Palm Springs City Council
January 9, 2025

highways and tying together different areas of the City.

Landscaped medians shall be provided on major
thoroughfares to maintain an acceptable level of service, to serve as a safety mechanism, and to provide beautification.

Major thoroughfares can be either six-lane or divided four- lane roads.
‹ Secondary Thoroughfare. Secondary thoroughfares serve through and local traffic and may allow on-street parking.

They connect various areas of the City, provide access to major thoroughfares, and serve secondary traffic generators such as small business centers, schools, and major parks.

Typical street right-of-way width has a maximum of 88 feet, which can be divided or undivided.
‹ One-Way Modified Arterial. Similar to thoroughfares, arterials largely serve through traffic with the intent of minimizing traffic patterns that unnecessarily increase congestion. One-way modified arterials provide through
capacity with the specific intent of directing traffic in one direction. Palm Springs only has one stretch of roadway classified as a one-way modified arterial. This is Palm Canyon Drive from Alejo to Ramon Road.
‹ Collector. Collector streets serve mostly local traffic; they are usually comprised of two la nes and carry traffic from
secondary and major thoroughfares. On-street parking is often permitted on collectors, which can be divided or
undivided, modified or unmodified roadways. Maximum
right-of-way width for a collector is 80 feet and actual width depends on surrounding land use and historical roadway
classification.
‹ Local Streets. Primarily provide access to individual parcels of land. Local Streets can be either public streets or private streets. Maximum right-of-way is 60 feet for local streets. In certain cases, 50 feet right-of-way may be permitted by the City Engineer . Typical street widths for local streets are 36 feet. In Estate, Very Low, and Low Density Residential
neighborhoods, local public street widths may be reduced to 28 feet (curb face to curb face ) provided that (1) additional off-street parking is provided as determined by the City Engineer , the Fire Chief and Director of Planning, (2) rolled or wedge curb is provided such that vehicles may park partially out of the traveled way, and (3) pedestrian pathways or Item 2A - Page 177

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-7

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
sidewalks, if located along the street, separated from the curb by a minimum five-foot parkway, are provided.

Private streets provide access to individual parcels of land in planned development communities approved with privately maintained access. Access may b e r e s t r i c t e d w i t h g a t e d entrances/exits to communities.

Designated fire lanes in private developments shall be not less than 24 feet wide (curb face to curb face) with no parking on either side unless alternate arrangements are approved by the Palm Springs Fire Department.

Table 4-1
Minimum Centerline Radii and Desi
gn Speed1
Roadway
Classification
Minimum
Centerline Curve
Radius Design Speed Traffic Indices
Major Thoroughfare 1,000 feet 55 mph 9
Secondary Thoroughfare 850 feet 50 mph 8
Arterial 700 feet 45 mph 6
Collector 700 feet 45 mph 6
Local 300 feet 30 mph 5
Private 130 feet 20 mph 4

1 Centerline Curve Radius: a measure of the minimum allowed curvature of a street, which is measured from the center of the curve to the centerline of the street. A larger radius means a more gradual curve.

Design Speed: the speed used to determine design feature of the roadway such as horizontal and vertical curves. Design speed may differ from speed limits.

Traffic Indices: An assigned value based on the expected use of the street to determine pavement design and maintenance.

Item 2A - Page 178

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 179

SUNRISE WAY

S AVENIDA CABALLEROS

ALEJO RD

S PALM CANYON DR

E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
A

RABY DR
GENE

AUTRY TRL
CAM
INO
REAL

RAMON RD
LAWREN
CE CRO
SSLEY
RD

N PALM CANYON DR

MURRAY CANYON D
R

E VISTA CHINO

SAN RAFAEL DR

FARRELL DR

TACHEVAH DR

N INDIAN CANYON DR

MESQUITE AVE

LA VERNEWAY

BARONA RD

E PALM CANYON DR

BOGE RT TRL

EL CIELO RD

PEREZ RD
SH-111

RACQUET CLUB RD

HERMOSA DR

DILLON RD

DINAHSHOREDR

BELARDO RD
20TH AVE

PALM DR

VARNER RD

GARNET AVE
62 111
111
111
111
111
10 10

CATHEDRAL
CITY

DESERT HOT

SPRINGS

DESERT HOT

SPRINGS
Palm Springs Sphere of Influence
Adjacent City Limits
Railroad
Interstate
Expressway
Major Thoroughfare (6 - lane divided)
Major Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4 - lane divided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4 - lane undivided)
One-Way Modified Arterial
Two-Way Modified Collector (3 - lane undivided)
Modified Collector (2 - lane undivided)
Collector Street
Local
01 0.5
Miles Palm Springs General Plan
0 3,000 6,0001,500
Feet
Date: 5/16/2024
Circulation Plan
Figure 4-1
Item 2A - Page 180

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 181
Maximum Right-of-Way 110'
30' - 36' Curb to Curb Typ.

Major Thoroughfare (4-lane divided)
Maximum Right-of-Way 100'
20' - 24' Curb to Curb Typ.

Maximum Right-of-Way 100'
Major Thoroughfare (4-lane divided with bike lanes )
25' - 31' Curb to Curb Typ.

Major Thoroughfare (6-lane divided)
Typical Roadway Attributes
Classification Sub Classification Max. Right
of Way
Travel
Lane
Parking
Lane Median Bike Lane Sidewalk Parkway
Major
Thoroughfare
(6-lane divided) 110' 10'-12' - 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var. (4-lane divided) 100' 10'-12' - 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var. (4-lane divided with
bike lanes) 100' 10'-12' - 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var.

Figure 4-2: Roadway Cross Sections
Item 2A - Page 182

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 183
Maximum Right-of-Way 88'
20' - 24' Curb to Curb Typ.

Typical Roadway Attributes
Classification Sub Classification Max. Right
of Way
Travel
Lane
Parking
Lane Median Bike Lane Sidewalk Parkway
Secondary
Thoroughfare
(4-lane undivided) 88' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var. (4-lane undivided with
bike lanes) 88' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var. (4-lane divided) 88' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' 12'-14' 5'-7' 5' Min. Var.

Secondary Thoroughfare (4-lane undivided)
Secondary Thoroughfare (4-lane undivided with bike lanes) Secondary Thoroughfare (4-lane divided)
Maximum Right-of-Way 88'
Maximum Right-of-Way 88'
50’ - 62' Curb to Curb
55’ - 64' Curb to Curb
Figure 4-2: Roadway Cross Sections
Item 2A - Page 184

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 185
Maximum Right-of-Way 100'
45' - 54' Curb to Curb
Maximum Right-of-Way 100'

52.5' - 63' Curb to Curb
Typical Roadway Attributes
Classification Sub Classification Max. Right
of Way
Travel
Lane
Parking
Lane Median Bike Lane Sidewalk Parkway
One-way Modified
Arterial (3-lane) 100' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' 12'-14' 5'-7' 8' Min. Var.

Two-way Modified
Collector (3-lane divided) 100' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' 12'-14' 5'-7' 8' Min. Var.

One Way Modified Arterial (3-lane)
Two Way Modified Arterial (3-lane divided)
Figure 4-2: Roadway Cross Sections
Item 2A - Page 186

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 187
Maximum Right-of-Way 80'
45' - 54' Curb to Curb
Maximum Right-of-Way 66'
Collector Street*
35' - 40' Curb to Curb
20' - 24' Curb to Curb
Local Street with parking
Maximum Right-of-Way 60'Maximum Right-of-Way 60'
35' - 40' Curb to Curb
Local Street without parking
Modified Collector (2-lane undivided)
Typical Roadway Attributes
Classification Sub Classification Max. Right
of Way
Travel
Lane
Parking
Lane Median Bike Lane Sidewalk Parkway
Modified Collector (2-lane undivided) 88' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' - 5'-7' 5' Min. Var.

Collector 66' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' - 5'-7' 5' Min. Var.

Local 60' 10'-12' 7.5'-8' - 5'-7' 5' Min. Var.
*Collector streets may not always
have sidewalk present due to right
of way constraints
Figure 4-2: Roadway Cross Sections
Item 2A - Page 188

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 189

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-19

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is a metric for assessing the distance vehicles travel and considerin g how that metric affects the circulation system of a jurisdiction. In compliance with SB 743, the City of Palm Springs now requires a proposed project in the city to study that project’s anticipated impact on VMT within the city.

VMT analysis is intended to encourage project developers and cities to consider options to reduce vehicle trip length, frequency, and total volumes, without needing to unnecessarily invest in roadway expansion.

Level of Service
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative means of measuring traffic congestion as indicated by speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, and driving comfort and convenience on the City’s existing and future roadway network.

Levels of service are designated by grades of A (excellent, free flow) through F (failure, congested conditions). LOS can also be represented as volume-to-capacity ratios (V/C), or in other words, the average daily traffic (ADT) volume for the roadway divided by the theoretical roadway capacity as defined by its designated roadway classification. As the V/C ratio approaches 1.0, the roadway approaches LOS F .

Future Traffic Conditions
As part of the General Plan Update, a traffic analysis (Appendix B) was prepared to determine the LOS classifications on the City’s future roadway network at buildout. The traffic analysis determined that the dense grid-like structure of the existing circulation system allows traffic to filter throughout the City with minimal congestion- related delay. As a result, future traffic conditions on most City streets are forecast to operate at or above LOS D. Refer to Appendix B for forecast LOS levels for specific streets.

Scenic Highways
California’s Scenic Highway Program was created to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways.

Currently Highway 111 is classified as Eligible Scenic Highway – Not Item 2A - Page 190

Officially Designated. The status of a State Scenic Highway changes from “eligible” to “officially designated” when the local jurisdiction adopts a scenic corridor protection program, applies to the California Department of Tran sportation for scenic highway approval, and receives notification from Caltrans that the highway has been designated as a Scenic Highway.

It should be noted that the majority of the City’s roadways provide views to the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains. Although they are not designated by the state as scenic highways, the City’s roadways provide a valuable visual resource for the community.

Additional policies related to view preservation in the City’s Scenic/View Corridors can be found in the Community Design Element.

Truck Routes
I-10 and Highway 111 are part of the state highway truck route system. I-10 is included in the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) Network, which allows larger trucks with no maximum overall length. Highway 111 is also included in the STAA Network, except between Gateway Drive and Gene Autry Trail, where it is designated as part of the California Legal Network. Streets proposed to serve as truck routes throughout the City are illustrated in Figure 4-3.

Landscape Medians
The City’s circulation plan notes that certain roadways are “divided”; this may mean a raised landscaped median, or a shared left-turn “center lane.” It is the City’s preference that landscape medians be used wherever divided roadway designations are shown unless traffic conditions dictate that the shared center left- turn lane is necessary.

Item 2A - Page 191

ALEJO RD

SPALM CANYON DR

E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
GENE

AUTRY TRL
CA
M
INOREA
L

RAMON RD
LAWR

ENCECROSSLEY RD

E VISTA CHINO

SAN RAFAEL DR

FARRELL DR

TACHEVAH DR

RD NOYNAC NAIDNI N

LA VERNEW A Y

MESQUITE AVE

E PALM CANYON D
R

BOGERT TRL
YA

W ESIRNUS

DR OLEIC LE
SH-111

RACQUET CLUB RD

DILLON RD
20TH AVE
RD
MLAP

GARNET AVE
62 111
111
111
111
111
10 10

CATHEDRAL
CITY

DESERT HOT

SPRINGS
RANCHO
MIRAGE
Palm Springs City Limits
Palm Springs Sphere of Influence
Adjacent City Limits
Railroad
Truck Routes
01 0.5
Miles Palm Springs General Plan
0 3,000 6,0001,500
Feet
Date: 4/5/2024
Truck Routes
Figure 4-3
Item 2A - Page 192

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 193

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-23

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
GGOAL CR1:

Establish and maintain a safe, efficient, interconnected circulation system that accommodates vehicular travel,
walking, bicycling, public tr ansit, and other forms of transportation.

Policies
CR1.1 Develop a system of roadways that provides travel choices and reduces traffic congestion.

CR1.2 Preserve and extend the City’s fine grid of streets to the greatest extent possible. Where possible, allow the grid of streets to curve and meander to slow traffic and to create more interesting streetscapes.

CR1.3 Continue coordination/cooperation with adjacent
jurisdictions regarding future roadway sections,
standards, and improvements.

CR 1.4 Preserve the City’s right-of-way requirements and typical cross sections where possible, except where approved by the City Council.

CR1.5 Implement roadway traffic-calming mechanisms as
identified in the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming
Program to protect resident ial neighborhoods from the
intrusion of cut-through traffic in areas that have
demonstrated traffic problems.

CR1.6 Although the grid system of streets is important, avoid the use of long, straight roadway segments on new local
streets in new residential neighborhoods, whenever
possible.

CR1.7 Maintain a truck route system that serves business districts, industrial area s, the Airport, and meets
regulations specified in Palm Springs Municipal Code
Chapter 12.56 (Restricted Use of Certain Streets).

CR1.8 Encourage large employers (employers with 100 or more persons) to adopt incentiv e programs that include
ridesharing, fleet vehicles and vanpools, preferential
parking for rideshares, subsid ized shuttle bus services, telecommuting, alternative work hour programs, bicycle
Additional policies addressing
specific modes of travel can be
found throughout the Element,
including vehicles in Goal CR2,
walking in Goal CR7, bicycling in
Goal CR6, and public transit in
Goals CR4 and CR5.

Item 2A - Page 194

racks, lockers and shower rooms, and information on
transit services to reduce overall traffic volumes in the City.

CR1.9 Allow for a reduction in parking space requirements for office/industrial uses that implement ridesharing and
transit pass programs.

CR1.10 Require the owner or applicant of new development projects to address traffic deficiencies.

CR1.11 Pursue an aggressive regional posture advocating new and improved transportation solutions, including
continued participation in the Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee , and planning for changing mobility
trends and technology.

CR1.12 Private roads shall be developed in accordance with the City’s published engineering standards for public streets, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.

CR1.13 Require developers, prior to approval of development plans, to provide increased right-of-way through land
dedications to accommodate additional demand for dual
left-turn and exclusive right-turn lanes, interchange
improvements, bus stops and lanes, bicycle facilities or other improvements required to maintain a minimum
operating LOS D at critical intersections identified in the General Plan Appendix B.

CR1.14 Require developers, prio r to approval of development plans, to provide right-of-way through land dedications to accommodate the City’s network of trails and
nonmotorized routes.

CR1.15 Implement improvements to the existing roadway
network such as traffic signal synchronization and
upgrading road surfaces.

The County of Riverside and the
Coachella Valley Association of
Governments enacted the
Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) to fund the
mitigation of cumulative regional
transportation impacts resulting
from future development. The
mitigation fees collected through
the TUMF program are utilized to
complete transportation system
capital improvements necessary to
meet the increased travel demand
and to sustain current traffic levels
of service. The fee calculations are
based on the proportional
allocation of the costs of proposed
transportation improvements,
which are based on the cumulative
transportation system impacts of
different types of new develop-
ment. Fees are directly related to
the forecast rate of growth and trip
generation characteristics of
different categories of new
development.

Item 2A - Page 195

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-25

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
GGOAL CR2:

Provide a circulation network that maintains a safe and efficient system for all travel modes and users of all ages and mobilities.

Policies
CR2.1 Maintain a network of complete streets throughout the city to provide connectivity for all travel modes.

CR2.2 Maintain Level of Service D or better for the City’s circulation network, as measured using “in season” peak hour conditions.

CR2.3 Make street improvements at problem intersections and bottleneck locations to improve specific traffic operations and safety, with all such improvements to be considered selectively on the basis of spec ific studies of the affected intersection and streets, and the impacts on the
surrounding area and pedestrian activity.

CR2.4 Encourage the development of, and cooperate in,
valleywide visioning and initiatives to assure an LOS D on I-10.

CR2.5 Aim to eliminate fatal and serious injuries for all road users within 25 years, particularly for those most
vulnerable, by reviewing roadway design, roadway user
behavior, roadway operations, and post-crash care
standards.

CR2.6 Promote redundant and proactive safety measures, particularly along roadway segments and at intersections identified in the High Injury Network.CR2.7 Consider
roadway reconfigurations or lane reductions on roadways operating at LOS D or better , particularly to allocate right- of-way for new or enhanced bike facilities or sidewalks.

CR2.8 Improve connectivity and resiliency in and out of the City by constructing all-weather bridge crossings and other
infrastructure enhancements along major access
corridors like Vista Chino, Gene Autry Trail, Indian
Canyon Drive, and Palm Canyon Drive.

Item 2A - Page 196

GGOAL CR3:

Provide efficient circulation in the Downtown to support its role as the City’s primary retail center.

Policies
CR3.1 Provide an environment within the Central Business District along Palm Canyon Drive and Indian Canyon Drive that is suited to slower traffic speeds and more frequent pedestrian crossings.

CR3.2 Consider the use of cross-streets (such as Amado Road, Andreas Road, Arenas Road, and Museum Way) between
Museum Drive and Indian Canyon Drive for use as
combination street/parking and/or pedestrian zones.

CR3.3 Support recommendations from the Section 14 and
Downtown specific plans to improve multi modal
connectivity in the core of the City.

TRANSIT, PARATRANSIT AND RAIL
Transit
Public transportation in the City of Palm Springs is provided by SunLine Transit Agency, a joint powers authority created by the nine cities of the Coachella Valley, and the County of Riverside. Five routes currently serve the City of Palm Springs.

SunDial, operated by SunLine, provides on-demand curb-to-curb paratransit service to qualifying persons (e.g., seniors and disabled) within three-quarters of a mile on either side of SunLine bus routes.

Regional bus service is provided by Greyhound, which has a bus depot located on North Indian Canyon Drive near Amado Road.

Paratransit
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all public transit operators to provide a paratransit (door-to-door) service to persons whose disabilities prevent them from using accessible fixed-route public transit. Paratransit services are transportation services such as carpooling, vanpooling, taxi service, and dial-a-ride programs. The Desert Health Car service is available to transport Additional guidance related to
circulation Downtown can be found
in the Downtown Urban Design
Plan.

Item 2A - Page 197

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-27

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
seniors to the City’s senior centers, as is SunLine’s SunDial curb-to- curb paratransit service.

Rail
Amtrak provides regional rail and bus service in the City. The North Palm Springs Amtrak train station is located west of Indian Canyon Drive just south of I-10. Palm Springs is currently a stop on Amtrak’s Sunset Limited service between Los Angeles and New Orleans.

However, the train is not designed for commuters. Amtrak Thruway connecting service bus stops are located in Downtown Palm Springs on Indian Canyon Drive and near the Palm Springs Airport on East Tahquitz Canyon Way.

The California Department of Transportation and Riverside County Transportation Commission are proposing a new Intercity Rail Route from Los Angeles to the Coachella Valley. The service would run from Los Angeles to Palm Springs, Palm Desert, and Indio in the Coachella Valley.

Union Pacific also provides freight service along the rail line through Riverside County; currently, it runs up to 50 freight trains per day and that number will steadily increase. Because increased passenger service is desired in this area, it will become progressively more important to ensure the conflicts between freight and passenger trains and the local transportation system are addressed.

GGOAL CR4:

Reduce the City’s dependence on the use of single-passenger vehicles by enhancing mass transit opportunities.

Policies
CR4.1 Support the delivery of impr oved regional transit services to and within the City.

CR4.2 Continue to coordinate with SunLine Transit Agency and other regional transit agencies to address the need for the expansion or readjustment of bus routes, including
express routes valleywide.

CR4.3 Continue to coordinate with SunLine Transit Agency to establish or modify bus stop locations to provide
Item 2A - Page 198

adequate access for local residents to destination places, such as Downtown, the airport, or the Convention Center.

Coordinate improvements to existing and new bus stop
locations including aesthetic bus shelters.

CR4.4 Continue working with CVAG to achieve a regional
transportation strategy that coordinates physical
improvements, transportation systems management,
transportation demand management, public transit, and
issues of development that affect circulation.

CR4.5 Work with the Riverside County Transportation
Commission and Amtrak to provide increased passenger
rail service to, and stopping in, Palm Springs and
commuter rail, including high-speed rail concepts
between Los Angeles and Phoenix.

CR4.6 Pursue viable opportunities to partner with transit agencies, private shuttles, or Transportation Network
Companies, to provide transportation options to the
Downtown, hotels, museums, key activity centers
(Convention Center, airport, etc.), particularly during special events.

GGOAL CR5:

Provide improved mobility for City residents to access local services.

Policies
CR5.1 Support the impl ementation of local transit services for all residents with priority for the disadvantaged,
including the elderly, handicapped, those with low
incomes, and the temporarily disabled.

CR5.2 Continue to encourage SunLine Transit Agency to provide bicycle racks on its vehicles.

CR5.3 Require the construction of bus turnouts at bus stops on major and secondary thoroughfares to reduce congestion
on the adjacent public street and to provide for greater overall traffic safety. The City should work with SunLine Transit Agency to determine which bus stop locations
warrant bus turnouts and to address safety concerns that Item 2A - Page 199

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-29

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
may arise at bus stops located throughout their service area.

CR5.4 Encourage SunLine Transit Agency to periodically
undertake studies of local public transportation needs to identify the most efficient and cost-effective manner to provide services, including shuttle services, medical
transit service, and a centralized information location that promotes services available to the public.

CR5.5 In consultation with the SunLine Transit Agency, require construction of attractive and protective bus shelters with complete route and schedule information, and other
amenities, such as tourist information to promote transit ridership, at existing and new bus stop locations.

CR5.6 Support and maintain sidewalk infrastructure to provide connectivity to transit facilities.

CR5.7 Support a system of freig ht movement that minimizes impacts on residents and motorists.

CR5.8 Encourage greater use of alternative fuel vehicles, including compressed natural gas, electric, hydrogen and other fuel sources.

CR5.9 Explore opportunities for local shuttle circulator transit services in coordination with SunLine Transit Agency.

Item 2A - Page 200

RECREATIONAL TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS
Recreational Trails
Recreational trails are an important resource to the City of Palm Springs; they are a large part of the tourist draw to the community and they reflect the city’s history, both tribal and early European-American settlement and
movement. Over 80 miles of recreational trails provide
opportunities for biking, hiking, equestrian, backpacking and four-wheel drive activities. Figure 4-4, Bikeways and Recreational Trails , shows the numerous recreational
trails that extend through the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountain areas, in addition to the City’s bike trails
system.

A comprehensive inventory and mapping of the trails in
the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains have been
developed through a cooperative partnership of the
Bureau of Land Management–Palm Springs, South Coast
Resource Area; U.S. Forest Service–San Jacinto Ranger
District; Riverside County; Coache lla Valley Trails Council; Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla In dians; Coachella Valley Cycling Association; and Desert Riders.

The Palm Springs Aerial Tramway provides access to trails located in the Mount San Jacinto State Park. The park covers an area of 13,000 acres and offers approximately 54 miles of hiking trails. The tramway starts in Chino Canyon on the north end of Palm Springs and takes passengers from Valley Station at 2,643 feet elevation to Mountain Station at 8,516 feet elevation.

Bikeway Classifications
Off-street bikeways in exclusive corridors can be effective in providing new recreational opportunities and desirable commuter routes. On-street bikeways can enhance safety and convenience, especially in conjunction with other commitments such as:
elimination of parking or increasing roadway width, elimination of surface irregularities and roadway obstacles. The designation of bikeway routes can help minimize potential roadway conflicts and can establish bicycle traffic as a priority in these areas.

Carl Lykken Trail is one of several hiking
trails located in the mountains adjacent to
the City.

Item 2A - Page 201

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-31

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
Figure 4-4 shows the location of existing and proposed bikeways in the City. The City has approximately 14 miles of Class I, 10 miles of Class II, and 35 miles of Class III bikeways.

The State of California (and the C i t y o f P a l m S p r i n g s ) u s e s t h e following bikeway classifications.
‹ Class I (Bike Path or Trail). Off-street bikeways that provide a completely separate right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians wi th crossflow by motorists
minimized. The bike path area is physically separated from auto traffic or entirely outside the road right-of-way, and measures a minimum of 8 feet in width for two-way bicycling.

Pedestrian paths are characteri zed by sidewalks or similar rights-of-way shared by cyclists and pedestrians that
measure 12 feet wide, of which 8 feet will be designated for pedestrians and 4 feet will be designated for cyclists. ‹ Class II (Bike Lane) . Unprotected bikeways defined by a stripe on the roadway. A minimum 4-foot-wide lane within the roadway designated for one-way bicycle traffic.
‹ Class III (Bike Route) . Unprotected on-street bikeways sharing the roadway with vehicular traffic. Typically
characterized as any type of bikeway, including streets signed as bikeways, that offers no other specific lane or other accommodation for bicycles.
‹ Class IV (Separate Bikeway) . Protected on-street bikeways defined by linear and vertical separation between the bike lane and vehicle lane. Separation may include but is not limited to grade separation, flexible posts, or on-street parking. A minimum of 5-foot-wide lane for one-way bike traffic and 2-foot-wide for separation. The City bicycle plan refers to these facilities as mixed use bike routes.

In addition to the City’s bikeway design standards, the CVAG Active Transportation Design Guidelines and the State of California Highway Design Manual provide requirements for Bikeway
Planning and Design that should be considered as new bikeways are designed and developed in Palm Springs.

Figure 4-4 shows existing and proposed bikeways and recreational trails. Both facilities are off-street and typically serve multiple modes of travel such as bikes and pedestrians. Recreational trails Item 2A - Page 202

may be located partially or comple tely within the City of Palm Springs but generally provide a ccess to remote and undeveloped recreational areas. Class I bikeways provide access to developed areas within and around the City of Palm Springs.

Item 2A - Page 203


_À
_À
_À
_À
_À
_À
^hEZ/^
tz
^s
E/>>
ZK^
>
:KZ
^W>DEzKEZ

d,Yh/dEzKEtz

ZzZ
'
E

hdZzd
Z>
D
/EK
Z
>
ZDKEZ
>tZ
E

ZK
^^>
z
Z
EW>DEzKEZ
DhZZz EzKE 
Z

s/^d,/EK
^EZ&
>Z
&ZZ
>>Z
d,
s, Z
E/E/EEzKEZ
D
^Yh/d
s

> s
ZE
tz
ZKEZ

W>DEzKEZ
K'
Zd dZ>

>/
>KZ
W
Z
 Z
^,Ͳϭϭϭ
ZYh
d>hZ
,
ZDK^Z
/>>KEZ
/E,^,KZ
Z

>ZKZ
ϮϬd,s

W>D Z
sZE
ZZ
'ZE
d s









&$7+('5$/
&,7<
'(6(57 +27
635,1*6
'(6(57 +27
635,1*6
7UDLOV
7UDLO7 HUPLQXV
0L[HG8VH
&ODVV,,,%LNH5RXWH
&ODVV,,%LNH/DQH
&ODVV,%LNH3DWK
([LVWLQJ%LF\FOH)DFLOLWLHV
0L[HG8VH
&ODVV,,,%LNH5RXWH
&ODVV,,%LNH/DQH
&ODVV,%LNH3DWK
3URSRVHG%LF\FOH)DFLOLWLHV
5DLOURDG
$GMDFHQW&LW\/LPLWV
3DOP6SULQJV6SKHUHRI,QIOXHQFH
3DOP6SULQJV&LW\/LPLWV
8QGHU&RQVWUXFWLRQ
7 REH&RQVWUXFWHG
([LVWLQJ
&9/LQN
 
0LOHV 3DOP6SULQJV*HQHUDO3ODQ
  
)HHW
'DWH

%LNHZD\VDQG5HFUHDWLRQDO7UDLOV
)LJXUH
Item 2A - Page 204

This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 205

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-35

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
GGOAL CR6:

Establish the City as the premier provider of recreational trails and bikeways in the Coachella Valley.

Policies
CR6.1 Maintain a program regarding nonmotorized
transportation facilities, including those for bicycles and pedestrians.

CR6.2 Provide improved signage to direct residents and visitors to the City’s trail system.

CR6.3 Ensure new development a pplications establish access or safe connections to public trails and trailheads as
specified by the applicable specific plan.

CR6.4 Utilize bicycle and hiking trails as a means of providing recreational and educational experiences by connecting
to various parks and public facilities throughout the City.

CR6.5 Seek optimum linkage of existing and planned for
b i k e w a y s t o p a r k s , r e c r e a t i o n c e n t e r s , a n d o t h e r recreational open space.

CR6.6 Maintain widths, surfaces, and general maintenance of streets in a manner that will ensure the safety of the
cyclists using them.

CR6.7 Provide bikeways with appropriate traffic control devices.

CR6.8 Encourage proper design and maintenance of facilities and appropriate signing to ensure the safe use of the
bikeway and trail systems.

CR6.9 Promote and enhance bicycling and hiking opportunities to support local tourism.

CR6.10 Incorporate provisions within the Zoning Ordinance requiring private developers to construct recognized
bikeways that abut developable property.

CR6.11 Evaluate the need for and the feasibility of developing new bikeways and recreational paths (or improving to
Class I standards) as the City continues to grow.

Additional goals and policies
related to pathways and bikeways
can be found in the Recreation,
Open Space and Conservation
Element.

A nonmotorized transportation
facility may be part of a roadway
(such as a shoulder) or it may be
separated from roadway traffic for
exclusive non-motorized use (such
as a bike path or sidewalk).

Item 2A - Page 206

CR6.12 Recognize the importance of the City’s bikeway system as a major transportation, not solely recreational, network.

CR6.13 Maintain design standards for the development of various types of bikeways and related improvements—e.g.,
parkways, bridges, rest stop s—that may be necessary to implement the City’s bikeway network.

CR6.14 Coordinate with CVAG, adjacent cities, and affected agencies while planning for new trails, especially in areas adjacent to the Whitewater Wash and Cathedral City.

CR6.15 Improve pedestrian and bi cyclist connectivity to regional trails like CV Link.

CR6.16 Provide bike racks and other bicycle amenities
throughout the City to encourage bicycle use as an
alternative to vehicular use.

PEDESTRIANS
Pedestrian activity is an important part of the City’s recreational lifestyle. Pedestrian facilities su ch as walkways, bridges, trails, crosswalks, signals, benches, and shade canopies are a critical component of the nonmotorized tr ansportation network in Palm Springs. In areas where pedestrian facilities are present, people will be much more likely to make short trips by walking instead of by automobile. Pedestrian walkways help to link educational facilities to City parks and can help create a critical lifeline between the retail shops Downtown and the City’s resort amenities such as the Convention Center, casino, and hotels.

GGOAL CR7:

Create a pedestrian experience that is attractive to both residents and visitors.

Policies
CR7.1 Provide a safe and comfortable environment for
pedestrians.

CR7.2 Provide a welcoming atmosphere for visitors by
providing safe and comfortable multi modal and parking
facilities Downtown.

Item 2A - Page 207

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-37

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
CR7.3 Improve pedestrian links throughout the city and from surrounding residential areas to Downtown.

CR7.4 Utilize traffic calming measures in accordance with the City’s Neighborhood Tra ffic Calming Program in
appropriate locations to improve pedestrian safety and
comfortability, slow traffic, and help reduce noise impacts on adjacent uses.

CR7.5 Ensure that appropriate pedestrian facilities are provided as a component of new development, including ADA
compliant sidewalks and crosswalks where appropriate.

CR7.6 Maintain design standards for the construction of new pedestrian facilities and related improvements.

PARKING
Vehicular parking is a necessary consideration of any land use. It is essential that new development and projects undergoing
redevelopment analyze the parking demand they generate.

Due to the location of residential uses in close proximity to the commercial uses Downtown, there are many opportunities for potential parking conflicts or overflow commercial parking on residential streets. On-street parking and parking structures need to be carefully integrated into the existing urban fabric so they do not detract from the aesthetic quality and character of commercial and residential areas.

GGOAL CR8:

Develop a system of parking facilities and operations that serve current and future commercial and residential uses and
preserve the quality of life in residential neighborhoods.

Policies
CR8.1 Require sufficient parking to serve each use, including employee and visitor parking needs.

CR8.2 Locate surface parking lots to the rear of businesses fronting main streets. Surface parking lots directly
fronting onto main streets interrupt the continuity of
Traffic calming is the application
of strategies used to reduce the
speeds of vehicular traffic, alter
driver behavior, and improve
conditions for pedestrians.

Examples of traffic calming
measures include speed bumps,
bulb outs of sidewalks and neck
downs of roadways.

Item 2A - Page 208

building structures and the pedestrian walking
experience.

CR8.3 Provide parking spaces for bicycles, motorcycles, and similar vehicles as part of all parking facilities, public and private.

CR8.4 Evaluate the use of parking districts to resolve preexisting deficiencies.

CR8.5 Encourage the development and use of common parking facilities versus individual on-site parking facilities.

CR8.6 Explore the development of a valet parking program to enhance parking access and availability Downtown.

CR8.7 Design parking structures in the Downtown to
complement the scale, aesthetic, and activity levels of adjacent buildings and uses.

CR8.8 Encourage private developments to provide parking in excess of that required by the Municipal Code for lease to other businesses with parking deficiencies.

CR8.9 Encourage the redesign of existing parking lots if additional spaces can be created as well as spaces for
bicycles and motorcycles.

CR8.10 Provide appropriate and consistent signage to direct motorists to public and private parking areas.

CR8.11 Utilize parking fees and on demand pricing to promote vehicle turnover and increase parking availability in
Downtown while helping to encourage carbon
free/reduced alternative transportation such as walking, bicycles, public transportation, and ride share.

CR8.12 Encourage businesses to implement innovative
approaches to employee parking such as the
development of satellite parking areas that allow
employees to park at remote locations outside of
Downtown and provide shuttle access to the workplace if the parking site is located more than one-quarter mile
from the workplace to make parking spaces Downtown
more available to customers and visitors.

Parking District:

A district established to manage
parking issues in a particular area.

Parking districts can distribute the
revenue from parking meters and
other fee programs to implement
solutions to parking problems.

Such solutions may include the
creation or maintenance of parking
lots, parking structures, valet
parking, parking/transportation
signage, landscaping,
maintenance, and security.

Parking districts can also impose
parking time limits and implement
programs to manage employee
versus visitor parking.

Item 2A - Page 209
Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-39

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENTT

AVIATION AND HELIPORT FACILITIES
Three airports serve the Coachella Valley:

Palm Springs International Airport, Desert
Resorts Regional Airport (Thermal Airport),
and Bermuda Dunes Airport. Palm Springs
International, the largest of the three,
provides connections to many key points
throughout the United States and Canada. Air
freight is also handled at the airport.

The City is curr entl y und ergoing an upd at e to
the airport master plan for the Palm Springs
International Airport. That study’s initial
findings are that the airport is expected to
double in airport use; increasing from
approximately three million annual passengers
(MAP) to a 2045 forecast of 6.5 MAP . As a vital economic asset to the City, access to the airport must be maintained and improved to meet growing passenger demands. As pa ssenger activity continues to grow, transportation services must keep pace with that expansion.

Currently, SunLine Route 2 provides public transportation service to the airport. In addition, several resorts and hotels offer courtesy shuttle service to the airport. Am trak Thruway bus service is also available. Additional transportati on services including limousine, taxi, shuttle, and disabled and senior services are available at the airport. As the airport expands to satisfy air passenger demands, additional public transportation services should be considered to serve resident and visitor air pa ssengers. Additional courtesy shuttles could be considered or integrated to provide efficient service to popular destinations, such as the Downtown area.

Heliport access in Palm Springs is limited to medical evacuation flights traversing to and from the Desert Regional Medical Center heliport and the Palm Spring International Airport.

Palm Springs International Airport
Item 2A - Page 210

GGOAL CR9:

Maintain and operate safe, efficient, economical, and
environmentally responsible airport and heliport facilities in the City.

Policies
CR9.1 Ensure airport and heliport operations in Palm Springs are consistent with the Federal Aviation Regulation Part 150 Noise Compatibility Study, as amended from time to
time and consider the provisions of the Palm Springs
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan prepared by the
Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission.

CR9.2 Establish the City’s commercial streets as the principal helicopter flight corridors and require that helicopter takeoff and landing patterns be limited to commercial
areas.

CR9.3 Require that helicopters utilizing City airspace fly in compliance with Federal Ai r Regulations (FAR) Part 91
rules.

CR9.4 Establish multi modal circulation linkages (buses, trams, bicycle infrastructure, etc.) to and from the airport to relieve parking and traffic loads at the airport.

UTILITIES
Water Supply and Distribution Systems
The Coachella Valley Water Distri ct (CVWD), the Desert Water Agency (DWA), and Mission Springs Water District (MSWD) provide water to the City of Palm Springs. These water agencies prepare an Urban Water Management Plan every five years, which identifies historic and projected water usage, identifies existing and future water supply sources, describes purveyors’ demand management programs, and sets forth a program to meet water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

Three groundwater subbasins—Whitewater River, Mission Creek, and Indio—serve Palm Springs and its planning area. The Whitewater River , the largest basin, contains 28 million acre-feet and extends 70 miles from the junction of Highway 111 and I-10 to See also the Noise Element for
additional policies on airports
and heliports.

See other policies on utilities in
the Conservation portion of the
Recreation, Open Space, and
Conservation Element
Item 2A - Page 211

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-41

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
the Salton Sea. The Whitewater River is recharged by flows from the San Gorgonio Pass area, normal seasonal rainfalls, snowmelt, and surface water from various creeks. However, inflow is limited.

Therefore, to ensure that adequate water is available, the Coachella Valley water agencies rely on two sources of imported water—the Colorado River and the State Water Project (SWP).

CVWD’s entitlement to Colorado River water is firmly established at 330,000 acre-feet. Through contracts with MWD and the SWP , CVWD and DWA have allocations for water supply totaling approximately 194,100 acre-feet. This supply is specifically used to recharge the groundwater basin. As part of the 2019 Exchange Agreement between MWD and CVWD, water from the MWD
pipeline is released into 19 recharge ponds at Windy Point, where it percolates into the Whitewat er Subbasin. This agreement is intended to ensure adequate water supplies through the year 2035.

Deliveries of SWP water, however, are not guaranteed. Since most of California’s annual precipitation falls in the winter and early spring, most of the water supply is certain by this time. However, runoff in the late fall remains somewhat variable as the next year’s runoff season begins. A drier than forecasted fall can result in not meeting end-of-year reservoir storage ta rgets, which means less water available in storage for the following year. In 2019, the California Department of Water Resources mo delled that a single dry year SWP water supply allocation may be 7 percent below the water supply allocation for a typical year.

The DWA provides water to Palm Springs, parts of Desert Hot Springs and Cathedral City, and surrounding unincorporated areas.

Groundwater currently comprises approximately 95 percent of the water DWA provides to its customers, with the remainder being surface water from mountain streams. The groundwater is obtained from the Whitewater River Subbasin which underlies the northwest Coachella Valley from Whitewater in the northwest to the area of Bermuda Dunes in the southeast. The CVWD, based in Coachella, bears responsibility for ensuring reliable water supplies for the Coachella Valley, including portions of Palm Springs, and managing groundwater in the subbasins beneath the Valley. By 2045, groundwater is estimated to account for approximately 79 percent of DWA-supplied water .

Water is recharged into the subbasin from two sources: local stormwater and imported water. The Agency and District purchase entitlements to water from the State Water Project. However , as Item 2A - Page 212

there is no aqueduct connecting the Coachella Valley to the State Water Project, the District and Agency trade their water entitlements from the State Water Project to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California in exchange for imported water from the Colorado River. Recharge of imported water into the Whitewater River Subbasin began in 1973. In 2002, the Agency and District also began recharging imported water into the Mission Creek Subbasin, which underlies the area surrounding Desert Hot Springs and North Palm Springs.

Wastewater Treatment and Collection
The City contracts with Veolia Water North America to operate a comprehensive wastewater treatment program, including a City- owned, 10.9 million gallon per day (mgd) trickling filter wastewater treatment plant, five pump stations, 225 miles of sewer collection pipelines, six percolation ponds, and a biosolids disposal program.

The treatment plant currently accommodates approximately 6.5 mgd of sewage flow.

Recycling wastewater is an important water conservation strategy, because it reduces the amount of potable water used for irrigation.

DWA operates a wastewater recycling facility. The City provides primary and secondary treated domestic sewage to DWA, who then provides tertiary treatment. The recycled water is then used to irrigate public facilities such as the Tahquitz Creek Golf Course, DeMuth Park, and the Mesquite Golf Course.

Storm Drainage Systems
The Palm Springs Master Drainage Plan covers approximately 26.5 square miles, and consists of moderately flat valley terrain sloping generally to the east. Steep mountainous terrain dominates the westerly portion of the drainage area. The purpose of the plan centers on the following points:
‹ Determination of the quantity and points of concentration of storm runoff in the area
‹ Preparation of a drainage boundary map
‹ Determination of the location, size, and capacity of the proposed drainage structures
‹ Investigation of alternatives to select the plan with the most sound economics and engineering
Item 2A - Page 213

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-43

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
‹ Preparation of preliminary design plans and supporting cost estimates
Solid Waste
Palm Springs Disposal Services provides solid waste disposal service to the City of Palm Spring s and sphere of influence areas.

According to the California Integrated Waste Management Board, a total of 81,369 tons of solid waste was produced by Palm Springs in 2021.

Palm Springs Disposal Services tr ansports solid waste from Palm Springs to Edom Hill Transfer Station in Cathedral City. Edom Hill is permitted to receive 3,500 tons of waste per day as a transfer station. From Edom Hill, waste is trucked to Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill in Beaumont, approximately 24 miles west of Palm Springs.

Lamb Canyon Landfill is permitted to accept 5,000 tons of waste per day. The remaining capacity of the landfill is approximately 19,242,950 cubic yards of waste and its estimated closing date is 2032.

Palm Springs Disposal Services uses Badlands Landfill in Moreno Valley as an alternate disposal site. Badlands is permitted to receive 5,000 tons of waste per day and has a remaining capacity of approximately 7,800,000 cubic yards. Its estimated closing date is 2059.

On December 9, 2021, the Palm Springs City Council passed a new ordinance which requires organic waste collection services to all residents in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 1383. This includes collection of yard waste and food waste. Organic waste collection was already available to commercial establishments. Residential organic waste service began on October 1, 2022.

Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides service to the City and areas within the Sphere of Influence. SCE currently maintains major transmission lines within the City along their normal distribution system. Because of the current supply capacity of SCE, adequate electrical capaci ty is anticipated for the City of Palm Springs.

Desert Community Energy, a not- for-profit publicly managed electricity provider , began supplying electricity to the City of Palm Item 2A - Page 214

Springs in April 2020. Desert Community Energy is a Community Choice Energy program, which purchases power resources on behalf of the electricity customers in its jurisdiction to control costs, offer more renewable energy options, and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Under this sy stem, Desert Community Energy purchases electricity, while SCE co ntinues to deliver electricity, maintain infrastructure, and handle billing and repairs.

Natural Gas
The Southern California Gas Company (Gas Company) provides natural gas service to Palm Spring s’ citizens and business industry within the City and sphere of infl uence. The availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission and federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action that affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service would be provided in accordance with revised conditions.

Telecommunications
There are currently adequate telecommunication facilities available to serve the needs of the City. Data transmission, connectivity to the internet, and other wired and wire less data transmission systems are provided by a variety of carriers and providers. Currently, broadband internet service is provided by Spectrum, Frontier , Viasat, T -Mobile Home Internet.

GGOAL CR10:

Provide adequate and safe utility systems and facilities to support the City’s existing and proposed land uses.

Policies
CR10.1 Require utility improvements where existing systems are deficient.

CR10.2 Coordinate public infrastructure improvements through the City’s Capital Improvement Program.

CR10.3 Encourage the shared use of major transmission
corridors and other appropriate measures to minimize
Item 2A - Page 215

Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 4-45

CCIRCULATION

EELEMENT
the impact on the aesthetic appearance of the City,
including relocating overhead utilities underground.

CR10.4 Continue and expand existing programs for the upgrade of storm drainage systems where they are deficient, using public or private funds.

CR10.5 Require that new development be contingent upon the project’s ability to secure appropriate infrastructure
services.

CR10.6 Require developers of new projects to pay for the costs of construction and expansion water, sewer/wastewater ,
storm drainage improvements and other public utilities
necessitated by that development.

CR10.7 Require developers to notify utility agencies of their intent to develop a site early in the development process to provide sufficient time to plan for necessary capital
improvements.

CR10.8 Update the Sewer System Master Plan as needed to accommodate the demands of new and existing
development.

CR10.9 Monitor sewer flows on a regular basis to aid in the development of construction schedules.

CR10.10 Require new projects to connect with the City’s storm/sewer system unless a hardship can be
demonstrated. If septic systems must be used require
installation of septic systems to meet State Water
Resources Control Board Standards.

CR10.11 Monitor and reassess ra tes for sanitation/wastewater connection and service. This assessment should reflect
the costs of service and improvements and be equitably
allocated to users according to demands.

CR10.12 Participate in the annual review of the Desert Water Agency, Mission Springs Water District, and Coachella
Valley Water District Water System Master Plan to
evaluate how it is consistent with the City’s General Plan and approved projects.

Item 2A - Page 216

CR10.13 Work with the Desert Water Agency, Coachella Valley Water District, and Mission Springs Water District to
promote water and wastewater conservation practices.

CR10.14 Continue to implement a fee schedule to assess new development on a prorated basis for the cost of new
sewer and storm drainage systems.

CR10.15 Encourage all large-scale turf and irrigation projects to use tertiary treated water when feasible.

CR 10.16 Coordinate with public and private providers of data transmission and internet access services to develop
“WiFi” zones in the City to support and promote greater accessibility to information and communication
resources via the internet.

Item 2A - Page 217
Page | 1

PALM SPRINGS CIRCULATION ELEMENT | DRAFT IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS September 2024

This section serves as a working checklist of implementation programs for City staff and local decision makers to ensure that the General Plan vision is realized. The following table of Implementation Programs lists specific actions that should be pursued to implement each goal and policy in the City’s General Plan. An implementation program is an action, procedure, program, or technique that carries out goals and policies.

Implementation measures are comprehensive in nature, encompassing amendments of existing and preparation of new plans, ordinances, and development of design standards; administration of City procedures and development review and approval processes; and interagency coordination.

For each action, a recommended timeframe for completion is noted and the responsible City department is listed. The timeframes are delineated as follows:

ƒ Ongoing: Actions that continue or are periodically implemented through the life of the General Plan ƒ Short: 1-5 years
ƒ Mid: When resources become available, but prioritized after 5 years ƒ Long: 10 years or more
The described programs and actions are intended to inform and guide the development of the City’s annual budget. During that time, City staff will review and prioritize the level of expenditure necessary to carry out the prescribed action and program. Completion of a recommended implementation program will depend on a number of factors such as citizen priorities, finances, and staff availability.

To enable Palm Springs’ General Plan to serve its purpose effectively, the list of programs and actions need to be reviewed, maintained, and implemented in a systematic and consistent manner. At a minimum, the programs and timeframes described in this chapter should be comprehensively reviewed and updated at least once every five (5) years to reflect available fiscal resources, community needs, and priorities.

Revisions to these shall not constitute an amendment of the General Plan, provided that they are consistent with the Vision Statement and carry out its goals and policies. As such, future revisions to this Implementation Plan will not necessitate environmental review to conform to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, as each item described in this Plan will require subsequent action and evaluation.

Item 2A - Page 218
Page | 2

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
Goal
CCR11 EEstablish and maintain a ssafe, eefficient, interconnected circulation system that accommodates vehicular travel, walking, bbicycling, public transit, and other forms of transportation.

Policies
CR1.1 Develop a
system of roadways
that provides travel
choices and reduces
traffic congestion.

IM-CR 1.1 Require Traffic Impact
Analysis for new
development projects
to identify and plan for
their contribution to,
and effect on, the city’s
Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT), traffic
congestion, and
roadway infrastructure
performance (Level of
Service). Impact
Analyses shall be
submitted in a format
acceptable to the City
Engineer and be
subject to his/her
review and approval.

CR1.5 Engineering, Planning Ongoing
IM-CR 1.2 Continue to implement
the City’s
TTransportation Demand
MManagement ordinance
and update as
necessary.

Policy CR1.9 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 219
Page | 3

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR1.2 Preserve and
extend the City’s fine
grid of streets to the
greatest extent
possible. Where
possible, allow the
grid of streets to curve
and meander to slow
traffic and to create
more interesting
streetscapes
IM-CR 1.3 Maintain the City’s grid
system of roadways at
the quarter-mile interval
consistent with Policy

1.7. New streets
planned within the City
shall help to extend the
grid network. No
roadway
abandonments at half-
mile scale or larger will
be allowed.

Abandonments at
quarter-mile intervals
should be allowed only
where an adjacent
roadway has already
been abandoned.

CR1.2 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
CR1.3 Continue
coordination/
cooperation with
adjacent jurisdictions
regarding future
roadway sections,
standards, and
improvements.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects
that seek new and
creative solutions in
public transportation,
transportation systems,
and traffic
management.

CR4.1 Engineering, Planning,
Public Safety
Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 220
Page | 4

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR1.4 Preserve the
City’s right-of-way
requirements and
typical cross sections
where possible, except
where approved by
the City Council.

IM-CR 1.5 Cross-section standards
may be modified by the
City Council to take into
consideration the need
for special right-of-way
widths in areas where
property cannot
feasibly be acquired.

Such modifications
should be considered
for projects that
implement traffic
calming, projects
associated with public
parking facilities or
structures, or for areas
where it is desirable to
maintain the natural
terrain and prevent the
scarring of the
landscape. Any
approved special
rights-of-way widths
shall be adopted
through a general plan
amendment and shall
be noted on the
Circulation Plan.

Policy CR1.4 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 221
Page | 5

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
IM-CR 1.6 Local public street
rights-of-way may be
reduced to 44 feet in
width, subject to
determination by the
City Council that there
is no significant impact
to circulation or the
health, safety, and
welfare of the residents
of the neighborhood.

Policy CR1.5 Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 1.7 Allow local and
collector streets that are
not designed with full
public improvements
(curb, gutter, sidewalk)
and are located within
older, built-out
neighborhoods (e.g.,
Old Las Palmas, Movie
Colony, Tennis Club) to
remain unimproved if it
is determined that no
significant impacts to
the health, safety, and
welfare would occur to
the residents of Palm
Springs.

Policy CR1.7 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 222
Page | 6

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR1.5 Implement
roadway traffic-
calming mechanisms
as identified in the
City’s Neighborhood
Traffic Calming
Program to protect
residential
neighborhoods from
the intrusion of cut-
through traffic in areas
that have
demonstrated traffic
problems.

IM-CR 1.8 Periodically analyze and
improve high-accident
locations to improve
traffic flow and safety.

New Planning, Engineering,
Public Safety
Ongoing
CR1.6 Although the
grid system of streets
is important, avoid the
use of long, straight
roadway segments on
new local streets in
new residential
neighborhoods,
whenever possible.

IM-CR 1.3 Grid system CR 1.2 Engineering Ongoing
CR1.7 Maintain a
truck route system that
serves business
districts, industrial
areas, the Airport, and
meets regulations
IM-CR 1.9 Maintain established
truck routes as
presented in Figure 4-3.

Periodically review and
update truck routes as
New Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 223
Page | 7

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
specified in Palm
Springs Municipal
Code Chapter 12.56
(Restricted Use of
Certain Streets).
necessary to meet
current regulations.

CR1.8 Encourage
large employers
(employers with 100 or
more persons) to
adopt incentive
programs that include
ridesharing, fleet
vehicles and vanpools,
preferential parking for
rideshares, subsidized
shuttle bus services,
telecommuting,
alternative work hour
programs, bicycle
racks, lockers and
shower rooms, and
information on transit
services to reduce
overall traffic volumes
in the City.

IM-CR 1.2 TDM Ordinance Policy CR1.9 Community and
economic
development,
Planning,
Sustainability
Short
CR1.9 Allow for a
reduction in parking
space requirements
for office/industrial
IM-CR 1.10 Encourage developers
to provide facilities such
as passenger loading
areas and reserved
CR1.4 Planning Short
Item 2A - Page 224
Page | 8

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
uses that implement
ridesharing and transit
pass programs.
parking for carpools
and vanpools, and
bicycle parking facilities
for employees and
customers.

CR1.10 Require the
owner or applicant of
new development
projects to address
traffic deficiencies
IM-CR 1.1 Traffic Impact Analysis CR 1.5 Engineering, Planning Ongoing CR1.11 Pursue an
aggressive regional
posture advocating
new and improved
transportation
solutions, including
continued
participation in the
TTransportation Uniform
MMitigation Fee, and
planning for changing
mobility trends and
technology.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Engineering, Planning Ongoing
CR1.12 Private roads
shall be developed in
accordance with the
City’s published
engineering standards
IM-CR 1.11 Require street
dedications from new
development projects
that are consistent with
the right-of-way width
CR1.1 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 225
Page | 9

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
for public streets,
unless otherwise
approved by the City
Engineer.
identified by the
General Plan, including
necessary right-of-way
for bike and pedestrian
facilities and for those
development projects
located adjacent to a
critical intersection, as
identified in Figure 4-2.

CR1.13 Require
developers, prior to
approval of
development plans, to
provide increased
right-of-way through
land dedications to
accommodate
additional demand for
dual left-turn and
exclusive right-turn
lanes, interchange
improvements, bus
stops and lanes,
bicycle facilities or
other improvements
required to maintain a
minimum operating
LOS D at critical
IM-CR 1.11 Street dedications CR 1.1 Planning, Engineering Ongoing Item 2A - Page 226
Page | 10

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
intersections identified
in the General Plan
Appendix B.

CR1.14 Require
developers, prior to
approval of
development plans, to
provide right-of-way
through land
dedications to
accommodate the
City’s network of trails
and nonmotorized
routes.

IM-CR 1.11 Street dedicati ons CR1.1 Planning Ongoing
CR1.15 Implement
improvements to the
existing roadway
network such as traffic
signal synchronization
and upgrading road
surfaces.

IM-CR 1.12 Maintain a Capital
Improvement Program
(CIP) that identifies
preservation and
improvement projects
to the existing
transportation network.

New Engineering Ongoing
GGoal
CCR 2 PProvide a circulation network that mmaintains aa safe and efficient system for aall travel modes and users of all ages and mmobilities.

Policies
CR2.1 Maintain a
network of complete
streets throughout the
city to provide
IM-CR 2.1 Develop a dynamic
curb management
strategy that plans for
and balances multiple
New Planning, Engineering,
Sustainability
Medium
Item 2A - Page 227
Page | 11

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
connectivity for all
travel modes.
forms of transportation
including personal
vehicles, motorcycles,
bicycles, micro mobility,
and ride share
programs.

IM-CR 2.2 Maintain and
periodically update the
City’s Master Plan of
Bikeways.

New Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 2.3 Monitor opportunities
to provide enhance
bike, pedestrian, and
transit access on City
streets, particularly in
Downtown.

New Planning, Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 2.4 Explore opportunities
to develop and update
multimodal
transportation plans
New Planning Ongoing
IM-CR 2.5 Require adequate
drop-off and pick-up
facilities at all new
schools for safety of
school children and to
prevent traffic
congestion.

Policy CR2.3 Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 2.6 Require development
with gated entries to
Policy CR2.5 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 228
Page | 12

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
provide adequate
stacking distances and
turn-around
maneuvering areas so
as not to interfere with
the safe and efficient
operation of adjacent
public streets.

CR2.2 Maintain Level
of Service D or better
for the City’s
circulation network, as
measured using “in
season” peak hour
conditions.

IM-CR 1.1 Traffic Impact Analysis CR 1.5 Engineering, Planning Ongoing CR2.3 Make street
improvements at
problem intersections
and bottleneck
locations to improve
specific traffic
operations and safety,
with all such
improvements to be
considered selectively
on the basis of specific
studies of the affected
intersection and
IM-CR 2.7

Upgrade and maintain
traffic signal-
interconnect systems to
efficiently coordinate
and control traffic flow
on arterial streets,
including the
installation or removal
of separate left-turn
phasing where
warranted. Traffic signal
timing should
adequately provide for
CR2.2

Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 229
Page | 13

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
streets, and the
impacts on the
surrounding area and
pedestrian activity.
safe pedestrian
crossing.

IM-CR 2.8 Construct all-weather
bridge crossing along
Indian Canyon Drive,
Gene Autry Trail, and
Vista Chino to alleviate
weather induced traffic
congestion
Policy CR 2.5 Engineering Long
IM-CR 2.9 Consider realignment
of Gene Autry Trail
northerly of the
Tahquitz Creek/Palm
Canyon Wash Bridge to
facilitate the use of both
northbound lanes.

Policy CR2.7 Long CR2.4 Encourage the
development of, and
cooperate in, valley
wide visioning and
initiatives to assure an
LOS D on I-10.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Engineering, Planning Ongoing
CR2.5 Aim to
eliminate fatal and
serious injuries for all
road users within 25
years, particularly for
those most vulnerable,
IM-CR 2.10 Complete the City of
Palm Springs Local
Roadway Safety Plan
and implement relevant
recommendations from
the LRSP on City streets.

New Engineering, Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 230
Page | 14

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
by reviewing roadway
design, roadway user
behavior, roadway
operations, and post-
crash care standards.

IM-CR 2.11 Pursue funding
opportunities for grant
programs that promote
and implement
enhanced safety
measures on City
streets
New Engineering, Planning Ongoing
IM-CR 2.11 Pursue funding New Engineering, Planning Ongoing CR 2.7 Consider
roadway
reconfigurations or
lane reductions on
roadways operating at
LOS D or better,
particularly to allocate
right-of-way for new or
enhanced bike
facilities or sidewalks.

IM-CR 2.12 Evaluate City roadways
as traffic counts are
available to determine
operations; roadways
operating at LOS D or
better should be
considered for “road
diets” or lane
reductions. Priority
should be given to
allocating right-of-way
for new or enhanced
bike facilities or
sidewalks.

New Engineering Ongoing
CR2.8 Improve
connectivity and
resiliency in and out of
the City by
constructing all-
weather bridge
crossings and other
IM-CR 2.13 Explore options for
other infrastructure
improvements focused
on resiliency related to
heat, climate change,
weather, and
emergency evacuation.

New Planning, Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 231
Page | 15

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
infrastructure
enhancements along
major access corridors
like Vista Chino, Gene
Autry Trail, Indian
Canyon Drive, and
Palm Canyon Drive.

IM-CR 2.14 Consider nominating
Highway 111 from I-10
to Tram Way as a
California State Scenic
Highway
New Planning, Engineering Short
Goal
CCR 3 PProvide efficient circulation in the Downtown to support its role as the City’s primary retail center.

Policies
CR3.1 Provide an
environment within the
Central Business
District along Palm
Canyon Drive and
Indian Canyon Drive
that is suited to slower
traffic speeds and
more frequent
pedestrian crossings.

NA NA NA Engineering, Planning Short
CR3.2 Consider the
use of cross-streets
(such as Amado Road,
Andreas Road, and
Arenas Road, and
Museum Ways)
between Belardo
Road, Museum Drive
and Indian Canyon
NA NA NA Engineering, Planning Short
Item 2A - Page 232
Page | 16

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
Drive for use as
combination
street/parking and/or
pedestrian zones.

CR3.3 Support
recommendations
from the Section 14
and Downtown
specific plans to
improve multi modal
connectivity in the core
of the City.

IM-CR 2.3 Multi-modal
opportunities
Downtown
New Planning Ongoing
Goal
CCR 4 RReduce the City’s dependence on the use of ssingle--ppassenger vehicles by enhancing mass transit opportunities.

Policies
CR4.1 Support the
delivery of improved
regional transit
services to and within
the City.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
CR4.2 Continue to
coordinate with
SunLine Transit
Agency and other
regional transit
agencies to address
the need for the
expansion or
readjustment of bus
IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 233
Page | 17

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
routes, including
express routes
valleywide.

CR4.3 Continue to
coordinate with
SunLine Transit
Agency to establish or
modify bus stop
locations to provide
adequate access for
local residents to
destination places,
such as Downtown, the
airport, or the
Convention Center.

Coordinate
improvements to
existing and new bus
stop locations
including aesthetic bus
shelters.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
CR4.4 Continue
working with CVAG to
achieve a regional
transportation strategy
that coordinates
physical
improvements,
transportation systems
IM-CR 4.1 Resolve any
inconsistencies
between the City’s
Master Plan of Bikeways
and the CVAG Non-
Motorized
Transportation Plan
CR6.2 Planning,
Sustainability
Medium
Item 2A - Page 234
Page | 18

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
management,
transportation demand
management, public
transit, and issues of
development that
affect circulation.
(NMTP), and adopt the
CVAG NMTP.

CR4.5 Work with the
Riverside County
Transportation
Commission and
Amtrak to provide
increased passenger
rail service to, and
stopping in, Palm
Springs and commuter
rail, including high-
speed rail concepts
between Los Angeles
and Phoenix.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning, Engineering,
Community and
Economic
Development
Ongoing
CR4.6 Pursue viable
opportunities to
partner with transit
agencies, private
shuttles, or
Transportation
Network Companies,
to provide
transportation options
to the Downtown,
IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning, Engineering,
Community and
Economic
Development,
Sustainability
Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 235
Page | 19

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
hotels, museums, key
activity centers
(Convention Center,
airport, etc.),
particularly during
special events.

Goal
CCR 5 PProvide improved mobility for City residents to aaccess local services.

Policies
CR5.1 Support the
implementation of
local transit services for
all residents with
priority for the
disadvantaged,
including the elderly,
handicapped, those
with low incomes, and
the temporarily
disabled.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
CR5.2 Continue to
encourage SunLine
Transit Agency to
provide bicycle racks
on its vehicles.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Sustainability Ongoing
CR5.3 Require the
construction of bus
turnouts at bus stops
on major and
IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects
CR4.1 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 236
Page | 20

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
secondary
thoroughfares to
reduce congestion on
the adjacent public
street and to provide
for greater overall
traffic safety. The City
should work with
SunLine Transit
Agency to determine
which bus stop
locations warrant bus
turnouts and to
address safety
concerns that may
arise at bus stops
located throughout
their service area.

CR5.4 Encourage
SunLine Transit
Agency to periodically
undertake studies of
local public
transportation needs
to identify the most
efficient and cost-
effective manner to
provide services,
including shuttle
IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 237
Page | 21

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
services, medical
transit service, and a
centralized information
location that promotes
services available to
the public.

CR5.5 In consultation
with the SunLine
Transit Agency,
require construction of
attractive and
protective bus shelters
with complete route
and schedule
information, and other
amenities, such as
tourist information to
promote transit
ridership, at existing
and new bus stop
locations.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs and projects

CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
CR5.6 Support and
maintain sidewalk
infrastructure to
provide connectivity to
transit facilities.

IM-CR 2.4 Explore opportunities
to develop and update
multimodal
transportation plans
New Planning, Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing
CR5.7 Support a
system of freight
movement that
IM-CR 1.9 Maintain established
truck routes as
presented in Figure 4-3.

New Planning, Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 238
Page | 22

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
minimizes impacts on
residents and
motorists.

CR5.8 Encourage
greater use of
alternative fuel
vehicles, including
compressed natural
gas, electric, hydrogen
and other fuel sources.

IM-CR 5.1 Pursue options for
procuring alternative
fuel vehicles when
purchasing or
upgrading City-owned
fleet.

New Sustainability,
Engineering
Ongoing
CR5.9 Explore
opportunities for local
shuttle circulator
transit services in
coordination with
SunLine Transit
Agency.

IM-CR 2.4 Multimodal
Transportation Plans
New Planning, Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing Goal
CCR 6 EEstablish the City as the premiere provider of recreational trails and bikeways in the Coachella Valley.

Policies
CR6.1 Maintain a
program regarding
nnonmotorized
ttransportation facilities,
including those for
bicycles and
pedestrians.

IM-CR 6.1 Establish and maintain
design standards for
the development of
various types of
bikeways, pedestrian
facilities, and related
improvements—e.g.,
parkways, bridges, trail
heads, and rest stops—
CR6.4 Engineering Short
Item 2A - Page 239
Page | 23

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
¬that may be necessary
to implement the
Master Plan of
Bikeways. Bikeways
shall be designed and
constructed in
accordance with
Chapter 1000, Bikeway
Planning and Design, of
the Caltrans Highway
Design Manual, the
CVAG Active
Transportation Design
Guidelines or as
otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.

CR6.2 Provide
improved signage to
direct residents and
visitors to the City’s
trail system.

IM-CR 6.2 Develop and maintain
bicycle and walking trail
system brochures and
maps that educate and
inform trail users. This
information should be
made available on the
City’s website.

CR6.3 Office of
Communications and
Media Relations,
Engineering, Planning,
Sustainability
Short
CR6.3 Ensure new
development
applications establish
access or safe
connections to public
IM-CR 6.3 Review proposed
development projects
and applications for
conformance with the
General Plan
New Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 240
Page | 24

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
trails and trailheads as
specified by the
applicable specific
plan.

Circulation element,
regulatory codes,
design standards, and
requirements.

CR6.4 Utilize bicycle
and hiking trails as a
means of providing
recreational and
educational
experiences by
connecting to various
parks and public
facilities throughout
the City.

IM-CR 6.4 Aggressively seek
funding for trails and
bikeways from federal
and state sources.

CR6.5 Planning, Parks and
Recreation,
Sustainability,
Engineering
Ongoing
CR6.5 Seek optimum
linkage of existing and
planned for bikeways
to parks, recreation
centers, and other
recreational open
space.

IM-CR 2.3 Multi-modal
opportunities
CR3.1 Planning, Parks and
Recreation
Ongoing
CR6.6 Maintain
widths, surfaces, and
general maintenance
of streets in a manner
that will ensure the
safety of the cyclists
using them.

IM-CR 6.1 Design standards CR6.4 Street pavement
management,
Engineering
Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 241
Page | 25

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR6.7 Provide
bikeways with
appropriate traffic
control devices.

IM-CR 6.1 Design standards CR6.4 Engineering Ongoing
CR6.8 Encourage
proper design and
maintenance of
facilities and
appropriate signing to
ensure the safe use of
the bikeway and trail
systems.

IM-CR 6.1 Design standards CR6.4 Engineering, Planning Ongoing CR6.9 Promote and
enhance bicycling and
hiking opportunities to
support local tourism.

IM-CR 6.2 Develop and maintain
bicycle and walking trail
system brochures and
maps
CR6.3 Community and
Economic
Development, Parks
and Recreation
Ongoing
CR6.10 Incorporate
provisions within the
Zoning Ordinance
requiring private
developers to
construct recognized
bikeways that abut
developable property.

IM-CR 6.5 Update the Zoning
Code for consistency
with the General Plan’s
priorities for multi-
modal access,
connectivity, and safety.

New Planning Short
CR6.11 Evaluate the
need for and the
feasibility of
developing new
bikeways and
IM-CR 6.6 Create a trail along the
north side of the Palm
Canyon Wash levee.

CR6.1 Planning, Engineering,
Sustainability
Medium
Item 2A - Page 242
Page | 26

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
recreational paths (or
improving to Class I
standards) as the City
continues to grow.

CR6.12 Recognize the
importance of the
City’s bikeway system
as a major
transportation, not
solely recreational,
network.

IM-CR 6.1 Design standa rds CR6.4 Office of
communications and
media relations,
Sustainability
Ongoing CR6.13 Maintain
design standards for
the development of
various types of
bikeways and related
improvements—e.g.,
parkways, bridges, rest
stops—that may be
necessary to
implement the City’s
bikeway network.

IM-CR 6.1 Design standards CR6.4 Engineering Ongoing
CR6.14 Coordinate
with CVAG, adjacent
cities, and affected
agencies while
planning for new trails,
especially in areas
adjacent to the
IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs
CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 243
Page | 27

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
Whitewater Wash and
Cathedral City.

CR6.15 Improve
pedestrian and
bicyclist connectivity to
regional trails like CV
Link.

IM-CR 1.4 Participate in and
influence regional
transportation
programs
CR4.1 Planning Ongoing
CR6.16 Provide bike
racks and other bicycle
amenities throughout
the City to encourage
bicycle use as an
alternative to vehicular
use.

IM-CR 1.10 Developer facilities CR1.4 Planning,
Sustainability
Ongoing Goal
CCR 7 CCreate a pedestrian experience that is attractive to both residents and visitors.

Policies
CR7.1 Provide a safe
and comfortable
environment for
pedestrians
IM-CR 7.1 Provide barrier-free
accessibility for all
handicapped residents,
employees and visitors,
including special
designs for rural street
profiles to
accommodate ADA-
required path of travel
separation from
vehicular lanes.

Policy CR7.1 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 244
Page | 28

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
IM-CR 7.2 Encourage pedestrian
street crossings at
midblock in the Central
Business District, where
the distance between
street intersections is
in excess of 1,000 feet.

Mid-block pedestrian
crossings shall be
installed upon a
determination by the
City Engineer that
sufficient warrants exist
for such crossings,
which should be
signalized and
designed with
decorative street
improvements to
correspond to other
mid-block pedestrian
crossings within the
Central Business
District.

Policy CR7.2 Engineering Short
IM- CR 7.3 Provide and maintain
trash receptacles,
benches, shade
structures, drinking
fountains and other
Policy CR7.6 Engineering,
Sustainability and
Recycling
Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 245
Page | 29

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
amenities in pedestrian
corridors throughout
the City.

CR7.2 Provide a
welcoming
atmosphere for visitors
by providing safe and
comfortable multi
modal and parking
facilities Downtown.

IM-CR 7.4 Create a desirable
pedestrian walking
environment that links
the Downtown with the
Convention Center
through the use of
signage, landscape,
and streetscape
improvements and the
development or
renovation of
retail/restaurant
facilities along the
linkage.

Policy CR7.3 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 7.5 Provide shade on
sidewalks, particularly
Downtown, to make
walking more
appealing during the
summer months.

Policy CR7.5 Parks and Recreation,
Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing
IM-CR 7.6 Provide lighting and
signage Downtown that
provides for safe travel
by residents,
employees and visitors.

Policy CR 7.6 Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 246
Page | 30

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
IM-CR 7.7 Improve first-last mile
connections in the
Downtown.

Policy CR7.7 Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing
CR7.3 Improve
pedestrian links
throughout the city
and from surrounding
residential areas to
Downtown.

IM-CR 2.3 Multi-modal
opportunities
CR3.1 Planning, Engineering Ongoing
CR7.4 Utilize ttraffic
ccalming measures in
accordance with the
City’s Neighborhood
Traffic Calming
Program in
appropriate locations
to improve pedestrian
safety and
comfortability, slow
traffic, and help
reduce noise impacts
on adjacent uses
IM-CR 1.8 Periodically analyze and
improve high-accident
locations to improve
traffic flow and safety.

CR2.1 Engineering, Planning Ongoing
CR7.5 Ensure that
appropriate
pedestrian facilities are
provided as a
component of new
development,
including ADA
IM-CR 6.3 Development Review New Planning Ongoing
IM-CR 7.8 Provide incentives to
developers to add
pedestrian trails and
infrastructure
Policy CR7.12 Planning Medium
Item 2A - Page 247
Page | 31

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
compliant sidewalks
and crosswalks where
appropriate.

CR7.6 Maintain design
standards for the
construction of new
pedestrian facilities
and related
improvements .

IM-CR 7.9 Develop pedestrian
design standards that
detail minimum
sidewalk widths, ADA
compliance, lighting,
shade, and midblock
crossings.

New Engineering Ongoing
Goal
CCR 8 DDevelop a system of parking facilities and operations that serve current and future commercial and residential uses and ppreserve the quality of life in residential neighborhoods.

Policies
CR8.1 Require
sufficient parking to
serve each use,
including employee
and visitor parking
needs.

IM-CR 8.1 Create a plan to identify
parking availability in
the downtown core and
proximity to restaurants
and merchants
throughout the City and
the best locations to
implement fee-based
parking, if warranted.

New Planning Medium
CR8.2 Locate surface
parking lots to the rear
of businesses fronting
main streets. Surface
parking lots directly
fronting onto main
IM-CR 8.2 Develop and adopt
appropriate parking
strategies and design
standards that address
parking needs, layout,
possible alternatives to
New Planning Medium

Item 2A - Page 248
Page | 32

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
streets interrupt the
continuity of building
structures and the
pedestrian walking
experience.
parking supply and
management, public
and private spaces, and
multi-modal parking.

Parking standards may
need to differentiate
between the Downtown
core and other areas of
the City. Allow for
flexibility in minimum
parking requirements
for complementing
land uses, mixed-use
areas, and locations
where parking can be
shared at different
times.

CR8.3 Provide parking
spaces for electric
vehicles, bicycles,
motorcycles, and
similar vehicles as part
of all parking facilities,
public and private.

IM-CR 2.1 Develop a dynamic
curb management
strategy
New Planning Ongoing
IM-CR 8.3 Provide industry-
standard and fast
electric vehicle
recharging stations at
feasible public and
private curb and lot
parking areas.

CR8.3 Planning, Engineering Ongoing CR8.4 Evaluate the use of pparking districts
IM-CR 8.4 Develop a timeline and
estimates of revenue
New Planning Short
Item 2A - Page 249
Page | 33

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
to resolve preexisting
deficiencies.
and expenses
necessary to implement
fee-based parking
CR8.5 Encourage the
development and use
of common parking
facilities versus
individual on-site
parking facilities.

IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning, Engineering Ongoing
CR8.6 Explore the
development of a valet
parking program to
enhance parking
access and availability
Downtown.

IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning Medium
CR8.7 Design parking
structures in the
Downtown to
complement the scale,
aesthetic, and activity
levels of adjacent
buildings and uses.

IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning Ongoing
CR8.8 Encourage
private developments
to provide parking in
excess of that required
by the Municipal Code
for lease to other
IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 250
Page | 34

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
businesses with
parking deficiencies.

CR8.9 Encourage the
redesign of existing
parking lots if
additional spaces can
be created as well as
spaces for bicycles and
motorcycles.

IM-CR 8.1 Implement fee based
parking
New Planning, Engineering Ongoing
CR8.10 Provide
appropriate and
consistent signage to
direct motorists to
public and private
parking areas.

IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning, Engineering Short
CR8.11 Utilize parking
fees and on demand
pricing to promote
vehicle turnover and
increase parking
availability in
Downtown while
helping to encourage
carbon free/reduced
alternative
transportation such as
walking, bicycles,
public transportation,
and ride share.

IM-CR 8.1 Implement fee based
parking
New Planning, Community
and Economic
Development
Medium
Item 2A - Page 251
Page | 35

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR8.12 Encourage
businesses to
implement innovative
approaches to
employee parking
such as the
development of
satellite parking areas
that allow employees
to park at remote
locations outside of
Downtown and
provide shuttle access
to the workplace if the
parking site is located
more than one-quarter
mile from the
workplace to make
parking spaces
Downtown more
available to customers
and visitors.

IM-CR 8.2 Parking Strategies and
Standards
New Planning Long
Goal
CCR 9 MMaintain and operate safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally responsible airport and heliport facilities in the City..

Policies
CR9.1 Ensure airport
and heliport
operations in Palm
Springs are consistent
NA NA NA Aviation

Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 252
Page | 36

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
with the Federal
Aviation Regulation
Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Study, as
amended from time to
time and consider the
provisions of the Palm
Springs Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan
prepared by the
Riverside County
Airport Land Use
Commission.

CR9.2 Establish the
City’s commercial
streets as the principal
helicopter flight
corridors and require
that helicopter takeoff
and landing patterns
be limited to
commercial areas.

IM-CR 9.1

Coordinate with the
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to
update the Helicopter
Route Chart Program
New

Aviation Medium
CR9.3 Require that
helicopters utilizing
City airspace fly in
compliance with
Federal Air
Regulations (FAR) Part
91 rules.

NA NA NA Aviation Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 253
Page | 37

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR9.4 Establish
multimodal circulation
linkages (busses,
trams, bicycle
infrastructure, etc.) to
and from the airport to
relieve parking and
traffic loads at the
airport.

IM-CR 9.2 Conduct a periodic
review of the Palm
Springs Airport Master
Plan to ensure that the
airport can properly
respond to future
aviation demands.

CR9.1 Planning, Aviation,
Engineering,
Sustainability
Ongoing IM-CR 9.3 Consider opportunity to
enhance wayfinding
signage to direct
visitors to and from the
airport to access the
circulation network.

New Aviation, Engineering Medium
Goal
CCR 10 PProvide adequate and safe utility systems and facilities to support the CCity’s existing and proposed land uses.

Policies
CR10.1 Require utility
improvements where
existing systems are
deficient.

IM-CR 10.1 Solicit funds for the
improvement and
maintenance of the
City’s public
infrastructure from state
and federal agencies
when such revenue is
available and the costs
cannot be assigned to
development projects.

CR10.4 Engineering Ongoing
CR10.2 Coordinate
public infrastructure
improvements through
IM-CR 10.2 Initiate a Capital
Improvement Program
to upgrade sewer
CR10.2 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 254
Page | 38

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
the City’s Capital
Improvement
Program.
systems, streets, and
public open space as
required.

IM-CR 10.3 Investigate municipal
bonding programs to
finance public
improvements and
maintenance costs.

CR10.6 Engineering Ongoing
CR10.3 Encourage the
shared use of major
transmission corridors
and other appropriate
measures to minimize
the impact on the
aesthetic appearance
of the City, including
relocating overhead
utilities underground.

NA NA NA
CR10.4 Continue and
expand existing
programs for the
upgrade of storm
drainage systems
where they are
deficient, using public
or private funds.

IM-CR 10.1 Solicit funds for the
improvement and
maintenance of the
City’s public
infrastructure
CR10.4 Engineering Ongoing
IM-CR 10.2 Initiate a Capital
Improvement Program

CR10.2 Engineering Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 255
Page | 39

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR10.5 Require that
new development be
contingent upon the
project’s ability to
secure appropriate
infrastructure services.

IM-CR 6.3 Review proposed
development projects
and applications
New Planning Ongoing
CR10.6 Require
developers of new
projects to pay for the
costs of construction
and expansion water,
sewer/wastewater,
storm drainage
improvements and
other public utilities
necessitated by that
development.

IM-CR 10.4 Enact ordinances that
promote water
conservation in existing
facilities and that make
water conservation a
mandatory requirement
for all new
development.

CR10.1 Planning, Community
and Economic
Development
Ongoing
IM-CR 6.3 Review proposed
development projects
and applications
New Planning Ongoing
CR10.7 Require
developers to notify
utility agencies of their
intent to develop a site
early in the
development process
to provide sufficient
time to plan for
necessary capital
improvements.

NA NA NA
CR10.8 Update the
Sewer System Master

NA NA NA
Item 2A - Page 256
Page | 40

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
Plan as needed to
accommodate the
demands of new and
existing development.

CR10.9 Monitor sewer
flows on a regular
basis to aid in the
development of
construction
schedules.

IM-CR 10.5 Update the sewer flow
estimates (including the
trunk sewers) as
funding is available,
based on present and
future use as defined in
the Land Use Element.

CR10.5 Engineering Ongoing
CR10.10 Require new
projects to connect
with the City’s
storm/sewer system
unless a hardship can
be demonstrated. If
septic systems must be
used require
installation of septic
systems to meet State
Water Resources
Control Board
Standards.

IM-CR 6.3 Review proposed
development projects
and applications
New Planning Ongoing
CR10.11 Monitor and
reassess rates for
sanitation/wastewater
connection and
service. This
IM-CR 10.6 Form benefit
assessment districts in
which those who
benefit from
infrastructure
CR10.3 Public Works Ongoing
Item 2A - Page 257
Page | 41

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
assessment should
reflect the costs of
service and
improvements and be
equitably allocated to
users according to
demands.
improvements pay a
prorated share of the
costs.

CR10.12 Participate in
the annual review of
the Desert Water
Agency, Mission
Springs Water District,
and Coachella Valley
Water District Water
System Master Plan to
evaluate how it is
consistent with the
City’s General Plan and
approved projects.

NA NA NA
CR10.13 Work with
the Desert Water
Agency, Coachella
Valley Water District,
and Mission Springs
Water District to
promote water and
wastewater
conservation practices.

NA NA NA
Item 2A - Page 258
Page | 42

GOALS AND

POLICIES
ACTION
NUMBER

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS/PROGRAMS
ACTION

NUMBER IN
2007

GENERAL
PLAN

RESPONSIBLE

DEPARTMENT TIMING
CR10.14 Continue to
implement a fee
schedule to assess
new development on a
prorated basis for the
cost of new sewer and
storm drainage
systems.

IM-CR 10.3 Form benefit
assessment districts

10.3 Planning Ongoing CR10.15 Encourage
all large-scale turf and
irrigation projects to
use tertiary treated
water when feasible.

IM-CR 10.1 Enact ordinances that
promote water
conservation
CR10.1 Planning Ongoing
CR10.16 Coordinate
with public and private
providers of data
transmission and
internet access
services to develop
“WiFi” zones in the City
to support and
promote greater
accessibility to
information and
communication
resources via the
internet.

IM-CR 10.7 Prepare a Broadband
Master Plan to assess
opportunities for the
expansion of access to
high speed internet
within the City
New Community and
Economic
Development
Medium
Item 2A - Page 259

Draft Transportation Impact
Analysis for Palm Springs General
Plan

Prepared for:

City of Palm Springs

May 2023

OC19-0681

Item 2A - Page 260
Table of Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3

1.1 Project Description...................................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Analysis Scenarios ....................................................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3

2. Analysis Methodologies ......................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled ............................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Level of Service ............................................................................................................................................................. 5

2.3 Regulatory Setting and Significance Criteria .................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis ............................................................................................................ 6

3. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................. 8

3.1 Existing Roadway Facilities ...................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.1 Regional Roads .................................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.2 Local Roads ............................................................................................................................................................ 8

3.1.3 Roadway Segment Level of Service ............................................................................................................. 9

3.2 Existing Intersections ...............................................................................................................................................11

3.2.1 Intersection Level of Service .........................................................................................................................11

3.3 Existing Transit Facilities .........................................................................................................................................15

3.3.1 Bus Routes ...........................................................................................................................................................15

3.3.2 Paratransit ............................................................................................................................................................15

3.3.3 Passenger Rail.....................................................................................................................................................16

3.4 Existing Bicycle Facilities .........................................................................................................................................16

3.4.1 Bicycle Facility Classifications .......................................................................................................................16

3.4.2 Bicycle Facility Locations ................................................................................................................................18

3.5 Existing Pedestrian Facilities .................................................................................................................................21

4. Impact Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 22

3.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled .............................................................................................................................................22

5. Level of Service Analysis ....................................................................................................... 24

5.1 Cumulative (2045) Year ...........................................................................................................................................24

5.1.1 Cumulative (2045) Year Forecasts ..............................................................................................................24

5.1.2 Roadway Segment Level of Service ...........................................................................................................25 Item 2A - Page 261

5.1.3 Intersection Level of Service .........................................................................................................................27

6. CEQA Checklist Review ......................................................................................................... 32

6.1.1 Checklist Item A .................................................................................................................................................32

6.1.2 Checklist Item B .................................................................................................................................................32

6.1.3 Checklist Item C .................................................................................................................................................32

6.1.4 Checklist Item D .................................................................................................................................................33

Appendices

Appendix A: Synchro LOS Worksheets

List of Tables

Table 1: Significance Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................ 6

Table 2: VMT Significance Thresholds .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3: Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 4: LOS Threshold for Roadway Segments ..................................................................................................................... 9 Table 5: Existing (2019) Roadway Segment Level of Service .......................................................................................... 10 Table 6: Intersection Level of Service Grades ......................................................................................................................... 12 Table 7: Existing (2019) Intersection Level of Service ........................................................................................................ 12 Table 8: City of Palm Springs Bus Route Information ......................................................................................................... 15 Table 9: Project Generated Vehicle Miles Traveled .............................................................................................................. 22 Table 10: Cumulative Vehicle Miles Traveled ......................................................................................................................... 23 Table 11: Cumulative (2045) Roadway Segment Level of Service .................................................................................. 26 Table 12: Cumulative (2045) Intersection Level of Service ................................................................................................ 29

List of Figures
Figure 1: Palm Springs Existing Intersection Turning Movement Counts ................................................................... 14 Figure 2: Palm Springs Existing and Proposed Bike Facilities……… ………………………………… …………………………... 20 Figure 3: Palm Springs Cumulative No Project Intersection Turning Movement Forecasts ................................ 31 Figure 4: Palm Springs Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Turning Movement Forecasts .............................. 32 Item 2A - Page 262
This page intentionally left blank.

Item 2A - Page 263



  
ɶ´ÆźǶƾ¾²ÃÊ
352326('*(1(5$/3/$183'$7(
)HKU 3HHUVKDVFRPSOHWHGDWUDQVSRUWDWLRQDQDO\VLVIRUWKHSU RSRVHG*HQHUDO3ODQ8SGDWHLQWKH&LW\RI 3 D O P 6 S U L Q J V  & D O L I R U Q L D  7 K H S U R S R V H G & L W \ R I 3 D O P 6 S U L Q J V * H QHUDO 3ODQ 8SGDWH WKH SURMHFW
 LQFOXGHV
UHVLGHQWLDOFRPPHUFLDOLQGXVWULDODQGPL[HGXVHODQGXVHGHVLJQDWLRQV,QWRWDOWKH*HQHUDO3ODQODQGXVH SURSRVHVQHWLQFUHDVHRIDSSUR[LPDWHO\KRXVHKROGVDQG MREV 6&23(2)678'<
5RDGZD\VHJPHQWVLQWHUVHFWLRQVDQGPXOWLPRGDOWUDQVSRUWDWLRQ IDFLOLWLHVVXFKDVSHGHVWULDQELF\FOHDQG WUDQVLWZHUHDOOFRQVLGHUHGLQWKLVWUDQVSRUWDWLRQLPSDFWDVVHV VPHQWVWXG\7KHVWXG\DUHDLQFOXGHGPDMRU URDGZD\IDFLOLWLHVDQGFULWLFDOLQWHUVHFWLRQVLQWKH&LW\RI3DOP6SULQJV7KH&LW\RI3DOP6SULQJV9HKLFOH0LOHV 7UDYHOHG
907
907ZHUHHYDOXDWHG
$1$/<6,60(7+2'2/2*,(6
7KH+LJKZD\&DSDFLW\0DQXDO WK(GLWLRQPHWKRGRORJ\ZDVXVHGIRUURDGZD\VHJPHQWVDQGLQWHUVHF WLRQV &(4$LPSDFWVZHUHDVVHVVHGXVLQJWKH&LW\RI3DOP6SULQJVDGRSWHG9HKLFOH0LOHV7UDYHOHG 907
WKUHVKROG
R I V L J Q L I L F D Q F H  7 K H 5 L Y H U V L G H & R X Q W \ 0 R G H O  5 , 9 & 2 0
Z D V X V H G WR GHYHORS IXWXUH \HDU WUDIILF YROXPH IRUHFDVWVDQGWRHYDOXDWH907
5(68/76
7KLV WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ LPSDFWV DVVHVVPHQW ZDV GRQH XQGHU WKH IUDPH ZRUN RI &(4$ 907 SHU 6HUYLFH 3 R S X O D W L R Q G H F U H D V H G  Z K L F K L Q G L F D W H V W K D W W U D Y H O E H F R P H V P R U H HIILFLHQW LQ 3DOP 6SULQJV ZLWK WKH LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI WKH XSGDWHG *HQHUDO 3ODQ 7KHUHIRUH WKH LPSDFW WR WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ LV FRQVLGHUHGOHVV WKDQVLJQLILFDQWXQGHU&(4$
$OORWKHULWHPVFRYHUHGLQ$SSHQGL[*RIWKH&DOLIRUQLD(QYLURQ PHQWDO4XDOLW\$FW &(4$
*XLGHOLQHV

&&5HWVHT
ZHUHGHWHUPLQHGWRKDYHOHVVWKDQVLJQLILFDQ WLPSDFWV 7KHDVVHVVPHQWIRXQGWKHIROORZLQJURDGZD\VLQFOXGHGVHJPHQWVWKDWRSHUDWHGEHORZWKHHVWDEOLVKHG/26 VWDQGDUGZLWKWKHEXLOGRXWRIWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ

 +LJKZD\
 6XQULVH:D\
 *HQH$XWU\7UDLO
 5DPRQ5RDG
 (3DOP&DQ\RQ'ULYH
7KHVHVHJPHQWVDUHSURMHFWHGWRRSHUDWH´DWFDSDFLW\µDW/26( RU´RYHUFDSDFLW\µ/26)ZLWKWKHEXLOGRXW R I W K H * H Q H U D O 3 O D Q  $ O O L G H Q W L I L H G V H J P H Q W V Z H U H S U R M H F W H G W R R S H U D W H D W / 2 6 ( R U ) L Q W K H S U H Y L R X V O \  DSSURYHG*HQHUDO3ODQ
7KHDVVHVVPHQWIRXQGWKHIROORZLQJLQWHUVHFWLRQVRSHUDWHGEHORZ WKHHVWDEOLVKHG/26VWDQGDUGZLWKWKH EXLOGRXWRIWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ

 9LVWD&KLQRDW+LJKZD\
Item 2A - Page 264

&LW\RI3DOP6SULQJV*HQHUDO3ODQ8SGDWH
0D\

 9LVWD&KLQRDW6XQULVH:D\
 9LVWD&KLQRDW)DUUHOO'U
 $OHMR5RDGDW,QGLDQ&DQ\RQ'ULYH
 7DKTXLW]&DQ\RQ:D\DW,QGLDQ&DQ\RQ'ULYH
 5DPRQ5GDW6XQULVH:\
 5DPRQ5GDW)DUUHOO'U
 (&DPLQR3DURFHODDW,QGLDQ&DQ\RQ'U63DOP&DQ\RQ'U  (3DOP&DQ\RQ'UDW6XQULVH:\
7KHVHVHJPHQWVDUHSURMHFWHGWRRSHUDWH´DWFDSDFLW\µDW/26( RU´RYHUFDSDFLW\µ/26)ZLWKWKHEXLOGRXW RIWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ$OOLGHQWLILHGLQWHUVHFWLRQVZHUHSURMHFWH GWRRSHUDWHDW/26(RU)LQWKHSUHYLRXVO\ DSSURYHG*HQHUDO3ODQZLWKWKHH[FHSWLRQVRI9LVWD&KLQR DW+LJKZD\ZKLFKZDVSURMHFWHGWR RSHUDWHDW/26'LQWKH30SHDNKRXUXQGHUWKH*HQHUDO3OD QDQGLVSURMHFWHGWRRSHUDWHGDW/26( LQWKH30SHDNKRXUXQGHUWKLVSURSRVHG*HQHUDO3ODQXSGDWH 

Item 2A - Page 265

3 1. Introduction
Fehr & Peers has completed the transportation impact analysis for the proposed Palm Springs General Plan Update in the City of Palm Springs, California. This report summarizes the methodology, findings and conclusions of the analyses, including identification of recommended mitigation measures necessary to maintain consistency with the goals and policies of the proposed General Plan.

This chapter outlines the geographic scope of the transportation impact analysis, including the study area.

1.1 Project Description
The proposed City of Palm Springs General Plan Updated consists of the buildout of residential and nonresidential development within the City and changes to the City’s circulation system. The General Plan update assumes a growth of 25,773 households and 30,081 jobs.

1.2 Analysis Scenarios
To identify potential significant project impacts, Fehr & Peers analyzed the effects of traffic under the following three scenarios:
x Existing Year (2019) Conditions – Roadway volumes were purchased from a big data provider, Streetlight Data. The data was collected using anonymized and aggregated GPS and cell phone data. The volumes represent the average daily traffic on Tuesdays-Thursdays throughout 2019 while schools were in session. This data was compared to historic counts provided by the City of Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). x Cumulative Year (2045) No Project Conditions – Consists of forecasted volumes to Year 2045 based on growth and travel forecasts contained in the Riverside County Model (RIVCOM). This scenario assumes minimal change in existing land use for the City of Palm Springs. x Cumulative Year (2045) Plus Project Conditions – Consists of forecasted volumes to Year 2045 based on the growth and travel forecasts contained in the Riverside County Model (RIVCOM) and the land use projects proposed by the General Plan Update.

Roadway segment and intersection Level of Service (LOS) is reported for these analysis scenarios; however, this information is not used to identify significant project impacts. The City of Palm Springs adopted CEQA thresholds consistent with Senate Bill 743, which identified that Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) would be used to evaluate significant transportation impacts under CEQA.

1.3 Study Area
The study area of this analysis includes roadway segments and intersections in the City of Palm Springs that are anticipated to be affected by the proposed General Plan. The following lists define the study area:

Item 2A - Page 266

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
4 Roadway Segments:

1. Highway 111 north of Vista Chino

2. Indian Canyon north of Vista Chino

3. Sunrise Way north of Vista Chino

4. Gene Autry Trail north of Vista Chino

5. Vista Chino between Palm Canyon and Sunrise Way

6. Vista Chino between Sunrise Way and Gene Autry Trail

7. Palm Canyon between Vista Chino and Alejo Road

8. Indian Canyon between Vista Chino and Alejo Road

9. Palm canyon between Alejo Road and Ramon Road

10. Indian canyon between Alejo Road and Ramon Road

11. Sunrise Way between Vista Chino and Tahquitz Canyon Way

12. Gene Autry Trail between Vista Chino and Tahquitz Canyon Way

13. Alejo Road between Palm Canyon Drive and Sunrise Way

14. Tahquitz Canyon Way between Palm Canyon Drive and Sunrise Way

15. Tahquitz Canyon Way between Sunrise Way and El Cielo Rd

16. Ramon Road between Palm Canyon Drive and Sunrise Way

17. Ramon Road between Sunrise Way and Gene Autry Trail

18. Palm Canyon Drive between Ramon Road and E Palm Canyon Drive

19. Sunrise Way between Ramon Road and E Palm Canyon Drive

20. Gene Autry Trail between Ramon Road and E Palm Canyon Drive

21. E Palm Canyon Drive between Palm Canyon Drive and Sunrise Way

22. E Palm Canyon Drive between Sunrise Way and Gene Autry Trail Study Intersections:

1. Alejo Road and Sunrise Way

2. Vista Chino and Hwy 111

3. Vista Chino and Sunrise Way

4. Vista Chino and Farrell Drive

5. Vista Chino and Gene Autry Trail

6. Ramon Road and Sunrise Way

7. Ramon Road and Farrell Drive

8. E Palm Canyon and Sunrise Way

9. E. Palm Canyon and Farrell Drive

10. Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way

11. Alejo Road and Indian Canyon Drive

12. Tahquitz and Indian Canyon Drive

13. Ramon Road and Indian Canyon Drive

14. E. Camino Parocela and Indian Canyon Drive/S. Palm Canyon Drive

Item 2A - Page 267

5 2. Analysis Methodologies
The transportation impact analysis methodology includes a combination of quantitative and qualitative evaluations of the roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit components of the transportation system. All analysis presumes that future background travel conditions remain relatively constant and do not account for potential changes associated with disruptive trends such as increased use of transportation networking companies (TNCs), which include Uber and Lyft, internet shopping, other internet related activities, automated vehicles (AVs), and micro-transit services.

2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled
RIVCOM was used to forecast roadway segment volumes and estimate existing and future VMT. This model is consistent with the 2020 SCAG RTP/SCS; it has a base year of 2018 and a forecast year of 2045.

The 2045 roadway network and land use inputs were revised to reflect the new General Plan conditions for the Cumulative Year Plus Project analysis.

2.2 Level of Service
Level of service was evaluated for roadway segments and intersections in the City of Palm Springs to ensure consistency with adopted General Plan policies. For both segments and intersections, methodology consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board (TRB), 2017) was followed.

The volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio is reported for each roadway segment and intersection. After the quantitative V/C or delay estimates are complete, the methodologies assign a qualitative letter grade which represents the operations of the intersection. These grades range from level of service (LOS) A (minimal delay) to LOS F (excessive congestion). LOS E represents at-capacity operations.

2.3 Regulatory Setting and Significance Criteria
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to transportation are based on the City of Palm Springs Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 2020) and the CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist (2021). Specific criteria to be used for identifying potential transportation impacts are:

Item 2A - Page 268

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
6 Table 1: Significance Criteria
Impact Categories CEQA Significance Criteria
Plan Conflict The project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

VMT Impacts¹ The project would result in a VMT-related impact as described below Hazard Impact
The project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Emergency Access Impact The project would result in inadequate emergency access.

Note: 1. Refer to Table 2
Source: AEP, 2021
For plan conflicts addressing the circulation system, a review of transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities are provided in Chapter 3. For VMT impacts, the City’s guidelines include detailed thresholds for project and cumulative conditions as shown in Table 2. In this case, the Project proposes the addition of 25,773 households and 30,081 jobs.

Table 2: VMT Significance Thresholds
Impact Categories Significance Thresholds
Project Level Impacts
¾ The baseline project-generated VMT per service population exceeds the City of Palm Springs General Plan Buildout VMT per service population, or ¾ The cumulative project-generated VMT per service population exceeds the City of Palm Springs General Plan Buildout VMT per service population Cumulative Impacts
¾ The cumulative link-level boundary VMT per service population within the City boundary increases under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition.

Note: 1. Service population is typically defined as population plus employment. For campuses, service population is defined as population plus employment plus students. The transportation consultant shall not double count resident students twice in this evaluation (i.e., shall not count students that also live on campus).

Source: City of Palm Springs TIA Guidelines, 2020

2.4 Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
The latest version of RIVCOM was used to estimate the existing VMT per Service Population for the City of Palm Springs.

VMT was estimated using the Origin/Destination (OD) method. This was completed by multiplying the OD trip tables and the final assignment skim matrices. The OD tables provided the number of trips between each Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ), and the skim matrices provided the distance on the roadway network, or Item 2A - Page 269

7 trip length, between each TAZ. The full length of all trips with an origin or destination in the TAZ representing the City of Palm Springs were used to estimate the City VMT.

VMT was also estimated using the Production/Attraction (PA) method. This was completed by summing all weekday VMT generated by trips with at least one trip end in the study area. The PA method is completed after the fourth (out of five) loops of assignment in the travel demand model, while trips are still tracked by trip purpose. Productions and attractions are converted from person trips to vehicle trips for the purposes of calculating VMT. PA matrices do not include trips that have one trip end outside of the model boundary (IX-XI trips) and, therefore, do not include those trips in the VMT estimates. Home-based PA VMT represents VMT generated that starts or ends at a home in the City of Palm Springs. Home-based-work PA VMT represents all commute VMT generated by residents and employees in the City of Palm Springs.

The City of Palm Springs City Boundary and Sphere of Influence have both been provided. The Sphere of influence and PA VMT performance are provided for informational purposes only, all impact conclusions will be made based on OD VMT within the City’s boundaries.

Table 3: Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled
Metric VMT
City of Palm Springs City Boundary
OD VMT (Daily total) 3,131,065
OD VMT per Service Population 39.04
PA Home-based VMT (Daily total) 416,747
PA Home-based VMT per Resident 8.69
PA Home-based-work VMT (Daily total) 690,976
PA Home-based-work VMT per Employee 21.42
City of Palm Springs Sphere of Influence
OD VMT (Daily total) 3,213,152
OD VMT per Service Population 39.18
PA Home-based VMT (Daily total) 454,290
PA Home-based VMT per Resident 9.15
PA Home-based-work VMT (Daily total) 695,369
PA Home-based-work VMT per Employee 21.48
Note: Service population includes residents and employees.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

Item 2A - Page 270

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
8 3. Existing Conditions
This chapter discusses the existing transportation conditions in the City of Palm Springs, including the roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks.

3.1 Existing Roadway Facilities

3.1.1 Regional Roads
Highway 111 (Hwy 111) – Hwy-111 is a north-south highway beginning in the City of Whitewater, California and terminating in the City of Calexico, California. Within the city limits, the corridor has six lanes with a posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour.

Interstate 10 (I-10) San Bernardino Freeway - I-10 freeway is located in the North Palm Springs area and has ten lanes, including two high-occupancy vehicles lanes, with a posted speed limit of 60 miles per hour. I-10 freeway provides five exits to the City of Palm Springs, including an exit leading to a rest area. I-10 does not pass directly through the City of Palm Springs.

3.1.2 Local Roads
Vista Chino – Vista Chino is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan. Vista Chino is an east-west facility with four to six lanes and a posted speed limit of 25 to 50 miles per hour.

Indian Canyon Drive – Indian Canyon Drive is classified as a Major Thoroughfare north of Alejo Road, and a Two-Way Modified Collector from Alejo Road to Ramon Road in the Proposed General Plan. Indian Canyon Drive is a north-south facility with four lanes north of Alejo Road and three lanes below Alejo Road and has a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour.

Sunrise Way – Sunrise Way is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan. Sunrise Way is a north-south facility with four lanes and a posted speed limit of 25 to 45 miles per hour.

Gene Autry Trail – Gene Autry Trail is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan.

Gene Autry Trail is a north-south facility with four to six lanes and a posted speed limit of 45 to 55 miles per hour.

Palm Canyon Drive – Palm Canyon Drive is classified as a One-Way Modified Arterial northeast of San Rafael Drive and in between Alejo Road and Ramon Road, a Secondary Thoroughfare between San Rafael Drive and Vista Chino, and a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan. Palm Canyon Drive is a north-south facility and an east-west facility with three to four lanes and a posted speed limit of 25 to 50 miles per hour.

Alejo Road – Alejo Road is classified as a Modified Collector in the Proposed General Plan. Alejo Road is an east-west facility with two lanes and a posted speed limit of 35 to 45 miles per hour.

Item 2A - Page 271

9 Ramon Road – Ramon Road is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan. Ramon Road is an east-west facility with four to six lanes and a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour.

Tahquitz Canyon Way – Tahquitz Canyon Way is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the Proposed General Plan. Tahquitz Canyon Way is an east-west facility with four lanes and a posted speed limit of 35 to 40 miles per hour.

Amado Road – Amado Road is classified as a Collector Street in the Proposed General Plan. Amado Road is an east-west facility with two lanes and a posted speed limit of 40 miles per hour.

Avenida Caballeros – Avenida Caballeros is classified as a Modified Collector in the Proposed General Plan. Avenida Caballeros is a north-south facility with two lanes and a posted speed limit of 25 to 35 miles per hour.

Farrell Drive – Farrell Drive is classified as a Secondary Thoroughfare north of Ramon Road and a Modified Collector south of Ramon Road in the Proposed General Plan. Farrell Drive is a north-south facility with two to four lanes and has a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour.

3.1.3 Roadway Segment Level of Service
This section evaluates existing roadway segment operations using Chapter 16 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6 th Edition (Transportation Research Board (TRB), 2017). Roadway segments are evaluated using daily service volumes, which may be used to identify how much additional roadway capacity is available. The methodology assigns a qualitative letter grade range from C (stable operation) to E (unstable operation and congestion) that represents the operations of the roadway, as presented in Table 4Error! Reference source not found..

Table 4: LOS Threshold for Roadway Segments
Number of Lanes LOS C LOS D LOS E
Collector
2 (1 lane in each direction) 1,600 10,800 16,400
4 (2 lanes in each direction) 2,000 22,700 32,800
6 (3 lanes in each direction) 2,400 35,600 49,500
Arterial
2 (1 lane in each direction) 7,100 14,500 16,800
4 (2 lanes in each direction) 15,100 30,800 33,700
6 (3 lanes in each direction) 23,400 47,400 50,700
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (TRB, 2016), Fehr & Peers.

As noted above, at the time of completing this assessment, traditional traffic counts were not considered reliable due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Roadway volumes were purchased from a big data Item 2A - Page 272

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
10 provider, StreetLight Data. The data was collected using anonymized and aggregated GPS and cell phone data. The volumes represent the average daily traffic on Tuesdays-Thursdays throughout 2019 while schools were in session. This data was compared to historic counts provided by the City of Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). The StreetLight volumes were adjusted based on historic trends and used to evaluate the existing roadway segment LOS, which is presented below in Table 5.

Table 5: Existing (2019) Roadway Segment Level of Service Location Facility Type Number of
Lanes AADT LOS
Hwy 111
North of Vista Chino Secondary Thoroughfare 4 25,780 E
Indian Canyon Drive
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 19,360 A
Vista Chino to Alejo Road Major Thoroughfare 4 19,910 A Alejo Road to Ramon Road Two-Way Modified Collector 3 18,060 B Sunrise Way
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 16,710 A
Vista Chino to Ramon Road Major Thoroughfare 4 25,770 C Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 24,010 B Gene Autry Trail
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 33,910 E
Vista Chino to Ramon Road Major Thoroughfare 6 33,510 B Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 35,070 E Vista Chino
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 23,650 B Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail Major Thoroughfare 6 35,260 B Palm Canyon Drive
Vista Chino to Alejo Road Major Thoroughfare 4 19,060 A Alejo Road to Ramon Road One-Way Modified Arterial 3 12,780 A Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 24,830 B Alejo Road
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Modified Collector 2 7,290 A Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 13,580 A Sunrise Way to El Cielo Rd Major Thoroughfare 4 17,770 A Item 2A - Page 273

11 Table 5: Existing (2019) Roadway Segment Level of Service Location Facility Type Number of
Lanes AADT LOS
Ramon Road
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 26,480 C Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail Major Thoroughfare 6 47,070 D E Palm Canyon Drive
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 25,620 C Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail Major Thoroughfare 4 40,290 F Notes:

1. Bold symbolizes unacceptable LOS.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022.

3.2 Existing Intersections
As noted in the discussion of roadway segments, at the time of completing this assessment, traditional traffic counts were not considered reliable due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Intersection turning movement counts were compiled from recent traffic studies and data the City and CVAG had collected. The counts were then grown based on historic trends observed in the StreetLight data comparison described above to represent intersection volumes as of 2019.

3.2.1 Intersection Level of Service
Signalized intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2017) methodology. The HCM 6th Edition methodology for signalized intersections estimates the average control delay for vehicles at the intersection.

For unsignalized study intersections methodologies consistent with HCM 6th Edition were utilized to evaluate intersection operations. The HCM 6th Edition methodology for unsignalized intersections estimates the average control delay for vehicles at all-way stop-controlled intersections and estimates the worst-case movement delay for side-street stop-controlled intersections.

Descriptions of the LOS letter grades for intersections are provided in Table 6 and LOS results are provided in Table 7. The existing intersection turning movement counts in the City are shown on Figure

1. All analysis was performed using the Synchro 11 software. Level of Service worksheets are provided in Appendix A.

Item 2A - Page 274

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
12 Table 6: Intersection Level of Service Grades
Level of Service Description Signalized Delay
(Seconds)
Unsignalized
Delay (Seconds)
A Operations with very low delay occurring with
favorable progression and/or short cycle length < 10.0 < 10.0 B Operations with low delay occurring with good
progression and/or short cycle lengths > 10.0 to 20.0 > 10.0 to 15.0 C
Operations with average delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual
cycle failures begin to appear
> 20.0 to 35.0 > 15.0 to 25.0
D
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high
V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle
failures are noticeable
> 35.0 to 55.0 > 25.0 to 35.0
E
Operations with high delay values indicating poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios.

Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences
> 55.0 to 80.0 > 35.0 to 50.0
F
Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers
occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or
very long cycle lengths
> 80.0 > 50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (TRB, 2017), Fehr & Peers.

Existing intersections operations are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7: Existing (2019) Intersection Level of Service Intersection Peak Hour LOS / Average Delay
1 Vista Chino and Hwy 111

AM D / 36
PM F / 97
2 Vista Chino and Sunrise Way
AM C / 23
PM C / 27
3 Vista Chino at Farrell Dr

AM C / 26
PM C / 26
4 Vista Chino and Gene Autry Trail
AM D / 54
PM D / 54
5 Alejo Rd and Indian Canyon Dr

AM C / 21
PM B / 14
6 AM B / 13
Item 2A - Page 275

13 Notes:

1. Delay operations were calculated using HCM 6th methodologies, unless stated otherwise.

2. Due to limitations in the Synchro 11 Software and unique intersection geometries or signal timing, delay operations were calculated using HCM 2000 methodologies.

3. Bold symbolizes unacceptable LOS.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

Table 7: Existing (2019) Intersection Level of Service Intersection Peak Hour LOS / Average Delay
Alejo Rd and Sunrise Way

PM B / 16
7 Tahquitz and Indian Canyon Drive
AM B / 13
PM B / 12
8 Tahquitz Canyon Way and Sunrise Way
AM B / 15
PM B / 20
9 Ramon Rd and Indian Canyon Dr
AM A / 10
PM B / 12
10 Ramon Rd and Sunrise Way
AM B / 16
PM C / 21
11 Ramon Rd and Farrell Dr
AM B / 16
PM B / 17
12 E. Camino Parocela and Indian Canyon/S. Palm Canyon
AM C / 24
PM D / 39
13 E Palm Canyon and Sunrise Way
AM B / 18
PM C / 25
14 E Palm Canyon and Farrell Dr
AM A / 9
PM B/13
Item 2A - Page 276
Figure x
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
and Lane Configurations -
Existing Condition
121 (57)
464 (876)
43 (124)
96 (106)
116 (251)
386 (427)
203 (298)

9. Indian Canyon Dr/Ramon Rd
126 (133)
299 (384)
133 (130)
47 (111)
236 (552)
110 (179)
60 (91)
397 (479)
142 (212)
148 (220)
400 (658)
212 (132)

10. Sunrise Way/Ramon Rd
51 (47)
254 (253)
90 (95)
31 (39)
481 (659)
33 (40)
69 (52)
175 (265)
122 (141)
132 (152)
772 (665)
91 (80)

11. Farrell Dr/Ramon Rd
519 (807)
13 (31)
80 (132)
12 (0)
14 (37)
5 (52)
62 (57)

12. Indian Canyon/S Palm Canyon/E Camino Parocela
43 (82)
142 (212)
172 (179)
60 (69)
356 (637)
32 (37)
69 (89)
202 (211)
215 (328)
201 (281)
446 (656)
212 (217)

13. Sunrise Way/E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr
21 (64)
25 (51)
25 (30)
6 (22)
589 (1,204)
32 (75)
144 (156)
16 (37)
41 (50)
42 (125)
946 (1,386)
234 (179)

14. Farrell Dr/Barona Rd/E Palm Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd
Sunrise Way
Ramon Rd
Farrell Dr
E Camino Parocela
Indian CanyonS Palm Canyon
E Palm Canyon Dr E Palm Dr
Sunrise Way
E Palm Canyon Dr
Farrell DrBarona Rd
37 (94)
119 (353)
175 (120)
40 (53)
31 (45)
2 (4) 179 (29)
379 (317)
298 (153)
257 (284)
30 (2)
110 (204)

1. Hwy 111/Vista Chino
150 (230)
240 (383)
77 (131)
27 (56)
351 (486)
198 (105)
35 (41)
400 (237)
117 (175)
24 (45)
523 (411)
228 (164)

2. Sunrise Way/Vista Chino
35 (104)
103 (317)
176 (367)
19 (39)
542 (593)
69 (105)
36 (19)
436 (165)
235 (148)
119 (155)
806 (553)
277 (208)

3. Farrell Dr/Vista Chino
78 (194)
249 (856)
190 (332)
345 (311)
566 (1,177)
130 (252)
61 (110)
833 (529)
378 (277)
153 (161)
959 (687)
62 (125)

4. Gene Autry Trail/Vista Chino
276 (233)
832 (710)
54 (45)
78 (43)
166 (166)
157 (217)
250 (335)
178 (212)
234 (127)

5. Indian Canyon Dr/Alejo Rd
16 (41)
326 (794)
41 (95)
60 (107)
138 (133)
12 (49)
16 (33)
607 (675)
77 (69)
25 (28)
98 (119)
20 (26)

6. Sunrise Way/Alejo Rd
129 (139)
881 (696)
117 (126)
119 (95)
198 (236)
134 (146)
329 (242)

7. Indian Canyon Dr/Tahquitz Canyon Way
29 (59)
373 (700)
91 (138)
71 (110)
155 (231)
22 (106)
89 (117)
507 (546)
64 (100)
48 (70)
187 (368)
45 (89)

8. Sunrise Way/Tahquitz Canyon Way
Vista Chino
Hwy 111
Vista Chino
Sunrise Way
Vista Chino
Farrell Dr
Vista Chino
Gene Autry Trail
Alejo Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Alejo Rd
Sunrise Way
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Indian Canyon Dr
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Sunrise Way
bcce
ac
cef
ace
accf
accf
accf
ace
accf
acf
accf
ccf
bf
ac
aacf
aaccf
aace
aaccf
acf
accf
acf
accf
ace
bf
ace
bf
aace
acce
ace
ace
accf
acce
ace
ace
aaccf
accf
aaccf
accf
accf
ac
af
ccf
ace
ae
ace
acf
bcce
ac
cf
aace
accf
aace
accf
Turn Lane
AC
Peak HourAM
F
(PM) Traffic Vol

ume
LEGEND
Stop Sign
Signal
Roundabout
1 Item 2A - Page 277

15 3.3 Existing Transit Facilities
Within the City of Palm Springs, there are currently bus routes provided by SunLine and the Morongo Basin Transit Authority (MBTA), and rail service provided by Amtrak.

3.3.1 Bus Routes
The bus routes and schedules listed in Table 8 are also provided on SunLine and MBTA websites.

Table 8: City of Palm Springs Bus Route Information
Transit
Provider Transit Route Operating Hours Headways Cities Served SunLine Transit Route 1 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM 20 minutes Palm Springs, Cathedral
City Rancho Mirage, Palm
Desert, Indian Wells, La
Quinta, Indio, Coachella
SunLine Transit Route 2 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM 40 minutes Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, Cathedral City
SunLine Transit Route 4 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM 60 minutes Palm Springs, Palm Desert,
Rancho Mirage, Palm
Desert
MBTA Route 15
Friday: 5:00 PM to 8:30 PM;
Saturday: 10:00 AM to 1:30 PM and
4:00 PM to 7:30 PM;
Sunday: 4:40 PM to 7;30 PM
Fri: 5 to 50-
minutes
Sat: 5 to 30-
minutes
Sun: 5 to 45-
minutes
Palm Springs, Yucca Valley,
Joshua Tree, Twentynine
Palms
Source: SunLine Transit, MBTA, 2022
SunLine Transit has also announced the addition of Route 1X which will provide express service between Indio and Palm Springs.

3.3.2 Paratransit
SunLine Transit Agency’s SunDial operates a shared-ride paratransit service for qualified applicants. Access service is provided within ¾-mile of local Sunline bus routes during the same time the bus route is operational. Demand/response transit services to senior citizens and the handicapped are provided by dial- a-ride and medi-van.

Item 2A - Page 278

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
16 3.3.3 Passenger Rail
Amtrak provides regional rail and bus service within the City of Palm Springs. The Amtrak station in Palm Springs is located west of Indian Canyon Drive south of I-10 in the Northern Palm Springs region. The Sunset Limited and Texas Eagle routes stop at the Palm Springs Amtrak Station, with one train in each direction most days.

The Amtrak Thruway Bus provides a connection from the Palm Springs Amtrak Station and Palm Springs airport and Fullerton Station to the Pacific Surfliner service.

3.4 Existing Bicycle Facilities
Currently, there are bike facilities along most corridors in Palm Springs.

3.4.1 Bicycle Facility Classifications
Bicycle facilities as described in the City of Palm Springs Bicycle Route Plan (2014) are classified as follows:

3.4.1.1 Class I
Referred to as a bike path, shared-use path, or multi-purpose trail. Provides for bicycle travel on a paved right-of-way completely separated from any street or highway. Other users may also be found on this type of facility.

3.4.1.2 Class II
Referred to as a bike lane. Provides a striped lane for one-way bicycle travel on a street or highway.

Item 2A - Page 279

17 3.4.1.3 Class III
Referred to as a bike route. Provides for shared use with pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic.

3.4.1.4 Colored Bike Lanes
Colored bike lanes are bike lanes with an approved color in the Palm Springs Bicycle Route Design Guidelines

3.4.1.5 Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes provide a painted area between the bike lane and either the travel lane or parking lane.

Double-buffered bike lanes provide a painted buffer on both the travel lane and parking lane. These bike lanes may also be colored.

Item 2A - Page 280

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
18 3.4.1.6 Cycle Tracks
Cycle tracks, also called protected bike lanes, provide a physical barrier between the bike lane and other lanes. If there is on-street parking they are placed between the sidewalk and parking. Cycle tracks may be one-way or two-way. They may also be at the level of the street, at the level of the sidewalk, or between the two.

3.4.1.7 Type B Sharrows
Type B sharrows provide a more prominent shared lane marking than the standard shared lane marking.

This may be achieved through augmentation of the shared lane marking with side lines, a larger stencil, more frequent placement, and/or paint underneath.

3.4.1.8 Shared Lane Marking Streets
Shared lane marking streets are simply streets with standard shared lane markings or “sharrows” to make motorists alert for bicyclists, to train cyclists where to ride in the lane and to educate motorists of bicyclists’ rights to ride in the lane. These shared lane-marking streets will not have bikeway signs.

3.4.2 Bicycle Facility Locations
The existing bicycle facilities in the City are shown on Figure 2.

In addition to on-street bike facilities, the City includes a number of off-street trails, including the CV Link trails between Ramon Road and Vista Chino Road.

The Coachella Valley Association of Governments Active Transportation Plan (ATP) published in 2016 provides the proposed bikeway projects for the City of Palm Springs, which can be found in Table 4-27 of the ATP. New bikeways or improved are proposed on many roadways in the City, including:
x Baristo Road
x Amado Road
x Ramon Road
x Hwy 111
x Vista Chino
x Tahquitz Canyon Way
x Sunrise Way
x San Rafael Drive
x S Palm Canyon Drive
x Racquet Club Drive
x Indian Canyon Drive
x Gene Autry Trail
x Farrell Drive
x New or expanded trails on Chino Wash, Whitewater River, Abrams-Butler Trail, Tahquitz Creek Trail, and Tipton Road
Item 2A - Page 281

19 Table 6-3 of the ATP also proposes new bike amenities at transit stations on Vista Chino, Civic Drive, Avenue Caballeros, Gene Autry Trail, Farrell Drive and Baristo Road.

Item 2A - Page 282
Á
·11 1
!"10
Belardo Rd
20Th Ave
Calle El SegundoCalle Encilia
El Ci elo Rd
Alejo Rd
Farre ll Dr
Amado Rd
Tach evah D r
Vista
Chino
Cerritos
Dr
Mesquite Ave
Cam
ino
Real Waverly
Dr
He rmosa Dr
Lawrence
Crossley
Rd
Sunny Dunes Rd
Camino
Parocela
Rac quet Clu b Rd
La Ve rne Way
Via Miraleste
Cerritos Rd
Tamari sk R d
Andreas Rd
San Rafael Dr
BogertTrl
Avenida Caballeros
Palm
Canyon
Dr
Twin Palms Dr
Fr anc is Dr
Barona Rd
Ram on Rd
Araby
Dr
Via Escuela
SunriseWay
Hwy 111
V olturno
Rd
Tol edo Ave
34Th
Ave
19Th Ave
Sonora Rd
Murra y Canyon Dr
Vero n a
Rd
San Rafa el Pl
Baristo Rd
Arenas
Rd
Tramw ay Rd
SalviaRd
In di an Canyon Dr
Garnet Ave
Gene A utry Trl
Bicycle Facilities & Hiking Trails
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Class I Bike Path
Cl as s II B ike Lane
Class III Bike Route
Mixed Use
Proposed Bike Facilities
Cl as s I B ike Pat h
Cl as s II Bike Lane
Class III Bike Route
Mixed Use
Proposed in CVAG ATP
Tra ils
Tra il Te r m in u s
Roads
Railroad
Á Amtrak Station
Airport Boundaries
Ci ty Bound ary
Palm Springs General Plan012 0.5
Miles
Item 2A - Page 283

21 3.5 Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Most of the major roadways through Palm Springs provide continuous sidewalks on both sides of the road. Pedestrian facilities can be found at key corridors such as Gene Autry Trail between Vista Chino and Ramon Road, and Sunrise Way between Vista Chino and Palm Canyon Drive.

Current pedestrian facilities provide sufficient sidewalk width for pedestrians with minimal sidewalk damage. Curb ramps are typically provided within the City of Palm Springs. Some sidewalk gaps exist throughout the City, particularly on residential streets and longa the frontage of vacant parcels.

The City of Palm Springs Citywide Traffic Calming Projects details the recently completed projects in May 2021 that aim to improve pedestrian safety through traffic calming. The following discusses improvements to pedestrian facilities described in The City of Palm Springs Citywide Traffic Calming Projects:
x South Palm Canyon Drive and La Verne Way –ADA ramps and crosswalks x South Palm Canyon Drive and Murray Canyon Way –ADA ramps and crosswalks x Toledo Avenue and La Verne Way –ADA ramps and crosswalks x Toldeo Avenue and Maricopa Drive –ADA ramps, and crosswalks x Rosa Parks Road and Tramview Road – ADA ramps, crosswalks, and speed cushions x West Racquet Club Road – Modified existing road diets o Removed 6-inch diameter bollards
o Replaced with 2-inch diameter delineators
x South Riverside Drive –Speed cushions and associated signage x Mesquite Avenue- Speed cushions and associated signage The Coachella Valley Association of Governments Active Transportation Plan provides the proposed pedestrian improvements for the City of Palm Springs, which can be found in Table 6-2 of the ATP. These improvements include intersection level improvements such as enhanced crosswalks and countdown signals, pedestrian lighting on Farrell Drive and Baristo Road, and new sidewalks on Baristo Road.

Item 2A - Page 284

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
22 4. Impact Analysis
This chapter evaluates potential transportation impacts under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, with the proposed buildout of the General Plan update.

3.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled
The RIVCOM model was modified to include the Project to evaluate its impacts. The addition of 25,773 households and 30,081 jobs were added to the appropriate City of Palm Springs and City of Palm Spring Sphere of Influence TAZs to assess the Project generated VMT per Service Population.

Origin-Destination Project Generated VMT
VMT was estimated using the Origin/Destination method. This was completed by multiplying the OD trip tables and the final assignment skim matrices. The OD tables provided the number of trips between each TAZ, and the skim matrices provided the distance on the roadway network, or trip length, between each TAZ. The full length of all trips with an origin or destination in the TAZ representing the City of Palm Springs were used to estimate the project generated VMT.

Table 9: Project Generated Vehicle Miles Traveled
Cumulative (2045) No
Project
Cumulative (2045)
Plus Project
City of Palm Springs Daily OD VMT 3,790,685 5,489,376
City of Palm Springs Service Population 103,436 152,312 City of Palm Springs VMT/Service Population 36.65 36.04 Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

As shown in Table 4, the Project generated VMT per service population does not exceed the City’s adopted threshold. In fact, VMT per service population is forecast to decrease under general plan buildout conditions (36.04) compared to the existing condition (39.04) and the future no project condition (36.65), indicating that the population is expected to travel in a more efficient manner. The improvement in travel efficiency is the result of people making fewer trips and traveling shorter distances due to increased availability of active modes of transportation and better accessibility to destinations by all modes of transportation.

Boundary Method Cumulative VMT
The 2045 RIVCOM model was used to calculate the VMT Per Service Population for the City of Palm Springs in the Cumulative condition.

Item 2A - Page 285

23 The 2045 RIVCOM model was modified to include the Project to evaluate cumulative project effect on citywide VMT under the Cumulative Plus Project condition. VMT was estimated using the boundary method.

This was completed by selecting all roadway segments in the SBTAM model within the City of Palm Springs boundary and multiplying the number of trips on each roadway segment by the length of that roadway segment.

Table 10: Cumulative Vehicle Miles Traveled

Future Year No Project (2045)
Cumulative VMT Per Service
Population
Future Year Plus Project (2045) Project Effect
on VMT Per Service Population
City of Palm Springs 7.75 7.44
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

As shown in Table 10, the Citywide VMT per Service Population under the “with project” condition does not exceed the Citywide VMT per Service Population under the “no project” condition.

VMT Impact Conclusion
Overall, the analysis shows that the RIVCOM model predicts VMT per service population to decrease in the future due to improved development and transportation patterns. RIVCOM is the best available tool to estimate VMT for the City of Palm Springs and the City has identified it as the most appropriate tool to estimate VMT as part of their VMT guidelines. The findings indicate that the Project is beneficial from a VMT efficiency perspective. Therefore, the General Plan is expected to produce VMT at a rate that would not result in a significant impact.

Given the analysis results presented above, the VMT impact is considered less than significant.

Item 2A - Page 286

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
24 5. Level of Service Analysis
Roadway segment and intersection LOS analysis have been provided in this chapter for informational purposes only and to document consistency with General Plan policies. Some roadway or intersection facilities may perform at unacceptable levels of service but are not considered significant impacts. CEQA transportation impact conclusions are based only on VMT.

5.1 Cumulative (2045) Year
This section provides the forecasting methodology and the Cumulative (2045) Year roadway segment operation analysis for locations in the study area under the No Project (previous General Plan) and Plus Project (General Plan update) scenarios.

5.1.1 Cumulative (2045) Year Forecasts
RIVCOM is a regional model that is based on the traditional four-step sequential modeling methodology with “feedback loop” procedures to insure internal modeling consistency. The model incorporates multi- modal analytical capabilities to analyze the following modes of travel: local and express bus transit, urban rail, commuter rail, toll roads, carpools, truck traffic, as well as non-motorized transportation which includes pedestrian and bicycle trips. Regional transportation models, such as RIVCOM, use socioeconomic data to estimate trip generation, mode choice, as well as several sub-models to address complex travel behavior and multi-modal transportation issues. The model responds to changes in land use types, household characteristics, transportation infrastructure, and travel costs such as transit fares, parking costs, tolls, and auto operating costs.

RIVCOM was used to develop the future traffic volume forecasts. Three model scenarios were utilized in the forecasting process: Base Year, Future Year No Project, Future Year Plus Project, as described below:
x Base Year Model – This scenario contains the base year (2018) land use and roadway network assumptions.
x Future Year Model No Project – This scenario contains the future year (2045) land use and roadway network assumptions. Additionally, TAZ’s in the City of Palm Springs were overwritten to represent the No Project land use scenario (e.g., account for regional growth in the region, but growth assumed in the City is consistent with the old General Plan). x Future Year Model Plus Project – This scenario is identical to the Future Year No Project scenario, except the new General Plan proposed land use growth by TAZ was incorporated in the City of Palm Springs.

To develop Cumulative (2045) Year No Project scenario forecasts, the Future Year Model No Project was compared to the Base Year Model outputs using the difference method. Similarly, to develop Cumulative Item 2A - Page 287

25 (2045) Year Plus Project scenario forecasts, the Future Year Model Plus Project was compared to the Base Year model outputs using the difference method. The difference method was done using standard techniques consistent with National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255. The arithmetic difference was taken between the future year and base year model outputs and that difference was used to determine an annual growth.

That annual growth was then successively added to the existing intersection and roadway volumes (Chapter 3 describes how 2019 roadway volumes were derived using historic counts and StreetLight data) to reach the cumulative year of 2045. To provide a conservative analysis, negative growth was not allowed in the Cumulative (2045) Year No Project scenario volumes. If the model predicted negative growth over existing conditions, the existing conditions volumes were utilized.

5.1.2 Roadway Segment Level of Service
Cumulative (2045) Year No Project and Plus Project roadway segment volumes are shown in Table 11, along with the number of lanes and roadway segment level of service.

Analysis methodology for the roadway segment level of service calculations is described in Chapter 3.

The proposed plan results in higher traffic volumes Citywide. The following study segments are forecast to be near or over capacity (LOS E or F):
x Highway 111
o North of Vista Chino (LOS F) in both scenarios
x Sunrise Way
o Vista Chino to Ramon Road (LOS E and F) in both scenarios o Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive (LOS E) in the Plus Project scenario x Gene Autry Trail
o North of Vista Chino (LOS E and F) in both scenarios
o Vista Chino to Ramon Road (LOS E) in the Plus Project scenario o Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive (LOS F) in both scenarios x Ramon Road
o Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail (LOS E) in the Plus Project scenario x E Palm Canyon Drive
o Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail (LOS F) in both scenarios

Item 2A - Page 288

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
26 Table 11: Cumulative (2045) Roadway Segment Level of Service Location Facility Type
Cumulative (2045) Year
No Project
Cumulative (2045) Year
Plus Project
Number
of Lanes ADT LOS Number
of Lanes ADT LOS
Highway 111
North of Vista Chino Secondary Thoroughfare 4 34,150 F 4 43,410 F Indian Canyon Drive
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 24,000 B 4 26,270 C Vista Chino to Alejo Road Major Thoroughfare 4 23,950 B 4 29,410 D Alejo Road to Ramon Road Two-Way Modified
Collector 3 18,250 B 3 22,870 D
Sunrise Way
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 18,460 A 4 20,760 A Vista Chino to Ramon Road Major Thoroughfare 4 34,010 E 4 36,720 F Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 27,460 C 4 33,390 E Gene Autry Trail
North of Vista Chino Major Thoroughfare 4 35,080 E 4 42,570 F Vista Chino to Ramon Road Major Thoroughfare 6 37,190 B 6 49,330 E Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 36,540 F 4 38,350 F Vista Chino
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 6 32,170 A 6 36,960 B Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail Major Thoroughfare 6 46,730 D 6 48,010 D Palm Canyon Drive
Vista Chino to Alejo Road Major Thoroughfare 4 21,900 B 4 21,970 B Alejo Road to Ramon Road One-Way Modified
Arterial 3 13,660 A 3 13,620 A
Ramon Road to E Palm Canyon Drive Major Thoroughfare 4 28,330 C 4 31,550 D Alejo Road
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Modified Collector 2 8,350 B 2 8,040 B Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 19,920 A 4 20,650 A Sunrise Way to El Cielo Rd Major Thoroughfare 4 23,770 B 4 26,370 C Ramon Road
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 28,220 C 4 22,930 B Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail
Major Thoroughfare 6 48,310 D 6 50,910 E
Item 2A - Page 289

27 Table 11: Cumulative (2045) Roadway Segment Level of Service Location Facility Type
Cumulative (2045) Year
No Project
Cumulative (2045) Year
Plus Project
Number
of Lanes ADT LOS Number
of Lanes ADT LOS
E Palm Canyon Drive
Palm Canyon Drive to Sunrise Way Major Thoroughfare 4 28,850 D 4 30,860 D Sunrise Way to Gene Autry Trail Major Thoroughfare 4 45,770 F 4 52,740 F Notes:

1. Delay operations were calculated using HCM 6th methodologies, unless stated otherwise.

2. Due to limitations in the Synchro 11 Software and unique intersection geometries or signal timing, delay operations were calculated using HCM 2000 methodologies.

3. Bold symbolizes unacceptable LOS.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022.

5.1.3 Intersection Level of Service
The intersection analysis for the two cumulative scenarios is reported in Table 11.

Intersection turning movement forecasts for the Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project scenarios are presented in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

Due to the increase in development proposed in the General Plan update, intersection forecasts are higher in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario than the Cumulative No Project. Directionality of trips for certain turning movements varies between scenarios based on where land uses are forecast.

Analysis methodology for the intersection level of service calculations is described in Chapter 3.

The following locations are forecasted to operate below the City’s LOS standard LOS D:
x Vista Chino at Highway 111
o LOS E and LOS F in the AM peak hour in the Cumulative No Project and Plus Project scenarios
x Vista Chino at Sunrise Way
o LOS E in the AM and PM peak hours in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario x Vista Chino at Farrell Dr
o LOS E in the AM peak hour in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario x Alejo Road at Indian Canyon Drive
o LOS E and F in the AM peak hour in the Cumulative No Project and Plus Project scenarios x Tahquitz Canyon Way at Indian Canyon Drive
o LOS E in the PM peak hour in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario x Ramon Rd at Sunrise Wy
o LOS E in the PM peak hour in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario Item 2A - Page 290

City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
28 x Ramon Rd at Farrell Dr
o LOS E in the AM peak hour in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario x E Camino Parocela at Indian Canyon Dr/S Palm Canyon Dr o LOS F in the PM peak hour in the Cumulative No Project scenario x E Palm Canyon Dr at Sunrise Wy
o LOS F in the AM peak hour in the Cumulative Plus Project scenario

Item 2A - Page 291

29 Notes:

1. Delay operations were calculated using HCM 6th methodologies, unless stated otherwise.

2. Due to limitations in the Synchro 11 Software and unique intersection geometries or signal timing, delay operations were calculated using HCM 2000 methodologies.

3. Bold symbolizes unacceptable LOS.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022.

Table 12: Cumulative (2045) Intersection Level of Service Intersection Peak
Hour
Cumulative (2045) No Project
LOS / Average Delay
Cumulative (2045) Plus
Project LOS / Average Delay
1 Vista Chino at Highway 111
AM E / 56 F / 82
PM D / 38 D / 55
2 Vista Chino at Sunrise Wy
AM C / 34 E / 62
PM D / 54 E / 74
3 Vista Chino at Farrell Dr
AM C / 30 E / 68
PM D / 36 D / 53
4 Vista Chino at Gene Autry Trail
AM D / 50 D / 54
PM D / 53 F / 84
5 Alejo Rd at Indian Canyon Dr
AM E / 58 F / 87
PM D / 43 D / 54
6 Alejo Rd at Sunrise Wy
AM B / 15 C / 31
PM C / 21 C / 22
7 Tahquitz Canyon Wy at Indian Canyon
Dr
AM D / 38 C / 27
PM C / 25 E / 63
8 Tahquitz Canyon Wy at Sunrise Wy
AM C / 23 D / 51
PM C / 28 C / 32
9 Ramon Rd at Indian Canyon Dr
AM B / 19 D / 37
PM C / 20 C / 24
10 Ramon Rd at Sunrise Wy
AM C / 27 C / 23
PM C / 32 E / 61
11 Ramon Rd at Farrell Dr
AM B / 16 E / 58
PM B / 17 B / 20
12 E Camino Parocela at Indian Canyon
Dr/S Palm Canyon Dr
AM D / 44 B / 20
PM F / 168 D / 46
13 E Palm Canyon Dr at Sunrise Wy
AM C / 24 F / 178
PM C / 25 D / 37
14 E Palm Canyon Dr at Farrell Dr
AM B / 11 D / 47
PM B / 17 B / 16
Item 2A - Page 292
Figure x
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
and Lane Configurations -
Future Year No Project Condition
220 (200)
540 (890)
80 (150)
130 (140)
140 (270)
120 (90)
190 (210)
140 (220)
140 (70)
400 (440)
240 (340)
80 (130)

9. Indian Canyon Dr/Ramon Rd
130 (140)
800 (780)
250 (250)
60 (130)
250 (570)
120 (190)
70 (110)
810 (900)
190 (250)
270 (320)
410 (660)
320 (250)

10. Sunrise Way/Ramon Rd
60 (60)
270 (270)
110 (110)
40 (50)
500 (670)
40 (50)
80 (60)
190 (280)
140 (160)
150 (170)
880 (730)
110 (110)

11. Farrell Dr/Ramon Rd
660 (1,030)
30 (60)
110 (180)
30 (10)
30 (60)
70 (30)
170 (260)
50 (40)
20 (80)
90 (80)

12. Indian Canyon/S Palm Canyon/E Camino Parocela
50 (90)
170 (220)
250 (220)
70 (80)
440 (710)
40 (40)
80 (90)
220 (230)
390 (480)
350 (400)
580 (760)
240 (280)

13. Sunrise Way/E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr
80 (130)
30 (60)
50 (50)
10 (30)
860 (1,450)
100 (130)
160 (170)
30 (50)
50 (60)
50 (140)
1,260 (1,610)
270 (210)

14. Farrell Dr/Barona Rd/E Palm Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd
Sunrise Way
Ramon Rd
Farrell Dr
E Camino Parocela
Indian CanyonS Palm Canyon
E Palm Canyon Dr E Palm Dr
Sunrise Way
E Palm Canyon Dr
Farrell DrBarona Rd
50 (110)
190 (570)
240 (310)
50 (60)
50 (60)
10 (10)
210 (50)
480 (360)
540 (420)
530 (290)
40 (20)
490 (220)

1. Hwy 111/Vista Chino
290 (340)
280 (440)
270 (410)
40 (120)
530 (740)
300 (220)
120 (60)
470 (270)
160 (230)
910 (560)
430 (400)

2. Sunrise Way/Vista Chino
50 (120)
120 (330)
190 (380)
30 (70)
910 (1,150)
90 (120)
70 (40)
450 (180)
290 (180)
160 (200)
1,400 (950)
290 (220)

3. Farrell Dr/Vista Chino
130 (240)
360 (1,000)
200 (350)
360 (330)
750 (1,440)
180 (310)
80 (120)
940 (630)
390 (290)
170 (180)
1,240 (880)
90 (150)

4. Gene Autry Trail/Vista Chino
290 (250)
950 (730)
70 (60)
90 (60)
180 (190)
100 (50)
170 (230)
240 (180)
570 (520)
250 (280)
250 (140)
50 (100)

5. Indian Canyon Dr/Alejo Rd
150 (80)
650 (1,160)
50 (110)
70 (120)
150 (150)
50 (150)
20 (40)
1,000 (990)
90 (80)
30 (30)
110 (130)
30 (30)

6. Sunrise Way/Alejo Rd
140 (150)
900 (710)
130 (150)
150 (130)
220 (380)
120 (100)
160 (130)
230 (180)
140 (120)
180 (190)
380 (290)
90 (110)

7. Indian Canyon Dr/Tahquitz Canyon Way
100 (110)
600 (890)
110 (160)
100 (120)
280 (500)
70 (180)
100 (150)
740 (730)
240 (260)
240 (220)
450 (470)
60 (110)

8. Sunrise Way/Tahquitz Canyon Way
Vista Chino
Hwy 111
Vista Chino
Sunrise Way
Vista Chino
Farrell Dr
Vista Chino
Gene Autry Trail
Alejo Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Alejo Rd
Sunrise Way
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Indian Canyon Dr
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Sunrise Way
accf
ace
ace
aef
ace
accf
accf
acccf
ace
acccf
acf
acccf
ccf
bf
ace
ac
aaccf
aaccf
aace
aaccf
acf
accf
accf
accf
ace
bf
ace
acf
aace
acce
ace
abcc
accf
acce
ace
acce
aacce
accef
aacce
acce
ace
ae
acf
accf
ace
ace
ace
accf
ace
ace
ace
abf
aace
accf
aace
accf
Turn Lane
AC
Peak HourAM
F
(PM) Traffic Vol

ume
LEGEND
Stop Sign
Signal
Roundabout
3 Item 2A - Page 293
Figure x
3HDN+RXU7UDIILF9ROXPHV
DQG/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
)XWXUH<HDU3OXV3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQ
170 (80)
840 (1,140)
110 (200)
130 (140)
190 (270)
120 (90)
190 (210)
210 (290)
140 (70)
400 (440)
220 (310)
80 (130)

9. Indian Canyon Dr/Ramon Rd
130 (160)
850 (920)
530 (310)
60 (130)
400 (570)
230 (190)
70 (110)
770 (960)
210 (270)
260 (320)
410 (710)
420 (370)

10. Sunrise Way/Ramon Rd/Baristo Rd
80 (60)
280 (270)
100 (110)
60 (60)
1,040 (860)
50 (70)
80 (90)
190 (280)
170 (160)
150 (170)
980 (1,140)
110 (90)

11. Farrell Dr/Baristo Rd
660 (1,030)
30 (60)
110 (180)
30 (10)
30 (60)
70 (30)
170 (260)
50 (40)
20 (80)
90 (80)

12. Indian Canyon/S Palm Canyon/E Camino Parocela
50 (90)
340 (280)
290 (270)
160 (140)
480 (800)
40 (50)
140 (180)
260 (360)
480 (530)
350 (600)
660 (750)
280 (320)

13. Sunrise Way/Twin Palms Dr
100 (140)
70 (60)
100 (70)
10 (30)
1,180 (1,630)
100 (150)
160 (170)
30 (60)
50 (80)
90 (140)
1,430 (1,940)
300 (250)

14. Farrell Dr/Barona Rd/E Palm Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Ramon Rd Baristo Rd
Sunrise Way
Baristo Rd
Farrell Dr
E Camino Parocela
Indian CanyonS Palm Canyon
Twin Palms Dr
Sunrise Way
E Palm Canyon Dr
Farrell DrBarona Rd
50 (110)
270 (580)
230 (220)
50 (60)
60 (60)
10 (10)
210 (50)
560 (480)
600 (660)
720 (380)
40 (20)
400 (210)

1. Hwy 111/Vista Chino
370 (450)
360 (530)
330 (350)
50 (100)
560 (790)
410 (280)
130 (70)
610 (360)
160 (230)
40 (70)
830 (650)
390 (390)

2. Sunrise Way/Vista Chino
60 (160)
130 (380)
190 (380)
70 (60)
960 (1,150)
110 (150)
60 (30)
510 (190)
550 (320)
430 (530)
1,350 (1,020)
290 (220)

3. Farrell Dr/Vista Chino
200 (370)
530 (1,210)
200 (360)
440 (330)
850 (1,510)
300 (380)
80 (200)
940 (630)
390 (290)
170 (180)
1,380 (1,070)
100 (150)

4. Gene Autry Trail/Vista Chino
390 (420)
1,120 (750)
70 (60)
90 (60)
190 (190)
100 (50)
160 (230)
280 (190)
410 (520)
370 (330)
260 (230)
50 (100)

5. Indian Canyon Dr/Alejo Rd
150 (90)
930 (1,310)
50 (110)
80 (120)
150 (150)
60 (120)
20 (40)
1,170 (1,190)
90 (80)
30 (30)
110 (130)
30 (30)

6. Sunrise Way/Alejo Rd
230 (170)
1,260 (990)
230 (230)
150 (130)
220 (340)
120 (100)
160 (130)
320 (250)
140 (120)
180 (190)
390 (410)
90 (110)

7. Indian Canyon Dr/Tahquitz Canyon Way
130 (200)
750 (1,030)
120 (160)
140 (110)
320 (420)
70 (190)
100 (180)
820 (850)
380 (290)
340 (380)
440 (600)
60 (130)

8. Sunrise Way/Tahquitz Canyon Way
Vista Chino
Hwy 111
Vista Chino
Sunrise Way
Vista Chino
Farrell Dr
Vista Chino
Gene Autry Trail
Alejo Rd
Indian Canyon Dr
Alejo Rd
Sunrise Way
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Indian Canyon Dr
Tahquitz Canyon Way
Sunrise Way
accf
ace
ae
bef
ace
accf
accf
accf
ae
acccf
be
acccf
ccf
bf
ae
ac
bf
aaccf
aacf
accf
ae
accf
acf
accf
ace
bf
ace
acf
aace
acce
ace
acce
accf
acce
ace
acce
aacce
accf
aacce
accf
accf
ae
ae
bcf
ace
ae
ace
acf
ace
ace
ae
be
aace
accf
aace
accf
7XUQ/DQH
AC
3HDN+RXU$0
F

30 7UDIILF9RO

XPH
LEGEND
6WRS6LJQ
6LJQDO
5RXQGDERXW
4 Item 2A - Page 294
City of Palm Springs General Plan Update
May 2023
32 6. CEQA Checklist Review
The following significance criteria, included in Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.), will determine the significance of a traffic impact. Impacts to traffic resources would be significant if the proposed project would:

6.1.1 Checklist Item A
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

6.1.1.1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
The Palm Springs General Plan Update Circulation Element provides a comprehensive system of bicycle lanes, trails, and pathways to enhance bicycle and pedestrian connectivity within the City. Additionally, the Circulation Element identifies a series of Goals, Policies, and Actions to ensure the integrity and service levels of these facilities are maintained. Circulation Element Policy CR1.11, Policy CR1.16, Policy CR1.17, Goal CR6 and Goal CR7 would create, improve or encourage the implementation of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Given this comprehensive planning effort, the project impact to bicycle and pedestrian facilities is considered less-than-significant.

6.1.1.2 Transit Facilities
The Palm Springs General Plan Update Circulation Element provides a series of policies to enhance transit systems. Circulation Element Goal CR4 and Goal CR5 include several policies related to transit enhancement. Given this comprehensive planning effort, the project impact to transit travel is considered less-than-significant.

6.1.2 Checklist Item B
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Based on the analysis presented in Chapter 4, implementation of the proposed project would decrease project generated VMT per Service Population and cumulative Citywide VMT per Service Population.

However, given the uncertainty and speculative influences on both VMT performance and potential mitigation actions described in Chapter 4, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

6.1.3 Checklist Item C
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
HoHooHoHoHoHoHoHoHoooooooooooowewewewwewewewewewewewewewewewewewewewewevevevevevevvevevevevevevevevevevevevevever,r,r,r,rr,r,r,r,r,r,rr,r,r,rr,r,rr,r ggggggggggggggggggivivivivvvivivvvvvvvvvvvvvveneneneneneneneneneneeneneeneneeee tttttttttttttttttttttheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheeehehe uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuncncncncncncncccccccccccccccererererererererrererererererererreerertatatatatattatatatatatatatatatatatatatainninininininininininininiinininnini tytytytytytytytytytyttytytytytytytytytty aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaandndndndndnnndnndndndndnndnnndnnn ssssssssssssssssssssspepepeppepepepepepepepepepepepepepepepecucucucucucuucucucucucucucucucucucucucuculalalalalaaalaaalaalalalalalaalatitititiititititititititititittitit vevveveveveveveveveveveveveveveveveveveve iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnfnflululululululuululuulululululululuuuueneneneneneneneneneneneneneenenenenenene ces on both VMT performance and potential mitigation actions described in Chapter 4, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

6.1.3 Checklist Item C
d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d)d) SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSubububububububububububububububububububububststststststststststststststststsststststananananananananananananananananananananantititititititititititititititititititititialalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalaalalallylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylyly iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiincncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncncrererererererrererrerererererererererereasaasaasasaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa e eee e ee eee eee e eeee ee hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazazardrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrdrddrdrdsssssssssssssssssssss dududududududududududududududududududududue e e eeee eee e ee e e ee eeee tototototototototototototototototototototo aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Item 2A - Page 295

33 The General Plan was developed to minimize conflicts between incompatible uses. Additionally, Action CR2.3 requires that high-accident locations be studied and improved. As such, this impact is considered less-than-significant.

6.1.4 Checklist Item D
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
In general, the Mobility Element improves connectivity and mobility throughout the City. This improved connectivity and mobility will also improve emergency access throughout the City. Since emergency accessibility will improve with implementation of the plan, this impact is considered less-than-significant.

Item 2A - Page 296

Appendix A: Synchro LOS Worksheets

Item 2A - Page 297
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 40 31 2 110 30 257 37 119 175 298 379 179 Future Volume (veh/h) 40 31 2 110 30 257 37 119 175 298 379 179 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.94 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 43 34 1 120 33 144 40 129 42 324 412 134 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 91 48 656 104 17 1002 236 368 114 389 1131 363 Arrive On Green 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.22 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 114 1553 0 40 1553 846 2628 812 1781 2621 841 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 1 153 0 144 40 85 86 324 278 268 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 114 0 1553 40 0 1553 846 1777 1663 1781 1777 1685 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.9 10.7 6.5 6.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 26.0 0.0 0.0 26.0 0.0 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.9 10.7 6.5 6.6 Prop In Lane 0.56 1.00 0.78 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00 0.50
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 139 0 656 121 0 1002 236 249 233 389 767 727 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.00 0.00 1.26 0.00 0.14 0.17 0.34 0.37 0.83 0.36 0.37 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 139 0 656 121 0 1002 445 690 645 769 1587 1505 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.6 0.0 10.3 27.2 0.0 4.4 23.9 23.9 24.0 23.0 11.8 11.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.7 0.0 0.0 169.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.0 4.7 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 0.4 0.5 1.1 1.1 4.5 2.2 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.3 0.0 10.3 196.2 0.0 4.4 24.2 24.7 25.0 27.7 12.1 12.1 L n G r p L O S CABFAACCCCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 78 297 211 870
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 103.2 24.7 17.9
Approach LOS C F C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.9 13.1 30.5 31.1 30.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.6 23.9 26.0 55.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.7 4.9 28.0 8.6 28.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 1.0 0.0 3.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.4
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 298
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 351 198 228 523 24 150 240 77 117 400 35 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 351 198 228 523 24 150 240 77 117 400 35 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 382 110 248 568 24 163 261 50 127 435 31 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 57 880 242 298 1243 52 265 667 125 162 801 57 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.22 0.22 0.17 0.36 0.36 0.08 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3957 1086 1781 3471 146 3456 2969 559 1781 3358 238 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 326 166 248 290 302 163 154 157 127 229 237 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1639 1781 1777 1840 1728 1777 1751 1781 1777 1820 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 5.0 5.3 8.2 7.7 7.7 2.8 4.5 4.7 4.3 6.9 6.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 5.0 5.3 8.2 7.7 7.7 2.8 4.5 4.7 4.3 6.9 6.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.66 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.13
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 57 757 364 298 636 659 265 399 393 162 424 434 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.43 0.46 0.83 0.46 0.46 0.61 0.39 0.40 0.79 0.54 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 175 1840 886 365 1150 1191 345 1019 1004 190 1030 1055 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 29.1 20.4 20.5 24.6 15.0 15.0 27.3 20.1 20.2 27.2 20.3 20.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.0 0.4 0.9 12.7 0.5 0.5 2.3 0.6 0.7 16.8 1.1 1.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.8 1.9 4.1 2.6 2.7 1.1 1.7 1.7 2.4 2.6 2.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.1 20.8 21.4 37.3 15.6 15.5 29.6 20.7 20.8 43.9 21.4 21.4 L n G r p L O S DCCDBBCCCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 521 840 474 593
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.9 22.0 23.8 26.2
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 18.2 14.7 18.1 9.2 19.1 6.4 26.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 35.0 12.5 33.0 6.1 35.4 6.0 39.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 6.7 10.2 7.3 4.8 8.9 3.0 9.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 0.2 2.9 0.1 2.5 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.3
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 299
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 19 542 69 277 806 119 35 103 176 235 436 36 Future Volume (veh/h) 19 542 69 277 806 119 35 103 176 235 436 36 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 589 61 301 876 120 38 112 124 255 474 32 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 42 1078 110 348 1257 172 66 550 547 301 967 65 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.23 0.23 0.20 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.17 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4692 480 1781 3131 429 1781 3554 1532 1781 3373 227 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 21 425 225 301 497 499 38 112 124 255 249 257 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1768 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1532 1781 1777 1823 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 7.9 8.0 11.7 16.7 16.7 1.5 2.0 4.1 10.0 8.3 8.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 7.9 8.0 11.7 16.7 16.7 1.5 2.0 4.1 10.0 8.3 8.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 42 782 406 348 714 716 66 550 547 301 510 523 V/C Ratio(X) 0.49 0.54 0.55 0.86 0.70 0.70 0.58 0.20 0.23 0.85 0.49 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 127 1375 715 442 1032 1036 164 1470 944 385 956 980 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.6 24.3 24.4 27.9 17.8 17.8 34.0 26.5 16.5 28.9 21.2 21.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.6 0.6 1.2 13.4 1.2 1.2 7.7 0.2 0.2 13.1 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.9 3.2 5.7 5.9 5.9 0.7 0.8 1.3 5.0 3.2 3.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.2 24.9 25.6 41.4 19.1 19.1 41.7 26.7 16.7 42.0 22.0 22.0 L n G r p L O S DCCDBBDCBDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 671 1297 274 761
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.7 24.3 24.2 28.7
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.6 15.6 18.5 21.0 7.2 25.1 6.2 33.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 29.7 17.8 29.0 6.6 38.6 5.1 41.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.0 6.1 13.7 10.0 3.5 10.4 2.8 18.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 1.0 0.3 3.6 0.0 2.8 0.0 6.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.7
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 300
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 345 566 130 62 959 153 78 249 190 378 833 61 Future Volume (veh/h) 345 566 130 62 959 153 78 249 190 378 833 61 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 375 615 66 67 1042 62 85 271 45 411 905 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 397 1715 750 86 1094 477 131 712 309 450 1041 453 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.48 0.48 0.05 0.31 0.31 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.13 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1555 1781 3554 1549 3456 3554 1539 3456 3554 1548 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 375 615 66 67 1042 62 85 271 45 411 905 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1555 1781 1777 1549 1728 1777 1539 1728 1777 1548 Q Serve(g_s), s 26.9 14.1 3.0 4.8 37.3 3.7 3.1 8.6 3.1 15.2 31.4 1.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 26.9 14.1 3.0 4.8 37.3 3.7 3.1 8.6 3.1 15.2 31.4 1.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 397 1715 750 86 1094 477 131 712 309 450 1041 453 V/C Ratio(X) 0.94 0.36 0.09 0.78 0.95 0.13 0.65 0.38 0.15 0.91 0.87 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 401 1715 750 162 1103 481 146 975 422 450 1287 560 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 49.6 21.0 18.2 61.1 44.0 32.4 61.6 44.9 42.7 55.7 43.6 32.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 30.9 0.1 0.1 14.1 16.9 0.1 8.3 0.3 0.2 23.0 5.6 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 14.9 5.6 1.0 2.5 18.2 1.4 1.5 3.7 1.2 7.8 13.9 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 80.6 21.2 18.2 75.2 60.9 32.5 69.9 45.2 43.0 78.7 49.2 32.9 LnGrp LOS F C B E E C E D D E D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1056 1171 401 1336
Approach Delay, s/veh 42.1 60.2 50.2 58.0
Approach LOS D E D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.4 30.5 10.8 67.1 9.4 42.5 33.4 44.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.9 35.6 11.8 57.7 5.5 47.0 29.2 40.3 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.2 10.6 6.8 16.1 5.1 33.4 28.9 39.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 0.0 4.3 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 53.6
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 301
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 78 166 0 0 234 178 276 832 54 250 0 157 Future Volume (veh/h) 78 166 0 0 234 178 276 832 54 250 0 157 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.95 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 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 85 180 0 0 254 43 300 904 23 272 0 171 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222202
Cap, veh/h 329 479 0 0 909 396 382 1353 575 370 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.15 0.38 0.38 0.14 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1067 1870 0 0 3647 1548 1781 3554 1510 1781 272 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 85 180 0 0 254 43 300 904 23 272 29.1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1067 1870 0 0 1777 1548 1781 1777 1510 1781 C Q Serve(g_s), s 4.2 4.8 0.0 0.0 3.5 1.3 9.0 12.8 0.6 8.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.8 4.8 0.0 0.0 3.5 1.3 9.0 12.8 0.6 8.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 329 479 0 0 909 396 382 1353 575 370 V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.11 0.79 0.67 0.04 0.73 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 610 971 0 0 1846 804 427 2303 978 728 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.3 18.6 0.0 0.0 18.1 17.3 26.3 15.6 11.8 26.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 8.4 0.6 0.0 2.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 4.9 4.6 0.2 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.7 19.1 0.0 0.0 18.2 17.4 34.8 16.2 11.8 29.1 L n G r p L O S CBAABBCBBC
Approach Vol, veh/h 265 297 1227
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.9 18.1 20.6
Approach LOS B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.3 27.4 20.0 14.2 20.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.7 39.3 31.5 10.5 31.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.5 14.8 9.8 11.0 5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 6.8 1.3 0.0 1.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.3
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 302
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 138 12 20 98 25 16 326 41 77 607 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 138 12 20 98 25 16 326 41 77 607 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.96 0.99 0.96 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 150 10 22 107 5 17 354 34 84 660 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 437 362 24 379 324 269 331 872 83 476 1132 27 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.27 0.27 0.07 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1730 115 1781 1870 1558 1781 3264 311 1781 3542 86 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 65 0 160 22 107 5 17 191 197 84 331 345 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1846 1781 1870 1558 1781 1777 1799 1781 1777 1851 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 3.2 0.4 2.1 0.1 0.3 3.8 3.8 1.4 6.6 6.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 3.2 0.4 2.1 0.1 0.3 3.8 3.8 1.4 6.6 6.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.05
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 437 0 386 379 324 269 331 475 480 476 568 592 V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.00 0.41 0.06 0.33 0.02 0.05 0.40 0.41 0.18 0.58 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 538 0 1214 541 1226 1021 503 1190 1205 574 1211 1261 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 12.9 0.0 14.6 13.8 15.4 14.6 11.1 12.8 12.8 9.9 12.1 12.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.2 1.0 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.1 1.2 1.2 0.4 2.0 2.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.1 0.0 15.3 13.9 16.0 14.6 11.2 13.4 13.4 10.1 13.1 13.0 L n G r p L O S BABBBBBBBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 225 134 405 760
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.7 15.6 13.3 12.7
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.6 15.9 5.6 13.4 5.4 18.1 7.2 11.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 28.5 5.0 28.0 5.0 29.0 5.1 27.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 5.8 2.4 5.2 2.3 8.6 3.2 4.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 303
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 119 198 0 0 329 134 129 881 117 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 119 198 0 0 329 134 129 881 117 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95
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 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 129 215 0 0 358 42 140 958 106
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 410 853 0 0 507 415 271 1997 223
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.37 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1529 737 5431 608
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 129 215 0 0 358 42 348 555 301
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1529 1834 1609 1724 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.4 3.6 0.0 0.0 8.8 1.1 7.6 6.7 6.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.4 3.6 0.0 0.0 8.8 1.1 7.6 6.7 6.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.40 0.35
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 410 853 0 0 507 415 674 1183 634 V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.10 0.52 0.47 0.47 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1108 1939 0 0 860 703 1004 1762 944 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 16.8 14.0 12.6 12.3 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.3 2.7 2.1 2.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.4 8.7 0.0 0.0 18.6 14.1 13.2 12.6 12.9 L n G r p L O S BAAABBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 344 400 1204
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.7 18.1 12.9
Approach LOS A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.3 27.8 9.5 18.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.0 53.0 25.0 23.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.6 5.6 4.4 10.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.8 1.3 0.3 1.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 304
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 71 155 22 45 187 48 29 373 91 64 507 89 Future Volume (veh/h) 71 155 22 45 187 48 29 373 91 64 507 89 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 168 6 49 203 13 32 405 75 70 551 83 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 428 706 306 435 644 278 126 892 164 221 1008 151 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.18 0.18 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1539 1781 3554 1537 3456 2985 548 3456 3088 463 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 168 6 49 203 13 32 239 241 70 316 318 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1539 1781 1777 1537 1728 1777 1756 1728 1777 1774 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 1.8 0.1 1.0 2.3 0.3 0.4 5.1 5.2 0.9 6.8 6.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 1.8 0.1 1.0 2.3 0.3 0.4 5.1 5.2 0.9 6.8 6.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 428 706 306 435 644 278 126 531 525 221 580 579 V/C Ratio(X) 0.18 0.24 0.02 0.11 0.32 0.05 0.25 0.45 0.46 0.32 0.54 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 503 2375 1029 541 2375 1027 372 1356 1340 410 1375 1373 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 13.7 15.6 15.0 14.1 16.5 15.7 21.7 13.2 13.2 20.7 12.8 12.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.2 1.7 1.7 0.3 2.2 2.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.9 15.8 15.0 14.2 16.8 15.8 22.8 13.8 13.8 21.5 13.6 13.6 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBCBBCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 251 265 512 704
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.2 16.2 14.4 14.4
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.5 18.4 6.8 13.7 6.2 19.6 7.6 12.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 35.4 5.1 31.0 5.0 35.9 5.1 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.9 7.2 3.0 3.8 2.4 8.8 3.6 4.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 1.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.8
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 305
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 96 116 0 0 203 386 121 464 43 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 96 116 0 0 203 386 121 464 43 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95
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 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 104 126 0 0 229 113 132 504 31
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 541 820 0 0 815 331 380 1590 98
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.30 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 0 0 3741 1520 1252 5241 322
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 104 126 0 0 229 113 191 304 172
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1520 1808 1609 1790 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 2.2 2.9 2.5 2.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 2.2 2.9 2.5 2.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.69 0.18
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 541 820 0 0 815 331 548 976 543
V/C Ratio(X) 0.19 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.34 0.35 0.31 0.32 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 634 1880 0 0 2739 1113 1350 2402 1337 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.6 5.9 0.0 0.0 11.3 11.5 9.4 9.3 9.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.8 6.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 12.1 9.8 9.5 9.7 L n G r p L O S AAAABBAAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 230 342 667
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.8 11.7 9.6
Approach LOS A B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.1 19.8 7.7 12.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.0 35.0 5.0 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 3.4 3.4 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.2 0.6 0.0 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.7
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 306
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 47 236 110 212 400 148 126 299 133 142 397 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 47 236 110 212 400 148 126 299 133 142 397 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 257 30 230 435 54 137 325 83 154 432 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 378 671 290 507 959 417 425 686 172 440 903 393 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.19 0.19 0.13 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.25 0.25 0.09 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1538 1781 3554 1546 1781 2797 702 1781 3554 1545 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 51 257 30 230 435 54 137 204 204 154 432 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1538 1781 1777 1546 1781 1777 1722 1781 1777 1545 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 3.3 0.8 5.0 5.3 1.4 2.9 5.1 5.3 3.3 5.4 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 3.3 0.8 5.0 5.3 1.4 2.9 5.1 5.3 3.3 5.4 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 378 671 290 507 959 417 425 436 422 440 903 393 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.38 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.13 0.32 0.47 0.48 0.35 0.48 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 462 1987 860 563 2218 965 466 1089 1055 519 2286 994 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 15.6 18.6 17.6 12.9 15.9 14.5 13.1 16.9 16.9 12.9 16.6 14.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 1.2 0.3 1.6 1.8 0.4 1.0 1.9 1.9 1.2 2.0 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.8 18.9 17.7 13.5 16.2 14.6 13.5 17.7 17.8 13.4 17.0 14.8 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBBBBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 338 719 545 603
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.4 15.3 16.7 16.0
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 17.3 11.4 14.4 8.8 17.8 7.1 18.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.1 32.1 8.5 29.3 5.5 33.7 5.1 32.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 7.3 7.0 5.3 4.9 7.4 3.2 7.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.4 0.1 1.5 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 307
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 11: Farrell Dr & Ramon Rd AM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 31 481 33 91 772 132 51 254 90 122 175 69 Future Volume (veh/h) 31 481 33 91 772 132 51 254 90 122 175 69 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 34 523 12 99 839 58 55 276 48 133 190 21 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 286 1106 474 424 1227 535 399 628 108 409 445 367 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.07 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.08 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1525 1781 3554 1551 1781 3019 517 1781 1870 1544 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 34 523 12 99 839 58 55 161 163 133 190 21 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1525 1781 1777 1551 1781 1777 1760 1781 1870 1544 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 6.5 0.3 2.0 11.1 1.4 1.3 4.3 4.4 3.1 4.7 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 6.5 0.3 2.0 11.1 1.4 1.3 4.3 4.4 3.1 4.7 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 286 1106 474 424 1227 535 399 370 366 409 445 367 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.47 0.03 0.23 0.68 0.11 0.14 0.43 0.45 0.32 0.43 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 382 1686 723 460 1686 736 473 1005 995 427 1055 870 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 12.7 15.2 13.1 11.5 15.4 12.2 15.6 18.9 18.9 15.2 17.7 16.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 2.2 0.1 0.7 3.8 0.4 0.5 1.6 1.6 1.1 1.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.9 15.6 13.1 11.8 16.1 12.3 15.7 19.7 19.8 15.6 18.4 16.2 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBBBBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 569 996 379 344
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.4 15.4 19.2 17.2
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 15.9 8.4 21.5 7.3 17.5 6.5 23.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 31.0 5.0 26.0 5.1 30.9 5.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 6.4 4.0 8.5 3.3 6.7 2.7 13.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.7 0.0 3.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 308
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Palm Spring General Plan 12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon AM Peak Hour Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR2 NBL2 NBT NBR SEL SER SER2 Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 80 12 14 62 5 18 10 519 13 15 433 35 Future Volume (vph) 80 12 14 62 5 18 10 519 13 15 433 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.88 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.95 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1771 1542 1750 1863 1547 1770 3539 1496 1770 2646 Flt Permitted 0.76 1.00 0.69 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1401 1542 1276 1863 1547 1770 3539 1496 1770 2646 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 87 13 15 67 5 20 11 564 14 16 471 38
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 11 0 0 15 0 0 10 0 34 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 100 4 67 5 5 11 564 4 16 475 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20 20
C o n f l . B i k e s ( # / h r ) 2222
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 9
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 22.5 22.5 22.5 23.3 23.3 Effective Green, g (s) 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 22.5 22.5 22.5 23.3 23.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 327 360 298 435 361 514 1028 434 532 796 v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 0.01 c0.16 0.01
v/s Ratio Perm c0.07 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 c0.18
v/c Ratio 0.31 0.01 0.22 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.55 0.01 0.03 0.60 Uniform Delay, d1 24.5 22.8 24.0 22.8 22.8 19.6 23.2 19.5 19.1 23.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.2 Delay (s) 25.0 22.8 24.4 22.8 22.8 19.6 23.8 19.5 19.1 24.3 L e v e l o f S e r v i c e CCCCCBCBBC
Approach Delay (s) 24.7 23.9 23.6 24.1
Approach LOS C C C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.4 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 309
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 13: Sunrise Way & E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr AM Peak Hour Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 356 32 212 446 201 43 142 172 215 202 69 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 356 32 212 446 201 43 142 172 215 202 69 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 387 10 230 485 98 47 154 45 234 220 38 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 204 838 364 354 993 597 165 381 314 360 788 134 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1543 3456 3554 1547 3456 1870 1540 3456 3026 513 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 65 387 10 230 485 98 47 154 45 234 127 131 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1543 1728 1777 1547 1728 1870 1540 1728 1777 1762 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 4.8 0.3 3.3 5.8 2.1 0.7 3.6 1.2 3.3 2.9 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 4.8 0.3 3.3 5.8 2.1 0.7 3.6 1.2 3.3 2.9 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 204 838 364 354 993 597 165 381 314 360 463 459 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.46 0.03 0.65 0.49 0.16 0.29 0.40 0.14 0.65 0.28 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 360 2163 940 523 2331 1180 339 1300 1070 536 1336 1326 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 23.0 16.7 15.0 22.0 15.3 10.3 23.4 17.6 16.6 21.9 15.0 15.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.4 0.0 2.0 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.7 0.2 2.0 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 1.6 0.1 1.2 1.9 0.6 0.3 1.4 0.4 1.2 1.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.9 17.1 15.0 24.0 15.7 10.5 24.3 18.3 16.8 23.9 15.3 15.4 LnGrp LOS C B B C B B C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 462 813 246 492
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.0 17.4 19.2 19.4
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.8 14.9 9.7 16.5 6.9 17.8 7.5 18.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.9 35.4 7.7 31.0 5.0 38.3 5.3 33.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 5.6 5.3 6.8 2.7 5.0 2.9 7.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.9 0.2 2.3 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.3 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 310
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 53 45 4 204 2 284 94 353 120 153 317 29 Future Volume (veh/h) 53 45 4 204 2 284 94 353 120 153 317 29 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 58 49 2 222 2 211 102 384 92 166 345 24 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 81 46 718 105 0 906 327 625 148 211 1365 94
Arrive On Green 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 100 1554 0 1 1554 999 2823 667 1781 3363 233 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 107 0 2 224 0 211 102 240 236 166 181 188 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 100 0 1554 1 0 1554 999 1777 1713 1781 1777 1819 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 6.0 8.3 8.5 6.2 4.6 4.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 31.5 0.0 0.0 31.5 0.0 4.5 6.0 8.3 8.5 6.2 4.6 4.7 Prop In Lane 0.54 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.13
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 128 0 718 106 0 906 327 394 379 211 721 739 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.00 0.00 2.12 0.00 0.23 0.31 0.61 0.62 0.79 0.25 0.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 128 0 718 106 0 906 509 717 691 457 1290 1320 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.8 0.0 9.9 33.9 0.0 6.9 23.0 23.9 24.0 29.2 13.4 13.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 36.2 0.0 0.0 534.8 0.0 0.1 0.5 1.5 1.7 6.3 0.2 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 2.1 0.0 0.0 17.3 0.0 1.1 1.3 3.3 3.3 2.8 1.6 1.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.0 0.0 9.9 568.7 0.0 7.1 23.6 25.4 25.6 35.6 13.6 13.6 L n G r p L O S EAAFAACCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 109 435 578 535
Approach Delay, s/veh 56.1 296.3 25.2 20.4
Approach LOS E F C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2468
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.6 19.6 36.0 32.2 36.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.5 27.5 31.5 49.5 31.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.2 10.5 33.5 6.7 33.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 2.9 0.0 2.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 96.8
HCM 6th LOS F
Item 2A - Page 311
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 56 486 105 164 411 45 230 383 131 175 237 41 Future Volume (veh/h) 56 486 105 164 411 45 230 383 131 175 237 41 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 61 528 79 178 447 41 250 416 106 190 258 30 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 89 1046 153 219 1006 92 348 700 176 231 895 103 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.31 0.31 0.10 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4478 657 1781 3285 300 3456 2794 704 1781 3202 368 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 61 399 208 178 241 247 250 263 259 190 142 146 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1731 1781 1777 1808 1728 1777 1722 1781 1777 1793 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 7.0 7.2 6.7 7.4 7.5 4.8 8.9 9.1 7.1 4.3 4.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 7.0 7.2 6.7 7.4 7.5 4.8 8.9 9.1 7.1 4.3 4.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 89 795 404 219 544 554 348 445 431 231 497 501 V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.50 0.51 0.81 0.44 0.45 0.72 0.59 0.60 0.82 0.29 0.29 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 240 1642 835 247 865 880 440 909 881 247 930 939 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 31.9 22.8 22.8 29.2 19.0 19.1 29.8 22.5 22.6 29.0 19.3 19.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.8 0.5 1.0 16.7 0.6 0.6 4.1 1.3 1.3 18.5 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 2.5 2.7 3.6 2.8 2.8 2.0 3.4 3.4 4.0 1.6 1.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 40.8 23.2 23.8 46.0 19.6 19.6 33.9 23.8 24.0 47.5 19.6 19.6 L n G r p L O S DCCDBBCCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 668 666 772 478
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.0 26.7 27.1 30.7
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.4 21.6 12.9 20.5 11.4 23.6 7.9 25.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 35.0 9.5 33.0 8.7 35.8 9.2 33.3 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.1 11.1 8.7 9.2 6.8 6.4 4.3 9.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0 3.6 0.2 1.5 0.0 2.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 312
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 39 593 105 208 553 155 104 317 367 148 165 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 39 593 105 208 553 155 104 317 367 148 165 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 645 91 226 601 146 113 345 346 161 179 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 69 1084 151 271 999 242 145 927 645 201 987 66 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.24 0.24 0.15 0.35 0.35 0.08 0.26 0.26 0.11 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4513 628 1781 2822 684 1781 3554 1546 1781 3376 224 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 484 252 226 378 369 113 345 346 161 93 98 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1737 1781 1777 1729 1781 1777 1546 1781 1777 1824 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 9.7 9.9 9.5 13.4 13.5 4.8 6.1 13.0 6.8 3.0 3.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 9.7 9.9 9.5 13.4 13.5 4.8 6.1 13.0 6.8 3.0 3.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 69 818 417 271 629 612 145 927 645 201 520 533 V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 0.59 0.60 0.83 0.60 0.60 0.78 0.37 0.54 0.80 0.18 0.18 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 157 1282 654 428 939 914 243 1384 843 335 784 805 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 36.5 25.9 26.0 31.7 20.4 20.4 34.7 23.3 17.1 33.3 20.3 20.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.6 0.7 1.4 7.8 0.9 1.0 8.8 0.2 0.7 7.2 0.2 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.9 3.7 3.9 4.3 5.0 4.9 2.3 2.4 4.0 3.1 1.2 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.0 26.6 27.4 39.5 21.3 21.4 43.5 23.5 17.8 40.6 20.5 20.5 L n G r p L O S DCCDCCDCBDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 778 973 804 352
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.8 25.6 23.9 29.7
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.2 24.6 16.2 23.0 10.8 27.0 7.5 31.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 30.0 18.5 29.0 10.5 34.0 6.8 40.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.8 15.0 11.5 11.9 6.8 5.1 3.8 15.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.9 0.3 4.0 0.1 0.9 0.0 4.3 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 313
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 311 1177 252 125 687 161 194 856 332 277 529 110 Future Volume (veh/h) 311 1177 252 125 687 161 194 856 332 277 529 110 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 338 1279 165 136 747 47 211 930 226 301 575 36 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 362 1371 599 160 967 421 265 1027 447 350 1115 486 Arrive On Green 0.20 0.39 0.39 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.10 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1552 1781 3554 1546 3456 3554 1548 3456 3554 1549 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 338 1279 165 136 747 47 211 930 226 301 575 36 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1552 1781 1777 1546 1728 1777 1548 1728 1777 1549 Q Serve(g_s), s 25.1 46.4 9.8 10.1 26.0 3.1 8.1 33.9 16.3 11.5 17.8 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.1 46.4 9.8 10.1 26.0 3.1 8.1 33.9 16.3 11.5 17.8 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 362 1371 599 160 967 421 265 1027 447 350 1115 486 V/C Ratio(X) 0.93 0.93 0.28 0.85 0.77 0.11 0.80 0.91 0.51 0.86 0.52 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 391 1414 618 166 967 421 368 1097 478 373 1115 486 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 52.7 39.6 28.4 60.3 45.1 36.7 61.0 46.0 39.8 59.5 37.8 32.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 28.2 11.3 0.2 31.6 3.9 0.1 8.1 10.3 0.9 17.2 0.4 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 13.7 21.3 3.6 5.8 11.6 1.1 3.7 15.6 6.1 5.7 7.5 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 80.8 50.9 28.6 91.9 49.0 36.8 69.1 56.3 40.7 76.6 38.2 32.5 LnGrp LOS F D C F D D E E D E D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1782 930 1367 912
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.5 54.6 55.7 50.6
Approach LOS D D E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.1 43.4 16.6 56.4 14.8 46.7 31.8 41.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 41.5 12.5 53.5 14.3 41.7 29.5 36.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.5 35.9 12.1 48.4 10.1 19.8 27.1 28.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.0 0.0 3.5 0.2 3.4 0.3 3.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 54.1
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 314
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 43 166 0 0 127 212 233 710 45 335 0 217 Future Volume (veh/h) 43 166 0 0 127 212 233 710 45 335 0 217 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 0.99 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 180 0 0 138 52 253 772 17 364 0 236 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222202
Cap, veh/h 372 433 0 0 823 358 361 1246 528 599 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.13 0.35 0.35 0.16 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1171 1870 0 0 3647 1544 1781 3554 1506 1781 364 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 180 0 0 138 52 253 772 17 364 8.2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1171 1870 0 0 1777 1544 1781 1777 1506 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.4 4.6 9.5 0.4 5.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.4 4.3 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.4 4.6 9.5 0.4 5.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 372 433 0 0 823 358 361 1246 528 599 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.15 0.70 0.62 0.03 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 790 1101 0 0 2091 909 465 2159 915 1275 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 17.5 17.2 0.0 0.0 16.2 16.1 11.7 14.2 11.2 7.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 3.3 0.5 0.0 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.4 1.7 3.3 0.1 1.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.7 17.8 0.0 0.0 16.3 16.3 14.9 14.7 11.3 8.2 L n G r p L O S BBAABBBBBA
Approach Vol, veh/h 227 190 1042
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.8 16.3 14.7
Approach LOS B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 23.0 16.7 11.1 16.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.5 32.0 31.0 9.7 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 11.5 6.3 6.6 3.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 5.3 1.1 0.2 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 315
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 107 133 49 26 119 28 41 794 95 69 675 33 Future Volume (veh/h) 107 133 49 26 119 28 41 794 95 69 675 33 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 116 145 37 28 129 7 45 863 93 75 734 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 390 295 75 326 305 254 368 1202 130 325 1347 61 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.37 0.37 0.06 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1428 364 1781 1870 1556 1781 3223 347 1781 3457 155 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 0 182 28 129 7 45 476 480 75 377 390 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1792 1781 1870 1556 1781 1777 1793 1781 1777 1836 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 4.9 0.7 3.4 0.2 0.8 12.6 12.6 1.4 9.1 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 4.9 0.7 3.4 0.2 0.8 12.6 12.6 1.4 9.1 9.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.08
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 390 0 371 326 305 254 368 663 669 325 692 715 V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.00 0.49 0.09 0.42 0.03 0.12 0.72 0.72 0.23 0.54 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 437 0 914 431 933 776 453 928 937 380 928 959 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 17.2 0.0 19.3 18.2 20.7 19.4 10.2 14.8 14.8 10.9 13.0 13.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.1 1.6 1.6 0.4 0.7 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 0.0 1.9 0.3 1.4 0.1 0.3 4.2 4.2 0.4 2.9 3.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.6 0.0 20.3 18.3 21.7 19.4 10.4 16.4 16.4 11.2 13.7 13.7 L n G r p L O S BACBCBBBBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 298 164 1001 842
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.3 21.0 16.1 13.5
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 25.1 6.2 15.9 7.0 26.0 8.7 13.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.1 28.8 5.0 28.1 5.1 28.8 5.6 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 14.6 2.7 6.9 2.8 11.1 4.9 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 316
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 95 236 0 0 242 146 139 696 126 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 95 236 0 0 242 146 139 696 126 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95
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 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 103 257 0 0 263 41 151 757 109
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 470 829 0 0 437 356 334 1810 261
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.36 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1523 936 5069 730
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 103 257 0 0 263 41 294 470 253
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1523 1824 1609 1694 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 4.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 1.0 5.6 5.0 5.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 4.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 1.0 5.6 5.0 5.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.51 0.43
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 470 829 0 0 437 356 651 1149 605 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.12 0.45 0.41 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1262 2156 0 0 933 760 1172 2068 1089 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.7 8.1 0.0 0.0 15.4 13.6 11.1 10.9 11.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.3 1.9 1.5 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.9 8.3 0.0 0.0 16.7 13.7 11.6 11.1 11.4 L n G r p L O S AAAABBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 360 304 1017
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.8 16.3 11.3
Approach LOS A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.6 24.5 9.4 15.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 52.0 25.0 22.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.6 6.0 3.7 7.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.9 1.6 0.2 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 317
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 110 231 106 89 368 70 59 700 138 100 546 117 Future Volume (veh/h) 110 231 106 89 368 70 59 700 138 100 546 117 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 120 251 28 97 400 17 64 761 134 109 593 110 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 355 799 347 408 767 333 183 1092 192 231 1123 208 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.05 0.36 0.36 0.07 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1542 1781 3554 1541 3456 3009 530 3456 2982 552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 120 251 28 97 400 17 64 449 446 109 353 350 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1542 1781 1777 1541 1728 1777 1761 1728 1777 1757 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 3.8 0.9 2.7 6.4 0.6 1.1 13.8 13.8 1.9 9.9 9.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 3.8 0.9 2.7 6.4 0.6 1.1 13.8 13.8 1.9 9.9 9.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 355 799 347 408 767 333 183 645 639 231 669 662 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.31 0.08 0.24 0.52 0.05 0.35 0.70 0.70 0.47 0.53 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 403 1721 747 435 1649 715 275 955 946 351 994 983 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 17.7 20.7 19.6 17.6 22.2 19.9 29.2 17.4 17.4 28.8 15.5 15.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.1 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 1.4 0.3 1.0 2.4 0.2 0.5 5.2 5.1 0.8 3.5 3.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.3 20.9 19.7 17.9 22.7 20.0 30.4 18.8 18.8 30.3 16.2 16.2 LnGrp LOS B C B B C B C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 399 514 959 812
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.0 21.7 19.5 18.1
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 27.7 8.6 18.9 7.9 28.6 9.2 18.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 34.4 5.1 31.0 5.1 35.8 6.4 29.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 15.8 4.7 5.8 3.1 11.9 5.3 8.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.5 0.0 1.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 2.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.6
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 318
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 106 251 0 0 298 427 57 876 124 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 106 251 0 0 298 427 57 876 124 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.95
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 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 115 273 0 0 447 203 62 952 101
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 220022222
Cap, veh/h 434 835 0 0 989 404 126 2074 223
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.36 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 0 0 3741 1528 354 5811 625
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 273 0 0 447 203 325 512 278
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 0 1870 1528 1853 1609 1720 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.9 4.3 0.0 0.0 4.6 5.2 6.3 5.6 5.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 4.3 0.0 0.0 4.6 5.2 6.3 5.6 5.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.19 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 434 835 0 0 989 404 661 1148 614 V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.50 0.49 0.45 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 522 1454 0 0 2042 834 1028 1784 954 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.6 8.2 0.0 0.0 14.1 14.3 11.5 11.3 11.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 1.2 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 2.2 1.7 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.9 8.4 0.0 0.0 14.4 15.3 12.0 11.5 11.8 L n G r p L O S AAAABBBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 388 650 1115
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.9 14.7 11.8
Approach LOS A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.8 24.9 8.3 16.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.4 35.6 6.1 25.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.3 6.3 3.9 7.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.9 1.4 0.0 3.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 319
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 111 552 179 132 658 220 133 384 130 212 479 91 Future Volume (veh/h) 111 552 179 132 658 220 133 384 130 212 479 91 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 121 600 58 143 715 79 145 417 103 230 521 28 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 314 1043 454 361 1081 471 389 685 167 419 1003 437 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.08 0.24 0.24 0.12 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1548 1781 3554 1548 1781 2814 688 1781 3554 1547 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 121 600 58 143 715 79 145 262 258 230 521 28 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1548 1781 1777 1548 1781 1777 1725 1781 1777 1547 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 9.9 1.9 3.8 12.0 2.6 4.1 9.0 9.2 6.4 8.5 0.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 9.9 1.9 3.8 12.0 2.6 4.1 9.0 9.2 6.4 8.5 0.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 314 1043 454 361 1081 471 389 432 420 419 1003 437 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.58 0.13 0.40 0.66 0.17 0.37 0.61 0.62 0.55 0.52 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 335 1583 689 400 1655 721 404 776 753 448 1717 748 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 16.1 20.6 17.8 15.6 20.8 17.5 17.3 23.1 23.1 16.6 20.7 18.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.6 1.4 1.5 1.2 0.4 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 3.6 0.6 1.4 4.5 0.8 1.6 3.6 3.6 2.5 3.3 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.9 21.1 17.9 16.3 21.5 17.7 17.8 24.4 24.6 17.8 21.2 18.1 LnGrp LOS B C B B C B B C C B C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 779 937 665 779
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.2 20.4 23.1 20.1
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.9 21.2 9.9 24.7 10.2 23.9 9.2 25.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 30.0 6.9 30.6 6.3 33.2 5.5 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.4 11.2 5.8 11.9 6.1 10.5 5.2 14.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.9 0.0 3.7 0.0 3.5 0.0 4.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 320
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 11: Farrell Dr & Ramon Rd PM Peak Hour
Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 39 659 40 80 665 152 47 253 95 141 265 52 Future Volume (veh/h) 39 659 40 80 665 152 47 253 95 141 265 52 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 716 15 87 723 58 51 275 51 153 288 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 319 1101 472 347 1185 517 338 621 113 423 466 385 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.09 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1525 1781 3554 1550 1781 2986 545 1781 1870 1545 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 716 15 87 723 58 51 162 164 153 288 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1525 1781 1777 1550 1781 1777 1754 1781 1870 1545 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 9.6 0.4 1.8 9.4 1.4 1.2 4.4 4.5 3.6 7.6 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 9.6 0.4 1.8 9.4 1.4 1.2 4.4 4.5 3.6 7.6 0.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 319 1101 472 347 1185 517 338 370 365 423 466 385 V/C Ratio(X) 0.13 0.65 0.03 0.25 0.61 0.11 0.15 0.44 0.45 0.36 0.62 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 404 1669 716 389 1669 728 414 995 982 423 1044 862 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 12.5 16.5 13.3 12.3 15.4 12.8 16.0 19.1 19.2 15.1 18.4 15.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.9 0.5 1.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 3.4 0.1 0.6 3.2 0.4 0.4 1.6 1.6 1.3 2.9 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.7 17.2 13.3 12.6 15.9 12.9 16.2 19.9 20.0 15.6 19.8 15.8 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBBBCBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 773 868 377 458
Approach Delay, s/veh 16.8 15.4 19.5 18.2
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 16.0 8.2 21.7 7.2 18.3 6.9 23.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 31.0 5.0 26.0 5.1 30.9 5.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 6.5 3.8 11.6 3.2 9.6 2.9 11.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.7 0.0 4.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 4.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 321
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Palm Springs General Plan 12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon PM Peak Hour Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR2 NBL2 NBT NBR SEL SER SER2 Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 132 0 37 57 52 63 57 807 31 28 669 54 Future Volume (vph) 132 0 37 57 52 63 57 807 31 28 669 54 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.88 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.94 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1748 1533 1744 1863 1541 1770 3539 1473 1770 2612 Flt Permitted 0.72 1.00 0.59 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1324 1533 1084 1863 1541 1770 3539 1473 1770 2612 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 143 0 40 62 57 68 62 877 34 30 727 59
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 31 0 0 52 0 0 24 0 31 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 143 9 62 57 16 62 877 10 30 755 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20 20
C o n f l . B i k e s ( # / h r ) 2222
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 9
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 38.6 38.6 Effective Green, g (s) 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 33.7 33.7 33.7 38.6 38.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.35 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 305 353 249 429 355 534 1069 445 612 904 v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.04 c0.25 0.02
v/s Ratio Perm c0.11 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.01 c0.29
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.03 0.25 0.13 0.04 0.12 0.82 0.02 0.05 0.83 Uniform Delay, d1 37.0 33.2 35.0 34.1 33.4 28.1 36.1 27.3 24.2 33.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.1 0.0 0.0 6.7 Delay (s) 38.2 33.2 35.5 34.2 33.4 28.2 41.2 27.4 24.3 40.2 L e v e l o f S e r v i c e DCDCCCDCCD
Approach Delay (s) 37.1 34.4 39.9 39.6
Approach LOS D C D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 39.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 111.5 Sum of lost time (s) 13.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 322
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Palm Springs General Plan 13: Sunrise Way & E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr PM Peak Hour Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 69 637 37 217 656 281 82 212 179 328 211 89 Future Volume (veh/h) 69 637 37 217 656 281 82 212 179 328 211 89 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 75 692 13 236 713 140 89 230 68 357 229 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 192 1046 456 327 1184 715 207 415 342 431 849 163 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1548 3456 3554 1550 3456 1870 1542 3456 2958 570 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 75 692 13 236 713 140 89 230 68 357 136 138 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1548 1728 1777 1550 1728 1870 1542 1728 1777 1751 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 11.6 0.4 4.5 11.4 3.7 1.7 7.4 2.4 6.9 4.0 4.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 11.6 0.4 4.5 11.4 3.7 1.7 7.4 2.4 6.9 4.0 4.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 192 1046 456 327 1184 715 207 415 342 431 510 502 V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.66 0.03 0.72 0.60 0.20 0.43 0.55 0.20 0.83 0.27 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 254 1644 716 330 1722 949 305 975 804 431 992 978 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.0 21.1 17.1 29.9 18.9 11.0 30.9 23.5 21.6 29.1 18.7 18.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.7 0.0 7.5 0.5 0.1 1.4 1.2 0.3 12.6 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 4.3 0.1 2.1 4.1 1.1 0.7 3.1 0.8 3.3 1.5 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.3 21.8 17.1 37.4 19.4 11.1 32.3 24.7 21.8 41.6 19.0 19.1 L n G r p L O S CCBDBBCCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 780 1089 387 631
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.7 22.3 25.9 31.8
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 19.6 10.9 24.5 8.6 24.0 8.3 27.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.5 35.5 6.5 31.5 6.0 38.0 5.0 33.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.9 9.4 6.5 13.6 3.7 6.2 3.4 13.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.4 0.0 4.1 0.0 1.4 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.0
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 323
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 50 10 490 40 530 50 190 240 540 480 210 Future Volume (veh/h) 50 50 10 490 40 530 50 190 240 540 480 210 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 53 53 11 516 42 558 53 200 253 568 505 221 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 267 254 639 537 770 639 175 294 254 569 1238 539 Arrive On Green 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.32 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 547 617 1553 1331 1870 1553 720 1777 1534 1781 2384 1037 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 106 0 11 516 42 558 53 200 253 568 376 350 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1164 0 1553 1331 1870 1553 720 1777 1534 1781 1777 1645 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.4 0.0 0.5 47.1 1.8 42.9 8.6 13.8 21.4 41.4 16.8 16.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 0.0 0.5 53.5 1.8 42.9 8.6 13.8 21.4 41.4 16.8 16.9 Prop In Lane 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 521 0 639 537 770 639 175 294 254 569 923 854 V/C Ratio(X) 0.20 0.00 0.02 0.96 0.05 0.87 0.30 0.68 1.00 1.00 0.41 0.41 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 521 0 639 537 770 639 175 294 254 569 923 854 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 24.2 0.0 22.7 43.0 23.0 35.1 48.9 51.0 54.2 44.2 19.1 19.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 29.0 0.0 12.7 1.0 6.2 55.7 37.4 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 0.2 20.8 0.8 17.7 1.6 6.5 12.0 23.6 6.7 6.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.4 0.0 22.7 72.0 23.1 47.8 49.8 57.3 110.0 81.7 19.3 19.4 LnGrp LOS C A C E C D D E F F B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 117 1116 506 1294
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.2 58.1 82.8 46.7
Approach LOS C E F D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.0 26.0 58.0 72.0 58.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.5 21.5 53.5 67.5 53.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 43.4 23.4 8.4 18.9 55.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.9 5.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 56.1
HCM 6th LOS E
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 324
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 40 530 300 430 910 40 290 280 270 160 470 120 Future Volume (veh/h) 40 530 300 430 910 40 290 280 270 160 470 120 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 558 228 362 1085 39 305 295 133 168 495 108 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 64 795 314 403 2225 80 381 573 251 203 706 153 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.24 0.24 0.11 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3565 1409 1781 5378 193 3456 2382 1044 1781 2889 626 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 532 254 362 754 370 305 218 210 168 303 300 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1570 1781 1870 1831 1728 1777 1649 1781 1777 1738 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 13.2 13.8 18.1 13.6 13.6 7.9 9.8 10.2 8.5 14.3 14.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 13.2 13.8 18.1 13.6 13.6 7.9 9.8 10.2 8.5 14.3 14.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 64 759 350 403 1548 757 381 428 397 203 434 425 V/C Ratio(X) 0.66 0.70 0.73 0.90 0.49 0.49 0.80 0.51 0.53 0.83 0.70 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 188 937 432 537 1762 863 455 764 709 281 810 792 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 43.8 32.9 33.1 34.5 19.8 19.8 39.9 30.2 30.4 39.8 31.6 31.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.0 1.8 4.6 14.6 0.2 0.5 8.3 0.9 1.1 13.4 2.0 2.2 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 1.1 5.3 5.4 9.0 5.4 5.4 3.6 4.0 3.9 4.3 6.0 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 54.8 34.6 37.7 49.1 20.0 20.3 48.2 31.1 31.5 53.2 33.7 33.9 L n G r p L O S DCDDCCDCCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 828 1486 733 771
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.6 27.2 38.3 38.0
A p p r o a c h L O S DCDD
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 26.6 25.3 25.0 14.6 27.0 7.8 42.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 39.5 27.7 25.3 12.1 41.9 9.7 43.3 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.5 12.2 20.1 15.8 9.9 16.5 4.1 15.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.4 0.7 3.3 0.2 3.4 0.0 7.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 325
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 910 90 290 1400 160 50 120 190 290 450 70 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 910 90 290 1400 160 50 120 190 290 450 70 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 32 958 95 305 1474 168 53 126 200 305 474 74 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 55 1311 130 343 2041 232 74 469 507 340 865 134 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.44 0.44 0.04 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4711 466 1781 4638 528 1781 3554 1526 1781 3071 477 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 32 691 362 305 1081 561 53 126 200 305 273 275 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1773 1781 1702 1763 1781 1777 1526 1781 1777 1771 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 16.1 16.1 14.6 22.8 22.8 2.6 2.8 4.3 14.6 11.4 11.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 16.1 16.1 14.6 22.8 22.8 2.6 2.8 4.3 14.6 11.4 11.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 55 947 493 343 1498 776 74 469 507 340 500 499 V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.73 0.73 0.89 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.27 0.39 0.90 0.55 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 112 1150 599 398 1695 878 133 1038 751 357 743 740 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 41.8 28.5 28.6 34.3 20.1 20.1 41.4 34.1 8.4 34.5 26.6 26.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.3 1.9 3.7 19.2 1.3 2.6 12.3 0.3 0.5 23.5 0.9 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 6.3 6.8 7.6 8.0 8.6 1.3 1.2 1.5 8.1 4.6 4.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.1 30.4 32.3 53.6 21.4 22.7 53.6 34.4 8.9 58.0 27.6 27.6 L n G r p L O S DCCDCCDCAECC
Approach Vol, veh/h 1085 1947 379 853
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.7 26.8 23.6 38.5
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCD
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.2 16.0 21.3 28.8 8.1 29.1 7.2 42.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.5 25.5 19.5 29.5 6.5 36.5 5.5 43.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.6 6.3 16.6 18.1 4.6 13.5 3.5 24.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 1.3 0.3 4.8 0.0 3.0 0.0 10.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 326
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 360 750 180 90 1240 170 130 360 200 390 940 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 360 750 180 90 1240 170 130 360 200 390 940 80 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 379 789 189 95 1305 179 137 379 211 411 989 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 382 2752 763 119 1550 213 175 563 254 473 1204 102 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.49 0.49 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5611 1555 1781 4526 621 3456 3404 1534 3456 4784 405 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 379 789 189 95 982 502 137 379 211 411 703 370 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1555 1781 1702 1742 1728 1702 1534 1728 1702 1785 Q Serve(g_s), s 27.2 10.7 9.0 6.7 34.1 34.1 5.0 13.4 17.1 14.9 25.0 25.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.2 10.7 9.0 6.7 34.1 34.1 5.0 13.4 17.1 14.9 25.0 25.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 382 2752 763 119 1166 597 175 563 254 473 857 449 V/C Ratio(X) 0.99 0.29 0.25 0.80 0.84 0.84 0.78 0.67 0.83 0.87 0.82 0.82 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 382 2752 763 229 1341 687 175 598 269 580 996 522 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 50.2 19.4 18.9 59.0 38.9 38.9 60.1 50.2 51.7 54.2 45.2 45.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 43.7 0.1 0.2 11.6 4.5 8.3 20.1 2.7 18.5 11.4 4.9 9.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 16.3 4.4 3.1 3.3 14.3 15.2 2.6 5.7 7.6 7.0 10.6 11.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 93.9 19.4 19.1 70.6 43.4 47.3 80.2 53.0 70.3 65.6 50.1 54.3 LnGrp LOS F B B E D D F D E E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1357 1579 727 1484
Approach Delay, s/veh 40.2 46.3 63.1 55.4
Approach LOS D D E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.1 25.7 13.0 67.3 11.0 36.8 32.0 48.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 22.5 16.5 61.5 6.5 37.5 27.5 50.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.9 19.1 8.7 12.7 7.0 27.1 29.2 36.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 1.1 0.1 6.4 0.0 4.4 0.0 7.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 49.7
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 327
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 180 100 50 250 250 290 950 70 570 240 170 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 180 100 50 250 250 290 950 70 570 240 170 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.94 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 95 189 105 53 263 263 305 1000 74 600 253 179 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 233 282 157 172 909 396 339 1056 78 553 815 660 Arrive On Green 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.19 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.44 0.44 Sat Flow, veh/h 868 1101 612 1070 3554 1548 1781 3345 248 1781 1870 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 95 0 294 53 263 263 305 531 543 600 253 179 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 868 0 1713 1070 1777 1548 1781 1777 1816 1781 1870 1515 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.3 0.0 17.6 5.4 6.8 17.4 19.1 33.4 33.4 35.5 10.1 8.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.1 0.0 17.6 23.0 6.8 17.4 19.1 33.4 33.4 35.5 10.1 8.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.14 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 233 0 438 172 909 396 339 561 573 553 815 660 V/C Ratio(X) 0.41 0.00 0.67 0.31 0.29 0.66 0.90 0.95 0.95 1.09 0.31 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 349 0 667 314 1383 602 475 567 580 553 815 660 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 41.5 0.0 38.2 48.6 34.2 38.1 45.2 38.2 38.2 39.4 21.0 20.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 1.8 1.0 0.2 1.9 15.6 25.1 24.8 63.4 0.2 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 2.5 0.0 7.5 1.5 2.9 6.7 9.8 18.0 18.4 24.8 4.4 3.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.6 0.0 40.0 49.6 34.4 40.1 60.8 63.3 63.0 102.8 21.3 20.9 L n G r p L O S DADDCDEEEFCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 389 579 1379 1032
Approach Delay, s/veh 40.6 38.3 62.6 68.6
Approach LOS D D E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 40.0 40.6 33.8 26.3 54.3 33.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 35.5 36.5 44.5 30.5 41.5 44.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 37.5 35.4 20.1 21.1 12.1 25.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.7 2.4 0.6 2.1 2.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 57.8
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 328
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 150 50 30 110 30 150 650 50 90 1000 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 150 50 30 110 30 150 650 50 90 1000 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 158 53 32 116 32 158 684 53 95 1053 21 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 351 385 124 296 429 186 362 1408 109 451 1456 29 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.15 0.15 0.04 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.42 0.42 0.07 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2618 842 1781 3554 1546 1781 3336 258 1781 3562 71 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 105 106 32 116 32 158 364 373 95 525 549 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1683 1781 1777 1546 1781 1777 1818 1781 1777 1856 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 3.0 3.2 0.9 1.6 1.0 2.7 8.2 8.2 1.6 13.7 13.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 3.0 3.2 0.9 1.6 1.0 2.7 8.2 8.2 1.6 13.7 13.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 351 261 247 296 429 186 362 750 767 451 726 759 V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.40 0.43 0.11 0.27 0.17 0.44 0.49 0.49 0.21 0.72 0.72 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 403 532 504 395 1063 463 489 1305 1335 504 1208 1262 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 19.3 21.3 21.4 20.0 22.0 21.8 10.3 11.6 11.6 8.5 13.7 13.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 1.0 1.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.2 1.4 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.8 2.5 2.6 0.5 4.4 4.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.6 22.3 22.6 20.2 22.4 22.2 11.1 12.1 12.1 8.7 15.1 15.0 L n G r p L O S BCCCCC BBBABB
Approach Vol, veh/h 285 180 895 1169
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.7 22.0 11.9 14.5
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.3 27.8 6.4 12.6 9.1 27.0 7.9 11.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 40.5 5.0 16.5 8.5 37.5 5.0 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 10.2 2.9 5.2 4.7 15.7 4.0 3.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.8 0.1 6.6 0.0 0.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 329
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 150 220 120 90 380 180 140 900 130 140 230 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 150 220 120 90 380 180 140 900 130 140 230 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 158 232 126 95 400 189 147 947 137 147 242 168 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 232 289 149 373 392 318 522 1659 240 239 1082 718 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2213 1142 1781 1870 1518 972 3105 449 520 2024 1343 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 158 184 174 95 400 189 147 542 542 147 211 199 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1578 1781 1870 1518 972 1777 1777 520 1777 1590 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.1 10.8 11.6 4.8 22.5 12.1 10.2 21.9 22.0 28.4 6.7 7.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.1 10.8 11.6 4.8 22.5 12.1 17.3 21.9 22.0 50.3 6.7 7.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.72 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.84
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 232 232 206 373 392 318 522 950 949 239 950 850 V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.79 0.85 0.25 1.02 0.59 0.28 0.57 0.57 0.62 0.22 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 240 240 213 373 392 318 812 1480 1480 394 1480 1325 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 44.6 45.3 45.6 35.5 42.5 38.3 17.9 16.8 16.8 33.6 13.2 13.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.2 16.1 25.1 0.4 51.0 3.0 0.3 0.5 0.5 2.6 0.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.4 5.7 5.9 2.1 15.7 4.7 2.3 8.7 8.7 3.7 2.7 2.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.8 61.4 70.7 35.8 93.4 41.3 18.2 17.3 17.3 36.2 13.3 13.5 LnGrp LOS D E E D F D B B B D B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 516 684 1231 557
Approach Delay, s/veh 61.6 71.0 17.4 19.4
A p p r o a c h L O S EEBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 61.9 18.5 61.9 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 89.5 14.5 89.5 22.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.0 13.6 52.3 24.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 11.2 0.3 5.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.7
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 330
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 280 70 60 450 240 100 600 110 240 740 100 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 280 70 60 450 240 100 600 110 240 740 100 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 105 295 74 63 474 253 105 632 116 253 779 105 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 324 971 422 404 928 403 217 936 172 348 1102 149 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.05 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.10 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1546 1781 3554 1546 3456 2987 547 3456 3137 423 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 295 74 63 474 253 105 376 372 253 441 443 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1546 1781 1777 1546 1728 1777 1757 1728 1777 1783 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 4.5 2.5 1.7 7.8 9.9 2.0 12.7 12.7 4.9 14.7 14.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 4.5 2.5 1.7 7.8 9.9 2.0 12.7 12.7 4.9 14.7 14.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.24
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 324 971 422 404 928 403 217 557 551 348 624 626 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.30 0.18 0.16 0.51 0.63 0.48 0.67 0.68 0.73 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 367 1602 697 443 1550 674 342 853 843 402 884 887 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 17.2 19.8 19.1 17.0 21.7 22.4 31.1 20.5 20.6 30.0 19.2 19.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.6 1.7 1.4 1.5 5.5 1.5 1.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 1.7 0.8 0.7 3.0 3.4 0.9 5.0 5.0 2.2 5.6 5.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.8 20.0 19.3 17.2 22.1 24.1 32.8 22.0 22.0 35.5 20.7 20.7 L n G r p L O S BBBB CCCCCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 474 790 853 1137
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 22.3 23.3 24.0
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 26.1 8.0 23.3 8.8 28.7 8.8 22.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 33.0 5.0 31.0 6.8 34.2 6.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.9 14.7 3.7 6.5 4.0 16.7 4.9 11.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.4 0.0 2.0 0.1 5.0 0.0 3.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 331
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 140 120 80 240 400 220 540 80 140 140 190 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 140 120 80 240 400 220 540 80 140 140 190 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 147 126 84 379 337 232 568 84 147 147 200 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 176 646 507 112 581 476 397 1297 561 310 648 561 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1865 1465 1781 1870 1534 1025 3554 1539 776 1777 1539 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 139 134 84 379 337 232 568 84 147 147 200 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1553 1781 1870 1534 1025 1777 1539 776 1777 1539 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 3.3 3.7 2.8 10.5 11.6 12.8 7.2 2.2 10.6 3.4 5.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 3.3 3.7 2.8 10.5 11.6 18.4 7.2 2.2 17.8 3.4 5.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 176 615 538 112 581 476 397 1297 561 310 648 561 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.23 0.25 0.75 0.65 0.71 0.58 0.44 0.15 0.47 0.23 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 283 788 689 224 767 629 409 1338 580 319 669 580 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 26.3 13.9 14.0 27.5 17.8 18.2 20.6 14.3 12.7 21.1 13.1 13.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.3 0.2 0.2 9.6 1.2 2.4 2.0 0.2 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.4 3.9 3.7 3.0 2.6 0.6 1.8 1.3 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.6 14.0 14.2 37.1 19.1 20.6 22.6 14.6 12.9 22.2 13.3 14.2 LnGrp LOS C B B D B C C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 410 800 884 494
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.6 21.6 16.5 16.3
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.3 8.3 25.2 26.3 10.4 23.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.5 7.5 26.5 22.5 9.5 24.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.4 4.8 5.7 19.8 6.5 13.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.0 1.4 0.8 0.1 2.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 332
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 250 120 320 410 270 130 800 250 190 810 70 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 250 120 320 410 270 130 800 250 190 810 70 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 263 126 337 432 284 137 842 263 200 853 74 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 320 794 344 411 1361 412 333 976 304 292 1392 608 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.07 0.37 0.37 0.09 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1542 1781 5106 1546 1781 2650 827 1781 3554 1552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 263 126 337 432 284 137 564 541 200 853 74 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1542 1781 1702 1546 1781 1777 1700 1781 1777 1552 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 4.9 5.5 7.2 5.4 13.2 3.7 23.4 23.5 5.4 15.3 2.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 4.9 5.5 7.2 5.4 13.2 3.7 23.4 23.5 5.4 15.3 2.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.49 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 320 794 344 411 1361 412 333 654 626 292 1392 608 V/C Ratio(X) 0.20 0.33 0.37 0.82 0.32 0.69 0.41 0.86 0.86 0.68 0.61 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 347 1324 575 411 2056 623 349 724 693 298 1511 660 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 22.0 26.0 26.2 26.1 23.4 26.3 15.2 23.3 23.3 17.9 19.4 15.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.2 0.7 12.5 0.1 2.1 0.8 9.7 10.2 6.2 0.6 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 2.0 1.9 3.7 2.0 4.6 1.5 10.8 10.4 2.5 5.9 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.3 26.2 26.8 38.6 23.6 28.3 16.0 33.0 33.6 24.1 20.0 15.6 L n G r p L O S CCCDCCBCCCCB
Approach Vol, veh/h 452 1053 1242 1127
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.8 29.7 31.4 20.5
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.9 33.8 11.7 22.3 10.0 35.7 8.3 25.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.6 32.5 7.2 29.7 6.2 33.9 5.0 32.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 25.5 9.2 7.5 5.7 17.3 4.1 15.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 5.6 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 333
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
11: Farrell Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 11
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 40 500 40 110 880 150 60 270 110 140 190 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 40 500 40 110 880 150 60 270 110 140 190 80 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 42 526 42 116 926 158 63 284 116 147 200 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 306 1562 474 453 1726 524 390 506 201 385 447 369 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.09 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5106 1549 1781 5106 1550 1781 2461 977 1781 1870 1544 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 42 526 42 116 926 158 63 203 197 147 200 84 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1549 1781 1702 1550 1781 1777 1661 1781 1870 1544 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 4.4 1.1 2.4 8.1 4.2 1.5 5.7 5.9 3.5 5.1 2.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 4.4 1.1 2.4 8.1 4.2 1.5 5.7 5.9 3.5 5.1 2.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 306 1562 474 453 1726 524 390 366 342 385 447 369 V/C Ratio(X) 0.14 0.34 0.09 0.26 0.54 0.30 0.16 0.55 0.58 0.38 0.45 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 389 3402 1032 480 3402 1033 454 688 643 387 721 595 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 12.5 14.9 13.7 11.6 14.9 13.5 15.8 19.8 19.9 15.4 18.0 17.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 1.3 1.5 0.6 0.7 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 1.5 0.3 0.8 2.6 1.3 0.5 2.1 2.1 1.2 1.9 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.7 15.0 13.8 11.9 15.1 13.9 16.0 21.1 21.4 16.0 18.7 17.3 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBBCCBBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 610 1200 463 431
Approach Delay, s/veh 14.8 14.6 20.5 17.5
Approach LOS B B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 15.9 8.7 21.5 7.6 17.8 6.9 23.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 21.5 5.0 37.0 5.1 21.4 5.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.5 7.9 4.4 6.4 3.5 7.1 2.9 10.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.0 0.0 7.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 334
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR WBR2 NBL2 NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 110 30 30 90 20 160 30 20 20 660 30 50 Future Volume (vph) 110 30 30 90 20 160 30 20 20 660 30 50 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.86 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 1780 1535 1746 1572 1770 3534 1476 1770 Flt Permitted 0.48 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 888 1535 1101 1572 1770 3326 1476 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 116 32 32 95 21 168 32 21 21 695 32 53
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 148 32 95 221 0 0 21 0 716 32 53 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 2.7 28.7 28.7 3.8 Effective Green, g (s) 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 2.7 28.7 28.7 3.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.27 0.27 0.04 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 225 390 280 400 45 899 399 63
v/s Ratio Prot 0.14 0.01 c0.03
v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 0.02 0.09 c0.22 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.66 0.08 0.34 0.55 0.47 0.80 0.08 0.84
Uniform Delay, d1 35.4 30.1 32.3 34.3 51.0 36.0 28.9 50.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.8 0.1 0.7 1.7 7.5 4.9 0.1 60.8
Delay (s) 42.2 30.2 33.0 36.0 58.5 40.9 28.9 111.7
L e v e l o f S e r v i c e DCCD E DCF
Approach Delay (s) 40.1 35.1 40.9
Approach LOS D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 44.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 106.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 113.4% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 335
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement SBT SBR SEL2 SEL SER SER2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 170 70 60 30 560 60
Future Volume (vph) 170 70 60 30 560 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.88
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.94
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.96 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 3384 1770 2616
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 3384 1770 2616
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph) 179 74 63 32 589 63
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 253 0 0 95 652 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2
Turn Type NA Perm Prot Perm
Protected Phases 6 9
Permitted Phases 9 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 29.8 28.6 28.6
Effective Green, g (s) 29.8 28.6 28.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.27 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 950 477 705
v/s Ratio Prot 0.07
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.25
v/c Ratio 0.27 0.20 0.92
Uniform Delay, d1 29.7 29.9 37.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 17.9
Delay (s) 29.8 30.1 55.6
Level of Service C C E
Approach Delay (s) 44.0 52.4
Approach LOS D D
Intersection Summary
Item 2A - Page 336
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
13: Sunrise Way & E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr 08/12/2022 Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 440 40 240 580 350 50 170 250 390 220 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 440 40 240 580 350 50 170 250 390 220 80 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 463 42 253 611 368 53 179 263 411 232 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 194 965 420 350 1125 739 162 712 308 541 794 279 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.10 0.32 0.32 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.16 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1546 3456 3554 1549 3456 3554 1539 3456 2562 898 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 463 42 253 611 368 53 179 263 411 159 157 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1546 1728 1777 1549 1728 1777 1539 1728 1777 1684 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 7.3 1.4 4.7 9.4 10.9 1.0 2.8 11.0 7.6 4.5 4.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 7.3 1.4 4.7 9.4 10.9 1.0 2.8 11.0 7.6 4.5 4.7 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 194 965 420 350 1125 739 162 712 308 541 551 522 V/C Ratio(X) 0.38 0.48 0.10 0.72 0.54 0.50 0.33 0.25 0.85 0.76 0.29 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 260 2350 1022 389 2510 1342 338 748 324 857 641 607 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 30.3 20.3 18.2 29.0 18.8 12.1 30.7 22.4 25.7 26.9 17.4 17.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.4 0.1 5.8 0.4 0.5 1.2 0.2 18.6 2.2 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 2.7 0.4 2.1 3.4 3.1 0.4 1.1 5.1 3.0 1.6 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.5 20.7 18.3 34.8 19.2 12.6 31.9 22.6 44.3 29.1 17.7 17.8 L n G r p L O S CCBCBBCCDCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 579 1232 495 727
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.9 20.4 35.1 24.2
A p p r o a c h L O S CCDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.9 17.8 11.2 22.6 7.6 25.1 8.2 25.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 14.0 7.5 44.0 6.5 24.0 5.0 47.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.6 13.0 6.7 9.3 3.0 6.7 3.4 12.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.2 0.1 3.1 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.0
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 337
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 60 10 220 20 290 110 570 310 420 360 50 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 60 10 220 20 290 110 570 310 420 360 50 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.99 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 63 3 232 21 79 116 600 326 442 379 -49 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 252 232 418 365 505 418 397 658 358 478 2209 0 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.62 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 693 860 1546 1323 1870 1546 1039 2202 1196 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 0 3 232 21 79 116 484 442 442 330 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1553 0 1546 1323 1870 1546 1039 1777 1621 1781 1777 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 0.0 0.1 14.0 0.7 3.3 7.3 21.8 21.8 20.1 3.2 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 0.0 0.1 18.9 0.7 3.3 7.3 21.8 21.8 20.1 3.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 485 0 418 365 505 418 397 531 485 478 2209 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.00 0.01 0.64 0.04 0.19 0.29 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.15 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 577 0 512 445 619 512 405 545 497 504 2287 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.8 0.0 22.2 31.4 22.4 23.3 23.0 28.1 28.1 29.6 6.6 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 19.4 20.8 22.4 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.3 1.1 1.7 11.4 10.6 10.9 1.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.1 0.0 22.2 33.5 22.4 23.5 23.4 47.4 48.9 52.0 6.6 0.0 L n G r p L O S CACCCCCDDDAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 129 332 1042 772
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.1 30.5 45.4 32.6
A p p r o a c h L O S CCDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.8 29.3 27.0 56.2 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 25.5 27.5 53.5 27.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.1 23.8 7.0 5.2 20.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 1.0 0.7 2.2 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.6
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 338
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 120 740 220 400 560 70 340 440 410 230 270 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 120 740 220 400 560 70 340 440 410 230 270 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 126 779 232 271 799 74 358 463 432 242 284 0 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 152 955 281 298 1654 152 417 520 453 256 1122 0 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.33 0.33 0.12 0.29 0.29 0.14 0.32 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3887 1145 1781 5050 465 3456 1777 1548 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 681 330 271 591 282 358 463 432 242 284 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1628 1781 1870 1774 1728 1777 1548 1781 1777 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.3 22.5 22.9 17.9 15.1 15.2 12.1 29.8 32.7 16.1 7.1 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.3 22.5 22.9 17.9 15.1 15.2 12.1 29.8 32.7 16.1 7.1 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 152 836 400 298 1225 581 417 520 453 256 1122 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.81 0.82 0.91 0.48 0.49 0.86 0.89 0.95 0.94 0.25 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 189 940 450 323 1315 624 468 522 455 256 1122 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.8 42.5 42.6 48.9 32.1 32.1 51.5 40.5 41.5 50.7 30.4 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.1 5.1 10.8 27.1 0.3 0.6 13.6 17.2 30.7 41.0 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.5 9.7 10.1 9.9 6.6 6.4 5.9 15.0 15.8 9.9 3.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.9 47.6 53.5 75.9 32.4 32.8 65.1 57.7 72.2 91.7 30.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS E D D E C C E E E F C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1137 1144 1253 526
Approach Delay, s/veh 52.3 42.8 64.8 58.7
Approach LOS D D E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.7 39.4 24.5 33.9 18.9 42.2 14.7 43.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.2 35.1 21.7 33.0 16.2 36.1 12.7 42.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.1 34.7 19.9 24.9 14.1 9.1 10.3 17.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.2 0.2 3.8 0.3 1.6 0.1 5.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 54.3
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 339
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 1150 120 220 950 200 120 330 380 180 180 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 1150 120 220 950 200 120 330 380 180 180 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 1211 126 232 1000 211 126 347 326 189 189 0 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 95 1428 149 251 1651 348 156 853 594 206 953 0 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.14 0.39 0.39 0.09 0.24 0.24 0.12 0.27 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4686 487 1781 4207 886 1781 3554 1544 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 880 457 232 809 402 126 347 326 189 189 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1769 1781 1702 1689 1781 1777 1544 1781 1777 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.7 22.0 22.0 11.7 17.2 17.2 6.3 7.5 15.0 9.5 3.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 22.0 22.0 11.7 17.2 17.2 6.3 7.5 15.0 9.5 3.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.52 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 95 1037 539 251 1336 663 156 853 594 206 953 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.92 0.61 0.61 0.81 0.41 0.55 0.92 0.20 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 135 1088 565 251 1336 663 159 1163 729 206 1257 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.4 29.6 29.6 38.5 22.0 22.0 40.6 29.0 22.0 39.7 25.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.4 6.2 11.2 36.8 0.8 1.6 25.2 0.3 0.8 40.3 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 9.2 10.3 7.3 6.3 6.4 3.7 3.0 5.0 6.3 1.5 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 58.8 35.8 40.8 75.2 22.8 23.6 65.8 29.3 22.8 80.0 25.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS E D D E C C E C C F C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1411 1443 799 378
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.6 31.4 32.4 52.9
A p p r o a c h L O S DCCD
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 26.3 17.3 32.2 12.5 28.8 9.3 40.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 29.7 12.8 29.0 8.1 32.1 6.9 34.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.5 17.0 13.7 24.0 8.3 5.7 5.7 19.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.6 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 6.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.2
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 340
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 330 1440 310 150 880 180 240 1000 350 290 630 120 Future Volume (veh/h) 330 1440 310 150 880 180 240 1000 350 290 630 120 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 347 1516 211 158 926 69 253 1053 194 305 663 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 362 2012 556 185 1255 93 195 1220 224 363 1518 190 Arrive On Green 0.20 0.36 0.36 0.10 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.28 0.28 0.11 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5611 1551 1781 4839 360 3456 4315 794 3456 4582 574 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 347 1516 211 158 651 344 253 830 417 305 491 256 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1551 1781 1702 1795 1728 1702 1705 1728 1702 1752 Q Serve(g_s), s 23.2 28.6 12.2 10.5 21.1 21.2 6.8 27.9 27.9 10.4 13.6 13.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.2 28.6 12.2 10.5 21.1 21.2 6.8 27.9 27.9 10.4 13.6 13.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.33
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 362 2012 556 185 883 465 195 963 482 363 1128 580 V/C Ratio(X) 0.96 0.75 0.38 0.85 0.74 0.74 1.30 0.86 0.86 0.84 0.43 0.44 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 362 2600 719 225 1314 693 195 1032 517 416 1249 643 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 47.5 33.9 28.7 53.0 40.8 40.9 56.8 41.0 41.0 52.9 31.5 31.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 36.2 0.9 0.4 22.4 1.2 2.3 165.9 7.3 13.6 12.9 0.3 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 13.5 12.4 4.4 5.7 8.6 9.2 7.3 11.9 12.8 5.0 5.3 5.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 83.6 34.9 29.1 75.4 42.1 43.2 222.7 48.3 54.6 65.8 31.7 32.1 LnGrp LOS F C C E D D F D D E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2074 1153 1500 1052
Approach Delay, s/veh 42.4 47.0 79.4 41.7
Approach LOS D D E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.2 38.6 17.0 47.7 11.3 44.4 29.0 35.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.5 36.5 15.2 55.8 6.8 44.2 24.5 46.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.4 29.9 12.5 30.6 8.8 15.8 25.2 23.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 3.7 0.1 12.3 0.0 4.4 0.0 6.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 52.8
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 341
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 190 50 100 140 280 250 730 60 520 180 230 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 190 50 100 140 280 250 730 60 520 180 230 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.98 0.94 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 200 53 105 147 53 263 768 18 547 189 200 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 370 394 104 257 998 435 305 995 23 518 748 605 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.17 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.40 0.40 Sat Flow, veh/h 1164 1404 372 1104 3554 1551 1781 3546 83 1781 1870 1512 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 0 253 105 147 53 263 385 401 547 189 200 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1164 0 1777 1104 1777 1551 1781 1777 1852 1781 1870 1512 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 10.9 8.0 2.8 2.3 13.1 18.1 18.1 26.5 6.2 8.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.7 0.0 10.9 18.9 2.8 2.3 13.1 18.1 18.1 26.5 6.2 8.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 370 0 499 257 998 435 305 499 520 518 748 605 V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.00 0.51 0.41 0.15 0.12 0.86 0.77 0.77 1.06 0.25 0.33 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 439 0 604 322 1208 527 498 565 589 518 748 605 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 27.1 0.0 27.5 35.4 24.6 24.4 36.7 30.1 30.1 32.3 18.3 18.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.1 8.4 5.8 5.6 55.4 0.2 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 0.0 4.6 2.2 1.2 0.8 6.2 8.2 8.5 18.8 2.6 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.4 0.0 28.3 36.5 24.7 24.5 45.2 35.9 35.7 87.7 18.4 19.2 L n G r p L O S CACDCCDDDFBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 316 305 1049 936
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.1 28.7 38.1 59.1
Approach LOS C C D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 31.0 30.1 30.1 20.1 41.0 30.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.5 29.0 31.0 25.5 30.0 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.5 20.1 12.9 15.1 10.3 20.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.5 1.7 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 43.3
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 342
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 120 150 150 30 130 30 80 1160 110 80 990 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 120 150 150 30 130 30 80 1160 110 80 990 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 126 158 158 32 137 6 84 1221 116 84 1042 0 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 392 347 301 279 543 238 326 1429 135 257 1551 0 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.44 0.44 0.06 0.44 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1777 1539 1781 3554 1554 1781 3274 310 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 158 158 32 137 6 84 661 676 84 1042 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1539 1781 1777 1554 1781 1777 1807 1781 1777 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 5.1 6.0 1.0 2.2 0.2 1.6 21.9 22.1 1.6 15.3 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 5.1 6.0 1.0 2.2 0.2 1.6 21.9 22.1 1.6 15.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 392 347 301 279 543 238 326 775 789 257 1551 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.45 0.53 0.11 0.25 0.03 0.26 0.85 0.86 0.33 0.67 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 392 759 657 355 1491 652 355 854 869 287 1708 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.8 23.3 23.6 22.2 24.5 23.6 10.9 16.6 16.6 13.4 14.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.9 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.4 7.8 7.9 0.7 0.9 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 2.0 2.1 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.5 8.7 9.0 0.5 5.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.2 24.2 25.1 22.3 24.7 23.6 11.3 24.4 24.6 14.1 15.6 0.0 L n G r p L O S CCCCCCBCCBBA
Approach Vol, veh/h 442 175 1421 1126
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.7 24.2 23.7 15.5
Approach LOS C C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 33.1 6.7 17.3 8.4 33.1 9.5 14.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 31.5 5.0 28.0 5.0 31.5 5.0 27.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 24.1 3.0 8.0 3.6 17.3 5.8 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.7 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 343
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 380 100 110 290 190 150 710 150 120 180 130 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 380 100 110 290 190 150 710 150 120 180 130 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 400 105 116 305 200 158 747 158 126 189 137 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 394 612 159 391 410 333 422 1112 235 198 766 521 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2766 717 1781 1870 1520 1046 2902 614 614 1997 1359 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 255 250 116 305 200 158 457 448 126 167 159 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1706 1781 1870 1520 1046 1777 1739 614 1777 1579 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.0 10.0 10.3 4.2 11.7 9.1 9.4 16.4 16.4 13.0 4.9 5.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 10.0 10.3 4.2 11.7 9.1 14.7 16.4 16.4 29.4 4.9 5.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.86
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 394 393 378 391 410 333 422 681 667 198 681 605 V/C Ratio(X) 0.35 0.65 0.66 0.30 0.74 0.60 0.37 0.67 0.67 0.64 0.24 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 581 579 556 513 539 438 422 681 667 198 681 605 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 25.2 27.1 27.2 25.0 27.9 26.9 21.2 19.6 19.6 33.0 16.1 16.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 1.8 2.0 0.4 3.9 1.7 0.5 2.6 2.6 6.6 0.2 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 2.1 4.2 4.2 1.7 5.4 3.3 2.2 6.8 6.7 2.7 1.9 1.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.7 28.9 29.2 25.4 31.9 28.6 21.8 22.2 22.3 39.5 16.3 16.4 L n G r p L O S CCCCCCCCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 642 621 1063 452
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.4 29.6 22.2 22.8
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 33.9 21.5 33.9 21.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.4 25.0 29.4 22.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.4 12.3 31.4 13.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.0 2.8 0.0 1.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.4
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 344
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 120 500 180 110 470 220 110 890 160 260 730 150 Future Volume (veh/h) 120 500 180 110 470 220 110 890 160 260 730 150 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 126 526 95 116 495 48 116 937 168 274 768 141 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 309 846 368 286 808 351 200 1121 201 346 1243 228 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.06 0.37 0.37 0.10 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1544 1781 3554 1542 3456 2999 537 3456 2987 548 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 526 95 116 495 48 116 555 550 274 457 452 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1544 1781 1777 1542 1728 1777 1760 1728 1777 1758 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 10.6 4.0 4.0 10.0 2.0 2.6 22.7 22.8 6.2 16.1 16.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 10.6 4.0 4.0 10.0 2.0 2.6 22.7 22.8 6.2 16.1 16.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 309 846 368 286 808 351 200 664 658 346 739 732 V/C Ratio(X) 0.41 0.62 0.26 0.41 0.61 0.14 0.58 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.62 0.62 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 312 1379 599 286 1334 579 294 734 727 346 760 753 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 21.8 27.2 24.7 22.2 27.7 24.6 36.7 22.8 22.8 35.1 18.3 18.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.9 0.8 0.2 2.7 7.7 7.8 11.8 1.5 1.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 4.3 1.4 1.6 4.1 0.7 1.1 10.1 10.1 3.0 6.2 6.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.6 28.0 25.1 23.2 28.5 24.8 39.4 30.5 30.6 47.0 19.8 19.8 L n G r p L O S CCCCCCDCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 747 659 1221 1183
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.7 27.3 31.4 26.1
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.5 34.4 9.5 23.5 9.1 37.8 10.4 22.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 33.0 5.0 31.0 6.8 34.2 6.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.2 24.8 6.0 12.6 4.6 18.2 6.3 12.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.3 0.0 3.4 0.1 5.0 0.0 3.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 345
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 270 90 130 340 440 200 890 150 70 220 210 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 270 90 130 340 440 200 890 150 70 220 210 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 147 284 95 137 358 328 211 937 158 74 232 221 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 187 735 239 176 516 422 402 1462 634 214 731 634 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2608 850 1781 1870 1530 932 3554 1542 514 1777 1542 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 191 188 137 358 328 211 937 158 74 232 221 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1682 1781 1870 1530 932 1777 1542 514 1777 1542 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.2 5.6 5.9 4.9 11.1 12.8 13.1 13.7 4.4 8.7 5.7 6.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 5.6 5.9 4.9 11.1 12.8 19.5 13.7 4.4 22.4 5.7 6.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 187 500 474 176 516 422 402 1462 634 214 731 634 V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.38 0.40 0.78 0.69 0.78 0.52 0.64 0.25 0.35 0.32 0.35 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 274 500 474 356 605 495 457 1669 724 244 834 724 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 28.4 18.8 18.9 28.6 21.1 21.7 19.8 15.3 12.5 24.2 12.9 13.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 0.5 0.5 7.1 2.8 6.6 1.1 0.7 0.2 1.0 0.2 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.5 2.1 2.1 2.2 4.6 4.7 2.7 5.1 1.3 1.1 2.1 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 37.3 19.3 19.4 35.7 23.8 28.2 20.9 16.0 12.7 25.2 13.2 13.5 L n G r p L O S DBBDCCCBBCBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 526 823 1306 527
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.4 27.6 16.4 15.0
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 31.2 10.9 22.8 31.2 11.3 22.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.5 13.0 18.0 30.5 10.0 21.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.5 6.9 7.9 24.4 7.2 14.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.3 0.2 1.4 1.9 0.1 1.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.4
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 346
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 570 190 250 660 320 140 780 250 250 900 110 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 570 190 250 660 320 140 780 250 250 900 110 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 600 51 263 695 135 147 821 263 263 947 48 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 294 863 375 313 1395 423 306 897 287 312 1358 593 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.09 0.27 0.27 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.12 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1544 1781 5106 1546 1781 2631 842 1781 3554 1552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 600 51 263 695 135 147 554 530 263 947 48 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1544 1781 1702 1546 1781 1777 1697 1781 1777 1552 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.0 13.1 2.2 7.6 9.7 5.9 4.5 25.4 25.5 7.8 19.1 1.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 13.1 2.2 7.6 9.7 5.9 4.5 25.4 25.5 7.8 19.1 1.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 294 863 375 313 1395 423 306 606 578 312 1358 593 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.70 0.14 0.84 0.50 0.32 0.48 0.92 0.92 0.84 0.70 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 294 1228 533 313 1920 581 335 624 596 318 1358 593 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 22.9 29.4 25.2 26.7 26.0 24.6 17.8 26.9 26.9 19.3 22.1 16.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 1.0 0.2 18.2 0.3 0.4 1.2 17.9 18.8 18.0 1.6 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 5.3 0.8 3.0 3.7 2.1 1.8 13.1 12.6 4.5 7.7 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.0 30.4 25.4 44.9 26.3 25.1 19.0 44.8 45.6 37.2 23.7 16.8 L n G r p L O S CCCDCCBDDDCB
Approach Vol, veh/h 788 1093 1231 1258
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.0 30.6 42.1 26.3
A p p r o a c h L O S CCDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.3 33.5 12.1 25.2 10.8 37.0 9.5 27.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.1 29.9 7.6 29.4 7.7 32.3 5.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.8 27.5 9.6 15.1 6.5 21.1 7.0 11.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.3 0.0 5.0 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 32.3
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 347
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
11: Farrell Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 11
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 670 50 110 730 170 60 270 110 160 280 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 50 670 50 110 730 170 60 270 110 160 280 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.99 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 53 705 16 116 768 58 63 284 116 168 295 0 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 333 1369 414 377 1498 454 376 578 229 424 505 428 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.27 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5106 1546 1781 5106 1548 1781 2462 978 1781 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 53 705 16 116 768 58 63 203 197 168 295 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1546 1781 1702 1548 1781 1777 1663 1781 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 6.4 0.4 2.5 6.8 1.5 1.4 5.4 5.6 3.8 7.5 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 6.4 0.4 2.5 6.8 1.5 1.4 5.4 5.6 3.8 7.5 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 333 1369 414 377 1498 454 376 417 390 424 505 428 V/C Ratio(X) 0.16 0.52 0.04 0.31 0.51 0.13 0.17 0.49 0.51 0.40 0.58 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 2433 737 405 2433 737 442 1009 945 424 1059 898 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 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.4 17.0 14.8 13.0 16.0 14.2 14.5 18.0 18.1 14.0 17.3 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.6 1.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.2 0.1 0.9 2.3 0.5 0.5 1.9 1.9 1.3 2.8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.6 17.3 14.8 13.5 16.3 14.3 14.7 18.9 19.2 14.6 18.3 0.0 L n G r p L O S BBBBBBBBBBBA
Approach Vol, veh/h 774 942 463 463
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.0 15.8 18.4 17.0
A p p r o a c h L O S BBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 17.3 8.6 19.1 7.6 19.2 7.3 20.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 31.0 5.0 26.0 5.1 30.9 5.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.8 7.6 4.5 8.4 3.4 9.5 3.1 8.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.1 0.0 4.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.8
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 348
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR WBR2 NBL2 NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 180 10 60 80 80 90 90 80 80 1030 60 40 Future Volume (vph) 180 10 60 80 80 90 90 80 80 1030 60 40 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 1761 1523 1741 1632 1770 3527 1445 1770 Flt Permitted 0.30 1.00 0.45 1.00 0.95 0.76 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (perm) 557 1523 831 1632 1770 2688 1445 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 189 11 63 84 84 95 95 84 84 1084 63 42
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 200 63 84 274 0 0 84 0 1168 63 42 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Prot Perm NA Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 35.9 35.9 35.9 35.9 11.3 48.4 48.4 3.9 Effective Green, g (s) 35.9 35.9 35.9 35.9 11.3 48.4 48.4 3.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.03 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 130 357 194 382 130 850 457 45
v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.05 0.02
v/s Ratio Perm c0.36 0.04 0.10 c0.43 0.04
v/c Ratio 1.54 0.18 0.43 0.72 0.65 1.37 0.14 0.93
Uniform Delay, d1 58.5 46.7 49.9 53.9 68.9 52.3 37.4 74.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 276.9 0.2 1.5 6.3 10.5 175.8 0.1 108.1 Delay (s) 335.5 47.0 51.4 60.2 79.4 228.1 37.5 182.5
Level of Service F D D E E F D F
Approach Delay (s) 266.4 58.1 209.5
Approach LOS F E F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 168.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service F HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.36
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 153.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 139.8% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 349
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement SBT SBR SEL2 SEL SER SER2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 260 30 70 40 860 80
Future Volume (vph) 260 30 70 40 860 80
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.95 1.00 0.88
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.92
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.98 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 3484 1770 2570
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 3484 1770 2570
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph) 274 32 74 42 905 84
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 306 0 0 116 989 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2
Turn Type NA Perm Prot Perm
Protected Phases 6 9
Permitted Phases 9 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 41.0 46.8 46.8
Effective Green, g (s) 41.0 46.8 46.8
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.31 0.31
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 933 541 786
v/s Ratio Prot 0.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.38
v/c Ratio 0.33 0.21 1.26
Uniform Delay, d1 44.9 39.4 53.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.2 126.5
Delay (s) 45.2 39.6 179.6
Level of Service D D F
Approach Delay (s) 61.7 164.9
Approach LOS E F
Intersection Summary
Item 2A - Page 350
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
13: Sunrise Way & E Palm Canyon Dr/E Palm Dr 08/12/2022 Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 80 710 40 280 760 400 90 220 220 480 230 90 Future Volume (veh/h) 80 710 40 280 760 400 90 220 220 480 230 90 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 84 747 11 295 800 194 95 232 103 505 242 32 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 197 1112 484 386 1306 853 206 507 218 617 824 107 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.11 0.37 0.37 0.06 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1549 3456 3554 1551 3456 3554 1529 3456 3150 411 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 84 747 11 295 800 194 95 232 103 505 135 139 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1549 1728 1777 1551 1728 1777 1529 1728 1777 1784 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 13.0 0.3 5.9 13.0 4.6 1.9 4.2 4.4 10.0 4.3 4.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 13.0 0.3 5.9 13.0 4.6 1.9 4.2 4.4 10.0 4.3 4.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.23
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 197 1112 484 386 1306 853 206 507 218 617 465 467 V/C Ratio(X) 0.43 0.67 0.02 0.76 0.61 0.23 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.82 0.29 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 268 2379 1037 415 2529 1387 337 1029 443 761 733 736 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 32.3 21.2 16.8 30.5 18.3 8.3 32.2 27.8 27.9 28.0 20.9 20.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.5 0.7 0.0 7.7 0.5 0.1 1.6 0.6 1.6 5.8 0.3 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 4.8 0.1 2.6 4.7 1.2 0.8 1.7 1.6 4.2 1.6 1.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.7 21.9 16.9 38.2 18.7 8.5 33.8 28.5 29.5 33.8 21.2 21.3 L n G r p L O S CCBDBACCCCCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 842 1289 430 779
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.0 21.7 29.9 29.4
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.1 14.6 12.4 26.6 8.7 23.0 8.5 30.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.6 20.5 8.5 47.4 6.9 29.2 5.5 50.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.0 6.4 7.9 15.0 3.9 6.4 3.7 15.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 1.4 0.1 5.2 0.1 1.3 0.0 6.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 351
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 60 10 400 40 720 50 270 230 600 560 210 Future Volume (veh/h) 50 60 10 400 40 720 50 270 230 600 560 210 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 53 63 11 421 42 758 53 284 242 632 589 192 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 231 262 661 538 796 661 171 317 261 541 1333 433 Arrive On Green 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.30 0.51 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 455 616 1553 1320 1870 1553 685 1823 1498 1781 2613 849 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 0 11 421 42 758 53 277 249 632 400 381 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1071 0 1553 1320 1870 1553 685 1777 1544 1781 1777 1685 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.6 0.0 0.6 41.3 1.8 59.5 9.7 21.3 22.3 42.5 19.9 20.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.0 0.0 0.6 49.3 1.8 59.5 9.7 21.3 22.3 42.5 19.9 20.0 Prop In Lane 0.46 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.50
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 493 0 661 538 796 661 171 309 269 541 907 860 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.00 0.02 0.78 0.05 1.15 0.31 0.89 0.93 1.17 0.44 0.44 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 493 0 661 538 796 661 172 311 270 541 908 862 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 25.0 0.0 23.2 40.9 23.6 40.2 51.7 56.5 56.9 48.7 21.7 21.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 83.0 1.0 26.1 35.9 94.0 0.3 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.5 0.0 0.2 14.1 0.8 36.8 1.7 11.6 11.2 32.6 8.2 7.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.3 0.0 23.3 48.3 23.6 123.2 52.7 82.6 92.8 142.7 22.0 22.0 LnGrp LOS C A C D C F D F F F C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 127 1221 579 1413
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 94.0 84.3 76.0
Approach LOS C F F E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.0 28.9 64.0 75.9 64.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 42.5 24.5 59.5 71.5 59.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 44.5 24.3 10.0 22.0 61.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.1 1.2 5.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 82.1
HCM 6th LOS F
Item 2A - Page 352
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 50 560 410 390 830 40 370 360 330 160 610 130 Future Volume (veh/h) 50 560 410 390 830 40 370 360 330 160 610 130 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 53 589 432 411 874 42 389 379 347 168 642 137 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 68 919 418 395 2261 108 387 462 402 179 721 154 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.22 0.45 0.45 0.11 0.26 0.26 0.10 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3404 1546 1781 4987 239 3456 1777 1545 1781 2899 618 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 53 589 432 411 596 320 389 379 347 168 393 386 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1546 1781 1702 1822 1728 1777 1545 1781 1777 1740 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 18.7 33.0 27.1 14.2 14.2 13.7 24.5 26.2 11.4 26.1 26.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.6 18.7 33.0 27.1 14.2 14.2 13.7 24.5 26.2 11.4 26.1 26.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.35
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 68 919 418 395 1543 826 387 462 402 179 442 433 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.64 1.03 1.04 0.39 0.39 1.00 0.82 0.86 0.94 0.89 0.89 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 136 919 418 395 1543 826 387 503 438 179 483 473 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 58.2 39.4 44.6 47.6 22.1 22.1 54.3 42.5 43.1 54.6 44.3 44.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.7 1.5 53.3 56.2 0.2 0.3 46.8 9.7 15.2 49.2 17.2 17.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 7.8 18.3 17.8 5.4 5.9 8.3 11.6 11.3 7.5 13.2 13.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 75.0 40.9 97.9 103.7 22.3 22.4 101.0 52.2 58.4 103.8 61.5 62.1 LnGrp LOS E D F F C C F D E F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1074 1327 1115 947
Approach Delay, s/veh 65.5 47.6 71.1 69.2
Approach LOS E D E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 36.3 31.6 37.5 18.2 34.9 9.2 59.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.3 34.6 27.1 33.0 13.7 33.2 9.3 50.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.4 28.2 29.1 35.0 15.7 28.2 5.6 16.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 6.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 62.4
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 353
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 960 110 290 1350 430 60 130 190 550 510 60 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 960 110 290 1350 430 60 130 190 550 510 60 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 1011 116 305 1421 453 63 137 200 579 537 63 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 89 1194 137 329 1500 474 81 552 531 471 1197 140 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.26 0.26 0.18 0.39 0.39 0.05 0.16 0.16 0.26 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4633 530 1781 3821 1206 1781 3554 1532 1781 3197 374 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 742 385 305 1265 609 63 137 200 579 298 302 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1759 1781 1702 1623 1781 1777 1532 1781 1777 1794 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 27.0 27.1 22.0 46.8 47.7 4.6 4.4 12.9 34.5 16.4 16.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 27.0 27.1 22.0 46.8 47.7 4.6 4.4 12.9 34.5 16.4 16.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 89 877 453 329 1337 637 81 552 531 471 665 671 V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.85 0.85 0.93 0.95 0.96 0.78 0.25 0.38 1.23 0.45 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 877 453 345 1343 641 102 1076 756 471 905 914 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 61.5 46.0 46.0 52.3 38.3 38.5 61.7 48.4 32.7 48.0 30.7 30.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 46.5 7.7 14.1 29.7 13.7 25.1 25.2 0.2 0.4 120.8 0.5 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 3.5 12.0 13.3 12.2 20.9 22.2 2.6 1.9 4.7 30.6 6.9 7.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 108.0 53.7 60.1 82.1 52.0 63.6 86.9 48.7 33.1 168.8 31.2 31.2 LnGrp LOS F D E F D E F D C F C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1201 2179 400 1179
Approach Delay, s/veh 59.1 59.5 46.9 98.8
Approach LOS E E D F
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 39.0 24.8 28.6 38.1 10.4 53.4 11.0 55.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 34.5 39.5 25.3 32.7 7.5 66.5 6.5 51.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 36.5 14.9 24.0 29.1 6.6 18.6 7.4 49.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.4 0.1 2.1 0.0 3.6 0.0 1.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 67.7
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 354
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 440 850 300 100 1380 170 200 530 200 390 940 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 440 850 300 100 1380 170 200 530 200 390 940 80 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 463 895 316 105 1453 179 211 558 211 411 989 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 279 1751 766 127 1448 633 270 637 233 471 1112 94 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.49 0.49 0.07 0.41 0.41 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1555 1781 3554 1553 3456 3648 1335 3456 4783 405 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 463 895 316 105 1453 179 211 519 250 411 703 370 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1555 1781 1777 1553 1728 1702 1579 1728 1702 1784 Q Serve(g_s), s 22.5 24.5 18.6 8.4 58.5 11.1 8.6 21.3 22.3 16.7 28.7 28.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 22.5 24.5 18.6 8.4 58.5 11.1 8.6 21.3 22.3 16.7 28.7 28.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.23
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 279 1751 766 127 1448 633 270 594 276 471 791 415 V/C Ratio(X) 1.66 0.51 0.41 0.83 1.00 0.28 0.78 0.87 0.91 0.87 0.89 0.89 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 279 1751 766 167 1448 633 830 604 280 614 791 415 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 60.6 24.7 23.2 65.8 42.6 28.5 65.0 57.7 58.1 60.8 53.3 53.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 312.0 0.3 0.4 21.8 24.6 0.2 4.9 13.3 30.4 10.7 12.1 20.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 34.1 9.9 6.6 4.5 29.2 4.1 3.9 10.0 10.9 7.8 13.1 14.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 372.6 25.0 23.6 87.6 67.1 28.8 69.8 71.1 88.5 71.5 65.4 74.2 LnGrp LOS F C C F F C E E F E E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1674 1737 980 1484
Approach Delay, s/veh 120.8 64.4 75.2 69.3
Approach LOS F E E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.1 29.6 14.8 75.2 15.7 37.9 27.0 63.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.5 25.5 13.5 67.5 34.5 16.5 22.5 58.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.7 24.3 10.4 26.5 10.6 30.8 24.5 60.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.6 0.1 8.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 83.5
HCM 6th LOS F
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 355
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 190 100 50 260 370 390 1120 70 410 280 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 90 190 100 50 260 370 390 1120 70 410 280 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.94 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 95 200 105 53 274 389 411 1179 74 432 295 168 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 219 331 174 141 631 455 439 1165 492 429 352 201 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.24 0.32 0.32 Sat Flow, veh/h 767 1129 593 299 2153 1553 1781 3554 1502 1781 1094 623 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 95 0 305 119 208 389 411 1179 74 432 0 463 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 767 0 1722 835 1617 1553 1781 1777 1502 1781 0 1717 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.2 0.0 14.8 4.2 10.2 23.1 22.1 32.0 3.4 23.5 0.0 24.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 21.4 0.0 14.8 19.0 10.2 23.1 22.1 32.0 3.4 23.5 0.0 24.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.34 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.36
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 219 0 505 298 474 455 439 1165 492 429 0 553 V/C Ratio(X) 0.43 0.00 0.60 0.40 0.44 0.85 0.94 1.01 0.15 1.01 0.00 0.84 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 237 0 547 332 513 493 442 1165 492 429 0 553 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 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 36.6 0.0 29.6 31.5 28.0 32.5 36.0 32.8 23.2 37.1 0.0 30.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.4 0.0 1.7 0.9 0.6 13.0 27.3 29.4 0.1 45.3 0.0 10.9 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 2.1 0.0 6.2 2.6 3.9 10.0 12.6 17.9 1.2 15.3 0.0 11.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 38.0 0.0 31.3 32.4 28.6 45.5 63.3 62.2 23.3 82.4 0.0 41.6 L n G r p L O S DACCCDEFCFAD
Approach Vol, veh/h 400 716 1664 895
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.9 38.4 60.8 61.3
Approach LOS C D E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 28.0 36.5 33.1 28.6 35.9 33.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.5 32.0 31.0 24.2 31.3 31.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.5 34.0 23.4 24.1 26.4 25.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.3 1.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 53.5
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 356
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 80 150 60 30 110 30 150 930 50 90 1170 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 80 150 60 30 110 30 150 930 50 90 1170 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 84 158 63 32 116 32 158 979 53 95 1232 21 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 373 260 104 278 337 281 288 1431 77 325 1446 25 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.18 0.18 0.08 0.42 0.42 0.06 0.40 0.40 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1260 502 1781 1870 1559 1781 3421 185 1781 3573 61 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 84 0 221 32 116 32 158 508 524 95 613 640 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1763 1781 1870 1559 1781 1777 1829 1781 1777 1857 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.4 0.0 7.4 0.9 3.5 1.1 3.3 15.1 15.1 1.9 20.3 20.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.4 0.0 7.4 0.9 3.5 1.1 3.3 15.1 15.1 1.9 20.3 20.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 373 0 364 278 337 281 288 743 765 325 719 752 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.61 0.12 0.34 0.11 0.55 0.68 0.68 0.29 0.85 0.85 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 403 0 763 356 809 674 289 796 820 350 796 832 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 19.7 0.0 23.3 20.6 23.2 22.2 14.1 15.3 15.3 11.6 17.5 17.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 1.6 0.2 0.6 0.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 0.5 8.2 7.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.9 0.0 2.9 0.4 1.4 0.4 1.2 5.4 5.5 0.6 8.3 8.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.0 0.0 24.9 20.8 23.8 22.4 16.3 17.6 17.5 12.1 25.7 25.4 L n G r p L O S BACCCC BBBBCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 305 180 1190 1348
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.6 23.0 17.4 24.6
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.6 31.6 6.7 17.9 9.5 30.7 8.4 16.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 29.0 5.0 28.0 5.0 29.0 5.0 28.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 17.1 2.9 9.4 5.3 22.3 4.4 5.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.0 1.1 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 357
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 150 220 120 90 390 180 230 1260 230 140 320 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 150 220 120 90 390 180 230 1260 230 140 320 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 158 232 126 95 411 189 242 1326 242 147 337 168 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 303 374 192 109 484 236 291 1399 252 77 545 272 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2198 1128 459 2039 994 894 2994 539 328 1166 581 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 158 185 173 382 0 313 242 779 789 147 0 505 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1549 1847 0 1644 894 1777 1757 328 0 1748 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.7 10.4 11.3 21.5 0.0 19.3 27.1 45.0 46.9 3.6 0.0 23.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.7 10.4 11.3 21.5 0.0 19.3 50.5 45.0 46.9 50.5 0.0 23.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.73 0.25 0.60 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.33
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 303 303 264 439 0 391 291 830 821 77 0 816 V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.61 0.66 0.87 0.00 0.80 0.83 0.94 0.96 1.90 0.00 0.62 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 931 929 810 504 0 449 291 830 821 77 0 816 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.8 41.5 41.9 39.6 0.0 38.8 41.5 27.3 27.8 53.8 0.0 21.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.4 2.0 2.8 13.9 0.0 8.8 18.3 18.2 22.3 448.0 0.0 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.9 4.7 4.4 11.2 0.0 8.6 8.0 22.4 23.8 11.7 0.0 9.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.2 43.5 44.6 53.5 0.0 47.6 59.8 45.5 50.1 501.8 0.0 23.0 L n G r p L O S DDDDADEDDFAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 516 695 1810 652
Approach Delay, s/veh 43.5 50.8 49.4 131.0
Approach LOS D D D F
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 55.0 22.9 55.0 30.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 50.5 56.5 50.5 29.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 52.5 13.3 52.5 23.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.8 0.0 2.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 63.3
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 358
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 320 70 60 440 340 130 750 120 380 820 100 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 320 70 60 440 340 130 750 120 380 820 100 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 147 337 74 63 463 358 137 789 126 400 863 105 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 312 1077 469 389 1026 447 208 919 147 483 1209 147 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.29 0.29 0.06 0.30 0.30 0.14 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1548 1781 3554 1547 3456 3057 488 3456 3181 387 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 337 74 63 463 358 137 458 457 400 482 486 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1548 1781 1777 1547 1728 1777 1769 1728 1777 1791 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.0 6.2 3.0 2.1 9.1 18.2 3.3 20.7 20.7 9.6 19.7 19.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 6.2 3.0 2.1 9.1 18.2 3.3 20.7 20.7 9.6 19.7 19.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.22
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 312 1077 469 389 1026 447 208 534 532 483 675 681 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.31 0.16 0.16 0.45 0.80 0.66 0.86 0.86 0.83 0.71 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 312 1293 563 412 1289 561 243 573 571 547 730 736 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 20.3 22.9 21.7 19.7 24.8 28.0 39.2 28.1 28.1 35.7 22.5 22.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 6.5 5.1 11.8 11.9 9.3 3.0 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 2.5 1.0 0.8 3.6 7.1 1.5 10.1 10.0 4.5 8.1 8.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.4 23.0 21.9 19.9 25.1 34.6 44.3 39.9 40.0 45.0 25.5 25.5 L n G r p L O S CCCBCCDDDDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 558 884 1052 1368
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.5 28.6 40.5 31.2
A p p r o a c h L O S CCDC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.4 30.1 8.4 30.3 9.6 36.9 9.6 29.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.5 27.5 5.0 31.0 6.0 35.0 5.1 30.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.6 22.7 4.1 8.2 5.3 21.7 7.0 20.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 2.4 0.0 2.2 0.0 4.9 0.0 3.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 31.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 359
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 190 120 80 220 400 170 840 110 140 210 190 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 190 120 80 220 400 170 840 110 140 210 190 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 200 126 84 232 421 179 884 116 147 221 200 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 155 983 583 0 1188 488 306 1455 631 219 365 330 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2106 1250 0 3741 1535 961 3554 1542 562 892 807 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 167 159 0 232 421 179 884 116 147 0 421 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1580 0 1870 1535 961 1777 1542 562 0 1698 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.5 4.0 4.3 0.0 3.3 18.7 13.0 14.2 3.5 15.5 0.0 14.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.5 4.0 4.3 0.0 3.3 18.7 27.2 14.2 3.5 29.7 0.0 14.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.79 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.48
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 155 829 737 0 1188 488 306 1455 631 219 0 695 V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.20 0.22 0.00 0.20 0.86 0.59 0.61 0.18 0.67 0.00 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 155 829 737 0 1315 539 306 1455 631 219 0 695 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.8 11.4 11.5 0.0 18.0 23.3 27.5 16.8 13.7 29.9 0.0 16.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 41.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 12.7 2.9 0.7 0.1 7.6 0.0 1.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 1.3 7.6 3.1 5.5 1.1 3.0 0.0 5.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 73.9 11.5 11.6 0.0 18.1 36.0 30.4 17.6 13.8 37.6 0.0 18.3 L n G r p L O S EBBABDCBBDAB
Approach Vol, veh/h 463 653 1179 568
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.0 29.6 19.1 23.3
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 34.2 0.0 38.3 34.2 10.8 27.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.7 5.0 26.8 29.7 6.3 25.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 29.2 0.0 6.3 31.7 7.5 20.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 360
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd/Baristo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 400 230 420 410 260 130 850 530 210 770 70 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 400 230 420 410 260 130 850 530 210 770 70 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 421 242 442 432 274 137 895 558 221 811 74 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 257 661 286 408 1119 488 343 906 549 212 1645 720 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.43 0.43 0.09 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1537 1781 3554 1549 1781 2109 1277 1781 3554 1554 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 421 242 442 432 274 137 750 703 221 811 74 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1537 1781 1777 1549 1781 1777 1610 1781 1777 1554 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 15.6 21.7 23.9 13.5 21.0 6.1 59.4 61.2 12.9 22.6 3.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 15.6 21.7 23.9 13.5 21.0 6.1 59.4 61.2 12.9 22.6 3.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.79 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 257 661 286 408 1119 488 343 763 691 212 1645 720 V/C Ratio(X) 0.25 0.64 0.85 1.08 0.39 0.56 0.40 0.98 1.02 1.04 0.49 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 260 723 313 408 1174 512 367 763 691 212 1645 720 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 44.4 53.6 56.0 40.9 38.1 40.6 21.8 40.1 40.7 47.4 26.6 21.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 1.6 17.7 68.6 0.2 1.3 0.8 28.2 38.6 73.8 0.2 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.8 7.0 9.6 19.1 5.8 8.0 2.6 31.3 31.0 12.0 9.6 1.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.9 55.2 73.8 109.4 38.3 41.9 22.5 68.4 79.3 121.2 26.9 21.6 LnGrp LOS D E E F D D C E F F C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 726 1148 1590 1106
Approach Delay, s/veh 60.5 66.5 69.2 45.4
Approach LOS E E E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.4 65.7 28.4 31.0 12.6 70.5 10.1 49.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.9 61.2 23.9 29.0 10.1 64.0 5.8 47.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.9 63.2 25.9 23.7 8.1 24.6 6.0 23.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 6.8 0.0 3.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 61.4
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 361
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
11: Farrell Dr & Baristo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 11
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 1040 50 110 980 150 80 280 100 170 190 80 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 1040 50 110 980 150 80 280 100 170 190 80 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 1095 53 116 1032 158 84 295 105 179 200 84 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 266 1581 472 278 1652 501 405 564 201 328 384 168 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.43 0.43 0.31 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5106 1525 1781 5106 1549 1781 1309 466 757 1247 545 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 1095 53 116 1032 158 84 0 400 218 0 245 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1525 1781 1702 1549 1781 0 1775 960 0 1589 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 13.1 1.7 3.0 11.9 5.3 2.1 0.0 11.5 12.1 0.0 8.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 13.1 1.7 3.0 11.9 5.3 2.1 0.0 11.5 15.0 0.0 8.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 0.82 0.34
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 266 1581 472 278 1652 501 405 0 765 390 0 489 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.69 0.11 0.42 0.62 0.32 0.21 0.00 0.52 0.56 0.00 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 304 1917 572 292 1917 582 431 0 795 540 0 711 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 15.7 21.0 17.1 16.1 19.9 17.6 14.2 0.0 14.5 22.7 0.0 19.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.8 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 4.8 0.6 1.1 4.2 1.8 0.7 0.0 3.9 3.0 0.0 2.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.1 21.8 17.2 17.1 20.4 18.0 14.5 0.0 15.1 23.9 0.0 20.4 L n G r p L O S BCBBCBBABCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 1211 1306 484 463
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.3 19.8 15.0 22.1
Approach LOS C B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 34.3 9.0 25.9 8.5 25.8 8.0 26.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.0 5.0 26.0 5.0 31.0 5.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.5 5.0 15.1 4.1 17.0 3.6 13.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 0.0 5.4 0.0 2.4 0.0 5.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 362
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR WBR2 NBL2 NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 110 30 30 90 20 160 30 20 20 660 30 50 Future Volume (vph) 110 30 30 90 20 160 30 20 20 660 30 50 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.93 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.87 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.96 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1778 1532 1744 1614 1540 1770 3534 1469 1770 Flt Permitted 0.51 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 941 1532 1060 1614 1540 1770 3327 1469 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 116 32 32 95 21 168 32 21 21 695 32 53
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 148 32 95 189 0 32 21 0 716 32 53 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Prot Perm NA Perm Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 27.2 27.2 27.2 27.2 27.2 1.7 34.0 34.0 5.1 Effective Green, g (s) 27.2 27.2 27.2 27.2 27.2 1.7 34.0 34.0 5.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.01 0.29 0.29 0.04 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 219 357 247 376 359 25 970 428 77
v/s Ratio Prot 0.12 0.01 c0.03
v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.02 0.09 0.02 c0.22 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.68 0.09 0.38 0.50 0.09 0.84 0.74 0.07 0.69
Uniform Delay, d1 40.6 35.0 37.6 38.8 35.0 57.3 37.2 29.9 54.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.0 0.1 1.0 1.1 0.1 109.3 3.0 0.1 22.6 Delay (s) 48.6 35.1 38.6 39.8 35.1 166.6 40.2 29.9 77.5 L e v e l o f S e r v i c e DDDD DF DCE
Approach Delay (s) 46.2 39.0 43.2
Approach LOS D D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 45.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 118.7% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 363
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement SBT SBR SEL2 SEL SER SER2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 170 70 60 30 560 60
Future Volume (vph) 170 70 60 30 560 60
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.94
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.96 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1781 1770 2606
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1781 1770 2606
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph) 179 74 63 32 589 63
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 253 0 0 95 652 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2
Turn Type NA Perm Prot Perm
Protected Phases 6 9
Permitted Phases 9 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 37.4 32.2 32.2
Effective Green, g (s) 37.4 32.2 32.2
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.32 0.28 0.28
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 571 489 720
v/s Ratio Prot c0.14
v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 c0.25
v/c Ratio 0.44 0.19 0.91
Uniform Delay, d1 31.3 32.2 40.7
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.2 14.9
Delay (s) 31.9 32.4 55.6
Level of Service C C E
Approach Delay (s) 39.8 52.6
Approach LOS D D
Intersection Summary
Item 2A - Page 364
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
13: Sunrise Way & Twin Palms Dr 08/12/2022
Scenario 1 Palm Spring General Plan 8:00 am 02/07/2021 AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 160 480 40 280 660 350 50 340 290 480 260 140 Future Volume (veh/h) 160 480 40 280 660 350 50 340 290 480 260 140 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 168 505 42 295 695 368 53 358 305 505 274 147 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 238 752 320 326 1158 766 0 486 401 569 878 730 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.16 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1511 1781 3554 1550 0 1870 1545 3456 1870 1555 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 168 505 42 295 695 368 0 358 305 505 274 147 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1511 1781 1777 1550 0 1870 1545 1728 1870 1555 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.7 13.0 2.2 16.1 16.3 15.8 0.0 17.4 18.1 14.2 9.1 5.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.7 13.0 2.2 16.1 16.3 15.8 0.0 17.4 18.1 14.2 9.1 5.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 238 752 320 326 1158 766 0 486 401 569 878 730 V/C Ratio(X) 0.71 0.67 0.13 0.90 0.60 0.48 0.00 0.74 0.76 0.89 0.31 0.20 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 378 1107 471 340 1396 870 0 660 545 587 883 734 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.4 36.0 31.8 39.8 28.1 16.9 0.0 33.7 34.0 40.7 16.4 15.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.8 1.0 0.2 25.9 0.5 0.5 0.0 2.9 4.2 15.1 0.2 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 5.5 0.8 9.1 6.6 5.2 0.0 8.0 6.9 7.0 3.6 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 49.2 37.1 32.0 65.7 28.6 17.4 0.0 36.6 38.2 55.7 16.6 15.6 LnGrp LOS D D C E C B A D D E B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 715 1358 663 926
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.6 33.6 37.3 37.8
A p p r o a c h L O S DCDD
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.9 30.4 22.7 25.6 0.0 51.2 11.3 36.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.9 35.1 19.0 31.0 5.0 47.0 10.9 39.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.2 20.1 18.1 15.0 0.0 11.1 6.7 18.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.8 0.1 2.8 0.0 2.0 0.2 5.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.5
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 365
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Hwy 111 & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 60 10 210 20 380 110 580 220 660 480 50 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 60 10 210 20 380 110 580 220 660 480 50 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 63 3 221 21 174 116 611 232 695 505 53 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 216 200 384 307 465 384 277 626 237 673 2167 227 Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.38 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 669 807 1544 1324 1870 1544 843 2500 948 1781 3236 338 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 0 3 221 21 174 116 434 409 695 276 282 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1476 0 1544 1324 1870 1544 843 1777 1671 1781 1777 1798 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.2 0.0 0.2 18.0 0.9 10.5 13.1 26.6 26.7 41.5 6.7 6.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.2 0.0 0.2 25.2 0.9 10.5 13.1 26.6 26.7 41.5 6.7 6.7 Prop In Lane 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.19
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 416 0 384 307 465 384 277 445 418 673 1190 1204 V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.00 0.01 0.72 0.05 0.45 0.42 0.98 0.98 1.03 0.23 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 419 0 387 310 469 387 277 445 418 673 1190 1204 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 33.6 0.0 31.1 44.0 31.4 34.9 35.7 40.8 40.8 34.1 7.1 7.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.0 7.8 0.0 0.8 1.0 36.1 37.9 43.2 0.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.8 0.0 0.1 6.3 0.4 3.9 2.7 15.7 15.0 25.0 2.2 2.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.0 0.0 31.1 51.8 31.4 35.8 36.8 76.9 78.7 77.3 7.2 7.2 L n G r p L O S CACDCDDEEFAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 129 416 959 1253
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.9 44.1 72.8 46.1
Approach LOS C D E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.0 32.0 31.8 78.0 31.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 41.5 27.5 27.5 73.5 27.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 43.5 28.7 9.2 8.7 27.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.6 3.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 54.5
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 366
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Sunrise Way & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 790 280 390 650 70 450 530 350 230 360 70 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 790 280 390 650 70 450 530 350 230 360 70 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 105 832 295 411 684 74 474 558 368 242 379 11 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 129 896 315 390 1818 195 503 556 367 233 913 26 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.24 0.24 0.22 0.39 0.39 0.15 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3697 1302 1781 4671 501 3456 2029 1338 1781 3524 102 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 766 361 411 497 261 474 489 437 242 191 199 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1595 1781 1702 1768 1728 1777 1590 1781 1777 1849 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.8 29.6 29.9 29.5 14.0 14.3 18.3 36.9 36.9 17.6 12.0 12.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.8 29.6 29.9 29.5 14.0 14.3 18.3 36.9 36.9 17.6 12.0 12.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.82 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 129 825 387 390 1325 688 503 487 436 233 461 479 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.93 0.94 1.05 0.37 0.38 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.41 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 205 834 391 390 1325 688 503 487 436 233 461 479 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 61.6 49.9 50.0 52.6 29.4 29.5 57.0 48.9 48.9 58.5 41.4 41.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.6 16.3 29.4 60.2 0.2 0.3 26.3 41.6 44.0 69.6 0.6 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.9 14.1 14.7 19.3 5.6 6.0 9.6 21.4 19.5 12.3 5.2 5.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 74.2 66.1 79.4 112.7 29.6 29.8 83.3 90.4 92.9 128.1 42.0 42.0 L n G r p L O S EEEFCCFFFFDD
Approach Vol, veh/h 1232 1169 1400 632
Approach Delay, s/veh 70.7 58.9 88.8 75.0
Approach LOS E E F E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.1 41.4 34.0 37.1 24.1 39.4 14.2 56.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.6 36.9 29.5 33.0 19.6 34.9 15.5 47.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.6 38.9 31.5 31.9 20.3 14.0 9.8 16.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.9 0.1 4.9 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 73.9
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 367
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Farrell Dr & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 1150 150 220 1020 530 160 380 380 320 190 30 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 1150 150 220 1020 530 160 380 380 320 190 30 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 1211 158 232 1074 558 168 400 326 337 200 0 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 81 1287 168 248 1281 584 199 790 563 354 1100 0 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.28 0.28 0.14 0.38 0.38 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.31 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4556 594 1781 3404 1552 1781 3554 1542 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 905 464 232 1074 558 168 400 326 337 200 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1746 1781 1702 1552 1781 1777 1542 1781 1777 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 29.7 29.7 14.7 32.9 40.0 10.6 11.3 19.6 21.4 4.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 29.7 29.7 14.7 32.9 40.0 10.6 11.3 19.6 21.4 4.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 81 962 493 248 1281 584 199 790 563 354 1100 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.84 0.96 0.85 0.51 0.58 0.95 0.18 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 83 968 496 248 1283 585 315 960 637 354 1100 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.0 40.1 40.1 48.7 32.5 34.7 49.8 39.0 29.6 45.3 28.9 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 36.2 16.5 26.3 40.2 5.1 26.5 11.5 0.5 1.0 35.6 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.6 14.0 15.7 9.0 13.5 18.3 5.2 4.8 7.0 12.6 2.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 90.2 56.6 66.3 88.9 37.6 61.2 61.3 39.5 30.6 80.9 29.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS F E E F D E E D C F C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1432 1864 894 537
Approach Delay, s/veh 61.2 51.0 40.3 61.6
Approach LOS E D D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 27.2 29.9 20.4 36.8 17.3 39.9 9.7 47.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.7 30.9 15.9 32.5 20.2 33.4 5.3 43.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 23.4 21.6 16.7 31.7 12.6 6.7 6.0 42.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.6 0.2 1.1 0.0 0.9 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 53.3
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 368
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gene Autry Trail & Vista Chino 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 330 1510 380 150 1070 180 370 1210 360 290 630 200 Future Volume (veh/h) 330 1510 380 150 1070 180 370 1210 360 290 630 200 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 347 1589 275 158 1126 82 389 1274 211 305 663 179 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 301 1393 609 147 1087 473 439 1376 228 286 1073 284 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.39 0.39 0.08 0.31 0.31 0.13 0.31 0.31 0.08 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1552 1781 3554 1549 3456 4395 728 3456 3994 1059 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 347 1589 275 158 1126 82 389 987 498 305 563 279 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1552 1781 1777 1549 1728 1702 1719 1728 1702 1648 Q Serve(g_s), s 23.5 54.5 18.2 11.5 42.5 5.4 15.4 39.0 39.0 11.5 20.2 20.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.5 54.5 18.2 11.5 42.5 5.4 15.4 39.0 39.0 11.5 20.2 20.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.64
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 301 1393 609 147 1087 473 439 1065 538 286 914 443 V/C Ratio(X) 1.15 1.14 0.45 1.07 1.04 0.17 0.89 0.93 0.93 1.07 0.62 0.63 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 301 1393 609 147 1087 473 480 1090 550 286 914 443 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 57.8 42.3 31.2 63.8 48.3 35.4 59.7 46.2 46.2 63.8 44.6 44.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 99.6 72.4 0.5 94.7 37.1 0.2 16.8 13.0 21.6 72.0 1.2 2.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 18.6 36.6 6.7 9.0 23.6 2.0 7.5 17.6 19.0 7.8 8.3 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 157.4 114.6 31.7 158.4 85.4 35.5 76.5 59.2 67.8 135.8 45.8 47.6 LnGrp LOS F F C F F D E E E F D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 2211 1366 1874 1147
Approach Delay, s/veh 111.0 90.9 65.1 70.2
Approach LOS F F E E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 48.0 16.0 59.0 22.2 41.8 28.0 47.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 44.5 11.5 54.5 19.3 36.7 23.5 42.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.5 41.0 13.5 56.5 17.4 22.7 25.5 44.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.1 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 86.7
HCM 6th LOS F
Item 2A - Page 369
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
5: Indian Canyon Dr & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 190 50 100 230 330 420 750 60 520 190 230 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 190 50 100 230 330 420 750 60 520 190 230 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.93 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.95 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 200 53 105 242 62 442 789 18 547 200 210 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 177 302 80 188 349 333 501 945 397 608 264 278 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.34 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1062 1400 371 435 1617 1541 1781 3554 1491 1781 811 851 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 0 253 105 242 62 442 789 18 547 0 410 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1062 0 1771 435 1617 1541 1781 1777 1491 1781 0 1662 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.4 0.0 10.0 6.5 10.5 2.5 18.1 16.0 0.7 22.3 0.0 16.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 15.0 0.0 10.0 16.5 10.5 2.5 18.1 16.0 0.7 22.3 0.0 16.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 177 0 382 188 349 333 501 945 397 608 0 542 V/C Ratio(X) 0.36 0.00 0.66 0.56 0.69 0.19 0.88 0.83 0.05 0.90 0.00 0.76 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 177 0 382 188 349 333 1037 1000 419 1130 0 554 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 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.5 0.0 27.4 35.3 27.6 24.5 26.3 26.5 20.8 23.9 0.0 23.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.0 4.2 3.7 5.8 0.3 5.3 6.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 5.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 0.0 4.4 2.1 4.4 0.9 7.9 7.1 0.2 9.5 0.0 7.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 35.8 0.0 31.6 39.0 33.4 24.8 31.5 32.4 20.9 29.0 0.0 28.8 L n G r p L O S DACDCCCCCCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 316 409 1249 957
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.4 33.5 31.9 29.0
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 30.6 24.8 21.0 26.0 29.4 21.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 48.5 21.5 16.5 44.5 25.5 16.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.3 18.0 17.0 20.1 18.9 18.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.8 1.7 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 31.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

Item 2A - Page 370
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
6: Sunrise Way & Alejo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 120 150 120 30 130 30 90 1310 110 80 1190 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 120 150 120 30 130 30 90 1310 110 80 1190 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 126 158 126 32 137 6 95 1379 116 84 1253 10 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 368 216 172 225 350 292 265 1536 129 211 1669 13 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.46 0.46 0.05 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 951 758 1781 1870 1560 1781 3309 277 1781 3612 29 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 126 0 284 32 137 6 95 737 758 84 616 647 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1709 1781 1870 1560 1781 1777 1810 1781 1777 1864 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 0.0 12.3 1.1 5.1 0.3 2.2 30.4 30.9 1.9 22.9 22.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 0.0 12.3 1.1 5.1 0.3 2.2 30.4 30.9 1.9 22.9 22.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 368 0 387 225 350 292 265 824 840 211 821 861 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.00 0.73 0.14 0.39 0.02 0.36 0.89 0.90 0.40 0.75 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 368 0 597 280 637 532 278 865 881 228 865 908 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 23.4 0.0 28.7 25.4 28.5 26.6 14.1 19.7 19.8 17.4 17.8 17.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 2.7 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.8 11.4 12.1 1.2 3.5 3.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.8 0.0 5.0 0.5 2.2 0.1 0.8 13.2 13.8 0.7 8.7 9.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.0 0.0 31.4 25.7 29.3 26.6 14.9 31.1 31.9 18.6 21.3 21.1 L n G r p L O S CACCCCBCCBCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 410 175 1590 1347
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.1 28.5 30.5 21.0
A p p r o a c h L O S CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 41.7 7.0 22.7 8.9 41.5 10.2 19.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 39.0 5.0 28.0 5.0 39.0 5.7 27.3 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 32.9 3.1 14.3 4.2 24.9 6.5 7.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.6 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.6
HCM 6th LOS C
Item 2A - Page 371
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
7: Indian Canyon Dr & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 340 100 110 410 190 170 990 230 120 250 130 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 340 100 110 410 190 170 990 230 120 250 130 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 358 105 116 432 200 179 1042 242 126 263 137 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 284 424 122 123 471 231 412 1463 338 148 589 307 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2661 764 520 1993 979 985 2850 659 430 1147 598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 236 227 412 0 336 179 648 636 126 0 400 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1648 1844 0 1648 985 1777 1732 430 0 1745 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.4 19.1 19.8 32.5 0.0 29.0 20.8 41.3 41.8 34.2 0.0 21.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.4 19.1 19.8 32.5 0.0 29.0 42.2 41.3 41.8 76.0 0.0 21.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.46 0.28 0.59 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.34
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 284 283 263 436 0 389 412 912 889 148 0 896 V/C Ratio(X) 0.48 0.84 0.86 0.94 0.00 0.86 0.43 0.71 0.72 0.85 0.00 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 301 300 278 442 0 395 412 912 889 148 0 896 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 56.7 60.4 60.7 55.6 0.0 54.3 36.1 27.6 27.7 60.6 0.0 22.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 17.4 22.5 29.0 0.0 17.6 0.7 2.6 2.8 35.1 0.0 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.8 9.9 9.9 18.5 0.0 13.9 5.1 18.1 17.9 6.3 0.0 9.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 58.0 77.8 83.2 84.6 0.0 71.8 36.8 30.2 30.5 95.7 0.0 23.1 LnGrp LOS E E F F A E D C C F A C
Approach Vol, veh/h 600 748 1463 526
Approach Delay, s/veh 75.3 78.9 31.1 40.5
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 80.5 28.1 80.5 39.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 76.0 25.0 76.0 35.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 44.2 21.8 78.0 34.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 12.8 1.0 0.0 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 51.2
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 372
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
8: Sunrise Way & Tahquitz Canyon Way 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 110 420 190 130 600 380 200 1030 160 290 850 180 Future Volume (veh/h) 110 420 190 130 600 380 200 1030 160 290 850 180 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 116 442 107 137 632 233 211 1084 168 305 895 172 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 253 919 399 320 914 398 276 1180 182 304 1161 223 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1545 1781 3554 1545 3456 3074 475 3456 2962 569 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 442 107 137 632 233 211 625 627 305 537 530 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1545 1781 1777 1545 1728 1777 1773 1728 1777 1754 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.1 9.0 4.7 4.9 13.7 11.2 5.1 28.5 28.7 7.5 22.4 22.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.1 9.0 4.7 4.9 13.7 11.2 5.1 28.5 28.7 7.5 22.4 22.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.32
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 253 919 399 320 914 398 276 682 680 304 697 688 V/C Ratio(X) 0.46 0.48 0.27 0.43 0.69 0.59 0.77 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.77 0.77 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 253 1292 562 320 1288 560 276 698 696 304 713 703 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 22.6 26.8 25.2 22.2 28.6 27.7 38.5 25.0 25.0 38.9 22.6 22.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.9 1.4 12.1 16.8 17.4 52.5 5.1 5.2 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 1.7 3.6 1.7 2.0 5.6 4.1 2.6 14.3 14.4 5.3 9.5 9.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.9 27.2 25.5 23.1 29.5 29.1 50.6 41.8 42.5 91.4 27.7 27.7 L n G r p L O S CCCCCCDDDFCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 665 1002 1463 1372
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.3 28.6 43.3 41.9
A p p r o a c h L O S CCDD
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.0 37.2 9.5 26.5 11.3 37.9 9.6 26.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 33.5 5.0 31.0 6.8 34.2 5.1 30.9 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.5 30.7 6.9 11.0 7.1 24.5 6.1 15.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.9 0.0 3.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 4.3 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.1
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 373
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
9: Indian Canyon Dr & Ramon Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 270 90 130 310 440 80 1140 200 70 290 210 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 270 90 130 310 440 80 1140 200 70 290 210 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 0.98 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 147 284 95 137 423 269 84 1200 211 74 305 221 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 142 1171 381 270 721 458 241 1445 627 154 405 293 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.45 0.45 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2602 847 610 2414 1533 873 3554 1541 381 995 721 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 191 188 261 299 269 84 1200 211 74 0 526 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1673 1321 1702 1533 873 1777 1541 381 0 1716 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.0 4.2 4.4 8.8 9.4 9.4 5.7 19.0 5.9 6.5 0.0 16.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.0 4.2 4.4 10.4 9.4 9.4 22.2 19.0 5.9 25.5 0.0 16.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.51 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.42
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 142 800 753 482 508 458 241 1445 627 154 0 698 V/C Ratio(X) 1.04 0.24 0.25 0.54 0.59 0.59 0.35 0.83 0.34 0.48 0.00 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 142 800 753 629 705 635 241 1445 627 154 0 698 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 28.9 10.6 10.7 18.8 18.7 18.7 25.4 16.7 12.8 29.6 0.0 15.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 85.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 1.1 1.2 0.9 4.3 0.3 2.3 0.0 4.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.3 1.3 1.3 2.9 3.3 3.0 1.2 7.6 1.9 1.2 0.0 6.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 114.1 10.8 10.9 19.8 19.8 19.9 26.3 20.9 13.1 31.9 0.0 20.6 L n G r p L O S FBBBBBCCBCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 526 829 1495 600
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.7 19.8 20.1 22.0
Approach LOS D B C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 30.0 32.7 30.0 9.5 23.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.5 26.0 25.5 5.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.2 6.4 27.5 7.0 12.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.4
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

Item 2A - Page 374
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
10: Sunrise Way & Ramon Rd/Baristo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 130 570 190 370 710 320 160 920 310 270 960 110 Future Volume (veh/h) 130 570 190 370 710 320 160 920 310 270 960 110 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 137 600 83 389 747 159 168 968 326 284 1011 48 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 242 711 308 383 1079 470 287 973 325 271 1502 657 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.30 0.30 0.07 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1539 1781 3554 1548 1781 2599 869 1781 3554 1553 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 600 83 389 747 159 168 659 635 284 1011 48 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1539 1781 1777 1548 1781 1777 1692 1781 1777 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.1 21.5 6.0 22.3 24.6 10.6 7.6 48.9 49.6 16.1 30.4 2.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.1 21.5 6.0 22.3 24.6 10.6 7.6 48.9 49.6 16.1 30.4 2.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 242 711 308 383 1079 470 287 665 633 271 1502 657 V/C Ratio(X) 0.57 0.84 0.27 1.02 0.69 0.34 0.58 0.99 1.00 1.05 0.67 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 242 778 337 383 1145 499 308 665 633 271 1502 657 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 39.3 51.0 44.8 35.0 40.7 35.8 25.5 41.3 41.5 43.6 30.9 22.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.0 7.9 0.5 50.3 1.7 0.4 2.5 32.7 36.3 68.1 1.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.7 10.1 2.3 14.7 10.7 4.0 3.4 26.9 26.6 14.1 13.1 0.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 42.4 58.9 45.3 85.3 42.4 36.2 28.0 74.0 77.8 111.7 32.1 22.8 LnGrp LOS D E D F D D C E F F C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 820 1295 1462 1343
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.7 54.5 70.3 48.6
Approach LOS D D E D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.6 54.1 26.8 31.0 14.2 60.5 13.1 44.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.1 49.6 22.3 29.0 11.2 54.5 8.6 42.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.1 51.6 24.3 23.5 9.6 32.4 10.1 26.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.1 7.6 0.0 4.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 57.6
HCM 6th LOS E
Item 2A - Page 375
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
11: Farrell Dr & Baristo Rd 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 11
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 860 70 90 1140 170 60 270 110 160 280 90 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 860 70 90 1140 170 60 270 110 160 280 90 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 0.99 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 905 26 95 1200 92 63 284 116 168 295 27 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 246 1616 483 314 1667 506 386 535 219 306 558 53 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.33 0.33 0.05 0.43 0.43 0.31 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 5106 1525 1781 5106 1550 1781 1254 512 691 1796 171 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 905 26 95 1200 92 63 0 400 226 0 264 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1525 1781 1702 1550 1781 0 1766 991 0 1667 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 10.2 0.8 2.4 14.3 2.9 1.5 0.0 11.6 11.5 0.0 8.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 10.2 0.8 2.4 14.3 2.9 1.5 0.0 11.6 15.1 0.0 8.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 0.74 0.10
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 246 1616 483 314 1667 506 386 0 754 399 0 518 V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.56 0.05 0.30 0.72 0.18 0.16 0.00 0.53 0.57 0.00 0.51 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 285 1925 575 335 1925 584 427 0 794 552 0 747 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 15.9 19.6 16.4 15.0 20.5 16.6 14.2 0.0 14.6 22.4 0.0 19.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 3.6 0.3 0.9 5.2 1.0 0.5 0.0 4.0 3.1 0.0 3.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.4 19.9 16.4 15.6 21.6 16.8 14.4 0.0 15.2 23.7 0.0 20.2 L n G r p L O S BBBBCBBABCAC
Approach Vol, veh/h 994 1387 463 490
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.6 20.8 15.1 21.8
Approach LOS B C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 33.9 8.7 26.3 8.0 25.9 8.0 27.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.0 5.0 26.0 5.1 30.9 5.0 26.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.6 4.4 12.2 3.5 17.1 3.6 16.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.1 0.0 5.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 5.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.8
HCM 6th LOS B
Item 2A - Page 376
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR WBR2 NBL2 NBL NBT NBR SBL Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 180 10 60 80 80 90 90 80 80 1030 60 40 Future Volume (vph) 180 10 60 80 80 90 90 80 80 1030 60 40 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.92 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1759 1528 1744 1714 1537 1770 3527 1457 1770 Flt Permitted 0.50 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.75 1.00 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 914 1528 886 1714 1537 1770 2651 1457 1770 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 189 11 63 84 84 95 95 84 84 1084 63 42
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 200 63 84 179 0 95 84 0 1168 63 42 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20 20 20 20 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2 2 2
Turn Type Perm NA Perm Perm NA Perm Prot Perm NA Perm Prot Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 4.6 45.1 45.1 3.5 Effective Green, g (s) 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 4.6 45.1 45.1 3.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.33 0.33 0.03 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 231 387 224 434 389 60 886 487 45
v/s Ratio Prot 0.10 c0.05 0.02
v/s Ratio Perm c0.22 0.04 0.09 0.06 c0.44 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.87 0.16 0.38 0.41 0.24 1.40 1.32 0.13 0.93
Uniform Delay, d1 48.1 39.2 41.5 41.9 40.0 65.1 44.9 31.2 65.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 27.0 0.2 1.1 0.6 0.3 254.3 151.2 0.1 108.1 Delay (s) 75.1 39.4 42.5 42.6 40.3 319.4 196.0 31.3 173.6 Level of Service E D D D D F F C F
Approach Delay (s) 66.5 42.0 196.0
Approach LOS E D F
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 177.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service F HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.26
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 134.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 144.1% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group Item 2A - Page 377
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
12: S Palm Canyon & E Camino Parocela & Indian Canyon 08/12/2022 Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 2
Movement SBT SBR SEL2 SEL SER SER2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 260 30 70 40 860 80
Future Volume (vph) 260 30 70 40 860 80
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 0.88
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 0.93
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 0.98 1.00 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1834 1770 2587
Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1834 1770 2587
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Adj. Flow (vph) 274 32 74 42 905 84
RTOR Reduction (vph) 000000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 306 0 0 116 989 0
Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 20
Confl. Bikes (#/hr) 2
Turn Type NA Perm Prot Perm
Protected Phases 6 9
Permitted Phases 9 9
Actuated Green, G (s) 44.0 34.0 34.0
Effective Green, g (s) 44.0 34.0 34.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.33 0.25 0.25
Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 598 446 652
v/s Ratio Prot 0.17
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 c0.38
v/c Ratio 0.51 0.26 1.52
Uniform Delay, d1 36.7 40.3 50.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.7 0.3 240.4
Delay (s) 37.5 40.6 290.8
Level of Service D D F
Approach Delay (s) 53.9 264.6
Approach LOS D F
Intersection Summary
Item 2A - Page 378
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
13: Sunrise Way & Twin Palms Dr 08/12/2022
Scenario 2 Palm Springs General Plan 6:00 pm 10/04/2021 PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Fehr & Peers Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 800 50 320 750 600 90 280 270 530 360 180 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 800 50 320 750 600 90 280 270 530 360 180 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 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 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 147 842 15 337 789 450 95 295 167 558 379 121 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 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 212 981 420 300 1362 846 0 418 345 549 796 661 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.28 0.28 0.17 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.16 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3554 1521 1781 3554 1552 0 1870 1542 3456 1870 1553 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 147 842 15 337 789 450 0 295 167 558 379 121 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1521 1781 1777 1552 0 1870 1542 1728 1870 1553 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 23.4 0.7 17.5 18.3 19.4 0.0 15.1 9.8 16.5 15.2 5.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 23.4 0.7 17.5 18.3 19.4 0.0 15.1 9.8 16.5 15.2 5.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 212 981 420 300 1362 846 0 418 345 549 796 661 V/C Ratio(X) 0.69 0.86 0.04 1.12 0.58 0.53 0.00 0.71 0.48 1.02 0.48 0.18 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 326 1060 454 300 1362 846 0 666 549 549 873 725 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 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.8 35.7 27.5 43.2 25.4 15.3 0.0 37.2 35.1 43.7 21.5 18.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.1 6.8 0.0 89.4 0.6 0.6 0.0 2.2 1.1 42.7 0.4 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.9 10.5 0.3 14.8 7.3 6.3 0.0 6.9 3.6 10.0 6.3 1.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.9 42.5 27.5 132.6 26.0 16.0 0.0 39.4 36.2 86.4 21.9 18.7 LnGrp LOS D D C F C B A D D F C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1004 1576 462 1058
Approach Delay, s/veh 43.6 46.0 38.2 55.6
Approach LOS D D D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 21.0 27.7 22.0 33.2 0.0 48.7 10.9 44.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 37.0 17.5 31.0 5.0 48.5 9.8 38.7 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.5 17.1 19.5 25.4 0.0 17.2 6.3 21.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.6 0.1 6.3 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 47.0
HCM 6th LOS D
Item 2A - Page 379










dd,D
Ed

Item 2A - Page 380
Palm Springs 2040 General Plan Page 6-1

66. SAFETY ELEMENT

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Protecting and preserving the health, safety, and welfare of the community is an issue of fundamental concern to the City. As such, it is important that the City of Pa lm Springs maintain and improve programs that effectively address safety and climate change considerations. The Safety Elem ent discusses natural and human- caused hazards that might occur, evaluates how these hazards are projected to change in the future, and presents a comprehensive set of goals and policies to minimize the effects of these hazards. Actions to implement these goals and policy can be found in Appendix X.

More detailed information regarding climate change hazards can be found in Appendix X of the Safety Element.

The Safety Element serves the following functions:
‹ Develops a framework by which safety considerations are introduced into the land use planning process.
‹ Facilitates the identification and mitigation of hazards for new development, thus strengthening existing codes, project review, and permitting processes.
‹ Presents policies and implementation programs, contained in Appendix X, directed at identifying and reducing hazards in existing development.
‹ Strengthens hazard preparedness planning and post-disaster reconstruction policies.
‹ Identifies how hazards are likely to increase in frequency and intensity due to climate change and provides policies to increase community resilience.

Item 2A - Page 381