AZ-11-001 TEN MILE ANNEXATIONIAN Planning Department
IDAHO ANNEXATION/REZONE r Application Checklist
Project name: Ten Mile Annexation File#: AZ: ll-oo I
Applicant/agent: Janicek Properties, LLCIF edrizzi Ten M ile, LLClSJJV LLC
Application is required to contain one copy of the following:
one copy of the obove items need be submitted when submitting multiple applications
Additional Requirements for Annexation/Rezone Applications:
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 210 o Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 o Facsimile: (208)
888-6854 o Website: www.meridiancity.org
(Rev. I lil/08)
NJ
("
Applicant Staff d),
(0
Description
&s Commission & Council Review i,/
Narrative fully describing the proposed project
L,/
Legal description ofthe property to be annexed and/or
. Include a metes & bounds description to the section line ofall adjacent roadways, stamped & signed by a
registered professional land surveyor, with a calculated closure sheet.
o Scaled exhibit map showing the boundaries of the legal description in compliance w/ the requirements of the
Idaho State Tax Commission Property Tax Administrative Rules IDAPA 35.01.03.225.01.h.
. If requesting more than one zoning designation, include a legal description for each zone along with an overall
annexation/rezone boundary description. Also include the boundaries ofeach different zone on the map.
*Note: Wen also submitting a Preliminary Plat application,
a sepdrate legal description is requiredfor the
boundaries of the plat, excluding property to the section line as annemtions/re:ones-
rezoned
Recorded deed for the ect t.
,/-
Affidavit of Legal Interest signed & notarized by the property owner (lf owner is a corporation,
{ submit Scaled a copy vicinity of the map Articles showing of Incorporation the location or other evidence of the subject to show that property the person signing is an authorized agent.)
t/
Provide concept plan lRoads, til/,?
access points, p*king, g.n"rul luyort of
Pre-applicatidn meeting notes (All applications that require a public hearing are required to conduct
a pre-
application meeting with the Planning Department.)
Neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet (Applicants are required to hold a neighborhood meeting to provide
z 1-\. anopportunityforpublicreviewoftheproposedprojectpriortothes Commitment of Property Posting form signed the L1
T.
Waived (Please call Planning Department to calculate correctfee. Applications with
by
Council
Applicant
(0
Description
Staff
(i)
If this application is not accompanied by a plat, conditional use permit, or planned unit
development application, submit a conceptual development plan and elevations for the
property (also submit an electronic version of the plan(s) in pdf format on a disk with the file named
with proiect name & plan type
[i.e. conceptual development plan, elevations]).
applicant/agent
u,h
("
incorrectfees will not be accepted.)
t-
City of Meridian
AZ 11-001lTen Mile Annexation
5 July 2011
Page 2 of2
All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any municipal surface drainage
leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. The
developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irrigation water be
made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
rti"Sincerely, tu , Anderson
Water Superintendent
Nampa & Meridian h'rigation District
JPA/dbg
C: File
Each Board
S ecretary/Treasurer-Coon
Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting
DATE: September 1, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4A
PROJECT NUMBER: AZ 11-001
ITEM TITLE: Ten Mile Annexation
continued Public Heoring from July 21 , 2011 - Annexotion ond zoning of 80.62 ocres of
lond from RUT in Ado County to C-G zone by Jonicek Properties, LLC: Fedrizzi Ten Mile,
LLC; ond SJJV, LLC - west ofS. Ten Mile Rood ond norih of l-84
MEETING NOTES
CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION
DATE: E.MAILED TO
STAFF
SENT TO
AGENCY
SENT TO
APPLICANT
NOTES INITIALS
CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTIES:
1. The historical agricultural uses on the property may continue until such time as the
parcel is developed. The RightTo-Farm Act under Idaho Code Section 22-4503 is
applicable to the subject property.
2. The Owner/Developer shall modifu the Development Agreement to include a site-specific
plan showing how the site is proposed to develop prior to submittal ofthe first development
application. The plan shall be consistent with the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan
(TMISAP) gfpurrent design standards in effect at the time of development.
'tt,
3. The subject property shall be platted prior to issuance ofa Certificate ofZoning
Compliance in accordance with the Unified Development Code.
4. Future development shall include vehicular cormections to adjacent properties consistent
with the TMISAP o1 current design standards in effect at the time of development.
5. At the time of development, the Owner/Developer shall construct a ten-foot wide multi-
use pathway adjacent to the Purdam Drain, consistent with the Master Pathways Plan.
Location ofthe pathways shall be determined by the Planning Departrnent and Parks
Department at the time of development.
7. Water service to these properties will be via extension of mains in Ten Mile Road. The
Owner,/Developer shall be responsible to install the necessary water connections to meet fire
flow requirements. The Owner/Developer shall be responsible for installation of water main
to and thLrough the future development. Coordination of main size and routing with Public
Works is required at time of development.
8. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-
round source of water. The Owner,/Developer will be required to use the City of Meridian
reuse water supply for primary source of irrigation at the time of development.
9. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways (Purdam Drain),
crossing or lfng adjacart and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per
UDC I 1-3,4.-6. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or
Janicek Properties LLC, Fedrizzi LLC and SJJV LLC
Development Agreement - Conditions
of Approval
6. Sanitary sewer service to these properties will be via extension ofa sewer trunk main
located along the Purdam Drain. The Owner/Developer shall coordinate a sewer connection
to the existing 36-inch trunk main. The Owner/Developer shall install main to and through
this property; coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Departrnent, and
execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide future
service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet; if cover from top ofpipe to the sub-
grade is less than three feet, then alternate materials shall be used in conformance with City
of Meridian Public Works Department Standard Specifications.
lateral users association (ditch owners), wittr written approval or non-approval submitted to
the Public Works Deparftnent. Iflateral users association approval can't be obtained,
alternate plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to the
issuance ofa building permit.
10. Any existing domestic well system within the property shall be removed from domestic
service per City Ordinance at the time of development. Wells may be used for non-domestic
purposes such as secondary landscaping irrigation if approved by the City of Meridian and
Idaho Departrnent of Water Resources.
11. Any existing septic systons within the property shall be rernoved from service per City
Ordinance at the time of development. Contact Central District Health for abandonment
procedures and inspections.
Staff recommends a modification to the DA be required prior to submittal ofthe first CZC application to include
a conceptual development plan for the entire property that incorporates the following:
o The integration ofthe three major use categories residential, commercial, and employment.
o Traditional neighborhood design concepts as detailed in the TMISAP that at a minimum, incorporate the
following: higher density buildings close to the street; narrower streets to slow traffic; parking lots
behind or under buildings; residences with porches or balconies facing the street.
o A transition in uses to the adjacent residentially zoned prope(y to the north and west.
o Venically integrated and multi-family residential uses with an overall target density of 8-12 dwelling
units per acre, with higher densities allowed on individual projects consistent with the mixed use land
use designation. Live-work units are strongly encouraged.
. Future development should be consistent with the guidelines contained in the Meridian Design Manual
for the Urban/Suburban development context.
. Future uses should include small scale office, retail, restaurants, recreational, personal services, public
or quasi-public uses, churches, multi-family dwellings, and employment uses consistent with the
purpose statement ofthe TN-C district and the MUR land use designation. Mixed use compact
development along with vertically integrated residential and live/work units are encouraged.
o Minimum number of stories for new construction adjacent to any street is two (2).
. Maximum building footprint is twenty thousand (20,000) square feet; however, other than retail, all
other uses may be allowed a footprint of greater than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet through the
conditional use permit process.
o A park area consistent with the TMISAP that incorporates a multi-use pathway along the Purdam Drain
shall be provided on the site consistent with the Master Pathways Plan.
r Development ofthe site shall be consistent with the collector street network plan attached in Exhibit
f
..\' \'"
6r
*
Y'
o
a ,{ r,
,r(t'"
-'C\
-o t$P*
*,"
v
J
D
,('
-,r" !1r
-&
f r/
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A.1
TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION
PROJECT: SJJV
DATE: 2/8h 1
LAND USE IVIULTI
(# 22o)
NO. UNITS (KSF) 30
TRIP RATES
INDUST
(# 1 10)
244
RETAIL
(# 820)
122
OFFICE
(# 750)
213
AM
ADT
PM
TRIP CAP. RATES
PASS BY RATES
UNADJUSTED TOTAL TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
11 .02 7 .05
0.6'l
1.14
n)7
0.81
0.76
0.20
12.34
1 .92
1 .71
0.1 1
0.37
0.20
63.34
1 .45
5.85
TOTAL
331 1721 7728 2629 12408 VPD
199 176 409 802 VPH
34 186 714 364 1297 VPH
CAPTURED TRIPS
ADT
AIVI
PM
DRIVEWAY VOLUME
ADT
AM
PIvI
PASS BY TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
NET NEW TRAFFIC
ADT
APPENDIX A.2
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
PROJECT: SJJV
OA'lEt 218111
TR.P GENERATION
EXIT
RATE
TOTAL
TRIPS
LAND USE
BLDG
AREA
EN'TER
RATE RATE
RETAIL
OFFICE
RESIDENTlAL
122
213
30 67%
241
024
0.76
52%
86%
33%
304
147
038
585
'171
114
714
364
34
PEAK TRIP CAPTURE FAC FoR TRIP oRlGlNs
TO OFFICE
1va
3%
o%
TO RETAIL
23vr
2go/o
53Yo
TO RESIDENTIAL
2o/o
FROM OFFICE 12Vo
FROM RETAIL
FROII,I RES,
PEAK HOUR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS FOR TRIP OESTINATIONS
FROI!] OFFICE FROM RETAIL
310/a
20eh
3lok
FROI!] RESIDENT
oa
gva
o%
TO OFFICE
TO RETAIL
APPENDIX A.1
TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION
PROJECT: FEDRITZI
DATE:218111
LAND USE I\4 U LTI
(# 220\
NO. UNrrS (KSF) 4
TRIP RATES
ADT 6,72
AM 0.51
PM 0,62
TRIP CAP. RATES 0.44
PASS BY RATES
UNADJUSTED TOTAL TRIPS
ADT 27
AM2
PM2
CAPTURED TRIPS
ADT
PM
DRIVEWAY VOLUME
ADT
AM
PM
PASS BY TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
NET NEW TRAFFIC
ADT 15
AM
TOTAL
2829 722 3759 VPD
INDUST
(# 1 10)
RETAIL
(# 820)
OFFICE
(# 750)
26 30
6.97 '108.82
0.92 2.68
0.98 9.90
0.20
181
24
ZJ
JO
5
JZt
I
29
2508
62
228
24.05
2.63
0.20
577
63
APPENDIX A.2
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
PROJECT: FEDRlzzl
DATE:2/a111
TRIP GENERATION
LAND USE
BLDG
AREA
ENTER
RATE
EXIT
RATE RATE
TOTAL
TRIPS
RETAIL
OFFICE
RESIDENTIAL
26
30
67%
4.75
0.67
o42
52vo
86%
33%
515
4.09
0.20
990
475
062
143
2
iEAK HouR TRtp cApruRE FAcroRs FoR TRIP oRlGlNS
TO OFFICE
FROM OFFICE 1o/o
FR.M RETAIL 3o/D
FRO[' RES oo/o
TO RETAIL
23vo
20%
53Yo
TO RESIDENTIAL
zak
12o/o
0%
PEAX HOUR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS FOR TRIP DESTINATIONS
FROII,l OFFICE
TO OFFTCE 6va
FROM RETAIL
31o/o
20%
31Yo
FROII,I RESIDENT
oa
9%
Olo
RETAIL 2r/o
TO RES 2%
APPENDIX A.1
TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION
PROJEGT: JANICEK
DAIEi 2l8l'11
LAND USE MULTI
(# 220)
NO. UNITS (KSF} 680
TRIP RATES
ADT 6,23
AM 0.50
Ptvl 0.58
TRIP CAP. RATES 0.24
PASS BY RATES
UNADJUSTED TOTAL TRIPS
ADT 4237
AM 337
PM 392
CAPTURED TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
'1024
81
95
687
tuo
92
VPD
VPH
VPH
INDUST
(# 1 10)
192
RETAIL
(# 820)
OFFICE
(# 750)
280
6.94
0.72
0.58
0.21
42.88
0.93
4.0'l
0.12
0.27
15951
344 515
1490 445
1942
42
181
2640
408
353
TOTAL
24847 VPD
1333 VPH
2438 VPH
TRIP GENERATION
BLDG ENTER EXIT TOTAL
LANO USE TRIPS
RATE RATE
RETAIL
OFFICE
RESIDENTIAL
372
2AO
680
4A%
67%
192
o22
0.39
52vo
a6a/o
33o/.
2.OA
137
019
401
159
058
'1490
445
392
APPET.IDIX A.2
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
PROJECT: JANiCEK
DATE: 2/8/11
PEAK HOIJR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS TRIP ORIGINS
TO OFFICE
1%
3%
ora
FROM OFFICE
FROM RETAIL
FROI,l RES.
TO RETAIL
23o/o
2Do/o
53ya
TO RESIDENTIAL
2%
12o/o
o%
PEAK HOUR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS FOR TRIP DESTINANONS
FROM OFFICE
-ro oFFlcE aak
TO RETAIL 2OA
FROIIIRETAIL
3'1vo
20vo
31r
FROM RESIDENT
o%
90h
IO RES 0%
2%
APPENDIX A.1
TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION
PROJECT: MERIDIAN 118
DATE: 218111
LAND USE MULTI
(#220l-
NO. UNrrs (KSF) '1035
TRIP RATES
ADT 6.16
AM 0.49
PM 0,57
TRIP CAP, RATES 0.25
PASS BY RATES
UNADJUSTED TOTAL TRIPS
ADT 6371
AM 511
PM 587
CAPTURED TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
7 39 39.66 10.80
1.11 085 1 .48
1 .29 J. / I 1 .31
0.19 0.19
INDUST
(# 1 10)
1205
RETAIL
(# 820)
465
OFFICE
(# 750)
1075
0.23
0.25
TOTAL
8899 18441 11611 45322 VPD
1333 394 1593 3830 VPH
1 560 1726 1407 5280 VPH
1568
126
144
2205
303
zot
VPD
VPH
VPH
1690
za5
296
7209
'1080
1263
4261
ot
aoo
3527
75
APPENDIX A.2
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
PROJECT: MERIDIAN 118
OAIET 2ft111
TRIP GENERA
TOTAL
TRIPS
BLDG ENTER
a/o
EXIT TRIP
RATE
LAND USE RATE RATE
RETAIL
OFFICE
RESIOENTIAL
465
1075
'1035
4A%
67o/o
174
018
0.38
52va
86%
33%
193
I 13
0.19
x.71
1.31
057
1726
1401
587
PEAK HOUR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS FOR TRIP GINS
FROM OFFICE
FROM RETAIL
FROIT,l RES,
TO OFFICE
'lYo
3va
o%
TO RETAIL
23%
20%
53%
TO RESIDENTIAL
2%
12va
a%
PEAK HOUR TRIP CAPTURE FACTORS FOR TRIP DESTINATIONS
FROM OFFICE
TO OFFTCE 6%
FROII,I RETAL
310,b
20v,
31Yo
FROM RESIDENI
o%
APPENDIX B
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Generallnformation lnformation Site
ntersectionB OUTH ROAD/ACCESS
risdiction CHD
aYear is
Analyst lP. DoBtE
Aqency/Co lDEt
Date Performed lzJl4/2011
Analysis Time Period IPM
Proiect Description TMlc MASTER PLAN
EastffVest Street: SOUTH ROAD North/South Street: ,4CCESS B fALI 7)
(COLLECTOR)
lntersection Orientation: StudY Period (hrs): 0.25
East-t4/est
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
lvlovement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 45 635 100 400 485 275
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 o.95 0.95 o.95 o.95 0.95
47 668 105 421 510 289
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent HeaW Vehicles 2 2
MedianLane Type Two Way Left Turn
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1
Configuration L T R L T R
Upstream Signal 0 1
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
7 8 '10 11 12
Movement
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 100 30 400 200 30 80
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow 105 421 210 31 84
Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 1 0
Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1
Configuration T R L T R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach Eastbound Northbound Southbound
lvlovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Conllguration L L L T R L T R
v (veh/h) 421 31 421 210 84
910 836 41 14 o/J 0 20 914
C (m) (veh/h)
0.05 0.50 0.63 1.55 0.09
95% 0.16 2.88 11.44 4.63 4.40 4.17 0.30
queue length
Control Delay (s/veh) 9.2 13.6 917.9 111 1 18.9 684.1 9.3
LOS A c A
Approach Oelay (s/veh) 249.1
Approach LOS
-
APPENDIX C
Two-Way Stop Control
Copyright@2010 University of Florida, All Righls Reserved
Ar
Page I of 1
)'t C
HCS+TM Version 5.5 Generated: 21512011 3:59 P[/l
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
enerallnformation lnformation ite
lntersectionA OUTH ROAD/ACCESS
urisdiction CHD
alYear s o
a DOBIE
encY/co
ate Performed 11
sis Time Period
ectPLAN Des n TMIC MASTER
orth/So uth Stre et: A s S A T
Easuwest Street: SOUTH ROAD OLLECTOR
East-West Period hrs 0.25
ntersection Orientation
o u m es a nd A d u s tme nts
e h c e V
Eastbound Westbound
6
ovement
1060
olume h/h
k-Hour Factor PHF
0 1194 0 1115 105
urly Flow Rate, HFR
veh/h
2
Percent H Vehicles
Two Wa Left Turn Lane
edian
0
1 0 2
R
nfl uration
stream S I 0 1
nor Street Northbound Southbound
7 9 12
ovement
L R L T
olume veh/h 100
0.95
Peak-Hour Factor PHF
0 10s 0 0
ourly Flow Rate, HFR
veh/h
Vehicles 2 2
rcent
rcent Grade 0 0
(%)
Flared Approach
0
Storage
Channelized
0 0 1
R
. Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
eneral lnformation ite lnformation
Analyst lP. DoBtE
Aqencv/Co lDEt
Date Performed l2/a/2011
Analysis Time Period
ntersection
urisdiction
sis Year
OUTH ROAD/ACCESS B
CHD
Project Description TMIC MASTER qLAN
(WTH RURO AC9ESS JoJEA t
lLE)
astA/y'est Street: SOUTH ROAD ECTOR uth Street: ,ACCESS B T2
lntersection Orientation: East-|,1/est Period hrs 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adj ustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
lvlovement I 2 3 4 5 6
L T R T R
Volume (veh/h) 45 960 50 300 685 100
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
47 1010 52 315 721 105
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2
Median Type Raised curb
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1
Configuration L T R L T R
UDstream Siqnal 0 1
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 I I 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 200 30
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
0 0 210 0 0 31
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 o
Flared Approach
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 1 1
Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1
nIl R R
on
Delay, Queue Lenqth, and Level of Service
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L R R
v (veh/h) 47 315 210 31
C 882 650 539 882
(m) (veh/h)
0.05 0.48 0.39 0.04
95% queue 0.17 2.65 I _dJ 0.11
length
Control Delay 9.3 15.6 15.9 9.2
(s/veh)
Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of I
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Generallnformation lnformation Site
OUTH ROAD/ACCESS C
CHD
ntersection
urisdiction
sis Year
Project Description TMIC MASTER PLAN
EaiUWest Street: SOUTH ROAD North/South Street: 4CCESS C (ALT 2)
(COLLECT)B)
ntersectionOrientation: East-West Period rS 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement I 2 3 4 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 640 75
Peak-Hour Factor. PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
0 794 26 0 673 78
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2
MedianLane Type Two Way Left Tum
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 2 1
Configuration T R T R
Upstream Siqnal 0 1
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 100 100 200
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9s 0.95
0 105 210 0 26
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h)
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach
Storage o 0
RT Channelized 1 0
Lanes 1 0 1 1 0 1
Northbound Southbound
R L R
Eastbound Westbound
nfi uration
Queue Len
L
and Level of Service
Ivlovement 1 4 7 I 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L R R
105 105 210 26
v (veh/h)
620 372 894
C (m) (veh/h)
0.17 u50 0.03
95% queue length 0.61
21 .5 12.O 26.5 9.1
Control Delay (s/veh)
c B D A
LOS
ROUNDABOUTS . UNSIGNALIZED
INTERSECTIONS WORKSHEET
eneral lnformation lnformation
NORTH./WEST RD
ACHD
2030
ntersection
urisdiction
Year
P. DOBIE
DEI
a8/2011
PM
Performed
Period
MA PLAN
olume nts
EB WB NB SB
veh/h 150 145 20 15
PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Flow rate, 157 152 21 15
veh/h
LT Traffic
Volume, veh/h 110 205 150 235
PHF 0.95 0.95
Flow rate, veh/h 115 215 157
TH Traffic
RT Traffic
Flow
veh/h
F
low
Flow Va
250
263
0.95
100
105
0.95
20
21
0.95
10
10
0.95
veh/h
tion
Vae 282
Vaw 388
Van 441
irculati Flow on
Vas 367
Flow
Vce 414
Vor 335
Vcn 287
Com
EB NB SB
388
WB
ROUNDABOUTS - UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS WORKSHEET
General lnformation Site lnformation
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed
Time Period
P. DOBIE
DEI
a8/2011
PM
lntersection
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
SOUTH RD./WEST RD,
ACHD
2030
Project Description TMIC TRAFFIC MASTER PLAN
EB WB NB SB
LT Traffic
Volume, veh/h 110 130 50 230
PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Flow rate, veh/h 115 136 52 242
TH Traffic
Volume, veh/h 435 450 95 55
PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Flow rate, veh/h 457 473 100 57
RT Traffic
Volume, veh/h 50 185 115 125
PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Flow rate, veh/h 52 194 121 131
Approach Flow Computation
Approach Flow (veh/h) Va (veh/h)
Vae 624
Vaw 803
Van 273
Vas 430
C i rcu lati naE low Gqn! pqlatlg!
Approach Flow (veh/h) Vc (veh/h)
Vce 435
Vcrr,, 267
Vcn 814
Vcs 661
Qepqclty Computation
EB WB NB SB
Capacity
Upper bound 983 1 123 724 820
Lower bound 798 924 570 654
v/c Ratio
Upper bound 0.63 0.72 0.38 0.52
0.78 0.87 0.48 0.66
. Roundabouts - Unsi g nalized Intersections Worksheet
Copyright @ 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS*ru Version 5.5
Page I of I
Generated: 211612011 8:56 AM
fi le ://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2k493 I .tmp 2116120fi
Lower bound
, Short Report
CopyrightO 201O Univercity of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5
Page 1 ol 1
SHORT REPORT
General lnformation Site lnformation
lntersection
Area Type
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
TMR/SOUTH RD. (RURO)
All other areas
ACHD
2030
Volume and Timing lnput
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1
Lane Group L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (vph) 475 160 600 530 160 600 1320 450 230 400
% Heavy Vehicles 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A
Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.O 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3
Unit Extension 3.0 J,U 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3_0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.O
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 50 10 120 10 120 50 10 120 50 10 120
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parki ng o 0 0 0
Parking/Hour
Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0
lvlinimum Pedestrian Time vZBt
Phasinq Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT NB Only 08
G = 30.0 G =
16.0 G= 0.0 G = 50.0 G = 17.0
Y= 5 Y 0 Y= 5
Timing
Y= 0
Duration of Analysis (hrs1 =
6.25 CycleLenqthC= 150.0
Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination
EB WB NB SB
174 174 196
1435
Adjusted Flow Rate 5lo 359 250 995 304
193 602 367 329 757
1654
694
1148
Lane Group Capacity 602 481
v/c Ratio 0.86 0.90 0.70 0.96 0.47 0.60 0.86 o.87 0.52 0.66 0.87 0.63
Green Ratio 0.20 0.11 0.37 0.20 0.11 0.25 0.23 0.48 0.48 0.11 0.33 0.33
Uniform Delay d1 57.9 66.2 40.5 59.4 63.0 49.2 55.7 34.8 27.O 63.7 46.9
0.39 0.42 0.27 0.47 0.11 0.18 0.39 0.40 0.12 0.24 0.40 o.21
zo.J 1.O 2.9 2.7 0.3 22 3.8 1.4
lncremental Delay d, 1 1.8 38.6 3.0
PF Factor 1 .000 1.000 1 .000 1 .000 1.000 1 .000 1.000 0.796 1 .000 1.000 0.958 1 .000
Control Delay 69.7 104.8 43.6 85.6 64.0 61.1 30.4 27.3 65.9 48.7 43.6
Lane Group LoS E F D E D E c c E D D
Approach Delay 63.5 38.1 50.5
Back-of-Queue Worksheet
HCS+TM Version 5.5
Page 1 of I
500
Generated: 2/16/2011 9:04 AN"l
Copyright O 2O10 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
General lnformation
-'l-$^& BOvt r.F
TMIC TRAFFIC MASTER PLAN WITH RURO
Project DescriPtion
AveraQueue e Back of
EB WB NB 5t1
LT TH RT TH RT LT TH RT
LT TH RT
T T L T R
R L D
Lane Group L T
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 00 0.0 00
lnitial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 00
576 174 652 1435 359 250 995 304
Flow Rate/Lane GrouP 516 174 522
1550143 1810 1 1 550 1809 1298 1719 1809 1445 1809 1442
7\7 694 378 1148 481
602 193 602 JO/ 329 1654
Capacity/Lane GrouP
0.2 01 0.2 0.2 04 02 0.1 03 0.2
Flow Ratio 0.2 0.1 0.3
47 60 86 0.87 .52 0.66 0.87 bJ
v/c Ratio 0.86 90 70
000 000 000 500 500 500 500 500
I Factor 1.000 000 000
3 3 4 3 J 4 3
3 j
Arrival Type J 3 3
1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .3s 1 .00
PF Factor 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 91 1 .00 1 .00 0.96 1 .00
12.2 3.6 13.4 10.3 5.1 19.7 10.7
Qt 10.7 7.2 10.4
0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3
KB 0.5 0.3 0.6
3.4 0.3 0.7 1.4 0.4 0.3 1.9 0.5
Qz 2.0 1.8 1.2
3.9 14.8 7.8 10.7 5.4 21 .6 11.2
11.7 15.6 70
Q Average 12.7 9.0
Percentile Back of Queue (9Sth percentile)
fB%
20.4
Back of Queue
Queue Storage Ratio
Queue Spacing
0
Queue Storage
Average Queue Storage
tlo
95% Queue Storage
atio
@@d
@@@ @@@
@d @4@
SHORT REPORT
Generallnformation lnformation Site
Ifi m m m lrII m
ln ut
m IEII
Volume and Timi
SB
EB WB m fir NB m
ffi
TMR/NORTH ROAD
All other areas
ACHD
2030
lntersection
Area Type
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year
Analyst P. DOBIE
Agency or Co. DEl
Oale Petto'rlr€d 2/8/2011
Time Period PM
Number of Lanes 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Lane Group
Volume 360 60 205 340 70 150 200 1475 420 130 1000 370
(vph)
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
o/o 5
Heavy Vehicles
0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 o.92 0.92 0.92
PHF
Pretimed/Actuated A A A A A A A A A A A A
(P/A)
Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3
3.O 3.0 3.0 3.0 J.U 3.O 3.0 3.0 J.U 3.0 3.0
Unit Extension
Ped/Bikei RTOR 50 10 120 50 10 120 50 10 120 50 10 120
Volume
Lane Wdth 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.O 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking 0 0 0 o
Parking/Hour
Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minimum Pedestrian Time 18.8 18.8 21.3 21.3
Phasinq EKIIGfl ftiErTGIi EB Only 04 Excl. Left Thru & RT NB Only 08
G = 10.9 G =
G = 20.8 G = 10.0 G= 0.0 54.8 G = 0.0
G
Y=5 5 Y= 5 Y=0 0 Y= Y 5 Y 0 Y=
Timing
Duration of Analysis (hrs) Cvcle Lenqth C= 150.0
= 0 25
Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination
WB NB SB
217 272
1603
326 141
1087
Adjusted Flow Rate 391 65 92 370 76
. Back-of-Queue Worksheet
Hcs+rM Version 5.5
Page 1 of 1
500
CopyrighlAM @ 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Generated: 2/'16/2011 10t'14
BACK.OF-OUEUE WORKSHEET
General lnformation
Project Description TMIC TRAFF\) MA}TER PLAN WTH Rt/Ro Tv\ @/xt o t'r ,+
Average Back of Queue
EB WB NB SB
TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Lane Group L T R L T R L T R L T R
lnitial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Flow Rate/Lane Group 391 92 370 76 JJ 217 1603 326 1 4 1 1087 272
Satflow/Lane 1719 1810 1719 1810 1 538 1719 1809 1 538 1719 1809 1538
Capacity/Lane Group 685 290 246 463 109 o, 406 1936 864 125 1259 562
Flow Ratio 0.1 0.0 01 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2
v/c Ratio 0.57 0.22 0.37 0.80 0.70 0.36 0.53 U-dJ 0.38 1.13 0.86 0.48
I Factor 1.000 1 .000 1 .000 1 .000 I .000 I .000 ).500 ).500 2.500 ?.500 ).500
Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3
Platoon Ratio 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1.33 1.00
1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 0.81 1 .00 1.00 095 1.00
Qr 3.4 7.7 JI 7.9 23.1 7.6 50 21 .0 8.7
kB 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.3
Qz 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.3 2.1 0.3 2.0 0.3
Q Average 6.2 9.0 3.6 1.4 8.2 25.2 7.8 8.7 23.0 9.0
Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile)
fB% 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 a1
1.9 1.6 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.9
154 5.0 7a
Back of Queue lo. / 7.2 30 15.4 41.5 14.8 16.3 38.3 16.9
Queue Storage Ratio
Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
Queue Storage 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Average Queue Storage
Ratio
95% Queue Storage
Ratio
III III
IIII IIII
ITII IIIII
fi le ://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\s2kDB 04.tmp 2/16/2011
LT
PF Factor
2.4
0.4 0.5
0.1
. Two-Way Stop Control
Tu P
CopydghtO 2010 Universlty of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Nogrt-F 8:
Page I of 1
8" + l.-L
HcslTM version 5.5 Generated: 9/1/2011 1 06 PN4
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General lnformation frETEETTiiiETFN
Analyst lP. DoBtE
Aqency/Co lDEt
Date Performed l9/s/2o t
1
Analysis Time Period IPM
lntersection lNoaru noeorreN uttr
Jurisdiction IACHD
Analysis Year 12Bo
I
Project Description TMIC MASTER PLAN (LEFT lN MOVEMENTS)
Easwvest Street: NORTH ROAD COLLECTO rth/South Street: TEN MILE ROAD
lntersectionOrientation: Notth-South Period rS 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Maior Street Northbound Southbound
l\,4ovement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 200 147 5 420 130 1000 370
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 o.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h) 222 1638 466
144 1111 411
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2
l\/ledian Type Two Way Lefl Turn Lane
RT Channelized 1 1
Lanes 1 2 0 0 2 1
Configuration L T TR LT T R
Upstream Siqnal 1 1
Minor Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 400 350
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.9 5 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
(veh/h) 0 a 444 0 0 388
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 2 0 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach
Storage o 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 a 1 0 0 1
Configuration R R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound
lvlovement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L LT R R
v (veh/h) 222 144 388 414
C (m) (veh/h) 869 535 672
0.26 0.27 0.73 0.66
95% queue length 1 .02 1.06 5.98 4.97
Control Delay (s/veh) 10.6 14.0 27.5 20.2
LOS B B D C
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE September 6,2011
TO Gary lnselman
ACHD
Anna Canning
City of Meridian
FROM: Patrick Dobie, P.E
Ten Mile Interchange -
Commercial Traffic Analysis Supplement
ln February 2010, Dobie Engineering (DEl) prepared a traffic analysis (TlS) for the
commercial properties on the west side of Ten Mile Road north of the new Ten Mile
lnterchange. The purpose of that analysis is to evaluate the projected traffic conditions
in line with the land use assumptions of the Meridian Ten Mile lnterchange Specific
Area Plan (TMSAP) and to identify the appropriate access requirements for the subject
properties.
Land Use and Traffic Volume
A summary of the land development potential for the assumed land use mix that was
evaluated in the traffic analysis is presented in Table 1 attached. These assumptions
generally conformed to the TMSAP and were modeled on the following zone
designations.
1. IVleridian 118, mixed use per the approved annexation agreement;
2. F edrizzi and South 6 acres of Janicek, Community Business (CC);
3. SJJV, High Density employment (HE) and CC;
4. Janicek North 40 acres, CC and Janicek West 26 acres, Traditional Neighborhood
Commercial (TN-C).
These land use assumptions are consistent with the current Annexation application
(MAZ-I 1-001). However should the Janicek North 40 acres be zoned as TN-C as
opposed to the CC zoning now requested then the overall traffic volume will be slightly
less than the conditions evaluated in the traffic analysis. This change will not affect the
conclusions of the TlS.
DOBIE ENGINEERING, INC.
777 Hearthstone Dr.
Boise, lD 83702
Phone 208-345-3290
Fax 208-388-0309
Dobie dei@msn.com
RE:
The projected traffic volumes for the four properties lying in the upper west side of Ten
lvlile lnterchange were calculated. Details ofthe analysis for each site are presented in
the attached TIS and a summary of the site generated traffic is presented in Table 2
which follows.
ACHD Review
ACHD reviewed that traffic study and provided comments in a letter of 3/17l11. lnthat
letter they requested verification of the land use assumptions and copies of the cited
references and appendices not included with the original submittal. A complete copy of
the Traffic study with those missing references and appendices is attached to this
supplemental analysis.
ACHD also asked for additional consideration ofthe Fedrizzi secondary access as well
as the need for a traffic signal at the North Access Road intersection with Ten lvlile
Road.
The TIS evaluated a direct access to Ten Mile Road from the Fedtizzi Property (refer to
Figure 3 for detailed turning movement data.) The proposed access would be restricted
to right-in/right-out movements since a raised median divider was being constructed on
Ten l\,4ile Road as part of the ITD project. This property needs a secondary access
alternative until the road network envisioned in the TMSAP is completed. At that time,
this access could be restricted to emergency use only or remain a RI/RO operation if no
problems are identified. Service levels identified in the TIS for a Rl/RO access were
shown to be acceptable.
A new signalized intersection was considered an the TIS at the North Access Road
connection to Ten Mile Road. This facility would also provide access to the Brighton
Property, and would be located near the north property boundary of the Janicek
Property on the Carrey site. Refer to Figure 3 for projected turning movements atthis
location.
Next considered was a non-signalized alternative allowing right-in/right-out and left-in
movements. The operational characteristics ofthese alternatives are summarized as
follows;
Fedrizzi Propertv - Riqht-in/Riohlout Access to Ten lvlile Road
Norlh Access Road/ Ten l\y'ile Road lntersection
North Access/ Ten Mile lntersection
Approach North Siqnal
LOS Queue
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
lntersection
B
B
C
D
C
C
D
E
E
D
1 050'
97s',
400'
42s',
Stop Control
LOS Queue
25'
25',
125',
1 50',
Both of these intersection control systems conform to ACHD capacity guidelines and
could provide a reasonable service level for the development of the upper west side
area of the Ten lt/ile lnterchange. However the ultimate development of the Carrey
property will influence the decision to install a signal. The specific land use and density
is not known at this time.
Conclusions
The TIS concluded that acceptable traffic operations can be achieved for the west side
area development with the access plan illustrated in Figure 4 and the mitigation
recommended in the TIS and TMSAP. Also as the area develops in phases, a less
restricted interim access control plan could be employed to support business start-up in
the new interchange area.
Ff
I
rH
DOBIE ENGINEERlNG, INC.
777 Hearthstone Dr.
Boise, lD 83702
Phone 208-345-3290
Fax 208-388-0309
Dobie dei@msn.com
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 15,2011
TO: Gary lnselman
ACHD
Anna Canning
City of Meridian
FROM: Patrick Dobie, P.E.
L)
c's
RE: Ten Mile lnterchange -
Commercial Traffic Analysis
Attached is a summary of the findings of a traffic analysis for the commercial properties
on the west side of Ten Mile Road north of the new Ten Mile lnterchange. The purpose
of this analysis is to evaluate the projected traffic conditions following the land use
assumptions of the Meridian Ten Mile lnterchange Specific Area Plan (TMSAP) and to
identify the minimum access requirements for the subject properties.
Specifically, the number and location of the future access connections to the proposed
mid-section collector road identified in the TMSAP were evaluated. ln this analysis the
following basic assumptions were employed:
1) A land use mix consistent with the recommendations of the TMSAP;
2) Year 2030 projected traffic on Ten Mile Road as presented in the Lochner Study
for the Ten Mile lnterchange;
3) Site traffic from the Brighton Properties as presented in the study prepared by
HDR:
4) Land use assumptions for the Meridian 118 Property consistent with the
annexation application; and
5) Total buildout of the Janicek, SJJV and Fedrizzi properties at a 50o/o Floor Area
Ratio (FAR).
6) Site-generated traffic was assigned as follows: north @ 25%, south
@ 35%, east
and west @20%.
Land Use
A summary of the land development potential for this land use mix is listed in Table 1
which follows.
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN
BUILDOUT ANATYSIS OF WEST SIDE PROJECTS
DOSIE ENGINEERING INC. DEI PROJECT * 1OO9
SITE
MERIDIAN 118
AREA (AC.)
118
TABLE 1
LAND USE TYPE BY PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA
o.72 0.28 o.32
0.20 0.35 0.40
0.30 0.35
TAND USE TYPE BY BUITDING AREA (5Q. FT.}
462,535 1,074,829 r,205,169
0.5 121,968 213,444 243,936
0.5 26,136 30,492
9A3,077 L,599,727 1,666,905
JANICEK
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
0.30
o.25
0.15
0.15
0.35
0.20
0.10
o.20
0.15
10
40
6
24
0.21
0.45
0.20
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
SJ',V
FEDRIZZI
TOTAL
SIJV
FEDRIZZI
TOTAL
aREA (AC.l
118
70
40
5
24
2a
4
220
2a
4
220
DOBIE ENGINEERING, INC
277 Hearthstone Dr
Boise, tD 83702
Phone 208-945-3290
Fax 208-388-0309
Dobie dei@msn.com
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 15,2011
TO: Gary lnselman
ACHD
FROM: Patrick Dobie, p.E.
RE: Ten Mile lnterchange - Commercial Traffic Analysis
Anna Canning
City of Meridian
Attached is a summary of the findings of a_traffic analysis for the commercial properties
on of this the analysis west side is of to ren evaluate Mire Road the projected north of the traffic new conditions Tln Mire following lnterchange. ifi; iri;;"
tne rano ule
---
assumptions of the Meridian Ten Mile lnterchange specific Area
pra-n (TH,lsAil ano to
identiff the minimum access requirements for the su6ject properties.
specifically, the number and location of the future access connections to the proposed
mid-section collector road identified in the TMSAp were evaluated. tn tnis ".;di;
th;
following basic assumptions were employed:
1) A land use mix consistent with the recommendations of the TMSAp;
2) Year 2030 projected traffic on Ten Mile Road as presented
in the Lochner study
for the Ten Mile lnterchange;
3) site_trafiic from the Brighton properties
as presented in the study prepared by
HDR;
4) Land use assumptions for the Meridian 11g property
consistent with the
annexation application; and
5) Total buildout of the Janicek, sJJV and Fedrizzi properties at a s0% Floor Area
Ratio (FAR).
6) Site-generated traffic was assigned as follows: north @
25%, south @ 35%, east
and west @20%.
Land Use
A which summary follows. of the land development potential forthis land use mix is listed in Table 1
rt
SIIE
MERIDIAN I18
AREA (AC.l
118
70
40
6
24
2A
4
220
AAEA (AC,l
118
70
40
6
24
4
220
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE SPECIFICAREA PLAN
BUII.DOUT ANALYSIS OF WESTSIDE PRO'ECIS
DOBIE ENGINEERING INC. DEI PROJECT fl 1OO9
TABTE 1
LAND USE TYPE BY PERCENTAGE OF TOTALAREA
o.rz 0.28 o.32
0.10
0.20
0.15
JANICE!(
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
0.30
0.25
0.15
0.15
0.35
0.20
o.27
0.45
0.20
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
SITE
MERIDIAN 118
FAR
0.735
SJtV
FEDRIZZI
TOTAL
SJ,IV
FEDRIZZI
TOTAL
0.20 0.35 0.05 1,00
0.30 0.35 0.05 1.00
tAND USE TYPE BY BUII.DING AREA (5q. FT.}
FIGURE 1
N i/'l _ _ lEllqt ROAD
1
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
ii
l
t
I
I
I
I
il
@ E
ltEST ROAI)
JANICEK
IIIEST
r!/ud
MEffIOIAN 118
w-
El-
-lq
B6E
JANICEX
NORIH
,l
i,-'* '
.i --- -)
._ :-- -J-'-t -'tE;-s--- -_li '
I
I
f,
I
I
l
)
JtotAl.l 118
JANIC€K
SOUIH
[f,DRtZZl alro
I
I
t
a
Ll i
E
SJJV
J
I
I
I
I
!
I
Site Generated Traffic
Based on the land use assumptions and building area estimates presented in Table 1,
the projected trafflc volumes for the 4 properties lying in the upper west side of Ten Mile
lnterchange were catculated. Details of the analysis for each site are presented in
Appendix A, and a summary of the findings is presented in Table 2 which follows.
ln this study, the system roads were identified as shown on Figure 1. The South
Collector Road (previously referred to as the 'West Access Road") provides the primary
access to the Janicek, Fedrizzi and sJJV properties and extends into the Meridian 118
development. The North Road extends from the Janicek Property to Ten l\{it9 Rg?d
through the carney Property to intersect with the "North Road" identified in the Brighton
traffiCanalysis. The'West Road" is the north extension of the system road network to
Franklin Road through the Baraya Subdivision'
Road ionations
Access Alternat ives to South Col r Road
attached.
Access Alternative 1- Single lntersection
Turning volumes are shown on Figure 2. Operational characteristics of this
option are summarized in Table 3 below, and details of the calculations are
attached in APPendix B.
Table 3: Srng/e Access to South Collector
Aoproach Level of Service Queue Lenqth
Northbound F 300'(12 vehicles)
Southbound F >300'(>12 vehicles)
Eastbound A 25'(1 vehicle)
Westbound B 75' (3 vehicles)
A single all-movement access to the sJJV, Janicek and Fedrizzi properties does
not piovide sufficient trafiic carrying capacity to accommodate development of
those properties in line with the objectives of the Meridian Specific Area Plan.
The average vehicle delay is not reasonable and the queue storage would
Two access options to the South Collector Road were considered: 't)
one using a single
access all-movement connection; and 2) the other using two partially controlled
accesses and one right-in/right-out connection. The schematic layout and peak hour
trafnc assignments to these intersections are illustrated in Figures 2 and 3, which are
TABLE 2
TEN MILE TNTERCHANGE SPECIFIC AREA PLAN
BUILDOUT ANALYSIS OF WEST AREA PROJECTS
DOBIE ENGINEERTNG INC. DEI PROJECT # 1OO9
SITE
MERIDIAN 118
JANICEK
SJJV
FEDRIZZI
TOTAL
UNADJUSTED TRAFF!C VOTUME
118 45322 5280 384
70 24847 2438 355
28 t2408 L297 443
4 37s9 428 940
220 85336 9443
DRTVEWAY TRAFFIC VOLUME (1)
ADT PM-HR %TRAFFTC (2) ADT NEW VPH NEW
1669
767
255
3510
45
35
46
LO7
SITE
MERIDIAN 118 35597 4173 t4239
JANICEK 20919 2047 8368
SJJV 1056r 1096 7393
FEDRIZZI 3245 364 2272
TOTAL 70322 7680
(L) DRTVEWAY TRAFFIC lS NET OF INTERNAL TRIPS AND INCLUDES PASS-BY TRAFFIC
(2) PERCENTAGE OF TRAFFIC ASSIGNED TO SOUTH COLLECTOR ROAD
819
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.7
32271
AREA ADT PM'HR ADT/AC VPH/ AC
exceed 12 vehicles at one time. These factors do not conform to acceptable
engineering standards and the capacity guidelines adopted by ACHD' ln
adlition, no direct access will be provided to the south portion of the Janicek
parcel under this alternative.
Access Atternative 2 - Three lntersections
Turning volumes for this alternative are illustrated in Figure 3, and the operational
analysi-s is summarized in Table 4 below. Details are attached in Appendix C.
Table 4: Multiple Access Alternative
Approach
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
Southbound in B
Southbound out A
East Access A
LOS Queue
Middle Access B
LOS Queue
50'
25',
25',
7s',
West Access C
LOS Queue
50'
1 00'
C
:
c
A
A
c
25
:
B
I
These operational criteria conform to ACHD standards and will provide
reasonabte access for the projected land use.
Fedrizzi Propertv - Riqht-in/Right-out Access to Ten IVlile Road
This alternative includes a direct access to Ten Mile Road for the Fedrizzi Property
t*tlii. Figrr" 3 for detailed turning movement data.) The access would be restricted
io right-in/i'rght-out movements. A raised median divider will be constructed on Ten Mile
Road as part of the ITD Project.
Table 5: Direct R/-RO Access to Ten Mile Road @
Fedrizzi
Approach Ten Mile -RO
LOS Queue
25',
25',
Service levels at the new right-in/right-out access would be acceptable.
Roundabouts
Shown in Table 6 are the service levels on the roadway approaches at the two
roundabout intersections.
Table 6: Roundabout lntersection Capact$
South North
0.48
0.66
0.76
0.87
v/c v/c
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
0.49
0.44
0.35
0.45
Aooroach North Sional South Siqnal
1150',
900'
575'
700'
LOS Queue LOS Queue
c
D
E
E
D
1050'
975'
400'
425'
D
D
E
E
D
Both of these signalized intersections conform to ACHD capacity guidelines and.could
pr*iO" . reasoiable service level for the development of the upper west side of the
Ten Mile lnterchange.
Access Plan
lllustrated in Figure 4 is the proposed long term access plan for the south collector
n""A *pp"rt"O by this anaiysis. This shows that acceptable traffic operations can be
irpr"r"hi"a as the west side area approaches development buildout. Until that time
less restricted interim access control plan would support business start-up
in the study
area.
Approach
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
lntersection
The volume to capacity ratio of the north intersection is 0.44, and the south intersection
is O.ai, Uotr of which conform to the ACHD standard of a maximum v/c ratio of 0.9 at
LOS'D."
New Sionalized Access Connections to Ten Mile Road
Two signalized intersections with Ten Mile Road were analyzed. The south signal is
at
G r.ition of the South Collector Road, and the north intersection, which will also
fioriO" """".s
to the Brighton Property, would be.located near the north property
[ornA"ry oittr" Janicek Froperty on the Carrey site. Refer to Figure 3 for projected
FIGURE 2
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE LAND USE PLAN
\EAR 2O3O BUILDOUT ANALYSIS
ALT 1 STNGLE ACCESS TO SOUTH COr LECTOR
il
t
8Bp
B8 tl
NORIH
Itr RO,NOABOt'T
, .N
3 1.5
2O3O BAO<GROTJND TRAFFIC
SIIE GANERAIED TRAMC
PLUS ERIGIITON
PLUS I'ERIDIAN 1T8
tt
t25 +
270 +
JANICEX
NEST
u,t+
fi+
m-
445 +
NORIH ROAD
ROAI)
6a
+c0
+aE
1 1230
+ lZs
B
+nl
8m t60 + t B
e
a lrib
+ 560
+ 6t0
+80
- oao
+l$
+ t6!i
r!o € ,
!ro
to
+60
+ lto
E 3sE
SC[jIH
Itr ROUI{DAAOUT
loJ -
{50
eln
+ 7!5
+uo
lO+
ro+
llERlDtAt{ rt8
PROPERW tt
N
+
FIGURE 3
TEN MILE INIERCHANGE LAND USE PLAN
\EAR 2O5O BUILDOUT ANALYSIS
MULTIPLE ACCESS TO SOUTH COLLECTOR
+ lto
+ 610
f,tt 8
2030 SACKGROUNo TRAfFlc
E]E GENAAIED TRAFFIC
PLUS BRIGTITOI{
!a! NORlH
ttr ROUNDABOIJT
s+ e
-olo
rl + 3C5
RE
NORIH ROAD
ai ,)
+60
+ tto
JANICEX
EAST
tl
EE
E
l)
t:ls +
270 +
N+
fi+
JAt{tcEx
IIEST
2t5 , c
€ ts
tt
t
€ E 5 tl
B
tr
t
tl
,
o
o
E
Fo
H
at
ll
ACCESS C
8E
+ffi
ACCSSS I
9
ACCESS A
!sl SOUIH
ROUNDABOUT \3t6 -/,'
ol
6
5
=e
EI
f; 6
C.
=o
rfl x
F-_
I
a
E
=
E
E
t_ -
/,
=m
4
I
z
@
EE
=5
E=
6I
€E
oC.
c-
6t
=
E
?
e
I q
ao
Ct
Eq
_t
Q- g=
a
E
q
I
e
:
al
Irt
0
3,
N
ll
Co. (-
g
=m6x
E
I
e
?
\- .
TEN MItE INTERCHANGE SPECIFIC AREA PIAN
BUITDOUT ANALYSIS OF WEST 5IDE PROJECTS
DOBIE ENGINEERING INC. DEI PROJECT f 1OO9
TABLE 1
TAND USE TYPE BY PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AREA
o.12 o.28 4.32
SlfE
MERIDIAN 118
aR[a {Ac.)
118
JANICEK
NORTH
sOUTH
WEST
70
40
6
24
28 0.20 0.35 0.40
0.30 0.35 0.30
LAND USE TYPE BY BUITDING AREA (Sq. FT.)
462,535 1,014,829 1,205,169
121,968 213,444 243,936
26,136 34,492 26,136
943,077 L,599,727 1,655,905
o.21 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.05 1.00
0.05 100
1,034,405 3,116,939
30,492 509,840
4,356 81,120
L,748,789 s,998,499
0.30
0.25
0.15
0.15
0.35
0.20
0.10
0.20
0.15
0.45
0.20
0.50
SITE
MERIDIAN 118
SIJV
FEDRIZZI
TOTAI.
SJ'V
FTDRIZZI
TOTAL
AREA IAC.I
118
70
40
6
TABLE 2
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE SPEC]FIC AREA PLAN
BUILDOUT ANALYSIS OF WEST AREA PROJECTS
DOBIE ENGINEERING INC. DEI PROJECT# 1OO9
UNADJUSTED TRAFFIC VOTUME
SITE AREA ADT PM.HR ADT/AC VPH/AC
MERIDIAN I18 118 45322 5 280 384
JANICEK 70 7438 355 35
SJJV ].2408 1297 443 46
FEDRIZZI 4 3759 428 940 1,07
TOTAT 220 86336
DRTVEWAY TRAFFTC VOLUME (1)
SITE ADT PM-HR % TRAFFTC (2) ADT NEW VPH NEW
MERIDIAN 118 35597 4!73 0.4 L4239
JANICE|( 2047 0.4 8368
SJJV 10561 1096 o.7 7393
FEDRIZZI 3245 364 0.7 2272
TOTAI. 70322 76aO 1227L
{1) DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC IS NET OF INTERNAL TRIPS AND INCLUDES PASS-BY TRAFFIC
(2) PERCENTAGE OF TRAFFIC ASSIGNED TO SOUTH COLI.ECTOR ROAD
45
1669
819
767
3510
24847
9443
209L9
255
TABLE 2
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE SPECIFIC AREA PIAN
BUILDOUT ANALYSIS OF WEST AREA PROJECTS
DOBIE ENGINEERING INC. DEI PROJECT# 1OO9
UNADJUSTED TRAFFIC VOLUME
SITE AREA ADT ADT/AC VPH/AC
MERIDIAN 118 118 45322 s 280 384 45
JANICEK 7Q 24847 2438 355 35
28 72408 1297 443 46
FEDRIZZI 4 3759 428 940 !07
TOTAL 220 86336 9443
DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC VOLUME (1)
SITE ADT PM-HR % TRAFFTC (2) ADT NEW VPH NEW
MERIDIAN 118 3ss97 4773 0.4 14239
JANICE( 209L9 2047 0.4
SJJV 10561 1096 0.7 7 393
3745 364 0.7 2272
TOTAT 70322 7680 3227L
(1) DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC IS NET OF INTERNAL TRIPS AND INCLUDES PASS-BY TRAFFIC
(2) PERCENTAGE OF TRAFFIC ASSIGNED TO SOUTH COLLECTOR ROAD
1659
819
767
255
PM-HR
SJJV
8368
FEDRIZZI
3510
exceed 12 vehicles at one time. These factors do not conform to acceptable
engineering standards and the capacity guidelines adopted by ACHD In
ad;ition, no direct access will be provided to the soulh portion
of the Janicek
parcel under this alternative.
Access Altemative 2 - Three lntersections
Turning volumes for this alternative are illustrated in Figure 3' and the operational
analysl is summarized in Table 4 below Details are attached in Appendix C
f ab/€ 4: Multiple Access Altemative
Approach East Access A Middle B
LOS Queue
West Access C
LOSQueue Queue LOS
25',
These operational criteria conform to ACHD standards and will provide
reasonable access for the pOected land use.
Fedrizzi Prooertv - Riq in/Rioh!out to Ten Mile Road
This alternative includes a direct access to Ten Mile Road for the Fedrizzi Property
(refer to Figure 3 for detailed turning movement data.) The access would be restricted
io right-inlrrghtout movements. A raised median divider will be constructed on Ten Mile
Road as part of the ITD Project.
Table 5: D/iect R/-RO Access to Ten Mile Road @ Fedizzi
ADoroach ile Road/R
LOS Queue
Southbound in
Southbound out 25'
Shown in Table 6 are the service levels on the roadway approaches at the two
roundabout intersections.
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
50'
25'
75'
C
c
c
B
I
B
f able 6'. Roundabout lntersection Capacity
50'
100'
Service levels at the new right-in/right-out access would be acceptable.
Roundabouts
Aoproach
Si n
North Siqnal
LOS Queue
South North
v/c
0.49
o.44
0.35
0.45
Con ns to Mile
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
0.48
u.oo
0.76
o.87
The votume to capacity ratio of the north intersection is 0 44, and the south intersection
S d.fii, o"tn
"t
*r',i"h conform to the ACHD standard of a maximum v/c ratio of 0 9
at
LOS "D,'
Two signalized intersections with Ten Mile Road were analyzed The south
signal is at
tlrel*Zii"" "ttn"
South Collector Road, and the north intersection' which will also
oiovide access to tne Brighton property.
would be located near the north property
["*o"rv-"i G J""icek Frope*y on the carrey site Refer to Figure
3 for proiected
turning movements at each location.
Fable 7: Signalized lntersection
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
lntersection
1050'
975',
400'
425',
Both of these signalized intersections conform to ACHD capacity guidelines and could
provide a reasoiable service level for the development of the upper west side of the
Ten Mile lnterchange.
Access Plan
lllustrated in Figure 4 is the proposed long term access plan for
th,e South Collector
norO
"rpport"-O
by this anaiysis. This shows that acceptable traffic operations can be
imptemeiried as ttri west sid! area approaches development buildout.. Until that time
iess restricted interim access control plan would support business start-up in the study
atea.
U
D
E
E
11-28-2 11-28-2
unified development code for any person to conduct in a commercial
district any conditional use unless such person shall first obtain a
conditional use permit from the city.
Any use not explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use in table
11-28-2 of this section is prohibited in all commercial districts. lt
shall be unlawful and a violation of the unified development code for
any person to conduct in a commercial district any prohibited use.
(Ord. 08-1 372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008)
Uses that are listed as P/C or AlC may be subject to a conditional
use permit depending on if the use is in accord with the specific use
standards as set Iorth in chapter 4, i'Specific Use Standards", ot this
title.
lnterpretation of. the inclusion or exclusion oJ allowed uses shall be
made by the director and based on the director's findings in review
of the criteria established in chapter .l , "General Regulations", of this
title.
For uses that may fall into more than one category, the director shall
determine the most appropriate category based on the more
restrictive standards. (Ord. 05-.1 170, 8-30-2005, elf. 9-15-2005; amd.
Ord. 07-1 325, 7 -10-2007)
TABLE 1
.I -28-2
ALLOWED USES lN THE COlVll\ilERClAL DISTRICTS
C
D
E
Use C-N U-U c-G M-E H-E
Animal care facilityl P P C C
Artist studiol P P P
Arts, entertainment or recreation
facility, indoorr
P P
Arts, entertainment or recreation
facility, outdoorl
c P P
Arts, entertainment or recreation
Iacility, outdoor stage or music venue
C c
Building material, garden equipment
and suppliesl
C P P
Cemeteryl C
Church or place ol religious worshipl P P P P c c
I
City of Meridian
May 20'1 1
(
(
(
F.
L-O
P
P
11-28-2
Use c-N c-G H.E (
Civic, social or fraternal organizationsr c C c c
Conference cenler U P
Construction sand and gravel mining c C (-
C c c
Daycare centerl AIC Atc Alc P Atc
Daycare, lamilyl
Daycare, groupl P P P c C
Drinking establishmentl c c C
Orive-through establishmentl Alc Atc Alc
Education institution, privatel P P P P P P
Education institution, public
j
P P P P P P
Equipment rental, sales, and servjcel c C
P P P P P
Flex spacej P P
Fuel sales lacilityj U P P C
Fuel sales facil irp t-rucr srgpl c
Healthcare or social services P P P
Home occupalionr
H os pita l1 C (- c P
Hotel and motell PlC PlC C P
lndustry, inlormationl P P P C P P
C P C
Laundromatl P P P c
Laundry and dry cleaning c P
Morluary U P P
Multi-family developmentl C C
Nursery or urban larmr c P P
Nursing or residential care facililyl c c c
Parking facilily c C P
(
(
May 2011
City of Meridian
11-28-2
c-c L-O M-E
/ P
Atc
f A
c
Financial inslitutionr
P
I
P P P
PlC
lndustry, lightl c
I l /
c
I
c c P
(
(
(
Use C-N C-C C-G L-O M-E H-E
Parks, public and private P P P P P P
Personal service P P P P A A
Professional service P P P P P P
Pu blic, inf rastructure C C C C C C
Public or quasi-public usel P P P P P P
Public utility, minor P P P P P P
Recrealional vehicle park P
P P P
Restaurant P P P C A A
Retail store P P P A A
Storage facility, outsidel A A A
Storage facility, self-servicel C C
Vehicle repair, minorl A P P
Vehicle sales or rental and servicel
Vehicle washing facilityl C P P A
Vertically integrated residential
projectl
C P P C
Warehousel AlC
Wholesale sales A
Wireless communication facilityl P/C PIC PlC P/C PIC PIC
Wireless communication facility,
amateur radio antennal
Atc Atc AlC AIC AlC Atc
11-28-2
1 1-28-3
Note:
1 . lndicates uses that are subject to specific use standards in accord with chapter
4
of this title.
(ord. 08-1 372, 7-a-2008, eff. 7-B-2ooB; amd. ord. 1o-1439, 1-12-2010, eff.
1-18-2010; Ord. 1O-1463, 11-3-2010, eff. 11-8-2010)
'1 '1-28-3
STANDARDS: The standards for all development in the
commercial districts shall be as follows:
(
(
City of Meridian
\liay 2011
Research and development facility
c P
A
(
7'/n rr/a & ?/qtcd,ean ?,uaefaaeoro Daotnat
I5O3 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 8365I.4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
Phones: Areo Code 208
OFFICE: Nompo 466-7861
SHOP: Nompo 466-0663
5 Iily 20ll
City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
Iaycee Holman
33 E Broadway Avenue Ste 102
Meridian, D 83642-2619
RE: AZll-001/Ten Mile Annexation
Dear Jaycee:
Narnpa & Meridian hrigation District requires that a Land Use Change Application be filed,
for review, prior to final platting. Please contact Suzy Hewlett at 466-7861 for fui1her
information.
All laterals and waste ways must be protected. The District's Pudam Drain and Kennedy
LateraT course through this proposed project. The District's easement for the Purdam Drain at
this location is a minimum of one hundred feet (100'), fifty feet (50') to each side of the
centerline. The District's easement for the Kennedy Lateral at this location is a minimum of
fifty-five feet (55'), twenty feet (20') left side and thirty-five feet (35') right of centerline
facing downstream.
However please contact the District directly to verify the width of easement necessary to
operate, maintain and repair the Purdam Drain & Kennedy Lateral.
This easement must be protected. Any encroachment without a signed License
Agreement and approved plan before any construction is started is unacceptable.
Page 1 of2
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABI,E ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS. 23,OOO
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS. 4O,OOO
.:
74nrrru & TVZerz,ad,ean ?,ruqafrdoro Daaar
]503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 8365I.4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
Phones: Areo Code 208
OFFICE: Nompo 466-7861
SHOP: Nompo 466-0663
I July 2011
Becky McKay, Planner
Engineering Solutions, LLP
1029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100
Meridian, lD 83642
RE: Land Use Change Application - Ten Mile tion
Please note the District now requires three (3) sets of plans
Dear Ms. McKay:
Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the lrrigation
District for its review on the above-referenced development. lf this development is under a
"rush" to be finalized, I would recommend that you submit a cashier's check, money order or
cash as payment of the fees in order to speed the process up. lf you submit a company or
personal check, it must clear the bank before processing the application.
Should this development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned,
operated and maintained by the lrrigation District, I strongly urge you to coordinate with John P.
Anderson, Water Superintendent for the lrrigation District, concerning the installation of the
pressure system. Enclosed is a questionnaire that you must fill out and return in order to initiate
the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the lrrigation
District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system.
lf you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call on me at the District's
office, or John P. Anderson, at the District's shop.
qfL Sincerely, qr*fu-
Suzette G. Hewlett, Asst. Secretary/Treasurer
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
cc: SGH/smk File
Water Superintendent
Jaycee Holman, City Clerk, Meridian City
Janicek Properties, LLC,27O E. Connemara Lane, Eagle, lD 83616
enc. eCl'r \a
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FI.OW RIGHTS - 23,OOO
BOISE PROJECT RIGHIS. 4O,OOO
User Namb: Paul
Prolect: 904'l 8 JaniceklsJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Date.01-24-12
Time 12,03:39
Page: '1
Lot Name: FEDRIZZI (C-C)
Lot Description. FEDRIZZI (C-C)
Lot lD: none
Lot Owner: none
Lot Area (Square Feet): 222397 82
Lot Area (Acres): 5.11
Lot Perimeter'. 2156.00
Parent Name:
Parent Description:
Parent Area (Square Feet). 0 00
Parent Area (Acres): 0 00
Percent oi Parent. 0 00
Closing Direction. N90"00'00'E
Closrng Distance: 0.0000
Course Data:(tVlapcheck Through Radius Points Method)
Begin Point 704496.Northing 751A
704218 7616
744229 2953
End 704547.7044967510 2847
Error of Closure
Departure in Y (Northing)
Departure in X (Easting).
Easting Direction Distance
2443513.9220 S00"30',03"W 278.00
2443911.4920 N89'.14'44"W 800.00
2443111.5613 N00"30'03"E 278.A0
2443113.9914 S89'14'44"E 800.00
2443913.922A
: IU 0.0000
0.0000
Lot Name. JANICEK (C-C)
Lot Description: JANICEK (C-C)
Lot lD; none
Loi Owner: none
Lot Area (Square Feet). 23811A2 27
Lot Area (Acres); 54 66
Lot Perimeter. 6217 72
Parent Name:
Parent Description:
Parent Area (Square Feet). 0.00
Parent,Area (Acres) 0 00
Fercent of Pai'errt: 0 00
Closirrg Dtrer";tiorr. N68'27'28"E
Ciosiiig Distance: C.0033
Course Data.(tu{apcheck Through Radius Points lllethod)
Pornl
Begrn
i.lorthing Easting Direction Distance
704496.7510 2443913.9220 N89"14'44"W 800 00
7C45C7.2847 2443113.9914 N89'1 4',44"W 521.59
User Name: Paul
Project: 9041 I Janicek/SJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Da1e AI-24-12
Time: 12.03:39
Page: 2
==== === ======= ====== ====== === =::= ======== == ==== ===:= ==== ==== ==========:== ==== ===
704514.1526 2442592.4466 N89'14',44"W 423.90
704519.7341 2442168,5833 N00'45'16"E 56.57
704576.2992 2442169.3282 N24'45'24"W ',115.33
704681 0298 2442121.0320 N16'29'52"W 98.83
RP PC 7A4775.704856.704927.791A 4989 9390 2442092 2442086.2443049.9664 9751 3270 N04'14'44"W 80.93
Curve Direction: CW
Radial ln: N85'45''16'E
D.O.C Arc. 05'56'15"
D.Radius: O.C Chord: 965.05'56'24" 00
Delta angle. 20"20'07"
Tangent length: 173.47
Arc length. 342.50
Chord Direction. N05'55'20"E
Chord External: length: 15.340.40 70
Middle RadialOut: ordinate: N73"15.15 54'37"W
Point Northing Easting Direction Distance
PRC RP 705482.705'195.2236 3813 2441127.2442122.6693 1272
Curve Direction: CCW
Radiai ln: N73"54'37"W
D.O.C Arc: 05'32'09"
D.Radius: O.C Chord: 1035.05'32'17" 00
Delta angle: 24'52'43"
Tangent length: 228.30
Arc length: 449.41
Choro Direction. N03"39'01"E
Chord External: length: 24.445.84 89
Point pRCDistance RP Middle RadialOut: 705818.705640.Northing ordinate. 3708 3656 2443301,Easting 2442154.N81"24.8369 30 12'40"5163 Direction E
Curve Directloir: CW
RacJiai ln N61"12'40"E
D,O.C Arc: 04'55'C5"
D Radius O C Chord: 1 165.04'55'11 00 '
Delta angle 09'14 33"
Tangent length 94 17
Arc length: '18 2.93
Chord Direction. N04''10'03"W
User Name. Paul
Prolect. 904 1 B Janicek/SJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Date. 01-24-12
Time. 12.03:39
Page, 3
Chord External: length'. 3.80 187 .72
lVliddle ordinate: 3.79
Point PTDistance Radial 705827.Out: Northing 5940 2442136.Easting N89'32'47"8735 Direction W N00"27'13"E 21.59
705849 1833 2442137 .0444 589"15'05"E 469.06
705843.0549 2442606 A643 S89'15'05"E 1320.97
End 705825.704496.7960 7496 2443926.2443913.9184 9216 S00"33',38"W 1329.1 1
Error of Closure 1 . 164527 4
Departure in Y (Northing). 0.0014
Departure in X (Easting): 0.0036
Lot Name JANICEK (TN-C) '
Lot Description. JANICEK (TN-C)
Lot lD: none
Lot Owner: none
Lot Area (Square Feet). 1134777 66
Lot Area (Acres) 25 96
Lot Perimeter'. 443'1.53
Parent Name.
Parent Description.
Parent Area (Square Feet) 0 00
Parent Area (Acres; 0.00
Percent of Parent. 0.00
Closing Direction. S26"56'36"E
Closing Distance: 0 0046
Course Data:(Mapcheck Through Radius Points iVlethod)
Point Begin 744519.NoiihinE 7341
7445j^1.5541
705860.31 78
PC RP 705849.705827.705818.1 874 5981 3749
Curve Direciion.
Radiai in
D,O C Arc:
D.O.C Chord:
Radius:
Delta angle.
Tangent length.
Arc length:
Chord Direction
Easting Direction Distance
2442168.5865 N89"14'.44"W 897.69
2441270 9743 N00'36'51"E 1328.84
2441285.2182 589"15',05"E 851.90
2442-i37.0455 500'27'13"W 21 59
2442136.8746
2443301.8380
CC\Ai
sE9"s2',47"E
uz+ CC tJJ
04"55'1 1"
44cE I IUJ.UU i
09"14'33"
Y4.tt
187.93
s04'10'03"E
User Namei: Paul
Proj.ect: 904 1 B Janicek/SJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Date: 01-24-12
Time: 12:03:39
Page: 4
Chord length:
External.
Middle ordinate.
Point PRC RP Radial 705482./05640.Out.Northing 2276 3696
Curve Direction:
Radial In:
D O.C Arc,
D O.C Chord:
Radius:
Delta angle.
Tangent length:
Arc length:
Chord Direction:
Chord length:
External:
Middle ordinate.
Point PRC RP Radial 744927.705195.Out.Northing 9430 3854
Curve Direction:
Radial ln.
D.O.C Arc:
D,O C Chord
Radius:
Delta angle.
Tangent length.
Arc length:
Chord Direction:
Choi"d length.
External:
tuliddle ordinate
Point PT Radial 704856.Out.Nonhing 5030
704775 7951
,/r-'.+Do t.uJ-10
EndJUJJ / U43 7A1U9./ O, 7332
Error of Closure
Depailure in Y (i.lofthing)
Depaflure in X (Easting).
187.72
3.80
379
Easting s8'1"'12'40"Direction W Distance
2442150.5174
2441127 6704
CW
s8'1"'12'40"W
05'32',09"
05"32'.17"
1035.00
24'52'43"
228.30
449 41
s03'3g',01"W
445.89
24.88
24.30
User Nam6: Paul
Prolect: 9041 8 Janicek/SJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Date: 0'1-24-12
Time. 12:03:39
Page: 5
Lot Description: SJJV (C-C)
Lot ID. none
Lot Owner: none
Lot Area (Square Feet). 145938 84
Lot Area (Acres): 3.35
Lot Perimeter: 1712.62
Parent Name:
Parent Description:
Parent Area (Square Feet). 0 00
Parent Area (Acres): 0 00
Percent of Parent. 0.00
Closing Direction: S26'54'02"W
Closing Distance 0.0078
Course Data:(Mapcheck Through Radius Points Method)
Point Begin 7A4507.Northing 2847
PC RP 704339.704339.7A4089 38'11 8619 8714
Curve Direction.
Radial ln:
D.O.C Arc:
D.O C Chord:
Radius:
Delta angle:
Tangent length:
Arc length:
Chord Direction.
Chord length:
External:
Middle ordinate:
Point PT PC4319 RP Radial 704279 704151 704341.Out:ltlorthing 5250 9646
Curve Directicn:
Ra,lial !n:
DOCATc:
D O.C Chor.i.
Radius:
Delta angle:
Tangent length:
Arc iength
Chord Direction:
Chord length:
Easting Direction Distance
2443113.9914 S00'30'.03"W
2443112"5237 N89"29'57"W
2443057.5258
2443055 3405
CCW
s00'30'03"w
22"55'06"
23"04',26"
250.00
41'11',29"
93.95
179 73
s69"54'19"W
175.89
User Namb. Paul
Prolect: 904 1 8 JanicekisJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Date.01-24-12
Time: 12:03:39
Page: 6
Externai: 15.24
Middle ordinate. 14 36
Point PTDistance Radial 704091.Out. Northing 6295 2442588.Easting S01'39'25"3387 Directton E N00',33',27"E 422.55
End 704514.7A4507.1595 2917 2442592.24431'13.9949 4502 SB9'14'44"E 521 59
Error of Closure 1 218829
Departure in Y (Northing): -0.0070
Departure in X (Easting), -0.0035
Lot Name. SJJV (H-E) '
Lot Description SJJV (H-E)
Lot lD. none
Lot Owner. none
Lot Area (Square Feet) 1 183683.36
Lot Area (Acres) 27 17
Lot Perimeter'. 4501.95
Parent Name.
Parent Description.
Parent Area (Square Feet): 0 00
Parent Area (Acres): 0.00
Percent of Parenl 0.00
Closing Direction. N48'23'07"E
Closing Distance 0 0091
Course Data:(l\/apcheck Through Radius Points Method)
Point
Begin
PC
f \ f
tDistance 704218.Northing 7616 Easting 2443511 .492A Direction S00'30'03"W 736.74
703482.0497 2443905.0521 N89"34'08"W 233.3i
703.+83.8052 244367 1 .7 487 S47'33',05"W i 09 C9
703410.1773 2443591 2530 S66'54'30"W 105.73
703368.7096 2443493.9943 S80'09'.2'l"W 150.16
703343.0369 2443346.0452 576'01',1 3"W 330.69
703263.14S3 2443025 .1498 S79',54'26'VV 177 .77
703231.e964 2442850 1307 S84'46'.38"W 162.75
7A3?17 .1815 2442688 0564 S88'47'05"W '108 28
70321.4.885A 2442579 8AA8 I'i00"33'27"E 876 78
70409 1 6235 2442.588 3319
i \-J4J4 LC i9U l+4lJd t. tu;) I
Curve Direction: CCW
Radial ln: i.l0i'39'25"\n/
D.O C Arc. 22"55'06"
D Raoius. O.C Cht-rrd. 250 23"00 04'26"
Delta angle. 39'02'01"
User NamS: Paul
ProlBct: 9041 B Janicek/SJJV
Create Mapcheck Reports
Dale01-24-12
Time. 12.03.39
Page. 7
============ = =======:=== ======= ==== === ======= ==== = ===== = ========== ==== ==== = === ==
Tangent length: 88.61
Arc length. 174.32
Chord Direction: N68'49'34"E
Chord External. length: 15 167 24 .04
Point pT Middle RadiaiOut:36 704151.Northing ordinate: 9585 2442744.Easting S40"14 41'26"A965 Direction E N49"18'34',Distance E 195.51
PC RP 704089.7A4279 4259 8654 2443055.2442892.3337 3443
Curve Direction CW
Radlal ln. S40'41'26"E
D.DOCChord. Radius: O.C Arc: 250.22"23"00 55'46" 04'26"
Delta angle: 41'11'29"
Tangent length: 93.95
Arc length. 179.73
Chord Direction. N69"54'19"E
Chord External: length: 17.175.07 89
Middle RadialOut: ordinate. N00'30'03"15.98 E
Point pTDistance 704339.Northing 8558 2443057.Easting 5190 Directton S89'29',57"E 55.00
704339.3751 2443112.5169 S00"30',03"W 1 10.09
704229.2893 2443111.5546 S89'',I4',44"E 800.00
End 7042187556 2443911.4852
Error of Closure 1 : 495671
Departure in Y (ttJorthing): 0.0060
Depanure in X (Easting): 0 0068
COMPASS
June 30, 20LL
Sonya Waters
City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho Avenue
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Ten Mile Annexation, AZ11-OO1
Dear Ms. Waters:
The Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS)
has received the transmittal of the annexation request (A211-001).
The project is bounded by Interstate 84 to the south, Ten Mile Road to
the east, and is approximately 81 acres.
Site Conditions and Forecasts
The 2015 Federal and 2035 Planning Functional Classification Maps
indicate Ten Mile Road as a principal afterial and I-84 as an interstate.
These maps and explanation of each is available on the COMPASS
website at http : //www. com passidaho. orglprodserv/fu nc- ma ps. htm.
Please see Figure 1 showing the 2035 Planning Functional Classification
of existing roadways in the vicinity of the site.
Figure 1
El
COMMUI{ITY PLA[{ltltNG ASS0CtATt0N
oI Southwest ld6ho
800 S. lndustry Way, Ste i 00
Mericlian, lD 83642
P.208.855.2s58
F.208.855.2559
wwrv.compassidaho.org
.14 E,
-,r Hl-q!rr'3ll
Er 61 7i
qL!9'
JOSHI
UYEUi_ 1-
{
,)\
<I
,*G
f mom
P?
l.-
",ic!e!
The site is located in two traffic analysis zones (TAZ),1007 and 1010, consuming
approximately 75o/o of TAZ LOOT and 35o/o of TAZ 1010. Please see Figure 2 for the
TAZs in the area and Table 1 for the current and forecasted demographics'
Figure 2
Table 1
TAZ
7007
1010
Popu ati
2070
Households
1
1
on
1
2
Jobs
0
0
TAZ
7007
1010
2075
Population Households
294 707
52 19
Jobs
129
775
2O7O to 2O75 Growth
Population Households
293 106
50 18
Jobs
t29
L75
TAZ
7007
1010
2025
Population Households
876 319
151 55
Jobs
382
522
2075 to 2O25 Growth
Population Households
582 272
99 36
Jobs
253
347
TAZ
7007
1010
2035
Population Households
7457 531
244 89
Access Management
The key access management issue is the project's central location and cross access
among and with other parcels. An access point to Ten Mile Road has been
determined and paftially constructed with the recent interchange improvements.
These properties and future projects will rely on intercon nections through each other
for robust development patterns, including a collector and local/access road network,
bicycle and pedestrian networks, and accommodations for freight and transit. Sites
designed with consideration of these networks and access management and driveway
standards will prove to be safe, efficient, and of enduring value.
The area plan includes part of a future bicycle/pedestria n connection adjacent to the
existing canal through the Janicek property.
Mobility Management
The mobillty management development guidebook supports mixed use development.
The project is not located within a quafter mile of an existing transit stop or park-
and-ride facility.
Commercial retail development can be a compatible use for park-and-ride facilities,
especially when located near accessible interchanges on major corridors. Consider
future park-and-ride facilities with proposed project - annexation and zoning.
Valley Regional Transit is developing a transit guide titled ValleyConnect, which
establishes a vision for future transit system needs based on short-term growth
projections, regional and local land uses, and roadway plans. Once finalized, this
plan will be a resource that drives future transit investments.
The project is located in proximity to potential alignments for a high capacity corridor
based on the Treasure Valley High Capacity Study conducted by COMPASS in 2009.
For more information, please contact MaryAnn Waldinger at COMPASS, 208-855-
2558 ext. 234 or mwaldinoer(dcom passida ho. orq.
Sincerely,
UtJ^t "fr-
MaryAnn Waldinger
Principa I Planner
pc: Mindy Wallace, Ada County Highway District
Pam Golden, Idaho Transportation Department
File 701
MAW:dw T:\FY11\700 Services\701 General Membership Services\Development Review\City of Meridian\Ten
Mile Annexation.doCX
COMFASS
91':!.!rtlt'!-r :1 gltg1 -U-I
g!I]!S!.
.\.lti)lii.ti. ld!14
June 30, 2011
Sonya Waters
City of Meridian
33 E, Idaho Avenue
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Ten Mile Annexation, AZ11:0O!
Dear Ms. Waters:
The Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS)
has received the transmittal of the annexation request (A211-001).
The project is bounded by Interstate 84 to the south, Ten Mile Road to
the east, and is approximately 81 acres.
Site Conditions and Forecasts
The 2015 Federal and 2035 Planning Functlonal Classification Maps
indicate Ten Mile Road as a principal arterial and I-84 as an interstate.
These maps and explanation of each is available on the COMPASS
we bsite at http : //www. co m passi d a ho. o rglp rodserv/func- m a ps. htm,
Please see Figure 1 showing the 2035 Planning Functional Classification
of existing roadways in the vicinity of the site.
Srp.ure 1
_-, Fl I
**[
flOrl $, hylqrlgry l,V..ri Stc. J {lr)
l\,tcridi.rrr, ll-) 836{2
tr, xltt.tt;3.J55r1
F
'a!,I
Jlii rrrl$
rvrtr%( { lnlhts}t{littrlr,q,rg
€ffi
"tl
1 0'15 1011 10'l? '1018
r007 1016
'1014
1010 1019
IIITERSTATE 8a
I I I al rl rl
-lt ol l-*r+ xt 6l
1 055
The site is located in two traffic analysis zones (TAZ),1007 and 1010, consuming
approximately 75o/o of TAZ 1007 and 35o/o of TAZ 1010. Please see Flgure 2 for the
TAZs in the area and Table 1 for the current and forecasted dernographics.
Figure 2
Table L
TAZ
LOOT
1010
Popu Jobs
207f,
lation Households
11
2t
0
0
TAZ
1007
1010
2075
Population Households
294 107
52 19
Jobs
729
77s
2O7O to 2O75 Growth
Populatlon Households
293 106
50 18
Jobs
L29
775
TAZ
1007
1010
2o25
Population Households
876 319
1s1 55
Jobs
382
522
201.5 to 2o.25 Growth
Population Households
272
36
582
99
Jobs
253
347
TAZ
Access Management
The key access management Issue is the project,s central location and cross access
among and with other parcels. An access point to Ten Mile Road has been
determined and partially constructed with the recent interchange improvements.
These properties and future projects will rely on intercon nections through each other
for robust development patterns, including a collector and locaTaccess ioad network,
bicycle and pedestrian networks, and accommodations for freight and transit. sites
designed with consideration of these networks and access management and driveway
standards will prove to be safe. efficient, and of enduring value.
The area plan lncludes part of a future bicycle/pedestrian connection adjacent to the
existing cana I through the Janicek property.
Mobility Management
The mobility management development guidebook supports mixed use development.
The project is not located within a quarter mile of an existing transit stop
or park-
and-ride facility.
commercial.retail development can be a compatible use for park-and-ride facilities,
especially when located near accessible interchanges on major corridors. consider
future park-and-ride facilities with proposed project - anneiation and zoning.
Valley Regional Transit is developing a transit guide titled Valleyconnect, which
establishes a vision for future transit system needs based on short-term growth
projections, regional and local land uses, and roadway plans. Once finaliied, this
plan will be a resource that drives future transit investments.
The project is located in proximity to potential
alignments for a high capacity corridor
based on the Treasure valley High capacity study conducted by cbMpAss in zoos,
For more i
2558 ext.
Sincerely,
MaryAnn Waldinger
Principal Planner
Uu)AtJ"?4-
nformation, please contact MaryAnn Waldinger at COMPASS, 208-855-
234 or mwaid in aer(acom passida
h o,orq
pc: Mindy Wallace, Ada County Highway District
Pam Golden, Idaho Transportalion Department
File 70t
MAw:dw T:\FYl1\7oo services\701 cenerar Membership services\Deveropment
Review\crty of Meridian\Ten
Mile Annexation.docx
ENGINEERINO
h S phnning and engineering conmunilies lor lhe tuture
I0[uflolfs,,=
1029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
Phone: (208) 938-0980
Fax: (208) 938-0941
E-mail : es-beckym@qwestoffice.net
January 16,2012
Mayor and City Council
City of Meridian
33 East Broadway
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Ten Mile Annexation (AZ-11-00f)
Dear Mayor and Council:
We began this annexation journey on January i8r 201i, when Anna and I came before the
Council as a discussion item. I included information from the Council minutes for your
review.
Anna Canning: "...As you may recall, one of the challenges that we identified within the plan
was getting that collector road system and the plan actually talks about staff assisting the
development community in developing the collector road system and finding a mechanism to get
it done and that this really was going to be one of the interesting challenges associated with
cie.relopment of that area...The second thing I need to talk to you about is usualiy you get an
aimexation, a concept plan, and a preliininary plat. That's the way'it usually w'orks and it rrla) go
a little differently this time. You may get the annexation with the right of way easements anci we
will get DAs at the time of annexation, but you may not get a concept plan right at first. If you
don't have a concept plan right at first the DA for that property would say before you do any
development you need to do a development agreement modification and bring us a concept
plan. . . So, it's taking things a little out of sequence. I'm comfortable that we can still get
cievelopment that's in the best interest of the city and that's consistent with the Ten Mile
Interchange Specific Area Plan..."
Zerembaz "I was just going to say the spirit of cooperation that appears to be going on all over
the place, I think that's marvelous that ACHD -
that's actually a variation to a policy they stuck
with pretty firmly for a long time to accept an unimproved easement. I think that's great and I
would support - if
we can get all those people together and work out the right of way..."
Mayor and City Council
January 12,2012
Page2
Hoaglun: "Madam Mayor, I agree. I think this is a great effort by everyone to put this project
together in that area and there will be many projects, but trying to unify this -
this plan, so I
certainly can support the fee waiver request and I know the planning director is asking us to kind
of take things out of order and be flexible...You know, I'm in agreement with that."
deWeerd: "Hey, I was already impressed that she came up with this, you know...to all of those
that have been working for the last several years on this, the really unique thing about Ten Mile
Area Specific Plan was the integration of land use and the transportation system and we
appreciate a solution that can get this going. It's important."
We reviewed the staff memorandum for the City Council meeting of January 17r2012,and
have the following responses to the proposed Development Agreement Provisions:
l-4. The applicant is in agreement.
5(a-g). The applicant is in agreement.
s(h). The applicant respectfully requests deletion of the 201000 square footage building
restriction for the C-C zone. This provision is applicable to the TN-C zone not the
C-C zone. The severe building size restriction is one of the primary reasons the
applicant requested the C-C zoning on the east portion of the property. The C-C
zone provides for more flexibility than the TN-C zone.
No building size restrictions for the C-C zoning were included in the DA provisions
fcr the Meridian 118 project located on the west and south boundary of Janicek
property. Their condition read as follows: "Development in the C-C district shall be
consistent with the development standards contained in the Ten Mile Interchange
Specific Area Plan for Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) designated areas. Uses within
the C-C district shall be comprised of a mix of uses (i.e. office, retail, recreational,
emplovment and other uses, including residential uses) as defined in the Ten Mile
Interehange Specific Area Plan."
5(i-l). The applicant is in agreement.
6. The applicant is in agreement.
The applicant is in agreement. The reference to sewer service at the northeast side of the
subject propeny is in error. The main is located on the south side of the Purclam Drain.
The applicant is in agreemerrt.
The applicant is in agreement.
The applicant is in agreement.
DA Provisions - Janicek Parcel
proposed zoning TN-C & C-C
7.
8.
8.
9.
Mayor and City Council
Jantary 12,2012
Page 3
10. The applicant is in agreement.
1. The applicant is in agreement.
2. The applicant is in agreement.
3. The applicant is in agreement.
4(a). The applicant is in agreement.
4(b). The applicant respectfully requests deletion ofthe 20'000 square footage building
restriction for the C-C zone. This provision is applicable to the TN-C zone not the
C-C zone. The severe building size restriction is one ofthe primary reasons the
applicant requested the C-C zoning on the east portion ofthe property. The C-C
zone provides for more flexibility than the TN'C zone.
No building size restrictions for the C-C zoning were included in the DA provisions
for the Meridian 118 project located on the west and south boundary ofJanicek
property. Their condition read as follows: "Development in the C-C district shall be
consistent with the development standards contained in the Ten Mile Interchange
Specific Area Plan for Mixed Use Commerciat (MUC) designated areas. Uses within
the C-C district shall be comprised of a mix of uses (i.e. office, retail, recreational,
employment and other uses, including residential uses) as defined in the Ten Mile
Interchange Specific Area Plan."
The applicant is in agreement.
The applicant is in agreement.
The applicant is in ag,reernent.
The appiicant is in agreement.
The applicant is in agreement.
l. The applicant is in agrcement.
2. The applicant is in agreement.
3. The applicant is in agreement.
4(a-b). The applicant is in agreement.
5
6
7
8
9
DA Provisions - Fedrizzi Parcel
prooosed zoninp C-C
DA Provisions - SJJV
pronosed zonins C-C & H-E
Mayor and City Council
January 12,2012
Page 4
4(c). The appticant respectfully requests deletion of the 20,000 square footage building
restriction for the C-C zone. This provision is applicable to the TN-C zone not the
C-C zone. The severe building size restriction is one of the primary reasons the
applicant requested the C-C zoning on the east portion of the property. The C-C
zone provides for more flexibility than the TN-C zone.
No building size restrictions for the C-C zoning were included in the DA provisions
for the Meridian 118 project located on the west and south boundary of Janicek
property. Their condition read as follows: "Development in the C-C district shall be
consistent with the development standards contained in the Ten Mile Interchange
Specific Area Plan for Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) designated areas. Uses within
the C-C district shall be comprised of a mix of uses (i.e. office, retail, recreational,
employment and other uses, including residential uses) as defined in the Ten Mile
Interchange Specific Area Plan."
5. The applicant is in agreement.
6. The applicant is in agreement.
7. The applicant is in agreement.
8. The applicant is in agreement.
9. The applicant is in agreement.
We appreciate the City's cooperation and look foru,ard to hnalizing this process
Sincerely,
Engineering Solutions, LLP
Becky McKay
Planner
t" ffi
uotuvl4 n4r+a\
ed, .1 0 >an/t-l,a&
Rebecca W, Arnold, President
John S. Franden, Vice President
Carol A. McKee, Commissioner
Sara M. Baker, Commissioner
David L. Case, Commissioner
# * !r \h
Date August 24,2011
To: Janicek Properties, LLC
27O E. Connemara Lane
Eagle, lD 83616
Subject: MAZ-11-001
Northwest corner of Ten Mile at l-84
Annexation and Rezone
The Ada County Highway District (ACHD) staff has reviewed the submitted application and site
plan for the item referenced above and has the following comments:
Proposed Zoninq
The zoning proposed for the site is different from the zoning designated for the site noted in the Ten lrdile
lnterchange Area Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). The zoning designations assumed in the plan were used
to determine the configurations, and classification of the roadways in the TMlSAp. Because the
proposed land uses do not match those in the plan the applicant will need to provide
a traffic impact
study to demonstrate the differences between the two plans and to identify any additional mitigalion that
may be necessary due to the proposed change in zoning.
Roadwavs
The roadways shown on the rezone plan are consistent with those shown in the TMlSAp, and the
approaches for the proposed roadways were constructed onto Ten t\4ile Road with the ldaho
Transportation Department's (lTD) Ten Mile lnterchange project.
Risht-of:Wav
The narrative included as part of the application notes that the property owners will
provide right-of-way
easements for some of the future collectors. The applicant's representative has indicated that the
applicants believe that right-of-way easements provide greater flexibility in the development and sale of
their land. However, ACHD does not typically accept right-of-way easements, and is not willing to accept
right-of-way easements as part of this application.
lnstead, staff recommends that ACHD accept the right-of-way dedication hy deed, when the property
owners are ready to dedicate the righlof-way, and allow construction of roidways within the site. This
will allow access to adjacent parcels, and for the construction of roadway improvements.
T"S.0 Mile Road
The segment of Ten Mile Road abutling the site has been recently improved by ITD as
part of the Ten
It/ile Road lnterchange proJect As part of the project
ITD construtted approaches to provide access from
Ten Mile Road to the site. The roadway locations shown on the site plan'are
consistent with the
locations of the approaches constructed by lTD.
Ada County Highway District . 3775 Adams
Street. Garden Clty, ID . 83714 . PH 208-387-6100 . E( 345-7650 .
www.achdidaho.org
lnternal Circulation
The internal roadway network shown on the submitted site plan is generally consistent with the street
layout shown in the TMISPA. The collector roadway shown on the site plan is anticipated to be
signalized in the future. Costs associated with the signalization of the intersection will be borne by the
developing neighboring property owners.
There are two intersections shown on the site plan that are to be constructed on other parcels (Meridian
1 1B and Baraya). Construction of the intersections will require coordination between all of the property
owners as development occurs.
lnternal Street Sections-
Specific internal street sections will be reviewed with future individualdevelopment applications.
Proposed street sections should conform to those listed noted in ACHD's Master Street Map. Potential
street sections include:
Town Center Collector - Town Cenler Collectors are typically improved with 2 to 3 travel lanes,
bike lanes, 6{oot wide buffer/landscaping area, and detached sidewalk. On-street parking may
be considered if it is appropriate for the neighboring land uses, and desired by the lead land use
agency.
a
r Town Center Local -Town Center Locals are typically improved
with 2 travel lanes, on-street
parking, a 6-foot wide bufferllandscaping area, and detached sidewalks.
Access
The submitted site plan shows several access points off of the proposed roadway network
to provide
access to individual parcels as they develop. The proposed access points generally meet ACHD
policy,
and appear to be consistent with the access points presented to ACHD and the City of Meridian in Maich
of 201 1. At that time the applicant's representative received the attached letter from ACHD regarding
access to the site. The comments in the attached letter will stand as ACHD's specific comment on
access to the site.
As noted in the letter, access to individual parcels will be reviewed with future individualdevelopment
applications. Allfuture development applications will be subject to the ACHD policy in effect at the time
the application is received by ACHD.
Recommendation
ACHD recommends that the City of Meridian take no action on the proposed rezone until the
applicant has provided an approved Traffic lmpact Study identifying any additional traffic impacts
and necessary traffic mitigation measures beyond those identified inthe T[/lSAp.
lf you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (20s)
3s7-612g.
Sincerely,
1)lu+d,Wa"-{^(ta<-
Mindy Wallace
Planning Review Supervisor
Development Services
Project file,
City of Meridian; Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC; SJJV, LLC;
Engineering Solutions -
Becky tt/cKay
cc
Ada Highway District . 3775 Adams
Street. Garden City, ID o 837L4.
pH 208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650 . www.achdidaho.org
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
3.Plan 2.Map 1. Vicinity Site tvlarch 2011 Letter
Ada Counfy Highway District . 3775 Adarns Street
. Garden City, ID .
83714 . PH 208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650 .
www.achdidaho.org
i
rl
Site Plan
7
ll
lliU U_llLt:
I frTm'-_r'1
'i\l 0
I
r,
z
n
ilil I
I
m I
:!
I
o
$5
I
I \
$
o
efr ! I
rl
i,$t t\
f\
o
s I
v4
fin
t .
i
j
i
i
I
a
o !t
fl
1
Ada County Highway District. 3778 Adams Street. Garden City. ID.83714rPH 208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650 . www.achdidaho.org
o
i
0
?
o
s\
6
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
t
I
,
I
i
ffi IDIA Mayor Tammy de l{eerd
Clty Counall Mcmbers;
Keith Bird
8nd Hoaglun
Charle! Rountree
II}.4HCI David Zaremba
March 14,2011
Mr. Gary Inselman
Ada County Highway Dishict
3775 Adams Street
Garden Citn ID 83714
STIBJECT: TEN MILF; INTERCTIANGE WEST ACCESS ANAYI"SIS
Dear Gary;
This is in response to tle Tcn Mile Interchange Commercial Traffic Analyris dated February 15,
2011 by Dobie Engineering. City of Merldian Plarming and Public Works staffhave revicwed
the analysis, proposed right of way alignments and accesses for consistency with the Ten Mile
Interchange Specific Area Plan (|MISAP). In ths absense of specific development plans we aro
in general agreemcnt with the underlying assumptions of the study and some of the proposed
access points. We are of the opinion that it would be beneficial to wait until specific
development plans are proposed to determino other accesie$,
We recognize that the analysis is coneotly based on the adopted land use designations of the
TMISAP even lhough the precise land uses are not identified" While the FAR employed in the
analysis (.50) is lowor than anticipated in the TMISAP it seems rcasonable since the
recommonded FARs in the plan do trot aocount for road rights of way and alleys. Thus, we are in
general agreement with the assumptions i
With regar<t to the proposed accesses, ws recognizo and support the District,s policy of
identi$ing access atthe time of development application and appreciate the District's flexibility
in reviewing the proposed acccsses and right of way alignments in this unique sihration. Based
on our reviow ofthe analysis and the proposed accesses our comments are directed to specific
areas on the attacheil map with conesponding numeric labels:
. We defer to the Dishict on the locatioa of the access to the wcst side bfTen Milc Road
that would be locat€d on &e north portion of the Janicek property or
the south portion of
. the Approval Carney ofthe property. aecesses (1) propo$ed for the rrorth and aorth/south collectors should be
dsforred until a specific development plan is proposed in order to determine ihe precise
location and functionality. (2)
Planning Oepartment . 33 E. Broadlvay, Meridian, lD 83642
Phone208-884-5533 . Fax208-888-6854 . lvww.merldlancity,org
Ada County Highway District o 3775 Adams Street .
Garden Gty', ID . 83714
. PH 208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650 . www.achdidaho,org
Mr. Gary Inseluan
Page2
r rte direct access fiom rhe Fodrizzi property to Ten Mile
Road should be limited to
"emergenry only" until such time as other access to that property c,' bo achieved. The
proposed driveway access to the Fedrizzi properly on tho norttr-south colleetor shoUJ
be
o approved. On the south (3) side of the south.colleotor road we recomrnend that first right in- right out
westof TenMIe Road be approved as well as tho left in/right i"-rigtriout tocated to
the west of tlat access. (4)
We are of ihe opinion that the access located on the western edge of the SJJV pmperry
bc
approved in cbncert with a specilic dcvelopment proposal and consideratio" t" giv"a';
I locatlng On the north it ou side the cornmon of tho soulh property collector iitro we lvitb recommend Msridian l1g. that approval (5) of the access
immediately oast of the roundabout (Q and recommendthat action on the other two be
defencd (7) until a specifio development application is tendored for consideration:.Ia
addition we aro uDsme of the necessity of the left in turaiag moyement as proposed f6r.
the middle access. (8) , rii.i ir:
Thank you for considoration ofour cornments. Please fcol free to call ifyou havc any
queslions
or would like to meet to discuss the proposed alignments.
Friedmao,
Deputy Director
Cc Anna Canning
BeckyMcKay
Pat Dobie
Tim Curns
.: .1. ,.
Ada Highway District ' 3775 Adams Street . Garden
City, ID r 83714 r PH 208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650. www.achdidaho.org
/
lt&Dqrl$
CAA'E'
l"**-
I
e
B
ItU
E
I
I
I
iI
l
a
I
I
I
I
t
I
I'
t,,,...
i
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-.1
I
I
! I
I
t
t I
tjs*a;#*tI =!*:5
Ftff-.
U
1laka*tEr
I
I
I
FEDffiII
_t.
tl,,
*ltrc{tx*nH 718
Ada County Highway District. 3775 Adams Sheet. Garden City, r 83714
" PH 208-387 .FX
345-7 650 . www.achdidaho.org
ffiHHE/ I
I
l
I
# t. ; ffi fk' trr*
h.r^.r*Xfddo *-r,nioo
Rebecca W. Arnold, President
John S. Franden, Vice President
Carol A. McKee, Commissioner
Sara M. Baker, Commissioner
David L. Case, Commissioner
October 18,2011
Funkhouser Engineering lnc.
1950 RegentAvenue
Boise, lD 83709
Subject: Ten Mile Crossing Subdivision Traffic lmpact Study
The Ada County Highway District (ACHD) staff has completed a review of the submitted traffic
impact study (TlS) for the proposed Ten Mile Crossing Subdivision. Comments/recommendations
provided by District Traffic Services and Planning Review staff are listed below:
Staff does not believe that the proposed roadway network shown in Figure 9 of the study meets
the intent of the Ten Mile lnterchange Specific Area Plan. Specifically, the layout of the collectors
and the locations of the proposed roundabouts. Staff recommends and will continue to
recgmmend that the site plan be revised to meet the collector and roundabout locations shown in
the Ten Mile lnterchange Specific Area Plan.
2. The capacity analysis on page 12 of the study notes several improvements planned by ACHD,
including the signalization of the Black CaUFranklin intersection, the Ten Mile/Franklin
intersection, and the widening of Black Cat between Linder and Ten Mile. These improvements
are scheduled in the current Five Year Work Plan. ls the applicant proposing to build the
improvements or wait until the improvements are made prior to moving forward with the
development?
3. The submitted study does not include an AM peak hour analysis as required by District policy
7106.3.3. The Am peak hour analysis should be completed and submitted to staff for review.
4. The submitted study does not include a peak hour peak direction analysis for the roadways
as
required by District policy 7106.4. The peak hour directional analysis for the roadways should
be
completed and submitted to staff for review.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Mindy Wallace
Planning Review Supervisor
Development Services
CC: City of Meridian
JUB Engineers - Scott
Wonders
Ada County Highway District. 3775 Adams Street. Garden City, ID .
83714. pH
208-387-6100 o FX 345-7650 . www.achd.ada.id.us
.i6 iffi't' \r- gt".i,.il,.li.
ry ACHD Rebe.ca W. Amol4 President
lohn S. Franden, Vice President
Carol A. McK€q Commissioner
Sara M. 8aker, Commissioner
Davld L. Case, Commissloner
eo^.* flAf" 9.4*;"-
Date August 24, 2011
To: Janicek Properties, LLC
270 E. Connemara Lane
Eagle, lD 83616
Subject: MAZ-11-OO1
Northwest corner of Ten Mile at l-84
Annexation and Rezone
Ten Mile Road
The Ada County Highway Diskict (ACHD) staff has reviewed the submilted application and site
plan for the item referenced above and has the following comments:
Proposed Zoninq
The zonlng proposed for the site is different from the zoning designated for the site noted in the Ten Mile
lnterchange Area Specific Area Plan (TI/ISAP). The zoning designations assumed in the
plan were used
to determine the configurations, and classification of the roadways in the TMlsAp. Because the
proposed land uses do not match those in the plan the applicant will need to provide
a traffic impact
study to demonstrate the differences between lhe two plans and to identify any additional mitigation that
may be necessary due to the proposed change in zoning.
Roadwavs
The roadways shown on the rezone plan are consistent wilh those shown in the TIvllSAp, and the
approaches for the proposed roadways were constructed onlo Ten lr/ile Road with the ldaho
Transportation Department's (lTD) Ten Mile lnterchange project.
Riqht-of-Wav
The narrative included as part ofthe application notes that the property owners will
provide right-of-way
easements for some of the future collectors. The applicant's representative has indicated tha-t the
applicants believe that right-of-way easements provide greater flexibility in the development and sale of
their land. However, ACHD does_ not typically accept right-of-way easements, and is not willing to accept
right-of-way easements as part of this applicalion.
lnstead, staff recommends that ACHD accept the right-of-way dedication by deed, when the property
owners are ready to dedicate the righlof-way, and allow construction of roadways within the site. This
will allow access lo adjacent parcels, and for the construction of roadway improvements.
The segment of Ten Mile Road abutting the site has been recently improved by ITD as part
of the Ten
Mile Road lnterchange project. As part of the project
ITD construtted approaches to provide access from
Ten tr4ile Road to the site. The roadway locations shown on the site plan are consistent
with the
locations ofthe approaches constructed by lTD.
Ada County Highway District . 3775 Adams Street
. Garden City, ID .
83714 . pH 208-38 7-6100 .
FX 345-7 650. yvlaw.achdidaho,org
lnternal Street Sections
Recommen dation
lf you have any questions, please feel
free to contact me at ( 2Og) 3Al_6178.
Sincerely,
The internal roadway network shown on the submitted site plan is
generally consistent with the street
layout shown in the TIvllsPA. The collector roadway shown on the site pla; is anticipated to be
signalized in the future. Costs associated with the signalization of the intersection will be borne by the
developing neighboring property owners.
There are two in{ersections shown on the site plan that are to be constructed on other parcels (Meridian
llSandBaraya). Construction of the intersections will require coordination between ail ofthe property
owners as development occurs.
Specific internal street sections will be reviewed with future individual development applications.
Proposed street sections should conform to those listed noted in ACHD's lvlaster Street Map.
potential
street sections include:
Town Center Collector - Town Center
Collectors are typically improved with 2 to 3 travel lanes,
bike lanes, 6-fool wide buffer/landscaping area, and detached sidewalk. on-street parking may
be considered if it is appropriate for the neighboring land uses, and desired by the lead lan"d use
agency.
Town center Local -Town center Locals
are typically improved with 2 travel lanes, on-street
parking, a 6-foot wide buffer/landscaping area, and detached sidewalks.
Access
The submitted site plan shows several access points off of the
proposed roadway network to provide
access to individual parcels as they develop. The proposed access points generally
meet AiHD policy,
and appear to be consistent with the access points presented to ACHD anO tne City ot Ueridian in March
of 201 1. At that time the appllcant's representative received the attached letter from ACHD regarding
access to the site' The comments in the attached letter will stand as ACHD's specific commerit on
access to the site.
As noted in the letter, access to individual parcels will be reviewed with future individual development
applications All future development applications will be subject to the ACHD policy in effect ai
the time
the application is received by ACHD.
ACHD recommends that the city of l\iieridian take no action on the proposed rezone
until the
applicant has provided an approved Traffic lmpact Study identifying any abditional
tranic impacts
and necessary traffic mitigation measures beyond those identified in the T[4rsAp.
a-(lac<_
lVindy Wallace
Planning Review Supervisor
Development Services
Project file,
City of Meridian; Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC; SJJV, LLC;
Engineering Solutions - Becky
McKay
CC
Ada County Highway District . 3775 Adams Street . Garden Oty, ID .
83714 . pH
208-387-6100 . FX 345-7650 . !'/yvw.achdldaho.org
lnternal Circulation
Attachrnents:
Vicinity Map
3.Plan 2. 1. Site fvlarch Vicinity 2011 Map Letter
Ada County Highway Disfict . 3775 Adams
Street . Garden City, lD ,
83714 "
PH 208:387-6100 ' FX 345-7650 . www.achdidaho,org
I
'l
ti.
Site Plan
-.--
;
i
*
T(1
fri
I]1U
ra
ryl
I.
rh
$t
a
't1
eA oI
!-
D
A
-{
z.
n +
rR
iFit t\
aI
o
iinit
t!r,l
4
1
Ada County Highway District .3775 Adams
Street o Garden City, ID .
" PH 208-387-6100 .
FX 345-76s0 "
wnw.achdidaho.org
I
!
!
I
I
I
Ix
o
o I
E
a
Ii !
I
I
eHo
7ta
I
I
I
I
i
n
/
i*",lo"
i
I
I
i
i
il
l'
I
I
l
t
Q
E
u
E
I
I
fi
-*--J*-J a
ftD@
Ada County Highway Districf . 3775
Adams Street. Garden City, ID
" 83714 .
pH 208-387-6100 . FX 34s-7650 . www.achdjdaho.org
I
t
I
T
I
t
{ i
I
it- F
-
F
PARCEL R.1
ffi!"".,*
PARCEL O.,1
PARCEL O-2
PARCEL O.3
PARCEL O-4
"$[$'[*.*,
PARCEL O-5
"tlx&'a*.*,
PARCEL 0.6
PARCEL .: O.7
PARCEL O-8
PARCEL M.1
PARCEL M-2 & M-3
PARCEL M.4
PARCEL M-5
PARCEL M-6
PARCEL IVI.7
ff#,{ m' iiffi: i-
PARK *RESTAURANTAB**- ffi.
PARK eE-RESTAURANT -* ilg. B
PARKffi PARK *%Hfu* ,RESTAURANT RESTAURANT ,,** Ig. D C
BOUTIQUE ffiffi.* RETAIL iiHa
6r-.-7f, rc"<.t i+;l
u/rc5d. abovg
.: --1
F --;{i*Nisnuffi
1 CtrNBEPT SITE trLAN
-3
*i].itl
ir-1 :1,!: a: rrf .;1;ri,
tti,r,,r : i i""'4 f,;":- ffi $ ill;, *".i&. l'""
rl'2,ari L,:,,J.
tgt
Zoning lleconrmended by Staf'{:
ril
iri
i--r
-.'1
'=!,L - l
.I'N-C
| :r;
Fi ia,
.ii
!
:'-' r
,"?
.'i
I
,-;!:ilir-,!',1
-s
..{.'.. . -^--l- i --
:
t
{
I
', l
:l
'i
',:
i,.'r.
:i.;
C-C
C=
I-I.E
I
i
,i
I
I
a
U)
o
(!
o
I
BLACK CAT ROAD
a
c
a
I
p
:*0
iiititili 'ilj Liiil----ll
EI
d
iti il tiillrl
o
c, li B
o
A
H8 o
6
o
6
fi
I
-z l
- O
-
B
rh
o
6
E
fi
+
m
lI
T
fi
T
m
+
m
I
a
rxrrclltEt[t
EEO I
I I
EEg I
I
l
I
I
/
grlr^
rEilEX
ufix^ltra
c/tF-,
rtlt!
d,If
illEalE3r
rglr!.
arlH
dLLEoi
e.o
,
I
! I
{
I
I
1
l
I
I
I
i
I
!
I
I
I
T
| ,,"
I
I
I
t.
I
lJ..r:1l.IIE l===j I
I
I
Fffi ,
I
t
F
rEiTI
rlf
Ada County Hlghway Distrlct .
3775 Adams SBeet. Gard€n Ctty, ID o
93714 .PH
208-387-6r00 . FX 3,{5-7650 . www.achdldatn.org
' F---iAXlN,-. rSaJ.:Clw
-_J
PARCEL R-,I
itr'E.'.'*'
PARCEL O.1
PARCEL O-2
PARCEL O.3
PARCEL O.4
PARCEL O.5
PARCEL 0.6
PARCEL O-7
PARCEL O.8
PARCEL M.1
PARCEL M-2 & IVI-3
PARCEL M.4
PARCEL KI-s
PARCEL M-6
PARCEL I\4.7
PARK RESTAURANTA
PARK RESTAURANT B
PARK RESTAURANT C
PARK RESTAURANT D
BOUTIQUE RETAIL
I
-r
I
t'
:
N4 k_ *:tr g
H*} *A h.{
:: ; l.: ': ::
| ... ri
t
FIGURE 1
lit/1 rt^Hcfi norD
,a |:
-.) 7,- \
\'...:
)
BARAYA
STJBDIVISION
CARNEY
8E
TIORIH ROAD A
I
I
ii
I
t
i
I
i
!
t
i
.BRIGHTON
EE6
JANICEK
a'at ..
' r j--*-t r5B!E***
-*-i --*---\ l
I
I
I
)
j
I
I
I
JtorAN 118
Hl/!f,8
MERIDIAN 116
n
.,
I
l
)
E
6
WESI ROAD
JANICEK
ITEST S0JIH ROAD g.'*
SJJV
JANICEK
SOUTH
FEDR|ZZI q@G
,
I UII
a
I
I
I
,l F
FIGURE 2
TEN MILE INTERCHANGE LAND USE PLAN
\EAR 2O3O BUILDO.'T ANAL1€IS
ALT 1 SINGI-E ACCESS TO SCI,.,TH COTI.ECTOR
EE
Itr
sol
H e
tl 2OJO BAO(GROIJNO IRAFFIC
gIE GANERAIED TRAFRC
PLUS ERIGHTO{
PLUS MERIDIAN 114
tl
Itr
+@
+flo
FgE
SO{JIH
tr| RCIJNOABqJT
m+
,*i + -.6i
rl tJo
lB+
lm+
gERIDIAN 118
PNOP€RTY It
9E: NOR'IH
ttr ROJNDAAO{JI
rni
e
tl
lr.
%+
270
'
JANIC€(
tEsr
m+
ffi+
!m+
tE+
NORIH ROAD
e +8€
+ 625
.,ANICEK
NORIH
+ 126O
+1*
JA'{ICEK SoljIH
FEff,IZZI
@+
iln
sE8
.r l9
+nl
160 +
m 1
fs
+ f,6O
j F
FIGURE 3
TEN MII-E INTERCHANGE LAND USE PLAN
\€AR 2O3O BUILDS,.,T ANALYSIS
MULIIPLE ACCESS TO SO.'TH COLLECTOR
+ 560
+ 6to
t+ 2O3() AAC(GRO{JND'IRAFFIC
SIE GOTERATED TRAFFIC
PLUS BRIGTITO{
PLUS MERIOAI{ 118
tl
EB
gaE NoRlH
lr' RffJI{DABOIJT
35+
270 +
+N
€ t1$
.i+
8E
JANICfK
II'EST
Eg
It)
8+
235+
+@
+ llo
b
ls
rtO
lo
-€N s , €
tl
$8
8r8
.rlt|
6S {}a I
NOR1H ROAD
ACCESS C
ta.
ACC€SS B
JAHICEK
EAST
tr
ql
3e
SOUlH
ttt RGINDASOUT
loI +g
€1fi
tst
4f6
€75
fl
ql
tl
6
&o
i\
Rlcl{r lN/djl oNLY
I
I
+ Rro{l rN/o'll strY
JANICEK
IIEST lfFr r,{ f,lIH
RlGr{I N/OJr
Rrd{I rN/oJT or{tY
l.In
RrGi{I
l)itlfvllllvll
ircHT rN/ouT oNtY
JANICEK
SOUTH
(f
uo
5
;[
Lzrj
l-
IIFI OUT TIH
FGHI IVqI l
.*
Q- -\\ i;t *t
un 0u f,rrH
RrGlII f{/0ur
FEDRIZZI
Rtcrr rr,l/ow o{LY
MERIDIAN 118 SJJV
i*', * I
I
-l \ SJJV
ult{ .MfI- BIKE o{tn LINE IIB
2- tll,rEs sB
2- t- w{UNTS E t}rRU [T EB tD
2- tlr{Es rT E8
1- S|KE UfiE tS
I
I )
(
t
i
i
I
/
l
I
\
\
Hi''t -t' r
Q_r
T-
r[
*)
L
{
,{il
{)L )
{
$
d
c
a
I.I t .5 i:;gl
ll-5 itiv u
*h !,' 6:!nr!'1 I !]=!3|i\r::
i,
u
J
n
fi
a
e"{
Hi
N
,t
at,
lil
e
j
F
l{
ll
tu
2
J
F
r-
rD
r
I
E
o
{
(3
o((\ v)
4
tu
q
! :t-3rrv f-i
r!
u !4i
.t
*J
E =g lraif I !
.s t-
f =SENV-II
;"11 t il 'ir/
.il
8-U
U-NI
rnu
M
::_
z-u
fl.I{I
I^IUVJ
(,)
uu
: ---
-
rl(.{\ J-J 40x}
fl-I l
o \
.d \
-do
- !
.J
a$$
.rad
.)"
07-u
9I-U
8-U
07-u
z
N-f,
3-f,
sI-u
rou
IU ffi=-l
\
i
I
I
I
ff-H
-/
,/
@
lz
lo
ls
12
*
x
Io
o7
JM tt
l(------r
L
zr
L f-l- oF
o
T
I L-
LI
t/'
__t
E:RI
3no
\
E
\
t]- rr
rl-
im
I
\
n \
C.G
R-ls
C.N
ST
W
R-8
R-l5
R-40
C.C
t,
R-8 i 5
L
RU
R1
k f
o
o
J
z
J
Jz
W I
I
uo
ok
Y
{
)
_l
-r
<o
_1
RR
I
Jz
os
z
RUT U)
R-2
TN-
M.E
;lqp"*J.," L
(67e'eErc€ 5
Final Traffic Report
Ten Mile Road lnterchange Project
Federal Aid Project No. AOO9(815)
Key No. 09815
{r
Prepared for
ldaho Transportation DePartment
Submitted by
H.W. Lochner
July 2gA7
ITD-001077
I
i
I
I
i
HCM Signalized lntersection Capacity Analysis
48: Road "G'& Ten Mile Rd ?O30 PM lOmiArea Ptan SPUI
) \{ \a t r ll J
Lane Configu'ations
l&lFbw(phd)
Totd Lost time (s)
Lafte UB- Fador
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flcnr (prot)
F[ Permitted
Satd. Fbtfl (perm)
1gx)
4.0
1_00
1.OO
o-95
1774
a-57
10s5
1900
4.0
1.00
1.@
1.00
1863
1.00
1863
lqx)
4.4
r.m
o-85
1.00
1583
1.@
1sql
1gx)
4.4
1-00
1.00
0.95
1770
0.30
556
lSOO
40
1.00
t.oo
1.OO
1863
1.00
1863
1SO
4.0
1.00
o.85
1.00
1 583
1-00
1583
Map - Ten Mile 2030 lmproved access scenario
Levels of Service
Timing Plan: PM Peak oPtimize
ACHD 2030 PM Peak Hour Volume
g
=
F C)
Franklin
600)
560r
oo
NF o@ t*
North Road
10+
480r
ON oo l+
South Road
Ten Mile 2030 lmproved access scenario 31412010
HDR C:\Projects\Boise\TENMILE\brighton\Analysis\Synchro\Brighton-AllAccess3_nobkgd.syn
o
v
o
N
u-
o
N
(s
(n
q) o
a
E10 O
+144Q
D
l-84 WB On
,-84
1330+
601
Franklin ,
50r
On
EB On
50-'\ 0) o
a
2
o
ro
6o
t
:o
0)
=N(E
.a 9
6No ll
^tt
aa AN
o$
Souh
C
o
F
HCM Signalized lntersection Capacity Analysis
20: South Road & Ten Mile 3t4t2010
-r--+\t +-a t t L
+ t J
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)
ldeal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd, Flow (perm)
160 480
1900 4.19000 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
1.00 1.00
1863 't583
1.00 1.00
1863 1583
300 270
1900 6.19000 4.0
0.1.85 00 1.1.00 00
1.00 0.95
1583 1770
1.00 0.95
1583 1770
300
1 900
4.0
0.97
1.00
0.95
3433
0.95
3433
\r
530
1 900
4.0
0.97
1.00
0.95
3433
0.95
3433
+
160
't900
4.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 863
1.00
1863
1170
1900
HCM Signalized lntersection Capacity Analysis
17: North Road & Ten Mile 3t4t2010
i + \{ \a t t L I t
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)
ldeal Flow (vphpl)
Total Lost time (s)
Lane Util. Factor
Frt
Flt Protected
Satd. Flow (prot)
Flt Permitted
Satd. Flow (perm)
340 20
1900 0.6.190097 0 1.6.00 0
1,00 0.87
0.95 1.00
3433 0.161795 1.00
3433 1617
300
1 900
6.0
0.97
1,00
0.95
3433
0.95
3433
10
1900
6.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 863
1.00
1 863
480
1 900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1 583
1.00
1583
150
1 900
t
270
1 900
4.0
1.00
'1.00
0.95
1774
0.95
1770
1080
1900
Site Gene Traffic
Based on the land use assumptions and building area estimates presented in Table 1,
the projected traffic volumes for the 4 propedies lying in the upper wesl side of Ten Mile
lnterchange were calculaled. Details ofthe analysis for each site are presented in
Appendix A, and a summary of the findings is presented in Table 2 which follows.
Road De nations
ln this study, the system roads were identified as shown on Figure 1 . The South
Collector Road (previously referred to as the'West Access Road") provides the primary
access to the Janicek, Fedrizzi and SJJV properties and extends into the Meridian 118
development. The North Road extends from the Janicek Property to Ten Mile Road
through the Carney Property to intersect with the "North Road" identified in the Brighton
traffic analysis. The "West Road" is the north extension of the system road network to
Franklin Road through the Baraya Subdivision.
Access Alternatives to South Collector Road
Two access options to the South Collector Road were considered: 1) one using a single
access all-movement connection; and 2) the other using two partially controlled
accesses and one right-in/right-out connection. The schematic layout and peak hour
traffic assignments to these intersections are illustrated in Figures 2 and 3, which are
attached.
Access Altemative 1- Single lntersection
Turning volumes are shown on Figure 2. Operational characteristics ofthis
option are summarized in Table 3 below, and details of the calculations are
attached in Appendix B.
Table 3: Smg/e Access to South Collector
Approach
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
300'(12 vehicles)
>300' (>12 vehicles)
25' (1 vehicle)
75' (3 vehicles)
A single all-movement access to the SJJV, Janicek and Fedrizzi properties does
not provide sufficient traffic carrying capacity to accommodate development of
those properties in line with the objectives of the Meridian Specific Area Plan.
The average vehicle delay is not reasonable and the queue storage would
F
F
B
Level of Service Queue Lenoth
Item #78: Ten Mile Annexation (AZ-11-001)
Application(s):
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This subject property consists of (3) individually
owned parcels
totaling 116.25 acres of land zoned RUT in Ada County, located at the NWC of l-84 & S. Ten Mile Road.
Background: The original request was to annex & zone all of the subject property with a C-G zoning district with only
a layout for collector streets within the site based on the transportation plan contained in the TMISAP; a conceptual
development plan was not submitted. Staff recommended denial of the request which the Commission upheld based
on inconsistency of the proposed C-G zoning dthe future land use designations of MHDR, MUR, MUC, HDE &
PARK for the overall property contained in the Plan. As an alternative to denial, staff proposed
zoning consistent with
the FLUM that could be supported. The owners of the SJJV and the Fedrizzi properties were in agreement MStaff s
recommended zoning shown, however, the owners of the Janicek parcel were nof in agreement wiStaffs
recommended zoning.
After the Commission hearing, the applicant's representative, Becky McKay, worked with the owners of the Janicek
property to determine a zoning for the property that would be acceptable to them & also consistent with the Plan. The
Janiceks' conceded to Stafls recommendation of TN-C zoning on the western 30 acres but proposed C-C zoning for
the eastern 44.5 acres.
At the heanng on December 6m, the new zoning request was presented to Council as shown on the right. As the
staff report recommended denial based on the original request, no DA provisions were included in the report. Council
directed staff to prepare potential DA provisions for consideration at a subsequent hearing based on the applicants'
proposed zoning.
Because there are three separate properties & property owners involved in the annexation request, staff
recommends three separate DA's if Council approves the annexation. Staff has prepared potential DA provisions for
Council's consideration based on the proposed zoning and FLUM designations for the subject properties. These
provisions are included in the memo to the Mayor & Council dated January 12,2012.
Notes:
_$
\$"5' r
Changes to Agenda: None 0f W
Item #7F: Ten iilile Annexation (AZ.1l -001
)
Application(s):
> Annexatron & zoning of 116.25 acres of land with a C-G zoning district
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This subject property consists of (3)
individually owned parcels
totaling 116.25 acres of land zoned RUT in Ada County, and is located at the NWC of l-84 & S. Ten Mile Road.
Summary of Request: The application requests to annex all of the subject property with a C-G zoning district. A
conceptual development plan is not proposed but a layout for collector streets within the site based
upon the
transportation system map contained in the TMISAP has been submitted that is consistent with the Plan.
Staff recommended denial of the applicant's request to the Commission based on inconsistency of the poposed C-G
zoning with the future land use designations of MHDR, MUR, MUC, HDE & PARK for the overall property. ln the
altemative, staff proposed zoning consistent with the FLU[,] that could be supported. The owners of the SJJV and the
Fedrizzi properties were in agreement dstaffs recommended zoning, however, the owneB of the Janicek parcel
were not in agreement w/Staffs recommended zoning.
Commission Recommendation: Denial at the Sept. 1( public hearing
Summary i. of ln Gommission favor: Becky Public McKay, Hearing:Engineering Solutions (Applicant's representative)
ii. ln opposition: None
iii. Commenting: Chris Penland
iv. Written testimony: Brad Boe (concemed about the proposed road alignment in relation to the approved
concept plan for his property); Keven Shreeve (in agreement dstaff recommended
zoning of H-E & C-
C for the SJJV propefl); Richard & Patsy Fedrizzi (in agreement dstaff recommended zoning of C-C
for their property)
Key lssue(i. s) The of Discussion consistency by of Commission:the proposed C-G zoning in regard to the intent of the Ten Mile lnterchange Specific
ii. Area The appropriateness Plan and the future of C-land G zoning use designations directly adjacent for the to property;residential without a development plan (no
transition in zoning/uses).
Key Commission i. None Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
Outstanding i. Since lssue(the s) for Commission City Council:hearing, Becky McKay, the applicant's representative, has been working with the
:ilffi[::T:i::if:ifl,i#i'*1,1fl:Ti,t1.J.?]9,#+x#twiH#H$ffi#rtrlf]{loffi-*f.,"-^,
westem 30 acres and C-C zoning for the eastem 44.5 +l acres of the Janicek property
along with C-C
& H-E zoning for the SJJV property and C-C zoning for the Fedrizzi property.
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Bndley Miller, Van Auker Com panies ; fu\ Mc,t_1
f
adhfl'r'/fiAf
L;ru u"tt''t'1
5,3e-&&
$lnct- Q,+, i,t N' uf (1"',
Page 1 of 1
Sonya Watters
From: Peter Friedman
Sent: Friday, January 13,2012 11:34 AM
To: Bill Nary; C. Caleb Hood; Richard Dees; Sonya Watters
Subject: Ten Mile Annexation
It now looks like Betsy's surgery is later in the day than initially anticipated. Thus, it is highly unlikely I will
attend the hearing. Sonya has a very good grasp of the proposed DA conditions. As I mentioned the other
day, if Council leans toward requiring a plat she will respond that getting a plat
has the advantage of
securing the future right of way, but doesn't get us a site plan or plans. Plats or conceptual
plats are
highly effective for residential project. lf they want an example of what would be most effective for this
annexation I would point to the property to the west, Meridian 1 18.
Also, we don't know if the applicant's representative will have comments we will need to respond to, but if
we get them it will likely be Tuesday and there may not be time to address them before the meeting.
l'll be in touch by phone Tuesday
Pete
Pete Friedman, AICP
lnterim Planning Director
33 E. Broadway Ave.
Meridian, lD 83642
phone (208) 884-5533
fax (208)489-0576 )
r/1312012
Page I of 1
Sonya Watters
From: Becky McKay [es-beckym@qwestoffice.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 31,2011 4:24 PM
To: Sonya Watters
Subject: FW: SJJV Ten Mile Property - Ten Mile Annexation
Sonya:
See comments on SJJV
Becky
From: Keven T. Shreeve fmailto:shreeve88@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 20t1 4:11 PM
To: Becky McKay
Subjectr SJJV Ten Mile Property - Ten Mile Annexation
Becky,
As discussed over the phone, please accept this email as a formal request to represent
SJJV's annexation to the City of lVleridian at next weeks P&Z meeting in the following
manner:
1 - SJJV agrees to conform with the Meridian Plan, so please petition for a zoning of HE
as well as a portion of the property with a zoning of Commercial (per the Plan);
2 - lf the neighboring properties, for whatever reason, are not annexed, SJJV would like
to be considered independently and annexed regardless of what the neighbors do. lt is
the desire of SJJV to get their property annexed.
Thank you again Becky for your help. Please call with any questions or verifications. I
will likely give a call next week just to check in before the meeting.
Keven Shreeve
208-559- 8532
8131t2011
Page 1 of I
Sonya Watters
From: Becky McKay [es-beckym@qwestoffice.net]
Sent: Monday, July 11,2011 11.424M
To: Sonya Watters
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Annexation
Sonya;
The Purdam Drain is a year round waterway. I had discussions with Eric Gerke at the Army Corps
concerning piping the drain. The Corps will allow piping for vehicular crossings or a short relocation of
channel, but will not approve piping the whole facility.
Becky
From : Sonya Watters [ma ilto : swatters@ merid ia ncity.org]
Sent: Monday, July Lt,2071 11:32 AM
To : es-beckym @qwestoffice. net
Subject: Ten Mile Annexation
Hi Becky,
ls the Purdam Drain proposed to be tiled?
711U2011
Page I of2
Sonya Watters
From: Jarom Wagoner [Jwagoner@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30,2011 3:18 PM
To: Sonya Watters
Subject: FW: Ten Mile Annexations (MAZ-11-001)
From : Becky McKay fma i lto : es-beckym @Qwestoffice. net]
Sent: Monday, August 29,2011 4:16 PM
To: Jarom Wagoner
Cc: dobie_dei@msn.com; Heather
Subject: Ten Mile Annexations (MAZ-11-001)
Jarom
Received a letter from Mindy Wallace dated August 24,201-L. The letter recommends the City of
Meridian take no action on the proposed rezone until the applicant has provided an approved Traffic
lmpact Study identifying any additional traffic impacts and necessary mitigation measures beyond those
identified in the TMISAP.
The original traffic study provided to the District reflected the transportation Plan as proposed in the
TMISAP and utilized a very aggressive traffic numbers. The study took into consideration the TMISAP
and its extremely high floor area ratios in the traffic calculations. I believe Mindy's concern was the zone
request of C-G. Due to the inability of the three different applicants to decide on a zone and in an
attempt to expedite the submittal of the application, the zoning request to the City of Meridian was C-G
(General Commercial). The City staff report is recommending three different zoning district, H-E (High
Density Employment), C-C (Community Business District)and TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood-
Commercial). The SJJV property owners are in agreement with the City's recommendation of H-E and C-
C. Mr. Fedrizzi is agreement with the City's recommendation of C-C. The Janicek property owners are
not in agreement with TN-C. lt is the Janicek's desire to obtain a C-G or C-C zoning on the east portion of
the property and TN-C on the west area. We will be presenting our case before the Planning and Zoning
Commission on Thursday, September 1st.
It is my understanding that Gary lnselman has requested some additional information from the
applicant's traffic engineer. ln my conversations with the engineer today, he indicates that he can't
provide the data until the zoning designations are determined. Therefore, we have a chicken and egg
situation before us. I need the Planning and Zoning Commission to make a determination on Thursday
night and ACHD wants additionalinformation that is based on that decision. ls there any way, the
District could allow the Planning and Zoning Commission to proceed with a decision. Once the
p & Z
makes their recommendation, the application for annexation and rezone will have a second hearing
before the City Council. We will agree that the application will not be scheduled for public hearing
before the Council until additional information is provided by the traffic engineer to ACHD and ACHD
make a formal recommendation to the City. Typically, the District does not provide detailed comment
on annexations and reserves the right to apply conditions when a preliminary plat or development plan
is submitted. We understand that this application is unique and has more complexity with multiple
property owners, complex collector system, ITD condemnations and the specific requirements of the
Ten Mile lnterchange Specific Area plan.
We are requesting the District allow the P&Z Commission to proceed on Thursday and
make a
8l3U20tt
Page2 ot2
Thanks for your consideration
Becky McKay
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, LLP
8131l20tt
recommendation to the Council.
Page I of3
Sonya Watters
From: Peter Friedman
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 11:03 AM
To: Sonya Watters
Subject: FW: Ten Mile lnterchange (collector drawing)
FYI
Pete Friedman, AIGP
lnterim Planning Director
33 E. Broadway Ave.
Meridian, lD 83642
phone (208) 884-5533
fax (208) 489-0576
From: Anna Canning
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:57 PM
To: 'Gary Inselman'
Cc: Peter Friedman; C. Caleb Hood
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange (collector drawing)
Gary,
I haven't heard from Becky yet. Perhaps they will have a detailed site plan for at least Janicek. That would
make things a lot easier.
Did you realize that the plan has "should be" statements regarding curb radii,
median strip width,
roundabout lane widths, and maximum design speeds? Perhaps we should review some of these before
too long. They are all "should" as opposed to the access to arterial and intersection discussions which are
clearly "shall be prohibited."
Be Seeing You,
Anna
From: Gary Inselman Imailto:ginselman@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:48 PM
To: Anna Canning
Cc: Peter Friedman
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange (collector drawing)
Anna,
We will need to work out what portion of the street section is required to be constructed with
which development or phase of development. ldeally we would be able to get the whole
street
s_ection including curb and gutters from the start. You just get
a much better product. However,
if we can't, we can't.
That said, we will need the design for the ultimate street section including the storm drain
system even if we don't build the whole street section. Even building an interim rural section, to
ensure the whole thing is not a throw away we will need to have a mechanism to get the design
and apportion those costs out proportionally to the other developers benefitting from the
roadway.
A lot to think about and consider in trying to work through this.
7l2st201t
Page 2 of3
Thanks for the help,
Gary.
From : An na Canning [mailto : acann ing@ meridia ncity.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 9:43 AM
To: Gary Inselman; Becky McKay
Cc: Peter Friedman
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange (collector drawing)
Becky,
I have reviewed the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan and feel comfortable recommending that Council approve the
"Full Movement Access" to provide access to the Fedrizzi property. lt is an unusual circumstance created by the
ownership pattern and the State's need to provide access.
With regard to right-in/right-out access points, is the expectation that you will have all these points
approved at the
time of annexation? I will strongly recommend to Council that they do not approve any access points other than
the "Full Movement Access" until we have a detailed concept plan showing the need for access
points to the
arterials and collectors. For the west entrance road, the plan states, "Parkways may also serve as the entry/spine
street portion of a collector that provides the main access from arterial streets, including right-in/right-out and
serves as a focus of activity for large mixed use or employment centers." I take this to mean that right-in/right-out
access may be approved as necessary to accommodate the development. However and more importantly the
plan also speaks to bringing buildings up to all the arterial and collector roadways with parking behind. At our last
meeting, I believe someone indicated that there would be a detailed site plans with the annexation. We would be
happy to review those whenever they are is ready so that we can come to some recommendations on appropriate
access points. Just let Pete or me know.
Gary,
Thank you for forwarding the draft. lt helps to stay in the loop.
I know that one of the goals for all parties involved is that they do not put in improvements that may need to
be
removed later. Given that we may not know the appropriate location for access points at this time, would it be
okay to wait on the curb and gutter untilwe have approved concept and/or development plans?
Be Seeing You,
Anna
From : Gary Inselman Imailto : ginselman@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 7:52 AM
To: Anna Canning
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange (collector drawing)
Anna,
Just FYI on our review of Becky's submittal. Attached are our preliminary comments.
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks,
Gary.
Gary lnselman
Manager, Right-of-Way & Development Services
Ada County Highway District
7125t2011
Page 3 of3
3775 N. Adams Street
Garden City, lD 83714
Office: (2OB) 387-6170
Fax: (208) 387-6393
ginselman@achdidaho.org
X ACHD-logo-for-e-
From : Anna Can ning [mailto:acanning@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Monday, January 31,2011 5:11 PM
To: Becky McKay
Cc: Heather A.. Cunningham; Gary Inselman; Matthew Schultz; Peter Friedman
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange (collector drawing)
Becky,
I just wanted to check in and see how things are going toward coming up with acceptable easement agreement
for all parties; not an enviable task. Let Pete or me know if there is anything we can do to help.
Be Seeing You,
Anna
712512011
Page I of 1
Sonya Watters
From: Becky McKay [es-beckym@qwestoffice.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 12,2011 3:12PM
To: Sonya Watters
Subject: RE: Ten Mile AZ
They are not planning on extending that street as this time since it connects to the underpass at Ten
Mile. Until development takes place on the east side of Ten Mile, there is nothing to connect to. The
westerly connection is shown in dashed lines because it is anticipated but not planned. Also, the
alignment of the street may vary depending on Meridian 118 and the site design on SJJV.
Thanks,
Becky
From : Sonya Watters [mai lto : swatters@ merid ia ncity. org]
Sentr Tuesday, July t2,20Lt 2:36 PM
To: es-beckym@qwestoffice. net
Subject: Ten Mile AZ
Hey...question: there's a road from the Meridian Crossing property that appears to stub to the west side
of the SJJV property? Are you planning to extend that street?
Sowla !/r'ar".eYs
Planning Department
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 2l 0
Meridian, lD 83642
208-884-5533 phone / 208-888-6854 fax
71t2t2011
Page 1 of 1
Sonya Watters
From: Gary lnselman[ginselman@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Thursday, July '14,
2011 12:49 PM
To: Sonya Watters
Cc: Mindy Wallace
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Property
Yes, if the City of Meridian needed this driveway for emergency access ACHD would allow it
with the appropriate measures installed to restrict the use to emergency vehicles only.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Thanks,
Gary.
Gary lnselman
Development Services Manager
Ada County Highway District
3775 N. Adams Street
Garden City, lD 83714
Office: (208) 387-6170
Fax: (208) 387-6393
ginsel man@achdidaho.orq
"We drive quolity tronsportotion for
oll Ado County - Anytime, Anywhere!"
From : Sonya Watters [ma ilto : swatters@ merid ia ncity,org]
Sent: Thursday, July 74,2017 10:54 AM
To: Gary Inselman
Subject: Ten Mile Property
HiGary,
I have a question for you... You sent a letter to Becky McKay on March 17
, 2011 in regard to Ten Mile
lnterchange West Access Analysis. ln the letter you stated that the proposed direct access to Ten Mile
Road was last shown as an emergency access only but is now depicted as a direct access & would not
be considered for approval as such. Would ACHD approve of this access for emergency access only?
Thanks,
SowAa !/./atlLirs
Planning Department
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 2l 0
Meridian, lD 83642
208-884-5533 phone / 208-888-6854 fax
7 /14t2011
Page 1 of 2
Sonya Watters
From: Gary lnselman [ginselman@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Monday, April 1 1, 2011 9:53 AM
To: Becky McKay
Subject: RE: Ten Mile lnterchange West Access Analysis
Becky,
We received the appendices from Pat but nothing else. Do you intend on modifying the analysis
to address the other comments? Specifically no signal at the lo mile. We also requested some
other documents referenced.
Thanks,
Gary.
From : Becky McKay [ma i lto : es-beckym @gwestoffice. net]
Sent: Thursday, March 17,2011 2:03 PM
To: Gary Inselman
Subject: RE: Ten Mile Interchange West Access Analysis
Thanks Gary, I appreciate your prompt review of the information. Pat should be e-mailing the additional
information you requested.
Thanks,
Becky McKay
ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, LLP
Becky,
Attached are ACHD comments on the Traffic analysis and layout.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Gary.
Gary lnselman
Manager, Right-of-Way & Development Services
Ada County Highway District
3775 N. Adams Street
Garden City, lD 83714
Office: Fax: ((208) 208) 387-387-6170 6393
ginselman@achdidaho.orq
7112t2011
From: Gary Inselman Imailto:ginselman@achdidaho.org]
Sent: Thursday, March t7 , 20tl 9:17 AM
To: Becky McKay
Cc: Peter Friedman; dei; Mindy Wallace; Shawn Martin; Christy Little
Subject: Ten Mile Interchange West Access Analysis
\\./
Barbara Shiffer
I'age I of I
Vy/
From: lVlachelle Hill
Sent: Friday, June 24,2011 4 54 Plll
Subject: FW: City of lVleridian Dev App - AZ 11-001
From: Machelle Hill
Sent: Friday, June 24,2017 4:53 PM
Subject: City of Meridian Dev App - AZ 11-001
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application referenced above
To review
detailed information about the request, please click on the file number above to take you directly to the
application.
We request that you submit your comments or recommendations by date specified above. When
responding, please
reference the file number of the project. lf responding by email, please send comments to
clerk@merid iancity.org.
For additional information associated with this application please contact City Clerk's Office at number
below.
Thank you,
Machelle Hill
Meridian City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, lD 83642
(208) 888-4433
mhill@meridiancitv.orq
*{& IilIAI'[
IDAHO
City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, lD 83642
I'lanning and Zoning Commission
D ev e lo p me nt App I ic ati o n T r an s m itlal
To: Citv Departments Comments due by: June 30,2011
Transmittal Date Jtne 24,2011 Irile No. AZ 1 1-001
Hearing Date July 21.2071
Request Public Hearing - Annexation
and Zonrng of 80.62 acres of land from RUT in
Ada County to C-G zone for Ten Mile Annexation
By Janicek Properties, LLC; Pedrizzil'en Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC
Location of Property or Proiect West of S. Ten Mile Road and north of I-84
I11 2011
r)\
t,
4.0
0.95
1.00
'1.00
3539
1.00
3539
420
1 900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1 583
1.00
1583
130
1900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.95
1770
0.95
1770
810
I 900
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
3539
1.00
3539
320
1 900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1 583
1.00
1583
Peak-hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (vph)
RTOR Reduction (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
0.92
326
0
326
0.92
11
0
11
0.92
522
18
504
0.92
370
0
370
0.92
163
0
0
0.92
1174
0
1174
0.92
457
139
318
0.92
348
194
154
0.92
22
145
40
0.92
141
0
141
0.92
880
0
880
0.92
293
0
293
Turn Type
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)
Effective Green, g (s)
Actuated g/C Ratio
Clearance Time (s)
Vehicle Extension (s)
Prot
1
Prot
5
Prot
7
15.7
15.7
0.13
. 6.0
3.0
4
3.0
3.0
0.02
6.0
3.0
26.2
26.2
0.22
6.0
3.0
13.5
13.5
0.11
6.0
3.0
33.4
35.4
0.29
6.0
3.0
53.3
55.3
0.4.6
6.0
3.0
13.5
15.5
0.1 3
6.0
3.0
o
.33.4
35.4
0.29
6.0
3.0
pm+ov
7
6
49.1
53.1
0.44
6.0
3.0
pm+0v
5
4
q64
40.4
0.34
6.0
3.0
Prot 38 2
pm+0v
3
2
79.5
83.5
0.70
. 6.0
3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio
Uniform Delay, dl
Progression Factor
lncrementalDelay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
586
c0.25
0.06
0.86
37.2
1.00
12.3
49.4
D
47
0.01
182
0.02
449
c0.09
0.73
50.1
1.00
5.8
55.9
E
750
c0.11
522
0.17
0.56
35.7
0.66
0.8
24.3
1 631
0.33
0.72
26.1
1.16
1.6
3'1.8
c
33.5
C
1154
0.06
0.14
0.28
6.9
6.41
0.1
44.1
D
229
0.08
1044
c0.25
0.23
57.4
1.00
2.6
59.9
E
52.0
D
0.49
41.1
1.00
0.5
41.6
D
0.22
48.5
1.00
0.6
49.1
D
44.1
D
0.62
49.4
1.25
3.6
65.6
E
0.84
39.7
0.75
6.3
36.2
D
41.7
D
753
0.03
0.07
0.20
24.5
2.23
0.1
45.9
D
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
lntersection Capacity Utilization
Analysis Period (min)
c Critical Lane Group
40.5
0.78
120.0
73.5%
15
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
D
14.0
D
Ten Mile 2030 lmproved access scenario 5:00 pm 71112030 ACHD 2030 PM Peak Hour Volume
HDR
Synchro 7 - Report
Page 4
t
4.0
0.95
1.00
1.00
3539
1.00
3539
450
1900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1,00
1 583
1.00
't583
230
1 900
4.0
1.00
1.00
0.95
1770
0.95
1770
++
1 070
1 900
4.0
0.95
'1.00
1.00
3539
1.00
3539
I
330
1 900
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1 583
1.00
1 583
Peak-hour factor, PHF
Adj. Flow (vph)
RIOR Reduction (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
0.92
489
77
412
0.92
359
108
251
0.92
326
0
326
0.92
174
0
174
0.92
522
10
512
0.92
174
0
174
0.92
JZO
15
311
0.92
293
0
293
0.92
1272
0
1272
0.92
250
0
250
0.92
576
0
576
0.92
1 163
0
1 163
Turn Type
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)
Effective Green, g (s)
Actuated g/C flatio
Clearance Time (s)"
Vehicle Extension (s)
Prot
1
Prot pm+ov
5
Prot
3
Prot
7
14.4
16.4
0.14
6.0
3.0
14.5
16.5
0.14
6.0
3.0
pm+0v
5
4
34.5
38.5
0.32
6.0
3.0
19.0
21.0
0.18
6.0
3.0
19.1
21.1
0.18
6.0
3.0
20.0
22.0
.0,18
6.0,
3.0
2
45.6
47.6
040
6.0
3.0
16.9
18.9
016
6.0
30
42.5
44.5
0,37
6.0
3.0
pm+0v
7
o
56.9
60.9
0.51
6.0
3.0
4 I
pm+ov
1
B
36.0
36.0
0.30
6.0
3.0
3
2
64.6
68.6
0.57
6.0
3,0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
v/s Ratio Prot
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio
Uniform Delay, dl
Progression Factor
lncremental Delay, d2
Delay (s)
Level of Service
Approach Delay (s)
Approach LOS
469
0.09
0,70
49.4
1.00
4.4
53.9
D
256
0.09
561
c0.17
0.16
0.91
39.2
1,00
19.4
58.5
E
601
c0.17
328
0.09
554
0.08
0.12
0.56
35.3
1.00
1.3
36.6
D
325
0.17
1404
c0.36
958
0.08
0.'18
0.43
14.6
0.47
0.3
7.1
A
279
0.14
0.90
49.6
1.07
20.3
73.5
E
1312
0.33
0.89
35.4
0.83
6.1
35.4
D
37.2
D
856
0.04
0.12
0.29
17.1
1.03
0.1
17.7
B
0.68
49.2
1.00
7.0
56.2
E
56.6
E
0.96
49.1
1.00
26.4
75.4
E
0.53
44.9
1.00
1.6
46.6
D
59.0
E
0.90
47.9
1.12
25.2
78.7
E
0.91
34.1
0.59
9.4
29.6
3'1.3
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
lntersection Capacity Utilization
Analysis Period (min)
c Critical Lane Group
42.4
0.93
120.0
84.4Y0
15
12.0
E
HCM Level of Service
Sum of lost time (s)
ICU Level of Service
D
Ten Mile 2030 lmproved access scenario 5:00 pm 71112030 ACHD 2030 PM Peak Hour Volume
HDR
Synchro 7 - Report
Page 5
/
g
C
Fo
g
=q,
F
IL
access
Road
Road
l-84
ii, li
lji
','i
,ii,i
r,it,:
iit, 'rii;]
't,i
;iil:
19[)0
4.4
0.97
1.OO
0.95
3433
0.95
3433
1900
4.0
0.95
1-00
1.00
353S
1.CIo
3s39
1900
4.0
1.m
0.85
1.00
1583
1-00
1583
1900
4.0
0.97
1.OO
0.95
3433
0.95
3433
t900
4.0
0.95
1-m
1.00
3539
1.m
3539
't9@
4.0
1.00
0.85
1.00
1583
1.00
1583
Volume {vph}
Peak+our factor, PHF
Adj. Flor (vph)
RTOR Reducticn {vph)
r19
0.92
129
0
129
183
o.92
1Sl
0
1S9
458
0.92
498
373
125
2%
0.s2
32.
0
3?2.
197
a.g2
211
0
214
1Ut
4.92
139
109
30
313
0.92
340
vo 0
1 188
o.92
181
0
1231
323
0.92
351
185
16€
225 432 270
0.245 92 00167293 0-470 92 0.92
tane Grouo Fbv{ (wh) 245 470 126
Tum Type pm+pt Perm pm+pt Perm Prot Perm Prot Parm
Protec*edPfiaes 7 4 3 I 5 2 1 6
PermittedPhases 4 4 I I ? 6
A{fiidad Green, G (s} ?3.7 17 .7 17 .7 33.7 ?3.7 23.7 17 .A 51.9 51 .9 12-l 47 -3 47 .3
Etrecti\.e Green. g (s) X.7 17.7 '17.7 33"7 23.7 23.7 17-O 51,9 51-9 12-4 47.3 47.3
Actuatd g/C Ralio A22 0.16 0.16 0.31 O22 O.2, O.15 A.47 O.47 O.11 0.43 0.43
Ciearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4-0 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4-A 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0
Vahide ktsr.sim (sl 3.O 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.O 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0- 3.0 3.0 3.O
Laae Grp Cap {vph} 266 300 255 3O3 40, U1 531 1670 747 367 1522 ffi1
v/s Rdb fu 0.O3 O.11 {0.12 0.11 O.10 c0-36 cO.07 0.13
vls Ratio Perm 0-08 0"31 0.21 O.09 CI-U. O.19
vlc Ftatio 0.48 0.66 0.49 ,.06 0.53 O.09 0.64 4.77 O22 0.63 0.31 0.19
Uniform Delay, dl 36.7 43.4 42.A 35.5 38.3 34.5 43.6 24.2 17.1 46.6 20.6 19.4
progeg*on Factor 1.0O 1.00 1.0O l.m l.fi) 1.OO t.OO 1.OO 1-0O O.91 0.62 O-82
IncrementalDelay, & 1.4 5.4 1.5 69.2 1.4 0.1 2.6 3.5 0.7 1.2 Q.2 0.2
De}ry{s} 38-l 48.8 43.5 1a4.7 39.6 34.8 ;t6.3 27.7 17.8 43-8 17.1 162
LevelofServiceDDDFDCDCBDBB
Apprmctt Detay {s} 4i}.9 69.7 29.1 23.3
Approa6LOS D E C C
HCM Averagre ConH Delay 36.6 HCM Level of Servbe D
HCM VdumcbCrycityrato 1.gz
Actuated Cyde Lerqth (s) t 10.0 Sum of lost time ts) 16.0
lntersedkrn C+adty t tHion 78.696 IGU Lerrcl of Service D
Andysis c Criticrd Period t-ane (Grup min) 15
H.W- Lochner, lnc-
7127t2007
Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
tTD-001287
I
l
1
,,i
tkI\ t\
,:ll: ll
I
I
,I
I,l
I
,l
il
!l
i
I
i
t
, il=*i{*-,
.l
il
I
i
i
1
;$
1:l
I
: :rl .I -.." t
-;.rl:5{
F
E
o
o
E
z
tt Ep
r3
t+
88 tt
tt
ACCESS A
tm
-lm
JANICEX SOJIH
FEDRIZA
RGfiT-tNAlerT-OaJT
UNDERPASS
m+ b\='-*M \E-J
E+
+m , +s +m
+m
+rS
+ 165
+r)
gds €9O 15+ n
MERIDIAN 1I8
PROPERTY
lG+
1!O +
ft)
ts+
t75 -
ll
BE
ft)
r) +s
€n
tt
3!
+ 160
-€m 55
20 fr ,
t rc .rl
It SJJV tt
PROP€RTY t
Trqttic Stldy Pr+0.d Bli
DOAIE ENqNEERING, INC.
mlffi*. &O&@ +@
+6{
+e6 H
tlr
€[i
+ 610
+S
+m
+t$
+ls
M s
1S a
s
25 tr)
tt
tl
€T
rmi to+
ri0
E
$
rl
98 tl
I
! G
E
II
F
+5
€70
tt
99 ll
tl
ll
I
65
€ 6
338
It)
, +ro 275
+ 7fi,
45 , -s
€.u
rr l,
EB
Itt
.r+
75 ,
m
to +l&
6.)
70+
70?
UND€RPASS
rl rr
ll
tt
EE
DOBIE ENGINEERING, INC.
mffit bo.ry *@
s.1lv
PROPERTY
Tromc Study Prop6.ed Bf
H
i
SJJV
MERIOIAN 11E ,(
I
I
l
I
l
i
I 1
------r \ /
\
''a
-?r I
i
l
)
t
l
)
,rl -
I
I
I
i
:ii :
I ________
tr *tt^ I
e.erreoH
TH'TE'
&utlt
oou.EIq
to.o
I
i I
!
I
I
I
i
!
I
I
7047
1010
20,35
Population Households
7457 531
244 89
Jobs
641
874
2025 to 2O35 Growth
Populatlon Households
s81 2t2
93 34
Jobs
259
3s2
The 2015 forecasted weekday travel dernand on Ten Mile Road is approximately
30,000 between the westbound ramps and Franklin Road; and 11,dd0 betweenthe
eastbound ramps and Overland Road. By 2035 the forecasted weekday travel
demand on Ten Mile Road could exceed 50,000 and 40,000, respectively.
>-_
105
Jobs
641
874
2025 to 2O35 Growth
Population Households
581 272
93 34
Jobs
259
352
The 2015 forecasted weekday travel demand on Ten Mile Road is approximately
30,000 between the westbound ramps and Franklin Road; and 11,000 between the
eastbound ramps and Overland Road. By 2035 the forecasted weekday travel
demand on Ten Mile Road could exceed 50,000 and 40,000, respectively.
1011 1012 1018
i
I
1016
10'15
1014
L- 101 0
e
Ll
E
1019 5
SILVER
TASA055 1
17 A7
i 5.98
Easting Nl40'41'26"Direction W Distance
2442892.3472 S49',18'34"W
2442744.1433
24425U1499
CW
N40'41',26"W
22'55'06"
23"C1',26"
250 00
39"C2',C1 ',
88 61
r70 32
s68"49'34"W
167 04
167 91
55.00
195 51
Easting s73'54'37"Direction E Distance
2442122.1283
2443449.3281
ccw
s73"54'37"E
05"56',1 5"
05"56'24"
965.00
20"20'07"
173.47
342 5A
s05'55'20"W
340.70
15 40
15 15
s85'45'16"W
Easting Direction Distance
2442086.9762 504"14',44"8 80 93
2442092.967 5 S16'29',52"E 98.83
24^212i.0331 S24'45'24"E 1 "i5.33
2442169.3293 S00'45'16"V/ 56 57
2,i12168.5841
'1 : 963070
-0.004'1
0 0021
Lot Name c! r r\/ /^ rr\
U.JU V I \-,-IJ,I
D
South Siqnal
LOS Queue
1150'.
900'
700'
D
D
E
E
D
v/c
Approach
24
4
220
4
220
JANICEK
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
312,438
261,360
32,610
74,408
280,962
130,680
45,738
104,544
191,664
81,L20
26,t36
78,408
679,535
392,O40
26,136
261,350
1,524,600
87L,2@
130,680
522,720
FAR
o.735
0.s
0-5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
rElIE@I@I RESIDENTIAT
@I@I@I RESIDTNTIAL TOTAI.
f liorar
I
'l __l-
TEN MILE ROAD
i'!D t:4v
*:iiiEE
I
I
I
I
I
I
_t_ I
ql
B
l) lt
,
tl *E
tl
Bg
SO{J'IH ROAD
t
tt B3
ll
tl
rl
tl
EE
m+
aas +
+g
ets
IIERIDIAN 1'I8
PROPERTY
lO+
100 +
tlo +
rr5 -
,H +fr
t&
0
ilo
,$s
50
, a5, - 685 -tE0 ts
+sO
+8{
+ !50
+ tts
o
tt Itr
JANICEX SOTJIH
FEDRIZZ
Rro{T-rNnlGHT-Ot T
,s UNOERPASS
m
to
, 20
70
m
s
€ !s !t
+lS
I 160
s
, 70
I
3
t
tt
3!
I
slJv
PROPERTY
ll-l:tr]I A
IETES
DOEIE ENGINEERING, INC.
Zffit BOW SD
Trofilc Stldy Pr.ps.d 8f
B
tlr
sEi
H
rl.'
s!8
JAfltCEX
NORIH
ll
8-R
.rltr
n ti
NF
tl
,
€
It)
t
tl
e5
13
I
T
E
3
t
F
15
tl
6oe
Itr
, rl, €1Q
8B
,5,
t
lrr
+ las
+l&
t
m , € 70
70
70
+es 35
99 ll JANICEK SOUIH
FEDRIzzI
tl
.tl
l)
t0+
tE+
UNDERPASS
I
tl
Eg
stv
PREERTY
t
ll
3E
(
OOBIE ENGINEERING. INC.
fr@t hl.W SE
T.otlic Study Pr.por.d B,
turning movements at each location.
Table 7: Signalized lntersection
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
!
!
I
I
I
t-
SJJV
I
I
I
I
LI
MERIOIAII 1IE
I
r_-_-__-J
)
I
)
BARAYA
slrBDlvlsloN
NOfiIH ROAI)
CARNEY
BdE
fl E
6
SOIJIH ROAB
ud-
-tE
--t-
_)
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
t
I
462,535 7,074,829 1,205,169 7,O34,405 3,776,939
0.5 121,968 273,444 243,936 30,492 609,840
0.5 26,136 30,492 26,136 4,356 a7,120
9A\Or7 1,599,721 1,666,9{15 L,748,789 5,99&499
JANICEI(
NORII{
soutlt
WEST
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
372,438
261,360
32,67O
78,408
2a0,962
130,580
45,738
to4,544
191,654
87,r20
26,136
78,408
679,536
392,040
26,136
261,350
1,s24600
877,200
130,680
522,720
rfirilr-rEIIlIilI INDUST IEEIIEI
GTILIEETI INDUST IEEE@IIEITII
0.40
0.30
0.05 1.00
0.05 1.00
1,034,405 3,776,939
10,492 609,840
4,356 87,124
L,744,749 5,998,499
SITE
MERIDIAN 118
FAR
0.735
JANICEK
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.s
372,438
267,360
32,670
78,408
24o,962
130,580
45,738
104,544
19t,564
87,720
26,736
78,404
679,536
392,O40
26,136
261,360
1,524,600
871,200
130,680
522,720
RESIDENTIAI, TOTAI
REfAIT I OFFICE INDUST RE5IOENTIAL I TOTAI.
0.30
26,136
fmrAill fo*rcal IrNDrrsr=I
Approach Delay (s/veh) 27.5 20.2
Approach LOS D c
-
I
IT
-
II II
II II
II II
II
II II
II II
II II
II
fi le :///C :/Users/DOBIE/AppData/L ocaVT emp / u2k22C A.tmp 91112011
864
1259
109 92 406 562
1936
Lane Group Capacity 290 246 463
0.57 o.22 0.37 0.80 0.70 0.36 0.53 0.83 0.38 1.13 0.86 0.48
v/c Ratio
o.16 0.16 o.14 0.06 0.06 0.24 0.56 0.56 0.07 0.37 0.37
Green Ratio 0.21
53.7 54.9 56.3 62.6 69.2 67.7 50.1 26.9 18.3 oY_o 44.1 36.7
Uniform Delay dj
Delay Factor 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.34 o.26 0.11 0.14 0.37 0.11 o.50 0.39 0.11
k
1.1 0.4 1.0 9.6 17.8 2.4 o.7 1.6 0.1 95.8 3.4 0.3
lncremental Delay d2
PF Factor 1.000 1 .000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 .000 1.000 0.658 1 .000 1.000 0.929 1 .000
50.8 19.3 18.4 37.0
165.3
Control 54.8 55.3 57.2 72.2 86.9 70.1 44.4
Delay
Lane Group LOS D E E E E D B B D D
Approach Delay 55.3 74.4 54.4
Approach E E c D
LOS
Intersection Delay 41.8 lntersection LOS D
IIIIIIIII
EIflIT@Gil
IIIEilIilIilIiilEil IilIiilEilITIIiilEiI
II
. Short Report
Copyright O 201O lJniversity of Florida, All Rights Reserved
Page 1 of 1
HCS+IM Version 5.5 Generated: 2/16/2011 10:17 A[,'t
fi le ://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\s2k9F 1 C.tmp 2t161201t
2.0 2.0
2.0 2.0
3.0
EB
685 125
t^d
@
@@ t4
4@
@
d@rrr III @
@rr II @
@rI
d@ rr II
@Ir
I
@rr II @
@
211612011
BACK-OF.QUEUE WORKSHEET
LT
L R
404
1719
Satflow/Lane
0.96
Platoon Ratio
fi le:/iC :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\s2kDB04'tmp
Approach LOS E E D D
lntersection Delay 51 .9 lntersection LOS D
IIIIIIIIIIII
-I,ZE,II
1l1e://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\s2kDB20.tmp 211612011
Analyst P. DOBIE
Agency or Co. DEl
Date Peiotmed A82011
Time Period PM
300
0.92
2.0
522 576
742
Delay Factor k
Genelated: 2/16/2011 9:04 Alu
Vcs
tation
Upper bound 999 1064 11 05 1020
Lower 813 871 908 832
bound
Capacity
Upper 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.36
bound
Lower 0.35 0.45 0.49 0.44
bound
v/c Ratio
Roundabouts - Unsignalized Intersections Worksheet
Copyright @ 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version
5.5
Page I of 1
Generated: 211612011 8:59 AM
file ://C :\Users\DOBlE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2k493 1'tmp
211612011
0.95 0.95
247
16.7 24.6
Approach Delay (s/veh)
Approach c C
LOS
E
-
E
I I
@- -
II
II
II
II
I I
Copyright O 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5
Generated: 2/15/2011 3 56 PM
fi le ://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2kA3 42'tmp
211sl20I1
755
105
L
0.33
)3(
10
2
I s.st lo.og
LOS A c C A
Approach Delay 15.9 9.2
(s/veh)
Approach LOS L A
- I
-I
--
E-
-
-
II
II II
II II
II II
II
II II
II II
II II
II
CopyrightO 2O1o University of Florida, AllRights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5
Generatedr 2/15/2011 3:36 PlVl
fi Ie ://C :\Users\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2kBA62.tmp 2t1st20t\
2030
It-
nfi uration
Dela Queue Len and Level of Service
Westbound Southbound
4 12
ovement
R
(veh/h)
(m) (veh/h)
0.04
5% queue length
10.8
ontrol Delay (s/veh)
OS
14.6 10.8
proach LOS B B
Girx{?!'- E
I-
@
@
i-Iil w@ r
EE
IEI
EE
-
@ @@ w@
E E E
EE@il il
I E I E I Er
--
-
--
E
IEI
E IL
E
-
@
-
@@ @-itil
EE r II EE
I
-
r
I EE r
-
r
il EE
II II
II II
II II
II
EIil EI
@a
@-
@-
@a,r,I Ii
rI
III I
II
II
I
II
-
@@
-
II
I IT
file ://C tUsers\DOBIE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2kA3 42lmp 2t15t2011
0
0
0
Eastbound Northbound
0.13
-a
I
IE
Ir
Two-Way Stop Control
Copyright@ 2O1o University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
A pp.^J
Page 1 of I
2
HCS+IM version 5.5 Generaled 2/15/2011 3:36 PM
fi le ://C :\Users\DOB IE\AppData\Local\Temp\u2kFCEB'tmp
211512011
2030
L
Westbound
105
2.56
9%
ovo
RETAIL 2%
TO RES 2%
INTERNAL TRIP EXCHANGE
FROIV] RETAIL
TO OFFICE
ENTER 4
EXT 2'7
BALANCED 4
TO RES
TO RETAIL
FROM OFFICE
257
274
257
FROM RES
257
103
103
35
108
35
ENTER
EXIT
BALANCEO
FROM OFFICE
TO RESIDENTIAL
2
24
2
TO OFFICE
FROM RESIDENTIAL
8
5
5
NET EXTERNAL TRIPS FROM SITE
RETAIL OFFLCE RESIDENTIAL
356
86
442
547
TOTAL
1014
1896
2910
3720
ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
SINGLE USE TRIPS
469
858
1327
1726
188
'1140
1407
23% 19% 25%
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE RATE
330
9405
1290
1140
9724
772
1107
? 4EO7
3058
4173
3527
75
330
DRIVEWAY VOLUME
ADT
AM
PM
PASS BY TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
NET NEWTRAFFIC
ADT
14180
303
1327
VPD
VPH
VPH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
VPD
VPH
VPH
AM
PM
4803 7209 10654 9405 32071 vPD
385 1080 1290 29A2 VPH
442 1263 997 1140 3843 VPH
4803
385
442
INTERNAL TRIP EXC E
FROM RETAIL
TO OFFICE
I
1
TO RES
TO RETAIL
FROM OFFICE
222
88
88
FROT/I RES,
222
68
68
ENTER
EXIT
BALANCED
93
24
ENTER
EXIT
BALANCED
FROM OFFICE
TO RESIDENTIAL
1
8
1
TO OFFICE
FROIV RESIOENTIAL
5
2
2
NET EXTERNAL TRI SITE
RETAIL OFFICE RESIDENT AL TOTAL
856
1103
1959
2327
ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
SINGLE USE TRIPS
559
750
1309
1490
60
294
445
234
59
297
392
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTIJRE RATE 21% 16%
RATE
3928
258
391
20919
1075
2047
VPD
VPH
VPH
1332
137
111
3213
255
297
275
23
1057
109
88
DRIVEWAY VOLUME
ADT
AM
PM
PASS BY TRIPS
ADT
AM
PM
NET NEW TRAFFIC
ADT
14009
302
1309
37 18
80
347
3718
80
347
VPD
VPH
VPH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
AM
3213 1057 10291 2640 17201 VPD
255 109 222 408 995 VPH
PM 297 88 961 17OO VPH
1 1_88
I .84
1.59
0.21
INTERNAL TRIP EXCHATGE
FROM RETAIL
TO OFFICE
ENTER O
EXIT 4
BALANCED O
TO RES
TO RETAIL
FROIVI OFFICE
38
28
2A
FROM RES
38
0
0
0
16
0
ENTER
EXIT
BALANCED
FROM OFFICE
TO RESIDENTIAL
0
2
0
TO OFFICE
,FROIV o RESIDENTIAL
0
0
NET EXTERNAL TRIPS FROM
RETAiL OF CE RESIDENTIAL TOTAL
ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
SINGLE USE TRIPS
95
133
228
257
20
94
114
143
2
0
1
2
116
224
343
402
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE RATE 11% 1s%
114
514
29
64
1444
Jb
131
0.1 1
0.58
70 79
257 143 428 VPH
175 VPH
2
1
I
1
1
1
0
0
0
145
16
29
VPD
VPH
VPH
145
19
20
3245
145
364
VPD
VPH
VPH
0
0
0
1444
JO
131
VPD
VPH
VPH
0
0
0
145 1065 577 1801 VPD
19 26 oc 109 VPH
PM 1 20 97 114 232 VPH
TO RES
6%
2o/o
2va
INTERNAL TRIP EXCHANGE
FROI\,1RETAIL
TO OFFICE
ENIER 1
EXtr 11
BALANCED 1
TO RES
TO RETAIL
FROM OFFICE
106
72
12
FROM RES
106
5
6
2
45
2
ENTER
EXIT
BALANCED
FROM OFFICE
TO RESIDENTIAL
0
6
0
TO OFFICE
FROM RES'DENTIAL
0
1
0
TET EXTERNAL TRTPS FROM SITE
TOTAL
RETA L OFFICE RESlDENTIAL
21
4
34
ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
SINGLE USE TRIPS
368
633
714
49
241
290
364
335
613
948
1112
20% 15%
INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE RATE 110/r
348
40
5t
877
20
81
1847
148
201
91
5
9
0
0
0
531
83
74
VPD
VPH
VPH
240
13
t?)
1373
158
148
685'l
156
633
2515
57
232
0
0
0
0
0
0
arl0-7
5ZO
290
10561
o34
1096
VPD
VPH
VPH
VPD
VPH
VPH
2515
232
240 1373 4336 2097 8046 VPD
13 158 oo
326 597 VPH
25 148 441 ,on 864 VPH
At\4
PM