Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUniversity Towne Center TIA 6949 South High Tech Drive, Suite 200, Midvale, Utah 84047 p 801.352.0075 UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REXBURG, ID October 29, 2025 25-8007 10/30/25 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 3 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ............................................................................................... 3 1.2 PRINCIPAL FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 4 2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 8 2.1 DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 8 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................11 3.1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ............................................................................................11 3.2 EXISTING ROADWAYS .......................................................................................................11 3.3 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................................................12 3.4 CRASH DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................12 4.0 BACKGROUND YEAR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ....................................................................16 5.0 TRIP GENERATION AND TRIP DISTRIBUTION .................................................................21 5.1 TRIP GENERATION .............................................................................................................21 5.2 SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION & GENERATION .....................................................................24 6.0 TOTAL TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .......................................................................................31 6.1 SITE TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION PERCENTAGE ..............................................................31 7.0 CAPACITY ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................36 7.1 2025 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE ....................................................................................37 7.2 2027 PHASE 1 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................37 7.3 2027 PHASE 1 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................39 7.4 2028 PHASE 2 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................40 7.5 2028 PHASE 2 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................41 7.6 2030 PHASE 3 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................42 7.7 2030 PHASE 3 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE ...........................................................43 7.8 2040 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE .........................................................................45 7.9 2040 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE ..........................................................................46 8.0 DECELERATION LANE WARRANT ANALYSIS .................................................................49 9.0 APPENDIX .....................................................................................................................50 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 2 List of Figures Figure 1 – Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................ 9 Figure 2 - Site plan...................................................................................................................10 Figure 3 – 2025 Existing Traffic Volumes .................................................................................15 Figure 4 – 2027 Phase 1 Background Year Traffic Volumes .................................................17 Figure 5 – 2028 Phase 2 Background Year Traffic Volumes .................................................18 Figure 6 – 2030 Phase 3 Background Year Traffic Volumes .................................................19 Figure 7 – 2040 Background Year Traffic Volumes ...............................................................20 Figure 8 – 2027 Phase 1 Trip Distribution Percentages .........................................................25 Figure 9 – 2028 Phase 2 Trip Distribution Percentages .........................................................26 Figure 10 – 2030 Phase 3 Trip Distribution Percentages ........................................................27 Figure 11 – 2027 Phase 1 Trip Distribution Volumes ...............................................................28 Figure 12 – 2028 Phase 2 Trip Distribution Volumes ...............................................................29 Figure 13 – 2030 Phase 3 Trip Distribution Volumes ...............................................................30 Figure 14 – 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Volumes .....................................................................32 Figure 15 – 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Volumes .....................................................................33 Figure 16 – 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Volumes .....................................................................34 Figure 17 – 2040 Total Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................35 List of Tables Table 1 – Crash Data ................................................................................................................................ 13 Table 2 – Crash Data by Type ................................................................................................................. 14 Table 3 – Full Build-Out Trip Generation .................................................................................................. 22 Table 4 – Phase 1 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................... 22 Table 5 – Phase 2 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................... 23 Table 6 – Phase 3 Trip Generation .......................................................................................................... 23 Table 7 – Site Traffic Contribution Percentages .................................................................................... 31 Table 8 - Signalized and Unsignalized intersection LOS and Delay Parameters ............................... 36 Table 9 – 2025 Existing Level of Service .................................................................................................. 37 Table 10 – 2027 Phase 1 Background Year Level of Service ............................................................... 38 Table 11 – 2027 Phase 1 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................... 38 Table 12 – 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Level of Service .......................................................................... 39 Table 13 – 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................................ 40 Table 14 – 2028 Phase 2 Background Year Level of Service ............................................................... 40 Table 15 – 2028 Phase 2 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................... 41 Table 16 – 2028 Phase 2 Total Level of Service ...................................................................................... 41 Table 17 – 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................................ 42 Table 18 – 2030 Phase 3 Background Year Level of Service ............................................................... 42 Table 19 – 2030 Phase 3 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................... 43 Table 20 – 2030 Phase 3 Total Level of Service ...................................................................................... 44 Table 21 – 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ........................................................ 45 Table 22 – 2040 Background Year Level of Service .............................................................................. 45 Table 23 – 2040 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated .......................................................... 46 Table 24 – 2040 Total Level of Service .................................................................................................... 47 Table 25 – 2040 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated ....................................................................... 48 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 3 1.0 Executive Summary This report presents the results of a traffic impact analysis for the University Towne Center development, formerly known as the Rexburg Mixed Use Development, located north of University Boulevard and east of Yellowstone Highway, in Rexburg, Idaho. This study evaluates the existing traffic volumes, growth anticipated in this area with various planned developments and combining the trips generated by this development for the following scenarios: • 2025 Existing Traffic • 2027 Background Traffic (anticipated build-out year for Phase 1 of the University Towne Center development) • 2027 Total Traffic (Background traffic with project Traffic) • 2028 Background Traffic (anticipated build-out year for Phase 2 of the University Towne Center development) • 2028 Total Traffic (Background traffic with project traffic) • 2030 Background Traffic (anticipated build-out year for Phase 3 of the University Towne Center development) • 2030 Total Traffic (Background traffic with project traffic) • 2040 Background Traffic (10 years beyond full build-out of the University Towne Center development) • 2040 Total Traffic (Background traffic with project traffic) 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The University Towne Center development is planned to be built out in three phases. Phase 1 is planned to be built-out by 2027 and will consist of a 46,000 SF shopping plaza, A 3,000 high-turnover restaurant, and 3,000 SF fast-food restaurant with drive through window. Phase 2 is planned to be built-out by 2028 and will consist of a 6,100 SF office building, 7,600 SF shopping plaza, 6,700 SF of high-turnover restaurant space, and 5,200 SF of fast-food restaurant space with drive through window. Phase 3 is planned to be built-out by 2030 and will consist of a 100-room hotel and a 20,500 SF shopping plaza. The proposed site is planned with five accesses. Access 1 is located to the west of the development and will provide connectivity onto Yellowstone Highway. Access 2, located to south of the development, will function as a right-in right-out access onto University Blvd. Access 3, located to the east of the development, will align with the Eden Apartments access and provide connectivity onto Mikan Drive. Access 4, located east of the development and north of Access 3, will provide connectivity onto Mikan Drive. The fifth access will use the existing Tamana Drive to the south of the proposed FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 4 development. All traffic entering and exiting the proposed development will utilize all accesses. The proposed parcel of land for the University Towne Center development currently consists of undeveloped land. This development is surrounded by commercial properties to the north, apartment buildings to the east, restaurants to the south and Yellowstone Highway to the west. Figure 1 illustrates the Vicinity Map and the location of this development in relation to the adjacent roadway network. For purposes of this study, and following the City of Rexburg and Idaho Transportation Department’s (ITD) guidelines for a traffic impact study, the analysis will consist of the following intersections: 1. Yellowstone Highway & University Boulevard 2. Tamana Drive & University Boulevard 3. Mikan Drive & University Boulevard The proposed accesses to the development are also included in the analysis. The proposed development is planned to be built out in three phases. Phase 1 will be fully built-out by 2027, Phase 2 will be fully built-out by 2028, and Phase 3 will be fully built-out by 2030. Refer to Figure 2 for the overall site plan of the University Towne Center development and the proposed access locations. The traffic associated with this development is generated using the Trip Generation Manuals published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The University Towne Center development will generate 643 AM peak hour trips (351 entering the site and 292 exiting the site) and 816 PM peak hour trips (417 entering the site and 399 exiting the site). On an average weekday, the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume is estimated at 10,763 vehicles. To our knowledge there are no planned capital improvement projects by Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) or the City of Rexburg surrounding the proposed development at this time. 1.2 PRINCIPAL FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS With the growth that is occurring in this area of Rexburg, and the planned projects by the City of Rexburg, the following are the principal findings from the analysis and recommendations to improve the flow of traffic. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 5 2025 Existing Scenario Under the 2025 Existing scenario, all intersections within this study area function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds. No mitigations are needed. 2027 Phase 1 Background Scenario Under the 2027 Phase 1 Background scenario, the following intersections are expected to experience excessive delays and failing levels of service, recommendations to improve the intersections overall levels of service are as follows: • Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd: It is recommended that a second dedicated eastbound left turn lane be constructed with a protected signal phase. It is also recommended a dedicated southbound right turn lane be constructed with a permissive + overlap signal phase to improve the LOS. 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Scenario With the addition of a 46,000 SF shopping plaza, 3,000 SF of high-turnover restaurant space, and 3,000 SF fast-food restaurant with drive through window with Phase 1 of the University Towne Center development and the mitigations proposed under the 2027 Phase 1 Background scenario, all intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds. Therefore, no mitigations are needed at the study area intersections. The site layout should be designed to provide access onto Yellowstone Highway that meet city standards. It is recommended a southbound left turn lane and a northbound right turn lane be constructed at Access 1. 2028 Phase 2 Background Scenario Under the 2028 Background scenario (without Phase 2 of the proposed University Towne Center development), the intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previously mentioned mitigations. No mitigations are needed. 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Scenario With the addition of a 6,100 SF office space, 7,600 SF shopping plaza, 6,700 SF of high- turnover restaurant space, and 5,200 SF of fast-food restaurant space with drive through window with Phase 2 of the University Towne Center development, the intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previously mentioned mitigations. Therefore, no mitigations are needed at the study area intersections. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 6 The site layout should be designed to connect with Tamana Drive so that the roadway meets city standards. 2030 Phase 3 Background Scenario Under the 2030 Background scenario (without Phase 3 of the proposed University Towne Center development), the intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previously mentioned mitigations. No mitigations are needed. 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Scenario With the addition of a 100-room hotel and a 20,500 SF shopping plaza within the University Towne Center development, the intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previously mentioned mitigations. No mitigations are needed. The site layout should be designed to provide access onto Mikan Drive that meet city standards. 2040 Background Scenario Under the 2040 Background scenario (without Phase 3 of the proposed University Towne Center development), the intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previously mentioned mitigations. No mitigations are needed. 2040 Total Traffic Scenario Analyzing ten years beyond the full-build out of the University Towne Center development all intersections within this study area will continue to function with acceptable levels of service and meet the city’s minimum thresholds with the previous mentioned mitigations. Therefore, no mitigations are needed at the study area intersections. Below is a table summarizing the recommended improvements. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 7 Table E2 – Intersection Improvement Summary FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 8 2.0 Introduction 2.1 DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION The proposed University Towne Center development, formerly known as the Rexburg Mixed Use Development, is situated on roughly 17 acres of land located north of University Boulevard and east of Yellowstone Highway in Rexburg, Idaho. This proposed development is planned to be built out in three phases. Phase 1 is planned to be built- out by 2027 and will consist of a 46,000 SF shopping plaza, A 3,000 high-turnover restaurant, and 3,000 SF fast-food restaurant with drive through window. Phase 2 is planned to be built-out by 2028 and will consist of a 6,100 SF office building, 7,600 SF shopping plaza, 6,700 SF of high-turnover restaurant space, and 5,200 SF of fast-food restaurant space with drive through window. Phase 3 is planned to be built-out by 2030 and will consist of a 100-room hotel and a 20,500 SF shopping plaza. The University Towne Center development is planned with five accesses. Access 1 is located to the west of the development and will provide connectivity onto Yellowstone Highway. Access 2, located to south of the development, will function as a right-in right- out access onto University Blvd. Access 3, located to the east of the development, will align with the Eden Apartments access and provide connectivity onto Mikan Drive. Access 4, located east of the development and north of Access 3, will provide connectivity onto Mikan Drive. The fifth access will use the existing Tamana Drive to the south of the proposed development. The five accesses will be used by all vehicles accessing the site. Refer to the Vicinity Map and Site Plan in Figures 1 and 2, respectively, for the location of the new development, the layout of the site and the locations of the proposed accesses. T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 1 - Vicinity Map.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 - V I C I N I T Y M A P PR O P O S E D PR O J E C T LO C A T I O N YE L L O W S T O N E H I G H W A Y US-20 7T H S O U T H 5TH WEST UN I V E R S I T Y B L V D MIKAN DRIVE T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 2 - Site Plan.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 2 - S I T E P L A N YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y UN I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 11 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS From analyzing previous traffic impact studies conducted on the University Towne Center development and in accordance to ITD and city requirements, it was determined the following intersections fall within the study area: 1. Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd 2. Tamana Drive & University Blvd 3. Mikan Drive & University Blvd 4. Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 (Future Intersection) 5. Access 2 & University Blvd (Future Intersection) 6. Mikan Drive & Access 3 (Future Intersection) 7. Mikan Drive & Access 4 (Future Intersection) 3.2 EXISTING ROADWAYS Yellowstone Highway: Yellowstone Highway is a principal arterial Roadway that is owned and maintained by Rexburg City. Currently, Yellowstone Highway consists of two lanes in the northbound direction and two lanes in the southbound direction. Yellowstone Highway provides access onto 4th Street to the north. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. University Boulevard: University Boulevard is a principal arterial roadway that is owned and maintained by Rexburg City. Currently, west of Tamana Drive, University Boulevard consists of two lanes in the eastbound direction and two lanes in the westbound direction with a two-way left turn lane down the center. East of Tamana Drive, University Boulevard consists of one lane in the eastbound direction and one lane in the westbound direction with a two-way left turn lane. University Boulevard provides connectivity onto US-20. The posted speed limit is 45 mph east of Tamana Drive and 35 mph west of Tamana Drive. Tamana Drive: Tamana Drive is a local roadway that is owned and maintained by Rexburg City. Currently, Tamana Drive consists of one lane in the northbound direction and one lane in the southbound direction. Tamana Drive provides access onto University Boulevard for local commercial businesses. Tamana Drive does not have a posted speed limit, it is assumed to be 25 mph. Mikan Drive: Mikan Drive is a local roadway that is owned and maintained by Rexburg City. Currently, Mikan Drive consists of one lane in the northbound direction and one lane in the southbound direction. Mikan Drive provides access onto University Boulevard for FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 12 local residents. Mikan Drive does not have a posted speed limit, it is assumed to be 25 mph. 3.3 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES Coordinating with the City of Rexburg, from the intersections that were determined to be analyzed, existing traffic volumes were collected at the following intersections: 1. Yellowstone Highway & University Boulevard 2. Tamana Drive & University Boulevard 3. Mikan Drive & University Boulevard Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic counts were collected between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM at these intersections on April 1, 2025 and April 2, 2025. From the existing counts that were collected, it was determined the AM peak hour at the three intersections is from 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM. The PM peak hour did vary between the three intersections from 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respectively. These AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 3 and the details of the peak hours and traffic counts are also illustrated in the appendix of this report. 3.4 CRASH DATA ANALYSIS Crash data for the existing intersections within the study area was obtained from the Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) website (http://gis.lhtac.org/safety/). This data was collected for the most recent five-year period (2019-2023) that is available. This crash data is included in the Appendix of this report. The following table illustrates the number of crashes that were recorded at each intersection within the study area and defines the severity and crash type. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 13 Table 1 – Crash Data Intersection Total Crashes Crash Severity Notes PDO Injury Fatal 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd 21 18 3 0 •15 rear-end collision crashes. •4 angle turning collisions crashes. 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd 2 0 2 0 •1 rear-end collision crash. •1 crash was due to running off the road. 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd 8 5 3 0 •5 rear-end collisions crashes. •2 angle turning collisions crashes. Only crashes that were marked as “intersection related” were analyzed. From the crash data that is available, 2019 – 2023, there were a total of 31 crashes recorded at the study area intersections. Of the 31 crashes, 23 crashes resulted in Property Damage Only (74%), 8 crashes involved injury (26%), and no crashes included a fatality (0.0%). Table 2 illustrates the number of crashes based on the type of crash. Of the 31 crashes at the three study area intersections, 21 crashes occurred as rear-end crashes (68%), 6 angle crashes (19%), 1 sideswipe crashes (3%), 1 head-on crashes (3%), and 2 crashes were other types (7%). Other types of crashes include backed into accidents and cargo loss/shift. The highest number of crashes occurred at the Yellowstone Highway and University Boulevard intersection. The highest percentage of crashes were rear-end crashes that were caused by a driver’s inattention, following too close, or speed too fast for conditions. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 14 Table 2 – Crash Data by Type Intersection Total Crashes Crash Type Totals Rear- End Head- On Side- Swipe Angle Other 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd 21 15 1 0 4 1 21 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd 2 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd 8 5 0 1 2 0 8 Totals 31 21 1 1 6 2 31 This crash data is pulled over a four-year span from 2019 to 2023. The number of crashes over that four-year span per intersection is too low to indicate a severe issue is present at any one intersection. Therefore, is it not recommended improvements at the study area intersections be implemented based on crash data. T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 3 - 2025 Existing Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 3 - 2 0 2 5 E X I S T I N G T R A F F I C V O L U M E S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 27 9 ( 2 7 6 ) 20 9 ( 2 5 9 ) 5(2) 13 ( 8 9 ) 1( 2 ) 74(36) 29 2 ( 3 4 7 ) 28 2 ( 2 6 8 ) 0(18) 0( 1 9 ) 1( 2 7 ) 1(26) 27 8 ( 3 7 7 ) 31 1 ( 2 8 6 ) 30 ( 4 2 ) 51 ( 7 0 ) 393 ( 3 3 1 ) 33 4 ( 3 7 4 ) 10 ( 2 6 ) 88( 1 9 7 ) 12( 2 5 ) 130 ( 9 4 ) 191 ( 1 6 9 ) 50( 6 5 ) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 16 4.0 Background Year Traffic Volumes Background traffic is the traffic that is on the roadways within the study area regardless if the proposed development is constructed or not. These traffic volumes are a projection of growth within the study area based on current land available and opportunities for future development within this area. To our knowledge, there is one planned development to the south that will consist of fast-food restaurants and high-turnover sit- down restaurants, fronting onto University Blvd. Projected traffic volumes from these land uses were accounted for in the background traffic volumes. Therefore, it was determined the following average growth rates will occur within this study area from 2025 to 2030: • Yellowstone Highway: 3% • University Boulevard: 3% • Tamana Drive: 3% • Mikan Drive: 3% The following average growth rates will occur within this study area from 2030 to 2040: • Yellowstone Highway: 2% • University Boulevard: 2% • Tamana Drive: 2% • Mikan Drive: 2% Applying the assumed growth rate to the existing traffic volumes, the projected traffic volumes for the 2027 Phase 1 Background Year traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 4. Following the City of Rexburg and ITD’s traffic impact study guidelines, this analysis also looked at the 2028 Phase 2 Background Year, 2030 Phase 3 Background Year, AND 2040 Background Year. Applying the growth rate described above to the Existing and Background Year traffic volumes, the 2028 Background, 2030 Background, and 2040 Background Year traffic volumes are generated. The 2028 Phase 2 Background Year volumes can be found in Figure 5. The 2030 Phase 3 Background Year volumes can be found in Figure 6. The 2040 Background Year volumes can be found in Figure 7. T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 4 - 2027 Phase 1 Background Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 4 - 2 0 2 7 P H A S E 1 B A C K G R O U N D T R A F F I C V O L U M E S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 29 6 ( 2 9 3 ) 22 2 ( 2 7 5 ) 5(2) 14 ( 9 4 ) 1( 2 ) 79(38) 31 0 ( 3 6 8 ) 29 9 ( 2 8 4 ) 0(19) 0( 2 0 ) 1( 2 9 ) 1(28) 29 5 ( 4 0 0 ) 33 0 ( 3 0 3 ) 32 ( 4 5 ) 54 ( 7 4 ) 417 ( 3 5 1 ) 35 4 ( 3 9 7 ) 11 ( 2 8 ) 93( 2 0 9 ) 13( 2 7 ) 138 ( 1 0 0 ) 203 ( 1 7 9 ) 53( 6 9 ) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 5 - 2028 Phase 2 Background Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 5 - 2 0 2 8 P H A S E 2 B A C K G R O U N D T R A F F I C V O L U M E S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 30 5 ( 3 0 2 ) 22 8 ( 2 8 3 ) 5(2) 14 ( 9 7 ) 1( 2 ) 81(39) 31 9 ( 3 7 9 ) 30 8 ( 2 9 3 ) 0(20) 0( 2 1 ) 1( 3 0 ) 1(28) 30 4 ( 4 1 2 ) 34 0 ( 3 1 3 ) 33 ( 4 6 ) 56 ( 7 6 ) 429 ( 3 6 2 ) 36 5 ( 4 0 9 ) 11 ( 2 8 ) 96( 2 1 5 ) 13( 2 7 ) 142 ( 1 0 3 ) 209 ( 1 8 5 ) 55( 7 1 ) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 6 - 2030 Phase 3 Background Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 6 - 2 0 3 0 P H A S E 3 B A C K G R O U N D T R A F F I C V O L U M E S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 32 3 ( 3 2 0 ) 24 2 ( 3 0 0 ) 6(2) 15 ( 1 0 3 ) 1( 2 ) 86(42) 33 9 ( 4 0 2 ) 32 7 ( 3 1 1 ) 0(21) 0( 2 2 ) 1( 3 1 ) 1(30) 32 2 ( 4 3 7 ) 36 1 ( 3 3 2 ) 35 ( 4 9 ) 59 ( 8 1 ) 456 ( 3 8 4 ) 38 7 ( 4 3 4 ) 12 ( 3 0 ) 102 ( 2 2 8 ) 14( 2 9 ) 151 ( 1 0 9 ) 221 ( 1 9 6 ) 58( 7 5 ) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 7 - 2040 Background Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 7 - 2 0 4 0 B A C K G R O U N D T R A F F I C V O L U M E S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 39 4 ( 3 9 0 ) 29 5 ( 3 6 6 ) 7(3) 18 ( 1 2 6 ) 1( 3 ) 105(51) 41 3 ( 4 9 0 ) 39 9 ( 3 7 9 ) 0(25) 0( 2 7 ) 1( 3 8 ) 1(37) 39 3 ( 5 3 3 ) 43 9 ( 4 0 4 ) 42 ( 5 9 ) 72 ( 9 9 ) 555 ( 4 6 8 ) 47 2 ( 5 2 9 ) 14 ( 3 7 ) 124 ( 2 7 8 ) 17( 3 5 ) 184 ( 1 3 3 ) 270 ( 2 3 9 ) 71( 9 2 ) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 21 5.0 Trip Generation and Trip Distribution 5.1 TRIP GENERATION The University Towne Center development is planned is planned to be built out in three phases. Phase 1 is planned to be built-out by 2027 and will consist of a 46,000 SF shopping plaza, A 3,000 high-turnover restaurant, and 3,000 SF fast-food restaurant with drive through window. Phase 2 is planned to be built-out by 2028 and will consist of a 6,100 SF office building, 7,600 SF shopping plaza, 6,700 SF of high-turnover restaurant space, and 5,200 SF of fast-food restaurant space with drive through window. Phase 3 is planned to be built-out by 2030 and will consist of a 100-room hotel and a 20,500 SF shopping plaza. Using land use code 310 for a hotel, 712 for a small office space, 821 for a shopping plaza (40-150K), 932 for a high-turnover (sit-down) restaurant, and 934 for a fast-food restaurant with drive through window, trip generation rates were determined using the 11th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual. This manual is an ITE information report, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trips generated by the proposed development which will occur during the peak hours of the proposed development were used for the analysis. The Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic rates are used to generate the AM and PM peak hour volumes based on the number of square footages for commercial properties and number of rooms for a hotel. The trips generated from the full build-out of the University Towne Center development are presented in Table 3. The trips generated for each phase of this project are presented in tables 4-6. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 22 Table 3 – Full Build-Out Trip Generation ITE Land Use Code Land Use Land Use Description Size Daily Trip Generation (AM) Trip Generation (PM) (AADT) Enter Exit Enter Exit 310 Hotel Rooms 100 799 26 20 30 29 712 Small Office Building 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 6.1 88 8 2 4 9 821 Shopping Plaza (40- 150K) 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 74.1 5003 79 49 188 197 932 High- Turnover (sit-down) Restaurant 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 9.7 1040 51 42 54 34 934 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 8.2 3833 187 179 141 130 Total 10763 351 292 417 399 Table 4 – Phase 1 Trip Generation ITE Land Use Code Land Use Land Use Description Size Daily Trip Generation (AM) Trip Generation (PM) (AADT) Enter Exit Enter Exit 821 Shopping Plaza (40- 150K) 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 46 3106 49 31 117 122 932 High- Turnover (sit-down) Restaurant 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 3 322 16 13 17 10 934 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 3 1402 68 66 52 47 Total 4830 133 110 186 179 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 23 Table 5 – Phase 2 Trip Generation ITE Land Use Code Land Use Land Use Description Size Daily Trip Generation (AM) Trip Generation (PM) (AADT) Enter Exit Enter Exit 712 Small Office Building 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 6.1 88 8 2 4 9 821 Shopping Plaza (40- 150K) 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 7.6 513 8 5 19 20 932 High- Turnover (sit-down) Restaurant 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 6.7 718 35 29 37 24 934 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive Through Window 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 5.2 2431 118 114 89 83 Total 3750 169 150 149 136 Table 6 – Phase 3 Trip Generation ITE Land Use Code Land Use Land Use Description Size Daily Trip Generation (AM) Trip Generation (PM) (AADT) Enter Exit Enter Exit 310 Hotel Rooms 100 799 26 20 30 29 821 Shopping Plaza (40- 150K) 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA 20.5 1384 22 13 52 54 Total 2183 48 33 82 83 The above tables for each phase of this project illustrate the traffic volumes that will be entering and exiting the proposed development at each phase of the project. As the project progresses from Phase 1 to Phase 2, the trips from Phase 1 are added to the trips in the table above for Phase 2. Similarly, as the project progresses from Phase 2 to Phase 3. These volumes are explained below and illustrated in the traffic generation figures of this report. Table 3 illustrates the full build-out of the University Towne Center development will generate approximately 10,763 daily trips, with 643 trips occurring in the AM peak hour (351 entering, 292 exiting) and 816 trips occurring in the PM peak hour (417 entering, 399 exiting). FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 24 5.2 SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION & GENERATION Site ingress/egress traffic at the proposed accesses were distributed based on the anticipated direction vehicles would be coming from or going to. Directional distribution was estimated based on current traffic patterns and current land uses within the proximity of the proposed development, primarily access to highways, residential neighborhoods, etc. Figure 8 illustrates the site traffic distribution percentages throughout the study area following the full build-out of Phase 1. Using the distribution percentages along with the projected traffic volumes outlined in Table 1, Figure 11 illustrates the site traffic volumes anticipated at the study area intersections following the full build-out of Phase 1. Figure 9 illustrates the site traffic distribution percentages throughout the study area following the full build-out of Phase 2. With the addition of the Tamana Drive Access and Access 2, it is anticipated the traffic distribution will adjust as vehicles maneuver throughout the project and use the most convenient access to enter or exit the project. Using the distribution percentages along with the projected traffic volumes outlined in the above tables for Phases 1 and 2, Figure 12 illustrates the site traffic volumes anticipated at the study area intersections following the full build-out of Phase 2. Figure 10 illustrates the site traffic distribution percentages throughout the study area following the full build-out of Phase 3. Similarly, with the addition of Access 3 and Access 4, the overall project distribution will adjust throughout the entire project and all accesses. Using the distribution percentages along with the projected traffic volumes outlined in the above tables Phases 1, 2 and 3, Figure 13 illustrates the site traffic volumes anticipated at the study area intersections following the full build-out of Phase 3. T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 8 - 2027 Phase 1 Project Distribution Percentages.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 8 - 2 0 2 7 P H A S E 1 P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 0% 0% 50 % 50 % XX % = P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 10 % 10 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 10 % 10 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 20 % 20 % 10 % 20 % 10 % 0% 20 % 0% 50 % 50 % YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 9 - 2028 Phase 2 Project Distribution Percentages.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 9 - 2 0 2 8 P H A S E 2 P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 0% 0% 15 % 45 % 45% 15% XX % = P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 0% 10 % 15% 15 % 15 % 15% 10 % 20 % 5% 0% 10 % 10 % 0% 5% 0% 0% 5% 5% 15 % 25 % 0% 0% 0% 0% YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S 15 % 15 % 10 % 10% T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 10 - 2030 Phase 3 Project Distribution Percentages.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 0 - 2 0 3 0 P H A S E 3 P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 0% 0% 15 % 30 % 30% 15 % XX % = P R O J E C T D I S T R I B U T I O N P E R C E N T A G E S 15% 15 %5% 0% 0% 5% 10 % 20 % 10% 5% 10 % 5% 5% 15 % 10% 10 % 10 % 10% 5% 15 % 10 % 0% 10 % 10 % 0% 5% 0% 0% 5% 10 % YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S 15 % 15 % 10 % 10% 0% 5 % 5% 5 % 0 % 5 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 11 - 2027 Phase 1 Trip Distribution Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 1 - 2 0 2 7 P H A S E 1 T R I P D I S T R I B U T I O N V O L U M E S YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 67( 9 3 ) 66( 9 3 ) 11 ( 1 8 ) 13 ( 1 9 ) 0(0) 0( 0 ) 0( 0 ) 0(0) 11 ( 1 8 ) 13 ( 1 9 ) 0(0) 0( 0 ) 0( 0 ) 0(0) 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 22( 3 6 ) 27 ( 3 7 ) 13 ( 1 9 ) 22( 3 5 ) 11( 1 8 ) 0(0) 27( 3 7 ) 0(0) 55 ( 8 9 ) 55 ( 9 0 ) T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 12 - 2028 Phase 2 Trip Distribution Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 2 - 2 0 2 8 P H A S E 2 T R I P D I S T R I B U T I O N V O L U M E S YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 46( 5 0 ) 136 ( 1 5 1 ) 11 7 ( 1 4 2 ) 39 ( 4 7 ) 0( 0 ) 26 ( 3 2 ) 39(47) 45 ( 5 0 ) 45 ( 5 0 ) 39(47) 30 ( 3 3 ) 52 ( 6 3 ) 13 ( 1 6 ) 0(0 ) 26( 3 1 ) 31 ( 3 3 ) 0(0 ) 13( 1 6 ) 0(0) 0(0) 15( 1 7 ) 15( 1 7 ) 39 ( 4 7 ) 75 ( 8 4 ) 0(0) 0( 0 ) 0( 0 ) 0(0) 39 ( 4 7 ) 45 ( 5 0 ) 30 ( 3 4 ) 26(32) T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 13 - 2030 Phase 3 Trip Distribution Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 3 - 2 0 3 0 P H A S E 3 T R I P D I S T R I B U T I O N V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 7(1 2 ) 15( 2 5 ) 10 ( 2 5 ) 5(1 2 ) 7(13) 5( 1 3 ) 2( 4 ) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4) 3( 8 ) 10 ( 1 6 ) 3(9) 2( 4 ) 5( 9 ) 2(4) 2( 4 ) 5( 1 2 ) 3(8) 5( 8 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 2(4 ) 5(1 2 ) 3(8 ) 0(0 ) 3(8) 5(8 ) 0(0 ) 2(4) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4 ) 5(8) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S 5( 1 2 ) 7( 1 2 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 0(0 ) 2( 4 ) 2(4 ) 2( 4 ) 0( 0 ) 2( 4 ) XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 53( 6 2 ) 105 ( 1 2 5 ) 88 ( 1 1 9 ) 44 ( 6 0 ) 53(62) 44 ( 6 0 ) 15 ( 2 0 ) 0(0) 0(0) 18(21) 29 ( 4 0 ) 70 ( 8 4 ) 29(40) 18 ( 2 1 ) 35 ( 4 1 ) 15(20) 18 ( 2 1 ) 44 ( 6 0 ) 29(40) 35 ( 4 2 ) 35 ( 4 2 ) 29(40) 18 ( 2 1 ) 44 ( 6 0 ) 29 ( 4 0 ) 0(0 ) 29( 4 0 ) 35 ( 4 1 ) 0(0 ) 15( 2 0 ) 0(0 ) 0(0) 18( 2 1 ) 35( 4 2 ) 47 ( 6 1 ) 50 ( 6 2 ) 35 ( 4 2 ) 29(40) 0(0 ) 1 7 ( 2 1 ) 14(2 0 ) 1 8 ( 2 1 ) 0( 0 ) 1 5 ( 2 0 ) 0( 0 ) 0(0) 0( 0 ) 0(0) 0( 0 ) 0( 0 ) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 31 6.0 Total Traffic Conditions The Total Traffic volumes (also known as Background Year with Project traffic volumes) represent the traffic that will be added to the study area with the addition of the proposed University Towne Center development. Using the 2027 Phase 1 Background Year traffic volumes (Figure 4) and the Phase 1 site generated traffic volumes, the 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic volumes are generated. Per the developer’s schedule, it is anticipated the University Towne Center development will be constructed in three phases and will be fully built-out by 2030. The 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic volumes, which combine the 2028 Phase 2 Background Year traffic volumes (Figure 5) with the Phase 2 cumulative project generated traffic volumes (Figure 12), are illustrated in Figure 15. The 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic volumes, which combine the 2030 Phase 3 Background Year traffic volumes (Figure 6) with the Phase 3 cumulative project generated traffic volumes (Figure 13), are illustrated in Figure 16. The 2040 Total Traffic volumes, which combine the 2040 Background Year traffic volumes (Figure 7) with the Phase 3 cumulative project generated traffic volumes (Figure 13), are illustrated in Figure 17. 6.1 SITE TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION PERCENTAGE The following tables illustrate the site traffic contribution as a percentage of the 2040 Total Traffic volumes at each study area intersection. Table 7 – Site Traffic Contribution Percentages Intersection % Site Traffic of 2030 Total Traffic AM Peak PM Peak Average 1 Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd 7.8% 8.9% 8.4% 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd 18.9% 19.7% 19.3% 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd 19.3% 20.8% 20.1% 4 Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 16.6% 18.8% 17.7% 5 Access 2 & University Blvd 16.4% 18.0% 17.2% 6 Mikan Drive & Access 3 48.5% 46.8% 47.7% 7 Mikan Drive & Access 4 42.1% 40.8% 41.5% T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 14 - 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 4 - 2 0 2 7 P H A S E 1 T O T A L T R A F F I C V O L U M E S YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 568 ( 6 0 4 ) 523 ( 5 8 7 ) 67( 9 3 ) 66( 9 3 ) 30 7 ( 3 1 1 ) 23 5 ( 2 9 4 ) 32 1 ( 3 8 6 ) 31 2 ( 3 0 3 ) 439 ( 3 8 7 ) 38 1 ( 4 3 4 ) 24 ( 4 7 ) 115 ( 2 4 4 ) 24( 4 5 ) 230 ( 2 1 6 ) 55 ( 8 9 ) 55 ( 9 0 ) 0(19) 0( 2 0 ) 1( 2 9 ) 1(28) 5(2) 14 ( 9 4 ) 1( 2 ) 79(38) 29 5 ( 4 0 0 ) 33 0 ( 3 0 3 ) 32 ( 4 5 ) 54 ( 7 4 ) 138 ( 1 0 0 ) 53( 6 9 ) T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 15 - 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 5 - 2 0 2 8 P H A S E 2 T O T A L T R A F F I C V O L U M E S YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 585 ( 6 2 2 ) 538 ( 6 0 4 ) 46( 5 0 ) 136 ( 1 5 1 ) 11 7 ( 1 4 2 ) 39 ( 4 7 ) 33 4 ( 3 2 5 ) 39(67) 45 ( 7 1 ) 46 ( 8 0 ) 40(75) 33 4 ( 4 4 5 ) 39 2 ( 3 7 6 ) 46 ( 6 2 ) 455 ( 3 9 3 ) 39 6 ( 4 4 2 ) 109 ( 2 3 1 ) 224 ( 2 0 2 ) 70( 8 8 ) 34 4 ( 3 4 9 ) 30 3 ( 3 6 7 ) 35 8 ( 4 4 6 ) 35 4 ( 3 7 3 ) 30 ( 3 4 ) 26(32) 5(2) 14 ( 9 7 ) 1( 2 ) 81(39) 31 9 ( 3 7 9 ) 56 ( 7 6 ) 11 ( 2 8 ) 13( 2 7 ) 142 ( 1 0 3 ) T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 16 - 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 6 - 2 0 3 0 P H A S E 3 T O T A L T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 7(1 2 ) 15( 2 5 ) 10 ( 2 5 ) 5(1 2 ) 7(13) 5( 1 3 ) 2( 4 ) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4) 3( 8 ) 10 ( 1 6 ) 3(9) 2( 4 ) 5( 9 ) 2(4) 2( 4 ) 5( 1 2 ) 3(8) 5( 8 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 2(4 ) 5(1 2 ) 3(8 ) 0(0 ) 3(8) 5(8 ) 0(0 ) 2(4) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4 ) 5(8) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S 5( 1 2 ) 7( 1 2 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 0(0 ) 2( 4 ) 2(4 ) 2( 4 ) 0( 0 ) 2( 4 ) XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 620 ( 6 6 0 ) 572 ( 6 4 1 ) 53( 6 2 ) 105 ( 1 2 5 ) 88 ( 1 1 9 ) 44 ( 6 0 ) 53(62) 44 ( 6 0 ) 15 ( 2 0 ) 6(64) 52(19) 18(21) 35 2 ( 3 6 0 ) 31 2 ( 3 8 4 ) 35(42) 33 ( 1 2 4 ) 36 ( 4 3 ) 101(62) 35 7 ( 4 2 3 ) 37 1 ( 3 7 1 ) 29(61) 35 ( 6 4 ) 36 ( 7 3 ) 30(70) 34 0 ( 4 5 8 ) 40 5 ( 3 9 2 ) 64 ( 8 9 ) 485 ( 4 2 4 ) 42 2 ( 4 7 5 ) 117 ( 2 4 8 ) 239 ( 2 1 7 ) 143 ( 1 1 7 ) 38 6 ( 4 8 4 ) 37 8 ( 4 0 4 ) 35 ( 4 2 ) 29(40) 0(0 ) 1 7 ( 2 1 ) 14(2 0 ) 7 3 ( 4 1 ) 0( 0 ) 2 1 ( 8 4 ) 0( 0 ) 10(41) 40 ( 2 5 ) 3(1) 4( 1 ) 0( 0 ) 59 ( 8 1 ) 151 ( 1 0 9 ) 12 ( 3 0 ) 14( 2 9 ) T:\_2025\25-8007 Rexburg Mixed Use TIA\transportation\traffic\figures\Figure 17 - 2040 Total Traffic Volumes.dwg FOCU S ã EN G I N E E R I N G A N D S U R V E Y I N G , L L C 69 4 9 S . H I G H T E C H D R I V E S U I T E 2 0 0 MI D V A L E , U T A H 8 4 0 4 7 P H : ( 8 0 1 ) 3 5 2 - 0 0 7 5 ww w . f o c u s u t a h . c o m UN I V E R S I T Y T O W N E C E N T E R FI G U R E 1 7 - 2 0 4 0 T O T A L T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 0(0 ) 0(0 ) 7(1 2 ) 15( 2 5 ) 10 ( 2 5 ) 5(1 2 ) 7(13) 5( 1 3 ) 2( 4 ) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4) 3( 8 ) 10 ( 1 6 ) 3(9) 2( 4 ) 5( 9 ) 2(4) 2( 4 ) 5( 1 2 ) 3(8) 5( 8 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 2(4 ) 5(1 2 ) 3(8 ) 0(0 ) 3(8) 5(8 ) 0(0 ) 2(4) 0(0) 0(0) 2(4 ) 5(8) YE L L O W S T O N E H W Y U N I V E R S I T Y B L V D AC C E S S 4 TAMANA DRIVE MIKAN DRIVE AC C E S S 1 PH A S E 1 PH A S E 2 PH A S E 3 AC C E S S 3 ACCESS 2DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S DE V E L O P M E N T T O BE D O N E B Y O T H E R S 5( 1 2 ) 7( 1 2 ) 5( 8 ) 3(8) 0(0 ) 2( 4 ) 2(4 ) 2( 4 ) 0( 0 ) 2( 4 ) XX ( X X ) = A M ( P M ) P E A K H O U R T R A F F I C V O L U M E S 756 ( 8 0 5 ) 696 ( 7 8 1 ) 53( 6 2 ) 105 ( 1 2 5 ) 88 ( 1 1 9 ) 44 ( 6 0 ) 53(62) 44 ( 6 0 ) 15 ( 2 0 ) 9(88) 72(29) 18(21) 42 3 ( 4 3 0 ) 36 5 ( 4 5 0 ) 36(43) 36 ( 1 4 7 ) 36 ( 4 4 ) 120(71) 43 1 ( 5 1 1 ) 44 3 ( 4 3 9 ) 29(65) 35 ( 6 9 ) 36 ( 8 0 ) 30(77) 41 1 ( 5 5 4 ) 48 3 ( 4 6 4 ) 71 ( 9 9 ) 584 ( 5 0 8 ) 50 7 ( 5 7 0 ) 139 ( 2 9 8 ) 288 ( 2 6 0 ) 106 ( 1 3 4 ) 47 0 ( 5 7 6 ) 45 0 ( 4 7 9 ) 35 ( 4 2 ) 29(40) 0(0 ) 1 7 ( 2 1 ) 14(2 0 ) 9 3 ( 5 1 ) 0( 0 ) 2 8 ( 1 0 9 ) 0( 0 ) 0( 0 ) 10(41) 40 ( 2 5 ) 3(1) 4( 1 ) 72 ( 9 9 ) 184 ( 1 3 3 ) 14 ( 3 7 ) 17( 3 5 ) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 36 7.0 Capacity Analysis Intersection capacity analysis was performed at the study area intersections. Synchro© Version 11 was used to analyze the study intersection for the proposed trip conditions according to methods put forth by the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000). The Level of Service (LOS) of an intersection range from A to F where LOS A has a low vehicular delay indicating smooth free-flowing traffic. LOS F has a high vehicular delay and indicates the worst-case scenario with high congestion and a complete breakdown of traffic flow. According to the City of Rexburg Transportation Master Plan, LOS A through C considered acceptable in urban conditions. Traffic conditions with LOS of D, E, or F are deemed unacceptable and represent significant travel delay, increased accident potential, and inefficient motor vehicle operation. Table 2 shows the relation between LOS and vehicular delay for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 8 - Signalized and Unsignalized intersection LOS and Delay Parameters Level of Service (LOS) Vehicular Delay (seconds/vehicle) Signalized Intersection Stop Controlled Approach A 0.0 <10.0 0.0 < 10.0 B >10.0 < 20.0 > 10.0 < 15.0 C > 20.0 < 35.0 > 15.0 < 25.0 D > 35.0 < 55.0 > 25.0 < 35.0 E > 55.0 < 80.0 > 35.0 < 50.0 F > 80.0 > 50.0 Using guidelines for operational threshold from both the City of Rexburg and ITD, each of the study area intersections were analyzed on both the level of service and also the volume to capacity ratio. The minimum threshold for level of service is C for the worst movement or lane group. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 37 7.1 2025 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2025 Existing traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into the Synchro Software. The intersection levels of service and worst lane group MOE’s of the study intersections can be seen in the following tables. Table 9 – 2025 Existing Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 24.4 29.8 Intersection v/c 0.56 0.53 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.69 (EBL) D / 0.71 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS A B SB Delay (s/veh) 9.9 11.4 Worst Lane Group MOEs A / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.08 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.0 10.2 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.01 (SBL) B / 0.05 (SBL) As seen in table 6, all intersections meet the minimum threshold for operation under the 2025 Existing conditions. 7.2 2027 PHASE 1 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2027 Phase 1 Background Year traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s for each intersection can be seen in the following table. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 38 Table 10 – 2027 Phase 1 Background Year Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 26.3 30.7 Intersection v/c 0.59 0.58 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.75 (EBL) D / 0.75 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.0 11.6 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.09 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.2 10.4 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.11 (SBR) B / 0.06 (SBR) As seen in table 10, the Tamana Drive/University Blvd and the Mikan Drive/University Blvd intersections all currently function at acceptable levels of service and meet the minimum thresholds during the AM and PM peak hours. However, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection currently functions at unacceptable levels of service under the AM and PM peak hours. Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd: It is recommended that a second dedicated eastbound left turn lane be constructed with a protected signal phase. It is also recommended a dedicated southbound right turn lane be constructed with a permissive + overlap signal phase to improve the LOS. The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2027 Phase 1 Background conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 11 – 2027 Phase 1 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS B B Intersection Delay (s/veh) 19.8 20.0 Intersection v/c 0.49 0.45 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.72 (EBL) A / 0.74 (EBL) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 39 7.3 2027 PHASE 1 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s for each intersection can be seen in the following table. Table 12 – 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 26.6 31.6 Intersection v/c 0.62 0.60 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.76 (EBL) D / 0.79 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.1 11.8 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.09 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.3 10.5 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.11 (SBR) B / 0.08 (EBR) 4 Yellowstone Hwy & Access 1 WB LOS B C WB Delay (s/veh) 14.3 17.1 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.18 (WBL) C / 0.33 (WBL) As seen in table 12, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/University Blvd, and the Yellowstone Road/Access 1 will all function at acceptable levels of service. The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 40 Table 13 – 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 20.3 20.3 Intersection v/c 0.52 0.48 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.74 (EBL) C / 0.76 (EBL) 7.4 2028 PHASE 2 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2028 Phase 2 Background Year traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. Table 14 – 2028 Phase 2 Background Year Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 26.7 31.3 Intersection v/c 0.61 0.60 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.76 (EBL) D / 0.78 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.1 11.8 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.09 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.2 10.4 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.11 (SBR) A / 0.08 (EBL) As seen in table 14, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd and the Mikan Drive/University Blvd will continue to function at acceptable levels of service. The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2028 Phase 2 Background Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 41 Table 15 – 2028 Phase 2 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 20.1 20.2 Intersection v/c 0.51 0.46 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.73 (EBL) C / 0.75 (EBL) 7.5 2028 PHASE 2 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. Table 16 – 2028 Phase 2 Total Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 28.9 33.0 Intersection v/c 0.66 0.64 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.81 (EBL) D / 0.84 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B C SB Delay (s/veh) 13.0 15.5 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.16 (SB) C / 0.31 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.9 11.1 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.12 (SBR) B / 0.07 (SBR) 4 Yellowstone Hwy & Access 1 WB LOS B B WB Delay (s/veh) 13.8 14.9 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.16 (WBL) C / 0.21 (WBL) 5 Access 2 & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.7 10.9 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.04 (SBR) B / 0.05 (SBR) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 42 As seen in table 16, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/University Blvd, Yellowstone Road/Access 1, and the Access 2/University Blvd intersections will all continue to function at acceptable levels of service. The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 17 – 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 21.1 21.0 Intersection v/c 0.56 0.52 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.75 (EBL) C / 0.77 (EBL) 7.6 2030 PHASE 3 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2030 Phase 3 Background Year traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. Table 18 – 2030 Phase 3 Background Year Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 27.9 32.7 Intersection v/c 0.66 0.63 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.80 (EBL) D / 0.83 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.2 12.1 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.10 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.4 10.6 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.12 (SBR) B / 0.09 (EBL) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 43 As seen in table 18, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd and the Mikan Drive/University Blvd intersections will continue to function at acceptable levels of service. The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2030 Phase 3 Background Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 19 – 2030 Phase 3 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 20.8 20.6 Intersection v/c 0.55 0.49 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.74 (EBL) C / 0.76 (EBL) 7.7 2030 PHASE 3 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 44 Table 20 – 2030 Phase 3 Total Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 29.7 34.6 Intersection v/c 0.71 0.68 Worst Lane Group MOEs D / 0.84 (EBL) D/ 0.88 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B C SB Delay (s/veh) 13.0 16.0 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.13 (SB) C / 0.30 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 11.9 13.9 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.16 (SBR) C / 0.14 (SBL) 4 Yellowstone Hwy & Access 1 WB LOS B C WB Delay (s/veh) 14.3 16.2 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.17 (WBL) C / 0.26 (WBL) 5 University Blvd & Access 2 SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.9 11.3 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.05 (SBR) B / 0.07 (SBR) 6 Mikan Drive & Access 3 WB LOS B B WB Delay (s/veh) 10.6 11.3 Worst Lane Group MOEs A / 0.07 (EB) A / 0.10 (EB) 7 Mikan Drive & Access 4 EB LOS A A EB Delay (s/veh) 0.0 0.0 Worst Lane Group MOEs A / 0.00 (EB) A / 0.00 (EB) As seen in table 20, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/University Blvd, Yellowstone Road/Access 1, Access 2/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/Access 3, and the Mikan Drive/Access 4 intersections will all continue to function at acceptable levels of service. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 45 The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 21 – 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 21.7 21.5 Intersection v/c 0.59 0.56 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.76 (EBL) C / 0.78 (EBL) 7.8 2040 BACKGROUND LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2040 Background Year traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. Table 22 – 2040 Background Year Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS D D Intersection Delay (s/veh) 35.0 43.9 Intersection v/c 0.87 0.78 Worst Lane Group MOEs E / 0.91 (EBL) E / 1.00 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 10.8 13.3 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / <0.01 (SB) B / 0.14 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 11.0 11.4 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.16 (SBR) B / 0.12 (EBL) As seen in table 22, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd and the Mikan Drive/University Blvd intersections will continue to function at acceptable levels of service. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 46 The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2040 Background Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 23 – 2040 Background Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 24.2 23.5 Intersection v/c 0.68 0.62 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.79 (EBL) C / 0.82 (EBL) 7.9 2040 TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE The 2040 Total Traffic volumes at each of the study area intersections were input into Synchro. The overall levels of service and the worst lane MOE’s can be seen in the following table. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 47 Table 24 – 2040 Total Level of Service Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS D D Intersection Delay (s/veh) 39.1 49.9 Intersection v/c 0.90 0.82 Worst Lane Group MOEs E / 0.96 (EBL) F / 1.07 (EBL) 2 Tamana Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B C SB Delay (s/veh) 14.2 18.7 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.14 (SB) C / 0.37 (SB) 3 Mikan Drive & University Blvd SB LOS B C SB Delay (s/veh) 12.7 15.3 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.21 (SBR) C / 0.16 (SBR) 4 Yellowstone Hwy & Access 1 WB LOS C C WB Delay (s/veh) 16.2 19.0 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.20 (WBL) C / 0.32 (WBL) 5 University Blvd & Access 2 SB LOS B B SB Delay (s/veh) 11.6 12.0 Worst Lane Group MOEs B / 0.05 (SBR) B / 0.08 (SBR) 6 Mikan Drive & Access 3 WB LOS B B WB Delay (s/veh) 10.8 11.6 Worst Lane Group MOEs A / 0.07 (EB) A / 0.10 (EB) 7 Mikan Drive & Access 4 EB LOS A A EB Delay (s/veh) 0.0 0.0 Worst Lane Group MOEs A / 0.00 (EB) A / 0.00 (EB) As seen in table 24, without the previous mentioned mitigations, the Yellowstone Highway/University Blvd intersection will continue to experience failing levels of service and not meet the minimum threshold. The Tamana Drive/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/University Blvd, Yellowstone Road/Access 1, Access 2/University Blvd, Mikan Drive/Access 3, and the Mikan Drive/Access 4 intersections will all continue to function at acceptable levels of service. FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 48 The following table illustrates the expected levels of service and MOE’s to the Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd intersection under the 2040 Total Traffic conditions with the above-mentioned mitigations. Table 25 – 2040 Total Traffic Level of Service Mitigated Intersection MOE's AM Peak PM Peak 1 Yellowstone Hwy & University Blvd Intersection LOS C C Intersection Delay (s/veh) 26.0 25.4 Intersection v/c 0.73 0.68 Worst Lane Group MOEs C / 0.81 (EBL) C / 0.84 (EBL) FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 49 8.0 Deceleration Lane Warrant Analysis The Yellowstone Highway and Access 1 intersection was analyzed for a deceleration lane warrant. The City of Rexburg Transportation Master Plan was used applying the Deceleration Lanes for Right Turning Vehicles Guidelines for 45 to 55 mph roadways. Within this study area, Yellowstone Highway would follow the major roadway analysis, where Access 1 would fall under the minor roadway analysis. The following Advancing Volumes and Right Turning Volumes under the 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic scenario was used. Refer to the appendix of this report for a more thorough description of the Deceleration Lanes for Right Turning Vehicles Section of the City of Rexburg Transportation Master Plan. Yellowstone Highway & Access 1: The following analysis was performed using the Deceleration Lanes for Right Turning Vehicles Section for evaluation of a northbound right turn lane at Yellowstone Highway under the 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic scenario. 2027 Phase 1 Total Traffic Northbound Right Turn Lane: Does Warrant AM Northbound Right Turn Volume = 67 vph AM Major Road Volume = 568 vph PM Northbound Right Turn Volume = 93 vph PM Major Road Volume = 604 vph FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 50 9.0 Appendix FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 51 Scoping Memo 1 Jason Watson From:Jeffrey Rawson <Jeffrey.Rawson@itd.idaho.gov> Sent:Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To:Jason Watson; Kevin Flamm; Tre Davis Subject:Development at Yellowstone and University Blvd Rexburg Hey All, 1 Jason Watson From:Jason Watson Sent:Friday, March 14, 2025 9:19 AM To:JR Grotjohn Cc:Kevin Flamm; Tre Davis Subject:Rexburg Mixed Use Traffic Impact Study Scoping Attachments:Pages from Lot 6 and 17 Acres Combined site plans - Phase 2.pdf JR, We are working with Kevin from Lot6 Group on the traffic study for his development on the northeast corner of Yellowstone Highway and University Blvd, in Rexburg. We wanted to send over our scope of work for this 2 a. HCM 6th FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 52 Existing Traffic Counts TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 5 8 1 74 0 5 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 9 4 1 2 . 7 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 9 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 7 : 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 13 1 2. 2 % 0 . 2 % CO U N T T I M E : 27 9 20 9 FR O M : 7: 0 0 A M 48 . 0 % 3 6 . 0 % TO : 9: 0 0 A M 0 0 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 To t a l = 5 8 1 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 7 : 1 5 A M 3 2 7 1 1 8 4 4 1 94 7: 1 5 A M 7 : 3 0 A M 3 4 5 1 2 4 4 3 0 11 6 7: 3 0 A M 7 : 4 5 A M 6 7 1 3 2 4 4 1 0 14 5 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 3 7 8 0 2 5 4 8 0 15 4 8: 0 0 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 1 6 7 1 1 3 5 9 0 14 1 8: 1 5 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 3 6 3 1 1 2 6 1 1 14 1 8: 3 0 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 2 7 5 1 1 0 2 1 0 10 9 8: 4 5 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 3 7 1 1 1 1 3 4 0 12 0 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 0 0 0 1 5 2 2 1 0 5 0 9 1 0 1 7 6 1 5 0 9 7: 1 5 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 0 0 0 1 3 2 6 1 0 5 0 8 6 0 1 9 1 0 5 5 6 7: 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 0 0 0 1 3 2 7 9 0 5 0 7 4 0 2 0 9 1 5 8 1 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 0 0 0 9 2 8 3 0 3 0 6 0 0 1 8 9 1 5 4 5 8: 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 0 0 0 9 2 7 6 0 4 0 4 6 0 1 7 5 1 5 1 1 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 AM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S F O C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , LL C Mi k a n D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Mi k a n D r i v e a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Mi k a n D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d 1 TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y PM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 6 6 4 36 0 2 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 8 8 5 . 4 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 3 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 89 2 13 . 4 % 0 . 3 % CO U N T T I M E : 27 6 25 9 FR O M : 4: 0 0 P M 41 . 6 % 3 9 . 0 % TO : 6: 0 0 P M 0 0 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 To t a l = 66 4 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 4 : 1 5 P M 12 5 9 0 9 5 1 0 13 1 4: 1 5 P M 4 : 3 0 P M 11 5 7 1 1 0 4 8 1 12 8 4: 3 0 P M 4 : 4 5 P M 9 5 3 0 1 3 4 8 2 12 5 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 15 6 7 0 1 3 5 8 0 15 3 5: 0 0 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 24 5 2 1 7 7 0 1 15 5 5: 1 5 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 22 5 7 1 1 3 6 9 1 16 3 5: 3 0 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 23 6 9 0 8 5 8 0 15 8 5: 4 5 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 20 9 8 0 8 6 2 0 18 8 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 0 0 0 4 7 2 3 6 0 1 0 4 5 0 2 0 5 3 5 3 7 4: 1 5 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 0 0 0 5 9 2 2 9 0 2 0 4 3 0 2 2 4 4 5 6 1 4: 3 0 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 0 0 0 7 0 2 2 9 0 2 0 4 6 0 2 4 5 4 5 9 6 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 0 0 0 8 4 2 4 5 0 2 0 4 1 0 2 5 5 2 6 2 9 5: 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 0 0 0 8 9 2 7 6 0 2 0 3 6 0 2 5 9 2 6 6 4 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . Un i v e r s i t y B l v d FO C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , L L C Mi k a n D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Mi k a n D r i v e a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Mi k a n D r i v e 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 2 TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 5 7 6 1 0 0 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 9 3 0 . 2 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 7 : 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 0 1 0. 0 % 0 . 2 % CO U N T T I M E : 29 2 28 2 FR O M : 7: 0 0 A M 50 . 7 % 4 9 . 0 % TO : 9: 0 0 A M 0 0 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 To t a l = 5 7 6 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 7 : 1 5 A M 0 3 0 0 0 6 2 0 92 7: 1 5 A M 7 : 3 0 A M 0 4 8 0 0 6 7 0 11 5 7: 3 0 A M 7 : 4 5 A M 0 7 7 0 0 6 5 0 14 2 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 0 8 1 0 1 7 2 1 15 5 8: 0 0 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 0 6 8 0 0 7 2 0 14 0 8: 1 5 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 0 6 6 0 0 7 3 0 13 9 8: 3 0 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 1 7 7 0 0 3 1 0 10 9 8: 4 5 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 0 7 4 0 0 4 5 0 11 9 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 0 0 0 0 2 3 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 6 6 1 5 0 4 7: 1 5 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 0 0 0 0 2 7 4 0 0 0 1 0 2 7 6 1 5 5 2 7: 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 0 0 0 0 2 9 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 8 2 1 5 7 6 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 0 0 0 1 2 9 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 4 8 1 5 4 3 8: 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 0 0 0 1 2 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 5 0 7 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . AM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S F O C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , LL C Ta m a n a D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Ta m a n a D r i v e a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Ta m a n a D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 1 TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y PM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 7 0 5 26 0 1 8 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 9 1 3 . 7 % 0 . 0 % 2 . 6 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 19 27 2. 7 % 3 . 8 % CO U N T T I M E : 34 7 26 8 FR O M : 4: 0 0 P M 49 . 2 % 3 8 . 0 % TO : 6: 0 0 P M 0 0 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 To t a l = 70 5 0. 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 4 : 1 5 P M 1 6 9 2 3 5 8 2 13 5 4: 1 5 P M 4 : 3 0 P M 0 6 5 3 4 5 5 3 13 0 4: 3 0 P M 4 : 4 5 P M 3 6 0 2 5 5 6 5 13 1 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 1 7 8 4 6 6 7 4 16 0 5: 0 0 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 7 7 1 5 8 7 1 6 16 8 5: 1 5 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 6 7 5 4 6 7 7 5 17 3 5: 3 0 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 5 8 7 5 7 5 9 7 17 0 5: 4 5 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 1 1 1 4 4 5 6 1 9 19 4 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 0 0 0 5 2 7 2 0 1 1 0 1 8 0 2 3 6 1 4 5 5 6 4: 1 5 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 0 0 0 1 1 2 7 4 0 1 4 0 2 3 0 2 4 9 1 8 5 8 9 4: 3 0 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 0 0 0 1 7 2 8 4 0 1 5 0 2 5 0 2 7 1 2 0 6 3 2 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 0 0 0 1 9 3 1 1 0 1 8 0 2 7 0 2 7 4 2 2 6 7 1 5: 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 0 0 0 1 9 3 4 7 0 1 8 0 2 6 0 2 6 8 2 7 7 0 5 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . Un i v e r s i t y B l v d FO C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , L L C Ta m a n a D r i v e Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Ta m a n a D r i v e a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Ta m a n a D r i v e 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 2 TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 1 , 8 7 8 39 3 8 8 1 2 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 9 5 2 0 . 9 % 4 . 7 % 0 . 6 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 7 : 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 33 4 10 17 . 8 % 0 . 5 % CO U N T T I M E : 27 8 31 1 FR O M : 7: 0 0 A M 14 . 8 % 1 6 . 6 % TO : 9: 0 0 A M 51 30 2. 7 % 1 . 6 % 13 0 19 1 50 To t a l = 1 , 8 7 8 6. 9 % 1 0 . 2 % 2 . 7 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 7 : 1 5 A M 13 2 4 6 1 7 3 2 2 2 1 9 7 1 2 6 1 0 24 9 7: 1 5 A M 7 : 3 0 A M 24 2 2 1 2 3 8 4 7 7 2 1 7 6 8 8 7 4 3 32 2 7: 3 0 A M 7 : 4 5 A M 23 5 3 1 8 5 8 6 9 1 3 3 2 4 8 7 6 6 1 1 41 6 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 29 5 3 1 5 9 1 7 2 1 4 4 2 6 9 1 3 7 9 4 48 1 8: 0 0 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 48 4 8 1 1 8 2 6 7 1 0 1 1 6 1 0 0 8 1 0 2 1 49 4 8: 1 5 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 30 3 7 6 1 0 3 7 0 1 4 4 2 2 1 1 5 1 3 6 9 4 48 7 8: 3 0 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 11 2 2 7 4 8 6 0 6 1 1 0 4 5 3 2 0 2 23 5 8: 4 5 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 9 2 5 5 5 1 5 9 8 2 1 4 5 1 5 2 7 1 25 7 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 7: 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 8 9 1 5 2 5 1 2 0 4 2 2 0 3 6 1 1 8 6 3 1 7 1 9 2 7 5 8 1 , 4 6 8 7: 1 5 A M 8 : 1 5 A M 1 2 4 1 7 6 5 6 2 6 9 2 5 5 4 4 1 0 8 3 3 4 6 2 5 3 1 6 9 1 , 7 1 3 7: 3 0 A M 8 : 3 0 A M 1 3 0 1 9 1 5 0 3 3 4 2 7 8 5 1 1 2 8 8 3 9 3 3 0 3 1 1 1 0 1 , 8 7 8 7: 4 5 A M 8 : 4 5 A M 1 1 8 1 6 0 3 9 3 2 4 2 6 9 4 4 1 0 7 4 3 5 1 2 7 2 7 0 1 1 1 , 6 9 7 8: 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 9 8 1 3 2 2 9 2 8 4 2 5 6 3 8 8 6 2 3 1 1 2 9 2 1 8 8 1 , 4 7 3 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 AM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S F O C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , LL C Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y Un i v e r s i t y B l v d 1 TU R N I N G M O V E M E N T C O U N T S U M M A R Y PM P E A K H O U R V O L U M E S IN T E R S E C T I O N : P K H R V O L U M E : 2 , 0 5 6 33 1 1 9 7 2 5 NO R T H N- S S T R E E T : P H F : 0 . 9 2 1 6 . 1 % 9 . 6 % 1 . 2 % E- W S T R E E T : P E A K H O U R : FR O M : T O : FO C U S P R O J . N O . : 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M CO U N T D A T E : NO T E S : 37 4 26 18 . 2 % 1 . 3 % CO U N T T I M E : 37 7 28 6 FR O M : 4: 0 0 P M 18 . 3 % 1 3 . 9 % TO : 6: 0 0 P M 70 42 3. 4 % 2 . 0 % 94 16 9 65 To t a l = 20 5 6 4. 6 % 8 . 2 % 3 . 2 % CO U N T D A T A I N P U T : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 4 : 1 5 P M 20 3 7 1 4 5 4 7 3 2 1 4 4 0 9 1 1 0 5 8 4 42 6 4: 1 5 P M 4 : 3 0 P M 17 4 0 1 2 6 1 7 0 1 8 5 3 9 8 9 1 3 5 7 6 42 7 4: 3 0 P M 4 : 4 5 P M 19 4 6 1 3 5 6 6 9 1 9 8 4 1 1 0 0 1 6 5 8 3 44 8 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 25 3 6 1 6 8 4 7 1 2 3 2 4 2 8 5 5 6 5 8 46 2 5: 0 0 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 28 3 8 2 0 8 4 9 4 1 7 4 5 2 8 9 1 2 9 6 4 53 8 5: 1 5 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 35 5 5 1 8 8 8 8 5 2 0 3 5 3 1 0 2 1 1 8 2 9 56 1 5: 3 0 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 15 2 9 1 3 1 0 3 1 0 1 1 6 9 4 6 7 4 1 0 7 0 6 49 2 5: 4 5 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 16 4 7 1 4 9 9 9 7 1 7 9 4 6 6 6 9 3 8 7 46 5 HO U R L Y T O T A L S : TI M E P E R I O D N O R T H B O U N D E A S T B O U N D S O U T H B O U N D W E S T B O U N D T O T AL FR O M : T O : L T R L T R L T R L T R V O L U M E S 4: 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 8 1 1 5 9 5 5 2 5 5 2 8 3 8 1 1 9 1 6 2 3 6 5 4 4 2 3 8 2 1 1 , 7 6 3 4: 1 5 P M 5 : 1 5 P M 8 9 1 6 0 6 1 2 8 5 3 0 4 7 7 1 9 1 7 4 3 6 3 4 6 2 7 6 2 1 1 , 8 7 5 4: 3 0 P M 5 : 3 0 P M 1 0 7 1 7 5 6 7 3 1 2 3 1 9 7 9 1 7 1 8 8 3 7 6 4 4 3 0 1 2 4 2 , 0 0 9 4: 4 5 P M 5 : 4 5 P M 1 0 3 1 5 8 6 7 3 5 9 3 5 1 7 6 1 8 1 9 3 3 5 0 3 8 3 1 3 2 7 2 , 0 5 3 5: 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 9 4 1 6 9 6 5 3 7 4 3 7 7 7 0 2 5 1 9 7 3 3 1 4 2 2 8 6 2 6 2 , 0 5 6 *N O T E * P H F I S B A S E D O N 1 5 M I N . P E A K W I T H I N T H E P E A K H O UR . Un i v e r s i t y B l v d FO C U S E N G I N E E R I N G & S U R V E Y I N G , L L C Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y Un i v e r s i t y B l v d Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y a n d U n i v e r s i t y B l v d Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y 25 - 8 0 0 7 2- M a r - 2 5 2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 53 Crash Data Summary Cr a s h N u m b e r Se v e r i t y Cr a s h D a t e Cr a s h T i m e Dr i v e r A c t i o n Mo s t H a r m f u l E v e n t Co n t r i b u t i n g C i r c u m s t a n c e s 19 C 5 0 9 2 2 7 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 2/ 7 / 2 0 1 9 7: 2 3 Go i n g S t r a i g h t An g l e Sp e e d t o o F a s t f o r C o n d i t i o n s 19 C 5 0 9 0 9 8 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 2/ 7 / 2 0 1 9 8: 1 5 Tu r n i n g R i g h t An g l e Sp e e d t o o F a s t f o r C o n d i t i o n s 19 C 5 1 4 9 9 1 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 4/ 2 4 / 2 0 1 9 21 : 4 5 Go i n g S t r a i g h t An g l e Fa i l e d t o O b e y S i g n a l 19 C 5 3 5 8 2 6 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 12 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 9 14 : 4 5 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d No n e 20 C 5 5 7 9 8 2 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 10 / 3 0 / 2 0 2 0 9: 0 2 Tu r n i n g R i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 6 9 0 3 2 B I n j u r y A c c i d e n t 3/ 2 2 / 2 0 2 1 6: 2 8 Tu r n i n g L e f t He a d - O n T u r n i n g No n e 21 C 5 7 0 8 5 8 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 4/ 1 3 / 2 0 2 1 8: 0 0 Sl o w i n g i n T r a f f i c Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 7 7 1 9 3 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 7/ 9 / 2 0 2 1 12 : 2 3 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 8 0 0 5 8 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 8/ 1 1 / 2 0 2 1 19 : 2 4 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 8 4 0 9 4 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 10 / 3 / 2 0 2 1 7: 0 0 Sl o w i n g i n T r a f f i c Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 22 C 5 9 5 9 3 2 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 2/ 7 / 2 0 2 2 16 : 4 0 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d No n e 22 C 6 0 0 1 6 4 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 4/ 1 4 / 2 0 2 2 17 : 0 0 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d In a t t e n t i o n 22 C 6 1 9 7 4 7 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 12 / 2 / 2 0 2 2 8: 0 0 Tu r n i n g L e f t Ra n O f f R o a d Sp e e d t o o F a s t f o r C o n d i t i o n s 22 C 6 2 1 5 8 8 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 12 / 1 7 / 2 0 2 2 11 : 3 2 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Ot h e r 23 C 6 2 7 0 2 8 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 2/ 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 20 : 0 7 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Sp e e d t o o F a s t f o r C o n d i t i o n s 23 C 6 2 8 9 5 9 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 3/ 1 3 / 2 0 2 3 8: 0 5 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Sp e e d t o o F a s t f o r C o n d i t i o n s 23 C 6 3 4 4 0 1 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 5/ 2 5 / 2 0 2 3 18 : 3 6 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 23 C 6 3 8 4 7 2 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 7/ 1 4 / 2 0 2 2 19 : 3 0 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Di s t r a c t e d i n o r o n v e h i c l e 23 C 6 3 8 9 5 6 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 7/ 2 0 / 2 0 2 3 10 : 5 9 Ba c k i n g Re a r - e n d Ca r g o L o s s / S h i f t 23 C 6 4 3 1 7 2 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 9/ 6 / 2 0 2 3 9: 3 1 Go i n g S t r a i g h t An g l e Fa i l e d t o O b e y S i g n a l 23 C 6 4 7 3 7 9 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 10 / 2 5 / 2 0 2 3 7: 5 1 Tu r n i n g L e f t Re a r - e n d T u r n i n g Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 20 C 5 4 4 6 2 6 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 5/ 2 / 2 0 2 2 1: 5 5 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Ra n O f f R o a d In a t t e n t i o n 21 C 5 6 4 3 5 6 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 1/ 1 8 / 2 0 2 1 15 : 3 6 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d In a t t e n t i o n 20 C 5 6 3 3 7 9 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 12 / 3 1 / 2 0 2 0 13 : 4 5 Tu r n i n g L e f t An g l e T u r n i n g Fa i l e d t o Y i e l d 21 C 5 7 6 9 4 5 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 7/ 6 / 2 0 2 1 17 : 2 6 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d In a t t e n t i o n 21 C 5 7 9 1 3 1 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 2 1 16 : 0 7 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 8 2 3 2 2 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 9/ 1 0 / 2 0 2 1 16 : 2 8 Tu r n i n g L e f t An g l e T u r n i n g Im p r o p e r T u r n 21 C 5 8 2 8 6 1 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 9/ 1 5 / 2 0 2 1 14 : 4 0 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 21 C 5 8 7 4 6 3 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 11 / 4 / 2 0 2 1 16 : 4 2 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e 22 C 6 0 1 8 9 3 Pr o p e r t y D m g R e p o r t 5/ 9 / 2 0 2 2 19 : 2 4 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Re a r - e n d In a t t e n t i o n 23 C 6 3 4 0 8 8 C I n j u r y R e p o r t 5/ 2 2 / 2 0 2 3 17 : 5 2 Go i n g S t r a i g h t Si d e S w i p e S a m e Lo s s o f C o n t r o l Ye l l o w s t o n e H i g h w a y & U n i v e r s i t y B o u l e v a r d Ta m a n a D r i v e & U n i v e r s i t y B o u l e v a r d Mi k a n D r i v e & U n i v e r s i t y B o u l e v a r d FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 54 Traffic Analysis Reports FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 55 2025 Existing Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Existing AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 334 278 51 30 311 10 130 191 50 12 88 393 Future Volume (vph) 334 278 51 30 311 10 130 191 50 12 88 393 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3289 1770 3522 1770 3430 1770 3106 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.59 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3289 1770 3522 573 3430 1099 3106 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 363 302 55 33 338 11 141 208 54 13 96 427 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 3 0 0 25 0 0 296 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 236 472 0 33 346 0 141 237 0 13 227 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.5 15.5 12.4 12.4 31.3 26.4 23.3 22.4 Effective Green, g (s) 15.5 15.5 12.4 12.4 31.3 26.4 23.3 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.43 0.36 0.32 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 340 696 299 596 325 1237 358 950 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.14 0.02 c0.10 c0.03 0.07 0.00 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.68 0.11 0.58 0.43 0.19 0.04 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 26.7 26.6 25.7 28.0 13.6 16.1 17.1 19.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.0 2.6 0.2 1.4 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.6 Delay (s) 32.7 29.2 25.9 29.4 14.6 16.4 17.2 19.6 Level of Service C C C C B B B B Approach Delay (s) 30.3 29.1 15.8 19.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.2 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2025 Existing AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 292 282 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 292 282 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 317 307 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 308 0 - 0 625 308 Stage 1 - - - - 308 - Stage 2 - - - - 317 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1253 - - - 449 732 Stage 1 - - - - 745 - Stage 2 - - - - 738 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1253 - - - 449 732 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 543 - Stage 1 - - - - 745 - Stage 2 - - - - 738 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 9.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1253 - - - 732 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.001 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2025 Existing AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 279 209 1 5 74 Future Vol, veh/h 13 279 209 1 5 74 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 14 303 227 1 5 80 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 228 0 - 0 559 228 Stage 1 - - - - 228 - Stage 2 - - - - 331 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1340 - - - 490 811 Stage 1 - - - - 810 - Stage 2 - - - - 728 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1340 - - - 485 811 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 568 - Stage 1 - - - - 802 - Stage 2 - - - - 728 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1340 - - - 568 811 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - - 0.01 0.099 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - - - 11.4 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.3 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2025 Existing PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 374 377 70 42 286 26 94 169 65 25 197 331 Future Volume (vph) 374 377 70 42 286 26 94 169 65 25 197 331 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3294 1770 3495 1770 3391 1770 3206 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.58 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3294 1770 3495 465 3391 1079 3206 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 407 410 76 46 311 28 102 184 71 27 214 360 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 9 0 0 51 0 0 277 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 293 587 0 46 330 0 102 204 0 27 297 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 786 218 784 360 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.18 0.03 c0.09 c0.03 0.06 0.00 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm c0.11 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.70 0.12 0.42 0.47 0.26 0.07 0.40 Uniform Delay, d1 27.1 26.9 24.7 26.5 21.6 25.2 20.3 26.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 10.0 4.7 0.6 1.7 7.1 0.8 0.4 1.6 Delay (s) 37.0 31.6 25.3 28.2 28.7 26.0 20.7 27.7 Level of Service D C C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 33.4 27.8 26.7 27.4 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.7% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2025 Existing PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 19 347 268 27 18 26 Future Vol, veh/h 19 347 268 27 18 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 21 377 291 29 20 28 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 320 0 - 0 725 306 Stage 1 - - - - 306 - Stage 2 - - - - 419 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1240 - - - 392 734 Stage 1 - - - - 747 - Stage 2 - - - - 664 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1240 - - - 385 734 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 493 - Stage 1 - - - - 734 - Stage 2 - - - - 664 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 11.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1240 - - - 612 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.017 - - - 0.078 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 11.4 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2025 Existing PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 89 276 259 2 2 36 Future Vol, veh/h 89 276 259 2 2 36 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 97 300 282 2 2 39 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 284 0 - 0 777 283 Stage 1 - - - - 283 - Stage 2 - - - - 494 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1278 - - - 365 756 Stage 1 - - - - 765 - Stage 2 - - - - 613 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1278 - - - 337 756 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 452 - Stage 1 - - - - 707 - Stage 2 - - - - 613 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2 0 10.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1278 - - - 452 756 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.076 - - - 0.005 0.052 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 13 10 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0 0.2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 56 2027 Phase 1 Background Year Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Background AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 Future Volume (vph) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3289 1770 3522 1770 3429 1770 3105 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.58 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3289 1770 3522 515 3429 1081 3105 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 385 321 59 35 359 12 150 221 58 14 101 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 3 0 0 24 0 0 317 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 254 498 0 35 368 0 150 255 0 14 237 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.1 16.1 13.0 13.0 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 Effective Green, g (s) 16.1 16.1 13.0 13.0 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 338 692 300 598 334 1277 344 929 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.15 0.02 c0.10 c0.04 0.07 0.00 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.72 0.12 0.61 0.45 0.20 0.04 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 28.1 26.9 29.4 13.8 16.3 18.3 20.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.1 3.7 0.2 1.9 1.0 0.4 0.0 0.7 Delay (s) 37.4 31.8 27.1 31.3 14.8 16.6 18.3 21.0 Level of Service D C C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 33.7 30.9 16.0 20.9 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Background AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 310 299 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 310 299 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 337 325 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 326 0 - 0 663 326 Stage 1 - - - - 326 - Stage 2 - - - - 337 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1234 - - - 426 715 Stage 1 - - - - 731 - Stage 2 - - - - 723 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1234 - - - 426 715 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 526 - Stage 1 - - - - 731 - Stage 2 - - - - 723 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1234 - - - 715 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.002 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 10 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Background AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 296 222 1 5 79 Future Vol, veh/h 14 296 222 1 5 79 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 15 322 241 1 5 86 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 242 0 - 0 594 242 Stage 1 - - - - 242 - Stage 2 - - - - 352 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1324 - - - 468 797 Stage 1 - - - - 798 - Stage 2 - - - - 712 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1324 - - - 463 797 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 551 - Stage 1 - - - - 789 - Stage 2 - - - - 712 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 10.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1324 - - - 551 797 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - - 0.01 0.108 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - - 11.6 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Background PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 Future Volume (vph) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3295 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3206 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.56 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3295 1770 3495 411 3392 1045 3206 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 432 435 80 49 329 30 109 195 75 29 227 382 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 9 0 0 51 0 0 294 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 311 623 0 49 350 0 109 219 0 29 315 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 786 205 784 352 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.19 0.03 c0.10 c0.03 0.06 0.01 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.75 0.74 0.12 0.45 0.53 0.28 0.08 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 27.3 24.7 26.7 21.8 25.3 20.3 26.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.1 5.7 0.6 1.8 9.5 0.9 0.5 1.8 Delay (s) 39.6 33.0 25.3 28.5 31.4 26.2 20.7 28.0 Level of Service D C C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 35.2 28.2 27.7 27.7 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Background PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 368 284 29 19 28 Future Vol, veh/h 20 368 284 29 19 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 22 400 309 32 21 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 341 0 - 0 769 325 Stage 1 - - - - 325 - Stage 2 - - - - 444 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1218 - - - 369 716 Stage 1 - - - - 732 - Stage 2 - - - - 646 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1218 - - - 362 716 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 475 - Stage 1 - - - - 719 - Stage 2 - - - - 646 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 11.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1218 - - - 594 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.086 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 11.6 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Background PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 94 293 275 2 2 38 Future Vol, veh/h 94 293 275 2 2 38 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 102 318 299 2 2 41 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 301 0 - 0 822 300 Stage 1 - - - - 300 - Stage 2 - - - - 522 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1260 - - - 344 740 Stage 1 - - - - 752 - Stage 2 - - - - 595 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1260 - - - 316 740 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 434 - Stage 1 - - - - 691 - Stage 2 - - - - 595 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2 0 10.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1260 - - - 434 740 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.081 - - - 0.005 0.056 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - - 13.3 10.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0 0.2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 57 2027 Phase 1 Background Year Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 Future Volume (vph) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3522 1770 3429 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 981 3522 1072 3429 1081 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 385 321 59 35 359 12 150 221 58 14 101 453 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 3 0 0 24 0 0 0 109 Lane Group Flow (vph) 385 364 0 35 368 0 150 255 0 14 101 344 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.5 26.3 18.0 15.4 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 36.4 Effective Green, g (s) 13.5 26.3 18.0 15.4 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 36.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.34 0.24 0.20 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.30 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 607 1191 258 710 535 1280 345 1062 848 v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.11 0.00 c0.10 c0.02 0.07 0.00 0.03 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.10 0.01 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.31 0.14 0.52 0.28 0.20 0.04 0.10 0.41 Uniform Delay, d1 29.1 18.3 22.7 27.1 13.0 16.2 18.2 19.2 12.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.2 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 31.3 18.5 23.0 27.8 13.3 16.5 18.3 19.4 13.3 Level of Service C B C C B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 24.9 27.4 15.4 14.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.3 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2027 Phase 1 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 Future Volume (veh/h) 354 295 54 32 330 11 138 203 53 13 93 417 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 385 321 59 35 359 12 150 221 58 14 101 453 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 536 674 122 397 534 18 514 1057 271 496 1118 744 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.38 0.38 0.02 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3003 546 1781 3509 117 1781 2800 718 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 385 188 192 35 181 190 150 138 141 14 101 453 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 1741 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.4 5.6 5.7 0.9 5.8 5.9 3.2 3.2 3.3 0.3 1.2 12.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 5.6 5.7 0.9 5.8 5.9 3.2 3.2 3.3 0.3 1.2 12.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 536 399 398 397 270 281 514 671 657 496 1118 744 V/C Ratio(X) 0.72 0.47 0.48 0.09 0.67 0.67 0.29 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.09 0.61 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1058 544 543 781 529 551 562 671 657 613 1118 744 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.3 20.3 20.4 18.1 24.2 24.2 11.3 12.7 12.7 13.6 14.6 11.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 0.9 0.9 0.1 2.9 2.8 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.2 3.7 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(50%),veh/ln 2.4 2.1 2.1 0.3 2.4 2.5 1.1 1.2 1.2 0.1 0.4 4.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.1 21.2 21.3 18.1 27.1 27.0 11.6 13.4 13.5 13.6 14.8 15.6 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 765 406 429 568 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.7 26.3 12.8 15.4 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.5 27.3 9.5 18.1 9.4 23.5 13.9 13.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 5.3 2.9 7.7 5.2 14.8 8.4 7.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.9 1.0 1.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.8 HCM 6th LOS B HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 Future Volume (vph) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.59 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 860 3495 1021 3392 1091 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 432 435 80 49 329 30 109 195 75 29 227 382 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 9 0 0 45 0 0 0 130 Lane Group Flow (vph) 432 498 0 49 350 0 109 225 0 29 227 252 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.0 24.2 18.0 14.1 27.9 23.7 23.1 21.3 35.3 Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 24.2 18.0 14.1 27.9 23.7 23.1 21.3 35.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.34 0.25 0.20 0.39 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 671 1168 265 688 441 1122 369 1052 879 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.14 0.01 c0.10 c0.01 0.07 0.00 0.06 c0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.64 0.43 0.18 0.51 0.25 0.20 0.08 0.22 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 26.5 18.3 20.6 25.7 14.3 17.2 16.7 18.9 10.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.1 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 Delay (s) 28.6 18.6 21.0 26.3 14.6 17.6 16.8 19.4 10.9 Level of Service C B C C B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 23.2 25.6 16.7 14.2 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.6 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2027 Phase 1 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 Future Volume (veh/h) 397 400 74 45 303 28 100 179 69 27 209 351 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 432 435 80 49 329 30 109 195 75 29 227 382 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 585 712 130 361 496 45 459 890 331 503 1115 766 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.07 0.35 0.35 0.03 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3001 548 1781 3295 299 1781 2535 943 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 432 256 259 49 176 183 109 135 135 29 227 382 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1817 1781 1777 1701 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.2 7.8 7.9 1.3 5.7 5.7 2.4 3.2 3.4 0.7 2.8 9.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.2 7.8 7.9 1.3 5.7 5.7 2.4 3.2 3.4 0.7 2.8 9.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 585 422 420 361 267 273 459 624 597 503 1115 766 V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.61 0.62 0.14 0.66 0.67 0.24 0.22 0.23 0.06 0.20 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1055 572 570 743 557 570 497 624 597 593 1115 766 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.9 20.6 20.6 18.4 24.3 24.3 12.4 13.8 13.9 13.2 15.2 10.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 1.4 1.5 0.2 2.8 2.8 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.4 2.3 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(50%),veh/ln 2.7 2.9 3.0 0.5 2.3 2.4 0.8 1.2 1.2 0.2 1.0 3.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.7 22.0 22.1 18.5 27.0 27.1 12.6 14.6 14.7 13.2 15.7 13.0 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 947 408 379 638 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.7 26.0 14.1 13.9 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.4 25.8 9.5 18.9 8.7 23.5 14.8 13.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 5.4 3.3 9.9 4.4 11.9 9.2 7.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.1 1.9 0.0 1.6 1.1 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.0 HCM 6th LOS B FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 58 2027 Phase 1 Total Year Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Total AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 Future Volume (vph) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3287 1770 3503 1770 3439 1770 3119 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.56 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3287 1770 3503 446 3439 1051 3119 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 321 59 35 359 26 150 250 58 26 125 477 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 339 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 521 0 35 378 0 150 286 0 26 263 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.3 16.3 13.2 13.2 33.0 26.6 23.9 22.0 Effective Green, g (s) 16.3 16.3 13.2 13.2 33.0 26.6 23.9 22.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.43 0.35 0.31 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 345 704 307 608 306 1203 348 902 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.16 0.02 c0.11 c0.04 0.08 0.00 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.74 0.11 0.62 0.49 0.24 0.07 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 28.0 27.9 26.5 29.1 14.4 17.5 18.1 21.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.1 4.2 0.2 2.0 1.2 0.5 0.1 0.8 Delay (s) 37.1 32.1 26.6 31.1 15.6 18.0 18.2 21.8 Level of Service D C C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 33.7 30.7 17.2 21.6 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 321 312 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 321 312 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 349 339 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 340 0 - 0 689 340 Stage 1 - - - - 340 - Stage 2 - - - - 349 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1219 - - - 412 702 Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 714 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1219 - - - 412 702 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 515 - Stage 1 - - - - 721 - Stage 2 - - - - 714 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1219 - - - 702 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.002 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 307 235 1 5 79 Future Vol, veh/h 14 307 235 1 5 79 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 15 334 255 1 5 86 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 256 0 - 0 620 256 Stage 1 - - - - 256 - Stage 2 - - - - 364 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1309 - - - 452 783 Stage 1 - - - - 787 - Stage 2 - - - - 703 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1309 - - - 447 783 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 540 - Stage 1 - - - - 778 - Stage 2 - - - - 703 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1309 - - - 540 783 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - - 0.01 0.11 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - - 11.7 10.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.4 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total AM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 55 55 568 67 66 523 Future Vol, veh/h 55 55 568 67 66 523 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 60 60 617 73 72 568 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1045 309 0 0 690 0 Stage 1 617 - - - - - Stage 2 428 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 224 687 - - 900 - Stage 1 501 - - - - - Stage 2 625 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 206 687 - - 900 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 338 - - - - - Stage 1 501 - - - - - Stage 2 575 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.3 0 1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 338 687 900 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.177 0.087 0.08 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.9 10.7 9.3 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.3 0.3 - HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Total PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 Future Volume (vph) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3292 1770 3468 1770 3411 1770 3213 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.51 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3292 1770 3468 403 3411 957 3213 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 472 435 80 49 329 51 109 235 75 49 265 421 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 16 0 0 38 0 0 324 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 326 648 0 49 365 0 109 272 0 49 362 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 843 398 780 203 788 331 743 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.20 0.03 c0.11 c0.03 0.08 0.01 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.12 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.79 0.77 0.12 0.47 0.54 0.34 0.15 0.49 Uniform Delay, d1 27.8 27.6 24.7 26.8 22.1 25.7 20.5 26.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.4 6.7 0.6 2.0 9.8 1.2 0.9 2.3 Delay (s) 42.1 34.2 25.3 28.9 31.9 26.9 21.5 28.9 Level of Service D C C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 36.8 28.5 28.2 28.4 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 386 303 29 19 28 Future Vol, veh/h 20 386 303 29 19 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 22 420 329 32 21 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 361 0 - 0 809 345 Stage 1 - - - - 345 - Stage 2 - - - - 464 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1198 - - - 350 698 Stage 1 - - - - 717 - Stage 2 - - - - 633 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1198 - - - 344 698 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 460 - Stage 1 - - - - 704 - Stage 2 - - - - 633 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 11.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1198 - - - 577 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.089 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - - 11.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 94 311 294 2 2 38 Future Vol, veh/h 94 311 294 2 2 38 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 102 338 320 2 2 41 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 322 0 - 0 863 321 Stage 1 - - - - 321 - Stage 2 - - - - 542 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1238 - - - 325 720 Stage 1 - - - - 735 - Stage 2 - - - - 583 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1238 - - - 298 720 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 420 - Stage 1 - - - - 675 - Stage 2 - - - - 583 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.9 0 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1238 - - - 420 720 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.083 - - - 0.005 0.057 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - - - 13.6 10.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0 0.2 HCM 6th TWSC 2027 Phase 1 Total PM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 89 90 604 93 93 587 Future Vol, veh/h 89 90 604 93 93 587 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 97 98 657 101 101 638 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1178 329 0 0 758 0 Stage 1 657 - - - - - Stage 2 521 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 184 667 - - 849 - Stage 1 477 - - - - - Stage 2 561 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 162 667 - - 849 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 295 - - - - - Stage 1 477 - - - - - Stage 2 494 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 17.1 0 1.3 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 295 667 849 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.328 0.147 0.119 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 23 11.3 9.8 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.4 0.5 0.4 - FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 59 2027 Phase 1 Total Year Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 Future Volume (vph) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3503 1770 3439 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 981 3503 1040 3439 1051 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 414 321 59 35 359 26 150 250 58 26 125 477 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 0 110 Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 365 0 35 378 0 150 286 0 26 125 367 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.0 27.3 18.5 15.9 33.0 26.7 23.7 21.9 35.9 Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 27.3 18.5 15.9 33.0 26.7 23.7 21.9 35.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.36 0.24 0.21 0.43 0.35 0.31 0.29 0.47 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 629 1235 264 729 512 1201 342 1014 837 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.11 0.00 c0.11 c0.03 0.08 0.00 0.04 c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.30 0.13 0.52 0.29 0.24 0.08 0.12 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 17.6 22.4 26.9 13.6 17.6 18.4 20.2 13.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.4 Delay (s) 31.5 17.8 22.6 27.5 13.9 18.1 18.5 20.4 13.9 Level of Service C B C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 24.9 27.1 16.7 15.4 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.4 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2027 Phase 1 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 Future Volume (veh/h) 381 295 54 32 330 24 138 230 53 24 115 439 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 414 321 59 35 359 26 150 250 58 26 125 477 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 563 715 130 407 525 38 493 1035 236 488 1094 746 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.08 0.36 0.36 0.03 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3003 546 1781 3361 242 1781 2875 655 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 414 188 192 35 189 196 150 153 155 26 125 477 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1827 1781 1777 1753 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.0 5.6 5.7 0.9 6.2 6.3 3.4 3.7 3.8 0.6 1.6 14.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.0 5.6 5.7 0.9 6.2 6.3 3.4 3.7 3.8 0.6 1.6 14.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.37 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 563 423 422 407 277 285 493 640 631 488 1094 746 V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.45 0.45 0.09 0.68 0.69 0.30 0.24 0.25 0.05 0.11 0.64 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1036 533 531 782 518 533 535 640 631 580 1094 746 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.6 20.0 20.1 18.3 24.6 24.6 12.1 13.8 13.9 13.8 15.3 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 0.7 0.8 0.1 2.9 2.9 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.2 4.2 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.7 2.1 2.1 0.3 2.5 2.6 1.1 1.4 1.4 0.2 0.6 4.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.5 20.8 20.9 18.4 27.5 27.6 12.5 14.7 14.8 13.8 15.5 16.5 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 794 420 458 628 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 26.8 14.0 16.2 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 26.7 9.5 19.2 9.5 23.5 14.6 14.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 5.8 2.9 7.7 5.4 16.1 9.0 8.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.8 1.0 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.3 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2027 Phase 1 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 Future Volume (vph) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3468 1770 3411 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 860 3468 1021 3411 1049 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 472 435 80 49 329 51 109 235 75 49 265 421 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 35 0 0 0 131 Lane Group Flow (vph) 472 499 0 49 364 0 109 275 0 49 265 290 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 25.3 18.4 14.5 26.1 21.9 23.1 20.4 35.1 Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 25.3 18.4 14.5 26.1 21.9 23.1 20.4 35.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.35 0.26 0.20 0.36 0.31 0.32 0.28 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 702 1218 269 700 414 1040 364 1005 873 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.14 0.01 c0.10 c0.02 0.08 0.01 0.07 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.41 0.18 0.52 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.26 0.33 Uniform Delay, d1 26.3 17.6 20.4 25.5 15.5 18.9 17.0 19.9 11.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.6 0.2 Delay (s) 28.9 17.8 20.8 26.2 15.9 19.5 17.2 20.5 11.4 Level of Service C B C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 23.1 25.6 18.5 15.1 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2027 Phase 1 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 Future Volume (veh/h) 434 400 74 45 303 47 100 216 69 45 244 387 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 472 435 80 49 329 51 109 235 75 49 265 421 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 622 770 141 374 484 74 426 874 272 477 1086 770 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.05 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3001 548 1781 3088 474 1781 2667 830 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 472 256 259 49 188 192 109 155 155 49 265 421 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1785 1781 1777 1721 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.1 7.8 7.9 1.3 6.2 6.3 2.5 4.0 4.2 1.1 3.5 11.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.1 7.8 7.9 1.3 6.2 6.3 2.5 4.0 4.2 1.1 3.5 11.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 622 456 454 374 279 280 426 582 564 477 1086 770 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.56 0.57 0.13 0.67 0.69 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.10 0.24 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1028 557 556 746 543 545 462 582 564 538 1086 770 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.2 20.1 20.1 18.6 24.7 24.8 13.1 15.4 15.4 13.5 16.2 11.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 1.1 1.1 0.2 2.8 3.0 0.3 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.5 2.8 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(50%),veh/ln 3.1 2.9 3.0 0.5 2.5 2.6 0.9 1.5 1.6 0.4 1.3 3.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.1 21.2 21.3 18.8 27.5 27.7 13.4 16.5 16.7 13.6 16.7 14.0 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 987 429 419 735 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.6 26.6 15.8 15.0 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.4 24.9 9.5 20.5 8.7 23.5 15.7 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 6.2 3.3 9.9 4.5 13.6 10.1 8.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.9 0.0 1.5 1.1 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.3 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 60 2028 Phase 2 Background Year Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Background AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 Future Volume (vph) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3289 1770 3523 1770 3428 1770 3105 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.26 1.00 0.58 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3289 1770 3523 493 3428 1073 3105 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 397 330 61 36 370 12 154 227 60 14 104 466 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 3 0 0 25 0 0 328 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 258 517 0 36 379 0 154 262 0 14 242 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.3 16.3 13.2 13.2 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Effective Green, g (s) 16.3 16.3 13.2 13.2 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.30 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 341 698 304 605 325 1267 339 921 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.16 0.02 c0.11 c0.04 0.08 0.00 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.17 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.74 0.12 0.63 0.47 0.21 0.04 0.26 Uniform Delay, d1 28.4 28.3 26.9 29.5 14.1 16.5 18.5 20.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9.2 4.2 0.2 2.0 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.7 Delay (s) 37.6 32.5 27.1 31.5 15.2 16.9 18.6 21.3 Level of Service D C C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 34.2 31.1 16.3 21.2 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Background AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 319 308 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 319 308 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 347 335 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 336 0 - 0 683 336 Stage 1 - - - - 336 - Stage 2 - - - - 347 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1223 - - - 415 706 Stage 1 - - - - 724 - Stage 2 - - - - 716 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1223 - - - 415 706 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 518 - Stage 1 - - - - 724 - Stage 2 - - - - 716 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1223 - - - 706 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.002 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Background AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 305 228 1 5 81 Future Vol, veh/h 14 305 228 1 5 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 15 332 248 1 5 88 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 249 0 - 0 611 249 Stage 1 - - - - 249 - Stage 2 - - - - 362 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1317 - - - 457 790 Stage 1 - - - - 792 - Stage 2 - - - - 704 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1317 - - - 452 790 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 543 - Stage 1 - - - - 783 - Stage 2 - - - - 704 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1317 - - - 543 790 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - - 0.01 0.111 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - - 11.7 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Background PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 Future Volume (vph) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3294 1770 3496 1770 3392 1770 3206 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.55 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3294 1770 3496 403 3392 1027 3206 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 445 448 83 50 340 30 112 201 77 29 234 393 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 9 0 0 50 0 0 302 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 320 643 0 50 361 0 112 228 0 29 325 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 786 203 784 348 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.20 0.20 0.03 c0.10 c0.03 0.07 0.01 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.78 0.76 0.13 0.46 0.55 0.29 0.08 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 27.6 27.5 24.7 26.8 21.9 25.3 20.3 26.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.4 6.4 0.6 1.9 10.4 0.9 0.5 1.9 Delay (s) 41.0 33.9 25.4 28.7 32.3 26.3 20.8 28.2 Level of Service D C C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 36.2 28.3 28.0 27.9 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Background PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 21 379 293 30 20 28 Future Vol, veh/h 21 379 293 30 20 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 23 412 318 33 22 30 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 351 0 - 0 793 335 Stage 1 - - - - 335 - Stage 2 - - - - 458 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1208 - - - 358 707 Stage 1 - - - - 725 - Stage 2 - - - - 637 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1208 - - - 351 707 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 466 - Stage 1 - - - - 711 - Stage 2 - - - - 637 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 11.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1208 - - - 582 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.019 - - - 0.09 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 11.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Background PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 97 302 283 2 2 39 Future Vol, veh/h 97 302 283 2 2 39 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 105 328 308 2 2 42 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 310 0 - 0 847 309 Stage 1 - - - - 309 - Stage 2 - - - - 538 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1250 - - - 332 731 Stage 1 - - - - 745 - Stage 2 - - - - 585 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1250 - - - 304 731 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 425 - Stage 1 - - - - 682 - Stage 2 - - - - 585 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2 0 10.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1250 - - - 425 731 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.084 - - - 0.005 0.058 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - - 13.5 10.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0 0.2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 61 2028 Phase 2 Background Year Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 Future Volume (vph) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3456 1770 3523 1770 3428 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3456 970 3523 1069 3428 1073 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 397 330 61 36 370 12 154 227 60 14 104 466 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 3 0 0 25 0 0 0 105 Lane Group Flow (vph) 397 375 0 36 379 0 154 262 0 14 104 361 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 13.7 26.8 18.3 15.7 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 36.6 Effective Green, g (s) 13.7 26.8 18.3 15.7 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 36.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.35 0.24 0.20 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.30 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 612 1206 258 720 531 1272 340 1055 847 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.11 0.00 c0.11 c0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.10 0.01 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.31 0.14 0.53 0.29 0.21 0.04 0.10 0.43 Uniform Delay, d1 29.3 18.3 22.7 27.2 13.3 16.4 18.4 19.5 13.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.4 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 Delay (s) 31.7 18.4 23.0 27.9 13.6 16.8 18.5 19.7 13.6 Level of Service C B C C B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 25.1 27.5 15.7 14.8 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.4% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2028 Phase 2 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 Future Volume (veh/h) 365 304 56 33 340 11 142 209 55 13 96 429 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 397 330 61 36 370 12 154 227 60 14 104 466 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 547 694 127 397 544 18 508 1049 271 488 1104 743 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.38 0.38 0.02 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3000 548 1781 3513 114 1781 2795 722 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 397 194 197 36 187 195 154 142 145 14 104 466 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 1740 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.7 5.8 5.9 1.0 6.1 6.1 3.4 3.3 3.5 0.3 1.3 13.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.7 5.8 5.9 1.0 6.1 6.1 3.4 3.3 3.5 0.3 1.3 13.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 547 411 410 397 275 286 508 667 653 488 1104 743 V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.47 0.48 0.09 0.68 0.68 0.30 0.21 0.22 0.03 0.09 0.63 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1045 537 536 776 523 544 551 667 653 603 1104 743 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.5 20.3 20.3 18.2 24.4 24.4 11.5 13.0 13.0 13.9 15.0 12.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 0.8 0.9 0.1 2.9 2.9 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.2 4.0 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(50%),veh/ln 2.5 2.2 2.2 0.4 2.5 2.6 1.1 1.2 1.2 0.1 0.5 4.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.3 21.1 21.2 18.3 27.3 27.3 11.8 13.7 13.8 13.9 15.1 16.2 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 788 418 441 584 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 26.5 13.1 16.0 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.6 27.5 9.5 18.6 9.5 23.5 14.2 14.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 5.5 3.0 7.9 5.4 15.5 8.7 8.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.8 1.0 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.1 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 Future Volume (vph) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3456 1770 3496 1770 3392 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.45 1.00 0.54 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3456 847 3496 1015 3392 1082 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 445 448 83 50 340 30 112 201 77 29 234 393 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 9 0 0 44 0 0 0 125 Lane Group Flow (vph) 445 515 0 50 361 0 112 234 0 29 234 268 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.2 24.7 18.5 14.5 27.9 23.7 23.1 21.3 35.5 Effective Green, g (s) 14.2 24.7 18.5 14.5 27.9 23.7 23.1 21.3 35.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.34 0.26 0.20 0.39 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 675 1182 268 702 436 1113 363 1044 877 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.15 0.01 c0.10 c0.01 0.07 0.00 0.07 c0.06 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.44 0.19 0.51 0.26 0.21 0.08 0.22 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 26.8 18.4 20.6 25.7 14.6 17.5 17.0 19.2 11.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 Delay (s) 29.1 18.6 20.9 26.4 14.9 17.9 17.1 19.7 11.2 Level of Service C B C C B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 23.4 25.7 17.0 14.5 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.2 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2028 Phase 2 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 Future Volume (veh/h) 409 412 76 46 313 28 103 185 71 27 215 362 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 445 448 83 50 340 30 112 201 77 29 234 393 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 597 732 135 360 507 44 450 883 327 494 1103 766 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.07 0.35 0.35 0.03 0.31 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 2996 552 1781 3305 290 1781 2537 941 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 445 264 267 50 182 188 112 139 139 29 234 393 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1771 1781 1777 1818 1781 1777 1701 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.5 8.1 8.2 1.4 5.9 6.0 2.5 3.4 3.6 0.7 3.0 10.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.5 8.1 8.2 1.4 5.9 6.0 2.5 3.4 3.6 0.7 3.0 10.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.55 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 597 434 433 360 272 279 450 619 592 494 1103 766 V/C Ratio(X) 0.75 0.61 0.62 0.14 0.67 0.67 0.25 0.22 0.24 0.06 0.21 0.51 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1044 566 564 738 552 564 487 619 592 582 1103 766 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.0 20.5 20.6 18.5 24.4 24.5 12.6 14.1 14.2 13.5 15.6 10.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 1.4 1.4 0.2 2.8 2.8 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.4 2.5 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(50%),veh/ln 2.8 3.0 3.1 0.5 2.4 2.5 0.9 1.3 1.3 0.2 1.1 3.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.9 21.9 22.0 18.7 27.3 27.3 12.9 14.9 15.1 13.5 16.0 13.3 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 976 420 390 656 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 26.3 14.4 14.3 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.4 25.8 9.5 19.5 8.8 23.5 15.1 13.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 5.6 3.4 10.2 4.5 12.4 9.5 8.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.1 2.0 0.0 1.6 1.1 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.2 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 62 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Total AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 Future Volume (vph) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3293 1770 3525 1770 3413 1770 3111 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.56 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3293 1770 3525 434 3413 1040 3111 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 430 363 61 50 426 12 154 243 76 14 118 495 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 32 0 0 351 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 279 564 0 50 436 0 154 287 0 14 262 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.8 16.8 14.4 14.4 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Effective Green, g (s) 16.8 16.8 14.4 14.4 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.18 0.43 0.36 0.30 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 344 704 324 646 297 1234 322 903 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.17 0.03 c0.12 c0.04 0.08 0.00 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.18 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.80 0.15 0.67 0.52 0.23 0.04 0.29 Uniform Delay, d1 29.3 29.3 26.9 29.9 15.1 17.5 19.3 21.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 13.5 6.5 0.2 2.8 1.5 0.4 0.1 0.8 Delay (s) 42.8 35.8 27.2 32.6 16.6 17.9 19.3 22.4 Level of Service D D C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 38.1 32.1 17.5 22.3 Approach LOS D C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 319 334 46 39 40 Future Vol, veh/h 45 319 334 46 39 40 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 49 347 363 50 42 43 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 413 0 - 0 833 388 Stage 1 - - - - 388 - Stage 2 - - - - 445 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1146 - - - 339 660 Stage 1 - - - - 686 - Stage 2 - - - - 646 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1146 - - - 324 660 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 445 - Stage 1 - - - - 657 - Stage 2 - - - - 646 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1 0 13 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1146 - - - 533 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - - 0.161 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - - 13 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.6 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 344 303 1 5 81 Future Vol, veh/h 14 344 303 1 5 81 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 15 374 329 1 5 88 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 330 0 - 0 734 330 Stage 1 - - - - 330 - Stage 2 - - - - 404 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1229 - - - 387 712 Stage 1 - - - - 728 - Stage 2 - - - - 674 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1229 - - - 382 712 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 491 - Stage 1 - - - - 719 - Stage 2 - - - - 674 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1229 - - - 491 712 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - - 0.011 0.124 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 12.4 10.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.4 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total AM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 39 117 585 46 136 538 Future Vol, veh/h 39 117 585 46 136 538 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 42 127 636 50 148 585 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1225 318 0 0 686 0 Stage 1 636 - - - - - Stage 2 589 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 171 678 - - 904 - Stage 1 489 - - - - - Stage 2 517 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 143 678 - - 904 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 274 - - - - - Stage 1 489 - - - - - Stage 2 432 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13.8 0 2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 274 678 904 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.155 0.188 0.164 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 20.5 11.5 9.8 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.7 0.6 - HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total AM 5: University Blvd & Access 2 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 358 354 30 0 26 Future Vol, veh/h 0 358 354 30 0 26 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 389 385 33 0 28 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 385 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 663 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 663 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 663 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.043 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 10.7 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Total PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 Future Volume (vph) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3298 1770 3503 1770 3378 1770 3205 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.51 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3298 1770 3503 403 3378 944 3205 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 480 484 83 67 409 30 112 220 96 29 251 427 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 7 0 0 62 0 0 328 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 346 688 0 67 432 0 112 255 0 29 350 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 845 398 788 203 781 328 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.21 0.04 c0.12 c0.03 0.08 0.01 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.81 0.17 0.55 0.55 0.33 0.09 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 28.2 28.0 25.0 27.4 22.1 25.6 20.3 26.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 18.3 8.5 0.9 2.7 10.4 1.1 0.5 2.2 Delay (s) 46.5 36.5 25.9 30.1 32.5 26.7 20.8 28.7 Level of Service D D C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 39.8 29.6 28.2 28.4 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 71 379 325 80 67 75 Future Vol, veh/h 71 379 325 80 67 75 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 77 412 353 87 73 82 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 440 0 - 0 963 397 Stage 1 - - - - 397 - Stage 2 - - - - 566 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1120 - - - 284 652 Stage 1 - - - - 679 - Stage 2 - - - - 568 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1120 - - - 264 652 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 393 - Stage 1 - - - - 632 - Stage 2 - - - - 568 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.3 0 15.5 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1120 - - - 497 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.069 - - - 0.311 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - - 15.5 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 1.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 97 349 367 2 2 39 Future Vol, veh/h 97 349 367 2 2 39 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 105 379 399 2 2 42 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 401 0 - 0 989 400 Stage 1 - - - - 400 - Stage 2 - - - - 589 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1158 - - - 274 650 Stage 1 - - - - 677 - Stage 2 - - - - 554 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1158 - - - 249 650 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 379 - Stage 1 - - - - 615 - Stage 2 - - - - 554 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.8 0 11.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1158 - - - 379 650 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.091 - - - 0.006 0.065 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - - - 14.6 10.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0 0.2 HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total PM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.7 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 47 142 622 50 151 604 Future Vol, veh/h 47 142 622 50 151 604 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 51 154 676 54 164 657 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1333 338 0 0 730 0 Stage 1 676 - - - - - Stage 2 657 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 145 658 - - 870 - Stage 1 467 - - - - - Stage 2 477 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 118 658 - - 870 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 246 - - - - - Stage 1 467 - - - - - Stage 2 387 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.9 0 2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 246 658 870 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.208 0.235 0.189 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 23.4 12.1 10.1 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.8 0.9 0.7 - HCM 6th TWSC 2028 Phase 2 Total PM 5: University Blvd & Access 2 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 446 373 34 0 32 Future Vol, veh/h 0 446 373 34 0 32 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 485 405 37 0 35 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 405 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 646 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 646 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 646 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.054 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 10.9 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 63 2028 Phase 2 Total Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 Future Volume (vph) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3463 1770 3525 1770 3413 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3463 940 3525 1054 3413 1040 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 430 363 61 50 426 12 154 243 76 14 118 495 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 32 0 0 0 88 Lane Group Flow (vph) 430 409 0 50 436 0 154 287 0 14 118 407 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.8 26.6 20.0 15.9 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 37.7 Effective Green, g (s) 14.8 26.6 20.0 15.9 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 37.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.34 0.26 0.20 0.43 0.36 0.30 0.29 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 650 1179 284 717 517 1245 325 1037 855 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.12 0.01 c0.12 c0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.10 0.01 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.66 0.35 0.18 0.61 0.30 0.23 0.04 0.11 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 29.3 19.3 22.2 28.3 13.8 17.2 19.0 20.2 13.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 0.2 0.3 1.5 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 Delay (s) 31.9 19.4 22.5 29.7 14.2 17.6 19.1 20.4 14.0 Level of Service C B C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 25.7 29.0 16.5 15.3 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.5% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2028 Phase 2 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 Future Volume (veh/h) 396 334 56 46 392 11 142 224 70 13 109 455 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 430 363 61 50 426 12 154 243 76 14 118 495 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 575 783 130 403 597 17 482 976 298 461 1062 737 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.08 0.36 0.36 0.02 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3048 508 1781 3530 99 1781 2681 819 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 430 210 214 50 214 224 154 159 160 14 118 495 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1779 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1723 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.5 6.3 6.5 1.4 7.2 7.3 3.6 4.0 4.1 0.3 1.5 15.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.5 6.3 6.5 1.4 7.2 7.3 3.6 4.0 4.1 0.3 1.5 15.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 575 456 457 403 301 313 482 647 627 461 1062 737 V/C Ratio(X) 0.75 0.46 0.47 0.12 0.71 0.71 0.32 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.11 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1006 517 518 767 503 525 518 647 627 571 1062 737 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 19.9 19.9 18.5 24.9 24.9 12.3 14.1 14.2 15.0 16.2 13.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 3.1 3.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.2 4.8 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(50%),veh/ln 2.9 2.4 2.4 0.5 3.0 3.1 1.2 1.5 1.5 0.1 0.6 5.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.2 20.6 20.7 18.6 28.1 28.0 12.7 15.0 15.1 15.0 16.4 18.0 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 854 488 473 627 Approach Delay, s/veh 24.0 27.1 14.3 17.7 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.6 27.6 9.5 20.8 9.7 23.5 15.1 15.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 6.1 3.4 8.5 5.6 17.4 9.5 9.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.4 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.1 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2028 Phase 2 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 Future Volume (vph) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3462 1770 3503 1770 3378 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.54 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3462 818 3503 1003 3378 1043 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 480 484 83 67 409 30 112 220 96 29 251 427 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 7 0 0 56 0 0 0 103 Lane Group Flow (vph) 480 552 0 67 432 0 112 260 0 29 251 324 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.2 27.1 20.3 16.1 27.8 23.7 23.2 21.4 36.6 Effective Green, g (s) 15.2 27.1 20.3 16.1 27.8 23.7 23.2 21.4 36.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.36 0.27 0.22 0.37 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 697 1254 275 753 414 1070 340 1012 869 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.16 0.01 c0.12 c0.01 0.08 0.00 0.07 c0.08 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.09 0.02 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.44 0.24 0.57 0.27 0.24 0.09 0.25 0.37 Uniform Delay, d1 27.6 18.1 20.6 26.3 15.8 18.9 18.1 20.5 11.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 0.2 0.5 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.3 Delay (s) 30.5 18.3 21.1 27.3 16.2 19.4 18.2 21.1 12.2 Level of Service C B C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 23.9 26.5 18.6 15.6 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2028 Phase 2 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 Future Volume (veh/h) 442 445 76 62 376 28 103 202 88 27 231 393 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 480 484 83 67 409 30 112 220 96 29 251 427 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 625 833 142 367 577 42 419 813 343 451 1058 759 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3036 518 1781 3358 245 1781 2435 1027 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 480 282 285 67 216 223 112 159 157 29 251 427 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1777 1781 1777 1826 1781 1777 1685 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.4 8.7 8.8 1.9 7.3 7.4 2.7 4.2 4.4 0.7 3.4 12.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.4 8.7 8.8 1.9 7.3 7.4 2.7 4.2 4.4 0.7 3.4 12.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.61 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 625 488 488 367 305 314 419 593 563 451 1058 759 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.58 0.58 0.18 0.71 0.71 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.06 0.24 0.56 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1002 543 543 730 529 544 452 593 563 534 1058 759 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.9 20.0 20.0 18.7 24.9 24.9 13.8 15.6 15.6 14.6 16.9 11.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 1.2 1.3 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.3 1.1 1.2 0.1 0.5 3.0 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(50%),veh/ln 3.2 3.3 3.3 0.7 3.0 3.1 1.0 1.6 1.6 0.3 1.3 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.9 21.2 21.3 18.9 27.9 27.9 14.2 16.7 16.9 14.7 17.5 14.9 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 1047 506 428 707 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 26.7 16.1 15.8 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.5 25.8 9.5 22.0 8.8 23.5 16.1 15.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 6.4 3.9 10.8 4.7 14.3 10.4 9.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.1 2.0 0.0 1.4 1.1 1.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.0 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 64 2030 Phase 3 Background Year Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Background AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 Future Volume (vph) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3289 1770 3522 1770 3429 1770 3105 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.57 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3289 1770 3522 446 3429 1056 3105 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 421 350 64 38 392 13 164 240 63 15 111 496 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 3 0 0 25 0 0 350 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 274 549 0 38 402 0 164 278 0 15 257 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.6 16.6 13.6 13.6 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Effective Green, g (s) 16.6 16.6 13.6 13.6 33.8 28.4 23.7 22.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.18 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 344 704 310 618 305 1256 331 913 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.17 0.02 c0.11 c0.05 0.08 0.00 0.08 v/s Ratio Perm c0.19 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.80 0.78 0.12 0.65 0.54 0.22 0.05 0.28 Uniform Delay, d1 28.8 28.7 26.9 29.7 14.7 16.9 18.8 21.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 12.1 5.6 0.2 2.5 1.8 0.4 0.1 0.8 Delay (s) 40.9 34.3 27.1 32.2 16.5 17.3 18.9 21.8 Level of Service D C C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 36.5 31.7 17.1 21.7 Approach LOS D C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 27.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Background AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 339 327 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 339 327 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 368 355 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 356 0 - 0 724 356 Stage 1 - - - - 356 - Stage 2 - - - - 368 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1203 - - - 393 688 Stage 1 - - - - 709 - Stage 2 - - - - 700 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1203 - - - 393 688 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 501 - Stage 1 - - - - 709 - Stage 2 - - - - 700 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1203 - - - 688 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.002 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 10.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Background AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 323 242 1 6 86 Future Vol, veh/h 15 323 242 1 6 86 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 16 351 263 1 7 93 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 264 0 - 0 647 264 Stage 1 - - - - 264 - Stage 2 - - - - 383 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1300 - - - 436 775 Stage 1 - - - - 780 - Stage 2 - - - - 689 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1300 - - - 431 775 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 527 - Stage 1 - - - - 771 - Stage 2 - - - - 689 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1300 - - - 527 775 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.012 0.121 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - - - 11.9 10.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 0.4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Background PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 Future Volume (vph) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3295 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3206 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.53 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3295 1770 3495 403 3392 989 3206 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 472 475 88 53 361 33 118 213 82 32 248 417 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 9 0 0 51 0 0 321 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 340 682 0 53 385 0 118 244 0 32 344 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 786 203 784 339 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.21 0.03 c0.11 c0.04 0.07 0.01 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.83 0.81 0.13 0.49 0.58 0.31 0.09 0.46 Uniform Delay, d1 28.1 27.9 24.8 27.0 22.1 25.5 20.3 26.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 17.0 8.2 0.7 2.2 11.6 1.0 0.6 2.1 Delay (s) 45.0 36.1 25.5 29.2 33.7 26.5 20.9 28.6 Level of Service D D C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 39.0 28.7 28.6 28.2 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 32.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.63 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Background PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 22 402 311 31 21 30 Future Vol, veh/h 22 402 311 31 21 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 24 437 338 34 23 33 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 372 0 - 0 840 355 Stage 1 - - - - 355 - Stage 2 - - - - 485 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - - 335 689 Stage 1 - - - - 710 - Stage 2 - - - - 619 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1186 - - - 328 689 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 448 - Stage 1 - - - - 696 - Stage 2 - - - - 619 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 12.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1186 - - - 564 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 - - - 0.098 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - - 12.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Background PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 103 320 300 2 2 42 Future Vol, veh/h 103 320 300 2 2 42 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 112 348 326 2 2 46 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 328 0 - 0 899 327 Stage 1 - - - - 327 - Stage 2 - - - - 572 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1232 - - - 309 714 Stage 1 - - - - 731 - Stage 2 - - - - 565 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1232 - - - 281 714 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 405 - Stage 1 - - - - 664 - Stage 2 - - - - 565 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2 0 10.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1232 - - - 405 714 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.091 - - - 0.005 0.064 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - - - 13.9 10.4 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0 0.2 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 65 2030 Phase 3 Background Year Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 Future Volume (vph) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3522 1770 3429 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.57 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 949 3522 1061 3429 1056 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 421 350 64 38 392 13 164 240 63 15 111 496 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 3 0 0 25 0 0 0 93 Lane Group Flow (vph) 421 398 0 38 402 0 164 278 0 15 111 403 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.6 26.0 19.2 15.3 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 37.5 Effective Green, g (s) 14.6 26.0 19.2 15.3 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 37.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.34 0.25 0.20 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.30 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 648 1162 277 697 524 1264 333 1048 860 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.12 0.01 c0.11 c0.03 0.08 0.00 0.03 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.11 0.01 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.34 0.14 0.58 0.31 0.22 0.05 0.11 0.47 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 19.2 22.3 28.1 13.6 16.8 18.7 19.8 13.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.3 0.2 0.2 1.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.4 Delay (s) 31.2 19.4 22.5 29.2 13.9 17.2 18.7 20.0 13.7 Level of Service C B C C B B B B B Approach Delay (s) 25.4 28.7 16.0 14.9 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.3 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2030 Phase 3 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 Future Volume (veh/h) 387 322 59 35 361 12 151 221 58 14 102 456 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 421 350 64 38 392 13 164 240 63 15 111 496 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 567 736 133 397 563 19 496 1037 267 473 1075 740 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.37 0.37 0.02 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3005 544 1781 3510 116 1781 2798 719 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 421 205 209 38 198 207 164 151 152 15 111 496 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 1741 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.3 6.2 6.3 1.0 6.6 6.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 0.4 1.4 15.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.3 6.2 6.3 1.0 6.6 6.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 0.4 1.4 15.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 567 435 434 397 285 296 496 658 645 473 1075 740 V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.47 0.48 0.10 0.70 0.70 0.33 0.23 0.24 0.03 0.10 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1018 524 522 765 509 530 527 658 645 582 1075 740 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.0 20.2 20.3 18.5 24.9 24.9 11.9 13.6 13.6 14.6 15.8 13.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 0.8 0.8 0.1 3.1 3.0 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.2 4.8 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(50%),veh/ln 2.8 2.3 2.4 0.4 2.7 2.8 1.2 1.4 1.4 0.1 0.5 5.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.9 21.0 21.1 18.6 28.0 27.9 12.2 14.4 14.5 14.6 16.0 17.8 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 835 443 467 622 Approach Delay, s/veh 24.0 27.1 13.7 17.4 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 27.8 9.5 19.9 9.9 23.5 14.8 14.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 5.8 3.0 8.3 5.7 17.2 9.3 8.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.8 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 Future Volume (vph) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3456 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.54 1.00 0.57 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3456 821 3495 1002 3392 1065 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 472 475 88 53 361 33 118 213 82 32 248 417 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 9 0 0 45 0 0 0 115 Lane Group Flow (vph) 472 547 0 53 385 0 118 250 0 32 248 302 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 14.7 25.9 19.2 15.2 28.0 23.8 23.2 21.4 36.1 Effective Green, g (s) 14.7 25.9 19.2 15.2 28.0 23.8 23.2 21.4 36.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.35 0.26 0.21 0.38 0.32 0.32 0.29 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 686 1217 266 722 425 1098 353 1030 874 v/s Ratio Prot c0.14 0.16 0.01 c0.11 c0.02 0.07 0.00 0.07 c0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.09 0.03 0.12 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.45 0.20 0.53 0.28 0.23 0.09 0.24 0.35 Uniform Delay, d1 27.3 18.3 20.7 26.0 15.1 18.1 17.5 19.9 11.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.9 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.2 Delay (s) 30.2 18.6 21.0 26.8 15.5 18.6 17.6 20.4 11.7 Level of Service C B C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 23.9 26.1 17.7 15.1 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2030 Phase 3 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 Future Volume (veh/h) 434 437 81 49 332 30 109 196 75 29 228 384 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 472 475 88 53 361 33 118 213 82 32 248 417 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 621 777 143 358 526 48 433 859 320 475 1079 766 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.34 0.34 0.03 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 2996 552 1781 3294 299 1781 2532 945 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 472 281 282 53 194 200 118 147 148 32 248 417 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1771 1781 1777 1816 1781 1777 1700 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.1 8.7 8.8 1.5 6.4 6.5 2.8 3.7 3.9 0.8 3.3 11.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.1 8.7 8.8 1.5 6.4 6.5 2.8 3.7 3.9 0.8 3.3 11.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 621 461 459 358 284 290 433 603 577 475 1079 766 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.61 0.61 0.15 0.68 0.69 0.27 0.24 0.26 0.07 0.23 0.54 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1021 554 552 728 539 551 465 603 577 557 1079 766 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.4 20.4 20.4 18.7 24.8 24.8 13.3 14.9 15.0 14.0 16.3 11.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 1.4 1.5 0.2 2.9 2.9 0.3 1.0 1.1 0.1 0.5 2.8 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(50%),veh/ln 3.1 3.3 3.3 0.5 2.6 2.7 1.0 1.4 1.5 0.3 1.2 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 26.3 21.8 21.9 18.9 27.7 27.8 13.6 15.9 16.0 14.1 16.8 14.1 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 1035 447 413 697 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.9 26.7 15.3 15.1 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.6 25.7 9.5 20.7 8.9 23.5 15.7 14.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 5.9 3.5 10.8 4.8 13.5 10.1 8.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.1 2.0 0.0 1.5 1.1 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.6 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 66 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 Future Volume (vph) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3291 1770 3524 1770 3341 1770 3111 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.51 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3291 1770 3524 384 3341 948 3111 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 459 370 64 70 440 13 164 260 155 15 127 527 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 96 0 0 376 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 294 588 0 70 451 0 164 319 0 15 278 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.1 17.1 14.7 14.7 33.7 28.3 23.6 22.7 Effective Green, g (s) 17.1 17.1 14.7 14.7 33.7 28.3 23.6 22.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.19 0.19 0.43 0.36 0.30 0.29 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 348 712 329 655 277 1196 292 893 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.18 0.04 c0.13 c0.05 0.10 0.00 0.09 v/s Ratio Perm c0.20 0.01 v/c Ratio 0.84 0.83 0.21 0.69 0.59 0.27 0.05 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 29.7 29.5 27.2 30.0 15.7 18.0 19.6 22.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 16.9 7.8 0.3 3.0 3.4 0.5 0.1 0.9 Delay (s) 46.6 37.3 27.6 33.0 19.1 18.5 19.7 22.9 Level of Service D D C C B B B C Approach Delay (s) 40.3 32.3 18.7 22.9 Approach LOS D C B C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 35 357 371 36 29 30 Future Vol, veh/h 35 357 371 36 29 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 38 388 403 39 32 33 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 442 0 - 0 887 423 Stage 1 - - - - 423 - Stage 2 - - - - 464 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1118 - - - 315 631 Stage 1 - - - - 661 - Stage 2 - - - - 633 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1118 - - - 304 631 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 429 - Stage 1 - - - - 639 - Stage 2 - - - - 633 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 13 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1118 - - - 512 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.034 - - - 0.125 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - - 13 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.4 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 33 352 312 36 35 101 Future Vol, veh/h 33 352 312 36 35 101 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 36 383 339 39 38 110 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 378 0 - 0 814 359 Stage 1 - - - - 359 - Stage 2 - - - - 455 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1180 - - - 347 685 Stage 1 - - - - 707 - Stage 2 - - - - 639 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1180 - - - 336 685 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 455 - Stage 1 - - - - 685 - Stage 2 - - - - 639 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 11.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1180 - - - 455 685 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - - - 0.084 0.16 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - - 13.6 11.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 0.6 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 44 88 620 53 105 572 Future Vol, veh/h 44 88 620 53 105 572 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 48 96 674 58 114 622 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1213 337 0 0 732 0 Stage 1 674 - - - - - Stage 2 539 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 174 659 - - 868 - Stage 1 468 - - - - - Stage 2 549 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 151 659 - - 868 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 285 - - - - - Stage 1 468 - - - - - Stage 2 477 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.3 0 1.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 285 659 868 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.168 0.145 0.131 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 20.2 11.4 9.8 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.5 0.5 - HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 5: University Blvd & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 386 378 35 0 29 Future Vol, veh/h 0 386 378 35 0 29 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 420 411 38 0 32 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 411 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 641 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 641 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 641 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.049 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 10.9 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 6: Mikan Drive & Access 3 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 0 44 40 0 4 53 6 10 3 52 18 Future Vol, veh/h 15 0 44 40 0 4 53 6 10 3 52 18 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 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 16 0 48 43 0 4 58 7 11 3 57 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 204 207 67 226 212 13 77 0 0 18 0 0 Stage 1 73 73 - 129 129 - - - - - - - Stage 2 131 134 - 97 83 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 754 690 997 729 685 1067 1522 - - 1599 - - Stage 1 937 834 - 875 789 - - - - - - - Stage 2 873 785 - 910 826 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 728 662 997 672 657 1067 1522 - - 1599 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 728 662 - 672 657 - - - - - - - Stage 1 900 832 - 841 758 - - - - - - - Stage 2 836 754 - 865 824 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.3 10.6 5.7 0.3 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1522 - - 911 695 1599 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - 0.07 0.069 0.002 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - 9.3 10.6 7.3 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - A B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.2 0.2 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total AM 7: Mikan Drive & Access 4 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 0 73 17 0 21 Future Vol, veh/h 14 0 73 17 0 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 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 15 0 79 18 0 23 Major/Minor Minor2 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 176 18 0 0 Stage 1 176 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Critical Hdwy 6.52 6.22 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.52 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.018 3.318 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 717 1061 - - Stage 1 753 - - - Stage 2 - - - - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 0 1061 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Approach EB WB HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBLn1 WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - - HCM Lane LOS - - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 Future Volume (vph) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3295 1770 3501 1770 3353 1770 3204 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.45 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3295 1770 3501 403 3353 846 3204 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 516 498 88 97 426 33 118 236 127 32 270 461 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 7 0 0 89 0 0 354 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 361 728 0 97 452 0 118 274 0 32 377 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 787 203 775 306 740 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.22 0.05 c0.13 c0.04 0.08 0.01 0.12 v/s Ratio Perm c0.13 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.88 0.86 0.24 0.57 0.58 0.35 0.10 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 28.5 28.4 25.4 27.6 22.4 25.7 20.4 26.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 22.1 11.3 1.5 3.0 11.6 1.3 0.7 2.5 Delay (s) 50.7 39.8 26.9 30.6 34.0 27.0 21.1 29.3 Level of Service D D C C C C C C Approach Delay (s) 43.3 30.0 28.7 28.9 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 64 423 371 73 61 70 Future Vol, veh/h 64 423 371 73 61 70 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 70 460 403 79 66 76 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 482 0 - 0 1043 443 Stage 1 - - - - 443 - Stage 2 - - - - 600 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1081 - - - 254 615 Stage 1 - - - - 647 - Stage 2 - - - - 548 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1081 - - - 237 615 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 370 - Stage 1 - - - - 605 - Stage 2 - - - - 548 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.1 0 16 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1081 - - - 470 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.303 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - - 16 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 1.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 124 360 384 43 42 62 Future Vol, veh/h 124 360 384 43 42 62 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 135 391 417 47 46 67 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 464 0 - 0 1102 441 Stage 1 - - - - 441 - Stage 2 - - - - 661 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1097 - - - 234 616 Stage 1 - - - - 648 - Stage 2 - - - - 514 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1097 - - - 205 616 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 339 - Stage 1 - - - - 568 - Stage 2 - - - - 514 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.2 0 13.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1097 - - - 339 616 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.123 - - - 0.135 0.109 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - - 17.3 11.6 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - - 0.5 0.4 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 60 119 660 62 125 641 Future Vol, veh/h 60 119 660 62 125 641 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 65 129 717 67 136 697 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1338 359 0 0 784 0 Stage 1 717 - - - - - Stage 2 621 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 144 638 - - 830 - Stage 1 445 - - - - - Stage 2 498 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 120 638 - - 830 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 251 - - - - - Stage 1 445 - - - - - Stage 2 416 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.2 0 1.7 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 251 638 830 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.26 0.203 0.164 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 24.3 12.1 10.2 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.8 0.6 - HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 5: University Blvd & Access 2 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 484 404 42 0 40 Future Vol, veh/h 0 484 404 42 0 40 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 526 439 46 0 43 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 439 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 618 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 618 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 11.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 618 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.07 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 11.3 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 6: Mikan Drive & Access 3 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 60 25 0 1 62 64 41 1 19 21 Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 60 25 0 1 62 64 41 1 19 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 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 22 0 65 27 0 1 67 70 45 1 21 23 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 262 284 33 294 273 93 44 0 0 115 0 0 Stage 1 35 35 - 227 227 - - - - - - - Stage 2 227 249 - 67 46 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 691 625 1041 658 634 964 1564 - - 1474 - - Stage 1 981 866 - 776 716 - - - - - - - Stage 2 776 701 - 943 857 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 665 596 1041 595 604 964 1564 - - 1474 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 665 596 - 595 604 - - - - - - - Stage 1 936 865 - 740 683 - - - - - - - Stage 2 739 669 - 883 856 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.4 11.3 2.7 0.2 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1564 - - 912 604 1474 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - 0.095 0.047 0.001 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.4 11.3 7.4 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - A B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.3 0.1 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC 2030 Phase 3 Total PM 7: Mikan Drive & Access 4 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 41 21 0 84 Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 41 21 0 84 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 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 22 0 45 23 0 91 Major/Minor Minor2 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 113 23 0 0 Stage 1 113 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Critical Hdwy 6.52 6.22 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.52 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.018 3.318 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 777 1054 - - Stage 1 802 - - - Stage 2 - - - - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 0 1054 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Approach EB WB HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBLn1 WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - - HCM Lane LOS - - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 67 2030 Phase 3 Total Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 Future Volume (vph) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3461 1770 3524 1770 3341 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3461 931 3524 1045 3341 948 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 459 370 64 70 440 13 164 260 155 15 127 527 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 2 0 0 94 0 0 0 81 Lane Group Flow (vph) 459 418 0 70 451 0 164 321 0 15 127 446 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.3 24.7 21.0 15.2 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 38.2 Effective Green, g (s) 15.3 24.7 21.0 15.2 33.9 28.5 23.8 22.9 38.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.32 0.27 0.20 0.44 0.37 0.31 0.29 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 674 1097 313 687 515 1222 299 1040 867 v/s Ratio Prot c0.13 0.12 0.02 c0.13 c0.03 0.10 0.00 0.04 c0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.38 0.22 0.66 0.32 0.26 0.05 0.12 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 20.7 21.6 28.9 13.8 17.3 18.9 20.1 13.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 0.2 0.4 2.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.5 Delay (s) 31.9 20.9 22.0 31.2 14.2 17.8 19.0 20.4 14.0 Level of Service C C C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 26.5 30.0 16.8 15.4 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 22.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 77.9 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2030 Phase 3 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 Future Volume (veh/h) 422 340 59 64 405 12 151 239 143 14 117 485 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 459 370 64 70 440 13 164 260 155 15 127 527 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 600 816 140 406 607 18 471 781 450 404 1036 738 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.09 0.36 0.36 0.02 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3034 520 1781 3525 104 1781 2170 1252 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 459 215 219 70 222 231 164 211 204 15 127 527 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1777 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1645 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.2 6.6 6.7 2.0 7.7 7.7 3.9 5.6 5.9 0.4 1.7 17.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.2 6.6 6.7 2.0 7.7 7.7 3.9 5.6 5.9 0.4 1.7 17.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.76 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 600 478 478 406 306 319 471 639 592 404 1036 738 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.45 0.46 0.17 0.72 0.73 0.35 0.33 0.34 0.04 0.12 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 981 504 504 761 491 511 495 639 592 509 1036 738 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.7 19.8 19.9 19.1 25.5 25.5 12.7 15.2 15.2 15.7 17.0 14.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.7 0.7 0.2 3.3 3.2 0.4 1.4 1.6 0.0 0.2 5.8 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(50%),veh/ln 3.2 2.5 2.5 0.7 3.2 3.3 1.3 2.2 2.1 0.1 0.6 6.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.7 20.5 20.5 19.3 28.8 28.7 13.2 16.5 16.8 15.7 17.2 19.8 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 893 523 579 669 Approach Delay, s/veh 24.2 27.5 15.7 19.2 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 27.9 9.5 22.0 10.1 23.5 15.8 15.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 7.9 4.0 8.7 5.9 19.4 10.2 9.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.7 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2030 Phase 3 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 Future Volume (vph) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3459 1770 3501 1770 3353 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.43 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3459 803 3501 982 3353 997 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 516 498 88 97 426 33 118 236 127 32 270 461 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 7 0 0 81 0 0 0 95 Lane Group Flow (vph) 516 570 0 97 452 0 118 282 0 32 270 366 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 15.7 25.1 21.6 15.5 27.8 23.7 23.2 21.4 37.1 Effective Green, g (s) 15.7 25.1 21.6 15.5 27.8 23.7 23.2 21.4 37.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.34 0.29 0.21 0.37 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.50 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 721 1162 311 726 408 1063 328 1013 881 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.16 0.03 c0.13 c0.02 0.08 0.00 0.08 c0.09 v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.09 0.03 0.14 v/c Ratio 0.72 0.49 0.31 0.62 0.29 0.27 0.10 0.27 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 27.4 19.7 20.0 26.9 15.8 19.0 18.1 20.6 11.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3.4 0.3 0.6 1.7 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.3 Delay (s) 30.8 20.0 20.5 28.6 16.2 19.6 18.2 21.2 12.2 Level of Service C C C C B B B C B Approach Delay (s) 25.1 27.2 18.8 15.7 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 22.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.56 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 74.7 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2030 Phase 3 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 Future Volume (veh/h) 475 458 81 89 392 30 109 217 117 29 248 424 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 516 498 88 97 426 33 118 236 127 32 270 461 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 657 915 161 360 589 45 399 734 381 417 1033 762 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.03 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3020 531 1781 3343 258 1781 2261 1174 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 516 292 294 97 226 233 118 184 179 32 270 461 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1775 1781 1777 1824 1781 1777 1659 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.3 9.0 9.0 2.9 7.8 7.9 3.0 5.1 5.4 0.8 3.8 13.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.3 9.0 9.0 2.9 7.8 7.9 3.0 5.1 5.4 0.8 3.8 13.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.71 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 657 538 538 360 313 322 399 576 538 417 1033 762 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.54 0.55 0.27 0.72 0.73 0.30 0.32 0.33 0.08 0.26 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 978 538 538 737 516 530 428 576 538 493 1033 762 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 19.0 19.0 20.0 25.4 25.4 14.6 16.6 16.7 15.3 17.8 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.5 1.1 1.2 0.4 3.1 3.1 0.4 1.5 1.7 0.1 0.6 3.5 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(50%),veh/ln 3.6 3.3 3.4 1.1 3.2 3.3 1.1 2.0 2.0 0.3 1.4 4.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.7 20.1 20.2 20.4 28.5 28.6 15.0 18.1 18.4 15.4 18.4 16.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C B B B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 1102 556 481 763 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.7 27.1 17.4 16.8 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.7 25.7 8.7 24.3 8.9 23.5 16.9 16.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 7.4 4.9 11.0 5.0 15.9 11.3 9.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.2 2.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 1.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.5 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 68 2040 Background Year Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Background AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 Future Volume (vph) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3289 1770 3523 1770 3429 1770 3105 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.53 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3289 1770 3523 283 3429 990 3105 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 513 427 78 46 477 15 200 293 77 18 135 603 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 12 0 0 3 0 0 26 0 0 384 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 333 673 0 46 489 0 200 344 0 18 354 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.2 18.2 15.3 15.3 32.8 26.4 23.7 21.8 Effective Green, g (s) 18.2 18.2 15.3 15.3 32.8 26.4 23.7 21.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.19 0.19 0.41 0.33 0.30 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 750 339 675 237 1134 312 848 v/s Ratio Prot c0.21 0.20 0.03 c0.14 c0.07 0.10 0.00 0.11 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.91 0.90 0.14 0.72 0.84 0.30 0.06 0.42 Uniform Delay, d1 30.0 29.9 26.8 30.3 17.8 19.9 19.9 23.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 25.2 13.5 0.2 3.9 23.0 0.7 0.1 1.5 Delay (s) 55.1 43.4 26.9 34.1 40.8 20.5 20.0 25.3 Level of Service E D C C D C B C Approach Delay (s) 47.2 33.5 27.7 25.2 Approach LOS D C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 35.0 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.87 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 77.1% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Background AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 413 399 1 0 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 413 399 1 0 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 0 449 434 1 0 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 435 0 - 0 884 435 Stage 1 - - - - 435 - Stage 2 - - - - 449 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1125 - - - 316 621 Stage 1 - - - - 653 - Stage 2 - - - - 643 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1125 - - - 316 621 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 440 - Stage 1 - - - - 653 - Stage 2 - - - - 643 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 10.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1125 - - - 621 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - 0.002 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - - - 10.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Background AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 18 394 295 1 7 105 Future Vol, veh/h 18 394 295 1 7 105 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 20 428 321 1 8 114 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 322 0 - 0 790 322 Stage 1 - - - - 322 - Stage 2 - - - - 468 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1238 - - - 359 719 Stage 1 - - - - 735 - Stage 2 - - - - 630 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1238 - - - 353 719 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 467 - Stage 1 - - - - 723 - Stage 2 - - - - 630 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 11 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1238 - - - 467 719 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.016 - - - 0.016 0.159 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 12.8 10.9 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.1 0.6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Background PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 Future Volume (vph) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3294 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3206 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.46 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3294 1770 3495 403 3392 852 3206 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 575 579 108 64 439 40 145 260 100 38 302 509 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 9 0 0 51 0 0 382 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 414 835 0 64 470 0 145 309 0 38 429 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 786 203 784 307 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.26 0.25 0.04 c0.13 c0.04 0.09 0.01 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.03 v/c Ratio 1.00 0.99 0.16 0.60 0.71 0.39 0.12 0.58 Uniform Delay, d1 29.8 29.6 24.9 27.8 23.3 26.0 20.4 27.3 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 45.6 28.4 0.9 3.4 19.3 1.5 0.8 3.3 Delay (s) 75.3 58.0 25.8 31.1 42.5 27.5 21.3 30.6 Level of Service E E C C D C C C Approach Delay (s) 63.7 30.5 31.8 30.2 Approach LOS E C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 43.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 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 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Background PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 27 490 379 38 25 37 Future Vol, veh/h 27 490 379 38 25 37 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 29 533 412 41 27 40 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 453 0 - 0 1024 433 Stage 1 - - - - 433 - Stage 2 - - - - 591 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1108 - - - 261 623 Stage 1 - - - - 654 - Stage 2 - - - - 553 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1108 - - - 254 623 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 385 - Stage 1 - - - - 637 - Stage 2 - - - - 553 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 13.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1108 - - - 499 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.026 - - - 0.135 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - - 13.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.5 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Background PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 126 390 366 3 3 51 Future Vol, veh/h 126 390 366 3 3 51 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 137 424 398 3 3 55 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 401 0 - 0 1098 400 Stage 1 - - - - 400 - Stage 2 - - - - 698 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1158 - - - 235 650 Stage 1 - - - - 677 - Stage 2 - - - - 494 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1158 - - - 207 650 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 340 - Stage 1 - - - - 597 - Stage 2 - - - - 494 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.1 0 11.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1158 - - - 340 650 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.118 - - - 0.01 0.085 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - - 15.7 11.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - - 0 0.3 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 69 2040 Background Year Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 Future Volume (vph) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3457 1770 3523 1770 3429 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.53 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3457 869 3523 1030 3429 990 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 513 427 78 46 477 15 200 293 77 18 135 603 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 3 0 0 26 0 0 0 66 Lane Group Flow (vph) 513 490 0 46 489 0 200 344 0 18 135 537 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.2 29.2 21.2 17.1 33.0 26.6 23.9 22.0 38.2 Effective Green, g (s) 16.2 29.2 21.2 17.1 33.0 26.6 23.9 22.0 38.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.37 0.27 0.21 0.41 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 696 1264 277 754 486 1143 315 975 847 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 0.14 0.01 c0.14 c0.03 0.10 0.00 0.04 c0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.14 0.02 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.39 0.17 0.65 0.41 0.30 0.06 0.14 0.63 Uniform Delay, d1 29.8 18.7 22.1 28.6 15.6 19.7 19.8 21.8 15.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.1 0.2 0.3 1.9 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.6 Delay (s) 33.9 18.9 22.4 30.5 16.2 20.4 19.9 22.1 17.1 Level of Service C B C C B C B C B Approach Delay (s) 26.4 29.8 18.9 18.1 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.8 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Background AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 Future Volume (veh/h) 472 393 72 42 439 14 184 270 71 17 124 555 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 513 427 78 46 477 15 200 293 77 18 135 603 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 646 883 160 392 633 20 452 978 253 418 983 734 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.29 0.29 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.35 0.35 0.02 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3004 545 1781 3517 110 1781 2795 722 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 513 251 254 46 241 251 200 184 186 18 135 603 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1772 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 1740 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.7 8.0 8.1 1.4 8.8 8.9 5.2 5.2 5.3 0.5 2.0 19.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.7 8.0 8.1 1.4 8.8 8.9 5.2 5.2 5.3 0.5 2.0 19.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.41 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 646 522 521 392 320 333 452 622 609 418 983 734 V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.48 0.49 0.12 0.75 0.75 0.44 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.14 0.82 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 931 522 521 729 466 485 452 622 609 510 983 734 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.7 19.9 20.0 19.7 26.7 26.7 14.1 16.2 16.2 17.1 18.7 16.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.1 0.7 0.7 0.1 4.0 3.9 0.7 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.3 10.0 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(50%),veh/ln 3.9 3.0 3.0 0.5 3.7 3.9 1.9 2.0 2.1 0.2 0.8 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.8 20.6 20.7 19.8 30.7 30.7 14.8 17.4 17.5 17.2 19.0 26.0 LnGrp LOS C C C B C C B B B B B C Approach Vol, veh/h 1018 538 570 756 Approach Delay, s/veh 25.2 29.8 16.5 24.5 Approach LOS C C B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.0 28.5 9.5 24.7 11.0 23.5 17.3 16.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 7.3 3.4 10.1 7.2 21.0 11.7 10.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.2 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 Future Volume (vph) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3456 1770 3495 1770 3392 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3456 727 3495 891 3392 1000 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 575 579 108 64 439 40 145 260 100 38 302 509 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 16 0 0 9 0 0 47 0 0 0 82 Lane Group Flow (vph) 575 671 0 64 470 0 145 313 0 38 302 427 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.7 29.4 21.3 17.0 29.2 23.7 23.8 21.0 37.7 Effective Green, g (s) 16.7 29.4 21.3 17.0 29.2 23.7 23.8 21.0 37.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.38 0.27 0.22 0.37 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 733 1299 255 759 394 1028 331 950 854 v/s Ratio Prot c0.17 0.19 0.01 c0.13 c0.03 0.09 0.00 0.09 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.11 0.03 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.78 0.52 0.25 0.62 0.37 0.30 0.11 0.32 0.50 Uniform Delay, d1 29.0 18.9 21.5 27.7 16.8 20.9 19.3 22.9 13.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 5.5 0.3 0.5 1.5 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.9 0.5 Delay (s) 34.6 19.2 22.0 29.2 17.4 21.7 19.5 23.8 14.3 Level of Service C B C C B C B C B Approach Delay (s) 26.2 28.3 20.5 17.9 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 23.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 78.2 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Background PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 Future Volume (veh/h) 529 533 99 59 404 37 133 239 92 35 278 468 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 575 579 108 64 439 40 145 260 100 38 302 509 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 705 929 173 343 591 54 387 804 301 414 980 760 Arrive On Green 0.20 0.31 0.31 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.08 0.32 0.32 0.04 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 2991 556 1781 3294 299 1781 2529 948 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 575 343 344 64 236 243 145 181 179 38 302 509 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1770 1781 1777 1817 1781 1777 1700 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.9 11.4 11.4 1.9 8.7 8.7 3.9 5.3 5.5 1.0 4.6 17.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.9 11.4 11.4 1.9 8.7 8.7 3.9 5.3 5.5 1.0 4.6 17.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.31 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.56 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 705 552 550 343 318 326 387 565 541 414 980 760 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.62 0.63 0.19 0.74 0.75 0.37 0.32 0.33 0.09 0.31 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 928 552 550 679 490 501 387 565 541 477 980 760 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.2 20.3 20.3 20.0 26.8 26.8 15.5 17.8 17.9 16.7 19.7 13.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 2.2 2.2 0.3 3.4 3.4 0.6 1.5 1.6 0.1 0.8 4.6 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 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.5 4.4 4.4 0.7 3.6 3.7 1.4 2.1 2.1 0.4 1.8 5.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.5 22.5 22.5 20.3 30.2 30.2 16.1 19.3 19.6 16.7 20.6 18.4 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C B B B B C B Approach Vol, veh/h 1262 543 505 849 Approach Delay, s/veh 26.2 29.0 18.5 19.1 Approach LOS C C B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.1 26.4 9.5 25.9 10.0 23.5 18.6 16.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 7.5 3.9 13.4 5.9 19.0 12.9 10.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.5 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 70 2040 Total Traffic Analysis HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Total AM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 Future Volume (vph) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.88 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3290 1770 3524 1770 3397 1770 3110 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.50 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3290 1770 3524 283 3397 936 3110 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 551 447 78 77 525 15 200 313 115 18 151 635 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 43 0 0 382 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 353 712 0 77 538 0 200 385 0 18 404 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 18.5 18.5 16.2 16.2 32.8 26.3 23.8 21.8 Effective Green, g (s) 18.5 18.5 16.2 16.2 32.8 26.3 23.8 21.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.40 0.32 0.29 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 367 751 354 704 233 1102 295 837 v/s Ratio Prot c0.22 0.22 0.04 c0.15 c0.07 0.11 0.00 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm c0.28 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.96 0.95 0.22 0.76 0.86 0.35 0.06 0.48 Uniform Delay, d1 30.9 30.8 27.1 30.6 18.7 20.8 20.4 24.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 36.8 20.9 0.3 4.9 25.4 0.9 0.1 2.0 Delay (s) 67.7 51.7 27.4 35.5 44.1 21.7 20.5 26.9 Level of Service E D C D D C C C Approach Delay (s) 57.0 34.5 28.8 26.7 Approach LOS E C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 39.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.90 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 81.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 35 431 443 36 29 30 Future Vol, veh/h 35 431 443 36 29 30 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 38 468 482 39 32 33 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 521 0 - 0 1046 502 Stage 1 - - - - 502 - Stage 2 - - - - 544 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1045 - - - 253 569 Stage 1 - - - - 608 - Stage 2 - - - - 582 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1045 - - - 244 569 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 378 - Stage 1 - - - - 586 - Stage 2 - - - - 582 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 14.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1045 - - - 456 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.036 - - - 0.141 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - - 14.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.5 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 36 423 365 36 36 120 Future Vol, veh/h 36 423 365 36 36 120 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 39 460 397 39 39 130 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 436 0 - 0 955 417 Stage 1 - - - - 417 - Stage 2 - - - - 538 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1124 - - - 287 636 Stage 1 - - - - 665 - Stage 2 - - - - 585 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1124 - - - 277 636 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 405 - Stage 1 - - - - 642 - Stage 2 - - - - 585 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 12.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1124 - - - 405 636 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - - 0.097 0.205 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - - 14.8 12.1 HCM Lane LOS A - - - B B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.3 0.8 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 44 88 756 53 105 696 Future Vol, veh/h 44 88 756 53 105 696 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 48 96 822 58 114 757 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1429 411 0 0 880 0 Stage 1 822 - - - - - Stage 2 607 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 126 590 - - 764 - Stage 1 392 - - - - - Stage 2 507 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 107 590 - - 764 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 236 - - - - - Stage 1 392 - - - - - Stage 2 431 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.2 0 1.4 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 236 590 764 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.203 0.162 0.149 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 24.1 12.3 10.5 - HCM Lane LOS - - C B B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.7 0.6 0.5 - HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 5: University Blvd & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 470 450 35 0 29 Future Vol, veh/h 0 470 450 35 0 29 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 511 489 38 0 32 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 489 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 579 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 579 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 11.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 579 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.054 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 11.6 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.2 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 6: Mikan Drive & Access 3 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 0 44 40 0 4 53 9 10 3 72 18 Future Vol, veh/h 15 0 44 40 0 4 53 9 10 3 72 18 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 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 16 0 48 43 0 4 58 10 11 3 78 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 228 231 88 250 236 16 98 0 0 21 0 0 Stage 1 94 94 - 132 132 - - - - - - - Stage 2 134 137 - 118 104 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 727 669 970 703 665 1063 1495 - - 1595 - - Stage 1 913 817 - 871 787 - - - - - - - Stage 2 869 783 - 887 809 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 702 642 970 647 638 1063 1495 - - 1595 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 702 642 - 647 638 - - - - - - - Stage 1 877 815 - 837 756 - - - - - - - Stage 2 832 752 - 842 807 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.4 10.8 5.5 0.2 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1495 - - 884 671 1595 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.039 - - 0.073 0.071 0.002 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - 9.4 10.8 7.3 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - A B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.2 0.2 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total AM 7: Mikan Drive & Access 4 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 0 93 17 0 28 Future Vol, veh/h 14 0 93 17 0 28 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 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 15 0 101 18 0 30 Major/Minor Minor2 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 220 18 0 0 Stage 1 220 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Critical Hdwy 6.52 6.22 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.52 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.018 3.318 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 678 1061 - - Stage 1 721 - - - Stage 2 - - - - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 0 1061 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Approach EB WB HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBLn1 WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - - HCM Lane LOS - - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Total PM 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 Future Volume (vph) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.91 Flt Protected 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1610 3295 1770 3500 1770 3359 1770 3205 Flt Permitted 0.95 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.38 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1610 3295 1770 3500 403 3359 717 3205 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 620 602 108 108 504 40 145 283 146 38 324 552 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 13 0 0 7 0 0 82 0 0 388 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 440 877 0 108 537 0 145 347 0 38 488 0 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Effective Green, g (s) 20.5 20.5 18.0 18.0 23.5 18.5 23.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.29 0.23 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 412 844 398 787 203 776 276 741 v/s Ratio Prot c0.27 0.27 0.06 c0.15 c0.04 0.10 0.01 0.15 v/s Ratio Perm c0.16 0.03 v/c Ratio 1.07 1.04 0.27 0.68 0.71 0.45 0.14 0.66 Uniform Delay, d1 29.8 29.8 25.6 28.4 23.3 26.4 20.5 27.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 63.6 41.7 1.7 4.8 19.3 1.9 1.0 4.5 Delay (s) 93.3 71.5 27.3 33.1 42.5 28.2 21.5 32.4 Level of Service F E C C D C C C Approach Delay (s) 78.7 32.2 31.8 32.0 Approach LOS E C C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 49.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.0 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 84.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 2: University Blvd & Tamana Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 69 511 439 80 65 77 Future Vol, veh/h 69 511 439 80 65 77 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 - - - 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 75 555 477 87 71 84 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 564 0 - 0 1226 521 Stage 1 - - - - 521 - Stage 2 - - - - 705 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1008 - - - 197 555 Stage 1 - - - - 596 - Stage 2 - - - - 490 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1008 - - - 182 555 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 320 - Stage 1 - - - - 552 - Stage 2 - - - - 490 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.1 0 18.7 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1008 - - - 415 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.074 - - - 0.372 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - - 18.7 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 1.7 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 3: University Blvd & Mikan Drive Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 430 450 44 43 71 Future Vol, veh/h 147 430 450 44 43 71 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 45 - - - 0 100 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 160 467 489 48 47 77 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 537 0 - 0 1300 513 Stage 1 - - - - 513 - Stage 2 - - - - 787 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1031 - - - 178 561 Stage 1 - - - - 601 - Stage 2 - - - - 449 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1031 - - - 150 561 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 286 - Stage 1 - - - - 508 - Stage 2 - - - - 449 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.3 0 15.3 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 1031 - - - 286 561 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.155 - - - 0.163 0.138 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - - 20 12.4 HCM Lane LOS A - - - C B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 - - - 0.6 0.5 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 4: Yellowstone Highway & Access 1 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 60 119 805 62 125 781 Future Vol, veh/h 60 119 805 62 125 781 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 100 - 100 100 - 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 65 129 875 67 136 849 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1572 438 0 0 942 0 Stage 1 875 - - - - - Stage 2 697 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - - 2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 101 567 - - 724 - Stage 1 368 - - - - - Stage 2 455 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 82 567 - - 724 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 206 - - - - - Stage 1 368 - - - - - Stage 2 369 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 19 0 1.5 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - - 206 567 724 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.317 0.228 0.188 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 30.4 13.2 11.1 - HCM Lane LOS - - D B B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.3 0.9 0.7 - HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 5: University Blvd & Access 2 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 576 479 42 0 40 Future Vol, veh/h 0 576 479 42 0 40 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - 100 - 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 0 626 521 46 0 43 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 521 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 555 Stage 1 0 - - - 0 - Stage 2 0 - - - 0 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 555 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 12 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - - - 555 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.078 HCM Control Delay (s) - - - 12 HCM Lane LOS - - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 6: Mikan Drive & Access 3 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 60 25 0 1 62 88 41 1 29 21 Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 60 25 0 1 62 88 41 1 29 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 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 22 0 65 27 0 1 67 96 45 1 32 23 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 299 321 44 331 310 119 55 0 0 141 0 0 Stage 1 46 46 - 253 253 - - - - - - - Stage 2 253 275 - 78 57 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 653 596 1026 622 605 933 1550 - - 1442 - - Stage 1 968 857 - 751 698 - - - - - - - Stage 2 751 683 - 931 847 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 628 567 1026 561 576 933 1550 - - 1442 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 628 567 - 561 576 - - - - - - - Stage 1 923 856 - 716 665 - - - - - - - Stage 2 715 651 - 871 846 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.5 11.6 2.4 0.1 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1550 - - 886 570 1442 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 - - 0.098 0.05 0.001 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 - 9.5 11.6 7.5 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A - A B A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.3 0.2 0 - - HCM 6th TWSC 2040 Total PM 7: Mikan Drive & Access 4 Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 0 51 21 0 109 Future Vol, veh/h 20 0 51 21 0 109 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 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 22 0 55 23 0 118 Major/Minor Minor2 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 133 23 0 0 Stage 1 133 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Critical Hdwy 6.52 6.22 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.52 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 4.018 3.318 2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 758 1054 - - Stage 1 786 - - - Stage 2 - - - - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 0 1054 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 0 - - - Stage 1 0 - - - Stage 2 0 - - - Approach EB WB HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBLn1 WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - HCM Control Delay (s) - - - HCM Lane LOS - - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 71 2040 Total Traffic Analysis Mitigations HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 Future Volume (vph) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3460 1770 3524 1770 3397 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.54 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3460 852 3524 1014 3397 936 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 551 447 78 77 525 15 200 313 115 18 151 635 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 42 0 0 0 58 Lane Group Flow (vph) 551 510 0 77 538 0 200 386 0 18 151 577 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 16.8 27.7 22.9 16.9 32.9 26.5 23.8 21.9 38.7 Effective Green, g (s) 16.8 27.7 22.9 16.9 32.9 26.5 23.8 21.9 38.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.35 0.29 0.21 0.41 0.33 0.30 0.27 0.48 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 720 1196 312 743 477 1123 297 967 853 v/s Ratio Prot c0.16 0.15 0.02 c0.15 c0.03 0.11 0.00 0.04 c0.14 v/s Ratio Perm 0.05 0.14 0.02 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.43 0.25 0.72 0.42 0.34 0.06 0.16 0.68 Uniform Delay, d1 29.8 20.1 21.4 29.4 15.8 20.2 20.0 22.1 15.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.9 0.2 0.4 3.5 0.6 0.8 0.1 0.3 2.1 Delay (s) 34.7 20.3 21.8 32.9 16.4 21.1 20.1 22.4 18.0 Level of Service C C C C B C C C B Approach Delay (s) 27.7 31.5 19.6 18.9 Approach LOS C C B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 80.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.4% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Total AM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 Future Volume (veh/h) 507 411 72 71 483 14 184 288 106 17 139 584 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 551 447 78 77 525 15 200 313 115 18 151 635 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 677 957 166 395 673 19 427 866 312 374 952 735 Arrive On Green 0.20 0.32 0.32 0.07 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.02 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3028 525 1781 3528 101 1781 2559 922 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 551 261 264 77 264 276 200 215 213 18 151 635 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1776 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1704 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.8 8.4 8.5 2.4 10.0 10.0 5.5 6.5 6.7 0.5 2.3 19.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.8 8.4 8.5 2.4 10.0 10.0 5.5 6.5 6.7 0.5 2.3 19.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.54 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 677 561 561 395 339 353 427 602 577 374 952 735 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.47 0.47 0.20 0.78 0.78 0.47 0.36 0.37 0.05 0.16 0.86 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 902 561 561 721 451 470 427 602 577 462 952 735 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.3 19.4 19.5 20.2 27.3 27.3 15.1 17.6 17.7 18.1 19.8 17.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 0.6 0.6 0.2 6.2 6.0 0.8 1.7 1.8 0.1 0.4 12.8 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(50%),veh/ln 4.4 3.1 3.2 0.9 4.4 4.6 2.0 2.6 2.6 0.2 0.9 10.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.6 20.0 20.1 20.5 33.5 33.3 15.9 19.3 19.5 18.2 20.2 29.9 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C B B B B C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1076 617 628 804 Approach Delay, s/veh 26.0 31.8 18.3 27.8 Approach LOS C C B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.0 28.5 9.5 26.9 11.0 23.5 18.4 18.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 20.5 18.0 18.5 6.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 8.7 4.4 10.5 7.5 21.0 12.8 12.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.0 HCM 6th LOS C HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2040 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 Future Volume (vph) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 3433 3458 1770 3500 1770 3359 1770 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3433 3458 711 3500 851 3359 896 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 620 602 108 108 504 40 145 283 146 38 324 552 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 15 0 0 8 0 0 77 0 0 0 69 Lane Group Flow (vph) 620 695 0 108 536 0 145 352 0 38 324 483 Turn Type Prot NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+ov Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 7 Permitted Phases 8 2 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 17.5 28.1 23.8 17.2 29.1 23.6 23.9 21.0 38.5 Effective Green, g (s) 17.5 28.1 23.8 17.2 29.1 23.6 23.9 21.0 38.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.35 0.30 0.22 0.37 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.49 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 758 1226 301 760 376 1000 302 938 859 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.20 0.03 c0.15 c0.03 0.10 0.00 0.09 c0.12 v/s Ratio Perm 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.82 0.57 0.36 0.71 0.39 0.35 0.13 0.35 0.56 Uniform Delay, d1 29.3 20.6 20.6 28.7 17.4 21.8 19.7 23.5 14.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6.9 0.6 0.7 3.0 0.7 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.8 Delay (s) 36.2 21.2 21.4 31.7 18.0 22.8 19.9 24.5 15.2 Level of Service D C C C B C B C B Approach Delay (s) 28.2 30.0 21.6 18.7 Approach LOS C C C B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 24.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 79.2 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Total PM Mitigations 1: Yellowstone Highway & University Blvd Rexburg Mixed Use Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 Future Volume (veh/h) 570 554 99 99 464 37 133 260 134 35 298 508 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 620 602 108 108 504 40 145 283 146 38 324 552 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 738 995 178 358 648 51 358 697 350 361 941 758 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.04 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 3011 539 1781 3336 264 1781 2290 1150 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 620 355 355 108 268 276 145 218 211 38 324 552 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1777 1773 1781 1777 1823 1781 1777 1663 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.3 12.0 12.0 3.4 10.3 10.3 4.2 7.0 7.3 1.1 5.3 19.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.3 12.0 12.0 3.4 10.3 10.3 4.2 7.0 7.3 1.1 5.3 19.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.69 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 738 587 586 358 345 354 358 541 506 361 941 758 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.60 0.61 0.30 0.78 0.78 0.41 0.40 0.42 0.11 0.34 0.73 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 891 587 586 667 470 483 358 541 506 419 941 758 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.1 20.1 20.1 20.3 27.4 27.5 17.0 19.8 19.9 18.0 21.3 15.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.2 1.8 1.8 0.5 5.5 5.6 0.7 2.2 2.5 0.1 1.0 6.1 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(50%),veh/ln 5.2 4.6 4.6 1.3 4.5 4.6 1.6 2.9 2.9 0.4 2.1 7.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.2 21.9 21.9 20.8 33.0 33.0 17.7 22.0 22.4 18.1 22.3 21.1 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C B C C B C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1330 652 574 914 Approach Delay, s/veh 27.2 31.0 21.1 21.4 Approach LOS C C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.2 26.3 10.1 28.2 10.0 23.5 19.8 18.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 19.5 18.0 19.5 5.5 19.0 18.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 9.3 5.4 14.0 6.2 21.0 14.3 12.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.7 0.2 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.4 HCM 6th LOS C FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 72 ITE Trip Generation Data Hotel (310) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Rooms On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:7 Avg. Num. of Rooms:148 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Room Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 7.99 5.31 - 9.53 1.92 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = Number of Rooms Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 10.84(X) - 423.51 R²= 0.85 Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 200 250 3000 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 100 799 660 10/14/25, 4:25 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=Gener… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban…1/1 Hotel (310) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Rooms On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:28 Avg. Num. of Rooms:182 Directional Distribution:56% entering, 44% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Room Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.46 0.20 - 0.84 0.14 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = Number of Rooms Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.50(X) - 7.45 R²= 0.84 Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 100 200 300 400 5000 100 200 300 100 46 43 10/14/25, 4:25 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=General… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/…1/1 Hotel (310) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Rooms On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:31 Avg. Num. of Rooms:186 Directional Distribution:51% entering, 49% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Room Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.59 0.26 - 1.06 0.22 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = Number of Rooms Study Site Average RateFitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.74(X) - 27.89 R²= 0.78 Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 100 200 300 400 5000 100 200 300 400 100 59 46 10/14/25, 4:26 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=General… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=310&ivlabel=UNITS310&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=100&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/…1/1 Small Office Building (712) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:21 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 14.39 4.44 - 50.91 10.16 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 50 100 150 200 6 88 10/14/25, 4:28 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Small Office Building (712) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:21 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:82% entering, 18% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.67 0.76 - 4.12 0.88 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 5 10 15 20 6 10 10/14/25, 4:28 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Small Office Building (712) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:21 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:34% entering, 66% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 2.16 0.56 - 5.50 1.26 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 5 10 15 20 6 13 10/14/25, 4:29 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=712&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=6.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:7 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:59 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 67.52 43.29 - 91.06 19.25 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 20 40 60 800 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 74 5003 10/14/25, 4:31 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/S…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:13 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:67 Directional Distribution:62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.73 0.29 - 3.77 1.06 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 100 200 300 74 128 10/14/25, 4:32 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:42 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:79 Directional Distribution:49% entering, 51% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 5.19 2.55 - 15.31 2.28 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 200 400 600 800 1,000 74 385 10/14/25, 4:33 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=74.1&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:50 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 107.20 13.04 - 742.41 66.72 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 500 1,000 1,500 10 1040 10/14/25, 4:34 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:37 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:55% entering, 45% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.57 0.76 - 102.39 11.61 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 10 93 10/14/25, 4:34 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:104 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:6 Directional Distribution:61% entering, 39% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.05 0.92 - 62.00 6.18 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 10 88 10/14/25, 4:35 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=9.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:71 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 467.48 98.89 - 1137.66 238.62 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 8 3833 10/14/25, 4:36 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:96 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:4 Directional Distribution:51% entering, 49% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 44.61 1.05 - 164.25 27.14 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 500 8 366 10/14/25, 4:36 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:190 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:52% entering, 48% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 33.03 8.77 - 117.22 17.59 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 8 271 10/14/25, 4:37 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=8.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:7 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:59 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 67.52 43.29 - 91.06 19.25 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 20 40 60 800 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 46 3106 10/23/25, 11:22 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:13 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:67 Directional Distribution:62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.73 0.29 - 3.77 1.06 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 100 200 300 46 80 10/23/25, 11:23 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:42 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:79 Directional Distribution:49% entering, 51% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 5.19 2.55 - 15.31 2.28 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 200 400 600 800 1,000 46 239 10/23/25, 11:23 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=46&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:50 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 107.20 13.04 - 742.41 66.72 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 500 1,000 1,500 3 322 10/23/25, 11:24 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:37 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:55% entering, 45% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.57 0.76 - 102.39 11.61 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 3 29 10/23/25, 11:25 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urb… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Subur…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:104 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:6 Directional Distribution:61% entering, 39% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.05 0.92 - 62.00 6.18 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 3 27 10/23/25, 11:25 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urb… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Subur…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:71 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 467.48 98.89 - 1137.66 238.62 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 3 1402 10/23/25, 11:26 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Ur… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:96 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:4 Directional Distribution:51% entering, 49% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 44.61 1.05 - 164.25 27.14 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 500 3 134 10/23/25, 11:27 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urb… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Subur…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:190 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:52% entering, 48% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 33.03 8.77 - 117.22 17.59 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 3 99 10/23/25, 11:27 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urb… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=3&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Subur…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:7 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:59 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 67.52 43.29 - 91.06 19.25 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 20 40 60 800 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 8 513 10/23/25, 11:29 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:13 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:67 Directional Distribution:62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.73 0.29 - 3.77 1.06 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 100 200 300 8 13 10/23/25, 11:29 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:42 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:79 Directional Distribution:49% entering, 51% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 5.19 2.55 - 15.31 2.28 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 200 400 600 800 1,000 8 39 10/23/25, 11:29 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=7.6&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:50 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 107.20 13.04 - 742.41 66.72 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 500 1,000 1,500 7 718 10/23/25, 11:30 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:37 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:5 Directional Distribution:55% entering, 45% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.57 0.76 - 102.39 11.61 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 7 64 10/23/25, 11:31 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (932) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:104 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:6 Directional Distribution:61% entering, 39% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.05 0.92 - 62.00 6.18 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 5 10 15 200 50 100 150 200 7 61 10/23/25, 11:32 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=932&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=6.7&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:71 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 467.48 98.89 - 1137.66 238.62 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5 2431 10/23/25, 11:34 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:96 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:4 Directional Distribution:51% entering, 49% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 44.61 1.05 - 164.25 27.14 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 500 5 232 10/23/25, 11:34 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window (934) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:190 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA:3 Directional Distribution:52% entering, 48% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 33.03 8.77 - 117.22 17.59 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 2 4 6 80 100 200 300 400 5 172 10/23/25, 11:34 AM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=934&ivlabel=QFQAF&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=5.2&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Sub…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:7 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:59 Directional Distribution:50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 67.52 43.29 - 91.06 19.25 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 20 40 60 800 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 21 1384 10/20/25, 2:08 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=AWDVTE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/S…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:13 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:67 Directional Distribution:62% entering, 38% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.73 0.29 - 3.77 1.06 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 100 200 300 21 35 10/20/25, 2:08 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General U… https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TASIDE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 Shopping Plaza (40-150k) - Supermarket - No (821) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq. Ft. GLA On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:42 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA:79 Directional Distribution:49% entering, 51% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 5.19 2.55 - 15.31 2.28 Data Plot and Equation T = Tri p E n d s X = 1000 Sq. Ft. GLA Study Site Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given R²= **** Trip Gen Manual,11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers 0 50 100 150 2000 200 400 600 800 1,000 21 106 10/20/25, 2:09 PM itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General … https://www.itetripgen.org/query/PrintGraph2?code=821&ivlabel=TQGFQ&timeperiod=TPSIDE&x=20.5&edition=685&locationCode=General Urban/Su…1/1 FOCUS ENGINEERING & SURVEYING | UNIVERSITY TOWNE CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 73 City of Rexburg TMA – Deceleration Lanes for Right Turning Vehicles 34 Madison County/City of Rexburg/Sugar City Transportation Master Plan Update 2022 Traffic Signal Warrants in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices The need for new traffic signals will be based on warrants contained in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and any additional warrants established by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Traffic progression is important in determining the location of a new signal. Generally, a minimum spacing of one-half mile for all signalized intersections should be maintained. The one-half mile spacing is usually desirable to achieve decent speed, capacity, and optimum signal progression. The one-half mile signal spacing standard may be relaxed on lower volume collector streets where an engineering study shows traffic progression can be maintained. The signal cycle split assumptions must consider pedestrian movements and clearance. To provide flexibility for existing conditions and to ensure optimum two-way signal progression, an approved traffic engineering analysis must be made to properly locate all proposed access points that may require signalization. The section of roadway to be analyzed for signal progression will be determined by the City and will include all existing and future signalized intersections. ITD is currently analyzing intersections along SH-33. A traffic control signal should only be installed if and when the warrant criteria outlined in Chapter 4C of the MUTCD are met. It is possible to predict where traffic control signals may be warranted in the future based on projected traffic volumes and roadway functional classifications. A traffic control signal may be warranted at intersections containing at least one arterial and one collector street. They are rarely warranted where two collector streets meet and almost never warranted where local streets connect. Traffic signals are typically not warranted when other traffic control devices such as modern roundabouts are recommended. Signal Timing One method that will need to be maintained regularly is traffic signal timing. As traffic volumes continue to increase, the signal timing can be improved to optimize the performance of the traffic signal. Since many of the signals in the area are ITD owned and operated, coordination with ITD is essential to assure that all traffic signal timing is updated regularly to maintain adequate traffic flow. Queuing Analysis A 95th percentile (using Poisson’s distribution) queue length will be used as the basis of storage length design and verification of the adequacy of existing storage lengths. Alternative methodologies, such as the Synchro 95th percentile length calculations may be used with City approval. At signalized intersections, a background cycle length of 120 seconds will be assumed. Green times for specific movements will be based on the movement’s proportion of the critical lane volume, subject to phase minimums. Minimum green times will be assumed to be 10 seconds for through movements and 4 seconds for left turns. Yellow change and red clearance intervals will be assumed to be 3 seconds and 1 second, respectively, for left turn movements and 4 seconds and 1 second, respectively, for through movements. For lane groups that have multiple lanes, a lane utilization factor, in accordance with the HCM methodology, shall be applied to the calculation of queue lengths. Deceleration Lanes for Right Turning Vehicles A right turn deceleration lane is required when any one or more of the following criteria is met: Where the design hour volume of the right turn into the access is more than five and the outside lane volume exceeds 250 on 45 to 55 mph roadways, 400 on 35 to 40 mph roadways, or 600 on a 35 Madison County/City of Rexburg/Sugar City Transportation Master Plan Update 2022 25 to 30 mph roadway, a right turn lane may be required due to high traffic volumes or other unique site specific safety considerations. When the access volume meets or exceeds 25 design hour volume for roadways with speeds of 25 to 40 mph or 20 design hour volume for roadways with speeds in excess of 40 mph, a right turn deceleration lane will be required. Roundabouts as Intersection Improvements According to FHWA, many international studies have found that one of the most significant benefits of a roundabout installation is the improvement in overall safety performance. Specifically in the United States, it has been found that single-lane roundabouts are safer for drivers than two-way stop-controlled intersections. The frequency of crashes might not always be lowered at roundabouts, but the injury rates and severity of crashes are reduced. On a planning level, it can be assumed that roundabouts will provide higher capacity and lower delays than all-way stop control, but less than two-way stop control if the minor movements are not experiencing operational problems. A single-lane roundabout may be assumed to operate within its capacity at any intersection that does not exceed peak-hour volumes warranted for signals. A roundabout that operates within its capacity will generally produce lower delays than a signalized intersection operating with the same traffic volumes and right-of-way limitations. Mini-roundabouts are a type of roundabout characterized by a small diameter and traversable islands central island and splitter islands). Mini-roundabouts offer most of the benefits of regular roundabouts with the added benefit of a smaller footprint. As with roundabouts, mini-roundabouts are a type of intersection rather than merely a traffic calming measure, although they may produce some traffic calming effects. According to the published Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) technical summary FHWA-SA-10-007), there are three applications for mini roundabouts: Space Constrained locations with reasonable approach speeds (30 mph or less): Since mini-roundabouts require less space than larger roundabouts, they may be a solution when a larger roundabout does not fit, provided that incoming speeds are reasonable Residential environments: Mini-roundabouts offer a low-speed, low-noise intersection option that requires little ongoing maintenance Intersections with high delay: A mini-roundabout can be an ideal application to reduce delay at stop-controlled intersections that do not meet signal warrants Reference: “Roundabouts: An Informational Guide”, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-RD-00-067). Stop-Control as Intersection Improvements Wherever possible the City is encouraged to use roundabouts to control traffic on low to medium volume roadways. In cases where this is not feasible due to financial restraints or sight distance concerns, stop- control may be an appropriate intersection treatment. Four-way stop control should be avoided on collector streets and prohibited on arterial streets where possible. In all cases stop controlled intersections should follow the guidelines and warrants set forth in the MUTCD.