HomeMy WebLinkAboutPM 2019-10 - Traffic Impact Study - CLOVIS & JENSEN - 9/23/2019
Traffic Impact Study
Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues
Fresno, California
Prepared For:
TAIT & Associates, Inc.
11280 Trade Center Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95742
Date:
March 25, 2019
Job No.:
19-010.01
952 Pollasky Avenue ♦ Clovis, California 93612 ♦ (559) 299-1544 ♦ www.peters-engineering.com
Ms. Kim Barnett March 25, 2019
TAIT & Associates, Inc.
11280 Trade Center Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95742
Subject: Traffic Impact Study
Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues
Fresno, California
Dear Ms. Barnett:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a traffic impact study for a proposed 7-Eleven convenience
store and fuel station in Fresno, California. This analysis focuses on the anticipated effect of
vehicle traffic resulting from the project and was performed in accordance with the City of
Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines updated February 2, 2009.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed 7-Eleven convenience store and fuel station site covers 1.45 acres within a
gross site acreage of 15.63 acres (APN: 481-130-18) on the northwest corner of the
intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues in Fresno, California. The proposed development
will consist of a new 3,062-square-foot convenience store building with 12 fueling positions
under a 3,096-square-foot canopy. Site access is proposed via one right-in/right-out driveway
connecting to Clovis Avenue and one right-in/right-out driveway connecting to Jensen
Avenue. The location of the site is presented in the attached Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map,
following the text of this report. The site plan is presented in the attached Figure 2, Site Plan.
3.0 STUDY AREA AND TIME PERIOD
The study locations were determined based on consultation with City of Fresno staff
considering anticipated Project trip distribution, the size of the Project, and the existing
conditions in the vicinity of the Project site. This report includes counts and analysis of the
following intersection:
1. Clovis Avenue / Jensen Avenue
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 2
The study time periods include the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours determined between
7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. The peak hours are analyzed for the
following conditions:
• Existing Conditions;
• Existing-Plus-Project Conditions;
• Near-Term With-Project Conditions (includes pending projects); and
• Cumulative (Year 2040) Conditions With Project.
4.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE
The Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual, 2010, (HCM2010) defines
level of service (LOS) as, “A quantitative stratification of a performance measure or
measures that represent quality of service, measured on an A-F scale, with LOS A
representing the best operating conditions from the traveler’s perspective and LOS F the
worst.” Automobile mode LOS characteristics for signalized intersections are presented in
Table 1.
Table 1
Level of Service Characteristics for Signalized Intersections
Level of
Service Description Average Vehicle
Delay (seconds)
A Volume-to-capacity ratio is low. Progression is exceptionally
favorable or the cycle length is very short. <10
B Volume-to-capacity ratio is low. Progression is highly favorable or
the cycle length is very short. >10-20
C Volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than 1.0. Progression is
favorable or cycle length is moderate. >20-35
D
Volume-to-capacity ratio is high but no greater than 1.0.
Progression is ineffective or cycle length is long. Many vehicles
stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.
>35-55
E
Volume-to-capacity ratio is high but no greater than 1.0.
Progression is unfavorable and cycle length is long. Individual
cycle failures are frequent.
>55-80
F Volume-to-capacity ratio is greater than 1.0. Progression is very
poor and cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue. >80
Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010
5.0 PLANNING AND FUNDING
5.1 City of Fresno General Plan
The City of Fresno General Plan designates Clovis Avenue in the vicinity of the Project site
as an arterial street with four lanes and an ultimate LOS D. The General Plan designates
Jensen Avenue as a super arterial street with six lanes and an ultimate LOS E.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 3
5.2 City of Fresno Traffic Signal Mitigation and Major Street Impact Fees
The City of Fresno Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program and the Fresno
Major Street Impact (FMSI) fee program provide funds for construction of specified traffic
signals and major street segments. The intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues is in the
TSMI fee program (September 2016) for 100 percent of traffic signal upgrades for additional
turn lanes (dual left-turn lanes on the eastbound and westbound approaches).
The Project site is located within the new growth area with respect to the FMSI fee program.
5.3 Measure C
In 1986, the voters of Fresno County approved Measure C, which created a half-cent sales tax
for 20 years to provide a source of funds for specified transportation improvement projects
within Fresno County. Money generated through the Measure C program is used for various
improvements to extend freeways, improve roads, and enhance public safety. In its first 20
years (1986 to 2006) Measure C funded over $1 billion of improvements. In 2006, the voters
approved the extension of Measure C from 2007 to 2027, and it is projected to generate $1.7
billion over its 20-year life. Measure C authorizes the establishment of a Regional
Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF) program to provide additional funding for regional
transportation projects through new fees charged to development projects. The RTMF
program was enacted by the County of Fresno and all cities within the County and became
effective on January 1, 2009. The program is administered by a Joint Powers Authority
(JPA) that was formed for the specific purpose of managing the fee program. In accordance
with State law, a nexus study was completed that analyzed the growth of travel demand for
each jurisdiction, identified regional road improvements to meet such demands, described the
appropriate “nexus” between such demand and improvements, and adopted appropriate
mitigation fees applicable to various land use categories.
The current RTMF fee rate for commercial/retail structures is $1.61 per square foot and the
rate for commercial/office/service structures is $0.89 per square foot.
6.0 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
6.1 Level of Service
The City of Fresno General Plan includes the following policies pertaining to vehicular LOS
that are relevant to the proposed Project:
MT-1-k Multi-Modal Level of Service Standards. Develop and use a tiered system of
flexible, multi-modal Level of Service standards for streets designated by the
Circulation Diagram (Figure MT-1). Strive to accommodate a peak hour vehicle
LOS of D or better on street segments and at intersections, except where Policies
MT-1-m through MT-1-p provide greater specificity. Establish minimum
acceptable service levels for other modes and use them in the development and
environmental review process.
MT-1-n Peak Hour Vehicle LOS. Maintain a peak-hour vehicle LOS standard of D or
better for all roadway areas outside of identified Activity Center and Bus Rapid
Transit Corridor districts, unless the City Traffic Engineer determines that
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 4
mitigation to maintain this LOS would be infeasible and/or conflict with the
achievement of other General Plan policies.
MT-1-o LOS Deviations Outside of Activity Centers and Areas Designated for
Mixed-Use. Accept vehicle LOS E or F conditions outside of identified multi-
modal districts only if provisions commensurate with the level of impact and
approved by the City Traffic Engineer are made to sufficiently improve the overall
transportation system and/or promote non-vehicular transportation as part of a
development project or City-initiated project.
MT-2-i Transportation Impact Studies. Require a Transportation Impact Study
(currently named Traffic Impact Study) to assess the impacts of new development
projects on existing and planned streets for projects meeting one or more of the
following criteria, unless it is determined by the City Traffic Engineer that the
project site and surrounding area already has appropriate multi-modal
infrastructure improvements:
• When a project includes a General Plan amendment that changes the General
Plan Land Use Designation.
• When the project will substantially change the off-site transportation system
(auto, transit, bike or pedestrian) or connection to the system, as determined
by the City Traffic Engineer.
• Transportation impact criteria are tiered based on a project’s location within
the City’s Sphere of Influence. This is to assist with areas being incentivized
for development. The four zones, as defined on Figure MT-4, are listed
below. The following criteria apply:
o Traffic Impact Zone I (TIZ-I): TIZ-I represents the Downtown Planning
Area. Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of F or better for all
intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all
development projected to generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle
trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone II (TIZ-II): TIZ-II generally represents areas of the
City currently built up and wanting to encourage infill development.
Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of E or better for all intersections and
roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all development projected
to generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone III (TIZ-III): TIZ-III generally represents areas near
or outside the City Limits but within the SOI as of December 31, 2012.
Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of D or better for all intersections and
roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all development projected
to generate 100 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone IV (TIZ-IV): TIZ-IV represents the southern
employment areas within and planned by the City. Maintain a peak hour
LOS standard of E or better for all intersections and roadway segments. A
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 5
TIS will be required for all development projected to generate 200 or more
peak hour new vehicle trips.
The proposed Project site and the study intersections are located in TIZ-III. For purposes of
this study, a significant traffic impact will be identified if:
• the proposed Project will decrease the LOS below D at an intersection; or
• the proposed Project will exacerbate an existing deficiency at an intersection already
operating below LOS D by increasing the average delay per vehicle at the intersection
by 5.0 seconds or more.
6.2 Intersection Queuing
The City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines dated January 20, 2009 require a
queuing analysis of the study intersections and recommendations for queues that are
projected to exceed the available storage capacity. However, it should be noted that queuing
is not included in the significance criteria recognized by the City and is reviewed to confirm
the LOS results. Where excessive queues are expected, the LOS results may not be
applicable due to blocking of adjacent lanes.
A queuing deficiency is identified if the calculated 95th-percentile queue length exceeds the
storage length by more than 25 feet (the average storage length for one vehicle) since the bay
taper can typically store approximately one vehicle.
6.3 Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
A significant impact will be identified if the proposed Project would disrupt or impede
existing or planned transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities.
7.0 LANE CONFIGURATIONS AND INTERSECTION CONTROL
The existing lane configurations and intersection control at the study intersection are
presented in the attached Figure 3, Existing Lane Configurations and Intersection Control.
For purposes of these analyses, it is assumed that the existing lane configurations will be
maintained through the year 2040.
8.0 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Existing peak-hour traffic volumes at the study intersection were determined by performing
manual turning-movement counts between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 and 6:00
p.m. on a weekday. The data sheets are presented in Appendix A and indicate the date the
counts were performed. The existing peak-hour turning movement volumes are presented in
the attached Figure 4, Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes.
9.0 PENDING PROJECTS
The traffic analyses for the near-term and long-term conditions consider the effects of traffic
expected to be generated by pending and approved projects in the study area. As assumption
was made that background traffic would increase at a rate of one percent per year for one year
to account of regional growth.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 6
10.0 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
10.1 Trip Generation
Data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual,
10th Edition, are typically used to estimate the number of trips anticipated to be generated by
proposed projects. Table 2 presents the trip generation calculations.
Table 2
Project Trip Generation
ITE Land Use Building
Area
A.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
P.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
Weekday
Traffic Volume
Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate
Split Enter Exit Rate Total
Super Convenience
Market/Gas Station
(960)
3,062
sq. ft.
FC1
50/50 79 78 69.28
50/50 106 107 837.58 2,566
Reference: Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2017
Rates are reported in trips per 1,000 square feet of building area
Splits are reported as Entering/Exiting as a percentage of the total.
FC1: Fitted curve: T = 137.38(X) – 264.53
10.2 Pass-By Trips
The ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, September 2017 (TGH) presents
information suggesting that the Project traffic volumes will include pass-by trips. The TGH
defines a pass-by trip as a trip that “is made as an intermediate stop on the way from an origin
to a primary trip destination without a route diversion. Pass-by trips are attracted from traffic
passing the site on an adjacent street or roadway that offers direct access to the generator.”
The TGH states: “However, not all traffic entering or exiting a site driveway is necessarily
new traffic added to the street system. The actual amount of new traffic is dependent upon
the purpose of the trip and the route used from its origin to its destination. For example,
retail-oriented developments such as shopping centers, discount stores, restaurants, banks,
service stations, and convenience markets are often located adjacent to busy streets in order
to attract the motorists already on the street system for a different purpose. These sites attract
a portion of their trips from traffic passing the site on the way from an origin to an ultimate
destination. Thus, these “pass-by” trips do not add new traffic to the adjacent street system
and may be reduced from the total external trips generated by a study site.”
Tables E.15 and E.16 of the TGH indicate the average pass-by trip percentage observed for
convenience market with gasoline pumps (ITE Land Use Code 853) is 63 percent during the
a.m. peak hour and 66 percent during the p.m. peak hour, with a minimum observed value of
48 percent for each peak hour. Table E.38 of the TGH indicates the average pass-by trip
percentage observed for gasoline/service station (ITE Land Use Code 945) is 56 percent, with
a minimum observed value of 46 percent.
For purposes of this study, a pass-by reduction of 40 percent is applied to the external project
trips. Table 3 presents a breakdown of Project pass-by trips and primary trips.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 7
Table 3
Pass-By Trips and Net External Primary Project Trips
Trip Type Weekday A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
In Out In Out In Out
Total Trips 1,283 1,283 79 78 106 107
Pass-By Trips -513 -513 -31 -31 -42 -42
Primary Trips 770 770 48 47 64 65
10.3 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
The Project trips were distributed to the adjacent road network using engineering judgment
considering the distribution of existing traffic volumes, the locations and types of streets in
the study area, the configuration of the site, and complementary land uses in the project
vicinity. The peak-hour primary Project traffic volumes at the intersection of Clovis and
Jensen Avenues and at the site driveways are presented in the attached Figure 5, Peak-Hour
Primary Project Traffic Volumes. The peak-hour Project pass-by traffic volumes at the site
driveways are presented in the attached Figure 6, Peak-Hour Project Pass-By Traffic
Volumes.
11.0 EXISTING-PLUS-PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The existing-plus-Project peak-hour turning movement volumes are presented in the attached
Figure 7, Existing-Plus-Project Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes.
12.0 NEAR-TERM WITH-PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The near-term with-Project peak-hour turning movement volumes are presented in the
attached Figure 8, Near-Term With-Project Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes. The near-term
volumes include the existing traffic volumes, the pending projects, and the proposed Project.
13.0 CUMULATIVE YEAR 2040 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The Fresno Council of Governments (COG) maintains a travel model that is typically used to
forecast future traffic volumes. Cumulative (year 2040) traffic volumes were projected using
the Increment Method, which is described in a document available from the COG entitled
“Model Steering Committee Recommended Procedures for Using Traffic Projections from
the Fresno COG Travel Model dated December 2002.” In general, the Increment Method
forecasts future traffic volumes by estimating the additional trips that will result from
regional growth as calculated by the model between the base year and the horizon year. The
additional trips are added to the existing traffic volumes, resulting in a forecast of the future
traffic volumes. The Fresno County travel model data output is presented in Appendix B.
The cumulative year 2040 traffic volumes with the Project at the study intersections are
presented in the attached Figure 9, Year 2040 Cumulative With-Project Peak-Hour Traffic
Volumes.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 8
14.0 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
14.1 Bicycle Facilities
The City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP) dated December 2016 refers to the
Caltrans Highway Design Manual for classification of bicycle facilities as follows:
• Class I Bikeway (Bike Path): Off-street facilities that provide exclusive use for non-
motorized travel, including bicyclists and pedestrians.
• Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane): On-street facilities that use striping, stencils, and
signage to denote preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists.
• Class III Bikeway (Bike Route): On-street pavement markings or signage that
connect the bicycle roadway network along corridors that do not provide enough
space for dedicated lanes on low-speed and low-volume streets.
• Class IV Bikeway (Separated Bikeways): Physically separated bicycle facilities that
are distinct from the sidewalk and designed for exclusive use by bicyclists.
Commonly known as “cycle tracks,” they are located within the street right-of-way,
but provide similar comfort when compared to Class I Bikeways.
Bike lanes do not exist in the vicinity of the Project site. Figure 48 of the ATP identifies a
proposed bikeway system with Class II bike lanes planned on Jensen Avenue and on Clovis
Avenue.
The Project is not expected to disrupt or impede existing or planned bicycle facilities.
14.2 Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian connectivity is not well established in the vicinity of the Project site, as much of
the area is undeveloped. The property northeast of the intersection of Clovis and Jensen
Avenues is developed and contains sidewalks along the frontage and a curb ramp at the
intersection; however, the sidewalks end at the limits of the development. A curb ramp exists
on the southeast corner of the intersection but there is no pedestrian connectivity beyond the
curb returns. Crosswalks exist at the intersection but do not conform to current City
standards where the crosswalks contain angle points and median noses extend into the
crosswalk.
It is anticipated that the Project would be required to construct sidewalk along its frontage
and a curb ramp on the northwest corner of the intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues.
The Project is not expected to disrupt or impede existing or planned pedestrian facilities.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 9
15.0 SITE CIRCULATION AND ACCESS
As required by the City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines, a review of the
proposed site plan is performed to identify potential issues related to on-site circulation and
site access. At a minimum, the Project should be designed in accordance with the following
City documents and standards:
• City of Fresno Parking Manual;
• City of Fresno Public Works Standards for driveways; and
• City of Fresno Policy TE-1.1.1.
The site plan appears to provide adequate circulation throughout the site. It should be
confirmed that the easternmost parking spaces in the parking lot immediately north of the
proposed building have adequate area to back out of the stalls.
The proposed driveway connecting to Jensen Avenue is located 87 feet west of the end of
curb return at Clovis Avenue. Jensen Avenue is designated as a super arterial; the City of
Fresno would typically require a minimum spacing of 300 feet from the intersection per City
of Fresno Standard Drawing P-6. City of Fresno Policy TE-1.1.1 describes requirements
relative to the number of driveways connecting to super arterials. Considering that future
development is likely to occur immediately west and north of the proposed Project, the site
plan may require modification to share a driveway with potential future development.
The site plan should be developed to accommodate the planned future widening of the
intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues for additional left-turn lanes in accordance with
City of Fresno intersection standards for arterials and super arterials and as described later in
this report.
16.0 TRANSIT
Fresno Area Express (FAX) provides bus service to the Fresno area. The nearest FAX bus
route is approximately two miles north of the Project site (Routes 1 and 22). The Project is
not expected to disrupt or impede existing transit facilities.
17.0 INTERSECTION ANALYSES
The levels of service at the study intersections were determined using the computer program
Synchro 9, which is based on HCM2010 procedures for calculating levels of service. The
intersection analysis sheets are presented in Appendix C. Table 4 presents the results of the
intersection analyses. Delays and levels of service worse than the target LOS are indicated in
bold font.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 10
Table 4
LOS Summary – Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues
Scenario Control
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS
Existing Signals 28.2 C 29.2 C
Existing Plus Project Signals 29.8 C 34.2 C
Near-Term With Project Signals 30.4 C 35.0 C
Cumulative 2040 With Project Signals 201.4 F 239.3 F
The results of the intersection operational analyses include an estimate of the 95th-percentile
queue lengths. The existing storage capacity and the calculated 95th-percentile queue lengths
are presented in Table 5. The storage capacities reported in Table 8 are based on
measurements from available aerial photographs. Calculated 95th-percentile queues
exceeding the existing storage capacity are indicated in bold font.
Table 5
Intersection Queuing Summary – Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues
Intersection Existing
Storage
Length
(feet)
95th-Percentile Queue Length (feet)
Approach Lane Existing Existing
Plus Project
Near-Term
With Project
2040 With
Project
A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M.
Eastbound L 200 78 215 89 240 90 242 660 896
Eastbound T (2) * 97 197 97 197 98 200 959 1,252
Eastbound R Shared
Westbound L 205 251 119 251 119 255 121 695 458
Westbound T (2) * 232 117 239 121 242 122 1,666 1,439
Westbound R Shared
Northbound L 175 54 90 64 122 64 125 236 352
Northbound T (2) * 158 321 158 321 160 342 481 981
Northbound R Shared
Southbound L 215 85 120 99 183 100 184 763 812
Southbound T (2) * 247 176 254 182 257 184 853 580
Southbound R Shared
L: Left-turn lane T: Through lane R: Right-turn lane
** Storage length exceeds 2,000 feet to the next major intersection.
18.0 DISCUSSION
The results of the intersection analyses indicate that the intersection of Clovis and Jensen
Avenues is currently operating at acceptable levels of service with calculated 95th-percentile
queue lengths less than the available storage capacity, with the exception that queues in the
left-turn lane on the eastbound approach exceed the storage capacity. The intersection is
expected to continue to operate at acceptable levels of service after construction of the
Project and in the near-term condition. Therefore, the Project does not cause a significant
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 11
traffic impact based on intersection LOS. However, the Project will exacerbate the queues in
the left-turn lane on the eastbound approach.
By the year 2040 the intersection is expected to operate at LOS F.
Mitigation Measures
The left-turn lane on the eastbound approach to the intersection of Clovis and Jensen
Avenues should be lengthened to at least 250 feet in accordance with City of Fresno
standards.
The intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues will require widening in the future to improve
the LOS at the intersection. It is anticipated that the intersection would operate at LOS D
with the following lane configurations:
Eastbound: two left-turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Westbound: two left-turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Northbound: two left-turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Southbound: two left-turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right-turn lane
The mitigated intersection analysis sheets are presented in Appendix D.
It is recommended that the Project mitigate its share of the significant impact by paying the
City of Fresno development fees and by developing its frontage to accommodate the required
future intersection configuration.
The dual left-turn lanes on the northbound and southbound approaches to the intersection are
not currently included in the TSMI fee program. It is recommended that the next update of
the fee program include the recommended intersection configuration.
19.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Generally-accepted traffic engineering principles and methods were employed to estimate the
number of trips expected to be generated by the Project, to analyze the existing traffic
conditions, and to analyze the traffic conditions projected to occur in the future.
The City of Fresno General Plan designates Clovis Avenue in the vicinity of the Project site
as an arterial street with four lanes and an ultimate LOS D. The General Plan designates
Jensen Avenue as a super arterial street with six lanes and an ultimate LOS E. The
intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues is in the TSMI fee program (September 2016) for
100 percent of traffic signal upgrades for additional turn lanes (dual left-turn lanes on the
eastbound and westbound approaches). The Project site is located within the new growth
area with respect to the FMSI fee program.
The traffic impact study found that the intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues is currently
operating at acceptable levels of service with calculated 95th-percentile queue lengths less
than the available storage capacity, with the exception that queues in the left-turn lane on the
eastbound approach exceed the storage capacity. The intersection is expected to continue to
operate at acceptable levels of service after construction of the Project and in the near-term
condition. By the year 2040 the intersection is expected to operate at LOS F.
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 12
The Project does not cause a significant traffic impact in the near-term conditions based on
intersection LOS, but will contribute to the cumulative LOS F at the intersection of Clovis
and Jensen Avenues in the ultimate year 2040 condition. In addition, the Project will
exacerbate queues in the deficient left-turn storage lane on the eastbound approach.
The left-turn lane on the eastbound approach to the intersection of Clovis and Jensen
Avenues should be lengthened to at least 250 feet in accordance with City of Fresno
standards.
The intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues will require widening in the future to improve
the LOS at the intersection. It is anticipated that the intersection would operate at LOS D
with the following lane configurations:
Eastbound: two left-turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Westbound: two left-turn lanes, three through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Northbound: two left-turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right-turn lane
Southbound: two left-turn lanes, two through lanes, and one right-turn lane
It is recommended that the Project mitigate its share of the significant impact by paying the
City of Fresno development fees and by developing its frontage to accommodate the required
future intersection configuration.
The dual left-turn lanes on the northbound and southbound approaches to the intersection of
Clovis and Jensen Avenues are not currently included in the TSMI fee program. It is
recommended that the next update of the fee program include the recommended intersection
configuration.
The site plan appears to provide adequate circulation throughout the site. It should be
confirmed that the easternmost parking spaces in the parking lot immediately north of the
proposed building have adequate area to back out of the stalls. The proposed driveway
connecting to Jensen Avenue may need to be moved west and shared with future
development adjacent to the Project site. The City of Fresno would typically require a
minimum spacing of 300 feet from a major intersection per City of Fresno Standard Drawing
P-6. In addition, City of Fresno Policy TE-1.1.1 describes requirements relative to the
number of driveways connecting to super arterials.
The site plan should be developed to accommodate the planned future widening of the
intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues for additional left-turn lanes in accordance with
City of Fresno intersection standards for arterials and super arterials.
The City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP) dated December 2016 identifies a
proposed bikeway system with Class II bike lanes planned on Jensen Avenue and on Clovis
Avenue in the vicinity of the Project site. The bike lanes do not currently exist. The Project
is not expected to disrupt or impede existing or planned bicycle facilities.
Pedestrian connectivity is not well established in the vicinity of the Project site, as much of
the area is undeveloped. Crosswalks exist at the intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues
but do not conform to current City standards where the crosswalks contain angle points and
median noses extend into the crosswalk. It is anticipated that the Project would be required
to construct sidewalk along its frontage and a curb ramp on the northwest corner of the
Traffic Impact Study – Proposed 7-Eleven Convenience Store and Fuel Station March 25, 2019
Northwest of the Intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues, Fresno, California Page 13
intersection of Clovis and Jensen Avenues. The Project is not expected to disrupt or impede
existing or planned pedestrian facilities.
Fresno Area Express (FAX) provides bus service to the Fresno area. The nearest FAX bus
route is approximately two miles north of the Project site (Routes 1 and 22). The Project is
not expected to disrupt or impede existing transit facilities.
Thank you for the opportunity to perform this traffic impact study. Please feel free to contact
our office if you have any questions.
PETERS ENGINEERING GROUP
John Rowland, PE, TE
Attachments: Figures 1 through 9
Appendix A - Traffic Count Data Sheets
Appendix B - Fresno County Travel Model
Appendix C - Intersection Analysis Sheets
Appendix D - Mitigated Intersection Analysis Sheets
FIGURES
APPENDIX A
TRAFFIC COUNT DATA SHEETS
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
Peters Engineering Group
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 952 Pollasky Avenue
www.metrotrafficdata.com Clovis, CA 93612
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 11 94 18 7 20 121 33 6 15 42 7 3 49 82 13 6
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 10 89 23 7 30 161 44 7 17 57 16 10 51 144 8 4
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 12 96 17 6 34 185 63 13 16 64 15 5 64 156 17 4
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 11 118 15 7 10 107 15 7 14 58 22 2 63 165 22 4
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 9 82 17 3 13 147 37 9 13 47 14 4 42 147 16 4
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 8 79 19 4 14 126 41 9 21 42 14 7 37 91 8 2
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 13 79 15 7 12 87 21 8 17 62 9 7 30 69 9 5
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 14 102 23 7 11 78 20 9 10 42 7 4 25 61 8 7
TOTAL 88 739 147 48 144 1012 274 68 123 414 104 42 361 915 101 36
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 21 173 39 8 19 102 19 11 37 87 34 2 31 65 14 8
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 14 143 29 7 16 101 15 3 38 121 23 3 33 69 15 7
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 26 204 49 3 19 129 11 5 43 84 13 0 29 71 13 8
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 23 172 39 5 22 129 24 8 38 137 20 3 31 67 16 6
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 16 170 52 9 21 107 10 4 54 136 17 3 21 62 17 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 19 168 47 7 22 112 12 5 48 124 20 3 24 77 20 4
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 11 170 42 4 16 119 17 4 44 67 14 3 29 49 24 1
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 12 144 48 1 17 96 14 0 27 74 6 2 28 85 13 4
TOTAL 142 1344 345 44 152 895 122 40 329 830 147 19 226 545 132 38
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 42 385 72 23 87 600 159 36 60 226 67 21 220 612 63 16
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 84 714 187 24 84 477 57 22 183 481 70 9 105 277 66 18
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.877 3.7%
PM 57 477 84 0.883
PM 0.970 2.6%AM 159 600 87 0.75
PHF 0.886 0.929 AM PM
183 60 63 66
481 226 612 277
70 67 220 105
PM AM
PHF 0.895 0.926 PHF
0.866 42 385 72 AM
0.883 84 714 187 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3Clovis Ave
Clovis Ave
Jensen AveJensen Ave
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Jensen Ave @ Clovis Ave
Fresno
Tuesday, February 26, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
36.707448°
-119.700006°
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
Peters Engineering Group
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 952 Pollasky Avenue
www.metrotrafficdata.com Clovis, CA 93612
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Bikes Peds Peds <>
AM Peak Total 0 1 PM 0 0 0 0
PM Peak Total 0 1 AM 0 0 0 0
Peds <>0 0 AM PM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
PM AM
Peds <>1 1
Peds <>0 0 0 0 AM
0 0 0 0 PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Clovis Ave
Jensen Ave Jensen Ave
Clovis Ave Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
Jensen Ave @ Clovis Ave 36.707448°
Fresno -119.700006°
Tuesday, February 26, 2019 Clear
APPENDIX B
FRESNO COUNTY TRAVEL MODEL
Licensed to Peters Engineering
AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
2018 Fresno County Council of Governments Travel Demand Model
1
1
1
1
95425294118486410733
6
1
6
3
119
262
247
153 392831402112162133013217531576110431079898ClovisClovis984138114061201ClovisClovis1185
1473
1500
1324
Jensen
Jensen
1118
1520
1520
1319
Jensen
Jensen8599981057971ClovisClovis
1101
1295
1323
1266
Jensen
Jensen
984138114061201ClovisClovis
Licensed to Peters Engineering
AMand PM Peak HOur Traffic Volumes
2035 Fresno County Council of Governments Travel Demand Model
1
1
1
1
1627992151203831151945
5
6
5204571518274
3514314055124
284
266
110 6345106663623253838
7
10
50
1376121345
7
8
55672323075341066122612861130ClovisClovis81311611139883ClovisClovis2191
2385
2468
2290
Jensen
Jensen
2155
2536
2573
2294
Jensen
Jensen1167116612041204ClovisClovis
2189
2221
2313
2274
Jensen
Jensen
84611631143928ClovisClovis
APPENDIX C
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SHEETS
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 226 67 220 612 63 42 385 72 87 600 159
Future Volume (veh/h) 60 226 67 220 612 63 42 385 72 87 600 159
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 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 243 72 244 680 70 48 443 83 116 800 212
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, %444444444444
Cap, veh/h 91 465 135 288 917 94 77 905 168 149 953 253
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.29 0.29 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.35 0.35
Sat Flow, veh/h 1740 2657 770 1740 3178 327 1740 2923 544 1740 2716 720
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 65 157 158 244 371 379 48 262 264 116 511 501
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1740 1736 1691 1740 1736 1769 1740 1736 1731 1740 1736 1700
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 5.5 5.7 9.2 13.0 13.1 1.8 8.3 8.4 4.4 18.2 18.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 5.5 5.7 9.2 13.0 13.1 1.8 8.3 8.4 4.4 18.2 18.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.42
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 91 304 296 288 501 510 77 537 536 149 609 597
V/C Ratio(X) 0.72 0.52 0.53 0.85 0.74 0.74 0.63 0.49 0.49 0.78 0.84 0.84
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 155 464 452 326 634 646 155 537 536 289 660 646
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.4 25.2 25.3 27.3 21.7 21.7 31.6 18.9 18.9 30.2 20.1 20.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.0 1.4 1.5 16.9 3.5 3.5 8.1 0.7 0.7 8.6 8.9 9.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 2.8 2.8 5.8 6.7 6.8 1.1 4.0 4.1 2.4 10.2 10.0
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 41.4 26.5 26.8 44.1 25.2 25.2 39.8 19.6 19.6 38.7 29.0 29.2
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDBBDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 380 994 574 1128
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.2 29.8 21.3 30.1
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.8 25.7 15.1 16.7 7.0 28.5 7.5 24.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.2 20.4 12.6 18.0 6.0 25.6 6.0 24.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 10.4 11.2 7.7 3.8 20.3 4.5 15.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.9 0.1 4.1 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 28.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 315 244 750 48 526 116 1012
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.47 0.78 0.61 0.32 0.56 0.50 0.84
Control Delay 44.1 24.6 50.4 23.4 40.4 25.3 38.9 29.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 44.1 24.6 50.4 23.4 40.4 25.3 38.9 29.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 31 60 117 170 23 108 53 232
Queue Length 95th (ft) #78 97 #251 232 54 158 85 247
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 154 925 323 1267 154 1047 287 1301
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.42 0.34 0.76 0.59 0.31 0.50 0.40 0.78
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 183 481 70 105 277 66 84 714 187 84 477 57
Future Volume (veh/h) 183 481 70 105 277 66 84 714 187 84 477 57
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 206 540 79 113 298 71 95 811 212 95 542 65
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 248 726 106 144 500 117 122 982 257 121 1124 134
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.36 0.36 0.07 0.36 0.36
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3070 448 1757 2819 661 1757 2751 719 1757 3153 377
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 206 307 312 113 184 185 95 517 506 95 301 306
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 1766 1757 1752 1728 1757 1752 1718 1757 1752 1778
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.9 11.3 11.4 4.4 6.7 6.9 3.7 18.7 18.7 3.7 9.3 9.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.9 11.3 11.4 4.4 6.7 6.9 3.7 18.7 18.7 3.7 9.3 9.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 248 414 417 144 311 307 122 626 613 121 625 634
V/C Ratio(X) 0.83 0.74 0.75 0.78 0.59 0.60 0.78 0.83 0.83 0.78 0.48 0.48
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 277 513 517 217 453 447 222 684 671 151 625 634
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.1 24.6 24.7 31.4 26.3 26.4 31.9 20.4 20.4 31.9 17.4 17.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.4 4.5 4.6 10.2 1.8 1.9 10.2 7.6 7.8 18.8 0.6 0.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.0 6.0 6.1 2.5 3.4 3.5 2.1 10.4 10.2 2.4 4.5 4.7
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.5 29.1 29.3 41.6 28.1 28.3 42.1 28.1 28.2 50.7 18.0 18.0
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCCDBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 825 482 1118 702
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.5 31.3 29.3 22.4
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 29.8 9.7 21.4 8.8 29.7 13.8 17.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 27.2 8.6 20.4 8.8 24.4 11.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 20.7 6.4 13.4 5.7 11.3 9.9 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.1 0.0 2.9 0.0 7.4 0.1 3.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 29.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 206 619 113 369 95 1024 95 607
v/c Ratio 0.78 0.62 0.57 0.51 0.49 0.85 0.63 0.55
Control Delay 55.3 27.9 46.3 26.7 42.5 30.7 57.2 23.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 55.3 27.9 46.3 26.7 42.5 30.7 57.2 23.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 101 142 54 76 45 234 47 127
Queue Length 95th (ft) #215 197 #119 117 90 #321 #120 176
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 276 1034 215 902 220 1350 150 1216
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.75 0.60 0.53 0.41 0.43 0.76 0.63 0.50
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 67 226 67 220 628 63 51 385 72 103 615 159
Future Volume (veh/h) 67 226 67 220 628 63 51 385 72 103 615 159
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 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 72 243 72 244 698 70 59 443 83 137 820 212
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, %444444444444
Cap, veh/h 95 463 134 287 908 91 86 880 164 173 961 248
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.35 0.35
Sat Flow, veh/h 1740 2657 770 1740 3187 319 1740 2923 544 1740 2732 706
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 72 157 158 244 380 388 59 262 264 137 521 511
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1740 1736 1691 1740 1736 1771 1740 1736 1731 1740 1736 1702
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 5.6 5.8 9.3 13.7 13.8 2.3 8.5 8.6 5.3 19.1 19.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 5.6 5.8 9.3 13.7 13.8 2.3 8.5 8.6 5.3 19.1 19.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.41
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 95 303 295 287 495 505 86 523 521 173 610 599
V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.52 0.54 0.85 0.77 0.77 0.69 0.50 0.51 0.79 0.85 0.85
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 152 456 444 320 623 635 152 523 521 284 648 636
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.0 25.7 25.8 27.8 22.4 22.4 32.1 19.7 19.7 30.2 20.6 20.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.7 1.4 1.5 17.6 4.5 4.4 9.4 0.7 0.8 7.8 10.3 10.5
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.6 2.8 2.8 5.9 7.2 7.3 1.3 4.2 4.2 2.9 10.9 10.7
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.7 27.1 27.3 45.4 26.9 26.9 41.5 20.5 20.5 37.9 30.9 31.1
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 387 1012 585 1169
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.3 31.4 22.6 31.8
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.8 25.5 15.3 16.8 7.4 29.0 7.7 24.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.2 20.4 12.6 18.0 6.0 25.6 6.0 24.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 10.6 11.3 7.8 4.3 21.1 4.8 15.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.8 0.1 4.1 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 29.8
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 72 315 244 768 59 526 137 1032
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.45 0.79 0.68 0.40 0.56 0.57 0.86
Control Delay 47.2 24.4 52.0 25.9 43.1 25.8 41.3 31.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 47.2 24.4 52.0 25.9 43.1 25.8 41.3 31.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 60 118 175 28 111 63 242
Queue Length 95th (ft) #89 97 #251 239 64 158 99 254
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 151 909 317 1232 151 1022 282 1285
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.35 0.77 0.62 0.39 0.51 0.49 0.80
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 200 481 70 105 287 66 106 714 187 124 492 57
Future Volume (veh/h) 200 481 70 105 287 66 106 714 187 124 492 57
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 225 540 79 113 309 71 120 811 212 141 559 65
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 265 751 110 144 500 113 152 955 250 145 1085 126
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.35 0.35 0.08 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3070 448 1757 2840 643 1757 2751 719 1757 3165 367
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 225 307 312 113 189 191 120 517 506 141 309 315
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 1766 1757 1752 1731 1757 1752 1718 1757 1752 1780
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.1 11.7 11.8 4.6 7.3 7.5 4.9 19.9 19.9 5.8 10.3 10.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.1 11.7 11.8 4.6 7.3 7.5 4.9 19.9 19.9 5.8 10.3 10.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 265 429 432 144 308 305 152 608 596 145 601 610
V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.72 0.72 0.79 0.61 0.63 0.79 0.85 0.85 0.98 0.51 0.52
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 265 490 494 207 433 427 212 654 641 145 601 610
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.2 25.2 25.3 32.8 27.7 27.8 32.6 22.0 22.0 33.4 19.1 19.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 22.2 4.3 4.4 11.7 2.0 2.1 12.4 9.8 10.0 67.1 0.8 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 6.0 6.1 6.2 2.7 3.7 3.7 2.9 11.3 11.1 5.5 5.1 5.2
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 52.4 29.5 29.6 44.6 29.7 29.9 45.1 31.8 32.0 100.5 19.9 19.9
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCCFBB
Approach Vol, veh/h 844 493 1143 765
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.6 33.2 33.3 34.7
Approach LOS DCCC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 30.2 10.0 22.7 10.3 29.9 15.0 17.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 27.2 8.6 20.4 8.8 24.4 11.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 21.9 6.6 13.8 6.9 12.3 11.1 9.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.0 2.8 0.0 7.1 0.0 3.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 34.2
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 225 619 113 380 120 1024 141 624
v/c Ratio 0.88 0.66 0.60 0.54 0.62 0.87 1.01 0.53
Control Delay 68.1 28.9 48.2 27.9 49.1 32.6 119.8 23.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 68.1 28.9 48.2 27.9 49.1 32.6 119.8 23.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 142 54 79 58 234 ~78 132
Queue Length 95th (ft) #240 197 #119 121 #122 #321 #183 182
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 257 986 201 842 205 1261 140 1191
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.88 0.63 0.56 0.45 0.59 0.81 1.01 0.52
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 68 228 68 222 634 64 51 389 73 104 621 161
Future Volume (veh/h) 68 228 68 222 634 64 51 389 73 104 621 161
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 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 73 245 73 247 704 71 59 447 84 139 828 215
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, %444444444444
Cap, veh/h 95 464 135 290 913 92 85 876 164 176 960 249
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.29 0.29 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.35 0.35
Sat Flow, veh/h 1740 2653 773 1740 3185 321 1740 2921 545 1740 2729 708
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 73 158 160 247 383 392 59 264 267 139 527 516
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1740 1736 1691 1740 1736 1770 1740 1736 1731 1740 1736 1702
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 5.7 5.9 9.5 14.0 14.0 2.3 8.7 8.8 5.4 19.5 19.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 5.7 5.9 9.5 14.0 14.0 2.3 8.7 8.8 5.4 19.5 19.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.42
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 95 303 295 290 498 508 85 520 519 176 610 599
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.52 0.54 0.85 0.77 0.77 0.69 0.51 0.51 0.79 0.86 0.86
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 151 453 441 318 619 631 151 520 519 282 644 631
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.2 25.9 26.0 27.9 22.5 22.5 32.3 20.0 20.0 30.3 20.8 20.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.2 1.4 1.5 18.3 4.7 4.6 9.5 0.8 0.9 7.7 11.2 11.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 2.8 2.9 6.0 7.3 7.5 1.3 4.2 4.3 3.0 11.1 10.9
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.4 27.3 27.5 46.3 27.2 27.2 41.8 20.8 20.9 38.1 32.0 32.2
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCCDCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 391 1022 590 1182
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.5 31.8 22.9 32.8
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 25.6 15.5 17.0 7.4 29.2 7.8 24.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.2 20.4 12.6 18.0 6.0 25.6 6.0 24.6
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 10.8 11.5 7.9 4.3 21.5 4.9 16.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.8 0.1 4.1 0.0 2.8 0.0 3.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 30.4
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 73 318 247 775 59 531 139 1043
v/c Ratio 0.50 0.46 0.80 0.69 0.40 0.57 0.58 0.86
Control Delay 47.8 24.3 53.0 26.0 43.3 25.9 41.8 31.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 47.8 24.3 53.0 26.0 43.3 25.9 41.8 31.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 61 120 177 28 113 64 246
Queue Length 95th (ft) #90 98 #255 242 64 160 100 257
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 150 903 315 1223 150 1014 280 1279
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.35 0.78 0.63 0.39 0.52 0.50 0.82
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 202 486 71 106 290 67 107 721 189 125 497 58
Future Volume (veh/h) 202 486 71 106 290 67 107 721 189 125 497 58
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 227 546 80 114 312 72 122 819 215 142 565 66
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88
Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333
Cap, veh/h 264 751 110 145 502 114 155 956 251 144 1081 126
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.35 0.35 0.08 0.34 0.34
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3070 448 1757 2837 646 1757 2748 721 1757 3163 369
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 227 311 315 114 191 193 122 522 512 142 312 319
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 1766 1757 1752 1731 1757 1752 1717 1757 1752 1780
Q Serve(g_s), s 9.2 11.9 12.0 4.7 7.4 7.6 5.0 20.3 20.3 5.9 10.5 10.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.2 11.9 12.0 4.7 7.4 7.6 5.0 20.3 20.3 5.9 10.5 10.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.21
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 264 429 432 145 310 306 155 609 597 144 599 608
V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.73 0.73 0.79 0.62 0.63 0.79 0.86 0.86 0.99 0.52 0.52
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 264 488 492 206 431 426 211 651 638 144 599 608
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.3 25.4 25.4 32.9 27.8 27.9 32.7 22.2 22.2 33.6 19.3 19.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 23.7 4.6 4.7 12.1 2.0 2.1 13.0 10.5 10.7 70.6 0.8 0.8
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 6.2 6.3 6.4 2.7 3.7 3.8 3.0 11.5 11.3 5.7 5.2 5.3
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 54.1 30.0 30.1 45.0 29.8 30.1 45.7 32.7 32.9 104.2 20.1 20.1
LnGrp LOS DCCDCCDCCFCC
Approach Vol, veh/h 853 498 1156 773
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.5 33.4 34.1 35.6
Approach LOS DCCD
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 30.4 10.0 22.8 10.4 29.9 15.0 17.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.0 27.2 8.6 20.4 8.8 24.4 11.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.9 22.3 6.7 14.0 7.0 12.5 11.2 9.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.2 0.0 2.8 0.0 7.1 0.0 3.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 35.0
HCM 2010 LOS C
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 227 626 114 384 122 1034 142 631
v/c Ratio 0.89 0.66 0.61 0.54 0.63 0.88 1.02 0.53
Control Delay 69.9 29.1 48.7 28.0 49.9 33.2 122.4 23.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 69.9 29.1 48.7 28.0 49.9 33.2 122.4 23.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 113 144 55 80 59 238 ~80 134
Queue Length 95th (ft) #242 200 #121 122 #125 #342 #184 184
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 256 984 200 840 204 1257 139 1189
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.89 0.64 0.57 0.46 0.60 0.82 1.02 0.53
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 1236 125 333 1632 348 87 474 101 376 754 313
Future Volume (veh/h) 314 1236 125 333 1632 348 87 474 101 376 754 313
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 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900 1827 1827 1900
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 341 1343 136 362 1774 378 95 515 110 409 820 340
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
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, %444444444444
Cap, veh/h 232 1319 133 244 1207 248 81 477 101 278 673 278
Arrive On Green 0.13 0.41 0.41 0.14 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.28 0.28
Sat Flow, veh/h 1740 3185 321 1740 2868 590 1740 2850 606 1740 2396 991
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 341 729 750 362 1048 1104 95 313 312 409 593 567
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1740 1736 1770 1740 1736 1723 1740 1736 1720 1740 1736 1652
Q Serve(g_s), s 20.0 62.1 62.1 21.0 63.1 63.1 7.0 25.1 25.1 24.0 42.1 42.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.0 62.1 62.1 21.0 63.1 63.1 7.0 25.1 25.1 24.0 42.1 42.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.60
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 232 719 733 244 730 725 81 290 288 278 487 464
V/C Ratio(X) 1.47 1.01 1.02 1.49 1.44 1.52 1.17 1.08 1.08 1.47 1.22 1.22
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 232 719 733 244 730 725 81 290 288 278 487 464
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 65.0 44.0 44.0 64.5 43.5 43.5 71.5 62.4 62.5 63.0 54.0 54.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 233.4 37.3 39.3 239.4 204.0 242.3 152.9 74.8 77.6 229.7 115.6 118.1
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 24.6 37.2 38.3 26.3 71.6 78.8 6.8 18.1 18.1 29.3 35.8 34.4
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 298.4 81.2 83.2 303.9 247.5 285.7 224.4 137.2 140.0 292.7 169.5 172.0
LnGrp LOS FFFFFFFFFFFF
Approach Vol, veh/h 1820 2514 720 1569
Approach Delay, s/veh 122.7 272.4 149.9 202.6
Approach LOS FFFF
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 28.0 30.0 25.0 67.0 11.0 47.0 24.0 68.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 25.1 21.0 62.1 7.0 42.1 20.0 63.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 26.0 27.1 23.0 64.1 9.0 44.1 22.0 65.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 201.4
HCM 2010 LOS F
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 341 1479 362 2152 95 625 409 1160
v/c Ratio 1.48 1.04 1.49 1.50 1.17 1.08 1.48 1.21
Control Delay 279.1 77.3 283.3 261.4 212.1 117.7 275.0 146.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 279.1 77.3 283.3 261.4 212.1 117.7 275.0 146.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~457 ~817 ~488 ~1535 ~111 ~353 ~548 ~711
Queue Length 95th (ft) #660 #959 #695 #1666 #236 #481 #763 #853
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 231 1422 243 1434 81 577 277 961
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.48 1.04 1.49 1.50 1.17 1.08 1.48 1.21
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 434 1456 130 195 1312 305 178 880 262 388 603 257
Future Volume (veh/h) 434 1456 130 195 1312 305 178 880 262 388 603 257
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 472 1583 141 212 1426 332 193 957 285 422 655 279
Adj No. of Lanes 120120120120
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 281 1284 113 141 891 202 204 695 206 258 698 297
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.39 0.39 0.08 0.31 0.31 0.12 0.26 0.26 0.15 0.29 0.29
Sat Flow, veh/h 1757 3259 288 1757 2839 645 1757 2666 791 1757 2396 1021
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 472 845 879 212 866 892 193 628 614 422 479 455
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1757 1752 1794 1757 1752 1731 1757 1752 1705 1757 1752 1665
Q Serve(g_s), s 24.0 59.1 59.1 12.0 47.1 47.1 16.4 39.1 39.1 22.0 40.0 40.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 24.0 59.1 59.1 12.0 47.1 47.1 16.4 39.1 39.1 22.0 40.0 40.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.61
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 281 690 707 141 550 544 204 457 444 258 511 485
V/C Ratio(X) 1.68 1.22 1.24 1.51 1.57 1.64 0.95 1.37 1.38 1.64 0.94 0.94
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 281 690 707 141 550 544 204 457 444 258 511 485
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 63.0 45.5 45.5 69.0 51.5 51.5 65.8 55.5 55.5 64.0 51.8 51.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 320.7 113.3 121.5 262.0 267.2 296.4 48.0 181.8 185.5 303.9 25.3 26.2
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 36.7 50.3 53.1 16.0 63.6 67.2 10.7 42.0 41.3 32.4 22.9 21.9
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 383.7 158.7 167.0 331.0 318.7 347.9 113.9 237.2 241.0 367.9 77.1 78.1
LnGrp LOS FFFFFFFFFFEE
Approach Vol, veh/h 2196 1970 1435 1356
Approach Delay, s/veh 210.4 333.2 222.2 167.9
Approach LOS FFFF
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.0 44.0 16.0 64.0 21.4 48.6 28.0 52.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.0 39.1 12.0 59.1 17.4 43.7 24.0 47.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 24.0 41.1 14.0 61.1 18.4 42.0 26.0 49.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 239.3
HCM 2010 LOS F
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 472 1724 212 1758 193 1242 422 934
v/c Ratio 1.69 1.26 1.51 1.62 0.95 1.38 1.65 0.93
Control Delay 360.3 161.4 307.9 318.1 116.3 217.6 346.5 64.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 360.3 161.4 307.9 318.1 116.3 217.6 346.5 64.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~673 ~1112 ~288 ~1300 191 ~840 ~595 451
Queue Length 95th (ft) #896 #1252 #458 #1439 #352 #981 #812 #580
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 200 180 230
Base Capacity (vph) 280 1368 140 1083 203 901 256 1006
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.69 1.26 1.51 1.62 0.95 1.38 1.65 0.93
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
APPENDIX D
MITIGATED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SHEETS
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 1236 125 333 1632 348 87 474 101 376 754 313
Future Volume (veh/h) 314 1236 125 333 1632 348 87 474 101 376 754 313
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 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 341 1343 136 362 1774 378 95 515 110 409 820 340
Adj No. of Lanes 231231221221
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, %444444444444
Cap, veh/h 369 1706 531 436 1805 562 172 692 310 434 961 430
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.34 0.34 0.13 0.36 0.36 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.13 0.28 0.28
Sat Flow, veh/h 3375 4988 1553 3375 4988 1553 3375 3471 1553 3375 3471 1553
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 341 1343 136 362 1774 378 95 515 110 409 820 340
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1688 1663 1553 1688 1663 1553 1688 1736 1553 1688 1736 1553
Q Serve(g_s), s 8.9 21.5 5.6 9.3 31.2 18.2 2.4 12.4 5.4 10.7 19.8 18.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.9 21.5 5.6 9.3 31.2 18.2 2.4 12.4 5.4 10.7 19.8 18.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 369 1706 531 436 1805 562 172 692 310 434 961 430
V/C Ratio(X) 0.92 0.79 0.26 0.83 0.98 0.67 0.55 0.74 0.36 0.94 0.85 0.79
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 369 1706 531 480 1805 562 225 744 333 434 961 430
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.1 26.3 21.0 37.7 28.0 23.9 41.1 33.4 30.6 38.3 30.4 29.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 28.4 2.5 0.3 10.9 17.2 3.1 2.8 3.8 0.7 29.1 7.5 9.6
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 5.6 10.2 2.4 5.0 17.2 8.2 1.2 6.3 2.4 6.7 10.5 8.8
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 67.5 28.8 21.3 48.5 45.2 27.0 43.8 37.2 31.3 67.4 37.9 39.3
LnGrp LOS E CCDDCDDCEDD
Approach Vol, veh/h 1820 2514 720 1569
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.5 42.9 37.2 45.9
Approach LOS DDDD
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.4 22.6 15.5 35.2 8.5 29.5 13.7 37.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.4 19.0 12.6 29.2 5.9 24.5 9.7 32.1
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.7 14.4 11.3 23.5 4.4 21.8 10.9 33.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.3 0.2 5.5 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 40.9
HCM 2010 LOS D
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 341 1343 136 362 1774 378 95 515 110 409 820 340
v/c Ratio 0.93 0.81 0.22 0.78 0.98 0.53 0.43 0.74 0.25 0.95 0.83 0.54
Control Delay 73.3 32.1 3.0 50.3 47.0 10.7 46.6 40.6 2.7 72.3 39.0 11.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 73.3 32.1 3.0 50.3 47.0 10.7 46.6 40.6 2.7 72.3 39.0 11.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 101 256 0 103 363 51 27 143 0 121 233 36
Queue Length 95th (ft) #184 313 25 #165 #482 133 52 199 13 #211 #335 117
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 150 200 150 180 150 230 150
Base Capacity (vph) 367 1662 629 477 1803 720 223 742 464 432 991 627
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.81 0.22 0.76 0.98 0.53 0.43 0.69 0.24 0.95 0.83 0.54
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 434 1456 130 195 1312 305 178 880 262 388 603 257
Future Volume (veh/h) 434 1456 130 195 1312 305 178 880 262 388 603 257
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 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845 1845
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 472 1583 141 212 1426 332 193 957 285 422 655 279
Adj No. of Lanes 231231221221
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 484 1758 547 245 1405 437 261 957 428 436 1137 509
Arrive On Green 0.14 0.35 0.35 0.07 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 3408 5036 1568 3408 5036 1568 3408 3505 1568 3408 3505 1568
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 472 1583 141 212 1426 332 193 957 285 422 655 279
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1704 1679 1568 1704 1679 1568 1704 1752 1568 1704 1752 1568
Q Serve(g_s), s 13.8 29.8 6.4 6.2 27.9 19.4 5.5 27.3 16.1 12.3 15.5 14.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.8 29.8 6.4 6.2 27.9 19.4 5.5 27.3 16.1 12.3 15.5 14.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 484 1758 547 245 1405 437 261 957 428 436 1137 509
V/C Ratio(X) 0.98 0.90 0.26 0.86 1.01 0.76 0.74 1.00 0.67 0.97 0.58 0.55
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 484 1758 547 245 1405 437 354 957 428 436 1137 509
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.7 30.9 23.3 45.9 36.0 33.0 45.2 36.3 32.3 43.4 28.1 27.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 34.4 6.8 0.2 25.8 27.8 7.5 5.3 29.1 3.9 34.6 0.7 1.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 8.8 14.9 2.8 3.8 16.5 9.3 2.8 17.0 7.4 7.9 7.6 6.5
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 77.2 37.7 23.5 71.7 63.8 40.5 50.5 65.5 36.2 78.0 28.8 29.0
LnGrp LOS E D C E F D D F D E C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 2196 1970 1435 1356
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.3 60.7 57.7 44.1
Approach LOS D E E D
Timer 12345678
Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 32.2 11.2 39.8 11.7 37.3 18.2 32.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9 4.0 4.9
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.8 27.3 7.2 34.9 10.4 29.7 14.2 27.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.3 29.3 8.2 31.8 7.5 17.5 15.8 29.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.2 8.6 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 52.0
HCM 2010 LOS D
03/22/2019
Synchro 9 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 472 1583 141 212 1426 332 193 957 285 422 655 279
v/c Ratio 0.98 0.90 0.23 0.87 1.01 0.56 0.58 1.00 0.52 0.97 0.62 0.43
Control Delay 80.1 39.3 8.2 78.9 64.3 14.2 50.5 66.6 16.4 80.9 33.0 7.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 80.1 39.3 8.2 78.9 64.3 14.2 50.5 66.6 16.4 80.9 33.0 7.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 156 347 14 70 ~341 54 61 ~321 60 140 189 13
Queue Length 95th (ft) #258 #421 55 #136 #447 143 97 #461 141 #237 250 76
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1272 1220 638 947
Turn Bay Length (ft) 215 150 200 150 180 150 230 150
Base Capacity (vph) 482 1757 617 244 1405 597 353 956 548 435 1063 649
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.98 0.90 0.23 0.87 1.01 0.56 0.55 1.00 0.52 0.97 0.62 0.43
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.