Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKnight Sky Traffic Study• • i C~ Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud KNIGHT SKY ESTATES Traffic Impact Study Prepared for Sea 2 Sea, LLC 757 W. Bankside Drive Eagle, ID 83616 December 21, 2005 ~ 031 ®~ `aa m.~i Prepared by Keith Haiar and Dave Szplett (208) 846-9389 Page 1 0.(19 Knight Sky Estates TIS -Final ~ ~ Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud Table o~ Contents I. INTRODUCTION AND S[TNINIARY ......................... 4 ............................................... A. PURPOSE OF REPORT AND STUDY OBJECTIVES . 4 B. . ............................................................... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... ... 4 I. ....... Site Location and Study Area ................................................... ... 4 2 ....................................... Develo ment Descri ti . p p on .............................................................................................. .. 4 3. Principal Findings ...................................................................... 4 4 .................................. Conclusions .. . ................................................................................................................... ..5 5. Recommendatians ......................................................................................................... .. 6 II. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................... 6 ........................................... A. OFF-SITE DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................... .. 6 B. DESCRIP'I'IUN OF UN-SI'Z'E DEVELOPMENT ..............................................•.........•..•.•............ .. 6 1. Land Use and Density ................................................................................................... .. 6 2. Location ........................................................................................................................ .. 7 3. Site Plan ...............................................•----.............---...............---.............------•.............. .. 7 4. Zoning ........................................................................................................................... ..7' 5. Project Phasing and Timing ............................................................................•............ .. 7 III. AREA CONDITIONS .......................... . 7 . .................................................................. A. STUDY AREA .............................................:.........:............................................................. .. 7 X. Area of Influence ......................................•---....................................................---•......... .. 7 2. Areu of Significant Impact ..................................:......................................................... .. 7 B. STUDY AREA LAND USE .......:.............. • -- '] I. Existing Land Uses ....................................................................................................... .. 7 2. Existing Zoning ............................................................................................................... 7 3. Anticipated Future Development ..............................................................•.................... . 8 C. SITE ACCESSIBILITY ......................................................................................•---................. .. $ 1. Area Roudway System .................................................................................•-----.............. $ Z. Traffic Volumes and Conditions .................................................................................... . 8 3. Public Transportation Service ....................................................................................... . 8 IV. PROJECTED TRAFFIC .......................................... .. 9 . ............................................. A. SITE TRAFFIC ...................................................................................................................... . ~ X. Trip Generativn ...............................................................................................•............. . 9 2. Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................ . 9 3. Modal Split .................................................................................................................... IO 4. Trip Assignment ........................ .................................................................................... IO B. THROUGH TRAFFIC ......................................................................................•--•---•.............. 10 I. Method of Projectian .................................................................................................... IO 2. Non-site Traffic for Anticipated Development .............................................................. 10 3. Through Traffc ................................................................................................a............ I1 4. Estimated Volurrees ........................................................................................................ II C. TOTAL TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................. 11 V. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................................11 Page 2 of l9 Knight Sky Estates TIS - rival Knight Sky Estates S Tra is Im act St ud A. SITE ACCESS ...............:...................................................................................................... 11 B. CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE .................................................................................... 11 C. TRAFFIC SAFETY ................................................................................................................ 13 D. TRAFFIC SIGNALS .............................................................................................................. I3 . E. SITE CIRCULATION AND PARKING ...................................................................................... 13 VI. IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS ..............................................................................14 i A. IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCOMMODATE BASE TRAFFIC .....................:.................................... 14 B. ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO ACCOMMODATE SITE TRAFFIC ...................................... 14 C. ALTERNATIVE IMPROVEMENTS .......................................................................................... 14 D. STATUS OF IMPROVEMENTS ALREADY FUNDED, PROGRAMMED OR PLANNED .................. 14 E. EVALUATION ..................................................................................................................... 14 VII. C ONCLUSIONS ............................................•----------......-•---,......~ .....--~------------------14 A. SITE ACCT;SSIBILITY ........................................................................................................... 14 B. TRAFFIC IMPACTS ...................................................................•---....................................... 15 C. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS ................•--.......................................---................................... 15 .. D. ASSOCIATED IMPACT FEES ..........................................................................•--------.............. 1S E. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL CODES .. ~ 1S . .. VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS... ....... ...........................................................16 ..... ...... A. SITE ACCESS/CIRCULATION PLAN ........................:..............................................•-•........... 16 - B. ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................... lE) '~_ 1. On-site ....................~...................................................................................................... 16 2. Off-site ............................................................................•-•-•---•--.................................... 16 . 3. Project Phasing ............................................................................................................. 16 C. OTHER ........................................................................................................................... . 16 ... ` APPENDIX A-FIGURES ...............................................................................................17 APPENDIX B-CAPACITY ANALYSIS ......................................................................19 Page 3 of 19 Knight Sky Es~ates TIS -Final ~ ~ Knight Sky Estates Tra ac Im act Stud I. Introduction and Summary A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives Keith Haiar and Dave Szplett were retained by the Sea 2 Sea, LLC to prepare a traffic impact study for the proposed Knight Sky mixed use development on the northwest corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26) near Meridian, Idaho. The traffic impact area includes Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the traffic impacts resulting from the proposed development in the vicinity of the project. This study will evaluate the transportation-related impacts and make recommendations for improvements to the transportation system to mitigate any adverse impacts of the development. This report is prepared in conformance with the requirements of a major traffic impact study for the Idaho T ransportatiun Department. in particular the study objectives include the following: • Capacity analysis of the adjacent arterials for the existing, background and build- out conditions, • Capacity analysis of the Linder Rd /Chinden Blvd and Meridian Rd /Chinden Blvd intersections for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, • Analysis of average daily traffic (ADT) volumes an the internal roadways, and • Capacity and turn-lane analysis of the internal street roadway connections to the arterial streets in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. B. Executive Summary 1. Site Location and Study Area The project vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. All figures are presented in Appendix A. The proposed Knight Sky development will be located northwest of the Chinden Blvd and Linder Road intersection in Ada County, Idaho. The traffic impact area includes Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26), Linder Road, Meridian Road and the adjacent intersections. 2. Development Description With nearly 56 acres, the proposed Knight Sky development is plam~ed to contain approximately 101 single family detached homes, 24 townhomes, and nearly 110,000 square feet office and retail floor area. The business and retail portion of the commercial development are expected to be roughly equal. The Knight Sky site has proposed two full accesses: one each on Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard. The full access on Chinden Road is located 1/z mile west of Linder Road and aligns with a full access to the south. The Knight Sky Estates development is planned for completion by 2011. 3. Principal Findings The following are the principal findings of the traffic analysis far the Knight Sky Estates: 1) The proposed development is projected to generate an average daily traffic volume (ADT) of 3,$58 vehicles of which the a.m. peak hour traffic is 209 vehicles per hour (vph) and the p.m. peak hour. traffic is 363 vph. Page 4 of 19 Knight Sky 13states TIS -Final Knight Sky Estates Tra 'c Im act Stud 2) As a result of the site build-out, traffic on the roadways in the project vicinity are expected Eo increase. Traffic an Chinden Blvd may increase by 390 vpd west of Linder Road and 1,930 vpd east. Traffic on Linder Road may increase 390 vpd north and 1,160 vpd south of Chinden Blvd, respectively. Traffic on Meridian Road may increase 40 vpd north and 200 vpd south of Chinden Blvd, respectively 3) The intersection of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard is signalized with a single thru/right lane and separate left turn bay on each leg. The intersection currently operates at level of service (LOS) E in bath the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For the 2011 Background condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Improvements to the intersection are needed to accommodate the Background traffic volumes. 4) With impravements, the Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and p.rn, peak hours for the 2011 Background and Build Out conditions. No additional improvements are needed to accommodate the Build Out condition. 5) The intersection of Meridian Road and Chinden Boulevard is signalized with a single thru/right lane and separate left turn bay on each leg. The intersection currently operates at LOS C in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For the 2011 Background condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and the p.m. peak hours. For the 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and the p.m. peak hours. No improvements are needed to accommodate the Build Out candition. 6) The site approach with Linder Road was assumed to be two-way STOP controlled on the minor approaches. For the 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS B in the a.m. peak hour and LOS C in the p.m. peak hour. A left turn bay and improved curb radii are warranted at the site 7) The site approach with Chinden Boulevard is signalized with one thrulright twin lane and a separate left turn bay on each leg. For the 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D in the a.rn. peak hour and LOS B in the p.m. peak hour. No improvements are needed to accommodate the Build Out condition. $) The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for both Linder Road and Meridian Road are below COMPASS thresholds. 9) The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for Chinden Boulevard meet or exceed COMPASS thresholds for the Background condition. Capacity impravements to Chinden Blvd are needed for the Background conditions. 10) ITD is currently studying Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26). If widened to a five-lane section, the roadway will be have adequate capacity for the Build Out condition. 1.1) The internal site roadways meet local requirements for a maximum of 1,000 vpd on local roads with front-an housing. 4. Conclusions The fallowing are Che principal conclusions of the traffic analysis: Page 5 oP 19 Knight Sky Cs[ale3 "f15 -final r Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud 1) The Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection needs improvements to accommodate the 2011 Background traffic. Adding a second east/west bound thru lane to the intersection will provide sufficient capacity for the Background and Build Out conditions. 2) The Meridian Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection does not need improvements to accommodate the Build Out volumes. 3) The Linder Rd site approach warrants a left turn bay and special curb radii to accommodate the right turning traffic. 4) The Chinden Blvd site approach does not need improvements to accommodate the Build Out volumes. S) Meridian Road and Linder Road are under COMPASS thresholds. 6) Chinden Boulevard meets or exceeds COMPASS thresholds for the Background condition. Widening the roadway with additional lanes is necessary to increase capacity. 7) The internal site roadways meet planning guidelines 5. Recommendations The following are the recommendations of the traffic analysis: 1) A second eastlwest bound thru lane should be added to the Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection. This recommendation was also part of the Lochsa Subdivision Traffic Impact Study. 2) The Linder Rd site approach warrants a left turn bay on Linder Road for vehicles entering the site. The curb radii should be 30 ft or greater to accommodate right turning traffic. 3) Additional lanes are needed to increase capacity along Chinden Boulevard. A five-lane section would have enough capacity to accommodate the Build Out traffic volumes. II. Proposed Development A. Off-site Development Based on the draft Meridian Future Land Use Plan, the corridor along Chinden Boulevard is zoned for mixed used community and medium density residential development. The corridor along Linder Road is zoned for commercial development at the mile intersections with medium density in between. B. Description of On-site Development 1. Land Use and Density The proposed Knight Sky Estates development encompasses nearly 56 acres and is planned to contain approximately 101 single family detached homes, 24 townhornes, az~d nearly 110,000 square feet of office and retail floor area. The business and retail portion of the commercial development are expected to be roughly equal. The project is planned far completion by 2011 Page 6 of 19 Knight Sky Estates TIS - Finnl ~ ~ Knight Sky Estates Tra is I'm act Stud 2. Location The proposed Knight Sky development is located on the northwest corner of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26) near Meridian, Idaho. The project vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. All figures are presented in Appendix A. 3. Site Plan Figure 2 displays the currently proposed site plan. Single family homes are planned far the northwest section of the development. The townhomes are situated adjacent to Chinden Boulevard. The commercial area is located closest to the of Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection. The site has proposed two full accesses: one each on Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard. The full access on Chinden Road is located 1/z mile west of Linder Rd and aligns with a full access to the south. The full access on Linder Road is proposed as,a T-intersection. 4. Zoning The current zoning for the site is agricultural. The site is proposed to be rezoned for residential and commercial uses in accordance with the draft City of Meridian Future Land Use Map. 5. Project Phasing and Timing The project is expected to be completed in several phases. A completion date of 211 has been set to allow for project approval, engineering, construction, and full development of the site. Area Conditions A. Study Area 1. Area of Influence The area of influence for the Knight Sky Estates development is the City of Meridian within Ada County, Idaho. - 2. Area of Significant Impact The traffic impact area for the proposed development is mainly concentrated on Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road with a minor impact to Meridian Road. B. Study Area Land Use 1. Existing Land Uses Over the last decade the land use in the vicinity has been transitioning from agricultural to mainly residential. Existing developments along Chinden Boulevard are typically large lot residential to the north and medium density residential development to the south. Existing development along Linder Road is mainly residential. 2. Existing Zoning The current zoning for the study area is agricultural. Pagc 7 of 19 Knight Sky Cstates TIS -Final i 1 Knight Sky Estates Tra rc Im act Stud 3. Anticipated Future Development Over the past several years the north Meridian area has seen enormous residential growth. Based on the draft Meridian Future Land Use Plan, the corridor along Chinden Boulevard is zoned for mixed used community and medium density residential. The corridor along Linder Road is zoned for commercial at the mile intersections with medium density in between. C. Site Accessibility 1. Area Roadway System a) Existing The road system in the project vicinity is described below: • Chinden Blvd. (US Highway 20 and 26) is designated as a principal arterial and is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department (ITDj. In the study area, the roadway has recently been widened to a three lane section from 1/a mile west of Linder Road to Locust Grove Road. The posted speed limit is SS mph. • Linder Road is anorth-south, two=lane roadway and is classified as a minar arterial. The pasted speed limit is 35 mph south of McMillan Road. • Meridian Road is anorth-south, two-lane roadway. North of Chinden Blvd it is classified as a collector and south of Chinden Boulevard it is classified as a minor arterial. The posted speed limit is 35 mph south of McMillan Road. b) Future The Idaho Transportation Department has currently contracted the study of Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26) to a private engineering. firm. The results of this study will not be known for some time but it can be assumed there will be recommendations to widened the roadway. Improvements to Linder Road or Meridian Road between McMillan Road and Chinden Boulevard are currently not included in ACHD's Five Year Work Program. 2. Traffic Volumes and Conditions Existing turning movements for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours were obtained from ACHD's traffic counts. Daily volumes were obtained ACHD traffic summaries and compared to ITD's Pavement Management Report. The existing traffic volumes in the project vicinity are summarized in Figure 3. 3. Public Transportation Service Valleyride provides the current regular, scheduled public transit service within the project vicinity. Page 8 of 19 Knight Sky Estates TIS -Final ~' M Knight Sky Estates Tra 'c Im act Stud IV. Projected Traffic A. Site Traffic 1. Trip Generation Site traffic generation is estimated by procedures recommended in the latest edition of the Trip Generation Manual (7`i' Ed) published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip rates estimated in the manual are based on actual driveway traffic measurements performed on different land uses nationwide, particularly in metropolitan areas. The site trip generation is obtained by applying the trip rates from the Trip Generation Manual to each of the uses of the site development. Table 1 presents the summary of the site trip generation used in this report. Due to the mixed use of the development, the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour periods were analyzed far site impacts. Typically the a.m. peak hour occurs between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and the p.m. peak hour occurs between x:00 p.rn. and 6:00 p.m. The proposed development is projected to generate an ADT of 3,$58 vpd of which the a.m. peak hour traffic is 209 vehicles per hour and the p.m. peak hour traffic is 363 vehicles per hour. With a mixed use development it can be conservatively estimated that 10°Io of the commercial traffic can be captured by the site. Using this approach, the a.m. peak hour was reduced by 15 vehicles and the p.m. peak hour was reduced by 2$ vehicles Table 1: Trip Generation Summary '~atai S}ng#e Pami,Ny ~ '~wwnhomes C)ffice (770} Retaii (B~o) V~hiale i Units or 1000 sf 101 24 55 55 Trip Generation Rate 24-hr daily rate 9.57 5.86 12.76 42.94 7-gam peak hour rate 0.76 0.44 1.43 1.03 4-6 m eak hour rate 1.01 0.52 1.29 3.75 24-hr daily trips 967 141 700 2,356 24-hr capture 0 0 70 236 24~hr new tri s 967 141 630 2 121 3 858 7-gam peak hour trips 77 11 78 57 7-gam peak capture 0 0 8 6 7-gam eak new tri s 77 11 71 51 209 4-6pm peak hour trips 102 12 71 206 4-6pm peak capture 0 0 7 21 4-6 m eak new tri s 102 12 64 185 363 Source: Trin Ggneration, Institute of Transportation. Engineers, 7th Edition. 2. Trip Distribution Once the generated trips were estimated, they were distributed to geographic origins and destinations. The trip distribution along the roadway network was based on the existing Page 9 of 1.9 Knight Sky Estates TIS -Final i Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud distributions and the expectation that a majority of the residents would be employed in or around Boise. Figure 4 presents the trip distribution used in this. study. 3. Modal Split Due to the minimum level of public transit service in the vicinity, all of the trips are assumed to be completed using private vehicles. There is potential for future use of the public transit service in the area. Any future transit service will help to decrease the volume of vehicles attracted to the project site. 4. Trip Assignment Once the site-generated trips are distributed to their origins and destinations, they are assigned to the vicinity roadways. Figure 6 presents the site traffic trip assignments on the roadways in the project vicinity and through the project site. ~ B. Through Traffic 1. Method of Projection The expected project completion date is 2011, therefore the existing traffic was projected to 2011 to determine traffic conditions in this year without the proposed development traffic. An annual growth rate of 3.5% was used for this project. This growth rate is based on the traffic growth for the area as projected by the COMPASS 2030 Model. 2. Non-site Traffic for Anticipated Development a) Method of Projections . The method of projection for through traffic was as stated in Item 1 above. b) Trip Generation No separate trip generation was evaluated for off-site traffic. A growth rate was used to account for the natural increase in traffic volumes. c) Trip Distribution The trip distribution along the roadway network was based on the existing traffic distributions at the adjacent intersections. Figure 4 presents the trip distribution used in this study. d) Modal Split Due to the minimum level of public transit service in the vicinity, all of the trips are assumed to ~' be completed using private vehicles. There is potential for increased use of the future public transit service in the area. Any future transit service will help to decrease the volume of vehicles • attracted to the project site. e) Trip Assignment Figure 6 presents the site traffic assigned to the roadways in the project vicinity. Table 2 presents the ADT projected to travel on the area roadways. Page 10 of X9 Kitighl Sky Estates TIS -Final ~ ~ Knight Sky Estates _ _ ._ _ _ Tra f,~ic Impact Study 3. Through Traffic Existing through traffic was obtained from traffic counts. Background traffic conditions were estimated be applying a growth rate to the existing counts. 4. Estimated Volumes The existing through traffic was obtained from traffic counts. Background traffic conditions were estimated by applying a growth rate to the existing taunts. Table 2 on the following page presents the ADT projected to travel on the area roadways. C. Total Traffic Total traffic (Build Out condition) far the area roadways is calculated by adding the Background traffic and the Site traffic. Figure 7 presents the projected 2011 Build Out (total traffic) volumes for the intersection and roadways within the project' vicinity. V. Traffic Analysis A. Site Access Figure 2 displays the current proposed site plan, including the proposed site access locations. The site has proposed two full accesses: one each on Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard. The Chinden site approach is located 1/z mile west of Linder Road and aligns with the full access to the south. Chinden Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of ITD and is restricted to Type IV access control based on ITD's access management policy. This limits full access ta'/z mile spacing and also allows for signalization at the mid-mile intersection. An existing subdivision entrance is located approximately west of the site approach. The Linder site approach is located about 550 ft (center to center) north of Chinden Boulevard and 250 ft (center to center) south of West Brandt Lane. This spacing conforms with ACHD's intersection spacing guidelines. B. Capacity and Level of Service Table 3 presents the capacity analysis for the intersections and approaches associated with this project. All capacity analyses are presented in Appendix B. Page 11 of 19 CCnigltt Sky Estates TCS -Final Knight Sky Estates Traffic Impact Study Table 2: Capacity Analysis Summary ,: , l ~ ; n Exlstl ~ . ` 2Q11 sack round X011 Build C3ut al ~" Coltr ._ ` ; P~~'# ~ f, v . LOS "C7 L©S Data, ~ LQS ,~,t r Chinden Blvd / Si l AM 78.8 E 57.7 E 77.4 E Linder Rd 1 ~ ~ gna PM 71.1 E 60.2 E 79.3 E Chinden Blvd / Si l AM 33.6 C 66.0 E 77.8 E Meridian Rd gna PM 31.8 C 66.9 E 76.1 E Lind®r Site Twa-way AM ";;~ '~ 4 .' ~ ~'';. f 14.8 B Approach Stop PM ' °~; ~~~~ ~~ r ,~, M1 . 19.2 C Chind®n Sit® l Si AM ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4 u>;' ,~ ~ ~ ,~~'S r ~~~ ~,w: ~r r ,,{ ~ 55.0 D Approach gna PM ,~ ~ <~~ •,, .. r } r:,r~~ 7 ~~ 18.1 B (1) Far the Background and Build Out conditions, the second east/west thru lane is included. The intersection of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard is signal-controlled with a single thru/right lane and separate left turn bay on each leg. The intersection currently operates at level of service (LOS) E in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For the 2011 Background condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Improvements to the intersection are needed to accommodate the Background traffic volumes. Several improvement alternatives were evaluated. It was found that adding an additional east/west through lane on Chinden Blvd greatly increased capacity. This recommendation was also part of the Lochsa Subdivision Traffic Impact Study. With the improvement and for the projected 2011 Background condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For the projected 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. No additianal improvements are needed to accommodate the Build Out condition. The intersection of Meridian Road and Chinden Boulevard is signal-controlled with a single through/right lane and separate left tum bay on each leg. The intersection currently operates at LOS C in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For the projected 2011 Background condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and the p.m. peak hours. For the projected 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS E in both the a.m. and the p.m. peak hours. No improvements are needed to accommodate the Build Out condition. The site access with Linder Road was assumed to be two-way STOP controlled on the minor approaches. The intersection was modeled with one lane on each leg. For the 2011 Build Out condition, the intersection is forecast to operate at LOS B in the a.m. peak hour and LOS C in the p.m. peak hour. Based on ACHD guidelines, a left turn bay and improved curb radii are warranted at the site approach. The site access with Chinden Boulevard has recently been signalized. Each leg of the intersection has a shared thru/right lane with a separate left turn bay. For the 2011 Build Out Page ] 2 of 19 Kniglu Sky 13s[ates Ti5 -Final Knight Sky Estates Traffic Impact Study M • i condition, the intersection was forecast to operate at LOS D in the a.m. peak hour and LOS B in the p.m. peak hour. Roadway capacity is evaluated by thresholds developed by COMPASS for various functional classifications, roadway lanes, and levels of service. For a two lane collector road, the threshold is $,500 vehicles per day at LO5 C. ,For atwo-lane minor arterial, the threshold is 14,000 vpd at LOS D. For athree-lane principal arterial, the threshold is 1$,500 vpd at LOS E. The roadway ADTs are given in Table 3. Table 3: Daily Traffic Summary .. ~ r ; , , „ kg 'y _ ' a~ ~ ' BIJt [1 C-uk CAMPASS Ro~clway ''t,~pcatlbn ~ Existing Traftle Volun-~$; Traffic , Traffic Tt'a((1G Pl~ttriing Rotidvr8y Pro ectlong Pro Ions Classification volumes Thraat~alds nor x ~p11 xi Chinden Blvd w/ Llnder 2004 16,621 17,203 21 147 386 21 600 18,500 Princi al Arterial Chinden Blvd e/ Llnder 2003 13,965 14,961 18 416 1 929 20,400 18,500 Princi al Arterial Chinden Blvd e/ Meridian 2003 15,301 16,391 20 148 1 698 21,900 18,500 Princi al Arterial Linder Road n/Chinden Blvd 2003 8 984 9,624 11,830 386 12,300 14 000 Minor Arterial Linder Road s/ Chinden Blvd 2004 6 437 6,662 8,190 1,157 9,400 14,000 Minor Arterial Meridian Road n/ Chlnden Blvd 2003 852 913 1,122 39 1 200 8 500 Collector Meridian Road s/Chinden Blvd 2003 2 839 3 041 3 738 193 4 000 14 000 Minor Arterial Annual Growth Rate 3.50% The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for both Linder Road and Meridian Raad are below COMPASS thresholds. The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for Chinden Boulevard meets or exceeds COMPASS thresholds for the Background condition. Capacity improvements to Chinden Blvd are needed far the Background conditions. lTD is currently studying Chinden Boulevard (US 20-2b). if widened to a five-lane section, the roadway will be have adequate capacity for the Build Out condition. C. Traffic Safety Signalization of the Chinden site access has the potential to reduce the severity and number of angled crashes for vehicles entering and existing Chinden Boulevard. D. Traffic Signals The Chinden Boulevard intersections with Linder, Meridian Road, and the mid-mile Chinden site approach (Long Lake) are currently signalized. E, Site Circulation and Parking The proposed roadways through the site provide direct access to the commercial/office components fronting Chinden Boulevard. A two-lane roadway will adequately serve the forecast traffic within the site. None of the internal streets exceed the maximum of 1,000 vpd on local roads with front-on housing. Page 13 of 19 Knight Sky Estates TIS - Pinal ~ ~ Knight Sky Estates Tra 'c Im act Stud The traffic volumes on the project approaches and internal roadways are presented in Figure 5. The roadways, as proposed, are adequate to serve the projected traffic volumes. VI. Improvement Analysis A. Improvements to Accommodate Base Traffic Improvements were identified at the Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection to accommodate the Background traffic volumes. The average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for Chinden Boulevard meet or exceed COMPASS thresholds for the Background condition. The roadway will need to be widened to accommodate the Background traffic. No additional improvements are necessary to accommodate the existing or Background traffic conditions, beyond the improvements outlined in this study. B. Additional Improvements to Accommodate Site Traffic The Linder Rd site approach warrants a left turn bay and special curb radii to accommodate the right turning traffic. C. Alternative Improvements No alternative improvements are identified or recommended. D. Status of Improvements Already Funded, Programmed or Planned The Idaho Transportation Department has currently contracted the study of Chinden Boulevard (US 20-26) to a private engineering firm. The results of this study will not be known for some time but it can be assumed there will be recommendations to widened the roadway. Improvements to Linder Road or Meridian Road between McMillan Rd and Chinden Blvd are currently not included in ACHD's Five Year Work Program. E. Evaluation The improvements outlined above in Items A through D have been evaluated based on the Highway Capacity Software level of service values and COMPASS capacity thresholds. VII. Conclusions A, Site Accessibility The number of approaches and location appear adequate for the site and conform to ACHD and ITD spacing guidelines. The internal site roadways meet planning guidelines. The Linder Rd site approach was found to warrant a left turn bay al~d special curb radii to accommodate the right turning traffic based on ACHD guidelines. The Chinden Blvd site approach does not need improvements to accommodate the Build Out volumes. Page 14 of 19 Knigh[ Sky Es[ates T1S - Fi~tal • Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud ~ 6. Traffic Impacts The proposed development is projected to generate an ADT of 3,$58 vpd of which the a.m. peak hour traffic is 209 vehicles per hour and the p.m. peak hour traffic is 3b3 vehicles per hour. The Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection needs improvements to accommodate the 2011 Background traffic. Adding a second eastJwest bound thru lane to the intersection will provide . sufficient capacity for the Background and Build Out conditions. The Meridian Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection does not need improvements to accommodate the Build Out volumes. Both Meridian Road and Linder Road are under COMPASS thresholds. Chinden Boulevard meets or exceeds COMPASS thresholds for the Background condition. • Widening the roadway with additional lanes is necessary to increase capacity. ~ C. Need for Improvements Several improvements to the roadway network have been identified and outlined in the report. S D. Associated Impact Fees The impact fees are based on ACHD's Ordinance 200. The estimate fees are given in the table below. ~' Estimation of Impact Fees Land Use Amount Fee Rate Impact Fee Single-family det. 101 $1,517 $153,217 Townhouse 24 $781 $18,744 Office 55 $2,238 $123,090 Retail 55 $2,686 $147,730 $442, 781 • Based Upon Ordinance 200 ~ E. Compliance with Applicable Local Codes The traffic impacts from the site have been reviewed with respect to the applicable ACHD and ITD codes and guidelines. Page 15 of 19 Knight Sky Lstates T15 -final Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud Viil. Recommendations A. Site Access/Circulation Plan The Linder site approach warrants a left turn bay on Linder Road for vehicles entering the site. Also, the curb radii should be 30 ft or greater based on the right turning traffic volumes. 6. Roadway Improvements 1. On-site A second eastJwest bound thru lane should be added to the Linder Rd/ Chinden Blvd intersection. Once improved, no additional measures are needed to accommodate the Build Out volumes at the intersection. Widening of Chinden Boulevard is needed to accommodate the traffic volumes. Once widened, the capacity will be sufficient for the projected Background and Build Out traffic volumes. No other roadway improvements are necessary to accommodate the Build Out traffic volumes. 2. Off-site No off-site transportation system improvements are needed to accommodate the project-related traffic volumes under build-out conditions. 3. Project Phasing No recommendations to the project phasing have been identified. C. Other There are no other major, transportation-related reconnmendatians at this time. Page 16 of 19 Knight' Sky Estates TIS -Final • • • • • • • • • • • i • i • • • f • • r • i Knight Slry Estates Tra ~c Im act Stud APPENDIX A-Figures Page 17 of 19 Knight Sky Estates TiS -Final STUDY SITE W. CHINDEN BLVD. R. ta~R I ~N,T.S, '~ ~~~ DATE DECE~6ER 7005 D. SiPLEi i ILE ~~ ....~^_ ~ »_ cus NwY 20&26) Figure 1 Tlicinity Ma Sea 2 Sea; Knight Sky Estates i • • • • LEGEND ~ • 123 = AM PEAK HOUR 123 = PM PEAK HOUR 456 =DAILY TRAFFIC ----~--~ ~~ I, ~ E~- 68 9 385 .,. ~~•r-r•rr,~: , ~ L~..~,-.~~,.-._ _.. ~ b H .-, ems. N W N __---,..w,_.,._ ....._ u-- v ,~ ~ 105 82 • 87 sa' 21 ~ . , _ ,~ ,~ 05 -rte ~ 1 ~ '' l 84_.-~ _ _~ ~ N ~ ~--.-.. u'e~ N e-y _._.__.__ __.._~.._m~ .~. __ - I € ................. ~~~u~~ ~' i -'~7 '~ s) ~ ~',i ,,,,. i R. COLlgIER ~ __14i.5. WTE~ [, RAIN OECE1lfR 2N5 D. SIPLE T T 14E ~^ ...r^......~ ~ W. GHINDEN BLVD. 14,981 ~ ~ ~ ti s N F ~..,..~ .~..~~,,.~.~...._~ ,m_-..-~_ -,__........_.. ~ cv .. ...___ .. . -~ ~. ._ 3 30 9 . -~906 457 ~- ..^ ~.,._ ~_ ~-- `~ _ _ _~.~~.__ - - ~ --- --- --- ~ ~ 123 ~s ~.. ~ ~ _,,.........M~O 13 10 '~ ~ ~ ~._ ` _ 910 487 ;~~ --- ~ 1 ' ~--..._.. --... '~' 49 46 ~ ~ e ~ ~_ 5z ,. ~ a N LL . - 1 i i -~ __~. O . ....~ ...~- -_ .. --- i i W ~. .-.J_. i L._...--._ ............. Figure 3 Existing T~a~c Counts Sea 2 Seao Knight Sky Estates ~i • • • • M i i a • i • • • ` ~;. ~~ ., ,~ r ;~ Z' f 1" IYri: 1 n7.. r ow t ~ .__ ;.. ,. a.cana~a ~. ~,,,,~ o.s~r~Err O N i lJ~ t' - _ _ .. ~ j ' 4 a , -- _ a 3 ! ' { __.. k Figure Site Tra ~c Sea 2 Seae Knight 4 Distribution Sky Estates i • • • • • • LEGEND 223 = AM PEAK HOUR 123 = PM PEAK HOUR q~6 =DAILY TRAFFIC i i 1 1 i i ,~ ~~ i _ i ~ 11 I• ~ u .., ,,_. : 0 a 0 w 0 z J Z .~ _~.~ ,E. ~ ~.~ Figure 5 K. xA1M DEEEM9ER 2N5 I~E~ a SZPLET7 GLnACM1t/IIn tSR /hCtl I n ~e rn a l S i ~e T ra~c, AD T Sea 2 Seao Knight Sky Estates r r • • • • • LEGEND 123 = AM PEAK HOUR 123 = PM PEAK HOUR q~6 =DAILY TRAFFIC .. r- •~ ~~. ~. ~• _, ~ I - 386 - -- ~ .._. _.._.._..- ,"_~.._...~..__.~~_g i ~ r"' n1 ~ ~ .~ 62 4s _....- ~ .~_ 3 7 s -_ ~_ 0 0 .... ~ ........w --... 14 12 ~..-__-_ _,.~_.. ~ . ............_ ~ M ~ ----- -...... , '~ ~ N O ,... i 1r` ~Q aD p 8 ~~ 20 44 10 3 ~.~ ~~ rn O ~ n W. CHINDEN BLVD. 1,929 1 ~ ~~'~ ...._....-... ....~ ...~,.,~. ~ o o / ~..~...w....__._ _ ~- .-. ---__ r_~ .....w- - _ ~ ~ ~ Q e a 0 0 .m- __..... ~ ~ ..- ._- 89 ~ _. __.-_i-f-.~ _ - -..,.. ~ 0 0 ,.. -- :.---~ .. - 1 4 ~~..~_. _.J ~-- G - € ' 7 - ~ ~~ 3..._~ ~.... ~ Q- .. , . 5 ~~ , 49 4 9 "~, ~ l~ ~ 0 ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~,oo 4 Q ia~ ~ [ F'-'~ ~: ( ~ -----=- r_ E ! ~ ~ W t l j ~ f i _ W.'McMILLAN .w.ROAp .. .. L ....w~.._-......._..~_---.(_ ................----------......___-__.z_.. o ... { ~ f . .,.,, , R. caRauER R.i.5. 51CR Br. .lE, Figure 6 ¢. wIM DECE~6ER Y~05 a B. 52PLEi1 'EEC/Lr~nNt/linlpnT$ky/C.pp Site T ra is D is tri b ~ d o n Sea 2 Sea: Knight Sky Estates i i • • LEGEND 123 = AM PEAK HOUR 123 = PM PEAK HOUR q56 = DAILY TRAFFIC ~2. ~ ,~ ~..m ~. m....r~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ 5 7 13 ... ~., _ ,~ ~= 172 641 -, ...M. 161 245 .r ..5 23 ~2~s 819 ~ ,. ~`~ s9 65 ~ ti ~ ~, rn rn ~,, .d.aa e., - ', .~ '~<, 20 900 ~ - -- o~-~ C~ ^'~ n ~, ~ er ~~ v s ~~ 20 44 10 3 ~~ u'~ ~' m'~ a ~' n ~ ~~ W. CHINDEN BLVD. 19,800 N ~ ~ ~ a.,...~..,..__.._..,...~.~ °°~.y ~ nv~ ._.__... ~f Cy e~ ~ -..,.., ',. ... ..... _ _ .. ...,., - .~ ~ Q, ~ ~ ..., .,..,..,.~._ ... I... . M...,w.~m._.,~ N N Q ~ .. 195 15o i ~,m ~ ~ ;.. G 498 i. ~" - 914 ~_,..~ .....~..._......~._~_ ~ M .. ~~._ ..,~.,.~.m,..M.._.~..,_~...__..-._..._..--_ _.......-. 111 64 N ~' N 'i 38 11 ---- -..~ . 627 .._._ _ _.__ _ _....~ ~ ~ ._ p-E--1242 - _- - __~ 9046 664 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~` , v-, ~°~ ~ ; I ~ .E .~ QQ 77 35 ~, N ~- M ~ - 18 17 ~ j i ~C'. 4-__.__. ~ ~ ~ --- Pr1 1'x'1 .~ _ -- -- ,.... .... ~ ~ - .~~207695 -~-~_ .. _ ._ .~ ._-~_ ~ - ~-. ~ ~ n ~ ~ 67 6 7 ~ ~ ,r1 ''; i -~ ~ N ~, ~Q ,~: ~ N ~' 4 ' r t ; ' z ~ ;' ;~ ~. ~ ~ a ~ ,. -~ ~ ~ ~ ._ _ -, ~ o ~~ ._.._ ,_~w....__.. _._ - _ ; _ ,.a, ~~ ~ , ---- ~ ~ ~ Z ~ t w a ~ :.... ............... ~~~i~..~ p f ...................r.a...r... _ ~... R ; S Z.... .. I I,_.....--, r., x... _.. .., ~ eR , r :. n ,. .:. , ,. .,. ... .. W. MCMILLAN' ROAD { _. Slp~ Erg tE~ "`~"`R ~,.s. Figure 7 a. MAIAR DECE1bEN 7M5 °'°.SmE" 11Ei`n~i°~*~"°~'~`y"~~« Build ~u~: Peak Hour Tra is Sea 2 Sea: Knight Sky Estates • • Knight Sky Estates Tra is Im act Stud ~ APPENDIX B-Capacity Anaiysis • • • • • • • i • • • • r • • • • • Knight Sky Gstates TIS -Final Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'~ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Pertormed 12/19/05 Time Period AM peak hour Intersection Chinden/Cinder Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction ITD Analysis Year 2004 Existing Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and 1'Imin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH R7 LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 142 802 50 50 385 82 25 164 122 112 165 94 Heavy vehicles, %HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (~y) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.D 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3' Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.p00 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.D Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes D 5 0 8 0 12 0 9 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Timin G= 10.0 G= 55.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 20.0 G= G= g Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C ~ 115.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH R7 LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 158 941 56 510 28 304 124 277 Lane group capacity, c 149 85$ 149 845 149 296 149 299 v/c ratio, X 1.06 1.10 0.38 0.60 0.19 1.03 0.83 0.93 0.09 0.48 0.09 0.48 0.09 0.17 0.09 0.17 file://C:\Documents%20and°7°20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k84.tmp 12/21/2005 i i • • • • • i Detailed Report C~ Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 52.5 30.0 49.6 22.0 48.7 47.5 51.7 46.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.D00 1.000 1.000 1.OOD Delay calibration, k p.50 0.50 D.1 i D.19 0.11 0.50 0.37 0.44 Incremental delay, d2 90.7 6D.6 1.6 1.2 0.6 59.4 31.3 33.4 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 143.2 90.6 51.1 23.2 49.3 106.9 83.D 80.2 Lane group LOS F F D C D F F F Approach delay 98.2 26.0 102.1 81.D Approach LOS F C F F Intersection delay 78,8 X~ = 1.05 Intersection LOS E HCS2000rN1 Copyright p ?000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%2USettings\haiaka0l\T.oval%20Settings\Temp\s2k84.tmp Version 4.1c 12/21/2005 Detailed Report CJ Page 1 a~ 2 HCS2000'~ DETAILED REPORT General information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/05 Time Period AM peak hour Intersection Chinden/LindEr Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction ITD Analysis Year 2011 Background mad Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 1$1 102p 64 64 490 104 32 209 155 142 210 120 Heavy vehicles, %HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (,4) A A A A A A A A A A A A .Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT $ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 D.D 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 8 0 12 0 9 lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Ng 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Timin G= 15.0 G= 47.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 28.0 G= G= g Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y.~ Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH R7 LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 201 1199 71 651 36 391 158 356 Lane group capacity, c 215 1338 215 1316 143 396 143 400 v/c ratio, X 0.93 0.90 0.33 0.49 0.25 0:99 1.10 0.89 0. i 3 0.39 0.13 0.39 0.08 0.23 0.08 0.23 file://C:~Documents%20and%20Settings~haiaka0l~Local°Io20Settings\Temp\s2k8F.tmp 12/21/2005 i • • • i • i i f • f • • • • • • • Detailed Report i i Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, di 52.0 34.2 47.9 27.5 51.5 45.8 55.0 44.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.45 0.42 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.49 0.50 0.41 Incremental delay, d2 43.5 8.3 0.9 0.3 0.9 41.7 106.2 21.1 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 95.5 42.5 48.8 27.8 52.4 87.6 161.2 65.6 Lane group LOS F D D C D F F E Approach delay 50.1 29.9 84.6 95.0 Approach LOS D C F F Intersection delay 57.7 X~ = 0.95 Intersection LOS E HCS2000TM Copyright m 20D0 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e file://C:\Docunrzents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k8F.trnp 12/21/2005 Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 ~ HCS2000"" DETAILED REPORT Genera/ lnformatlon A l t Site Information na ys K. Haiar Agency ar Ca. Intersection Chinden/Cinder Area T All Date Performed 12/19/05 ype other areas Time Period AM peak hour Jurisdiction lTD Analysis Year 2011 Build Out Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT 7H R7 LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 181 1046 77 64 498 150 40 255 172 188 248 132 Heavy vehicles, %HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up last time, li 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective g reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1:000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR a olumes 0 5 0 8 0 12 0 g ~' Lane width i2.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12 0 12 0 Parking /Grade /Parking N D N N 0 N N . . P 0 N N 0 N arking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, 0 0 G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Le ft Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 45.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 30.0 G= G= D Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= uration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120 0 Lane Group Capacity, , Control Delay, and LOS Determination . EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 201 1242 71 711 44 461 207 413 Lane group capacity, c 215 1280 215 1249 143 426 143 430 v/c ratio, X 0.93 0.97 0.33 0.57 0.31 1.08 1.45 0.96 0.13 0.38 0.13 0.38 0.0$ 0.25 0. p8 0.25 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\h aiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kA3.tmp l2/20/2005 Detailed Report Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d~ Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k Incremental delay, d2 Initial queue delay, d3 52.0 36.8 1.000 1.000 0.45 0.48 43.5 18.4 47.9 29.8 1.000 1.000 0.11 0.16 0.9 0.6 51.7 45.0 1.000 1.000 0.11 0.50 1,2 67,5 Control delay Lane group LOS Approach delay 95.5 55.3 F E 60.9 48.8 30.4 p C 32.1 53.0 112.5 D F 107.3 Approach LOS E C F Intersection delay 77.4 X = 1.05 c Intersection LOS HCS2000TM Copyright p 20p0 University of Florida, All ,R ights Reserved Page 2 of 2 55.0 44.4 1.000 1.000 0.50 p.47 ?36.1 33,3 a1.1 77.7 F E 148.9 F E Version 4.1e file://C:\Documents%ZOand%20Settings\hai aka01\Local%20Settin~s\Temn\s2kA3 Detailed Report . ~ Page 1 of 2 .....--.. ................~,,..,, .xb ~.~ v.v v.v v.v v.u u.v u.v 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 2 0 10 0 8 0 15 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking l~/ p N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N m Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 .0 D p p Min. time far pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 55.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 20.0 G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 115.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 134 579 97 872 89 317 63 316 Lane group capacity, c 149 861 149 850 149 303 149 292 v/c ratio, X p.90 0.67 0.65 1.03 0.60 1.05 0.42 1.08 0.09 p.48 0.09 0.48 0. p9 0.17 0.09 0.17 file://C:\Docuraaents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k24.tmp 12/20/2005 a • s • • • i i • Detailed Report • ~ Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d~ 52.0 23.1 50.8 30.0 50.6 47.5 49.8 47.5 Progression factor, PF 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.42 0.24 0.23 p.50 0.19 0.50 0.11 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 45.4 2.1 9.7 37.6 6.4_ 64.3 1.9 76.3 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 97.4 25.1 60.5 67.6 57.p 111.8 51.7 123.8 Lane group LOS F C E E E F D F Approach delay 38.7 66.9 99.8 111.8 Approach LOS p E F F Intersection delay 71.1 X = 0,98 Intersection LOS E HCS2000TM Copyright ©2000 University oP Florida; All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%n20Settings\hai aka01 \Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k24.tmp Version 4.1e 12/20/2005 ~. i i r Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/05 Time Period PM peak hour Intersection Chinden / Linder Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction ITD Analysis Year 2011 Background mod Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Timin /n ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 154 643 23 111 877 134 113 300 113 80 208 214 Heavy vehicles, %HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (p~) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3:0' Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 7.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 D.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 2 0 10 0 8 0 15 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N D N N 0 N N p N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Ti i G= 10.0 G= 35.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= G= m ng Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TW RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 171 737 123 1112 126 450 89 452 Lane group capacity, c 172 1200 172 1183 172 435 172 419 v/c ratio, X 0.99 0.61 0.72 0.94 0.73 1.03 0.52 1.08 0.10 0.35 0.10 0.35 0.1 D 0.25 0.10 0.25 file://C:\Documents%a20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kA4.tmp 12/21./2005 Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, di 45.0 26.9 43.6 31.5 43.7 37:5 42.7 37.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.20 0.28 0.45 0.29 0.50 0.12 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 66.8 0.9 13.2 14.2 14.9 52.3 2.7 66.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 111.8 27.9 56.8 45.7 58.6 89.8 45.4 104.2 Lane group LOS F C E D E F D F Approach delay 43.7 46.8 83.0 94.5 Approach LOS D D F F Intersection delay 80,2 X = 0.96 c Intersection LOS E HCS2000Ttvt Copyright (~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haia1ca01\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kA4.tmp 12/21./2005 i Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Ca. Date Performed 12/19/05 Time Period PM peak hour Intersection Chinden / Linder Area Type All otherareas Jurisdiction ITD Analysis Year 2011 Build Out Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 154 664 35 111 914 195 132 333 113 147 244 214 Heavy vehicles, %HV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.ODp 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Ob 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 2 0 10 0 8 0 15. Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT 07 08 Timin G= 10.0 G= 35.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= G= g Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y~ 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and L OS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 171 775 123 1222 147 487 163 492 Lane group capacity, c 172 1187 172. 1175 172 436 172 422 v/c ratio, X 0.99 0.65 0.72 1.04 0.85 1.12 0.95 1.17 0.10 0.35 0.10 0.35 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.25 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kB0.tzxap 12/20/2005 .~ .' • • •. i • Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 45.0 27.3 43.6 32.5 44.3 3~ 5 44.7 37.5 Progression factor, PF 1,0Qp 1.000 1.000 1.DOp 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.23 0.28 0.50 0.39 0.50 0.46 0.50 Incremental delay, dz 66.8 1.2 13.2 37.2 32.0 78.9 53.3 97.6 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 111.8 28.5 56.8 69.7 76.2 116.4 98.1 135.1 Lane group LOS F C E E E F F F Approach delay 43.6 68.6 107.7 125.9 Approach LOS D E F F Intersection delay 79,3 X~ = 1.06 Intersection LOS E IIC52000Tt`"t Copyright O 2000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved Version 4_lc file://C:\Documents°Io20and%20Settings\haiaka0 ~~L.ocal%20Settings\Temp\s2kB0.tmp 12/20/2005 i Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 HCS2000~' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/2005 Time Period AM peak hour Intersection Chinden/Meridian Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2004 Existing Project ID Knight Sky Estates Vo/ume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TW RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 D 1 1 p Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 13 910 49 75 457 9 37 3 88 14 5 24 Weavy vehicles, %HV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective teen, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.D 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 1 0 9 0 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking /~/ 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N D N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timin G= 10.0 G= 60.0 G= G~ G= 15.0 G= G= G- g Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 14 1060 83 517 41 91 16 30 Lane group capacity, c 177 1079 177 1084 206 239 195 246 v/c ratio, X 0.08 0.98 0.47 0.48 0.20 0.38 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.60 p.1 Q 0.60 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Teax~p\s2k47.tmp 12/20/2005 Detailed Repoxt Control delay 41.0 42.6 44.5 11.5 37.7 39.3 Lane group LOS D D D B D D Approach delay 42,6 16,1 38.8 Approach LOS p B D Intersection delay 33.6 X = 0.82 Intersection LOS c HCS2000rt`'t Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 40.8 19.5 42.5 11.2 37.2 38.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k p,11 0,4g 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.2 23.1 2.0 0.3 0.5 1.0 Initial queue delay, d3 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k47.tmp Page 2 of 2 36.6 36.8 1.000 1.OOD 0.11 0.11 D.2 0.2 36.8 3~ 0 D D 36.9 .~_.. ~_ Version 4.1e 12/20/2005 i Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'~ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/2005 Time Period AM peak hour Intersection Chinden/Meridian Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2011 Background Project ID Knighf Sky Estates Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 D 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 17 1158 62 95 581 11 47 4 112 18 6 31 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Ob 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 1 0 9 0 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N p N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Ng 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Ti i G= 8.0 G= 65.0 G= G= G= 12.0 G= G= G= m ng Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y~ Y= 5 Y~ Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 19 1350 106 657 52 118 20 39 Lane group capacity, c 142 1169 142 1174 164 191 137 196 v/c ratio, X 0.13 1.15 0.75 0.56 0.32 0.62 0.15 0.20 0.0$ 0.65 0.08 0.65 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k52.t~x~.p 12/20/2005 w i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • • • • Detailed Report • Page 2 0~ 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 42.8 17.5 45.0 9.6 40.3 41.8 39.4 39.7 Progression factor, PF i.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.50 0.30 0.16 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.4 79.7 19.3 0.6 1.1 5.9 0.5 0.5. Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 43.2 97.2 64.3 10.2 41.4 47.8 39.9 40.2 Lane group LOS D F E B D D D D Approach delay gg.5 17.7 45.8 40.1 Approach LOS F B D D Intersection delay 66.0 X = 1.04 Intersection L05 E FICS2000TM Copyright O 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e file://C:\Dacu~aents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k52.tmp 12/20/2005 a • i i Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'~ DETAILED REPORT General Information Slte Informs#ian Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/2005 Time Period AM peak hour Intersection Chind®n/Meridian Area Typ® All other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2011 Build Out Project ID Knight Sky Estates Volume and Timin /n ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 D 1 1 0 1 1 D 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 18 1207 67 95 627 11 52 4 112 18 6 33 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 D.90 0.90 D.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I~ 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.D 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.D 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.D 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb p.p 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 1 0 9 D 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.D 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N D N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Ns 0 0 0 0 D D 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 0$ Ti i G= 8.D G= 65.0 G= G= G= 12.0 G= G= G= m ng Y= 5 Y.~ 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C ~ 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 20 1410 106 708 58 118 20 . 41 Lane group capacity, c 142 1169 142 1174 163 191 137 196 v/c ratio, X p.14 1.21 0.75 D.60 0.36 0.62 0.15 0.21 0.08 D.65 0.08 0.65 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0 \Local%20Settings\Ternp\s2kAF.tz~ap 12/21/2005 i • • • • • • Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 42.8 17.5 45.0 10.1 40.4 41.8 39.4 39.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.DD0 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.OOD 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.50 0.30 0.19 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.5 101.0 19.3 0.9 1.3 5.9 0.5 0.5 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 43.3 118.5 64.3 11.0 41.8 47.8 39.9 40.3 Lane group LOS D F E B D D D D Approach delay 117.5 17.9 45.8 4D.1 Approach LOS F g D D Intersection delay 77.8 X = 1.08 Intersection LOS E HCS2000TM Copyright C~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l \L.ocal%20Settings\Temp\s2kAF.tmp Version 4.1e 12/21/200 Detailed Report - Page 1 of 2 HCS2000~" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Intersection Chinden/Meridian Agency or Ca. Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/19/2005 Jurisdiction Time Period PM peak hour Analysis Year 2004 Existing Project ID Knight Sky Estates Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 D i B TH 1 T p Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 10 487 46 123 906 30 53 10 98 18 7 17 Heavy vehicles, %HV Peak-hour factor, PHF 2 0.90 5 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 5 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.D 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2-0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 3 0 10 0 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= fi0.0 G= G= G= 15.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y-- Y~ 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH FiT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 11 587 137 1037 59 109 20 25 Lane group capacity, c 177 1075 177 1082 207 242 186 251 v/c ratio, X p,06 0.55 0.77 0.9fi 0.29 0.45 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.60 0.10 0.60 0.15 0.15. 0.15 0.15 file://C:~Documents%20and%20Settings~haiaka0l~Loca1%20Settings\Temp\s2k3B.tmp 12/20/2005 Detailed Report ontrol delay 40.9 12.5 62.9 37.0 38.5 40.1 Lane group LOS D B E D D D Approach delay 13.0 40.0 39.5 Approach LOS g D D Intersection delay 31.g X = 0.85 Intersection LOS c NCS2000T^'t Copyright ®3000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 40.8 11.9 43.9 18.8 37.7 38.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.15 0.32 0.47 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.1 0.6 19.0 18.2 0.8 1.3 Initial queue delay, d3 C Page 2 of 2 36.7 36.7 1.000 1.000 0.11 0.11 0.3 0.2 37.0 36.8 D D 36.9 D ~..~. Version 4.1e file://C:Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s21c3B.tmp 12/20/2005 i i Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 HCS2000~' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Agency or Co. Date Performed 12/19/2005 Time Period PM peak hour Intersection Chinden/Meridian Area Type Al! other areas Jurisdiction Analysis Year 2011 Background Project ID Knight Sky Estates Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 13 620 59 156 1153 38 67 13 125 23 9 22 Heavy vehicles, %HV Peak-hour factor, PHF 2 0.90 5 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 5 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 2 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE ,3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 3 D 10 0 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N D N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 Og Timing G= 8.0 G= 65.0 G= G= G= 12.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y~ Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T - 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LQS Determination EB WB NB SB L7 TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 14 749 173 1320 74 142 26 32 Lane group capacity, c 142 1165 142 1172 165 i93 117 201 v/c ratio, X 0.1 D 0.64 1.22 1.13 0.45 0.74 0.22 0.16 0.08 0.65 0.08 0.65 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Ternp\s2k5E.trnp l2/20/2005 i • • • Detailed Report Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d~ 42.7 10.5 46.0 17.5 40.9 42.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.p00 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.22 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.29 Incremental delay, d2 0.3 i.2 145.9 68.2 1.9 13.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 43.0 11.7 191.9 85.7 42.9 56.2 Lane group LOS D B F F D E Approach delay 123 98.0 51.6 Approach LOS g F D Intersection delay 66.9 X = 1.08 Intersection LOS c HCS2000TI`'t Copyright ®?000 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 39.8 39.5 1.OOD 1.000 0.11 0.11 1.0 0.4 40.7 39.$ D D 4D.2 D E Version 4.1e file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k5E.tzxip 12/20/2005 i • • i i i i Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 Volume, V (vph) 17 695 67 156 1242 38 73 13 125 23 9 26 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green; e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.p 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 3 0 10 D 2 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12,0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N m Buses stopping, Ne 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 pg Timing G= 8.0 G= 75.0 G= G= G= 12.0 G= G~ G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT L7 TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 19 841 173 1419 $1 142 26 37 Lane group capacity, c 129 1221 129 1228 149 176 97 181 v/c ratio, X 0.15 0.69 1.34 1.15 0.54 0.81 0.27 0.20 0.07 0.68 0.07 0.68 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Ternp\s2k5E.tmp 12/20/2005 w • • • • • • i • • • i • • • • Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, di 47.8 10.5 51.0 17.5 46.4 47.9 45.0 44.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.26 0.50 0.50 0.14 0.35 0.11 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.5 1.7 196.4 79.2 4.1 23.5 i.5 0.6 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 48.3 12.2 47.4 96.7 50.5 71.4 46.5 45.2 Lane group LOS D B F F D E D D Approach delay 13.0 113.1 63.8 45.7 Approach LOS B F E D Intersection delay 7g,1 X~ = 1.13 Intersection LOS E HCS2000Tt`'t Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2k5~.tmp Version 4.1e 12/20/2005 i i • i Two-Way Stop Control L.J Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information nalyst K. Haiar gency/Co. Date Performed 12/17/2005 nal sis Time Period AM eak hour Pro'ect Descri tian Kni ht Sk Site Information Intersection urisdictian nalysis Year Linder Road /site ITD 2011 Build Out East/West Street: Linder Road Intersection Orientation: North-South North/South Street: site a roach Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes a Ma or Street nd Ad'ustments Northbpund Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 70 494 0 0 472 13 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Houriy Fiow Rate, HFR 7% 548 0 0 524 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 0 __ __ Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream 5i nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 0 0 p 8 0 44 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Wourly Flow Rate, HFR Q 0 0 8 0 48 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 p 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes p 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Dela Queue Len th and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 77 56 C (m) (vph) 1030 424 lc 0.07 0.13 95% queue length 0.24 0.45 Control Delay 8.8 14,8 LOS A B pproach Delay -- -- 14.8 Approach LOS -- -- B Rights Reserved Copyright p ?003 University of Florida, All Righ[s Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Ternp\u2k452.tmp Version 4.1d 12/20/2005 i Two-Way Stop Control ~ ~ Page 1 01' 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst K. Haiar Intersection Linder Road /site gency/Co. urisdiction ITD Date Performed 12/17/2005 nalysis Year 2011 Build Out nalysis Time Period PM peak hour Pro'ect Descri tion Kni ht Sk East/West Street: Linder Road North/South Street: site a roach Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 95 559 0 0 454 18 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 105 621 0 0 504 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 0 __ __ Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 0 0 0 2p 0 103 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 22 0 114 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 0 2 Percent Grade (%) p p Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized p 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR luelav. C2ueue Lenath. and Level of Service ~ pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 105 136 C (m) (vph) 1043 388 lc 0.1 D 0.35 95% queue length 0.33 1.54 Control Delay 8.8 19.2 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 19.2 pproach LOS -- -- C Rights Reserved Copyright ~ ?003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\u2k452.tmp Version 4.1d 12/20/2005 Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General lnformatlon Site Information Analyst K. Haiar Intersection Chinden /site approach Agency or Co. Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/19/05 Jurisdiction ITD Time Period AM peak hour Analysis Yea r 2011 Build Qut Project ID Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Tfmin In ut EB WB NB 5B LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N i 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 D 1 1 ~ 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 5 1265 59 145 641 13 41 0 102 39 0 16 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 ,2 2 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 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext®nsion of eff®ctive reen, a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival typ®, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.p 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ~ 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb p.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 0 5 0 8 0 12 0 9 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, N m Buses stopping, Ns 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 5.0 G= 73.0 G= G= G= i0.0 G- G= G= Y= 2 Y = 5 Y- Y.- Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 6 1466 161 718 46 100 43 8 Lane group capacity, c 524 1315 163 1446 140 158 125 158 v/c ratio, X 0.01 1.11 0.99 0.50 0.33 0.63 0.34 0.05 0.73 0.73 0.80 0.80 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kBA.tnnp 12/21/2005 i ~. • i i • • i • • • • • • i r • Detailed Report Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d~ 3.7 13.5 36.2 3.3 41.9 43.2 Progression factor, PF 1.OOp 1.000 1.pp0 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 p.50 0.49 0.11 0.11 0.21 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 62.6 66.7 0.3 1.4 8.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Contrpl delay 3.7 76.1 102.9 3.6 43.3 51.2 Lane group LOS A E F A D D Approach delay 75.8 21 $ 48 7 Approach LOS E C D Intersection delay 55.0 X = 1.09 Intersection LOS c HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 41.9 40.7 1. pOp 1.Op0 0.11 0.11 1.7 0.1 '43.6 40.8 D D 43.2 D D Version 4.1e file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kBA.tmp 12/21/2005 Detailed Report ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'~ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information . Analyst K. Haiar Intersection Chinden /site approach i Agency ar Co. Area Type Al! other areas Date Performed 12/19/05 Jurisdiction ITD • Time Period PM peak hour Analysis Year 2011 Build Out Project I D Knight Sky subdivision Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 . Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 23 819 66 161 1172 57 37 D 93 33 0 14 Heavy vehicles, %FiV 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 • 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 • Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A . Start-up lost time, li 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective reen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 0 3 0 . . Filtering/metering, ( 1.000 1.OOp 1.000 1.Dp0 1.000 1.000 1.p00 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb D.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR . olumes 0 5 0 6 0 9 D 1 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N D N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . Min. time far pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only EW Perm 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 5.0 G= 73.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= G= G= Y= 2 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y- 5 Y- Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 26 978 179 1358 41 93 37 14 Lane group capacity, c g3 1310 334 1440 139 158 130 158 v/c ratio, X 0.28 0.75 0.54 0.94 0.29 0.59 0.28 0.09 0.73 0.73 0.80 0.80 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 fi le://C:\Documents~o20and~o20Settings\haiaka0l\Loca1~o20Settings\Temp\s2kC6.trnp 12/21/2005 Detailed Report Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d1 4.6 8.0 9.7 8.2 41.7 43.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0,11 0.30 0.14 0.46 p.11 0.18 Incremental delay, d2 1.6 2.4 1.7 12.7 1.2 5.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Cont I d I ro a ay fi.2 i 0.4 11.4 20.9 42.9 4$. 7 Lane group LOS A 8 B C D D Approach delay 10.3 19.$ 46.9 Approach LOS B B D Intersection delay 18.1 X = 0.90 Intersection LOS c !lCS2000Tt`'t Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 4i.7 40.9 1.000 1.000 0.11 0.11 1.2 0.2 42.9 41.1 D D 42.4 .~ ~~,~ Version 4.1e file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\haiaka0l\Local%20Settings\Temp\s2kC6.tmp 12/21/2005 ~-~ti-~ ~~~~~~ LEFT-TURN DECELERATION-LANE WARRANTS 30-'~5 mnh ~.~4 :~ 401 c v °' 30( :~ c O U C.~ 'O ~OC ~~ l00 y Q :~ 30( c e HOC 'J J V ~ l00 r"~ ..y v ~ 0 E ~ ~<. i~ ~5 20 ZS 30 40-45 mnh ~u ~` '0 ?5 DHV or a~~zrage peak-hour volume or vehicles turning left into the access Y 30 ~l S 72-F10 .r M • • • i • • • • • • • i 'i '• ~~ • • • Gl~~r ~ apr~~~~lL WARRANTS FOR RIGHT-TURN TREATMENTS (35-40 mph) Righ#-Turn Treatments (4/5 lanes) Pasted Speed 35-40 mph 120 E 100 7 80 e r- Radius fi0 ~ Taper 2 40 '4 T urn Lane 4 20 0- 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 Projected Volume on Major Street Right Turn Treatments (2/3 lanes) Posted Speed 35.40 mph 7 m6 E j5 ~ q~ rn 3i 0 2~ m 4 1( Projected Volume on Major Street Radius Taper Tum Lane Figure 11 r--~ 00 1 20000 25000 30000 35000 72-F11(2)