Fresno City Council
April 4, 2024

Fresno Street
SR 99 NB Ramps SR 99 NB Ramps
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:

City of Fresno
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 2600 Fresno Street, 4th Floor
www.metrotrafficdata.com Fresno, CA 93721-3623

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 0000000000050000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000020000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000020000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0100010000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000020000050000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0100010000030000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0200010000060000
TOTAL 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0200020000020000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0100020000070000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0201000000040000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000030000050000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0101010000090000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0300010000030000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0300040000090000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0200000000060000
TOTAL 0 14 0 2 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0 6 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0
Bikes Peds Peds <>
AM Peak Total 4 10 PM 0 5 0 2
PM Peak Total 11 23 AM 0300 Peds <>
00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <> 10 21
Peds <>
0010 AM
0 0 6 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
SR 99 NB Ramps @ Fresno St 36.731294°
Fresno 119.798822°
Tuesday, April 04, 2017 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
Fresno Street
SR 99 NB Ramps SR 99 NB Ramps
Fresno Street Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax City of Fresno
www.metrotrafficdata.com 2600 Fresno Street, 4th Floor
Fresno, CA 93721-3623

LOCATION N/S STREET

COUNTY E/W STREET

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
CYCLE TIME CONTROL TYPE 81 Seconds
Turning Movement Report
SR 99 NB Ramps @ Fresno St
Fresno
Tuesday, April 04, 2017
Fresno Street
SR 99 NB Ramps
Clear
Signal
COMMENTS Northbound left turns are protected.

TRAFFIC TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS:

PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS REPORTS
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 744 42 0 300 116 0 0 0 238 0 530 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 744 42 0 300 116 0 0 0 238 0 530 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1900 0 1810 1810 1810 1810 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 809 0 0 326 0 304 0 96
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 201
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055 555
Cap, veh/h 0 2846 0 0 1980 886 594 0 265
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5266 0 0 3529 1538 3447 0 1538
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 809 0 0 326 0 304 0 96
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1647 0 0 1719 1538 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 4.0 0.0 2.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 4.0 0.0 2.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2846 0 0 1980 886 594 0 265
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2846 0 0 1980 886 1659 0 740
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 18.7 0.0 18.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.5 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 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.3 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 19.9 0.0 19.7 LnGrp LOS A A B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 809 326 400
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.6 5.1 19.9
Approach LOS A A B
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 14.7 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 * 24 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 6.0 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 12.1 2.6 12.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.2
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 555 427 0 386 157 30 0 89 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 555 427 0 386 157 30 0 89 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1810 0 1810 1900 1810 0 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 603 0 0 420 0 33 0 6
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055505
Cap, veh/h 0 2228 997 0 3201 0 119 0 106
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3529 1538 0 5266 0 1723 0 1538
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 603 0 0 420 0 33 0 6
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1719 1538 0 1647 0 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2228 997 0 3201 0 119 0 106
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2228 997 0 3201 0 933 0 833
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 19.5 0.0 19.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.4 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 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 21.9 0.0 19.6 LnGrp LOS A A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 603 420 39
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.6 3.1 21.6
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 35.0 9.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 28.6 23.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 3.4 2.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 11.2 11.6 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.1
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: East Ave./SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 421 35 130 526 83 22 0 122 570 242 147 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 421 35 130 526 83 22 0 122 570 242 147 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 463 33 143 578 0 24 0 0 446 518 27 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011111
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099999999999
Cap, veh/h 0 979 70 184 1633 730 66 0 59 428 449 381
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.49 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3224 223 1660 3312 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1480 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 244 252 143 578 0 24 0 0 446 518 27 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1656 1704 1660 1656 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1480 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 10.9 11.0 7.7 9.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 23.6 23.6 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 10.9 11.0 7.7 9.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 23.6 23.6 1.3 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 517 532 184 1633 730 66 0 59 428 449 381 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.78 0.35 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.15 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 517 532 350 1633 730 428 0 382 428 449 381 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 25.4 25.4 39.6 14.3 0.0 42.9 0.0 0.0 34.0 34.0 25.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 3.1 3.0 2.6 0.6 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 55.2 91.9 0.2 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 0.0 5.4 5.6 3.7 4.6 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 17.2 22.7 0.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 28.5 28.5 42.3 14.9 0.0 46.2 0.0 0.0 89.2 125.9 25.9 LnGrp LOS C C D B D F F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 496 721 24 991
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.5 20.3 46.1 106.7
Approach LOS C C D F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.6 35.0 30.0 51.6 10.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 29 23.6 28.6 23.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.7 13.0 25.6 11.8 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 4.9 0.0 6.4 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.8
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave. & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 773 61 0 1056 72 126 76 96 41 0 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 773 61 0 1056 72 126 76 96 41 0 145 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 1743 0 1743 1900 1900 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 143 849 0 0 1160 74 138 84 13 45 0 19 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 999099999999
Cap, veh/h 452 2260 1011 0 1071 68 229 100 259 279 0 256 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 3312 1482 0 3248 202 933 568 1474 1136 0 1462 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 143 849 0 0 607 627 222 0 13 45 0 19 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1656 1482 0 1656 1707 1501 0 1474 1136 0 1462 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.2 9.9 0.0 0.0 30.5 30.5 9.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.2 9.9 0.0 0.0 30.5 30.5 12.8 0.0 0.7 3.1 0.0 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.12 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 452 2260 1011 0 561 578 328 0 259 279 0 256 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.38 0.00 0.00 1.08 1.08 0.68 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.00 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 452 2260 1011 0 561 578 412 0 344 350 0 341 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.1 6.1 0.0 0.0 29.7 29.8 35.7 0.0 30.9 31.9 0.0 31.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 62.1 62.1 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 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 2.8 4.6 0.0 0.0 23.5 24.3 5.6 0.0 0.3 1.0 0.0 0.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.2 6.6 0.0 0.0 91.8 91.8 38.8 0.0 30.9 32.2 0.0 31.1 LnGrp LOS C A F F D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 992 1234 235 64
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 91.8 38.4 31.8
Approach LOS A F D C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 67.8 22.2 30.9 36.9 22.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.4 * 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 56.2 21.0 20.0 * 31 21.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.9 5.1 8.2 32.5 14.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 14.2 1.4 7.0 0.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 318 8 28 144 0 0 0 0 311 0 193 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 318 8 28 144 0 0 0 0 311 0 193
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1712 1712 1712 1712 0 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 366 3 32 166 0 357 0 61
Adj No. of Lanes 011110 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 11 11 11 11 0 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 0 707 601 65 918 0 458 0 408
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.04 0.54 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 1712 1455 1630 1712 0 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 366 3 32 166 0 357 0 61
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1712 1455 1630 1712 0 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 10.9 0.1 1.3 3.4 0.0 13.8 0.0 2.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 10.9 0.1 1.3 3.4 0.0 13.8 0.0 2.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 707 601 65 918 0 458 0 408
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.49 0.18 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 707 601 461 918 0 580 0 518
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 15.0 11.8 32.1 8.1 0.0 22.6 0.0 18.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.7 0.0 2.1 0.4 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.8 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 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.6 1.7 0.0 7.7 0.0 1.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 17.7 11.8 34.2 8.6 0.0 34.9 0.0 19.2 LnGrp LOS B B C A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 369 198 418
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.6 12.7 32.6
Approach LOS B B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 35.0 24.9 43.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 19 28.2 * 24 28.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 12.9 15.8 5.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.6 3.4 7.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 23.0
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 153 476 0 0 157 173 15 0 55 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 153 476 0 0 157 173 15 0 55 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1712 1712 0 0 1712 1712 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 176 547 0 0 180 79 17 0 0
Adj No. of Lanes 110011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 0 0 11 11 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 219 1271 0 0 866 721 54 0 48
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.03 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1630 1712 0 0 1712 1425 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 176 547 0 0 180 79 17 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1712 0 0 1712 1425 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.8 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.2 1.6 0.6 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.8 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.2 1.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 219 1271 0 0 866 721 54 0 48
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.31 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 1271 0 0 866 721 711 0 634
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.4 2.7 0.0 0.0 7.6 7.2 26.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.3 6.3 0.0 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.8 3.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 8.1 7.5 32.6 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A A A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 723 259 17
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.2 8.0 32.6
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 48.2 13.2 35.0 7.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.2 * 19 28.2 24.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.7 7.8 5.2 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 9.3 0.2 10.2 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.3
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 438 107 54 217 0 0 0 0 445 149 307 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 438 107 54 217 0 0 0 0 445 149 307 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1845 1900 1845 1845 0 1845 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 476 90 59 236 0 484 162 111
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 033330 333
Cap, veh/h 0 780 147 224 1650 0 638 670 568
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.47 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3038 554 1757 3597 0 1757 1845 1565
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 282 284 59 236 0 484 162 111
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1752 1747 1757 1752 0 1757 1845 1565 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 10.3 10.4 2.2 2.8 0.0 17.6 4.5 3.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 10.3 10.4 2.2 2.8 0.0 17.6 4.5 3.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.32 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 464 463 224 1650 0 638 670 568 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.61 0.61 0.26 0.14 0.00 0.76 0.24 0.20 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 464 463 224 1650 0 810 851 722
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.5 23.5 28.7 10.9 0.0 20.4 16.2 15.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 5.8 6.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 7.5 0.8 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 5.7 5.7 1.1 1.4 0.0 9.8 2.4 1.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 29.3 29.5 28.9 11.1 0.0 27.9 17.0 16.6 LnGrp LOS C C C B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 566 295 757
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.4 14.7 23.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 25.0 32.9 40.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 * 19 33.6 * 34
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 12.4 19.6 4.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 2.0 6.8 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 24.1
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 207 676 0 0 172 131 99 73 250 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 207 676 0 0 172 131 99 73 250 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 0 0 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 225 735 0 0 187 50 108 79 85
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 330033333
Cap, veh/h 602 2598 0 0 1148 506 189 189 169
Arrive On Green 0.34 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.11 0.11 0.11 Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3597 0 0 3597 1546 1757 1752 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 225 735 0 0 187 50 108 79 85
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 0 0 1752 1546 1757 1752 1568 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.7 5.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.8 4.7 3.4 4.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.7 5.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.8 4.7 3.4 4.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 602 2598 0 0 1148 506 189 189 169 V/C Ratio(X) 0.37 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.10 0.57 0.42 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 602 2598 0 0 1148 506 439 438 392 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.8 3.4 0.0 0.0 19.1 18.7 33.9 33.4 33.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 5.7 3.1 4.9 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 3.8 2.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 2.6 1.8 2.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.2 3.6 0.0 0.0 19.4 19.1 39.6 36.5 38.6 LnGrp LOS C A B B D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 960 237 272
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.5 19.3 38.4
Approach LOS A B D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 65.0 33.1 31.9 15.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 48 * 16 * 26 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.5 9.7 5.0 6.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.2 3.0 1.2 2.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.1
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 846 41 0 462 112 0 0 0 77 0 493 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 846 41 0 462 112 0 0 0 77 0 493 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1900 0 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 910 0 0 497 0 55 0 157
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044 444
Cap, veh/h 0 2932 0 0 2041 913 270 0 482
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5316 0 0 3563 1553 1740 0 3106
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 910 0 0 497 0 55 0 157
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1663 0 0 1736 1553 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 2.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2932 0 0 2041 913 270 0 482
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.33 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2932 0 0 2041 913 855 0 1526
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 17.9 0.0 18.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 18.6 0.0 19.0 LnGrp LOS A A B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 910 497 212
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.3 5.1 18.9
Approach LOS A A B
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 13.6 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 * 24 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.5 4.2 5.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 14.4 1.4 14.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 7.0
HCM 2010 LOS A
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 411 512 0 532 441 42 0 102 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 411 512 0 532 441 42 0 102 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1827 0 1827 1900 1827 0 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 442 0 0 572 0 45 0 8
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044404
Cap, veh/h 0 2207 988 0 3172 0 150 0 134
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1553 0 5316 0 1740 0 1553
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 442 0 0 572 0 45 0 8
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1736 1553 0 1663 0 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2207 988 0 3172 0 150 0 134
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2207 988 0 3172 0 925 0 825
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 19.3 0.0 18.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.4 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 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 21.4 0.0 19.2 LnGrp LOS A A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 442 572 53
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.6 3.5 21.1
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 35.0 10.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 28.6 23.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.4 4.1 3.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 11.9 11.9 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.4
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: East Ave./SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 595 30 75 499 134 49 0 316 482 105 73 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 595 30 75 499 134 49 0 316 482 105 73 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 647 30 82 542 0 53 0 48 605 0 14 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011201
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, % 077777777777
Cap, veh/h 0 1093 51 102 1579 706 143 0 128 757 0 337
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.06 0.47 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.22 0.00 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3372 152 1691 3374 1509 1691 0 1509 3382 0 1505 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 332 345 82 542 0 53 0 48 605 0 14 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1687 1748 1691 1687 1509 1691 0 1509 1691 0 1505 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 4.1 8.7 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.6 14.5 0.0 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 4.1 8.7 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.6 14.5 0.0 0.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 562 582 102 1579 706 143 0 128 757 0 337 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.80 0.34 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.38 0.80 0.00 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 562 582 380 1579 706 465 0 415 929 0 414 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.8 23.8 39.8 14.5 0.0 37.1 0.0 37.1 31.5 0.0 26.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 4.5 4.4 5.5 0.6 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.8 5.3 0.0 0.1 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 0.0 7.3 7.5 2.1 4.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.1 7.4 0.0 0.3 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 28.3 28.2 45.3 15.1 0.0 38.7 0.0 39.0 36.8 0.0 26.2 LnGrp LOS C C D B D D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 677 624 101 619
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.2 19.1 38.8 36.6
Approach LOS C B D D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.6 35.0 25.6 46.6 13.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 29 23.6 28.6 23.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 16.1 16.5 10.7 4.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 5.9 2.6 6.2 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 28.5
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave. & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 81 935 234 0 948 59 168 50 135 42 0 284 Future Volume (veh/h) 81 935 234 0 948 59 168 50 135 42 0 284 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 0.99 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1776 1776 1776 0 1776 1900 1900 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 88 1016 0 0 1030 60 183 54 46 46 0 47 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
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, % 777077777777
Cap, veh/h 523 2288 1024 0 987 57 283 65 289 333 0 292
Arrive On Green 0.31 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1691 3374 1509 0 3324 188 1132 334 1493 1347 0 1509 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 88 1016 0 0 537 553 237 0 46 46 0 47 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1691 1687 1509 0 1687 1737 1466 0 1493 1347 0 1509 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 13.9 0.0 0.0 30.5 30.5 12.6 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 2.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 13.9 0.0 0.0 30.5 30.5 15.4 0.0 2.6 2.8 0.0 2.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.11 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 523 2288 1024 0 515 530 348 0 289 333 0 292 V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.44 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.04 0.68 0.00 0.16 0.14 0.00 0.16 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 523 2288 1024 0 515 530 442 0 388 417 0 392 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 7.4 0.0 0.0 34.7 34.8 38.5 0.0 33.5 33.6 0.0 33.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 51.5 51.1 3.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.3 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 1.8 6.5 0.0 0.0 21.5 22.1 6.5 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.2 8.0 0.0 0.0 86.3 85.8 41.5 0.0 33.8 33.8 0.0 33.8 LnGrp LOS C A F F D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1104 1090 283 93
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 86.0 40.2 33.8
Approach LOS A F D C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 74.2 25.8 37.3 36.9 25.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.4 * 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 61.2 26.0 25.0 * 31 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.9 4.8 5.8 32.5 17.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 18.4 1.9 11.5 0.0 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 46.2
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 341 10 46 203 0 0 0 0 87 0 143 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 341 10 46 203 0 0 0 0 87 0 143
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1743 1743 1743 0 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 363 5 49 216 0 93 0 22
Adj No. of Lanes 011110 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099990 999
Cap, veh/h 0 873 727 95 1149 0 197 0 176
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.06 0.66 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 1743 1451 1660 1743 0 1660 0 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 363 5 49 216 0 93 0 22
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1743 1451 1660 1743 0 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 7.4 0.1 1.6 2.7 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 7.4 0.1 1.6 2.7 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 873 727 95 1149 0 197 0 176
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.42 0.01 0.52 0.19 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 873 727 569 1149 0 717 0 640
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 8.9 7.0 25.8 3.7 0.0 23.2 0.0 22.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.6 0.4 0.0 7.8 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.8 1.4 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.3 7.0 27.4 4.1 0.0 31.0 0.0 23.6 LnGrp LOS B A C A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 368 265 115
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.3 8.4 29.6
Approach LOS B A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.9 35.0 12.4 43.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 19 28.2 * 24 28.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 9.4 4.9 4.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 1.3 7.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 12.6
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 204 224 0 0 232 267 17 1 35 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 204 224 0 0 232 267 17 1 35 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 0 0 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 217 238 0 0 247 121 18 1 1
Adj No. of Lanes 110011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 990099999
Cap, veh/h 265 1300 0 0 850 708 60 3 56
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 1743 0 0 1743 1451 1577 88 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 217 238 0 0 247 121 19 0 1
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1743 0 0 1743 1451 1664 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 4.9 2.7 0.6 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 4.9 2.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 265 1300 0 0 850 708 63 0 56
V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.17 0.30 0.00 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 554 1300 0 0 850 708 699 0 623
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.5 2.2 0.0 0.0 8.8 8.3 27.1 0.0 26.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.5 5.1 0.0 0.2 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 3.5 1.2 0.0 0.0 2.5 1.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.9 2.5 0.0 0.0 9.7 8.8 32.1 0.0 27.0 LnGrp LOS C A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 455 368 20
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.6 9.4 31.9
Approach LOS B A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 49.9 14.9 35.0 7.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.2 * 19 28.2 24.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 9.3 6.9 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.1 0.2 6.8 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 12.2
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 485 115 141 369 0 0 0 0 137 227 215 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 485 115 141 369 0 0 0 0 137 227 215 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1863 1900 1863 1863 0 1863 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 516 96 150 393 0 146 241 61
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 022220 222
Cap, veh/h 0 942 174 270 1986 0 427 449 381
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.15 0.56 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3076 552 1774 3632 0 1774 1863 1581
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 305 307 150 393 0 146 241 61
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1770 1765 1774 1770 0 1774 1863 1581 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.7 8.8 4.8 3.3 0.0 4.2 6.9 1.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 8.7 8.8 4.8 3.3 0.0 4.2 6.9 1.9 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.31 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 559 557 270 1986 0 427 449 381 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.20 0.00 0.34 0.54 0.16 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 559 557 270 1986 0 975 1024 869 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 17.3 17.3 24.0 6.6 0.0 19.2 20.2 18.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 3.8 3.9 1.5 0.2 0.0 1.9 4.0 0.8 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 0.0 4.8 4.9 2.4 1.7 0.0 2.3 4.0 0.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 21.1 21.2 25.5 6.8 0.0 21.1 24.3 19.1 LnGrp LOS C C C A C C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 612 543 448
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.1 12.0 22.5
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 25.0 21.1 40.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 * 19 33.6 * 34
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.8 10.8 8.9 5.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 2.4 5.8 2.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.4
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 216 406 0 0 392 444 118 95 181 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 216 406 0 0 392 444 118 95 181 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 230 432 0 0 417 181 126 101 23
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 594 2597 0 0 1159 511 204 204 181
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.12 0.12 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 1774 3632 0 0 3632 1559 1774 1770 1575
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 230 432 0 0 417 181 126 101 23
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1774 1770 0 0 1770 1559 1774 1770 1575 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 7.1 5.4 4.3 1.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 7.1 5.4 4.3 1.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 594 2597 0 0 1159 511 204 204 181 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.35 0.62 0.50 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 594 2597 0 0 1159 511 444 442 394 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.3 3.2 0.0 0.0 20.5 20.5 33.7 33.2 31.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.9 6.3 4.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.3 3.0 2.3 0.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 21.4 22.4 40.1 37.2 32.5 LnGrp LOS C A CCDDC
Approach Vol, veh/h 662 598 250
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 21.7 38.2
Approach LOS A C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 64.4 32.5 31.9 15.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 48 * 16 * 26 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 9.9 9.2 7.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.2 2.0 3.1 1.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 19.0
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1560 70 0 620 120 0 0 0 240 0 1360 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1560 70 0 620 120 0 0 0 240 0 1360 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1900 0 1810 1810 1810 1810 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1696 0 0 674 0 174 0 1139
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055 555
Cap, veh/h 0 1897 0 0 1320 591 725 0 1294
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5266 0 0 3529 1538 1723 0 3076
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1696 0 0 674 0 174 0 1139
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1647 0 0 1719 1538 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 20.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 21.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 20.6 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 21.8 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1897 0 0 1320 591 725 0 1294
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1900 0 0 1322 592 752 0 1342
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 18.5 0.0 0.0 15.1 0.0 11.9 0.0 17.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 7.4 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 0.0 10.4 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 2.0 0.0 10.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 24.7 0.0 0.0 15.6 0.0 12.3 0.0 24.4 LnGrp LOS C B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1696 674 1313
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.7 15.6 22.8
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 31.0 33.0 31.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.6 * 28 24.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.6 23.8 11.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.0 3.1 12.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 22.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 870 930 0 710 160 30 0 90 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 870 930 0 710 160 30 0 90 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1810 0 1810 1900 1810 0 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 946 0 0 772 0 33 0 7
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055505
Cap, veh/h 0 2224 995 0 3196 0 121 0 108
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3529 1538 0 5266 0 1723 0 1538
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 946 0 0 772 0 33 0 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1719 1538 0 1647 0 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2224 995 0 3196 0 121 0 108
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2224 995 0 3196 0 932 0 832
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 19.5 0.0 19.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.5 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 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 21.8 0.0 19.7 LnGrp LOS A A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 946 772 40
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.4 3.4 21.4
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 35.0 9.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 28.6 23.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.9 4.9 2.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 16.3 18.2 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.4
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 690 60 130 830 90 30 0 130 570 250 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 690 60 130 830 90 30 0 130 570 250 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 758 61 143 912 0 33 0 9 450 521 30 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011111
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099999999999
Cap, veh/h 0 951 77 183 1606 718 94 0 84 420 441 374
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.48 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.25 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3192 250 1660 3312 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1480 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 404 415 143 912 0 33 0 9 450 521 30 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1656 1699 1660 1656 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1480 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 20.9 20.9 7.8 18.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.5 23.6 23.6 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 20.9 20.9 7.8 18.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.5 23.6 23.6 1.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 507 520 183 1606 718 94 0 84 420 441 374 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.78 0.57 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.11 1.07 1.18 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 507 520 343 1606 718 420 0 374 420 441 374 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 29.7 29.7 40.5 17.1 0.0 42.4 0.0 41.8 34.9 34.9 26.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 12.3 12.0 2.8 1.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.6 64.7 103.3 0.2 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 0.0 11.3 11.5 3.7 8.7 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.2 18.3 23.9 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 42.0 41.8 43.2 18.6 0.0 44.6 0.0 42.3 99.6 138.1 26.8 LnGrp LOS D D D B D D F F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 819 1055 42 1001
Approach Delay, s/veh 41.9 21.9 44.1 117.5
Approach LOS D C D F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.7 35.0 30.0 51.7 11.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 29 23.6 28.6 23.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.8 22.9 25.6 20.3 3.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 3.7 0.0 5.8 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.6
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 900 70 0 1260 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 900 70 0 1260 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 1743 0 1743 1900 1900 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 143 989 0 0 1385 83 253 88 18 55 0 25 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 999099999999
Cap, veh/h 179 2047 916 0 1416 85 335 95 375 399 0 372
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 3312 1482 0 3262 190 1072 373 1476 1286 0 1463 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 143 989 0 0 721 747 341 0 18 55 0 25 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1656 1482 0 1656 1709 1445 0 1476 1286 0 1463 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.4 16.3 0.0 0.0 42.7 43.1 19.7 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.4 16.3 0.0 0.0 42.7 43.1 23.0 0.0 0.9 3.3 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.11 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 179 2047 916 0 739 762 430 0 375 399 0 372 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.79 0.00 0.05 0.14 0.00 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 179 2047 916 0 739 762 447 0 393 413 0 389 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.5 10.4 0.0 0.0 27.2 27.3 36.1 0.0 28.2 29.1 0.0 28.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 20.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 27.7 28.2 9.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 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 4.9 7.7 0.0 0.0 25.1 26.1 10.3 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.0 0.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 63.9 11.2 0.0 0.0 54.8 55.5 45.4 0.0 28.2 29.2 0.0 28.4 LnGrp LOS E B D E D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1132 1468 359 80
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.9 55.2 44.5 29.0
Approach LOS B E D C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 68.2 31.8 17.2 51.0 31.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.4 * 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 60.6 26.6 10.3 * 45 26.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.3 5.3 10.4 45.1 25.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.3 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 39.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 770 20 30 260 0 0 0 0 320 0 470 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 770 20 30 260 0 0 0 0 320 0 470 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1712 1712 1712 1712 0 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 885 17 34 299 0 368 0 379
Adj No. of Lanes 011110 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 11 11 11 11 0 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 0 866 736 61 1032 0 433 0 386
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.04 0.60 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 1712 1455 1630 1712 0 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 885 17 34 299 0 368 0 379
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1712 1455 1630 1712 0 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 48.2 0.6 2.0 8.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 24.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 48.2 0.6 2.0 8.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 24.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 866 736 61 1032 0 433 0 386
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.02 0.02 0.56 0.29 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.98 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 866 736 142 1118 0 433 0 386
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.5 11.8 45.1 9.1 0.0 33.2 0.0 34.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 36.2 0.0 3.0 0.4 0.0 18.4 0.0 41.2 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 0.0 31.3 0.2 0.9 3.9 0.0 11.4 0.0 14.3 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 59.7 11.8 48.0 9.5 0.0 51.6 0.0 76.0 LnGrp LOS F B D A D E
Approach Vol, veh/h 902 333 747
Approach Delay, s/veh 58.8 13.5 64.0
Approach LOS E B E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 55.0 31.0 64.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 8.3 48.2 * 25 62.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 50.2 26.6 10.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 53.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 490 600 0 0 270 180 20 0 60 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 490 600 0 0 270 180 20 0 60 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1712 1712 0 0 1712 1712 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 563 690 0 0 310 87 23 0 6
Adj No. of Lanes 110011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 0 0 11 11 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 606 1314 0 0 536 446 81 0 72
Arrive On Green 0.37 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.00 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1630 1712 0 0 1712 1424 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 563 690 0 0 310 87 23 0 6
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1712 0 0 1712 1424 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 22.7 10.7 0.0 0.0 10.4 3.1 0.9 0.0 0.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 22.7 10.7 0.0 0.0 10.4 3.1 0.9 0.0 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 606 1314 0 0 536 446 81 0 72
V/C Ratio(X) 0.93 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.20 0.28 0.00 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 865 1681 0 0 630 524 245 0 219
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.6 3.1 0.0 0.0 19.7 17.2 31.3 0.0 31.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.6 3.7 0.0 1.0 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 11.9 5.1 0.0 0.0 5.3 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.2 4.0 0.0 0.0 22.6 17.8 35.0 0.0 32.0 LnGrp LOS C A C B D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1253 397 29
Approach Delay, s/veh 16.2 21.5 34.4
Approach LOS B C C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 59.3 31.1 28.2 9.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 67.2 * 36 25.2 10.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.7 24.7 12.4 2.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 22.3 0.7 9.0 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 17.8
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 790 140 60 410 0 0 0 0 450 150 600 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 790 140 60 410 0 0 0 0 450 150 600 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1845 1900 1845 1845 0 1845 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 859 126 65 446 0 489 163 429
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 033330 333
Cap, veh/h 0 981 144 107 1613 0 651 684 580
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.46 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3160 450 1757 3597 0 1757 1845 1565
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 491 494 65 446 0 489 163 429
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1752 1765 1757 1752 0 1757 1845 1565 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 18.9 18.9 2.6 5.6 0.0 17.4 4.4 17.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 18.9 18.9 2.6 5.6 0.0 17.4 4.4 17.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.25 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 560 564 107 1613 0 651 684 580 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.61 0.28 0.00 0.75 0.24 0.74 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 596 600 204 1877 0 727 764 648
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.0 23.0 32.7 11.9 0.0 19.6 15.5 19.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 13.3 13.2 2.1 0.1 0.0 7.2 0.7 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 0.0 11.2 11.3 1.3 2.7 0.0 9.7 2.4 8.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 36.3 36.2 34.8 12.0 0.0 26.9 16.3 27.1 LnGrp LOS D D C B C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 985 511 1081
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.2 14.9 25.4
Approach LOS D B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.1 28.6 32.9 38.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 8.3 * 24 29.6 * 38
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 20.9 19.4 7.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 1.9 7.1 3.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 27.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 420 820 0 0 320 140 150 80 250 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 420 820 0 0 320 140 150 80 250 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 0 0 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 457 891 0 0 348 60 163 87 85
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 330033333
Cap, veh/h 543 2481 0 0 1148 506 248 247 221
Arrive On Green 0.31 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.14 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3597 0 0 3597 1546 1757 1752 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 457 891 0 0 348 60 163 87 85
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 0 0 1752 1546 1757 1752 1568 Q Serve(g_s), s 19.4 8.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 2.2 7.0 3.6 3.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 19.4 8.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 2.2 7.0 3.6 3.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 543 2481 0 0 1148 506 248 247 221 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.12 0.66 0.35 0.38 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 543 2481 0 0 1148 506 439 438 392 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.8 4.6 0.0 0.0 20.1 18.8 32.5 31.1 31.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.5 6.2 1.8 2.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 10.2 3.9 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.0 3.8 1.9 1.8 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 20.8 19.3 38.8 32.9 33.6 LnGrp LOS C A C B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1348 408 335
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.6 20.5 35.9
Approach LOS B C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 62.3 30.4 31.9 17.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 48 * 16 * 26 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.0 21.4 7.9 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 10.7 0.0 2.3 2.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.6
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1900 60 0 790 120 0 0 0 80 0 1240 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1900 60 0 790 120 0 0 0 80 0 1240 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1900 0 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 2043 0 0 849 0 57 0 962
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044 444
Cap, veh/h 0 2235 0 0 1556 696 619 0 1106
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5316 0 0 3563 1553 1740 0 3106
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 2043 0 0 849 0 57 0 962
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1663 0 0 1736 1553 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 24.4 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 18.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 24.4 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 18.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2235 0 0 1556 696 619 0 1106
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.87 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2235 0 0 1556 696 652 0 1163
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 16.5 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 13.7 0.0 19.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 7.2 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 7.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 5.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 9.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 23.7 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 13.8 0.0 26.8 LnGrp LOS C B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2043 849 1019
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.7 14.2 26.1
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 28.8 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 * 24 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 26.4 20.4 13.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 2.3 14.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 22.3
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 740 1240 0 860 450 50 0 110 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 740 1240 0 860 450 50 0 110 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1827 0 1827 1900 1827 0 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 796 0 0 925 0 54 0 16
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044404
Cap, veh/h 0 2167 969 0 3113 0 179 0 160
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1553 0 5316 0 1740 0 1553
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 796 0 0 925 0 54 0 16
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1736 1553 0 1663 0 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2167 969 0 3113 0 179 0 160
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2167 969 0 3113 0 908 0 810
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 18.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.5 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 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 20.8 0.0 19.2 LnGrp LOS A A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 796 925 70
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.7 4.2 20.5
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.0 35.0 10.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.6 28.6 23.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.1 5.9 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.0 17.8 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.1
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 890 50 80 790 140 60 0 320 490 110 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 890 50 80 790 140 60 0 320 490 110 80 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 967 51 87 859 0 65 0 53 619 0 22 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011201
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, % 077777777777
Cap, veh/h 0 1066 56 104 1561 698 148 0 132 768 0 342
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.06 0.46 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.23 0.00 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3349 172 1691 3374 1509 1691 0 1509 3382 0 1505 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 500 518 87 859 0 65 0 53 619 0 22 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1687 1745 1691 1687 1509 1691 0 1509 1691 0 1505 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 24.5 24.5 4.4 15.8 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.9 14.9 0.0 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 24.5 24.5 4.4 15.8 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.9 14.9 0.0 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 552 571 104 1561 698 148 0 132 768 0 342 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.91 0.91 0.84 0.55 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.40 0.81 0.00 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 560 579 379 1561 698 463 0 413 926 0 412 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 27.8 27.8 40.0 16.7 0.0 37.3 0.0 37.2 31.5 0.0 26.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 19.8 19.3 6.5 0.9 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.0 5.6 0.0 0.2 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 0.0 14.4 14.8 2.2 7.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.3 7.6 0.0 0.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 47.5 47.1 46.5 17.6 0.0 39.4 0.0 39.2 37.1 0.0 26.3 LnGrp LOS D D D B D D D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1018 946 118 641
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.3 20.2 39.3 36.8
Approach LOS DCDD
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.7 34.6 26.0 46.3 13.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 29 23.6 28.6 23.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 26.5 16.9 17.8 5.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 1.7 2.6 6.8 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 35.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 1080 240 0 1100 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 1080 240 0 1100 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1776 1776 1776 0 1776 1900 1900 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 98 1174 0 0 1196 61 348 54 51 54 0 53 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
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, % 777077777777
Cap, veh/h 162 1943 869 0 1357 69 430 56 444 522 0 447
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 1691 3374 1509 0 3351 166 1227 190 1499 1522 0 1509 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 1174 0 0 618 639 402 0 51 54 0 53 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1691 1687 1509 0 1687 1742 1418 0 1499 1522 0 1509 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.6 22.6 0.0 0.0 33.8 33.8 25.2 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 2.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.6 22.6 0.0 0.0 33.8 33.8 27.8 0.0 2.5 2.6 0.0 2.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.10 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 162 1943 869 0 702 725 487 0 444 522 0 447 V/C Ratio(X) 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.83 0.00 0.11 0.10 0.00 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 174 1943 869 0 702 725 487 0 444 522 0 447 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.4 13.8 0.0 0.0 26.9 26.9 34.3 0.0 25.7 25.7 0.0 25.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.2 1.4 0.0 0.0 14.8 14.6 11.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 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 2.7 10.8 0.0 0.0 18.5 19.1 12.3 0.0 1.0 1.1 0.0 1.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.6 15.2 0.0 0.0 41.7 41.5 45.5 0.0 25.8 25.8 0.0 25.8 LnGrp LOS D B D D D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1272 1257 453 107
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.6 41.6 43.2 25.8
Approach LOS B D D C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 64.0 36.0 16.0 48.0 36.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.4 * 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 57.6 29.6 10.3 * 42 29.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.6 4.6 7.6 35.8 29.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 18.9 3.3 2.3 4.8 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 31.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 850 10 50 350 0 0 0 0 90 0 430 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 850 10 50 350 0 0 0 0 90 0 430
Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1743 1743 1743 0 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 904 5 53 372 0 96 0 327
Adj No. of Lanes 011110 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099990 999
Cap, veh/h 0 895 745 79 1084 0 407 0 363
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.05 0.62 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 1743 1451 1660 1743 0 1660 0 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 904 5 53 372 0 96 0 327
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1743 1451 1660 1743 0 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 48.2 0.2 2.9 9.6 0.0 4.4 0.0 20.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 48.2 0.2 2.9 9.6 0.0 4.4 0.0 20.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 895 745 79 1084 0 407 0 363
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.01 0.01 0.67 0.34 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.90 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 895 745 164 1173 0 430 0 383
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 22.8 11.2 44.0 8.5 0.0 28.4 0.0 34.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 32.7 0.0 3.6 0.5 0.0 1.3 0.0 27.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 31.0 0.1 1.4 4.7 0.0 2.2 0.0 11.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 55.5 11.2 47.5 9.1 0.0 29.8 0.0 62.0 LnGrp LOS F B D A C E
Approach Vol, veh/h 909 425 423
Approach Delay, s/veh 55.3 13.9 54.7
Approach LOS E B D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.2 55.0 28.7 65.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 48.2 * 24 63.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 50.2 22.1 11.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.9 32.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 45.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 620 320 0 0 380 270 20 0 40 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 620 320 0 0 380 270 20 0 40 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 0 0 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 660 340 0 0 404 124 21 0 7
Adj No. of Lanes 110011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 990099999
Cap, veh/h 697 1368 0 0 502 418 78 0 70
Arrive On Green 0.42 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.05 0.00 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 1743 0 0 1743 1450 1660 0 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 660 340 0 0 404 124 21 0 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1743 0 0 1743 1450 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 28.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 16.0 5.0 0.9 0.0 0.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 28.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 16.0 5.0 0.9 0.0 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 697 1368 0 0 502 418 78 0 70
V/C Ratio(X) 0.95 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.30 0.27 0.00 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 854 1574 0 0 543 452 230 0 205
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 24.6 20.6 34.2 0.0 33.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 10.7 1.1 3.5 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 16.1 1.9 0.0 0.0 9.1 2.1 0.5 0.0 0.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.7 2.4 0.0 0.0 35.2 21.8 37.7 0.0 35.1 LnGrp LOS D A D C D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1000 528 28
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 32.0 37.1
Approach LOS C C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 65.2 37.0 28.2 9.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 67.2 * 38 23.2 10.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.9 30.5 18.0 2.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 15.2 0.8 3.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 27.6
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 990 140 150 680 0 0 0 0 140 230 390 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 990 140 150 680 0 0 0 0 140 230 390 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1863 1900 1863 1863 0 1863 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1053 123 160 723 0 149 245 247
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 022220 222
Cap, veh/h 0 1186 138 233 2066 0 433 455 386
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.13 0.58 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3287 373 1774 3632 0 1774 1863 1581
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 583 593 160 723 0 149 245 247
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1770 1797 1774 1770 0 1774 1863 1581 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 21.7 21.7 6.1 7.5 0.0 4.9 8.0 9.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 21.7 21.7 6.1 7.5 0.0 4.9 8.0 9.8 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.21 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 657 667 233 2066 0 433 455 386 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.89 0.89 0.69 0.35 0.00 0.34 0.54 0.64 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 688 698 285 2232 0 596 626 531
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 20.7 20.7 29.1 7.7 0.0 21.9 23.1 23.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 13.0 13.0 3.2 0.1 0.0 1.9 4.0 7.0 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 0.0 12.9 13.1 3.2 3.6 0.0 2.6 4.6 5.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 33.7 33.7 32.3 7.8 0.0 23.8 27.1 30.8 LnGrp LOS C C C A C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1176 883 641
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.7 12.2 27.8
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.9 31.8 23.5 46.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 11 * 27 23.6 * 44
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.1 23.7 11.8 9.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 2.3 5.3 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 25.3
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Plus Project 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 580 550 0 0 610 450 220 100 190 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 580 550 0 0 610 450 220 100 190 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 617 585 0 0 649 188 234 106 32
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 597 2430 0 0 987 434 287 287 256
Arrive On Green 0.34 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1774 3632 0 0 3632 1558 1774 1770 1577
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 617 585 0 0 649 188 234 106 32
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1774 1770 0 0 1770 1558 1774 1770 1577 Q Serve(g_s), s 26.9 5.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 7.9 10.2 4.3 1.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 26.9 5.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 7.9 10.2 4.3 1.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 597 2430 0 0 987 434 287 287 256 V/C Ratio(X) 1.03 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.43 0.81 0.37 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 597 2430 0 0 987 434 324 323 288
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.5 4.7 0.0 0.0 25.5 23.7 32.4 29.9 28.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 30.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.4 3.1 16.1 1.7 0.5 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 18.2 2.4 0.0 0.0 6.8 3.8 6.3 2.2 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.3 4.8 0.0 0.0 28.9 26.8 48.5 31.6 29.1 LnGrp LOS F A CCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 1202 837 372
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.7 28.4 42.0
Approach LOS C C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.6 32.6 28.0 19.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 53 * 25 * 22 14.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.0 28.9 15.0 12.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 8.6 0.0 3.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 32.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1900 100 0 670 120 0 0 0 240 0 1370 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1900 100 0 670 120 0 0 0 240 0 1370 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1900 0 1810 1810 1810 1810 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 2065 0 0 728 0 174 0 1150
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055 555
Cap, veh/h 0 2249 0 0 1565 700 755 0 1349
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.44 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5266 0 0 3529 1538 1723 0 3076
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 2065 0 0 728 0 174 0 1150
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1647 0 0 1719 1538 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 46.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 0.0 7.4 0.0 39.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 46.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 0.0 7.4 0.0 39.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2249 0 0 1565 700 755 0 1349
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.85 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2252 0 0 1568 701 863 0 1541
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 22.1 0.0 20.6 0.0 29.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 5.0 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 0.0 22.3 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 3.6 0.0 17.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 36.8 0.0 0.0 22.5 0.0 20.9 0.0 34.6 LnGrp LOS D C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2065 728 1324
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.8 22.5 32.8
Approach LOS D C C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 59.9 57.6 59.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.6 * 59 53.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 48.0 41.4 19.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.5 10.1 32.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 33.0
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 2: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1020 1120 0 740 230 50 0 90 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1020 1120 0 740 230 50 0 90 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1810 1810 0 1810 1900 1810 0 1810 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1109 0 0 804 0 54 0 7
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 055055505
Cap, veh/h 0 2261 1011 0 3248 0 158 0 141
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3529 1538 0 5266 0 1723 0 1538
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1109 0 0 804 0 54 0 7
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1719 1538 0 1647 0 1723 0 1538 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2261 1011 0 3248 0 158 0 141
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2664 1192 0 3828 0 481 0 429
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 21.2 0.0 20.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 23.7 0.0 20.9 LnGrp LOS A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1109 804 61
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.5 3.6 23.4
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 39.2 39.2 10.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 38.6 38.6 13.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.1 5.3 3.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 22.6 25.6 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.7
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 810 80 180 850 90 40 0 180 860 470 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 810 80 180 850 90 40 0 180 860 470 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 890 83 198 934 0 44 0 64 730 816 30 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011111
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099999999999
Cap, veh/h 0 786 73 213 1416 633 92 0 82 647 679 577
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.43 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.39 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3150 286 1660 3312 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1481 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 481 492 198 934 0 44 0 64 730 816 30 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1656 1693 1660 1656 1482 1660 0 1482 1660 1743 1481 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 38.6 38.6 17.8 33.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 6.4 58.6 58.6 1.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 38.6 38.6 17.8 33.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 6.4 58.6 58.6 1.9 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 425 434 213 1416 633 92 0 82 647 679 577 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.13 1.13 0.93 0.66 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.78 1.13 1.20 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 425 434 213 1416 633 95 0 85 647 679 577 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 55.9 55.9 64.9 34.3 0.0 68.9 0.0 70.1 45.9 45.9 28.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 85.0 84.5 41.9 1.8 0.0 3.8 0.0 35.4 76.5 104.5 0.1 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 0.0 27.6 28.2 10.6 15.8 0.0 1.9 0.0 3.4 40.5 47.8 0.8 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 140.9 140.5 106.7 36.1 0.0 72.8 0.0 105.5 122.4 150.4 28.7 LnGrp LOS F F F D E F F F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 973 1132 108 1576
Approach Delay, s/veh 140.7 48.5 92.2 135.1
Approach LOS F D F F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.7 45.0 65.0 70.7 14.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 39 58.6 63.6 8.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.8 40.6 60.6 35.8 8.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 109.4
HCM 2010 LOS F
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 1300 110 0 1940 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 1300 110 0 1940 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 1743 0 1743 1900 1900 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 143 1429 0 0 2132 83 253 88 18 55 0 25 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 999099999999
Cap, veh/h 103 2287 1023 0 1920 74 283 84 331 338 0 328 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 3312 1482 0 3338 126 1076 374 1476 1293 0 1462 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 143 1429 0 0 1079 1136 341 0 18 55 0 25 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1656 1482 0 1656 1721 1451 0 1476 1293 0 1462 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.3 35.2 0.0 0.0 88.6 88.6 28.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 2.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.3 35.2 0.0 0.0 88.6 88.6 33.6 0.0 1.4 5.2 0.0 2.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.07 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 103 2287 1023 0 978 1016 367 0 331 338 0 328 V/C Ratio(X) 1.39 0.62 0.00 0.00 1.10 1.12 0.93 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.00 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 103 2287 1023 0 978 1016 367 0 331 338 0 328 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 70.3 12.6 0.0 0.0 30.7 30.7 58.6 0.0 45.7 47.2 0.0 45.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 224.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 61.3 66.4 29.7 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 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 10.7 16.3 0.0 0.0 56.9 60.5 17.1 0.0 0.6 1.9 0.0 0.8 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 294.4 13.9 0.0 0.0 92.0 97.1 88.3 0.0 45.8 47.4 0.0 46.0 LnGrp LOS F B F F F D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1572 2215 359 80
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.4 94.6 86.2 47.0
Approach LOS D F F D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 110.0 40.0 15.0 95.0 40.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 * 5.7 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 103.6 33.6 * 9.3 88.6 33.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 37.2 7.2 11.3 90.6 35.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 66.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 72.5
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1460 30 40 570 0 0 0 0 660 0 570 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1460 30 40 570 0 0 0 0 660 0 570 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1712 1712 1712 1712 0 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1678 28 46 655 0 759 0 494
Adj No. of Lanes 021120 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 11 11 11 11 0 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 0 1409 630 58 1651 0 663 0 592
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.04 0.51 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3338 1455 1630 3338 0 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1678 28 46 655 0 759 0 494
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1626 1455 1630 1626 0 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 63.2 1.6 4.1 18.1 0.0 59.3 0.0 44.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 63.2 1.6 4.1 18.1 0.0 59.3 0.0 44.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1409 630 58 1651 0 663 0 592
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.19 0.04 0.80 0.40 0.00 1.15 0.00 0.84 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1409 630 104 1744 0 663 0 592
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 41.3 23.9 69.8 22.1 0.0 43.3 0.0 38.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 93.1 0.1 9.1 0.5 0.0 82.3 0.0 13.0 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 0.0 46.4 0.7 2.0 8.2 0.0 41.7 0.0 20.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 134.5 24.0 78.9 22.6 0.0 125.6 0.0 51.9 LnGrp LOS F C E C F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1706 701 1253
Approach Delay, s/veh 132.7 26.3 96.5
Approach LOS F C F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.8 70.0 65.0 80.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 63.2 * 59 78.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 65.2 61.3 20.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 99.9
HCM 2010 LOS F
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 690 1430 0 0 580 330 30 0 70 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 690 1430 0 0 580 330 30 0 70 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1712 1712 0 0 1712 1712 1900 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 793 1644 0 0 667 259 34 0 17
Adj No. of Lanes 120021011
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 11 0 0 11 11 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 814 2766 0 0 997 436 85 0 76
Arrive On Green 0.50 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.00 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1630 3338 0 0 3338 1424 1630 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 793 1644 0 0 667 259 34 0 17
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1630 1626 0 0 1626 1424 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 60.9 19.6 0.0 0.0 23.0 19.8 2.6 0.0 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 60.9 19.6 0.0 0.0 23.0 19.8 2.6 0.0 1.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 814 2766 0 0 997 436 85 0 76
V/C Ratio(X) 0.97 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.59 0.40 0.00 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1045 3121 0 0 997 436 182 0 162
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 38.8 37.7 58.9 0.0 58.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 2.7 4.1 5.8 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 31.4 8.9 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.3 1.3 0.0 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 49.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 41.5 41.9 64.7 0.0 61.2 LnGrp LOS D A D D E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2437 926 51
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.4 41.6 63.5
Approach LOS B D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 116.0 69.8 46.1 12.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 123.2 * 82 35.2 14.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.6 62.9 25.0 4.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 87.5 1.3 10.1 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 25.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 7: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1190 140 290 770 0 0 0 0 450 300 600 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1190 140 290 770 0 0 0 0 450 300 600 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1845 1900 1845 1845 0 1845 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1293 126 315 837 0 489 326 429
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 033330 333
Cap, veh/h 0 1348 131 269 2167 0 493 518 439
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.15 0.62 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3320 314 1757 3597 0 1757 1845 1565
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 700 719 315 837 0 489 326 429
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1752 1789 1757 1752 0 1757 1845 1565 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 46.3 46.8 18.3 14.3 0.0 33.2 18.5 32.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 46.3 46.8 18.3 14.3 0.0 33.2 18.5 32.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.18 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 732 747 269 2167 0 493 518 439 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.96 0.96 1.17 0.39 0.00 0.99 0.63 0.98 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 736 752 269 2176 0 493 518 439
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 33.8 33.9 50.7 11.5 0.0 42.9 37.6 42.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 22.9 23.8 109.9 0.1 0.0 38.5 5.2 37.4 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 0.0 27.0 28.1 17.0 6.9 0.0 21.3 10.2 18.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 56.7 57.7 160.6 11.6 0.0 81.4 42.8 80.1 LnGrp LOS E E F B F D F
Approach Vol, veh/h 1419 1152 1244
Approach Delay, s/veh 57.2 52.3 70.8
Approach LOS E D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.0 55.7 40.0 79.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 18 * 50 33.6 * 74
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.3 48.8 35.2 16.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.0 7.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 60.2
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 460 1180 0 0 830 280 230 250 470 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 460 1180 0 0 830 280 230 250 470 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 0 0 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 500 1283 0 0 902 212 250 272 324
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 330033333
Cap, veh/h 532 2230 0 0 978 431 400 474 390
Arrive On Green 0.30 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.25 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3597 0 0 3597 1545 1608 1909 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 500 1283 0 0 902 212 274 248 324
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 0 0 1752 1545 1764 1752 1568 Q Serve(g_s), s 29.1 22.1 0.0 0.0 26.2 12.0 14.5 13.0 20.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 29.1 22.1 0.0 0.0 26.2 12.0 14.5 13.0 20.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 532 2230 0 0 978 431 438 435 390 V/C Ratio(X) 0.94 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.49 0.63 0.57 0.83 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 532 2230 0 0 978 431 481 477 427
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.7 11.0 0.0 0.0 36.7 31.6 35.1 34.5 37.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 15.2 4.0 3.6 2.6 14.2 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 14.6 10.5 0.0 0.0 14.7 5.6 7.5 6.6 10.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 39.8 11.1 0.0 0.0 52.0 35.6 38.7 37.1 51.6 LnGrp LOS D B DDDDD
Approach Vol, veh/h 1783 1114 846
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.1 48.8 43.2
Approach LOS B D D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 72.5 37.5 35.0 32.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 64 * 29 * 29 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.1 31.1 28.2 22.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.4 0.0 0.7 3.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 33.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1980 90 0 900 120 0 0 0 90 0 1420 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1980 90 0 900 120 0 0 0 90 0 1420 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1900 0 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 2129 0 0 968 0 65 0 1159
Adj No. of Lanes 030021 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044 444
Cap, veh/h 0 2334 0 0 1624 727 758 0 1352
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.44 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5316 0 0 3563 1553 1740 0 3106
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 2129 0 0 968 0 65 0 1159
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1663 0 0 1736 1553 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 51.3 0.0 0.0 26.6 0.0 2.8 0.0 43.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 51.3 0.0 0.0 26.6 0.0 2.8 0.0 43.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2334 0 0 1624 727 758 0 1352
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.86 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2337 0 0 1626 728 900 0 1606
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 31.9 0.0 0.0 25.4 0.0 21.4 0.0 32.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 4.9 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 0.0 24.8 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 1.4 0.0 19.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 38.2 0.0 0.0 26.1 0.0 21.5 0.0 37.8 LnGrp LOS D C C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 2129 968 1224
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.2 26.1 37.0
Approach LOS D C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 66.9 62.4 66.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.1 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 60.6 * 67 60.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 53.3 45.5 28.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.3 10.8 31.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 35.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 820 1250 0 970 450 50 0 110 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 820 1250 0 970 450 50 0 110 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1827 1827 0 1827 1900 1827 0 1827 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 882 0 0 1043 0 54 0 16
Adj No. of Lanes 021030101
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 044044404
Cap, veh/h 0 2258 1010 0 3245 0 173 0 154
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1553 0 5316 0 1740 0 1553
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 882 0 0 1043 0 54 0 16
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1736 1553 0 1663 0 1740 0 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2258 1010 0 3245 0 173 0 154
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2679 1198 0 3849 0 484 0 432
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 20.9 0.0 20.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.6 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 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 22.9 0.0 21.1 LnGrp LOS A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 882 1043 70
Approach Delay, s/veh 4.2 4.0 22.5
Approach LOS A A C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 38.9 38.9 11.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.1
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 38.6 38.6 13.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.0 6.6 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 24.6 25.5 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.8
HCM 2010 LOS A
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 930 50 100 870 140 140 0 440 950 230 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 930 50 100 870 140 140 0 440 950 230 80 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1011 51 109 946 0 152 0 183 642 798 22 Adj No. of Lanes 020121011111
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, % 077777777777
Cap, veh/h 0 921 46 121 1341 600 235 0 210 559 587 498
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.07 0.40 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3357 165 1691 3374 1509 1691 0 1509 1691 1776 1507 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 522 540 109 946 0 152 0 183 642 798 22 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1687 1746 1691 1687 1509 1691 0 1509 1691 1776 1507 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 40.6 40.6 9.2 33.8 0.0 12.3 0.0 17.1 47.6 47.6 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 40.6 40.6 9.2 33.8 0.0 12.3 0.0 17.1 47.6 47.6 1.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 475 492 121 1341 600 235 0 210 559 587 498 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.10 1.10 0.90 0.71 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.87 1.15 1.36 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 475 492 121 1341 600 312 0 279 559 587 498 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 51.8 51.8 66.4 36.3 0.0 58.7 0.0 60.8 48.3 48.3 32.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 70.6 70.0 51.7 2.4 0.0 3.0 0.0 20.2 86.5 173.1 0.1 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 0.0 28.2 29.1 6.1 16.2 0.0 5.9 0.0 8.3 35.6 51.5 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 122.4 121.8 118.1 38.7 0.0 61.7 0.0 81.0 134.7 221.4 32.9 LnGrp LOS F F F D E F F F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1062 1055 335 1462
Approach Delay, s/veh 122.1 46.9 72.2 180.5
Approach LOS F D E F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.7 47.0 54.0 63.7 26.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.3 * 41 47.6 56.6 26.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.2 42.6 49.6 35.8 19.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 0.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 119.4
HCM 2010 LOS F
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 1610 330 0 1720 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 1610 330 0 1720 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1776 1776 1776 0 1776 1900 1900 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 98 1750 0 0 1870 61 348 54 51 54 0 53 Adj No. of Lanes 121020011011
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, % 777077777777
Cap, veh/h 319 2563 1147 0 1752 57 387 53 413 475 0 416 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1691 3374 1509 0 3421 108 1230 191 1498 1537 0 1509 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 1750 0 0 941 990 402 0 51 54 0 53 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1691 1687 1509 0 1687 1754 1421 0 1498 1537 0 1509 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 73.6 73.6 34.9 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 73.6 73.6 38.6 0.0 3.6 3.7 0.0 3.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.06 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 319 2563 1147 0 887 922 440 0 413 475 0 416 V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.68 0.00 0.00 1.06 1.07 0.91 0.00 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 319 2563 1147 0 887 922 440 0 413 475 0 416 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 33.2 33.2 50.8 0.0 38.0 38.1 0.0 38.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 47.7 51.6 23.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 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 3.3 17.1 0.0 0.0 45.8 48.5 18.4 0.0 1.5 1.6 0.0 1.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 49.2 9.9 0.0 0.0 80.9 84.8 74.3 0.0 38.1 38.2 0.0 38.2 LnGrp LOS D A F F E D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1848 1931 453 107
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.0 82.9 70.3 38.2
Approach LOS B F E D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 113.0 45.0 33.0 80.0 45.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 6.4 * 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 88.6 38.6 9.3 * 74 38.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 38.2 5.7 9.0 75.6 40.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 39.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 50.3
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1260 50 50 1000 0 0 0 0 240 0 660 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1260 50 50 1000 0 0 0 0 240 0 660 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1743 1743 1743 0 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1340 47 53 1064 0 255 0 572
Adj No. of Lanes 021120 011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099990 999
Cap, veh/h 0 1331 583 67 1615 0 685 0 612
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.49 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3399 1451 1660 3399 0 1660 0 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1340 47 53 1064 0 255 0 572
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1656 1451 1660 1656 0 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 50.4 2.5 4.0 30.4 0.0 13.4 0.0 46.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 50.4 2.5 4.0 30.4 0.0 13.4 0.0 46.3 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1331 583 67 1615 0 685 0 612
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 1.01 0.08 0.79 0.66 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.94 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1331 583 123 1694 0 705 0 629
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.5 23.2 59.7 24.3 0.0 25.6 0.0 35.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 26.4 0.2 7.6 1.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 23.4 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 0.0 27.8 1.0 2.0 14.2 0.0 6.4 0.0 22.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 63.9 23.4 67.3 25.8 0.0 27.1 0.0 58.7 LnGrp LOS F C E C C E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1387 1117 827
Approach Delay, s/veh 62.5 27.8 48.9
Approach LOS E C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.8 57.2 57.5 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 49.2 * 53 64.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 52.4 48.3 32.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 3.5 28.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 47.5
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 620 880 0 0 1030 740 20 0 50 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 620 880 0 0 1030 740 20 0 50 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 0 0 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 660 936 0 0 1096 624 21 0 17
Adj No. of Lanes 120021011
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 990099999
Cap, veh/h 652 2791 0 0 1327 581 81 0 72
Arrive On Green 0.39 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.05 0.00 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 3399 0 0 3399 1451 1660 0 1482
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 660 936 0 0 1096 624 21 0 17
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1656 0 0 1656 1451 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 45.3 7.1 0.0 0.0 34.2 46.2 1.4 0.0 1.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 45.3 7.1 0.0 0.0 34.2 46.2 1.4 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 652 2791 0 0 1327 581 81 0 72
V/C Ratio(X) 1.01 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.83 1.07 0.26 0.00 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 652 2791 0 0 1327 581 148 0 132
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 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 31.0 34.6 52.8 0.0 52.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 38.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 58.7 3.2 0.0 3.2 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 27.6 3.2 0.0 0.0 16.5 27.9 0.7 0.0 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.3 2.2 0.0 0.0 36.2 93.3 56.1 0.0 56.0 LnGrp LOS F A D F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1596 1720 38
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.6 56.9 56.0
Approach LOS C E E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 104.0 51.0 53.0 11.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 * 5.7 6.8 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 97.2 * 45 46.2 10.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.1 47.3 48.2 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 78.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 44.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1230 140 510 1030 0 0 0 0 260 240 390 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1230 140 510 1030 0 0 0 0 260 240 390 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1863 1900 1863 1863 0 1863 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1309 123 543 1096 0 277 255 247
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 111
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 022220 222
Cap, veh/h 0 1367 128 472 2577 0 316 332 281
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.27 0.73 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.18 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3365 306 1774 3632 0 1774 1863 1581
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 706 726 543 1096 0 277 255 247
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1770 1809 1774 1770 0 1774 1863 1581 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 49.8 50.3 34.3 15.7 0.0 19.6 16.8 19.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 49.8 50.3 34.3 15.7 0.0 19.6 16.8 19.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.17 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 740 756 472 2577 0 316 332 281 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.95 0.96 1.15 0.43 0.00 0.88 0.77 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 745 762 472 2588 0 325 341 289
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 36.3 36.5 47.3 6.9 0.0 51.6 50.5 51.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 22.4 23.3 89.8 0.1 0.0 26.6 14.9 29.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 28.9 29.9 28.5 7.7 0.0 11.9 10.0 10.8 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 58.7 59.8 137.1 7.0 0.0 78.2 65.3 80.7 LnGrp LOS E E F A E E F
Approach Vol, veh/h 1432 1639 779
Approach Delay, s/veh 59.2 50.1 74.8
Approach LOS E D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 40.0 59.6 29.3 99.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 34 * 54 23.6 * 94
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 36.3 52.3 21.6 17.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 1.3 12.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 58.5
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 580 910 0 0 1320 450 220 480 310 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 580 910 0 0 1320 450 220 480 310 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 617 968 0 0 1404 188 234 511 160
Adj No. of Lanes 120021021
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 498 2510 0 0 1373 605 219 512 323
Arrive On Green 0.28 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.20 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1774 3632 0 0 3632 1560 1074 2505 1579
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 617 968 0 0 1404 188 394 351 160
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1774 1770 0 0 1770 1560 1809 1770 1579 Q Serve(g_s), s 39.3 15.3 0.0 0.0 54.3 11.7 28.6 27.5 12.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 39.3 15.3 0.0 0.0 54.3 11.7 28.6 27.5 12.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.59 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 498 2510 0 0 1373 605 370 362 323 V/C Ratio(X) 1.24 0.39 0.00 0.00 1.02 0.31 1.07 0.97 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 498 2510 0 0 1373 605 370 362 323 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 50.3 8.1 0.0 0.0 42.8 29.8 55.7 55.3 49.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 110.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 30.2 1.3 65.6 39.7 2.5 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 34.5 7.4 0.0 0.0 32.3 5.3 21.0 17.4 5.7 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 160.6 8.2 0.0 0.0 73.1 31.2 121.3 95.0 51.8 LnGrp LOS F A F C F F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1585 1592 905
Approach Delay, s/veh 67.5 68.1 98.8
Approach LOS E E F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 105.0 45.0 60.0 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 99 * 39 * 54 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.3 41.3 56.3 30.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 74.7
HCM 2010 LOS E
Notes
TRAFFIC TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS:

PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS REPORTS – WITH MITIGATION
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 1900 100 0 670 120 0 0 0 240 0 1370 Future Volume (vph) 0 1900 100 0 670 120 0 0 0 240 0 1370 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.4 6.4 4.0 6.1 6.1
Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.88
Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 4903 3438 1538 1719 2707
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 4903 3438 1538 1719 2707
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2065 109 0 728 130 0 0 0 261 0 1489
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2168 0 0 728 130 0 0 0 261 0 1471 Heavy Vehicles (%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
Turn Type NA NA Free Prot custom
Protected Phases 2 6 4 5
Permitted Phases Free 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 67.3 25.3 98.6 18.8 54.7
Effective Green, g (s) 67.3 25.3 98.6 18.8 54.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.26 1.00 0.19 0.55
Clearance Time (s) 6.4 6.4 6.1 6.1
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.8 4.2 4.7 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3346 882 1538 327 1669
v/s Ratio Prot 0.44 c0.21 0.15 c0.32
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.22
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.83 0.08 0.80 0.88
Uniform Delay, d1 8.9 34.6 0.0 38.1 19.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 6.8 0.1 14.2 5.8
Delay (s) 9.5 41.3 0.1 52.3 25.0
Level of Service A D A D C
Approach Delay (s) 9.5 35.1 0.0 29.0
Approach LOS A D A C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 98.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 810 80 180 850 90 40 0 180 860 470 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 810 80 180 850 90 40 0 180 860 470 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1900 1743 1743 1743 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 890 83 198 934 0 44 0 64 945 516 30 Adj No. of Lanes 030121011211
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099999999999
Cap, veh/h 0 1152 107 227 1473 659 98 0 290 1132 613 520 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.14 0.44 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.35 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4588 412 1660 3312 1482 1660 0 1482 3221 1743 1480 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 636 337 198 934 0 44 0 64 945 516 30 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1586 1670 1660 1656 1482 1660 0 1482 1610 1743 1480 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 24.7 24.8 15.5 29.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 35.8 36.2 1.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 24.7 24.8 15.5 29.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 35.8 36.2 1.8 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 825 434 227 1473 659 98 0 290 1132 613 520 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.77 0.77 0.87 0.63 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.22 0.83 0.84 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 922 485 229 1561 698 107 0 298 1203 651 553 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 45.5 45.5 56.2 28.5 0.0 60.4 0.0 44.9 39.5 39.7 28.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 5.3 9.8 27.7 1.4 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.4 5.6 10.4 0.1 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 0.0 11.4 12.6 8.9 13.5 0.0 1.7 0.0 2.0 16.8 19.3 0.7 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 50.7 55.3 83.9 29.9 0.0 63.6 0.0 45.3 45.2 50.1 28.6 LnGrp LOS D E F C E DDDC
Approach Vol, veh/h 973 1132 108 1491
Approach Delay, s/veh 52.3 39.4 52.7 46.5
Approach LOS DDDD
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.5 40.9 53.1 65.5 14.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.3 * 39 49.6 62.6 8.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.5 26.8 38.2 31.0 5.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 7.7 8.5 15.1 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 46.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 1300 110 0 1940 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 1300 110 0 1940 80 230 80 100 50 0 150 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1743 1743 1743 0 1743 1900 1743 1743 1900 1743 0 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 143 1429 0 0 2132 83 253 88 18 55 0 25 Adj No. of Lanes 121030110101
Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 999099999909
Cap, veh/h 150 2334 1044 0 2673 104 320 122 25 91 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.19 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1660 3312 1482 0 4858 182 1660 1402 287 1660 55 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 143 1429 0 0 1437 778 253 0 106 55 64.2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1660 1656 1482 0 1586 1711 1660 0 1689 1660 E Q Serve(g_s), s 10.7 28.0 0.0 0.0 44.6 45.0 18.1 0.0 7.6 4.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.7 28.0 0.0 0.0 44.6 45.0 18.1 0.0 7.6 4.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.11 1.00 0.17 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 150 2334 1044 0 1804 973 320 0 147 91 V/C Ratio(X) 0.95 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.79 0.00 0.72 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 150 2334 1044 0 1804 973 353 0 359 127 HCM Platoon Ratio 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.6 9.6 0.0 0.0 21.2 21.3 48.0 0.0 55.6 57.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 58.7 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.7 6.9 10.6 0.0 6.5 6.4 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 7.4 13.1 0.0 0.0 20.3 23.1 9.2 0.0 3.8 2.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 115.3 10.8 0.0 0.0 25.0 28.2 58.6 0.0 62.0 64.2 LnGrp LOS F B C C E E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1572 2215 359
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.3 26.1 59.6
Approach LOS C C E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 3 5678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 94.5 30.5 17.0 77.5 13.2 17.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 * 5.7 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 69.6 26.6 * 11 52.6 9.6 26.6 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 30.0 20.1 12.7 47.0 6.0 9.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 39.3 0.4 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 27.3
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1460 30 40 570 0 0 0 0 660 0 570 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1460 30 40 570 0 0 0 0 660 0 570 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1712 1712 1712 1712 0 1712 1712 1712 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1678 28 46 655 0 913 0 329
Adj No. of Lanes 031120 201
Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 11 11 11 11 0 11 11 11
Cap, veh/h 0 2033 633 60 1674 0 1276 0 569
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.04 0.51 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4827 1455 1630 3338 0 3260 0 1455
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1678 28 46 655 0 913 0 329
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1558 1455 1630 1626 0 1630 0 1455 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 42.1 1.5 3.7 16.3 0.0 31.5 0.0 23.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 42.1 1.5 3.7 16.3 0.0 31.5 0.0 23.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2033 633 60 1674 0 1276 0 569
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.83 0.04 0.77 0.39 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2044 636 114 1789 0 1575 0 703
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 33.1 21.7 63.5 19.6 0.0 34.2 0.0 31.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 3.7 0.1 7.3 0.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 4.2 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 0.0 18.7 0.6 1.8 7.4 0.0 14.8 0.0 10.2 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 36.8 21.8 70.9 20.1 0.0 37.7 0.0 36.0 LnGrp LOS D C E C D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1706 701 1242
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.6 23.4 37.2
Approach LOS D C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.6 64.7 57.8 75.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 9.3 58.2 * 64 73.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 44.1 33.5 18.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 13.7 18.6 50.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 34.3
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 7: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1190 140 290 770 0 0 0 0 450 300 600 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1190 140 290 770 0 0 0 0 450 300 600 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1845 1900 1845 1845 0 1845 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1293 126 315 837 0 408 440 429
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 112
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 033330 333
Cap, veh/h 0 1355 132 270 2178 0 486 510 865
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.15 0.62 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3320 314 1757 3597 0 1757 1845 3125
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 700 719 315 837 0 408 440 429
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1752 1789 1757 1752 0 1757 1845 1562 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 45.9 46.4 18.3 14.1 0.0 26.0 26.9 13.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 45.9 46.4 18.3 14.1 0.0 26.0 26.9 13.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.18 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 735 751 270 2178 0 486 510 865 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.95 0.96 1.16 0.38 0.00 0.84 0.86 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 741 757 270 2191 0 497 521 883
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 33.3 33.5 50.3 11.2 0.0 40.5 40.8 36.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 21.9 22.8 106.8 0.1 0.0 15.3 16.7 1.8 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 0.0 26.6 27.5 16.8 6.8 0.0 14.6 16.1 6.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 55.2 56.2 157.1 11.3 0.0 55.8 57.6 37.8 LnGrp LOS E E F B E E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1419 1152 1277
Approach Delay, s/veh 55.8 51.2 50.4
Approach LOS E D D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.0 55.6 39.3 79.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 18 * 50 33.6 * 74
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.3 48.4 28.9 16.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 4.0 7.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.6
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 460 1180 0 0 830 280 230 250 470 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 460 1180 0 0 830 280 230 250 470 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 0 0 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 500 1283 0 0 902 212 250 272 324
Adj No. of Lanes 120031021
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 330033333
Cap, veh/h 532 2230 0 0 1405 431 400 474 390
Arrive On Green 0.30 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.25 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3597 0 0 5202 1545 1608 1909 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 500 1283 0 0 902 212 274 248 324
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 0 0 1679 1545 1764 1752 1568 Q Serve(g_s), s 29.1 22.1 0.0 0.0 16.5 12.0 14.5 13.0 20.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 29.1 22.1 0.0 0.0 16.5 12.0 14.5 13.0 20.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.91 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 532 2230 0 0 1405 431 438 435 390 V/C Ratio(X) 0.94 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.49 0.63 0.57 0.83 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 532 2230 0 0 1405 431 481 477 427 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.7 11.0 0.0 0.0 33.2 31.6 35.1 34.5 37.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 2.3 4.0 3.6 2.6 14.2 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 15.0 10.6 0.0 0.0 7.9 5.6 7.5 6.6 10.4 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.3 11.1 0.0 0.0 35.5 35.6 38.7 37.1 51.6 LnGrp LOS D B DDDDD
Approach Vol, veh/h 1783 1114 846
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.9 35.5 43.2
Approach LOS B D D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 72.5 37.5 35.0 32.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 64 * 29 * 29 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.1 31.1 18.5 22.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.4 0.0 5.1 3.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 29.8
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 0 1980 90 0 900 120 0 0 0 90 0 1420 Future Volume (vph) 0 1980 90 0 900 120 0 0 0 90 0 1420 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 6.4 6.4 4.0 6.1 6.1
Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.88
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.99 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 4955 3471 1520 1736 2733
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 4955 3471 1520 1736 2733
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 0 2129 97 0 968 129 0 0 0 97 0 1527
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 2222 0 0 968 129 0 0 0 97 0 1509 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2
Heavy Vehicles (%) 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Turn Type NA NA Free Prot custom
Protected Phases 2 6 4 5
Permitted Phases Free 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 74.1 27.8 96.4 9.8 50.0
Effective Green, g (s) 74.1 27.8 96.4 9.8 50.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.29 1.00 0.10 0.52
Clearance Time (s) 6.4 6.4 6.1 6.1
Vehicle Extension (s) 4.8 4.2 4.7 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 3808 1000 1520 176 1590
v/s Ratio Prot 0.45 c0.28 0.06 c0.40
v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.16
v/c Ratio 0.58 0.97 0.08 0.55 0.95
Uniform Delay, d1 4.7 33.9 0.0 41.2 22.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 21.0 0.1 5.7 12.4
Delay (s) 5.0 54.8 0.1 46.9 34.4
Level of Service A D A D C
Approach Delay (s) 5.0 48.4 0.0 35.1
Approach LOS A D A D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.03
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 96.4 Sum of lost time (s) 18.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.0% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 930 50 100 870 140 140 0 440 950 230 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 930 50 100 870 140 140 0 440 950 230 80 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1900 1776 1776 1776 1776 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1011 51 109 946 0 152 0 183 1033 250 22 Adj No. of Lanes 030121011211
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, % 077777777777
Cap, veh/h 0 1258 63 204 1465 655 170 0 334 1060 573 487 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.43 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.32 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4886 238 1691 3374 1509 1691 0 1509 3281 1776 1507 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 691 371 109 946 0 152 0 183 1033 250 22 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1616 1733 1691 1687 1509 1691 0 1509 1640 1776 1507 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 26.9 27.0 8.2 29.8 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 42.0 15.0 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 26.9 27.0 8.2 29.8 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 42.0 15.0 1.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 860 461 204 1465 655 170 0 334 1060 573 487 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.80 0.80 0.53 0.65 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.55 0.97 0.44 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 924 495 242 1589 711 170 0 334 1060 573 487 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) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 46.2 46.3 55.8 30.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 46.6 45.2 36.0 31.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 6.4 11.4 0.8 1.5 0.0 39.9 0.0 1.9 21.8 1.0 0.1 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 0.0 12.8 14.3 3.9 14.1 0.0 7.5 0.0 6.2 22.3 7.5 0.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 52.6 57.6 56.6 31.5 0.0 99.9 0.0 48.5 67.0 37.0 31.5 LnGrp LOS D E E C F D E D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1062 1055 335 1305
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.3 34.1 71.8 60.7
Approach LOS D C E E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.7 42.3 50.0 65.0 20.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 * 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 19.3 * 39 43.6 63.6 13.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.2 29.0 44.0 31.8 14.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.4 6.9 0.0 15.3 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.4
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 1610 330 0 1720 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 1610 330 0 1720 60 320 50 140 50 0 290 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1776 1776 1776 0 1776 1900 1776 1776 1900 1776 0 1776 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 98 1750 0 0 1870 61 348 54 51 54 0 53 Adj No. of Lanes 121030110101
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, % 777077777707
Cap, veh/h 120 2274 1017 0 2677 87 371 92 87 94 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.07 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.22 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1691 3374 1509 0 4978 157 1691 833 786 1691 54 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 1750 0 0 1253 678 348 0 105 54 60.7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1691 1687 1509 0 1616 1744 1691 0 1619 1691 E Q Serve(g_s), s 6.9 42.2 0.0 0.0 33.8 33.9 24.3 0.0 7.4 3.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.9 42.2 0.0 0.0 33.8 33.9 24.3 0.0 7.4 3.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.09 1.00 0.49 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 120 2274 1017 0 1795 969 371 0 179 94 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.94 0.00 0.59 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 131 2274 1017 0 1795 969 375 0 359 135 HCM Platoon Ratio 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 55.0 13.2 0.0 0.0 19.4 19.4 46.0 0.0 50.8 55.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 26.9 2.6 0.0 0.0 2.3 4.2 31.0 0.0 3.1 5.4 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.1 20.3 0.0 0.0 15.5 17.3 14.5 0.0 3.5 1.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 81.8 15.8 0.0 0.0 21.6 23.6 77.0 0.0 53.8 60.7 LnGrp LOS F B C C E D E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1848 1931 453
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.3 22.3 71.6
Approach LOS B C E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 3 5678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 87.3 32.7 14.2 73.1 13.1 19.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.4 6.4 * 5.7 6.4 6.4 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 64.6 26.6 * 9.3 49.6 9.6 26.6 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 44.2 26.3 8.9 35.9 5.7 9.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 20.4 0.0 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 26.7
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1260 50 50 1000 0 0 0 0 240 0 660 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1260 50 50 1000 0 0 0 0 240 0 660 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1743 1743 1743 1743 0 1743 1743 1743 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1340 47 53 1064 0 170 0 663
Adj No. of Lanes 031120 102
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 099990 999
Cap, veh/h 0 2015 614 82 1782 0 531 0 948
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.54 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4916 1451 1660 3399 0 1660 0 2963
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1340 47 53 1064 0 170 0 663
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1586 1451 1660 1656 0 1660 0 1482 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 19.9 1.7 2.8 19.2 0.0 6.8 0.0 17.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 19.9 1.7 2.8 19.2 0.0 6.8 0.0 17.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2015 614 82 1782 0 531 0 948
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.66 0.08 0.64 0.60 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.70 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2015 614 195 1930 0 686 0 1224
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 20.3 15.1 41.0 13.8 0.0 22.6 0.0 26.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.5 0.2 3.1 1.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 4.2 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 0.0 9.0 0.7 1.3 9.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 7.6 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 21.8 15.3 44.1 14.8 0.0 24.2 0.0 30.4 LnGrp LOS C B D B C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1387 1117 833
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.6 16.2 29.2
Approach LOS C B C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.1 44.0 33.8 54.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 6.8 * 5.7 6.8
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 10 35.2 * 36 51.2
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 21.9 19.2 21.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 13.0 8.9 26.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 21.7
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1230 140 510 1030 0 0 0 0 260 240 390 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1230 140 510 1030 0 0 0 0 260 240 390 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 7 4 14
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000
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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1863 1900 1863 1863 0 1863 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1309 123 543 1096 0 266 270 247
Adj No. of Lanes 020120 112
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 022220 222
Cap, veh/h 0 1362 128 510 2647 0 282 296 501
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.29 0.75 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3365 306 1774 3632 0 1774 1863 3157
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 706 726 543 1096 0 266 270 247
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1770 1809 1774 1770 0 1774 1863 1578 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 50.2 50.8 37.3 14.7 0.0 19.2 18.5 9.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 50.2 50.8 37.3 14.7 0.0 19.2 18.5 9.3 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.17 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 737 753 510 2647 0 282 296 501 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.96 0.96 1.06 0.41 0.00 0.94 0.91 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 741 757 510 2655 0 282 296 501
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 36.8 36.9 46.2 6.0 0.0 54.0 53.7 49.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 23.2 24.1 58.0 0.1 0.0 40.7 33.6 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 29.3 30.3 26.4 7.0 0.0 12.6 12.3 4.3 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 60.0 61.1 104.2 6.1 0.0 94.6 87.2 52.8 LnGrp LOS E E F A F F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1432 1639 783
Approach Delay, s/veh 60.5 38.6 78.9
Approach LOS E D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 43.0 59.7 27.0 102.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 37 * 54 20.6 * 97
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 39.3 52.8 21.2 16.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.0 12.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 54.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation 8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 580 910 0 0 1320 450 220 480 310 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 580 910 0 0 1320 450 220 480 310 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 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 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1863 1863 0 0 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 617 968 0 0 1404 188 234 511 160
Adj No. of Lanes 120031021
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 587 2510 0 0 1718 527 219 512 323
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.20 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1774 3632 0 0 5253 1559 1074 2505 1579
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 617 968 0 0 1404 188 394 351 160
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1774 1770 0 0 1695 1559 1809 1770 1579 Q Serve(g_s), s 46.3 15.3 0.0 0.0 35.4 12.7 28.6 27.5 12.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 46.3 15.3 0.0 0.0 35.4 12.7 28.6 27.5 12.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.59 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 587 2510 0 0 1718 527 370 362 323 V/C Ratio(X) 1.05 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.36 1.07 0.97 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 587 2510 0 0 1718 527 370 362 323 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.9 8.1 0.0 0.0 42.4 34.9 55.7 55.3 49.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 29.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 4.4 1.9 65.6 39.7 2.5 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 27.4 7.4 0.0 0.0 17.2 5.8 21.0 17.4 5.7 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 76.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 46.8 36.8 121.3 95.0 51.8 LnGrp LOS F A D D F F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1585 1592 905
Approach Delay, s/veh 34.6 45.7 98.8
Approach LOS C D F
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 105.0 52.0 53.0 35.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 5.7 * 5.7 * 5.7 6.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 99 * 46 * 47 28.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.3 48.3 37.4 30.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 15.1 0.0 6.8 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 53.1
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
TRAFFIC TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS:

PEAK HOUR QUEUING REPORTS
Queues Existing Conditions
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 855 326 126 233 302 300
v/c Ratio 0.36 0.20 0.08 0.46 0.48 0.46
Control Delay 10.9 10.4 0.1 19.5 5.8 4.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 10.9 10.4 0.1 19.5 5.8 4.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 69 35 0 69 6 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 106 63 0 126 58 46
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 2366 1653 1538 656 733 766
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.20 0.08 0.36 0.41 0.39
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 603 464 591 33 97
v/c Ratio 0.27 0.31 0.19 0.11 0.28
Control Delay 5.4 0.5 3.6 18.2 7.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 5.4 0.5 3.6 18.2 7.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 0 17 8 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 0 32 26 30
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2266 1507 3175 822 786
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.31 0.19 0.04 0.12
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
3: East Ave./SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 501 143 578 91 24 134 438 454 162 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.67 0.36 0.06 0.17 0.51 1.16 1.17 0.34
Control Delay 31.9 56.3 17.0 0.1 46.0 13.5 134.2 135.5 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 31.9 56.3 17.0 0.1 46.0 13.5 134.2 135.5 7.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 134 86 114 0 14 0 ~341 ~354 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 208 153 162 0 42 49 #601 #620 54 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 956 324 1804 1463 397 467 377 389 473 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.44 0.32 0.06 0.06 0.29 1.16 1.17 0.34 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave. & Jensen Ave. A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 849 67 1239 222 105 45 159
v/c Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.05 1.02 0.80 0.27 0.26 0.38
Control Delay 33.5 8.3 0.1 61.5 55.7 6.4 32.9 7.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 33.5 8.3 0.1 61.5 55.7 6.4 32.9 7.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 70 112 0 ~416 118 0 21 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 125 153 0 #561 #215 33 52 48
Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 368 2169 1463 1214 318 431 201 463
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.39 0.05 1.02 0.70 0.24 0.22 0.34 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 366 9 32 166 357 222
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.01 0.21 0.20 0.67 0.36
Control Delay 20.1 0.0 34.8 10.9 28.3 6.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 20.1 0.0 34.8 10.9 28.3 6.0
Queue Length 50th (ft) 100 0 12 39 110 4
Queue Length 95th (ft) 221 0 39 68 238 50
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 714 666 464 1348 585 654
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.01 0.07 0.12 0.61 0.34
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 176 547 180 199 17 63
v/c Ratio 0.60 0.39 0.21 0.25 0.08 0.22
Control Delay 33.5 4.6 13.1 3.4 28.1 3.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 33.5 4.8 13.1 3.4 28.1 3.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 66 81 44 0 6 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 120 135 93 34 23 8
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 498 1479 849 806 628 632
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 315 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.47 0.21 0.25 0.03 0.10
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 592 59 236 484 162 334
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.33 0.15 0.70 0.22 0.41
Control Delay 24.2 38.1 13.9 25.3 15.9 3.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 24.2 38.1 13.9 25.3 15.9 3.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 134 27 36 188 50 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 190 63 58 293 90 46
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1155 211 1560 763 804 863
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.28 0.15 0.63 0.20 0.39
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St. A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 225 735 187 142 187 272
v/c Ratio 0.64 0.31 0.13 0.20 0.31 0.61
Control Delay 39.0 6.5 16.8 4.4 28.9 13.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 39.0 7.2 16.8 4.4 28.9 13.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 104 66 30 0 43 28
Queue Length 95th (ft) #179 121 58 37 65 90
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 350 2353 1402 703 851 548
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 1209 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.64 0.64 0.13 0.20 0.22 0.50
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 954 497 120 75 268 270
v/c Ratio 0.37 0.27 0.08 0.19 0.50 0.49
Control Delay 8.9 8.8 0.1 16.6 6.8 6.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 8.9 8.8 0.1 16.6 6.8 6.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 55 39 0 20 5 6
Queue Length 95th (ft) 120 96 0 46 52 51
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 2612 1826 1520 725 761 786
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.37 0.27 0.08 0.10 0.35 0.34
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 442 551 1046 45 110
v/c Ratio 0.19 0.36 0.33 0.15 0.31
Control Delay 5.2 0.7 3.5 18.5 7.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 5.2 0.7 3.5 18.5 7.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 0 27 11 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 50 0 50 32 32
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2279 1519 3194 828 789
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.36 0.33 0.05 0.14
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
3: East Ave./SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 680 82 542 146 53 343 314 324 79
v/c Ratio 0.67 0.49 0.37 0.10 0.26 0.76 0.79 0.80 0.16
Control Delay 35.2 53.7 19.8 0.1 42.9 19.0 51.9 52.3 0.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 35.2 53.7 19.8 0.1 42.9 19.0 51.9 52.3 0.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 185 48 106 0 30 21 185 191 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 313 105 182 0 69 116 #418 #430 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1011 343 1905 1490 419 605 398 406 480 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.67 0.24 0.28 0.10 0.13 0.57 0.79 0.80 0.16 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave. & Jensen Ave. P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 1016 254 1094 237 147 46 309
v/c Ratio 0.24 0.46 0.17 0.80 0.82 0.35 0.26 0.54
Control Delay 32.4 10.0 0.2 35.9 59.3 11.0 34.5 7.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.4 10.0 0.2 35.9 59.3 11.0 34.5 7.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 45 160 0 358 142 14 24 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 87 222 0 #540 #231 62 55 65
Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 421 2203 1489 1364 343 472 211 621
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.46 0.17 0.80 0.69 0.31 0.22 0.50 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 363 11 49 216 93 152
v/c Ratio 0.44 0.01 0.26 0.21 0.27 0.36
Control Delay 15.7 0.0 31.8 6.9 24.4 7.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 15.7 0.0 31.8 6.9 24.4 7.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 98 0 18 32 32 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 203 0 51 72 71 42
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 824 739 527 1508 663 685
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.01 0.09 0.14 0.14 0.22
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 217 238 247 284 19 37
v/c Ratio 0.66 0.17 0.30 0.34 0.08 0.12
Control Delay 34.2 3.3 14.7 3.5 29.3 0.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 34.2 3.3 14.7 3.5 29.3 0.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 84 28 66 0 7 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 152 53 140 46 27 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 520 1482 828 838 658 655
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.16 0.30 0.34 0.03 0.06
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Conditions
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 638 150 393 146 241 229
v/c Ratio 0.63 0.61 0.22 0.27 0.42 0.36
Control Delay 24.7 43.1 11.1 17.9 20.1 4.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 24.7 43.1 11.1 17.9 20.1 4.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 113 59 43 45 78 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 206 #163 94 82 130 39
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1011 244 1806 885 931 896
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.63 0.61 0.22 0.16 0.26 0.26
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Conditions
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St. P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 230 432 417 472 227 193
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.18 0.29 0.52 0.39 0.45
Control Delay 39.2 5.4 17.5 4.6 30.5 8.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 39.2 5.4 17.5 4.6 30.5 8.0
Queue Length 50th (ft) 106 35 71 3 53 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #182 65 117 66 79 49
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 354 2397 1437 907 861 535
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.18 0.29 0.52 0.26 0.36
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1772 674 130 235 750 754
v/c Ratio 0.95 0.52 0.08 0.34 1.13 1.10
Control Delay 32.9 17.4 0.1 14.1 98.2 85.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 32.9 17.4 0.1 14.1 98.2 85.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 241 105 0 62 ~363 ~341
Queue Length 95th (ft) #350 151 0 112 #582 #550
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 1865 1301 1538 700 661 685
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.95 0.52 0.08 0.34 1.13 1.10
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 946 1011 946 33 98
v/c Ratio 0.42 0.67 0.30 0.11 0.30
Control Delay 6.7 2.4 5.0 17.8 11.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 6.7 2.4 5.0 17.8 11.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 71 0 38 8 9
Queue Length 95th (ft) 125 0 67 26 40
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2248 1507 3174 815 761
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.67 0.30 0.04 0.13
Intersection Summary
Queues Existing Plus Project
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 824 143 912 99 33 143 444 457 165 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.67 0.58 0.07 0.22 0.54 1.18 1.18 0.35
Control Delay 44.7 56.5 20.4 0.1 47.1 15.2 141.2 140.0 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.7 56.5 20.4 0.1 47.1 15.2 141.2 140.0 7.6 Queue Length 50th (ft) 252 86 206 0 20 0 ~348 ~357 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #418 155 284 0 52 56 #620 #632 54 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 953 323 1798 1463 396 466 376 387 474 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.86 0.44 0.51 0.07 0.08 0.31 1.18 1.18 0.35 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave AM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 989 77 1473 341 110 55 165
v/c Ratio 0.84 0.49 0.05 1.01 0.99 0.24 0.36 0.32
Control Delay 82.7 12.1 0.1 53.2 83.9 7.0 37.9 6.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 82.7 12.1 0.1 53.2 83.9 7.0 37.9 6.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 91 172 0 ~485 216 0 28 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #200 220 0 #656 #398 41 67 49
Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 170 2007 1463 1465 345 468 153 510
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.84 0.49 0.05 1.01 0.99 0.24 0.36 0.32 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 885 23 34 299 368 540
v/c Ratio 1.00 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.84 0.77
Control Delay 56.5 0.1 49.5 10.0 52.0 16.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 56.5 0.1 49.5 10.5 52.0 16.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~609 0 21 80 221 59
Queue Length 95th (ft) #818 0 50 119 #373 184
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 883 794 144 1139 440 703
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 467 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.00 0.03 0.24 0.44 0.84 0.77
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 563 690 310 207 23 69
v/c Ratio 0.87 0.51 0.64 0.38 0.11 0.24
Control Delay 39.2 5.8 33.7 6.2 37.3 4.3
Queue Delay 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 39.8 6.6 33.7 6.2 37.3 4.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 270 120 148 0 12 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #451 192 234 46 34 10
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 855 1436 625 651 242 315
Starvation Cap Reductn 79 422 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.73 0.68 0.50 0.32 0.10 0.22
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1011 65 446 489 163 652
v/c Ratio 0.91 0.39 0.28 0.73 0.23 0.85
Control Delay 38.5 40.9 13.2 28.8 18.1 24.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 38.5 40.9 13.2 28.8 18.1 24.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 247 31 66 205 54 169
Queue Length 95th (ft) #384 69 96 #336 99 #392
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1137 195 1806 698 734 789
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.89 0.33 0.25 0.70 0.22 0.83
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St AM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 457 891 348 152 250 272
v/c Ratio 1.31 0.39 0.26 0.22 0.38 0.64
Control Delay 186.9 7.7 18.7 4.5 28.6 20.1
Queue Delay 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 186.9 8.8 18.7 4.5 28.6 20.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~298 96 61 0 57 55
Queue Length 95th (ft) #474 152 101 38 84 125
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 350 2286 1335 682 848 502
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 1084 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.31 0.74 0.26 0.22 0.29 0.54
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2108 849 129 77 676 666
v/c Ratio 0.96 0.56 0.08 0.13 1.18 1.12
Control Delay 31.4 15.2 0.1 14.4 120.3 96.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 31.4 15.2 0.1 14.4 120.3 96.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 282 124 0 21 ~340 ~306
Queue Length 95th (ft) #407 175 0 47 #550 #507
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 2188 1527 1520 606 572 594
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.96 0.56 0.08 0.13 1.18 1.12
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 796 1333 1409 54 118
v/c Ratio 0.35 0.88 0.44 0.17 0.33
Control Delay 6.2 9.3 5.3 18.7 9.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 6.2 9.3 5.3 18.7 9.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 57 0 58 14 5
Queue Length 95th (ft) 100 #86 99 37 38
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2269 1519 3180 824 778
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.88 0.44 0.07 0.15
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1021 87 859 152 65 348 325 328 87 v/c Ratio 1.02 0.51 0.60 0.10 0.31 0.77 0.82 0.82 0.18
Control Delay 69.8 54.9 23.7 0.1 43.5 20.8 55.8 54.7 1.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 69.8 54.9 23.7 0.1 43.5 20.8 55.8 54.7 1.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~337 51 194 0 38 30 196 198 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #625 113 318 0 80 130 #449 #451 5 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1000 339 1886 1490 415 595 394 402 477 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.02 0.26 0.46 0.10 0.16 0.58 0.82 0.82 0.18 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave PM Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 1174 261 1261 402 152 54 315
v/c Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.18 0.84 1.07 0.30 0.37 0.52
Control Delay 59.3 15.4 0.3 31.9 101.6 11.2 36.7 12.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 59.3 15.4 0.3 31.9 101.6 11.2 36.7 12.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 60 239 0 385 ~285 21 27 44
Queue Length 95th (ft) #116 303 0 #527 #469 70 66 126
Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 173 1943 1489 1501 376 513 147 602
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.57 0.60 0.18 0.84 1.07 0.30 0.37 0.52 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 904 11 53 372 96 457
v/c Ratio 0.92 0.01 0.38 0.33 0.29 0.69
Control Delay 36.8 0.0 48.8 8.1 33.0 9.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 36.8 0.0 48.8 8.5 33.0 9.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 484 0 30 79 48 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #882 0 71 153 94 86
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 983 859 180 1289 471 748
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 491 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.92 0.01 0.29 0.47 0.20 0.61
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 660 340 404 287 21 43
v/c Ratio 0.91 0.23 0.79 0.46 0.11 0.16
Control Delay 40.6 3.0 41.8 6.2 37.5 1.2
Queue Delay 3.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 43.9 3.3 41.8 6.2 37.5 1.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 333 44 215 0 11 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #574 77 #390 60 33 0
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 841 1488 536 645 226 301
Starvation Cap Reductn 104 616 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.39 0.75 0.44 0.09 0.14
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1202 160 723 149 245 415
v/c Ratio 0.95 0.70 0.36 0.30 0.48 0.74
Control Delay 42.3 49.7 10.1 23.8 26.6 23.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 42.3 49.7 10.9 23.8 26.6 23.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~309 77 98 57 99 103
Queue Length 95th (ft) #459 #153 134 105 165 209
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1261 263 2065 550 579 608
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 958 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.95 0.61 0.65 0.27 0.42 0.68
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Existing Plus Project
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St PM Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 617 585 649 479 340 202
v/c Ratio 1.10 0.25 0.64 0.78 0.57 0.46
Control Delay 98.5 5.5 28.5 23.9 34.3 8.4
Queue Delay 2.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 100.6 6.1 28.5 23.9 34.3 8.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~356 53 150 113 82 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #552 74 207 #274 124 54
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 559 2387 1016 614 624 449
Starvation Cap Reductn 122 1334 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.41 0.56 0.64 0.78 0.54 0.45
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2174 728 130 235 756 759
v/c Ratio 1.03 0.49 0.08 0.31 1.05 1.01
Control Delay 63.8 27.3 0.1 21.8 74.2 64.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 63.8 27.3 0.1 21.8 74.2 64.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~689 220 0 121 ~671 ~595
Queue Length 95th (ft) #785 277 0 184 #939 #881
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 2105 1474 1538 769 723 749
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.03 0.49 0.08 0.31 1.05 1.01
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
2: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1109 1217 1054 54 98
v/c Ratio 0.48 0.81 0.32 0.17 0.27
Control Delay 6.8 5.2 4.3 21.1 8.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 6.8 5.2 4.3 21.1 8.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 0 39 12 2
Queue Length 95th (ft) 150 0 65 44 37
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2675 1507 3752 491 504
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.41 0.81 0.28 0.11 0.19
Intersection Summary
Queues Cumulative Conditions
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 978 198 934 99 44 198 718 743 165 v/c Ratio 1.15 0.94 0.67 0.07 0.48 0.74 1.17 1.16 0.26
Control Delay 129.9 112.6 37.5 0.1 86.1 25.0 131.7 130.2 10.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 129.9 112.6 37.5 0.1 86.1 25.0 131.7 130.2 10.7 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~591 195 382 0 42 0 ~876 ~906 29 Queue Length 95th (ft) #731 #352 459 0 86 #98 #1140 #1170 82 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 849 214 1409 1463 95 271 616 639 644 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.15 0.93 0.66 0.07 0.46 0.73 1.17 1.16 0.26 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 1429 121 2220 341 110 55 165
v/c Ratio 1.40 0.62 0.08 1.14 1.17 0.29 0.67 0.40
Control Delay 277.0 14.1 0.1 100.6 157.1 21.9 91.3 20.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 277.0 14.1 0.1 100.6 157.1 21.9 91.3 20.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~186 371 0 ~1334 ~396 32 50 44
Queue Length 95th (ft) #332 436 0 #1464 #599 90 #127 116 Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 102 2287 1463 1944 291 379 82 412
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.40 0.62 0.08 1.14 1.17 0.29 0.67 0.40 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1678 34 46 655 759 655
v/c Ratio 1.19 0.05 0.52 0.40 1.15 0.92
Control Delay 131.7 1.6 89.0 22.8 124.5 47.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 131.7 1.6 89.0 24.2 124.5 47.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~1051 0 44 197 ~880 461
Queue Length 95th (ft) #1133 5 87 233 #1078 #681
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 1406 663 103 1739 659 712
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 832 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.19 0.05 0.45 0.72 1.15 0.92
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 793 1644 667 379 34 80
v/c Ratio 0.94 0.61 0.78 0.64 0.27 0.43
Control Delay 50.0 5.2 54.2 16.2 67.2 22.4
Queue Delay 15.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 65.9 6.1 54.2 16.2 67.2 22.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 617 201 285 53 29 3
Queue Length 95th (ft) 828 267 393 166 66 53
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 1045 2978 894 609 181 230
Starvation Cap Reductn 252 947 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.00 0.81 0.75 0.62 0.19 0.35
Intersection Summary
Queues Cumulative Conditions
7: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1445 315 837 489 326 652
v/c Ratio 0.99 1.18 0.39 1.00 0.63 1.18
Control Delay 57.0 157.0 12.1 83.8 44.2 127.6
Queue Delay 0.0 1.1 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 57.0 158.2 17.4 83.8 44.2 127.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 573 ~292 159 379 221 ~506
Queue Length 95th (ft) #746 #475 200 #602 323 #739
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1453 267 2170 490 516 553
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 22 1255 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.99 1.29 0.91 1.00 0.63 1.18
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 500 1283 902 304 522 511
v/c Ratio 1.02 0.60 0.92 0.53 0.56 1.04
Control Delay 85.6 13.9 52.6 14.9 35.6 84.4
Queue Delay 29.6 46.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 115.2 60.2 52.6 14.9 35.6 84.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~359 257 309 55 158 ~328
Queue Length 95th (ft) #561 319 #430 140 213 #535
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 488 2146 978 573 932 490
Starvation Cap Reductn 147 972 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.47 1.09 0.92 0.53 0.56 1.04
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2226 968 129 87 774 763
v/c Ratio 1.04 0.64 0.08 0.11 1.10 1.04
Control Delay 68.4 33.7 0.1 20.7 97.2 77.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 68.4 33.7 0.1 20.7 97.2 77.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~797 360 0 45 ~848 ~761
Queue Length 95th (ft) #889 434 0 80 #1124 #1025
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670 1840
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 2147 1502 1520 787 704 733
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.04 0.64 0.08 0.11 1.10 1.04
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
2: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 882 1344 1527 54 118
v/c Ratio 0.35 0.88 0.44 0.20 0.35
Control Delay 5.3 9.5 4.4 24.4 8.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 5.3 9.5 4.4 24.4 8.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 67 0 64 17 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 110 #83 102 44 38
Internal Link Dist (ft) 670 435
Turn Bay Length (ft) 450
Base Capacity (vph) 2488 1519 3493 411 453
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.35 0.88 0.44 0.13 0.26
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1065 109 946 152 152 478 640 643 87 v/c Ratio 1.17 0.95 0.74 0.10 0.51 1.31 1.26 1.24 0.16
Control Delay 137.0 138.6 44.8 0.1 62.6 194.2 174.1 165.8 2.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 137.0 138.6 44.8 0.1 62.6 194.2 174.1 165.8 2.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~653 108 420 0 136 ~502 ~823 ~818 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #793 #236 503 0 213 #730 #1080 #1072 19 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350
Base Capacity (vph) 907 115 1273 1490 299 364 508 519 552 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.17 0.95 0.74 0.10 0.51 1.31 1.26 1.24 0.16 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBT NBR SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 1750 359 1935 402 152 54 315
v/c Ratio 0.88 0.82 0.24 1.10 1.15 0.33 0.51 0.63
Control Delay 120.3 23.8 0.4 85.2 139.9 22.1 62.6 32.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 120.3 23.8 0.4 85.2 139.9 22.1 62.6 32.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 603 0 ~1047 ~428 53 42 156
Queue Length 95th (ft) #202 712 0 #1186 #636 117 95 264 Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634 502
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 675 150
Base Capacity (vph) 112 2135 1489 1765 350 461 105 503
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 0.82 0.24 1.10 1.15 0.33 0.51 0.63 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1340 53 53 1064 255 702
v/c Ratio 1.04 0.09 0.51 0.67 0.36 1.04
Control Delay 73.5 3.7 75.6 27.7 27.7 79.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 73.5 3.7 75.6 37.1 27.7 79.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~649 0 44 342 146 ~608
Queue Length 95th (ft) #796 18 88 417 221 #856
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 125
Base Capacity (vph) 1292 608 122 1686 699 672
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 593 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.04 0.09 0.43 0.97 0.36 1.04
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
6: SR 41 Northbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 660 936 1096 787 21 53
v/c Ratio 1.02 0.33 0.83 1.04 0.17 0.27
Control Delay 76.1 2.7 38.5 68.0 54.4 7.0
Queue Delay 30.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 106.9 3.3 38.5 68.0 54.4 7.0
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~546 72 396 ~516 15 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #789 100 501 #772 42 15
Internal Link Dist (ft) 342 858 2175
Turn Bay Length (ft) 125
Base Capacity (vph) 649 2829 1324 754 147 210
Starvation Cap Reductn 133 1335 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.28 0.63 0.83 1.04 0.14 0.25
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1458 543 1096 277 255 415
v/c Ratio 1.00 1.16 0.43 0.86 0.75 1.05
Control Delay 60.4 137.1 7.7 77.2 65.5 92.5
Queue Delay 0.0 4.4 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.4 141.5 15.0 77.2 65.5 92.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 634 ~542 172 229 206 ~278
Queue Length 95th (ft) #808 #766 208 #382 #324 #486
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 1462 467 2567 321 338 396
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 163 1421 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.00 1.79 0.96 0.86 0.75 1.05
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 617 968 1404 479 745 330
v/c Ratio 1.24 0.39 1.02 0.74 1.05 0.73
Control Delay 167.8 8.7 72.4 39.1 99.5 35.5
Queue Delay 4.4 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 172.2 15.5 72.4 39.1 99.5 35.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~696 169 ~713 322 ~386 141
Queue Length 95th (ft) #933 203 #854 465 #516 260
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 496 2510 1372 648 712 452
Starvation Cap Reductn 180 1485 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.95 0.94 1.02 0.74 1.05 0.73
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

TRAFFIC TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS:

PEAK HOUR QUEUING REPORTS – WITH MITIGATION
Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2174 728 130 261 1489
v/c Ratio 0.65 0.83 0.08 0.80 0.88
Control Delay 10.1 44.2 0.1 57.1 23.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 10.1 44.2 0.1 57.1 23.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 260 231 0 158 406
Queue Length 95th (ft) 306 #309 0 #276 548
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 3369 894 1538 347 1685
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.81 0.08 0.75 0.88
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 978 198 934 99 44 198 945 516 165 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.90 0.62 0.07 0.42 0.59 0.80 0.81 0.27
Control Delay 48.2 98.3 30.8 0.1 76.2 24.3 45.6 51.1 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 48.2 98.3 30.8 0.1 76.2 24.3 45.6 51.1 10.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 295 181 339 0 39 51 404 430 24
Queue Length 95th (ft) 350 #332 412 0 82 96 492 #617 78 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1384 229 1572 1463 107 345 1209 656 628 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.86 0.59 0.07 0.41 0.57 0.78 0.79 0.26 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave A.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 143 1429 121 2220 253 198 55 165
v/c Ratio 0.96 0.67 0.08 0.92 0.61 0.71 0.47 0.63
Control Delay 120.5 17.4 0.1 37.0 46.2 52.1 68.8 24.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 120.5 17.4 0.1 37.0 46.2 52.1 68.8 24.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 117 370 0 609 177 120 43 18
Queue Length 95th (ft) #251 544 0 #842 241 191 88 91
Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 150
Base Capacity (vph) 149 2138 1451 2412 444 373 127 262
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.96 0.67 0.08 0.92 0.57 0.53 0.43 0.63 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1678 34 46 655 493 476 445
v/c Ratio 0.88 0.05 0.51 0.42 0.75 0.74 0.64
Control Delay 46.8 1.8 87.9 25.1 43.5 37.6 23.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 46.8 1.8 87.9 26.3 43.5 37.6 23.0
Queue Length 50th (ft) 567 0 44 212 417 364 208
Queue Length 95th (ft) 609 5 87 251 548 500 318
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 350 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1909 630 106 1671 697 677 726
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 747 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 0.05 0.43 0.71 0.71 0.70 0.61
Intersection Summary
Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
7: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1445 315 837 401 414 652
v/c Ratio 0.99 1.18 0.39 0.86 0.85 0.67
Control Delay 57.0 157.0 12.1 60.2 58.8 24.2
Queue Delay 0.0 1.1 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 57.0 158.2 17.4 60.2 58.8 24.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 573 ~292 159 310 320 139
Queue Length 95th (ft) #746 #475 200 #491 #500 214
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1453 267 2170 466 485 967
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 22 1255 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.99 1.29 0.91 0.86 0.85 0.67
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St A.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 500 1283 902 304 522 511
v/c Ratio 1.02 0.60 0.64 0.53 0.56 1.04
Control Delay 85.6 13.9 35.8 14.9 35.6 84.4
Queue Delay 29.6 46.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 115.2 60.2 35.8 14.9 35.6 84.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~359 257 194 55 158 ~328
Queue Length 95th (ft) #561 319 241 140 213 #535
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 488 2146 1405 573 932 490
Starvation Cap Reductn 147 972 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.47 1.09 0.64 0.53 0.56 1.04
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
1: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 2226 968 129 97 1527
v/c Ratio 0.56 0.95 0.08 0.46 0.96
Control Delay 5.7 54.2 0.1 47.1 34.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 5.7 54.2 0.1 47.1 34.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 192 318 0 57 452
Queue Length 95th (ft) 244 #469 0 108 #674
Internal Link Dist (ft) 971 670
Turn Bay Length (ft) 500
Base Capacity (vph) 3946 1014 1520 255 1587
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.56 0.95 0.08 0.38 0.96
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
3: East Ave/SR 99 SB Off Ramp & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1065 109 946 152 152 478 1033 250 87 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.47 0.62 0.10 0.93 1.14 1.01 0.45 0.16
Control Delay 52.6 63.0 31.2 0.1 116.0 114.0 78.5 41.8 2.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 52.6 63.0 31.2 0.1 116.0 114.0 78.5 41.8 2.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) 330 93 338 0 140 ~302 ~497 183 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 387 157 410 0 #280 #569 #644 268 15 Internal Link Dist (ft) 827 540 665 1741
Turn Bay Length (ft) 225 225 75 350 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1331 232 1535 1490 163 420 1021 554 550 Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.80 0.47 0.62 0.10 0.93 1.14 1.01 0.45 0.16 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
4: SR 99 NB Off Ramp/East Ave & Jensen Ave P.M. Peak Hour Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 98 1750 359 1935 348 206 54 315
v/c Ratio 0.79 0.96 0.24 0.95 0.95 0.47 0.44 0.75
Control Delay 93.6 39.6 0.4 45.5 82.1 29.4 64.2 35.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 93.6 39.6 0.4 45.5 82.1 29.4 64.2 35.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 76 656 0 528 266 88 41 124
Queue Length 95th (ft) #165 #853 0 #649 #447 168 84 #237 Internal Link Dist (ft) 580 815 1634
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 150 150
Base Capacity (vph) 130 1831 1476 2033 373 440 134 411
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.96 0.24 0.95 0.93 0.47 0.40 0.77 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
5: SR 41 Southbound Ramps & North Ave P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1340 53 53 1064 229 363 365
v/c Ratio 0.71 0.08 0.37 0.63 0.42 0.67 0.66
Control Delay 27.7 1.6 49.7 18.5 25.8 25.0 24.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 27.7 1.6 49.7 19.1 25.8 25.0 24.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 265 0 32 245 107 141 135
Queue Length 95th (ft) 337 9 71 313 183 264 250
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1079 342 2047
Turn Bay Length (ft) 150 250 350 350
Base Capacity (vph) 1937 644 196 1958 659 630 650
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 461 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.69 0.08 0.27 0.71 0.35 0.58 0.56
Intersection Summary
Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
7: SR 99 Southbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBT WBL WBT SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1458 543 1096 249 283 415
v/c Ratio 1.00 1.07 0.41 0.94 1.01 0.64
Control Delay 60.4 104.4 6.5 95.1 111.4 23.7
Queue Delay 0.0 15.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 60.4 119.9 11.9 95.1 111.4 23.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 634 ~506 155 221 ~258 67
Queue Length 95th (ft) #808 #730 187 #393 #454 130
Internal Link Dist (ft) 174 202 327
Turn Bay Length (ft) 200
Base Capacity (vph) 1462 507 2648 266 279 649
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 189 1476 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.00 1.71 0.94 0.94 1.01 0.64
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Queues Cumulative Conditions with Mitigation
8: SR 99 Northbound Ramps & Fresno St P.M. Peak Hour
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan PEIR Synchro 9 Report
Fehr & Peers
Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR NBT NBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 617 968 1404 479 745 330
v/c Ratio 1.05 0.39 0.82 0.84 1.05 0.73
Control Delay 97.3 8.7 47.1 50.3 99.5 35.5
Queue Delay 21.5 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 118.8 15.5 47.1 50.3 99.5 35.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~613 169 428 351 ~386 141
Queue Length 95th (ft) #849 203 489 #539 #516 260
Internal Link Dist (ft) 202 182 382
Turn Bay Length (ft)
Base Capacity (vph) 585 2510 1718 573 712 452
Starvation Cap Reductn 235 1485 0000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.76 0.94 0.82 0.84 1.05 0.73
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
1 EXHIBIT 2
TO RESOLUTION NO. 2017-299

CERTIFYING THE SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS SECTION 1 PURPOSE OF THE FINDINGS
The purpose of these findings is to satisfy the requirement of Public Resources Code Section 21000,et seq., and Sections 15091, 15092, 15093 and 15097 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. Sections 15000, et seq., associated with approval of the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan (Plan). These findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of the City Council regarding the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR), collectively referred to as the “Project.”
CEQA provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” (Public Resources Code Section 21002 [emphasis added].) The procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” (Public Resources Code Section 21002.) CEQA’s mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three conclusions:
(1)“[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR,” (2) “[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding [and] [s]uch changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency,” or
(3) “[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.” (Public Resources Code Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15091.)
2 CEQA defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, legal, environmental, social and technological factors.” (Public Resources Code Section 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15364.)
Because the South West Fresno Specific Plan Final PEIR identified significant effects that may occur as a result of the project, and in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Fresno hereby adopts these Findings of Fact. For each of the significant effects that have been mitigated to a less than significant level through project revisions or mitigation measures, as set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the City of Fresno makes the finding under Public Resources Code Section Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1). For each of the significant effects that will remain significant and unavoidable, even after the application of mitigation measures (or if there are no feasible mitigation measures), as set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the City of Fresno makes the finding under Public Resources Code Section Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(2) and/or 21081(a)(3).

Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines does not require specific findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as having “no impact” or a “less than significant” impact. Therefore, these effects are not addressed in these Findings.

SECTION 2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15124, an EIR must identify the objectives sought by the proposed project. As shown in Section 3.2.3, Objectives of the Proposed Plan, of Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the stated objectives of the proposed Plan are to:
• Create a healthy community that offers a positive physical, social, natural and economic environment to support the health and wellbeing of all its members. • Attract high quality new development while protecting existing neighborhoods. • Provide a mix of high quality housing types, with an emphasis on single-family housing that is compatible with community character and located close to amenities such as parks, schools, transit, services, shopping and employment.
• Attract needed retail, such as department stores, restaurants, and grocery stores, in order to serve resident needs with fewer, shorter vehicle trips.
• Provide quality open space and recreational opportunities by improving existing parks and creating new parks within walking distance (1/2 mile radius) of all residences. • Increase economic and educational opportunity through programs, services and facilities to prepare, mentor and train Southwest Fresno residents to access high quality employment opportunities. • Enhance transportation connectivity both within Southwest Fresno and between Southwest Fresno and other Fresno neighborhoods in order to provide more access to economic, social, and educational opportunities.
• Improve the quality of life in Southwest Fresno through high quality investment, compatible land uses, increased park and recreational opportunities and a multi-modal and connected transportation system.
3 SECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Fresno proposes the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan for the 3,255-acre area located southwest of the Downtown Planning Area. The proposed Plan envisions the interplay of “Complete Neighborhoods,” “Corridors,” and “Magnet Cores” to create a vibrant and desirable community for both existing and new residents. The proposed Plan sets aside the majority of vacant land for single-family residential uses and locates higher density residential uses at neighborhood nodes, near magnet uses, and along corridors. This will allow walkable access for greater numbers of residents to shopping, schools, parks, and transit.

Additionally, the proposed Plan envisions that the most optimal locations for large-scale, regionalserving retail are those that have good proximity, visibility, and access from the greatest number of people, while having enough distance away from other similar types of retail to avoid competition. In the proposed Plan, regional retail is shown in two locations: with access from Highway 180 at Marks and Whites Bridge avenues and from Highway 41 near Jensen Avenue and MLK Jr. Boulevard. These locations would allow new retail businesses to draw customers from areas beyond Southwest Fresno.

On the other hand, smaller scale community commercial, including neighborhood retail shops, would be closer to the residential areas at many of the neighborhood nodes, adjacent to magnet uses, and near mixed use.

Furthermore, larger scale employment uses such as offices, a college, and medical facilities are concentrated along higher-intensity corridors and within magnet cores, while opportunities for smaller scale offices are allowed along a less intensive corridor. While more jobs in Southwest Fresno are desirable, the types of businesses that provide them must be healthy, safe, and good neighbors to nearby residents. To avoid potential conflicts between residents and employment uses, new employment areas and all previously “Light Industrial,” “Heavy Industrial,” “Business Park,” or “Regional Business Park” areas would be planned and zoned “Office”.

Table 3-1 in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, contains the development capacity of the land uses proposed in the Plan Area over the proposed Plan’s 25-year timeframe compared to the Fresno General Plan, as well as a discussion of findings from the development capacity analysis. It should be noted that, like the Fresno General Plan, the development capacities are for new development and only take into account the development of parcels that have higher opportunities for development, such as parcels that are vacant, open agriculture, or rural residential (partially vacant).

The development capacities for the Fresno General Plan are also shown in the table for comparison against the proposed Plan’s development capacities.

SECTION 4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
4 • The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City of Fresno in conjunction with the proposed project.
• The Draft PEIR and the technical appendices for the proposed project. • All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft Master EIR.
• All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft PEIR.
• The Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) for the proposed project, which consists of the Draft PEIR, the technical appendices, and the Response to Comments. • All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project at which such testimony was taken.
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). • The documents, reports, and data included or referenced in the technical appendices of the PEIR. • All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft PEIR and Response to Comments.
• The City of Fresno Staff Reports
• The Resolution adopted by the City of Fresno in connection with the proposed project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein.
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings or in the resolution adopting these Findings. • Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e) (excluding privileged materials).

SECTION 5 CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City of Fresno’s actions related to the project are located at the City of Fresno City Clerk Office at 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are, and at all relevant times, have been and will be available upon request at the City of Fresno City Clerk Office.

This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guideline Section 15091(e).

SECTION 6 THE CEQA PROCESS
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal Code of Regulations 15000 et seq.), a Draft EIR and Final EIR (State 5 Clearinghouse #2017031012) has been prepared for the proposed Plan. The EIR for the proposed Plan consists of the following:
• Draft EIR, dated August 2017 (issued August 9, 2017); • All appendices to the Draft EIR;
• Final EIR, dated October 2017 (issued October 13, 2017), containing all written comments and responses on the Draft EIR, refinements and clarifications to the Draft EIR, the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP), and technical appendices; and • All of the comments and staff responses entered into the record orally and in writing, as well as accompanying technical memoranda or evidence entered into the record.

In conformance with CEQA, the City has taken the following actions in relation to the EIR:
• On February 28, 2017, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed to appropriate agencies and parties for the purpose of obtaining written comments from the agencies and parties regarding the scope and content of environmental information and analysis which they wanted addressed in the EIR;
• On March 1, 2017, the City held a scoping meeting with interested parties for the purpose of receiving comments on the scope of the EIR;
• A Draft EIR was prepared for the proposed Plan and was circulated for public review and comment from August 9, 2017 to September 25, 2017. The Draft EIR was submitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH) for review on August 9, 2017 (SCH #2017031012);
• A Notice of Availability (NOA) was provided to appropriate agencies via a Notice of Completion (NOC) sent to the SCH, as well as to the general public via mailed notice to all interested parties. • A notice was published in the Fresno Bee on August 8, 2017 indicating the Draft EIR’s availability for review on the City’s website and at Fresno City Hall Development and Resource Management permit counter, West Fresno and Central branches of the Fresno County Library, and o Mary Ella Brown Community Center, 1350 E. Annadale Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 o Hinton Community Center, 2385 Fairview Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 o West Fresno Family Resource Center, 1801 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 • On September 25, 2017, all comments received on the Draft EIR during the public comment period were responded t o and included in the Final EIR, made available for public review on October 13, 2017;
• On October 18, 2017, the City of Fresno Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing on the proposed Plan and the EIR, and recommended that the City Council certify the EIR and adopt the proposed Plan; and
• The proposed Plan and PEIR came before the City Council on October 26, 2017, at a duly and properly noticed public hearing. On this date, the City Council adopted the following findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
6 SECTION 7 SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING FINDINGS
The City of Fresno City Council certifies that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and that it was presented to, and reviewed and considered by, the City Council prior to acting on the Plan. In so certifying, the City Council recognizes that there may be differences in and among the different sources of information and opinions offered in the documents and testimony that make up the EIR and the administrative record; that experts disagree; and that the City Council must base its decision and these findings on substantial evidence in the record that it finds most compelling. Therefore, by these findings, the City Council has relied upon the expertise of a variety of independent technical and professional consultants to the City, and the expertise of City Staff. The City Council has also carefully considered the evidence submitted by other interested agencies and individuals. To the extent that evidence consists of expert opinions that differ from the opinions of the City’s outside consultants or Staff, at most it represents a disagreement of experts, which is adequately reviewed in the EIR. Based on its review, the City Council has determined that the opinions of outside consultants and Staff are valid and are hereby accepted. To the extent that alternatives or mitigation measures were proposed by other agencies or interested persons that differ from the mitigation adopted herein, the City Council specifically rejects these proposals based on the substantial evidence in the record supporting the mitigation adopted as sufficient and necessary to mitigate impacts to a less-than-significant level or to the level that the impacts can feasibly be mitigated.

SECTION 8 IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND FINDINGS
In conformance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this section of the findings lists each significant environmental effect of the project listed in the EIR; describes those mitigation measures recommended in the EIR; and, as required by Section 15091(a), finds that either the adopted mitigation measures have substantially lessened the significant effect or that specific considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. All feasible mitigation measures listed below have been incorporated into the MMRP. Implementation of the proposed Plan would be required to comply with the MMRP, as applicable. It is important to note that some of the mitigation measures for the proposed Plan rely upon or require implementation or compliance with the mitigation measures adopted as part of the City of Fresno General Plan Update (adopted December 18, 2014) and Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR)[Certified on December 18, 2014; SCH #2012111015]. (a) Impacts Mitigated to a Less Than Significant Level
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1.1: Potential development resulting from the proposed Plan could result in the loss of rare plant species.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.1: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a through BIO-1.1c, as follows:
7 • MEIR BIO‐1.1a: Construction of a proposed project should avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special‐status species known to occur within the Plan Area. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, a qualified botanist should conduct botanical surveys to confirm the presence/absence of any special‐status plant or wildlife species, to determine if the habitat supports any special‐status species. The surveys should be completed using the reporting and data collection guidelines outlined in the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities and a report of findings should be submitted to the City and the Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) before the onset of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction associated with each phase of project implementation. If a special‐status species is determined to occupy any portion of a project site, then any occurrence should be avoided whenever possible by delineating and observing a disturbance-free buffer zone of a minimum of 50 feet from the outer-edge of the special-status plant populations(s) or specific habitat type(s) required by special status plant species. If the buffer zone(s) cannot be maintained, appropriate minimization measures and mitigation measures should be prepared in consultation with CDFW on a case-by-case basis. • MEIR BIO‐1.1b: Direct or incidental take of any State- or federally-listed species should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resources agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the CDFW 2081 and USFWS Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis through agency consultation. • MEIR BIO‐1.1c: Development within the Plan Area should avoid, where possible, special‐ status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special‐status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special‐status natural community or suitable habitat for special‐status species, compensatory habitat‐ based mitigation is required under CEQA and CESA. Mitigation will consist of preserving on‐site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off‐site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be agreed upon by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special‐ status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed‐upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special‐status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case‐ by‐case basis.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.1 will reduce impacts related to the loss of rare plant species to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 8 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of Swainson’s hawks.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.2: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Swainson’s Hawk Nests and Implement Avoidance Measures.

A qualified biologist knowledgeable of the species should conduct a Swainson’s hawk survey of the project site and the surrounding 0.5-mile-radius area, in substantial compliance with the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000) during the normal bird breeding season (February 1 through September 15) prior to the start of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction associated with each phase of project implementation, to the extent feasible. Additional preconstruction Swainson’s hawk surveys should take place no more than 10 days prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities.

If an active Swainson’s hawk nest is detected on the project site, a minimum disturbance-free buffer zone of 0.5-mile should be delineated and maintained until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest for parental care for survival. If the 0.5-mile disturbance-free buffer zone is not feasible, CDFW will be consulted and acquisition of an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) for Swainson’s hawk may be necessary prior to project initiation to comply with CESA. If nesting trees are identified on the project site, removal of nesting trees for Swainson’s hawk should be avoided. If avoidance is infeasible, nesting trees should be replaced with an appropriate native tree species, planted at a ratio of 3:1, in an area that will be protected in perpetuity.

To mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat, the project applicant should provide Habitat Management (HM) lands to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) based on the following ratios, if feasible:
• If the project(s) is located within 1 mile of an active nest tree, the applicant should provide a minimum of 1 acre of HM lands for each 1 acre of urban development authorized.
• If the project(s) is located within 5 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 1 mile from the nest tree, the applicant should provide a minimum of 0.75 acres of HM lands for each 1 acre of urban development authorized.
• If the project(s) is located within 10 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 5 miles from the nest tree, the applicant should provide a minimum of 0.5 acres of HM lands for each 1 acre of urban development authorized.

The project applicant should provide for the long-term management of the HM lands by funding a management endowment, the interest of which should be used for managing the HM lands.

The rate per HM acre should be established through consultation with CDFW. In addition to fee title acquisition of grassland habitat, mitigation could occur by the purchase of conservation or suitable agricultural easements. Suitable agricultural easements would include areas limited to production of crops such as alfalfa, dry land, and irrigated pasture, and cereal grain crops. 9 Vineyards, orchards, cotton fields, and other dense vegetation do not provide adequate foraging habitat.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.2 will reduce impacts to the Swainson’s hawks to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of San Joaquin kit fox.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.3: Implement Standard Measures for Protection of San Joaquin Kit Fox. No less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to commencement of construction activities the project proponent should retain a USFWS- and CDFW-approved biologist to conduct pre‐construction surveys in potential habitat periphery of the Plan Area that has not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development. The survey, reporting, and activities during construction should be in substantial compliance with the requirements contained in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance. As described in the standardized recommendations, if a natal/pupping den is discovered within the Plan Area or within 200-feet of the project boundary, the USFWS and CDFW should be immediately notified and under no circumstances should the den be disturbed or destroyed without prior authorization. If the preconstruction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal pupping or new information, the project applicant should contact the USFWS immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.3 will reduce impacts to the San Joaquin kit fox to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.4: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in impacts to roosting habitat or maternity colonies of special-status bats.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.4: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Special-status Bats and Implement Avoidance Measures. Any medium or larger (≥ 12-inch diameter) trees or snags selected for removal should be inspected by a qualified biologist for presence of potential dayroosting habitat (e.g., cavities exfoliating bark, or basal hollows) for special-status bats or a maternity colony. If feasible, cavities should be examined for roosting bats using a portable camera probe or similar technology.

No more than two weeks before the onset of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction associated with each phase of project implementation, a qualified bat biologist should conduct preconstruction surveys of all buildings with potential for roosting habitat for supporting special-status bats or a maternity colony should be inspected by a qualified biologist 10 for evidence of roosting colonies. If suitable roosting habitat is present and/or bat sign is observed, but no bats are detected, an evening exit count and acoustic survey using a full spectrum acoustic detector should be conducted by a qualified bat biologist to determine if bats are present and what species are present. If present, roosts (including day roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity colonies) and a 100- to 300-foot disturbance-free buffer surrounding each roost should be flagged and avoided, as determined by a qualified bat biologist. The 100- to 300-foot disturbance-free buffer should be maintained until the qualified bat biologist can determine that bats no longer use the roost.

If avoidance is not possible, a qualified bat biologist should develop a Bat Eviction Plan in consultation with CDFW for written approval prior to implementation. The Bat Eviction Plan should include exclusion methods, roost removal procedures, and monitoring efforts to ensure that all bats have exited the roost prior to all ground-disturbing activities and are unable to reenter the roost. In addition, replacement habitat appropriate for the species’ roost requirements should be created prior to the roost removal. The qualified bat biologist, in consultation with CDFW should facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (November 1 to February 28th) and maternity roosting (15 March to 31 August) periods through the following means:
• Implementing eviction during a period of warm (nighttime low >50°F), dry weather, when bats are expected to be active.
• Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow disturbance).
• Waiting a minimum of three nights of warm weather, as defined above, for roosting bats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing bats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.
• Conducting a follow-up survey prior to roost removal to ensure that bats have vacated the roost.
• Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow bats to escape during nighttime hours.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.4 will reduce impacts to the roosting bat to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.5: Potential development resulting from the proposed Plan could result in disruption of denning badgers and mortality of badgers.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.5: Conduct Focused American Badger Surveys and Avoid or Minimize Impacts to American Badger Dens. No more than 30 days before the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist should conduct pre-construction surveys for American badgers 11 within suitable habitat. If a potentially active den is found in a construction area, the den openings may be monitored with tracking medium or an infrared-beam camera for three consecutive nights to determine current use. Potential (inactive) dens within the limits of disturbance should be blocked with a one-way door or excavated to prevent use during construction. Blocking with one-way doors is preferable to excavation where feasible; potential dens blocked with doors will be made available to badgers after construction. If American badgers or active dens are detected during these surveys, the following should be implemented:
• If present, occupied badger dens should be flagged, and ground-disturbing activities avoided, within 50 feet of the occupied den during the nonbreeding season (1 July through 14 February). Flagging that is highly visible by construction crews should encircle the occupied den at the appropriate buffer distance, and should not prevent access to the den by badgers. Dens determined to be occupied during the breeding season (15 February through 30 June) should be flagged, and ground-disturbing activities avoided, within 200 feet to protect adults and nursing young. Buffers may be modified by the qualified biologist, provided the badgers are protected, and should not be removed until the qualified biologist has determined that the den is no longer in use. • If avoidance of an active non-maternity den is not feasible, the qualified biologist should consult with CDFW to determine whether the badger(s) may be evicted. Relocation methods may be implemented by first incrementally blocking the den over a three-day period, followed by slowly excavating the den (either by hand or with mechanized equipment under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist, removing no more than 4 inches at a time) before or after the rearing season (15 February through 30 June). Any passive relocation of American badgers shall occur only under the direction of a qualified biologist.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.5 will reduce impacts to the denning badgers to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.6: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of, and loss of habitat for burrowing owls.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.6: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Burrowing Owl and Implement Avoidance Measures. A qualified biologist(s) knowledgeable of the species should conduct a focused, preconstruction survey during the peak breeding season for burrowing owls (15 April to 15 July) prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities for the project to determine if burrowing owls are present on the project site and within 250 feet where access allows. The survey should be conducted in substantial compliance with the California Burrowing Owl Consortium's Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC, 1997), or other survey and mitigation protocols recommended by the CDFW, to the extent feasible. All areas of suitable 12 habitat proposed for ground disturbance will be surveyed. If burrowing owls are detected, buffers and mitigation per the Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines will be implemented.

If burrowing owl(s) are found to occupy the site and avoidance is not possible, a qualified biologist knowledgeable of the species should conduct burrow exclusion during the nonbreeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty by site surveillance and/or scoping. Burrow closure should be implemented only where there are adjacent natural burrows and nonimpacted sufficient habitat for burrowing owls to occupy with permanent protection mechanisms in place. Ongoing surveillance should be conducted during any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction associated with each phase of project implementation to monitor colonization of the area by burrowing owls.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.6 will reduce impacts to burrowing owl habitat to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.7: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in impacts to Western pond turtle nests and mortality of pond turtles.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1.7: Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle, and Move Individuals to Safety. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist (i.e., a biologist approved by CDFW and that holds a Scientific Collecting Permit to handle western pond turtles) should conduct focused surveys during the western pond turtle egg-laying season (March through August) to determine if for western pond turtles are present within 0.25-mile of aquatic and riparian habitat, where accessible. If any pond turtles are detected during these surveys, or during construction in an area where individuals could be affected, they should be allowed to move out on their own volition. If this is not feasible, they should be moved to the nearest suitable habitat immediately upstream or downstream from the project site. The candidate sites for relocation should be identified before construction and should be selected based on the size and type of habitat present, the potential for negative interactions with resident species, and the species’ range.

If any western pond turtle nests with eggs are found, the nests should remain undisturbed until the eggs have hatched.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.7 will reduce impacts to Western Pond Turtle habitat and the mortality of pond turtles to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-1.8: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in take of birds or nests. 13 Mitigation Measure BIO-1.8: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1.8, as follows:
• MEIR BIO-1.8: Proposed projects within the Plan Area should avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre‐construction clearance survey must be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no more than 10 days prior to the start of any initial ground-disturbing activity or construction associated with each phase of project implementation to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. Once construction begins, a qualified wildlife biologist should continuously monitor nests to detect behavioral changes resulting from project-related activities.

If continuous monitoring of nests by a qualified wildlife biologist is not feasible, a disturbance-free buffer zone of a minimum of 250 feet should be delineated around active nests of non-listed bird species and a disturbance-free buffer zone of a minimum of 500 feet should be delineated around active nests of nonlisted raptors, or suitable buffer distance approved by the biological monitor. These buffers should be maintained until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified wildlife biologist can determine that the bird species or raptors have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. Variance from these buffers should be considered only after consultation with a qualified wildlife biologist and CDFW Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1.8 will reduce impacts to birds or nests to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measures BIO-2.1a through BIO-2.1c, as follows:
• MEIR BIO-2.1a: : Impacts to riparian habitat should be avoided by delineating a 200-foot disturbance free buffer from the high water mark of a waterbody or waterway or form 14 the outside edge of the riparian habitat and for areas with no riparian vegetation, a minimum 100-foot disturbance-free buffer should be delineated around the high water mark of a waterbody or waterway.

If avoidance is not possible, a compensatory habitat‐based mitigation should be required to reduce project impacts. Compensatory mitigation must involve the preservation or restoration or the purchase of off‐site mitigation credits for impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special‐status natural community. Mitigation must be conducted in‐kind or within an approved mitigation bank in the region. The specific mitigation ratio for habitat based mitigation should be determined on and acre-for-acre basis through consultation with the appropriate agency (i.e., CDFW or USFWS) on a case‐by‐case basis.
• MEIR BIO‐2.1b: Project impacts that occur to riparian habitat may also result in significant impacts to streambeds or waterways protected under Section 1600 of Fish and Wildlife Code and Section 404 of the CWA. In accordance with Fish & Game Code §1600 et seq., consultation with CDFW and/or USACE should be initiated to determine the appropriate mitigation strategy and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts prior to commencing any activity that may (a) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (b) substantially change or use any material from the bed, bank, or channel of any river, stream, or lake (including the removal of riparian vegetation); or (c) deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake.
• MEIR BIO‐2.1c: Project‐related impacts to riparian habitat or a special‐status natural community may result in direct or incidental impacts to special‐status species associated with riparian or wetland habitats. Project impacts to special‐status species associated with riparian habitat shall be mitigated through agency consultation, development of a mitigation strategy, and/or issuing incidental take permits for the specific special‐status species, as determined by the CDFW and/or USFWS.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 will reduce impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact BIO-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in loss of federally protected wetlands or waters.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measures BIO-3a through BIO-3b, as follows:
• MEIR BIO‐3a: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, in accordance with Fish & Game Code Section 1600 et seq., 15 consultation with CDFW and/or USACE should be initiated to determine the appropriate mitigation strategy and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts prior to commencing any activity that may (a) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (b) substantially change or use any material from the bed, bank, or channel of any river, stream, or lake (including the removal of riparian vegetation); or (c) deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake.

In addition, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to USACE accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation should be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and approval of wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the Plan Area by the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., USACE, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)). Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation should be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland.
• MEIR BIO‐3b: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage and incorporating detention basins shall assist in ensuring project‐related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3 will reduce impacts to federally protected wetlands within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-1, as follows:
• MEIR CUL-1: If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but 16 not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.

If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 will reduce impacts to historical resources within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact CUL-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-2, as follows:
• MEIR CUL-2: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for prehistoric archaeological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed.

If prehistoric resources are not found during either the field survey or a literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If the resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to 17 the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.

If prehistoric resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried using appropriate State record forms and submit the forms to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. The resources shall be evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, measures shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include an archaeological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist. If additional prehistoric archaeological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 will reduce impacts to archaeological resources within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact CUL-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to directly or indirectly affect a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-3, as follows:
• MEIR CUL-3: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:

If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or a literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence.

In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during 18 excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds. If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency.

Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.

If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist. If additional paleontological/ geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3 will reduce impacts to paleontological resources within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact CUL-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-4, as follows:

MEIR CUL-4: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County 19 Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment.

Applicable regulations and procedures described above, along with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4, would ensure that any human remains discovered during construction would be handled appropriately.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4 will reduce impacts to human remains within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact CUL-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to impact TCRs the disturbance of which could result in a significant impact under CEQA.

Mitigation Measure CUL-5: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-4.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-5 will reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources within the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed school.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a through HAZ-4h, described later in the section under Impact HAZ-4, would reduce potential impacts to schools. 20 In addition, as stated in the discussions of Impacts HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, of the Draft EIR, compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations, procedures, and policies would avoid potential impacts associated with hazardous materials handling, use, and storage in the Plan Area. Compliance with these regulations, procedures, and policies would ensure that hazardous materials are properly handled, thereby reducing potential risks to nearby schools.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 and compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations will reduce impacts related to the handling of hazardous materials or waste within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed school to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact HAZ-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would occur on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a potentially significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4a: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase I ESA (performed in accordance with the current ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process [E 1527]) shall be conducted for each individual property prior to development or redevelopment to ascertain the presence or absence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HRECs), and Potential Environmental Concerns (PECs) relevant to the property under consideration. The findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, if found to be warranted.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4b: In the event that the findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA for a property result in evidence of RECs, HRECs and/or PECs warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase II ESA shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of a significant impact to the subject site from hazardous materials.

The Phase II ESA may include but may not be limited to the following: (1) Collection and laboratory analysis of soils and/or groundwater samples to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of constituents of concern; (2) Collection and laboratory analysis of soil vapors and/or indoor air to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of volatile constituents of concern; and/or (3) Geophysical surveys to ascertain the presence or absence of subsurface features of concern such as USTs, drywells, drains, plumbing, and septic systems. The findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, site characterization, and/or remedial activities, if found to be warranted.
21 Mitigation Measure HAZ-4c: In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern. The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4d: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA(s), site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency including, but not limited to, the Cal-EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD).

Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil. If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4e: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for an individual property within the Plan Area with residual environmental contamination, the agency with primary regulatory oversight of environmental conditions at such property ("Oversight Agency") shall have determined that the proposed land use for that property, including proposed development features and design, does not present an unacceptable risk to human health, if applicable, through the use of an Environmental Site Management Plan (ESMP) that could include institutional controls, site-specific mitigation measures, a risk management plan, and deed restrictions based upon applicable risk-based cleanup standards. Remedial action plans, risk management plans and health and safety plans shall be required as determined by the Oversight Agency for a given property under applicable environmental laws, if not already completed, to prevent an unacceptable risk to human health, including workers during and after construction, from exposure to residual contamination in soil and groundwater in connection with remediation and site development activities and the proposed land use.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4f: For those sites with potential residual volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil, soil gas, or groundwater that are planned for redevelopment with an overlying occupied building, a vapor intrusion assessment shall be performed by a licensed environmental professional. If the results of the vapor intrusion assessment indicate the potential for significant vapor intrusion into the proposed building, the project design shall include vapor controls or source removal, as appropriate, in accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or the Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD) requirements. Soil vapor mitigations or controls could include passive venting and/or active venting. The vapor intrusion assessment as associated 22 vapor controls or source removal can be incorporated into the ESMP (Mitigation Measure HAZ4- 4e).

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4g: In the event of planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures on the subject site, prior to the issuance of demolition permits, asbestos and lead based paint (LBP) surveys shall be conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and/or LBP. Removal of friable ACM, and non-friable ACMs that have the potential to become friable, during demolition and/or renovation shall conform to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs).

The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) is the responsible agency on the local level to enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) and shall be notified by the property owners and/or developers of properties (or their designee(s)) prior to any demolition and/or renovation activities. If asbestoscontaining materials are left in place, an Operations and Maintenance Program (O&M Program) shall be developed for the management of asbestos containing materials.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-4h: Prior to the import of a soil to a particular property within the Plan Area as part of that property’s site development, such soils shall be sampled for toxic or hazardous materials to determine if concentrations exceed applicable Environmental Screening Levels for the proposed land use at such a property, in accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or the Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD)requirements, prior to importing to such a property.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a through HAZ-4h and compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations will reduce impacts related to the handling of hazardous materials or waste within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed school to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Noise
Impact NOISE-2: Construction activities could result in vibration-induced architectural damage at nearby structures or hardscape features, or could result in vibration-induced annoyance at nearby sensitive receptors.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2a: Prior to issuance of grading and construction permits, applicants for individual development projects that involve vibration-intensive construction activities— such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers—within 50 feet of off-site structures, shall prepare and submit to the City of Fresno an acoustical study to evaluate potential construction-related vibration damage impacts. The vibration assessment shall be prepared by a 23 qualified acoustical engineer and be based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibrationinduced architectural damage criterion. If the acoustical study determines a potential exceedance of the FTA thresholds, measures shall be identified that ensure vibration levels are reduced to below the thresholds. Measures to reduce vibration levels can include use of lessvibration-intensive equipment (e.g., drilled piles and static rollers) and/or construction techniques (e.g., non-explosive rock blasting and use of hand tools) and preparation of a preconstruction survey report to assess the condition of the affected sensitive structure. Identified measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and submitted for verification to the City.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2b: Prior to issuance of grading and construction permits, applicants for individual development projects that involve vibration-intensive construction activities— such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers—within 100 feet of sensitive receptors (e.g., residences and schools) shall prepare and submit to the City of Fresno an acoustical study to evaluate potential construction-related vibration annoyance impacts. The study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer and shall identify measures to reduce impacts to habitable structures to below the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration-induced annoyance criterion. If construction-related vibration is determined in the acoustical study to be perceptible at vibration-sensitive uses, additional requirements, such as use of less-vibrationintensive equipment or construction techniques, shall be implemented during construction (e.g., drilled piles, static rollers, and non-explosive rock blasting). Identified measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and submitted for verification to the City.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-2a and NOISE-2b will reduce construction-related vibration impacts to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Public Services & Recreation
Impact PS-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

Mitigation Measure PS-7: As new development occurs in the Plan Area, the City shall periodically (every 5 years) monitor residential population growth compared to development of new parklands for the purpose of evaluating the strength of this Plan to meet the ratio of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 population. If the ratio is not met, the City shall explore additional ways to increase the amount of dedicated parkland in the Plan Area, including but not limited to designating additional lands for parkland development.
24 Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure PS-7 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Transportation and Traffic
Impact TRANS-7.1: The addition of proposed Plan traffic to the roadway network, in combination with traffic generated by reasonably foreseeable projects, results in unacceptable roadway operations on City of Fresno study roadway segments under cumulative conditions.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.1: Provide transportation improvements consistent with General Plan Policy MT-1-j in the Plan Area that would encourage non-vehicular transportation and reduce auto traffic levels. These improvements shall be consistent with the goals and policies in the proposed Plan, which require the implementation of complete streets, bikeways, trails, sidewalks, and enhanced transit service to support transit use, biking, and walking as viable modes of travel. By supporting and encouraging these non-auto modes in lieu of auto travel, future traffic levels would be reduced. The City of Fresno shall also apply General Plan Policy MT-1-o, which allows LOS E or F conditions outside of identified multimodal districts if provisions are made to sufficiently improve the overall transportation system and promote nonvehicular transportation. With the application of General Plan policy MT-1-o, the LOS F conditions on Church Avenue and LOS E conditions on North Avenue would be considered acceptable.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.1 will reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Utilities & Service Systems
Impact UTIL-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure USS-1 through USS-3, as follows:
• MEIR USS-1: The City shall develop and implement a wastewater master plan update. • MEIR USS-2: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements.
25 o Construct an approximately 70 MGD expansion of the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
o Construct an approximately 0.49 MGD expansion of the North Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
• MEIR USS-3: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. After approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements.
o Construct an approximately 24 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility within the Southeast Development Area and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
o Construct an approximately 9.6 MGD expansion of the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact UTIL-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-2: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure USS-4 through USS-9, as follows:
• MEIR USS-4: A Traffic Control/Traffic Management Plan to address traffic impacts during construction of water and sewer facilities shall be prepared and implemented subject to approval by the City prior to construction. The plan shall identify hours of construction and for deliveries, include haul routes, identify access and parking restrictions, plan for notifications, identify pavement markings and signage, and plan for coordination with emergency service providers and schools. • MEIR USS-5: Prior to exceeding existing water supply capacity, the City shall evaluate the water supply system and shall not approve additional development that demand additional water until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided.
o Construct an approximately 80 million gallon per day (MGD) surface water treatment facility near the intersection of Armstrong and Olive Avenues, in 26 accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan Update Phase 2 Report, January 2012 (2012 Metro Plan Update).
o Construct an approximately 30 MGD expansion of the existing northeast surface water treatment facility for a total capacity of 60 MGD, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct an approximately 20 MGD surface water treatment facility in the southwest portion of the City, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐ 1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
• MEIR USS-6: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing wastewater collection system facilities, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall not approve additional development that would generate additional wastewater and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided.
o Orange Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Dakota and Jensen Avenues. Approximately 37,240 feet of new sewer main shall be installed and approximately 5,760 feet of existing sewer main shall be rehabilitated. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 27‐inches to 42‐inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are RS03A, RL02, C01‐REP, C02‐REP, C03‐REP, C04‐REP, C05‐REP, C06‐REL and C07‐REP. o Marks Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Clinton Avenue and Kearney Boulevard. Approximately 12,150 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 33‐ inches to 60‐inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CM1‐ REP and CM2‐REP.
o North Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Polk and Fruit Avenues and also between Orange and Maple Avenues. Approximately 25,700 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 48‐inches to 66‐ inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CN1‐REL1 and CN3‐REL1.
o Ashlan Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Hughes and West Avenues and also between Fruit and Blackstone Avenues. Approximately 9,260 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 24‐inches to 36‐inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CA1‐REL and CA2‐REP. • MEIR USS-7: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing 28 pipeline segment shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix J-1 of the Fresno General Plan MEIR, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall not approve additional development that would generate additional wastewater and exceed the capacity of one of the 28 pipeline segments until additional capacity is provided.
27 • MEIR USS-8: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall not approve additional development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. The following capacity improvements shall be provided by approximately 2025.
o Construct 65 new groundwater wells, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct a 2.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T2) near the intersection of Clovis and California Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct a 3.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T3) near the intersection of Temperance and Dakota Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct a 3.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T4) in the Downtown Planning Area, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T5) near the intersection of Ashlan and Chestnut Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T6) near the intersection of Ashlan Avenue and Highway 99, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct 50.3 miles of regional water transmission mains ranging in size from 24‐ inch to 48‐inch, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
o Construct 95.9 miles of 16‐inch transmission grid mains, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
• MEIR USS-9: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall not approve additional development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. The following capacity improvements shall be provided after approximately the year 2025 and additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance facilities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update.
o Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 1) within the northern part of the Southeast Development Area.
o Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 2) within the southern part of the Southeast Development Area. Additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance facilities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update. 28 Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-2 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact UTIL-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the proposed Plan that it has adequate capacity to serve the proposed Plan’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s baseline commitments.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-3: Implement MEIR Mitigation Measures USS-1 through USS-3.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-3 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact UTIL-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in a significant cumulative impacts with respect to wastewater.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-4: Implement MEIR Mitigation Measures USS-1 through USS-9.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-4 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact UTIL-15: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the proposed Plan’s solid waste disposal needs.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-15: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure USS-22, as follows:
• MEIR USS-22: Prior to exceeding landfill capacity, the City shall evaluate additional landfill locations and shall not approve additional development that could contribute solid waste to a landfill that is at capacity until additional capacity is provided.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-15 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.

Impact UTIL-17: Implementation of the proposed Plan in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects would not be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the proposed Plan’s solid waste disposal needs. 29 Mitigation Measure UTIL-17: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measure USS-22, as follows:
• MEIR USS-22: Prior to exceeding landfill capacity, the City shall evaluate additional landfill locations and shall not approve additional development that could contribute solid waste to a landfill that is at capacity until additional capacity is provided.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-17 will reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the PEIR.
(b) Impacts than Remain Significant and Unavoidable
Aesthetics
Impact AES-4: Implementation of the Plan would create new sources of substantial light and glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area as a result of new development.

Mitigation Measure AES-4: Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan Master EIR (MEIR) Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-5, as follows:
• MEIR AES-1: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. • MEIR AES-2: Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low‐intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. • MEIR AES-3: Lighting systems for non‐residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low‐intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur.
• MEIR AES-4: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot‐Lamberts (FT‐ L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT‐L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. • MEIR AES-5: Materials used on building façades shall be non‐reflective.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1 would serve to substantially lessen potential impacts related to light and glare from new development under implementation of the proposed Plan; however, because the Plan Area consists of several vacant and/or underutilized parcels that could be developed, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable with respect to light and glare. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, 30 technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AES-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a cumulative impact related to light and glare.

Mitigation Measure AES-5: Implementation of Implementation of City of Fresno General Plan Master EIR (MEIR) Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-5.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-5 would serve to substantially lessen potential impacts related to light and glare from new development under implementation of the proposed Plan; however, because the Plan Area consists of several vacant and/or underutilized parcels that could be developed, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable with respect to cumulative impacts related to light and glare. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact AG-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures are available for the impact of converting Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.

Finding: Because the plan area is comprised of Farmland that would be developed under implementation of the Plan, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce the impact to less-than-significant level, since, once developed, a permanent loss of Farmland of importance would be lost. The only mitigation for this impact would be to not develop; however, that would conflict with the stated objectives of the Plan. Therefore, Impact AG-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AG-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to agriculture resources.

Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures are available for the cumulative impact of converting Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. 31 Finding: Because the plan area is comprised of Farmland that would be developed under implementation of the Plan, there are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce the impact to less-than-significant level, since, once developed, a permanent loss of Farmland of importance would be lost. The only mitigation for this impact would be to not develop; however, that would conflict with the stated objectives of the Plan. Therefore, Impact AG-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Air Quality
Impact AQ-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in the generation of substantial longterm criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District (SJVAPCD) regional significance thresholds and would therefore not be considered consistent with the existing Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs).

Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development projects within the Plan Area, the project applicant shall show on the building plans that all major appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be provided/installed are Energy Star-certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency. Installation of Energy Star-certified or equivalent appliances shall be verified by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

Finding: Although the Plan includes policies and objectives to support a more sustainable development patter for the Plan Area, such as mixed-use and transit-oriented neighborhoods, and increased capacity for alternative transportation modes, which would help reduce air pollutant emissions, along with Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the additional development would nevertheless result in a substantial increase in emissions compared to existing conditions and exceed the SJVAPCD operational significance thresholds. However, the Plan policies would serve to reduce long-term criteria pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. Impact AQ-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained worker, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AQ-2: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) regional significance thresholds for (Volatile Organic Compounds) VOC and Nitrogen Oxide (NOX).

Mitigation Measure AQ-2a: In order to contribute in minimizing exhaust emission from construction equipment, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide a list of all construction equipment 32 proposed to be used on the project site for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects). This list may be provided on the building plans. The construction equipment list shall state the make, model, and equipment identification number of all equipment.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2b: During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2c: In order to reduce VOC emissions from construction activities, prior to issuance of a building permit for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property owner/developer shall require the construction contractor and provide a note on construction plans indicating that:
• All coatings and solvents will have a volatile organic compound (VOC) content lower than required under Rule 4601 (i.e., super compliant paints). • All architectural coatings shall be applied either by (1) using a high-volume, low-pressure spray method operated at an air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge to achieve a 65 percent application efficiency; or (2) manual application using a paintbrush, hand-roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge, to achieve a 100 percent applicant efficiency.
• The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural colored building materials, where feasible.

Finding: While Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-2c would serve to reduce emissions impacts, the Plan buildout at 25 years would result in construction activities that could generate short-term emissions that exceed the SJVAPD’s significance thresholds during that time, as well as cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJAVB). Further, due the programmatic nature of the Plan, specific projects have not yet been identified and therefore specific construction timelines and equipment for site specific projects are not available. Thus, Impact AQ-2 would remain significant and unavoidable.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AQ-3: Operation of development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan would generate emissions that would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.

Mitigation Measure AQ-3: Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-1. 33 Finding: No further measures to reduce operation-phase criteria air pollutant emissions are available beyond Mitigation Measure AQ-3, the applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations, and proposed Plan policies and design guidelines. Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulations, such as Rules 9510 and 9410, implementation of the proposed Plan’s roadway, bicycle, and trail improvements, policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-11.1, and T-12.3), and complete streets design guidelines, and implementation of applicable General Plan policies (e.g., Policies RC-4-e, RC-4-k, MT-2-b, and MT-4-b) would reduce operation-related criteria air pollutants generated from energy, stationary, and mobile sources to the extent feasible. As stated, the aforementioned Mitigation Measure AQ-3, improvements, design guidelines, and policies could contribute in reducing operation-phase regional air quality impacts of future individual projects to a less than significant level. However, despite adherence to Mitigation Measure AQ-3 and implementation of the policies and design guidelines, Impact AQ-3 would remain significant and unavoidable due to the magnitude of the overall land use development associated with the proposed Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AQ-4: Development of land uses accommodated under the proposed Plan could result in shortand long-term emissions that could cause or contribute to a violation of the Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS).

Mitigation Measure AQ-4a: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-2c to further reduce construction-related criteria air pollutant emissions.

Mitigation Measure AQ-4b: In order to reduce fugitive dust particulate matter emissions during construction activities, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), but that would be outside the purview of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Regulation VIII,the property owner/developer shall submit a dust control plan that includes, but not limited to the following measures during ground-disturbing activities to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions:
• Disturbed areas (including storage piles) that are not being actively utilized for construction purposes shall be effectively stabilized using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or covered with a tarp or other suitable cover (e.g., revegetated). • On-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
• Land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
34 • Material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained when materials are transported off-site.
• Operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.) (Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.) • Following the addition of materials to or the removal of materials from the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
• Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
• Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent. • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the project area.
• Adhere to Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation, as applicable.

Finding: Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulations, implementation of the proposed Plan’s policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-10.1, and T-11.3) and complete streets design guidelines in addition to applicable General Plan policies and objectives (e.g., Policies UF12-a and UF-14-a and Objective RC-4), and incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-4a and AQ AQ-4b, would reduce construction and operation-related criteria air pollutants to the extent feasible. However, despite implementation of the proposed plans, policies, and design guidelines and adherence to these mitigation measures, Impact AQ-4 would remain significant and unavoidable due to the magnitude of land use development associated with the proposed Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact AQ-7: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC and NOX.

Mitigation Measure AQ-7: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-4b.

Finding: Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulation in addition to incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-4b and adherence to the proposed Plan goals, policies, and design guidelines would reduce short- and long-term emissions to the extent feasible.

However, due to the magnitude and intensity of development planned under the proposed Plan, Impact AQ-7 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 35 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a substantial increase in GHG emissions.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-2b.

Finding: Implementation of the proposed Plan’s roadway and bicycle and trail network improvements, policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-10.1, and T-11.3), and Complete Streets Design Guidelines would reduce operation-related criteria air pollutants generated from energy, stationary, and mobile sources to the extent feasible. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ-2b would contribute in minimizing GHG emissions from construction activities. Furthermore, advancement of General Plan policies pertaining to GHG emissions (e.g., Policies RC-5-a through RC-5-g), urban form, transit, water and energy conservation (e.g., Policies RC-7-h and RC-8-c) would also contribute in minimizing GHG emissions overall. However, due to the magnitude of growth associated with the proposed Plan, it is anticipated that an increase in GHG emissions would remain substantial. While adherence to the City of Fresno’s GHG Plan would also contribute in reducing GHG emissions associated with implementing the proposed Plan and progress in meeting the year 2020 AB 32 reduction target, additional federal, State, and local measures would be necessary to reduce GHG emissions under the proposed Plan to meet the long-term GHG reduction goals under Executive Order S-03-05 and SB 32. At this time, there is no plan past 2030 that achieves the long-term GHG reduction goal established under Executive Order S-03-05. As identified by the California Council on Science and Technology, the State cannot meet the 2050 goal without major advancements in technology. Since no additional statewide measures are currently available, Impact GHG-1 would be significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact GHG-3: GHG emissions associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would substantially cumulatively contribute to climate change impacts.

Mitigation Measure GHG-3: Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-2b.

Finding: Implementation of the proposed Plan’s policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-10.1, and T-11.3) and complete streets design guidelines would reduce operation-related criteria air pollutants generated from energy, stationary, and mobile sources to the extent feasible. In addition, Mitigation Measure AQ-2a would also contribute in reducing construction-related GHG emissions. However, due to the magnitude of growth associated with the proposed Plan, it is 36 anticipated that an increase in GHG emissions would remain substantial. While adherence to the City of Fresno’s GHG Plan would also contribute in reducing GHG emissions associated with implementing the proposed Specific Plan and progress in meeting the year 2020 AB 32 reduction target, additional federal, State, and local measures would be necessary to reduce GHG emissions under the proposed Plan to meet the long-term GHG reduction goals under Executive Order S-03-05 and SB 32. As Stated, there is no plan at this time past 2030 that achieves the long-term GHG reduction goal established under Executive Order S-03-05. As identified by the California Council on Science and Technology, the State cannot meet the 2050 goal without major advancements in technology. Since no additional statewide measures are currently available, Impact GHG-3 would be significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Noise
Impact NOISE-1: Development in accordance with the proposed Plan would cause increases in traffic along local roadways of more than 3 dBA over existing conditions.

Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures are available for the impact of minimizing noise impacts related to traffic from implementation of the Plan to 3 dBA or below compared to existing conditions.

Finding: Given the extent of the Plan and potential for development, there are no feasible mitigations that would reduce traffic-related noise increases over existing conditions. The extent of potential development would result in Impact NOISE-1 to remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact NOISE-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Plan Area above levels existing without the proposed Plan.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: No feasible mitigation measures are available for the impact of minimizing ambient noise impacts related to equal to or below existing conditions.

Finding: Due to the extent of development that could occur under implementation of the Plan over the next 25 years, increases in ambient noise levels would occur compared to existing conditions. No feasible mitigation measures would offset potential increases to ambient noise levels and Impact NOISE-3 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR. 37 Impact NOISE-4: Construction activities would result in temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the Plan Area.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-4a: As required by the City of Fresno Municipal Code, construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, and shall require a permit issued by the City.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-4b: Prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and/or construction permits, applicants for individual development projects within 500 feet of noise-sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, hospitals, schools) shall conduct a project-level construction noise analysis to evaluate potential impacts on sensitive receptors. The analysis shall be conducted once the final construction equipment list that will be used for demolition and grading activities is determined. The project-level noise analysis shall be prepared, reviewed, and approved by the City of Fresno Community Development Director. If the analysis determines that demolition and construction activities would result in an impact to identified noise-sensitive receptors, then specific measures to attenuate the noise impact shall be outlined in the analysis and reviewed and approved by the City of Fresno Community Development Director. Specific measures may include, but are not limited to, the following best management practices:
• Post a construction site notice near the construction site access point or in an area that is clearly visible to the public. The notice shall include the following: job site address; permit number, name, and phone number of the contractor and owner; dates and duration of construction activities; construction hours allowed; and the City of Fresno Community Development Director and construction contractor phone numbers where noise complaints can be reported and logged.
• Consider the installation of temporary sound barriers for construction activities immediately adjacent to occupied noise-sensitive structures. • Restrict haul routes and construction-related traffic to the least noise-sensitive times of the day.
• Reduce non-essential idling of construction equipment to no more than five minutes. • Ensure that all construction equipment is monitored and properly maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to minimize noise. • Fit all construction equipment with properly-operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds, no less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer, to minimize noise emissions.
• If construction equipment is equipped with back-up alarm shut offs, switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters, as feasible.
• Stationary equipment (such as generators and air compressors) and equipment maintenance and staging areas shall be located as far from existing noise-sensitive land uses, as feasible.
• To the extent feasible, use acoustic enclosures, shields, or shrouds for stationary equipment such as compressors and pumps.
38 • Shut off generators when generators are not needed. • Coordinate deliveries to reduce the potential of trucks waiting to unload and idling for long periods of time.
• Grade surface irregularities on construction sites to prevent potholes from causing vehicular noise.
• Minimize the use of impact devices such as jackhammers, pavement breakers, and hoe rams. Where possible, use concrete crushers or pavement saws rather than hoe rams for tasks such as concrete or asphalt demolition and removal.

The final noise-reduction measures to be implemented and their associated details shall be determined by the construction-level noise analysis. The final noise-reduction measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and/or construction management plans and submitted for verification to the City; implemented by the construction contractor through the duration of the construction phase; and discussed at the pre-demolition, -grade, and/or - construction meetings.

Finding: Although implementation of Mitigation Measures NOISE-4 and NOISE-4b would serve to minimize temporary noise impacts related to construction of future projects under implementation of the Plan, the extent of potential development would nevertheless result in temporary increases in noise as construction occurs. Therefore, Impact NOISE-4 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact NOISE-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to noise.

Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures are available for the cumulative impact of noise impacts related to buildout of the Plan.

Finding: Although the above noise-related mitigation measures would serve to minimize potential noise impacts, primarily related to construction activities, and a permanent increase in ambient noise levels, the Plan as a programmatic document guiding future development in the Plan Area for 25 years, would result in new development to the extent that it would cumulatively contribute to noise impacts within and surrounding the Plan Area to a level that cannot be sufficiently mitigated to less-than-significant level. Therefore, Impact NOISE-7 would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Transportation & Traffic
39 Impact TRANS-7.2: The addition of project traffic to the roadway network, in combination with traffic generated by reasonably foreseeable projects, results in unacceptable intersection operations at Caltrans study intersections.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2: Development within the proposed Plan shall pay its regional transportation mitigation fee (RTMF) towards funding improvements to the regional highways and streets system. The City of Fresno shall coordinate with Caltrans and the Fresno Council of Governments to recommend the following intersection and ramp improvements at the SR99/Jensen Avenue interchange and SR-41/North Avenue interchange be incorporated into the RTMF program and any applicable future City of Fresno fee update applicable to roadway facilities and/or traffic signals:
• SR-99 Southbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
o Widen the SR-99 southbound off-ramp to add an additional left-turn pocket. o Restripe the existing shared through-left turn lane on the SR-99 southbound offramp as a dedicated through lane. o The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: two left-turn lanes, one through lane, and one right-turn lane.
o Add an overlap phase for the northbound right-turn movement. o Prohibit westbound U-turn movement to allow the northbound right-turn overlap.
o Widen the eastbound approach to stripe a third through lane; add a third receiving lane on the east leg that traps into the SR-99 southbound on-ramp. • SR-99 Northbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
o Change the lane configurations on the northbound off-ramp to a dedicated leftturn pocket and shared through-right turn lane. o Add an overlap phase for the southbound right-turn movement. o Prohibit eastbound U-turn movement to allow the southbound right-turn overlap.
o Widen the westbound approach to stripe a third through lane; add a third receiving lane on the west leg that traps into the SR-99 northbound on-ramp. o Change the phasing for the northbound and southbound approaches to protected left-turn movements and separate.
• SR-41 Southbound Off-Ramp/North Avenue intersection:
o Widen the SR-41 southbound off-ramp to add a left-turn pocket. o Change the lane configurations on the southbound off-ramp to convert the existing shared through-left turn lane to a shared right turn-through-left turn lane.
o Extend the right-turn pocket on the off-ramp to accommodate right-turn queue length shown in Table 4.14-16.
40 o The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one left-turn lane, one shared right turn-through-left turn lane, and one right-turn lane. o Widen the eastbound approach to add a third through lane that traps into the eastbound left-turn onto the SR-41 northbound on-ramp.

In addition to addressing intersection operations, the changes identified above also address freeway off-ramp queuing impacts identified in Impact TRANS-7.3 of the Draft EIR. With the implementation of the changes listed above, the operations at these three intersections would be improved to LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours, as shown in Table 4.14- 16 of the Draft EIR (refer to Appendix G for calculations).

While these changes would improve traffic operations to an acceptable LOS, these improvements require alterations to signals operated by Caltrans as well as physical expansion of intersections and ramps that are under Caltrans jurisdiction. Since these improvements are not within the City of Fresno’s jurisdiction to control, it cannot be guaranteed that these improvements will be implemented.

In addition to the three intersections at the SR-99/Jensen Avenue and SR-41/North Avenue interchanges that operate at LOS E or LOS F under cumulative conditions, the following improvements would address unacceptable LOS E operations at the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange:
• SR-99 Southbound Ramps/Fresno Street intersection:
o Widen the SR-99 southbound frontage road to add an additional right-turn pocket.
o Restripe the existing through lane as a shared through-left turn lane on the SR-99 southbound off-ramp.
o The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one leftturn lane, one shared through left-turn lane, and two right-turn lanes. • SR-99 Northbound Ramps/Fresno Street intersection:
o Add a through lane to the westbound approach on Fresno Street that traps into the left-turn onto the SR-99 southbound on-ramp.
o Adding the third through lane on Fresno Street would require removing the existing raised median and prohibiting eastbound left-turns at the Fresno Street/E Street intersection.

With the implementation of the changes listed above, the operations at these two intersections would be improved to LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours, as shown in Table 4.14-17 below (refer to Appendix G for calculations).

While the intersection and ramp changes at the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange would improve intersection LOS, physical constraints on the SR-99 southbound frontage road would make the proposed widening of the southbound approach infeasible. 41 Finding: The improvements to the SR-99/Jensen Avenue and SR-41/North Avenue interchanges require changes to intersections and ramps under Caltrans jurisdiction. Therefore, the City of Fresno cannot guarantee that these changes will be implemented. In addition, some of the improvements to the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange are physically infeasible. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s cumulative contribution to unacceptable operations at these intersections remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

Impact TRANS-7.3: The addition of proposed Plan traffic to the roadway network in combination with traffic generated by reasonably foreseeable projects results in freeway off-ramp queues that extend back onto the freeway mainline.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.3: Development within the proposed Plan shall pay its regional transportation mitigation fee (RTMF) towards funding improvements to the regional highways and streets system. In addition to the recommended improvements listed in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2, the City of Fresno shall coordinate with Caltrans and the Fresno Council of Governments to recommend the following intersection and ramp improvements at the SR41/Jensen Avenue interchange be incorporated into the RTMF program and any applicable future City of Fresno fee update applicable to roadway facilities and/or traffic signals:
• SR-41 Southbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
o Change the existing shared left-right turn lane on the SR-41 southbound offramp as a dedicated right-turn lane SR-99 southbound off-ramp o The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one left-turn lane and two right-turn lanes
o Add a southbound right-turn phase to run concurrently with the eastbound through phase by taking green time from the westbound through phase The implementation of the changes to the SR-41 southbound off-ramp at Jensen Avenue listed above would reduce queuing on the SR-41 southbound off-ramp. These changes in combination with the improvements to the SR-99/Jensen Avenue, SR-41/North Avenue, and SR-99/Fresno Street interchange listed in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2, would reduce freeway off-ramp queuing under cumulative conditions.

Table 4.14-18 in Chapter 4.14 of the Draft EIR presents the estimated freeway off-ramp queues with the improvements presented in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2 and TRANS-7.3 (refer to Appendix G for calculations). While these changes would reduce the 95th percentile queues on freeway off-ramps to within the available storage on the off-ramp, these improvements require alterations to signals operated by Caltrans as well as physical expansion of intersections and ramps that are under Caltrans jurisdiction. Since these improvements are not within the City of 42 Fresno’s jurisdiction to control, it cannot be guaranteed that these improvements will be implemented.

Finding: The improvements to the SR-99/Jensen Avenue, SR-41/North Avenue, and SR41/Jensen Avenue interchanges require changes to intersections and ramps under Caltrans jurisdiction. Therefore, the City of Fresno cannot guarantee that these changes will be implemented. In addition, some of the improvements to the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange are physically infeasible. Therefore, the proposed Plan’s cumulative contribution to unacceptable freeway off-ramp queuing at these off-ramps remains significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.

SECTION 9 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an environmental impact report include a “reasonable range of alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project.” Based on the analysis in the EIR, the Plan would be expected to result in significant and unavoidable impacts to Aesthetics; Agriculture and Forestry Resources; Air Quality; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Noise; and Transportation and Traffic. The EIR alternatives described below were designed to avoid or reduce these significant unavoidable impacts, white attaining at least some of the proposed Plan objectives. The City Council has reviewed the significant impacts associated with the reasonable range of alternatives compared to the proposed Plan, and in evaluating alternatives has also considered each alternative’s feasibility, taking into account a range of economic, environmental, social, legal, and other factors. In evaluating the alternatives, the City Council has also considered important factors listed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, contained in Section 10 below.

Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3) provides that when approving a project for which an environmental impact report has been prepared, a public agency may find that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report and, pursuant to Section 21081(b) with respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment as more fully set forth in Section 8 below. 43 As part of the environmental review process, the City prepared two alternatives in the EIR, which are described in detail in Chapter 5, Alternatives to the Proposed Plan, in the Draft EIR. The alternatives analyzed included the following:

No Project Alternative
Description: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(1), the No Project Alternative is required as part of the “reasonable range of alternatives” to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed Plan with the impacts of taking no action or not approving the proposed Plan. Under this alternative, the proposed Plan would not be implemented, and the Plan Area would remain in its current condition with future development occurring in accordance with the objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan. The following provides a general description of the differences between the No Project Alternative and the proposed Plan.
• Housing. The total number of projected housing units in the proposed Specific Plan is lower than the General Plan’s total number of housing units. The General Plan’s ratio of single-family housing to multi-family housing within the Plan Area is 61 percent singlefamily housing to 39 percent multi-family housing. The proposed Plan’s ratio is 70 percent single-family housing to 30 percent multi-family housing in the Plan Area.

Therefore, housing developed under the proposed Plan would result in 575 fewer dwelling units than the total number of dwelling units proposed within the Plan Area under the General Plan. However, under the Dual Designation Scenario, the ratio would be 59 percent single family housing to 41 percent multi-family housing, and would result in 408 more dwelling units developed within the Plan Area than under the General Plan. • Commercial. Under the Standard Development Scenario, the amount of commercial development in the Plan Area is greater under the proposed Specific Plan than in the General Plan by approximately 222,000 square feet. Several factors contribute to this increase, including new areas designated as corridor/center mixed-use, neighborhood mixed-use, regional commercial, and community commercial. However, under the Dual Designation Development Scenario, the amount of commercial development in the Plan Area would be 110,235 square feet less than the General Plan. • Employment. Under the Standard Development Scenario, the projected amount of employment space in the Plan Area (i.e., office, business park, regional business park, light industrial, and heavy industrial uses) under the proposed Specific Plan is less than in the General Plan by approximately 1 million square feet. The reason for this decrease is because of the change of business park and regional business park uses to other land uses such as residential, park, mixed use, and commercial. However, under the Dual Designation Development Scenario, the amount of employment space would be 708,985 square feet more than the General Plan.
• Parks/Open Space. The proposed Plan includes a refined definition of parkland compared to the definition in the adopted General Plan. As a result, the Plan Area’s total 44 park acreage in the proposed Plan under the Standard Development Scenario is less than in the General Plan because the General Plan counts the 112 acres directly east of the Regional Sports Complex, as well as the 16-acre Hyde Park, as parkland. Since these areas do not provide locally-serving park facilities, they were removed from the inventory of park land in the Plan Area. With the exclusion of the 112-acre Regional Sports Complex from the General Plan’s parks/open space development capacity, the amount of parkland within the Plan Area under the proposed Plan is slightly less than the General Plan’s park acreage. In addition, the amount of parks/open space in the SOI increases more significantly in the proposed Plan by 55 acres, largely because of the new parkland located directly to the west of the Regional Sports Complex that is accessible to residents of the Plan Area. Under the Dual Designation Development Scenario, the dual land use pattern is assumed, which results in zero acres of parkland within the Plan Area.
• Public Facilities. The amount of public facilities development in the proposed Plan under the Standard Development Scenario is larger than the amount in the General Plan (1,767,687 square feet; 135 acres). The primary reasons for this increase include the redesignation of the aforementioned 112-acre landfill from park to public facilities, the inclusion of a new college in the MLK Activity Center, and the re-designation of singlefamily housing to public facilities along North Avenue in an effort to create a buffer between residential areas and nearby industrial uses. However, under the Dual Designation Development Scenario, the amount of public facilities development is less than the amount in the General Plan (317,895 square feet; 25 acres).

In general, the development capacity in the proposed Specific Plan is higher due to the increased area of land designated for public facilities compared to the General Plan. While this is partially offset by the reduced area designated for employment uses, the overall development capacity would be higher.

Comparison to the Plan: The No Project Alternative would result in fewer impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, population and housing, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems when compared to the proposed Plan. The No Project Alternative would avoid all of the significant-but-mitigable and significant and unavoidable impacts related to implementation of the Plan given that the Plan would no longer be implemented under this alternative.

Finding: Although implementation of this alternative could avoid impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of implementation of the proposed Plan, the No Project Alternative proposed would not meet any of the Plan objectives. While some development would still occur in the Plan Area based on the Fresno General Plan, the development would not Mixed-Use Corridor Alternative
Description: The purpose of the Mixed-Use Transit Corridor Alternative is to provide an alternative that could reduce potential impacts from future development when compared to the 45 proposed Plan. This alternative would focus growth along California Avenue, which is currently designated for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Additional growth would be focused along the South Elm Avenue corridor, which could provide a transit connection to the California Avenue BRT project at a later date. Under this alternative, the CMX (Corridor/Center Mixed-Use) land use designation would be applied along the north side of the California Avenue corridor, and along the portions of the South Elm Avenue corridor currently proposed for C (Community Commercial), and NMX (Neighborhood Mixed-Use). The proposed land use intensities in other portions of the Planning Area would be reduced to achieve an overall reduction by about onethird of the development capacity projections of the proposed Plan. The policies in the proposed Plan would apply under this alternative; however, the overall development footprint would be lower under the Mixed-Use Transit Corridor alternative.

Comparison to the Plan: The Mixed-Use Corridor Alternative would result in fewer impacts to agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, GHG emissions, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation and traffic, and utility and service systems. Therefore, this Alternative would have the fewest environmental impacts as compared to the other two alternatives, and would be considered the environmentally superior alternative. However, this alternative would meet some, but not all, of the project objectives.

Finding: The Mixed-Use Corridor Alternative would meet many of the objectives of the proposed Plan. However, this Alternative would conflict with Objective #3 (“Provide a mix of high quality housing types, with an emphasis on single-family housing…”) because of its emphasis on multi-family housing which would not improve the availability of single-family housing to the same extent the plan would. In addition, the Alternative would not meet Objective #4 (“Attract needed retail…”) as it would bring fewer new residents to the Plan Area, potentially affecting the viability of retail which could reduce the amount of needed retail that develops in the Plan Area below what the proposed Plan would achieve. Similarly, this Alternative would conflict with Objective #8 (“Improve the quality of life in Southwest Fresno through high quality investment…”) as the reduced area of development would bring fewer people to the Plan Area, thereby potentially dis-incentivizing investment in the Plan Area and reducing the ability to achieve this Objective to the same extent that the proposed Plan would.

SECTION 10 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council of the City of Fresno adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant, unavoidable impacts of the Plan and the anticipated benefits of the Plan.

The Council has carefully balanced the benefits of the Plan against any adverse impacts identified in the EIR that could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance. Notwithstanding the identification and analysis of impacts that are identified in the EIR as being significant and which have not been eliminated, lessened or mitigated to a level of insignificance, the Council, acting pursuant to CEQA 46 Guidelines Section 15092 and 15093, hereby determines that significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable in Section 6 above, are acceptable due to overriding concerns described herein.

Based on the objectives identified in the Plan and EIR, the Council has determined that the Plan should be approved, and the unmitigated environmental impact attributable to implementation of the Plan are outweighed by the following specific environmental, economic, fiscal, social, housing and other overriding considerations, each one being a separate and independent basis upon which to approve the Plan. Substantial evidence in the record demonstrates the City would derive the benefits listed below from adoption and implementation of the Plan. Along with the benefits identified below, some policies from the proposed Plan have been included which provide support for each of the benefits. While the Plan includes a variety of policies that independently and collectively serve to achieve such benefits, only a few were included as substantial evidence in the record to support the Statement of Overriding considerations provided below.

Economic Benefits
A. The Plan would promote a vibrant economy by supporting a diversity of business and employment opportunities. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-2.3, Policy LU-2.6, Policy LU-6.1, and Policy LU-7.3.

B. The Plan will increase economic and educational opportunity through programs, services and facilities to prepare, mentor and train Southwest Fresno residents to access high quality employment opportunities by specifically identifying two magnet cores to accommodate regional retail as well as educational and/or medical facilities and by encouraging both new educational and job training programs within the plan area and by encouraging coordination with existing programs.

Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-1.1, Policy LU-7.2, Policy PF-6.1, and Policy PF-7.1.

C. The Plan provides for more commercial development compared to the Plan Area under the General Plan, which would support increased property and sales tax revenues. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-2.7, Policy LU-6.1, Policy LU-7.1, and Policy LU-7.3.

Environmental Benefits
D. The Plan is environmentally superior to the existing General Plan, as discussed in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-8.4, and Policy LU-8.6.

E. The Plan enhances transportation connectivity both within Southwest Fresno and between Southwest Fresno and other Fresno neighborhoods in order to provide more access to economic, social and educational opportunities. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-2.1, Policy LU-3.1, and Policy LU-3.2.

F. The Plan concentrates growth in existing urbanized areas and thereby results in fewer impacts from the construction of new infrastructure, maximizes use of existing impervious surfaces, provides multi-modal transportation opportunities, and reduces vehicle miles traveled, which translates into air quality and greenhouse gas emissions benefits and increases in resources and energy efficiency.

Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-4.3, Policy LU-4.6, Policy PF-1.1, and Policy PF-2.1. 47 G. The Plan would rezone existing parcels zoned for industrial use to non-industrial use which will, over time, phase out industrial uses within the Plan Area. This will contribute to a healthier environment by improving air quality in the area by encouraging the relocation of industrial uses to areas of the City more suitable for such uses and away from residential land uses. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-8.1, Policy LU-8.4, and Policy LU-8.5.

H. The Plan includes policies and mitigation measures, enforceable through the MMRP.

I. The Plan would attract needed retail, such as department stores, restaurants, and grocery stores, in order to serve resident needs with fewer, shorter vehicle trips. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-1.1, Policy LU-2.3, Policy LU-2.5, Policy LU-2.6, and Policy LU-2.7.

Social Benefits
J. The Plan would create a healthy community that offers a positive physical, social, natural and economic environment to support the health and wellbeing of all its members. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-3.1, Policy LU-3.2, Policy LU-6.4, Policy T-1.1, and Policy T-1.5.

K. The Plan serves to attract high quality new development while protecting existing neighborhoods by encouraging revitalization of existing corridors by attracting new development that follows enhanced designs standards aimed at retaining the unique character of the existing corridors, and by encouraging programs that will fund the rehabilitation of older neighborhoods while maintaining their residential character. Goals and their subsequent policies that support this benefit include Goal LU-2 , Goal LU-3, and Goal LU-4
L. The Plan provides a mix of high quality housing types, with an emphasis on single-family housing that is compatible with community character and located close to amenities such as parks, schools, transit, services, shopping and employment. Policies that support this benefit include Policy LU-1.1, Policy LU-2.4, Policy LU-2.5, and Policy LU-2.7.

M. The Plan provides quality open space and recreational opportunities by improving existing parks and creating new parks within walking distance (1/2 mile) of all residences. Specifically, the Plan calls for first improving the condition of existing amenities in parks, and then renovating existing parks to provide new amenities, as well as transforming vacant or underutilized parcels into park uses. The Policies that support this benefit are Policy PF-2.1, Policy PF-2.1, and Policy 2.3.

N. The Plan improves the quality of life in Southwest Fresno through high quality investment, compatible land uses, increased park and recreational opportunities and a multi-modal and connected transportation system. Specifically, the Plan calls for installation of new sidewalks and improvement of existing sidewalks to current Development Code standard to provide a sufficiently wide path for travel; enhancement of streetscapes with lighting, outdoor seating, and planters; implementation of bicycle facilities contemplated in the ATP, as well as secure bicycle parking; and creation of a scenic and well-connected trail system. Goals and their subsequent policies that support this benefit include Goal T-1, Goal T-2, Goal T-3, Goal T-4, and Goal T-5.