Minutes - 2020 - Planning & Zoning - 01/06/2020 - RegularTHE CITY OF EAGLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
January 6, 2020
Minutes
CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 6:02 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: WRIGHT, GUERBER, JOHNSON, MCLAUGHLIN, and SMITH. A
quorum is present.
ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE ACTION ITEMS. CONSENT AGENDA:
♦ Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one motion. There
will be no separate discussion on these items unless the Chairman, a Commissioner, member
of City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for
discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be placed on the Regular Agenda in
a sequence determined by the Rules of Order.
♦ Any item on the Consent Agenda that contains written recommendations from the City of Eagle
shall be adopted as part of the Planning & Zoning Commission's Consent Agenda approval
motion unless specifically stated otherwise.
A. Minutes of December 16, 2019.
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the approval of A-04-19 & RZ-09-19 —
Annexation and Rezone from RUT to R -E — City of Eagle: On behalf of George Fischer,
the City of Eagle, represented by William Vaughan, AICP, is requesting annexation and rezone
from RUT (Rural -Urban Transition — Ada County designation) to R -E (Residential -Estates).
The 5.85 -acre and 5.39 -acre properties are located on the south side of West Beacon Light
Road approximately 2,098 -feet east of North Ballantyne Lane at 1275 West Beacon Light Road
(unplatted property) and 2575 North Sky View Lane (Lot 6, Block 1, Pony Subdivision).
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the approval of CU -07-19 — Building Height
Exception — Pet IO, LLC: Pet IQ, LLC, represented by Stan Cole with Cole Architects, is
requesting a building height exception to 59 -feet. The request is in association with a proposed
three (3) story office building. The 3.85 -acre site is located within the Eagle River development
on the north side of East Eagle River Street and East Riverside Drive on Lot 20 and a portion
of Lot 19, Block 3, Mixed Use Subdivision No. 5.
Johnson moves to approve the consent agenda as presented. Seconded by McLaughlin. ALL
AYES... MOTION CARRIES.
Discussion.
4. ACTION ITEM.- Election of Chairman and Vice -Chairman of the Planning & Zoning
Commission.
Guerber moves to re-elect Commissioner Wright as the Chairman and Commissioner
Johnson as the Vice -Chair for Planning & Zoning in 2020. ALL AYES... MOTION
CARRIES.
Discussion.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
City Planner, Mike Williams, explains that item 6B will likely be a quick hearing, and
requests that item 6B (ZOA-04-19) be heard ahead of item 6A.
Page 1 of 5
K:\P&Z\MIN UTE S\2020\PZ-01-06-20m in. docx
Guerber moves to amend the agenda to move item 6A to item 613 and item 613 to item 6A on
the agenda. Seconded by Johnson. ALL AYES... MOTION CARRIES.
BA. ACTION ITEM: ZOA-04-19 — Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Permit Printing and/or
Slue rintin within the M-1 Zone — Jim McCauley: Jim McCauley is proposing an
ordinance of the City of Eagle, Ada County Idaho, to amend Title 8 Zoning, Chapter 2, Section
3 to permit "Printing and/or Blueprinting" within the M-1 zone; providing a severability clause;
and providing an effective date.
Jim McCauley, 2611 West State Street. The applicant provides a brief overview of the application.
McCauley responds to questions from the Commission.
City Planner, Mike Williams, provides a detailed overview of the application.
Williams responds to questions from the Commission.
Chairman Wright opens the Public Hearing.
There were no members of the public present who wished to testify.
Chairman Wright closes the Public Hearing.
Smith moves to recommend for approval ZOA-04-19 — Zoning Ordinance Amendment to
Permit Printing and/or Blueprinting within the M-1 Zone — Jim McCauley. Seconded by
Johnson. ALL AYES... MOTION CARRIES.
AB. ACTION ITEM. ACTION ITEM: A-02-19/RZ-05-19/CU-04-19/PPUD-03-19/PP-05-19 —
Whitehurst Planned Unit Development — Mustang 35, LLC: Mustang 35, LLC, represented
by Mark Butler with Land Consultants, Inc., is requesting an annexation, rezone from RUT
(Rural -Urban Transition — Ada County designation) to R -1 -DA -P (Residential with a
development agreement — PUD) and R -3 -DA -P (Residential with a development agreement —
PUD), conditional use permit, preliminary development plan, and preliminary plat approvals
for Whitehurst Subdivision, a 67 -lot (60 -buildable, 7 -common) residential planned unit
development. The 30.06 -acre site is located at the terminus of West Breanna Drive north of
Flint Estates Subdivision.
Mark Butler, 1675 East Bishop Way. The applicant provides a brief overview of the application.
Butler responds to questions from the Commission.
City Planner, Mike Williams, provides a detailed overview of the application.
Williams responds to questions from the Commission.
Chairman Wright opens the Public Hearing.
Skye Hamilton, 3660 West Flint Drive. Hamilton thanks Mr. Butler, states that many of the
requested changes were made and that the applicants were open and transparent throughout the
process, and that she supports the application. Hamilton expresses concerns regarding the cost of
preserving and maintaining the existing trees on the application property, and cites her personal
experience with trees on her own property.
Hamilton responds to comments from the Commission.
Tom Ricks, 5655 West Floating Feather Road. Ricks expresses concerns regarding North Fisher
Park Way, reads an excerpt from a letter provided by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD),
states that he owns the property to the east, and that he has not been approached by the applicant
or ACHD regarding an easement for a proposed roadway.
Ricks responds to comments from the Commission.
Page 2 of 5
K: \P&Z\M IN UTE S\2020\PZ-01-06-20m in. docx
Jim Magdich, 515 North Cove Colony Way. Magdich states that he lives behind the lot with all the
trees, discusses birds/animals that live in the existing trees and tree preservation, and states that he
would like to see some amount of wildlife preserved, and expresses concerns about traffic and
traffic flows.
Magdich responds to statements from the Commission.
Mike McGrath, 678 North Cove Colony Way. McGrath states opposition to that application
because of the proposed density, discusses his desire to see larger lots, the perceived character of
Eagle, and discusses overcrowding of local schools.
McGrath responds to questions from the Commission.
Randall Johnson, 785 North Cove Colony Way. Johnson discusses traffic patterns in the
surrounding area and states opposition to the application due to the increased traffic that will be
generated, discusses impact fees, and suggests that the developer be required to extend Fisher Park
Way to Floating Feather Road.
Becky McKay, 1100 East Valli -Hi. The applicant's engineer discusses justifications for the layout
of the subdivision, the plan for existing trees on the property, traffic counts and impact, and project
feasibility and lot sizes.
Mark Butler provides rebuttal and addresses concerns raised during the Public Hearing.
Chairman Wright closes the Public Hearing.
General discussion amongst the Commission.
Williams responds to questions from the Commission.
Johnson moves to recommend for approval item 6B A-02-19/RZ-05-19/CU-04-19/PPUD-03-
19/PP-05-19 — Whitehurst Planned Unit Development — with the following changes to the site
specific conditions starting on page 6:
Item #2 be changed to state "comply with all requirements of the City Engineer except that
an easement only shall be provided for the North Fisher Park Way northerly extension with
Phase 1.
Item #4: Add at the end "The City acknowledges that alternative methods of compliance are
provided for in 8-2A-7-0
Item 95 be eliminated and everything else be renumbered as necessary.
Item #6: Strike out the section that says "Lot 1C, Block 3" and add at the end of that sentence
"Lot 1-C, Block 3, Pathway shall be permitted to be 6 -feet."
Item #9: After the words "development plan" add "showing an easement to be dedicated",
change it to Mark's comments, basically. Strike out "in its entirety located within" before
phase 1, so change it to the applicant's comments. (The applicant's written comments read:
"Provide a revised preliminary plat and preliminary development plan showing an easement
to be dedicated for North Fisher Park Way c~t?. ct; !+�a - �''-« as a part of Phase 1
of the development prior to submittal of a design review application.)
Add the end, so new #19, regarding the elevations as shown on Exhibit E per staff
recommendation.
Add another requirement saying that construction access shall be accomplished through
Flint.
The standard conditions of approval starting on page 21— leave as is.
Page 3 of 5
K: \P&Z\M I N UTES�2020\PZ-01-06-20m in, docx
And then allow for the reduction of Lot 2, Block 5, in order to include the trees that are
recommended for preservation as part of the open space.
Discussion.
Johnson adds: "Add under Condition of Development 3.4B, to add at the end: "shall comply
with ECC" after "all other fencing."
Seconded by Guerber.
Williams requests clarification.
Discussion.
Johnson amends the motion to include "allow for a reduced side setback to 7.5 -feet on Lot 2,
Block 5.
Amended motion seconded by Guerber.
Discussion.
Johnson regarding a minimum lot size for Lot 2, Block 5: I thought I said to allow it to be
reduced to 18,000 sq. feet.
ALL AYES... MOTION CARRIES.
7. NEW BUSINESS: NONE.
REPORTS:
A. Commission: Commissioner Johnson expresses to the Commission that she is interested in
working with City Staff to revise the maximum heights defined in City Code. Discussion
amongst the Commission and Staff.
B. City Attorney: None.
C. Staff. City Planner, Mike Williams, provides an update regarding application submittals and
upcoming hearings. Clerk of the Meeting, Kristl Caron, reminds the Commission that the next
Commission meeting will be held on Tuesday, January 21, due to the Monday, January 201h
holiday.
9. ADJOURNMENT:
McLaughlin moves to adjourn. Seconded by Wright. ALL AYES... MOTION CARRIES.
Hearing no further business, the Commission meeting adjourned at 8:27 P.M.
Page 4 of 5
K: \P&Z\M IN UTE S\2020\PZ-01-06-20m in.docx
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
KRISTL D. CARON,
CLERK OF THE MEETING
APPROVED:
TRENT WRIGHT,
CHAIRMAN
AN AUDIO RECORDNG OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD AT
W W W.CITYOFEAGLE.ORG.
Page 5 of 5
KAP&Z\M INUTES\2020\PZ-01-06-20m in. docx
CITY OF EAGLE - PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION rAM
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET
January 6, 2020
A-02-19/RZ-05-19/CU-04-19/PPUD-03-19/PP-05-19 — Whitehurst Planned Unit Development —
Mustan2 35.. LLC: Mustang 35, LLC, represented by Mark Butler with Land Consultants, Inc., is requesting
an annexation, rezone from RUT (Rural -Urban Transition — Ada County designation) to R -1 -DA -P
(Residential with a development agreement — PUD) and R -3 -DA -P (Residential with a development
agreement — PUD), conditional use permit, preliminary development plan, and preliminary plat approvals for
Whitehurst Subdivision, a 67 -lot (60 -buildable, 7 -common) residential planned unit development. The 30.06 -
acre site is located at the terminus of West Breanna Drive north of Flint Estates Subdivision.
NAME (PLEASE PRINT) ADDRESS
TESTIFY? (Y/N) PRO/CON
/7 L4,'
-4-77,V
AI/ i
t
cc
C
77
CITY OF EAGLE - PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET
January 6, 2020
ZOA-04-19 — Zoniny, Ordinance Amendment to Permit Printing and/or BluenrintinLy within the M-1
Zone — Jim McCauley: Jim McCauley is proposing an ordinance of the City of Eagle, Ada County Idaho, to
amend Title 8 Zoning, Chapter 2, Section 3 to permit "Printing and/or Blueprinting" within the M-1 zone;
providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date.
NAME (PLEASE PRINT) ADDRESS
TESTIFY? (Y/N) PRO/CON
,F
VY�
3�� U
L
40
LE
40
r �
Q .---.
NO
Q L.()
CY)i
C45 V)
a CO U
EC:
4)
Q E
< 0 x C:
1-- CU 0 D C-4
C: > Q cn
4�
E r)
Q- 4�
Q C: cn
O
>
E
a)
c LL- a) v
0 C) U
4- CL
O
a)x C: U. �
O a) W
V)
c- N V) CY7
a} p Q O
Q ry m OL Z
A
V
tU
0
Lm
Q.
A
Ami�v :Ab
CL
4�
Lm
0
�W
r' a
Ms
r. u
Q 0.
c71
cr
}4
.L.
0
CL
4)
o .
.4.c
d
O
.p.
C
E
a�
(:)7
< �u
"14:
co
41 v
<
aoLu
a
s
C
0
G
a �
o 0
N
� a
r
w a
U
X
4) 0
LU x
U�
o 0
_N
(D
p
nLn``
1i1
Q] �
OU-
a
Q
E`-
U
a
�-0
0
a)
(D
4-
o`�a�
Ln 3
- E — 0
(1
, -C>a
u
C)
a L U
C:
N O (ll
Q •- �•:
O -O
-C C:
Q) �o ^
o � u cb
O W U ,C
EV O v -c
O N
O 0 �- p
c N N
N -Q op •a
U U C
•7
'U tE O 0
� C U
O N q} U
a) C QN d
N . Ua
0 0 0 w U
_ C O C
a•CZv
L
75
• CT U
0
QQ v N
(-D Cc
V)0D4v
L-")U•ooE
Fl
L
c a
'o v
.c
N o
c• o
U
QQL
.Q
0
• E
Q)
.�
Q, v
t�
� a O
C) .(A o
Q � -F-
2�. o
Viz° Q
.E D
v--
� Q �
Q �} N
•� ,a o
�i C N
LO °` 0
CA) C/5 0101
W
G
c
0
v
m
,F
N
Q]
C
0 IL
H
�N 'i
C�
a a
m
E �
_0 3
�z
C Cr
o=
U u
3C
0 0
Z 0
1-3
R
oll v
wo
A .
41
ANON
k
RECEIVED & FILEDCITY OF EAGLE � IM a INC.
JAN 0 5 M 181 East 50th Street
MEMORANDUM Garden City, ID 83714
File: (208) 841-4996
DATE: September 12, 2019
TO: Mark Butler
FROM: Chhang Ream, P.E., PTOE �' ��'j
CR Engineering, Inc. �i
PROJECT: Whitehurst Subdivision 91Y211
Eagle, Idaho
SUBJECT: Fisher Park Way & SH 44 Intersection — Traffic Impact Analysis
INTRODUCITON
As requested, CR Engineering, Inc. conducted an abbreviated traffic impact analysis (TIA) for the proposed
Whitehurst Subdivision located off of Fisher Park Way north of SH 44 in Eagle, Idaho, as shown in Figure 1. We
understand the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has concerns regarding the development's impacts at the
Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection. This TIA focused on the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection
operational impacts, and specifically the storage lengths for the eastbound left -turn and westbound right -turn lanes
as the majority of the traffic generated by the site are expected to make these movements. This memorandum
summarizes the traffic data, analysis, and findings.
Figure 1 — Site Location
S.•Iprojectsl19-55 Whitehurst Subdivision Wocl Whitehurst TIA.docx Page 1 of
CR ENG G, INC.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Whitehurst Subdivision is a proposed residential development with 77 single-family dwelling units. The expected
build -out year is 2022. The development is proposed to connect to Fisher Park Way to the south and Breanna Drive
to the east for site access. The development will also have connectivity to the north once the proposed park north
of the site is constructed.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SH 44 is classified as a principal with a 55 -mph posted speed limit and two through lanes in each direction and a
center turn lane within the study area. Fisher Park Way is a 25 -mph local road providing access for the Eagle Island
State Park south of SH 44 and Eagle Island Cross north of SH 44.
The study area intersection of Fisher Park Way and SH 44 is a signalized intersection with the lane configuration
as shown in Figure 2 below. The eastbound left -turn lane is a two-way left -turn lane striped with 150 feet of storage
length, which is consistent with the westbound left -turn lane and other left -turn lanes at the adjacent intersections.
The westbound right -turn lane is approximately 330 feet long with 150 feet of storage length, which does not meet
ITD's 550 feet minimum length or a 55 -mph posted speed limit on SH 44.
Existing peak hour turning movement counts were collected at the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection and are
attached. Fisher Park Way north of SH 44 is carrying approximately 300 vehicles per hour (vph) during the AM
peak hour and 100 vph during the PM peak hour. South of SH 44, Eagle Island Parkway is carrying approximately
20 vph during the AM peak hour and 65 vph during the PM peak hour. SH 44 is carrying approximately 3,000 vph
during the peak hours. The major directional split on SH 44 is eastbound with a 64/36 split during the AM peak
hour and westbound during the PM peak hour with a 66/34 split.
Figure 2 — Fisher Park Way and SH 44 Intersection Control and Lane Configurations
- ae4: -
•' �a mss;` �3 7_�
Y
CL
-SH 44�-
S:Iprojects119-55 Whitehurst SubdivisionVoclWhitehurst TIA.docx Page 2 of 5
ryINC.
The most current years crash data (2012-2017) was obtained from the Local Highway Technical Assistance Council
(LHTAC) website (httt :// is.lhtac.org/safetvl?. There were a total of 22 reported crashes within the area of influence
of the Fisher Park Way SH 44 intersection between 2012 and 2017 as summarized in Figure 3 below. Review of
the reported crashes revealed that 19 of the 22 crashes were rear -end crashes. There are many possible causes of
rear -end crashes. Poor visibility of the signal heads could be one of the causes at the Fisher Park Way and SH 44
intersection. None of the crashes were specifically related to the eastbound left -turn or westbound right -turn
movements.
Adding 3 -inch yellow retroreflective sheeting to signal backplates has the potential crash reduction of 15% (Crash
Modification Factor ID: 1410).
Figure 3 — Fisher Park Way and SH 44 Intersection Crash Data (2012-2017)
O
A ❑ • !�! -
C� fJ A A _.
Intersection capacity analysis was performed using Synchro 10 (Version 10.3.122.0), which utilizes the Highway
Capacity Manual 6"' Edition (HCM6) methodologies. All parameters used in the analysis were based on existing
data when available or Synchro default values, when not available. The existing signal timing data was provided by
the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) and is included in the appendix. Level of Service for intersections is
based on the average delay of vehicles traveling through the intersection on a scale of A (best) to F (worst). For this
study, the minimum operational threshold is 0.90 v/c ratio for the overall intersection and lane group.
Intersection capacity analysis worksheets are attached. Table 1 and Table 2 summarize the measures of
effectiveness (MOEs). Based on the analysis results, the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection currently meets
ITD's minimum operational thresholds during the peak hours with the existing intersection control and lane
configurations. The intersection is operating with an overall intersection and lane group v/c ratio of 0.76 or less
during the peak hours. The estimated 95" percentile queue length in the eastbound left -turn lane and westbound
right -turn lane are within the existing storage length. No improvements are needed to mitigate 2019 existing traffic
impacts.
S: Iprojectsl19-55 Whitehurst SubdivisionWocl Whitehurst TIA.docx Page 3 of 5
j ANG G, INC.
INER.IN
TRAFFIC .IMPACT ANALYSIS
Background traffic at the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection was estimated by extrapolating the 2019 counts
with a 2% annual growth rate. This growth rate is based on the Community Planning Association of Southwest
Idaho (COMPASS) travel demand model forecasts (attached). A 2%o annual growth rate was assumed on Fisher
Park Way to accounts for potential traffic fluctuation and growth.
Based on the latest ITE trip generation methodologies, Whitehurst Subdivision is estimated to generate
approximately 818 trips per day, 59 trips during the AM peak hour, and 79 trips during the PM peak hour. The
expected site distribution patterns are: 5% north of the site, 25% west of the site, and 70% east of the site. The 5%
site traffic having origins/destinations north of the site is expected use the proposed connection to Breanna Drive at
the eastern site boundary. The 25% site traffic having origins/destinations west of the site are expected to use Flint
Drive (10%) and SH 44 (15%). Site traffic having origins/destinations east of the site is expected use SH 44. Overall,
approximately 85% of the site generated traffic is expected to go through the Fisher Park Way and SH 44
intersection. A summary of the site traffic estimate is attached. The estimated site traffic is added to the background
traffic to obtain the 2022 total traffic (attached).
To determine the development's impacts, the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection was analyzed with the 2022
total traffic conditions with the existing intersection control and lane configuration. The signal timing was optimized
for the expected traffic conditions. Intersection capacity analysis reports are attached. Table 1 and Table 2
summarize the intersection MOE comparisons between the 2019 existing and 2022 total traffic for the AM peak
hour and PM peak hour, respectively. The 95" percentile queue length was estimated in Synchro assuming a 25 -
foot average vehicle length.
The followings are key findings:
■ With 2019 existing traffic, the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection meets ITD's minimum operational
• The estimated 95t" percentile queue length in the eastbound left -turn lane is approximately 25 feet
during the peak hour, which is within the existing storage length
o The eastbound left -turn lane is a two-way left -turn lane striped with 150 feet of storage length,
which is similar with the westbound left -turn lane and other left -turn lanes at the adjacent
intersections on SH 44
■ Restriping the eastbound left -turn lane to meet ITD's 600 feet minimum requirements would
impact one existing driveway, and would not be consistent with other existing left -turn lanes
at the adjacent intersections
• The estimated 95"' percentile queue length in the westbound right -turn lane is approximately 50 feet
during the peak hours, which is within the existing storage length
o The existing westbound right -turn lane has a total length of approximately 330 feet, which does not
meet ITD's 550 feet minimum length for a 55 -mph posted speed limit on SH 44
■ With 2022 total traffic, the intersection is expected to continue to meet ITD's minimum operational
thresholds
• The estimated site traffic is approximately 1.5% of the intersection total traffic during the AM peak
hour and 2.1% during the PM peak hour
• The estimated 95t' percentile queue length in the eastbound left -turn lane is approximately 25 feet
during the peak hours, which is within the existing storage length
• The estimated 95`11 percentile queue length in the westbound right -turn lane is approximately 50 feet
during the peak hours, which is within the existing storage length
S:Iprojectsl19-55 Whitehurst SttbdivisionldoclWhitehurst TIA.docx Page 4 of 5
.ENGINF N ,, .INC.
Table 1- Intersection MOEs Comparison - AM Peak Hour
Intersection
Intersection
or
Lane Group
2019 Existing AM Peak
2022 Total
AM Peak
Delay
LOS Is/vl
v/c
Ratio
95th
Queue
(feet)
LOS
Delay
Is/V
v/c
Ratio
95th
Queue
(feet)
Ol
SH 44
and
Fisher Park Way
Intersection
A 9
0.76
-
B
13
0.83
-
EBL
A 4
0.14
1 25
A
6
0.17
25
EBT
A 7
0.71
325
A
10
0.78
475
EBR
A 2
0.01
25
A
3
0.01
25
WBL
B 13
0.02
25
C
22
0.03
25
WBT
A 7
-
0.43
225
A
9
0.48
275
WBR
A 5
0.12
50
A
6
:0.14
75
NBL
E 63
0.01
25
E
58
0.01
25
NBTR
E 63
0.01
25
E
58
0.01
25
SBL
E 72
0.61
200
E
67
0.69
250
SBT
E 62
0.01
25
E
58
0.01
25
SBR
E 64
0.24
75
E
60
0.23
75
Table 2 - Intersection MOEs Comparison - PM Peak
Intersection
Intersection
or
Lane Group
2019 Existing PM Peak
2022 Total PM Peak-
eakor
Delay v/c 95th Delay v/c
LOS s/vl Ratio Queue LOSIS/V1 Ratio
95`h
Queue
(:D
SH 44
and
Fisher Park Way
Intersection
A
8
0.71
-
B
10
0.77
-
EBL
A 7 0.05 25 B 12 0.11
25
EBT
A 2 0.35 50 A 3 0.38
100
EBR
A 1 0.01 25 A 2 0.01
25
WBL
A 3 0.01 25 A 4 0.01
25
WBT
A 7 0.71 350 B 10 0.78
500
WBR
A 3 0.03 25 A 3 0.07
25
NBL
E 70 0.27 75 E 68 0.24
75
NBTR
A 69 0.21 25 E 67 0.16
75
SBL
E 72 0.34 75 E 71 0.47
100
SBT
A 0 0.00 0 A 0 0.00
0
SBR
E 70 0.32 50 E 67 0.29
50
SUMMARY
Based on the analysis results and findings discussed above, the proposed Whitehurst Subdivision is expected to
have minimal impacts to the Fisher Park Way and SH 44 intersection operations. With 2022 total traffic conditions,
the intersection is expected to meet ITD's minimum operational thresholds during the peak hours. The estimated
95"' percentile queue lengths in the eastbound left -turn and westbound right -turn lanes are within the existing storage
lengths.
S:Iprojectslt9-55 Whitehurst SubdivisionldoclWhitehurstTIA.docx Page 5 of 5
ENGINE G, INC.
ATTACHMENT A - TRAFFIC COUNTS & FORECASTS
S;IprojectsU9-55 WhitehzirstSztbdivisionldoclWhitehzirst TIA.docx Page A
J
� ooe eoo oeo ooe m,d.�d "'
� o0o nv o�woia u^yo vei
\ o 0 o e O o 0 0 0 0 p p o o p o 0 0 0 p o p 0 0 0
� a t
a°=n o 00 000 000 000 000 "'
m ry
0 0 0 O O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p o 0 0 0 0 0 0
FO 0 o O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O H O p 0 0 p O N
O
Y3 A F p p o 0 o p p O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 p o o 0 0 0 0 0 0
IL
c pp ppp pp
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p s o. .
y " w
LL 0 d w
Fo 0 o p o o 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 o p o o 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y �
a�Q
a� acm N m pp ppp ppp ppp ppp ppp ppp ppp
cu
d
C
LU OCt
o
O N N vmi tp Omi � N p
tY
2
� � Opp pp0 Opo Opo ppp Opo 00.- pN.-.-v
FO.O Opo pop pp0 OOp Opp Opo .Op
o m
YF o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N
co
N t N H
3 �
FO o 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0
7
o N a N a a a a a E
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o a a a a a a a c
> o.n _ otio,n2 0�o a o m pin_
Qi
w
a
2
J
p �nwm .o inn
H
'a a'av
na vmia°i aaaa're
anaa�
aw�o
m m w GA
Q ~ r -
H ro N V N< Y Y
F 0 0 0 O O O
O O O
7
O O
O O O
O 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 O
0 0 0
O o 0
O o
0 O O
0 0 0
O h m
O
O o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
L> g 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
O o 0
0 0 O O O
O O O
o 0
O o 0
Izs
1 `
I W
T o m o 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 o
O O O
m m 0
0 0 0
L
-a m mm mmm
m
O.m
000 000
mom
moo
mmm
� �E. r O
F
.R �
m m
'-
T O O L .n rym r
O O 0
o O
O O O O
O o
o O
O O O
\ O O O o 0 0 0
6 m
0 0 0
O o 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
C O
O C m
3
F 0 0 0O O 0 0 0 0
J
0 0 0 o O
O O O O
O O O o 0 0
O O
O O O
O O O
O O
.N-
O O O
O 0 0
O
a a a
y
a a
a a a a�
E
J
o
D o
-----
0 o
r^
\
e o e o o e o 0 0
o
F
� R
T
� O O
7
0
0
O
a—^ m 0000 000
00 0 000 000
Rf T z s
a
6'
N
o O o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N
_
LL t d w
Y d r
M� a�e0e ooe
eee eee eee eee eee 000 �e
�w m
T
N H N N M N
n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O ....
h h N m
O
LLI
06
'
� O
F 0 0 0 O O O
J
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 O O
O
1 m
O
C O
O Y m
O O O 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o
N F O
O
�3
E
LL
F O o 00 o 0 0 0 O O
�
0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o e o e
o
S =
� L
� O
-
- Al.
W
> W d
Westbound
r
2
U
N
t_hy
F _
i O
N �
01 d m F N O m F n N
t6 =
d m v a
od 5va m o a a -. o
a
N pN p
o�
ppp ppp
p � p
o m
E<m�z�N
Q
c Y a
a =
2 z mp
E ao.aa
O n = a r
U
N
punoglse3
=vn
t_hy
F _
i O
Figure 1 — Existing Traffic Counts
-IQ aw_ Mba
M3 �j
9L
��• ,. -- - c — C�
#{ r: l
2019 Existing
SH 44 & Fisher Park Way SH 44 & Fisher Park Way
- 29 2 92 22 0 32
47 125 r8 38
1800— -0-- 1003 969 1874
10� �4 17� �6
-� t
2 0 2 AM L 28 0 14 PM
,l
NTS
Figure 2 — 2022 Background Traffic Volumes
-.:- 7-5-
x41
l F
NTS
�C _ TS
2022 Background
SH 44 & Fisher Park Way
SH 44 & Fisher Park Way
31
2 98
23
0 34
50 j
�— 133
8j
40
1910-0-
1064
1028 —►
1989
11�
� 4
18�
� 6
2
0 20 2 AMS
30
0 15 PM
Figure 3 — 2022 Site Traffic Volumes
NTS
2022 Site AM
SH 44 & Fisher Park Way 1 SH 44 P. Fisher Park Way
7 0 32 4 0 20
2J k— 10 8J 35
0 --- 0 0----o- 0
0—� 0 0—, 0
-) f
0 0 0 AM 0 0 0 PM
Figure 4 — 2022 Total Traffic Volumes
x
6.a
CL
VC.
2022 Total
AM
SH 44 & Fisher Park Way
38 2 130
52 143
1910— 1064
11 f 4
I
2 0 2 AM
SH A4
1 SH 44 & Fisher Park Way
27 0 54
16J 75
1028— 1989
18� } � 6
I
30 0 15 PM
IN
Clk
ui z c
Ul
a)
0 Ci
0
75 a)
EOR
CU
0
>
C. cu
1.7 0cu
cu
Park Lil
0
Ca 0
c) ol 0
I L rT
6
17T RTZ £'6L roz15 2L' U vu
I
PN
ca
co 4, .Al„_
O
L6 u)
04 u)
cl
ELI a)
col
cl!
6TZ E
9'LZ (D
Aer, U a,
cn
N
VIq
- 'I
39.3i 9'6C 35.9 43.9 6'LZ 111-6Z JCZ 6'6 t
—Jec� .4 0 Lu
t! Ln 5� cu
U Paimer Lr.
co
cj Ln a)
0
E
Z
LL a)
O N
N
cu
.2
2
(n
3.7 L -C 6T
—44
,NjSH 16 9, 9L HS 0 a)
c4 Rs r's u)
2t �js
r -f
0
-- 3.7
00
<
S;,A U) <
15
N
(Li
P�Gffl W, INC.
ATTACHMENT B - SYNCHRO CAPACITY ANALYSIS REPORTS
S: IprojectsU9-55 Whitehurst SubdivisionWocl Whitehurst TIA.docx Page B
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2019 Existing
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 AM Peak
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBI
Lane Configurations
++
r
++
r"
>�
1�
+
r
Traffic Volume (vph)
47
1800
10
4
1003
125
2
0
2
92
2
29
Future Volume (vph)
47
1800
10
4
1003
125
2
0
2
92
2
29
!deaf Flow (vphpl)
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Total Lost time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
Fit Protected
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
Satd. Flow (prat)
1710
3353
1530
1710
3320
1515
1710
1530
1693
1800
1530
Flt Permllted
0.22
1.00
1.00
0.09
1.00
1.00
0.76
1.00
0.76
1.00
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
399
3353
1530
159
3320
1515
1362
1530
1348
1800
1530
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
Adj. Flow (vph)
52
1978
11
4
1102
137
2
0
2
101
2
32
RTQR Reduction (vph)
0
0
2
0
0
31
0
2
0
0
0
29
Lane Group Flow (vph)
52
1978
9
4
1102
106
2
0
0
101
2
3
Heavy Vehicles %
0%
2%
0%
0%
3%
1 %
0%
0%
0%
1 %
0%
0%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
NA
Perm
Protected Phases
1
6
2
8
4
Permitted Phases
6
6
2
2
8
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
124.1
124.1
124.1
113.7
1137
113.7
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
Effective Green, g (s)
124.1
124.1
124.1
113.7
113.7
113.7
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.09
Clearance Time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Vehicle Extensions
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
368
2774
1265
120
2516
1148
126
141
124
166
141
vts Ratio Prot
0.00
c0.59
0.33
0.00
0.00
v/s Ratio Perm
0.11
0.01
0.03
0.07
0.00
c0.07
0.00
vlc Ratio
0.14
0.71
0.01
0.03
0.44
0.09
0.02
0.00
0.81
0.01
002
Uniform Delay, d1
3.4
5.5
2.2
4.5
6.6
4.7
61.8
61.8
66.8
61.8
61.9
Progression Factor
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
1.6
0.0
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.0
0.0
30.7
0.0
0.0
Delay (s)
3.5
7.0
2.3
5.0
7.1
4.9
61.9
61.8
97.5
61.8
61 9
Level of Service
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
E
F
E
E
Approach Delay (s)
6.9
6.9
61.8
88.5
Approach LOS
A
A
E
F
Intersection Summar
HCM 2000 Control Delay 10.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 150.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.6% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
c Critical Lane Group
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 Existing
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 AM Peak
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SSR
Lane Configurations
I
ft
r
tt
r
T+
t
i
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
47
1800
10
4
1003
125
2
0
2
92
2
29
Future Volume (veh/h)
47
1800
10
4
1003
125
2
0
2
92
2
29
Initial Q (Qb), veh
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Parking Bus, Adj
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
100
Work Zone On Approach
No
No
No
No
Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln
1800
1 772
1800
1800
1758
1786
1800
1800
1800
1786
1800
1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
52
1978
11
4
1102
137
2
0
2
101
2
32
Peak Hour Factor
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0-91
Percent Heavy Veh, %
0
2
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
Cap,ve%
378
2801
1269
172
2546
1154
163
0
134
165
159
134
Arrive On Green
0.03
0.83
0.83
0.76
0.76
0.76
0.09
0.00
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.09
Sat Flow, veh/h
1714
3367
1525
209
3340
1514
1323
0
1525
1351
1800
1525
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
52
1978
11
4
1102
137
2
0
2
101
2
32
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
1714
1683
1525
209
1670
1514
1323
0
1525
1351
1800
1525
Q Serve(g_s), s
0.9
35.9
0.2
1.2
17.6
3.5
0.2
0.0
0.2
11.1
0.2
2.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
0.9
359
0.2
26.7
17.6
3.5
0.4
0.0
0.2
11.2
0.2
2.9
Prop In Lane
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
378
2801
1269
172
2546
1154
163
0
134
165
159
134
V/C Ratio(X)
0.14
0.71
0.01
0.02
0.43
0.12
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.61
0.01
0.24
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
487
2801
1269
172
2546
1154
170
0
142
172
168
142
HCM Platoon Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Upstream Filter(l)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
4.4
5.1
2.1
12.7
6.3
4.7
62.6
0.0
62.4
67.6
62.4
63.7
incr Delay (d2), s/veh
0.1
1.5
0.0
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In
0.4
12.4
0.1
0.1
8.7
17
0.1
0.0
0.1
7.2
0.1
2.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
4.4
6.7
2.1
13.0
6.9
4.9
62.6
0.0
62.5
71.5
62.4
64.0
LnGrp LOS
A
A
A
B
A
A
E
A
E
E
E
E
Approach Vol, veh/h
2041
1243
4
135
Approach Delay, s/veh
6.6
6.7
62.5
69.6
Approach LOS
A
A
E
E
Timer - Assigned Phs
1
2
4
6
8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
10.4
120.4
19.2
130.8
19.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
14.0
104.0
14.0
124.0
14.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s
2.9
28.7
13.2
37.9
2.4
Green Ext Time (p -c), s
0.0
23.9
0.0
61.4
0.0
Intersection Summar
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay
9.2
HCM 6th LOS
A
Whitehurst urS, vuuwVSiGn -may^^ie, Idaho �yiw
III v iv INUPUI i
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2019 Existing
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 PM Peak
vement
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
I
tt
r
ft
r
79.7% ICU Level of Service D
T
15
c Critical Lane Group
t
r
Traffic Volume (vph)
8
969
17
6
1874
38
28
0
14
32
0
22
Future Volume (vph)
8
969
17
6
1874
38
28
0
14
32
0
22
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Total Lost time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
100
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
Frt
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
FIt Protected
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1710
3386
1530
1710
3386
1485
1710
1530
1710
1530
Flt Permitted
0.07
1.00
100
0.28
1.00
1.00
0.76
1.00
0.75
100
Satd. Flow (perm)
134
3386
1530
500
3386
1485
1363
1530
1346
1530
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.9A
Adj. Flow (vph)
9
1031
18
6
1994
40
30
0
15
34
0
23
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
0
2
0
0
7
0
14
0
0
0
22
Lane Group Flow (vph)
9
1031
16
6
1994
33
30
1
0
34
0
1
Heavy Ve€lides °Ia
0%
1 %
0%
0%
1 %
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Tune Type
pm+pt
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
1
6
2
8
4
Permitted Phases
6
6
2
2
8
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
130.5
130.5
130.5
123.5
123.5
123.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7 5
Effective Green, g (s)
130.5
130.5
130.5
123.5
123.5
123.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
Actuated g/C Ratio
0.87
0.87
0.87
0.82
0.82
0.82
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
Clearance Time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Vehicie Extension (s)
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
127
2945
1331
411
2787
1222
68
76
67
76
vis Ratio Prot
0.00
c0.30
c0.59
0.00
v/s Ratio Perm
0.06
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
c0.03
0.00
vlc Ratio
0.07
0.35
0.01
0.01
0.72
0.03
0.44
0.01
0.51
002
Uniform Delay, d 1
6.1
1.8
1.3
2.4
5.7
2.4
69.2
67.7
69.4
67.7
Progression Factor
1.00
1 00
1.00
100
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.1
1.6
0.0
17
0.0
2.2
0.0
Delay (s)
6.2
2.2
1.3
2.4
7.3
2.4
70.9
67.7
71.6
678
Level of Service
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
E
Approach Delay (s)
2.2
7.2
69.8
70 1
Approach LOS
A
A
E
E
Intersection Summa
HCM 2000 Control Delay
7.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio
0.71
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
150.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
79.7% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 Existing
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 PM Peak
Movement _ EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
I
ft
F
'�
Tt
r
1
1
t
r
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
8
969
17
6
1874
38
28
0
14
32
0
22
Future Volume (veh/h)
8
969
17
6
1874
38
28
0
14
32
0
22
Initial Q (Qb), veh
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Parking Bus, Adj
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
Work Zone On Approach
No
No
No
No
Adj Sat Flow, vehlhlln
1800
1786
1800
1800
1786
1758
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
9
1031
18
6
1994
40
30
0
15
34
0
23
Peak Hour Factor
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cap,vehm
180
2962
1331
471
2790
1225
111
0
72
99
85
72
Arrive On Green
0.01
0.87
0.87
0.82
0.82
0.82
0.05
0.00
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.05
Sat Flow, veh/h
1714
3393
1525
518
3393
1490
1336
0
1525
1346
1800
1525
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
9
1031
18
6
1994
40
30
0
15
34
0
23
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
1714
1697
1525
518
1697
1490
1336
0
1525
1346
1800
1525
Q Serve(g_s), s
0.1
8.3
0.2
0.3
38.0
0.7
3.3
0.0
1.4
3.7
0.0
2.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
01
8.3
0.2
1 1
38.0
0.7
3.3
0.0
1.4
5.2
0.0
2.2
Prop In Lane
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
180
2962
1331
471
2790
1225
111
0
72
99
85
72
V/C Ratio(X)
0.05
0.35
0.01
0.01
0.71
0.03
0.27
0.00
0.21
0.34
0.00
0.32
Avail Cap(c_a),veh/h
322
2962
1331
471
2790
1225
173
0
142
161
168
142
HCM Platoon Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Upstream Filter(I)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
7.4
1.7
1.2
2.5
5.7
2.4
69.6
0.0
68.8
71.2
0.0
69.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
16
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.8
0.0
0.9
Initial Q Delay(d3),slveh
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),vehlln
0.1
2.0
0.1
0.1
13.8
0.3
2.1
0.0
1.0
2.4
0.0
1.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
7.4
2.1
12
2.6
7.3
2.5
70.1
0.0
69.3
72.0
0.0
70.1
LnGrp LOS
A
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
E
E
A
E
Approach Vol, veh/h
1058
2040
45
57
Approach Delay, s/veh
2.1
7.2
69.8
71.2
Approach LOS
A
A
E
E
rimer - Assigned Phs
1
2
4
6
8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
7.6
129.4
13.1
136.9
13.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
14.0
104.0
14.0
124.0
14.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+11), s
2.1
40.0
7.2
10.3
5.3
Green Ext Time (p -c), s
0.0
50.3
0.0
19.7
0.0
Intersec0n Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay
7.6
HCM 6th LOS
A
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2022 Total
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 AM Peak
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
ft
r
ft
r
I
+
r
Traffic volume (vph)
52
1910
11
4
1064
143
2
0
2
130
2
38
Future Volume (vph)
52
1910
11
4
1064
143
2
0
2
130
2
38
Ideal Flow (vphpl)
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Total Lost time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Lane Util. Factor
1.00
0.95
100
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
Fit Protected
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
100
0.95
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)
1710
3353
1530
1710
3320
1515
1710
1530
1693
1800
1530
Fit Permitted
0.20
1.00
1.00
0.06
1.00
1.00
0.76
1.00
0.76
1.00
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
351
3353
1530
116
3320
1515
1362
1530
1348
1800
1530
Peak -hour factor. PHF
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
Adj. Flow (vph)
57
2099
12
4
1169
157
2
0
2
143
2
42
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
0
3
0
0
31
0
2
0
0
0
36
Lane Group Flow (vph)
57
2099
9
4
1169
126
2
0
0
143
2
6
,Heavy Vehicles (%)
0%
2%
0%
0%
3%
1 %
0%
0%
0%
1 %
0%
0%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
NA
Perm
Protected Phases
1
6
2
8
4
Permitted Phases
6
6
2
2
8
4
4
Actuated Green, G (s)
118.3
118.3
118.3
107.6
1076
107.6
19.7
19.7
19.7
19.7
197
Effective Green, g (s)
118.3
118.3
118.3
107.6
107.6
107.6
19.7
19.7
19.7
19.7
19.7
Actuated gfC Ratio
0.79
0.79
0.79
0.72
0.72
0.72
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0 13
Clearance Time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Vehicle Extension (s)
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
319
2644
1206
83
2381
1086
178
200
177
236
200
v/s Ratio Prot
0.01
c0.63
0.35
0.00
0.00
v/s Ratio Perm
0.14
0.01
0.03
0.08
0.00
c0.11
0.00
v/c Ratio
0.18
0.79
0.01
0.05
0.49
0 12
0.01
0.00
0.81
0.01
0.03
Uniform Delay, d1
5.3
9.0
3.4
6.2
9.3
6.5
56.7
56.6
63.3
56.7
56.8
Progression Factor
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
100
1.00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.1
2.6
0.0
1.1
0.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
21.9
0.0
0.0
Delay (s)
5.4
11.5
3.4
7.3
10.0
6.8
56.7
56.6
85.2
56.7
568
Level of Service
A
B
A
A
A
A
E
E
F
E
E
Approach Delay (s)
11.3
9.6
56.6
78.5
Approach LOS
B
A
E
E
Intersection Summar
HCM 2000 Control Delay
14.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 volume to Capacity ratio
0.83
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
150.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization
80.0% ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2022 Total
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 AM Peak
Ir ,-
EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
I
ft
r
6
ft
r
'�
T+
24.0
126.0
t
r
Traffic Volume (veh/h)
52
1910
11
4
1064
143
2
0
2
130
2
38
Future Volume (veh/h)
52
1910
11
4
1064
143
2
0
2
130
2
38
Initial Q (Qb), veh
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Parking Bus, Adj
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Work Zone On Approach
No
No
No
No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h4n
1800
1772
1800
1800
1758
1786
1800
1800
1800
1786
1800
1800
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
57
2099
12
4
1169
157
2
0
2
143
2
42
Peak Hour Factor
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.51
Percent Heavy Veh, %
0
2
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
Cap,veh/h
332
2694
1220
135
2438
1105
204
0
183
208
216
183
Arrive On Green
0.03
0.80
0.80
0.73
0.73
0.73
0.12
0.00
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
Sat Flow, veh/h
1714
3367
1525
186
3340
1514
1311
0
1525
1351
1800
1525
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
57
2099
12
4
1169
157
2
0
2
143
2
42
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In
1714
1683
1525
186
1670
1514
1311
0
1525
1351
1800
1525
Q Serve(g_s), s
1.2
49.7
0.2
1.8
21.8
4.7
0.2
0.0
0.2
15.6
0.1
3.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s
1.2
49.7
0.2
40.9
21.8
4.7
0.3
0.0
0.2
15.8
0.1
37
Prop In Lane
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
332
2694
1220
135
2438
1105
204
0
183
208
216
183
V/C Ratio(X)
0.17
0.78
0.01
0.03
0.48
0.14
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.69
0.01
0.23
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
441
2694
1220
135
2438
1105
274
0
264
281
312
264
HCM Platoon Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Upstream Filter(I)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Uniform Delay (d), slveh
6.2
8.0
3.0
21.6
8.4
6.1
58.3
0.0
58.2
65.1
58.2
59.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
0.1
2.3
0.0
0.4
0.7
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
°/vile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In
0.6
18.8
0.1
0.2
11.0
2.4
0.1
0.0
0.1
9.4
0.1
2.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh
6.3
10.3
3.0
22.0
9.1
6.4
58.3
0.0
58.2
67.0
58.2
60.0
LnGrp LOS
A
B
A
C
A
A
E
A
E
E
E
E
Approach Vol, veh/h
2168
1330
4
187
Approach Delay, s/veh
10.1
8.8
58.2
65.3
Approach LOS
B
A
E
E
Timer - Assigned Phs
1
2
4
6
8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
10.5
115.5
24.0
126.0
24.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
14.0
92.0
26.0
112.0
26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll ), s
3.2
42.9
17.8
51.7
2.3
Green Ext Time (p -c), s
0.0
23.0
0.2
49.9
0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay
12.5
HCM 6th LOS
B
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2022 Total
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44 PM Peak
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SEIR
Lane Configurations
ft
r
ft
r"
1,
t
r
Traffic Volume (vph)
16
1028
18
6
1989
75
30
0
15
54
0
27
Future Volume (vph)
16
1028
18
6
1989
75
30
0
15
54
0
27
Ideal Row (vphpi)
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
Total Lost time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Lane UR Factor
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Frt
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.85
Flt Protected
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
100
0.95
1.00
095
1.00
Satd. Flow (pros)
1710
3386
1530
1710
3386
1485
1710
1530
1710
1530
Fit Permitted
0.06
1.00
1.00
0.26
1.00
1.00
0.76
1.00
0.75
1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)
104
3386
1530
470
3386
1485
1363
1530
1345
1530
Peak -hour factor, PHF
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
Adj. Flow (vph)
17
1094
19
6
2116
80
32
0
16
57
0
29
RTOR Reduction (vph)
0
0
3
0
0
13
0
15
0
0
0
27
Lane Group Flow (vph)
17
1094
16
6
2116
67
32
1
0
57
0
2
Heavy Vehicles °lu
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
011/0
0%
Turn Type
pm+pt
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
NA
Perm
Perm
Protected Phases
1
6
2
8
4
Permitted Phases
6
6
2
2
8
4
4
Actuated Green. G (s)
128.8
128.8
128.8
120.8
120.8
120.8
9.2
9.2
9.2
92
Effective Green, g (s)
128.8
128.8
128.8
120.8
120.8
120.8
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
Actuated giC Ratio
0.86
0.86
0.86
0.81
0.81
0.81
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
Clearance Time (s)
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Vehicle Extension s)
2.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)
110
2907
1313
378
2726
1195
83
93
82
93
vis Ratio Prot
0.00
c0.32
c0.62
0.00
v/s Ratio Perm
0.13
0.01
0.01
0.05
0.02
c0.04
0.00
v/c Ratio
0.15
0.38
0.01
0.02
0.78
0.06
0.39
0.01
0.70
0.02
Uniform Delay, dl
9.9
2.2
1.5
2.9
7.6
3.0
67.7
66.1
69.0
66.2
Progression Factor
100
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 00
Incremental Delay, d2
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.1
2.2
0.1
1.1
0.0
18.6
0.0
Delay (s)
10.1
2.6
1.5
3.0
9.8
3.1
68.8
66.1
87.6
662
Level of Service
B
A
A
A
A
A
E
E
F
E
Approach Delay (s)
2.7
9.6
67.9
80.4
Approach LOS
A
A
E
F
Intersection Summar
HCM 2000 Control Delay
9.9
HCM 2000 Level of Service
A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity
ratio
0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s)
150.0
Sum of lost time
(s)
18.0
Intersection Capacity Ubliaation
83.0%
ICU Level of
Service
E
Analysis Period (min)
15
c Critical Lane Group
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
2022 Total
1: Eagle Island Parkway/Fisher Park Way & SH 44
PM Peak
---*
--0.
--*
f-
.f-
',-♦
►
I
l
fir"
-4/
Movement
EBL
EBT
EBR
WBL
WBT
WBR
NBL
NBT
NBR
SBL
SBT
SBR
Lane Configurations
tt
r
ft
r
1�
t
Traffic volume (veh/h)
16
1028
18
6
1989
75
30
0
15
54
0
27
Future Volume (veh/h)
16
1028
18
6
1989
75
30
0
15
54
0
27
Initial Q (Ob), veh
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Parking Bus, Adj
100
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Work Zone On Approach
No
No
No
No
Adj Sal Flow. vehrh/In
1800
1786
1800
1800
1786
1758
1800
1800
1800
1800
1800
1600
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h
17
1094
19
6
2116
80
32
0
16
57
0
29
Peak Hour Factor
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
0.94
Percent Heavy Veh, %
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cap,veh1h
156
2901
1304
431
2708
1189
134
0
99
122
117
99
Arrive On Green
0.02
0.85
0.85
0.80
0.80
0.80
0.07
0.00
0.07
0.07
0.00
0.07
Sat Flow, veh/h
1714
3393
1525
487
3393
1490
1329
0
1525
1345
1800
1525
Grp Volume(v), veh/h
17
1094
19
6
2116
80
32
0
16
57
0
29
Grp Sat Flow(s).vehrnMn
1714
1697
1525
487
1697
1490
1329
0
1525
1345
1800
1525
Q Serve(g_s), s
0.3
10.4
0.3
0.4
50.2
1.7
3.5
0.0
1.5
6.3
0.0
2.7
Cycle Q Clear(g, c), s
0.3
10.4
0.3
2.2
50.2
1.7
3.5
0.0
1.5
7.8
0.0
2.7
Prop In Lane
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h
156
2901
1304
431
2708
1189
134
0
99
122
117
99
V/C Ratio(X)
0.11
0.38
0.01
0.01
0.78
0.07
0.24
0.00
0.16
0.47
0.00
0.29
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h
287
2901
1304
431
2708
1189
172
0
142
160
168
142
HCM Platoon Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Upstream Filter(I)
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh
12.3
2.3
1.6
3.5
8.1
3.2
67.2
0.0
66.3
69.9
0.0
66.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.1
2.3
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.3
1.0
0.0
0.6
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
°toile SackOfQ(95%),veh/In
0.4
3.2
0.1
0.1
19.2
0.7
2.2
0.0
1.1
4.0
0.0
1.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh
Ln Grp Delay(d),s/veh
12.4
2.7
1.6
3.5
10.4
3.3
67.5
0.0
66.5
71.0
0.0
67.4
LnGrp LOS
B
A
A
A
B
A
E
A
E
E
A
E
Approach Vol, veh/h
1130
2202
48
86
Approach Delay, s/veh
2.8
10.2
67.2
69.8
Approach LOS
A
B
E
E
Timer - Assigned Phs
1
2
4
6
8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s
8.5
125.7
15.8
134.2
15.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s
14.0
104.0
14.0
124.0
14.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s
2.3
52.2
9.8
12.4
5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s
0.0
44.7
0.0
21.9
0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Whitehurst Subdivsion - Eagle, Idaho Synchro 10 Report
Traffic Analysis - September 2019 CR Engineering, Inc.
L13ma
CRASH MODIFICATION FACTORS CLEARINGHOUSE
CMF /CRF Details
CMF ID: 1410
Add 3 -inch yellow retroreflective sheeting to signal backplates
Description:
Prior Condition: No Prior Condition(s)
Category: Intersection traffic control
Study: SaLe& Impact of Increased Trak Signa! Backboards Conspicuity, Saved et
al., 2005
Star Quality Rating: [ _ !s]
Crash Modification Factor (CMF)
Value: 0.85
Adjusted Standard Error:
Unadjusted Standard Error: 0.005
Crash Reduction Factor (CRF)
Value: 15 (This value indicates a decrease in crashes)
Adjusted Standard Error:
Unadjusted Standard Error: 0.5
Applicability
Crash Type: All
Crash Severity: All
Roadway Types: Not specified
Number of Lanes:
Road Division Type:
Speed Limit:
Area Type: Urban
Traffic Volume:
Time of Day: All
If countermeasure is intersection -based
Intersection Type: Roadway/roadway (not interchange related)
Intersection Geometry:
Traffic Control: Signalized
Major Road Traffic Volume:
Minor Road Traffic Volume:
Development Details
Date Range of Data Used:
Municipality:
State:
Country:
Type of Methodology Used: Before/after using empirical Bayes or full Bayes
Sample Size Used: Sites
Before Sample Size Used: 17 Sites
After Sample Size Used: 17 Sites
Other Details
Included in Highway Safety
Manual? No
Date Added to Clearinghouse: Dec -01-2009
Comments: '
This site is funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway .Administration and maintained by
the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center
1 t? "1'7`OtY.'. "'On C!';"t c l,;c'C t �� ?5, :u';Cf i ICc :/Giv i'd" ;- {' 1 � L"
S,J03iSC-iGl);oi -,"-he `.0 ? ui1T # ^ oi� —, ocrtaL,on, !R ,& i,ire "est rYI!UI7I; 10 exc- FcIlge. "7e U.S.
f- i,, Se D -'the ,..,`? ,.,_._.O7 Gr"r c. vC in 'ie .'.'/; Thr
:/'Des not Co, -,E a ste, C'_ i ' Sr IIIC 0i7; Or v� ?'ct Ji7. l D, :S i
a s. TULe ifl SC' +iiC� e;1Cl,'1?ei'lr t�CFr' iei7 .