HomeMy WebLinkAboutT-6237 - Traffic Impact Study - DAKOTA & GRANTLAND - 2/20/2020 (Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Single-Family Housing
On the Southeast Corner of the Dakota Avenue
Alignment and Grantland Avenue
In the City of Fresno, California
Prepared for:
Granville Homes, Affiliate
1396 West Herndon Avenue, Suite 101
Fresno, CA 93711
Project No. 004-055
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Phone: (559) 570-8991
www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions
Z:\01 Projects\004 Fresno\004-055 Dakota Grantland TIA\Report\R04112018 Dakota and Grantland TIA.docx
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Phone: (559) 570-8991
www.JLBtraffic.com
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
For the Single-Family Housing located on the Southeast Corner of the Dakota
Avenue Alignment and Grantland Avenue
In the City of Fresno, CA
April 11, 2018
This Draft Technical Letter has been prepared under the direction of a licensed Traffic Engineer. The
licensed Traffic Engineer attests to the technical information contained therein and has judged the
qualifications of any technical specialists providing engineering data from which recommendations,
conclusions, and decisions are based.
Prepared by:
_________________________________
Jose Luis Benavides, PE, TE
President
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | iii
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table of Contents
Introduction and Summary ....................................................................................................................1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
Existing Traffic Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 1
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions .................................................................................................... 1
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................... 2
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................... 2
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................. 4
Queuing Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Project’s Equitable Fair Share .................................................................................................................. 5
TIA Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................6
Study Facilities ............................................................................................................................................. 6
Study Intersections: ................................................................................................................................. 6
Study Segments:....................................................................................................................................... 7
Project Only Trips to State Facilities: ....................................................................................................... 7
Study Scenarios ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Existing Traffic Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 7
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions .................................................................................................... 7
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions: .............................................................................................. 7
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................... 7
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................. 8
Level of Service Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................................8
Criteria of Significance ..........................................................................................................................8
Operational Analysis Assumptions and Defaults ....................................................................................9
Existing Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................................... 10
Roadway Network ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Results of Existing Level of Service Analysis .............................................................................................. 13
Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................................... 13
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions ................................................................................................ 15
Project Description..................................................................................................................................... 15
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | iv
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Project Access ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Bikeways .................................................................................................................................................... 15
Transit ........................................................................................................................................................ 16
Safe Routes to School ................................................................................................................................ 16
Trip Generation .......................................................................................................................................... 18
Trip Distribution ......................................................................................................................................... 19
Results of Existing plus Project Level of Service Analysis .......................................................................... 20
Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................................... 21
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................... 24
Description of Approved and Pipeline Projects ......................................................................................... 24
Results of Near Term plus Project Level of Service Analysis ...................................................................... 26
Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................................... 26
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................. 29
Results of Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Level of Service Analysis ..................................................... 29
Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................................... 31
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions ........................................................................... 33
Results of Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Level of Service Analysis ................................................... 33
Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................................................................... 35
Project’s Trip Assignment to Caltrans Facilities ......................................................................................... 36
Queuing Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 41
Project’s Pro-Rata Fair Share of Future Transportation Improvements.................................................. 44
Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................................... 45
Existing Traffic Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 45
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions .................................................................................................. 45
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 46
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................. 46
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions ........................................................................... 47
Queuing Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 48
Project’s Equitable Fair Share ................................................................................................................ 49
Study Participants ............................................................................................................................... 50
References .......................................................................................................................................... 50
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | v
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
List of Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 2: Existing - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls................................................................................. 14
Figure 3: 2018 Project Only Trips ............................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 4: Existing plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls ............................................................. 23
Figure 5: Near Term Projects' Trip Assignment ....................................................................................................... 27
Figure 6: Near Term plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls ......................................................... 28
Figure 7: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls ......................................... 32
Figure 8: 2035 Project Only Trips ............................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 9: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls ....................................... 38
Figure 10: State Route 99 at Veterans Boulevard Interchange - 2035 Project Only Trips ......................................... 39
Figure 11: State Route 99 at Ashlan Avenue Interchange - 2035 Project Only Trips ................................................ 40
List of Tables
Table I: Existing Intersection LOS Results ................................................................................................................ 13
Table II: Existing Segment LOS Results .................................................................................................................... 13
Table III: Proposed Project Trip Generation (General Plan Amendment) ................................................................ 19
Table IV: Project Site Trip Generation (Consistent with the 2035 General Plan) ...................................................... 19
Table V: Difference in Trip Generation .................................................................................................................... 19
Table VI: Existing plus Project Intersection LOS Results .......................................................................................... 20
Table VII: Existing plus Project Segment LOS Results .............................................................................................. 20
Table VIII: Near Term Projects’ Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 25
Table IX: Near Term plus Project Intersection LOS Results ...................................................................................... 26
Table X: Near Term plus Project Segment LOS Results ............................................................................................ 26
Table XI: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Intersection LOS Results ...................................................................... 31
Table XII: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Segment LOS Results .......................................................................... 31
Table XIII: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Intersection LOS Results .................................................................. 35
Table XIV: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Segment LOS Results ....................................................................... 35
Table XV: Queuing Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 43
Table XVI: Project’s Fair Share of Future Roadway Improvements .......................................................................... 44
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Scope of Work
Appendix B: Traffic Counts
Appendix C: Traffic Modeling
Appendix D: Methodology
Appendix E: Existing Traffic Conditions
Appendix F: Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
Appendix G: Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
Appendix H: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
Appendix I: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
Appendix J: Signal Warrants
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 1
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Introduction and Summary
Introduction
This report describes a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. (JLB) for the
proposed Single-Family Housing (Project) located on the southeast corner of the Dakota Avenue
Alignment and Grantland Avenue in the City of Fresno. The Project proposes to develop up to 180 single-
family residential units on approximately 30.00 acres. Based on information provided to JLB, the Project
will undergo a General Plan Amendment to modify the land use intended for High-Density Residential
(10.00 acres) to allow Medium-Density Residential altogether (30.00 acres). Figure 1 shows the location of
the proposed Project site relative to the surrounding roadway network.
The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate the potential on- and off-site traffic impacts, identify short-term
roadway and circulation needs, determine potential mitigation measures, and identify any critical traffic
issues that should be addressed in the on-going planning process. The scope of work was prepared via
consultation with City of Fresno, County of Fresno and Caltrans staff.
Summary
The potential traffic impacts of the proposed Project were evaluated in accordance with the standards set
forth by the level of service (LOS) policy of the City of Fresno, County of Fresno and Caltrans.
Existing Traffic Conditions
At present, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue exceeds its LOS threshold during the
AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended that the following
recommendations be implemented.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane; and
Add a westbound right-turn lane.
At present, all study segments operate at an acceptable LOS.
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
A review of the Project driveways to be constructed indicates that they are located at points the
minimize traffic operational impacts to the existing roadway network.
It is recommended that access to the Project Driveway maintain a minimum throat depth of 50 feet
before any vehicular openings to the north.
It is recommended that the Project implement Class II bike lanes along its frontages to Grantland
Avenue and Dakota Avenue, and a Class I Bike Path on its frontage to Grantland Avenue.
To promote alternative modes of transportation to Harvest Elementary School, it is recommended
that the Central Unified School District work with the City of Fresno and County of Fresno to
implement a Safe Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding to help build bikeways and
walkways where they are lacking within the one-mile radius of the existing school site.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 2
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
To promote alternative modes of transportation to Glacier Point Middle School and Central High
School (East Campus), it is recommended that the Central Unified School District work with the City of
Fresno and County of Fresno to implement a Safe Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding to
help build bikeways and walkways where they are lacking within the two-mile radius of the existing
school site.
At buildout, the proposed Project is estimated to generate a maximum of 1,699 daily trips, 133 AM
peak hour trips and 178 PM peak hour trips.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its
LOS threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended
that the following recommendations be implemented.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
The total trip generation for the near term projects is 53,404 daily trips, 4,071 AM peak hour trips and
5,164 PM peak hour trips.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its
LOS threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended
that this intersection be signalized with protective left-turn phasing in all directions.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and
Ashlan Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland
Avenue and Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their
LOS threshold during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to
exceed their LOS threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
o Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 3
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
o Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue
are projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is
recommended that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 4
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and
Ashlan Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland
Avenue and Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their
LOS threshold during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to
exceed their LOS threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
o Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
Modify the southbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Implement overlap phasing of the southbound right-turn with the eastbound left-turn phase;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
o Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 5
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
o Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue
are projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is
recommended that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
Queuing Analysis
It is recommended that the City consider left- and right-turn lane storage lengths as indicated in the
Queuing Analysis.
Project’s Equitable Fair Share
It is recommended that the Project contribute its equitable Fair Share as presented in Table XVI.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 6
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
TIA Scope of Work
The study focused on evaluating traffic conditions at the existing study intersections that may potentially
be impacted by the proposed Project. On January 29, 2018, a Draft Scope of Work for the preparation of a
Traffic Impact Analysis for this Project was provided to the City of Fresno, County of Fresno and Caltrans
for their review and comment. The Draft Scope of Work was based on communication with City of Fresno
staff. Any comments to the proposed Scope of Work were to be provided by February 19, 2018.
On Tuesday, February 13, 2018, the City of Fresno responded to the Draft Scope of Work. The City of
Fresno requested that Warrants 1 and 2 be prepared for the unsignalized study intersections under the
Existing Traffic Conditions scenario only. In addition, the City requested that the intersections of Ashlan
Avenue and Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue and Bryan Avenue be included in the analysis. On Thursday,
February 15, 2018, Caltrans approved the Draft Scope of Work as presented. On Friday, February 16, 2018,
the County of Fresno responded to the Draft Scope of Work. The County of Fresno, like the City of Fresno,
requested that the intersections of Ashlan Avenue and Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue and Bryan
Avenue be included in the analysis. Moreover, the County of Fresno requested that the Project’s trip
distribution be provided to them. The distribution of Project Only Trips is described in detail under the
Existing plus Project and Cumulative Year plus Project Traffic Conditions scenarios.
Based on the comments received, this TIA includes the analysis of the additional intersections requested
by the City and County of Fresno and the preparation of Warrants 1 and 2 for the unsignalized study
intersections under the Existing Traffic Conditions scenario as requested by the City of Fresno. The Draft
Scope of Work and the comments received from the lead agency and responsible agencies are included in
Appendix A.
Study Facilities
The existing peak hour turning movement and segment volume counts were conducted at the study
intersections and segments in March 2018 while schools in the vicinity of the proposed Project were in
session. The intersection turning movement counts included pedestrian volumes. The traffic counts for the
existing study intersections and segments are contained in Appendix B. The existing intersection turning
movement volumes, intersection geometrics and traffic controls are illustrated in Figure 2.
Study Intersections:
1. Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue
2. Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue
3. Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue (Future)
4. Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue (Future)
5. Grantland Avenue / Project Driveway (Future)
6. Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue
7. Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 7
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Study Segments:
1. Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue Alignment
2. Grantland Avenue between Dakota Avenue Alignment and Shields Avenue
3. Grantland Avenue between Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Project Only Trips to State Facilities:
1. State Route 99 / Veterans Boulevard
2. State Route 99 / Ashlan Avenue
Study Scenarios
Existing Traffic Conditions
This scenario evaluates the Existing Traffic Conditions based on existing traffic volumes and roadway
conditions from traffic counts and field surveys conducted in the year 2018.
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
This scenario evaluates total traffic volumes and roadway conditions based on the Existing plus Project
Traffic Conditions. The Existing plus Project traffic volumes were obtained by adding the 2018 Project Only
Trips to the Existing Traffic Conditions scenario. The 2018 Project Only Trips to the study intersections
were developed based on existing travel patterns, the Fresno COG Project Select Zone, the existing
roadway network, engineering judgment, existing residential and commercial densities, and the 2035 City
of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element in the vicinity of the Project. The Fresno COG Models for the
Project Select Zone are contained in Appendix C.
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions:
This scenario evaluates total traffic volumes and roadway conditions based on the Near Term plus Project
Traffic Conditions. The Near Term plus Project traffic volumes were obtained by adding the Near Term
related trips to the Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario.
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
This scenario evaluates total traffic volumes and roadway conditions based on the Cumulative Year 2035
No Project Traffic Conditions. The Cumulative Year 2035 No Project traffic volumes were obtained by
subtracting the 2035 Project Only Trips from the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
scenario.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 8
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
This scenario evaluates total traffic volumes and roadway conditions based on the Cumulative Year 2035
plus Project Traffic Conditions. The Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project traffic volumes were obtained from
the Fresno COG traffic model runs (Base Year 2018 and Cumulative Year 2035) and existing traffic counts.
Under this scenario, the increment method, as recommended by the Model Steering Committee was
utilized to determine the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project traffic volumes. The Fresno COG Models are
contained in Appendix C. It should be noted that this study assumes that Ashlan Avenue will be built
west of Grantland Avenue and that Dakota Avenue would be built east of Grantland Avenue by the year
2035, resulting in changes in travel patterns and volumes.
Level of Service Analysis Methodology
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative index of the performance of an element of the transportation system.
LOS is a rating scale running from “A” to “F”, with “A” indicating no congestion of any kind and “F”
indicating unacceptable congestion and delays. LOS in this study describes the operating conditions for
signalized and unsignalized intersections.
The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) is the standard reference published by the Transportation
Research Board and contains the specific criteria and methods to be used in assessing LOS. U-turn
movements were analyzed using HCM 2000 methodologies and would yield more accurate results for the
reason that HCM 2010 methodologies do not allow the analysis of U-turns. Synchro software was used to
define LOS in this study. Details regarding these calculations are included in Appendix D.
Criteria of Significance
The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan has established various degrees of acceptable level of service (LOS)
on its major streets, which are dependent on four (4) Traffic Impact Zones (TIZ) within the City. The
standard LOS threshold for TIZ I is LOS F, that for TIZ II is LOS E, that for TIZ III is LOS D, and that for TIZ IV is
LOS E. Additionally, the 2035 MEIR made findings of overriding consideration to allow a lower LOS
threshold than that established by the underlying TIZ’s. For those cases in which a LOS criterion for a
roadway segment differs from that of the underlying TIZ, such criteria are identified in the roadway
description. As all study facilities fall within TIZ III, LOS D is used to evaluate the potential significance of
LOS impacts to intersections and segments within this TIA pursuant to the 2035 City of Fresno General
Plan.
The County of Fresno has established LOS C as the acceptable level of traffic congestion on county roads
and streets that fall entirely outside the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of a City. For those areas that fall within
the SOI of a City, the LOS criteria of the City are the criteria of significance used in this report. LOS C is used
to evaluate the potential significance of LOS impacts to Fresno County intersections and segments, which
fall outside the City of Fresno SOI. In this case, all study facilities fall within the City of Fresno SOI and
therefore the City of Fresno LOS is utilized.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 9
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS C and D on State highway
facilities consistent with the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies dated December
2002. However, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the
lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. In this TIA, however, all study
facilities fall within the City of Fresno. Therefore, the City of Fresno LOS thresholds are utilized.
Operational Analysis Assumptions and Defaults
The following operational analysis values, assumptions and defaults were used in this study to ensure a
consistent analysis of LOS among the various scenarios.
Yellow time consistent with the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD)
based on approach speeds
Yellow time of 3.2 seconds for left-turn phases
All-red clearance intervals of 1.0 second for all phases
Walk intervals of 7.0 seconds
Flashing Don’t Walk based on 3.5 feet/second walking speed with yellow plus all-red clearance
subtracted and 2.0 seconds added
All new or modified signals utilize protective left-turn phasing
A 3 percent heavy vehicle factor
The number of observed pedestrians at existing intersections was utilized under all study scenarios
An average of 3 pedestrian calls per hour at signalized intersections
An average of 10 pedestrian calls per hour per at the intersections of Ashlan Avenue and Grantland
Avenue and Ashlan Avenue and Bryan Avenue in the Cumulative Year 2035 scenarios
At existing intersections, the observed approach Peak Hour Factor (PHF) is utilized in the Existing,
Existing plus Project and Near Term plus Project scenarios
For the Cumulative Year 2035 scenarios, the following PHF’s were utilized to reflect school traffic
operations and an increase in future traffic volumes. As roadways start to reach their saturated flow
rates, PHF’s tend to increase to 0.90 or higher. The PHF’s were established based on historical traffic
counts collected by JLB for intersections in proximity of school sites.
o For the intersections of Ashlan Avenue and Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue and Bryan
Avenue, the following PHF’s were utilized.
A PHF of 0.86 during the AM peak
A PHF of 0.90 during the PM peak
o A PHF of 0.92, or the existing PHF if higher, is utilized for all other intersections
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 10
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Existing Traffic Conditions
Roadway Network
The Project site and surrounding study area are illustrated in Figure 1. Important roadways serving the
Project are discussed below.
Grantland Avenue is an existing north-south two-lane undivided arterial adjacent to the proposed Project.
In this area, Grantland Avenue extends south of Parkway Drive through the southern limits of the City of
Fresno SOI. The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates Grantland Avenue as a
two-lane arterial between Parkway Drive and Shaw Avenue, a four-lane collector between Shaw Avenue
and Gettysburg Avenue, and a four-lane super arterial between Gettysburg Avenue and Belmont Avenue.
Ashlan Avenue is an existing east-west two-lane divided arterial in the vicinity of the proposed Project. In
this area, Ashlan Avenue extends east of Grantland Avenue through the eastern limits of the City of Fresno
SOI. The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates Ashlan Avenue as a four-lane
divided arterial between Grantland Avenue and Fruit Avenue and east of Maroa Avenue and a two-lane
collector between Fruit Avenue and Maroa Avenue.
Bryan Avenue is an existing north-south two-lane undivided collector in the vicinity of the proposed
Project. In this area, Bryan Avenue exists between Shaw Avenue and McKinley Avenue. The 2035 City of
Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates Bryan Avenue as a two-lane collector between Shaw
Avenue and Belmont Avenue.
Dakota Avenue is a future east-west two-lane undivided collector adjacent to the proposed Project. In this
area, Dakota Avenue exists between Hayes Avenue and State Route 99. The 2035 City of Fresno General
Plan Circulation Element designates Dakota Avenue as two-lane collector between Grantland Avenue and
State Route 99.
Shields Avenue is an existing east-west two-lane undivided arterial in the vicinity of the proposed Project.
In this area, Shields Avenue extends west of its connection to State Route 99 through the western limits of
the City of Fresno SOI. The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates Shields
Avenue as a two-lane collector west of State Route 99 through the City of Fresno SOI.
Clinton Avenue is an existing east-west two-lane undivided collector in the vicinity of the proposed
Project. In this area, Clinton Avenue exists between Grantland Avenue and State Route 99. The 2035 City
of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates Clinton Avenue as two-lane collector between
Grantland Avenue and Polk Avenue and a four-lane collector between Polk Avenue and approximately 700
feet east of Marks Avenue.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 11
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Veterans Boulevard is planned as a six-lane divided super arterial in the vicinity of the proposed Project.
Veterans Boulevard will ultimately connect to State Route 99 and Herndon Avenue to the north and
Grantland Avenue to the south. The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element designates
Veterans Boulevard as a six-lane super arterial. The 2035 City of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element
acknowledged that additional lanes would be needed between Barstow Avenue and Riverside Drive;
however, it established the criteria of significance for this segment at LOS E as a six-lane facility.
State Route 99 is an existing four- to six-lane freeway near the vicinity of the proposed Project. State
Route 99 traverses the City of Fresno in a northwest-southeast direction and serves as the principal
connection to various metropolitan areas within the Central San Joaquin Valley.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVECORNELIA AVEG
O
L
D
E
N
S
T
A
T
E
B
L
V
D
SHAW AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVEHAYES AVEIS
L
A
N
D
W
A
T
E
R
P
A
R
K
VETERANS BLVDFAIRMONT AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 03/22/18 - SM
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
1 2
3 4
6
7
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Vicinity Map
Figure 1
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= STUDY INTERSECTION
= PROJECT LOCATION
= FUTURE STREET
#
= STUDY SEGMENT
5
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 13
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Results of Existing Level of Service Analysis
Figure 2 illustrates the Existing Traffic Conditions turning movement volumes, intersection geometrics and
traffic controls. LOS worksheets for the Existing Traffic Conditions scenario are provided in Appendix E.
Table I presents a summary of the Existing peak hour LOS at the study intersections, while Table II
presents a summary of the Existing LOS for the study segments.
At present, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue exceeds its LOS threshold during the AM
peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended that the following
recommendations be implemented.
Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane; and
o Add a westbound right-turn lane.
At present, all study segments operate at an acceptable LOS.
Table I: Existing Intersection LOS Results
ID Intersection Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
1 Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue One-Way Stop 11.4 B 10.7 B
2 Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue All-Way Stop 38.3 E 8.5 A
All-Way Stop (Mitigated) 24.0 C 8.6 A
3 Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
4 Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
5 Grantland Avenue / Project Driveway Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
6 Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue All-Way Stop 10.0 A 8.4 A
7 Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue One-Way Stop 9.5 A 9.5 A
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on average delay on signalized intersections and All-Way STOP Controls
LOS for two-way and one-way STOP controlled intersections are based on the worst approach/movement of the minor street.
Table II: Existing Segment LOS Results
ID Segment Limits Lanes 24-hour Volume LOS
1 Grantland Avenue Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 2 3,093 B
2 Grantland Avenue Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 2 3,093 B
3 Grantland Avenue Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2 2,213 B
Note: LOS = Level of Service per the Florida Roadway Segment LOS Tables
Traffic Signal Warrants
Eight-hour and four-hour traffic signal warrants, as appropriate, were prepared for the unsignalized
intersections in the Existing Traffic Conditions scenario. These warrants are found in Appendix J. These
warrants were prepared pursuant to the CA MUTCD guidelines for the preparation of traffic signal
warrants. Under this scenario, the none of the unsignalized intersections satisfy either signal warrants.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 03/22/18 - SM
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Existing - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls
Figure 2
123(153)75(83)34(32)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.86(141)68(75)
82(30)
Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.51(18)124(74)26(33)12(10)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.72(78)17(10)15(22)
137(63)
15(7)
4(10)
105(85)
24(18)58(6)53(28)105(62)5(9)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.58(33)100(6)145(50)
192(68)
6(8)
38(7)
184(64)
43(12)
Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.116(112)13(17)3(5)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.64(113)13(12)
13(6)
DOES
NOT EXISTDOES N
OT EXIST
20(1)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
5
Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.
DOES
NOT EXIST
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 15
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
Project Description
The Project proposes to develop up to 180 single-family residential units on approximately 30.00 acres on
the southeast corner of the Dakota Avenue Alignment and Grantland Avenue. Based on information
provided to JLB, the Project will undergo a General Plan Amendment to modify the land use for 10 acres of
the Project site intended for High-Density Residential to allow Medium-Density Residential altogether
(30.00 acres). Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed Project site relative to the surrounding roadway
network.
Project Access
Based on information provided by the developer, access to and from the Project site will be from three (3)
points. One access point is proposed on the south side of Dakota Avenue approximately 700 feet east of
Grantland Avenue and is proposed as a full access. The remaining access points are proposed on the east
side of Grantland Avenue. One is proposed approximately 475 feet south of Dakota Avenue and is
proposed as a right-in, right-out access only, while the other is approximately 950 feet south of Dakota
Avenue and is proposed as a left-in, right-in and right-out access only. The proposed left-in, right-in, right-
out access point, labeled study intersection 5, was quantitatively analyzed for traffic operational impacts
and LOS. JLB analyzed the location of the proposed access points relative to the existing local roads and
driveways in the Project’s vicinity. A review of the Project driveways to be constructed indicates that they
are located at points the minimize traffic operational impacts to the existing roadway network.
JLB also analyzed the conceptual roadway connections to the Project. Based on this review, it is
recommended that the Project incorporate the recommendations presented in more detail within the
Queuing Analysis for the intersection of Grantland Avenue and Project Driveway, study intersection 5. It is
recommended that access to the Project Driveway maintain a minimum throat depth of 50 feet before any
vehicular openings to the north. By incorporating the recommendations presented in the Queuing
Analysis, on-site and off-site traffic operations and circulation would be improved to acceptable levels.
Bikeways
Currently, bike lanes exist in the vicinity of the proposed Project site along Grantland Avenue, Ashlan
Avenue and Bryan Avenue. The City of Fresno “Bicycle, Pedestrian & Trails Master Plan” recommends that
Class II Bike Lanes be implemented on: 1) Grantland Avenue between Gettysburg Avenue and Belmont
Avenue, 2) Ashlan Avenue east of Grantland Avenue, 3) Dakota Avenue east of Grantland Avenue, 4)
Shields Avenue east of Grantland Avenue, and 5) Clinton Avenue east of Grantland Avenue. The City of
Fresno “Bicycle, Pedestrian & Trials Master Plan” also recommends that Class I Bike Path be implemented
on the east side of Grantland Avenue between Gettysburg Avenue and Belmont Avenue. Therefore, it is
recommended that the Project implement Class II bike lanes along its frontages to Grantland Avenue and
Dakota Avenue, and a Class I Bike Path on its frontage to Grantland Avenue.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 16
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Transit
Fresno Area Express (FAX) is the transit operator in the City of Fresno. At present, there are no FAX transit
routes that operate in the vicinity of the proposed Project. The closest is FAX Route 9, which runs on
Brawley Avenue and Shields Avenue, approximately 3.5 miles to the east of the proposed Project. Route 9
operates at 30-minute intervals on weekdays and weekends and its nearest stop to the Project site is
located on the east side of Brawley Avenue approximately 200 feet north of Shields Avenue. This route
provides a direct connection to Forestiere Underground Gardens, Fig Garden Shopping Center, Fashion
Fair, Fresno State and Vinland Park. Retention of the existing and expansion of future transit routes is
dependent on transit ridership demand and available funding.
Safe Routes to School
Kindergarten through 12th grade students from the Project will be served by the Central Unified School
District. The Central Unified School District provides transportation for students who live in excess of an
established radius zone. The zone is a radius of 1 mile for grades Kindergarten through 6th and 2.0 miles
for grades 7th through 12th.
Based on the attendance area boundaries at the time of the preparation of this TIA, elementary school
students would attend Harvest Elementary School located on the southwest corner of Bryan Avenue and
Gettysburg Avenue. Harvest Elementary School is located 0.95 and 1.20 miles from the nearest and
farthest future home on the Project. Therefore, it is anticipated that the majority of elementary school
students will need to walk, bike or be driven to school.
The most direct path from the Project to the Harvest Elementary School campus would begin from either
the westmost end of the Project along the east side of Grantland Avenue or the northmost end of the
Project along the south side of Dakota Avenue. Students would proceed either north along the east side of
Grantland Avenue or west along the south side of Dakota Avenue toward the intersection of Grantland
Avenue and Dakota Avenue. With the construction of the Project, it is anticipated that the intersection of
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue will be controlled by a one-way stop on Dakota Avenue and have a
marked crosswalk on the westbound approach of Dakota Avenue. Although there is a lack of walkways on
the east side of Grantland Avenue, it is anticipated that students would proceed to cross Dakota Avenue
along the east side of Grantland Avenue and continue heading north toward the intersection of Grantland
Avenue and Ashlan Avenue. The intersection of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is controlled by a
one-way stop on Ashlan Avenue and contains a marked crosswalk on the westbound approach of Ashlan
Avenue. It is anticipated that students would proceed to cross Ashlan Avenue along the east side of
Grantland Avenue and head east along the north side of Ashlan Avenue toward the intersection of Bryan
Avenue and Ashlan Avenue. Once at the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, students would
proceed north along the west side of Bryan Avenue until reaching a campus entrance.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 17
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Since the walking distance between the Project and the Harvest Elementary School campus is
approximately 1.2 miles and there are no walkways in between, it is anticipated that a large percentage of
elementary school students will likely be driven to school. To promote alternative modes of transportation
to Harvest Elementary School, it is recommended that the Central Unified School District work with the
City of Fresno and County of Fresno to implement a Safe Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding
to help build bikeways and walkways where they are lacking within the one-mile radius of the existing
school site.
Based on the attendance area boundaries at the time of the preparation of this TIA, middle school
students would attend Glacier Point Middle School located on the northwest quadrant of Bryan Avenue
and Ashlan Avenue. Glacier Point Middle School is located 0.60 and 0.87 miles from the nearest and
farthest future home on the Project. Therefore, it is anticipated that middle school students will need to
walk, bike or be driven to school.
The most direct path from the Project to the Glacier Point Middle School campus would begin from either
the westmost end of the Project along the east side of Grantland Avenue or the northmost end of the
Project along the south side of Dakota Avenue. Students would proceed either north along the east side of
Grantland Avenue or west along the south side of Dakota Avenue toward the intersection of Grantland
Avenue and Dakota Avenue. With the construction of the Project, it is anticipated that the intersection of
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue will be controlled by a one-way stop on Dakota Avenue and have a
marked crosswalk on the westbound approach of Dakota Avenue. Although there is a lack of walkways on
the east side of Grantland Avenue, it is anticipated that students would proceed to cross Dakota Avenue
along the east side of Grantland Avenue and continue heading north toward the intersection of Grantland
Avenue and Ashlan Avenue. The intersection of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is controlled by a
one-way stop on Ashlan Avenue and contains a marked crosswalk on the westbound approach of Ashlan
Avenue. It is anticipated that students would proceed to cross Ashlan Avenue along the east side of
Grantland Avenue and head east along the north side of Ashlan Avenue until reaching a campus entrance.
Since there are no walkways in between the Project and the Glacier Point Middle School campus, it is
anticipated that a large percentage of middle school students will likely be driven to school. To promote
alternative modes of transportation to Glacier Point Middle School, it is recommended that the Central
Unified School District work with the City of Fresno and County of Fresno to implement a Safe Routes to
School plan and to seek grant funding to help build bikeways and walkways where they are lacking within
the two-mile radius of the existing school site.
Based on information from the Central Unified School District, 9th grade high school students would be
provided with bus transportation to Central High School (West Campus) generally located at the
northwest quadrant of McKinley Avenue and Dickenson Avenue. To a large degree, the majority of 10th
through 12th grade high school students would attend Central High School (East Campus) located at the
northwest corner of Dakota Avenue and Cornelia Avenue. Central High School (East Campus) is located
1.65 and 1.92 miles away from the nearest and farthest future home on the Project. Therefore, it is
anticipated that high school students will need to walk, bike or be driven to school.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 18
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
The most direct path from the Project to the Central High School (East Campus) would begin from the
westmost end of the Project along the east side of Grantland Avenue. Although there is a lack of walkways
on the east side of Grantland Avenue, students would proceed south along the east side of Grantland
Avenue toward the intersection of Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue. Although there is a lack of
walkways on the north side of Shields Avenue, students would proceed east along the north side of
Shields Avenue toward the intersection of Polk Avenue and Shields Avenue. The intersection of Polk
Avenue and Shields Avenue is controlled by an all-way stop and contains unmarked crosswalks on all
approaches. Although there is a lack of walkways on both sided of Polk Avenue, it is anticipated that
students will proceed to cross Polk Avenue along the north side of Shields and proceed north along the
east side of Polk Avenue toward the intersection of Polk Avenue and Dakota Avenue. Once at the
intersection of Polk Avenue and Dakota Avenue, students would proceed east along the south side of
Dakota Avenue toward the intersection of Forestiere Avenue and Dakota Avenue. The intersection of
Forestiere Avenue and Dakota Avenue is controlled by a one-way stop on Forestiere Avenue and contains
marked crosswalks on the northbound approach of Forestiere Avenue and the eastbound approach of
Dakota Avenue. Students would proceed to cross Dakota Avenue along the east side of Forestiere Avenue
to reach a campus entrance.
Since there are no walkways in between the Project and the Central High School (East Campus), it is
anticipated that a large percentage of high school students will likely be driven to school. To promote
alternative modes of transportation to Central High School (East Campus), it is recommended that the
Central Unified School District work with the City of Fresno and County of Fresno to implement a Safe
Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding to help build bikeways and walkways where they are
lacking within the two-mile radius of the existing school site.
Trip Generation
Trip generation rates for the proposed Project were obtained from the 10th Edition of the Trip Generation
Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Table III presents the trip generation
for the proposed Project with trip generation rates for Single-Family Detached Housing. At buildout, the
proposed Project is estimated to generate a maximum of 1,699 daily trips, 133 AM peak hour trips and
178 PM peak hour trips. However, assuming that the proposed Project does not undergo a General Plan
Amendment, the anticipated trip generation for the Project site would be slightly higher. Table IV presents
the trip generation for the proposed Project with trip generation rates for Single-Family Detached Housing
and Multi-Family Housing (highest density is assumed), consistent with the 2035 City of Fresno General
Plan. Based on this, the proposed Project site has the potential to generate a maximum of 2,304 daily
trips, 163 AM peak hour trips and 209 PM peak hour trips. Compared to the land use consistent with the
2035 City of Fresno General Plan, the proposed Project is estimated to yield less traffic by 605 daily trips,
30 AM peak hour trips and 31 PM peak hour trips. The difference in trip generation is summarized in Table
V.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 19
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table III: Proposed Project Trip Generation (General Plan Amendment)
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Table IV: Project Site Trip Generation (Consistent with the 2035 General Plan)
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Table V: Difference in Trip Generation
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution assumptions were developed based on existing travel patterns, the Fresno COG
Project Select Zone, the existing roadway network, engineering judgement, data provided by the
developer, knowledge of the study area, existing residential and commercial densities, and the 2035 City
of Fresno General Plan Circulation Element in the vicinity of the Project. Figure 3 illustrates the 2018
Project Only Trips to the study intersections.
Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total % %
Single-Family Detached
Housing (210) 180 d.u. 9.44 1,699 0.74 25 75 33 100 133 0.99 63 37 112 66 178
Total Project Trips 1,699 33 100 133 122 66 178
Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total % %
Single-Family Detached
Housing (210) 120 d.u. 9.44 1,133 0.74 25 75 22 67 89 0.99 63 37 75 44 119
Multifamily Housing (220) 160 d.u. 7.32 1,171 0.46 23 77 17 57 74 0.56 63 37 57 33 90
Total Project Trips 2,304 39 124 163 132 77 209
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed Project Trip Generation
(General Plan Amendment) 1,699 33 100 133 112 66 178
Proposed Project Trip Generation
(Consistent with the 2035 General Plan) 2,304 39 124 163 132 77 209
Change in Trip Generation -605 -6 -24 -30 -20 -11 -31
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 20
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Results of Existing plus Project Level of Service Analysis
The Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario assumes that the existing roadway geometrics and
traffic controls will remain in place with two exceptions. This scenario assumes that the Project will
construct a portion of Dakota Avenue east of Grantland Avenue and that it will built its frontage
improvements to Grantland Avenue. Figure 4 illustrates the Existing plus Project turning movement
volumes, intersection geometrics and traffic controls. LOS worksheets for the Existing plus Project Traffic
Conditions scenario are provided in Appendix F. Table VI presents a summary of the Existing plus Project
peak hour LOS at the study intersections, while Table VII presents a summary of the Existing plus Project
LOS for the study segments.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its LOS
threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended that the
following recommendations be implemented.
Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a westbound right-turn lane; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
Table VI: Existing plus Project Intersection LOS Results
ID Intersection Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
1 Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue One-Way Stop 11.8 B 11.5 B
2 Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue All-Way Stop 41.6 E 8.8 A
All-Way Stop (Mitigated) 27.1 D 8.8 A
3 Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue One-Way Stop 10.6 B 10.4 B
4 Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
5 Grantland Avenue / Project Driveway One-Way Stop 9.1 A 9.5 A
6 Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue All-Way Stop 11.0 B 8.8 A
7 Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue One-Way Stop 9.6 A 9.8 A
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on average delay on signalized intersections and All-Way STOP Controls
LOS for two-way and one-way STOP controlled intersections are based on the worst approach/movement of the minor street.
Table VII: Existing plus Project Segment LOS Results
ID Segment Limits Lanes 24-hour Volume LOS
1 Grantland Avenue Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 2 3,983 B
2 Grantland Avenue Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 2 3,903 B
3 Grantland Avenue Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2 2,394 B
Note: LOS = Level of Service per the Florida Roadway Segment LOS Tables
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 21
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Traffic Signal Warrants
Peak hour traffic signal warrants, as appropriate, were prepared for the unsignalized intersections in the
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario. These warrants are found in Appendix J. The effects of
right-turning traffic from the minor approach onto the major approach were taken into account using
engineering judgement pursuant to the CA MUTCD guidelines for the preparation of traffic signal
warrants. Under this scenario, the none of the unsignalized intersections satisfy the peak hour signal
warrant.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 03/22/18 - SM
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions6(18)24(21)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.17(13)10(27)
Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.5(2)28(9)25(19)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.2(37)13(22)
1(7)3(7)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.
7(20)
14(16)
10(5)7(18)10(28)6(26)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.20(17)29(15)21(18)
30(16)28(9)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.2(37)DOES N
OT EXIST
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PROJECT TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PROJECT TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
559(31)6(16)5(20)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.11(46)24(15)
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
2018 Project Only Trips
Figure 3
1(2)
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 03/26/18 - JA
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Existing plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls
Figure 4
129(171)75(83)58(53)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.103(154)68(75)
92(57)
Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.56(20)152(83)51(52)12(10)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.74(115)17(10)28(44)
137(63)
15(7)
4(10)
105(85)
25(25)61(13)53(28)105(62)5(9)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.58(33)100(6)145(50)
199(88)
6(8)
38(7)
198(80)
53(17)210(172)10(28)6(26)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.136(163)29(15)21(18)
30(16)144(121)13(17)3(5)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.66(150)13(12)
13(6)DOES N
OT EXIST
20(1)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
5261(184)6(16)5(20)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.126(190)24(15)1(2)
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 24
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
Description of Approved and Pipeline Projects
Approved and Pipeline Projects consist of developments that are either under construction, built but not
fully occupied, are not built but have final site development review (SDR) approval, or for which the lead
agency or responsible agencies have knowledge of. The City of Fresno, County of Fresno and Caltrans staff
were consulted throughout the preparation of this TIA regarding approved and/or known projects that
could potentially impact the study intersections. JLB staff conducted a reconnaissance of the surrounding
area to confirm the near term projects. Subsequently, it was agreed that the projects listed in Table VIII
were approved, near approval, or in the pipeline within the proximity of the proposed Project.
The trip generation listed in Table VIII is that which is anticipated to be added to the streets and highways
by these projects between the time of the preparation of this report and five years after buildout of the
proposed Project. As shown in Table VIII, the total trip generation for the near term projects is 53,404
daily trips, 4,071 AM peak hour trips and 5,164 PM peak hour trips. Figure 5 illustrates the location of the
approved, near approval, or pipeline projects and their combined trip assignment to the study
intersections and segments under the Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 25
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table VIII: Near Term Projects’ Trip Generation
Approved Project
Location
Approved or Pipeline
Project Name
Daily
Trips
AM
Peak Hour
PM
Peak Hour
A TT 49831 500 39 52
B TT 53561 85 7 9
C TT 53631 1,029 81 108
D TT 54431 2,672 209 280
E TT 54441 576 45 60
F TT 54791 1,152 90 121
G TT 54931 2,303 181 242
H TT 55371 378 30 40
I TT 55381 878 69 92
J TT 55541 406 32 43
K TT 55861 699 55 73
L TT 5599 (portion of)1 396 31 42
M TT 56041 1,038 81 109
N TT 56081 747 47 57
O TT 56311 142 11 15
P TT 56521 1,633 128 171
Q TT 56801 1,661 130 174
R TT 56951 906 71 95
S TT 57251 893 56 68
T TT 57561 963 75 101
U TT 57661 170 13 18
V TT 58081 1,407 110 148
W TT 58642 1,152 90 121
X TT 58911 6,108 479 641
Y TT 60563 1190 94 125
Z TT 60901 330 26 35
AA TT 60911 76 6 8
AB TT 61391 963 75 101
AC TT 61621 765 60 80
AD Herndon and Van Buren Mixed-Use Development3 5,372 357 419
AE Herndon and Riverside Commercial Development3 1,897 134 139
AF Shaw and 99 Mixed-Use Development3 2,425 232 237
AG Johnny Quick Food Store4 2,833 202 215
AH Jack-in-the-Box3 1,284 118 84
AI Clinton and Blythe Commercial Development3 1,815 93 153
AJ Clinton Avenue (Single-Family Housing)3 1,982 155 208
AK Westlake Development (portion of)5 4,578 359 480
Total Approved and Pipeline Project Trips 53,404 4,071 5,164
Note: 1 = Trip Generation prepared by JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. based on readily available information
2 = Trip Generation based on TJKM Traffic Impact Analysis Report
3 = Trip Generation based on JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis Report
4 = Trip Generation based on Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis Report
5 = Trip Generation based on Peters Engineering Group Traffic Impact Analysis Report
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 26
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Results of Near Term plus Project Level of Service Analysis
The Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario assumes the same roadway geometrics and traffic
controls as those assumed in the Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario. Figure 6 illustrates the
Near Term plus Project turning movement volumes, intersection geometrics and traffic controls. LOS
worksheets for the Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario are provided in Appendix G. Table IX
presents a summary of the Near Term plus Project peak hour LOS at the study intersections, while Table X
presents a summary of the Near Term plus Project LOS for the study segments.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its LOS
threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended that this
intersection be signalized with protective left-turn phasing in all directions.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
Table IX: Near Term plus Project Intersection LOS Results
ID Intersection Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
1 Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue One-Way Stop 13.2 B 13.0 B
2 Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue All-Way Stop >120.0 F 14.2 B
All-Way Stop (Mitigated) 53.5 D 24.6 C
3 Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue One-Way Stop 11.4 B 11.5 B
4 Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
5 Grantland Avenue / Project Driveway One-Way Stop 9.5 A 10.1 B
6 Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue All-Way Stop 12.9 B 9.7 A
7 Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue One-Way Stop 9.8 A 9.8 A
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on average delay on signalized intersections and All-Way STOP Controls
LOS for two-way and one-way STOP controlled intersections are based on the worst approach/movement of the minor street.
Table X: Near Term plus Project Segment LOS Results
ID Segment Limits Lanes 24-hour Volume LOS
1 Grantland Avenue Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 2 5,393 B
2 Grantland Avenue Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 2 5,313 B
3 Grantland Avenue Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2 2,784 B
Note: LOS = Level of Service per the Florida Roadway Segment LOS Tables
Traffic Signal Warrants
Peak hour traffic signal warrants, as appropriate, were prepared for the unsignalized intersections in the
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario. These warrants are found in Appendix J. The effects of
right-turning traffic from the minor approach onto the major approach were taken into account using
engineering judgement pursuant to the CA MUTCD guidelines for the preparation of traffic signal
warrants. Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue satisfies the peak hour
signal warrant during the AM peak period. Based on the signal warrant and engineering judgement,
signalization of this intersection is recommended.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 03/28/18 - SM
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions25(39)34(41)6(18)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.44(44)41(40)
13(13)131(140)Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.119(179)9(7)13(18)26(31)1(1)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.16(20)33(40)
6(1)
1(0)
1(9)
5(16)9(7)70(117)79(51)46(41)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.102(120)27(20)34(53)
39(66)
25(41)
18(26)
56(52)
6(12)54(58)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.55(83)9(10)4(6)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.12(11)3(7)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM NEAR TERM TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM NEAR TERM TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
554(58)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.56(82)Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Near Term Projects' Trip Assignment
Figure 5
A
B
C
DE
F
G
H
I
Y
L
M
N
P
Q
R
S
T
U
VWX
K
Z
AA
ACADAE AFAG
AH
AI
AJ
AK
AB DOES N
OT EXIST
X = NEAR TERM PROJECT LOCATION
J
O
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 04/04/18 - SM
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions154(210)109(124)64(71)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.147(198)109(115)
105(70)131(140)Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.119(179)65(27)165(101)77(83)13(11)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.90(135)17(10)61(84)
143(64)
16(7)
4(10)
106(94)
30(41)70(20)123(145)184(113)51(50)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.160(153)127(26)179(103)
238(154)
31(49)
56(33)
254(132)
59(29)264(230)10(28)6(26)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.191(246)29(15)21(18)
30(16)153(131)17(23)3(5)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.78(161)16(19)
13(6)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
5315(242)6(16)5(20)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.182(272)24(15)
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Near Term plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls
Figure 6
DOES N
OT EXIST
20(1)1(2)
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 29
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
The Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario assumes that the existing roadway
geometrics and traffic controls will remain in place with two exceptions. For purposes of this TIA, it was
assumed that Ashlan Avenue would be built as a two-lane undivided collector west of Grantland Avenue.
Additionally, it was assumed that the Dakota Avenue extends to Grantland Avenue by the year 2035. It
was assumed that Dakota Avenue would be built as a two-lane collector divided by a two-way left-turn
lane between Grantland Avenue and Bryan Avenue and a two-lane undivided collector east of Bryan
Avenue. Furthermore, it was assumed that the intersection of Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
would be controlled by a one-way stop on Dakota Avenue and contain a left-turn lane and a trap right-
turn lane and that Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue would be controlled by a two-way stop on Dakota
Avenue and contain a left-through-right lane on all approaches.
Results of Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Level of Service Analysis
The Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario assumes that Dakota Avenue will exist
east of Grantland Avenue. Figure 7 illustrates the Cumulative Year 2035 No Project turning movement
volumes, intersection geometrics and traffic controls. LOS worksheets for the Cumulative Year 2035 No
Project Traffic Conditions scenario are provided in Appendix H. Table XI presents a summary of the
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project peak hour LOS at the study intersections, while Table XII presents a
summary of the Cumulative year 2035 No Project LOS for the study segments.
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Ashlan
Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland Avenue and
Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their LOS threshold
during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to exceed their LOS
threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
o Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 30
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a westbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a northbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a southbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
o Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a westbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a westbound right-turn lane;
o Add a northbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
o Add a southbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
o Add a southbound right-turn lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
o Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue are
projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is recommended
that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 31
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table XI: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Intersection LOS Results
ID Intersection Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
1 Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue Two-Way Stop >120.0 F >120.0 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 54.9 D 44.7 D
2 Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue All-Way Stop >120.0 F 22.5 C
Signalized (Mitigated) 46.0 D 27.7 C
3 Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue One-Way Stop 105.3 F 32.8 D
One-Way Stop (Mitigated) 27.5 D 15.9 C
4 Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue Two-Way Stop >120.0 F 73.4 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 45.9 D 18.7 B
5 Grantland Avenue / Project Driveway Does Not Exist N/A N/A N/A N/A
6 Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue All-Way Stop >120.0 F >120.0 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 41.5 D 33.7 C
7 Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue One-Way Stop 39.3 E 26.5 D
One-Way Stop (Mitigated) 29.5 D 24.5 C
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on average delay on signalized intersections and All-Way STOP Controls.
LOS for two-way STOP controlled intersections are based on the worst approach/movement of the minor street.
Table XII: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Segment LOS Results
ID Segment Limits Lanes 24-hour Volume LOS
1 Grantland Avenue Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 2 24,410 E
4 (Mitigated) C
2 Grantland Avenue Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 2 22,470 E
4 (Mitigated) C
3 Grantland Avenue Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2 17,500 E
4 (Mitigated) B
Note: LOS = Level of Service per the Florida Roadway Segment LOS Tables
Traffic Signal Warrants
Peak hour traffic signal warrants, as appropriate, were prepared for the unsignalized intersections in the
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario. These warrants are found in Appendix J. The
effects of right-turning traffic from the minor approach onto the major approach were taken into account
using engineering judgement pursuant to the CA MUTCD guidelines for the preparation of traffic signal
warrants. Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue
and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue satisfy
the peak hour signal warrant during both peak periods. Based on the signal warrants and engineering
judgement, signalization of these intersections is recommended. The intersection of Grantland Avenue
and Dakota Avenue satisfies the peak hour signal warrant during the AM peak period only. Based on the
signal warrant and engineering judgement, signalization of this intersection is also recommended.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 04/03/18 - JR
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls
Figure 7
67(294)831(1041)143(124)159(53)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.975(834)123(188)109(115)
42(38)
113(46)
98(61)
338(215)
97(61)24(19)308(240)28(25)90(124)Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.463(353)171(85)13(10)
97(73)
13(11)
4(10)
91(131)
7(14)203(46)731(595)137(354)65(78)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.786(711)117(72)120(112)
427(175)
47(20)
4(26)
106(219)
140(82)67(13)156(145)189(129)94(87)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.195(218)173(26)206(103)
231(134)
69(51)
117(48)
522(239)
115(37)1070(1125)42(91)11(0)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.1150(1066)179(95)
16(1)703(571)82(88)25(32)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.849(831)68(25)
13(6)
20(1)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
5
Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.0(0)DOES
NOT EXIST
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 33
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
The Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario assumes that the Existing plus Project
roadway geometrics and traffic controls will remain in place with a few exceptions. Similar to the
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario, the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic
Conditions scenario assumes the same changes in the roadway network. Considering the potential
changes in the existing roadway network, it is projected that travel patterns and volumes may differ from
what is anticipated for the immediate Project buildout. Figure 8 illustrates the 2035 Project Only Trips to
the study intersections.
Results of Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Level of Service Analysis
Figure 9 illustrates the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project turning movement volumes, intersection
geometrics and traffic controls. LOS worksheets for the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic
Conditions scenario are provided in Appendix I. Table XIII presents a summary of the Cumulative Year 2035
No Project peak hour LOS at the study intersections, while Table XIV presents a summary of the
Cumulative year 2035 plus Project LOS for the study segments.
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Ashlan
Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland Avenue and
Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their LOS threshold
during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to exceed their LOS
threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
o Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
o Modify the southbound through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
o Add a southbound right-turn lane;
o Implement overlap phasing of the southbound right-turn with the eastbound left-turn phase;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 34
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a westbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a northbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a southbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
o Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
o Add a westbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a westbound right-turn lane;
o Add a northbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
o Add a southbound left-turn lane;
o Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
o Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
o Add a southbound right-turn lane;
o Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
o Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
o Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue are
projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is recommended
that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 35
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table XIII: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Intersection LOS Results
ID Intersection Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
1 Ashlan Avenue / Grantland Avenue Two-Way Stop >120.0 F >120.0 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 50.7 D 41.5 D
2 Ashlan Avenue / Bryan Avenue All-Way Stop >120.0 F 22.8 C
Signalized (Mitigated) 50.6 D 34.7 C
3 Dakota Avenue / Grantland Avenue One-Way Stop >120.0 F >120.0 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 20.4 C 10.1 B
4 Dakota Avenue / Bryan Avenue Two-Way Stop >120.0 F 106.5 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 20.1 C 38.6 D
5 Project Driveway / Grantland Avenue One-Way Stop 24.3 C 21.8 C
6 Shields Avenue / Grantland Avenue All-Way Stop >120.0 F >120.0 F
Signalized (Mitigated) 51.6 D 42.2 D
7 Clinton Avenue / Grantland Avenue One-Way Stop 41.7 E 28.7 D
One-Way Stop (Mitigated) 30.7 D 26.5 D
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on average delay on signalized intersections and All-Way STOP Controls.
LOS for two-way STOP controlled intersections are based on the worst approach/movement of the minor street.
Table XIV: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Segment LOS Results
ID Segment Limits Lanes 24-hour Volume LOS
1 Grantland Avenue Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 2 25,006 E
4 (Mitigated) C
2 Grantland Avenue Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 2 22,800 E
4 (Mitigated) C
3 Grantland Avenue Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2 17,719 E
4 (Mitigated) B
Note: LOS = Level of Service per the Florida Roadway Segment LOS Tables
Traffic Signal Warrants
Peak hour traffic signal warrants, as appropriate, were prepared for the unsignalized intersections in the
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions scenario. These warrants are found in Appendix J.
The effects of right-turning traffic from the minor approach onto the major approach were taken into
account using engineering judgement pursuant to the CA MUTCD guidelines for the preparation of traffic
signal warrants. Under this scenario the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan
Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
satisfy the peak hour signal warrant during both peak periods. Based on the signal warrants and
engineering judgement, signalization of these intersections is recommended. The intersection of
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue satisfies the peak hour signal warrant during the AM peak period
only. Based on the signal warrant and engineering judgement, signalization of this intersection is also
recommended.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 36
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Project’s Trip Assignment to Caltrans Facilities
The 2035 Project Only Trip assignment to the interchanges of State Route 99 at Veterans Boulevard and
Ashlan Avenue are illustrated in Figures 10 and 11, respectively.
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 04/09/18 - JR
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions10(38)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.33(23)1(1)1(1)3(7)Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.5(9)6(10)
9(7)
11(9)
6(4)4(1)33(16)1(1)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.6(38)1(1)
1(6)1(2)4(2)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.2(1)1(4)4(16)7(23)14(31)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.17(12)16(8)18(13)
28(22)33(16)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.6(38)LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PROJECT TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PROJECT TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
539(19)8(24)2(12)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.6(33)21(14)
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
2035 Project Only Trips
Figure 8
1(3)
McKINLEY AVE
CLINTON AVE
SHIELDS AVE
CORNELIA AVEDAKOTA AVE
POLK AVESANTA ANA AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVEPOLK AVEGETTYSBURG AVE
GRANTLAND AVEASHLAN AVE
BRYAN AVEHAYES AVE004-055 - 04/03/18 - JR
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project - Traffic Volumes, Geometrics and Controls
Figure 9
67(294)841(1079)143(124)159(53)Ashlan AveGrantland AveGrantland AveAshlan Ave &1.1008(857)124(189)109(115)
42(38)
113(46)
99(62)
338(215)
97(61)27(26)308(240)28(25)90(124)Dakota AveBryan AveBryan AveDakota Ave &4.463(353)176(94)13(10)
103(83)
13(11)
13(17)
102(140)
13(18)207(47)764(611)138(355)65(78)Shields AveGrantland AveGrantland AveShields Ave &6.792(749)117(72)121(113)
427(175)
47(20)
4(26)
106(219)
141(88)67(13)157(147)189(129)98(89)Ashlan AveBryan AveBryan AveAshlan Ave &2.197(219)173(26)206(103)
231(134)
70(55)
117(48)
522(239)
115(37)1074(1141)49(114)25(31)Dakota AveGrantland AveGrantland AveDakota Ave &3.1167(1078)16(8)197(108)
44(23)736(587)82(88)25(32)Clinton AveGrantland AveGrantland AveClinton Ave &7.855(869)68(25)
13(6)
20(1)
LEGEND
N
Not To Scale
= PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
XX
(XX)
= STOP SIGN
= STUDY INTERSECTION#
= PROJECT LOCATION
= AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
= FUTURE STREET
= STUDY SEGMENT
1 2
3 4
6
7
51108(1136)8(24)2(12)Project DrivewayGrantland AveGrantland AvenueProject Driveway &5.1150(1083)21(14)1(3)
U
P
R
R
G
O
L
D
E
N
S
T
A
T
E
B
L
V
D
G
O
L
D
E
N
S
T
A
T
E
B
L
V
D
VETERANS BLVDBRYAN AVEBULLARD AVE
BARSTOW AVE
004-055 - 04/09/18 - JR
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
SR 99 at Veterans Boulevard Interchange - 2035 Project Only Trips
Figure 10
N
Not To Scale16(11)4(18)16(11)16(11)0(0)0(0)0(0)0(0
)0(0)4(18)0(0)4(18)0(
0
)
0(
0
)4(18)0(
0
)
0(
0
)
0(
0
)
0(
0
)
LEGEND
= FUTURE STREET
= AM PROJECT TRIPS
= PM PROJECT TRIPS
XX
(XX)16(11)0(
0
)
0(
0
)
ASHLAN AVE
ASHLAN AVE
PA
R
KW
A
Y
D
R
I
V
E
G
O
L
D
E
N
S
T
A
T
E
B
L
V
D BRAWLEY AVEDAKOTA AVE
004-055 - 04/09/18 - JR
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103, Fresno, CA 93710
PHONE:(559) 570-8991, EMAIL: info@JLBtraffic.com, www.JLBtraffic.com
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
SR 99 at Ashlan Avenue Interchange - 2035 Project Only Trips
Figure 11
N
Not To Scale
1(
0
)
1(0)0(0)3(6)
2(0)
0(
1
)
0(0)1(0)6(5)
1(0)
0(
0
)
0(
0
)
LEGEND
= FUTURE STREET
= AM PROJECT TRIPS
= PM PROJECT TRIPS
XX
(XX)0(0)2(5)
4(5)
3(6)3(6)3(6)
5(5)
0(0)
1(0)
1(0)
0(0
)
1(
0
)
1(
0
)
4(5)1(0)0(1)0(0)
2(5)
4(5)
0(
0
)
0(
0
)0(0
)
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 41
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Queuing Analysis
Table XV provides a queue length summary for left- and right-turn lanes at the study intersections under
all study scenarios. The queuing analyses for the study intersections are contained in the LOS worksheets
for the respective scenarios. Appendix D contains the methodologies used to evaluate these intersections.
Queuing analyses were completed using Sim Traffic output information. Synchro provides both 50th and
95th percentile maximum queue lengths (in feet). According to the Synchro manual, “the 50th percentile
maximum queue is the maximum back of queue on a typical cycle and the 95th percentile queue is the
maximum back of queue with 95th percentile volumes.” The queues shown on Table XV are the 95th
percentile queue lengths for the respective lane movements.
The Highway Design Manual (HDM) provides guidance for determining deceleration lengths for the left-
and right-turn lanes based on design speeds. Per the HDM criteria, “tapers for right-turn lanes are usually
un-necessary since the main line traffic need not be shifted laterally to provide space for the right-turn
lane. If, in some rare instances, a lateral shift were needed, the approach taper would use the same
formula as for a left-turn lane.” Therefore, a bay taper length pursuant to the Caltrans HDM would need to
be added, as necessary, to the recommended storage lengths presented in Table XV.
Based on the SimTraffic output files and engineering judgement, it is recommended that the storage
capacity for the following be considered for the Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions.
Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o While the projected queuing demand for the eastbound left-turn lane is anticipated to exceed 250
feet, it is recommended that the storage capacity for this movement be set based on studies
specifically prepared by the development project(s) to be served by this movement.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the northbound left-turn lane based on studies specifically
prepared by the development project(s) to be served by this movement.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the northbound right-turn lane to 250 feet.
o The existing storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane is projected to exceed that available
for the PM peak period in the Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario.
However, it is recommended that this movement be monitored.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound right-turn lane based on studies
specifically prepared by the development project(s) to be served by this movement.
Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the eastbound right-turn lane to 150 feet.
o The existing storage capacity of the northbound left-turn lane is projected to exceed that available
for the AM peak period in the Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions scenario. While
there are no constraints to increasing the storage capacity of this movement, it is recommended
that this movement be monitored.
o Consider increasing the storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane to 225 feet.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 42
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o While the projected queuing demand for the westbound left-turn lane is anticipated to be 85 feet,
it is recommended that the storage capacity for this movement be set to 200 feet as a means to
prevent blocking from the westbound right-turn lane.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the northbound left-turn lane to 150 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane to 175 feet.
Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the eastbound left-turn lane to 75 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the westbound left-turn lane to 75 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the northbound left-turn lane to 200 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane to 75 feet.
Grantland Avenue and Project Driveway
o In an effort to improve onsite and off-site circulation, it is recommended that the Project Driveway
maintain a minimum throat depth of 50 feet before any vehicular openings to the north.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane to 75 feet.
Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the eastbound left-turn lane to 175 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the westbound left-turn lane to 225 feet.
o While the projected queuing demand for the westbound right-turn lane is anticipated to be 325
feet, it is recommended that the storage capacity for this movement be set to 150 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the northbound left-turn lane to 225 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound left-turn lane to 375 feet.
o Consider setting the storage capacity of the southbound right-turn lane to 125 feet.
Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
o While the projected queuing demand for the westbound left-turn lane is anticipated to be 49 feet,
it is recommended that the storage capacity for this movement be set to 75 feet as a means to
prevent blocking from the westbound right-turn lane.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 43
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Table XV: Queuing Analysis
ID Intersection Existing Queue
Storage Length (ft.)
Existing Existing
plus Project
Near Term
plus Project
Cumulative
Year 2035
No Project
Cumulative
Year 2035
plus Project
AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1
Grantland Avenue
/
Ashlan Avenue
EB Left * * * * * * * 354 109 200 108
WB Left 230 64 38 47 51 59 60 165 110 167 79
WB Right >500 48 45 36 42 58 52 64 57 59 60
NB Left * * * * * * * 430 455 297 316
NB Right * * * * * * * 150 44 235 38
SB Left 250 38 21 22 46 41 51 * * * *
SB Dual Lefts 250 * * * * * * 133 293 108 94
SB Right * * * * * * * * * 21 98
2
Bryan Avenue
/
Ashlan Avenue
EB Left 250 52 29 57 35 104 55 191 53 161 66
EB Right * * * * * * * 40 35 133 21
WB Left 250 17 27 22 23 71 79 122 94 172 100
WB Right * 52 44 52 53 * * * * * *
NB Left 250 44 21 51 18 136 41 303 41 215 45
SB Left 150 * * * * 151 92 205 139 216 203
SB Right 150 * * * * 57 25 43 25 52 22
3
Grantland Avenue
/
Dakota Avenue
WB Left * * * 34 20 28 25 50 13 85 60
WB Right >500 * * 37 27 21 36 176 76 142 90
NB Left * * * 18 21 16 17 * * 43 44
SB Left * * * 0 23 0 20 51 87 80 174
4
Bryan Avenue
/
Dakota Avenue
EB Left * * * * * * * 37 36 27 44
WB Left * * * * * * * 36 30 34 47
NB Left * * * * * * * 200 99 141 95
SB Left * * * * * * * 40 52 49 49
5
Grantland Avenue
/
Project Driveway
WB Right * * * 44 34 37 32 * * 41 38
SB Left * * * 0 22 0 8 * * 13 44
6
Grantland Avenue
/
Shields Avenue
EB Left * * * * * * * 169 99 149 90
WB Left * * * * * * * 82 38 205 52
WB Right * * * * * * * 150 69 325 76
NB Left * * * * * * * 150 91 222 107
SB Left * * * * * * * 214 379 276 315
SB Right * * * * * * * 102 25 120 26
7
Grantland Avenue
/
Clinton Avenue
WB Left * * * * * * * 39 21 49 33
WB Right >500 * * * * * * 45 47 59 46
Note: * = Does not exist or is not projected to exist
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 44
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Project’s Pro-Rata Fair Share of Future Transportation Improvements
The Project’s fair share percentage impact to study intersections projected to fall below their LOS
threshold and which are not covered by an existing impact fee program is provided in Table XVI. The
Project’s fair share percentage impacts were calculated pursuant to the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation
of Traffic Impact Studies. The Project’s pro-rata fair shares were calculated utilizing the Existing volumes,
2035 Project Only Trips and Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project volumes. Figure 2 illustrates the Existing
traffic volumes, Figure 8 illustrates the 2035 Project Only Trips, and Figure 9 illustrates the Cumulative
Year 2035 plus Project traffic volumes. Since the critical peak period for the study facilities was
determined to be during the PM peak, the PM peak volumes are utilized to determine the Project’s pro-
rata fair share.
It is recommended that the Project contribute its equitable fair share as listed in Table XVI for the future
improvements necessary to maintain an acceptable LOS. However, fair share contributions should only be
made for those facilities or portion thereof currently not funded by the responsible agencies roadway
impact fee program(s), as appropriate. For those improvements not presently covered by local and
regional roadway impact fee programs, it is recommended that the Project contribute its equitable fair
share. Payment of the Project’s equitable fair share in addition to the local and regional impact fee
programs would satisfy the Project’s traffic mitigation measures.
This study does not provide construction costs for the recommended mitigation measures; therefore, if
the recommended mitigation measures are implemented, it is recommended that the developer work
with the City of Fresno to develop the estimated construction cost.
Table XVI: Project’s Fair Share of Future Roadway Improvements
ID Intersection
Existing
Traffic Volumes
(PM Peak)
Cumulative Year
2035 plus Project
Traffic Volumes
(PM Peak)
2035 Project
Only Trips
(PM Peak)
Project's Fair
Share (%)
1 Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue 514 3,133 63 2.41%
2 Bryan Avenue / Ashlan Avenue 354 1,240 9 1.02%
3 Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue 300 2,503 125 5.67%
4 Bryan Avenue / Dakota Avenue 90 1,141 46 4.38%
6 Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue 428 2,553 63 2.96%
7 Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue 265 1,607 54 4.02%
ID Grantland Avenue between:
Existing
Traffic Volumes
(Daily)
Cumulative Year
2035 plus Project
Traffic Volumes
(Daily)
2035 Project
Only Trips
(Daily)
Project's Fair
Share (%)
1 Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue 3,093 25,006 596 2.72%
2 Dakota Avenue and Shields Avenue 3,093 22,800 330 1.67%
3 Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue 2,213 17,719 219 1.41%
Note: Project Fair Share = ((2035 Project Only Trips) / (Cumulative Year 2035 + Project Traffic Volumes - Existing Traffic Volumes)) x 100
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 45
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions and recommendations regarding the proposed Project are presented below.
Existing Traffic Conditions
At present, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue exceeds its LOS threshold during the
AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended that the following
recommendations be implemented.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane; and
Add a westbound right-turn lane.
At present, all study segments operate at an acceptable LOS.
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
A review of the Project driveways to be constructed indicates that they are located at points the
minimize traffic operational impacts to the existing roadway network.
It is recommended that access to the Project Driveway maintain a minimum throat depth of 50 feet
before any vehicular openings to the north.
It is recommended that the Project implement Class II bike lanes along its frontages to Grantland
Avenue and Dakota Avenue, and a Class I Bike Path on its frontage to Grantland Avenue.
To promote alternative modes of transportation to Harvest Elementary School, it is recommended
that the Central Unified School District work with the City of Fresno and County of Fresno to
implement a Safe Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding to help build bikeways and
walkways where they are lacking within the one-mile radius of the existing school site.
To promote alternative modes of transportation to Glacier Point Middle School and Central High
School (East Campus), it is recommended that the Central Unified School District work with the City of
Fresno and County of Fresno to implement a Safe Routes to School plan and to seek grant funding to
help build bikeways and walkways where they are lacking within the two-mile radius of the existing
school site.
At buildout, the proposed Project is estimated to generate a maximum of 1,699 daily trips, 133 AM
peak hour trips and 178 PM peak hour trips.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its
LOS threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended
that the following recommendations be implemented.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the westbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 46
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
The total trip generation for the near term projects is 53,404 daily trips, 4,071 AM peak hour trips and
5,164 PM peak hour trips.
Under this scenario, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue is projected to exceed its
LOS threshold during the AM peak period. To improve the LOS at this intersection, it is recommended
that this intersection be signalized with protective left-turn phasing in all directions.
Under this scenario, all study segments are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS.
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and
Ashlan Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland
Avenue and Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their
LOS threshold during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to
exceed their LOS threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
o Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
o Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 47
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
o Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue
are projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is
recommended that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
Under this scenario, the intersections of Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue, Bryan Avenue and
Ashlan Avenue, Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue, Grantland
Avenue and Shields Avenue, and Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue are projected to exceed their
LOS threshold during one or both peak periods. To improve the LOS at the intersections projected to
exceed their LOS threshold, it is recommended that the following improvements be implemented.
o Grantland Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the northbound through-right lane to a right-turn lane;
Add a second southbound left-turn lane with a receiving lane east of Grantland Avenue;
Modify the southbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Ashlan Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Implement overlap phasing of the southbound right-turn with the eastbound left-turn phase;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
Modify the eastbound through-right lane to a through lane;
Add an eastbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 48
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
o Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Modify the northbound right-turn lane to a through-right lane with a receiving lane north of
Dakota Avenue;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Dakota Avenue; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Bryan Avenue and Dakota Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Shields Avenue
Add an eastbound left-turn lane;
Modify the eastbound left-through-right lane to a through-right lane;
Add a westbound left-turn lane;
Modify the westbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a westbound right-turn lane;
Add a northbound left-turn lane;
Modify the northbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a northbound through-right lane with a receiving lane north of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound left-turn lane;
Modify the southbound left-through-right lane to a through lane;
Add a second southbound through lane with a receiving lane south of Shields Avenue;
Add a southbound right-turn lane;
Signalize the intersection with protective left-turn phasing in all directions; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lanes.
o Grantland Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Add a westbound left-turn lane; and
Modify the intersection to accommodate the added lane.
Under this scenario, the segments of Grantland Avenue between Ashlan Avenue and Clinton Avenue
are projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS. To improve the LOS of these segments, it is
recommended that Grantland Avenue be modified to accommodate two lanes in each direction.
Queuing Analysis
It is recommended that the City consider left- and right-turn lane storage lengths as indicated in the
Queuing Analysis.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 49
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Project’s Equitable Fair Share
It is recommended that the Project contribute its equitable Fair Share as presented in Table XVI.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 50
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Dakota and Grantland (Single-Family Housing) - City of Fresno
Draft Traffic Impact Analysis
April 11, 2018
Study Participants
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. Personnel:
Jose Luis Benavides, PE, TE Project Manager
Susana Maciel, EIT Engineer I/II
Javier Rios Engineer I/II
Jove Alcazar Engineer I/II
Persons Consulted:
Jeff Roberts Granville Homes, Affiliate
Jill Gormley, PE City of Fresno
Harpreet Kooner County of Fresno
Tong Xiong County of Fresno
David Padilla Caltrans
Kai Han, TE Fresno COG
Lang Yu Fresno COG
References
1. City of Fresno, 2035 General Plan.
2. County of Fresno, 2000 General Plan.
3. Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, Caltrans, dated December 2002.
4. Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Washington D.C., Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2017.
5. 2014 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, November 7, 2014.
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | A
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix A: Scope of Work
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 P a g e | 1
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
January 29, 2018
Mrs. Jill Gormley, P.E.
Traffic Engineer
City of Fresno
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721-3616
Via Email Only: Jill.Gormley@fresno.gov
Subject: Draft Scope of Work for the Preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis for a Single-
Family Subdivision Located on the Southeast Corner of Dakota Avenue and
Grantland Avenue in the City of Fresno (JLB Project 004-055)
Dear Mrs. Gormley,
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. (JLB) hereby submits this Draft Scope of Work for the preparation of a Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Project described below. The Project proposes to build a 180-unit single-
family subdivision on 30.00 acres on the southeast corner of Dakota Avenue and Grantland Avenue in
the City of Fresno. Based on information provided to JLB, the Project will undergo a General Plan
Amendment to modify the land use intended for High Density Residential (10.00 acres) to allow Medium
Density Residential altogether (30.00 acres). An aerial of the Project vicinity is shown in Exhibit A.
The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate the potential on- and off-site traffic impacts, identify short-term
roadway and circulation needs, determine potential mitigation measures and identify any critical traffic
issues that should be addressed in the on-going planning process. To evaluate the on- and off-site traffic
impacts of the proposed Project, JLB proposes the following Draft Scope of Work.
Scope of Work
• Request a Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) traffic forecast model run for the project
(Select Zone Analysis) which will include the project and the streets to be analyzed. The Fresno COG
traffic forecasting model will be used to forecast traffic volumes for the Base Year and Cumulative
Year 2035 plus Project scenarios.
• JLB will obtain recent or schedule and conduct new traffic counts at the study facility(ies) as
necessary.
• JLB will perform a site visit to observe existing traffic conditions, especially during the AM and PM
peak hours. Existing roadway conditions including intersection geometrics and traffic controls will be
verified.
• JLB will conduct a qualitative safe routes to school evaluation from the Project site to the K-12
school(s) which would most likely serve the Project on opening day.
• JLB will qualitatively analyze existing and planned transit routes in the vicinity of the Project.
• JLB will qualitatively analyze existing and planned bikeways in the vicinity of the Project.
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 P a g e | 2
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mrs. Gormley
Single-Family Subdivision TIA - Draft Scope of Work
January 29, 2018
• JLB will forecast trip distribution based on turn count information, school boundaries and knowledge
of the existing and planned circulation network in the vicinity of the Project.
• JLB will evaluate existing and forecasted levels of service (LOS) at the study intersection(s). JLB will
use HCM 2010 methodologies within Synchro to perform this analysis for the AM and PM peak
hours. JLB will identify the causes of poor LOS.
• JLB will evaluate on-site circulation and provide recommendations as necessary to improve
circulation to and within the Project site.
• JLB will prepare California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) peak hour signal
warrants for unsignalized study intersections.
Study Scenarios:
1. Existing Traffic Conditions with proposed improvement measures (if any)
2. Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions with proposed mitigation measures (if any)
3. Near Term (include pending and approved projects) plus Project Traffic Conditions with
proposed mitigation measures (if any)
4. Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions with proposed improvement measures (if
any)
5. Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions with proposed mitigation measures (if any)
Weekday peak hours to be analyzed:
1. 7 - 9 AM peak hour
2. 4 - 6 PM peak hour
Study Intersections:
1. Grantland Avenue / Ashlan Avenue
2. Grantland Avenue / Dakota Avenue (future intersection)
3. Grantland Avenue / Shields Avenue
4. Grantland Avenue / Clinton Avenue
Queuing analysis is included in the proposed scope of work for the study intersection(s) listed above
under all study scenarios. This analysis will be utilized to recommend minimum storage lengths for left-
and right-turn lanes at all study intersections.
Study Segments:
1. Grantland Avenue between:
a. Ashlan Avenue and Dakota Avenue alignment
b. Dakota Avenue alignment and Shields Avenue
c. Shields Avenue and Clinton Avenue
Project Only Trip Assignment to State Facilities:
1. State Route 99 / Veterans Boulevard
2. State Route 99 / Ashlan Avenue
3. State Route 99 / Clinton Avenue
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 P a g e | 3
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mrs. Gormley
Single-Family Subdivision TIA - Draft Scope of Work
January 29, 2018
Project Only Trip Generation
The trip generation rates for the Proposed Project and Existing General Plan Land Use designations were
obtained form the 10th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE). Table I presents the Proposed Project Land Use Trip Generation, while
Table II presents the Existing General Plan Land Use Trip Generation. The Existing Land Use Trip
Generation considers the construction of a 120-unit Single-Family Detached Housing and a 160-unit
Multi-Family Housing based on the Existing General Plan Land Use zoning and density. The proposed
Project is estimated to generate a maximum of 1,699 daily trips, 133 AM peak hour trips and 178 PM
peak hour trips. Under the Existing General Plan, the site is anticipated to generate a maximum of 2,304
daily trips, 163 AM peak hour trips and 209 PM peak hour trips. Compared to the Existing General Plan
Land Use, the proposed Project is estimated to reduce traffic generation by 605 Daily, 30 AM peak hour
and 31 PM peak hour trips. The difference in trip generation is summarized in Table III.
Table I: Proposed Project Land Use Trip Generation
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Table II: Existing General Plan Land Use Trip Generation
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Table III: Difference in Trip Generation
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Near Term Projects to be Included
Based on our local knowledge of the study area, consultation with City of Fresno Planning &
Development staff, JLB proposes to include projects in the vicinity of the proposed Project under the
Near Term plus Project Analysis. The projects proposed to be included in the Near Term Scenario are:
Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total % %
Single-Family Detached Housing (210) 180 d.u. 9.44 1,699 0.74 25 75 33 100 133 0.99 63 37 112 66 178
Total Project Trips 1,699 33 100 133 112 66 178
Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total % %
Single-Family Detached Housing (210) 120 d.u. 9.44 1,133 0.74 25 75 22 67 89 0.99 63 37 75 44 119
Multi-Family Housing (220) 160 d.u. 7.32 1,171 0.46 23 77 17 57 74 0.56 63 37 57 33 90
Total Project Trips 2,304 39 124 163 132 77 209
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed Project Land Use Trip Generation 1,699 33 100 133 112 66 178
Existing General Plan Land Use Trip Generation 2,304 39 124 163 132 77 209
Change in Trip Generation -605 -6 -24 -30 -20 -11 -31
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 P a g e | 4
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mrs. Gormley
Single-Family Subdivision TIA - Draft Scope of Work
January 29, 2018
Project Name General Location
1. Westlake (portion of) SW Ashlan Avenue and Grantland Avenue
2. TT 5493 (portion of) SE Shaw Avenue and Bryan Avenue
3. TT 5538 (portion of) SE Ashlan Avenue and Hayes Avenue
4. TT 5597 (portion of) NE of Barstow Avenue and Garfield Avenue
5. TT 5600 (portion of) SW Barstow Avenue and Grantland Avenue
6. TT 5652 (portion of) SE Bryan Avenue and Ashlan Avenue
7. Koligian Educational Center (portion of) NE Ashlan Avenue and Grantland Avenue
8. TT 5864 (portion of) NW Gettysburg Avenue and Grantland Avenue
9. TT 5891 (portion of) NW Ashlan Avenue and Hayes Avenue
10. TT 6056 SE Bryan Avenue and Gettysburg Avenue
11. El Paseo (portion of) SE Herndon Avenue and Golden State
12. Jack in the Box SW Shaw Avenue and Barcus Avenue
13. Commercial Development NW Herndon Avenue and Van Buren Avenue
14. Commercial Development SE Herndon Avenue and Riverside Drive
15. Multi-Family Residential SE Herndon Avenue and Riverside Drive
16. Residential Development Clinton Avenue between Bryan Avenue and Hayes Avenue
Other Near Term Projects the City, County or Caltrans has knowledge and for which it is anticipated that
said project(s) is/are projected to be whole or partially built by the Near Term Project Year 2020. City,
County and Caltrans as appropriate would provide JLB with project details such as a project description,
location, proposed land uses with breakdowns and type of residential units and amount of square
footages for non-residential uses.
The above scope of work is based on our understanding of this Project and our experience with similar
Traffic Impact Analysis Projects. In the absence of comments by February 19, 2018, it will be assumed that
the above scope of work is acceptable to the agency(ies) that have not submitted any comments to the
proposed TIA Scope of Work.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me by phone at (559) 570-
8991 or by e-mail at smaciel@JLBtraffic.com.
Sincerely,
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
cc: Harpreet Kooner, County of Fresno
Tong Xiong, County of Fresno
David Padilla, Caltrans
Jose Luis Benavides, JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
Z:\01 Projects\004 Fresno\004-055 Dakota Grantland TIA\Scope of Work\L01292018 Draft Scope of Work.docx
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 P a g e | 5
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mrs. Gormley
Single-Family Subdivision TIA - Draft Scope of Work
January 29, 2018
Exhibt A – Aerial
1
Susana Maciel
From:Jill Gormley <Jill.Gormley@fresno.gov>
Sent:Tuesday, February 13, 2018 12:33 PM
To:Susana Maciel
Cc:hkooner (HKooner@co.fresno.ca.us); Tong Xiong (tonxiong@co.fresno.ca.us); David Padilla
(dave_padilla@dot.ca.gov); Jose Benavides
Subject:RE: Single-Family Subdivision (Dakota Avenue and Grantland Avenue) TIA - Draft Scope of Work
Hi Susana,
Please add the intersections of Ashlan at Bryan and Dakota at Bryan to the scope of work.Also,please prepare traffic
signal Warrant 1 (8 hour)and Warrant 2 (4 hour)for the proposed study intersections (existing conditions only).Include
the warrants and the results in the study.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Jill Gormley,TE
City Traffic Engineer /Traffic Operations &Planning Manager
City of Fresno,Public Works Department
2600 Fresno Street,4th Floor
Fresno,CA 93721 3623
www.fresno.gov/publicworks/traffic engineering
P:559/621 8792
F:559/457 1107
From: Susana Maciel [mailto:smaciel@jlbtraffic.com]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 3:22 PM
To: Jill Gormley
Cc: hkooner (HKooner@co.fresno.ca.us); Tong Xiong (tonxiong@co.fresno.ca.us); David Padilla
(dave_padilla@dot.ca.gov); Jose Benavides
Subject: Single-Family Subdivision (Dakota Avenue and Grantland Avenue) TIA - Draft Scope of Work
Good afternoon Mrs. Gormley,
Attached you will find a Draft Scope of Work for the preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis for a
Project in the City of Fresno.
I kindly ask that you take a moment to review and comment on the proposed Scope of Work. In the
absence of comments by February 19, 2018, it will be assumed that the proposed Scope of Work is
acceptable to the agency(ies) that have not submitted any comments.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me by phone at
559.570.8991 or by e-mail at smaciel@JLBtraffic.com. I appreciate your time and attention to this
matter.
Best,
2
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Office: 559.570.8991
Cell: 559.232.9474
E-mail: SMaciel@JLBtraffic.com
Web: www.JLBtraffic.com
David Padilla,Associate Transportation Planner
Office of Planning &Local Assistance
1352 W.Olive Avenue
Fresno,CA 93778 2616
Office:(559)444 2493,Fax:(559)445 5875
District 6
Good afternoon,
I just wanted to reach out to see if you all had a moment to review the proposed Scope of Work for this
Project and to help answer any questions you may have.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to me should you have any questions or require any additional
information. You can find my contact information below.
I look forward to hearing from you all soon.
Best,
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Office: 559.570.8991
Cell: 559.232.9474
E-mail: SMaciel@JLBtraffic.com
Web: www.JLBtraffic.com
Good afternoon Mrs. Gormley,
Attached you will find a Draft Scope of Work for the preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis for a Project
in the City of Fresno.
I kindly ask that you take a moment to review and comment on the proposed Scope of Work. In the
absence of comments by February 19, 2018, it will be assumed that the proposed Scope of Work is
acceptable to the agency(ies) that have not submitted any comments.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me by phone at 559.570.8991
or by e-mail at smaciel@JLBtraffic.com. I appreciate your time and attention to this matter.
Best,
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Office: 559.570.8991
Cell: 559.232.9474
E-mail: SMaciel@JLBtraffic.com
Web: www.JLBtraffic.com
This email has been flagged as containing one or more attachments from an outside source.
Please check the senders email address carefully.
If you were not expecting to receive an email with attachments, please DO NOT open the file.
Forward the email to SPAM "SPAM@co.fresno.ca.us" and delete it.
Good afternoon Mrs. Gormley,
Attached you will find a Draft Scope of Work for the preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis for a Project
in the City of Fresno.
I kindly ask that you take a moment to review and comment on the proposed Scope of Work. In the
absence of comments by February 19, 2018, it will be assumed that the proposed Scope of Work is
acceptable to the agency(ies) that have not submitted any comments.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me by phone at 559.570.8991
or by e-mail at smaciel@JLBtraffic.com. I appreciate your time and attention to this matter.
Best,
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
Office: 559.570.8991
Cell: 559.232.9474
E-mail: SMaciel@JLBtraffic.com
Web: www.JLBtraffic.com
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | B
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix B: Traffic Counts
File Name : 01 Grantland Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/6/2018
Page No : 1
Groups Printed- Unshifted
GRANTLAND
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
GRANTLAND
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
07:00 AM 51 19 0 70 14 10 0 24 20 7 0 27 121
07:15 AM 10 27 0 37 31 30 0 61 24 8 0 32 130
07:30 AM 5 36 0 41 29 17 0 46 24 12 0 36 123
07:45 AM 9 41 0 50 8 11 0 19 18 7 0 25 94
Total 75 123 0 198 82 68 0 150 86 34 0 120 468
08:00 AM 3 30 0 33 6 9 0 15 22 2 0 24 72
08:15 AM 3 21 0 24 6 7 0 13 17 2 0 19 56
08:30 AM 5 23 0 28 2 4 0 6 23 1 0 24 58
08:45 AM 5 18 0 23 7 3 0 10 22 3 0 25 58
Total 16 92 0 108 21 23 0 44 84 8 0 92 244
******
04:00 PM 12 22 0 34 9 15 0 24 28 5 0 33 91
04:15 PM 18 33 0 51 5 9 0 14 23 7 0 30 95
04:30 PM 17 36 0 53 7 21 0 28 32 9 0 41 122
04:45 PM 19 44 0 63 11 17 0 28 37 10 0 47 138
Total 66 135 0 201 32 62 0 94 120 31 0 151 446
05:00 PM 18 32 0 50 9 19 0 28 43 3 0 46 124
05:15 PM 29 41 0 70 3 18 0 21 29 10 2 41 132
05:30 PM 33 41 0 74 5 8 0 13 24 9 0 33 120
05:45 PM 20 36 0 56 8 13 0 21 19 3 2 24 101
Total 100 150 0 250 25 58 0 83 115 25 4 144 477
******
Grand Total 257 500 0 757 160 211 0 371 405 98 4 507 1635
Apprch %33.9 66.1 0 43.1 56.9 0 79.9 19.3 0.8
Total %15.7 30.6 0 46.3 9.8 12.9 0 22.7 24.8 6 0.2 31
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 01 Grantland Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/6/2018
Page No : 2
GRANTLAND
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
GRANTLAND
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM
07:00 AM 51 19 0 70 14 10 0 24 20 7 0 27 121
07:15 AM 10 27 0 37 31 30 0 61 24 8 0 32 130
07:30 AM 5 36 0 41 29 17 0 46 24 12 0 36 123
07:45 AM 9 41 0 50 8 11 0 19 18 7 0 25 94
Total Volume 75 123 0 198 82 68 0 150 86 34 0 120 468
% App. Total 37.9 62.1 0 54.7 45.3 0 71.7 28.3 0
PHF .368 .750 .000 .707 .661 .567 .000 .615 .896 .708 .000 .833 .900
GRANTLAND ASHLAN ASHLAN GRANTLAND
Thru
123
Left
75
Peds
0
InOut Total
154 198 352 Right68 Left82 Peds0 OutTotalIn109 150 259 Thru
86
Right
34
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
205 120 325 TotalOutIn0 0 0 Peak Hour Begins at 07:00 AM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 01 Grantland Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/6/2018
Page No : 3
GRANTLAND
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
GRANTLAND
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 06:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM
04:30 PM 17 36 0 53 7 21 0 28 32 9 0 41 122
04:45 PM 19 44 0 63 11 17 0 28 37 10 0 47 138
05:00 PM 18 32 0 50 9 19 0 28 43 3 0 46 124
05:15 PM 29 41 0 70 3 18 0 21 29 10 2 41 132
Total Volume 83 153 0 236 30 75 0 105 141 32 2 175 516
% App. Total 35.2 64.8 0 28.6 71.4 0 80.6 18.3 1.1
PHF .716 .869 .000 .843 .682 .893 .000 .938 .820 .800 .250 .931 .935
GRANTLAND ASHLAN ASHLAN GRANTLAND
Thru
153
Left
83
Peds
0
InOut Total
216 236 452 Right75 Left30 Peds0 OutTotalIn115 105 220 Thru
141
Right
32
Peds
2
Out TotalIn
183 175 358 TotalOutIn0 0 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 02 Bryan Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 1
Groups Printed- Unshifted - Bank 1
BRYAN
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
BRYAN
Northbound
ASHLAN
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
07:00 AM 9 2 8 0 19 2 50 6 0 58 7 3 1 0 11 5 72 4 0 81 169
07:15 AM 3 8 18 0 29 2 93 18 0 113 34 15 0 0 49 27 72 10 0 109 300
07:30 AM 29 28 25 1 83 1 73 14 0 88 49 25 0 0 74 28 82 16 0 126 371
07:45 AM 20 10 4 0 34 3 14 38 0 55 13 6 1 0 20 8 23 8 0 39 148
Total 61 48 55 1 165 8 230 76 0 314 103 49 2 0 154 68 249 38 0 355 988
08:00 AM 53 7 11 0 71 0 12 75 1 88 4 12 4 0 20 0 7 4 1 12 191
08:15 AM 66 23 5 0 94 1 10 71 0 82 2 19 1 0 22 6 9 1 0 16 214
08:30 AM 21 6 6 0 33 3 10 8 0 21 1 2 2 0 5 1 21 3 0 25 84
08:45 AM 4 2 1 0 7 3 14 7 0 24 0 7 4 0 11 2 11 1 0 14 56
Total 144 38 23 0 205 7 46 161 1 215 7 40 11 0 58 9 48 9 1 67 545
******
04:00 PM 19 7 5 0 31 2 15 10 0 27 1 6 2 0 9 6 14 4 1 25 92
04:15 PM 15 7 3 0 25 4 19 12 0 35 0 6 3 0 9 0 12 2 0 14 83
04:30 PM 8 10 4 0 22 2 15 9 0 26 1 3 1 0 5 6 17 1 0 24 77
04:45 PM 14 5 5 0 24 3 18 16 0 37 1 2 2 0 5 7 15 2 0 24 90
Total 56 29 17 0 102 11 67 47 0 125 3 17 8 0 28 19 58 9 1 87 342
05:00 PM 10 4 1 0 15 3 11 10 0 24 3 10 0 0 13 1 18 1 0 20 72
05:15 PM 7 7 2 2 18 1 20 11 0 32 1 5 4 0 10 4 18 5 2 29 89
05:30 PM 22 9 2 0 33 2 16 18 0 36 1 9 2 0 12 3 16 0 0 19 100
05:45 PM 23 8 1 2 34 2 21 11 0 34 1 9 3 0 13 5 12 1 0 18 99
Total 62 28 6 4 100 8 68 50 0 126 6 33 9 0 48 13 64 7 2 86 360
Grand Total 323 143 101 5 572 34 411 334 1 780 119 139 30 0 288 109 419 63 4 595 2235
Apprch %56.5 25 17.7 0.9 4.4 52.7 42.8 0.1 41.3 48.3 10.4 0 18.3 70.4 10.6 0.7
Total %14.5 6.4 4.5 0.2 25.6 1.5 18.4 14.9 0 34.9 5.3 6.2 1.3 0 12.9 4.9 18.7 2.8 0.2 26.6
Unshifted 323 143 101 5 572 31 411 334 1 777 119 139 30 0 288 82 419 63 4 568 2205
% Unshifted
Bank 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 27 30
% Bank 1 0 0 0 0 0 8.8 0 0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 24.8 0 0 0 4.5 1.3
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 02 Bryan Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 2
BRYAN
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
BRYAN
Northbound
ASHLAN
Eastbound
Start
Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM
07:15 AM 3 8 18 0 29 2 93 18 0 113 34 15 0 0 49 27 72 10 0 109 300
07:30 AM 29 28 25 1 83 1 73 14 0 88 49 25 0 0 74 28 82 16 0 126 371
07:45 AM 20 10 4 0 34 3 14 38 0 55 13 6 1 0 20 8 23 8 0 39 148
08:00 AM 53 7 11 0 71 0 12 75 1 88 4 12 4 0 20 0 7 4 1 12 191
Total Volume 105 53 58 1 217 6 192 145 1 344 100 58 5 0 163 63 184 38 1 286 1010
% App. Total 48.4 24.4 26.7 0.5 1.7 55.8 42.2 0.3 61.3 35.6 3.1 0 22 64.3 13.3 0.3
PHF .495 .473 .580 .250 .654 .500 .516 .483 .250 .761 .510 .580 .313 .000 .551 .563 .561 .594 .250 .567 .681
BRYAN ASHLAN ASHLAN BRYAN
Right
58
Thru
53
Left
105
Peds
1
InOut Total
266 217 483 Right145 Thru192 Left6 Peds1 OutTotalIn294 344 638 Left
100
Thru
58
Right
5
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
97 163 260 Left63 Thru184 Right38 Peds1 TotalOutIn350 286 636 Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM
Unshifted
Bank 1
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 02 Bryan Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 3
BRYAN
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
BRYAN
Northbound
ASHLAN
Eastbound
Start
Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM
05:00 PM 10 4 1 0 15 3 11 10 0 24 3 10 0 0 13 1 18 1 0 20 72
05:15 PM 7 7 2 2 18 1 20 11 0 32 1 5 4 0 10 4 18 5 2 29 89
05:30 PM 22 9 2 0 33 2 16 18 0 36 1 9 2 0 12 3 16 0 0 19 100
05:45 PM 23 8 1 2 34 2 21 11 0 34 1 9 3 0 13 5 12 1 0 18 99
Total Volume 62 28 6 4 100 8 68 50 0 126 6 33 9 0 48 13 64 7 2 86 360
% App. Total 62 28 6 4 6.3 54 39.7 0 12.5 68.8 18.8 0 15.1 74.4 8.1 2.3
PHF .674 .778 .750 .500 .735 .667 .810 .694 .000 .875 .500 .825 .563 .000 .923 .650 .889 .350 .250 .741 .900
BRYAN ASHLAN ASHLAN BRYAN
Right
6
Thru
28
Left
62
Peds
4
InOut Total
96 100 196 Right50 Thru68 Left8 Peds0 OutTotalIn135 126 261 Left
6
Thru
33
Right
9
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
43 48 91 Left13 Thru64 Right7 Peds2 TotalOutIn80 86 166 Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM
Unshifted
Bank 1
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : 02 Bryan Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 1
Groups Printed- Bank 1
BRYAN
Southbound
ASHLAN
Westbound
BRYAN
Northbound
ASHLAN
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 3
07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 10
07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 9
07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 23 23
******
08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3
******
Total 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3
******
04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2
******
04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
******
Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 3
******
05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 27 30
Apprch %0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0
Total %0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 90 0 0 0 90
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Shields Avenue
Site Code : 00003718
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 1
Groups Printed- Unshifted
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Shields Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Shields Ave
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
07:00 AM 3 17 13 0 33 4 55 3 0 62 3 21 5 0 29 5 18 2 0 25 149
07:15 AM 8 29 15 0 52 7 37 6 0 50 4 17 4 0 25 7 46 1 0 54 181
07:30 AM 11 37 14 0 62 1 29 1 0 31 2 17 3 0 22 6 23 0 1 30 145
07:45 AM 4 41 9 0 54 3 16 5 0 24 8 17 0 0 25 6 18 1 0 25 128
Total 26 124 51 0 201 15 137 15 0 167 17 72 12 0 101 24 105 4 1 134 603
08:00 AM 5 16 5 0 26 6 27 8 0 41 6 15 1 0 22 4 27 1 0 32 121
08:15 AM 5 15 8 0 28 4 44 2 0 50 4 10 1 0 15 9 39 1 0 49 142
08:30 AM 3 12 8 0 23 1 14 2 0 17 4 19 1 0 24 9 27 2 0 38 102
08:45 AM 4 8 5 0 17 2 19 5 0 26 0 13 0 0 13 9 14 0 0 23 79
Total 17 51 26 0 94 13 104 17 0 134 14 57 3 0 74 31 107 4 0 142 444
******
04:00 PM 7 11 5 0 23 1 12 7 0 20 7 12 2 0 21 12 34 3 0 49 113
04:15 PM 8 19 6 0 33 1 14 4 0 19 2 18 1 0 21 6 23 0 0 29 102
04:30 PM 10 17 5 0 32 2 6 4 0 12 1 27 2 0 30 5 19 0 0 24 98
04:45 PM 6 19 6 0 31 2 10 4 0 16 2 26 2 0 30 4 24 2 0 30 107
Total 31 66 22 0 119 6 42 19 0 67 12 83 7 0 102 27 100 5 0 132 420
05:00 PM 9 16 4 0 29 3 21 9 0 33 1 17 0 0 18 6 23 1 0 30 110
05:15 PM 8 17 3 0 28 1 13 3 0 17 4 17 3 0 24 4 22 3 0 29 98
05:30 PM 10 22 5 0 37 1 19 6 0 26 3 18 5 0 26 4 16 4 0 24 113
05:45 PM 9 27 10 0 46 0 8 5 0 13 3 12 6 0 21 5 15 1 0 21 101
Total 36 82 22 0 140 5 61 23 0 89 11 64 14 0 89 19 76 9 0 104 422
Grand Total 110 323 121 0 554 39 344 74 0 457 54 276 36 0 366 101 388 22 1 512 1889
Apprch %19.9 58.3 21.8 0 8.5 75.3 16.2 0 14.8 75.4 9.8 0 19.7 75.8 4.3 0.2
Total %5.8 17.1 6.4 0 29.3 2.1 18.2 3.9 0 24.2 2.9 14.6 1.9 0 19.4 5.3 20.5 1.2 0.1 27.1
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Shields Avenue
Site Code : 00003718
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 2
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Shields Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Shields Ave
Eastbound
Start
Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM
07:00 AM 3 17 13 0 33 4 55 3 0 62 3 21 5 0 29 5 18 2 0 25 149
07:15 AM 8 29 15 0 52 7 37 6 0 50 4 17 4 0 25 7 46 1 0 54 181
07:30 AM 11 37 14 0 62 1 29 1 0 31 2 17 3 0 22 6 23 0 1 30 145
07:45 AM 4 41 9 0 54 3 16 5 0 24 8 17 0 0 25 6 18 1 0 25 128
Total Volume 26 124 51 0 201 15 137 15 0 167 17 72 12 0 101 24 105 4 1 134 603
% App. Total 12.9 61.7 25.4 0 9 82 9 0 16.8 71.3 11.9 0 17.9 78.4 3 0.7
PHF .591 .756 .850 .000 .810 .536 .623 .625 .000 .673 .531 .857 .600 .000 .871 .857 .571 .500 .250 .620 .833
Grantland Ave Shields Ave Shields Ave Grantland Ave
Right
51
Thru
124
Left
26
Peds
0
InOut Total
111 201 312 Right15 Thru137 Left15 Peds0 OutTotalIn143 167 310 Left
17
Thru
72
Right
12
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
143 101 244 Left24 Thru105 Right4 Peds1 TotalOutIn205 134 339 Peak Hour Begins at 07:00 AM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Shields Avenue
Site Code : 00003718
Start Date : 3/7/2018
Page No : 3
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Shields Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Shields Ave
Eastbound
Start
Time Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Left Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM
04:45 PM 6 19 6 0 31 2 10 4 0 16 2 26 2 0 30 4 24 2 0 30 107
05:00 PM 9 16 4 0 29 3 21 9 0 33 1 17 0 0 18 6 23 1 0 30 110
05:15 PM 8 17 3 0 28 1 13 3 0 17 4 17 3 0 24 4 22 3 0 29 98
05:30 PM 10 22 5 0 37 1 19 6 0 26 3 18 5 0 26 4 16 4 0 24 113
Total Volume 33 74 18 0 125 7 63 22 0 92 10 78 10 0 98 18 85 10 0 113 428
% App. Total 26.4 59.2 14.4 0 7.6 68.5 23.9 0 10.2 79.6 10.2 0 15.9 75.2 8.8 0
PHF .825 .841 .750 .000 .845 .583 .750 .611 .000 .697 .625 .750 .500 .000 .817 .750 .885 .625 .000 .942 .947
Grantland Ave Shields Ave Shields Ave Grantland Ave
Right
18
Thru
74
Left
33
Peds
0
InOut Total
118 125 243 Right22 Thru63 Left7 Peds0 OutTotalIn128 92 220 Left
10
Thru
78
Right
10
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
91 98 189 Left18 Thru85 Right10 Peds0 TotalOutIn91 113 204 Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Clinton Avenue
Site Code : 00003818
Start Date : 3/8/2018
Page No : 1
Groups Printed- Unshifted
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Clinton Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
07:00 AM 0 19 0 19 0 4 0 4 15 0 0 15 38
07:15 AM 2 25 0 27 2 5 0 7 19 1 0 20 54
07:30 AM 3 43 0 46 5 2 0 7 15 0 0 15 68
07:45 AM 6 33 0 39 4 3 0 7 10 1 0 11 57
Total 11 120 0 131 11 14 0 25 59 2 0 61 217
08:00 AM 2 15 0 17 2 3 0 5 20 1 0 21 43
08:15 AM 2 14 0 16 1 3 0 4 12 0 0 12 32
08:30 AM 4 8 0 12 1 2 0 3 16 0 0 16 31
08:45 AM 0 21 0 21 2 0 0 2 12 2 0 14 37
Total 8 58 0 66 6 8 0 14 60 3 0 63 143
******
04:00 PM 6 20 0 26 3 6 0 9 23 5 0 28 63
04:15 PM 1 25 0 26 2 4 0 6 16 0 0 16 48
04:30 PM 5 19 0 24 0 4 0 4 24 2 0 26 54
04:45 PM 4 34 0 38 2 4 0 6 20 1 0 21 65
Total 16 98 0 114 7 18 0 25 83 8 0 91 230
05:00 PM 7 30 0 37 2 2 0 4 33 1 0 34 75
05:15 PM 4 28 0 32 1 4 0 5 31 1 0 32 69
05:30 PM 2 20 0 22 1 2 0 3 29 2 0 31 56
05:45 PM 5 18 0 23 2 3 0 5 13 1 0 14 42
Total 18 96 0 114 6 11 0 17 106 5 0 111 242
Grand Total 53 372 0 425 30 51 0 81 308 18 0 326 832
Apprch %12.5 87.5 0 37 63 0 94.5 5.5 0
Total %6.4 44.7 0 51.1 3.6 6.1 0 9.7 37 2.2 0 39.2
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Clinton Avenue
Site Code : 00003818
Start Date : 3/8/2018
Page No : 2
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Clinton Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM
07:15 AM 2 25 0 27 2 5 0 7 19 1 0 20 54
07:30 AM 3 43 0 46 5 2 0 7 15 0 0 15 68
07:45 AM 6 33 0 39 4 3 0 7 10 1 0 11 57
08:00 AM 2 15 0 17 2 3 0 5 20 1 0 21 43
Total Volume 13 116 0 129 13 13 0 26 64 3 0 67 222
% App. Total 10.1 89.9 0 50 50 0 95.5 4.5 0
PHF .542 .674 .000 .701 .650 .650 .000 .929 .800 .750 .000 .798 .816
Grantland Ave Clinton Ave Grantland Ave
Thru
116
Left
13
Peds
0
InOut Total
77 129 206 Right13 Left13 Peds0 OutTotalIn16 26 42 Thru
64
Right
3
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
129 67 196 TotalOutIn0 0 0 Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
File Name : Grantland Avenue at Clinton Avenue
Site Code : 00003818
Start Date : 3/8/2018
Page No : 3
Grantland Ave
Southbound
Clinton Ave
Westbound
Grantland Ave
Northbound
Start Time Left Thru Peds App. Total Left Right Peds App. Total Thru Right Peds App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM
04:45 PM 4 34 0 38 2 4 0 6 20 1 0 21 65
05:00 PM 7 30 0 37 2 2 0 4 33 1 0 34 75
05:15 PM 4 28 0 32 1 4 0 5 31 1 0 32 69
05:30 PM 2 20 0 22 1 2 0 3 29 2 0 31 56
Total Volume 17 112 0 129 6 12 0 18 113 5 0 118 265
% App. Total 13.2 86.8 0 33.3 66.7 0 95.8 4.2 0
PHF .607 .824 .000 .849 .750 .750 .000 .750 .856 .625 .000 .868 .883
Grantland Ave Clinton Ave Grantland Ave
Thru
112
Left
17
Peds
0
InOut Total
125 129 254 Right12 Left6 Peds0 OutTotalIn22 18 40 Thru
113
Right
5
Peds
0
Out TotalIn
118 118 236 TotalOutIn0 0 0 Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM
Unshifted
Peak Hour Data
North
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570-8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
www.JLBtraffic.com
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | C
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix C: Traffic Modeling
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 1
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
January 29, 2018
Kai Han, TE
Council of Fresno County Governments
2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201
Fresno, CA 93721
Via E-mail Only: khan@fresnocog.org
Subject: Traffic Modeling Request for the Preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis for a
Subdivision Located on the Southeast Corner of Dakota Avenue and Grantland
Avenue in the City of Fresno (JLB Project 004-055)
Dear Mr. Han,
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. (JLB) hereby requests traffic modeling for the Project described below. The
Project proposes to build a 180-unit single-family subdivision on 30.00 acres on the southeast corner of
Dakota Avenue and Grantland Avenue. Based on information provided to JLB, the Project will undergo a
General Plan Amendment to modify the land use intended for High Density Residential (10 acres) to
allow Medium Density Residential altogether (30 acres). An aerial of the Project vicinity is shown in
Exhibit A.
The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate the potential on- and off-site traffic impacts, identify short-term
roadway and circulation needs, determine potential mitigation measures and identify any critical traffic
issues that should be addressed in the on-going planning process.
Scenarios:
The following scenarios are requested:
1. Base Year 2018 (with Link and TAZ modifications)
2. Year 2018 plus Project Select Zone (with Link and TAZ modifications)
3. Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Select Zone (with Link and TAZ modifications)
4. Differences between model runs 3 and 1 above
Changes and/or additions to the Model Network or TAZ’s
JLB reviewed the Fresno COG model network for the Base Year 2018 and Cumulative Year 2035. Based
on this review, JLB requests the following link and TAZ Network modifications. Details on the requested
Link and TAZ modifications for Base Year 2018 and Cumulative Year 2035 are illustrated in Exhibit C.
LINK and TAZ MODIFICATIONS (For Base Year 2018 and Year 2018 plus Project Select Zone
Scenarios):
1. Modify Ashlan Avenue to increase westbound lanes between Grantland Avenue and Bryan
Avenue to two lanes
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 2
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mr. Han
Fresno COG Modeling Request (Project 004-055)
January 26, 2018
LINK and TAZ MODIFICATIONS (Year 2018 plus Project Select Zone Scenario Only):
1. Create Dakota Avenue between Grantland Avenue and a point approximately 1,320 feet east
a. Classification: Collector
b. One lane in each direction
c. Speed 45 MPH
LINK and TAZ MODIFICATIONS (For Year 2018 plus Project Select Zone and Cumulative Year
2035 plus Project Select Zone Scenarios):
1. Create Project TAZ A generally located southeast of the Grantland Avenue and Dakota Avenue
(see Exhibit B). TAZ A shall have TAZ Connectors to Dakota Avenue (north) and Grantland
Avenue (west).
LINK and TAZ MODIFICATIONS (For Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Select Zone Scenario
Only):
1. Modify Ashlan Avenue to reduce lanes west of Grantland Avenue to one lane in each direction
2. Modify Grantland Avenue to reduce lanes south of Shaw Avenue to two lanes in each direction
3. Modify Bryan Avenue to reduce lanes south of Shaw Avenue to one lane in each direction
4. Modify Hayes Avenue to reduce lanes south of Shaw Avenue to one lane in each direction
5. Modify Dakota Avenue as follows:
a. Create Dakota Avenue between Grantland Avenue and Hayes Avenue
i. Classification: Collector
ii. One lane in each direction
iii. Speed 45 MPH
b. Reduce lanes east of Hayes Avenue to one lane in each direction
6. Modify TAZ 860 to add a TAZ Connector to Dakota Avenue (south)
7. Modify TAZ 863 to add a TAZ Connector to Dakota Avenue (south)
8. Modify TAZ 1565 to add a TAZ Connector to Dakota Avenue (north)
9. Modify TAZ 1566 to add a TAZ Connector to Dakota Avenue (north)
10. Modify Shields Avenue to reduce lanes east of Garfield Avenue to one lane in each direction
11. Modify Clinton Avenue to reduce lanes east of Grantland Avenue to one lane in each direction
TAZ A Project Only Trip Generation (For Year 2018 plus Project Select Zone and Cumulative
Year 2035 plus Project Select Zone Scenarios Only)
Table I presents the trip generation for the proposed TAZ A Project pursuant to the 10th Edition of the
Trip Generation Manual with trip generation rates for Single-Family Detached Housing. At build-out, the
Project is estimated to generate a maximum of 1,699 daily trips, 133 AM peak hour trips and 178 PM
peak hour trips.
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 3
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mr. Han
Fresno COG Modeling Request (Project 004-055)
January 26, 2018
Table I: TAZ A Project Only Trip Generation
Note: d.u. = Dwelling Units
Please invoice JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. and reference JLB Project No. 004-055 on the invoice. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at
(559) 570-8991 or by e-mail at smaciel@JLBtraffic.com.
Sincerely,
Susana Maciel, EIT
Engineer I/II
cc: Jose Benavides, JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.
Z:\01 Projects\004 Fresno\004-055 Dakota Grantland TIA\Model Request\L01292018 Model Request.docx
Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total Trip
Rate
In Out In Out Total % %
Single-Family Detached Housing (210) 180 d.u. 9.44 1,699 0.74 25 75 33 100 133 0.99 63 37 112 66 178
Total Project Trips 1,699 33 100 133 112 66 178
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 4
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mr. Han
Fresno COG Modeling Request (Project 004-055)
January 26, 2018
Exhibit A – Aerial
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 5
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mr. Han
Fresno COG Modeling Request (Project 004-055)
January 26, 2018
Exhibit B – Model TAZ Modifications
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | 6
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Mr. Han
Fresno COG Modeling Request (Project 004-055)
January 26, 2018
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Base Year 20180000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0000000 0
0
0
0
0
0
0000001
0
1
1
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0 1011770
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000110660
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000440
0
0
0
4
4
1
0
1
1
8
8
0
0
0
0
3
4
0000440
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0000001
1
1
1
12
12
0000110
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
0
0 0010110
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000001001660
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
1
1
1
6
6
1
0
1
1
7
7
0
1
1
1
7
7
0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000550
0
0
0
0
0
16
59
66
31
451
359
41173546491399GrantlandGrantland41163445482389Ashlan
Ashlan
24
10
21
27
324
239GrantlandGrantland1761318158150
Shields
Shields
25
13
19
22
231
306
GrantlandGrantland22837910180ShieldsShields
1
5
7
2
37
41 GrantlandGrantland58163065352444ntlandntland2283699574GrantlandGrantland2283699675BryanBryan000000Ashlan
Ashlan
14
8
17
20
255
172
Ashlan
Ashlan
24
10
21
27
324
239 BryanBryan310756769HayesHayes11242329Ashlan
Ashlan
13
7
16
20
248
165
Ashlan
Ashlan
13
6
14
15
225
136
HayesHayes000000PolkPolk000054Ashlan
Ashlan
12
5
13
15
219
130
Ashlan
Ashlan
11
5
12
13
206
117
PolkPolk011188GrantlandGrantland41173546491399BryanBryan000000HayesHayes000000Dakota
Dakota
0
0
0
0
0
0
HayesHayes000000PolkPolk000000Dakota
Dakota
0
0
0
0
0
0
Dakota
Dakota
0
0
0
0
0
0
PolkPolk000000Shields
Shields
18
9
13
15
141
225
Shields
Shields
24
13
19
21
227
302
BryanBryan46667786BryanBryan000000HayesHayes000000Shields
Shields
18
8
12
15
137
220
Shields
Shields
17
8
12
15
130
214
HayesHayes111076PolkPolk000034Shields
Shields
16
8
11
14
124
208
Shields
Shields
16
7
11
13
116
200
PolkPolk000055GrantlandGrantland28293780101Clinton
Clinton
0
0
0
0
0
0
Clinton
Clinton
2
1
2
2
35
36BryanBryan35556574
BryanBryan23332838ClintonClinton
0
0
0
0
0
0 HayesHayes010023ClintonClinton
2
1
2
2
34
35
Clinton
Clinton
2
1
2
2
25
25
HayesHayes00001212PolkPolk000000Clinton
Clinton
2
1
1
1
19
20
PolkPolk0100109Clinton
Clinton
1
1
1
1
10
10
BryaBrya32333828yesyes000022olkolk000076esesBrBr65GrantlandGrantland1651217148141GrantlandGrantland16596631451359Dakota
Dakota
0
0
0
0
0
0
Grantla
ndGrantland000000Dakota
Dakota
17
41
46
35
399
491
859
860
862
863
865
866
867
934
935
936
937
938
939
1565 1566
1726
2430
2511
2595
3330 3331 3332
3334 3335
3336 3337
3343 3344 3345
3347 3348 3349 3350
3402 3403
3404 3405
3408 3409
3412
3416 3417
3421 3422
3425 3426
3432 3433
3437 3438
5072
50735074
5075
5098 5099
5100
5101
80128014
1245912460
12461
12462
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Base Year 2018
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
1
0
1
1
7
7
0
1
1
1
7
7
0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
59
66
31
451
359 41173546491399GrantlandGrantland41163445482389GrantlandGrantland58163065352444BryanBryan000000GrantlandGrantland41173546491399BryanBryan000000BryanBryan000000GrantlandGrantland16596631451359Dakota
Dakota
0
0
0
0
0
0
Grantla
ndGrantland000000Dakota
Dakota
17
41
46
35
399
491
860
1565
1726
3334
3335
8012
8014
1245912460
12461
12462
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 20350000000
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
7
7 0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0000440
0
0
0
0
0
1001320
0
0
0
6
7 0000001
1
1
1
10
9 0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0000010
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000110000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1011880011650
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
4
4
1
0
1
1
7
7
0
0
0
0
4
4
1111770
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0000000001140
0
0
0
0
0
0000001
0
1
1
11
8
0000110
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
0
0 0111660
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000001001660
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000001
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
7
7
1
1
1
1
12
12
0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0111660
0
0
0
0
0
0000001
0
1
1
6
7 0000008
39
45
19
157
173
61254767677693GrantlandGrantland34112439290292Ashlan
Ashlan
0
0
0
0
0
0GrantlandGrantland33102338279282
Ashlan
Ashlan
1
1
1
1
10
10
Shields
Shields
1
1
1
1
11
9
GrantlandGrantland6333816103116Shields
Shields
1
4
6
1
33
33 GrantlandGrantland3871844160145GrantlandGrantland633371698112GrantlandGrantland633371699113BryanBryan5246128144Ashlan
Ashlan
4
1
2
4
105
116
Ashlan
Ashlan
0
0
0
0
0
0 BryanBryan12212824HayesHayes21121617Ashlan
Ashlan
3
1
2
3
101
114
Ashlan
Ashlan
1
0
1
2
85
99
HayesHayes000001PolkPolk001144AshlanAshlan
1
0
0
2
84
98
Ashlan
Ashlan
1
3
5
5
130
159
PolkPolk13545166GrantlandGrantland35112539297299BryanBryan3674153138HayesHayes000001Dakota
Dakota
11
6
9
10
122
113
HayesHayes000000Dakota
Dakota
11
6
9
10
122
114 PolkPolk41557358Dakota
Dakota
9
5
8
9
109
100
Dakota
Dakota
8
1
2
4
46
23
PolkPolk000046Shields
Shields
7
3
5
8
57
54
Shields
Shields
0
0
0
0
3
2
BryanBryan12125649BryanBryan4897109103HayesHayes000000Shields
Shields
6
2
4
7
55
50
Shields
Shields
6
2
4
6
46
37
HayesHayes1001912PolkPolk000012Shields
Shields
5
2
4
6
40
32
Shields
Shields
4
2
3
5
37
27
PolkPolk011055GrantlandGrantland3361638116103Clinton
Clinton
0
0
0
0
0
0
Clinton
Clinton
1
1
1
1
16
26BryanBryan11114838
BryanBryan00002222ClintonClinton
0
0
0
0
0
0 HayesHayes0110129Clinton
Clinton
0
1
1
1
15
25
Clinton
Clinton
1
1
1
1
13
15
HayesHayes00002211PolkPolk000000Clinton
Clinton
0
0
1
0
7
9
PolkPolk000033Clinton
Clinton
0
0
0
0
4
6
BryanBryan00002222HayesHayes00002211PolkPolk000000ayesayes12211314lklk001BryaBrya21121821GrantlandGrantland33102337273275BryanBryan9479109116GrantlandGrantland8394519157173Dakota
Dakota
26
13
22
28
380
394
Dakota
Dakota
25
13
21
27
370
384
GrantlandGrantland000000Dakota
Dakota
11
35
39
25
299
297
Dakota
Dakota
11
6
9
10
123
115
859
860
862
863
865
866
867
934
935
936
937
938
939
1565 1566
1726
2430
2511
2595
3330 3331 3332
3334 3335
3336 3337
3343 3344 3345
3347 3348 3349 3350
3402
3403
3404 3405
3408 3409
3412
3416 3417
3421 3422
3425 3426
3432 3433
3437 3438
5072
50735074
5075
5098 5099
5100
5101
80128014
1245912460
12461
12462 12463 12464
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0000441
1
1
1
7
7
1
1
1
1
12
12
0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0111668
39
45
19
157
173 61254767677693GrantlandGrantland34112439290292Shields1
19
Shields4133 GrantlandGrantland3871844160145BryanBryan5246128144GrantlandGrantland35112539297299BryanBryan3674153138Shields002 BryanBryan4897109103BryanBryan9479109116GrantlandGrantland8394519157173Dakota
Dakota
26
13
22
28
380
394
Dakota
Dakota
25
13
21
27
370
384
GrantlandGrantl
and000000Dakota
Dakota
11
35
39
25
299
297
860
1565
1726
2511
3334
3335
33435075
8012
8014
1245912460
12461
12462 12463
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035
SR 990
0
0
V
et
er
a
n
s
/
9
9
0
0
0
SR 99
0
0
0
V
e
ter
a
n
s/9
9
0
0
3
Veterans/99
0
0
0
Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1641118139141Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1541118137137Veterans/99
Veterans/990
0
0
0
2
3
Veterans/990
0
0
Veterans/99
Veterans/99
0
0
0
0
0
0
Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1641118139141SR 990
0
0
SR 99
0
0
2
Veterans/99000Veterans/990026819
6820
6821
6822
12360
12361
12362
12363
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 20350000000033 0
0
0
0
1
1
11100000
0
0
0
0
0 0
1
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
000000004
SR 99
0
0
2
Golden State
Golden State5
1
2
4
21
16
Golden State
Golden State5
1
2
4
21
16
Golden State
Golden State0
0
0
0
0
0
Golden State
Golden State0
0
0
0
0
0
Barstow
Barstow
1
1
1
1
9
10
Barstow
Barstow
0
0
0
0
0
0
BarstowBarstow
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
2
HayesHayes000000SR 990
0
0
SR 990
0
0
V
e
ter
a
n
s
/9
9
0
0
0
SR 99
0
0
3
Bullard Dia
Bullard
0
0
0
CaCarne1413SierraSierra1118Bullard Diag
Bullard Diag
1
1
1
1
8
Bullard DiagBull
ard Di
ag000001B
ullard
Dia
g
B
ullard Dia
g
0
0
0
0
0
1Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd114913115120Bullard
Bullard
0
0
0
0
4
4
BryanBryan000044BryanBryan000000Bryan
Bryan
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bryan
Bryan
1
1
1
1
9
10
Bryan
Bryan
0
0
0
0
3
3BryanBryan000044Bry
an
Brya
n
0
0
0
0
4
4
SR 99
0
0
0
V
ete
ra
n
s/9
9
0
0
3
SR 99000Veterans/99
0
0
0
Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1641118139141Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1541118137137Veterans/99
Veterans/990
0
0
0
2
3
Veterans/990
0
0
Veterans/99
Veterans/990
0
0
0
0
0
Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1641118139141Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1651219145147Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1641118139141Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1651219145147Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd17513201551561
4
16
0
0
1
Veterans BlvdVeterans Blvd1149181161365
221
SR 990
0
0
SR 99
0
0
2
Veterans/99000Veterans/99002232
237
787
2058
2295
3287
3294 3295
3393
3394
5356
5809
6237
6713
6716
6740 6741
6742
6743 6744
6745
6746
6819
6820
6821
6822
8672
8674
12103
12104
12105
12223
12224
12225
12360
1236112362
12363
12407
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035000000SR 99
0
0
4
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
155
158
Ashlan
Ashlan
4
3
5
6
149
158
Pa
r
k
wa
y
P
a
r
k
wa
y
0 20
0
0
6
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
57
161
Ashlan
Ashlan
5
2
5
5
53
53Golden StateGolden State011044BrawleBrawle020006SR 99
0
0
1 As
hl
an/9910105A
shla
n
/9
9
0
0
0
SR 990
0
0
SR 991
0
98
Ashlan/991
0
98
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
57
158
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
155
158
Ashlan/99
0
0
0
A
s
hla
n/99
0
03
G
olden State
Golden State0
1
1
0
4
4
G
old
e
n
St
ate
G
old
e
n S
tate
0
1
1
0
4
4
Golden StateGolden State011044Ashlan/99
0
0
3
Parkway
Parkway
0
2
0
0
0
6
Parkway
Parkway
0
2
0
0
0
6
Golden State
Golden State
0
0
0
0
0
0
G
olden State
0
0
0
878
2017
2432 2433
3583
3985
3987
3988 3989
93
5109
5422
5423
6045
6070
6071
12226
12253 12254
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 20350110440
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0000000000000000000000000
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
002
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000
0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
SR 99
0
0
4
GS/99
0
0
0
SR 99
1
0
105
SR 99
1
0
105
6
3
5
7
Ashlan
Ashlan
4
3
5
6
149
158
Pa
r
k
wayPa
r
k
way
0
2
000
6
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
57
161
Ashlan
Ashlan
5
2
5
5
53
53Gold
en StateGolden State011044Ashlan
Ashlan
4
1
4
4
39
39
W
eber
W
eber
1
0
0
1
10
10
BrawleyBrawley000000ValentineValentine010030BrawleyBrawley000000BrawleyBrawley000010Ashlan
Ashlan
5
2
5
5
53
53
Ashlan
Ashlan
5
2
5
5
53
53
ValentineValentine000011ValentineValentine000000Ashlan
Ashlan
4
1
4
4
41
40 ValentineValentine000011ValentineValentine000000Weber
Weber
1
0
1
1
11
11
Weber
Weber
1
0
0
1
10
10
lan
lan
5
7
57
BlytheBlythe3011221Ashlan
Ashlan
4
3
5
6
149
158
BlytheBlythe0421324ota
ota
8
5
Dakota
Dakota
3
0
0
1
10
7
BlytheBlythe000044BrawleyBrawley200061BrawleyBrawley020006Dakota
Dakota
3
0
0
1
10
7
BrawleyBrawley000032Dakota
Dakota
1
0
0
1
1
4
Parkway
Parkway
1
0
0
1
1
4
Dakota
Dakota
1
0
0
1
1
4
ValentineValentine011041BlytheBlythe000000Golden State
G
olden State0
0
0
0
0
0
Golden State
G
olden State0
1
1
0
4
4 BrawleyBrawley000001Weber
Weber
0
0
0
0
0
0
Weber
Weber
0
0
0
0
0
0
MartyMarty01111111Weber
Weber
1
0
1
1
11
11
SR 99
0
0
1 Ashl
an/9910105A
shla
n/
9
9
0
0
0
SR 990
0
0
SR 991
098
Ashlan/991
098
Ashlan
Ashlan
6
3
5
7
57
158
6
3
5
7
155
158
Ashlan/99
0
0
0
As
hla
n/99
0
03
SR 991
098
SR 991
0
98
SR 990
0
0
SR 99
0
0
4
Golden State
Golden State0
1
1
0
4
4
GS/99000G
olden St
ate
Golden St
ate0
0
0
0
0
0
AshlanAshlan
4
1
4
4
43
4 2
MartyMarty101111110
1
1
0
4
4
011044ValentineValentine000000ValentineValentine000000ne0
0
0 V
ale
nti
neValentin
e00
0 000
Ashlan/99
0
0
3
Motel/990
0
0
SR 991
0
98
SR 99
1
0
105
SR 99
1
0
105
SR 991
098
Parkway
Parkway
0
2
0
0
0
6
Parkway
Parkway
0
2
0
0
0
6
Dakota
Dakota
1
0
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
878
879
880
882
883
884
885
886
892
2017
2018
2432 2433
3118
3119
3254
3267
3268
3333
3338
3339
3340 3341
3342
3411
3415
3419
3420
3483
3583
3585
36833985
3986
3987
3988 3989
3990
3991
4593
4634
4635
4636
50785084
5085 5086
5087
5108
51095110
5111
5422
5423
5432
5433
5653
6045
6046
60476048
60496050
6070
6071
6166
6167
6276
12176
12226
12227
12228
12229
12230
1225312254
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035
S
R
9
9
1
091
Cli
nt
on/99002Clint
o
n
/9
9
0
0
1
1
Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
3
15
10
Motel
/990013Clinton/99
0
0
3
Cli
nt
on/9901597
Cli
nt
on/99001Mot
el/990
013Clinton/99
0
0
3
2036
2566
4280
5780
6051
12236
12238
12458
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035SR
9
91
0
9
1
Cli
nt
on/99002Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
2
15
17Clint
o
n
/9
9
0
0
1
1
Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
3
15
10
S
R
9
9
0
0
83Motel/990013Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
3
17
10
Motel/990
0
13
Clinto
n/99
0
0
3
Clinton/99
0
0
3Clinton/99015Clinton/99
0
0
15
Vassar
Vassar
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
R
9
91
09
7Cli
nton/99001Mot
el/990013 Clinton/99
0
0
3
Clinto
n/
9
9
0
0
3
2035
2036
2566
4280
5778
5779
5780
5781
6051
12235
12236
12237
12238
12244
12458
(Licensed to JLB Traffic Engineering Inc)
AM, PM and Daily Volumes
Select Zone
Cumulative Year 2035
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
0000220000000
0
0
0
0
0
S
R
9
9
1192
SR 99
1
0
105
SR
9
9109
1
Cli
nton/99002HughesHughes000011W
eberWeber
0
0
0
0
1
1
W
eber
W
eber
0
0
0
0
0
0
Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
2
15
17
Clin
to
n
/9
9
0
0
1
1
Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
3
15
10
Clinton
Clinton
2
0
1
2
14
16
ClintonClinton
2
0
1
2
15
17
We
b
e
rWeb
e
r00
0
0
0 0McKinley2314
Motel
M
otel
0
0
0
0
13
7
W
eber
W
eber
0
0
0
0
0
0
SR 991
098
SR 991
098
SR
9
9
0
08
3Mot
el
/990013S
R 99
1
08
7
V
as
s
a
rVa
s
s
a
r0
0
000
0 ClintonClinton
2
0
1
3
17
10
M
otel
Motel
0
0
0
0
13
7
Motel
0
0
7
Motel/990
013
Clinton/99
0
0
3
Clinton/99
0
0
3Clinton/990
1
5
0
0
15
Vassar
Vassar
0
0
0
0
0
0
WoodsonWoodson000000We
b
erWe
b
er0
0
0
0
0
0WeberWeber000000SR
9
91
09
7Cli
nt
on/99001Mot
el/990013 Clinton/99
0
0
3
Clinto
n/
9
9
0
0
3
951
952
953
954
955
2035
2036
2037
2548
2566 2567 25683436
4274
4277
4280
4310
4311
4312
5436
5778 5779
5780
5781
6051
6052
6174
6271
6272
6273
12234
12235
12236
12237
12238
12242
12244
12458
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | D
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix D: Methodology
Levels of Service Methodology
The description and procedures for calculating capacity and level of service (LOS) are found in the
Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The HCM 2010 represents the
research on capacity and quality of service for transportation facilities.
Quality of service requires quantitative measures to characterize operational conditions within a traffic
stream. Level of service is a quality measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream,
generally in terms of such service measures as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic
interruptions, comfort and convenience.
Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility that has analysis procedures available. Letters
designate each level of service (LOS), from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions
and LOS F the worst. Each LOS represents a range of operating conditions and the driver’s perception of
these conditions. Safety is not included in the measures that establish a LOS.
Urban Streets (Automobile Mode)
The term “urban streets” refers to urban arterials and collectors, including those in downtown areas.
Arterial streets are roads that primarily serve longer through trips. However, providing access to
abutting commercial and residential land uses is also an important function of arterials. Collector streets
provide both land access and traffic circulation within residential, commercial and industrial areas. Their
access function is more important than that of arterials, and unlike arterials their operation is not always
dominated by traffic signals. Downtown streets are signalized facilities that often resemble arterials.
They not only move through traffic but also provide access to local businesses for passenger cars, transit
buses, and trucks. Pedestrian conflicts and lane obstructions created by stopping or standing taxicabs,
buses, trucks and parking vehicles that cause turbulence in the traffic flow are typical of downtown
streets.
Flow Characteristics
The speed of vehicles on urban streets is influenced by three main factors, street environment,
interaction among vehicles and traffic control.
The street environment includes the geometric characteristics of the facility, the character of roadside
activity, and adjacent land uses. Thus, the environment reflects the number and width of lanes, type of
median, driveway/access point density, spacing between signalized intersections, existence of parking,
level of pedestrian and bicyclist activity and speed limit.
The interaction among vehicles is determined by traffic density, the proportion of trucks and buses, and
turning movements. This interaction affects the operation of vehicles at intersections and, to a lesser
extent, between signals.
Traffic controls (including signals and signs) forces a portion of all vehicles to slow or stop. The delays
and speed changes caused by traffic control devices reduce vehicle speeds; however, such controls are
needed to establish right-of-way.
www.JLBtraffic.com
info@JLBtraffic.com
www.JLBtraffic.com 2
info@JLBtraffic.com
Levels of Service (automobile Mode)
The average travel speed for through vehicles along an urban street is the determinant of the operating
level of service (LOS). The travel speed along a segment, section or entire length of an urban street is
dependent on the running speed between signalized intersections and the amount of control delay
incurred at signalized intersections.
LOS A describes primarily free-flow operation. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to
maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized intersections is minimal. Travel speeds
exceed 85 of the base free flow speed (FFS).
LOS B describes reasonably unimpeded operation. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is
only slightly restricted and control delay at the boundary intersections is not significant. The travel
speed is between 67 and 85 percent of the base FFS.
LOS C describes stable operations. The ability to maneuver and change lanes in midblock location may
be more restricted than at LOS B. Longer queues at the boundary intersections may contribute to lower
travel speeds. The travel speed is between 50 and 67 percent of the base FFS.
LOS D indicates a less stable condition in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases
in delay and decreases in travel speed. This operation may be due to adverse signal progression, high
volumes, inappropriate signal timing, at the boundary intersections. The travel speed is between 40 and
50 percent of the base FFS.
LOS E is characterized unstable operation and significant delay. Such operations may be due to some
combination of adverse progression, high volume, and inappropriate signal timing at the boundary
intersections. The travel speed is between 30 and 40 percent of the base FFS.
LOS F is characterized by street flow at extremely low speed. Congestion is likely occurring at the
boundary intersections, as indicated by high delay and extensive queuing. The travel speed is 30 percent
or less of the base FFS.
Table A-1: Urban Street Levels of Service (Automobile Mode)
Travel Speed as a Percentage of Base Free-Flow Speed (%) LOS by Critical Volume-to-Capacity Ratioa
>85 A F
>67 to 85 B F
>50 to 67 C F
>40 to 50 D F
>30 to 40 E F
F F
Intersection Levels of Service
One of the more important elements limiting, and often interrupting the flow of traffic on a highway is
the intersection. Flow on an interrupted facility is usually dominated by points of fixed operation such as
traffic signals, stop and yield signs.
Signalized Intersections – Performance Measures
For signalized intersections the performance measures include automobile volume-to-capacity ratio,
automobile delay, queue storage length, ratio of pedestrian delay, pedestrian circulation area,
pedestrian perception score, bicycle delay, and bicycle perception score. LOS is also considered a
performance measure. For the automobile mode average control delay per vehicle per approach is
determined for the peak hour. A weighted average of control delay per vehicle is then determined for
the intersection. A LOS designation is given to the weighted average control delay to better describe the
level of operation. A description of LOS for signalized intersections is found in Table A-2.
www.JLBtraffic.com
info@JLBtraffic.com
Table A-2: Signalized Intersection Level of Service Description (Automobile Mode) Level of Service Description
Average
Control Delay
(seconds per
vehicle)
A
Operations with a control delay of 10 seconds/vehicle or less and a volume-to-capacity
ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when volume-to-capacity ratio is
and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If it’s
due to favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel
through the intersection without stopping.
10
B
Operations with control delay between 10.1 to 20.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-
capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short.
More vehicles stop than with LOS A.
>10.0 to
20.0
C
Operations with average control delays between 20.1 to 35.0 seconds/vehicle and a
volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the
volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when
progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures (i.e., one
or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the
cycle) may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant,
although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping.
>20 to 35
D
Operations with control delay between 35.1 to 55.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-
capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long.
Many vehicles stop, and i ndividual cycle failures are noticeable.
>35 to 55
E
Operations with control delay between 55.1 to 80.0 seconds/vehicle and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-
capacity ratio is high, progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. Individual
cycle failures are frequent.
>55 to 80
F
Operations with unacceptable control delay exceeding 80.0 seconds/vehicle and a
volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the
volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor, and the cycle length is
long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue.
>80
Unsignalized Intersections
The HCM 2010 procedures use control delay as a measure of effectiveness to determine level of service.
Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and increased travel time. The
delay experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of factors that relate to control, traffic and
incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference
travel time that would result during base conditions, i. e., in the absence of traffic control, geometric
delay, any incidents, and any other vehicles. Control delay is the increased time of travel for a vehicle
approaching and passing through an unsignalized intersection, compared with a free-flow vehicle if it
were not required to slow or stop at the intersection.
www.JLBtraffic.com
info@JLBtraffic.com
All-Way Stop Controlled Intersections
All-way stop controlled intersections is a form of traffic controls in which all approaches to an
intersection are required to stop. Similar to signalized intersections, at all-way stop controlled
intersections the average control delay per vehicle per approach is determined for the peak hour. A
weighted average of control delay per vehicle is then determined for the intersection as a whole. In
other words the delay measured for all-way stop controlled intersections is a measure of the average
delay for all vehicles passing through the intersection during the peak hour. A LOS designation is given to
the weighted average control delay to better describe the level of operation.
Two-Way Stop Controlled Intersections
Two-way stop controlled (TWSC) intersections in which stop signs are used to assign the right-of-way,
are the most prevalent type of intersection in the United States. At TWSC intersections the stop-
controlled approaches are referred as the minor street approaches and can be either public streets or
private driveways. The approaches that are not controlled by stop signs are referred to as the major
street approaches.
The capacity of movements subject to delay are determined using the "critical gap" method of capacity
analysis. Expected average control delay based on movement volume and movement capacity is
calculated. A LOS for TWSC intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay for
each minor movement. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole for three main reasons: (a)
major-street through vehicles are assumed to experience zero delay; (b) the disproportionate number of
major-street through vehicles at the typical TWSC intersection skews the weighted average of all
movements, resulting in a very low overall average delay from all vehicles; and (c) the resulting low
delay can mask important LOS deficiencies for minor movements. Table A-3 provides a description of
LOS at unsignalized intersections.
Table A-3: Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Description (Automobile Mode)
Control Delay (seconds per vehicle) LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio
v/c <
10 A F
>10 to 15 B F
>15 to 25 C F
>25 to 35 D F
>35 to 50 E F
>50 F F
www.JLBtraffic.com
info@JLBtraffic.com
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | E
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix E: Existing Traffic Conditions
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing AM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 82 68 86 34 75 123
Future Vol, veh/h 82 68 86 34 75 123
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 91 76 96 38 83 137
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 418 67 0 0 134 0
Stage 1 115 -----
Stage 2 303 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 593 832 - - 999 -
Stage 1 839 -----
Stage 2 720 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 544 832 - - 999 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 557 -----
Stage 1 769 -----
Stage 2 720 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.4 0 3.4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 557 832 999 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.164 0.091 0.083 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.7 9.8 8.9 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.3 0.3 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 38.3
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 43 184 38 6 192 145 100 58 5 105 53
Future Vol, veh/h 20 43 184 38 6 192 145 100 58 5 105 53
Peak Hour Factor 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 63 271 56 9 282 213 147 85 7 154 78
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 24.4 73.7 16 17.2
HCM LOS C F C C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 80% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 0% 83% 0% 57% 20% 31%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 0% 17% 0% 43% 0% 69%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 100 63 63 222 6 337 132 85
LT Vol 100 0 63 0 6 0 105 0
Through Vol 0 58 0 184 0 192 27 27
RT Vol 0 5 0 38 0 145 0 58
Lane Flow Rate 147 93 93 326 9 496 193 124
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.37 0.218 0.217 0.707 0.02 1.026 0.47 0.274
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.313 8.735 8.54 7.899 8.178 7.453 8.988 8.074
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 388 413 423 460 436 491 404 447
Service Time 7.013 6.435 6.24 5.599 5.955 5.13 6.688 5.774
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.379 0.225 0.22 0.709 0.021 1.01 0.478 0.277
HCM Control Delay 17.4 13.9 13.6 27.5 11.1 74.8 19.4 13.8
HCM Lane LOS C B B D B F C B
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.7 0.8 0.8 5.5 0.1 14.5 2.4 1.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 58
Future Vol, veh/h 58
Peak Hour Factor 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 85
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing AM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 24 105 4 15 137 15 17 72 12 26 124 51
Future Vol, veh/h 24 105 4 15 137 15 17 72 12 26 124 51
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 127 5 18 165 18 20 87 14 31 149 61
Number of Lanes 0 10010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 9.8 10.1 9.3 10.4
HCM LOS A B A B
Lane NBLn1EBLn1WBLn1SBLn1
Vol Left, % 17% 18% 9% 13%
Vol Thru, % 71% 79% 82% 62%
Vol Right, % 12% 3% 9% 25%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 101 133 167 201
LT Vol 17 24 15 26
Through Vol 72 105 137 124
RT Vol 12 4 15 51
Lane Flow Rate 122 160 201 242
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.174 0.228 0.281 0.329
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.137 5.132 5.024 4.887
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 690 691 706 729
Service Time 3.234 3.227 3.114 2.971
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.177 0.232 0.285 0.332
HCM Control Delay 9.3 9.8 10.1 10.4
HCM Lane LOS AABB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.4
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing AM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 13 64 3 13 116
Future Vol, veh/h 13 13 64 3 13 116
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 16 16 78 4 16 141
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 253 80 0 0 82 0
Stage 1 80 -----
Stage 2 173 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 733 977 - - 1509 -
Stage 1 941 -----
Stage 2 855 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 724 977 - - 1509 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 724 -----
Stage 1 930 -----
Stage 2 855 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.5 0 0.7
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 832 1509 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.038 0.011 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.5 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 75 141 32 83 153
Future Vol, veh/h 30 75 141 32 83 153
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00220
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 32 80 150 34 88 163
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 508 94 0 0 186 0
Stage 1 169 -----
Stage 2 339 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 531 800 - - 945 -
Stage 1 780 -----
Stage 2 693 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 481 798 - - 943 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 512 -----
Stage 1 706 -----
Stage 2 693 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.7 0 3.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 512 798 943 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.062 0.1 0.094 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 12.5 10 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0.3 0.3 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.5
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 12 64 7 8 68 50 6 33 9 62 28
Future Vol, veh/h 1 12 64 7 8 68 50 6 33 9 62 28
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 13 71 8 9 76 56 7 37 10 69 31
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 8.4 8.5 8.2 8.9
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 82% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 79% 0% 90% 0% 58% 18% 70%
Vol Right, % 0% 21% 0% 10% 0% 42% 0% 30%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 42 13 71 8 118 76 20
LT Vol 6 0 13 0 8 0 62 0
Through Vol 0 33 0 64 0 68 14 14
RT Vol 090705006
Lane Flow Rate 7 47 14 79 9 131 84 22
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.011 0.066 0.022 0.11 0.014 0.174 0.131 0.031
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.746 5.093 5.606 5.035 5.57 4.771 5.59 4.97
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 624 704 639 712 644 753 643 721
Service Time 3.474 2.821 3.334 2.762 3.294 2.494 3.316 2.695
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 0.067 0.022 0.111 0.014 0.174 0.131 0.031
HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.2 8.5 8.4 8.4 8.5 9.2 7.9
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.1 0.4 0 0.6 0.4 0.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 7
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing PM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.4
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 18 85 10 7 63 22 10 78 10 33 74 18
Future Vol, veh/h 18 85 10 7 63 22 10 78 10 33 74 18
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
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 19 89 11 7 66 23 11 82 11 35 78 19
Number of Lanes 0 10010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.5
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1EBLn1WBLn1SBLn1
Vol Left, % 10% 16% 8% 26%
Vol Thru, % 80% 75% 68% 59%
Vol Right, % 10% 9% 24% 14%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 98 113 92 125
LT Vol 10 18 7 33
Through Vol 78 85 63 74
RT Vol 10 10 22 18
Lane Flow Rate 103 119 97 132
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.131 0.152 0.121 0.166
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.566 4.59 4.511 4.541
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 785 781 794 791
Service Time 2.594 2.616 2.539 2.567
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.131 0.152 0.122 0.167
HCM Control Delay 8.3 8.4 8.2 8.5
HCM Lane LOS AAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.6
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/22/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 12 113 5 17 112
Future Vol, veh/h 6 12 113 5 17 112
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 14 128 6 19 127
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 296 131 0 0 134 0
Stage 1 131 -----
Stage 2 165 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 693 916 - - 1444 -
Stage 1 893 -----
Stage 2 862 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 683 916 - - 1444 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 683 -----
Stage 1 880 -----
Stage 2 862 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.5 0 1
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 822 1444 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.025 0.013 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.5 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 24
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 43 184 38 6 192 145 100 58 5 105 53
Future Vol, veh/h 20 43 184 38 6 192 145 100 58 5 105 53
Peak Hour Factor 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 63 271 56 9 282 213 147 85 7 154 78
Number of Lanes 011011111002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 3 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 3
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 3 2
HCM Control Delay 31.9 23.4 17.7 19.3
HCM LOS D C C C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 80% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 0% 83% 0% 100% 0% 20% 31%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 0% 17% 0% 0% 100% 0% 69%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 100 63 63 222 6 192 145 132 85
LT Vol 10006306001050
Through Vol 0 58 0 184 0 192 0 27 27
RT Vol 0 5 0 38 0 0 145 0 58
Lane Flow Rate 147 93 93 326 9 282 213 193 124
Geometry Grp 888888888
Degree of Util (X) 0.405 0.241 0.239 0.785 0.023 0.68 0.471 0.513 0.299
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.922 9.348 9.294 8.653 9.185 8.669 7.946 9.556 8.648
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 362 384 386 418 389 418 452 377 415
Service Time 7.696 7.121 7.058 6.416 6.948 6.431 5.708 7.322 6.415
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.406 0.242 0.241 0.78 0.023 0.675 0.471 0.512 0.299
HCM Control Delay 19.3 15.1 15 36.7 12.2 28.1 17.6 22 15.1
HCM Lane LOS C C B E B DCCC
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.9 0.9 0.9 6.8 0.1 4.9 2.5 2.8 1.2
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 58
Future Vol, veh/h 58
Peak Hour Factor 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 85
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.6
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 12 64 7 8 68 50 6 33 9 62 28
Future Vol, veh/h 1 12 64 7 8 68 50 6 33 9 62 28
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 13 71 8 9 76 56 7 37 10 69 31
Number of Lanes 011011111002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 3 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 3
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 3 2
HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.2 8.4 9
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 82% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 79% 0% 90% 0% 100% 0% 18% 70%
Vol Right, % 0% 21% 0% 10% 0% 0% 100% 0% 30%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 42 13 71 8 68 50 76 20
LT Vol 60130800620
Through Vol 0 33 0 64 0 68 0 14 14
RT Vol 0907005006
Lane Flow Rate 7 47 14 79 9 76 56 84 22
Geometry Grp 888888888
Degree of Util (X) 0.011 0.068 0.023 0.115 0.014 0.11 0.07 0.134 0.031
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.918 5.267 5.812 5.24 5.734 5.232 4.53 5.698 5.079
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 604 679 615 683 624 685 789 628 704
Service Time 3.662 3.01 3.551 2.979 3.47 2.967 2.265 3.438 2.819
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 0.069 0.023 0.116 0.014 0.111 0.071 0.134 0.031
HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.4 8.7 8.7 8.6 8.6 7.6 9.3 8
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.1 0.4 0 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 7
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Peak
Mitigated 03/26/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 99 74 50
Average Queue (ft) 35 29 13
95th Queue (ft) 64 48 38
Link Distance (ft) 2586 2586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L T R L TR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 54 111 30 100 54 54 54 62 53
Average Queue (ft) 29 50 3 49 36 30 33 38 25
95th Queue (ft) 52 80 17 81 52 44 55 56 44
Link Distance (ft) 2586 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 76 74 55 76
Average Queue (ft) 34 40 33 44
95th Queue (ft) 50 62 47 70
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1610
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing AM Peak
Mitigated 03/26/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31
Average Queue (ft) 17
95th Queue (ft) 39
Link Distance (ft) 2530
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Peak
Mitigated 03/26/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 61 25
Average Queue (ft) 21 27 5
95th Queue (ft) 38 45 21
Link Distance (ft) 2586 2586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L T R L TR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 30 49 31 68 46 25 31 55 28
Average Queue (ft) 9 30 7 29 23 5 18 29 8
95th Queue (ft) 29 36 27 47 44 21 40 48 27
Link Distance (ft) 2586 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 63 45 55 79
Average Queue (ft) 34 28 31 32
95th Queue (ft) 49 42 50 48
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1615
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing PM Peak
Mitigated 03/26/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 28 26
Average Queue (ft) 11 2
95th Queue (ft) 32 12
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2593
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | F
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix F: Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 92 68 103 58 75 129
Future Vol, veh/h 92 68 103 58 75 129
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 102 76 114 64 83 143
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 455 89 0 0 178 0
Stage 1 146 -----
Stage 2 309 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 566 806 - - 954 -
Stage 1 805 -----
Stage 2 715 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 517 806 - - 954 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 541 -----
Stage 1 735 -----
Stage 2 715 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.8 0 3.4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 541 806 954 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.189 0.094 0.087 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.2 9.9 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.3 0.3 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 41.6
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 53 198 38 6 199 145 100 58 5 105 53
Future Vol, veh/h 20 53 198 38 6 199 145 100 58 5 105 53
Peak Hour Factor 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 78 291 56 9 293 213 147 85 7 154 78
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 26.6 81.8 16.2 17.4
HCM LOS D F C C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 80% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 0% 84% 0% 58% 20% 30%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 0% 16% 0% 42% 0% 70%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 100 63 73 236 6 344 132 88
LT Vol 100 0 73 0 6 0 105 0
Through Vol 0 58 0 198 0 199 27 27
RT Vol 0 5 0 38 0 145 0 61
Lane Flow Rate 147 93 107 347 9 506 193 129
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.37 0.218 0.246 0.746 0.02 1.053 0.47 0.28
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.442 8.863 8.585 7.951 8.316 7.497 9.105 8.181
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 384 408 421 458 432 486 398 441
Service Time 7.142 6.563 6.285 5.651 6.029 5.209 6.805 5.881
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.383 0.228 0.254 0.758 0.021 1.041 0.485 0.293
HCM Control Delay 17.6 14 14.1 30.5 11.2 83 19.6 14
HCM Lane LOS C B B D B F C B
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.7 0.8 1 6.2 0.1 15.4 2.4 1.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61
Future Vol, veh/h 61
Peak Hour Factor 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 90
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 21 29 136 6 10 210
Future Vol, veh/h 30 21 29 136 6 10 210
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 34 24 33 155 7 11 239
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 416 155 - 0 0 162 0
Stage 1 155 ------
Stage 2 261 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 591 888 - - - 1411 -
Stage 1 871 ------
Stage 2 780 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 586 888 - - - 1411 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 586 ------
Stage 1 864 ------
Stage 2 780 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.6 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 586 888 1411 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.058 0.027 0.008 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 11.5 9.2 7.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 24 126 5 1 6 261
Future Vol, veh/h 0 24 126 5 1 6 261
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 27 143 6 1 7 297
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 146 0 0 - 149 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 898 - - - 1426 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 898 - - ~ -7 ~ -7 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.1 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 898 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.03 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 105 4 15 137 28 17 74 12 51 152 56
Future Vol, veh/h 25 105 4 15 137 28 17 74 12 51 152 56
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 30 127 5 18 165 34 20 89 14 61 183 67
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 10.3 10.8 9.7 12.1
HCM LOS BBAB
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 17% 19% 8% 20%
Vol Thru, % 72% 78% 76% 59%
Vol Right, % 12% 3% 16% 22%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 103 134 180 259
LT Vol 17 25 15 51
Through Vol 74 105 137 152
RT Vol 12 4 28 56
Lane Flow Rate 124 161 217 312
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.188 0.246 0.32 0.442
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.445 5.493 5.31 5.104
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 659 654 677 705
Service Time 3.48 3.529 3.343 3.132
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.188 0.246 0.321 0.443
HCM Control Delay 9.7 10.3 10.8 12.1
HCM Lane LOS ABBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 1 1.4 2.3
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 13 66 3 13 144
Future Vol, veh/h 13 13 66 3 13 144
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 16 16 80 4 16 176
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 290 82 0 0 84 0
Stage 1 82 -----
Stage 2 208 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 699 975 - - 1506 -
Stage 1 939 -----
Stage 2 824 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 691 975 - - 1506 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 691 -----
Stage 1 928 -----
Stage 2 824 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 0 0.6
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 809 1506 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.039 0.011 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.6 7.4 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 57 75 154 53 83 171
Future Vol, veh/h 57 75 154 53 83 171
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00220
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 61 80 164 56 88 182
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 552 112 0 0 222 0
Stage 1 194 -----
Stage 2 358 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 503 779 - - 910 -
Stage 1 754 -----
Stage 2 680 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 453 778 - - 908 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 492 -----
Stage 1 679 -----
Stage 2 680 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.5 0 3.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 492 778 908 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.123 0.103 0.097 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 13.3 10.2 9.4 -
HCM Lane LOS - - B B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.3 0.3 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 17 80 7 8 88 50 6 33 9 62 28
Future Vol, veh/h 1 17 80 7 8 88 50 6 33 9 62 28
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 19 89 8 9 98 56 7 37 10 69 31
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 8.6 8.9 8.4 8.9
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 82% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 79% 0% 92% 0% 64% 18% 52%
Vol Right, % 0% 21% 0% 8% 0% 36% 0% 48%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 42 18 87 8 138 76 27
LT Vol 6 0 18 0 8 0 62 0
Through Vol 0 33 0 80 0 88 14 14
RT Vol 0907050013
Lane Flow Rate 7 47 20 97 9 153 84 30
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.011 0.068 0.031 0.137 0.014 0.207 0.134 0.041
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.878 5.224 5.653 5.094 5.618 4.861 5.709 4.96
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 609 685 633 704 638 739 628 721
Service Time 3.616 2.962 3.386 2.827 3.348 2.591 3.445 2.695
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 0.069 0.032 0.138 0.014 0.207 0.134 0.042
HCM Control Delay 8.7 8.3 8.6 8.6 8.4 8.9 9.3 7.9
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.1 0.5 0 0.8 0.5 0.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13
Future Vol, veh/h 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 14
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 18 15 163 26 28 172
Future Vol, veh/h 16 18 15 163 26 28 172
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 18 20 17 185 30 32 195
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 444 185 - 0 0 215 0
Stage 1 185 ------
Stage 2 259 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 570 855 - - - 1349 -
Stage 1 844 ------
Stage 2 782 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 556 855 - - - 1349 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 556 ------
Stage 1 824 ------
Stage 2 782 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.4 1.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 556 855 1349 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.033 0.024 0.024 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 11.7 9.3 7.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 15 190 20 2 16 184
Future Vol, veh/h 0 15 190 20 2 16 184
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 17 216 23 2 18 209
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 228 0 0 - 239 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 809 - - - 1322 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 809 - - ~ -9 ~ -9 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.5 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 809 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.021 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 85 10 7 63 44 10 115 10 52 83 20
Future Vol, veh/h 25 85 10 7 63 44 10 115 10 52 83 20
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
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 26 89 11 7 66 46 11 121 11 55 87 21
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 8.8 8.5 8.8 9
HCM LOS AAAA
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 7% 21% 6% 34%
Vol Thru, % 85% 71% 55% 54%
Vol Right, % 7% 8% 39% 13%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 135 120 114 155
LT Vol 10 25 7 52
Through Vol 115 85 63 83
RT Vol 10 10 44 20
Lane Flow Rate 142 126 120 163
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.186 0.169 0.154 0.213
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.704 4.813 4.616 4.698
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 760 743 774 762
Service Time 2.749 2.859 2.661 2.742
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.187 0.17 0.155 0.214
HCM Control Delay 8.8 8.8 8.5 9
HCM Lane LOS AAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.8
HCM 2010 TWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/26/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 12 150 5 17 121
Future Vol, veh/h 6 12 150 5 17 121
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 14 170 6 19 138
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 349 173 0 0 176 0
Stage 1 173 -----
Stage 2 176 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 646 868 - - 1394 -
Stage 1 855 -----
Stage 2 852 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 636 868 - - 1394 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 636 -----
Stage 1 842 -----
Stage 2 852 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.8 0 0.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 774 1394 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.026 0.014 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.8 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 27.1
Intersection LOS D
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 53 198 38 6 199 145 100 58 5 105 53
Future Vol, veh/h 20 53 198 38 6 199 145 100 58 5 105 53
Peak Hour Factor 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 78 291 56 9 293 213 147 85 7 154 78
Number of Lanes 011011111002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 3 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 3
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 3 2
HCM Control Delay 38 25.9 18.3 20.1
HCM LOS E D C C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 80% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 0% 84% 0% 100% 0% 20% 30%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 0% 16% 0% 0% 100% 0% 70%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 100 63 73 236 6 199 145 132 88
LT Vol 10007306001050
Through Vol 0 58 0 198 0 199 0 27 27
RT Vol 0 5 0 38 0 0 145 0 61
Lane Flow Rate 147 93 107 347 9 293 213 193 129
Geometry Grp 888888888
Degree of Util (X) 0.416 0.247 0.281 0.848 0.023 0.722 0.483 0.526 0.317
Departure Headway (Hd) 10.186 9.611 9.433 8.798 9.393 8.876 8.152 9.795 8.878
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 353 373 380 410 381 407 441 367 404
Service Time 7.966 7.39 7.203 6.567 7.161 6.644 5.92 7.568 6.65
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.416 0.249 0.282 0.846 0.024 0.72 0.483 0.526 0.319
HCM Control Delay 20.1 15.5 15.9 44.8 12.4 31.7 18.4 23 15.7
HCM Lane LOS C C C E B DCCC
HCM 95th-tile Q 2 1 1.1 8.1 0.1 5.6 2.6 2.9 1.3
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61
Future Vol, veh/h 61
Peak Hour Factor 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 90
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.8
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 17 80 7 8 88 50 6 33 9 62 28
Future Vol, veh/h 1 17 80 7 8 88 50 6 33 9 62 28
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 19 89 8 9 98 56 7 37 10 69 31
Number of Lanes 011011111002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 3 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 3
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 3 2
HCM Control Delay 9 8.5 8.6 9.1
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 WBLn3 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 82% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 79% 0% 92% 0% 100% 0% 18% 52%
Vol Right, % 0% 21% 0% 8% 0% 0% 100% 0% 48%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 42 18 87 8 88 50 76 27
LT Vol 60180800620
Through Vol 0 33 0 80 0 88 0 14 14
RT Vol 09070050013
Lane Flow Rate 7 47 20 97 9 98 56 84 30
Geometry Grp 888888888
Degree of Util (X) 0.011 0.07 0.033 0.143 0.014 0.144 0.071 0.137 0.042
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.067 5.415 5.889 5.33 5.817 5.314 4.611 5.833 5.086
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 588 659 607 671 615 674 774 613 702
Service Time 3.822 3.17 3.633 3.074 3.558 3.056 2.352 3.581 2.834
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 0.071 0.033 0.145 0.015 0.145 0.072 0.137 0.043
HCM Control Delay 8.9 8.6 8.8 9 8.6 9 7.7 9.5 8.1
HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.1 0.5 0 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.1
HCM 2010 AWSC Existing plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/26/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13
Future Vol, veh/h 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 14
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 03/27/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 44 31
Average Queue (ft) 28 26 5
95th Queue (ft) 47 36 22
Link Distance (ft) 2586 2586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L T R L TR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 75 124 30 131 55 56 76 72 55
Average Queue (ft) 32 48 5 46 35 31 28 36 27
95th Queue (ft) 57 81 22 82 52 51 51 57 46
Link Distance (ft) 2586 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB
Directions Served L R U
Maximum Queue (ft) 48 53 28
Average Queue (ft) 16 14 3
95th Queue (ft) 34 37 18
Link Distance (ft) 1281
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 03/27/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 76
Average Queue (ft) 15
95th Queue (ft) 44
Link Distance (ft) 636
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 71 78 53 78
Average Queue (ft) 34 37 29 44
95th Queue (ft) 52 59 45 67
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1598
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 29 26
Average Queue (ft) 14 2
95th Queue (ft) 35 12
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2593
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 03/27/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R TR L
Maximum Queue (ft) 71 50 22 72
Average Queue (ft) 29 23 1 17
95th Queue (ft) 51 42 7 46
Link Distance (ft) 2586 2586 330
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L T R L TR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 45 54 30 54 73 30 50 61 31
Average Queue (ft) 12 32 5 31 28 3 19 28 8
95th Queue (ft) 35 42 23 46 53 18 44 43 30
Link Distance (ft) 2586 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R U L
Maximum Queue (ft) 21 43 25 26
Average Queue (ft) 5 10 5 6
95th Queue (ft) 20 27 21 23
Link Distance (ft) 1256
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Existing plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 03/27/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB SB
Directions Served R UL
Maximum Queue (ft) 28 30
Average Queue (ft) 12 5
95th Queue (ft) 34 22
Link Distance (ft) 893
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 54 53 79 74
Average Queue (ft) 32 33 38 36
95th Queue (ft) 45 45 59 55
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1603
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 26 25
Average Queue (ft) 6 1
95th Queue (ft) 24 8
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2593
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | G
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix G: Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 105 109 147 64 109 154
Future Vol, veh/h 105 109 147 64 109 154
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 117 121 163 71 121 171
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 612 117 0 0 234 0
Stage 1 199 -----
Stage 2 413 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 467 774 - - 898 -
Stage 1 749 -----
Stage 2 642 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 404 774 - - 898 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 441 -----
Stage 1 648 -----
Stage 2 642 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.2 0 4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 441 774 898 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.265 0.156 0.135 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.1 10.5 9.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.1 0.6 0.5 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 141.4
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 59 254 56 31 238 179 127 160 51 184 123
Future Vol, veh/h 20 59 254 56 31 238 179 127 160 51 184 123
Peak Hour Factor 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 29 87 374 82 46 350 263 187 235 75 271 181
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 125.5 295.5 41.7 64.2
HCM LOS F F E F
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 75% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 76% 0% 82% 0% 57% 25% 47%
Vol Right, % 0% 24% 0% 18% 0% 43% 0% 53%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 127 211 79 310 31 417 246 132
LT Vol 127 0 79 0 31 0 184 0
Through Vol 0 160 0 254 0 238 62 62
RT Vol 0 51 0 56 0 179 0 70
Lane Flow Rate 187 310 116 456 46 613 361 193
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.531 0.825 0.33 1.214 0.131 1.621 0.997 0.494
Departure Headway (Hd) 11.991 11.275 11.494 10.826 10.878 10.032 11.632 10.833
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 303 323 315 337 331 368 314 335
Service Time 9.691 8.975 9.194 8.526 8.578 7.732 9.332 8.533
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.617 0.96 0.368 1.353 0.139 1.666 1.15 0.576
HCM Control Delay 27.5 50.3 19.8 152.4 15.2 316.3 85.9 23.7
HCM Lane LOS D F C F C F F C
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.9 7 1.4 17.5 0.4 34.2 10.7 2.6
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 70
Future Vol, veh/h 70
Peak Hour Factor 0.68
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 103
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 21 29 191 6 10 264
Future Vol, veh/h 30 21 29 191 6 10 264
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 34 24 33 217 7 11 300
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 539 217 - 0 0 224 0
Stage 1 217 ------
Stage 2 322 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 502 820 - - - 1339 -
Stage 1 817 ------
Stage 2 732 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 498 820 - - - 1339 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 498 ------
Stage 1 810 ------
Stage 2 732 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.4 0.3
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 498 820 1339 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.068 0.029 0.008 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 12.8 9.5 7.7 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 24 182 5 1 6 315
Future Vol, veh/h 0 24 182 5 1 6 315
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 27 207 6 1 7 358
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 210 0 0 - 213 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 828 - - - 1351 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 828 - - ~ -7 ~ -7 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.5 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 828 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.033 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 12.9
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 106 4 16 143 61 17 90 13 77 165 65
Future Vol, veh/h 30 106 4 16 143 61 17 90 13 77 165 65
Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 36 128 5 19 172 73 20 108 16 93 199 78
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 11.2 12.4 10.6 14.9
HCM LOS BBBB
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 14% 21% 7% 25%
Vol Thru, % 75% 76% 65% 54%
Vol Right, % 11% 3% 28% 21%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 120 140 220 307
LT Vol 17 30 16 77
Through Vol 90 106 143 165
RT Vol 13 4 61 65
Lane Flow Rate 145 169 265 370
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.233 0.276 0.408 0.552
Departure Headway (Hd) 5.795 5.892 5.548 5.374
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 616 607 647 669
Service Time 3.862 3.958 3.606 3.425
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.235 0.278 0.41 0.553
HCM Control Delay 10.6 11.2 12.4 14.9
HCM Lane LOS BBBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 1.1 2 3.4
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project AM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 16 78 3 17 153
Future Vol, veh/h 13 16 78 3 17 153
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 16 20 95 4 21 187
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 326 97 0 0 99 0
Stage 1 97 -----
Stage 2 229 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 666 956 - - 1488 -
Stage 1 924 -----
Stage 2 807 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 655 956 - - 1488 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 655 -----
Stage 1 909 -----
Stage 2 807 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.8 0 0.7
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 793 1488 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.045 0.014 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.8 7.5 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 70 115 198 71 124 210
Future Vol, veh/h 70 115 198 71 124 210
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00220
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 0 - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 74 122 211 76 132 223
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 738 146 0 0 289 0
Stage 1 251 -----
Stage 2 487 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.095 7.145 - - 5.345 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.645 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.445 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67853.9285 - -3.1285 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 399 742 - - 847 -
Stage 1 698 -----
Stage 2 595 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 336 741 - - 845 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 384 -----
Stage 1 588 -----
Stage 2 595 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13 0 3.7
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 384 741 845 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.194 0.165 0.156 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.6 10.8 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.6 0.6 -
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.2
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 29 132 33 49 154 103 26 153 50 113 145
Future Vol, veh/h 1 29 132 33 49 154 103 26 153 50 113 145
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 32 147 37 54 171 114 29 170 56 126 161
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 13 15.5 14.2 13.6
HCM LOS B C B B
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 61% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 75% 0% 80% 0% 60% 39% 78%
Vol Right, % 0% 25% 0% 20% 0% 40% 0% 22%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 26 203 30 165 49 257 186 93
LT Vol 26 0 30 0 49 0 113 0
Through Vol 0 153 0 132 0 154 73 73
RT Vol 0 50 0 33 0 103 0 20
Lane Flow Rate 29 226 33 183 54 286 206 103
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.06 0.427 0.07 0.353 0.112 0.523 0.412 0.192
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.504 6.816 7.588 6.933 7.387 6.59 7.198 6.733
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 477 528 472 519 488 551 501 532
Service Time 5.249 4.561 5.332 4.677 5.087 4.29 4.943 4.477
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.428 0.07 0.353 0.111 0.519 0.411 0.194
HCM Control Delay 10.7 14.6 10.9 13.4 11 16.3 14.9 11.1
HCM Lane LOS BBBBBCBB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 2.1 0.2 1.6 0.4 3 2 0.7
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20
Future Vol, veh/h 20
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 22
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 18 15 246 26 28 230
Future Vol, veh/h 16 18 15 246 26 28 230
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 18 20 17 280 30 32 261
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 605 280 - 0 0 310 0
Stage 1 280 ------
Stage 2 325 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 459 756 - - - 1245 -
Stage 1 765 ------
Stage 2 730 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 447 756 - - - 1245 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 447 ------
Stage 1 745 ------
Stage 2 730 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.5 0.9
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 447 756 1245 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.041 0.027 0.026 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 13.4 9.9 8 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 15 272 20 2 16 242
Future Vol, veh/h 0 15 272 20 2 16 242
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 17 309 23 2 18 275
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 321 0 0 - 332 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 718 - - - 1222 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 718 - - ~ -9 ~ -9 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.1 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 718 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.024 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.7
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 41 94 10 7 64 84 10 135 11 83 101 27
Future Vol, veh/h 41 94 10 7 64 84 10 135 11 83 101 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
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 43 99 11 7 67 88 11 142 12 87 106 28
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 9.6 9.2 9.5 10.2
HCM LOS AAAB
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 6% 28% 5% 39%
Vol Thru, % 87% 65% 41% 48%
Vol Right, % 7% 7% 54% 13%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 156 145 155 211
LT Vol 10 41 7 83
Through Vol 135 94 64 101
RT Vol 11 10 84 27
Lane Flow Rate 164 153 163 222
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 0.227 0.217 0.217 0.304
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.981 5.123 4.79 4.935
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 713 694 742 722
Service Time 3.064 3.205 2.87 3.014
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.307
HCM Control Delay 9.5 9.6 9.2 10.2
HCM Lane LOS AAAB
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.3
HCM 2010 TWSC Near Term plus Project PM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/27/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 19 161 5 23 131
Future Vol, veh/h 6 19 161 5 23 131
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 22 183 6 26 149
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 387 186 0 0 189 0
Stage 1 186 -----
Stage 2 201 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 614 854 - - 1379 -
Stage 1 843 -----
Stage 2 830 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 601 854 - - 1379 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 601 -----
Stage 1 825 -----
Stage 2 830 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 9.8 0 1.1
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 776 1379 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.037 0.019 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 9.8 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.1 -
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Near Term plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/28/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 20 59 254 56 31 238 179 127 160 51 184 123
Future Volume (vph) 20 59 254 56 31 238 179 127 160 51 184 123
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1795 1752 1726 1752 1778 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1795 1752 1726 1752 1778 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Adj. Flow (vph) 29 87 374 82 46 350 263 187 235 75 271 181
RTOR Reduction (vph)00700230010000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 116 449 0 46 590 0 187 300 0 271 181
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 9.7 44.0 4.2 38.5 15.1 22.9 18.8 26.6
Effective Green, g (s) 9.7 44.0 4.2 38.5 15.1 22.9 18.8 26.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.40 0.04 0.35 0.14 0.21 0.17 0.24
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 154 718 66 604 240 370 299 847
v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.25 0.03 c0.34 0.11 c0.17 c0.15 c0.05
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.75 0.63 0.70 0.98 0.78 0.81 0.91 0.21
Uniform Delay, d1 49.0 26.4 52.3 35.3 45.8 41.5 44.7 33.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 18.6 1.7 27.4 30.6 14.7 12.6 29.0 0.1
Delay (s) 67.6 28.1 79.6 65.9 60.5 54.1 73.7 33.5
Level of Service E C E E E D E C
Approach Delay (s) 36.1 66.8 56.5 52.9
Approach LOS D E E D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 53.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.88
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.3% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Near Term plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/28/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 70
Future Volume (vph) 70
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.68
Adj. Flow (vph) 103
RTOR Reduction (vph) 78
Lane Group Flow (vph) 25
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 26.6
Effective Green, g (s) 26.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.24
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 379
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02
v/c Ratio 0.07
Uniform Delay, d1 32.1
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1
Delay (s) 32.2
Level of Service C
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Near Term plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/28/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 1 29 132 33 49 154 103 26 153 50 113 145
Future Volume (vph) 1 29 132 33 49 154 103 26 153 50 113 145
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1789 1752 1734 1752 1776 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1789 1752 1734 1752 1776 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 1 32 147 37 54 171 114 29 170 56 126 161
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 11 0 0 30 0 0 15 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 33 173 0 54 255 0 29 211 0 126 161
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s) 1.6 14.2 2.6 15.2 1.8 17.0 6.3 21.5
Effective Green, g (s) 1.6 14.2 2.6 15.2 1.8 17.0 6.3 21.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.03 0.24 0.04 0.25 0.03 0.28 0.10 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 46 421 75 437 52 501 183 1251
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 0.10 c0.03 c0.15 0.02 c0.12 c0.07 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.72 0.41 0.72 0.58 0.56 0.42 0.69 0.13
Uniform Delay, d1 29.1 19.5 28.4 19.7 28.8 17.6 26.0 13.0
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 41.5 0.7 28.0 2.0 12.3 0.6 10.3 0.0
Delay (s) 70.6 20.1 56.4 21.7 41.1 18.2 36.3 13.1
Level of Service E C E C D B D B
Approach Delay (s) 27.8 27.2 20.8 22.5
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.2 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.7% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Near Term plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/28/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 20
Future Volume (vph) 20
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 22
RTOR Reduction (vph) 14
Lane Group Flow (vph) 8
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 21.5
Effective Green, g (s) 21.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 560
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 12.5
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0
Delay (s) 12.5
Level of Service B
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/02/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 76 76 52
Average Queue (ft) 35 35 14
95th Queue (ft) 59 58 41
Link Distance (ft) 2574 2574
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 130 202 92 295 157 207 159 84 49 71
Average Queue (ft) 59 109 30 176 77 108 101 29 20 27
95th Queue (ft) 104 185 71 290 136 181 151 63 49 57
Link Distance (ft) 2574 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 3 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 2
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB
Directions Served L R U
Maximum Queue (ft) 21 21 25
Average Queue (ft) 11 8 3
95th Queue (ft) 28 21 16
Link Distance (ft) 1281
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/02/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 28
Average Queue (ft) 16
95th Queue (ft) 37
Link Distance (ft) 636
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 79 128 76 94
Average Queue (ft) 35 45 35 51
95th Queue (ft) 60 82 53 78
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1598
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 25
Average Queue (ft) 16 1
95th Queue (ft) 37 8
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2593
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 3
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/02/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R TR L
Maximum Queue (ft) 74 66 24 76
Average Queue (ft) 32 32 1 21
95th Queue (ft) 60 52 8 51
Link Distance (ft) 2574 2574 330
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL TR L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 68 127 95 238 52 155 108 66 51 42
Average Queue (ft) 22 59 42 70 15 72 45 31 16 6
95th Queue (ft) 55 116 79 143 41 128 92 64 46 25
Link Distance (ft) 2574 1036 973 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R U L
Maximum Queue (ft) 25 63 25 26
Average Queue (ft) 8 11 3 4
95th Queue (ft) 25 36 17 20
Link Distance (ft) 1256
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Near Term plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/02/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB SB
Directions Served R UL
Maximum Queue (ft) 28 26
Average Queue (ft) 11 1
95th Queue (ft) 32 8
Link Distance (ft) 893
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 54 55 54 91
Average Queue (ft) 34 35 34 49
95th Queue (ft) 50 52 52 78
Link Distance (ft) 2557 2500 2593 1603
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 49 26
Average Queue (ft) 11 3
95th Queue (ft) 34 17
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2593
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | H
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix H: Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 97 338 98 113 42 109 123 975 159 143 831 67
Future Vol, veh/h 97 338 98 113 42 109 123 975 159 143 831 67
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 250 - - 230 - 0 250 - - 250 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 113 393 114 131 49 127 143 1134 185 166 966 78
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2101 2942 1005 3104 2889 660 1044 0 0 1319 0 0
Stage 1 1337 1337 - 1513 1513 -------
Stage 2 764 1605 - 1591 1376 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.795 6.545 6.245 6.795 6.545 7.145 4.145 - - 5.345 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.145 5.545 - 7.345 5.545 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.745 5.545 - 6.145 5.545 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67854.02853.32853.67854.02853.92852.2285 - -3.1285 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 45 ~ 15 291 ~ 9 ~ 16 347 659 - - 273 - -
Stage 1 183 ~ 220 - ~ 88 180 -------
Stage 2 337 ~ 162 - ~ 131 210 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 5 291 - ~ 5 347 659 - - 273 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 5 - - ~ 5 -------
Stage 1 143 ~ 86 - ~ 69 141 -------
Stage 2 ~ 109 ~ 127 - - 82 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.2 5.1
HCM LOS - -
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 659 - - - 6 - 5 347 273 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.217 - - -84.496 - 9.767 0.365 0.609 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - -$ 38775.9 -$ 5354 21.2 36.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - - F - F C E - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 - - - 65.5 - 7.8 1.6 3.7 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 200.7
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 115 522 117 69 231 206 173 195 94 189 156
Future Vol, veh/h 20 115 522 117 69 231 206 173 195 94 189 156
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 23 134 607 136 80 269 240 201 227 109 220 181
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 391 173.9 48.2 46.9
HCM LOS F F E E
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 71% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 67% 0% 82% 0% 53% 29% 54%
Vol Right, % 0% 33% 0% 18% 0% 47% 0% 46%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 173 289 135 639 69 437 267 145
LT Vol 173 0 135 0 69 0 189 0
Through Vol 0 195 0 522 0 231 78 78
RT Vol 0 94 0 117 0 206 0 67
Lane Flow Rate 201 336 157 743 80 508 310 169
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.567 0.88 0.444 1.969 0.229 1.333 0.869 0.441
Departure Headway (Hd) 12.142 11.362 10.925 10.26 11.715 10.831 12.075 11.349
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 300 323 331 364 309 340 304 320
Service Time 9.842 9.062 8.625 7.96 9.415 8.531 9.775 9.049
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.67 1.04 0.474 2.041 0.259 1.494 1.02 0.528
HCM Control Delay 29.6 59.4 22.1 468.9 17.9 198.5 60.1 22.7
HCM Lane LOS D F C F C F F C
HCM 95th-tile Q 3.3 8.1 2.2 47.9 0.9 21.5 7.7 2.2
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 67
Future Vol, veh/h 67
Peak Hour Factor 0.86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 78
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8.5
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 179 0 1150 11 42 1070
Future Vol, veh/h 16 179 0 1150 11 42 1070
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 17 195 0 1250 12 46 1163
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2505 1250 - 0 0 1262 0
Stage 1 1250 ------
Stage 2 1255 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 31 210 - - - 547 -
Stage 1 269 ------
Stage 2 267 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 28 210 - - - 547 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 28 ------
Stage 1 246 ------
Stage 2 267 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 105.3 0 0.5
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 28 210 547 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.621 0.927 0.083 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 256.2 91.8 12.2 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F F B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 2 7.6 0.3 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 79
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 91 4 13 97 13 171 463 90 28 308 24
Future Vol, veh/h 7 91 4 13 97 13 171 463 90 28 308 24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 8 99 4 14 105 14 186 503 98 30 335 26
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1392 1381 348 1384 1345 552 361 0 0 601 0 0
Stage 1 408 408 - 924 924 -------
Stage 2 984 973 - 460 421 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 119 143 693 120 151 531 1192 - - 971 - -
Stage 1 618 595 - 322 347 -------
Stage 2 298 329 - 579 587 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 15 105 693 16 111 531 1192 - - 971 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 15 105 - 16 111 -------
Stage 1 471 572 - 245 264 -------
Stage 2 133 251 - 457 564 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s$ 359.9 $ 528.8 2 0.7
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1192 - - 76 72 971 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.156 - - 1.459 1.857 0.031 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 0 -$ 359.9$ 528.8 8.8 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - F F A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - - 9 11.9 0.1 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 660.8
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 140 106 4 47 427 120 117 786 65 137 731 203
Future Vol, veh/h 140 106 4 47 427 120 117 786 65 137 731 203
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 152 115 4 51 464 130 127 854 71 149 795 221
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 80.1 324.7 771.3 882.8
HCM LOS FFFF
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 12% 56% 8% 13%
Vol Thru, % 81% 42% 72% 68%
Vol Right, % 7% 2% 20% 19%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 968 250 594 1071
LT Vol 117 140 47 137
Through Vol 786 106 427 731
RT Vol 65 4 120 203
Lane Flow Rate 1052 272 646 1164
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 2.615 0.736 1.588 2.87
Departure Headway (Hd) 16.193 26.13 17.061 15.359
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 242 141 220 256
Service Time 14.193 24.13 15.061 13.359
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 4.347 1.929 2.936 4.547
HCM Control Delay 771.3 80.1 324.7 882.8
HCM Lane LOS FFFF
HCM 95th-tile Q 49.3 4.3 21.4 59.1
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 68 849 25 82 703
Future Vol, veh/h 13 68 849 25 82 703
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 14 74 923 27 89 764
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1879 937 0 0 950 0
Stage 1 937 -----
Stage 2 942 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 78 320 - - 719 -
Stage 1 380 -----
Stage 2 378 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 61 320 - - 719 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 61 -----
Stage 1 298 -----
Stage 2 378 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 39.3 0 1.1
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 190 719 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.463 0.124 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 39.3 10.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - E B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.2 0.4 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 215 61 46 38 115 188 834 53 124 1041 294
Future Vol, veh/h 61 215 61 46 38 115 188 834 53 124 1041 294
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 250 - - 230 - 0 250 - - 250 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 68 239 68 51 42 128 209 927 59 138 1157 327
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2407 3001 1321 3125 3135 493 1484 0 0 986 0 0
Stage 1 1597 1597 - 1375 1375 -------
Stage 2 810 1404 - 1750 1760 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.795 6.545 6.245 6.795 6.545 7.145 4.145 - - 5.345 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.145 5.545 - 7.345 5.545 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.745 5.545 - 6.145 5.545 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67854.02853.32853.67854.02853.92852.2285 - -3.1285 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 28 ~ 13 189 ~ 9 ~ 11 445 447 - - 396 - -
Stage 1 130 ~ 164 - 110 211 -------
Stage 2 315 ~ 204 - 106 136 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 5 189 - ~ 4 445 447 - - 396 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 5 - - ~ 4 -------
Stage 1 69 ~ 107 - 59 112 -------
Stage 2 74 ~ 109 - - 89 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 3.5 1.6
HCM LOS - -
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 447 - - - 6 - 4 445 396 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.467 - - -51.111 -10.556 0.287 0.348 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 19.9 - - -$ 23751.2 -$ 6037.9 16.3 18.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS C - - - F - F C C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.4 - - - 40.4 - 7 1.2 1.5 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 22.5
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 37 239 48 51 134 103 26 218 87 129 145
Future Vol, veh/h 1 37 239 48 51 134 103 26 218 87 129 145
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 41 266 53 57 149 114 29 242 97 143 161
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 24.7 19 27.3 17.9
HCM LOS C C D C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 64% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 71% 0% 83% 0% 57% 36% 85%
Vol Right, % 0% 29% 0% 17% 0% 43% 0% 15%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 26 305 38 287 51 237 202 86
LT Vol 26 0 38 0 51 0 129 0
Through Vol 0 218 0 239 0 134 73 73
RT Vol 0 87 0 48 0 103 0 13
Lane Flow Rate 29 339 42 319 57 263 224 95
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.068 0.729 0.099 0.692 0.135 0.568 0.523 0.21
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.464 7.741 8.451 7.814 8.6 7.769 8.402 7.961
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 426 471 424 462 417 463 430 450
Service Time 6.164 5.441 6.205 5.568 6.357 5.525 6.158 5.716
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.068 0.72 0.099 0.69 0.137 0.568 0.521 0.211
HCM Control Delay 11.8 28.6 12.1 26.4 12.7 20.3 20.1 12.8
HCM Lane LOS B D B D B C C B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 5.9 0.3 5.2 0.5 3.5 2.9 0.8
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13
Future Vol, veh/h 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 14
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 95 0 1066 0 91 1125
Future Vol, veh/h 1 95 0 1066 0 91 1125
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 1 103 0 1159 0 99 1223
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2580 1159 - 0 0 1159 0
Stage 1 1159 ------
Stage 2 1421 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 28 237 - - - 599 -
Stage 1 297 ------
Stage 2 222 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 23 237 - - - 599 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 23 ------
Stage 1 248 ------
Stage 2 222 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 32.8 0 0.9
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 23 237 599 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.047 0.436 0.165 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 169.2 31.4 12.2 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F D B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1 2.1 0.6 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 14.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 131 10 11 73 10 85 353 124 25 240 19
Future Vol, veh/h 14 131 10 11 73 10 85 353 124 25 240 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 15 142 11 12 79 11 92 384 135 27 261 21
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1007 1029 272 1038 972 452 282 0 0 519 0 0
Stage 1 326 326 - 636 636 -------
Stage 2 681 703 - 402 336 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 219 233 764 208 251 605 1275 - - 1042 - -
Stage 1 684 647 - 464 470 -------
Stage 2 439 438 - 623 640 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 140 202 764 80 218 605 1275 - - 1042 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 140 202 - 80 218 -------
Stage 1 613 627 - 416 421 -------
Stage 2 313 392 - 460 620 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 73.4 43.3 1.2 0.8
HCM LOS F E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1275 - - 204 192 1042 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 - - 0.826 0.532 0.026 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 - 73.4 43.3 8.5 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - F E A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 6 2.7 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 565.3
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 82 219 26 20 175 112 72 711 78 354 595 46
Future Vol, veh/h 82 219 26 20 175 112 72 711 78 354 595 46
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 89 238 28 22 190 122 78 773 85 385 647 50
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 85.4 74.4 639.6 810.2
HCM LOS FFFF
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 8% 25% 7% 36%
Vol Thru, % 83% 67% 57% 60%
Vol Right, % 9% 8% 36% 5%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 861 327 307 995
LT Vol 72 82 20 354
Through Vol 711 219 175 595
RT Vol 78 26 112 46
Lane Flow Rate 936 355 334 1082
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 2.336 0.906 0.845 2.724
Departure Headway (Hd) 13.162 17.186 17.519 12.344
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 290 213 210 303
Service Time 11.162 15.186 15.519 10.344
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 3.228 1.667 1.59 3.571
HCM Control Delay 639.6 85.4 74.4 810.2
HCM Lane LOS FFFF
HCM 95th-tile Q 50.4 7.3 6.3 67.3
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 03/30/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 25 831 32 88 571
Future Vol, veh/h 6 25 831 32 88 571
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 27 903 35 96 621
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1734 921 0 0 938 0
Stage 1 921 -----
Stage 2 813 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 96 326 - - 726 -
Stage 1 386 -----
Stage 2 434 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 77 326 - - 726 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 77 -----
Stage 1 308 -----
Stage 2 434 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 26.5 0 1.4
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 201 726 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.168 0.132 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 26.5 10.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.5 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 97 338 98 113 42 109 123 975 159 143 831 67
Future Volume (veh/h) 97 338 98 113 42 109 123 975 159 143 831 67
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 113 393 114 131 49 127 143 1134 185 166 966 78
Adj No. of Lanes 110111121220
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 506 414 120 156 165 140 193 1347 603 199 1043 84
Arrive On Green 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.06 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1375 399 1757 1845 1568 1757 3505 1568 3408 3285 265
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 113 0 507 131 49 127 143 1134 185 166 515 529
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1774 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1568 1704 1752 1798
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 33.6 8.8 3.0 8.1 9.5 35.3 9.9 5.8 34.1 34.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.9 0.0 33.6 8.8 3.0 8.1 9.5 35.3 9.9 5.8 34.1 34.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 506 0 534 156 165 140 193 1347 603 199 557 571
V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.00 0.95 0.84 0.30 0.91 0.74 0.84 0.31 0.83 0.93 0.93
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 506 0 553 158 600 510 193 1347 603 199 583 598
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 32.5 0.0 41.1 53.8 51.1 38.7 51.7 33.6 25.8 55.9 39.6 39.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 25.9 30.7 1.0 18.5 13.9 6.5 1.3 25.3 23.6 23.2
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 2.9 0.0 20.3 5.6 1.6 4.3 5.4 18.2 4.5 3.4 20.1 20.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.7 0.0 67.0 84.5 52.1 57.2 65.6 40.1 27.1 81.2 63.2 62.8
LnGrp LOS C E F D E E D C F E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 620 307 1462 1210
Approach Delay, s/veh 60.7 68.1 41.0 65.5
Approach LOS E E D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.2 52.1 14.9 41.8 19.2 44.1 40.2 16.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7 6.0 * 6 5.7 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 7 44.7 * 11 37.4 11.8 * 40 9.2 * 39
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 37.3 10.8 35.6 11.5 36.1 7.9 10.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.5 0.3 2.0 0.5 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 54.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 20 115 522 117 69 231 206 173 195 94 189 156
Future Volume (vph) 20 115 522 117 69 231 206 173 195 94 189 156
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1714 1752 1755 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1714 1752 1755 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Adj. Flow (vph) 23 134 607 136 80 269 240 201 227 109 220 181
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 80 0 25 0 0 15 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 157 607 56 80 484 0 201 321 0 220 181
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 12.7 49.4 49.4 7.7 44.4 28.4 25.6 17.2 14.4
Effective Green, g (s) 12.7 49.4 49.4 7.7 44.4 28.4 25.6 17.2 14.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.41 0.41 0.06 0.37 0.24 0.21 0.14 0.12
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
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) 185 759 645 112 634 414 374 251 420
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.33 0.05 0.28 0.11 c0.18 c0.13 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.85 0.80 0.09 0.71 0.76 0.49 0.86 0.88 0.43
Uniform Delay, d1 52.7 31.0 21.5 55.1 33.2 39.5 45.5 50.4 49.0
Progression Factor 0.89 0.56 0.37 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.11 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 24.3 7.1 0.2 19.3 8.5 0.8 15.9 27.1 0.7
Delay (s) 71.0 24.5 8.3 74.4 41.7 44.4 66.3 77.5 49.7
Level of Service E C A E D D E E D
Approach Delay (s) 30.2 46.1 58.1 62.0
Approach LOS C D E E
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 46.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.4% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 67
Future Volume (vph) 67
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.86
Adj. Flow (vph) 78
RTOR Reduction (vph) 69
Lane Group Flow (vph) 9
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.4
Effective Green, g (s) 14.4
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 188
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.05
Uniform Delay, d1 46.7
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1
Delay (s) 46.9
Level of Service D
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.4
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 179 0 1150 11 42 1070
Future Vol, veh/h 16 179 0 1150 11 42 1070
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - - 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 17 195 0 1250 12 46 1163
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1929 631 849 0 0 1262 0
Stage 1 1256 ------
Stage 2 673 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.86 6.96 6.46 - - 4.16 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.86 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.86 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.53 3.33 2.53 - - 2.23 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 58 421 412 - - 541 -
Stage 1 230 ------
Stage 2 466 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 53 421 412 - - 541 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 53 ------
Stage 1 230 ------
Stage 2 426 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 27.5 0 0.5
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) 412 - - 53 421 541 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.328 0.462 0.084 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 103.1 20.7 12.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 1.2 2.4 0.3 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 7 91 4 13 97 13 171 463 90 28 308 24
Future Volume (veh/h) 7 91 4 13 97 13 171 463 90 28 308 24
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 99 4 14 105 14 186 503 98 30 335 26
Adj No. of Lanes 110110110110
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 17 144 6 27 139 19 216 549 107 623 1035 80
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.35 0.61 0.61
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1761 71 1757 1595 213 1757 1501 292 1757 1690 131
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 0 103 14 0 119 186 0 601 30 0 361
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1832 1757 0 1807 1757 0 1793 1757 0 1822
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 0.0 6.6 0.9 0.0 7.7 12.5 0.0 38.4 1.3 0.0 11.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 0.0 6.6 0.9 0.0 7.7 12.5 0.0 38.4 1.3 0.0 11.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 17 0 150 27 0 158 216 0 656 623 0 1115
V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.00 0.69 0.51 0.00 0.75 0.86 0.00 0.92 0.05 0.00 0.32
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 85 0 340 85 0 336 363 0 971 623 0 1115
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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 59.1 0.0 53.6 58.6 0.0 53.5 51.6 0.0 36.3 25.4 0.0 11.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.5 0.0 5.5 14.1 0.0 7.1 10.4 0.0 19.7 0.0 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 0.4 0.0 3.5 0.6 0.0 4.2 6.7 0.0 22.6 0.7 0.0 6.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 77.6 0.0 59.1 72.7 0.0 60.5 62.0 0.0 56.0 25.5 0.0 12.0
LnGrp LOS E E E E E E C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 111 133 787 391
Approach Delay, s/veh 60.5 61.8 57.4 13.0
Approach LOS EEEB
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 48.5 49.9 6.1 15.5 19.0 79.5 5.4 16.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 * 4.2 5.7 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.8 * 65 * 5.8 22.3 * 25 47.0 * 5.8 22.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 40.4 2.9 8.6 14.5 13.5 2.5 9.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 3.5 0.0 0.8 0.3 2.0 0.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 45.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 140 106 4 47 427 120 117 786 65 137 731 203
Future Volume (veh/h) 140 106 4 47 427 120 117 786 65 137 731 203
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 152 115 4 51 464 130 127 854 71 149 795 221
Adj No. of Lanes 110111120121
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 182 616 21 65 519 441 155 1045 87 179 1165 521
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.04 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.32 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1772 62 1757 1845 1568 1757 3277 272 1757 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 152 0 119 51 464 130 127 457 468 149 795 221
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1834 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1797 1757 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.9 0.0 4.8 3.0 25.4 6.8 7.5 25.2 25.2 8.7 20.6 11.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.9 0.0 4.8 3.0 25.4 6.8 7.5 25.2 25.2 8.7 20.6 11.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 182 0 638 65 519 441 155 559 573 179 1165 521
V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.00 0.19 0.78 0.89 0.29 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.68 0.42
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 238 0 700 152 615 523 204 604 619 238 1275 571
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.2 0.0 23.9 50.1 36.2 29.6 47.0 32.9 32.9 46.3 30.3 27.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.5 0.0 0.1 17.9 14.0 0.4 17.4 8.1 7.9 16.9 1.3 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 5.2 0.0 2.4 1.8 14.9 3.0 4.4 13.4 13.7 5.1 10.2 5.1
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 63.7 0.0 24.0 68.0 50.2 29.9 64.4 41.0 40.8 63.2 31.6 27.8
LnGrp LOS E C E D C E D D E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 271 645 1052 1165
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.3 47.6 43.8 34.9
Approach LOS DDDC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.9 39.5 8.1 42.5 13.5 40.9 15.1 35.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 14 36.2 * 9.1 40.1 * 12 38.2 * 14 35.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.7 27.2 5.0 6.8 9.5 22.6 10.9 27.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.3 0.0 3.6 0.1 9.4 0.1 2.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 41.5
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 15
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 68 849 25 82 703
Future Vol, veh/h 13 68 849 25 82 703
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 ----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 14 74 923 27 89 764
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1878 936 0 0 950 0
Stage 1 936 -----
Stage 2 942 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 78 320 - - 719 -
Stage 1 380 -----
Stage 2 378 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 61 320 - - 719 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 61 -----
Stage 1 380 -----
Stage 2 297 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 29.5 0 1.1
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 61 320 719 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.232 0.231 0.124 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 81 19.6 10.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F C B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.8 0.9 0.4 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 61 215 61 46 38 115 188 834 53 124 1041 294
Future Volume (veh/h) 61 215 61 46 38 115 188 834 53 124 1041 294
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 68 239 68 51 42 128 209 927 59 138 1157 327
Adj No. of Lanes 110111121220
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 229 270 77 65 165 140 236 1919 858 193 1233 344
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.55 0.55 0.06 0.46 0.46
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1382 393 1757 1845 1568 1757 3505 1568 3408 2708 756
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 68 0 307 51 42 128 209 927 59 138 743 741
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1775 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1568 1704 1752 1711
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 0.0 20.7 3.5 2.6 8.4 14.4 20.0 2.2 4.9 49.3 51.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 20.7 3.5 2.6 8.4 14.4 20.0 2.2 4.9 49.3 51.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.44
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 229 0 346 65 165 140 236 1919 858 193 798 779
V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.00 0.89 0.78 0.25 0.91 0.89 0.48 0.07 0.72 0.93 0.95
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 229 0 557 100 586 498 249 1919 858 289 814 795
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 48.3 0.0 48.1 58.6 52.1 40.0 52.2 17.1 13.1 56.9 31.6 32.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.0 10.1 18.9 0.8 19.2 28.8 0.2 0.0 4.9 17.1 20.6
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 2.1 0.0 11.1 2.1 1.4 4.7 8.8 9.7 1.0 2.4 27.5 28.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 49.0 0.0 58.1 77.5 52.9 59.2 81.0 17.3 13.1 61.9 48.7 52.7
LnGrp LOS D E E D E F B B E D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 375 221 1195 1622
Approach Delay, s/veh 56.5 62.2 28.2 51.7
Approach LOS E E C D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.1 73.2 8.8 29.6 22.5 61.9 21.7 16.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7 6.0 * 6 5.7 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 10 64.0 * 7 38.5 17.4 * 57 6.5 * 39
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.9 22.0 5.5 22.7 16.4 53.0 6.3 10.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.6 0.0 1.3 0.1 2.9 0.0 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 44.7
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 1 37 239 48 51 134 103 26 218 87 129 145
Future Volume (vph) 1 37 239 48 51 134 103 26 218 87 129 145
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1725 1752 1765 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1725 1752 1765 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 1 41 266 53 57 149 114 29 242 97 143 161
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 41 0 36 0 0 18 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 42 266 12 57 227 0 29 321 0 143 161
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 2.9 14.8 14.8 2.6 14.5 3.7 20.1 6.3 22.7
Effective Green, g (s) 2.9 14.8 14.8 2.6 14.5 3.7 20.1 6.3 22.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.04 0.23 0.06 0.31 0.10 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
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) 79 427 363 71 391 101 555 172 1245
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.14 c0.03 0.13 0.02 c0.18 c0.08 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.53 0.62 0.03 0.80 0.58 0.29 0.58 0.83 0.13
Uniform Delay, d1 29.8 22.0 19.0 30.4 22.0 28.8 18.4 28.3 13.9
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 6.7 2.8 0.0 46.2 2.2 1.6 1.5 27.6 0.0
Delay (s) 36.6 24.9 19.1 76.6 24.2 30.4 19.8 55.8 14.0
Level of Service D C B E C C B E B
Approach Delay (s) 25.4 33.5 20.7 32.8
Approach LOS CCCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 63.9 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 13
Future Volume (vph) 13
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 14
RTOR Reduction (vph) 9
Lane Group Flow (vph) 5
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 22.7
Effective Green, g (s) 22.7
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 557
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 13.3
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0
Delay (s) 13.3
Level of Service B
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 95 0 1066 0 91 1125
Future Vol, veh/h 1 95 0 1066 0 91 1125
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - - 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 1 103 0 1159 0 99 1223
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1968 579 892 0 0 1159 0
Stage 1 1159 ------
Stage 2 809 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.86 6.96 6.46 - - 4.16 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.86 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.86 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.53 3.33 2.53 - - 2.23 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 54 456 386 - - 593 -
Stage 1 259 ------
Stage 2 396 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 45 456 386 - - 593 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 45 ------
Stage 1 259 ------
Stage 2 330 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 15.9 0 0.9
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) 386 - - 45 456 593 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.024 0.226 0.167 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - 87 15.2 12.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.9 0.6 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 14 131 10 11 73 10 85 353 124 25 240 19
Future Volume (veh/h) 14 131 10 11 73 10 85 353 124 25 240 19
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 15 142 11 12 79 11 92 384 135 27 261 21
Adj No. of Lanes 110110110110
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 33 230 18 27 211 29 130 463 163 55 591 48
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.35 0.35 0.03 0.35 0.35
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1691 131 1757 1585 221 1757 1305 459 1757 1685 136
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 15 0 153 12 0 90 92 0 519 27 0 282
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1822 1757 0 1806 1757 0 1764 1757 0 1821
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 3.8 0.3 0.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 12.8 0.7 0.0 5.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 3.8 0.3 0.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 12.8 0.7 0.0 5.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.12 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.07
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 33 0 248 27 0 240 130 0 626 55 0 638
V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.62 0.44 0.00 0.38 0.71 0.00 0.83 0.49 0.00 0.44
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 185 0 768 185 0 761 267 0 926 185 0 871
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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.0 0.0 19.3 23.1 0.0 18.8 21.5 0.0 14.0 22.6 0.0 11.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.3 0.0 2.5 10.9 0.0 1.0 6.9 0.0 4.1 6.5 0.0 0.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.0 1.1 1.4 0.0 6.8 0.4 0.0 2.9
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.3 0.0 21.8 34.1 0.0 19.7 28.3 0.0 18.1 29.1 0.0 12.3
LnGrp LOS C C C B C B C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 168 102 611 309
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.7 21.4 19.6 13.8
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.5 22.8 4.9 12.2 7.7 22.6 5.1 12.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 * 4.2 5.7 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 * 25 * 5 20.0 * 7.2 22.7 * 5 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 14.8 2.3 5.8 4.4 7.6 2.4 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 2.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.7
HCM 2010 LOS B
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 13
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 82 219 26 20 175 112 72 711 78 354 595 46
Future Volume (veh/h) 82 219 26 20 175 112 72 711 78 354 595 46
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 89 238 28 22 190 122 78 773 85 385 647 50
Adj No. of Lanes 110111120121
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 113 313 37 42 282 240 100 906 100 426 1646 737
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.28 0.28 0.24 0.47 0.47
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1620 191 1757 1845 1568 1757 3185 350 1757 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 89 0 266 22 190 122 78 425 433 385 647 50
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1811 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1783 1757 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 11.1 1.0 7.8 5.7 3.5 18.3 18.3 17.0 9.6 1.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 11.1 1.0 7.8 5.7 3.5 18.3 18.3 17.0 9.6 1.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 113 0 350 42 282 240 100 498 507 426 1646 737
V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.00 0.76 0.52 0.67 0.51 0.78 0.85 0.85 0.90 0.39 0.07
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 128 0 618 123 625 531 222 541 550 489 1646 737
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 36.8 0.0 30.4 38.5 31.9 31.0 37.1 27.0 27.0 29.3 13.8 11.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 24.3 0.0 3.4 9.4 2.8 1.7 12.0 11.8 11.7 18.5 0.2 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.7 0.0 5.9 0.6 4.2 2.6 2.0 10.5 10.7 10.4 4.6 0.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 61.0 0.0 33.9 47.9 34.7 32.7 49.1 38.8 38.7 47.8 13.9 11.6
LnGrp LOS E CDCCDDDDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 355 334 936 1082
Approach Delay, s/veh 40.7 34.8 39.6 25.9
Approach LOS DCDC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.5 28.7 6.1 21.4 8.8 43.5 9.3 18.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 22 24.6 * 5.6 27.2 * 10 36.7 * 5.8 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 20.3 3.0 13.1 5.5 11.6 6.0 9.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 2.4 0.0 2.3 0.0 9.8 0.0 2.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 33.7
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 15
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 25 831 32 88 571
Future Vol, veh/h 6 25 831 32 88 571
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 ----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 27 903 35 96 621
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1733 921 0 0 938 0
Stage 1 921 -----
Stage 2 812 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 96 326 - - 726 -
Stage 1 386 -----
Stage 2 435 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 77 326 - - 726 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 77 -----
Stage 1 386 -----
Stage 2 347 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.5 0 1.4
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 77 326 726 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.085 0.083 0.132 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 56 17 10.7 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F C B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.3 0.5 -
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T R L L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 370 732 193 90 81 370 563 548 360 111 369 430
Average Queue (ft) 131 301 95 31 32 207 394 320 54 53 55 243
95th Queue (ft) 354 525 165 68 64 430 555 468 150 91 175 350
Link Distance (ft) 2301 1253 1253 2580 2580 1629
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 230 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 23 32 10 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 22 39 17 8
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement SB
Directions Served TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 447
Average Queue (ft) 246
95th Queue (ft) 340
Link Distance (ft) 1629
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T R L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 220 304 63 120 385 350 458 218 224 90 50
Average Queue (ft) 103 156 17 62 212 150 187 130 80 26 25
95th Queue (ft) 191 271 40 122 336 303 373 205 152 62 43
Link Distance (ft) 1260 1036 960 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 6 2 11 10 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 4 6 19 8 2
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 225 73
Average Queue (ft) 19 92 20
95th Queue (ft) 50 176 51
Link Distance (ft) 2526
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L TR L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 51 140 52 168 215 309 51 161
Average Queue (ft) 13 74 13 93 127 133 16 45
95th Queue (ft) 37 123 36 158 200 275 40 111
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2488 2523 1547
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 181 150 96 367 355 159 314 316 368 400 353 108
Average Queue (ft) 96 53 43 239 52 93 197 225 107 234 179 50
95th Queue (ft) 169 118 82 349 150 150 313 333 214 389 339 102
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2482 1266 1266 1580 1580
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 9 3 9 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 15 4 12 2
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB WB SB B26
Directions Served L R LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 53 694 840
Average Queue (ft) 12 23 149 28
95th Queue (ft) 39 45 425 277
Link Distance (ft) 2530 1253 1266
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 164
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T R L L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 136 242 132 65 63 370 1429 1368 52 124 370 862
Average Queue (ft) 52 134 49 20 30 346 902 831 20 68 192 498
95th Queue (ft) 109 225 110 50 57 455 1481 1422 44 116 469 854
Link Distance (ft) 2301 1253 1253 2580 2580 1629
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 230 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 88 4 1 44
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 366 8 0 55
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement SB
Directions Served TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 881
Average Queue (ft) 496
95th Queue (ft) 857
Link Distance (ft) 1629
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T R L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 68 254 63 118 206 45 220 156 109 34 23
Average Queue (ft) 24 116 12 50 107 19 116 76 46 3 8
95th Queue (ft) 53 210 35 94 200 41 203 139 94 18 25
Link Distance (ft) 1260 1036 960 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R L
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 95 136
Average Queue (ft) 2 44 34
95th Queue (ft) 13 76 87
Link Distance (ft) 2526
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L TR L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 162 51 119 128 266 75 155
Average Queue (ft) 12 80 8 52 56 110 22 59
95th Queue (ft) 36 138 30 93 99 212 52 129
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2488 2523 1547
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 136 221 50 160 74 140 212 250 370 584 425 42
Average Queue (ft) 47 86 14 91 37 44 148 184 231 183 80 7
95th Queue (ft) 99 150 38 151 69 91 203 244 379 427 215 25
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2482 1266 1266 1580 1580
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 17 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 52 0
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 No Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB WB SB
Directions Served L R LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 27 71 181
Average Queue (ft) 5 17 72
95th Queue (ft) 21 47 155
Link Distance (ft) 2530 1253
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 484
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | I
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix I: Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 97 338 99 113 42 109 124 1008 159 143 841 67
Future Vol, veh/h 97 338 99 113 42 109 124 1008 159 143 841 67
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 250 - - 230 - 0 250 - - 250 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 113 393 115 131 49 127 144 1172 185 166 978 78
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2130 2994 1017 3156 2941 679 1056 0 0 1357 0 0
Stage 1 1349 1349 - 1553 1553 -------
Stage 2 781 1645 - 1603 1388 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.795 6.545 6.245 6.795 6.545 7.145 4.145 - - 5.345 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.145 5.545 - 7.345 5.545 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.745 5.545 - 6.145 5.545 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67854.02853.32853.67854.02853.92852.2285 - -3.1285 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 43 ~ 13 286 ~ 9 ~ 15 337 652 - - 261 - -
Stage 1 180 ~ 217 - ~ 82 172 -------
Stage 2 329 ~ 155 - ~ 129 208 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 4 286 - ~ 4 337 652 - - 261 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 4 - - ~ 4 -------
Stage 1 140 ~ 79 - ~ 64 134 -------
Stage 2 ~ 102 ~ 121 - - 76 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.2 5.5
HCM LOS - -
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 652 - - - 5 - 4 337 261 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.221 - - -101.628 -12.209 0.376 0.637 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12.1 - - -$ 46723.4 -$ 6789.5 22 40.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - - F - F C E - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 - - - 65.8 - 7.9 1.7 3.9 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 201.9
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 115 522 117 70 231 206 173 197 98 189 157
Future Vol, veh/h 20 115 522 117 70 231 206 173 197 98 189 157
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 23 134 607 136 81 269 240 201 229 114 220 183
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 393.3 175.1 50.6 47.5
HCM LOS F F F E
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 71% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 67% 0% 82% 0% 53% 29% 54%
Vol Right, % 0% 33% 0% 18% 0% 47% 0% 46%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 173 295 135 639 70 437 268 146
LT Vol 173 0 135 0 70 0 189 0
Through Vol 0 197 0 522 0 231 79 79
RT Vol 0 98 0 117 0 206 0 67
Lane Flow Rate 201 343 157 743 81 508 311 169
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.568 0.899 0.445 1.975 0.233 1.337 0.873 0.443
Departure Headway (Hd) 12.161 11.376 10.959 10.294 11.754 10.87 12.112 11.387
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 300 322 331 364 308 340 302 318
Service Time 9.861 9.076 8.659 7.994 9.454 8.57 9.812 9.087
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.67 1.065 0.474 2.041 0.263 1.494 1.03 0.531
HCM Control Delay 29.7 62.9 22.2 471.7 18 200.3 60.9 22.8
HCM Lane LOS D F C F C F F C
HCM 95th-tile Q 3.3 8.5 2.2 48 0.9 21.6 7.8 2.2
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 67
Future Vol, veh/h 67
Peak Hour Factor 0.86
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 78
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 21.4
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 44 197 16 1167 25 49 1074
Future Vol, veh/h 44 197 16 1167 25 49 1074
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 48 214 17 1268 27 53 1167
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2541 1268 - 0 0 1295 0
Stage 1 1268 ------
Stage 2 1273 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 30 ~ 205 - - - 532 -
Stage 1 263 ------
Stage 2 262 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 27 ~ 205 - - - 532 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 27 ------
Stage 1 237 ------
Stage 2 262 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 225.7 0.5
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 27 205 532 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 1.771 1.045 0.1 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - -$ 681.2 124 12.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - F F B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 5.7 9.6 0.3 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 102 13 13 103 13 176 463 90 28 308 27
Future Vol, veh/h 13 102 13 13 103 13 176 463 90 28 308 27
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 14 111 14 14 112 14 191 503 98 30 335 29
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1407 1393 350 1406 1358 552 364 0 0 601 0 0
Stage 1 410 410 - 934 934 -------
Stage 2 997 983 - 472 424 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 116 141 691 116 148 531 1189 - - 971 - -
Stage 1 617 594 - 318 343 -------
Stage 2 293 326 - 571 585 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 102 691 - ~ 107 531 1189 - - 971 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 102 - - ~ 107 -------
Stage 1 466 571 - 240 259 -------
Stage 2 122 246 - 433 562 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 2.1 0.7
HCM LOS - -
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1189 ----971--
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.161 ----0.031 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 0 - - - 8.8 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 ----0.1--
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 21 1150 2 1 8 1108
Future Vol, veh/h 0 21 1150 2 1 8 1108
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 23 1250 2 1 9 1204
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 1251 0 0 - 1252 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 209 - - - 552 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 209 - - ~ -9 ~ -9 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 24.3 0
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 209 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.109 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 24.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 684.9
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 141 106 4 47 427 121 117 792 65 138 764 207
Future Vol, veh/h 141 106 4 47 427 121 117 792 65 138 764 207
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 153 115 4 51 464 132 127 861 71 150 830 225
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 82.2 327.3 780.2 929.4
HCM LOS FFFF
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 12% 56% 8% 12%
Vol Thru, % 81% 42% 72% 69%
Vol Right, % 7% 2% 20% 19%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 974 251 595 1109
LT Vol 117 141 47 138
Through Vol 792 106 427 764
RT Vol 65 4 121 207
Lane Flow Rate 1059 273 647 1205
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 2.633 0.739 1.592 2.974
Departure Headway (Hd) 16.541 26.765 17.374 15.45
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 233 139 220 253
Service Time 14.541 24.765 15.374 13.45
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 4.545 1.964 2.941 4.763
HCM Control Delay 780.2 82.2 327.3 929.4
HCM Lane LOS FFFF
HCM 95th-tile Q 48.8 4.3 21.2 61.7
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 8
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.4
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 68 855 25 82 736
Future Vol, veh/h 13 68 855 25 82 736
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 14 74 929 27 89 800
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1921 943 0 0 956 0
Stage 1 943 -----
Stage 2 978 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 73 317 - - 715 -
Stage 1 377 -----
Stage 2 363 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 57 317 - - 715 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 57 -----
Stage 1 293 -----
Stage 2 363 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 41.7 0 1.1
HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 183 715 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.481 0.125 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 41.7 10.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - E B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.3 0.4 -
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 215 62 46 38 115 189 857 53 124 1079 294
Future Vol, veh/h 61 215 62 46 38 115 189 857 53 124 1079 294
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 250 - - 230 - 0 250 - - 250 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 68 239 69 51 42 128 210 952 59 138 1199 327
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2461 3070 1363 3195 3204 506 1526 0 0 1011 0 0
Stage 1 1639 1639 - 1402 1402 -------
Stage 2 822 1431 - 1793 1802 -------
Critical Hdwy 6.795 6.545 6.245 6.795 6.545 7.145 4.145 - - 5.345 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.145 5.545 - 7.345 5.545 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.745 5.545 - 6.145 5.545 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.67854.02853.32853.67854.02853.92852.2285 - -3.1285 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 26 ~ 12 179 ~ 8 ~ 10 437 431 - - 385 - -
Stage 1 123 ~ 156 - 105 204 -------
Stage 2 310 ~ 198 - 100 130 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 4 179 - ~ 3 437 431 - - 385 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 4 - - ~ 3 -------
Stage 1 ~ 63 ~ 100 - 54 105 -------
Stage 2 ~ 67 ~ 102 - - 83 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 3.6 1.6
HCM LOS - -
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 431 - - - 5 - 3 437 385 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.487 - - -61.556 -14.074 0.292 0.358 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 21 - - -$ 28688.2 -$ 8178.2 16.6 19.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS C - - - F - F C C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.6 - - - 40.7 - 7.1 1.2 1.6 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 22.8
Intersection LOS C
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 37 239 48 55 134 103 26 219 89 129 147
Future Vol, veh/h 1 37 239 48 55 134 103 26 219 89 129 147
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 1 41 266 53 61 149 114 29 243 99 143 163
Number of Lanes 011011011002
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 2
HCM Control Delay 25.1 19.1 27.8 18.1
HCM LOS D C D C
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 64% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 71% 0% 83% 0% 57% 36% 85%
Vol Right, % 0% 29% 0% 17% 0% 43% 0% 15%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 26 308 38 287 55 237 203 87
LT Vol 26 0 38 0 55 0 129 0
Through Vol 0 219 0 239 0 134 74 74
RT Vol 0 89 0 48 0 103 0 13
Lane Flow Rate 29 342 42 319 61 263 225 96
Geometry Grp 77777777
Degree of Util (X) 0.068 0.735 0.1 0.696 0.147 0.571 0.528 0.214
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.452 7.727 8.494 7.857 8.637 7.805 8.44 8.002
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 424 469 422 459 415 463 428 449
Service Time 6.199 5.474 6.243 5.606 6.389 5.556 6.191 5.753
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.068 0.729 0.1 0.695 0.147 0.568 0.526 0.214
HCM Control Delay 11.8 29.1 12.2 26.8 12.9 20.5 20.3 12.9
HCM Lane LOS B D B D B C C B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 6 0.3 5.3 0.5 3.5 3 0.8
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13
Future Vol, veh/h 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.90
Heavy Vehicles, % 3
Mvmt Flow 14
Number of Lanes 0
Approach
Opposing Approach
Opposing Lanes
Conflicting Approach Left
Conflicting Lanes Left
Conflicting Approach Right
Conflicting Lanes Right
HCM Control Delay
HCM LOS
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.3
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 108 8 1078 31 114 1141
Future Vol, veh/h 23 108 8 1078 31 114 1141
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 250 - 0 150 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 25 117 9 1172 34 124 1240
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 2660 1172 - 0 0 1206 0
Stage 1 1172 ------
Stage 2 1488 ------
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 25 233 - - - 575 -
Stage 1 293 ------
Stage 2 206 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 20 233 - - - 575 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 20 ------
Stage 1 230 ------
Stage 2 206 ------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 128.1 1.2
HCM LOS F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBU NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 20 233 575 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 1.25 0.504 0.216 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - -$ 564.4 35.2 13 -
HCM Lane LOS - - - F E B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 3.4 2.6 0.8 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 22.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 18 140 17 11 83 10 94 353 124 25 240 26
Future Vol, veh/h 18 140 17 11 83 10 94 353 124 25 240 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length ------------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333333333
Mvmt Flow 20 152 18 12 90 11 102 384 135 27 261 28
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1035 1052 275 1070 999 452 289 0 0 519 0 0
Stage 1 329 329 - 656 656 -------
Stage 2 706 723 - 414 343 -------
Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 209 226 761 198 242 605 1267 - - 1042 - -
Stage 1 682 645 - 453 461 -------
Stage 2 425 429 - 614 636 -------
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 122 194 761 62 207 605 1267 - - 1042 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 122 194 - 62 207 -------
Stage 1 603 625 - 400 408 -------
Stage 2 287 379 - 439 616 -------
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 106.5 56.9 1.3 0.7
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1267 - - 196 175 1042 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.081 - - 0.97 0.646 0.026 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 0 - 106.5 56.9 8.5 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - F F A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 8.1 3.7 0.1 - -
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBU SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 14 1083 12 3 24 1136
Future Vol, veh/h 0 14 1083 12 3 24 1136
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 000000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - 250 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 333333
Mvmt Flow 0 15 1177 13 3 26 1235
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 1184 0 0 - 1190 0
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Critical Hdwy - 6.23 - - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.327 - - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 229 - - - 583 -
Stage 1 0 ------
Stage 2 0 ------
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 229 - - ~ -9 ~ -9 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------
Stage 1 -------
Stage 2 -------
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 21.8 0
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 229 + -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.066 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 21.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS - - C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 2010 AWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 600
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 88 219 26 20 175 113 72 749 78 355 611 47
Future Vol, veh/h 88 219 26 20 175 113 72 749 78 355 611 47
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333
Mvmt Flow 96 238 28 22 190 123 78 814 85 386 664 51
Number of Lanes 010010010010
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1111
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1111
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1111
HCM Control Delay 91.5 77.9 694.5 842
HCM LOS FFFF
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 8% 26% 6% 35%
Vol Thru, % 83% 66% 57% 60%
Vol Right, % 9% 8% 37% 5%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 899 333 308 1013
LT Vol 72 88 20 355
Through Vol 749 219 175 611
RT Vol 78 26 113 47
Lane Flow Rate 977 362 335 1101
Geometry Grp 1111
Degree of Util (X) 2.458 0.925 0.852 2.793
Departure Headway (Hd) 13.451 17.76 18.239 12.743
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 283 210 201 297
Service Time 11.451 15.76 16.239 10.743
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 3.452 1.724 1.667 3.707
HCM Control Delay 694.5 91.5 77.9 842
HCM Lane LOS FFFF
HCM 95th-tile Q 53.4 7.5 6.3 67.7
HCM 2010 TWSC Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue 04/02/2018
Baseline Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 8
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 25 869 32 88 587
Future Vol, veh/h 6 25 869 32 88 587
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 27 945 35 96 638
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1793 963 0 0 980 0
Stage 1 963 -----
Stage 2 830 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 88 309 - - 700 -
Stage 1 369 -----
Stage 2 426 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 69 309 - - 700 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 69 -----
Stage 1 291 -----
Stage 2 426 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 28.7 0 1.4
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 185 700 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.182 0.137 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 28.7 11 0
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.5 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 97 338 99 113 42 109 124 1008 159 143 841 67
Future Volume (veh/h) 97 338 99 113 42 109 124 1008 159 143 841 67
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 113 393 115 131 49 127 144 1172 185 166 978 78
Adj No. of Lanes 110111121221
Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 482 418 122 148 187 159 164 1235 552 238 1208 971
Arrive On Green 0.27 0.30 0.30 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.35 0.35 0.07 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1372 402 1757 1845 1568 1757 3505 1568 3408 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 113 0 508 131 49 127 144 1172 185 166 978 78
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1774 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1568 1704 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.8 0.0 32.4 8.6 2.8 9.2 9.4 37.8 7.4 5.5 29.4 0.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.8 0.0 32.4 8.6 2.8 9.2 9.4 37.8 7.4 5.5 29.4 0.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.23 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 482 0 540 148 187 159 164 1235 552 238 1208 971
V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.00 0.94 0.88 0.26 0.80 0.88 0.95 0.33 0.70 0.81 0.08
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 482 0 581 148 620 527 164 1248 558 238 1208 971
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 32.6 0.0 39.3 52.5 48.1 51.0 52.0 36.6 14.9 52.7 34.6 2.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 22.8 41.6 0.7 8.8 38.4 16.0 1.6 8.5 5.9 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.8 0.0 19.2 5.9 1.5 4.4 6.3 21.0 3.4 2.9 15.3 0.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.9 0.0 62.1 94.2 48.8 59.8 90.4 52.6 16.5 61.3 40.5 2.6
LnGrp LOS C E F D E F D B E D A
Approach Vol, veh/h 621 307 1501 1222
Approach Delay, s/veh 56.8 72.7 51.8 40.9
Approach LOS E E D D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.1 46.9 14.0 41.0 15.0 46.0 37.6 17.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 * 4.2 5.7 * 4.2 6.0 5.7 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.8 * 41 * 9.8 38.0 * 11 37.3 8.8 * 39
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.5 39.8 10.6 34.4 11.4 31.4 7.8 11.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.2 0.4 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 50.7
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 20 115 522 117 70 231 206 173 197 98 189 157
Future Volume (vph) 20 115 522 117 70 231 206 173 197 98 189 157
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1714 1752 1753 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1714 1752 1753 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86
Adj. Flow (vph) 23 134 607 136 81 269 240 201 229 114 220 183
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 81 0 26 0 0 16 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 157 607 55 81 483 0 201 327 0 220 183
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 12.8 47.3 47.3 6.8 41.3 27.5 25.4 16.4 14.3
Effective Green, g (s) 12.8 47.3 47.3 6.8 41.3 27.5 25.4 16.4 14.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.41 0.41 0.06 0.36 0.24 0.22 0.14 0.12
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
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) 193 752 639 102 610 415 383 247 432
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 c0.33 0.05 0.28 0.11 c0.19 c0.13 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.81 0.81 0.09 0.79 0.79 0.48 0.85 0.89 0.42
Uniform Delay, d1 50.4 30.3 21.1 53.9 33.5 38.1 43.5 48.9 47.0
Progression Factor 1.12 0.96 1.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 19.0 7.6 0.2 33.3 10.1 0.9 16.5 30.3 0.7
Delay (s) 75.6 36.7 41.6 87.2 43.6 39.0 60.1 79.2 47.7
Level of Service E D D F D D E E D
Approach Delay (s) 44.2 49.6 52.3 61.7
Approach LOS D D D E
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 50.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.86
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.8% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 67
Future Volume (vph) 67
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.86
Adj. Flow (vph) 78
RTOR Reduction (vph) 68
Lane Group Flow (vph) 10
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.3
Effective Green, g (s) 14.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 193
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.05
Uniform Delay, d1 44.9
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1
Delay (s) 45.0
Level of Service D
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 44 197 16 1167 25 49 1074
Future Volume (vph) 44 197 16 1167 25 49 1074
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1568 1752 3494 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1568 1752 3494 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 48 214 17 1268 27 53 1167
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 170 01000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 48 44 17 1294 0 53 1167
Turn Type Prot Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.5 10.5 3.1 81.7 9.4 88.0
Effective Green, g (s) 10.5 10.5 3.1 81.7 9.4 88.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.70 0.08 0.76
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 158 141 46 2460 141 2658
v/s Ratio Prot 0.03 0.01 c0.37 0.03 c0.33
v/s Ratio Perm c0.03
v/c Ratio 0.30 0.31 0.37 0.53 0.38 0.44
Uniform Delay, d1 49.3 49.4 55.5 8.1 50.5 5.1
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.73 2.28 1.25 2.49
Incremental Delay, d2 1.1 1.3 3.8 0.6 0.9 0.3
Delay (s) 50.4 50.6 44.1 19.0 64.2 12.9
Level of Service D D D B E B
Approach Delay (s) 50.6 19.3 15.1
Approach LOS D B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.8% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 13 102 13 13 103 13 176 463 90 28 308 27
Future Volume (veh/h) 13 102 13 13 103 13 176 463 90 28 308 27
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 14 111 14 14 112 14 191 503 98 30 335 29
Adj No. of Lanes 110110110110
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 31 195 25 31 195 24 243 596 116 60 549 48
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.40 0.40 0.03 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1606 203 1757 1608 201 1757 1501 292 1757 1674 145
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 14 0 125 14 0 126 191 0 601 30 0 364
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1809 1757 0 1809 1757 0 1793 1757 0 1819
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 3.3 0.4 0.0 3.4 5.4 0.0 15.5 0.9 0.0 8.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 3.3 0.4 0.0 3.4 5.4 0.0 15.5 0.9 0.0 8.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.08
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 31 0 220 31 0 220 243 0 712 60 0 597
V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.57 0.45 0.00 0.57 0.79 0.00 0.84 0.50 0.00 0.61
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 172 0 710 172 0 710 428 0 1052 172 0 803
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 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.8 0.0 21.1 24.8 0.0 21.1 21.2 0.0 13.9 24.2 0.0 14.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.9 0.0 2.3 9.9 0.0 2.4 5.5 0.0 4.2 6.4 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 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0 1.8 3.0 0.0 8.3 0.5 0.0 4.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.7 0.0 23.4 34.7 0.0 23.5 26.8 0.0 18.1 30.6 0.0 15.4
LnGrp LOS C C C C C B C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 139 140 792 394
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.6 24.6 20.2 16.6
Approach LOS C C C B
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.7 26.2 5.1 11.9 11.3 22.7 5.1 11.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 * 4.2 5.7 * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 * 30 * 5 20.0 * 12 22.5 * 5 20.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.9 17.5 2.4 5.3 7.4 10.6 2.4 5.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 2.8 0.0 1.0 0.2 1.5 0.0 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 20.1
HCM 2010 LOS C
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 141 106 4 47 427 121 117 792 65 138 764 207
Future Volume (veh/h) 141 106 4 47 427 121 117 792 65 138 764 207
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 153 115 4 51 464 132 127 861 71 150 830 225
Adj No. of Lanes 110111120121
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 180 593 21 65 497 423 272 1149 95 179 987 441
Arrive On Green 0.10 0.33 0.33 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.16 0.35 0.35 0.03 0.09 0.09
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1772 62 1757 1845 1568 1757 3279 270 1757 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 153 0 119 51 464 132 127 460 472 150 830 225
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1834 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1797 1757 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.9 0.0 5.4 3.3 28.5 7.8 7.6 26.8 26.8 9.8 27.0 11.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.9 0.0 5.4 3.3 28.5 7.8 7.6 26.8 26.8 9.8 27.0 11.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 180 0 614 65 497 423 272 614 629 179 987 441
V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.00 0.19 0.78 0.93 0.31 0.47 0.75 0.75 0.84 0.84 0.51
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 201 0 614 136 525 446 272 614 629 209 1130 506
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33
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 51.2 0.0 27.5 55.4 41.4 33.8 44.6 33.2 33.2 55.1 50.1 24.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.5 0.0 0.2 17.8 23.4 0.4 1.2 8.2 8.0 22.2 8.6 4.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 6.1 0.0 2.7 2.0 17.7 3.4 3.8 14.3 14.6 5.9 14.3 5.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 76.7 0.0 27.6 73.1 64.7 34.2 45.9 41.4 41.2 77.3 58.7 28.5
LnGrp LOS E C E E CDDDEEC
Approach Vol, veh/h 272 647 1059 1205
Approach Delay, s/veh 55.2 59.2 41.8 55.4
Approach LOS E E D E
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.0 46.6 8.5 44.8 24.0 38.7 16.1 37.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 6.0 6.0 * 6 * 4.2 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 14 35.5 * 9 37.3 11.9 * 37 * 13 33.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.8 28.8 5.3 7.4 9.6 29.0 11.9 30.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.0 0.0 3.6 1.2 3.6 0.0 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 51.6
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 68 855 25 82 736
Future Vol, veh/h 13 68 855 25 82 736
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 ----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 14 74 929 27 89 800
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1921 943 0 0 957 0
Stage 1 943 -----
Stage 2 978 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 73 317 - - 715 -
Stage 1 377 -----
Stage 2 363 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 57 317 - - 715 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 57 -----
Stage 1 377 -----
Stage 2 282 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 30.7 0 1.1
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 57 317 715 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.248 0.233 0.125 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 87.8 19.8 10.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F C B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.9 0.9 0.4 -
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 61 215 62 46 38 115 189 857 53 124 1079 294
Future Volume (veh/h) 61 215 62 46 38 115 189 857 53 124 1079 294
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 68 239 69 51 42 128 210 952 59 138 1199 327
Adj No. of Lanes 110111121221
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 232 270 78 66 187 159 214 1099 491 922 1673 956
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.31 0.31 0.27 0.48 0.48
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1377 398 1757 1845 1568 1757 3505 1568 3408 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 68 0 308 51 42 128 210 952 59 138 1199 327
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1775 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1568 1704 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.2 0.0 20.3 3.5 2.5 9.6 14.3 30.7 3.2 3.7 32.6 5.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.2 0.0 20.3 3.5 2.5 9.6 14.3 30.7 3.2 3.7 32.6 5.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 232 0 348 66 187 159 214 1099 491 922 1673 956
V/C Ratio(X) 0.29 0.00 0.88 0.78 0.23 0.81 0.98 0.87 0.12 0.15 0.72 0.34
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 232 0 528 133 600 510 214 1335 597 922 1673 956
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 47.0 0.0 46.9 57.3 49.6 52.8 52.6 38.8 29.4 33.3 24.9 3.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.0 11.3 17.7 0.6 9.3 56.4 9.2 0.5 0.1 2.7 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 2.1 0.0 11.0 2.0 1.3 4.6 10.3 16.2 1.5 1.8 16.3 2.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.7 0.0 58.2 75.0 50.2 62.0 108.9 48.0 29.9 33.3 27.6 4.5
LnGrp LOS D E E D E F DCCCA
Approach Vol, veh/h 376 221 1221 1664
Approach Delay, s/veh 56.3 62.8 57.6 23.5
Approach LOS E E E C
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 38.5 43.6 8.7 29.2 18.8 63.3 20.1 17.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 4.2 * 5.7 * 4.2 6.0 4.2 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.4 * 46 9.1 * 36 * 15 40.5 5.8 * 39
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 32.7 5.5 22.3 16.3 34.6 6.2 11.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.7 4.9 0.0 1.3 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 41.5
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 4
Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 1 37 239 48 55 134 103 26 219 89 129 147
Future Volume (vph) 1 37 239 48 55 134 103 26 219 89 129 147
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1725 1752 1765 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1845 1568 1752 1725 1752 1765 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Growth Factor (vph) 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 1 41 266 53 61 149 114 29 243 99 143 163
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 32 0 19 0 0 13 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 42 266 21 61 244 0 29 329 0 143 163
Turn Type Prot Prot NA Perm Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 7 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 47.2 47.2 8.6 49.3 3.8 27.5 16.6 40.3
Effective Green, g (s) 6.5 47.2 47.2 8.6 49.3 3.8 27.5 16.6 40.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.39 0.39 0.07 0.41 0.03 0.23 0.14 0.34
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 5.7 5.7 4.2 5.7 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
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) 94 725 616 125 708 55 404 242 1177
v/s Ratio Prot 0.02 c0.14 c0.03 0.14 0.02 c0.19 c0.08 0.05
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.45 0.37 0.03 0.49 0.34 0.53 0.81 0.59 0.14
Uniform Delay, d1 55.0 25.8 22.4 53.6 24.3 57.2 43.8 48.5 27.8
Progression Factor 0.82 0.59 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.80 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 3.1 1.3 0.1 3.0 1.3 8.2 11.1 3.8 0.1
Delay (s) 48.2 16.5 22.5 56.6 25.6 62.0 46.0 52.3 27.8
Level of Service D B C E C E D D C
Approach Delay (s) 21.1 31.4 47.2 38.7
Approach LOS CCDD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.4% ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 5
Movement SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 13
Future Volume (vph) 13
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900
Total Lost time (s) 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00
Frt 0.85
Flt Protected 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1568
Flt Permitted 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1568
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90
Growth Factor (vph) 100%
Adj. Flow (vph) 14
RTOR Reduction (vph) 9
Lane Group Flow (vph) 5
Turn Type Perm
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases 6
Actuated Green, G (s) 40.3
Effective Green, g (s) 40.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.34
Clearance Time (s) 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 526
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm 0.00
v/c Ratio 0.01
Uniform Delay, d1 26.5
Progression Factor 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.0
Delay (s) 26.6
Level of Service C
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
Intersection Summary
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 7
Movement WBL WBR NBU NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph) 23 108 8 1078 31 114 1141
Future Volume (vph) 23 108 8 1078 31 114 1141
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Total Lost time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1568 1752 3490 1752 3505
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1568 1752 3490 1752 3505
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Adj. Flow (vph) 25 117 9 1172 34 124 1240
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 108 01000
Lane Group Flow (vph) 25 9 9 1205 0 124 1240
Turn Type Prot Perm Prot NA Prot NA
Protected Phases 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 8
Actuated Green, G (s) 9.4 9.4 2.2 82.4 13.8 94.0
Effective Green, g (s) 9.4 9.4 2.2 82.4 13.8 94.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.69 0.12 0.78
Clearance Time (s) 4.2 4.2 4.2 6.0 4.2 6.0
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 137 122 32 2396 201 2745
v/s Ratio Prot c0.01 0.01 c0.35 c0.07 0.35
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01
v/c Ratio 0.18 0.08 0.28 0.50 0.62 0.45
Uniform Delay, d1 51.7 51.3 58.1 9.0 50.6 4.4
Progression Factor 0.67 1.91 0.94 0.36 1.27 0.23
Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.3 4.0 0.6 3.3 0.3
Delay (s) 35.0 98.0 58.4 3.9 67.6 1.3
Level of Service D F E A E A
Approach Delay (s) 86.9 4.3 7.4
Approach LOS F A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 10.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 120.0 Sum of lost time (s) 14.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 10
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 18 140 17 11 83 10 94 353 124 25 240 26
Future Volume (veh/h) 18 140 17 11 83 10 94 353 124 25 240 26
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 20 152 18 12 90 11 102 384 135 27 261 28
Adj No. of Lanes 110110110110
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 71 184 22 24 119 15 890 888 312 43 301 32
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.07 0.07 0.51 0.68 0.68 0.02 0.18 0.18
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1619 192 1757 1613 197 1757 1305 459 1757 1638 176
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 170 12 0 101 102 0 519 27 0 289
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1811 1757 0 1810 1757 0 1764 1757 0 1814
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 0.0 11.0 0.8 0.0 6.6 3.6 0.0 16.0 1.8 0.0 18.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 0.0 11.0 0.8 0.0 6.6 3.6 0.0 16.0 1.8 0.0 18.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.10
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 71 0 205 24 0 134 890 0 1200 43 0 333
V/C Ratio(X) 0.28 0.00 0.83 0.50 0.00 0.75 0.11 0.00 0.43 0.62 0.00 0.87
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 100 0 367 85 0 351 890 0 1200 114 0 801
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 0.75 0.00 0.75 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 55.9 0.0 52.1 58.8 0.0 54.5 15.5 0.0 8.7 58.0 0.0 47.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 0.0 6.3 15.0 0.0 8.3 0.1 0.0 1.1 13.6 0.0 25.0
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 0.7 0.0 5.9 0.5 0.0 3.6 1.8 0.0 8.0 1.0 0.0 11.6
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.4 0.0 58.4 73.7 0.0 62.8 15.6 0.0 9.8 71.6 0.0 72.5
LnGrp LOS E E E E B A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 190 113 621 316
Approach Delay, s/veh 58.3 64.0 10.8 72.4
Approach LOS EEBE
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.2 87.7 5.8 19.3 66.8 28.0 10.6 14.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s * 4.2 6.0 * 4.2 5.7 6.0 * 6 5.7 * 5.7
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s * 7.8 62.0 * 5.8 24.3 16.8 * 53 6.8 * 23
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 18.0 2.8 13.0 5.6 20.6 3.3 8.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.6 2.4 1.5 0.2 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 38.6
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 14
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 88 219 26 20 175 113 72 749 78 355 611 47
Future Volume (veh/h) 88 219 26 20 175 113 72 749 78 355 611 47
Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1900 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 96 238 28 22 190 123 78 814 85 386 664 51
Adj No. of Lanes 110111120121
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 119 271 32 45 231 197 99 876 92 612 2034 910
Arrive On Green 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.06 0.27 0.27 0.70 1.00 1.00
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 1620 191 1757 1845 1568 1757 3204 334 1757 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 96 0 266 22 190 123 78 445 454 386 664 51
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 0 1811 1757 1845 1568 1757 1752 1786 1757 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 0.0 17.2 1.5 12.1 8.9 5.3 29.7 29.7 14.3 0.0 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 0.0 17.2 1.5 12.1 8.9 5.3 29.7 29.7 14.3 0.0 0.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.19 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 119 0 303 45 231 197 99 479 489 612 2034 910
V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.00 0.88 0.49 0.82 0.63 0.79 0.93 0.93 0.63 0.33 0.06
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 129 0 453 85 415 353 176 497 506 612 2034 910
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
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 55.2 0.0 48.7 57.7 51.2 49.8 55.9 42.4 42.4 14.0 0.0 0.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 28.5 0.0 12.2 7.9 7.1 3.2 12.8 26.7 26.4 2.1 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 4.1 0.0 9.6 0.8 6.6 4.0 2.9 17.9 18.2 7.0 0.1 0.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 83.7 0.0 61.0 65.6 58.2 53.0 68.7 69.1 68.8 16.1 0.4 0.1
LnGrp LOS F E E E D EEEBAA
Approach Vol, veh/h 362 335 977 1101
Approach Delay, s/veh 67.0 56.8 69.0 5.9
Approach LOS EEEA
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.8 38.8 7.3 26.1 11.0 75.6 12.3 21.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 * 6 4.2 * 6 * 4.2 6.0 4.2 * 6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.8 * 34 5.8 * 30 * 12 51.8 8.8 * 27
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.3 31.7 3.5 19.2 7.3 2.0 8.5 14.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.4 1.1 0.1 0.9 0.1 5.9 0.0 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 42.2
HCM 2010 LOS D
Notes
04/03/2018
Mitigated Synchro 10 Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 16
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 25 869 32 88 587
Future Vol, veh/h 6 25 869 32 88 587
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 250 0 ----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 3 33333
Mvmt Flow 7 27 945 35 96 638
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1791 962 0 0 979 0
Stage 1 962 -----
Stage 2 829 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - - 2.227 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 88 309 - - 701 -
Stage 1 369 -----
Stage 2 427 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 69 309 - - 701 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 69 -----
Stage 1 369 -----
Stage 2 336 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 26.5 0 1.4
HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 69 309 701 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.095 0.088 0.136 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 62.5 17.8 10.9 0
HCM Lane LOS - - F C B A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.3 0.5 -
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T R L L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 370 533 202 46 83 369 624 565 370 118 125 281
Average Queue (ft) 82 230 95 23 31 120 333 276 68 67 47 191
95th Queue (ft) 200 394 167 45 59 297 537 450 235 116 100 269
Link Distance (ft) 2288 1253 1253 2579 2579 1628
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 230 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 12 0 23 8 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 11 0 28 13 2
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement SB SB
Directions Served T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 297 37
Average Queue (ft) 180 6
95th Queue (ft) 269 21
Link Distance (ft) 1628
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T R L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 173 447 362 370 478 341 360 249 294 111 88
Average Queue (ft) 102 219 29 76 257 106 172 130 92 25 26
95th Queue (ft) 161 347 133 172 419 215 281 216 174 74 52
Link Distance (ft) 1260 1036 960 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 14 2 13 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 10 4 11 0
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L R U T TR L T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 94 161 52 304 356 96 118 109
Average Queue (ft) 41 85 15 64 60 40 25 32
95th Queue (ft) 85 142 43 169 183 80 72 85
Link Distance (ft) 2526 950 950 2579 2579
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L TR L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 120 51 135 153 293 72 248
Average Queue (ft) 7 56 9 55 82 113 21 109
95th Queue (ft) 27 98 34 104 141 228 49 206
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2488 2523 1547
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB SB
Directions Served R UL
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 27
Average Queue (ft) 20 2
95th Queue (ft) 41 13
Link Distance (ft) 638
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project AM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 172 126 369 474 370 369 450 452 367 360 317 152
Average Queue (ft) 99 54 62 289 110 115 226 255 146 187 142 54
95th Queue (ft) 149 108 205 457 325 222 346 379 276 312 274 120
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2482 1266 1266 1580 1580
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 21 7 1 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 35 8 2 5 1
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 52 64 21 1135
Average Queue (ft) 18 34 1 204
95th Queue (ft) 49 59 7 618
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2489 1253
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 141
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 1
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T R L L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 171 279 94 110 65 370 435 397 48 110 192 352
Average Queue (ft) 51 145 39 19 32 170 223 177 14 54 27 237
95th Queue (ft) 108 248 79 58 60 316 386 331 38 95 93 329
Link Distance (ft) 2288 1253 1253 2579 2579 1628
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 230 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 8 7 2 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 34 14 1 6
Intersection: 1: Grantland Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement SB SB
Directions Served T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 346 144
Average Queue (ft) 221 40
95th Queue (ft) 317 98
Link Distance (ft) 1628
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 11
Intersection: 2: Bryan Avenue & Ashlan Avenue
Movement EB EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served UL T R L TR L TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 88 128 40 155 202 66 302 236 151 48 30
Average Queue (ft) 29 44 6 44 89 16 186 112 42 9 6
95th Queue (ft) 66 101 21 100 151 45 313 203 97 33 22
Link Distance (ft) 1260 1036 960 2480 2480
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 150 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 4 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 3 0
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 2
Intersection: 3: Grantland Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served L R U T TR L T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 94 70 227 273 269 375 215
Average Queue (ft) 24 53 14 65 69 93 60 30
95th Queue (ft) 60 90 44 175 188 174 201 122
Link Distance (ft) 2526 950 950 2579 2579
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 23 1
Intersection: 4: Bryan Avenue & Dakota Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L TR L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 73 265 72 138 118 268 51 306
Average Queue (ft) 16 89 13 52 53 110 22 67
95th Queue (ft) 44 178 47 101 95 195 49 165
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2488 2523 1547
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Intersection: 5: Grantland Avenue & Project Driveway
Movement WB SB
Directions Served R UL
Maximum Queue (ft) 53 75
Average Queue (ft) 12 16
95th Queue (ft) 38 44
Link Distance (ft) 638
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project PM Peak
Mitigated 04/03/2018
Mitigated SimTraffic Report
JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc.Page 3
Intersection: 6: Grantland Avenue & Shields Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 109 339 54 210 116 138 323 413 353 345 341 40
Average Queue (ft) 48 141 19 128 42 55 202 222 216 167 123 10
95th Queue (ft) 90 240 52 200 76 107 318 338 315 297 256 26
Link Distance (ft) 2526 2482 1266 1266 1580 1580
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 250 250 250 250 250
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 4 6 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 19 9 0
Intersection: 7: Grantland Avenue & Clinton Avenue
Movement WB WB NB SB
Directions Served L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 48 71 22 390
Average Queue (ft) 10 18 1 91
95th Queue (ft) 33 46 7 247
Link Distance (ft) 2530 2489 1253
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 126
http://www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710 Page | J
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Appendix J: Signal Warrants
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 841
(FHWA'S MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California)
Signal Warrant Analysis
COUNT DATE
006 FRESNO n/a n/a CALC JA DATE 3/15/2018
DIST CO RTE KPM CHK JLB DATE 3/15/2018
Major St:Grantland Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Minor St:Ashlan Avenue Critical Approach Speed 50 MPH
Critical speed of major street traffic > 64 km/h (40 mph)………………
or RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population ………..
URBAN (U)
(Condition A or Condition B or combination of A and B must be satisfied)
Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
WARRANT 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
3/8/2018
Hour
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.
Combination of Conditions A & B SATISFIED YES NO
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
Major Street
Highest Approach 115
Minor Street
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches 276
319
123
350
(280)
U R U R
7:00 a.m.12:00 p.m.1:00 p.m.4:00 p.m.5:00 p.m.1 2 or More 6:00 p.m.386319600
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U
276236525900630
500
(400)
150 105
203 236
312 203 236
276312
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
420
NoTWO WARRANTS SATISFIED
80%
1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
113
(120)(84)(160)(112)113 109 106
200 140
123 153 115
312
109 10613265
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approach
(420)
153 113115
203 4:00 p.m.123
750 319 386
Yes
(60)(56)
(600)(720)(504)312
Minor Street (42)(80)
203 236 276 319
113
386
2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
115
75 53 100 70
REQUIREMENT
132 65 123 153
FULFILLEDWARRANT
410 331
106109
410 331
109 106132655:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.2:00 p.m.1 2 or More
(336)
R U 3:00 p.m.R
(480)
132 65
7:00 a.m.12:00 p.m.1:00 p.m.2:00 p.m.3:00 p.m.410 331
386 410 331
153
1
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 841
(FHWA'S MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California)
Signal Warrant Analysis
COUNT DATE
006 FRESNO n/a n/a CALC JA DATE 3/15/2018
DIST CO RTE KPM CHK JLB DATE 3/15/2018
Major St:Ashlan Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Minor St:Bryan Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Critical speed of major street traffic > 64 km/h (40 mph)………………
or RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population ………..
URBAN (U)
(Condition A or Condition B or combination of A and B must be satisfied)
Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.
Combination of Conditions A & B SATISFIED YES NO
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions 6:00 p.m.7:00 p.m.3:00 p.m.1 2 or More
(336)
R U 4:00 p.m.R
(480)
192 202
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.2:00 p.m.3:00 p.m.4:00 p.m.339 354
279 339 354
52
202 60 52
FULFILLEDWARRANT
339 354
126130
339 354
130 126192202
Yes
(60)(56)
(600)(720)(504)650
Minor Street (42)(80)
262 303 308 287
109
279
2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
171
75 53 100 70
REQUIREMENT
192
Major Street
Highest Approach
(420)
52 109171
262 5:00 p.m.60
750 287 279
NoTWO WARRANTS SATISFIED
80%
1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
109
(120)(84)(160)(112)109 130 126
200 140
60 52 171
650
130 126192202
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches
279287
3/8/2018
600
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U
308303525900630
500
(400)
150 105
262 303
650 262 303
308650
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
420
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U R U R
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.2:00 p.m.WARRANT 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
5:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.1 2 or More 7:00 p.m.Major Street
Highest Approach 171
Minor Street
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches 308
287
60
350
(280)
1
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 841
(FHWA'S MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California)
Signal Warrant Analysis
COUNT DATE
006 FRESNO n/a n/a CALC JA DATE 3/15/2018
DIST CO RTE KPM CHK JLB DATE 3/15/2018
Major St:Grantland Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Minor St:Shields Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Critical speed of major street traffic > 64 km/h (40 mph)………………
or RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population ………..
URBAN (U)
(Condition A or Condition B or combination of A and B must be satisfied)
Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
WARRANT 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
3/8/2018
Hour
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Major Street
Highest Approaches 138
Minor Street
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches 241
266
107
350
(280)
U R U R
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.1:00 p.m.4:00 p.m.5:00 p.m.1 2 or More 6:00 p.m.261266600
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
500
(400)
150 105
261 166
307 261 166
241307
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
420
174
(120)(84)(160)(112)174 163 146
200 140
107 144 138
163 146199902:00 p.m.(336)3:00 p.m.(480)
199 90
226 147
261 226 147
144
Hour
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.
Combination of Conditions A & B SATISFIED YES NO
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions
U
241166525900630
NoTWO WARRANTS SATISFIED
80%
1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
307
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches
Major Street
Highest Approaches
(420)
144 174138
261 4:00 p.m.107
750 266 261
Yes
(60)(56)
(600)(720)(504)307
Minor Street (42)(80)
261 166 241 266
174
261
2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
138
75 53 100 70
REQUIREMENT
199 90 107 144
FULFILLEDWARRANT
226 147
146163
226 147
163 146199905:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.1 2 or More
R U R
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.1:00 p.m.2:00 p.m.3:00 p.m.1
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 841
(FHWA'S MUTCD 2009 Edition, as amended for use in California)
Signal Warrant Analysis
COUNT DATE
006 FRESNO n/a n/a CALC JA DATE 3/19/2018
DIST CO RTE KPM CHK JLB DATE 3/19/2018
Major St:Grantland Avenue Critical Approach Speed 55 MPH
Minor St:Clinton Avenue Critical Approach Speed 40 MPH
Critical speed of major street traffic > 64 km/h (40 mph)………………
or RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population ………..
URBAN (U)
(Condition A or Condition B or combination of A and B must be satisfied)
Condition A - Minimum Vehicle Volume 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES NO
80 % SATISFIED YES NO
Hour
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.
Combination of Conditions A & B SATISFIED YES NO
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com 1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
Fresno, CA 93710
info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions 5:00 p.m.6:00 p.m.2:00 p.m.1 2 or More
(336)
R U 3:00 p.m.R
(480)
20 13
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.1:00 p.m.2:00 p.m.3:00 p.m.225 152
209 225 152
22
13 24 22
FULFILLEDWARRANT
225 152
1420
225 152
20 142013
Yes
(60)(56)
(600)(720)(504)190
Minor Street (42)(80)
124 118 143 180
24
209
2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
31
75 53 100 70
REQUIREMENT
20
Major Street
Highest Approach
(420)
22 2431
124 4:00 p.m.24
750 180 209
NoTWO WARRANTS SATISFIED
80%
1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
24
(120)(84)(160)(112)24 20 14
200 140
24 22 31
190
20 142013
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches
209180
3/8/2018
600
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U
143118525900630
500
(400)
150 105
124 118
190 124 118
143190
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
420
Figure 4C-101 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U R U R
7:00 a.m.8:00 a.m.1:00 p.m.WARRANT 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
4:00 p.m.5:00 p.m.1 2 or More 6:00 p.m.Major Street
Highest Approach 31
Minor Street
APPROACH LANES
Both Approaches 143
180
24
350
(280)
1
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103 Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com
Warrant 2 - Four Hour Volumes
Existing Conditions
Intersection: Grantland Avenue at Ashlan Avenue
7:00 AM Volume 5:00 PM Volume
4:00 PM Volume 6:00 PM Volume
Grantland at Ashlan:
Approach Lanes One Lane
Two or More
Lanes 7:00AM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM
Both Approaches -
Major Street X 312 386 410 331
Highest Approach -
Minor Street X 132 113 109 106
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals, November 7, 2014
Satisfied?Yes No
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103 Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com
Warrant 2 - Four Hour Volumes
Existing - AM (PM) Peak Hour
Intersection: Ashlan Avenue at Bryan Avenue
7:00 AM Volume 5:00 PM Volume
3:00 PM Volume 6:00 PM Volume
Ashlan at Bryan:
Approach Lanes One Lane
Two or More
Lanes 7:00AM 3:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM
Both Approaches -
Major Street X 650 287 339 354
Highest Approach -
Minor Street X 192 171 130 126
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals, November 7, 2014
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103 Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com
Warrant 2 - Four Hour Volumes
Existing Conditions
Intersection: Grantland Avenue at Shields Avenue
7:00 AM Volume 4:00 PM Volume
3:00 PM Volume 5:00 PM Volume
Grantland at Shields:
Approach Lanes One Lane
Two or More
Lanes 7:00AM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM
Both Approaches -
Major Street X 307 266 261 226
Highest Approach -
Minor Street X 199 138 174 163
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals, November 7, 2014
Satisfied?Yes No
Prepared By:
www.JLBtraffic.com
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103 Fresno, CA 93710
(559) 570 - 8991
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com
Warrant 2 - Four Hour Volumes
Existing Conditions
Intersection: Grantland Avenue at Clinton Avenue
7:00 AM Volume 4:00 PM Volume
3:00 PM Volume 5:00 PM Volume
Grantland at Clinton:
Approach Lanes One Lane
Two or More
Lanes 7:00AM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM
Both Approaches -
Major Street X 190 180 209 225
Highest Approach -
Minor Street X 20 31 24 20
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals, November 7, 2014
Satisfied?Yes No
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
1. Ashlan Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Ashlan
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
126 (95) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
365 (461) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
2. Ashlan Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Bryan Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
189 (97) VPH
Ashlan Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
659 (251) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
3. Dakota Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
41 (25) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
391 (404) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Urban Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
5. Project Driveway / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Project
Driveway
Highest
Approach
Volume =
12 (8) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
399 (412) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
6. Shields Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Shields
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
166 (115) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
362 (290) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Existing plus Project Traffic Conditions
7. Clinton Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Clinton
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
20 (12) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
226 (293) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
1. Ashlan Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Ashlan
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
160 (128) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
474 (603) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
2. Ashlan Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
342 (255) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
837 (507) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
3. Dakota Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
41 (25) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
500 (545) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Urban Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
5. Project Driveway / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Project
Driveway
Highest
Approach
Volume =
12 (8) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
509 (552) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
6. Shields Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Shields
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
190 (140) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
427 (367) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Near Term plus Project Traffic Conditions
7. Clinton Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Clinton
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
21 (16) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
251 (320) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
1. Ashlan Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Ashlan
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
484 (307) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2298 (2534) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
2. Ashlan Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
415 (301) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
1280 (618) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
3. Dakota Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
106 (49) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2273 (2282) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
4. Dakota Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
117 (150) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
1084 (846) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
6. Shields Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Shields
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
534 (314) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2039 (1856) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 No Project Traffic Conditions
7. Clinton Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Clinton
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
47 (19) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
1659 (1522) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
1. Ashlan Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Ashlan
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
485 (307) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2342 (2596) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
2. Ashlan Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Minor Street
Highest
Approach
Volume =
419 (301) VPH
Major Street Total of Both Approaches =
1281 (623) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
3. Dakota Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
143 (77) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2331 (2372) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
4. Dakota Avenue / Bryan Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Dakota
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
123 (167) VPH
Bryan Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
1092 (862) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Urban Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
5. Project Driveway / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Project
Driveway
Highest
Approach
Volume =
11 (7) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2269 (2258) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
6. Shields Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Shields
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
535 (320) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
2083 (1912) VPH
1300 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 103
www.JLBtraffic.com Fresno, CA 93710
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning, & Parking Solutions info@JLBtraffic.com (559) 570-8991
Peak Hour Signal Warrant (Rural Areas)
Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Traffic Conditions
7. Clinton Avenue / Grantland Avenue
AM (PM) Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
PM Peak Hour – Signal Warrant is Not Met
Source: California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD 2014 Edition)
Chapter 4C: Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies
Part 4: Highway Traffic Signals
November 7, 2014
Clinton
Avenue
Highest
Approach
Volume =
47 (19) VPH
Grantland Avenue Total of Both Approaches =
1698 (1576) VPH