 0.184 5.8 LOS A 0.7 18.9 0.50 0.44 0.50 37.9 Approach 149 3.0 166 3.0 0.184 5.8 LOS A 0.7 18.9 0.50 0.44 0.50 38.1 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 386 3.0 429 3.0 0.616 11.5 LOS B 5.3 136.1 0.47 0.48 0.66 28.1 16x R2 217 3.0 241 3.0 0.616 11.5 LOS B 5.3 136.1 0.47 0.48 0.66 27.6 Approach 603 3.0 670 3.0 0.616 11.5 LOS B 5.3 136.1 0.47 0.48 0.66 27.9 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 187 3.0 208 3.0 0.530 8.8 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.2 2x T1 403 3.0 448 3.0 0.530 8.8 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.4 Approach 590 3.0 656 3.0 0.530 8.8 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 All Vehicles 1342 3.0 1491 3.0 0.616 9.7 LOS A 5.3 136.1 0.27 0.26 0.35 30.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:57:04 AM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\1 Existing plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
214
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LTR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 247 227 98 54
Average Queue (ft) 67 70 47 3
95th Queue (ft) 149 141 86 21
Link Distance (ft) 1234 844 619 148
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 96 32 266
Average Queue (ft) 46 2 99
95th Queue (ft) 75 15 194
Link Distance (ft) 1216 148 1045
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
215
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LTR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 183 101 72 82
Average Queue (ft) 64 46 32 10
95th Queue (ft) 130 87 60 44
Link Distance (ft) 1234 844 619 148
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 76 76 230
Average Queue (ft) 33 9 85
95th Queue (ft) 61 42 167
Link Distance (ft) 1216 148 1044
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
216
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | G
(559) 570-8991
Appendix G: Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
217
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 143.5
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 170 16 14 0 544 0 240 39 321 109 0 Future Vol, veh/h 209 170 16 14 0 544 0 240 39 321 109 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 235 191 18 16 0 611 0 270 44 361 122 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 125.8 259.8 53.7 67

HCM LOS F F F F
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 3% 53% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 86% 0% 43% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 14% 97% 4% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 279 558 395 321 109
LT Vol 0 14 209 321 0
Through Vol 240 0 170 0 109
RT Vol 39 544 16 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 313 627 444 361 122
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.838 1.495 1.14 0.991 0.32
Departure Headway (Hd) 11.616 9.16 10.723 11.412 10.885 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 313 401 342 321 333
Service Time 9.616 7.16 8.723 9.112 8.585
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 1 1.564 1.298 1.125 0.366
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 53.7 259.8 125.8 83.5 18.6
HCM Lane LOS FFFFC
HCM 95th-tile Q 7.2 31.3 15.3 10.7 1.3
218
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 37.7
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 59 2 143 284 687 0 0 376 154
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 59 2 143 284 687 0 0 376 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 65 2 157 312 755 0 0 413 169
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1792 1962 755 582 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1379 1379 -------
Stage 2 413 582 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 88 63 407 987 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 232 211 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 666 497 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 60 0 407 987 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 60 0 -------
Stage 1 159 0 -------
Stage 2 666 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v $ 300.58 3.02 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 987 - 152 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.316 - 1.476 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.3 -$ 300.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.4 - 14.7 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s
+: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 219
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project AM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 130 88 123 301 22 74 376 169 18 323 13 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 130 88 123 301 22 74 376 169 18 323 13 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 9 141 96 134 327 24 80 409 184 20 351 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 12 450 200 170 764 341 101 505 227 25 667 27 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.42 0.42 0.01 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1554 1753 3497 1560 1753 1201 540 1767 1772 71 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 141 96 134 327 24 80 0 593 20 0 365 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1554 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1741 1767 0 1843 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 2.2 3.4 4.4 4.7 0.7 2.6 0.0 17.6 0.7 0.0 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 2.2 3.4 4.4 4.7 0.7 2.6 0.0 17.6 0.7 0.0 9.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 450 200 170 764 341 101 0 731 25 0 694 V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.31 0.48 0.79 0.43 0.07 0.79 0.00 0.81 0.80 0.00 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 1665 740 238 1962 875 209 0 918 90 0 846 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.1 23.3 23.8 26.0 19.8 18.2 27.4 0.0 15.0 28.9 0.0 14.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 26.9 0.8 3.8 7.1 0.8 0.2 5.0 0.0 6.1 18.6 0.0 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.8 1.3 1.9 1.7 0.3 1.2 0.0 7.0 0.4 0.0 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 56.0 24.1 27.6 33.1 20.6 18.4 32.4 0.0 21.1 47.5 0.0 15.6 LnGrp LOS ECCCCBC CD B
Approach Vol, veh/h 246 485 673 385
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.6 24.0 22.4 17.2
Approach LOS C C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.7 12.6 8.4 27.1 5.4 17.9 5.8 29.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 28.0 7.0 27.0 3.0 33.0 3.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 5.4 4.6 11.1 2.3 6.7 2.7 19.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.7 0.0 5.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 22.3
HCM 7th LOS C
220
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.2
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 322 47 4 347 121 25
Future Vol, veh/h 322 47 4 347 121 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 335 49 4 361 126 26
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 385 0 731 361
Stage 1 - - - - 361 -
Stage 2 - - - - 370 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1168 - 388 681
Stage 1 - - - - 703 -
Stage 2 - - - - 697 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1167 - 386 681
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 386 -
Stage 1 - - - - 702 -
Stage 2 - - - - 694 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.09 18.52

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 417 1167 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.365 0.004 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 18.5 8.1 - - -
HCM Lane LOS C A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.6 0 - - -
221
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 9.1
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 355 38 110 228 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 355 38 110 228 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 359 38 111 230 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 111 111 0 -
Stage 1 111 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 881 937 - 0
Stage 1 909 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 881 937 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 881 - - -
Stage 1 909 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 11.59 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 881 937 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.407 0.041 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 11.9 9 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2 0.1 -
222
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 47.2
Intersection LOS E
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 241 40 29 0 372 0 124 49 321 166 0 Future Vol, veh/h 163 241 40 29 0 372 0 124 49 321 166 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 170 251 42 30 0 388 0 129 51 334 173 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 75.4 43 19.7 34.8

HCM LOS F E C D
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 7% 37% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 72% 0% 54% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 28% 93% 9% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 173 401 444 321 166
LT Vol 0 29 163 321 0
Through Vol 124 0 241 0 166
RT Vol 49 372 40 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 180 418 463 334 173
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.454 0.868 1.018 0.834 0.407
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.254 7.617 7.925 9.115 8.596
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 391 480 463 401 422
Service Time 7.254 5.617 5.925 6.815 6.296
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.46 0.871 1 0.833 0.41
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 19.7 43 75.4 43.9 17.1
HCM Lane LOS C E F E C
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.3 9.1 13.7 7.7 1.9
223
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 10.5
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 61 1 90 235 424 0 0 430 217
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 61 1 90 235 424 0 0 430 217
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 68 1 100 261 471 0 0 478 241
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1471 1712 471 719 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 993 993 -------
Stage 2 478 719 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 139 90 591 878 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 357 322 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 622 431 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 98 0 591 878 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 98 0 -------
Stage 1 251 0 -------
Stage 2 622 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 83.82 3.86 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 878 - 195 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.297 - 0.868 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.8 - 83.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 - 6.5 - -
224
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project PM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 292 67 117 183 25 38 257 125 23 258 9 Future Volume (veh/h) 15 292 67 117 183 25 38 257 125 23 258 9 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 307 71 123 193 26 40 271 132 24 272 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 21 655 292 157 927 414 47 380 185 30 563 19
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.03 0.33 0.33 0.02 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1560 1753 3497 1560 1753 1168 569 1767 1786 59 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 307 71 123 193 26 40 0 403 24 0 281 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1560 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1736 1767 0 1845 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 4.1 1.5 3.6 2.3 0.7 1.2 0.0 10.7 0.7 0.0 6.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 4.1 1.5 3.6 2.3 0.7 1.2 0.0 10.7 0.7 0.0 6.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 21 655 292 157 927 414 47 0 565 30 0 582 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.47 0.24 0.78 0.21 0.06 0.85 0.00 0.71 0.80 0.00 0.48 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 100 1931 861 334 2397 1069 134 0 926 101 0 948 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.9 19.0 9.8 23.4 15.0 14.4 25.4 0.0 15.6 25.7 0.0 14.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 19.3 1.1 0.9 3.2 0.2 0.1 14.2 0.0 3.6 16.8 0.0 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 1.5 0.7 1.4 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.0 4.1 0.4 0.0 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 45.2 20.1 10.7 26.6 15.2 14.6 39.6 0.0 19.1 42.5 0.0 15.9 LnGrp LOS D C B C B B D B D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 394 342 443 305
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 19.3 21.0 17.9
Approach LOS B B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.7 14.8 6.4 21.6 5.6 18.9 5.9 22.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 29.0 4.0 27.0 3.0 36.0 3.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 6.1 3.2 8.5 2.5 4.3 2.7 12.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.7 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 19.6
HCM 7th LOS B
225
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 503 68 8 265 57 23
Future Vol, veh/h 503 68 8 265 57 23
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 547 74 9 288 62 25
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 622 0 892 585
Stage 1 - - - - 585 -
Stage 2 - - - - 307 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 954 - 311 509
Stage 1 - - - - 555 -
Stage 2 - - - - 743 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 953 - 307 509
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 307 -
Stage 1 - - - - 555 -
Stage 2 - - - - 735 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.26 18.82

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 347 953 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.251 0.009 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 18.8 8.8 - - -
HCM Lane LOS C A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0 - - -
226
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.5
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 272 30 162 363 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 272 30 162 363 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 283 31 169 378 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 169 169 0 -
Stage 1 169 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 819 873 - 0
Stage 1 859 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 819 873 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 819 - - -
Stage 1 859 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 11.46 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 819 873 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.346 0.036 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 11.7 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.6 0.1 -
227
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project AM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/20/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 209 170 16 14 0 544 0 240 39 321 109 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 209 170 16 14 0 544 0 240 39 321 109 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 235 191 18 0 0 628 0 270 44 361 122 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 0
Cap, veh/h 300 284 27 0 411 697 0 388 62 412 760 0
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.23 0.41 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 1657 156 0 1841 3120 0 3109 485 1753 1841 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 235 0 209 0 0 628 0 155 159 361 122 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 0 1813 0 1841 1560 0 1749 1753 1753 1841 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.3 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 15.8 0.0 6.8 7.0 16.0 3.4 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.3 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 15.8 0.0 6.8 7.0 16.0 3.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.28 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 300 0 310 0 411 697 0 225 226 412 760 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.69 0.70 0.88 0.16 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 609 0 629 0 422 716 0 477 478 696 1324 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.0 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 30.4 0.0 33.6 33.7 29.7 14.9 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 3.7 4.0 6.8 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.3 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 3.0 3.1 7.1 1.3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 36.4 0.0 33.8 0.0 0.0 44.8 0.0 37.3 37.6 36.5 15.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C D D D D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 444 628 314 483
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.2 44.8 37.5 31.1
Approach LOS DDDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.9 22.9 15.0 19.8 37.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 32.0 22.0 28.0 58.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.8 18.0 9.0 12.3 5.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.9 1.4 1.5 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 37.7
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 228
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project AM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/20/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 59 2 143 284 687 0 0 376 154 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 59 2 143 284 687 0 0 376 154 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 2 157 312 755 0 0 413 169
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 333330033
Cap, veh/h 81 2 195 370 1221 0 0 481 197
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 472 15 1140 1767 1856 0 0 1251 512
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 224 0 0 312 755 0 0 0 582
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1627 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1763
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.2 0.0 0.0 10.5 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.2 0.0 0.0 10.5 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.8 Prop In Lane 0.29 0.70 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.29
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 278 0 0 370 1221 0 0 0 677
V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 368 0 0 543 1662 0 0 0 924
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.7 0.0 0.0 23.5 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.4 0.0 0.0 7.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.4 0.0 0.0 4.8 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 34.1 0.0 0.0 31.4 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.7 LnGrp LOS C C A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 224 1067 582
Approach Delay, s/veh 34.1 13.8 23.7
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.6 45.3 16.9 28.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.0 55.4 19.0 32.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.2 16.5 12.5 20.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 6.2 0.5 3.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 19.3
HCM 7th LOS B
229
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project PM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/20/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 163 241 40 29 0 372 0 124 49 321 166 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 163 241 40 29 0 372 0 124 49 321 166 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 251 42 0 0 420 0 129 51 334 173 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0
Cap, veh/h 367 322 54 0 319 538 0 296 112 393 739 0
Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.22 0.40 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1549 259 0 1856 3136 0 2592 944 1767 1856 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 0 293 0 0 420 0 89 91 334 173 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1808 0 1856 1568 0 1763 1681 1767 1856 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 3.3 3.5 12.6 4.3 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.9 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 3.3 3.5 12.6 4.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.14 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.56 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 367 0 376 0 319 538 0 209 199 393 739 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.46 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.43 0.46 0.85 0.23 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 709 0 725 0 492 831 0 556 530 810 1542 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.2 0.0 26.1 0.0 0.0 27.6 0.0 28.6 28.7 26.0 13.9 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.4 1.6 5.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.4 1.4 5.5 1.7 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 25.1 0.0 29.7 0.0 0.0 30.2 0.0 29.9 30.3 31.2 14.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 463 420 180 507
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.0 30.2 30.1 25.3
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.9 19.5 12.9 20.5 32.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 32.0 22.0 28.0 58.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.9 14.6 5.5 12.7 6.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.7 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.0
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 230
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Near Term plus Project PM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/20/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 61 1 90 235 424 0 0 430 217 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 61 1 90 235 424 0 0 430 217 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 68 1 100 261 471 0 0 478 241
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Percent Heavy Veh, % 333330033
Cap, veh/h 88 1 129 313 1306 0 0 542 273
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 663 10 975 1767 1856 0 0 1163 587
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 169 0 0 261 471 0 0 0 719
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1647 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1750
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.4 0.0 0.0 9.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 0.0 0.0 9.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.2 Prop In Lane 0.40 0.59 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.34
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 218 0 0 313 1306 0 0 0 815
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 279 0 0 436 1669 0 0 0 1035
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.2 0.0 0.0 25.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.8 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.6 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.8 0.0 0.0 4.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 37.0 0.0 0.0 35.4 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 LnGrp LOS D D A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 169 732 719
Approach Delay, s/veh 37.0 15.2 23.3
Approach LOS D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.6 50.3 15.5 34.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.0 58.4 16.0 38.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 8.5 11.3 26.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 3.2 0.3 4.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.1
HCM 7th LOS C
231
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 247 225 179 197 161 318 274 116
Average Queue (ft) 125 110 77 96 58 140 177 39
95th Queue (ft) 214 185 144 155 117 260 269 96
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 4 9
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 12 25
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 220 269 267 350
Average Queue (ft) 85 139 134 190
95th Queue (ft) 156 225 234 319
Link Distance (ft) 1268 263 263 1106
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 74 53 54 182 179 143 60 189 476 89 296 Average Queue (ft) 11 41 16 33 81 72 43 14 66 186 15 125 95th Queue (ft) 37 72 46 59 146 133 88 43 161 345 54 222 Link Distance (ft) 2511 2511 1359 1359 1106 1071
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 0 17 0 25
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0 12 0 4
232
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement NE
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 121
Average Queue (ft) 60
95th Queue (ft) 104
Link Distance (ft) 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB NB
Directions Served L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 135 144
Average Queue (ft) 60 5
95th Queue (ft) 101 47
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 62
233
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 150 221 95 93 93 179 264 136
Average Queue (ft) 84 124 52 54 36 68 169 73
95th Queue (ft) 136 207 88 87 75 134 249 135
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 181 197 132 399
Average Queue (ft) 54 114 62 220
95th Queue (ft) 118 184 112 361
Link Distance (ft) 1267 263 263 1104
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 122 96 52 205 100 95 43 190 305 99 258 Average Queue (ft) 20 65 47 27 73 41 24 13 39 134 19 89 95th Queue (ft) 49 107 81 52 143 76 63 36 117 248 53 167 Link Distance (ft) 2516 2516 1358 1358 1104 1073
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 4 0 1 8 0 18
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 0 3 0 4
234
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NE
Directions Served TR L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 31 96
Average Queue (ft) 3 3 37
95th Queue (ft) 20 18 67
Link Distance (ft) 882 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 87
Average Queue (ft) 44
95th Queue (ft) 71
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 15
235
Section 10, Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:13:43 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\2 Near Term plus Project\1 SR 99 SB OffRamp Merced Street.sip9 236
Section 10, Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 14 4.0 16 4.0 0.676 15.0 LOS B 8.0 206.2 0.72 0.86 1.25 33.7 18x R2 544 4.0 611 4.0 0.676 15.0 LOS B 8.0 206.2 0.72 0.86 1.25 33.2 Approach 558 4.0 627 4.0 0.676 15.0 LOS B 8.0 206.2 0.72 0.86 1.25 33.3 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 321 4.0 361 4.0 0.399 6.9 LOS A 2.0 52.0 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.7 6x T1 109 4.0 122 4.0 0.399 6.9 LOS A 2.0 52.0 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.9 Approach 430 4.0 483 4.0 0.399 6.9 LOS A 2.0 52.0 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.8 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 209 4.0 235 4.0 0.468 9.4 LOS A 2.7 68.4 0.53 0.54 0.65 30.4 4x T1 170 4.0 191 4.0 0.468 9.4 LOS A 2.7 68.4 0.53 0.54 0.65 30.6 14x R2 16 4.0 18 4.0 0.468 9.4 LOS A 2.7 68.4 0.53 0.54 0.65 30.0 Approach 395 4.0 444 4.0 0.468 9.4 LOS A 2.7 68.4 0.53 0.54 0.65 30.5 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 240 4.0 270 4.0 0.433 10.9 LOS B 2.8 71.5 0.73 0.79 0.88 28.4 12x R2 39 4.0 44 4.0 0.433 10.9 LOS B 2.8 71.5 0.73 0.79 0.88 27.8 Approach 279 4.0 313 4.0 0.433 10.9 LOS B 2.8 71.5 0.73 0.79 0.88 28.3 All Vehicles 1662 4.0 1867 4.0 0.676 10.9 LOS B 8.0 206.2 0.52 0.56 0.74 30.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 29 3.0 30 3.0 0.389 7.4 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.39 0.31 0.39 38.1 18x R2 372 3.0 388 3.0 0.389 7.4 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.39 0.31 0.39 37.6 Approach 401 3.0 418 3.0 0.389 7.4 LOS A 1.7 42.8 0.39 0.31 0.39 37.6 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 321 3.0 334 3.0 0.418 7.2 LOS A 1.9 47.9 0.12 0.04 0.12 28.8 6x T1 166 3.0 173 3.0 0.418 7.2 LOS A 1.9 47.9 0.12 0.04 0.12 28.9 Approach 487 3.0 507 3.0 0.418 7.2 LOS A 1.9 47.9 0.12 0.04 0.12 28.8 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 163 3.0 170 3.0 0.494 10.0 LOS B 3.2 81.3 0.57 0.61 0.74 30.4 4x T1 241 3.0 251 3.0 0.494 10.0 LOS B 3.2 81.3 0.57 0.61 0.74 30.6 14x R2 40 3.0 42 3.0 0.494 10.0 LOS B 3.2 81.3 0.57 0.61 0.74 30.0 Approach 444 3.0 463 3.0 0.494 10.0 LOS B 3.2 81.3 0.57 0.61 0.74 30.5 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 124 3.0 129 3.0 0.239 7.5 LOS A 1.2 30.2 0.64 0.60 0.64 29.6 12x R2 49 3.0 51 3.0 0.239 7.5 LOS A 1.2 30.2 0.64 0.60 0.64 29.0 Approach 173 3.0 180 3.0 0.239 7.5 LOS A 1.2 30.2 0.64 0.60 0.64 29.5 All Vehicles 1505 3.0 1568 3.0 0.494 8.1 LOS A 3.2 81.3 0.39 0.34 0.44 31.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:25:19 AM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\2 Near Term plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
239
Section 10, Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 59 3.0 65 3.0 0.363 10.9 LOS B 2.1 54.7 0.79 0.80 0.84 35.5 8x T1 2 3.0 2 3.0 0.363 10.9 LOS B 2.1 54.7 0.79 0.80 0.84 35.6 18x R2 143 3.0 157 3.0 0.363 10.9 LOS B 2.1 54.7 0.79 0.80 0.84 35.0 Approach 204 3.0 224 3.0 0.363 10.9 LOS B 2.1 54.7 0.79 0.80 0.84 35.2 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 376 3.0 413 3.0 0.563 10.7 LOS B 4.3 109.6 0.51 0.55 0.71 28.4 16x R2 154 3.0 169 3.0 0.563 10.7 LOS B 4.3 109.6 0.51 0.55 0.71 27.9 Approach 530 3.0 582 3.0 0.563 10.7 LOS B 4.3 109.6 0.51 0.55 0.71 28.3 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 284 3.0 312 3.0 0.863 22.0 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 2x T1 687 3.0 755 3.0 0.863 22.0 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.4 Approach 971 3.0 1067 3.0 0.863 22.0 LOS C 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.4 All Vehicles 1705 3.0 1874 3.0 0.863 17.2 LOS C 4.3 109.6 0.25 0.27 0.32 31.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:45:07 AM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\2 Near Term plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
240
Section 10, Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [NT+Project - SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 61 3.0 68 3.0 0.198 6.3 LOS A 0.8 21.7 0.55 0.50 0.55 38.1 8x T1 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.198 6.3 LOS A 0.8 21.7 0.55 0.50 0.55 38.2 18x R2 90 3.0 100 3.0 0.198 6.3 LOS A 0.8 21.7 0.55 0.50 0.55 37.6 Approach 152 3.0 169 3.0 0.198 6.3 LOS A 0.8 21.7 0.55 0.50 0.55 37.8 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 430 3.0 478 3.0 0.679 13.6 LOS B 8.2 208.8 0.56 0.69 0.96 27.4 16x R2 217 3.0 241 3.0 0.679 13.6 LOS B 8.2 208.8 0.56 0.69 0.96 26.9 Approach 647 3.0 719 3.0 0.679 13.6 LOS B 8.2 208.8 0.56 0.69 0.96 27.2 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 235 3.0 261 3.0 0.592 10.0 LOS B 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.2 2x T1 424 3.0 471 3.0 0.592 10.0 LOS B 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 Approach 659 3.0 732 3.0 0.592 10.0 LOS B 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 All Vehicles 1458 3.0 1620 3.0 0.679 11.2 LOS B 8.2 208.8 0.31 0.36 0.48 30.3 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:46:22 AM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\2 Near Term plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
241
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 181 465 202 103
Average Queue (ft) 70 176 67 8
95th Queue (ft) 131 357 131 43
Link Distance (ft) 1233 844 619 148
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 194 208 274
Average Queue (ft) 63 56 120
95th Queue (ft) 129 191 223
Link Distance (ft) 1216 148 1045
Upstream Blk Time (%) 11
Queuing Penalty (veh) 105
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 105
242
Section 10, Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/20/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 291 89 90 75
Average Queue (ft) 98 46 39 12
95th Queue (ft) 193 82 70 46
Link Distance (ft) 1233 844 619 148
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 98 75 678
Average Queue (ft) 35 2 221
95th Queue (ft) 67 25 474
Link Distance (ft) 1216 148 1044
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
243
Section 10, Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | H
(559) 570-8991
Appendix H: Cumulative Year 2046 No Project Traffic Conditions 244
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 135.6
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 168 16 7 0 629 0 240 32 246 109 0 Future Vol, veh/h 209 168 16 7 0 629 0 240 32 246 109 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 227 183 17 8 0 684 0 261 35 267 118 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 82.1 268 39.4 31.3

HCM LOS F F E D
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 1% 53% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 88% 0% 43% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 12% 99% 4% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 272 636 393 246 109
LT Vol 0 7 209 246 0
Through Vol 240 0 168 0 109
RT Vol 32 629 16 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 296 691 427 267 118
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.747 1.523 1.01 0.718 0.301
Departure Headway (Hd) 10.684 8.089 9.869 11 10.474
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 340 456 372 332 346
Service Time 8.684 6.089 7.869 8.7 8.174
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.871 1.515 1.148 0.804 0.341
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 39.4 268 82.1 37.3 17.6
HCM Lane LOS E F F E C
HCM 95th-tile Q 5.8 36.1 12 5.2 1.2
245
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 20.1
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 25 2 187 381 675 0 0 333 154
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 25 2 187 381 675 0 0 333 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 27 2 203 414 734 0 0 362 167
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1924 2091 734 529 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1562 1562 -------
Stage 2 362 529 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 73 52 419 1033 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 189 172 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 702 525 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 44 0 419 1033 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 44 0 -------
Stage 1 113 0 -------
Stage 2 702 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 145.65 3.9 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 1033 - 208 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.401 - 1.117 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 10.8 - 145.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2 - 11 - -
246
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 335 80 111 1412 30 69 403 142 20 308 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 13 335 80 111 1412 30 69 403 142 20 308 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 14 364 87 121 1535 33 75 438 154 22 335 22 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 16 1287 573 147 1548 691 95 467 164 27 551 36 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.37 0.37 0.08 0.44 0.44 0.05 0.36 0.36 0.02 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1558 1753 3497 1560 1753 1299 457 1767 1722 113 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 14 364 87 121 1535 33 75 0 592 22 0 357 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1558 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1756 1767 0 1835 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 8.5 4.3 7.8 50.2 1.1 4.9 0.0 37.5 1.4 0.0 18.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 8.5 4.3 7.8 50.2 1.1 4.9 0.0 37.5 1.4 0.0 18.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 16 1287 573 147 1548 691 95 0 631 27 0 587 V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.28 0.15 0.82 0.99 0.05 0.79 0.00 0.94 0.83 0.00 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 46 1287 573 259 1548 691 152 0 655 46 0 587 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.0 25.7 24.4 51.9 31.9 12.2 53.8 0.0 35.7 56.6 0.0 33.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 33.2 0.3 0.3 4.3 20.8 0.1 5.3 0.0 21.8 20.6 0.0 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 3.4 1.6 3.5 23.4 0.5 2.3 0.0 19.4 0.8 0.0 8.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 90.1 25.9 24.6 56.2 52.7 12.3 59.1 0.0 57.5 77.2 0.0 35.8 LnGrp LOS F C C E D B E E E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 465 1689 667 379
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.6 52.2 57.7 38.2
Approach LOS C D E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.7 47.4 11.3 41.9 6.1 56.0 6.7 46.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 37.0 10.0 36.0 3.0 51.0 3.0 43.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.8 10.5 6.9 20.9 2.9 52.2 3.4 39.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.8 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 48.1
HCM 7th LOS D
247
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.1
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 368 47 2 542 108 20
Future Vol, veh/h 368 47 2 542 108 20
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 383 49 2 565 113 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 433 0 978 409
Stage 1 - - - - 409 -
Stage 2 - - - - 569 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1121 - 277 640
Stage 1 - - - - 669 -
Stage 2 - - - - 565 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1120 - 276 640
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 276 -
Stage 1 - - - - 668 -
Stage 2 - - - - 564 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.03 25.91

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 303 1120 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.44 0.002 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 25.9 8.2 - - -
HCM Lane LOS D A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.1 0 - - -
248
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 13.1
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 548 44 133 273 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 548 44 133 273 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 554 44 134 276 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 134 134 0 -
Stage 1 134 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 855 909 - 0
Stage 1 887 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 855 909 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 855 - - -
Stage 1 887 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 16.06 0

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 855 909 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.648 0.049 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 16.6 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 4.9 0.2 -
249
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 95.6
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 392 40 19 0 420 0 124 43 313 166 0 Future Vol, veh/h 163 392 40 19 0 420 0 124 43 313 166 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 170 408 42 20 0 438 0 129 45 326 173 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 195.9 55.1 20.9 34.1

HCM LOS F F C D
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 4% 27% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 74% 0% 66% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 26% 96% 7% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 167 439 595 313 166
LT Vol 0 19 163 313 0
Through Vol 124 0 392 0 166
RT Vol 43 420 40 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 174 457 620 326 173
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.437 0.927 1.353 0.806 0.404
Departure Headway (Hd) 10.216 8.103 7.857 9.755 9.234
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 355 453 465 375 393
Service Time 8.216 6.103 5.942 7.455 6.934
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.49 1.009 1.333 0.869 0.44
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 20.9 55.1 195.9 42.6 18.1
HCM Lane LOS C F F E C
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.1 10.6 28.2 7 1.9
250
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 12.1
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 47 1 124 305 402 0 0 436 217
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 47 1 124 305 402 0 0 436 217
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 51 1 135 332 437 0 0 474 236
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1574 1810 437 710 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1100 1100 -------
Stage 2 474 710 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 120 78 617 885 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 317 287 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 624 435 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 75 0 617 885 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 75 0 -------
Stage 1 198 0 -------
Stage 2 624 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 87.16 4.96 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 885 - 207 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.375 - 0.902 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 11.5 - 87.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.8 - 7.2 - -
251
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 1030 75 120 660 27 36 251 118 27 267 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 1030 75 120 660 27 36 251 118 27 267 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 23 1084 79 126 695 28 38 264 124 28 281 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 27 1412 630 157 1670 745 47 315 148 34 448 27 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.40 0.40 0.09 0.48 0.48 0.03 0.27 0.27 0.02 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1560 1753 3497 1560 1753 1183 556 1767 1731 105 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 23 1084 79 126 695 28 38 0 388 28 0 298 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1560 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1738 1767 0 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 24.2 2.2 6.4 11.7 0.6 1.9 0.0 19.0 1.4 0.0 13.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 24.2 2.2 6.4 11.7 0.6 1.9 0.0 19.0 1.4 0.0 13.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 27 1412 630 157 1670 745 47 0 464 34 0 475 V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.77 0.13 0.80 0.42 0.04 0.81 0.00 0.84 0.83 0.00 0.63 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 194 1625 725 252 1741 776 116 0 596 78 0 589 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.4 23.3 10.0 40.4 15.4 7.1 43.8 0.0 31.3 44.2 0.0 29.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 22.4 2.6 0.2 3.7 0.4 0.0 11.3 0.0 10.8 16.8 0.0 2.9 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 9.3 1.0 2.7 4.0 0.3 1.0 0.0 9.0 0.8 0.0 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 66.8 25.9 10.2 44.1 15.8 7.1 55.0 0.0 42.1 61.0 0.0 32.6 LnGrp LOS ECBDBAE DE C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1186 849 426 326
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.7 19.7 43.3 35.0
Approach LOS C B D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.1 41.5 7.4 28.4 6.4 48.2 6.7 29.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 42.0 6.0 29.0 10.0 45.0 4.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 26.2 3.9 15.0 3.2 13.7 3.4 21.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 10.3 0.0 2.7 0.0 9.0 0.0 2.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 27.6
HCM 7th LOS C
252
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 730 68 4 390 46 12
Future Vol, veh/h 730 68 4 390 46 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 793 74 4 424 50 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 868 0 1266 831
Stage 1 - - - - 831 -
Stage 2 - - - - 435 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 772 - 186 368
Stage 1 - - - - 426 -
Stage 2 - - - - 651 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 771 - 184 367
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 184 -
Stage 1 - - - - 425 -
Stage 2 - - - - 646 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.1 30.13

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 205 771 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.307 0.006 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 30.1 9.7 - - -
HCM Lane LOS D A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 0 - - -
253
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 9.7
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 393 34 186 599 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 393 34 186 599 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 409 35 194 624 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 194 194 0 -
Stage 1 194 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 793 845 - 0
Stage 1 837 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 793 845 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 793 - - -
Stage 1 837 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 13.9 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 793 845 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.516 0.042 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 14.3 9.4 -
HCM Lane LOS B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3 0.1 -
254
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 209 168 16 7 0 629 0 240 32 246 109 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 209 168 16 7 0 629 0 240 32 246 109 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 227 183 17 0 0 693 0 261 35 267 118 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 0
Cap, veh/h 297 281 26 0 478 810 0 391 52 319 666 0
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.36 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 1659 154 0 1841 3120 0 3196 412 1753 1841 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 227 0 200 0 0 693 0 146 150 267 118 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 0 1813 0 1841 1560 0 1749 1767 1753 1841 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.2 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.0 5.9 6.0 10.9 3.2 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.2 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 15.7 0.0 5.9 6.0 10.9 3.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.23 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 297 0 308 0 478 810 0 220 223 319 666 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.66 0.67 0.84 0.18 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 661 0 684 0 583 988 0 518 524 638 1315 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.4 0.0 28.8 0.0 0.0 26.1 0.0 30.9 31.0 29.3 16.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.0 3.4 3.5 5.8 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.8 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 2.6 2.7 4.9 1.3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 33.4 0.0 31.1 0.0 0.0 32.5 0.0 34.3 34.5 35.1 16.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 427 693 296 385
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.3 32.5 34.4 29.3
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.2 17.5 13.9 18.6 31.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 27.0 22.0 28.0 53.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.7 12.9 8.0 11.2 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 0.6 1.3 1.4 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 32.1
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 255
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 25 2 187 381 675 0 0 333 154 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 25 2 187 381 675 0 0 333 154 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 27 2 203 414 734 0 0 362 167
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 333330033
Cap, veh/h 32 2 242 470 1241 0 0 412 190
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 186 14 1396 1767 1856 0 0 1201 554
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 232 0 0 414 734 0 0 0 529
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1595 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1756
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.4 0.0 0.0 15.1 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.4 0.0 0.0 15.1 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 Prop In Lane 0.12 0.87 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.32
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 276 0 0 470 1241 0 0 0 602
V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 309 0 0 633 1561 0 0 0 744
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.8 0.0 0.0 23.6 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.8 0.0 0.0 10.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.4 0.0 0.0 7.1 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 43.7 0.0 0.0 34.4 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 LnGrp LOS D C A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 232 1148 529
Approach Delay, s/veh 43.7 16.6 30.7
Approach LOS D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.6 49.4 21.8 27.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 56.4 24.0 28.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.4 16.5 17.1 21.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 5.9 0.8 2.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 23.8
HCM 7th LOS C
256
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 163 392 40 19 0 420 0 124 43 313 166 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 163 392 40 19 0 420 0 124 43 313 166 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 408 42 0 0 459 0 129 45 326 173 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0
Cap, veh/h 505 473 49 0 322 544 0 256 86 372 662 0
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.21 0.36 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1654 170 0 1856 3136 0 2682 867 1767 1856 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 0 450 0 0 459 0 86 88 326 173 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1825 0 1856 1568 0 1763 1694 1767 1856 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.4 0.0 19.7 0.0 0.0 11.9 0.0 3.9 4.2 15.0 5.6 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 0.0 19.7 0.0 0.0 11.9 0.0 3.9 4.2 15.0 5.6 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.51 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 505 0 521 0 322 544 0 174 167 372 662 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.49 0.52 0.88 0.26 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 713 0 736 0 385 651 0 460 442 566 1167 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.8 0.0 28.5 0.0 0.0 33.7 0.0 36.0 36.1 32.2 19.2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 2.2 2.5 9.7 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.4 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 1.7 1.8 7.2 2.3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 24.2 0.0 36.1 0.0 0.0 42.3 0.0 38.1 38.6 41.9 19.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS C D D D D D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 620 459 174 499
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.9 42.3 38.4 34.1
Approach LOS CDDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.5 21.7 12.9 30.1 34.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.5 27.0 22.0 34.0 53.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.9 17.0 6.2 21.7 7.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.3 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 36.2
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 257
Section 10, Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 47 1 124 305 402 0 0 436 217 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 47 1 124 305 402 0 0 436 217 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 1 135 332 437 0 0 474 236
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3
Cap, veh/h 65 1 173 373 1300 0 0 505 251
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 443 9 1171 1767 1856 0 0 1169 582
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 187 0 0 332 437 0 0 0 710
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1623 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1751
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.8 0.0 0.0 12.7 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.8 0.0 0.0 12.7 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1 Prop In Lane 0.27 0.72 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.33
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 240 0 0 373 1300 0 0 0 756
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.89 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.94 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 441 0 0 380 1339 0 0 0 787
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.7 0.0 0.0 26.8 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.5 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 34.1 0.0 0.0 48.5 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.4 LnGrp LOS C D A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 187 769 710
Approach Delay, s/veh 34.1 23.3 37.4
Approach LOS C C D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.3 53.5 18.8 34.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.0 50.4 15.0 31.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.8 8.4 14.7 29.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 2.9 0.0 1.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 30.6
HCM 7th LOS C
258
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 198 221 203 199 116 160 264 136
Average Queue (ft) 111 99 69 98 51 91 132 64
95th Queue (ft) 183 188 126 159 95 137 211 114
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 9
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 28
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 151 268 218 473
Average Queue (ft) 65 157 108 257
95th Queue (ft) 108 238 173 429
Link Distance (ft) 1268 263 263 1106
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 51 173 198 79 290 495 498 230 190 511 99 338 Average Queue (ft) 10 95 74 30 138 314 312 18 84 321 32 185 95th Queue (ft) 34 150 145 70 288 455 465 89 185 496 82 306 Link Distance (ft) 2511 2511 1359 1359 1106 1071
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 12 1 20 42 0 36 3 39
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 10 2 22 13 1 25 10 8
259
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement NW NE
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 161
Average Queue (ft) 2 62
95th Queue (ft) 14 104
Link Distance (ft) 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB NB
Directions Served L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 242 150
Average Queue (ft) 90 15
95th Queue (ft) 172 87
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 129
260
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 370 584 203 200 75 158 276 162
Average Queue (ft) 136 264 77 52 32 76 205 81
95th Queue (ft) 302 470 145 102 63 137 290 143
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 7
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 14 7
Queuing Penalty (veh) 23 14
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 227 268 139 767
Average Queue (ft) 70 167 72 433
95th Queue (ft) 158 255 125 715
Link Distance (ft) 1267 263 263 1104
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 9
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 209 334 331 210 175 252 250 71 190 321 99 275 Average Queue (ft) 26 210 209 49 91 115 91 13 43 177 33 162 95th Queue (ft) 91 311 308 166 146 188 179 47 115 249 89 260 Link Distance (ft) 2516 2516 1358 1358 1104 1073
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 21 37 0 0 10 0 18 1 40
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 27 1 0 3 1 6 4 11
261
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NW NE
Directions Served TR L T LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 95 31 53 94
Average Queue (ft) 5 3 2 43
95th Queue (ft) 35 16 17 88
Link Distance (ft) 882 154 1501
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 75
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 118
Average Queue (ft) 68
95th Queue (ft) 101
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 111
262
Section , Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [2046 No Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:45:34 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\3 Cumulative Year No Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
263
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 No Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 7 4.0 8 4.0 0.729 16.9 LOS C 10.3 264.6 0.75 0.93 1.42 32.7 18x R2 629 4.0 684 4.0 0.729 16.9 LOS C 10.3 264.6 0.75 0.93 1.42 32.3 Approach 636 4.0 691 4.0 0.729 16.9 LOS C 10.3 264.6 0.75 0.93 1.42 32.3 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 246 4.0 267 4.0 0.317 5.9 LOS A 1.5 37.5 0.06 0.01 0.06 29.2 6x T1 109 4.0 118 4.0 0.317 5.9 LOS A 1.5 37.5 0.06 0.01 0.06 29.3 Approach 355 4.0 386 4.0 0.317 5.9 LOS A 1.5 37.5 0.06 0.01 0.06 29.2 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 209 4.0 227 4.0 0.421 8.2 LOS A 1.8 45.4 0.44 0.38 0.44 30.9 4x T1 168 4.0 183 4.0 0.421 8.2 LOS A 1.8 45.4 0.44 0.38 0.44 31.1 14x R2 16 4.0 17 4.0 0.421 8.2 LOS A 1.8 45.4 0.44 0.38 0.44 30.5 Approach 393 4.0 427 4.0 0.421 8.2 LOS A 1.8 45.4 0.44 0.38 0.44 31.0 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 240 4.0 261 4.0 0.365 8.8 LOS A 1.8 47.4 0.63 0.61 0.63 29.1 12x R2 32 4.0 35 4.0 0.365 8.8 LOS A 1.8 47.4 0.63 0.61 0.63 28.5 Approach 272 4.0 296 4.0 0.365 8.8 LOS A 1.8 47.4 0.63 0.61 0.63 29.1 All Vehicles 1656 4.0 1800 4.0 0.729 11.2 LOS B 10.3 264.6 0.51 0.55 0.76 30.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:45:14 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\3 Cumulative Year No Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
264
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 No Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 19 3.0 20 3.0 0.428 8.0 LOS A 1.9 49.8 0.42 0.33 0.42 37.8 18x R2 420 3.0 438 3.0 0.428 8.0 LOS A 1.9 49.8 0.42 0.33 0.42 37.3 Approach 439 3.0 457 3.0 0.428 8.0 LOS A 1.9 49.8 0.42 0.33 0.42 37.3 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 313 3.0 326 3.0 0.409 7.0 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.8 6x T1 166 3.0 173 3.0 0.409 7.0 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 29.0 Approach 479 3.0 499 3.0 0.409 7.0 LOS A 1.8 46.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.9 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 163 3.0 170 3.0 0.652 13.9 LOS B 6.8 175.2 0.66 0.82 1.13 29.1 4x T1 392 3.0 408 3.0 0.652 13.9 LOS B 6.8 175.2 0.66 0.82 1.13 29.2 14x R2 40 3.0 42 3.0 0.652 13.9 LOS B 6.8 175.2 0.66 0.82 1.13 28.7 Approach 595 3.0 620 3.0 0.652 13.9 LOS B 6.8 175.2 0.66 0.82 1.13 29.2 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 124 3.0 129 3.0 0.281 9.5 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.76 0.75 0.76 28.9 12x R2 43 3.0 45 3.0 0.281 9.5 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.76 0.75 0.76 28.3 Approach 167 3.0 174 3.0 0.281 9.5 LOS A 1.6 40.4 0.76 0.75 0.76 28.7 All Vehicles 1680 3.0 1750 3.0 0.652 9.9 LOS A 6.8 175.2 0.44 0.46 0.61 30.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:45:17 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\3 Cumulative Year No Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
265
Section , Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [2046 No Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:05:03 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\Multilane 266
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 No Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 25 3.0 27 3.0 0.344 9.8 LOS A 1.4 34.9 0.60 0.62 0.71 36.5 8x T1 2 3.0 2 3.0 0.344 9.8 LOS A 1.4 34.9 0.60 0.62 0.71 36.6 18x R2 187 3.0 203 3.0 0.344 9.8 LOS A 1.4 34.9 0.60 0.62 0.71 36.0 Approach 214 3.0 233 3.0 0.344 9.8 LOS A 1.4 34.9 0.60 0.62 0.71 36.1 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 333 3.0 362 3.0 0.526 10.1 LOS B 3.5 89.8 0.52 0.55 0.69 28.7 16x R2 154 3.0 167 3.0 0.526 10.1 LOS B 3.5 89.8 0.52 0.55 0.69 28.1 Approach 487 3.0 529 3.0 0.526 10.1 LOS B 3.5 89.8 0.52 0.55 0.69 28.5 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 381 3.0 414 3.0 0.334 6.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.1 2x T1 675 3.0 734 3.0 0.512 7.7 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.9 Approach 1056 3.0 1148 3.0 0.512 7.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 All Vehicles 1757 3.0 1910 3.0 0.526 8.3 LOS A 3.5 89.8 0.22 0.23 0.28 31.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:53:29 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\Multilane Roundabout\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
267
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 No Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 47 3.0 51 3.0 0.231 6.9 LOS A 0.7 17.5 0.44 0.44 0.44 38.0 8x T1 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.231 6.9 LOS A 0.7 17.5 0.44 0.44 0.44 38.1 18x R2 124 3.0 135 3.0 0.231 6.9 LOS A 0.7 17.5 0.44 0.44 0.44 37.4 Approach 172 3.0 187 3.0 0.231 6.9 LOS A 0.7 17.5 0.44 0.44 0.44 37.6 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 436 3.0 474 3.0 0.685 14.1 LOS B 8.3 212.7 0.60 0.76 1.06 27.2 16x R2 217 3.0 236 3.0 0.685 14.1 LOS B 8.3 212.7 0.60 0.76 1.06 26.7 Approach 653 3.0 710 3.0 0.685 14.1 LOS B 8.3 212.7 0.60 0.76 1.06 27.1 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 305 3.0 332 3.0 0.251 4.9 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.1 2x T1 402 3.0 437 3.0 0.305 5.1 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.9 Approach 707 3.0 768 3.0 0.305 5.0 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.1 All Vehicles 1532 3.0 1665 3.0 0.685 9.1 LOS A 8.3 212.7 0.30 0.37 0.50 30.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:04:43 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\Multilane Roundabout\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
268
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 112 846 183 30
Average Queue (ft) 54 472 60 3
95th Queue (ft) 98 863 130 18
Link Distance (ft) 1233 844 619 149
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 54 201 199 188
Average Queue (ft) 26 109 117 91
95th Queue (ft) 57 213 212 168
Link Distance (ft) 1216 149 149 1046
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 18 31
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 50
269
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 No Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 530 105 79 98
Average Queue (ft) 218 44 39 19
95th Queue (ft) 439 80 73 64
Link Distance (ft) 1233 844 619 149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 90 85 466
Average Queue (ft) 22 29 20 176
95th Queue (ft) 50 71 63 377
Link Distance (ft) 1216 149 149 1045
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
270
Section , Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | I
(559) 570-8991
Appendix I: Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project Traffic Conditions 271
Section , Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 246.8
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 209 222 16 14 0 744 0 240 39 340 109 0 Future Vol, veh/h 209 222 16 14 0 744 0 240 39 340 109 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 227 241 17 15 0 809 0 261 42 370 118 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 169 464.5 55.9 75.2

HCM LOS F F F F
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 2% 47% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 86% 0% 50% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 14% 98% 4% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 279 758 447 340 109
LT Vol 0 14 209 340 0
Through Vol 240 0 222 0 109
RT Vol 39 744 16 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 303 824 486 370 118
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.815 1.964 1.247 1.012 0.308
Departure Headway (Hd) 13.266 9.388 11.823 12.411 11.881 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 276 395 311 296 304
Service Time 11.266 7.388 9.823 10.111 9.581
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 1.098 2.086 1.563 1.25 0.388
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 55.9 464.5 169 93 19.8
HCM Lane LOS FFFFC
HCM 95th-tile Q 6.5 51.7 17.5 10.7 1.3
272
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 125.9
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 60 2 187 424 747 0 0 392 154
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 60 2 187 424 747 0 0 392 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 65 2 203 461 812 0 0 426 167
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2160 2327 812 593 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1734 1734 -------
Stage 2 426 593 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 52 37 377 978 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 155 141 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 657 492 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 27 0 377 978 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 27 0 -------
Stage 1 82 0 -------
Stage 2 657 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v $ 973.41 4.32 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 978 - 92 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.471 - 2.941 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 11.9 -$ 973.4 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.6 - 26.2 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s
+: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 273
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 335 97 127 1412 30 92 420 174 20 333 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 13 335 97 127 1412 30 92 420 174 20 333 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 14 364 105 138 1535 33 100 457 189 22 362 22 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 16 1230 548 165 1526 681 124 454 188 27 541 33 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.35 0.35 0.09 0.44 0.44 0.07 0.37 0.37 0.02 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1558 1753 3497 1560 1753 1235 511 1767 1731 105 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 14 364 105 138 1535 33 100 0 646 22 0 384 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1558 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1746 1767 0 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 8.8 5.5 9.0 51.0 1.2 6.6 0.0 43.0 1.5 0.0 21.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 8.8 5.5 9.0 51.0 1.2 6.6 0.0 43.0 1.5 0.0 21.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 16 1230 548 165 1526 681 124 0 642 27 0 574 V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.30 0.19 0.84 1.01 0.05 0.81 0.00 1.01 0.83 0.00 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 45 1230 548 255 1526 681 150 0 642 45 0 574 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 57.8 27.4 26.3 52.0 32.9 12.8 53.5 0.0 36.9 57.4 0.0 34.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 33.6 0.3 0.4 7.9 24.4 0.1 19.3 0.0 36.9 20.4 0.0 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 3.6 2.1 4.2 24.5 0.5 3.5 0.0 24.3 0.8 0.0 10.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 91.4 27.7 26.7 59.9 57.3 12.9 72.9 0.0 73.8 77.8 0.0 38.9 LnGrp LOS F C C E F B E F E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 483 1706 746 406
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.3 56.7 73.7 41.0
Approach LOS C E E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 46.1 13.3 41.5 6.1 56.0 6.8 48.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 37.0 10.0 36.0 3.0 51.0 3.0 43.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.0 10.8 8.6 23.2 2.9 53.0 3.5 45.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.9 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 54.6
HCM 7th LOS D
274
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.1
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 390 47 4 547 121 35
Future Vol, veh/h 390 47 4 547 121 35
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 406 49 4 570 126 36
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 456 0 1010 432
Stage 1 - - - - 432 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1099 - 265 622
Stage 1 - - - - 653 -
Stage 2 - - - - 559 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1098 - 263 621
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 263 -
Stage 1 - - - - 652 -
Stage 2 - - - - 557 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.06 29.89

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 303 1098 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.537 0.004 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 29.9 8.3 - - -
HCM Lane LOS D A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3 0 - - -
275
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 13.6
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 555 44 147 296 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 555 44 147 296 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 561 44 148 299 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 148 148 0 -
Stage 1 148 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 839 893 - 0
Stage 1 874 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 839 893 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 839 - - -
Stage 1 874 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 16.88 0

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 839 893 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.668 0.05 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 17.5 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 5.3 0.2 -
276
Section , Item D
HCM 7th AWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak
1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 150.8
Intersection LOS F
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 163 435 40 29 0 512 0 124 49 371 166 0 Future Vol, veh/h 163 435 40 29 0 512 0 124 49 371 166 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 170 453 42 30 0 533 0 129 51 386 173 0
Number of Lanes 010010010110
Approach SE NW NE SW
Opposing Approach NW SE SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1 1 2 1
Conflicting Approach Left SW NE SE NW
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NE SW NW SE
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 271.4 140.8 24.8 58.1

HCM LOS F F C F
Lane NELn1 NWLn1 SELn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 0% 5% 26% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 72% 0% 68% 0% 100%
Vol Right, % 28% 95% 6% 0% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 173 541 638 371 166
LT Vol 0 29 163 371 0
Through Vol 124 0 435 0 166
RT Vol 49 512 40 0 0
Lane Flow Rate 180 564 665 386 173
Geometry Grp 4a 2 2 5 5
Degree of Util (X) 0.473 1.204 1.525 0.973 0.412
Departure Headway (Hd) 11.73 8.837 8.815 10.527 10.002
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 310 417 419 348 363
Service Time 9.73 6.837 6.815 8.227 7.702
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.581 1.353 1.587 1.109 0.477
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 24.8 140.8 271.4 75.3 19.5
HCM Lane LOS C F F F C
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.4 19.7 33.7 10.6 2
277
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak
2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 40.8
Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 61 1 124 349 450 0 0 480 217
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 61 1 124 349 450 0 0 480 217
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 100 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 66 1 135 379 489 0 0 522 236
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1770 2005 489 758 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 1248 1248 -------
Stage 2 522 758 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 5.53 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 91 59 577 849 - 0 0 - -
Stage 1 269 244 - - - 0 0 - -
Stage 2 593 414 - - - 0 0 - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 50 0 577 849 -----
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 50 0 -------
Stage 1 149 0 -------
Stage 2 593 0 -------
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v $ 345.64 5.51 0

HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NEL NETNWLn1 SWT SWR
Capacity (veh/h) 849 - 130 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.447 - 1.557 - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 12.6 -$ 345.6 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - F - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.3 - 14.3 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s
+: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon 278
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 1030 90 130 660 27 44 273 133 27 284 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 1030 90 130 660 27 44 273 133 27 284 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 23 1084 95 137 695 28 46 287 140 28 299 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 341 1362 608 167 1016 453 58 332 162 34 471 27 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.39 0.39 0.10 0.29 0.29 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 3497 1560 1753 3497 1560 1753 1167 569 1767 1738 99 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 23 1084 95 137 695 28 46 0 427 28 0 316 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1749 1560 1753 1749 1560 1753 0 1736 1767 0 1837 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 26.0 2.9 7.3 16.7 1.2 2.5 0.0 22.1 1.5 0.0 14.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 26.0 2.9 7.3 16.7 1.2 2.5 0.0 22.1 1.5 0.0 14.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.05
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 341 1362 608 167 1016 453 58 0 494 34 0 498 V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.80 0.16 0.82 0.68 0.06 0.79 0.00 0.86 0.82 0.00 0.63 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 341 1513 675 222 1771 790 111 0 605 75 0 601 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.1 25.6 11.2 42.1 29.8 24.3 45.5 0.0 32.1 46.3 0.0 30.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 3.5 0.3 12.4 1.8 0.1 8.7 0.0 13.0 16.4 0.0 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 10.3 1.3 3.5 6.6 0.5 1.2 0.0 10.7 0.8 0.0 6.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 31.2 29.1 11.5 54.5 31.5 24.4 54.1 0.0 45.2 62.7 0.0 33.5 LnGrp LOS C C B D C C D D E C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1202 860 473 344
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.7 35.0 46.0 35.8
Approach LOS C C D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.1 41.9 8.1 30.7 23.4 32.5 6.8 32.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 41.0 6.0 31.0 5.0 48.0 4.0 33.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.3 28.0 4.5 16.4 3.0 18.7 3.5 24.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.9 0.0 2.9 0.0 8.8 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 33.9
HCM 7th LOS C
279
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.3
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 747 68 8 405 57 24
Future Vol, veh/h 747 68 8 405 57 24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 812 74 9 440 62 26
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 887 0 1310 850
Stage 1 - - - - 850 -
Stage 2 - - - - 460 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 759 - 175 359
Stage 1 - - - - 417 -
Stage 2 - - - - 634 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 759 - 172 359
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 172 -
Stage 1 - - - - 417 -
Stage 2 - - - - 625 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.19 35.52

HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 204 759 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.433 0.011 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 35.5 9.8 - - -
HCM Lane LOS E A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2 0 - - -
280
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak
5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp 05/19/2025
Baseline Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 10.2
Movement NBL NBR SET SER NWL NWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 412 34 207 607 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 412 34 207 607 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - Yield - Free - None
Storage Length 0 100 - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 429 35 216 632 0 0
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1
Conflicting Flow All 216 216 0 -
Stage 1 216 - - -
Stage 2 0 - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 770 822 - 0
Stage 1 818 - - 0
Stage 2 - - - 0
Platoon blocked, % -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 770 822 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 770 - - -
Stage 1 818 - - -
Stage 2 - - - -
Approach NB SE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 14.94 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 NBLn2 SET
Capacity (veh/h) 770 822 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.557 0.043 -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 15.4 9.6 -
HCM Lane LOS C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.5 0.1 -
281
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 209 222 16 14 0 744 0 240 39 340 109 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 209 222 16 14 0 744 0 240 39 340 109 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 227 241 17 0 0 825 0 261 42 370 118 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 0
Cap, veh/h 303 294 21 0 515 873 0 354 56 412 722 0
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.24 0.39 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1753 1699 120 0 1841 3120 0 3115 480 1753 1841 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 227 0 258 0 0 825 0 150 153 370 118 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 0 1819 0 1841 1560 0 1749 1754 1753 1841 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.3 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.0 25.9 0.0 8.3 8.5 20.5 4.2 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.3 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.0 25.9 0.0 8.3 8.5 20.5 4.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.27 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 303 0 315 0 515 873 0 205 205 412 722 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.75 0.00 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.00 0.73 0.75 0.90 0.16 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 533 0 553 0 517 877 0 385 386 701 1215 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.3 0.0 39.8 0.0 0.0 35.2 0.0 42.6 42.7 37.1 19.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.7 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 18.4 0.0 5.0 5.4 8.4 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.3 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 3.8 3.9 9.5 1.8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 43.0 0.0 45.1 0.0 0.0 53.7 0.0 47.6 48.1 45.5 19.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D D D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 485 825 303 488
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.1 53.7 47.8 39.3
Approach LOS D D D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 32.9 27.5 16.3 23.3 43.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.1 40.0 22.0 30.4 66.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.9 22.5 10.5 15.7 6.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 1.0 1.2 1.6 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 47.3
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 282
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 60 2 187 424 747 0 0 392 154 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 60 2 187 424 747 0 0 392 154 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 2 203 461 812 0 0 426 167
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3
Cap, veh/h 66 2 205 502 1287 0 0 454 178
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.28 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 389 12 1216 1767 1856 0 0 1269 497
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 270 0 0 461 812 0 0 0 593
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1617 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1766
Q Serve(g_s), s 12.8 0.0 0.0 19.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.8 0.0 0.0 19.5 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 Prop In Lane 0.24 0.75 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.28
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 273 0 0 502 1287 0 0 0 632
V/C Ratio(X) 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.94 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 273 0 0 550 1358 0 0 0 651
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.0 0.0 0.0 26.7 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 51.6 0.0 0.0 19.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 8.4 0.0 0.0 10.3 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 83.5 0.0 0.0 46.3 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.1 LnGrp LOS F D A D
Approach Vol, veh/h 270 1273 593
Approach Delay, s/veh 83.5 21.4 45.1
Approach LOS F C D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.0 58.1 25.9 32.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 56.4 24.0 28.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.8 20.4 21.5 27.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 0.4 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 35.9
HCM 7th LOS D
283
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 390 47 4 547 121 35
Future Vol, veh/h 390 47 4 547 121 35
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 100
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 406 49 4 570 126 36
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 456 0 1010 432
Stage 1 - - - - 432 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1099 - 265 622
Stage 1 - - - - 653 -
Stage 2 - - - - 559 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1098 - 263 621
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 263 -
Stage 1 - - - - 652 -
Stage 2 - - - - 557 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.06 26.23

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NELn2 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 263 621 1098 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.478 0.059 0.004 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 30.6 11.2 8.3 - - -
HCM Lane LOS D B A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.4 0.2 0 - - -
284
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp 05/19/2025 Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 163 435 40 29 0 512 0 124 49 371 166 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 163 435 40 29 0 512 0 124 49 371 166 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 453 42 0 0 565 0 129 51 386 173 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0
Cap, veh/h 518 490 45 0 372 629 0 205 77 426 669 0
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.24 0.36 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1672 155 0 1856 3137 0 2591 944 1767 1856 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 0 495 0 0 565 0 89 91 386 173 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1827 0 1856 1569 0 1763 1679 1767 1856 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.0 0.0 27.9 0.0 0.0 18.7 0.0 5.2 5.6 22.6 7.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.0 0.0 27.9 0.0 0.0 18.7 0.0 5.2 5.6 22.6 7.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.56 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 518 0 536 0 372 629 0 145 138 426 669 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.33 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.62 0.66 0.91 0.26 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 0 584 0 403 681 0 365 347 688 1176 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.4 0.0 36.4 0.0 0.0 41.5 0.0 47.2 47.4 39.2 24.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 19.7 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 4.2 5.3 10.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.2 0.0 14.4 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 2.4 2.5 10.8 3.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 29.8 0.0 56.1 0.0 0.0 55.7 0.0 51.4 52.6 49.4 24.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS C E E D D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 665 565 180 559
Approach Delay, s/veh 49.4 55.7 52.0 41.6
Approach LOS D E D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.2 29.6 13.3 37.2 43.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.9 4.0 4.6 6.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.1 41.4 22.0 34.0 67.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.7 24.6 7.6 29.9 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 1.1 0.7 1.3 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 49.2
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 285
Section , Item D
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Movement SEL SET SER NWL NWT NWR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 61 1 124 349 450 0 0 480 217 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 61 1 124 349 450 0 0 480 217 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 66 1 135 379 489 0 0 522 236
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 3 3
Cap, veh/h 56 1 115 419 1401 0 0 563 254
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 533 8 1091 1767 1856 0 0 1210 547
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 202 0 0 379 489 0 0 0 758
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1632 0 0 1767 1856 0 0 0 1757
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.0 0.0 0.0 15.8 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.0 0.0 0.0 15.8 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.8 Prop In Lane 0.33 0.67 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 172 0 0 419 1401 0 0 0 817
V/C Ratio(X) 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 172 0 0 443 1502 0 0 0 889
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 33.9 0.0 0.0 28.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 122.9 0.0 0.0 21.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.8 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 8.7 0.0 0.0 8.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 156.8 0.0 0.0 49.4 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.9 LnGrp LOS F D A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 202 868 758
Approach Delay, s/veh 156.8 23.4 33.9
Approach LOS F C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.0 61.9 22.0 39.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 61.4 19.0 38.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.0 8.7 17.8 32.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.2 2.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 42.5
HCM 7th LOS D
286
Section , Item D
HCM 7th TWSC Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak
4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue 05/19/2025
Improved Synchro 12 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2
Movement SET SER NWL NWT NEL NER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 747 68 8 405 57 24
Future Vol, veh/h 747 68 8 405 57 24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 1 1 0 2 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 75 - 0 100
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 3 3 3 3
Mvmt Flow 812 74 9 440 62 26
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 887 0 1310 850
Stage 1 - - - - 850 -
Stage 2 - - - - 460 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.13 - 6.43 6.23
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.227 - 3.527 3.327
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 759 - 175 359
Stage 1 - - - - 417 -
Stage 2 - - - - 634 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 759 - 172 359
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 172 -
Stage 1 - - - - 417 -
Stage 2 - - - - 625 -
Approach SE NW NE
HCM Ctrl Dly, s/v 0 0.19 30.87

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NELn2 NWL NWT SET SER
Capacity (veh/h) 172 359 759 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.36 0.073 0.011 - - -
HCM Ctrl Dly (s/v) 37.2 15.8 9.8 - - -
HCM Lane LOS E C A - - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.5 0.2 0 - - -
287
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 221 266 272 200 149 248 272 116
Average Queue (ft) 148 152 133 145 75 148 226 60
95th Queue (ft) 223 262 245 209 125 237 306 115
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 13
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 8 20
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 31 77
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 255 276 254 662
Average Queue (ft) 117 209 126 350
95th Queue (ft) 213 292 217 546
Link Distance (ft) 1268 263 263 1106
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 17 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 180 160 95 290 651 616 230 190 739 99 324 Average Queue (ft) 13 93 83 39 167 364 342 25 123 450 26 205 95th Queue (ft) 42 148 136 69 328 575 551 137 235 674 72 316 Link Distance (ft) 2511 2511 1359 1359 1106 1071
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 17 2 1 24 44 1 52 4 45
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 17 3 4 30 13 6 48 12 9
288
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement NE NE
Directions Served L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 199 67
Average Queue (ft) 71 27
95th Queue (ft) 140 53
Link Distance (ft) 1502
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB NB
Directions Served L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 317 150
Average Queue (ft) 109 10
95th Queue (ft) 205 72
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 9
Queuing Penalty (veh) 4
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 290
289
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE SE NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L TR LTR R T TR L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 370 718 285 199 96 120 277 156
Average Queue (ft) 203 419 104 79 47 67 212 81
95th Queue (ft) 434 719 208 145 87 115 297 143
Link Distance (ft) 1284 882 674 674 263 263
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 11
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 37 10 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 60 27 4
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 222 269 138 661
Average Queue (ft) 103 201 65 305
95th Queue (ft) 182 296 118 529
Link Distance (ft) 1267 263 263 1104
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 15
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Merced Street & Golden State Boulevard Movement SE SE SE SE NW NW NW NW NE NE SW SW
Directions Served L T T R L T T R L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 210 371 391 210 160 277 292 53 190 418 99 297 Average Queue (ft) 54 214 211 71 91 143 127 16 63 204 33 164 95th Queue (ft) 161 324 326 196 144 230 232 45 157 347 88 251 Link Distance (ft) 2516 2516 1358 1358 1104 1073
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 140 60 230 70 140 60
Storage Blk Time (%) 23 40 1 1 19 0 0 20 2 40
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 36 4 1 5 0 0 9 5 11
290
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 4: Fresno Street & Fowler Avenue
Movement SE NW NE NE
Directions Served TR T L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 24 53 121 109
Average Queue (ft) 1 3 49 25
95th Queue (ft) 8 21 90 71
Link Distance (ft) 882 142 1502
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
Intersection: 5: Fowler Avenue & SR 99 SB On-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served L
Maximum Queue (ft) 135
Average Queue (ft) 62
95th Queue (ft) 102
Link Distance (ft) 1339
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 196
291
Section , Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [2046 + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:48:24 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
292
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 14 4.0 15 4.0 0.880 28.7 LOS D 21.5 555.8 0.94 1.37 2.35 27.8 18x R2 744 4.0 809 4.0 0.880 28.7 LOS D 21.5 555.8 0.94 1.37 2.35 27.5 Approach 758 4.0 824 4.0 0.880 28.7 LOS D 21.5 555.8 0.94 1.37 2.35 27.6 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 340 4.0 370 4.0 0.404 7.0 LOS A 2.2 57.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.7 6x T1 109 4.0 118 4.0 0.404 7.0 LOS A 2.2 57.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.8 Approach 449 4.0 488 4.0 0.404 7.0 LOS A 2.2 57.8 0.10 0.03 0.10 28.7 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 209 4.0 227 4.0 0.514 10.3 LOS B 3.5 89.1 0.56 0.61 0.76 30.1 4x T1 222 4.0 241 4.0 0.514 10.3 LOS B 3.5 89.1 0.56 0.61 0.76 30.4 14x R2 16 4.0 17 4.0 0.514 10.3 LOS B 3.5 89.1 0.56 0.61 0.76 29.7 Approach 447 4.0 486 4.0 0.514 10.3 LOS B 3.5 89.1 0.56 0.61 0.76 30.2 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 240 4.0 261 4.0 0.446 11.7 LOS B 3.0 77.3 0.77 0.84 0.94 28.1 12x R2 39 4.0 42 4.0 0.446 11.7 LOS B 3.0 77.3 0.77 0.84 0.94 27.5 Approach 279 4.0 303 4.0 0.446 11.7 LOS B 3.0 77.3 0.77 0.84 0.94 28.0 All Vehicles 1933 4.0 2101 4.0 0.880 17.0 LOS C 21.5 555.8 0.63 0.80 1.26 28.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:48:19 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
293
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 + Project - SR 99 SB off-ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: Fowler Ave
3x L2 29 3.0 30 3.0 0.530 9.8 LOS A 3.1 80.1 0.48 0.40 0.52 36.7 18x R2 512 3.0 533 3.0 0.530 9.8 LOS A 3.1 80.1 0.48 0.40 0.52 36.2 Approach 541 3.0 564 3.0 0.530 9.8 LOS A 3.1 80.1 0.48 0.40 0.52 36.2 NorthEast: Merced St
1x L2 371 3.0 386 3.0 0.462 7.8 LOS A 2.3 58.7 0.14 0.05 0.14 28.5 6x T1 166 3.0 173 3.0 0.462 7.8 LOS A 2.3 58.7 0.14 0.05 0.14 28.6 Approach 537 3.0 559 3.0 0.462 7.8 LOS A 2.3 58.7 0.14 0.05 0.14 28.5 NorthWest: SR 99 SB Off-Ramp
7x L2 163 3.0 170 3.0 0.738 18.1 LOS C 9.9 254.7 0.77 1.07 1.52 27.6 4x T1 435 3.0 453 3.0 0.738 18.1 LOS C 9.9 254.7 0.77 1.07 1.52 27.7 14x R2 40 3.0 42 3.0 0.738 18.1 LOS C 9.9 254.7 0.77 1.07 1.52 27.2 Approach 638 3.0 665 3.0 0.738 18.1 LOS C 9.9 254.7 0.77 1.07 1.52 27.7 SouthWest: Sumner Ave
2x T1 124 3.0 129 3.0 0.342 12.1 LOS B 2.1 53.8 0.84 0.85 0.85 27.9 12x R2 49 3.0 51 3.0 0.342 12.1 LOS B 2.1 53.8 0.84 0.85 0.85 27.4 Approach 173 3.0 180 3.0 0.342 12.1 LOS B 2.1 53.8 0.84 0.85 0.85 27.8 All Vehicles 1889 3.0 1968 3.0 0.738 12.2 LOS B 9.9 254.7 0.51 0.57 0.78 29.9 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:48:22 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\1 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB Ramps\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\1 SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Merced Street.sip9
294
Section , Item D

SITE LAYOUT
Site: 1 [2046 + Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Layout pictures are schematic functional drawings reflecting input data. They are not design drawings.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Created: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:42:29 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\2 SR 99 295
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 + Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St AM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 60 3.0 65 3.0 0.424 11.9 LOS B 2.0 50.8 0.65 0.71 0.91 35.1 8x T1 2 3.0 2 3.0 0.424 11.9 LOS B 2.0 50.8 0.65 0.71 0.91 35.2 18x R2 187 3.0 203 3.0 0.424 11.9 LOS B 2.0 50.8 0.65 0.71 0.91 34.6 Approach 249 3.0 271 3.0 0.424 11.9 LOS B 2.0 50.8 0.65 0.71 0.91 34.7 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 392 3.0 426 3.0 0.623 12.9 LOS B 6.0 152.7 0.64 0.80 1.05 27.7 16x R2 154 3.0 167 3.0 0.623 12.9 LOS B 6.0 152.7 0.64 0.80 1.05 27.1 Approach 546 3.0 593 3.0 0.623 12.9 LOS B 6.0 152.7 0.64 0.80 1.05 27.5 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 424 3.0 461 3.0 0.371 6.5 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.1 2x T1 747 3.0 812 3.0 0.567 8.6 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.9 Approach 1171 3.0 1273 3.0 0.567 7.8 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.3 All Vehicles 1966 3.0 2137 3.0 0.623 9.7 LOS A 6.0 152.7 0.26 0.31 0.41 31.1 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:49:55 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
296
Section , Item D

MOVEMENT SUMMARY
Site: 1 [2046 + Project SR 99 NB ramp at Merced St PM (Site Folder: General)]
Site Category: -
Roundabout
Vehicle Movement Performance
INPUT

VOLUMES
DEMAND
FLOWS
95% BACK OF
QUEUE
Mov
ID
Turn Deg.

Satn
Aver.

Delay
Level of
Service
Prop.

Que
Effective
Stop
Rate
Aver.

No.

Cycles
Aver.

Speed
[ Total HV ] [ Total HV ] [ Veh. Dist ]
veh/h % veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph
SouthEast: NB off-ramp
3x L2 61 3.0 66 3.0 0.260 7.5 LOS A 0.8 20.4 0.48 0.48 0.48 37.5 8x T1 1 3.0 1 3.0 0.260 7.5 LOS A 0.8 20.4 0.48 0.48 0.48 37.6 18x R2 124 3.0 135 3.0 0.260 7.5 LOS A 0.8 20.4 0.48 0.48 0.48 36.9 Approach 186 3.0 202 3.0 0.260 7.5 LOS A 0.8 20.4 0.48 0.48 0.48 37.1 NorthEast: Merced St
6x T1 480 3.0 522 3.0 0.756 17.5 LOS C 11.6 296.9 0.71 1.00 1.43 26.1 16x R2 217 3.0 236 3.0 0.756 17.5 LOS C 11.6 296.9 0.71 1.00 1.43 25.7 Approach 697 3.0 758 3.0 0.756 17.5 LOS C 11.6 296.9 0.71 1.00 1.43 26.0 SouthWest: Merced St
5x L2 349 3.0 379 3.0 0.286 5.2 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.1 2x T1 450 3.0 489 3.0 0.341 5.5 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.9 Approach 799 3.0 868 3.0 0.341 5.4 LOS A 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.1 All Vehicles 1682 3.0 1828 3.0 0.756 10.7 LOS B 11.6 296.9 0.35 0.47 0.65 29.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab).

Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Sign Control.

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement.

LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of movement delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection).

Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6).

Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard.

Delay Model: HCM Delay Formula (Geometric Delay is not included).

Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula.

Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D).

HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.

SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: JLB TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, INC. | Licence: PLUS / 1PC | Processed: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:50:41 PM Project: Z:\01 Projects\042 Fowler\042-004 Fowler Fresno TIA\SIDRA\2 Merced Ave at SR 99 SB off-ramp\4 Cumulative Year plus Project\2 SR 99 NB Ramps Merced Street.sip9
297
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project AM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 217 854 282 67
Average Queue (ft) 105 681 97 7
95th Queue (ft) 205 1063 201 35
Link Distance (ft) 1234 844 619 149
Upstream Blk Time (%) 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 33
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 91 187 190 418
Average Queue (ft) 41 90 106 199
95th Queue (ft) 74 169 203 384
Link Distance (ft) 1216 149 149 1046
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 32
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 71
298
Section , Item D
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project PM Peak Improved 05/19/2025
Improved SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.

Intersection: 1: Merced Street & Fowler Avenue/SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Movement SE NW NE SW
Directions Served LTR LR TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 1273 166 165 105
Average Queue (ft) 1053 63 60 17
95th Queue (ft) 1666 119 118 59
Link Distance (ft) 1234 844 619 149
Upstream Blk Time (%) 68
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Merced Street & SR 99 NB Ramps
Movement NW NE NE SW
Directions Served LTR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 93 123 88 537
Average Queue (ft) 26 38 22 264
95th Queue (ft) 64 90 68 492
Link Distance (ft) 1216 149 149 1045
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
299
Section , Item D
www.JLBtraffic.com
[email protected]
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93704 App | J
(559) 570-8991
Appendix J: Traffic Signal Warrants
300
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing Traffic Conditions

1. SR 99 SB Off-Ramp / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Merced St
Highest
Approach
Volume =
320 (382) VPH
SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Total of Both Approaches =
659 (553) VPH
301
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing Traffic Conditions

2. SR 99 NB Ramps / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 NB
Ramps
Highest
Approach
Volume =
168 (135) VPH
Merced St Total of Both Approaches =
1202 (1057) VPH
302
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing Traffic Conditions

4. Fresno Street / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Fresno Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
118 (57) VPH
Fowler Ave Total of Both Approaches =
560 (630) VPH
303
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing Traffic Conditions

5. SR 99 SB On-Ramp / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
266 (211) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
282 (381) VPH
304
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions

1. SR 99 SB Off-Ramp / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Merced St
Highest
Approach
Volume =
414 (440) VPH
SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Total of Both Approaches =
835 (698) VPH
305
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions

2. SR 99 NB Ramps / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 NB
Ramps
Highest
Approach
Volume =
203 (149) VPH
Merced St Total of Both Approaches =
1376 (1193) VPH
306
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions

4. Fresno Street / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Fresno Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
146 (80) VPH
Fowler Ave Total of Both Approaches =
589 (666) VPH
307
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions

5. SR 99 SB On-Ramp / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 SB OnRamp
Highest
Approach
Volume =
289 (230) VPH
Fowler Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
303(410) VPH
308
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions

1. SR 99 SB Off-Ramp / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Merced St
Highest
Approach
Volume =
430 (487) VPH
SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Total of Both Approaches =
953 (845) VPH
309
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions

2. SR 99 NB Ramps / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 NB
Ramps
Highest
Approach
Volume =
204 (152) VPH
Merced St Total of Both Approaches =
1501 (1306) VPH
310
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions

4. Fresno Street / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Fresno Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
146 (80) VPH
Fowler Ave Total of Both Approaches =
720 (844) VPH
311
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions

5. SR 99 SB On-Ramp / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
338(302) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
393(525) VPH
312
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 No Project Traffic Conditions

1. SR 99 SB Off-Ramp / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Merced St
Highest
Approach
Volume =
355 (479) VPH
SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Total of Both Approaches =
1029 (1034) VPH
313
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 No Project Traffic Conditions

2. SR 99 NB Ramps / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 NB
Ramps
Highest
Approach
Volume =
214 (172) VPH
Merced St Total of Both Approaches =
1543 (1360) VPH
314
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 No Project Traffic Conditions

4. Fresno Street / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Fresno Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
128 (58) VPH
Fowler Ave Total of Both Approaches =
959 (1192) VPH
315
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 No Project Traffic Conditions

5. SR 99 SB On-Ramp / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
406 (427) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
592 (785) VPH
316
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project Traffic Conditions

1. SR 99 SB Off-Ramp / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Merced St
Highest
Approach
Volume =
449 (537) VPH
SR 99 SB Off-Ramp Total of Both Approaches =
1205 (1179) VPH
317
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project Traffic Conditions

2. SR 99 NB Ramps / Merced St
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
SR 99 NB
Ramps
Highest
Approach
Volume =
249 (186) VPH
Merced St Total of Both Approaches =
1717 (1496) VPH
318
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project Traffic Conditions

4. Fresno Street / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Fresno Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
156 (81) VPH
Fowler Ave Total of Both Approaches =
988 (1228) VPH
319
Section , Item D
516 W. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93704
[email protected] (559) 570-8991
Warrant 3: Peak Hour (Rural)
Cumulative Year 2046 plus Project Traffic Conditions

5. SR 99 SB On-Ramp / Fowler Ave
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition) Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
443 (446) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
599 (814) VPH
320
Section , Item D
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 6 OFFICE
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE |P.O. BOX 12616 |FRESNO, CA 93778-2616 (559) 365-5140 | FAX (559) 488-4195 | TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
June 20, 2025
FRE-99-10.94
City of Fowler
NWC C-Store & Fuel
GTS #: 35683

SENT VIA EMAIL
Mr. Matthew Arndt
JLB Traffic
515 W. Shaw Ave. Suite 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Dear Mr. Arndt:

Caltrans has completed its review of the Traffic Impact Study for the proposed NWC CStore and Fuel Station project, located at the northwest corner of South Fowler Avenue and West Fresno Street, on the west side of State Route (SR) 99 in the City of Fowler. This letter supersedes Caltrans' previous comment letter dated June 18, 2025, and replaces it in its entirety.

Caltrans provides the following comments about the proposed project:

SR 99 Ramp Intersections – Safety and Congestion Risks
The intersections of the SR 99 southbound off-ramp at Merced Street and the SR 99 northbound ramps at Merced Street are projected to experience significant operational delays and capacity constraints under both near-term and cumulative scenarios. This raises substantial concerns regarding intersection performance, queuing, and overall traffic operations at these ramp terminals:
• Queuing/Spillback: Observed and projected delays exceed thresholds that risk queue spillback onto mainline SR 99.
• ISOAP Required: Caltrans has determined through previous evaluations that roundabouts are the only feasible long-term solution for both the northbound and southbound SR 99 ramp intersections at Merced Avenue due to the existing operational deficiencies and geometric limitations that preclude signalized solutions. As such, the ISOAP will serve to document and validate the roundabout alternative and support conceptual layout development and fair share coordination.

While Caltrans policy requires completion of an ISOAP prior to implementing intersection improvements, this process will function in this case to confirm and refine the roundabout strategy, not to weigh signalized alternatives that have already been deemed infeasible.

Furthermore, Caltrans acknowledges that while the proposed development is not independently constructing these improvements, it will contribute a proportional and fair share toward their implementation.

Attachment 10: Caltrans Comment Letter
321
Section , Item D
Mr. Matthew Arndt – NWC C-Store & Fuel
June 20, 2025

Page 2 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” The roundabout improvements should be reflected in the Cumulative + Project roadway network, and the TIA should be revised to explicitly identify them as the only feasible mitigation and incorporate their configurations into the Cumulative + Project scenario network.

Therefore, Caltrans recommends that the lead agency, in coordination with Caltrans District 6, take the lead in initiating and preparing the ISOAP as part of the broader effort to advance the roundabout improvements as a regional or capital infrastructure project.

Given that the proposed development contributes to conditions necessitating the roundabouts, Caltrans will only support the project if fair share contributions toward their implementation are clearly defined and secured through binding mechanisms such as a development agreement, capital improvement program, or fee structure administered by the lead agency in coordination with Caltrans.

While roundabouts are the only feasible long-term solution at the SR 99 ramp intersections, the timing of their implementation will depend on regional capital programming, funding availability, and project readiness. Caltrans recognizes that the proposed development is not solely responsible for constructing these improvements; however, its fair share contribution is necessary to support future delivery. Therefore, Caltrans does not require construction of the roundabouts as a condition for project approval but does require that the applicant’s fair share contribution be secured in advance, through a development agreement or fee mechanism coordinated with the lead agency and Caltrans.

Intersection Improvement Feasibility
The conceptual roundabout improvements at the SR 99 ramp intersections may face constraints related to existing structures, utilities, and planned bikeways. For example, geometric limitations along Merced Street may require design exceptions for shoulder widths, lane widths, and bikeway clearances.

Preliminary roundabout layouts should be developed and submitted by the lead agency, in coordination with Caltrans, as part of the ISOAP process. These layouts are intended to inform design feasibility and multimodal compatibility and are not required prior to project approval, as long as the applicant’s fair share contribution is secured.

Access Management – Fowler Avenue and Fresno Street
The project proposes three full-access driveways, including two closely spaced on Fowler Avenue.
• Caltrans recommends revisiting the driveway access strategy to minimize turning conflicts and improve operational safety.
• Right-in/right-out configurations or driveway consolidation should be considered to support corridor flow and multimodal safety, particularly with the future installation of Class IV bikeways.

Turn Lane Storage and Queuing
The queuing analysis includes turn pocket storage recommendations; however:
• Please confirm that left- and right-turn pockets near ramp terminals meet the Highway Design Manual (HDM) and Caltrans Design Manual criteria for 2046 cumulative volumes, including appropriate deceleration and taper lengths. 322
Section , Item D
Mr. Matthew Arndt – NWC C-Store & Fuel
June 20, 2025

Page 3 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
Future planned bikeways (Class I and IV) along Fowler Avenue and Fresno Street, along with existing pedestrian infrastructure, will introduce significant multimodal interaction at project driveways and intersections.
• Project access and intersection improvements must be designed to reduce conflict potential with non-motorized users.
• If roundabouts are selected, bikeway continuity and visibility through the intersection must be addressed per Caltrans' roundabout design guidance.

Conclusion
Due to the projected operational and safety deficiencies at the SR 99 ramp intersections, and based on Caltrans’ determination that roundabouts are the only feasible long-term improvement strategy, Caltrans recommends that the following conditions be incorporated into the City’s project approval:
• Initiation and preparation of an ISOAP by the lead agency, in coordination with Caltrans, for the SR 99 ramp intersections
• Submittal of conceptual improvement layouts
• Coordination with Caltrans on geometric and multimodal design elements These conditions are necessary to ensure the project’s consistency with long-term safety, operational, and multimodal goals for the State Highway System.

In addition, Caltrans recommends that the applicant’s fair share contribution toward future roundabout implementation be included as a condition of approval and secured through a binding mechanism such as a development agreement, capital improvement program, or fee program administered by the lead agency in coordination with Caltrans.

If you have any other questions, please call Elizabeth Yelton, Transportation Planner at (559) 365-5140.

Sincerely,
Mr. DAVE PADILLA, Branch Chief,
Local Development Branch
323
Section , Item D

EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
LOT 45 OF TRACT MAP NO. 5042, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72,

FRESNO COUNTY RECORDS, ALSO LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 42,605 SQ. FT. GROSS (0.98 ACRES) MORE OR LESS LOT 46 OF TRACT MAP NO. 5042, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72,

FRESNO COUNTY RECORDS, ALSO LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 11,809 SQ. FT. GROSS (0.27 ACRES) MORE OR LESS __________________________ DEC. 4, 2024
PEDRO J. PEDROZA, PLS 5494 DATE
APN’S 343-350-45 & 46
Attachment 11: Lot Line Adjust Exhibits
324
Section , Item D

Page 3 ends

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. _______
BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 45 AND 46 OF TRACT MAP NO. 5042, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72, FRESNO COUNTY RECORDS, ALSO LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL A:

LOTS 45 AND 46 OF TRACT MAP NO. 5042, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72,

FRESNO COUNTY RECORDS, ALSO LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 54,414 SQ. FT. GROSS (1.249 ACRES) MORE OR LESS __________________________ DEC. 4, 2024
PEDRO J. PEDROZA, PLS 5494 DATE
APN’S 343-350-45 & 46
325
Section , Item D
THIS MAP IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY PAGE 4 OF 8
PEDRO J. PEDROZA, PLS 5494
DATE
APN’S: 343-350-45 & 46
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. EXHIBIT B BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 45 AND 46 IN TRACT MAP NO. 5042 IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, FILED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72, IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, ALSO BEING LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

OWNER INFORMATION
MICHAEL ARFSLEN RETAIL CALIFORNIA 7480 NORTH PALM AVENUE SUITE 101 FRESNO, CA 93711 LAND SURVEYOR:PEDRO J. PEDROZA, PLS NO. 5494 425 19TH STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 661-578-1357 [email protected]
NOTES: SITE ADDRESS: 418 WEST FOWLER AVENUE, FOWLER, CA 93625 EXISTING USE: VACANT PROPOSED USE: GAS STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERICALZONING: C-1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERICAL WATER: CITY OF FOWLER SEWER: SELMA-KINGSBURG-FOWLER COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT ELECTRICITY: PG&E GAS: PG&E 1TELEPHONE: AT&T CABLE: SPECTRUM APN: 343-350-45 & 46 PROJECT AREA:

APN: 343-350-45: 42,605 SQ. FT. GROSS & 33,384 SQ. FT. NET APN: 343-350-46: 11,809 SQ. FT. GROSS & 9,905 SQ. FT. NET FLOOD ZONE: NONE BASIS OF BEARINGS: ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN UPON THIS MAPPING ARE RECORD AND CALCULATED FROM TRACT MAP NO. 5042, RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 2002 IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, PAGES 71 AND 72, F.C.R. EASEMENTS FROM TITLE REPORT: SEE PAGE 5 FOWLER, CA

VICINITY MAP

NO SCALE
N
NORTH
4 DEC 2024
326
Section , Item D
THIS MAP IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY PAGE 5 OF 8
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. EXHIBIT B BEING A MERGER OF LOTS 45 AND 46 IN TRACT MAP NO. 5042 IN THE CITY OF FOWLER, COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF, FILED OCTOBER 15, 2002, IN VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 71 AND 72, IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, ALSO BEING LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, T. 15 S., R. 21 E., M.D.M., IN THE COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

EXCEPTIONS AND EASEMENTS FROM TITLE REPORT:
5 IRRIGATION DITCH IN FAVOR OF W.L. GRIFFEN PER BOOK 284, PAGE 212 OF DEEDS. (THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORDED).
6 IRRIGATION DITCH RIGHTS PER LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN A.F. COFFEY, CHARLES ALDEN, AND PETER MATHSON RECORDED ON APRIL 8, 1913 IN BOOK 74, PAGE 375 OF COVENANTS (THE EXACT LOCATION OF EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD).
9 PUBLIC UTILITIES & STORM DRAIN EASEMENTS AS SHOWN AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS DELINEATED OR AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION , ON TRACT MAP NO. 5042.
(NOT IN TITLE REPORT) A 20.5’ WIDE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO. 5042. 327
Section , Item D
4 DEC 2024
328
Section , Item D
4 DEC 2024
329
Section , Item D
4 DEC 2024
330
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
1 / 54
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Attachment 12: CalEEMod Output Files
331
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
2 / 54

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type 332
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
3 / 54

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities 333
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
4 / 54

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated 334
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
5 / 54

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures 335
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
6 / 54

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
336
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
7 / 54

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name CUP 24-27
Construction Start Date 9/1/2025
Operational Year 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.70
Precipitation (days) 25.4
Location 36.62467210879598, -119.68355645924595
County Fresno
City Fowler
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2536
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
337
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
8 / 54
Convenience 6.00 Pump 0.02 847 0.00 — — —
Market with Gas
Pumps
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

4.54 1000sqft 0.10 4,545 0.00 — — —
Free-Standing
Discount store

1.50 1000sqft 0.03 1,500 0.00 — — —
Parking Lot 0.83 Acre 0.83 0.00 0.00 — — —
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

5.20 1000sqft 0.12 0.00 0.00 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.49 4.47 14.1 14.9 0.02 0.64 2.82 3.46 0.59 1.35 1.94 — 2,515 2,515 0.10 0.02 0.23 2,525 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.49 4.47 8.98 10.1 0.02 0.33 0.07 0.35 0.30 0.02 0.31 — 1,830 1,830 0.07 0.02 0.01 1,837 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.32 0.28 2.24 2.50 < 0.005 0.08 0.06 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.10 — 450 450 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 451 338
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
9 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(Max)
Unmit. 0.06 0.05 0.41 0.46 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 — 74.5 74.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 74.7

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.84 1.55 14.1 14.9 0.02 0.64 2.82 3.46 0.59 1.35 1.94 — 2,515 2,515 0.10 0.02 0.23 2,525 2026 4.49 4.47 0.86 1.15 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 — 137 137 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 137 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.29 1.08 8.98 10.1 0.02 0.33 0.02 0.35 0.30 < 0.005 0.31 — 1,830 1,830 0.07 0.02 < 0.005 1,837 2026 4.49 4.47 8.60 10.0 0.02 0.29 0.07 0.31 0.27 0.02 0.27 — 1,830 1,830 0.07 0.02 0.01 1,837 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.32 0.27 2.24 2.50 < 0.005 0.08 0.06 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.10 — 450 450 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 451 2026 0.31 0.28 1.31 1.57 < 0.005 0.05 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.04 — 280 280 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 281 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.06 0.05 0.41 0.46 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 0.02 — 74.5 74.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 74.7 2026 0.06 0.05 0.24 0.29 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 46.3 46.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 46.5

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
339
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
10 / 54
Unmit. 20.5 19.1 17.8 153 0.37 0.30 30.2 30.5 0.28 7.67 7.95 36.0 38,014 38,050 5.07 1.78 312 39,017 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 18.5 17.0 20.4 129 0.34 0.30 30.2 30.5 0.28 7.67 7.95 36.0 34,864 34,900 5.28 1.90 186 35,785 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 14.5 13.7 10.6 72.0 0.16 0.14 12.9 13.0 0.14 3.27 3.41 36.0 16,144 16,180 4.66 0.97 207 16,792 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.64 2.49 1.94 13.1 0.03 0.03 2.35 2.38 0.02 0.60 0.62 5.97 2,673 2,679 0.77 0.16 34.2 2,780

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 20.3 18.9 17.7 152 0.37 0.28 30.2 30.5 0.27 7.67 7.93 — 37,646 37,646 1.42 1.76 129 38,336 Area 0.22 0.21 < 0.005 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.23 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.24 Energy 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 364 364 0.04 < 0.005 — 366 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.98 3.42 6.40 0.31 0.01 — 16.2 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 33.1 0.00 33.1 3.30 0.00 — 116 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 183 183
Total 20.5 19.1 17.8 153 0.37 0.30 30.2 30.5 0.28 7.67 7.95 36.0 38,014 38,050 5.07 1.78 312 39,017 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 18.3 16.8 20.2 129 0.34 0.28 30.2 30.5 0.27 7.67 7.93 — 34,497 34,497 1.62 1.89 3.34 35,104 Area 0.16 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —340
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
11 / 54
Energy 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 364 364 0.04 < 0.005 — 366 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.98 3.42 6.40 0.31 0.01 — 16.2 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 33.1 0.00 33.1 3.30 0.00 — 116 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 183 183
Total 18.5 17.0 20.4 129 0.34 0.30 30.2 30.5 0.28 7.67 7.95 36.0 34,864 34,900 5.28 1.90 186 35,785 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 14.2 13.5 10.4 71.7 0.15 0.13 12.9 13.0 0.12 3.27 3.39 — 15,777 15,777 1.00 0.96 24.1 16,111 Area 0.19 0.19 < 0.005 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.61 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.61 Energy 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 364 364 0.04 < 0.005 — 366 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.98 3.42 6.40 0.31 0.01 — 16.2 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 33.1 0.00 33.1 3.30 0.00 — 116 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 183 183
Total 14.5 13.7 10.6 72.0 0.16 0.14 12.9 13.0 0.14 3.27 3.41 36.0 16,144 16,180 4.66 0.97 207 16,792 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.60 2.46 1.91 13.1 0.03 0.02 2.35 2.38 0.02 0.60 0.62 — 2,612 2,612 0.17 0.16 3.99 2,667 Area 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 60.2 60.2 0.01 < 0.005 — 60.6 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.49 0.57 1.06 0.05 < 0.005 — 2.69 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 5.47 0.00 5.47 0.55 0.00 — 19.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 30.2 30.2
Total 2.64 2.49 1.94 13.1 0.03 0.03 2.35 2.38 0.02 0.60 0.62 5.97 2,673 2,679 0.77 0.16 34.2 2,780

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 341
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
12 / 54
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.56 1.31 12.1 12.1 0.02 0.56 — 0.56 0.52 — 0.52 — 2,065 2,065 0.08 0.02 — 2,072 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.44 2.44 — 1.17 1.17 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17.0 17.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.0 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.81 2.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.82 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — 342
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
13 / 54
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 45.5 45.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.17 46.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.34 0.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
343
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
14 / 54
Off-Roa 1.80 1.51 14.1 14.5 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,455 2,455 0.10 0.02 — 2,463 d
Equipm
ent
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.02 0.02 0.15 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 26.9 26.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 27.0 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.45 4.45 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.47 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —344
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
15 / 54
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 60.6 60.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 61.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.61 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.62 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 8.95 10.0 0.02 0.33 — 0.33 0.30 — 0.30 — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 345
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
16 / 54
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 8.95 10.0 0.02 0.33 — 0.33 0.30 — 0.30 — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.28 0.24 1.98 2.22 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.07 — 0.07 — 398 398 0.02 < 0.005 — 400 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.05 0.04 0.36 0.40 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 65.9 65.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 66.2 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.1 16.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 16.4 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.9 14.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 15.6 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.3 14.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 14.5 346
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
17 / 54
Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.9 14.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 15.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.28 3.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.33 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.29 3.29 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.44 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.54 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.55 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.54 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.57 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.22 1.01 8.57 9.96 0.02 0.29 — 0.29 0.27 — 0.27 — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
347
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
18 / 54
Off-Roa 0.16 0.14 1.16 1.34 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 243 243 0.01 < 0.005 — 244 d
Equipm
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.03 0.21 0.25 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 40.3 40.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 40.4 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.0 14.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 14.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.6 14.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 15.3 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.96 1.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.99 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.97 1.97 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.06 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.32 0.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.34 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 348
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
19 / 54

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.56 0.47 4.41 6.48 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.17 — 0.17 — 991 991 0.04 0.01 — 995 Paving 0.22 0.22 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.01 0.12 0.18 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 27.2 27.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 27.3 Paving 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.50 4.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.51 Paving < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 349
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
20 / 54
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 65.9 65.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 66.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.87 1.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.90 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 350
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
21 / 54
Architect 4.35 4.35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coating
s

4.35 4.35 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.66 3.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.67 Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.12 0.12 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.61 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.61 Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.02 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
351
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
22 / 54
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.16 3.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.21 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.80 2.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.85 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 352
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
23 / 54
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

8.14 7.57 7.11 61.4 0.15 0.11 12.2 12.3 0.11 3.09 3.20 — 15,190 15,190 0.57 0.71 52.0 15,468 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru

11.8 11.0 10.3 88.9 0.22 0.16 17.7 17.8 0.16 4.48 4.63 — 21,982 21,982 0.82 1.03 75.3 22,385 Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store

0.40 0.38 0.26 2.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.37 0.38 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 — 473 473 0.02 0.03 1.59 483 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 20.3 18.9 17.7 152 0.37 0.28 30.2 30.5 0.27 7.67 7.93 — 37,646 37,646 1.42 1.76 129 38,336 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

7.33 6.74 8.13 52.0 0.14 0.11 12.2 12.3 0.11 3.09 3.20 — 13,919 13,919 0.65 0.76 1.35 14,164 353
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
24 / 54
Fast 10.6 9.75 11.8 75.2 0.20 0.16 17.7 17.8 0.16 4.48 4.63 — 20,143 20,143 0.94 1.10 1.95 20,497 Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store

0.36 0.33 0.30 1.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.37 0.38 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 — 435 435 0.03 0.03 0.04 444 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 18.3 16.8 20.2 129 0.34 0.28 30.2 30.5 0.27 7.67 7.93 — 34,497 34,497 1.62 1.89 3.34 35,104 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

1.16 1.10 0.80 5.52 0.01 0.01 0.93 0.94 0.01 0.24 0.25 — 1,046 1,046 0.07 0.07 1.59 1,069 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru

1.38 1.30 1.06 7.29 0.02 0.01 1.36 1.38 0.01 0.35 0.36 — 1,504 1,504 0.09 0.09 2.31 1,535 Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store

0.05 0.05 0.04 0.29 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 61.7 61.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 62.9 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 2.60 2.46 1.91 13.1 0.03 0.02 2.35 2.38 0.02 0.60 0.62 — 2,612 2,612 0.17 0.16 3.99 2,667 354 Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
25 / 54

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 27.8 27.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.0 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — 113 113 0.02 < 0.005 — 115
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
— — — — — — — — — — — — 8.85 8.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.94 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 17.7 17.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.9 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 168 168 0.03 < 0.005 — 169 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
355
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
26 / 54
Conveni———————————— 27.8 27.8 < 0.005 < 0.005— 28.0
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
———————————— 113 113 0.02 < 0.005— 115
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
———————————— 8.85 8.85 < 0.005 < 0.005— 8.94
Parking
Lot
———————————— 17.7 17.7 < 0.005 < 0.005— 17.9
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
———————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total———————————— 168 168 0.03 < 0.005— 169
Annual——————————————————
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
———————————— 4.60 4.60 < 0.005 < 0.005— 4.64
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
———————————— 18.8 18.8 < 0.005 < 0.005— 19.0
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
———————————— 1.47 1.47 < 0.005 < 0.005— 1.48
Parking
Lot
———————————— 2.93 2.93 < 0.005 < 0.005— 2.96
356
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
27 / 54
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 27.8 27.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 28.1

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.06 9.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.08 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru

0.02 0.01 0.15 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 182 182 0.02 < 0.005 — 183 Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.71 4.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.72 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 196 196 0.02 < 0.005 — 196 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
357
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
28 / 54
Conveni
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.06 9.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.08 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 196 196 0.02 < 0.005 — 196 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.50 1.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.50 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 30.2 30.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 30.2 Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.78 0.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.78 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 358
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
29 / 54
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 32.4 32.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 32.5

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s

0.15 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.23 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.24 Total 0.22 0.21 < 0.005 0.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.23 1.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.24 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s

0.15 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
359
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
30 / 54
Architect 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Coating
s
Total 0.16 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s

0.03 0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 Total 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.14 0.26 0.01 < 0.005 — 0.66 360
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
31 / 54
Fast——————————— 2.64 3.04 5.68 0.27 0.01— 14.4
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
——————————— 0.21 0.24 0.46 0.02 < 0.005— 1.16
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 2.98 3.42 6.40 0.31 0.01— 16.2
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
——————————— 0.12 0.14 0.26 0.01 < 0.005— 0.66
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
——————————— 2.64 3.04 5.68 0.27 0.01— 14.4
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
——————————— 0.21 0.24 0.46 0.02 < 0.005— 1.16
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
361
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
32 / 54
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 2.98 3.42 6.40 0.31 0.01 — 16.2 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.11 Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.44 0.50 0.94 0.04 < 0.005 — 2.39 Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.04 0.04 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.19 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.49 0.57 1.06 0.05 < 0.005 — 2.69

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
362
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
33 / 54
Conveni——————————— 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00— 4.79
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
——————————— 28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00— 98.7
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
——————————— 3.48 0.00 3.48 0.35 0.00— 12.2
Parking
Lot
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00
Total——————————— 33.1 0.00 33.1 3.30 0.00— 116
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
——————————— 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00— 4.79
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
——————————— 28.2 0.00 28.2 2.82 0.00— 98.7
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
——————————— 3.48 0.00 3.48 0.35 0.00— 12.2
363
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
34 / 54
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 33.1 0.00 33.1 3.30 0.00 — 116 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — 4.67 0.00 4.67 0.47 0.00 — 16.3
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.58 0.00 0.58 0.06 0.00 — 2.01
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 5.47 0.00 5.47 0.55 0.00 — 19.2

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 364
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
35 / 54
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
———————————————— 176 176
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
———————————————— 7.10 7.10
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
———————————————— 0.01 0.01
Total———————————————— 183 183
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
———————————————— 176 176
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
———————————————— 7.10 7.10
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
———————————————— 0.01 0.01
Total———————————————— 183 183
Annual——————————————————365
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
36 / 54
Conveni
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 29.1 29.1
Fast
Food
Restaurant
with
Drive
Thru
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.18 1.18
Free-Sta
nding
Discount
store
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 30.2 30.2

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
366
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
37 / 54

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
367
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
38 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —368
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
39 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —369
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
40 / 54
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2025 9/3/2025 5.00 3.00 — Grading Grading 9/4/2025 9/9/2025 5.00 4.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 9/10/2025 3/10/2026 5.00 130 — Paving Paving 3/11/2026 3/24/2026 5.00 10.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/25/2026 4/7/2026 5.00 10.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 370
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
41 / 54
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 4.00 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 4.00 HHDT,MHDT 371
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
42 / 54
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 2.66 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 1.13 4.00 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 12.5 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 4.00 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 0.53 7.70 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 4.00 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 10,338 3,446 2,481

5.6. Dust Mitigation
372
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
43 / 54

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 2.81 0.00 —
Grading — — 4.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.95

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.00 0%
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.00 0%
Free-Standing Discount store 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 0.83 100%
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.12 0%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
373
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
44 / 54

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
1,935 1,935 1,935 706,275 3,404 17,253 17,253 2,686,839 Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
2,140 2,800 2,148 816,061 6,191 24,968 19,151 3,914,582 Free-Standing
Discount store

79.7 106 90.3 31,017 423 527 448 161,141
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 10,338 3,446 2,481

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
374
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
45 / 54

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
49,684 204 0.0330 0.0040 28,255
Fast Food Restaurant with
Drive Thru
203,085 204 0.0330 0.0040 568,278
Free-Standing Discount store 15,840 204 0.0330 0.0040 14,689 Parking Lot 31,672 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 62,743 0.00
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,379,561 0.00
Free-Standing Discount store 111,109 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2.54 —
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 52.4 —
375
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
46 / 54
Free-Standing Discount store 6.45 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Supermarket
refrigeration and
condensing units
R-404A 3,922 26.5 16.5 16.5 18.0
Fast Food Restaurant
with Drive Thru
Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.00
Fast Food Restaurant
with Drive Thru
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 1.80 4.00 4.00 18.0
Fast Food Restaurant
with Drive Thru
Walk-in refrigerators
and freezers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
Free-Standing
Discount store
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Free-Standing
Discount store
Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor 376
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
47 / 54

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year) 377
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
48 / 54

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 29.8 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 1.25 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A 378
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
49 / 54
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 3 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 84.6 379
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
50 / 54
AQ-PM 94.9
AQ-DPM 65.0
Drinking Water 96.4
Lead Risk Housing 55.5
Pesticides 93.5
Toxic Releases 62.1
Traffic 35.2
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 50.3
Groundwater 61.5
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 27.1
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 98.1
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 88.8
Cardio-vascular 65.6
Low Birth Weights 73.8
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 79.3
Housing 13.1
Linguistic 63.0
Poverty 66.4
Unemployment 71.7

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic — 380
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
51 / 54
Above Poverty 27.9481586
Employed 28.26895932
Median HI 33.88938791
Education—
Bachelor's or higher 21.73745669
High school enrollment 23.59810086
Preschool enrollment 32.91415373
Transportation—
Auto Access 81.29090209
Active commuting 8.956756063
Social—
2-parent households 54.69010651
Voting 36.35313743
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 76.64570769
Park access 6.865135378
Retail density 6.916463493
Supermarket access 37.66200436
Tree canopy 4.504042089
Housing—
Homeownership 49.74977544
Housing habitability 37.64917233
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 52.76530219 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 58.00076992
Uncrowded housing 21.40382394
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 26.25433081
Arthritis 0.0
381
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
52 / 54
Asthma ER Admissions 14.8
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 13.6
Cognitively Disabled 36.6
Physically Disabled 60.6
Heart Attack ER Admissions 19.1
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 93.2
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 13.5
Elderly 45.2
English Speaking 30.1
Foreign-born 55.0
382
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
53 / 54
Outdoor Workers 2.8
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 92.1
Traffic Density 38.2
Traffic Access 0.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 81.9
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 22.7

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 93.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 25.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data 383
Section , Item D
CUP 24-27 Detailed Report, 12/17/2024
54 / 54
Screen Justification
Characteristics: Project Details Construction timeline inserted Construction: Construction Phases No demolition, based on given construction timeline. 384
Section , Item D
ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS
FOWLER AVENUE & FRESNO STREET CONVENIENCE STORE/GAS STATION FOWLER, CALIFORNIA
WJVA Project No. 24-69
PREPARED FOR
ARCHER ENGINEERING
15927 CUSANO PLACE
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93314
PREPARED BY
WJV ACOUSTICS, INC.

VISALIA, CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 23, 2024
113 N. Church Street, Suite 203 ∙ Visalia, CA 93291∙ (559) 627-4923 Attachment 13: Acoustical Analysis
385
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 2

INTRODUCTION
The project is a proposed gas station and convenience store, to be located at W. Fresno Street and S. Fowler Avenue, in the City of Fowler, California. The gas station would operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week. The convenience store would operate between 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., daily. The convenience store would offer a variety of products, including snacks, beverages, tobacco products, automotive supplies, and basic groceries. The convenience store would include a drive‐thru window allowing customers to order and receive food orders while remaining in their vehicles. The drive‐thru operations would occur between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The convenience store will have 2‐3 employees on shift during operational hours.

This analysis, prepared by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA), is based upon a project site plan prepared by Archer Engineering, the findings of on‐site ambient noise level measurements, project‐related operational information provided by the applicant, and WJVA file noise data. Revisions to the site plan and/or project operational information may affect the findings and recommendations of this report. The project site plan is provided as Figure 1.

Appendix A provides a description of the acoustical terminology used in this report. Unless otherwise stated, all sound levels reported are in A‐weighted decibels (dB). A‐weighting de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear. Most community noise standards utilize A‐weighting, as it provides a high degree of correlation with human annoyance and health effects. Appendix B provides typical A‐weighted sound levels for common noise sources.
386
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 3

NOISE EXPOSURE CRITERIA
Geneal Plan‐
The City of Fowler uses the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan (adopted April 18, 2023) provides noise level criteria for land use compatibility for transportation noise sources. The General Plan sets noise compatibility standards for transportation noise sources in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL represent the time‐weighted energy average noise level for a 24‐hour day, with a 10 dB penalty added to noise levels occurring during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m.‐7:00 a.m. and a penalty of 5 dB (technically 4.77 dB) that is added to noise levels occurring during the evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. The CNEL represents cumulative exposure to noise over an extended period of time and is therefore calculated based upon annual average conditions. Table I provides the General Plan noise level standards for transportation noise sources.

TABLE I

CITY OF FOWLER GENERAL PLAN NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS

TRANSPORTATION (NON-AIRCRAFT) NOISE SOURCES
Noise‐Sensitive Land Use
Outdoor Activity Areas1 Interior Occupied Spaces (dBA)
CNEL, dBA1 CNEL, dB Leq6
Residential 652,3 454 ‐‐‐
Convalescent Care Facilities, Hospitals 702,3 454 ‐‐‐
Transient Lodging 652,3 45 ‐‐‐
Schools, Libraries, Museums, Places of Worship ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 45 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 705 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
Office Buildings 703 ‐‐‐ 45
Commercial Retail & Light Industrial 75 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

1. To be applied at outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use.

2. Where it is not possible to reduce exterior noise levels to 65 dBA CNEL, or less, an exterior noise level of 70 dBA CNEL may be allowed provided that an acoustical analysis has been prepared for the project to identify available exterior noise‐reduction measures to be incorporated and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.

3. Where outdoor activity areas are not included in the project design, only the interior noise level standard shall apply.

4. In locations where railroad noise is the predominant noise source, the interior noise standard for residential land uses shall be reduced by 5 dB to account for the increased potential for sleep disruption to building occupants.

5. Where quiet is a basis for use.

6. This standard is intended to apply to land uses with operational hours predominantly during the daytime hours. The interior noise standard applies to a typical worst‐case hour during the period of use.

Source: City of Fowler General Plan
The exterior noise level standards for residential land uses provided in Table I apply at the outdoor activity areas. Outdoor activity areas are generally considered backyards and balconies of single‐family residential uses and individual yards, patios, balconies, and common use outdoor areas of multi‐family residential uses. Common use outdoor activities include pools, children’s play areas, and picnic and BBQ areas.
387
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 4 Municipal Code‐
Article 14, Section 9‐15.1417 of the City of Fowler Municipal Code provides the non‐ transportation (stationary) noise source standards applicable to the project. The performance standards for non‐transportation noise sources are summarized below in Table II. The standards become 5‐10 dB more restrictive during the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. As the project site is located adjacent to residential land uses, the noise standards provided below in Table II for residential land uses are applicable to the project.

It should be noted, standard practice and convention state that when existing measured ambient noise levels already exceed the noise levels established as applicable noise standards, the measured ambient noise levels become the applicable noise standards. In such situations the project cannot result in an increase over existing ambient noise levels at the location of a sensitive receptor property line.

TABLE II

CITY OF FOWLER MUNICIPAL CODE PERFORMANCE NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS

NON-TRANSPORTATION (STATIONARY) NOISE SOURCES
Receiving Lnad Use Category Time Period Noise Level (dBA)1 Residential 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60
Public Use2 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 55
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60
Commercial 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 60
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 65
Industrial Anytime 70 1
Applied at the property line of the receiving land use.

The noise standard of a cumulative 30‐minute period during any hour A 10 dB increase of the noise standard for a cumulative of 5, or more, minutes during any hour A 20 dB increase of the noise standard, or exceed maximum ambient noise level during any time period 2 Includes schools, libraries, hospitals, churches, and parks.

Noise standards do not apply to railroad operations, motor vehicles, including trucks, or to agricultural equipment used in the cultivation of any agricultural land in the M‐I Zone. Noise standards are subject to review/amendment by the City Source: City of Fowler Municipal Code
388
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 5

EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The project site is located at the northwest corner of W. Fresno Street and S. Fowler Avenue, in the City of Fowler, California. The project site is generally bordered by residential land uses to the west, commercial/retail land uses to the north, S Fowler Avenue and State Route 99 (SR 99) to the east, and undeveloped land to the south. The project site is exposed to traffic noise associated with SR 99, and to a lesser extent, S. Flower Avenue and W. Fresno Street.

WJVA staff conducted ambient noise level measurements in the vicinity of the project site on December 18, 2024. Long‐term (24‐hour) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at one (1) location (site LT‐1). Ambient noise levels were measured for a period of 24 continuous hours at the long‐term ambient noise measurement location. Site LT‐1 was located along the existing sound wall along the project site property line with adjacent residential land uses to the west. The location was selected as to document existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the closest existing sensitive receptors (residential land uses) to the project site. The location of the long‐term ambient noise measurement site is provided as Figure 2. Photographs of the long‐ term ambient noise measurement site is provided as Figure 3.

Noise monitoring equipment consisted of a Larson‐Davis Laboratories Model LDL‐820 sound level analyzer equipped with a B&K Type 4176 1/2” microphone. The equipment complies with the specifications of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for Type I (Precision) sound level meters. The meter was calibrated with a B&K Type 4230 acoustic calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements.

Measured hourly energy average noise levels (Leq) at site LT‐1 ranged from a low of 63.2 dB between 2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. to a high of 71.2 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. Hourly maximum (Lmax) noise levels at site LT‐1 ranged from 72.5 to 86.5 dBA. Residual noise levels at the monitoring site, as defined by the L90, ranged from 57.6 to 69.2 dBA. The L90 is a statistical descriptor that defines the noise level exceeded 90% of the time during each hour of the sample period. The L90 is generally considered to represent the residual (or background) noise level in the absence of identifiable single noise events from traffic, aircraft, and other local noise sources.

The measured CNEL value at site LT‐1 was 74.2 dB CNEL.

Figure 4 graphically depicts hourly variations in ambient noise levels at site LT‐1 for the 24‐hour measurement period. Table III provides the measured 24‐hour noise levels in terms of the applicable City of Fowler noise ordinance (municipal code) standards (L50, L8, and Lmax). 389
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 6

TABLE III
SUMMARY OF 24-HOUR NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS, LT-1

FOWLER & FRESNO CONVENIENCE STORE & GAS STATION
DECEMBER 18, 2024
Time
A‐Weighted Decibels, dB, Leq (one‐hour average)
LT‐1
L50 L8 Lmax
12:00 a.m. 63.6 67.4 77.1
1:00 a.m. 63.0 66.8 80.9
2:00 a.m. 62.3 66.6 72.5
3:00 a.m. 64.1 67.8 72.9
4:00 a.m. 66.4 69.6 75.5
5:00 a.m. 69.3 71.8 77.9
6:00 a.m. 70.9 72.8 78.8
7:00 a.m. 71.0 72.7 84.3
8:00 a.m. 70.3 72.1 75.5
9:00 a.m. 69.3 71.3 77.8
10:00 a.m. 70.0 72.0 83.5
11:00 a.m. 69.6 71.9 84.7
12:00 p.m. 69.8 71.8 81.3
1:00 p.m. 69.8 71.9 85.6
2:00 p.m. 70.0 71.9 78.7
3:00 p.m. 69.8 71.7 85.8
4:00 p.m. 70.1 71.8 80.8
5:00 p.m. 68.7 70.8 83.8
6:00 p.m. 69.5 71.6 84.3
7:00 p.m. 68.8 70.9 86.5
8:00 p.m. 68.1 70.4 80.1
9:00 p.m. 66.8 69.6 75.1
10:00 p.m. 65.6 68.7 74.4
11:00 p.m. 63.8 67.5 78.5
Average Daytime 69.5 71.6 83.1
Average Nighttime 66.5 69.3 77.3
Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc.
390
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 7

PROJECT-RELATED NOISE LEVELS
The project would include the operation of a gas station and convenience store, to be located at W. Fresno Street and S. Fowler Avenue, in the City of Fowler, California. The gas station would operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week. The convenience store would operate between 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., daily. The convenience store would include a drive‐thru window allowing customers to order and receive food orders while remaining in their vehicles. The drive‐ thru operations would include the same hours of operation as the convenience store.

It should be noted, the adjacent residential property line west of the project site includes an existing concrete/CMU block wall of approximately 8‐9 feet in height above project site elevation.

This existing wall would provide significant acoustic shielding/noise attenuation to the adjacent residential land uses.

A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with the proposed land uses (gas station and convenience store). The noise levels produced by such sources can also be highly variable and could potentially impact adjacent sensitive receptors (residential land uses west of the project site). Typical examples of stationary noise sources associated with such land uses include:
 HVAC/Mechanical equipment
 Truck deliveries
 Parking lot activities (closing of car doors and trunks, stereos, alarms etc.)  Drive Thru operations (amplified menuboard)
Mechanical Equipment
It is assumed that the project would include roof‐mounted HVAC units on the proposed building.

The heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) requirements for the buildings would likely require the use of multiple packaged roof‐top units. For the purpose of noise and aesthetics, roof‐mounted HVAC units are typically shielded by means of a roof parapet. WJVA has conducted reference noise level measurements at numerous commercial and retail buildings with roof‐ mounted HVAC units, and associated noise levels typically range between approximately 45‐50 dB at a distance of 50 feet from the building façade.

For this project, the closest residential property lines to any potential roof‐mounted HVAC equipment would be located at a minimum setback distance of 40 feet. Taking into account the standard rate of noise attenuation with increased distance from a point source (‐6 dB/doubling of distance), noise levels associated with the operation of roof‐mounted HVAC units would be approximately 47‐52 dB at the closest sensitive receptor property line. Such levels do not exceed any City of Fowler noise level standard or exceed existing (without project) ambient noise levels. 391
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 8 Truck Movements
At the time of this analysis, a specific truck access route was not known. However, it is assumed that the project would include periodic truck deliveries of fuel and retail products for the convenience store. Based upon the site plan layout, it is anticipated that truck movements would occur at distances of fifty (50) feet or greater from the residential property line.

WJVA has conducted measurements of the noise levels produced by slowly moving trucks for a number of studies. Such truck movements would be expected to produce noise levels in the range of 65 to 71 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. The range in measured truck noise levels is due to differences in the size of trucks, their speed of movement and whether they have refrigeration units in operation during the pass‐by.

Truck movements within the project site would likely occur at distances of 50 feet or greater from existing noise‐sensitive land uses (residences to the west). As such distances, noise levels associated with on‐site truck movements would produce maximum noise levels in the range of approximately 71 to 77 dB or less. Such noise levels would generally not be expected to exceed the City’s daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) noise level standard of 80 dB Lmax. It is not known if any truck deliveries would occur during the nighttime hours 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., however, average existing ambient noise levels during the nighttime hours were measured to be approximately 77 dB Lmax, the approximate maximum range of noise levels anticipated for on‐ site truck movements.

The above‐described noise levels do not take into account the noise attenuation that would be provided by the existing CMU block wall. WJVA calculated the anticipated noise level reduction that would be provided by the existing wall along the adjacent residential property line. A computer model based upon the FHWA Traffic Noise Model was used to determine the noise level reduction that would be provided by the existing wall. The model calculates sound wall insertion loss (noise reduction) based upon the distance from the source to the wall, the distance from wall to the receptor, and the relative heights of the sources and receptors. A semi‐truck is assumed to have an effective source height of 8 feet above the pavement and the assumed height of a residential receiver is 5 feet above the ground.

The existing sound wall is approximately 8‐9 feet in height. For the purpose of this analysis, an 8‐ foot wall assumed for the calculations. Based upon the above‐described assumptions and method of analysis, it was determined that the existing sound wall would reduce noise levels associated with on‐site truck movements by approximately 8 dB. As such, on‐site truck movements would not be expected to exceed any City of Fowler daytime or nighttime noise level standards and would not be expected to exceed existing ambient noise levels at the residential property line adjacent to the project site.

Parking Lot Activities/Vehicle Movements
Noise due to traffic in parking lots is typically limited by low speeds and is not usually considered to be significant. Human activity in parking lots that can produce noise includes voices, stereo systems and the opening and closing of car doors and trunk lids. Such activities can occur at any 392
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 9 time. The noise levels associated with these activities cannot be precisely defined due to variables such as the number of parking movements, time of day and other factors. It is typical for a passing car in a parking lot to produce a maximum noise level of 60 to 65 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, which is comparable to the level of a raised voice.

For this project, vehicle movements could occur as close as ten (10) feet from the adjacent residential property line. At such a distance, on‐site vehicle movements would be in the range of approximately 74‐79 dB.

Using the above‐described method of analysis, WJVA calculated the noise attenuation that would be provided by the existing CMU block wall. The existing block would reduce noise levels associated with on‐site vehicle movements by approximately 12 dB at the adjacent residential land uses. As such, noise levels associated with on‐site vehicle movements would not exceed any City of Fowler daytime or nighttime noise level standard, and would not exceed existing ambient noise levels measured at the residential property line, during both daytime and nighttime hours.

Additional Measurements at an Existing Convenience Store/Gas Station To further quantify noise levels that could be expected from typical gas station/convenience store operations, WJVA staff previously conducted reference noise measurements at an existing ARCO‐AM/PM facility (similar in size to the proposed project) located in Visalia, California. In order to obtain project‐related reference noise levels with minimal interference from roadway traffic noise levels, WJVA staff conducted the noise measurements between 3:45 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.

Noise measurements were conducted at distance of approximately 90 feet from the closest gas pump and 40 feet from the closest parking space. WJVA staff noted the number of vehicles entering the project site, and tallied them in 15‐minute intervals. The number of observed vehicles (patrons) were as follows:
 3:45‐4:00 a.m. : 13
 4:00‐4:15 a.m. : 12
 4:15‐4:30 a.m. : 10
 4:30‐4:45 a.m. : 17
 4:45‐5:00 a.m. : 14
Observed (and measured) sources of noise during the period of measurements were vehicle movements, vehicle starts (ignition), door/trunk closures, vehicle alarm sets and vehicle stereos.

As vehicles would enter the site and navigate to the pump or parking space of their choice, the distances between each activity and the noise monitor varied. In general, the vehicles tended to utilize the closest pumps to the gas station entrance, which corresponded to the closest spaces to the meter location.

Table IV provides the measured noise levels for each noise source type. Also provided in Table IV is the total number of events for each noise source, the average noise levels for all the events for 393
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 10 each noise source as well as the range of noise levels. During each “event” WJVA staff observed the noise meter and noted the maximum (Lmax) noise level for the event. It should be noted, for many of the vehicles/patrons, the noise sources described in Table IV were not audible or measurable over other existing off‐site noise sources, typically traffic noise associated with vehicles on the adjacent roadway.

TABLE IV

SUMMARY OF PROJECT-RELATED NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS

ARCO-AM/PM, VISALIA, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 18, 2018
Noise Source Number of Measured
Events
Average, Lmax
A‐Weighted Decibels, dB
Vehicle Movements 20 54 (45‐72)
Vehicle Starts (Ignition) 14 54 (47‐71)
Door/Trunk Closure 16 49 (43‐57)
Vehicle Alarm Set 4 53 (43‐57)
Vehicle Stereo 2 59 (58‐60)
Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc.

The noise levels described in Table IV indicate that operational noise levels associated with the convenience store and gas station would not be expected to exceed any City of Fowler noise level standards and would be significantly lower than existing ambient noise levels measured at the residential property line adjacent to the project site.

Additionally, WJVA staff conducted continuous nighttime noise level measurements (between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.) at the Visalia ARCO‐AM/PM facility on the night of January 17, 2018. The noise meter was placed on a light post at a distance of approximately fifty (50) feet from the closest gas pump and adjacent to the closest parking space. The meter location was selected due to its proximity to the operations and provided a secure location for the monitoring equipment. This setback distance between the noise meter location and the gas station/convenience store is comparable to the distance between the proposed gas station/convenience store and the adjacent residential land uses.

Noise levels measured at the Visalia ARCO‐AM/PM are provided as Table V. The noise levels provided as “50’” represent those measured at the Noise Monitoring Site, which was located approximately 50 feet from the closest gas pump and adjacent to the closest parking space. The noise levels provided in Table V are provided in terms of the L50 statistical noise metric. The City of Fowler noise ordinance noise standards applicable to the project (provided above in Table II) are in terms of the L50 metric.

The noise levels measured at the Visalia ARCO‐AM/PM were heavily influenced by existing traffic noise associated with vehicles on the adjacent roadway. While it is unreasonable to assume that 394
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 11 the noise levels described in Table V (50’) were entirely attributable to on‐site (convenience store and gas station) sources, these noise levels are well below existing ambient noise levels measured at the adjacent residential property line, and therefore do not result in an exceedance of noise standards. Additionally, the noise levels described below in Table V do not take into account noise attenuation that would be provided by the existing CMU block wall along the adjacent residential property line, which would be expected to further reduce these noise levels by approximately 8‐ 12 dB at the adjacent residential land uses.

TABLE V

SUMMARY OF NIGHTTIME NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS

VISALIA ARCO-AM/PM
JANUARY 17, 2018
Time
A‐Weighted Decibels, dB, L50
Leq
50’
8 pm 60
9 pm 59
10 pm 58
11 pm 53
12 pm 54
1 am 49
2 am 56
3 am 48
4 am 55
5 am 57
Average 56
Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc.

Drive Thru Retail
The project would include drive‐thru retail operations as part of the convenience store. Based upon the current site plan and details provided by the applicant, patrons would utilize the menuboard to order food products at the south side of the proposed building, drive around the travel lane at the west side of the project site/building and collect their order at the south side of the building. The menuboard would be located approximately 40 feet from the residential property line/CMU block wall adjacent to the project site.

In order to assess potential noise levels associated with drive‐thru operations, WJVA utilized reference noise levels measured at a Wendy’s drive‐thru restaurant located on South Mooney Boulevard in Visalia. Measurements were conducted during the early afternoon of July 11, 2011 between 12:45 p.m. and 1:45 p.m. using the previously‐described noise monitoring equipment.

The microphone used by customers to order food and the loudspeaker used by employees to confirm orders are both integrated into a menu board that is located a few feet from the drive‐ 395
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 12 thru lane at the approximate height of a typical car window. Vehicles would enter the drive‐thru lane from the west and then turn to the north along the east side of the restaurant.

Reference noise measurements were obtained at a distance of approximately 40 feet from the menu board containing the microphone/loudspeaker system at an angle of about 45° toward the rear of the vehicle being served. This provided a worst‐case exposure to sound from the loudspeaker system since the vehicle was not located directly between the loudspeaker and measurement location. Cars were lined up in the access lane during the noise measurement period indicating that the drive‐through lane was operating at or near a peak level of activity.

Each ordering cycle was observed to take approximately 60 seconds including vehicle movements. A typical ordering cycle included 5‐10 seconds of loudspeaker use with typical maximum noise levels in the range of 60‐62 dBA at the 40 foot‐reference location. Vehicles moving through the drive‐thru lane produced noise levels in the range of 55‐60 dBA at the same distance. Vehicles parked at the ordering position (between the menu board and measurement site) were observed to provide significant acoustic shielding during the ordering sequence. The effects of such shielding are reflected by the noise measurement data. Noise levels were measured to approximately 60 dB L50 at the measurement site, and included noise from all sources, including the loudspeaker, vehicle movements and HVAC equipment.

The closest noise‐sensitive receptors (residential property line) to the proposed retail drive‐thru operations (menu board location) are located approximately 40 feet to the west. As the measured noise levels described above were conducted at a setback distance of approximately 40 feet from the menuboard, the above‐described noise levels are considered representative of those which would be anticipated at the residential property line adjacent to the project site.

Drive‐thru operations would be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The applicable City of Fowler noise standard during these hours would be 60 dB L50. The above‐described reference noise levels indicate that noise levels associated with the amplified menuboard would be expected to be approximately 60 dB at the setback distance of the adjacent residential property line. However, these noise levels do not take into account existing elevated ambient noise levels ore the noise attenuation that would be provided by the existing CMU wall along the residential property line.

Using the above‐described method of analysis, WJVA calculated the amplified menuboard noise attenuation that would be provided by the existing CMU block wall at the adjacent residential property line. The existing block would reduce noise levels associated with the amplified menuboard by approximately 9 dB at the adjacent residential land uses. As such, noise levels associated with the amplified menuboard would be approximately 51 dB at the adjacent residential land uses, and would not exceed any City of Fowler noise level standards, and would not exceed existing ambient noise levels measured at the residential property line, during both daytime and nighttime hours.
396
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 13

CONCLUSIONS
 The existing noise environment is heavily impacted by existing elevated noise levels associated with traffic along SR 99. As such, existing ambient noise levels already exceed City of Fowler noise standards during every hour of the 24‐hour measurement period.  Sources of noise associated with the proposed project include mechanical/HVAC, truck and vehicle movements, parking lot activities (opening/closing of vehicle doors and trunks, etc.), and drive‐thru operations (amplified menuboard).  There is an existing 8‐9 foot CMU block wall along the project site property line adjacent to residential land uses. The block wall provides significant noise attenuation (reduction) of noise sources from the project site.
 Based upon the findings of this analysis, noise levels associated with the proposed project would not be expected to exceed any City of Fowler noise level standards/existing ambient noise levels at any nearby/adjacent residential land uses. Mitigation measures are therefore not required for project noise compliance.

The conclusions and recommendations of this acoustical analysis are based upon the best information known to WJV Acoustics Inc. (WJVA) at the time the analysis was prepared concerning the proposed site plan, project operational information, and proposed uses. Any significant changes in these factors will require a reevaluation of the findings of this report.

Additionally, any significant future changes in motor vehicle technology, noise regulations or other factors beyond WJVA’s control may result in long‐term noise results different from those described by this analysis.

Respectfully submitted,

Walter J. Van Groningen
President
WJV:wjv
397
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 14 FIGURE 1: SITE PLAN
398
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 FIGURE 2: PROJECT SITE VICINITY AND AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION 399
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 FIGURE 3: NOISE MEASUREMENT SITE LT-1
400
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 FIGURE4: MEASURED 24-HOUR NOISE LEVELS AT AMBIENT SITE LT-1 405060708090
100
0:00:00
1:00:00
2:00:00
3:00:00
4:00:00
5:00:00
6:00:00
7:00:00
8:00:00
9:00:00
10:00:00
11:00:00
12:00:00
13:00:00
14:00:00
15:00:00
16:00:00
17:00:00
18:00:00
19:00:00
20:00:00
21:00:00
22:00:00
23:00:00
Levels, dBA
Time
Site LT‐1
December 18, 2024
LmaxL8L50
401
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24

APPENDIX A

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY
AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL: The composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of approximately five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m.

DECIBEL, dB: A unit for describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter).

DNL/Ldn: Day/Night Average Sound Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m.

Leq: EquivaClent Sound Level. The sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period.

Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24‐hour sample periods.

NOTE: The CNEL and DNL represent daily levels of noise exposure averaged on an annual basis, while Leq represents the average noise exposure for a shorter time period, typically one hour.

Lmax: The maximum noise level recorded during a noise event.

Ln: The sound level exceeded "n" percent of the time during a sample interval (L90, L50, L10, etc.). For example, L10 equals the level exceeded 10 percent of the time.
402
Section , Item D
24‐69 (Fowler & Fresno Convenience Store & Gas Station) 12‐23‐24 A-2

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY
NOISE EXPOSURE
CONTOURS: Lines drawn about a noise source indicating constant levels of noise exposure. CNEL and Ldn contours are frequently utilized to describe community exposure to noise.

NOISE LEVEL
REDUCTION (NLR): The noise reduction between indoor and outdoor environments or between two rooms that is the numerical difference, in decibels, of the average sound pressure levels in those areas or rooms. A measurement of “noise level reduction” combines the effect of the transmission loss performance of the structure plus the effect of acoustic absorption present in the receiving room.

SEL or SENEL: Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Noise Exposure Level. The level of noise accumulated during a single noise event, such as an aircraft overflight, with reference to a duration of one second.

More specifically, it is the time‐integrated A‐weighted squared sound pressure for a stated time interval or event, based on a reference pressure of 20 micropascals and a reference duration of one second.

SOUND LEVEL: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A‐weighting filter network. The A‐weighting filter de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear and gives good correlation with subjective reactions to noise.

SOUND TRANSMISSION
CLASS (STC): The single‐number rating of sound transmission loss for a construction element (window, door, etc.) over a frequency range where speech intelligibility largely occurs.

403
Section , Item D
404
Section , Item D
RESOLUTION NO. 2816

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER, FINDING THAT PLANNING PROJECT NO. 24-27 IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES SECTION 15183 AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR PLANNING PROJECT NO. 24- 27 TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A CONVENIENCE STORE AND GAS STATION LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF S. FOWLER AVENUE AND W.

FRESNO STREET.

WHEREAS, Paul Archer of Archer Engineering, on behalf of Baleegh Muharram and Dawood Hotar (“Applicant”), has proposed Planning Project No. 24-27 (“Project”), which includes a request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) and a Lot Line Adjustment (“LLA”); and
WHEREAS, the Project proposes to construct an approximately 6,045 square foot (“sqft”) commercial development, that includes an approximately 4,545 sqft convenience store with quick serve restaurant (“QSR”), an approximately 1,500 sqft commercial tenant space, a fueling area with six (6) double sided fuel pumps, and an approximately 2,592 sqft fuel canopy on Assessor Parcel Numbers (“APNs”) 343-350-45 & -46 (“Project site”); and WHEREAS, APN 343-350-45 is approximately 0.27 acres in size and APN 343-250-46 is approximately 0.84 acres in size, and the Project site is generally located at the northwest corner of S. Fowler Avenue and W. Fresno Street; and
WHEREAS, the Project site is planned for Neighborhood Commercial land uses and is zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial); and
WHEREAS, the Project proposes a convenience store, alcohol sales (Type 20 Off-Sale Beer and Wine), tobacco sales, and operation of a drive through in conjunction with the proposed QSR within the C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) zone district; and WHEREAS, approval of alcohol sales and the operation of a drive through requires approval of a CUP; and
WHEREAS, the Project also proposes the sale of tobacco within the proposed convenience store; and
WHEREAS, the operator of the convenience store is required to apply and be approved for a tobacco retailer license with the City Manager pursuant to Fowler Municipal Code section 5-

20.01, et. seq.; and
WHEREAS, the Project proposes to construct a structure over parcel lines (fuel canopy), requiring that the underlying parcels be merged; and
405
Section , Item D
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for an LLA that would merge the two (2) underlying APNs into one (1) parcel of approximately 1.11 acres in size; and WHEREAS, the proposed LLA would conform with the City’s General Plan, and would not result in a greater number of parcels than originally existed; and WHEREAS, the Project was considered by the Fowler Planning Commission at a regular meeting of the Commission on November 6, 2025, and where the Commission voted to deny the Applicant’s request based on concerns related to traffic and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed a timely appeal of the Commission’s decision to the City Council pursuant to Fowler Zoning Ordinance section 9.30.090, challenging the Commission’s basis for denial; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Fowler Zoning Ordinance section 9.30.090, subsection (F), appeals shall be considered a de novo (new) hearing, and the City Council may approve, deny, or modify the recommendation of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report and is absolved of further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15183; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the November 21, 2025, edition of The Business Journal, posted at City Hall and the City’s website, and sent to interested parties via email; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on December 2, 2025, at 6:00pm, the Fowler City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the Project and voted to continue the public hearing to the January 6, 2026, regular City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on January 6, 2026, at 6:00pm, the Fowler City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the staff report, CEQA findings, the applicant’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision, and all evidence presented at the City Council’s regular meeting on January 6, 2026, including oral and written public testimony on the Project (“Administrative Record”), which is incorporated by this reference herein.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fowler:

1. Finds that the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report and is therefore exempt from any further environmental review under CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
406
Section , Item D

2. Hereby makes the following findings pursuant to Fowler Zoning Ordinance section

9.35.070 for approval of a CUP:
a. That the proposed design and location of the conditional use is consistent with the adopted General Plan and any applicable specific plan. b. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate such use and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features required by the Zoning Ordinance. c. That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use, consistent with the mobility goals of the City.
d. That the proposed use will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof.
e. That the conditions stated in the resolution are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.

3. The City Council could not make the findings necessary for approval of the CUP without the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit “A” attached herein to this Resolution.

4. The City Council hereby approves the CUP applied for under Planning Project No. 24-27, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference.

5. The City Council hereby approves the LLA applied for under Planning Project No. 24-27, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit “A”.

6. The bases for these findings are detailed in the January 6, 2026, staff report, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing which are hereby incorporated by reference. 407
Section , Item D
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2026, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Fowler by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
408
Section , Item D
EXHIBIT “A”

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PLANNING PROJECT NO. 24-27
General Conditions

1. All conditions of approval shall be the sole financial responsibility of the Applicant/owner, except where specified in the conditions of approval listed herein or mandated by statutes.

2. The Applicant shall submit to the City of Fowler Community & Economic Development Department a check in the amount necessary to file a Notice of Determination at the Fresno County Clerk. This amount shall equal the Fresno County filing fee in effect at the time of filing. Such check shall be made payable to the Fresno County Clerk and submitted no later than three (3) days following action on Planning Project No. 24-27.

3. Approval of Planning Project No. 24-27 and the associated site plan shall be valid for a period not to exceed two (2) years from the date of approval unless a building permit for the facility described herein has been issued by the Building Department and construction is being diligently pursued. The Applicant may request an extension of up to two (2) additional years via written request to the Community & Economic Development Department submitted not less than thirty (30) days prior to expiration of this approval.

Requests for extensions of time are subject to findings being made for the request.

4. Approval of Planning Project No. 24-27 and its associated site plan shall be considered null and void in the event of failure by the Applicant and/or the authorized representative, engineer, or surveyor to disclose and delineate all facts and information relating to the subject property, the proposed use, and the submitted plans.

5. Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the plans approved by the City Council and the subject conditions contained herein. Minor modifications to the approved plans necessary to meet regulatory, engineering, or similar constraints may be made at the discretion of the City Planner without amendment to Planning Project No. 24-

27. 6. Any proposed signs are subject to review and approval by the City Planner by means of a separate Sign Review process.

7. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner, operator, and/or management to ensure that any required permits, inspections, and approvals from any regulatory agency be obtained from the applicable agency prior to issuance of a building permit and/or the issuance of a certificate of completion, as determined appropriate by the City of Fowler Community & Economic Development Department.

8. All conditions shall be satisfied prior to occupancy approval for any portion of the Project.

Failure to comply with all conditions of approval shall be grounds for the imposition of penalties, suspension of the permit, modification of the permit, or revocation of the permit. 409
Section , Item D

9. The operator shall keep the exterior premises free of trash and debris. Graffiti shall be removed or covered within 48 hours of its discovery by the Applicant, manager, or any employee.

10. Approval of Planning Project No. 24-27 is not an authorization to commence construction.

On- and off-site improvements, building construction, sign erection or occupancy shall not be permitted without prior approval of the City through issuance of any required grading or building permits.

11. A copy of these conditions must be kept on the premises and be shown to any requesting City official. Failure to comply with all conditions of approval shall be grounds for the imposition of penalties, modification of the permit, or revocation of the permit.

12. All business and processes shall be conducted within a completely enclosed structure, except for off-street parking and loading areas, service stations, outdoor dining areas, nurseries, garden shops, signs, Christmas tree sales lots, bus depots, and transit stations, public utility stations and car sales.

13. No use shall be permitted, and no process, equipment or materials shall be used that are found by the City to be objectionable to persons living or working in the vicinity by reasons of odor, fumes, dust, smoke, cinders, dirt, refuse, water-carried waste, noise, vibration, illumination, glare, or unsightliness or to involve any hazard of fire or explosion.

14. The Project shall conform to the C-1 (Nieghborhood Commercial) zone district development standards. Any deviation from these standards shall result in the requirement for a variance or minor deviation.

15. All contractors or sub-contractors working in the City must obtain a business license from the Finance Department at Fowler City Hall. The Applicant shall report applicable sales tax revenue to the State.

16. The Applicant shall pay all fees as required by existing ordinances and schedules. The fees to be paid shall be those in effect at the time of payment.

17. New mechanical and electrical equipment shall be screened from view.

18. Construction shall occur only between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 pm in accordance with Fowler Municipal Code section 5-21.601, subdivision (d).

19. The Applicant shall at all times hold all required permits and approvals from local, State, and federal agencies.

20. The gas station operator shall hold a current Hazardous Materials Business Plan and all related permits and approvals at all times.

21. Approval of the CUP is contingent upon the LLA being recorded.

22. An active Type 20 alcohol license, issued by the California Department of Beverage Control, must be held at any point while the convenience store is offering the sale of alcohol. No type of alcohol approved other than through a Type 20 permit shall be offered 410
Section , Item D
for sale. No consumption of alcohol may occur on site. Notwithstanding, the future tenant space may apply for an on-sale alcohol license in the future.

23. The convenience store operator shall hold an approved tobacco retailer license at all times that tobacco products and paraphernalia are offered for sale. The operator shall follow all applicable regulations regarding the sale of tobacco products and paraphernalia set by the City and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.

Lighting

24. All lighting shall be hooded and directed to not shine towards adjacent properties and public streets. Lighting shall be approved by the City Engineer.

Off-Street Parking

25. Any new on-site parking stalls shall be striped and constructed to current City standards, including for aisle width.

26. All parking areas shall have adequate ingress and egress to and from a street or alley.

Sufficient room for turning and maneuvering vehicles shall be provided on the site, pursuant to current City standards.

27. All construction of new parking stalls shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to construction and the acquisition of building permits.

Landscaping Standards

28. Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Fowler Zoning Ordinance Chapter

9.165.

29. A minimum of 10% of the surface area of the site shall be landscaped, in accordance with General Plan Policy CDES-20.

30. All parking areas shall achieve a minimum 50% shading of the paved area by the tree canopies within 15 years of planting, in accordance with Fowler Zoning Ordinance Section

9.165.040(E).

31. Landscaping shall be kept free from weeds and litter.

32. One medium-sized street tree shall be required at one (1) tree for every thirty (30) linear feet within the public right-of-way frontage, not including alleys. Street trees shall be planted within the public right-of-way. Such trees shall not be removed without replacement and such replacement tree shall be of an approved street tree type. All trees required shall be a minimum 15-gallon size at the time of planting. Street trees shall be planted within tree wells using a frame and grate consistent with City Standard M-15.

33. A landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect and submitted as part of the submittals for a building permit. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community & Economic Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. Such plans shall indicate the location and type of vegetation existing and proposed on-site.

34. The property owner shall maintain all landscaping in a healthy and well-manicured appearance to achieve and maintain the landscaping design that was approved by the City. 411
Section , Item D
This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring properly operating irrigation equipment at all times, trimming and pruning of trees and shrubs, and replacing dead or unhealthy vegetation with drought-tolerant plantings.

35. Any unpaved ground area shall be improved with a combination of turf, groundcover, flowering vegetation, or climbing vines.

36. All turf grass must be sodded at installation (if applicable).

37. In addition to the lot, the owner must maintain the portion of the streetscape between their lot line and the curb.

Fire Department

38. A flow test is required to establish the current available fire flow. The plans indicate this is on the other side of S. Fowler Ave. If this is intended to become a divided road like Golden State, then a new street hydrant is mandatory. Flow test will determine if fire sprinklers are required.

39. One 4A40BC or larger fire extinguisher is required at the fuel pumps.

40. One 2A10BC rated fire extinguisher is required for each 3000 square feet of the retail areas.

41. Fire lanes shall be posted on site as applicable.

42. All special requirements for fuel dispensing shall be provided during the building permit stage.

43. The LPG tank must comply with setback requirements of the California Fire Code.

Police Department

44. Two ALPR readers shall be installed on-site at locations confirmed by the City of Fowler Police Department.

45. A duress alarm shall be installed.

46. Enhanced, high resolution video cameras shall be installed on the interior and exterior of the building at locations confirmed by the City of Fowler Police Department.

47. Engineering Conditions
General:

48. All proposals of the Applicant shall be conditions of approval, except as further modified below, and subject to modifications to conform to applicable City Standards.

49. The proposed trash enclosure shall be constructed to current City standards and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The enclosure shall be of sufficient size to accommodate containers for refuse, green waste, and recycling.

50. Any existing utility poles and overhead lines shall be undergrounded.

51. All new electric, cable TV, telephone, internet, etc. services provided to the development shall be underground (if applicable).

52. Unlevel or hazardous concrete sidewalk along the building frontage shall be replaced (if applicable).
412
Section , Item D

53. The Applicant shall construct a roundabout at the intersection of State Route 99 Off Ramp and W. Merced Street and at State Route 99 Northbound Ramps and W. Merced Street. “Quick-build” roundabouts may be constructed at each of the two intersections to satisfy the requirements of this condition with review and approval by both the City Engineer and Caltrans.

54. The Applicant shall pay the Project’s equitable fair share contribution for the ultimate construction of two permanent roundabouts approved by the City Engineer and Caltrans at the intersection of State Route 99 Off Ramp and W. Merced Street and at State Route 99 Northbound Ramps and W. Merced Street. The Project’s equitable fair share cost of improvements for these two intersections includes both the design and construction cost for permanent roundabouts, however the Project’s fair share cost will be applied to the design and construction of quick-build roundabouts at the two intersections.

55. The Applicant shall pay the Project’s equitable fair share contribution for future improvements to the intersection of W. Fresno Street and S. Fowler Avenue.

56. The Applicant shall enter into a fair share reimbursement agreement with the City of Fowler for the reimbursement of any costs associated with the required infrastructure improvements in excess of the Project’s equitable fair share amount.

Circulation:

57. The Applicant shall pay the Regional Traffic Mitigation Fee to the Fresno Council of Governments.

58. The parking lot shall be paved with asphalt or concrete, shall be properly lit and landscaped and shall comply with the Fowler Improvement Standards.

59. Drive aisles shall be kept unobstructed at all times. Vehicles shall not block driveways.

60. Queueing of the drive through shall not result in blockages of the drive aisles, or result in unsafe circulation conditions.

Grading and Drainage:

61. A Grading and Site Improvement Plan for the proposed on-site improvements shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall obtain a Grading and Site Improvement Permit once plans are approved. Improvement plans shall indicate the site can adequately drain to a City storm drain facility or if drainage can adequately be contained on-site.

Water/Sewer:

62. Any water connections, whether existing or proposed, shall be shown on the site plan.

63. The building shall be provided with domestic and landscape water services as approved by the City Engineer. Services shall be adjusted or upgraded to meet current City standards (if applicable).

64. The Applicant shall provide and install water meters and appropriate backflow devices (where required by City ordinances and standards). Existing water meters in conflict with improvements or in a non-standard location shall be relocated as directed by the Public Works Director.
413
Section , Item D

65. Complete and submit the Selma Kingsburg Fowler County Sanitation District (SKF) commercial sewer connection application. Provide documentation of the completed lot line merger with the application.

66. Provide a set of detailed floor and plumbing plans for sewer evaluation.

67. Pre-treatment will be required for a food service establishment (Must be sized accordingly.

Minimum 1,500-gal grease interceptor).

68. Pre-treatment will be required for any Carwash or service station (Must be sized accordingly. Minimum 1,500-gal sand/Oil separator).

69. Install 6-inch sewer service lateral with cleanout and box the reads “SEWER” at the property line.

70. Buildings shall be metered separately from the landscaping.

71. Applicant to pay for the SKF sewer connection and plan check/inspection fees prior to the issuance of the building permit.

72. SKF shall provide an inspection.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

73. The Applicant shall consult with and shall comply with the requirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, including but not limited to compliance with Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) and Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review).

City of Fowler General Plan Environmental Impact Report Mitigation Measures

74. The Project shall be constructed with electrically-powered appliances and building mechanical equipment in place of natural-gas fueled equipment.

75. The Project shall, to the maximum extent possible, exceed the California Green Building Standard Code Tier 2 requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Other

76. Approval of this Project is for the benefit of the Applicant. The submittal of applications by Applicant for this Project was a voluntary act on the part of the Applicant not required by the City. Therefore, as a condition of approval of this Project, the Applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Fowler and its agents, officers, consultants, independent contractors and employees (“City”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval by the City concerning the Project, including any challenges to associated environmental review, and for any and all costs, attorneys fees, and damages arising therefrom (collectively “Claim”).

The City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Claim and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any Claim or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the Applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City.

Nothing in this condition shall obligate the City to defend any Claim and the City shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement arising from any such Claim not defended by 414
Section , Item D
the City, unless the City approves the settlement in writing. Nor shall the City be prohibited from independently defending any Claim, and if the City does decide to independently defend a Claim, the Applicant shall be responsible for City’s attorneys’ fees, expenses of litigation and costs for that independent defense, including the costs of preparing any required administrative record. Should the City decide to independently defend any Claim, the Applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement arising from any such Claim unless the Applicant approves the settlement.

Signature of Applicant: ________________________________ Dated: ________________
415
Section , Item D
RESOLUTION NO. 2819

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER, FINDING THAT APPROVAL OF A TYPE 20 ALCOHOL LICENSE FOR PLANNING PROJECT NO. 24-27 IS MADE ON THE BASIS THAT SUCH APPROVAL CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY.

WHEREAS, Paul Archer of Archer Engineering, on behalf of Baleegh Muharram and Dawood Hotar (“Applicant”), proposed Planning Project No. 24-27 (“Project”), which included a request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) for alcohol sales within a convenience store; and
WHEREAS, the Project is located on Assessor’s Parcel Number (“APN”) 343-350-45, which is approximately 0.27 acres in size, and APN 343-250-46, which is approximately 0.84 acres in size (“Project Site”), and the Project site is generally located at the northwest corner of S.

Fowler Avenue and W. Fresno Street; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant intends to apply for a Type 20 “Off-Sale” alcohol license with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control; and WHEREAS, the Project Site’s underlying census tract is currently oversaturated with OffSale alcohol licenses, with six (6) Off-Sale licenses currently active within the census tract; and WHEREAS, approval of an additional Off-Sale alcohol license within the census tract would require the Fowler City Council find that such approval is made on the basis that another establishment selling alcohol under an Off-Sale alcohol license is a public convenience or necessity; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report and is absolved of further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15183; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the November 21, 2025, edition of The Business Journal, posted at City Hall and the City’s website, and sent to interested parties via email; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on December 2, 2025, at 6:00pm, the Fowler City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the Project and voted to continue the public hearing to the January 6, 2026, regular meeting of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the staff report, CEQA findings, and all evidence presented at the City Council’s regular meeting on January 6, 2026, including oral and written public testimony on the Project (“Administrative Record”), which is incorporated by this reference herein; and
416
Section , Item D
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the use of alcohol sales for the Project’s convenience store via adoption of Resolution No. 2816, subject to conditions of approval attached thereto as Exhibit “A”.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fowler:

1. Based on the record of proceedings for this matter, including the staff report and presentations provided at the public hearing, the City Council hereby makes the following findings pursuant to Fowler Zoning Ordinance section 9.205.040 for approval of an off-sale liquor license resulting in an oversaturation of such license types in the underlying census tract, finding that the approval is necessary as a matter of public convenience or necessity in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 23817.7:
a. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and the Fowler Zoning Ordinance.
b. The proposed use is compatible with the nature, condition, and character of adjacent land uses.
c. The proposed use would not have an adverse effect on adjacent land uses. d. The proposed use would not result in an excessive number of similar establishments in close proximity.
e. The proposed use will be essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare and will not impair the integrity and character of the zone district or be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. f. Notice of hearing, if applicable, shall be given to all owners of property in the same manner as required by the related permit.

2. The City Council hereby finds that the issuance of a Type 20 alcohol license for the Project is a public convenience or necessity, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit “A” of Resolution No. 2816.

3. The bases for these findings are detailed in the January 6, 2026, staff report, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing which are hereby incorporated by reference. 417
Section , Item D
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2026, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Fowler by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
418
Section , Item D
RESOLUTION NO. 2819

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER, FINDING THAT APPROVAL OF A TYPE 20 ALCOHOL LICENSE FOR PLANNING PROJECT NO. 24-27 DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY.

Fowler Avenue and W. Fresno Street; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant intends to apply for a Type 20 “Off-Sale” alcohol license with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control; and WHEREAS, the Project Site’s underlying census tract is currently oversaturated with OffSale alcohol licenses, with six (6) Off-Sale licenses currently active within the census tract; and WHEREAS, approval of an additional Off-Sale alcohol license within the census tract would require the Fowler City Council find that such approval is made on the basis that another establishment selling alcohol under an Off-Sale alcohol license is a public convenience or necessity; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report and is absolved of further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15183; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the November 21, 2025, edition of The Business Journal, posted at City Hall and the City’s website, and sent to interested parties via email; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on December 2, 2025, at 6:00pm, the Fowler City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the Project and voted to continue the public hearing to the January 6, 2026, regular meeting of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the staff report, CEQA findings, and all evidence presented at the City Council’s regular meeting on January 6, 2026, including oral and written public testimony on the Project (“Administrative Record”), which is incorporated by this reference herein; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the use of alcohol sales for the Project’s 419
Section , Item D
convenience store via adoption of Resolution No. 2816, subject to conditions of approval attached thereto as Exhibit “A”; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the request to operate a convenience store with an Off-Sale alcohol license and has determined that further oversaturation of the census tract would not be appropriate because the approval of an additional Off-Sale license would not be a public convenience, nor a public necessity, for the residents of the underlying census tract.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fowler:

1. Based on the record of proceedings for this matter, including the staff report and presentations provided at the public hearing, the City Council hereby makes the following findings pursuant to Fowler Zoning Ordinance section 9.205.040 for approval of an off-sale liquor license resulting in an oversaturation of such license types in the underlying census tract, finding that the approval is necessary as a matter of public convenience or necessity in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 23817.7:
a. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and the Fowler Zoning Ordinance.
b. The proposed use is compatible with the nature, condition, and character of adjacent land uses.
c. The proposed use would not have an adverse effect on adjacent land uses. d. The proposed use would result in an excessive number of similar establishments in close proximity.
e. The proposed use is not essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare and will not impair the integrity and character of the zone district or be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. f. Notice of hearing, if applicable, shall be given to all owners of property in the same manner as required by the related permit.

2. The City Council hereby finds that the issuance of a Type 20 alcohol license for the Project is not a public convenience or necessity, and denies the request.

3. The bases for these findings are detailed in the January 6, 2026, staff report, the entire Administrative Record, as well as the evidence and comments presented during the public hearing which are hereby incorporated by reference. 420
Section , Item D
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2026, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Fowler by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
421
Section , Item D

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: January 6, 2026
FROM: SOO HO PARK, City Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDER a Side Letter Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 6381 to Address Plan Revisions, SingleStory Restrictions, and Block Wall/Fencing Modifications and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Staff Recommendation: Approve side letter amendment to subdivision agreement for Tract No. 6381

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed Side Letter Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for Tract 6381 formalizes construction-phase adjustments and clarifies expectations regarding pad elevation differences, single-story home restrictions, block wall improvements, and fencing modifications. These revisions address concerns raised by adjacent homeowners and ensure that improvements are completed in accordance with the City’s community design standards. The amendment also provides for reimbursement or impact-fee credit to Woodside 06N, LP (“Subdivider”) for the construction of a decorative block wall around the storm drain basin and reflects mutually agreed changes to pilaster installation and fencing along the eastern property line.

BACKGROUND
The City of Fowler (“City”) and Woodside 06N, LP entered into a Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 6381 dated February 6, 2024, and recorded on May 31, 2024 as Document #2024‑0047886. During construction, revisions to the subdivision improvement plans were identified to address concerns regarding pad height differences and inconsistencies between the project’s approved conditions of approval and the improvement plans. To resolve these issues, the City and Subdivider collaborated to prepare a Side Letter Amendment, which includes the following components:
- Single-Story Home Restriction: Lots 23, 24, 35, and 93 along the eastern property line shall be restricted to single‑story homes
- Subdivider will construct a block walls around the storm drain basin where it previously identified wood fence
- Wood fence along the eastern property line will be replaced with block walls - Up to 17 pilasters along block walls within the tract may be removed from the subdivision improvement plans
- City will provide a standard monument sign for the neighborhood park 422
Section , Item E
All other terms of the previously executed Subdivision Agreement remain in full force and effect.

PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This action is consistent with:

General Plan Goal CDES-1
Through community design, Fowler fosters and reinforces the City’s unique sense of place.

General Plan Goal CDES-9
Encourage properties to be maintained consistent with established community design standards.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Side Letter Amendment authorizes the City to offset or reimburse the Subdivider for eligible block wall construction around the storm drain basin through Park Impact Fee Funds.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
No procurement is associated with this action.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Side Letter Amendment to Subdivision Agreement for Tract 6381 - Executed Subdivision Agreement- Recorded 05/31/2024
- Revised Improvement Plan Exhibits
423
Section , Item E
128 South Fifth Street ♦ Fowler, CA 93625 ♦ Voice: 559-834-3113 ♦ Fax: 559-834-0185 December 29, 2025
Matt Smith
VP of Land Acquisition and Forward Planning
Woodside 06N, LP
10 River Park Place E, Suite 105
Fresno, CA 93720
Subject: Side Letter Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 6381 The City of Fowler (“City”) and Woodside 06N, LP (“Subdivider”), entered into a Subdivision Agreement for Tract 6381 dated February 6, 2024, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Subdivision Agreement"), and as recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder on May 31, 2024 as Document # 2024-0047886.

This Side Letter Amendment is intended to amend the Subdivision Agreement for Tract 6381 to address revisions to the subdivision improvement plans and conditions of approval, establish a single-story home restriction on specific lots, and modify block wall and fencing requirements as detailed herein.

The Subdivision Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

1. Single-Story Home Restriction. Subdivider agrees to restrict development along the eastern property limits to single-story homes only for Lots 23, 24, 35, and 93.

2. Block Wall and Fencing Modifications. The parties acknowledge that Condition of Approval #45 for the project requires a block wall around the shared-use/walking trail where it is adjacent to residential lots. To resolve an oversight in the original improvement plans and to offset costs, the parties agree to the following:
o Subdivider agrees to construct a 6-foot-high decorative block wall around the storm drain basin within Tract 6381, as will be reflected in the revised improvement plans. City agrees to offset the cost of the additional block wall 424
Section , Item E
required around the storm drain basin with a credit against the project's Park Improvement impact fees or a reimbursement to the Subdivider from the City's Park Development impact fee fund.
o Subdivider agrees to convert all wood fences located on top of retaining walls along the eastern property line of Lots 23, 24, 35, and 93 to be full-height (6- foot) block walls.
o City agrees to allow for the removal of up to seventeen (17) decorative pilaster pillars from various segments of block walls within the tract, as will be reflected in the revised improvement plans.
o City agrees to supply the Subdivider with a City-standard monument sign for the neighborhood park being constructed within the tract.

This Side Letter Amendment may be recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder by either party.

All other terms, conditions, and obligations of the Subdivision Agreement not amended herein remain unchanged and in full force and effect, including all provisions for completion, inspection, approval, acceptance, security, insurance, and indemnification.

Now, therefore, the City and Subdivider have executed this Side Letter Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 6381 on the date(s) set forth below.

CITY OF FOWLER
By:______________________
Name: Michael Reid
Title: Fowler City Manager
Date: ____________________
WOODSIDE 06N, LP, a California limited
partnership
By: Richmond American Homes of
Maryland, Inc., a Maryland corporation, it’s
general partner
By:___________________________
Name:________________________
Title: _________________________
Date:_________________________
Attachment:
• Executed and Recorded Tract 6381 Subdivision Agreement 425
Section , Item E
426
Section , Item E
427
Section , Item E
428
Section , Item E
429
Section , Item E
430
Section , Item E
431
Section , Item E
432
Section , Item E
433
Section , Item E
434
Section , Item E
435
Section , Item E
436
Section , Item E
437
Section , Item E
438
Section , Item E
439
Section , Item E
440
Section , Item E
441
Section , Item E
442
Section , Item E
443
Section , Item E
444
Section , Item E
445
Section , Item E
446
Section , Item E
447
Section , Item E
448
Section , Item E
449
Section , Item E
450
Section , Item E
451
Section , Item E
452
Section , Item E
453
Section , Item E
454
Section , Item E
455
Section , Item E
456
Section , Item E
457
Section , Item E
458
Section , Item E
459
Section , Item E
460
Section , Item E
461
Section , Item E
462
Section , Item E
463
Section , Item E
464
Section , Item E
465
Section , Item E
466
Section , Item E
467
Section , Item E
468
Section , Item E
469
Section , Item E
470
Section , Item E
471
Section , Item E
472
Section , Item E
473
Section , Item E
474
Section , Item E
475
Section , Item E
476
Section , Item E
477
Section , Item E

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: January 6, 2026
FROM: SOO HO PARK, City Engineer
SUBJECT: CONSIDER the following actions pertaining to Tract 6381:
i. APPROVE Resolution No. 2820 to accept the public
improvements related to Tract 6381 upon receipt of the
maintenance bond required by the subdivision
agreement. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution
No. 2820.
ii. DIRECT the City Engineer to file the notice of completion and release the bonds associated with Tract 6381.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The subject action accepts the public improvements constructed as part of Tract 6381 and begin the one-year warranty period of the public improvements upon filing of the Notice of Completion.

BACKGROUND
The Final Map for Tract 6381, accepted by the City Council on February 6, 2024, dedicated public street right-of-way to the City for the purposes of providing public utilities and access to the lots.

The City currently holds a performance, labor, and material bond securities for Final Map No. 6381. These securities are held throughout construction to give the City a means to complete the public improvements should the developer fail to do so for any reason. These public improvements have since been completed and have been approved by the City Engineer. It is now appropriate for the City to formally accept the completion of work and release the developer’s construction bonds.

The project was completed and constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The one-year warranty period will begin upon the filing of the Notice of Completion, which will follow the Council’s acceptance of the project.

PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.
478
Section , Item F

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This action is consistent with:

General Plan Goal PF-1
Fowler provides reliable public facilities, utilities, and community services that meet the needs of the existing community and planned growth.

General Plan Policy PF-3
Ensure that land divisions and developments are approved only when a project's improvements, dedications, and fees fully cover incremental costs to the City and other agencies. Such improvements and infrastructure include parks, major streets, traffic signals, streetlights, drainage systems, sewer, water, fire, police, schools, and other related facilities.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be ongoing maintenance and renewal costs for the completed improvements. These will be offset by the landscape and storm drain maintenance district No. 1 assessments. There will be no direct impact on the General Fund.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
No procurement is associated with this action.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Resolution No. 2820
479
Section , Item F
RESOLUTION NO. 2820

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER

TO APPROVE AND ACCEPT THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED FOR TRACT NO. 6381 AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO RELEASE THE BOND

SECURITIES AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6381 was approved by the City Council with Resolution 2530 on January 4, 2022; and
WHEREAS, Revised Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6381 was approved by the City Council with Resolution 2631 on March 21, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Final Tract Map No. 6381 for the subdivision was approved by the City Council with Resolution 2703 on February 6, 2024;
WHEREAS, all work within the public right-of-way and all street improvements required by the conditions of approval of the above tract have been completed by the Owner in accordance with the City of Fowler Standard Drawings, City of Fowler Standard Specifications, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications, and the approved construction plans as stipulated in the Subdivision Agreements for the tract, and
WHEREAS, all such construction has been approved by the City Engineer and satisfactorily tested by approved testing laboratories; and
WHEREAS, Performance, Labor, and Materials bond securities were furnished to the City in accordance with the Subdivision Agreements for the tract.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fowler that:

1. The public improvements constructed for Tract No. 6381 are hereby approved and accepted, and authorization is given to the City Engineer to release the bond securities for said improvements in accordance with the provisions of Government Code section 66499.7.

2. The City Engineer is hereby authorized to file a Notice of Completion for this project with the Fresno County Recorder’s Office.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2026, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
480
Section , Item F

Fowler City CouncilJanuary 6, 2026

Fowler City Council
January 6, 2026