Public School ChecklistCivTech
March 16, 2021
Paige Bankhead
Ada County Highway District
Development Services
1301 N. Orchard St. Ste. 200
Boise, ID 83706
04�55�0144A
S 0 cf'tcn
10209
�Of
LEN �E
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.LAKE HAZEL RD.
--- -- ---------_--------------
—y��—���__—�-RT�o►4lRr� _. __ __ __ _ .. ci �.i�]:C :n :i1.ly.�F'� Y �s `,•ii�:'
I IT ~A
i i` is '� • � r
d
TOWOKU"
/Wm
// i s �.1 •cc fr
- Leciend
Crosswalk
_'.`- • � � � School Zone
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
ITE
Proposed
Daily
AM
Weekday
Peak Hour
Total
PM Peak Hour of
Generator
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
ITE
Proposed
Daily
-
AM
Weekday Trips
Peak Hour
Total
PM Peak Hour of
Generator
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
see
59(60) 65(51 )
398(295) 349(426)
14(37) 7(19)
CV �
[may CV 67
C7 G r
Locust Grave Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd.
C
N
O a
r o
MM
LL9 fM1
Peak Ave. & South Lot
A
459(334) 421(496]
10(32)
10
Peak Ave. a LaKe Hazel Rd
7
I
South Lot & Tower St.
GEM Innovation School - Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 6
_ B
Wb0(0]
�338(436)
67(4fl)
Co
C7 � �
OO UL7
v-�
Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
Vertex Way & North Lot
IXX(XX) = AM peak hour of school volumes (PM peak hour of school volumes) j
Figure 2a — 2021 Opening Year Volumes
E
105 CivTech
1
59(60) 81(63)
521(380) 454(553)
15(37) 7(19)
N O
m N
Locust Grove Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd
Peak Ave. & South Lot
A
L602028) 542(635)
I \\lr
Peak Ave. & take hazel Rd.
I
2[iy
1{1) 1(1)
5� 16) 9(29)
A
South Lot & Tower St.
Advanced Memorandum
GEM Innovation School —Meridian, Idaho
March 16, 2021
Page 7
B
s^s
ono
0(0) 0(0)
528(377) 435(558)
81(55) 108(58)
v N m
A ti
� m
isms
Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
� E
146(108)
1{1)
I7
�I
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
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
2021 Build
2025 No Build
2025 Build
ID
Intersection
Intersection
Approach/
LOS, Delay*, v/c
LOS'
LOS, Delay*, v/c
Control
Movement
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 Po/icy 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
AASHTO Sight
Distance Along Roadway
Posted
Roadway
Speed
Sight
Distance
Left of
Right of
On Major
Limit
(mph)
Left of
Driveway
Driveway
Road
Driveway
(Case 132/133)
(Case 131)
(Case F)
Hazel Road at Peak Avenue
MOTME
RI
Lake Hazel Road at Vertex Way
Peak Avenue at South Lot
Tower Street at South Lot
NorthLake
Vertex Way at •
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 Po/icy 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 PolicyManual
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:
accordance with the MUTCD and the Ada
section 5202, Sign and Object Markers.
The school zone should be signed in
County Highway District (ACHD) Policy Manual
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
Page is too large to OCR.
GEM School South
Proposed Full Build 2025
Trio Generation
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 1 625 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).
Used rEauated Ratel (Tvoe Abbreviations:
Rate ("WA" ), Fitted Curve I
Used
Charter Elementary School I WA: T=X*1.85 [1.85] 1 FC: T=1.17*X-34.68 [1.111 1 FC: LN(T)=0.98*LN(X)-0.3 [0.65] 1 1
j� !vTech Attachment B
ZZ7Page 1 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South
Proposed Full Build 2025
Box 5/Box 9 - Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips (Apply Equations and in/out Distributions)
Baseline Vehicular Trips
Trip Generation
February 2021
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H. of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use % In I In I Out ITotall %In1 In I Out ITotall %In1 In I Out ITotall %ini In I Out I Total
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 I Total I Percent In Out Total Percent I In I Out I Total Percent I In I Out I Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
i
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 Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
ivTeh Attachment B
Page 2 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South
Proposed Full Build 2025
Trip Generation
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)
77
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out I Total I Percent In Out Total Percent I In I Out I Total Percent I In I Out I Total
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 Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
•�
•� �:
IvTeh Attachment B
Page 3 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South
Proposed Opening Fall 2021
Trio Generation
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 1 392 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).
Used rEauated Ratel (Tvoe Abbreviations:
Rate ("WA" ), Fitted Curve I
Used
Charter Elementary School I WA: T=X*1.85 [1.85] 1 FC: T=1.17*X-34.68 [1.08] 1 FC: LN(T)=0.98*LN(X)-0.3 [0.66] 1 1
6,;�- !vTech Attachment B
Page 4 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South
Proposed Opening Fall 2021
Box 5/Box 9 - Estimate Baseline Trips/Estimate Vehicular Trips (Apply Equations and in/out Distributions)
Baseline Vehicular Trips
Trip Generation
February 2021
ADT AM Peak Hour PM P.H. of Generator (not used)
Proposed Use % In I In I Out ITotall %In1 In I Out ITotall %In1 In I Out ITotall %ini In I Out I Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
1'
..
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 I Total I Percent In Out Total Percent I In I Out I Total I Percenti In I Out I Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
0:
.-
0:
i
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 Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out TotalCharter
Elementary School
ivTeh Attachment B
Page 5 of 6 January 2021
GEM School South
Proposed Opening Fall 2021
Trip Generation
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)
77
Proposed Use Percent I In I Out I Total I Percent In Out TTotal Percent I In I Out I Total I Percenti In I Out I Total
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 Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
SchoolCharter Elementary
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
Total 1133 1116 2249
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
Peak - 16:30 16:45 - - - - - - 16:30
Vol. - 398 283 - - - - - - 673
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
6JC
DC
CDC
r
M
� DC
0
rn
33C
C
a
EL
O
23C
1DC
-LD% 2055 1596 1D% n V
f
Add Left -Turn
Lane
No Left-t n Lane J
iC7
The following data are required:
200 30 40D 5C7 CDC -J]
Advancing Volume (VJ. veh;h
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
3-.r
� a_C
2=r.
M
�—
dd Left-ium
Lane
L.
No Le Turn Lane
67 2N M) -10 60) c=i 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
W1
6113
2Da
5% 10-t"' S
Lefe-Tujn Lane Not
Turn Lane
I Ao Mr 707 517 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
3-E
m2
T
ta,'e: Wirer. V. z4:30 aehM (JaVled Ilre;
lest -aim lane is fiat rAmaup app-ropnaie
-jr I-sis Te advancing volurre (V,) In the
same director as ire left-tuming irwrc
ekoeeds aQ0 4en-7i yvA� 1!0D 4er11)j.
�5 Add Left -tam
Lane
if
r
No Left -turn
Lane
N.
N.
is 0 25
Left -Turn Volume jVJ, vehfh
The following data are required:
setes i
� S231es2
.;Seri�im
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
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
4
7
E
a-=
2�
4._
z
ajor-Roadspeed
4D mDh i
0 Rn•ih}
45 rn ph
17D knJ-
Add
Right-Tt:,
Lan=
50 nt
1-
: .80 kn
+h :
5:
'x
SS ntR
�k�
'90 k n'a
_> 6D
rnDh
0 DD
rreh:
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
300 600 700
�0
MW-Road
peed
46 mph
<=40mph(
)kmlh)
(70 kmih)
70
50
Add Rio
-Turn
(80 km
Lan
I
/
AM Pa.k
Hour
9M Pak
Heur
30
55 mph
M
� a
The following data are required:
Major -Road Volume jone direction), vehih
19t10
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 aright -turn
lane is appropriate.
Source: NCHRP Report 279 and 457
Adopted: Res. 469 (7/13/94) 7100 - 41
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)
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
Attachment E
Page 1 of 5
Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
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
Attachment E
Page 2 of 5
Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
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
Response #12. Traffic Volumes on Adjacent Highways
1. The study derived annual growth rates based on regional population
growth between 1980 and 2013 sourced from the Ada County 2025
Comprehensive Plan from 2016. This is not acceptable. Please update
these growth rates. The growth rates from the Apex Subdivision Traffic
Impact Study that was completed in March 2020 can be used.
2. Please include traffic counts sheets in the Appendix.
3. Specify which year is the build -out year. Evaluate the traffic impact of
the site on adjacent network in the build -out year rather than the existing
year (2020).
4. Figure 1 is not clear. The study needs to identify what time of day
each set of numbers refers to. The study should evaluate the AM peak
and the school PM peak hours.
5. Several items in Table 1 need to be justified or corrected.
a. Table 1 states that 40% of students take school buses. However, the
percentage of reduced car trips from student taking buses is close to
34% rather than 40% based on numbers provided in the table. Please
update this percentage.
b. The table states that the capacity of one bus is 50 students. Response
#2 states that the school will have 4 buses to provide bus service for an
estimate of 287 students. Please clarify the number of buses the school
will have and the number of students each bus will transport.
c. The number of students walking/biking/taking buses to school should
be provided by the school. Please include this information in the study
and ensure all the numbers consistent through the whole document.
d. GEM school will utilize 2 buses when the school starts. Please include
two scenarios to show trips for the first phase as well as at full buildout in
Table 1.
e.
CivTec
1. Analysis updated to use the 7% rate used in the Apex study in place of
the 8% found from Ada County. Text has been updated to read "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 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."
2. Appendix included. Appendix C
3. Buildout year of 2025 used.
4. Text has been updated to include "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." and additional anotation in Response#13.
5a. A subtotal line has been added to the table to clearly show that the
40% reduction is taken from the students who are left after removing the
walk/bike students. This is a vehicle reduction and so does not apply to
pedestrian trips. Students within walking/bike distance are not anticipated
to utilize the bus.
5b. Values in Response #2 updated to reflect Table 1.
5c. The number of walk/bike/bus students is taken as a percentage
derived from previous GEM school developments and is an anticipated
projectection.
5d. 2ns scenario has been added.
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
Attachment E
Page 4 of 5
Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
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
Attachment E
Page 5 of 5
Reviewed Date: 1/27/2021
CivTech Received Date: 1/29/2021
CivTech Entered Date: 1/29/2021
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
I Item Review Comment (Code) & Response I
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. I 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
3.
The study states that no exclusive turn lanes are warranted. The
Appendix includes turn lane guidelines, but the numbers used for
evaluation were not shown on the charts. However, based on
volumes from Figure 2b, a westbound left turn lane is warranted at
the intersection of Vertex Way and Lake Hazel Road in the AM peak
hour. Eastbound right turn lanes are warranted at the intersections
of Lake Hazel Road and Peak Avenue and the intersection of Vertex
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.
CivTech
Appendix E
An exclusive left -turn lane is not recommended at Vertex Way and Lake
Hazel Road as a center two-way left -turn lane is expected which will
provide for left -turn vehicles.
Attached Guidelines have been updated to include study volumes. A
right turn lanes is not warranted at Peak Avenue and Lake Hazel Road.
A right turn lane may be appropriate at Vertex Way and Lake Hazel
Road.
Page 1 of 2
Reviewed Date: March 10, 2021
CivTech Received Date: March 10, 2021
CivTech Entered Date: March 12, 2021
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.
The study notes that Vertex Way/Tower Street is classified as a
Road classification has been updated. Email coorispondence has
5.
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
rrnr4 4hic in 4hn ¢+—]v
= CivTech
Appendix E Page 2 of 2
Reviewed Date: March 10, 2021
CivTech Received Date: March 10, 2021
CivTech Entered Date: March 12, 2021
CivTech Response Date: March 16, 2021
GEM School
1: Locust Grove Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM
HCM
6th Roundabout
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
4.4
Intersection LOS
A
-
Approach
EB
WB
Entry Lanes
2
2
2
Conflicting Circle Lanes
2
2
2
2
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
512
458
124
-
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
522
467
126
145
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
90
170
565
432
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
487
521
47
133
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1,000
Approach Delay, s/veh
4.6
3.8
5.1
4.6
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane _
Left
Right
Left
Right
Bypass
Left
Right
Left
Right
Designated Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
Assumed Moves i
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
RT Channelized
Free
Lane Util �l469
0.531
0.471
0.529
0.468
0.532
0.469
0.531
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
Entry Flow, veh/h
245
277
186
209
1938
59
67
68
77
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
1243
1316
1154
1229
0.980
803
878
907
984
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.983
0.980
0.979
0.982
71
0.985
0.978
0.985
0.981
Flow Entry, veh/h
241
272
182
205
1900
58
66
67
76
Cap Entry,veh/h
1221
1290
1130
1207
0.037
791
859
894
965
V/C Ratio Ift
0.197
0.211
0.161
0.170
0.0
0.073
0.076
0.075
0.078
Control Delay, s/veh
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.4
A
5.3
4.9
4.7
4.4
LOS
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 1
GEM School
1: Locust Grove Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 PM
HCM
6th Roundabout
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
4.6
Intersection LOS
A
-
Approach
EB
WB
Entry Lanes
2
2
2
Conflicting Circle Lanes
2
2
2
2
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
426
539
82
203 _
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
434
549
84
206
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
159
135
457
518
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
565
405
136
110
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1,000
Approach Delay, s/veh
4.6
4.2
4.4
5.3
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane
Left
Right
Left
Right
Bypass
Left
Right
Left
Right
Designated Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
Assumed Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
RT Channelized
Free
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
Critical Headway, s
4.645
4.328
4.645
4.328
56
4.645
4.328
4.645
4.328
Entry Flow, veh/h
204
230
232
261
1938
39
45
97
109
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
1166
1241
1192
1266
0.980
887
963
838
914
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
200
226
227
256
1900
39
44
95
107
Cap Entry,veh/h
1143
1217
1168
1244
0.029
878
932
823
900
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
4.8
4.7
A
4.5
4.3
5.5
5.1
LOS �
A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 1
GEM School
2: Peak Ave. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.1
Movement
EBT
EBR
WBL
�NBR
Lane Configurations
??
F
Traffic Vol, veh/h
459
10
0
421
0
6
-
Future Vol, veh/h
459
10
0
421
0
6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
None
None
None
-
Storage Length
150
-
0
Veh in Median Storage,
# 0
-
0
0
-
-
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
-
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
499
11
0
458
0
7
-
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
250
Stage 1
-
-
-
-
Stage 2
-
Critical Hdwy
6.94
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
Follow-up Hdwy
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
0
0
750
Stage 1
0
0
Stage 2
0
0
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
-
-
750
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
9.8
-
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
EBT
EBR
WBT
Capacity (veh/h)
750
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.009
-
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.8
HCM Lane LOS
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 2
GEM School
2: Peak Ave. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 PM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0
Movement
EBT
EBR
WBL
N�NBR
Lane Configurations
+?
F
Traffic Vol, veh/h
334
32
0
496
0
4
-
Future Vol, veh/h
334
32
0
496
0
4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
None
None
None
-
Storage Length
150
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0
-
0
0
-
-
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
-
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
363
35
0
539
0
4
-
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
182
Stage 1
-
-
Stage 2
-
Critical Hdwy
6.94
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
i
Follow-up Hdwy
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
0
0
829
-
Stage 1
0
0
Stage 2
0
0
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
-
-
829
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
-
Stage 2
Approach
EB
WB
NB
-
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
9.4
-
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
EBT
EBR
WBT
Capacity (veh/h)
829
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.005
-
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.4
HCM Lane LOS
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 2
GEM School
3: Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 AM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
3.6
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
Lane Configurations
)
♦?
r
)
??
r
4.
4.
Traffic Vol, veh/h
0
413
52
67
338
0
83
1
54
0
1
0 -
Future Vol, veh/h
0
413
52
67
338
0
83
1
54
0
1
0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
=l0 -
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
None
�e
Storage Length
150
150
150
150
-
Veh in Median Storage,
# -
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
Heavy Vehicles, %
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
Major/Minor= Majorl
Major2
Wort
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
367
0
0
506
0
0
779
962
225
738
1019
184
Stage
-
-
-
-
-
-
449
449
-
513
513
-
Stage 2
-
-
330
513
-
225
506
-
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 2
Follow-up Hdwy
-
2.22
-
2.22
6.54
3.52
5.54
4.02
-
3.32
6.54
3.52
5.54
4.02
-
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1188
1055
286
254
178
306
236
827
Stage 1
-
-
559
571
-
512
534
-
Stage 2
-
-
657
534
-
757
538
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1188
1055
270
236
778
267
220
827
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
270
236
-
267
220
-
Stage 1
559
571
512
497
Stage 2
610
497
699
538
Approach
EB
WB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
1.4
21.8
21.4
HCM LOS
C
C
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt
NBLn1
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBRSBLnl
Capacity (veh/h)
362
1188
1055
220
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.414
-
-
-
0.069
-
-
0.005
HCM Control Delay (s)
21.8
0
8.7
21.4
-
HCM Lane LOS
C
A
A
C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
2
0
0.2
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 3
GEM School
3: Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2021 PM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
2.1
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
Lane Configurations
r
)
??
r
4.
4.
Traffic Vol, veh/h
0
1
41
0�
Future Vol, veh/h
0
296
42
40
436
0
60
1
41
0
1 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
_ 0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop Stop
RT Channelized
-
Nor
None
�pne
Storage Length
150
-
150
150
150
-
Veh in Median Storage,
# -
0
-
-
0
-
0
■ -
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 2
Mvmt Flow
0
322
46
43
474
0
65
1
45
0
1 0
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Wort
Minor2
Conflicting Flow Al
474
0
0
368
0
0
646
882
161
722
928 237
Stage
-
-
-
-
-
-
322
322
-
560
560 -
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 Stg 1
-
-
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
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1084
1187
357
284
855
314
266 764
Stage 1
-
-
664
650
-
480
509 -
Stage 2
-
-
662
509
-
824
620 -
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1084
1187
346
274
855
289
256 764
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
346
274
-
289
256 -
Stage 1
664
650
480
491
Stage 2
637
491
780
620
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0.7
15.5
19.1
HCM LOS
C
C
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt
NBLn1
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBRSBLnl
Capacity (veh/h)
453
1084
1187
256
_
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.245
-
-
-
0.037
-
-
0.004
HCM Control Delay (s)
15.5
0
8.1
19.1
-
HCM Lane LOS
C
A
A
C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
1
0
0.1
0
02/18/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 3
GEM School
1: Locust Grove Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM
HCM
6th Roundabout
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
4.9
Intersection LOS
A
-
Approach
EB
WB
Entry Lanes
2
2
2
Conflicting Circle Lanes
2
2
2
2
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
646
606
127
-
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
658
618
129
167
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
113
172
722
556
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
610
679
49
133
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1.000
1,000
Approach Delay, s/veh
5.3
4.2
5.9
5.3
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane _
Left
Right
Left
Right
Bypass
Left
Right
Left
Right
Designated Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
Assumed Moves i
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
RT Channelized
Free
Lane Util �l470
0.530
0.470
0.530
0.473
0.527
0.467
0.533
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
Entry Flow, veh/h
309
349
243
274
1938
61
68
78
89
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
1217
1290
1152
1227
0.980
695
769
809
885
Entry HV Adj Factor
0.982
0.981
0.981
0.981
99
0.976
0.987
0.985
0.974
Flow Entry, veh/h
303
342
238
269
1900
60
67
77
87
Cap Entry,veh/h
1195
1265
1130
1203
0.052
678
759
798
862
V/C Ratio Ift
0.254
0.271
0.211
0.223
0.0
0.088
0.088
0.096
0.101
Control Delay, s/veh
5.3
5.3
5.1
5.0
A
6.3
5.6
5.5
5.1
LOS A
A
A
A
0
A
A
A
A
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 1
GEM School
1: Locust Grove Rd. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 PM
HCM
6th Roundabout
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
5.1
Intersection LOS
A
_
Approach
EB
WB
_
Entry Lanes
2
2
2
2
Conflicting Circle Lanes
2
2
2
2
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h
518
690
85
213
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h
528
703
87
216
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h
169
139
561
661
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h
708
509
136
112
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h
0
0
0
0
Ped Cap Adj
1.000
1.000
1,000
1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh
5.1
4.8
4.9
6.2
Approach LOS
A
A
A
A
Lane
Left
Right
Left
Right
Bypass
Left
Right
Left
Right
Designated Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
Assumed Moves
LT
TR
LT
TR
R
LT
TR
LT
TR
RT Channelized
Free
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
Critical Headway, s
4.645
4.328
4.645
4.328
69
4.645
4.328
4.645
4.328
Entry Flow, veh/h
248
280
298
336
1938
41
46
102
114
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h
1155
1230
1188
1262
0.980
806
881
735
810
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
243
274
292
330
1900
40
45
100
113
Cap Entry,veh/h
1134
1205
1165
1238
0.036
786
864
720
800
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
5.1
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
95th %tile Queue, veh
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 1
GEM School
2: Peak Ave. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0.1
Movement
EBT
EBR
WBL
�NBR
Lane Configurations
??
F
Traffic Vol, veh/h
602
11
0
556
0
7
-
Future Vol, veh/h
602
11
0
556
0
7
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
None
None
None
-
Storage Length
150
-
0
Veh in Median Storage,
# 0
-
0
0
-
-
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
-
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
654
12
0
604
0
8
-
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
327
Stage 1
-
-
-
Stage 2
-
Critical Hdwy
6.94
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
i
Follow-up Hdwy
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
0
0
669
Stage 1
0
0
Stage 2
0
0
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
-
-
669
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
Stage 2
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
10.4
-
HCM LOS
B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
EBT
EBR
WBT
Capacity (veh/h)
669
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.011
-
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
10.4
HCM Lane LOS
B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 2
GEM School
2: Peak Ave. & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 PM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
0
Movement
EBT
EBR
WBL
N�NBR
Lane Configurations
+?
F
Traffic Vol, veh/h
428
32
0
635
0
4
-
Future Vol, veh/h
428
32
0
635
0
4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
RT Channelized
None
None
None
-
Storage Length
150
-
0
Veh in Median Storage, # 0
-
0
0
-
-
Grade, %
0
-
0
0
-
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
-
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mvmt Flow
465
35
0
690
0
4
-
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Conflicting Flow All
0
0
233
Stage 1
-
-
-
Stage 2
-
Critical Hdwy
6.94
-
Critical Hdwy Stg 1
Critical Hdwy Stg 2
-
i
Follow-up Hdwy
3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
0
0
769
-
Stage 1
0
0
Stage 2
0
0
-
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
-
-
769
-
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stage 1
-
Stage 2
Approach
EB
WB
NB
-
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0
9.7
-
HCM LOS
A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt
NBLn1
EBT
EBR
WBT
Capacity (veh/h)
769
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.006
-
-
-
HCM Control Delay (s)
9.7
HCM Lane LOS
A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
0
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 2
GEM School
3: Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 AM
HCM 6th TWSC
ntersection
Int Delay, s/veh
16.5
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
Lane Configurations
)
+?
r
)
??
r
4.
4.
Traffic Vol, veh/h
0
528
81
108
435
0
121
2
106
- 0 -
Future Vol, veh/h
0
528
81
108
435
0
121
2
106
0 2 0
Conflicting Pads, #/hr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 i0 -
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
-
None
None
�e _
Storage Length
150
150
150
150
-
Veh in Median Storage,
# -
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
0
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92 92 92 _
Heavy Vehicles, %
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
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Minor2
Conflicting Flow All
473
0
0
662
0
0
1046
1281
287
995 1369 237
Stage 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
574
574
-
707 707 -
Stage 2
-
-
472
707
-
288 662 -
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 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
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
1085
922
183
164
710
199 145 764
Stage 1
-
-
471
501
-
392 436 -
Stage 2
-
-
542
436
-
695 457 -
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
1085
922
163
143
710
149 127 764
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
163
143
-
149 127 -
Stage 1
471
501
392 381
Stage 2
471
381
580 457
Approach
EB
WB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
1.9
95
33.8
HCM LOS
F
D
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt
NBLn1
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBRSBIL
Capacity (veh/h)
253
1085
922
127
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.984
-
-
-
0.127
-
-
0.017
HCM Control Delay (s)
95
0
9.5
33.8
HCM Lane LOS
F
A
A
D
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
9.4
0
0.4
0.1
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 3
GEM School
3: Vertex Way & Lake Hazel Rd.
Total 2025 PM
HCM 6th TWSC
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh
3.1
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
)
+?
r
)
??
r
4.
4.
Traffic Vol, veh/h
0
377
55
58
558
g&ll
1
65
0�
Future Vol, veh/h
0
377
55
58
558
0
77
1
65
0 1 0
Conflicting Pads, #/hr
0
0
a
0
0
0_ 0
Sign Control
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized
-
None
I
-
None
�pne
Storage Length
150
150
150
.
150
-
Veh in Median Storage,
# -
0
-
-
0
-
0
■ -
-
Grade, %
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
-
- 0
Peak Hour Factor
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92 92 92 -
Heavy Vehicles, %
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 2 2
Mvmt Flow
0
410
60
63
607
0
84
1
71
0 1 0
Major/Minor Majorl
Major2
Minorl
Minor2
Conflicting Flow Al
607
0
0
470
0
0
840
1143
205
939 1203 304
Stage
-
-
-
-
-
-
410
410
-
733 733 -
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 Stg 1
-
-
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
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver
96
1088
258
199
802
219 183 692
Stage 1
589
594
-
378 424 -
Stage 2
574
424
-
777 558 -
Platoon blocked, %
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver
967
1088
245
187
802
190 172 692
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver
-
-
-
-
-
-
245
187
-
190 172 -
Stage 1
589
594
378 399
Stage 2
539
399
707 558
Approach
EB
WB
NB
HCM Control Delay, s
0
0.8
22.6
26.1
HCM LOS
C
D
Minor Lane/MajorMvmt
NBLn1
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBRSBLnl
Capacity (veh/h)
357
967
1088
172
-
HCM Lane V/C Ratio
0.435
-
-
-
0.058
-
-
0.006
HCM Control Delay (s)
22.6
0
8.5
26.1
-
HCM Lane LOS
C
A
A
D
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)
2.1
0
0.2
0
i
02/17/2021
Synchro 11 Report
CivTech Inc.
Page 3
Bill Selby
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,
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
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.