PZ - Public School Checklist by CivTech CivTech
04�55�� £D cf'tcn
March 16, 2021 ENS
��
Paige Bankhead 10209
Ada County Highway District sr �o az
Development Services 9/- 4T� Of
1301 N. Orchard St. Ste. 200 44<EN
Boise, ID 83706
RE: SCHOOL SITE CHECKLIST RESPONSES FOR GEM INNOVATION SCHOOL—MERIDIAN,IDAHO
Dear Ms. Bankhead:
CivTech is pleased to provide responses to the School Site Checklist for the GEM Innovation Charter
School development project located on the southeast corner of Locust Grove Road & Lake Hazel
Road, in unincorporated Ada County, south of the City of Meridian, Idaho. The project is part of the
larger Apex Southeast Subdivision and is in process with the City of Meridian for annexation and
rezoning.
The assessment of the development will utilize the School Site Checklist in Idaho Code 67-6519(3)
as follows:
1. Land Use Master Plan: The proposed school site is located within a larger development
called"Pinnacle Mixed-Used Development"that is on both the northwest corner and southeast
corner of Locust Grove Road & Lake Hazel Road. Kittelson and Associates (K&A) prepared a
Transportation Impact Study (study) for Brighton Development in March 2020 for the larger
mixed-use development. The location of the proposed charter school is shown as"commercial
or multi-family" in the study. The proposed project would develop approximately 6.12 acres
of farmland to a K-12 charter school land use, instead of the use shown in the study.
2. School Bus Plan: GEM Innovation School will utilize 2 buses in the opening year and add
more as the student body population increases over 4 years. Once the school is full of
students, it is anticipated that a maximum of 3 buses will be utilized to provide bus service
for an estimate of 118 students. Busses will access the school from Tower Street and exit the
school on Peak Avenue. Tower Street will be accessed from Lake Hazel Road via Peak Avenue
for arriving busses. Departing buses will utilize either Lake Hazel Road or Locust Grove Road
via Tower Street.
3. Access Safety: There are three proposed access points to the project, with one (1) new
driveway on Peak Avenue, one (1) new driveway on Vertex Way, and one (1) new driveway
on Tower Street, all three new roads to be constructed as part of the larger development.
Students will be able to enter and exit the bus on the south end of the school building to
prevent any vehicles conflicts. Bus access will be the access south of the school building. The
parent pick-up/drop-off is directly north of the school building. Parents will be using the east
access of the site off of Vertex Way to enter and exit the site. Students will be able to enter
and exit on the passenger side of the parent vehicle to prevent conflicts with crossing in front
CivTech Inc. • 10605 North Hayden Road •Suite 140•Scottsdale,AZ 85260
Phone: 480.659.4250• Fax: 480.659.0566
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 2
of vehicles. School staff are anticipated to arrive before the students'arrival and upon leaving
school staff will be anticipated to leave later than the students to avoid any conflicts with
buses or parents'drop off.
4. Pedestrian Plan: There are no existing sidewalks or bike lanes in the vicinity of the
development. The City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan states, the City regularly requires
developers to install sidewalk, micro-pathways and multi-use pathways that connects to
school sites."to ensure safe routes to school. Sidewalks along all site adjacent roads will be
required upon build out. Sidewalks as part of the adjacent roadway development will be
constructed as part of the larger mixed-use development.
Students are to enter and exit the school site on the south side of the site, directly east of the
South Parking Lot Entrance on Tower Street.
5. Crossing Guard Plan: A crossing guard will be required for students that are walking
and biking to school. Pedestrian crossings with crossing guards are recommended across the
north leg of the intersection of Peak Avenue & Tower Road, and across the north, east, and
south legs of the intersection of South Parking Lot Entrance & Tower Road. The proposed
locations for crosswalks/crossing guards and the school zone are shown in Figure 1.
— CiVTeCh
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 3
E.LAn HAZEL RD.
...............
t1p A
Legend
Crosswalk
School Zone
E. T.
GEM SCHOOL-SITE PLAN
Figure 1 — Site Plan and Crossing Guard
6. Barriers between Highways and Schools: A 25-foot-wide landscape buffer, driveway lanes,
parking areas, and internal and external sidewalks are proposed between the school and Lake
Hazel Road.
,Cc CivTech
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 4
7. Location of School Zone: GEM Innovation School is within the West Ada School District
Boundary; therefore, the school zone should follow West Ada School District Policy stating
that all schools should have a school zone for schools that fronts on the main roadway. School
zones will be required along portions of Tower Street, Vertex Way, and Peak Avenue where
students enter and exit the school site. The extent of the school zone is recommended to
include the intersection of Peak Avenue & Tower Street, continue east as Tower Street
transitions into Vertex Way then terminate just southwest of the intersection of Unnamed
Local Road &Vertex Way.
8. Need for Flashing Beacon: The school zone is not planned for a major roadway. Flashing
beacons are not recommended.
9. Need for a Traffic Control Signal: Two intersections adjacent to the proposed school site
need to be considered for traffic signal control needs; Peak Avenue & Lake Hazel Road, and
Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Road. Traffic due to the proposed school, traffic from the rest of
the proposed development, and existing traffic grown to the study year 2025 are added
together (as shown in Figure 2b) for this analysis. Based on the expected level of service
and expected peak hour delay at these intersections, signalization is not recommended. The
MUTCD contains warrants to provide guidance on determining if signalization of an
intersection should be recommended. MUTCD Warrant 5, School Crossing is relevant for this
analysis. Some students can be expected to need to cross Lake Hazel Road. The proposed
roundabout at the intersection of Locust Grove Road & Lake Hazel Road is planned to include
pedestrian crosswalks and will provide a safe location for students to cross Lake Hazel Road.
Signalization is not recommended at the study intersections based on Warrant 5.
10. Anticipated Future Improvements:According to the Community Planning Association of
Southwest Idaho also known as COMPASS, the Ada County Long Range Highway & Street
Functional Street Classification System for 2040, Lake Hazel Road is proposed to be a 5-lane
Residential Mobility Arterial, and Locus Grove Road is proposed to be a minor arterial. Peak
Avenue is proposed to be local roads. Vertex Way and Tower Street are proposed to be
collector roads. The intersection of Locust Grove Road & Lake Hazel Road is proposed to be
improved to a 2-lane roundabout.
11. Speed on Adjacent Highways: Lake Hazel Road has an existing posted speed limit of 50
mph. Locust Grove Road has an existing posted speed limit of 50 mph.
12. Traffic Volumes on Adjacent Highways: CivTech utilized traffic counts data from the larger
development study for a segment of Lake Hazel Road west of Eagle Road. The latest data
traffic counts were recorded was on December 10, 2019. The AM peak hour refers to the
highest volume hour between 7am and 9am on a weekday; this is the same for school
generated traffic and surrounding traffic. The PM peak hour refers to the highest volume hour
between 3pm and 5pm on a weekday; this is the peak hour for school generated traffic but
not for surrounding traffic. The existing volumes from between 3pm and 5pm were used for
this analysis.
The larger development study utilized a growth rate of 7 percent per year for their analysis.
This same growth rate was used here. The segment traffic counts were grown to study year
CiVTeCh
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovatlon School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 5
2025 values by multiplying the 2019 values by a 1.501 growth factor (1.07A6). The 24-hour
traffic calculated to be 8,612 bi-directional trips with 892 trips (482 eastbound/410
westbound) during the AM peak hour and 857 trips (341 eastbound/516 westbound) during
the PM peak hour.
The proposed surrounding development is expected to produce traffic as included in the K&A
study. The proposed school is expected to produce trips as shown in Table 2a and Table 1b.
Table is — 2021 School Trip Generation
Weekday Trips
PM Peak Hour of
ITE Daily AM Peak Hour Generator
Proposed
Charter Elementary School 537 392 7Students 726 225 199 424 119 139 258
Bike and Walk Reduction-15% -108 -34 -30 -64 -18 -21 -39
Subtotal External Trips 618 191 169 360 101 118 219
Bus Trips Students -40% -248 -72 -72 -144 -44 -44 88
Total External Car Trips 370 119 97 216 57 74 131
Total Bus Trips Buses -50 students per bus 2 2 F 4 1 1 2
Table 2b - 2025 School Trip Generation
- Weekday Trips PM Peak Hour of
ITE Daily AM Peak Hour Generator
Proposed
Charter Elementary School 537 625 Students 1,156 369 328 697 187 220 407
Bike and Walk Reduction-15% -174 -55 -50 -105 -28 -33 -61
Subtotal External Trips 982 314 278 592 159 187 346
Bus Trips Students -40% -392 -118 -118 -236 -69 -69 -138
Total External Car Trips 590 195 159 354 90 118 208
Total Bus Trips Buses -50 students per bus 3 3 6 2 2 4
The number of vehicle trips removed because the students are expected to bus instead of
ride in a parent's vehicle is taken as a percentage of the total for each peak hour then divided
evenly between the ins and outs.
For each the opening and buildout year, the school trips are distributed to the surrounding
road network using distribution percentages based on residential population within a 3-mile
radius, then added to surrounding development and background volumes to predict the
proposed volumes. The volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure a and
Figure 2b.
C i V T e c h
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 6
�I A B
r- �C --
59(60) 65(51) 0(0)
398(295) 349(426) 459(334) 421(496] *6-338(436)
14(37) 7(19) 10(32) 67(40)
Locust Grave Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd. Peak Ave.a LaKe Hazel Rd Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd.
c of e
N
O a O r
r o o
IKt(1) 2(1)
t{0] 1(1]
(16) 9(29)
LL9 fM1 N��
W
7
Peak Ave.&South Lot South Lot&Tower St. Vertex Way&North Lot
XX(XX) = AM peak hour of school volumes(PM peak hour of school volumes)
Figure 2a — 2021 Opening Year Volumes
CivTech
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School—Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 7
1 A B
sss
sus
���
59(60) 81(63) 0(0) 0(0)
521(380) 454(553) 602{4 4 28) 542(635) 528(377) 435(558)
15(37) 7(19) 81(55) 108(58)
ti�ss
��m
IF
CV O f� 1c
m CH � CG
isms- .
Locust Grove Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd. Peak Ave. take hazel Rd. Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd.
C
1 D E
(1] 146(108)
{1} 1[1}
5(16) 9(29) 1(1)
� I7
�I
Peak Ave.&South Lot South Lot&Tower St. Vertex Way&North Lot
XX(XX) =AM peak hour of school volumes(PM peak hour of school volumes)
Figure 2b — 2025 Total Build Out Volumes
13. Effect Upon the Highway's Level of Service: Increases in traffic on Lake Hazel Road are
likely to result in increased delay during the AM peak hour, and the school's PM peak hour
between 3pm and 5pm, but not the PM peak hour of the surrounding road network between
4pm and 6 pm. As discussed above, the school's AM peak hour is expected to coincide with
the peak hour of the surrounding road network while the PM peak hour is not expected to
coincide with the peak hour of the surrounding road network.
The concept of level of service (LOS) uses qualitative measures that characterize operational
conditions within the traffic stream. The individual levels of service are described by factors
that include speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and
convenience. Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility for which analysis
procedures are available. They are given letter designations A through F, with LOS A
representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Each level of service
,CC CiVTech
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 8
represents a range of operating conditions. Levels of service for intersections are defined
within ranges of average control delay per vehicle, the number of seconds a vehicle can expect
to wait due to the presence of a traffic control device. Table 2 lists the level of service criteria
for signalized and unsignalized intersections, respectively.
Table 3 - Level of Service Criteria for Controlled Intersections
Signalized Unsignalized
Level-of-Service
Control D-lay (sec/veh) Control Delay
A 15 10 <_ 10
B = > 10-20 > 10-15
......................................................................................................................................:
C - > 20-35 > 15-25
......................................................................................................................................
D = > 35-55 > 25-35
.......................................... ..........................................
E = > 55-80 > 35-50
F > 80 (or v/c > 1) > 50 (or v/c > 1)
Source:Exhibits 19-8,20-2,21-8, and 22-8, Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition(2016)
The increase in delay is not anticipated to cause levels of service outside of ACHD operational
standards (LOD D or worse) at the study intersections as shown in Table 3. The AM peak
hour levels of service at the study intersections without the school development in place, as
provided in the larger development study, are shown for comparison. The larger development
study's PM peak hour does not coincide with this study's PM peak hour; those values from the
larger development study are not shown. The larger development study does not include level
of service analysis for the 2021 year.
Table 4- Peak Hour Levels of Service
Intersection Approach/ 2021 Build 2025 No Build 2025 Build
ID Intersection Control Movement LOS, Delay*, v/c LOS' LOS, Delay*, v/c
NB A 5.10.075(A 4A 0.046) B(-) A 5.9 0.088(A4.9 0.052)
Locust Grove SB A 4.6 0.077(A 5.3 0.117) A(-) A 5.3 0.099(A 6.2 0.140)
1 Road & Lake Roundabout EB A4.60.204(A4.60.180) A(-) A5.30.263(A5.10.222)
Hazel Road WB A3.80.166(A420.201) A_(-) A4.20217(A4.80.259)
Overall A4.40.116(A4.60.121) A(-) A4.90.148(A5.10.149)
A Peak Avenue & 1-way stop NB Right A 9.8 0.009(A 9.4 0.005) B(-) B 10.4 0.011(A 9.7 0.006)
Lake Hazel Road (NB)
NB Shared C 21.8 0.414(C 15.5 0.245) D() F 95.0 0.984(C 22.6 0.435)
B Vertex Way & 2-way stop SB Shared C 21.4 0.005(C 19.10.004) D() D 33.8 0.017(D 26.10.006)
Lake Hazel Road (NB/SB) EB Left A 0.0 NA(A 0.0 NA) A(-) A 0.0 NA(A 0.0 NA)
W B Left A 8.7 0.069(A 8.10.037) A(-) A 9.5 0.127(A 8.5 0.058)
`Delay shown in seconds per vehicle.
'Delay and v/c values unavailable for No Build scenario.
14. Need for Acceleration and Deceleration Lanes: The projected cross section of Lake Hazel
Road is to be as a 5-lane road with two lanes in each direction of travel and a two-way left-
CiVTech
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 9
turn lane. Based on this configuration, no exclusive left-turn lanes along Lake Hazel Road are
appropriate. Based on the projected AM and PM peak hour volumes above, and the right-turn
deceleration lane guidance given in the ACHD Po/icy Manua/ Section 7106, a dedicated
eastbound right-turn lane is expected to not be warranted at the intersection of Peak Avenue
& Lake Hazel Road. An eastbound right-turn lane may be warranted at the intersection of
Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Road.
The projected cross section of Vertex Way, Tower Road, and Peak Avenue are to be as a 2-
lane road with one lane in each direction of travel. Based on this configuration, the projected
AM and PM peak hour volumes above, and the left-turn deceleration lane guidance given in
the ACHD Po/icy Manual Section 7106, no exclusive left-turn lanes along any of these roads
are recommended. Based on this configuration, the projected AM and PM peak hour volumes
above, and the right-turn deceleration lane guidance given in the ACHD Po/icy Manual Section
7106, no dedicated right-turn lanes along any of these roads are recommended. Any
improvements are to be completed as part of the larger proposed development that will
construct Peak Avenue, Tower Road, and Vertex Way.
15. Internal Traffic Circulation: The proposed plan is for passenger cars to enter from Vertex Way
northeast of the east parking lot, circle around counterclockwise north of the north parking
lot, turn back eastbound along the north side of the building where the parent pick-up/drop-
off is located, then circle back to exit on Vertex Way. The east and north parking lots can be
accessed from this loop. The conceptual site plan provides 1,200 feet of on-site queuing.
Bus traffic will access the school from Tower Street, turn left traveling along the east and
north side of the south parking lot, and exit the school on Peak Avenue. The student pick-
up/drop-off for busses will occur on the east side of the south parking lot.
The site includes four parking areas. An east parking lot with 28 spaces is adjacent to the
Vertex Way access. A north parking lot with 40 spaces is north of the school building, across
the parent pick-up/drip-off. A south parking lot with 36 spaces is accessible from Peak Avenue
or Tower Street and is separated from the school building by the bus pick-up/drop-off. The
fourth parking lot with 12 spaces is directly east of the school building.
16. Anticipated Development on Surrounding Undeveloped Parcels: According to the City of
Meridian Future Land Use Interactive Map, the areas surrounding the development are zoned
to be medium and medium-high density to medium-high density residential land use. The
land within the same development as the project site is planned as shown in the study to
contain single-family homes(325 units), midrise multi-family homes (220 units), and shopping
(61,060 square feet).
17. Zoning in the Vicinity: The project site is undergoing rezoning to Community Business
District (C-C) and is currently being used for farm land. East of the site is land designated as
Civic land designated as Medium Density Residential. South of the site is land designated
Medium Density Residential. West of the site is land designated Medium Density Residential
and land designated Medium-High Density Residential. North of the site is land designated
Medium Density Residential and land designated Medium-High Density Residential. Zoning on
CiVTeCh
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 10
surrounding land is identified as "Varies by project and location" by the Meridian City Future
Land Use Map and associated Future Land Use Map Designation Cut Sheets.
18.Access Control on Adjacent Highways: Lake Hazel Road is currently classified as a
Residential Mobility Arterial. The school site is expected to utilize two new roads, Peak Avenue
and Vertex Way, to access Lake Hazel Road. The intersection of Peak Avenue & Lake Hazel
Road is proposed to be restricted to right-turns only. Stop control on the northbound approach
is expected. The intersection of Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Road is proposed to be full access.
Stop control for the northbound and southbound approaches is expected.
Sight distance requirements were calculated at the intersections of Peak Avenue &Lake Hazel
Road, Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Road, Peak Avenue & South Lot, South Lot & Tower Road,
and Vertex Way & North Lot. Distance requirements based on the American Association of
State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) methodology are detailed in Table .
The ACHD Policy Manual Section 7211.2 includes more strict requirements for left of driveway
site distance. A minimum of value based on these standards is also shown in Table 4.
Table 4— Sight Distance
ACHD • Sight Distance Along Roadway
Posted Speed Sight Left of Right of On Major
Roadway Limit(mph) Distance Driveway Driveway
. . .
Left of
Driveway (Case 132/133) (Case 131) (Case F)
Lake Hazel Road at Peak Avenue 50 555' 480' Restricted Restricted
Lake Hazel Road at Vertex Way 50 555' 555' 625' 480'
Peak Avenue at South Lot 25 280' 260' 295' 225'
Tower Street at South Lot 25 280' 260' 295' 225'
Vertex Way at North Lot 1 25 1 280' 1 260' 1 295' 1 225'
The ACHD Po/icy Manua/ Section 7211.2 states 'The clear vision triangle shall include
restrictions on the height of embankments, shrubbery, fences or trees and the location of
buildings. No obstruction to vision will be allowed between 36-inches and 120-inches above
the elevation of the adjacent roadway surface. The area in the clear vision triangle shall be
given the District by dedication or permanent easement."
The proposed development plans for Peak Avenue to be 695 feet east of Locust Grove Road
and Vertex Way to be 1,355 feet east of Locust Grove Road. These values meet the
requirements. along an arterial road are described in the ACHD Policy Manua/ section
7205.4.3. For Lake Hazel Road local roads (which Peak Avenue is) must be spaced at least
660 feet centerline to centerline from a signalized intersection and unsignalized collector roads
(which Vertex Way is) must be spaced at least 1,320 feet centerline to centerline from a
signalized intersection.
Driveway spacing requirements along local roads are described in the ACHD Po/icy Manua/
section 7207.4.1. The Peak Avenue driveway must be 150 feet centerline to centerline from
CiVTech
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School-Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 11
the nearest collector or arterial and 75 feet from the nearest local road. The south access on
Peak Avenue is 230 feet from the nearest road.
Driveway spacing requirements along collector roads are described in the ACHD Policy Manual
section 7206.4.5. Driveways on Vertex Way and Tower Road must be 330 feet from the
nearest signalized intersection and 245 feet from the nearest driveway. The north access
point on Vertex Way is 285 feet from the nearest road. The south access point on Tower Road
is 185 feet from the nearest road. While these values do not meet the specific requirements
in the manual, the correspondence with the Ada County Highway District Development
Services indicates that this driveway spacing will be accepted.
19. Required Striping and Signing Modifications: The school zone should be signed in
accordance with the MUTCD and the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) Policy Manual
section 5202, Sign and Object Markers.
20. Funding of Highway Improvements to Accommodate Development: The improvements of
Lake Hazel Road are currently planned by ACHD Capital Improvement Plan. Other
improvements are to be a part of the development as shown in the study.
21. Proposed Highway Projects in the Vicinity: According to the Ada County Long Range
Highway & Street Functional Street Classification System for 2040, Lake Hazel Road is
proposed to be a principal arterial in the future.
22.Any other issues as may be considered appropriate to the particular application: No
further issues require consideration.
Sincerely,
CivTech
ich, P.E.
Director of Design
Idaho P.E. 10209
Attachments:
A— Site Plan
B —Trip Generation Calculations
C — Existing Traffic Counts
D —Turn Lane Warrants
E — Comment Responses
F — 2021 Build Level of Service Analysis
G — 2025 Build Level of Service Analysis
H - Correspondence
CivTech
� I �
"1 `
\ I o
�\ I �� PARADIGM DESIGN
" X—' < < a < x < K x x x M—� �r ** — x * >Eac--- �c—* --* X X .GI I w ARCHITECTS I ENGINEERS
HENRICKSON
2 12"W 12�"W 12-W 12"w 12"W^^ 12"W 12"W 12"w 12'W - 12"w 12\-^ 12"w 12"W 12"W- -12"W 12'w 12"W 12"W 12"W 12"W 12'W 12"W 12"W 12'w 2'Iw 12'W 12"W 12'w 12" 12'W 12"W 4250 N. Drinkwater Blvd, Suite 120 ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
` c c E. LAKE HAZEL RD.
m \ c \ _ —N— _ _ Scottsdale,
51 100 Grandville,Suite 030
( ) Grand Rapids,MI 49503
E 616.458.5554
\ \ I W Grand Rapids I Phoenix I Traverse City
-op—op—op—op—op �� OP OP�DP ��ls OP�O OP T OP OP �P OP OP �� OP OP OP�P OP OP OP OP—OP—OP OP OP� OP ^^- OP OP OP- www.paradigmae.com
JOB#2003035PH
s 1 \, 1 ' \ s 1• . `s ° FIRM#3856 (EXP.01/31/2021)
PI—PI—PI PI PI P PI PI PI y PI—PI—PI PI PIS
pl
25'LANDSCAPE BUFFER �— —=P'
PI PI PI PI PI PI ro 1_'
�C C P� PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI PI
AVAILABLE QUEUING LENGTH= 1 189'
N
z o SITE DATA:
III C I I PROPOSED
Q \ LOT SIZE(NET): 6.116 ACRES(266,442 SFT)
\ STORMWATER BASIN
o w 12 SPACES 9 SPACES I L I CURRENT ZONING: R4-MEDIUM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL o
o < I I - \ 1 PROPOSED ZONING: C-C COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT
0 � 2 \ I PROPOSED USE: EDUCATIONAL FACILITY
II I ~ I I 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 \ \ I c� MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 45'(MINIMUM 2 STORIES)
cn
z
" s° PROPOSED BUILDING SIZE: 45,635 SFT a
I 26' 7 SPACES I 12 SPACES \ \ I g m s LANDSCAPE BUFFERS:
�1 \ \ I " ° (MEASURED BACK OF CURB,PROVIDED BY BRIGHTON)
N B BF BF- BF BF
"' 9cF o \ I E. LAKE HAZEL ROAD BUFFER: 25'
BYPASS LANE (NO DROP-OFF OR PICKUP) �6 \\ `r ` �I S.VERTEX WAY BUFFER: 20'
PROPOSED \ �, EAST ROAD BUFFER: 20'
WATER LINE DROP-OFF AREA (ALONG CURB ONLY) `" \ \ I s S.PEAK AVENUE BUFFER: 10' o
1 c c\
Fs PARKING DATA: O > co
I �� >A `a REQUIRED PARKING: 115 SPACES Q E'
s9c� / (1 SPACE PER 400 SFT OF GFA 45,635lb
Z
5' I C6 w w is Ica I = 114.09 SPACES) Z
c3 Q a
I T Q l z
� ,a ° 0 PROPOSED PARKING: 118 SPACES w
m I I I 5' \ �sA / (INCLUDES 5 BARRIER FREE SPACES (59 SPACES BEHIND BUILDING FACE) U
PROPOSED — 9�, 0 uj
BUILDING AREA GYM 19 26 , 19 \ F`r / m
z I 45,635 SFT / / PARKING SPACE: 9'x 19'
U, a m 1 DRIVE AISLE: 25'MIN. Y
w ° �}, REQUIRED BICYCLE PARKING: 5 SPACES }
a Q I \� �� �� m (1 SPACE PER 25 VEHICLE SPACES w
A'b ,S�' 4.56 SPACES)
a
1 o I PROPOSED PLAY �� P`o�' \ 0 I o =
STRUCTURE �' 1 1°° I o m
�I
cn cn �P5 �a �� o m
>LLJ J
Q o I I SCREENED
DUMPSTER o '�
LL] I PROPOSED
L I FIRE SERVICE AND 1P 0 `\ o m p Z
DOMESTIC LINE �G Q 3
f s \ PROPOSED / \ a
GAGA BALL
s \ \ I 27
\ ` PROPOSED PLAY FIELD / o Z
%
Ne
S 3• s I G_ \ \ \ I ti I }0
� LU
PROPOSEd•\/
ol ATER LINE �� �, \ \ \ ' o m J a-
0 3 S" \ \ v O O
� a
\ \ o U z
`\ c m N 2
(n N C/ \\ O K
LU 0 f \q\ z
\ \
r I TETHERBALL(TYP.) /Q A\ \ om m 0
1�
m — — — I 26
19 25 19' 33.75 / 0 ,° o I A
O m m
��, PROPOSED SEWER S
B O
cn I \ SERVICE LINE Q\ s 0
w / , ` /��
Q I 0•y BS
om
2 O
s I
1
/ 6� O
CL _ 3
rn PROPOSED 0
STORMWATER I s
m m
I /� o
.3 �
�, BASIN b /
m
I / / 0 V y O I ti
00 m v m o m
IN 5' Q` / �
m 5
26' � I I
PI PI P - PI PI P, 'lanincraocQUF PI— 5/ �\ m m CONCEPT PLAN • 05.28.20
m / � CONCEPT PLAN • 05.28.20
/ a m I o
Y 8"W 8"W 8'W 8"W 8"W 8'w 'W 81w 8"w 8"w —81N "W 8"W 8"W 0 ° / m '•'
9
3"S 8"S 8'S 8"S 8"S 8"S 8"S 8"S S 8"S 8"S— —8"S —8"S S
_ I M8 t`
m G` a -r o m I m ^•
E TOWER ST. m m
J .
i OD 0 1
GI— GI GI GI GI .1-0-0-0— m GI GI GI GI— —GI v
PI y N
I
� � � J � m 50 S Cole Rd ti •
DIGUin Inc- 800-342--158Boise, ID 5 9
� I V
N CS
N Ii Ec-r 1/1 -F a Yc�LT j57 208-342-1585 n
i = .
DRAWN BY: RJ
CHECKED: DF
NOTE: THE EXISTENCE AND LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND UTILITY PIPES, CONDUITS OR N CONCEPT
GEM SCHOOL - SITE PLAN STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS WAS OBTAINED BY A SEARCH OF THE AVAILABLE
RECORDS. TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, THERE ARE NO EXISTING UTILITIES EXCEPT AS MINetf'v
'T�
SCALE: 1" = 40' 0 20' 40' 80' SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE DUE PRECAUTIONARY SITE PLAN
MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR
FURTHER ASSUMES ALL LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE UTILITY PIPES, CONDUITS AND
STRUCTURES SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROJECT No. • 2003035PH
POTHOLE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES TO VERIFY THE LOCATION AND ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN
0 40' ao'
THE PLANS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE DESIGN ENGINEER.
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Full Build 2025 February 2021
Methodology Overview
This form facilitates trip generation estimation using data within the Institute of Transportation Engineer's(ITE)Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition and methodology described within ITE's Trip
Generation Handbook,3rd Edition.These references will be referred to as Manual and Handbook,respectively.The Manual contains data collected by various transportation professionals for a
wide range of different land uses,with each land use category represented by a land use code(LUC).Average rates and equations have been established that correlate the relationship between an
independent variable that describes the development size and generated trips for each categorized LUC in various settings and time periods.The Handbook indicates an established methodology
for how to use data contained within the Manual when to use the fitted curve instead of the average rate and when to adjustments to the volume of trips are appropriate and how to do so.The
methodology steps are represented visually in boxes in Figure 3.1.This worksheet applies calculations for each box if applicable.
Box 1 -Define Study Site Land Use Type&Site Characteristics, I Box 2-Define Site Context I Box 3-Define Analysis Objectives Trip Types&Time Period
The analyst is to pick an appropriate LUC(s)based on the subject's zoning/land use(s)/future land use(s).The size of the land use(s)is described in reference to an independent variable(s)specific
to(each)the land use(example:1,000 square feet of building area is relatively common).Context assessment is to"simply determine whether the study sites is in a multimodal setting"and"could
have persons accessing the site by walking,bicycling,or riding transit."This assessment is used in Box 4.The Manual separates data into 4 setting categories-Rural,General Urban/Suburban,
Dense Multi-Urban Use and Center City Core.This worksheet uses the following abbreviations,respectively:R,G,D,and C.The Manual does not have data for all settings of all land use codes.
The"General Urban/Suburban"setting is used by default.
This tool will focus on vehicular trips for a 24-hour period on a typical weekday as well as its AM peak hour and PM peak hour.Other time period(s)may be of interest.
Land Use Types and Size
Proposed
Charter Elementary School 625 Students 537 Charter Elementary School
Box 4-Is Study Site Multimodal?
Per the Handbook,"if the objective is to establish a local trip generation rate for a particular land use or study site,the simplified approach(Box 9)may be acceptable but the Box 5 through 8
approach is required if the study site is located in an infill setting,contains a mix of uses on-site,or is near significant transit service."
Box 5/13ox 9-Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips(Determine Equation)
Vehicle trips are estimated using rates/equations applicable to each LUC.When the appropriate graph has a fitted curve,the Handbook has a process(Figure 4.2)to determine when to use it
versus using the weighted average rate or collecting local data.The methodology requires for engineering judgement in some circumstances and permits engineering judgement to override or
make adjustments when appropriate to best project(example 1:study site is expected to operate differently than data in the applicable land use code-such as restaurant that is closed in the
morning or in the evening;example 2:LUC data in a localized area fails to be represented by the typically selected fitted curve/weighted average rate-a small shop/LUC 820,AM peak hour is
skewed by the high y-intercept).
Equation Type:Equation Used[Equated Rate](Type Abbreviations:Weighted Average Rate("WA"),Fitted Curve I Type:Equation Used[Equated Rate]
Proposed
Charter Elementary School WA:T=X*1.85[1.85] FC:T=1.17"X-34.68[1.111 FC:LN(T)=0.98*LN(X)-0.3[0.65]
!vTech Attachment B
Page 1 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Full Build 2025 February 2021
Box 5/Box 9-Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips(Apply Equations and in/out Distributions)
Baseline Vehicular Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use %in I In • • • •
Charter Elementary School 50% 578 578 1,156 53% 369 328 697 46% 187 220 407
If vehicle trip reductions are not applied for internal capture and alternative mode,vehicle trips may be separtated into vehicle trip subsets(pass-by trips,diverted trips,truck trips,new passenger
vehicle trips)as part of Box 10. If vehicle trip reductions are to be applied,continue to Box 6.
Box 7-Estimate Internal Person Trips,External Walk/Bike Trips,Transit Person Trips,External Person Trips(Alternative Mode)
Alternate mode reductions are applied to account for trips to/from the study site made any means except as the driver of a personal vehicle(though carpooling is separate in Box 9).Alternative
mode reductions,with respect to trips entering/existing the site,include trips where more than one mode is used as long as the trip is not in a vehicle when crossing the boundary of the study site.
The reduction is applied as a percent of vehicular trips removed from total external trips.The reduction percentage used does not include any amount of alternate mode trips that are accounted for
in the baseline rates;the Dense Multi-Urban Use and City Core settings already account for alternate mode trips,though further reduction may still be reasonable in specific circumstances.The
table below presents the alternative mode percentages and trips in units of vehicle trips.CivTech can provide trips in units of persons if requested.
Adjustments for Alternate Mode Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
77
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out -r—OutTTotal Percent I In I Out Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 15% 87 87 174 15% 55 50 105 15% 28 33 61
Totals 15% 87 87 174 15% 55 50 105 15% 28 33 61
Box 8-Convert Person Trips to Final Vehicle Trips
The vehicle occupancy and baseline alternate mode are now factored out from the external trips in vehicles,after any adjustments for internal capture and additional alternate mode from Box 7. In
Box 6,vehicle trips were considered to account for 90%of total person trips.Alternate mode trips in addition to the baseline,if any,are accounted for in Box 7. It is estimated that vehicle trips
should be reduced by an additional 0%due to carpooling.The final external trips in vehicles is multiplied by 90%(=90%-0%)to produce the external vehicle trips.
External Vehicular Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use In I • • • Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 491 491 982 314 278 592 159 187 346
Totals 491 491 982 314 278 592 159 187 346
ivTeh Attachment B
Page 2 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Full Build 2025 February 2021
Truck Trips. Some trips may be classified as"truck"trips or trips by heavy vehicles.The Manual does not provide truck trip data.The Handbook provides limited data for the following LUCs:010,
021,022,030, 150, 151, 152,254,731,732,760,813,815,816,860,890,and 931.The percentage is applied to total external vehicle trips.
Bus Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out r—OutTTotal Percent I In I Out Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 40% 196 196 392 40% 119 119 238 40% 69 69 138
Totals 196 196 392 119 119 238 69 69 138
Net New Trips. Pass-by trips and truck trips may be subtracted from the total external vehicle trips,if applicable/data available.Diverted link trips may also be separated,but are often
(conservatively)grouped with primary trips.
Net New Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use In I • • • Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 295 295 590 195 159 354 90 118 208
Totals 295 295 590 195 159 354 90 118 208
IvTeh Attachment B
Page 3 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Opening Fall 2021 February 2021
Methodoloav Overview
This form facilitates trip generation estimation using data within the Institute of Transportation Engineer's(ITE)Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition and methodology described within ITE's Trip
Generation Handbook,3rd Edition.These references will be referred to as Manual and Handbook,respectively.The Manual contains data collected by various transportation professionals for a
wide range of different land uses,with each land use category represented by a land use code(LUC).Average rates and equations have been established that correlate the relationship between an
independent variable that describes the development size and generated trips for each categorized LUC in various settings and time periods.The Handbook indicates an established methodology
for how to use data contained within the Manual when to use the fitted curve instead of the average rate and when to adjustments to the volume of trips are appropriate and how to do so.The
methodology steps are represented visually in boxes in Figure 3.1.This worksheet applies calculations for each box if applicable.
Box 1 -Define Study Site Land Use Type&Site Characteristics, I Box 2-Define Site Context I Box 3-Define Analysis Objectives Trip Types&Time Period
The analyst is to pick an appropriate LUC(s)based on the subject's zoning/land use(s)/future land use(s).The size of the land use(s)is described in reference to an independent variable(s)specific
to(each)the land use(example:1,000 square feet of building area is relatively common).Context assessment is to"simply determine whether the study sites is in a multimodal setting"and"could
have persons accessing the site by walking,bicycling,or riding transit."This assessment is used in Box 4.The Manual separates data into 4 setting categories-Rural,General Urban/Suburban,
Dense Multi-Urban Use and Center City Core.This worksheet uses the following abbreviations,respectively:R,G,D,and C.The Manual does not have data for all settings of all land use codes.
The"General Urban/Suburban"setting is used by default.
This tool will focus on vehicular trips for a 24-hour period on a typical weekday as well as its AM peak hour and PM peak hour.Other time period(s)may be of interest.
Land Use Types and Size
Proposed
Charter Elementary School 392 Students 537 Charter Elementary School
Box 4-Is Study Site Multimodal?
Per the Handbook,"if the objective is to establish a local trip generation rate for a particular land use or study site,the simplified approach(Box 9)may be acceptable but the Box 5 through 8
approach is required if the study site is located in an infill setting,contains a mix of uses on-site,or is near significant transit service."
Box 5/113ox 9-Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips(Determine Equation)
Vehicle trips are estimated using rates/equations applicable to each LUC.When the appropriate graph has a fitted curve,the Handbook has a process(Figure 4.2)to determine when to use it
versus using the weighted average rate or collecting local data.The methodology requires for engineering judgement in some circumstances and permits engineering judgement to override or
make adjustments when appropriate to best project(example 1:study site is expected to operate differently than data in the applicable land use code-such as restaurant that is closed in the
morning or in the evening;example 2:LUC data in a localized area fails to be represented by the typically selected fitted curve/weighted average rate-a small shop/LUC 820,AM peak hour is
skewed by the high y-intercept).
Equation Type:Equation Used[Equated Rate](Type Abbreviations:Weighted Average Rate("WA"),Fitted Curve I Type:Equation Used[Equated Rate]
Proposed
Charter Elementary School WA:T=X*1.85[1.85] FC:T=1.17"X-34.68[1.08] FC:LN(T)=0.98*LN(X)-0.3[0.66]
!vTech Attachment B
Page 4 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Opening Fall 2021 February 2021
Box 5/Box 9-Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips(Apply Equations and in/out Distributions)
Baseline Vehicular Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use %in I In • • • •
Charter Elementary School 50% 363 363 726 53% 225 199 424 46% 119 139 258
If vehicle trip reductions are not applied for internal capture and alternative mode,vehicle trips may be separtated into vehicle trip subsets(pass-by trips,diverted trips,truck trips,new passenger
vehicle trips)as part of Box 10. If vehicle trip reductions are to be applied,continue to Box 6.
Box 7-Estimate Internal Person Trips,External Walk/Bike Trips,Transit Person Trips,External Person Trips(Alternative Mode)
Alternate mode reductions are applied to account for trips to/from the study site made any means except as the driver of a personal vehicle(though carpooling is separate in Box 9).Alternative
mode reductions,with respect to trips entering/existing the site,include trips where more than one mode is used as long as the trip is not in a vehicle when crossing the boundary of the study site.
The reduction is applied as a percent of vehicular trips removed from total external trips.The reduction percentage used does not include any amount of alternate mode trips that are accounted for
in the baseline rates;the Dense Multi-Urban Use and City Core settings already account for alternate mode trips,though further reduction may still be reasonable in specific circumstances.The
table below presents the alternative mode percentages and trips in units of vehicle trips.CivTech can provide trips in units of persons if requested.
Adjustments for Alternate Mode Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
77
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out -r—OutTTotal Percent I In I Out Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 15% 54 54 108 15% 34 30 64 15% 18 21 39
Totals 15% 54 54 108 15% 34 30 64 15% 18 21 39
Box 8-Convert Person Trips to Final Vehicle Trips
The vehicle occupancy and baseline alternate mode are now factored out from the external trips in vehicles,after any adjustments for internal capture and additional alternate mode from Box 7. In
Box 6,vehicle trips were considered to account for 90%of total person trips.Alternate mode trips in addition to the baseline,if any,are accounted for in Box 7. It is estimated that vehicle trips
should be reduced by an additional 0%due to carpooling.The final external trips in vehicles is multiplied by 90%(=90%-0%)to produce the external vehicle trips.
External Vehicular Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use In I • • • Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 309 309 618 191 169 360 101 118 219
Totals 309 309 618 191 169 360 101 118 219
ivTeh Attachment B
Page 5 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South Trip Generation
Proposed Opening Fall 2021 February 2021
Truck Trips. Some trips may be classified as"truck"trips or trips by heavy vehicles.The Manual does not provide truck trip data.The Handbook provides limited data for the following LUCs:010,
021,022,030, 150, 151, 152,254,731,732,760,813,815,816,860,890,and 931.The percentage is applied to total external vehicle trips.
Bus Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out r—OutTTotal Percent I In I Out Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 40% 124 124 248 40% 72 72 144 40% 44 44 88
Totals 124 124 248 72 72 144 44 44 88
Net New Trips. Pass-by trips and truck trips may be subtracted from the total external vehicle trips,if applicable/data available.Diverted link trips may also be separated,but are often
(conservatively)grouped with primary trips.
Net New Trips
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H.of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use In I • • • Out I Total
Charter Elementary School 185 185 370 119 97 216 57 74 131
Totals 185 185 370 119 97 216 57 74 131
IvTeh Attachment B
Page 6 of 6 January 2021
L2 Data Collection
Study: KITT0154 1-21DataCollection.com
Type:Volume/Direction Idaho(208)860-7554 Utah (801)413-290ke Hazel Rd b Locust Grove Rd&Eagle Rd VOL
Tech:Judd/Klaren Date Start:09-Dec-19
Count:Axle Hits/2 Date End: 10-Dec-19
Lake Hazel between Eagle&Locust Grove
Meridian, Idaho
Start 09-Dec-19 Total
Time Mon WB EB
12:00 AM
12:15
12:30
12:45
01:00
01:15
01:30
01:45
02:00
02:15
02:30
02:45
03:00
03:15
03:30
03:45
04:00
04:15
04:30
04:45
05:00
05:15
05:30
05:45
06:00
06:15
06:30
06:45
07:00
07:15
07:30
07:45
08:00
08:15
08:30
08:45
09:00
09:15
09:30
09:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00
11:15
11:30
11:45
Total 0 0 0
Percent 0.0% 0.0%
Peak - - - - - - - - - -
Vol. - - - - - - - - - -
P.H.F.
Page 1
L2 Data Collection
Study: KITT0154 1-21DataCollection.com
Type:Volume/Direction Idaho(208)860-7554 Utah (801)413-290ke Hazel Rd b Locust Grove Rd&Eagle Rd VOL
Tech:Judd/Klaren Date Start:09-Dec-19
Count:Axle Hits/2 Date End: 10-Dec-19
Lake Hazel between Eagle&Locust Grove
Meridian, Idaho
Start 09-Dec-19 Total
Time Mon WB EB
12:00 PIM
12:15
12:30
12:45
01:00
01:15
01:30
01:45
02:00
02:15
02:30
02:45
03:00
03:15
03:30
03:45
04:00
04:15
04:30
04:45
05:00
05:15
05:30
05:45
06:00
06:15
06:30
06:45
07:00
07:15
07:30
07:45
08:00
08:15
08:30
08:45
09:00
09:15
09:30
09:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00 7 10 17
11:15 13 7 20
11:30 7 2 9
11:45 3 3 6
Total 30 22 52
Percent 57.7% 42.3%
Peak - 23:00 23:00 - - - - - - 23:00
Vol. - 30 22 - - - - - - 52
P.H.F. 0.577 0.550 0.650
Page 2
L2 Data Collection
Study: KITT0154 1-21DataCollection.com
Type:Volume/Direction Idaho(208)860-7554 Utah (801)413-290ke Hazel Rd b Locust Grove Rd&Eagle Rd VOL
Tech:Judd/Klaren Date Start:09-Dec-19
Count:Axle Hits/2 Date End: 10-Dec-19
Lake Hazel between Eagle&Locust Grove
Meridian, Idaho
Start 10-Dec-19 Total
Time Tue WB EB
12:00 AM 4 4 8
12:15 1 2 3
12:30 2 1 3
12:45 6 4 10
01:00 3 1 4
01:15 2 1 3
01:30 0 0 0
01:45 1 1 2
02:00 0 0 0
02:15 1 0 1
02:30 0 2 2
02:45 2 2 4
03:00 3 1 4
03:15 1 2 3
03:30 2 2 4
03:45 0 1 1
04:00 2 1 3
04:15 4 2 6
04:30 6 4 10
04:45 7 2 9
05:00 6 8 14
05:15 10 4 14
05:30 12 6 18
05:45 18 13 31
06:00 18 16 34
06:15 30 26 56
06:30 48 35 83
06:45 68 43 111
07:00 68 44 112
07:15 68 83 151
07:30 67 68 135
07:45 70 88 158
08:00 48 82 130
08:15 49 50 99
08:30 31 58 89
08:45 42 54 96
09:00 42 38 80
09:15 54 30 84
09:30 44 36 80
09:45 24 38 62
10:00 34 26 60
10:15 26 32 58
10:30 33 13 46
10:45 40 38 78
11:00 28 36 64
11:15 32 32 64
11:30 40 38 78
11:45 36 48 84
Total 1133 1116 2249
Percent 50.4% 49.6%
Peak - 07:00 07:15 - - - - - - 07:15
Vol. - 273 321 - - - - - - 574
P.H.F. 0.975 0.912 0.908
Page 3
L2 Data Collection
Study: KITT0154 1-21DataCollection.com
Type:Volume/Direction Idaho(208)860-7554 Utah (801)413-290ke Hazel Rd b Locust Grove Rd&Eagle Rd VOL
Tech:Judd/Klaren Date Start:09-Dec-19
Count:Axle Hits/2 Date End: 10-Dec-19
Lake Hazel between Eagle&Locust Grove
Meridian, Idaho
Start 10-Dec-19 Total
Time Tue WB EB
12:00 PM 36 42 78
12:15 36 28 64
12:30 34 33 67
12:45 32 32 64
01:00 39 32 71
01:15 27 36 63
01:30 42 28 70
01:45 35 36 71
02:00 39 40 79
02:15 50 35 85
02:30 48 36 84
02:45 54 52 106
03:00 40 34 74
03:15 43 58 101
03:30 56 49 105
03:45 74 52 126
04:00 79 56 135
04:15 75 66 141
04:30 96 52 148
04:45 94 53 147
05:00 104 102 206
05:15 104 68 172
05:30 87 60 147
05:45 67 50 117
06:00 75 51 126
06:15 50 62 112
06:30 55 38 93
06:45 30 30 60
07:00 28 24 52
07:15 27 32 59
07:30 14 34 48
07:45 20 20 40
08:00 24 24 48
08:15 22 30 52
08:30 17 34 51
08:45 16 11 27
09:00 14 28 42
09:15 11 34 45
09:30 10 16 26
09:45 18 14 32
10:00 4 8 12
10:15 12 10 22
10:30 3 6 9
10:45 4 7 11
11:00
11:15
11:30
11:45
Total 1845 1643 3488
Percent 52.9% 47.1%
Peak - 16:30 16:45 - - - - - - 16:30
Vol. - 398 283 - - - - - - 673
P.H.F. 0.957 0.694 0.817
Grand 3008 2781 5789
Total
Percent 52.0% 48.0%
Page 4
Figure 1 — Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for Two-Lane Roads less than or equal to 40 mph
-LD% 2055 1596 1D% n V
6JC
f
Add Left-Turn
7Dc Lane
CDC
r
5DC
�DC
0
rn
C
EL No Left-t n Lane
2Dc
17C
C
D iC7 200 30 40D 5C7 CDC -J]
Advancing Volume(VJ.veh;h
The following data are required:
1. Opposing Volume (veh/hr) - VO - The opposing volume is to include only the right-turn and
through movements in the opposite direction of the left turning vehicle.
2. Advancing Volume (veh/hr) - VA - The advancing volume is to include the right-turn, left-turn
and through movements in the same direction as the left turning vehicle.
3. Operating Speed (mph)-The greatest of anticipated operating speed, measured 85th percentile
speed or posted speed.
4. Percentage of left turns in VA
Left- turn lane is not needed for left turn volume less than 10 vph. However, criteria other than
volume, such as crash experience, may be used to justify a left-turn lane.
The appropriate trend line is identified on the basis of the percentage of left-turns in the advancing
volume, rounded up to the nearest percentage trend line. If the advancing and opposing volume
combination intersects above or to the right of this trend line, a left-turn lane is appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100- 35
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res. 904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord.232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord.247 (12/16/20)
Figure 2 —Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for Two-Lane Roads, 45 mph
'-°5 1=r-krra
3=C
�—
dd Left-ium
Lane
� a_C
a
a
a
a
w
m
O
No Le Turn Lane
17C
C 67 2X M) -CO 60) c_C IN
Advancing Volume(V,J.xeh!h
The following data are required:
1. Opposing Volume (veh/hr) - VO - The opposing volume is to include only the right-turn and
through movements in the opposite direction of the left turning vehicle.
2. Advancing Volume (veh/hr) - VA - The advancing volume is to include the right-turn, left-turn
and through movements in the same direction as the left turning vehicle.
3. Operating Speed (mph)-The greatest of anticipated operating speed, measured 85th percentile
speed or posted speed.
4. Percentage of left turns in VA
Left-turn lane is not needed for left-turn volume less than 10 vph. However, criteria other than
volume, such as crash experience, may be used to justify a left-turn lane.
The appropriate trend line is identified on the basis of the percentage of left-turns in the
advancing volume, rounded up to the nearest percentage trend line. If the advancing and
opposing volume combination intersects above or to the right of this trend line, a left-turn lane is
appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100 - 36
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res. 904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord.232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord.247 (12/16/20)
Figure 3 —Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for Two-Lane Roads, 50 mph
3°i IE'I-!Jm5
ato
Left Turn Lane
:a
arran e
6113
sla
`a
c[a
t.
R
d 3Ca
O
Left-Tu n Lane Not:
Wa Tanted
2Ca
Ca
C I Ao Mr 7d7 517 6"C '70
Ad-ino Volume(VA),v hth
The following data are required:
1. Opposing Volume (veh/hr) - VO - The opposing volume is to include only the right-turn and
through movements in the opposite direction of the left-turning vehicle.
2. Advancing Volume (veh/hr) - VA - The advancing volume is to include the right-turn, left-turn
and through movements in the same direction as the left-turning vehicle.
3. Operating Speed (mph)-The greatest of anticipated operating speed, measured 85th percentile
speed or posted speed.
4. Percentage of left-turns in VA
Left-turn lane is not needed for left-turn volume less than 10 vph. However, criteria other than
volume, such as crash experience, may be used to justify a left-turn lane.
The appropriate trend line is identified on the basis of the percentage of left-turns in the advancing
volume, rounded up to the nearest percentage trend line. If the advancing and opposing volume
combination intersects above or to the right of this trend line, a left-turn lane is appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100 - 37
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res. 904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord.232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord.247 (12/16/20)
Figure 4—Left-Turn Lane Guidelines for Four-Lane Undivided Roadways
=a=
ta,'e: Wirer.V,z4:30 aehM(Jar,led Ilre;
lest-aim lane is fiat r"naup app-ropnaie
-jr I°ss Te advancing volurre(V,)In the
same director as me left-tuming irwrc
ekoeeds aQ0 4en-7i yvA�1!0D 4er11)).
�5 Add Left-tam
Lane
L
m r
0
Sgles 1
1d7C ��
}
P
No Left-turn
Lane
N.
N.
1= 15 0 25 ?C
Left-Turn Volume(VJ,vehfh
The following data are required:
1. Opposing Volume (veh/hr) - VO - The opposing volume is to include only the right-turn and
through movements in the opposite direction of the left-turning vehicle.
2. Left-Turn Volume—VL
If the opposing and left-turn volume combination intersects above or to the right of the trend
line, a left- turn lane is appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100- 38
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res. 904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord.232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord.247 (12/16/20)
Figure 5— Right-Turn Lanes
Dedicated right-turn lanes are also to be strongly considered in situations where:
• Poor internal site design and circulation leads to backups on the mainline.
o Auto-oriented businesses with
short drive-through lanes or F
poorly designed parking lots
would be prime examples of this
situation.
• The peak hour turning traffic activity is
unusually high (e.g. greater than 10
percent of the daily total).
• Operating speeds on the mainline route
are very high (greater than 50 miles per
hour) and drivers would generally not
expect right turns.
• The driveway or minor public road
intersection is difficult for drivers to see.
• The driveway entrance is gated or otherwise must be entered very slowly.
• Right-turning traffic consists of an unusually high number of trailers or
other large vehicles.
• The intersection or driveway angle is highly skewed.
• Rear end collision experience is unusually high at a location.
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100-39
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res.904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord.232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord. 247(12/16/20)
Figure 6— Right-Turn Lane Guidelines for Two-Lane Roadways
ajor-Roadspeed
4D mDh i 0 Rn•ih}
45 rn ph
17D knlj -
Add Right-Tt
Lan=
4
7
50 nt 1- 1
•::80 kn +h:
I- c:
E
47
.90 kn'a
_> 6D rnDh
0 DD rreh:
r.
211= SOD a. .__ 600 'CSC a0G BDC 1000 1 DD 12CJ
Major-Road Volume(one direction),vehih
The following data are required:
1. Advancing Volume (veh/hr) - The advancing volume is to include the right-turn, left-turn and
through movements in the same direction as the right-turning vehicle.
2. Right-Turning Volume (veh/hr) - The right-turning volume is the number of advancing vehicles
turning right.
3. Operating Speed (mph)-The greatest of anticipated operating speed, measured 85th percentile
speed or posted speed.
Note: Right-turn lane is not needed for right-turn volume less than 10 vph. However, criteria other
than volume, e.g. crash experience, may be used to justify a right-turn lane.
If the combination of major road approach volume and right-turn volume intersects above or to the
right of the speed trend line corresponding to the major road operating speed, then a right-turn
lane is appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res.469(7/13/94) 7100-40
Revised: Res.675(1/29/03); Res. 904(8/19/09);Ord.217(9/14/11); Ord. 232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1/25/17); Ord.238 (12/12/18); Ord.247 (12/16/20)
Figure 7 — Right-Turn Lane Guidelines for Four-Lane Roadways
149
120 Mapr-Road peed
46 mph < = 40mph ( ) kmlh)
(70 kmih)
too
1(8(01
Add Rip -Turn
h Lan
8
/ ArA Pak Por
a '
9 Pak Heur
f �
55 mph
8 6S hl
401 -7
3a
zo
II '
0
300 1 600 700 80o 11C0 1300 1500 170a 1900
?T 3 Major-Road Volume (one direction). veMh
The following data are required:
1 . Advancing Volume (veh/hr) = The advancing volume is to include the right-turn , left-turn and
through movements in the same direction as the right-turning vehicle.
2. Right-Turning Volume (veh/hr) - The right-turning volume is the number of advancing vehicles
turning right.
3. Operating Speed (mph) = The greatest of anticipated operating speed , measured 85th percentile
speed or posted speed.
Note: Right-turn lane not warranted for right-turn volume less than 10 vph . However, criteria other
than volume, e.g., crash experience, may be used to justify a right-turn lane .
If the combination of major road approach volume and right-turn volume intersects above or to the
right of the speed trend line corresponding to the major road operating speed , then a right-turn
lane is appropriate.
Source : NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted : Res. 469 (7/13/94) 7100 = 41
Revised : Res. 676 (1 /29/03); Res. 904 (8/19/09); Ord. 217 (9/14/11 ); Ord. 232 (12/7/16); Ord. 233
(1 /26/17); Ord. 238 (12/12/18); Ord. 247 (12/16/20)
Gem Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
1st Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, E.I. Planner III City of Meridian
Item Review Comment Code &Response
1. Response#4. Pedestrian Plan and Response#5. Crossing Guard Text of Response#4 has been updated to include "Students are to enter
Plan and exit the school site on the south side of the site, directly east of the
The study has not provided enough information. The study should South Parking Lot Entrance on Tower Street."
identify where anticipated crossing locations are. The actual pedestrian Text of Response#5 has been updated to include "Pedestrian crossings
plan and crossing guard plan of the school should be included in the with crossing guards are recommended across the north leg of the
study to make sure appropriate crossing treatments are in place. intersection of Peak Avenue and Tower Road, and across the north,
east, and south legs of the intersection of South Parking Lot Entrance
and Tower Road."
2. Response#7. Location of School Zone Text of Response#7 has been updated to include "School zones will be
The study should recommend a location for a school zone. required along portions of Tower Street, Vertex Way, and Peak Avenue
where students enter and exit the school site. The extent of the school
zone is recommended to include the intersection of Peak Avenue and
Tower Street, continue east as Tower Street transitions into Vertex Way
then terminate just southwest of the intersection of Unnamed Local Road
and Vertex Way."
3. Response#8. Need for Flashing Beacon Text has been updated to clarify.
The response is not accurate. ACHD does not require a flashing beacon
on new proposed roads. Flashing beacons will only be installed if
students are walking to school along or across Lake Hazel Road. The
applicant needs to provide ACHD with an estimated number of students
that will walk to school as well as a pedestrian plan in order to let ACHD
determine whether or not flashing beacons will be warranted when the
school opens. If flashing beacons are found to be warranted when the
school is constructed or at any point in the future, the school will be
responsible for funding them.
C i V T e C h Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
Attachment E Page 1 of 5 CivTech Response Date:2/22/2021
Gem Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
1st Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, E.I. Planner III City of Meridian
Item Review Comment (Code) &Response
4. Response#9. Need for a Traffic Control Signal Analysis updated with recommendations. Text updated to include "Traffic
The study indicates that the intersections of Lake Hazel Road/Peak due to the proposed school, traffic from the rest of the proposed
Avenue and Lake Hazel Road/Vertex Way should be evaluated for traffic development, and existing traffic grown to the study year 2025 are added
signals. As part of ACHD's action on Apex Subdivision, the Lake Hazel together(as shown in Figure 1)for this analysis. Based on the expected
Road/Vertex Way intersection was approved as a temporary full access level of service and expected peak hour delay at these intersections,
that would be restricted to right-in/right-out/left-in only in the future and signalization is not recommended. The MUTCD contains warrants to
the intersection of Peak Avenue/Lake Hazel Road was approved as a provide guidance on determining if signalization of an intersection should
restricted to right-in/right-out only access based on the South Meridian be recommended. MUTCD Warrant 5, School Crossing is relevant for
Transportation Plan and the findings of the Apex Subdivision Traffic this analysis. Some students can be expected to need to cross Lake
Impact Study that was completed in March 2020. The analysis in the Hazel Road. The proposed roundabout at the intersection of Locust
Apex Subdivision TIS did not account for traffic generated by a school. Grove Road & Lake Hazel Road is planned to include pedestrian
Please indicate if the traffic generated by the school will affect the crosswalks and will provide a safe location for students to cross Lake
intersection configurations for Lake Hazel Road/Peak Avenue and Lake Hazel Road. Signalization is not recommended at the study intersections
Hazel Road/Vertex Way that were approved for Apex Subdivision and based on Warrant 5."
provide an analysis for these intersections.
5. Response#10. Anticipated Future Improvements Text updated to note that Lake Hazel Road will be 5-lane. Text updated
The response has provided roadway classifications. The response needs to note that the intersection of Locust Grove Road and Lake Hazel Road
to include future improvements. The applicants for Apex Subdivision is proposed to be improved to a 2-lane roundabout.
have proposed to fully improve the intersection of Lake Hazel
Road/Locust Grove Road as a multi-lane roundabout and widen Lake
Hazel Road abutting the site to 5-lanes consistent with the CIP.
C i V T e C h Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
Attachment E Page 2 of 5 CivTech Response Date:2/22/2021
Gem Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
1st Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, E.I. Planner III City of Meridian
Item Review Comment Code &Response
6. Response#12. Traffic Volumes on Adjacent Highways 1. Analysis updated to use the 7% rate used in the Apex study in place of
1. The study derived annual growth rates based on regional population the 8% found from Ada County. Text has been updated to read "The
growth between 1980 and 2013 sourced from the Ada County 2025 larger development study utilized a growth rate of 7 percent per year for
Comprehensive Plan from 2016. This is not acceptable. Please update their analysis. This same growth rate was used here. The segment traffic
these growth rates. The growth rates from the Apex Subdivision Traffic counts were grown to study year 2025 values by multiplying the 2019
Impact Study that was completed in March 2020 can be used. values by a 1.501 growth factor(1.07A6). The 24-hour traffic calculated
2. Please include traffic counts sheets in the Appendix. to be 8,612 bi-directional trips with 892 trips (482 eastbound/410
3. Specify which year is the build-out year. Evaluate the traffic impact of westbound) during the AM peak hour and 857 trips (341 eastbound/516
the site on adjacent network in the build-out year rather than the existing westbound) during the PM peak hour."
year(2020). 2. Appendix included. Appendix C
4. Figure 1 is not clear. The study needs to identify what time of day 3. Buildout year of 2025 used.
each set of numbers refers to. The study should evaluate the AM peak 4. Text has been updated to include "The AM peak hour refers to the
and the school PM peak hours. highest volume hour between 7am and 9am on a weekday; this is the
5. Several items in Table 1 need to be justified or corrected. same for school generated traffic and surrounding traffic. The PM peak
a. Table 1 states that 40% of students take school buses. However, the hour refers to the highest volume hour between 3pm and 5pm on a
percentage of reduced car trips from student taking buses is close to weekday; this is the peak hour for school generated traffic but not for
34% rather than 40% based on numbers provided in the table. Please surrounding traffic. The existing volumes from between 3pm and 5pm
update this percentage. were used for this analysis." and additional anotation in Response#13.
b. The table states that the capacity of one bus is 50 students. Response 5a. A subtotal line has been added to the table to clearly show that the
#2 states that the school will have 4 buses to provide bus service for an 40% reduction is taken from the students who are left after removing the
estimate of 287 students. Please clarify the number of buses the school walk/bike students. This is a vehicle reduction and so does not apply to
will have and the number of students each bus will transport. pedestrian trips. Students within walking/bike distance are not anticipated
c. The number of students walking/biking/taking buses to school should to utilize the bus.
be provided by the school. Please include this information in the study 5b. Values in Response#2 updated to reflect Table 1.
and ensure all the numbers consistent through the whole document. 5c. The number of walk/bike/bus students is taken as a percentage
d. GEM school will utilize 2 buses when the school starts. Please include derived from previous GEM school developments and is an anticipated
two scenarios to show trips for the first phase as well as at full buildout in projectection.
Table 1. 5d. 2ns scenario has been added.
e.
CivTeCh Reviewed Date. 1/271202
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
Attachment E Page 3 of 5 CivTech Response Date:2/22/2021
Gem Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
1st Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, E.I. Planner III City of Meridian
Item Review Comment Code &Response
7. Response#13. Effect Upon the Highway's Level of Service This has been included with a table.
The study states that the increases in traffic on Lake Hazel Road is likely
to result in increased delay during the school's AM peak hour, and the
school's PM peak hour, but not the PM peak hour of the surrounding
road network. Please include an analysis and quantify the impact of the
school rather than simply stating that it is likely to increase delay.
8. Response#14. Need for Acceleration and Deceleration lanes This section has been updated to reflect the configuration of Lake Hazel
The study recommends constructing dedicated westbound and Road. This section has been updated to include the driveway access
eastbound left-turn lanes at the intersection of Vertex Way/ Lake Hazel points. Turn lane warrant information is included as Appendix D.
Road. Please include a copy of all turn lane analysis completed in the
Appendix. Apex Subdivision was required to construct eastbound right-
turn lanes on Lake Hazel Road at Peak Avenue and Vertex Way.
The study also recommends the construction of a dedicated westbound
left-turn at the intersection of Peak Venue/Lake Hazel Road. However,
this intersection will be restricted to right-in/right-out only with the
development of Apex Subdivision. Please update the analyses, narrative
and recommendations in the study to reflect the correct configuration at
this intersection, as necessary.
Please provide a turn lane analysis to assess if turn turn lanes are
warranted on Peak Avenue or Vertex Way at Lake Hazel Road, as well
for all driveways on Vertex Way and the driveway on Peak Avenue.
C i V T e C h Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
Attachment E Page 4 of 5 CivTech Response Date:2/22/2021
Gem Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
1st Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, E.I. Planner III City of Meridian
Item Review Comment Code &Response
9. Response#15. Internal Traffic Circulation Response 15 updated to state as Response 2 correctly described that
The study states that the bus traffic will enter from Peak Avenue west of "Bus traffic will access the school from Tower Street, turn left traveling
the north parking lot, turn south, and circle the south parking lot along the east and north side of the south parking lot, and exit the school
counterclockwise. However, this is not consistent with what is shown in on Peak Avenue."
the site plan provided in the study. The site plan shows bus traffic
entering from Vertex Way and existing onto Peak Avenue. Please
update the study narrative to match the site plan.
10. Response#17. Zoning in the Vicinity Text updated to include "East of the site is land designated as Civic land
The study states that the project site is going to be rezoned to designated as Medium Density Residential. South of the site is land
Community Business (C-C). The study should also mention the zoning designated Medium Density Residential. West of the site is land
surrounding the site. designated Medium Density Residential and land designated Medium-
High Density Residential. North of the site is land designated Medium
Density Residential and land designated Medium-High Density
Residential. Zoning on surrounding land is identified as"Varies by project
and location" by the Meridian City Future Land Use Map and associated
Future Land Use Map Designation Cut Sheets."
11. Response#18. Access Control on Adjacent Highways Site distance analysis has been included with a table. Spacing analysis
1. Please provide driveway spacing analysis, turn lane warrants analysis, has been added. Turn lane warrant analysis has been added to
and sight distance analysis for all access points. Response#14.
2. The study states that the intersection of Peak Avenue/Lake Hazel
Road is proposed to be restricted to right-in/right-out only with no median
break on Lake Hazel Road. The description is not consistent with Figure
1. Please update the lane configuration in Figure 1, trip assignment, and
text in other responses to reflect the restricted access at the intersection
of Peak Avenue/Lake Hazel Road.
12.
13.
14. 1 1
15.
CivTeCh Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
Attachment E Page 5 of 5 CivTech Response Date:2/22/2021
GEM Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
2nd Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, ACHD
Item Review Comment Code & Response
1. Figure 2a shows 2025 total build-out volumes. The figure shows Volume figure showed eroniously large value. Figure has been updated
179 EBL trips at the intersection of Vertex Way and the North Lot in with correct values.
the AM peak hour. However, Table 2b shows that there are only 159
total outbound trips for the AM peak hour. Please update this
2. The study uses LOS as the only indicator to qualify the impact of Table 4 is updated with requested information. Applicable Synchro
the school in response to#13. Please also include v/c ratios and reports are included as Attachments.
delay times in Table 4 and provide the related Synchro reports in
the Appendix.
3. The study states that no exclusive turn lanes are warranted. The An exclusive left-turn lane is not recommended at Vertex Way and Lake
Appendix includes turn lane guidelines, but the numbers used for Hazel Road as a center two-way left-turn lane is expected which will
evaluation were not shown on the charts. However, based on provide for left-turn vehicles.
volumes from Figure 2b, a westbound left turn lane is warranted at Attached Guidelines have been updated to include study volumes. A
the intersection of Vertex Way and Lake Hazel Road in the AM peak right turn lanes is not warranted at Peak Avenue and Lake Hazel Road.
hour. Eastbound right turn lanes are warranted at the intersections A right turn lane may be appropriate at Vertex Way and Lake Hazel
of Lake Hazel Road and Peak Avenue and the intersection of Vertex Road.
Way and Lake Hazel Road. Please provide this information for
completion purposes. Please clarify if turn lanes are warranted on
Peak Avenue or Vertex Way at their intersection with Lake Hazel
Road.
As part of ACHD's action on Apex Southeast Subdivision, that
applicant was required to extend the center turn lane on Lake Hazel
Road to Vertex Way to create a westbound left-turn lane for the
intersection, and construct a dedicated eastbound right-turn lane at
the intersections of Vertex Way and Lake Hazel Road and Peak
Avenue and Lake Hazel Road. The applicant for Apex Southeast
Subdivision has also proposed to construct a center turn lane on
Vertex Avenue/Tower Street east of Peak Avenue.
ICI v Tech Reviewed Date:March 10,2021
CivTech Received Date:March 10,2021
CivTech Entered Date:March 12,2021
Appendix E Page 1 of 2 CivTech Response Date: March 16,2021
GEM Innovation Charter School CivTech, Inc. Review Comments & Responses
2nd Submittal
Disposition Codes: (1)Will Comply (2)Will Evaluate (3) Delete Comment (4) Defer to Consultant/Owner
Reviewer Name, Agency: Paige Bankhead, ACHD
Item Review Comment Code & Response
4. Staff does not recommend the midblock crosswalk across Vertex It has been removed.
l Way and recommends that it be removed.
5. The study notes that Vertex Way/Tower Street is classified as a Road classification has been updated. Email coorispondence has
local street and applies the driveway spacing Policy for driveways indicated that the curently proposed driveway spaces will be acceptable.
on local roadways for the 2 driveways proposed on Vertex
Way/Tower Street. However, this roadway is classified as a
collector street. The minimum required driveway separation for
driveways with more than 100 vehicles per day on a collector
roadway is 245-feet or minimum of 150-feet or be located outside
the influence area of the intersection for a stop controlled
intersection, per District Policy 7206.4.5 and 7206.4.4. Please
r—+4hic inf--fl— in 4hn c4rly
=" CivTech Reviewed Date:March 10,2021
CivTech Received Date:March 10,2021
CivTech Entered Date:March 12,2021
Appendix E Page 2 of 2 CivTech Response Date: March 16,2021
GEM School 1:Locust Grove Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 1:Locust Grove Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM HCM 6th Roundabout Total 2021 PM HCM 6th Roundabout
Intersection Intersection
Intersection Delay,slveh 4.4 Intersection Delay,slveh 4.6
Intersection LOS A Intersection LOS A -
Approach EB WB Approach EB WB
Entry Lanes 2 2 2 Entry Lanes 2 2 2
Conflicting Circle Lanes 2 2 2 2 Conflicting Circle Lanes 2 2 2 2
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 512 458 124 Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 426 539 82 203 _
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 522 467 126 145 Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 434 549 84 206
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 90 170 565 432 Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 159 135 457 518
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 487 521 47 133 Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 565 405 136 110
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0 Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1,000 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1,000
Approach Delay,s/veh 4.6 3.8 5.1 4.6 Approach Delay,s/veh 4.6 4.2 4.4 5.3
Approach LOS A A A A Approach LOS A A A A
Lane _ Left Right Left Right Bypass Left Right Left Right Lane Left Right Left Right Bypass Left Right Left Right
Designated Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR Designated Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR
Assumed Moves i LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR Assumed Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR
RT Channelized Free RT Channelized Free
Lane Util �l469 0.531 0.471 0.529 0.468 0.532 0.469 0.531 Lane Util 0.470 0.530 0.471 0.529 0.464 0.536 0.471 0.529
Follow-Up Headway,s 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 Follow-Up Headway,s 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535
Critical Headway,�645 4.328 4.645 4.328 72 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328 Critical Headway,s 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328 56 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328
Entry Flow,veh/h 245 277 186 209 1938 59 67 68 77 Entry Flow,veh/h 204 230 232 261 1938 39 45 97 109
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 1243 1316 1154 1229 0.980 803 878 907 984 Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 1166 1241 1192 1266 0.980 887 963 838 914
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.983 0.980 0.979 0.982 71 0.985 0.978 0.985 0.981 Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981 0.981 0.980 0.982 55 0.990 0.967 0.981 0.985
Flow Entry,veh/h 241 272 182 205 1900 58 66 67 76 Flow Entry,veh/h 200 226 227 256 1900 39 44 95 107
Cap Entry,veh/h 1221 1290 1130 1207 0.037 791 859 894 965 Cap Entry,veh/h 1143 1217 1168 1244 0.029 878 932 823 900
V/C Ratio d& 0.197 0.211 0.161 0.170 0.0 0.073 0.076 0.075 0.078 V/C Ratio dl 0.175 0.185 0.195 0.206 0.0 0.044 0.047 0.116 0.119
Control Delay,s/veh 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.4 A 5.3 4.9 4.7 4.4 Control Delay,s/veh 4.7 4.6 4.8 4.7 A 4.5 4.3 5.5 5.1
LOS A A A A 0 A A A A LOS� A A A A 0 A A A A
95th%tile Queue,veh 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 95th%tile Queue,veh 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 1 CivTech Inc. Page 1
GEM School 2:Peak Ave.&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 2:Peak Ave.&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM HCM 6th TWSC Total 2021 PM HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.1 Int Delay,s/veh 0
Movement EBT EBR WBL Movement EBT EBR WBL N�NBR
Lane Configurations ?? F ?? i' Lane Configurations +? F ?? r
Traffic Vol,veh/h 459 10 0 421 0 6 Traffic Vol,veh/h 334 32 0 496 0 4 -
Future Vol,veh/h 459 10 0 421 0 6 Future Vol,veh/h 334 32 0 496 0 4
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 -
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized None None None RT Channelized None None None -
Storage Length 150 - 0 Storage Length 150 - 0
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0 - -
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 499 11 0 458 0 7 Mvmt Flow 363 35 0 539 0 4 -
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 250 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 182
Stage 1 - - - Stage 1 - -
Stage 2 - Stage 2 -
Critical Hdwy 6.94 Critical Hdwy 6.94 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.32 Follow-up Hdwy 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 750 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 829 -
Stage 1 0 0 Stage 1 0 0
Stage 2 0 0 Stage 2 0 0
Platoon blocked,% Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 750 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 829 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 Stage 1
Stage 2 Stage 2
Approach EB WB NB Approach EB WB NB -
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0 9.8 HCM Control Delay,s 0 0 9.4 -
HCM LOS A HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBT Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBT
Capacity(veh/h) 750 Capacity(veh/h) 829
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - -
HCM Control Delay(s) 9.8 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.4
HCM Lane LOS A HCM Lane LOS A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0
02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 2 CivTech Inc. Page 2
GEM School 3:Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 3:Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM HCM 6th TWSC Total 2021 PM HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 3.6 Int Delay,s/veh 2.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations ) +? r ) ?? r 4. 4. Lane Configurations r ) ?? r 4. 4.
Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 413 52 67 338 0 83 1 54 0 1 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 1 41 0�
Future Vol,veh/h 0 413 52 67 338 0 83 1 54 0 1 0 Future Vol,veh/h 0 296 42 40 436 0 60 1 41 0 1 0
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =l0 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 _ 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None None �e RT Channelized - Nor None �pne
Storage Length 150 150 150 150 - Storage Length 150 - 150 150 150 -
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - 0 - - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - 0 ■- -
Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 ` Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 449 57 73 367 0 90 1 59 0 1 0 Mvmt Flow 0 322 46 43 474 0 65 1 45 0 1 0
Major/Minor= Majorl Major2 Wort Minor2 = Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Wort Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 367 0 0 506 0 0 779 962 225 738 1019 184 Conflicting Flow Al 474 0 0 368 0 0 646 882 161 722 928 237
Stage - - - - - - 449 449 - 513 513 - Stage - - - - - - 322 322 - 560 560 -
Stage 2 - - 330 513 - 225 506 - Stage 2 - - 324 560 - 162 368 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1188 1055 286 254 178 306 236 827 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1084 1187 357 284 855 314 266 764
Stage 1 - - 559 571 - 512 534 - Stage 1 - - 664 650 - 480 509 -
Stage 2 - - 657 534 - 757 538 - Stage 2 - - 662 509 - 824 620 -
Platoon blocked,% Platoon blocked,
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1188 1055 270 236 778 267 220 827 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1084 1187 346 274 855 289 256 764
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 270 236 - 267 220 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 346 274 - 289 256 -
Stage 1 559 571 512 497 Stage 664 650 480 491
Stage 2 610 497 699 538 Stage 2 637 491 780 620
Approach EB WB Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 1.4 21.8 21.4 HCM Control Delay,s 0 0.7 15.5 19.1
HCM LOS C C HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLnl Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLnl
Capacity(veh/h) 362 1188 1055 220 Capacity(veh/h) 453 1084 1187 256 _
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.414 - - - 0.069 - - 0.005 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.245 - - - 0.037 - - 0.004
HCM Control Delay(s) 21.8 0 8.7 21.4 HCM Control Delay(s) 15.5 0 8.1 19.1 -
HCM Lane LOS C A A C HCM Lane LOS C A A C
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 2 0 0.2 0 HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 1 0 0.1 0
02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/18/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 3 CivTech Inc. Page 3
GEM School 1:Locust Grove Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 1:Locust Grove Rd.&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM HCM 6th Roundabout Total 2025 PM HCM 6th Roundabout
Intersection Intersection
Intersection Delay,s/veh 4.9 Intersection Delay,s/veh 5.1
Intersection LOS A Intersection LOS A _
Approach EB WB Approach EB WB _
Entry Lanes 2 2 2 Entry Lanes 2 2 2 2
Conflicting Circle Lanes 2 2 2 2 Conflicting Circle Lanes 2 2 2 2
Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 646 606 127 Adj Approach Flow,veh/h 518 690 85 213
Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 658 618 129 167 Demand Flow Rate,veh/h 528 703 87 216
Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 113 172 722 556 Vehicles Circulating,veh/h 169 139 561 661
Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 610 679 49 133 Vehicles Exiting,veh/h 708 509 136 112
Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0 Ped Vol Crossing Leg,#/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1,000 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1,000 1.000
Approach Delay,s/veh 5.3 4.2 5.9 5.3 Approach Delay,s/veh 5.1 4.8 4.9 6.2
Approach LOS A A A A Approach LOS A A A A
Lane _ Left Right Left Right Bypass Left Right Left Right Lane Left Right Left Right Bypass Left Right Left Right
Designated Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR Designated Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR
Assumed Moves i LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR Assumed Moves LT TR LT TR R LT TR LT TR
RT Channelized Free RT Channelized Free
Lane Util �l470 0.530 0.470 0.530 0.473 0.527 0.467 0.533 Lane Util 0.470 0.530 0.470 0.530 0.471 0.529 0.472 0.528
Follow-Up Headway,s 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 Follow-Up Headway,s 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535
Critical Headway,�645 4.328 4.645 4.328 101 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328 Critical Headway,s 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328 69 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328
Entry Flow,veh/h 309 349 243 274 1938 61 68 78 89 Entry Flow,veh/h 248 280 298 336 1938 41 46 102 114
Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 1217 1290 1152 1227 0.980 695 769 809 885 Cap Entry Lane,veh/h 1155 1230 1188 1262 0.980 806 881 735 810
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.982 0.981 0.981 0.981 99 0.976 0.987 0.985 0.974 Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981 0.980 0.981 0.981 68 0.976 0.980 0.979 0.988
Flow Entry,veh/h 303 342 238 269 1900 60 67 77 87 Flow Entry,veh/h 243 274 292 330 1900 40 45 100 113
Cap Entry,veh/h 1195 1265 1130 1203 0.052 678 759 798 862 Cap Entry,veh/h 1134 1205 1165 1238 0.036 786 864 720 800
V/C Ratio d& 0.254 0.271 0.211 0.223 0.0 0.088 0.088 0.096 0.101 V/C Ratio dl 0.215 0.228 0.251 0.266 0.0 0.051 0.052 0.139 0.141
Control Delay,s/veh 5.3 5.3 5.1 5.0 A 6.3 5.6 5.5 5.1 Control Delay,s/veh 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.3 A 5.1 4.7 6.5 5.9
LOS A A A A 0 A A A A LOS� A A A A 0 A A A A
95th%tile Queue,veh 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 95th%tile Queue,veh 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 1 CivTech Inc. Page 1
GEM School 2:Peak Ave.&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 2:Peak Ave.&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM HCM 6th TWSC Total 2025 PM HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 0.1 Int Delay,s/veh 0
Movement EBT EBR WBL Movement EBT EBR WBL N�NBR
Lane Configurations ?? F ?? i' Lane Configurations +? F ?? r
Traffic Vol,veh/h 602 11 0 556 0 7 Traffic Vol,veh/h 428 32 0 635 0 4 -
Future Vol,veh/h 602 11 0 556 0 7 Future Vol,veh/h 428 32 0 635 0 4
Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conflicting Peds,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 -
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized None None None RT Channelized None None None -
Storage Length 150 - 0 Storage Length 150 - 0
Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 0 - -
Grade,% 0 - 0 0 - Grade,% 0 - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 654 12 0 604 0 8 Mvmt Flow 465 35 0 690 0 4 -
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minorl
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 327 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 233
Stage 1 - - Stage 1 - - -
Stage 2 - Stage 2 -
Critical Hdwy 6.94 Critical Hdwy 6.94 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - i Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - i
Follow-up Hdwy 3.32 Follow-up Hdwy 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 669 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 769 -
Stage 1 0 0 Stage 1 0 0
Stage 2 0 0 Stage 2 0 0
Platoon blocked,% Platoon blocked,%
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 669 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 769 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 Stage 1
Stage 2 Stage 2
Approach EB WB NB Approach EB WB NB -
HCM Control Delay,s 0 0 10.4 HCM Control Delay,s 0 0 9.7 -
HCM LOS B HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBT Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBT
Capacity(veh/h) 669 Capacity(veh/h) 769
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - -
HCM Control Delay(s) 10.4 HCM Control Delay(s) 9.7
HCM Lane LOS B HCM Lane LOS A
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0 HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 0
02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 2 CivTech Inc. Page 2
GEM School 3:Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd. GEM School 3:Vertex Way&Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM HCM 6th TWSC Total 2025 PM HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection Intersection
Int Delay,s/veh 16.5 Int Delay,s/veh 3.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations ) +? r ) ?? r 4. 4. Lane Configurations ) +? r ) ?? r 4. 4.
Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 528 81 108 435 0 121 2 106 - 0 Traffic Vol,veh/h 0 377 55 58 558 g&ll 1 65 0�
Future Vol,veh/h 0 528 81 108 435 0 121 2 106 0 2 0 Future Vol,veh/h 0 377 55 58 558 0 77 1 65 0 1 0
Conflicting Pads,#/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i0 Conflicting Pads,#/hr 0 0 a 0 0 0 _ 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None None �e RT Channelized - None I - None �pne
Storage Length 150 150 150 150 - Storage Length 150 150 150 . 150 -
Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# - 0 - - 0 - 0 ■- -
Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - 0 - 0 Grade,% - 0 - - 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Heavy Vehicles,% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 574 88 117 473 0 132 2 115 0 2 0 Mvmt Flow 0 410 60 63 607 0 84 1 71 0 1 0
Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Wort Minor2 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Wort Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 473 0 0 662 0 0 1046 1281 287 995 1369 237 Conflicting Flow Al 607 0 0 470 0 0 840 1143 205 939 1203 304
Stage 1 - - - - - - 574 574 - 707 707 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 410 410 - 733 733 -
Stage 2 - - 472 707 - 288 662 - Stage 2 - - 430 733 - 206 470 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 Critical Hdwy 4.14 4.14 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 2.22 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1085 922 183 164 710 199 145 764 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 96 1088 258 199 802 219 183 692
Stage 1 - - 471 501 - 392 436 - Stage 1 589 594 - 378 424 -
Stage 2 - - 542 436 - 695 457 - Stage 2 574 424 - 777 558 -
Platoon blocked,% Platoon blocked,
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1085 922 163 143 710 149 127 764 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 967 1088 245 187 802 190 172 692
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 163 143 - 149 127 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 245 187 - 190 172 -
Stage 1 471 501 392 381 Stage 1 589 594 378 399
Stage 2 471 381 580 457 Stage 2 539 399 707 558
Approach EB WB _W Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay,s 0 1.9 95 33.8 HCM Control Delay,s 0 0.8 22.6 26.1
HCM LOS F D HCM LOS C D
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBIL Minor Lane/MajorMvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLnl
Capacity(veh/h) 253 1085 922 127 Capacity(veh/h) 357 967 1088 172 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.984 - - - 0.127 - - 0.017 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.435 - - - 0.058 - - 0.006
HCM Control Delay(s) 95 0 9.5 33.8 HCM Control Delay(s) 22.6 0 8.5 26.1 -
HCM Lane LOS F A A D HCM Lane LOS C A A D
HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 9.4 0 0.4 0.1 HCM 95th%tile Q(veh) 2.1 0 0.2 0 i
02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report 02/17/2021 Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc. Page 3 CivTech Inc. Page 3
Bill Selby
Fra
Sen
To:
Su
Att
Foll
Fla
Ex
Bill
Pie
Th
Bill
(61
Fro
fiat
To:
<K
Su
[CA
The
the
Jon
BRI
O:
❑:
C: 2
E. j
From: Paige Bankhead aho.org3
Sent:Wednesday, March 10, 2 -29 AM
To:Jon Wardle rp.com>
Cc: Regina Cunningham< o.org>; Lachlin Kinsella< Ilp.com>
Subject:Apex SE GEM South Driveways
Good Morning,
1
After reviewing additional information in the GEM South School TIS,Staff is comfortable with allowing the construction
of the driveways for GEM South School with Apex SE consistent with the locations noted in the attached TIS on page 10.
Regina, I will also note this in Trakit.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Thank you,
Paige Bankhead, E.I.
Planner III
Ada County Highway District
Development Services
1301 N.Orchard St. Ste. 200
Phone: (208) 387-6293
ggodEw-
Gm.,....t'tr'a'4 5;4,.,ro
ACHD Development Services is open for business at our new location at 1301 N. Orchard Street, Suite
200 in the CSC building. Parking and building entrance are located on west side of building.
2