Agenda — Hesperia City Council, October 21, 2025 (part 3 of 3)

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Bear Valley Rd & I-15 NB Ramps 09/20/2024
EX_PM Existing PM 4:01 pm 08/26/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 222 1401 0 0 1328 176 269 3 626 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 222 1401 0 0 1328 176 269 3 626 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 234 1475 0 0 1398 169 283 3 570
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 264 2902 0 0 1727 209 476 5 427
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5233 0 0 4739 553 1750 19 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 234 1475 0 0 1032 535 286 0 570
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 0 0 1689 1748 1768 0 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 18.1 0.0 0.0 28.2 28.2 14.5 0.0 28.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 18.1 0.0 0.0 28.2 28.2 14.5 0.0 28.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.99 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 264 2902 0 0 1276 660 481 0 427
V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.60 0.00 1.33 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 275 2902 0 0 1276 660 481 0 427
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.77 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.9 13.3 0.0 0.0 28.7 28.7 32.6 0.0 37.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 4.4 8.2 5.3 0.0 165.3 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 7.5 6.3 0.0 0.0 11.5 12.6 6.8 0.0 30.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 68.6 13.9 0.0 0.0 33.1 36.9 37.9 0.0 202.8 LnGrp LOS E B C D D F
Approach Vol, veh/h 1709 1567 856
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.4 34.4 147.7
Approach LOS C C F
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 69.0 20.1 48.9 34.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 10.0 4.7 10.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 38.0 16.0 38.0 28.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.1 15.4 30.2 30.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.9 0.0 4.3 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 52.5
HCM 7th LOS D

Page 284 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Mariposa Rd & Bear Valley Rd 09/20/2024
EX_PM Existing PM 4:01 pm 08/26/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 177 1488 362 109 1145 58 226 202 114 82 193 149 Future Volume (veh/h) 177 1488 362 109 1145 58 226 202 114 82 193 149 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 184 1550 333 114 1193 56 248 192 14 85 201 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 219 2126 454 133 2279 107 375 197 164 186 195 165 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.51 0.51 0.08 0.46 0.46 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 4169 890 1767 4952 232 3534 1856 1546 1767 1856 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 184 1254 629 114 813 436 248 192 14 85 201 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1682 1767 1689 1808 1767 1856 1546 1767 1856 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.2 28.9 29.3 6.4 17.1 17.1 6.7 10.3 0.8 4.5 10.5 0.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.2 28.9 29.3 6.4 17.1 17.1 6.7 10.3 0.8 4.5 10.5 0.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 219 1722 858 133 1554 832 375 197 164 186 195 165 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.73 0.73 0.86 0.52 0.52 0.66 0.98 0.09 0.46 1.03 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 343 1722 858 133 1554 832 375 197 164 186 195 165 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) 0.58 0.58 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.9 19.1 19.2 45.7 19.2 19.2 43.0 44.6 40.3 42.1 44.8 40.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.4 1.6 3.3 39.9 1.3 2.4 4.3 57.1 0.2 7.9 73.0 1.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.7 10.6 11.1 4.2 6.5 7.2 3.1 7.7 0.3 2.3 8.6 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 49.2 20.7 22.4 85.6 20.5 21.5 47.3 101.7 40.5 50.0 117.8 41.6 LnGrp LOS D C C F C C D F D D F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 2067 1363 454 302
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 26.3 70.1 94.7
Approach LOS C C E F
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.0 56.0 16.0 17.0 51.0 16.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.4 4.6 5.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 51.0 10.6 19.4 39.0 10.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 31.3 12.3 12.2 19.1 12.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.9 0.0 0.3 8.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 34.7
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 285 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Cataba Rd & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 900 90 110 1260 40 60 30 90 50 10 90 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 900 90 110 1260 40 60 30 90 50 10 90 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 93 928 93 113 1299 41 47 53 93 52 10 93 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 120 1836 569 239 1839 58 173 182 154 161 169 143 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.36 0.36 0.07 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5066 1571 3428 5045 159 1767 1856 1572 1767 1856 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 93 928 93 113 870 470 47 53 93 52 10 93 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1571 1714 1689 1827 1767 1856 1572 1767 1856 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 8.8 2.5 1.9 13.5 13.5 1.5 1.6 3.5 1.7 0.3 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 8.8 2.5 1.9 13.5 13.5 1.5 1.6 3.5 1.7 0.3 3.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 120 1836 569 239 1231 666 173 182 154 161 169 143 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.51 0.16 0.47 0.71 0.71 0.27 0.29 0.60 0.32 0.06 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 242 2481 769 437 1621 877 1212 1272 1078 1212 1272 1078 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.1 15.2 13.2 27.4 16.7 16.7 25.6 25.7 26.5 26.1 25.4 26.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.3 0.2 0.1 1.5 1.0 1.8 0.8 0.9 3.8 1.1 0.1 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 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 2.6 0.7 0.7 4.3 4.8 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.7 0.1 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 38.4 15.5 13.4 28.9 17.6 18.4 26.4 26.5 30.3 27.2 25.6 31.8 LnGrp LOS D B B C B B C C C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1114 1453 193 155
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.2 18.8 28.3 29.8
Approach LOS B B C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.1 29.5 11.1 9.3 29.4 11.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 7.2 5.5 5.0 7.2 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.4 29.4 42.0 7.8 30.0 42.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 15.5 5.5 3.9 10.8 5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.8 0.5 0.1 5.8 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 19.4
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 286 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Key Pointe Driveway/Key Pointe Ave & Main St 09/20/2024 ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 950 10 160 1230 500 10 30 60 220 40 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 950 10 160 1230 500 10 30 60 220 40 150 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 62 979 4 165 1268 486 10 31 35 227 41 148 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 196 2229 692 206 1596 608 223 401 340 358 76 276 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.44 0.44 0.12 0.44 0.44 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5066 1572 1767 3609 1376 1185 1856 1572 1325 353 1274 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 62 979 4 165 1186 568 10 31 35 227 0 189 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1572 1767 1689 1608 1185 1856 1572 1325 0 1626 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 10.9 0.1 7.4 24.5 24.7 0.6 1.1 1.4 13.4 0.0 8.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.6 10.9 0.1 7.4 24.5 24.7 9.0 1.1 1.4 14.4 0.0 8.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 196 2229 692 206 1493 711 223 401 340 358 0 352 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.44 0.01 0.80 0.79 0.80 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.63 0.00 0.54 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 327 3747 1163 327 2498 1189 551 915 775 724 0 802 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 33.2 15.8 12.7 34.9 19.5 19.5 32.2 25.3 25.5 31.1 0.0 28.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.1 0.0 3.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 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 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 3.6 0.0 3.1 8.1 7.9 0.2 0.5 0.5 4.2 0.0 3.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 33.6 15.8 12.8 37.9 19.8 20.3 32.2 25.4 25.5 31.8 0.0 28.7 LnGrp LOS C B B D B C C C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1045 1919 76 416
Approach Delay, s/veh 16.9 21.5 26.3 30.4
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.2 42.9 24.0 14.0 43.1 24.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.7 7.2 * 6.5 5.0 7.2 6.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 60.0 * 40 15.0 60.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.4 12.9 11.0 4.6 26.7 16.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.4 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.3
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Page 287 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Main St & I-15 SB Ramps 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1140 1460 0 300 420
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1140 1460 0 300 420
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1856 1856 0 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1175 1505 0 309 433
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 3 3 0 3 3
Cap, veh/h 0 2324 2324 0 1136 521
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5400 5400 0 3428 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1175 1505 0 309 433
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1689 1689 0 1714 1572
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 9.3 13.1 0.0 3.8 14.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 9.3 13.1 0.0 3.8 14.5
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2324 2324 0 1136 521
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.51 0.65 0.00 0.27 0.83
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 3544 3544 0 1799 825
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.9 11.9 0.0 14.0 17.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.1 4.1
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 1.3 5.2
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 11.1 12.2 0.0 14.2 21.8
LnGrp LOS B B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1175 1505 742
Approach Delay, s/veh 11.1 12.2 18.6
Approach LOS B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 32.2 24.9 32.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 30.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.3 16.5 15.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 8.6 2.4 11.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 13.2
HCM 7th LOS B

Page 288 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: I-15 NB Ramps & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1090 0 0 1880 570 210 10 420 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1090 0 0 1880 570 210 10 420 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1124 0 0 1938 588 216 0 440
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 0 2970 0 0 2970 922 361 0 642
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.20 0.00 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5400 0 0 5233 1572 1767 0 3145
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1124 0 0 1938 588 216 0 440
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1689 0 0 1689 1572 1767 0 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 14.7 14.1 6.3 0.0 7.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 14.7 14.1 6.3 0.0 7.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2970 0 0 2970 922 361 0 642
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.64 0.60 0.00 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 3540 0 0 3540 1099 772 0 1374
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 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 7.9 7.8 20.7 0.0 21.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 1.6 0.0 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.9 2.6 0.0 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 8.3 8.8 22.3 0.0 22.4 LnGrp LOS A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1124 2526 656
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.4 8.4 22.3
Approach LOS A A C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 39.6 39.6 17.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 40.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.8 16.7 9.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 8.3 16.9 2.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 10.0
HCM 7th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 289 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Mariposa Rd & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 170 1270 70 250 2010 60 110 60 120 60 120 340 Future Volume (veh/h) 170 1270 70 250 2010 60 110 60 120 60 120 340 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 179 1337 74 263 2116 63 116 63 126 63 126 358 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 207 2200 122 291 2558 76 105 183 366 350 141 401 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.35 0.35 0.16 0.40 0.40 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 6236 344 1767 6417 191 904 552 1104 1185 426 1211 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 179 1026 385 263 1578 601 116 0 189 63 0 484 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1596 1793 1767 1596 1821 904 0 1657 1185 0 1638 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.0 21.3 21.4 17.6 35.7 35.8 6.1 0.0 10.4 5.1 0.0 33.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.0 21.3 21.4 17.6 35.7 35.8 40.0 0.0 10.4 15.5 0.0 33.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.74
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 207 1689 633 291 1908 726 105 0 548 350 0 542 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.61 0.61 0.90 0.83 0.83 1.10 0.00 0.34 0.18 0.00 0.89 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 2365 886 436 2377 904 105 0 548 350 0 542 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.4 32.2 32.2 49.5 32.6 32.6 59.1 0.0 30.5 36.4 0.0 38.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.1 0.1 0.4 12.2 1.7 4.3 118.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 16.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.4 7.8 8.9 8.5 13.2 15.5 6.7 0.0 4.1 1.4 0.0 15.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 56.5 32.3 32.6 61.8 34.3 36.9 177.6 0.0 30.7 36.5 0.0 54.9 LnGrp LOS E C C E C D F C D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1590 2442 305 547
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.1 37.9 86.6 52.8
Approach LOS D D F D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.1 49.8 46.9 18.6 55.4 46.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.2 7.2 * 6.9 4.4 * 7.2 6.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.8 59.7 * 40 30.0 * 60 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.6 23.4 42.0 14.0 37.8 35.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 6.4 0.0 0.2 10.4 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 41.7
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
* HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Page 290 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: US-395 & Joshua St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 70 20 90 140 570 10 700 50 150 920 100 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 70 20 90 140 570 10 700 50 150 920 100 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 146 73 13 94 146 535 10 729 26 156 958 88 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 307 551 98 503 667 565 43 1026 458 192 1322 590 Arrive On Green 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.02 0.29 0.29 0.11 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 753 1533 273 1301 1856 1572 1767 3526 1572 1767 3526 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 146 0 86 94 146 535 10 729 26 156 958 88 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 753 0 1806 1301 1856 1572 1767 1763 1572 1767 1763 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 15.7 0.0 3.0 4.9 5.1 31.0 0.5 17.3 1.1 8.1 21.9 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.8 0.0 3.0 7.9 5.1 31.0 0.5 17.3 1.1 8.1 21.9 3.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 307 0 650 503 667 565 43 1026 458 192 1322 590 V/C Ratio(X) 0.48 0.00 0.13 0.19 0.22 0.95 0.23 0.71 0.06 0.81 0.72 0.15 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 317 0 674 521 693 587 377 1504 671 377 1504 671 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.1 0.0 20.2 22.8 20.9 29.1 44.9 29.7 24.0 40.9 25.2 19.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 24.1 2.7 2.0 0.1 8.1 2.1 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 2.8 0.0 1.2 1.5 2.2 14.8 0.2 6.9 0.4 3.7 8.5 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 29.2 0.0 20.3 23.0 21.0 53.3 47.6 31.7 24.1 49.0 27.3 19.7 LnGrp LOS C C C C D D C C D C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 232 775 765 1202
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.9 43.5 31.6 29.6
Approach LOS C D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.9 35.8 41.1 9.0 43.7 41.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.7 8.5 7.4 6.7 8.5 7.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 40.0 35.0 20.0 40.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.1 19.3 22.8 2.5 23.9 33.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 8.0 1.1 0.0 9.3 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 33.4
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Page 291 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Bear Valley Rd & I-15 NB Ramps 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 280 1330 0 0 1420 390 170 10 550 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 280 1330 0 0 1420 390 170 10 550 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 295 1400 0 0 1495 360 179 11 485
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 283 2989 0 0 1562 374 417 26 393
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.25 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5233 0 0 4246 977 1669 103 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 295 1400 0 0 1236 619 190 0 485
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 0 0 1689 1679 1772 0 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 16.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 35.6 36.0 9.0 0.0 25.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 16.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 35.6 36.0 9.0 0.0 25.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.94 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 283 2989 0 0 1293 643 443 0 393
V/C Ratio(X) 1.04 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.43 0.00 1.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 283 2989 0 0 1293 643 443 0 393
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 0.70 0.70 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.1 31.5 0.0 37.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 65.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 12.8 21.9 3.0 0.0 125.4 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 11.9 5.3 0.0 0.0 15.8 17.4 4.2 0.0 23.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 107.3 12.1 0.0 0.0 42.8 52.0 34.5 0.0 162.9 LnGrp LOS F B D D C F
Approach Vol, veh/h 1695 1855 675
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.7 45.9 126.8
Approach LOS C D F
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 69.0 20.7 48.3 31.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 10.0 4.7 10.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.0 16.0 38.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.7 18.0 38.0 27.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 51.9
HCM 7th LOS D

Page 292 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Mariposa Rd & Bear Valley Rd 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_AM Proposed AM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 1440 310 130 1330 80 380 220 180 60 140 100 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 1440 310 130 1330 80 380 220 180 60 140 100 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 135 1500 323 135 1385 83 396 229 188 62 146 104 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 154 1894 406 155 2217 133 478 251 212 237 249 211 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.45 0.45 0.09 0.45 0.45 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 4176 895 1767 4886 293 3534 1856 1569 1767 1856 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 135 1212 611 135 957 511 396 229 188 62 146 104 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1694 1767 1689 1802 1767 1856 1569 1767 1856 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.2 33.0 33.3 8.1 23.3 23.3 11.8 13.1 12.7 3.4 8.0 6.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.2 33.0 33.3 8.1 23.3 23.3 11.8 13.1 12.7 3.4 8.0 6.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 154 1532 768 155 1532 818 478 251 212 237 249 211 V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.79 0.80 0.87 0.62 0.62 0.83 0.91 0.89 0.26 0.59 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 154 1532 768 155 1532 818 478 251 212 237 249 211 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) 0.68 0.68 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.7 25.1 25.2 48.6 22.5 22.5 45.5 46.1 45.9 41.9 43.9 43.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 29.9 2.9 5.8 37.2 1.9 3.6 11.6 34.5 33.0 2.7 9.7 8.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.8 12.9 13.7 5.1 9.1 10.1 5.8 8.2 6.7 1.6 4.2 3.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 78.6 28.1 31.0 85.9 24.4 26.1 57.1 80.6 78.9 44.6 53.7 51.3 LnGrp LOS E C C F C C E F E D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1958 1603 813 312
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.5 30.1 68.8 51.1
Approach LOS C C E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.0 54.0 20.0 14.0 54.0 20.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.4 4.6 5.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 49.0 14.6 9.4 49.0 14.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.1 35.3 15.1 10.2 25.3 10.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 10.7 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 39.2
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 293 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Cataba Rd & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 310 1540 190 180 1030 50 180 60 190 50 50 180 Future Volume (veh/h) 310 1540 190 180 1030 50 180 60 190 50 50 180 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 320 1588 90 186 1062 50 124 149 74 52 52 78 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 205 1939 602 274 1719 81 229 240 203 156 163 138 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.38 0.38 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.09 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5066 1572 3428 4957 233 1767 1856 1569 1767 1856 1567 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 320 1588 90 186 723 389 124 149 74 52 52 78 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1572 1714 1689 1814 1767 1856 1569 1767 1856 1567 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.4 20.4 2.7 3.8 12.9 12.9 4.8 5.5 3.1 2.0 1.9 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.4 20.4 2.7 3.8 12.9 12.9 4.8 5.5 3.1 2.0 1.9 3.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 205 1939 602 274 1171 629 229 240 203 156 163 138 V/C Ratio(X) 1.56 0.82 0.15 0.68 0.62 0.62 0.54 0.62 0.36 0.33 0.32 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 205 2095 650 369 1369 735 1023 1074 908 1023 1074 907 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.1 20.1 14.7 32.5 19.7 19.7 29.6 29.9 28.8 31.1 31.0 31.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 276.2 2.5 0.1 3.0 0.6 1.2 2.0 2.6 1.1 1.2 1.1 3.6 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 18.9 6.9 0.8 1.6 4.4 4.8 2.1 2.6 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 308.3 22.7 14.8 35.5 20.3 20.9 31.5 32.5 29.9 32.3 32.1 35.3 LnGrp LOS F C B D C C C C C C C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1998 1298 347 182
Approach Delay, s/veh 68.0 22.7 31.6 33.6
Approach LOS E C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.4 32.4 11.9 10.8 35.0 14.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 7.2 5.5 5.0 7.2 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.4 29.4 42.0 7.8 30.0 42.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.4 14.9 5.5 5.8 22.4 7.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.7 0.7 0.1 5.3 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 47.7
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 294 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Key Pointe Driveway/Key Pointe Ave & Main St 09/20/2024 ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 1610 30 320 1150 570 40 80 240 570 110 130 Future Volume (veh/h) 50 1610 30 320 1150 570 40 80 240 570 110 130 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 52 1660 23 330 1186 561 41 82 101 588 113 130 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 133 1947 604 222 1459 679 313 623 528 424 264 304 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.38 0.38 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5066 1572 1767 3377 1572 1128 1856 1572 1191 787 905 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 52 1660 23 330 1186 561 41 82 101 588 0 243 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1572 1767 1689 1572 1128 1856 1572 1191 0 1693 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 35.8 1.1 15.0 36.6 37.5 3.5 3.7 5.4 36.3 0.0 13.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 35.8 1.1 15.0 36.6 37.5 16.8 3.7 5.4 40.0 0.0 13.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 133 1947 604 222 1459 679 313 623 528 424 0 568 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.85 0.04 1.48 0.81 0.83 0.13 0.13 0.19 1.39 0.00 0.43 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 222 2550 791 222 1700 791 313 623 528 424 0 568 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 52.5 33.6 22.9 52.1 29.6 29.9 37.2 27.5 28.1 44.0 0.0 30.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 1.9 0.0 240.3 2.3 5.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 188.8 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 1.5 14.0 0.4 21.2 14.2 14.1 1.0 1.6 2.1 35.0 0.0 5.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 53.2 35.5 22.9 292.5 31.9 35.3 37.3 27.6 28.2 232.8 0.0 30.9 LnGrp LOS D D C F C D D C C F C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1735 2077 224 831
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.8 74.2 29.6 173.8
Approach LOS D E C F
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.7 53.0 46.5 14.0 58.7 46.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.7 7.2 * 6.5 5.0 7.2 6.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 60.0 * 40 15.0 60.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.0 37.8 18.8 5.3 39.5 42.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.0 0.5 0.0 7.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 75.5
HCM 7th LOS E
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Page 295 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Main St & I-15 SB Ramps 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 2260 1720 0 660 380
Future Volume (veh/h) 0 2260 1720 0 660 380
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1856 1856 0 1856 1856
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 2330 1773 0 680 392
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 3 3 0 3 3
Cap, veh/h 0 2693 2693 0 1043 478
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.30 0.30
Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5400 5400 0 3428 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 2330 1773 0 680 392
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1689 1689 0 1714 1572
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 29.2 18.4 0.0 12.6 16.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 29.2 18.4 0.0 12.6 16.9
Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2693 2693 0 1043 478
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.87 0.66 0.00 0.65 0.82
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2773 2773 0 1408 646
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 14.8 12.3 0.0 22.1 23.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 3.1 0.6 0.0 0.7 6.1
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 9.0 5.3 0.0 4.9 6.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 17.9 12.9 0.0 22.8 29.7
LnGrp LOS B B C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2330 1773 1072
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.9 12.9 25.3
Approach LOS B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 44.8 28.2 44.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 30.0 40.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 31.2 18.9 20.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.7 3.3 11.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 17.7
HCM 7th LOS B

Page 296 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: I-15 NB Ramps & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 2610 0 0 1830 420 270 10 850 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 2610 0 0 1830 420 270 10 850 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 2691 0 0 1887 236 278 0 838
Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 0 2709 0 0 2709 841 539 0 959
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.30 0.00 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5400 0 0 5233 1572 1767 0 3145
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 2691 0 0 1887 236 278 0 838
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1689 0 0 1689 1572 1767 0 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 39.4 0.0 0.0 20.7 6.1 9.7 0.0 18.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 39.4 0.0 0.0 20.7 6.1 9.7 0.0 18.9 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2709 0 0 2709 841 539 0 959
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.28 0.52 0.00 0.87 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2709 0 0 2709 841 591 0 1051
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 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 12.9 9.5 21.4 0.0 24.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.8 0.0 7.8 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 15.2 0.0 0.0 6.1 1.7 3.9 0.0 7.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 9.7 22.2 0.0 32.4 LnGrp LOS C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2691 2123 1116
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.0 13.3 29.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.0 46.0 28.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 40.0 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 41.4 22.7 20.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.2 1.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.4
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 297 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Mariposa Rd & Main St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 630 2590 240 100 1830 110 170 190 160 160 130 300 Future Volume (veh/h) 630 2590 240 100 1830 110 170 190 160 160 130 300 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 663 2726 246 105 1926 111 179 200 143 168 137 259 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 465 3189 284 127 2102 121 93 274 196 144 157 296 Arrive On Green 0.26 0.53 0.53 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 6010 536 1767 6220 358 980 1006 719 1029 574 1085 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 663 2165 807 105 1482 555 179 0 343 168 0 396 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1596 1759 1767 1596 1791 980 0 1725 1029 0 1659 Q Serve(g_s), s 38.6 56.8 58.4 8.6 43.6 43.6 6.5 0.0 26.5 13.5 0.0 33.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 38.6 56.8 58.4 8.6 43.6 43.6 40.0 0.0 26.5 40.0 0.0 33.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.65
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 465 2540 933 127 1618 605 93 0 470 144 0 452 V/C Ratio(X) 1.43 0.85 0.86 0.83 0.92 0.92 1.93 0.00 0.73 1.17 0.00 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 465 2540 933 371 1678 628 93 0 470 144 0 452 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.0 29.5 29.9 67.2 46.6 46.6 71.8 0.0 48.4 68.9 0.0 51.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 203.7 2.9 8.2 5.1 7.9 17.5 454.6 0.0 5.0 126.9 0.0 16.6 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 42.9 20.9 25.0 4.0 17.8 21.6 15.2 0.0 12.0 10.4 0.0 15.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 257.8 32.4 38.0 72.2 54.5 64.0 526.4 0.0 53.4 195.7 0.0 67.6 LnGrp LOS F C D E D E F D F E
Approach Vol, veh/h 3635 2142 522 564
Approach Delay, s/veh 74.7 57.8 215.6 105.8
Approach LOS E E F F
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.8 85.0 46.9 43.0 56.8 46.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.2 7.2 * 6.9 4.4 * 7.2 6.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.8 58.7 * 40 38.6 * 51 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.6 60.4 42.0 40.6 45.6 42.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 82.7
HCM 7th LOS F
Notes
* HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Page 298 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: US-395 & Joshua St 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 350 220 10 90 100 350 30 1590 320 680 840 120 Future Volume (veh/h) 350 220 10 90 100 350 30 1590 320 680 840 120 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 365 229 9 94 104 235 31 1656 212 708 875 121 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 326 528 21 280 552 468 96 1199 535 301 1608 717 Arrive On Green 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.17 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 1033 1773 70 1133 1856 1572 1767 3526 1572 1767 3526 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 365 0 238 94 104 235 31 1656 212 708 875 121 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1033 0 1843 1133 1856 1572 1767 1763 1572 1767 1763 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.1 0.0 12.2 8.6 4.9 14.5 2.0 40.0 12.1 20.0 21.1 5.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 35.0 0.0 12.2 20.8 4.9 14.5 2.0 40.0 12.1 20.0 21.1 5.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 326 0 549 280 552 468 96 1199 535 301 1608 717 V/C Ratio(X) 1.12 0.00 0.43 0.34 0.19 0.50 0.32 1.38 0.40 2.36 0.54 0.17 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 326 0 549 280 552 468 301 1199 535 301 1608 717 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.6 0.0 33.3 41.7 30.7 34.1 53.5 38.8 29.6 48.8 23.1 18.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 86.6 0.0 0.5 0.7 0.2 0.8 1.9 176.7 1.0 620.3 0.7 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 17.4 0.0 5.5 2.4 2.2 5.6 0.9 45.4 4.5 60.2 8.1 1.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 133.2 0.0 33.9 42.4 30.9 35.0 55.5 215.5 30.6 669.1 23.8 19.1 LnGrp LOS F C D C C E F C F C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 603 433 1899 1704
Approach Delay, s/veh 94.0 35.6 192.3 291.6
Approach LOS F D F F
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.7 48.5 42.4 13.1 62.1 42.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.7 8.5 7.4 6.7 8.5 7.4
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 40.0 35.0 20.0 40.0 35.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.0 42.0 37.0 4.0 23.1 22.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 201.4
HCM 7th LOS F
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Page 299 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Bear Valley Rd & I-15 NB Ramps 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 240 1900 0 0 1670 320 340 10 680 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 240 1900 0 0 1670 320 340 10 680 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 253 2000 0 0 1758 321 358 11 627
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 275 2902 0 0 1601 289 467 14 427
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 5233 0 0 4471 777 1717 53 1572
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 253 2000 0 0 1375 704 369 0 627
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 0 0 1689 1704 1770 0 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 14.5 28.7 0.0 0.0 38.3 38.3 19.8 0.0 28.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.5 28.7 0.0 0.0 38.3 38.3 19.8 0.0 28.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.97 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 275 2902 0 0 1256 634 481 0 427
V/C Ratio(X) 0.92 0.69 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.11 0.77 0.00 1.47 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 275 2902 0 0 1256 634 481 0 427
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.9 15.5 0.0 0.0 32.3 32.4 34.5 0.0 37.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 33.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 48.8 60.0 11.1 0.0 222.5 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 8.7 10.1 0.0 0.0 23.1 25.3 9.9 0.0 37.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 76.6 16.9 0.0 0.0 81.1 92.3 45.6 0.0 260.0 LnGrp LOS E B F F D F
Approach Vol, veh/h 2253 2079 996
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.6 84.9 180.6
Approach LOS C F F
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 69.0 20.7 48.3 34.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 10.0 4.7 10.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 38.0 16.0 38.0 28.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 30.7 16.5 40.3 30.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 76.9
HCM 7th LOS E

Page 300 ends

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Mariposa Rd & Bear Valley Rd 09/20/2024
ProposedGP_PM Proposed PM 8:43 am 09/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 350 1760 470 120 1410 80 390 240 150 110 240 190 Future Volume (veh/h) 350 1760 470 120 1410 80 390 240 150 110 240 190 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 365 1833 446 125 1469 79 406 250 51 115 250 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cap, veh/h 343 1957 464 133 1769 95 481 252 210 186 195 165 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.48 0.48 0.08 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 4078 966 1767 4914 264 3534 1856 1548 1767 1856 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 365 1509 770 125 1010 538 406 250 51 115 250 59 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1689 1667 1767 1689 1801 1767 1856 1548 1767 1856 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 19.4 42.0 44.6 7.0 27.3 27.3 11.2 13.5 2.9 6.2 10.5 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 19.4 42.0 44.6 7.0 27.3 27.3 11.2 13.5 2.9 6.2 10.5 3.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 343 1621 800 133 1216 648 481 252 210 186 195 165 V/C Ratio(X) 1.06 0.93 0.96 0.94 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.99 0.24 0.62 1.28 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 343 1621 800 133 1216 648 481 252 210 186 195 165 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) 0.36 0.36 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.3 24.4 25.1 46.0 29.2 29.2 42.2 43.1 38.6 42.8 44.8 41.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 48.0 4.7 12.0 60.8 6.7 11.8 13.0 53.9 0.6 14.6 160.6 5.9 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 12.7 16.2 18.5 5.2 11.5 13.2 5.6 9.7 1.1 3.4 13.3 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 88.3 29.1 37.2 106.8 35.9 41.0 55.2 97.1 39.2 57.4 205.4 47.6 LnGrp LOS F C D F D D E F D E F D
Approach Vol, veh/h 2644 1673 707 424
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.6 42.8 68.8 143.3
Approach LOS D D E F
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.0 53.0 19.0 24.0 41.0 16.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.4 4.6 5.0 5.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 48.0 13.6 19.4 36.0 10.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.0 46.6 15.5 21.4 29.3 12.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 52.5
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Page 301 ends

City of Hesperia General Plan 2025 CI-1

CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Attachment 5

Page 302 ends

City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-2

This page intentionally left blank

Page 303 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-3

CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Purpose statement ................................................................................. 11 Background ........................................................................................... 13 Context and setting ........................................................................... 13 Relationship to state law ................................................................... 14 Relationship to other elements .......................................................... 15 Issues ..................................................................................................... 17 Street Classifications and Circulation Plan ....................................... 17 Evaluating Traffic Conditions ........................................................... 38 Physical Barriers ............................................................................... 40 Highway Corridors............................................................................ 44 Goods Movement .............................................................................. 47 Public Transit .................................................................................... 53

Page 304 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-4

This page intentionally left blank

Page 305 ends

LIST OF TABLES
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-5

LIST OF TABLES
Table CI-1 Coordination with Other General Plan Elements ................. 16 Table CI-2 Street Types ........................................................................... 19 Table CI-3 Level of Service Definitions ................................................. 39

Page 306 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-6

This page intentionally left blank

Page 307 ends

LIST OF EXHIBITS
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-7

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit CI-1 Circulation Plan ................................................................. 18 Exhibit CI-2 Super Arterial 140’ ROW – with Multi-Use Pathway ....... 20 Exhibit CI-3 Major Arterial 120’ ROW – without Bike Lane ................ 21 Exhibit CI-4 Major Arterial 128’ ROW – with Bike Lane ..................... 22 Exhibit CI-5 Arterial 100’ ROW - with Bike Lane ................................. 23 Exhibit CI-6 Arterial 100’ ROW - without Bike Lane ............................ 23 Exhibit CI-7 Second Arterial 80’ ROW - with Bike Lane ...................... 24 Exhibit CI-8 Second Arterial 80’ ROW - without Bike Lane ................. 24 Exhibit CI-9 Modified Arterial 80’ ROW –with Multi-Use Pathway ..... 25 Exhibit CI-10 Industrial Collector 70’ ROW – without Bike Lane ........ 26 Exhibit CI-11 Rural Collector 60’ ROW - with Bicycle Lane ................ 27 Exhibit CI-12 Rural Collector 60’ ROW - without Bicycle Lane ........... 27 Exhibit CI-13 Suburban Collector 60’ ROW – without Bicycle Lane ... 28 Exhibit CI-14 Enhanced Third Avenue 100’ ROW. ................................ 30 Exhibit CI-16 Ranchero Road ................................................................. 32 Exhibit CI-18 Main Street A ................................................................... 34 Exhibit CI-19 Main Street B ................................................................... 35 Exhibit CI-20 Live Oak Willow Street ................................................... 36 Exhibit CI-21 Enhanced Seventh Avenue ............................................... 37 Exhibit CI-22 Truck Routes ..................................................................... 51 Exhibit CI-23 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan ................................. 56

Page 308 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-8

This page intentionally left blank

Page 309 ends

LIST OF GOALS
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-9

CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Goal: CI-1 ................................................................................................. 45 Goal: CI-2 ................................................................................................. 49 Goal: CI-3 ................................................................................................. 52 Goal: CI-4 ................................................................................................. 55

Page 310 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-10

This page intentionally left blank

Page 311 ends

C IRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-11

PURPOSE STATEMENT
This Circulation Element details and outlines the City’s plans to provide a transportation network system that allows the movement of people, goods, and services easily and safely throughout the City. A reliable and sound transportation strategy encourages economic growth and development, and enhances the safety and quality of life of the community. This element identifies the broader issues on which the City bases its circulation and transportation policies and outlines the City’s goals and implementation policies to provide a safe and efficient transportation system strategy. This strategy also includes non- motorized modes of transportation such as bicycle and equestrian paths and pedestrian ways as well as bus routes.

The purpose of this Circulation Element is to provide the public, decision makers and staff a guide to implementing policies that will create a safe, efficient and balanced transportation network, improve environmental quality, encourage healthier lifestyles, and support economic development.

It is intended to mitigate the conflicts associated with circulation like traffic congestion and lack of access which has challenged the City to develop policies that will improve overall circulation as the City contin ues to expand.

The Plan for the City’s future street system envisions that it will serve multiple roles and functions:
 Provide for the safe and efficient mobility needs of residents, businesses, visitors, and emergency services
 Facilitate the movement of goods and services while minimizing impacts to sensitive land uses and vulnerable roadway users  Promote physical activity and non- automotive travel within Hesperia through a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network accessible to people of all ages and abilities
 Provide for safe and convenient access to goods and services, job centers, and healthcare facilities for transit users

Page 312 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-12

This page intentionally left blank

Page 313 ends

C IRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-13

BACKGROUND

CONTEXT AND SETTING
Circulation and transportation have played an integral part in the history and foundation of Hesperia. The first buildings were constructed after the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad tracks were built in the City.

Shortly after construction of a rail depot in 1885, the City was officially named Hesperia. Even though freeways and streets have supplanted rail as the main means of transportation, the railroad remains important for the movement of goods and people in through of the City today. The City is planning to construct a railroad spur which will improve the movement of goods from the City’s industrial area to outside markets.

The City is served by several major transportation routes including Interstate 15, US Highway 395 and State Highways 138 and 173. In addition to roadways, there are three rail lines that traverse the City; one Union Pacific Railroad rail line, and two (one via a branch line) Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail lines. The rail lines serve a mixture of freight cargo trains and passenger trains. The City’s roadway network is generally based on a grid system with major arterials providing access to all portions of the City. The City’s location relative to Interstate 15 and U. S. Highway 395 has resulted in establishment of multiple truck -related uses, which are in proximity to the Interstate 15/U. S. Highway 395 intersection.

Page 314 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-14

RELATIONSHIP TO STATE LAW
Section 65302 of the State of California Government Code identifies seven mandatory elements in a General Plan, including Circulation. Section 65302 (b) defines the element and issues to be analyzed, including:
 Existing and Proposed Streets
 Transportation Routes
 Terminals
 Airports
 Ports,
 Military Airports and Ports
 Other Local Public Utilities and Facilities (addressed in Land Use Element)
Recent legislative updates require that jurisdictions incorporate the principles of the Federal Highway Administration’s Safe System Approach with the aim of eliminating traffic injuries and fatalities. Additionally, jurisdictions must develop bicycle plans, pedestrian plans, and traffic calming plans for any urbanized area within the scope of the General Plan.

These plans must identify safety corridors, use evidence -based safety strategies, and set goals for initiation and completion.

Each of these issues that are applicable to the City is included in the following sections of this Circulation Element:
 Street Classifications
 Roadway Capacity
 Physical Barriers
 Goods and Services
 Public Transit
 Non-vehicular Transit (Bikeway and Pedestrian)

Page 315 ends

C IRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-15

RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS
The Circulation Element is written in conjunction with all other elements of the General Plan and must reflect and complement those elements. Those elements which are most aligned with the Circulation Element are Land Use, Open Space and Safety. In addition, circulation and most particularly motorized circulation, has a strong influence on the Noise Element. The impact of the Hesperia Airport, the railroad lines, and arterial roadways is identified in detail within the Noise Element. As an example, one of the goals of the Circulation Element is to provide alternative forms of transportation. The goals of the Open Space Element echo this concern by identifying the need to provide a trail system for health and recreational benefits for the community. Similarly, areas specified in the Safety Element such as emergency evacuation routes are repeated in circulation.

As the City’s population and built environment continues to expand, the need for providing safe and efficient access and mobility becomes essential in order to ensure the City's functionality and sustainability. This Circulation Element provides direction regarding the planning, development and utilization of circulation strategies and policies with the focus on providing a safe and efficient transportation network. The element also considers alternative modes of transportation. This corresponds to the Land Use Element, which includes goals and policies reducing dependence on the automobile.

Page 316 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-16
Table CI-1 identifies the issues discussed in this Circulation Element and identifies other elements which include discussions which also address these issues.

Table CI-1

COORDINATION WITH OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS

ISSUES
Conservation
Housing
Land Use
Noise
Open Space
Health &Safety
Circulation
Street Classification X X X
Roadway Capacity X X X X
Physical Barriers X X X
Highway Corridors X X
Goods and Services X X X
Public Transit X X X
Non-Vehicular Transit X X X X

Page 317 ends

C IRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-17
ISSUES

STREET CLASSIFICATIONS AND CIRCULATION PLAN
Each roadway located within the City is designated with a classification depending on its role in the overall circulation network and its relationship to surrounding uses. The City’s plan consists of 10 street classifications which are shown on the Circulation Plan (Exhibit CI -1). The Circulation Plan indicates the general location and extent of the different street classifications and how they relate to each other and to the City’s land uses.

With the exception of local streets, which serve primarily single -family neighborhoods exclusively, Table CI-2 provides a brief description, street right-of-way specifications, and purpose of each classification.

Page 318 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-18
Exhibit CI-1 Circulation Plan

Page 319 ends

CIRCULATION

Table CI-2

STREET TYPES

Street
Type
With/
Without
Bike Lane
Total
Width
(Feet)
Curb to
Curb (Feet)
Number of
Travel Lanes
(Total)
Center Turn
Lane Width
(Feet)
Raised
Median
Width (Feet)
Parkway
Width (Feet)
Example
Super
Arterial
w 140 92 6 No 14 16 Ranchero Road
Major
Arterial
w 128 104 6 No 14 12 Main Street
w/o 120 92 6 No 14 14 Mariposa Road
Arterial w 100 72 4 12 No 14 Escondido Road
w/o 100 72 4 14 No 14 Eucalyptus Street
Secondary
Arterial
w 80 50 2 12 No 14 Danbury Avenue
w/o 80 50 2 14 No 14 Peach Avenue
Modified
Arterial
w 80 40 2 12 No 16 Live Oak/ Willow
Street
Industrial
Collector
w/o 70 46 2 14 No 12 C Avenue
Rural
Collector
w 60 48 2 10 No 12 Choiceana Avenue
w/o 60 40 2 12 No 20 Balsam Avenue
Suburban
Collector
None 60 36 2 10 No 10 Lime Street
State
Highway To be determined by CALTRANS

Page 320 ends

CIRCULATION

City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-20
Super Arterial
Super arterials are the primary local highways intended to provide efficient high-volume traffic flow across town along the Ranchero Corridor. With an approximately one hundred forty-foot (140’) right-of-way, they are able to accommodate six lanes of traffic as well as pathways for both pedestrians and non- motorized vehicles. Super highways incorporate landscaped medians to protect vehicles traveling at the higher speeds allowed on such roadways.

Exhibit CI-2 shows the cross-section for a super arterial.

Exhibit CI-2
Super Arterial 140’ ROW – with Multi-Use Pathway

Page 321 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-21
Major Arterials
Major arterials are the largest of the local surface street roadways, intended to link freeways with local streets, accommodating larger volumes of through-traffic moving at higher speeds than local streets. Major arterials are primary thoroughfares that connect the City with adjacent cities and the regional highway system. With a right-of-way between one hundred twenty- (120’) and one hundred twenty eight- foot (128’) right -of-way, major arterials have six travel lanes and provide eight -foot (8’) sidewalks. With the larger right-of-way, bicycle access is provided within the curb -to-curb right-of-way. With the smaller right-of- way, such bicycle lanes are not provided. Like Super arterials, major arterials incorporate a landscaped median.

Exhibit CI-3 is the cross section for a one hundred twenty-foot (120’) right- of-way and Exhibit CI -4 shows the one hundred twenty- eight-foot (128’) right-of-way.

Exhibit CI-3
Major Arterial 120’ ROW – without Bike Lane

Page 322 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-22
Exhibit CI-4
Major Arterial 128’ ROW – with Bike Lane

Page 323 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-23
Arterials
With a one hundred- foot (100’ ) right-of- way, arterials are narrower than major arterials, providing four travel lanes. However, they serve the same purpose linking local collector streets and neighborhoods to citywide areas of interest and to regional corridors. Meandering sidewalks are provided to encourage pedestrian use and access. Bicycle access may or may not be provided, depending on whether or not the arterial is included on the city- wide bicycle path plan. A two-way turning lane is included in the center of the right-of-way, between the four travel lanes.

Exhibit CI -5 depicts an arterial with bicycle lanes and Exhibit CI -6 illustrates one without a bicycle lane.

Exhibit CI-5
Arterial 100’ ROW - with Bike Lane

Exhibit CI-6
Arterial 100’ ROW - without Bike Lane

Page 324 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-24
Secondary Arterial
Secondary arterials are roadways with an eighty -foot (80’ ) right -of-way, consisting of one travel lane in each direction. Their primary purpose is to link local collector streets with Arterial and Major Arterial roads. With meandering sidewalks for pedestrian use and access, they may or may not have bicycle lanes incorporated within the right -of-way. Secondary arterials also incorporate a two -way left turn pocket in the center of the right-of-way.

Exhibit CI-7 shows a secondary arterial with a bicycle lane and Exhibit CI- 8 is the cross section of a secondary arterial without a bicycle lane.

Exhibit CI-7
Second Arterial 80’ ROW - with Bike Lane

Exhibit CI-8
Second Arterial 80’ ROW - without Bike Lane

Page 325 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-25
Modified Arterial
The modified arterial is based on the specifications of a secondary arterial, with slightly varying characteristics such as curb- to-curb distance and parkway width. They serve the same purpose of transporting traffic from collector streets to arterial and major arterials. Multi -use pathways for pedestrians and bicycles can be included. A modified arterial includes a two-way turn pocket in the center, between the two travel lanes.

Exhibit CI-9 is the cross section showing the design of the modified arterial.

Exhibit CI-9
Modified Arterial 80’ ROW –with Multi-Use Pathway

Page 326 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-26
Industrial Collector
Industrial collector streets provide a transition between local streets and higher-speed arterial roadways within the industrial areas of the City. With a seventy-foot (70’) right-of-way, these roadways have one travel lane in each direction and a two- way turning pocket in the center. They are built to withstand the weight of trucks and other industrial vehicles. Sidewalks are provided to allow for pedestrian access; however they do not include bicycle lanes.

Exhibit CI-10 illustrates the industrial collector.

Exhibit CI-10
Industrial Collector 70’ ROW – without Bike Lane

Page 327 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-27
Rural Collector
Rural Collectors provide a connection between Arterial Streets and local streets in undeveloped areas of the City. These roadways have one travel lane in each with a turning lane in the center. There is no curb or sidewalk.

They may or may not have a bicycle lane. These roadways are expected to be upgraded as the areas they serve are developed.

Exhibits C-11 and C-12, on the next page, depict the standards for the rural collector roadways with and without bicycle lanes, respectively.

Exhibit CI-11
Rural Collector 60’ ROW - with Bicycle Lane

Exhibit CI-12
Rural Collector 60’ ROW - without Bicycle Lane

Page 328 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-28
Suburban Collector
Suburban Collectors provide a connection between the various types of arterial streets and local streets in undeveloped areas of the City. These roadways have one travel lane in each direction, with a two- way turning lane in the center. Sidewalks are pr ovided to allow for pedestrian access.

Bicycle lanes are not part of a suburban collector.

Exhibit CI-13 is the cross section for a suburban collector.

Exhibit CI-13
Suburban Collector 60’ ROW – without Bicycle Lane

Page 329 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-29

State Highway
State highways are multi -lane, limited -access, high -volume, high- speed roadways constructed for regional and interregional vehicular travel. Access to these facilities is restricted to interchange ramps at selected roadways along their route. Their purpose is to connect cities and regions together.

Freeways are under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS). US Highway 395 (US 395), State Route 138 (SR 138) and State Route 173 (SR 173) are designated as state highways.

Consequently, the design of these highways is not included within this document.

Local Streets
Local Streets are neighborhood roadways with one travel lane in each direction. They are narrower in width than collector streets and designed for very low traffic speeds. Unless otherwise posted, the speed limit on local roadways is 25 miles per hour. These roadways typically serve residential areas. and are designed based on their expected use and capacity requirements associated with new residential development. The City has established street design standards for local roadways.

Page 330 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-30
Special Street Sections
The city has several streets with specialized hybrid cross-sections designed for unique road situations. The characteristics of these streets are discussed in this element and are also identified in the Traffic Circulation Plan.

Enhanced Third Avenue. A portion of Third Avenue between Main Street and Willow Street has been designated for enhancement as part of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan. Enhanced Third Avenue section provides a unique landscaped pedestrian pathway in the center median to encourage non-motorized trips to the downtown and commercial area on Main Street. In addition to the pedestrian median, bike lanes are also included in this section.

Exhibit CI-14 is the cross section showing the design of the enhanced-Third Avenue.

Exhibit CI-14
Enhanced Third Avenue 100’ ROW.

Page 331 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-31
Bear Valley Road. The southern half of Bear Valley Road is located in the City of Hesperia, whereas the northern half of the road is located in the City of Victorville. The Bear Valley Road section extends from the I-15 freeway to the eastern city limits by the Mojave River. Bicycle lanes are included in this section.

Exhibit CI-15 is the cross section showing the design of the Bear Valley Road section.

Exhibit CI-15
Bear Valley Road

Page 332 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-32
Ranchero Road. The Ranchero Road corridor extends from Mariposa Road to Danbury Avenue and is designed to link local traffic with the regional highway system and adjacent cities. The center landscape median will enhance the aesthetics of the corridor as well as separating the traffic flow.

Bike lanes are not included in this section.

Exhibit CI-16 is the cross section showing the design of the Ranchero Road section.

Exhibit CI-16
Ranchero Road

Page 333 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-33
US 395. The cross-section for US 395, a Caltrans facility, from Joshua Tree Street/US-395 exit off of Interstate I-15 to the city’s northerly boundary at Smoke Tree Road is designed to carry heavy trucks to the City’s industrial area west of I -15. (Trucks are prohibited from using Main Street between US 395 and I -15.) US 395 connects local traffic to the I -15 freeway and provide access to some cities in the region including Adelanto and Phelan.

Bike lanes are not included in this section.

Exhibit CI-17 is the cross section showing the design of the Highway US - 395.

Exhibit CI-17
Highway US-395.

Page 334 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-34
Main Street Corridor ‘A’. The Main Street Corridor ‘A’ is located within the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan and extends from the I-15 freeway to Ninth Avenue. This corridor includes a landscape median which will enhance the aesthetics of Main Street as well as a widen pathway to encourage non- motorized forms of transportation. This section does not include a bike lane.

Exhibit CI-18 is the cross section showing the design of the Main Street Corridor ‘A’

Exhibit CI-18
Main Street A

Page 335 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-35
Main Street Corridor ‘B’. The Main Street Corridor ‘B’ is located within the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan and extends from Ninth Avenue to I Avenue. This corridor includes a landscape median which will enhance the aesthetics of Main Street as well as a widen pathway to encourage non- motorized forms of transportation. This section does not include a bike lane.

Exhibit CI-19 is the cross section showing the design of the Main Street Corridor ‘B’.

Exhibit CI-19
Main Street B

Page 336 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-36
Live Oak-Willow Street. The Live Oak-Willow Street section extends from Topaz Avenue to Hesperia Road. This section includes a meandering pathway to encourage non- motorized transport through walking or bicycling. This section does not include a bike lane.

Exhibit CI-20 is the cross section showing the design of the Live Oak-Will Street section.

Exhibit CI-20
Live Oak Willow Street

Page 337 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-37
Seventh Avenue. The Seventh Avenue special section extends through residential, commercial and municipal land uses that occur along this thoroughfare from Bear Valley Road south to Ranchero Road. This section includes a multiuse pathway and a bike lane on both sides of the roadway to encourage non- motorized transportation through the north -south corridor.

Exhibit CI-21 is the cross section showing the design of the Seventh Avenue section.

Exhibit CI-21
Enhanced Seventh Avenue

Page 338 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-38

EV ALUATING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Roadway classifications are based on existing traffic conditions, as well as projected traffic associated with General Plan buildout. Traffic counts are typically collected on roadway segments at mid -block locations to determine number of travel lanes needed today, and to model future travel demand to determine future capacity needs.

Roadway operations and the relationship between street capacity and traffic volumes are generally expressed in terms of Levels of Service (LOS), which are scored using the letter grades A through F. The LOS describes the ability of an intersection or road segment to meet its intended traffic volume design capacity. Each LOS rating describes how people perceive the amount of congestion or difficulty in reaching their destinations. LOS is ranked from A, representing no limitation on movement (best), to F, representing very high levels of traffic congestion (worst). Current circulation policy calls for all roadways to achieve and maintain a LOS D and intersections to achieve LOS C.

Page 339 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-39
Table CI-3, shows the definitions of the six levels of service.

Table CI-3

LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS

Level of
Service
Description Delay
(seconds)
A Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear quite open, turning movements are easily made, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation.
≤ 10.00
B Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles. This represents stable flow. An approach to an intersection may occasionally be fully utilized and traffic queues start to form.

10.1 – 20.0
C Good operation. Occasionally drivers may have to wait more than 60 seconds, and back -ups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted.

20.1 – 35.0
D Fair operation. Cars are sometimes required to wait more than 60 seconds during short peaks. There are no long-standing traffic queues.

35.1 – 55.0
E Poor operation. Some long-standing vehicular queues develop on critical approaches to intersections. Delays may be up to several minutes.

55.1 – 80.0
F Force Flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups form locations downstream or on the cross street may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approach lanes; therefore, volumes carried are not predictable. Potential for stop and go type traffic flow. ≥ 80.0

Page 340 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-40

PHYSICAL BARRIERS
There are significant topographical and physical barriers that inhibit efficient movement in the City’s circulation network such as railroads, river/water bodies, and state and interstate highways with limited access and crossings. These obstacles create a significant physical barrier to traffic circulation resulting in high traffic congestion in areas where city vehicular traffic is funneled to these limited crossing points. The City has identified several high traffic areas and is looking to develop addi tional crossings to reduce traffic congestion as part of its Capital Improvement Program.

Railroad Crossings
The BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (BNSF/UP) corridor constitutes a major barrier to east-west circulation across the City.

Three grade separations currently cross the BNSF/ UP lines at Bear Valley Road, Main Street, and Ranchero Road. The City’s current circulation plan also shows planned railroad crossings at Eucalyptus Street, Lemon Street/Mauna Loa Street, and Sultana Street. The following discussion addresses issues associated with the planned future crossings.

Eucalyptus Street
There is an offset in the alignment of Eucalyptus Street at the BNSF/UP railroad corridor, so the acquisition of properties will be necessary to realign the street and construct the grade separation.

Page 341 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-41
Lemon Street/Mauna Loa Street
There is an offset in the alignments of the two streets near the BNSF /UP railroad corridor, but the circulation plan shows these two streets as one continuous street. The City has conceptually evaluated alignment possibilities and believes the crossing is viable.

Lemon/Mauna Loa is planned to be connected with Mojave Street further west, which is planned to have an interchange at I-15.

Maple Avenue
With substantial future development planned for the southern part of the City, an extension of Maple Avenue southerly across the railroad line will provide these new areas with a railroad crossing west of the California Aqueduct. However, this crossing is not currently shown on regional plans.

Whitehaven Road
An alternative to the Maple Street crossing is Whitehaven Road (south of Ranchero Road in unincorporated San Bernardino County). As with Maple Street, this potential crossing is not currently shown on regional plans.

Page 342 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-42
River Crossings
The Mojave River constitutes a major barrier to east-west circulation at the eastern boundary of the City. Two crossings currently exist: a bridge at Bear Valley Road and a two-lane at-grade crossing through the river channel at Rock Springs Road.

The City’s plan shows a future bridge crossing Rock Springs Road (4 lanes).

The following discussion addresses issues associated with future crossing.

Rock Springs Road
This crossing currently runs into the Mohave River Channel. It is shown as a four -lane bridge on the County plan as well as on the City plan. San Bernardino County is responsible for its maintenance, as this crossing can be closed during the winter storm season. This crossing was recommended in VV ATS for future upgrade to a four-lane bridge.

VV ATS has determined that only one river crossing will be needed south of Rock Springs Road in the future.

California Aqueduct
The California Aqueduct is also a barrier that transverses through the center of the City creating access limitations for all streets except for existing crossings at Main Street, Maple Avenue, Seventh Avenue, Mesquite Street, Cottonwood Avenue and Ranchero Road.

Page 343 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-43
I-15 Freeway Interchanges and Crossings
Interchanges on I -15 currently exist at Bear Valley Road, Main Street, Joshua Street/US 395, and Oak Hills Road. The latter two are not designed to accommodate large volumes of traffic. As development occurs in the City and the region in the future, local and regional traffic volumes will also increase, necessitating additional interchanges to provide efficient access to the regional highway system.

The City’s Master Plan for Arterial Highways proposes a future interchanges at Mojave Street, as well as crossings at Willow Street and Muscatel Street.

Mojave Street
An interchange at this location would provide a connection to the Lemon Street corridor that has planned crossings of the railroad and Mojave River, thus providing a major east-west transportation corridor.

Muscatel Street
The City currently favors a full interchange at Muscatel (rather than an overcrossing); with Joshua Street converted from a partial interchange to an overcrossing.

Page 344 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-44

HIGHWAY CORRIDORS
Future improvements are planned for Interstate 15 to ensure it will have sufficient capacity to accommodate expected traffic loads. In addition, two new highway corridors are being planned or studied, which could pass through part of Hesperia.

The following discussion presents the current status of planning for each.

I-15

The I -15 Major Corridor Study recommended that I -15 be widened to accommodate an additional general purpose lane and a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction between US -395 and the Mojave River.

US 395

Caltrans has completed design for widening US 395 to six lanes and construction is anticipated to begin in 2025.

Southeast Beltway

VVATS evaluated the need for a major highway corridor around the southeast portion of the Victor Valley. The VVATS recommends a future major highway corridor from I- 15 (near SR -138) to approximately the intersection of SR -138 and Summit Valley Road. From there, the two arterials are projected to provide sufficient capacity with six lanes on SR - 138 and four lanes on Summit Valley Road, which would be extended easterly through the Rancho Las Flores planning area to a new crossing of the Mojave River.

By law, the City must establish goals and objectives that identify existing traffic conditions and address traffic congestion. To this end, the City establishes the following goals and policies that focus on maintenance and improvements to the roadway systems.

Page 345 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-45
Goal: CI-1
A roadway network that provides for the safe and
efficient mobility needs of residents, businesses,
visitors, and emergency services.

Policy CI-1.1
Maintain a multi-year Capital Improvement Program to ensure the organized financing and construction of roadway and intersection improvements that meet existing and future demands of the community.

Policy CI-1.2 Periodically review and maintain street roadway classifications and standards to serve both local and regional traffic.

Policy CI-1.3
Support the development of regional transportation facilities that ensure the safe and efficient movement of people and goods between the city and outside areas, accommodating regional travel demands while minimizing adverse
transportation impacts on Hesperia residents and businesses.

Policy CI-1.4
Strive to maintain a citywide level of service (LOS) standard of LOS D or better on all roadways and intersections: LOS E during peak hours shall be considered acceptable through freeway interchanges and major corridors (Bear Valley Road, Main Street/Phelan Road, Highway 395).

Policy CI-1.5
Coordinate with the County and other agencies on long- term plans, proposed development projects, and capital
improvements while minimizing adverse traffic impacts on Hesperia residents and businesses.

Policy CI-1.6
Require new development to pay a fair share of needed
transportation improvements based on a project’s impacts to the City’s motorized and non- motorized transportation
networks.

Page 346 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-46
Policy CI-1.7
Utilize intelligent transportation systems and research changing trends in mobility to more efficiently and safely move people and vehicles while managing motor vehicle speeds.

Policy CI-1.8
Encourage the installation, modernization, and improvement of grade separations at rail crossings to facilitate more convenient access for cars, trucks, and emergency vehicles.

Policy CI-1.9
Regularly update the pavement management plan and maintain roadways to ensure safety and functionality, as an investment strategy, and to improve the City’s image and quality of life.

Policy CI-1.10
Coordinate with SBCTA, the County of San Bernardino, and CalTrans to improve the segment of Summit Valley Road
between the City’s boundary and Highway 138.

Policy CI-1.11
Support the implementation of Safe Systems Approach
principles through the adoption and maintenance of a Local Roadway Safety Plan.

Page 347 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-47

GOODS MOVEMENT
Industrial and commercial growth through transportation-related businesses has boosted the City’s economy, and the level of commerce is enhanced by the availability of consumer goods and providing goods and services to residents.

This Circulation Element seeks to manage balancing the transportation and circulation of goods and services with the health, welfare and safety of the public, by mitigating traffic congestion, air quality issues, noise and safety that are a result of the movement of goods and services. The Land Use Element has provided separation of properties designated for commercial and industrial development. However, the roadways necessary to transport these goods and services also provide access to residential areas.

Truck Transportation
Truck movement and circulation is a vital part of the City’s economy and financial sustainability. Trucks have to be able to move their goods and services to businesses around the City without creating an impact to traffic, safety, air quality and noise wh ich may disrupt the local community. To accommodate the large volumes of truck traffic associated with goods movement, and to protect the residential and commercial neighborhoods, a system of arterial roads to facilitate efficient truck movement is needed.

Figure CI-21 shows the roadways designated as truck routes by the City of Hesperia, CalTrans, and neighboring jurisdictions.

Rail Transportation
There are three rail lines that pass through the City; one Union Pacific Railroad rail line, and two (one via a branch line) Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) rail lines.

The BNSF rail line enters at the City’s sphere of influence in Summit Valley through the Cajon Pass, traveling northeast through the middle of the City, parallel to Hesperia Road, and exits at the northern City boundary. This portion of rail is part of the San Bernardino-Barstow route and serves both passenger and freight trains. The BNSF rail line is a part of the nationwide transportation network from the transfer of goods from the ports in Long

Page 348 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-48
Beach and Los Angeles to the western and central portions of the country.

The Amtrak Southwest Chief passenger trains also utilize the BNSF mainline. Approximately 80 to 100 trains pass through the City using this rail line every day.

A branch line to Lucerne Valley runs easterly from the BNSF mainline, crossing Hesperia’s eastern City boundary into Apple Valley near the Rock Springs Road crossing. This route is used solely by the Mitsubishi Cement Plant in Lucerne Valley. Only one or t wo trains use this rail line per day.

The City is planning to construct the Lead Track project to extend a new rail spur north from this branch. This new spur will serve industrial properties in this area and provide an alternative to trucking raw materials and finished goods manufactured in this area.

The Union Pacific Railroad rail line enters the City’s sphere of influence in Summit Valley through Cajon Pass, parallel to the BNSF railroad tracks.

The Union Pacific tracks travel northwest across Oak Hills, exiting the City at the western sphere of infl uence boundary towards Palmdale. This route connects West Colton to Palmdale and is utilized entirely by freight trains.

Approximately ten trains pass through the City using this rail line each day.

The impact of the rail lines on the City’s circulation system are outlined above.

Air Transportation
Hesperia Airport is the only airport facility located within the City. This private airport is located in the southern portion of the City adjacent to the BNSF Railway, south of Ranchero Road. The airport provides aviation services to small non-commercial aircraft, as well as emergency air services such as air ambulances, California Highway Patrol, and fire control aircraft.

The facility occupies approximately 26 acres, and consists of one 3,950- foot paved runway, three private hangars, one maintenance hanger, and air lodge, and a restaurant. Approximately 12 aircraft are based at the airport.

Due to surrounding development and the topography at the southern end of the runway, this airport cannot be expanded beyond its current size and capacity.

Page 349 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-49
Two other airports exist within the vicinity of the City; Apple Valley Airport and Southern California Logistics Airport. Apple Valley Airport is a regional facility controlled by San Bernardino County and is located off of Highway 18 and Corwin Road in Apple Valley. This airport serves a variety general aviation aircraft from small non -commercial planes to jet sized aircraft. The airport occupies 778 acres and provides 6,500 feet of paved runway and a 3,000 -foot cross -wind runway. The airport also includes maintenance and private hangers, Mid -Field Aviation and Flightline Aviation Academy, flight schools, sky diving, charter schools, rental services, and a restaurant. It is estimated that over 200 aircraft are based at the airport.

Southern California Logistics Airport is located in the northwestern portion of the City of Victorville. Formerly active as George Air Force Base, this airport is now used as a logistical hub for national and global air cargo shipping. The facility includes a 5,000 acre intermodal business complex, and a 10,050-foot runway. The airport is predominately used by air freight aircraft and fire aircraft services. The U.S. Army also uses the airport to transport troops to and from various forts.

The airports are more specifically discussed in both the Land Use and the Safety Elements.

To this ensure that the needed movement of goods and services throughout the community is provided while protecting local neighborhoods, the following goals and objectives are established.

Goal: CI-2
A circulation system that facilitates the movement of goods and services while minimizing impacts to sensitive land uses, such as homes, schools, and hospitals, and vulnerable roadway users, such as pedestrians and cyclists.

Policy CI-2.1
Maintain a network of truck routes that provides for the safe and efficient transport of goods while minimizing negative impacts on local circulation and sensitive receptors.

Policy CI-2.2
Require new truck -intensive land uses to design and
incorporate space and facilities in order to reduce truck queueing, parking, and idling in the public rights-of-way.

Page 350 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-50
Policy CI-2.3
Support improvements to roadways and rail facilities that increase the efficiency of goods movement; enhance the safety of rail operations, motor vehicles, and non-motorized modes of mobility; and minimize noise and vibration impacts on
sensitive land uses.

Policy CI-2.4
Maintain Hesperia Airport as a general aviation facility, in conformance with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan, and explore opportunities to activate the airport for community benefit.

Page 351 ends

CIRCULATION

City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-51
Exhibit CI-22 Truck Routes

Page 352 ends

CIRCULATION

City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-52
Non-Vehicular Transportation
To achieve efficient and effective travel within the City, policies should not just focus on strategies to serve vehicular traffic, but also on ways to encourage the use of alternative non -vehicular transit options. Pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian and oth er non -vehicular pathways and trails are necessary components of a complete circulation system.

Areas developed with a mix of land use types should be planned to include walkways and bicycle facilities that facilitate non-motorized travel for both short walking trips as well as short and long bicycle trips.

These non- motorized forms of travel are represented in the City’s Non - Motorized Transportation Plan (Exhibit CI-22).

Goal: CI-3
A comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network
that promotes physical activity and non -
automotive travel within Hesperia for people of all
ages and abilities.

Implementation
Policy CI-3.1
Design new on - and off -street facilities to
accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians
based on a combination of the land use and roadway
context to promote safety and efficiency for all users.

Implementation
Policy CI-3.2
Establish and maintain an interconnected trail system
that promotes safe and convenient travel to transit
stops and between residential and commercial areas,
schools, parks, recreation facilities and other key
destination points.

Page 353 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-53
Implementation
Policy CI-3.3
Leverage public rights-of-way, easements, and other
public spaces to maintain and expand the non-
motorized network.

Implementation
Policy CI-3.4
Prioritize improvements along Main Street that
facilitate a more pedestrian-friendly environment.

Implementation
Policy CI-3.5
Promote new development and transportation
demand management (TDM) strategies that will
reduce household and employment vehicle miles
traveled (VMT). Prioritize the implementation of
TDM strategies over the expansion of roadway
capacity.

PUBLIC TRANSIT
Public transportation provides an essential mode of transportation for those without access to automobiles, and an alternative mode of travel for motorists, which can help reduce traffic and congestion on the City’s street network. The City plays a key ro le in the use of transit through land planning efforts. Projects can be designed to provide bus stops. These transit stops shall include comfortable waiting areas to promote ridership.

The City is a member of the Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA), along with the cities of Adelanto, Victorville, the Town of Apple Valley, and the County of San Bernardino. The VVTA provides multiple occupancy vehicle service to the City with the inten t to reduce traffic congestion, vehicle miles traveled, and vehicle trips which improves air quality. Also, the City provides Victor Valley Transit Authority with input and information that can help them to provide service in the areas that best meet the n eeds of the local community.

Page 354 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-54
Park-and-Ride
As the population commuting through the Cajon Pass continues to grow, the need for parking facilities to incentivize shared vehicle ridership becomes increasingly more important. There is a park and ride facility located at the Joshua Street exit off of Interstate 15. This facility serves commuters travelling down the Cajon Pass to rideshare and carpool with other commuters. This reduces the number of single-occupancy vehicles and the overall traffic volume on the interstate.

Rail
The Amtrak Southwest Chief passenger train regularly passes through Hesperia on the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) main railroad line. The train route travels from Los Angeles to Chicago, Illinois. The nearest Amtrak station is located in the City of Victorville. The station includes a Park and Ride, facilitating use of Amtrak by commuters.

Bus
The Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) provides the local bus service for the City and adjacent communities of Adelanto, Apple Valley, Victorville, and San Bernardino County. VVTA operates four bus routes in Hesperia, providing bus connections between shopping centers, public facilities, the Mall of Victor Valley, hospitals, schools, colleges, and residential areas.

The four routes include:
 Route 21 Victor Valley Mall-Serrano High School-Wrightwood Community Center (Phelan-Baldy Mesa-Bear Valley)
 Route 43 Victor Valley -Victor Valley College -Apple Valley High School (Bear Valley-Seventh Avenue)
 Route 44 Victor Valley Mall -Hesperia City Hall -Mojave High School-Hesperia Post Office-Sultana High School (Bear Valley- Cottonwood-Main Street -Seventh Avenue-Third Avenue- E
Avenue-I Avenue-Sultana-Danbury-Arrowhead Lake)
 Route 45 Desert Valley Hospital -Victor Valley College - Hesperia Post Office (Bear Valley -Main-Sultana-I Avenue -E Avenue-C Avenue-Muscatel-Santa Fe)

Page 355 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-55

Para-Transit
Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) provides para-transit services for persons with special needs on any paved street within the City as long as it is within their service boundaries. The VVTA para -transit services do not travel a fixed route. Certified passengers are required to schedule rides at least one day in advance.

In order to incentivize the use of public transport as an alternative to the motor vehicle and to promote increased public transit ridership, the following goals and objectives are established.

Goal: CI-4
A transit network that provides for safe and
convenient access to goods and services, job
centers, and healthcare facilities.

Implementation
Policy CI-4.1
Coordinate with Victor Valley Transit Authority
(VVTA) to provide residents and workers with
accessible and convenient service between
residential neighborhoods, commercial centers,
educational facilities, employment nodes, and
medical facilities.

Implementation
Policy CI-4.2
Coordinate with VVTA to install, improve, and
maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well-lit, and rider- friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Implementation
Policy CI-4.3
Support the development of a regional commuter rail
line that connects residents with employment centers
and essential services in San Bernardino and Los
Angeles counties and to reduce traffic on Interstate

15.

Page 356 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-56
Exhibit CI-23 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan

A thorough discussion of the City’s pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian trails and pathways is provided in the Open Space Elemen t of this General Plan.

Page 357 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-57

SUMMARY OF GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES

CIRCULATION ELEMENT

Roadway Network

Goal: CI-1
A roadway network that provides for the safe and efficient mobility needs of residents, businesses, visitors, and emergency services.

Policy CI-1.1
Maintain a multi -year Capital Improvement Program to ensure the organized financing and construction of roadway and intersection improvements that meet existing and future demands of the community.

Policy CI-1.2 Periodically review and maintain street roadway classifications and standards to serve both local and regional traffic.

Policy CI-1.3
Support the development of regional transportation facilities that ensure the safe and efficient movement of people and goods between the city and outside areas, accommodating regional travel demands while minimizing adverse transportation impacts on Hespe ria residents and businesses.

Page 358 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-58
Policy CI-1.5
Coordinate with the County and other agencies on long- term plans, proposed development projects, and capital improvements while minimizing adverse traffic impacts on Hesperia residents and businesses.

Policy CI-1.6
Require new development to pay a fair share of needed transportation improvements based on a project’s impacts to the City’s motorized and non-motorized transportation networks.

Policy CI-1.7
Utilize intelligent transportation systems and research changing trends in mobility to more efficiently and safely move people and vehicles while managing motor vehicle speeds.

Policy CI-1.8
Encourage the installation, modernization, and improvement of grade separations at rail crossings to facilitate more convenient access for cars, trucks, and emergency vehicles.

Policy CI-1.9
Regularly update the pavement management plan and maintain roadways to ensure safety and functionality, as an investment strategy, and to improve the City’s image and quality of life.

Policy CI-1.10
Coordinate with SBCTA, the County of San Bernardino, and CalTrans to improve the segment of Summit Valley Road between the City’s boundary and Highway 138.

Policy CI-1.11
Support the implementation of Safe Systems Approach principles through the adoption and maintenance of a Local Roadway Safety Plan.

Page 359 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-59
Goods Movement

Policy CI-2.1
Maintain a network of truck routes that provides for the safe and efficient transport of goods while minimizing negative impacts on local circulation and sensitive receptors.

Policy CI-2.2
Require new truck -intensive land uses to design and incorporate space and facilities in order to reduce truck queueing, parking, and idling in the public rights-of-way.

Policy CI-2.3
Support improvements to roadways and rail facilities that increase the efficiency of goods movement; enhance the safety of rail operations, motor vehicles, and non -motorized modes of mobility; and minimize noise and vibration impacts on sensitive land uses.

Non-Vehicular Transportation

Goal: CI-3
A comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network that promotes physical activity and non-automotive travel within Hesperia for people of all ages and abilities.

Page 360 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-60

Policy CI-3.1
Design new on- and off-street facilities to accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians based on a combination of the land use and roadway context to promote safety and efficiency for all users.

Policy CI-3.2
Establish and maintain an interconnected trail system that promotes safe and convenient travel to transit stops and between residential and commercial areas, schools, parks, recreation facilities and other key destination points.

Policy CI-3.3 Leverage public rights-of-way, easements, and other public spaces to maintain and expand the non-motorized network.

Policy CI-3.4 Prioritize improvements along Main Street that facilitate a more pedestrian-friendly environment.

Policy CI-3.5
Promote new development and transportation demand management (TDM) strategies that will reduce household and employment vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Prioritize the implementation of TDM strategies over the expansion of roadway capacity.

Transit Network

Page 361 ends

CIRCULATION
City of Hesperia General Plan 2025

CI-61

Goal: CI-4
A transit network that provides for safe and convenient access to essential goods and services, job centers, and healthcare facilities.

Policy CI-4.1
Coordinate with Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) to provide residents and workers with accessible and convenient service between residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, educational facilities, employment nodes, and medical facilities.

Policy CI-4.2
Coordinate with VVTA to install, improve, and maintain safe, clean, comfortable, well- lit, and rider -friendly transit stops that are well marked and visible to motorists.

Policy CI-4.3
Support the development of a regional commuter rail line that connects residents with employment centers and essential services in San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties and to reduce traffic on Interstate 15.

Page 362 ends

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 12, 2025
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services BY: Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: 2025 General Plan Update

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No s. PC-2025-08 and PC- 2025-09 recommending that the City Council: 1) Certify the Addendum as being complete and in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2) Adopt the updated Land Use Element, Circulation Element, and Health and Safety Element.

BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted Hesperia’s last General Plan update on September 7, 2010. Since then, state legislation has evolved, requiring specific revisions to maintain legal compliance. In 2024, the City engaged PlaceWorks, Inc. (Placeworks) to update the Land Use, Circulation, and Safety Elements and prepare an Addendum to the 2010 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). PlaceWorks was also contracted to draft Objective Design Standards in support of the City's recently adopted Housing Element. These standards will be advanced separately at a future date.

To prepare the update, the City and Placeworks hosted several public meetings and workshops.

In 2024, four public meetings and two study sessions were held with the Planning Commission and City Council. The Commission and Council reviewed and discussed critical components of each element, as well as the Objective Design Standards . The project team also consulted stakeholder groups and distributed a public survey to gather input, particularly for the Health and Safety Element.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The General Plan is the City’s “Constitution” and guide for development, outlining the City’s vision for itself and how it will develop over time and maintain quality of life. All decisions made by the City, from the adoption of the annual budget and implementation of capital improvements to the issuance of building permits, must be consistent with the General Plan.

Since the last General Plan update in 2010, the City’s popul ation has increased from approximately 90,000 to over 100,000, and employment has grown from 11,000 to 17,000.

Ongoing development interest has helped sustain this economic growth, which is expected to continue. The updated General Plan must also respond to new laws, regulations, and conditions that have emerged since 2010. For instance, recent state legislation on climate adaptation and resiliency requires cities to take steps to better withstand extreme weather events. Additionally,

Page 23 ends

Attachment 6

Page 363 ends

Page 2 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

new mandates have been enacted by the State legislature to address community health, education, and economic equity.

General Plan Goals

As a focused update, the primary objective of the project team was to integrate new policies and programs that comply with State law while preserving the overall vision and direction established by the 2010 General Plan. Throughout the process, input from community members, stakeholders, and City staff consistently reaffirmed that the goals set forth in the original plan remain relevant today. The focused General Plan Update supports the following goals:

 Preserve existing neighborhoods;
 Enhance the quality of residential areas across a variety of densities, with landscap ing and architectural standards;
 Reinforce efforts to build a local job base and establish sales tax-producing businesses along Bear Valley Road, Main Street and the Freeway Corridor;  Preserve lot sizes and prevent premature subdivision of land;  Enhance the quality of life in higher residential density developments with paseos, parks and other amenities;
 Establish a circulation system of arterial and connector streets to carry traffic efficiently within and across the City;
 Support the urban design framework, which includes two new greenways to link the freeway corridor with the downtown area;
 Dedicate housing units for senior citizens as well as for all income levels; and  Permit mixed-use developments in the downtown area and along the freeway corridor.

General Plan Elements

The General Plan Update consists of three chapters, or elements. A summary of each element and the associated issues are as follows:

Land Use: The motivating force behind updates to the Land Use Element stems from programs contained within the City’s adopted Housing Element. Crucially, the update process focused on revising development standards for the R -3, C-2, and R -C designations that more clearly and concisely communicate the City’s intent for these areas. The changes are summarized as follows:

 R-3 Multiple Family Residence : The R3 land use designation is amended to increase the maximum density of residential development from 15 dwelling units per acre to 30 dwelling units per acre and to conditionally permit group homes for seven or more persons.

 C-2 General Commercial : The C2 land use designation is amended to allow 100 -percent residential development ranging from 20 to 30 dwelling units per acre and to permit group homes for six or fewer persons.

 R-C Regional Commercial: The RC zone (part of Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan) is amended to increase the maximum density of residential development from 25 dwelling units per acre to 30 dwelling units per acre. The zone is also amended to allow 100- percent residential development and to permit group homes for six or fewer persons. The development of residential uses is limited primarily to the east side of Interstate 15.

Page 24 ends

Page 364 ends

Page 3 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

The most frequently referenced part of the General Plan is the Land Use Map. This map shows the location of residential, commercial, industrial us es, as well as schools and parks. The map also shows other features such as railroads, the airport, and the California Aqueduct. Residential uses are classified by density in dwelling units per acre. The proposed land use map does not propose new changes beyond reflecting all General Plan Amendments processed since the 2010 General Plan was adopted.

The text of the Land Use Element includes a description of the City’s existing development pattern, infrastructure, and public services. In addition, the intent for each land use designation is described alongside general density and intensity standards. The goals intended to guide future growth and development include:

 Ensuring compatibility between adjacent uses;
 Preserving and enhancing residential areas;
 Promoting balanced, efficient commercial development to generate sales taxes;  Providing for industrial development to increase opportunities for local employment;  Investing in high-quality public facilities;
 Sustainable development measures, including water conservation, energy efficient design and Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED) building certification;  Improving the quality of life for all community members; and  Ensuring that future growth is fiscally sustainable.

Circulation: The Circulation Element describes the City’s roadway network and identifies operational standards. The Transportation Plan maps the location and classification of streets within the City and illustrates the right-of way widths, as well as the curb-to-curb widths, for each classification, including special street -sections. Roadway performance is measured in terms of Level of Service (LOS), with the City’s acceptable threshold s remaining at LOS D for roadway segments and LOS C for intersections.

The Circulation Element also addresses other modes of transportation like walking, biking, and transit. The Non-Motorized Transportation Plan shows the location and classification of bicycle facilities throughout the City . Most streets include space for bike lanes to encourage their use.

This supports the goal of providing viable alternatives to the automobile.

The Circulation Element also addresses challenges faced by the City, including the need for additional freeway interchanges, more crossings at the railroa d and the Mojave River , and the reclassification of select roadways to better serve vehicular demand . Notable changes to the roadway network are as follows:

 Relocated future I-15 interchange from Muscatel Street to Cedar Street;  Reclassified Sultana Street from Seventh Avenue to I Avenue as Secondary Arterial (formerly Arterial);
 Reclassified Sultana Street from I Avenue to Main Street as Secondary Arterial (formerly local road);
 Modified the alignment of the Mauna Loa Street extension from Third Avenue to Hesperia Road / Lemon Street; and
 Reclassified Seventh Avenue as a Special Street section from Bear Valley Road to Ranchero Road.

Page 25 ends

Page 365 ends

Page 4 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

The goals intended to guide the City as it continues to build out its roadway network address the following issues:

 Ensuring a safe and efficient roadway network;
 Facilitating goods movement without negatively impacting sensitive areas;  Providing opportunities for non-motorized alternatives to vehicular travel; and  Supporting safe and convenient regional transit.

Health and Safety: The Health and Safety Element includes both safety and environmental equity components pursuant to the California Government Code sections 65302(g) and 65302(h).

The safety components focus on natural and human caused hazards, as well as emergency preparedness and response to protect the community from the effects of natural disasters and environmental hazards. The healthy community components focus on strategies to improve health and environmental equity.

Safety Topics
In Hesperia, the key safety issues include seismic and geological hazards, flood and inundation hazards, wildfires, hazardous waste and materials, emergency preparedness and response, and climate change resilience. Th e Safety Element works in tandem with the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and Emergency Operations Plan to provide a cohesive safety approach for Hesperia.

Since the previous update to the Safety Element in 2010, several new laws have come into effect, requiring updates to the Safety Element:

 AB 2140 (2006): Allows for the incorporation of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into the Safety Element;
 SB 1241 (2012): Requires the review and update of the flood and wildfire sections to minimize risk to new buildings and essential facilities and identify responsible agencies and ensure coordination among agencies;
 SB 379 (2015): Requires the preparation of a climate change vulnerability assessment that identifies risks to hazards, and develop goals, policie s, and implementation actions to build resilience in the community;
 SB 99 (2019): Requires the identification of residential areas in hazard zones with less than two ingress/egress routes; and
 AB 747 (2019)/1409 (2021): Requires the identification of evacu ation route capacity, safety, and viability, and evacuation locations under a range of hazard scenarios.

Following extensive technical analysis, staff updated the Safety Element hazard descriptions, goals, and policies to meet current Government Code requ irements. The key changes are summarized as follows:

 Incorporate the Hesperia Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference , as supported by AB 2140;
 Update hazard background information and mapping with the most current data from federal, state, and local sources;
 Update policies in the seismic and geologic hazards, flooding hazards, fire hazards, hazardous materials, and emergency preparation and response sections, based on the technical Background Report and California Government Code requirements;

Page 26 ends

Page 366 ends

Page 5 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

 Address climate change vulnerability and adaptation as directed by SB 379 through a new Climate Change Resilience section, including a goal and policies based on the findings of the Climate Vulnerability Assessment; and
 Provide a matrix of actions for implementing the goals and policies of the Safety Element.

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65302.5(b), the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection reviewed the draft Safety Element and consulted with the City from December 2024 to Janu ary 2025. The State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Resource Protection Committee reviewed the Safety Element on March 4, 2025, during its regular meeting and approved the City to move forward with the public hearings and adoption of the Safety Element without revisions.

Healthy Community Topics
With the passage of S B 1000, the Planning for Healthy Communities Act, a City’s general plan must incorporate goals, policies, and actions to improve health and environmental equity. In addition to SB 1000, the 2021-2029 City’s Housing Element contained commitments to address issues with the built environment as a condition for its certification by the State of California. As a result, the City’s General Plan Safety Element contains a Healthy Communities sec tion that addresses both requirements and builds upon the City’s Resolution 2010-030, which affirms the commitment to promoting and developing a safe and healthy Hesperia for all residents.

To inform goals, policies and programs in the Health and Safety Element, a Healthy Community Technical Report was prepared, supported by information gathered from community workshops, stakeholder interviews, and a public survey. Based on the findings and as required by Section 653902(h) of the Government Code, the Element provides goals, policies, and programs that address the following topics:

 Reduction of pollution exposure;
 Improvement in air quality;
 Opportunities for physical activity;
 Access to healthy food;
 Affordable, safe, and sanitary homes;
 Access to public facilities and services; and
 Increasing opportunities for civic involvement.

Addendum to the 2010 Environmental Impact Report: PlaceWorks prepared the Addendum to the 2010 Certified Environmental Impact Report ( Certified EIR) for Hesperia’s General Plan.

The Addendum evaluates whether the General Plan Update (proposed project) would modify the existing General Plan in such a way that it would create new environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects, potentially requiring further environmental review. The Addendum, in conjunction with the Certified EIR, serve as the environmental review for the proposed modifications to the existing General P lan, ensuring compliance with CEQA. The Addendum eva luates the potential environmental impacts associated with the existing General Plan as modified by the General Plan Update.

The proposed project will update the Land Use, Circulation, and Health and Safety elements, as well as the environmental equity policies to address state laws and support projected growth over the next 25 years. The proposed project is a focused update of the current General Plan to conform with new State laws related to community health, climate adaptation, resiliency, and mobility, and to bring long -term growth projections into alignment with current economic

Page 27 ends

Page 367 ends

Page 6 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

conditions and state mandates. Differences in population, jobs, housing units, and non-residential square feet between the existing General Plan and General Plan Update at buildout are shown in the following table.

Comparison of Buildout Conditions for Existing General Plan and General Plan Update Existing General Plan1
(2050)
General Plan Update
(2050) Difference
Population 144,538 162,835 +18,297
Jobs 48,527 48,502 -25
Housing Units 54,430 61,570 +7,140
Non-Residential
Square Feet
67,613,266 66,733,917 -879,349
1 The 2010 Certified EIR did not include a planning horizon, and therefore, the buildout under the existing General Plan was adjusted to account for a 2050 horizon year. The buildout under the proposed project is within the overall buildout as envisioned in the 2010 Certified EIR

Addendum Process: Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared under specific circumstances. The Addendum process allows for the documentation of minor project changes or technical updates that do not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts.

The proposed project qualifies for an Addendum under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, as the proposed changes are consistent with the scope of the previously Certified EIR and do not meet any of the conditions outlined in Section 15162(a) and Section 15163(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, that would require preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR. The environmental impacts remain within the range analyzed in the Certified EIR, and no new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts have been identified. Therefore, preparation of a full Subsequent EIR is not warranted, and the Addendum process is both appropriate and compliant with CEQA requirements.

Tribal Consultation: In compliance with Senate Bill 18 (Government Code Section 65352.3), the City of Hesperia initiated tribal consultation by contacting California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Notification letters were sent on May 21, 2024, to the Desert Cahuilla Indians, the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, and the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel. The Yuhaaviatam of the San Manuel tribe responded on May 24, 2024, and requested formal consultation with the City. The City indicated th at the proposed project would not allow for any ground-disturbing activities that would preclude a project from going through the standard CEQA requirements, and the Tribe concluded consultation on October 30, 2024.

In addition, since the proposed project is being evaluated through a CEQA Addendum and not a new EIR, consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (Public Resources Code Sections 21073 to 21084.3) do not apply in this instance.

Significant Impacts: CEQA requires that the EIR identify the impacts of a project and propose mitigation measures to reduce those impacts. CEQA also requires disclosure of any impacts that cannot be mitigated to a non -significant level, even if all feasible mitigations are req uired. The Certified EIR determined that implementation of the existing General Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, noise, and transportation. The

Page 28 ends

Page 368 ends

Page 7 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

Addendum determined that these impacts would continue to be sign ificant and unavoidable as part of the proposed project, as summarized:

 Air Quality

o Results in construction emissions that would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation;
o Results in operational emissions that would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; and
o Results in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applic able federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).

 Noise

o Results in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.

 Transportation1

o Causes an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system; and
o Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.

No new significant environmental impacts have been identified beyond those already assessed in the Certified EIR. While the proposed project may result in physical impacts due to future improvements, the analysis and mitigation measures from the Certified EIR will still apply. While the project involves physical impacts, it does not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. The analysis and mitigation measures from the previously Certified EIR remain applicable to the proposed project.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Future Development: Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.

CONCLUSION

Adoption of the General Plan Update will bring the City’s primary policy document into compliance with new state laws and mandates and ensure continued compliance with CEQA . The update will also address the changes the City has experienced in the previous 15 years since the General Plan was last updated. The update will provide guidance to the City’s decision makers and staff to carry out the overall vision for the City of Hesperia. The Addendum substantiates that the proposed changes do not induce new significant environmental impacts beyond those already addressed by the 2010 General Plan EIR.

1 The 2010 Certified EIR found impacts to Level of Service (LOS) to be significant and unavoidable.

However, since CEQA no longer uses LOS as a threshold standard, and has replaced it with Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), the LOS significance is no longer applicable to CEQA.

Page 29 ends

Page 369 ends

Page 8 of 8 ends

Staff Report to the Planning Commission
2025 General Plan Update
June 12, 2025

ALTERNATIVE

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1) Resolution No. PC-2025-08 (Certifying the Addendum in compliance with CEQA) 2) Resolution No. PC-2025-09 (Adoption of the 2025 General Plan Update) 3) Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR*
4) Land Use Element*
5) Circulation Element*
6) Health and Saftey Element*

The attachments above noted by an * are available on the City’s website at www.cityofhesperia.us and are provided under separate cover.

Page 30 ends

Page 370 ends

RESOLUTION NO. PC-2025-08

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF HESPERIA, RE COMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT THE ADDENDUM TO THE CITY ’S 2010

GENERAL PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(EIR) PURSUANT TO CEQA IN SUPPORT OF THE 2025

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

WHEREAS, on September 7, 2010, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted Resolution No. 2010-057 certifying the Final EIR for the City’s 2010 General Plan, which also remains applicable to development within the City; and

WHEREAS, fifteen (15) years have passed since the City of Hesperia adopted the 2010 General Plan and changes to t he City ’s size and population, as well as new laws, regulations, and circumstances that did not exist when the original General Plan was adopted, require an update to the General Plan described herein (hereinafter referred to as " 2025 General Plan Update" or “Project”); and

WHEREAS, the 2025 General Plan Update is a focused update to the three mandatory elements required by the State of California, including Land Use, Circulation and Health and Safety Elements; and

WHEREAS, the Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Se ction 15164 to evaluate whether the proposed 2025 General Plan Update would result in any new significant impacts, substantially more severe impacts, or trigger the need for a subsequent or supplemental EIR under Sections 15162 or 15163; and

WHEREAS, the 2010 General Plan EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, noise, and traffic, but the significant and unavoidable impacts pertaining to traffic no longer apply as Level of Service (LOS) was replaced with Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, and VMT has been determined to be the applicable metric for analyzing transportation impacts under CEQA, thereby r endering LOS - based impacts no longer applicable; and

WHEREAS, the Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR reflects this change in CEQA law and confirms that this transition from LOS to VMT does not result in new or more severe environmental effects; and

WHEREAS, the Addendum concludes that all impacts remain within the sc ope of analysis in the certified 2010 General Plan EIR, and that none of the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or Section 15163 are met; and

WHEREAS, on June 12, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to the Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR in connection with the 2025 General Plan Update and concluded said hearing on that date; and

WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 31 ends

Page 371 ends

Resolution No. PC-2025-08

Page 2 ends

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF HESPERIA PLANNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct.

Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Planning Commission during the above-referenced June 12, 2025, hearing, including public testimony and written and oral staff reports, this Planning Commission specifically finds as follows:

(a) An Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR has been prepared for the 2025 General Plan Update. The 2025 General Plan Update qualifies for an Addendum under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, as the proposed project is consistent with the scope of the 2010 General Plan EIR and does not meet any of the conditions outlined in Section 15162(a) or Section 15163(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, th at would require preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR. The environmental impacts remain within the range analyzed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, and no new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts have been identifi ed. Therefore, preparation of a full Subsequent EIR is not warranted, and the Addendum process is both appropriate and compliant with CEQA requirements.

(b) The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and analyzed the Addendum, and finds that it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission, and that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project may result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that were previously identified.

Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR as being complete pursuant to Resolution No.

PC-2025-08.

Section 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this 12th day of June 2025

___________________________________
Roger Abreo, Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:

__________________________________
Maricruz Montes, Secretary, Planning Commission

Page 32 ends

Page 372 ends

RESOLUTION NO. PC-2025-09

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE 2025 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.

WHEREAS, on September 7, 2010, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted the City’s General Plan, currently applicable with regards to development within the City; and

WHEREAS, on September 2, 2008, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted Resolution No. 2008-12, thereby adopting the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan; and

WHEREAS, fifteen (15) years have passed since the City of Hesperia adopted its 2010 General Plan and changes to the City’s size and population as well as new laws, regulations, and circumstances that did not exist when the original plan was adopted, require an update to the General Plan described herein (hereinafter referred to as "General Plan Update" or “Project”); and

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2023 the City Council adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element (6th Cycle Housing Element Update) which includes several program actions that require the City to amend the Development Code and update the General Plan to allow for up to 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) in the Multi-Family (R3) zone ; to allow for 100 -percent residential development ranging from 20 to 30 du/ac in the General Commercial (C -2) zone; and to allow for up to 30 du/ac in the Regional Commercial (RC) zone within the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan.

WHEREAS, the General Plan Update establishes the City’s overall policy development framework to help realize the community’s vision to the year 2050 planning horizon; and

WHEREAS, the General Plan Update is a focused update to the Land Use, Safety, and Circulation Elements of the General Plan; and

WHEREAS, the City of Hesperia, as the lead agency, prepared an Addendum to the 2010 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelin es, and determined that no new significant environmental impacts would occur beyond those previously analyzed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, and that the existing analysis and mitigation measures remain applicable to the proposed project; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held five workshops on April 11, 2024, May 23, 2024, July 11, 2024, August 8, 2024 and September 26, 2024 to review and discuss critical components of each element; and

WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024, the City Council held a workshop to review and discuss the 2025 General Plan Update; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65302.5(b), the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection reviewed the draft Safety Element and consulted with the City from December 2024 to January 2025. The State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Resource Protection Committee reviewed the Safety Element on March 4, 2025, during its regular meeting and approved the City to proceed with the pu blic hearings and adoption of the Safety Element without revisions; and

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 33 ends

Page 373 ends

Resolution No. 2025-09

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, on June 12, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to the proposed 2025 General Plan Update and concluded said hearing on that date; and

WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF HESPERIA PLANNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct.

(a) An Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR has been prepared for the 2025 General Plan Update . The 2025 General Plan Update qualifies for an Addendum under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, as the proposed project is consistent with the scope of the 2010 General Plan EIR and does not meet any of the conditions outlined in Section 15162(a) or Section 15 163(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, that would require preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR. The environmental impacts remain within the range analyzed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, and no new significant impacts or substantial increases in the sever ity of impacts have been identified. Therefore, preparation of a full Subsequent EIR is not warranted, and the Addendum process is both appropriate and compliant with CEQA requirements.

(b) The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and analyzed the Addendum and finds that it reflects the independent judgment of the Commission, and that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project may result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that were previously identified.

 Ensuring compatibility between adjacent uses;
 Preserving and enhancing residential areas;
 Promoting balanced, efficient commercial developme nt to generate sales taxes;
 Providing for industrial development to increase opportunities for local employment;
 Investing in high-quality public facilities;
 Sustainable development measures, including water conservation, energy efficient design and Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED) building certification;
 Improving the quality of life for all community members;

Page 34 ends

Page 374 ends

Resolution No. 2025-09

Page 3 ends

 Ensuring that future growth is fiscally sustainable.
 Ensuring a safe and efficient roadway network;
 Facilitating goods movement without negatively impacting sensitive areas;  Providing opportunities for non-motorized alternatives to vehicular travel;  Supporting safe and convenient regional transit;
 Reducing pollution exposure;
 Improving air quality;
 Opportunities for physical activity;
 Access to healthy food;
 Affordable, safe, and sanitary homes;
 Access to public facilities and services; and
 Increasing opportunities for civic involvement
Section 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Resolution, this Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the 2025 General Plan Update and certify the Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Section 4. That the Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this 12th day of June 2025.
_________________________________
Roger Abreo, Chair Planning Commission
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
Maricruz Montes, Secretary, Planning Commission

Page 35 ends

Page 375 ends

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

Page 376 ends

01071.0001 2056513.1
City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: October 21, 2025
TO: Mayor and City Council Members

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Melinda Sayre, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk
Tammy Pelayes, Assistant to the City Manager

SUBJECT: California Proposition 50 – Authorizes Temporary Changes to Congressional District Maps

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council re ceive and file this report which provides background and factual information regarding Proposition 50, scheduled for the November 4 , 2025, Special Election in California.

BACKGROUND

At the City Council meeting on October 7, 2025, Mayor Lee requested that an item be agendized regarding California Proposition 50, a proposition placed on the Statewide Special Election ballot, that authorizes temporary changes to congressional district maps.

The United States Congress is the part of the federal government that makes laws. Congress has two parts: the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Each of the 50 states is represented by 2 senators, with 100 senators in total. The House has 435 members.

The number of representatives in the House for each state depends on how many people live in that state. Each member in the House represents an area of the state called a congressional district. California currently has 52 congressional districts. Voters who live in each congressional district elect one member to the House every two years to represent them. The next election for all 435 representatives will be in 2026.

The United States Census c ounts the number of people who live in the United States. The last census was in 2020, and the next census is in 2030. Every 10 years, after the U nited States Census is completed, states draw new congressional district maps to reflect their number of House representatives based on where people live. This process is called “redistricting.” Each state decides what process to use to draw its new district maps. When drawing new maps, each state must follow federal laws.

Under the California Constitution, redistricting of congressional, State Senate and State Assembly districts is normally handled by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, a nonpartisan body that was created by the authorization of California voters in 2008. The Commission draws district lines every 10 years, following the decennial United States C ensus, and must draw the district lines in conformity with strict, nonpartisan criteria established in the California Constitution to ensure fair and equal representation for all Californians. For example, California law requires, among other things, the Commission to avoid splitting up neighborhoods or local communities of interest to the extent possible. State law also prohibits the Commission from considering political

Page 377 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
California Proposition 50
October 21, 2025

parties, current office holders, or people running for office when it draws the maps. The Commission’s maps are intended to avoid partisan gerrymandering by taking the authority out of direct legislative control. The current maps drawn by the Commission for California’s 52 congressional districts were based on the 2020 United States Census and have been used since the 2022 congressional elections.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

Earlier this year, the Texas Legislature enact ed new congressional maps midway between redistricting cycles, claiming that such redistricting was in response to, and required by, a Texas court decision regarding that state’s prior congressional maps. In response to Texas’ new congressional maps, California’s Legislature and Governor sought to enact their own adjustment.

Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 280, calling for a statewide special election on November 4, 2025, to consider a constitutional amendment, assigning the initiative as Proposition 50.

Proposition 50 proposes to replace California’s current congressional district maps with new, legislatively drawn maps midway between redistricting cycles. The new redistricting maps would not be drawn by the nonpartisan Commission or follow the requirements established in the California Constitution. However, the new redistrict maps will still follow federal law.

P
roposition 50 asks the U nited States Congress to change federal law and propose an amendment to the United States Constitution to require redistricting be done by “fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.”

If approved, the new maps would be in place for the next three congressional election cycles in 2026, 2028 and 2030. After the 2030 Census, the redistricting authority would revert to the Citizens Redistricting Commission.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Public Safety – Ensure public safety resources adequately protect our community.

FISCAL IMPACT

The Official Voter Information Guide notes that one-time costs to counties of up to a few million dollars statewide. County costs would be to update election materials to reflect new congressional maps.

LTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Current and Proposed Congressional Districts Maps provided in the Official Voter Information Guide.

Page 378 ends

Attachment 1

Page 379 ends

Page 380 ends

Page 381 ends

Page 382 ends

Page 383 ends

Page 384 ends

Hesperia City CouncilOctober 21, 2025

Hesperia City Council
October 21, 2025