HomeMy WebLinkAbout20260211_UTC Roundabout_Stamped2/11/2026
Project Standards: AASHTO
FHWA Project of Interest: NO
Design Speed (mph)
Posted Speed (mph)
Design Vehicle
Max Superelevation (%)
Minimum Radius (ft)
Minimum Length of Curve (ft)
Maximum Relative Slope
Superelevation Runoff (%)
Superelevation Runoff (ft)
Tangent Runoff (ft)
Maximum Grade
Minimum SSD (ft)
Minimum Crest (K)
Minimum Sag (K)
Minimum Vertical Curve Length (ft)
26
75
4
154
375
0.73
69, 1 lane rotated
34, 1 lane rotated
7%
155
12
3*Design Speed
University Towne Center Roundabout Design
AASHTO Table 3-16a (pg 3-66); 2% line
Vertical Alignment
AASHTO Table 7-4 (pg 7-38); level terrain
AASHTO Table 7-1 (pg 7-5)
AASHTO Table 3-35 (pg 3-170)
AASHTO Table 3-37 (pg 3-176)
Horizontal Alignment
4% max for 35 mph or lower
AASHTO Table 3-13 (pg 3-54)
15*Design Speed
AASHTO Table 3-15 (pg 3-64)
AASHTO Table 3-16a (pg 3-66); 4% line
Ref. Material
Geometric Elements
Construction Year: 2026
Terrain Type: Level
Highway Number: N/A
MP to MP: N/A
Design Year: 2040
Project Description:
The purpose of this project is to design a roundabout intersection for a 17.5 acre commercial site development in Rexburg, Idaho with the project name of University Towne Center. The following design guidance values, references, model import and
export parameters were used in creating the final design. The project includes a three-legged roundabout configuration and given the geometric layout we have excluded model parameters related to a through movement (R3). The roundabout includes
parameters for entry (R1), exit-right (R5), exit-left (R4), and circulatory (R3) movements. There is only one crosswalk (Access 1) required in the roundabout design as the site contains a prescribed pedestrian movement plan to promote safety. Each leg of
the roundabout named accordingly; Access 1, Access 2, or Access 3. Access 1 lines up with a proposed new access from Yellowstone Highway (Public ROW) and is proposed as a private road section. Access 2 lines up with Tamana Drive (Public ROW), but
transitions from a public to private road section at the edge of the development. Access 3 is a proposed new access from Mikan Drive (Public ROW) and is proposed as a private road section. Turning radius design accomodations for vehicles larger than
the below listed roundabout Design Vehicle, up to WB-67, can route between Access 4 onto Mikan Drive and the proposed access onto Yellowstone Highway, this is primarily to accomodate dock deliveries.
Client: Tyson Cichos
Project Number: 2025011
Functional Classification: Private
25
25
SU-40, BUS-40
Design & Posted Speed (mph)
Design Vehicle
Inscribed Circle Diameter
Entry Outer Geometry
Exit Outer Geometry
Lane Continuity
Circulatory Widths
Spitter Islands
Central Island
Wheel & Swept paths
Truck aprons
Sidewalks & Crosswalks
Max Superelevation (%)
Maximum Relative Gradient (%)
Superelevation Runoff (ft)
Tangent Runout (ft)
Minimum Grade
Minimum radius curve (ft) using 25
MPH
Minimum Crest (K)
Minimum Sag (K)
Maximum K Value for Drainage (ft)
Minimum Vertical Curve Length = 3V
(ft) using 35 MPH
Intersection and stopping sight
distance Values based on fastest path radii and NCHRP 672 methods
AASHTO Section 3.4.2.2.2 (pg 3-130)
AASHTO Table 3-37 (pg 3-176)
AASHTO Table 3-35 (pg 3-170) and Table 3-36 (pg 3-172)
AASHTO Table 3-37 (pg 3-176)
AASHTO Figure 3-36 and Figure 3-37
AASHTO Table 3-37 (pg 3-176)
Vertical Alignment
0.30%
105
29 (based on SSD), 108 (based on PSD)
49
167
105
34 (1 lane rotated)
ACHD Policy Manual 5108.8.6
NCHRP REPORT 672-6.4.7
ACHD Policy Manual 5108.8.8
ACHD Policy Manual 5108.8.10
AASHTO Section 3.3.8.2 Equation 3-23 (pg 3-62)
AASHTO Table 3-16a (pg 3-65)
4%, V=25 mph
AASHTO Table 3-16a (pg 3-65)
Roadway width and truck apron shall accommodate design vehicles. . Clearance between curbs and design vehicle wheel paths shall be at
least 1-ft.
Dictated by tracking of design vehicle, typically 3 to 15-ft wide. 12 ft used in the design. Cross slope of 1% to 2% away from central island.
Truck aprons shall be raised 3" above the adjoining roadway with mountable roundabout curb. Landscape maintenance vehicle refuge
provided.
1. Sidewalk shall comply with ADA standards. 2. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be located 20 to 25-ft back (roughly one car length) from the
entrance/yield line. Sidewalks located 20' back from the entrance line on Access 1.
1.5% - 2.5% outward cross slope
0.35
69 (1 lane rotated)
NCHRP REPORT Exhibit 6-14 (pg 182)
ACHD Policy Manual 5188.8.1.2
NA
NCHRP REPORT page 6-24, (pg 180)
NCHRP REPORT 672-6.4.1
Exhibit 6-12, and Exhibit 6-13
ACHD Policy Manual 5108.8.3.3
Entry width: typically 14 to 18 ft for single lane, Entry Lane Widths = 14 ft.
Entry radii typically 50-100 ft, Access 1: 58', Access 2: 80', Access 3: 50'
Exit Lane Widths = 12 ft., Exit Outside Curb Radius recommends 50-200'; Access 1: 188', Access 2: 100', Access 3: 65'
NA
100% to 120% of maximum entry width, 16 feet used in design
Island Length: 50 (min.) to 100 ft (desirable); Access 1: 49.5', Access 2: 54', Access 3: 41'. Access 3 has no centerlane which creates
challenge in extending island as well as there are some site constraints on limiting exit out geometry and vehicle paths. Access 1 was
shortened slightly to increase storage for immediate left turn.
Island Width: 6 ft min. at crosswalks. 8.75' used in the design. Crosswalk width min. 10 ft.
Offsets: per Exhibit 6-13.
Radii: per Exhibit 6-13 except for entry radii reduced from 2' minimum to 0.5', primarily to improve turn lane configuration.
Typical Entry Inner Radius: 50-100 ft; Type: Single Arc to Apron, Access 1: 88.5', Access 2: 100', Access 3: 100'.
Typical Exit Radius: 100-200 ft, Access 1: 200', Access 2: 112', Access 3: 65'. Radii are largely controlled by Exit Outer Geometry shown
above.
40' diameter used in the design. 1. 1:6 maximum surface slope (from top of curb). 2. 1:20 surface slope or greater for minimum of 20 ft
inside of curb. 2a. 1:20 positive slope or greater shall be extended for a maximum distance possible if center island is constrained by size
(diameter less than 40 ft) or by sight distance requirements. 3. At minimum, gain 3 ft in vertical height from top of curb as long as the
minimum sight distance requirements are met. 3a. Vertical height can be achieved by means of surface slope and/or inclusion of height
gained by foliage or art as approved by ACHD 4. The surface shall not drop below the top face of the curb. 40' used in the design.
SU-40, BUS-40
Horizontal Alignment
Singlelane (1 lanes) Lane: 90 to 150 ft, 96 ft used in design NCHRP REPORT Exhibit 6-9 (pg 174)
Roundabout
Geometric Elements
25
Street Section (Curb Face to Curb Face)
Width (ft)
Number of Travel Lanes
Lane Width (ft)
Min Shoulder Width (ft)
(Inside/Outside)
Lane Cross Slope (%)
Shoulder Cross Slope (%)
Prop. Roadway Widths (ft)
Clear Zone - ft; (Cut/Fill)
Shy Line (Ls, ft)
Guardrail Max Flare Rate
Max Unprotected Fill Height (2:1):
ADT (Future)
DHV (Future)
Minimum Level of Service
Access Control
10,000
1,000
C
Non-signalized intersections - 550 ft full access, 440 ft RIRO
ITD Roadway Design Manual
Section 335.06
Focus Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis
6
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide
Table 3-1 (≤40 mph, ADT > 6000)
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide
Table 5-7
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide
Table 5-9
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide
Figure 5-1(b), pg 5-6
Traffic
n/a
Miscellaneous
1V:6H or flatter : 14 to 16 (foreslope) and 16 to 18 (backslope)
1V:5H to 1V:4H: 16 to 18 (foreslope and backslope)
4
NA
12.0 and 13.0
n/a
Access 1: Crown, Access 2 & 3: Cross, 2%
n/a
n/a
n/a
AASHTO pg 6-4
Cross Section Elements
Access 1 & 2: 36', Access 3: 26'
1
Design Storm (volume)
Design Storm (peak flow)
Hydrology Methods
Storm Sewer Material Project Life
Gutter Spread
Catch Basin/Inlet Spacing
Minimum Pipe Size for Storm Drainage
Minimum Pipe Size for Culverts
Pipe Cover
Drainage Swale Design (bioretention
swales)
Concerns
Intersection Functional Classification
Pedestrian Activity
Continuous Lighting on Road? (Y/N?)
Minimum Average Horizontal
Illuminance
Uniformity (Eavg/Emin)
Vertical luminance in crosswalk
0.8 fc
6:1
0.8 fc
MCTMP 2022 Functional Classification
NCHRP 672 - Exhibit 8-1
NCHRP 672 - Exhibit 8-1
NCHRP 672 - Exhibit 8-1
n/a n/a
Lighting
Local
Low
No
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Environmental
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Storm Water
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Roundabout Dimension
Access 1 Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 1 Entry Design
Access 1 Exit Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 1 Splitter Island Design
Access 1 Entry/Exit Radius Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Splitter Island Design all Approaches
Access 1 Splitter Island Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 1 Crosswalk Design
Access 2 Approach Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 2 Entry Design
Access 2 Exit Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 2 Splitter Island Design
Access 2 Entry/Exit Radii Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 3 Approach Design
Access 3 Entry Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 3 Exit Design
Access 3 Splitter Island Design
University Towne Center Single Lane Roundabout 2/11/2026
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg Designer: Tyson Knudsen, PE
ACAD Roundabout Design Input Values
Access 3 Entry/Exit Radii Design
Fastest Path Calculation Input Values
Notes:1)
2)
3)
4)
Legend:
PROJECT NAME:
KE PROJECT #
CLIENT NAME:
DATE:
ENTERED BY:
Radius (ft) e (%) Radius (ft) e (%) Radius (ft) e (%) Radius (ft) e (%)
164 2.0 112 2.0 174 2.0 NA NA
38 -2.0 38 -2.0 38 -2.0 NA NA
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
74 -2.0 280 -2.0 122 -2.0 NA NA
122 2.0 74 2.0 280 2.0 NA NA
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
1 1 1 NA
1 1 1 NA
25 25 25 NA
5.5
NA
ESTIMATION OF R3 SPEED
CONTROLLED BY ACCELLERATION
APPROACH GEOMETRY Number of approach lanes
Number of exit lanes
Approach Speed Limit (mph)
Approach Grade Use a (+) or (-)
APPROACH STOPPING SIGHT
DISTANCE
Distance from midpoint of R2 Curve to
conflict point (ft)115.0 115.0 115.0 NA
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
FASTEST PATH RADII
2.0 2.0 2.0
Designer Input
CRITICAL TIME GAP Tc value
SPEED ESTIMATION
DATA
SIGHT DISTANCE
DATA Circulating Lane
2.0CIRCULATORY STOPPING SIGHT
DISTANCE
Circulatory Roadway Grade (enter largest
downhill grade)
YELLOW CELLS REQUIRE USER INPUT
Enter speed curve radii valves, in feet, from the CAD generated or hand drawn fastest paths
Enter superelevation rates fro each individual speed curve moements based on the vertical design of the roundabout
For calculation of the stopping sight distance on the circulatiory roadway enter the steepest downhill grade for the circulating lane.
This will result in a worst case scenario for stopping sight distance for vehicles travelling in the circulating lane. These grades can be
found on the truck apron profile.
Select a Tc value from the drop down list to be used in intersection sight distance calculations. NCHRP Report 672 gives a range of 4.5
to 6.5 for Tc. Designers should coordinate with the client and identify the appropriate value for calculation of intersection stopping
sight distance.
University Towne Center Roundabout Design
2025011
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg
2/11/2026
Access 1
Tyson Knudsen
Not UsedAccess 2 Access 3
APPROACH
SPEED ESTIMATION EQUATIONS FROM NCHRP REPORT 672
Equation 6-1 (for e = +0.02%)V = (3.4415)R0.3861 V = Velocity, (mph)
Equation 6-2 (for e = -0.02%)V = (3.4614)R0.3673 R = Radius of speed curve (ft)
Equation 6-4 (R3 based on acceleration)V3 = [(1.47V2)2 + 2a23d23].5/1.47 a23 = Acceleration (6.9 ft/s2)
d23 = Distance along vehicle path (ft)
NOTE 1)
NOTE 2)
NOTE 3)
NOTE 4)
NOTE 5)
NOTE 6)
NOTE 7)These speed differentials are for the consecutive movements on the through path (R1 to R2 to R3) and for the left turn movement (R1 to R4 to R3).
NOTE 8)This speed variation is associated with all radii passing through the same point.
These R3 exit speeds are calculated using the NCHRP Report 672 acceleration equation. Exit speeds are calculated by taking the R 2 speeds and adding the vehicle
acceleration to the conflict point. The lower of the two R3 values calculated in this table is used in the speed differential calculations below.
R3 SPEED AT
CONFLICT POINT
CONFLICT SPEED
DIFFERENTIALS
V5 - V3 #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE!
V1 - V5 2.7 3.1 5.1 #VALUE!
V2 - V2 0.0 0.0
ROUNDABOUT SPEED ESTIMATION - NCHRP REPORT 672 METHOD
PROJECT NAME:
CLIENT NAME:
University Towne Center Roundabout Design
Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg
KE PROJECT #:
ENTERED BY:
DATE:
2025011
Tyson Knudsen
2/11/2026
ROUNDABOUT DESIGN SPEEDS
24.7
13.2
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
V1
V2
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
13.2
8.1 12.1 #VALUE!
FASTEST PATH
SPEEDS
APPROACH
V3
V4
V5
APPROACH
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
30.1 30.1 30.1 #VALUE!
ROUNDABOUT SPEED DIFFERENTIALS
V2 + (accel)
#VALUE!
16.8
22.0
With offset left alignments and/or tangential exits, the exit speeds (R3) calculated using the speed curve radius (and corresponding speed differentials) may represent a
higher speed/differential than what is attainable due to acceleration limits. Designers should use the acceleration equation to determine vehicle speeds at conflict
points and pedestrian crossings on the exits.
These speeds are calculated using Equations 6-1 and 6-2 shown above, and the radii entered in the Designer Input table. If superelevation values other than +/- 0.02%
are entered into the Designer Input table the result in
NCHRP Report 672 recommends that entering speeds (V1) for single lane approaches be a maximum of 25 mph, however there are situations where higher entering
speeds on single lane approaches ( > 25) can be justified. For multi-lane approaches the NCHRP Report 672 recommends a maximum entering speed of 30 mph. All
design speeds should be kept under 30 mph to help minimize speed differentials. If speeds are outside of the recommended ranges, designers should look for
geometric solutions to reduce the entering speeds or identify the constraint that is dictating the higher speed and document that information.
The first "V" in each row heading is the speed for the movement associated with the respective approach column, and the second "V" is the conflicting movement.
NCHRP Report 672 recommends that speed differentials between conflicting vehicle movements and consecutive geometric movements be no higher than 10-15 mph.
Differentials for single lane RABs should be below or on the low end of this range while multi-lane RABs may be on the higher end. High speed differentials are typically
a result of an entering speed that is > 25 mph with a circulating speed of 15 mph or less. When speed differentials for single lane roundabouts/approaches are > 12
mph designers should look for geometric solutions to reduce the speeds causing the high differentials or identify the constraint that is dictating the speeds and
document that information. RABs with none perpendicular road alignments can create additional challenges to keep speed differentials low while still maintaining the
design vehicle movements.
Justification for Access 2, V2-V4 differential: (1) proximity to adjacent roadway alignments limits exit curvature, (2) roundabout inscribed diameter is on the low end of
the guidance for single lane RABs limiting curvature on exit, (3) small roundabout inscribed diameter limits circulatory radius
0.0 #VALUE!
#VALUE!
V2 - V4 3.7 14.3 7.0 #VALUE!
21.3 25.2 #VALUE!
13.2
#VALUE!
27.4
18.1
#VALUE!
20.2
30.3
#VALUE!
#VALUE!SPEED VARIATION
CONSECUTIVE
MOVEMENTS
DIFFERENTIALS
V1, V4, V5 5.4 3.1 13.5
#VALUE!
V4 - V3 #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE!
V1 - V4 7.8 6.1 5.0
V1 - V2
V2 - V3 #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE! #VALUE!
11.5
Intersection Sight Distance Equations from NCHRP Report 672
Equation 6-6 d1 = 1.468(Vconflict 1)(tc) d1 = Length of entering leg of sight triangle (ft)
d2 = Length of circulating leg of sight triangle
Vconflict 1 = Design speed of conflicting entering traffic stream (avg of R1 and R2 speeds)
Equation 6-7 Vconflict 2 = Design speed of conflicting circulating traffic stream (R2 speed, using 3 legged roundabout)
d2 =1.468(Vconflict 2)(tc)Tc =Critical time gap (value entered in Data Input Table is used here)
NOTE:
Stopping Sight Distance Equations from NCHRP Report 672
Equation 6-5 d =1.468(V)(t) + (1.087)(V2/a)a = Deceleration (11.2 ft/s2)
G = Approach grade (%)
d = Stopping Sight Distance (ft)
AASHTO Stopping Sight V = Initial speed (mph)
Distance on Grade Equation d =1.468(V)(t) + V2 t = Perception-brake reaction time (assumed to be 2.5 sec)
30 [ (a/32.2) +/- G/100]
NOTE:
PROJECT NAME:University Towne Center Roundabout Design KE PROJECT #:2025011
CLIENT NAME:Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg ENTERED BY:Tyson Knudsen
DATE: 2/11/2026
Roundabout Intersection Sight Distance - NCHRP Report 672 Equations (Using AASHTO Speeds)
CROSSWALK ON
EXIT
The Tc value used in these equations is from the Data Input Table. Designers should coordinate with the client to identify the appropriate Tc value for calculation of the
intersection sight distance. Designers should refer to section 6.7.3.2 for more discussion on intersection sight distance at roundabouts.d1 155.0 152.7 139.1 #VALUE!
d2 106.3 106.3 106.3 #VALUE!
FASTEST PATH
SPEEDS
ROUNDABOUT STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE
APPROACH
d 149.5 122.0 154.3 #VALUE!
Stopping sight distance calculations use data from the Designer Input table. If the approachgrade entered into the Designer Input table is greater than +/-3.0% then the
AASHTO Stopping Sight Distance on Grade Equation is used for the approach stopping isght distance calculation. Designers should refer to the NCHRP Report 672 for
more discussion on sight distance at roundabouts. Stopping Sight Distance on Grade Equation is used for the approach stopping sight distance
calculation. Designers should refer to the NCHRP Report 672 for more discussion on sight distance at roundabouts.
APPROACH
CIRCULATORY
ROUNDABOUT INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
APPROACH
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
Roundabout Stopping Sight Distance - NCHRP Report 672 Equations (Using AASHTO Speeds)
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
d 152.4 152.4 152.4 #VALUE!
d 65.2 65.2 65.2 #VALUE!
Stopping Sight Distance Equations from NCHRP Report 672
AASHTO Stopping Sight a = Deceleration (11.2 ft/s2)
Distance on Grade Equation d =1.468(V)(t) + V2 G = Approach grade (%)
30 [ (a/32.2) +/- G/100]dbrake = Stopping Sight Distance (ft)
V = Initial speed (mph)
NOTE:
Splitter Island Design on High Speed Approaches - AASHTO Braking Distance Calculation
AASHTO BRAKING
DISTANCE dbrake 56.6 56.6 56.6 #VALUE!
The primary safety concern for high speed approaches is making the driver aware of the roundabout ahead. It is important to provide a deceleration distance that
allows the driver to comfortably decelerate to the appropriate speed. Designers should refer to Section 6.8.5 of NCHRP Report 672 for more information on design of
high speed roundabout approaches.
AASHTO BRAKING DISTANCE
APPROACH
Access 1 Access 2 Access 3 NA
PROJECT NAME:University Towne Center Roundabout Design KE PROJECT #:2025011
CLIENT NAME:Tyson Cichos/City of Rexburg ENTERED BY:Tyson Knudsen
DATE: 2/11/2026
F-1
UNIVERSITY TOWN CENTER -
ROUNDABOUT FIGURES
TC_REXBURG INVESTMENTS, LLC
REXBURG, IDAHO
FASTEST PATH
FIGURE
NO.
DESIGNER
DRAFTER BRD, -3D
BRD, -3D
SHEET INFORMATION
ENGINEERING3RO-ECT NO2020
DATE
FEBRUARY-2026
REVIE:ER TL.DRA:ING
FILE3ATH
UTC-ROUNDABOUT
FIGSGZJ
FASTEST PATH
ACCESS
NAME RADIUS FT S3EED
M3H
R62
R2 2
RNA NA
R6
R22 220
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 1 - FASTEST PATH
FP
1
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 2 - FASTEST PATH
FP
2
INCH 60 FEET
ACCCESS 3 - FASTEST PATH
FP
3
FASTEST PATH
ACCESS
NAME RADIUS FT S3EED
M3H
R22
R2 2
RNA NA
R22 202
R20 0
FASTEST PATH
ACCESS 2
NAME RADIUS FT S3EED
M3H
R2 2
R2 2
RNA NA
R20 2
R
R
R2
R
R
R
R
R2
R
R
R
R2
R
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 1 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
1r
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 2 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
2r
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 3 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
3r
F-2
UNIVERSITY TOWN CENTER -
ROUNDABOUT FIGURES
TC_REXBURG INVESTMENTS, LLC
REXBURG, IDAHO
VEHICLE TURNING PATHS
(RIGHT TURNS)
FIGURE
NO.
DESIGNER
DRAFTER BRD, -3D
BRD, -3D
SHEET INFORMATION
ENGINEERING3RO-ECT NO2020
DATE
FEBRUARY-2026
REVIE:ER TL.DRA:ING
FILE3ATH
UTC-ROUNDABOUT
FIGSGZJ
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
F-3
UNIVERSITY TOWN CENTER -
ROUNDABOUT FIGURES
TC_REXBURG INVESTMENTS, LLC
REXBURG, IDAHO
VEHICLE TURNING PATHS
(LEFT TURNS)
FIGURE
NO.
DESIGNER
DRAFTER BRD, -3D
BRD, -3D
SHEET INFORMATION
ENGINEERING3RO-ECT NO2020
DATE
FEBRUARY-2026
REVIE:ER TL.DRA:ING
FILE3ATH
UTC-ROUNDABOUT
FIGSGZJ
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 1 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
1l
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 2 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
2l
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 3 - VEHICLE PATH
VP
3l
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
F-4
UNIVERSITY TOWN CENTER -
ROUNDABOUT FIGURES
TC_REXBURG INVESTMENTS, LLC
REXBURG, IDAHO
SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCES
FIGURE
NO.
DESIGNER
DRAFTER BRD, -3D
BRD, -3D
SHEET INFORMATION
ENGINEERING3RO-ECT NO2020
DATE
FEBRUARY-2026
REVIE:ER TL.DRA:ING
FILE3ATH
UTC-ROUNDABOUT
FIGSGZJ
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 1 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
1
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 2 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
2
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 3 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
3
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
DISTANCE TABLE
DESCRI3TION LENGTH
ACCESS STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO YIELD LINE 2
2 ACCESS STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO CROSS:AL. 2
ACCESS 2 STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO YIELD LINE 2
ACCESS 2 STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO CROSS:AL. NA
ACCESS STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO YIELD LINE 2
6 ACCESS STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE TO CROSS:AL. NA
ACCESS CIRCULATORY STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE 62
ACCESS 2 CIRCULATORY STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE 62
ACCESS CIRCULATORY STO33ING SIGHT DISTANCE 62
2
F-5
UNIVERSITY TOWN CENTER -
ROUNDABOUT FIGURES
TC_REXBURG INVESTMENTS, LLC
REXBURG, IDAHO
SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCES
FIGURE
NO.
DESIGNER
DRAFTER BRD, -3D
BRD, -3D
SHEET INFORMATION
ENGINEERING3RO-ECT NO2020
DATE
FEBRUARY-2026
REVIE:ER TL.DRA:ING
FILE3ATH
UTC-ROUNDABOUT
FIGSGZJ
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 1 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
ACCESS 3
A
C
C
E
S
S
2
A
C
C
E
S
S
1
2
6
DISTANCE TABLE
DESCRI3TION LENGTH
0 ACCESS CROSS:AL. ON EXIT SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE -
ACCESS 2 CROSS:AL. ON EXIT SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE -
2 ACCESS CROSS:AL. ON EXIT SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE
ACCESS INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE ENTERING LEG 0
ACCESS 2 INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE ENTERING LEG 2
ACCESS INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE ENTERING LEG
6 ACCESS INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE CIRCULATING LEG 06
ACCESS 2 INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE CIRCULATING LEG 06
ACCESS INTERSECTION SIGHT TRIANGLE DISTANCE CIRCULATING LEG 06
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 2 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
2
INCH 60 FEET
ACCESS 3 - SIGHT TRIANGLES
ST
3