Traffic Impact Study Manual Adopted: May 2017 Updated: June 2025 MARICOPA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS DIVISION 2901 W. DURANGO STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85009 Traffic Impact Study Manual This Page Intentionally Left Blank 2025 Update ii Docusign Envelope ID: 8A5CDE93-E1AB-4872-9C3F-7DB65193F890 Date: June 24, 2025 T0: Developers, Engineers, Consultants, and Agency Staff FROM: Jesse Gutierrez, P.E Transportation Director/County Engineer SUBJECT: 2025 Update to the MCDOT Traffic Impact Study Manual The effective date for this 2025 update of the MCDOT Traffic Impact Study Manual shall be June 25, 2025, and the update shall continue in effect thereafter until reissued or updated. The Traffic Impact Study Manual is intended to provide the foundation for analysis methodologies and submittal requirements for a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and/or a Traffic Statement (TS) for all the developments (new or modifications to existing sites) that fall under MCDOT jurisdiction. This manual outlines the minimum requirements and the approval process for a TIS and/or TS submittal. This manual shall supersede all previous memoranda and both written and unwritten guidelines for the preparation of TIS reports. The attached manual shall remain in effect until reissued or updated. Please address any specific concerns to: MCDOT Transportation Systems Management and Operations Division April Wire, P.E., PTOE, Division Manager (602) 506-8940 (email: april.wire@maricopa.gov) The manual is available on the MCDOT website: https://www.maricopa.gov/190/Technical. Transportation Systems Management & Operations Division 2901 W. Durango Street Phoenix, Arizona 85009 P: 602.506.8676 F: 602.506.8758 Traffic Impact Study Manual This Page Intentionally Left Blank 2025 Update iv Traffic Impact Study Manual Table of Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1 Definitions and Requirements .............................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Traffic Impact Study................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Traffic Statement ....................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Waiver Requests......................................................................................... 5 Reference Material................................................................................................. 6 2 Process Overview ........................................................................................................... 7 Scoping (Pre-Submittal) with TSMO..................................................................... 7 Jurisdictional Coordination................................................................................... 7 Coordination with County Departments............................................................... 8 Certification ............................................................................................................ 8 Review and Approval ............................................................................................. 8 3 Submittal Requirements................................................................................................. 9 Proposed Development ......................................................................................... 9 3.1.1 Project Description..................................................................................... 9 3.1.2 Proposed Land Use .................................................................................... 9 3.1.3 Construction Timeline/Phasing ................................................................ 9 3.1.4 Access/Circulation................................................................................... 10 Existing Conditions .............................................................................................. 10 3.2.1 Adjacent Land Use ................................................................................... 10 3.2.2 Roadway Characteristics ......................................................................... 10 3.2.3 Intersection Characteristics .................................................................... 10 3.2.4 Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................ 10 3.2.5 Operational Analysis ................................................................................ 11 3.2.6 Safety Analysis ......................................................................................... 11 Future Conditions................................................................................................. 11 3.3.1 Planned Street Improvements................................................................. 11 3.3.2 Adjacent Developments........................................................................... 11 3.3.3 Regional Traffic Growth (Background Traffic)....................................... 12 3.3.4 Site Traffic................................................................................................. 12 3.3.5 Total Traffic .............................................................................................. 12 3.3.6 Operational Analysis ................................................................................ 12 Recommendations............................................................................................... 13 2025 Update i Traffic Impact Study Manual 3.4.1 Roadway Improvements .......................................................................... 13 3.4.2 Intersection Improvements ..................................................................... 13 3.4.3 Traffic Calming Measures ....................................................................... 14 3.4.4 Multimodal Accommodations................................................................. 14 3.4.5 Other Considerations ............................................................................... 14 4 Technical Analysis Guidance ....................................................................................... 15 Trip Generation..................................................................................................... 15 4.1.1 Trip Distribution and Assignment ........................................................... 15 Site Access ........................................................................................................... 16 Operational Analysis............................................................................................ 16 4.3.1 Analysis Peak Hours ................................................................................ 16 4.3.2 Peak Hour Factors.................................................................................... 17 4.3.3 Seasonal Adjustments ............................................................................. 17 4.3.4 LOS Thresholds and Improvements Analysis ........................................ 17 Safety Analysis..................................................................................................... 17 Traffic Control ...................................................................................................... 18 4.5.1 Traffic Signal Warrants ............................................................................ 18 Turn Lane Warrants ............................................................................................. 19 4.6.1 Intersection Turn Lanes ........................................................................... 19 4.6.2 Driveway Turn Lanes ................................................................................ 19 4.6.3 Queuing Analysis ...................................................................................... 20 Design Exceptions ............................................................................................... 21 5 Report Format Requirements ...................................................................................... 22 TIS Report Format................................................................................................ 22 TS Report Format................................................................................................. 23 List of Tables Table 1: Study Area and Horizon Year Criteria...................................................................... 4 Table 2: Guidelines for Determining if a Signal may be Warranted................................... 19 Appendices Appendix A – Sample TIS Report Appendix B – Sample TS Report 2025 Update ii Traffic Impact Study Manual 1 Introduction One of Maricopa County’s key objectives is to operate and maintain a safe and efficient roadway system for all users. Integral to this objective is the management of access on County roadways and the mitigation of impacts from land use changes. This Manual has been developed to help guide those efforts through the documentation and evaluation of development-generated traffic. The procedures outlined in this Manual provide the foundation for analysis methodologies and submittal requirements for a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and/or a Traffic Statement (TS) depending on the characteristics of the proposed development. The procedures contained herein are provided to: • Assist and educate developers through the traffic evaluation process by outlining the minimum requirements and the approval process. • Standardize the types of analysis and level of detail required in the assessment of traffic impacts for developments. • Ensure consistency in the preparation and documentation of traffic studies. Background Land use and transportation are intricately connected and changes in development will inherently create changes in traffic. When insufficient attention is given to the assessment of traffic impacts, the following problems may result: • Inability to access a site due to congestion on adjacent roadways • On-site congestion due to poorly designed egress • Fewer options for travel mode choice (drive, walk, bike, transit, etc) • Increased crash experience • Limited future flexibility to modify the built environment These problems can negatively affect the success of a development and can damage the marketability and return on investment. A traffic study provides an opportunity for the County and the developer to share information and jointly address traffic-related problems in order to balance development needs with the functional integrity of the public roadways that serve both the development and the region. A TIS or a TS provides the foundation for evaluating the proposed development, anticipated future transportation conditions, and any recommended mitigation measures. These studies are useful tools for early identification of potential traffic problems and can play an important part in the success of a development. The need for a TIS or TS should be assessed as early as possible in the development process to ensure maximum flexibility both in terms of the built environment as well as the monetary funding. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Transportation and Land Development, such evaluations should start “from the earliest planning stage, including site evaluation and selection.” 2025 Update 1 Traffic Impact Study Manual Definitions and Requirements The scale of traffic evaluation for a proposed development will largely depend on the land use type, size, and volume of traffic generated by the site. Projects that generate significant traffic require a more detailed analysis and a broader scope in terms of offsite evaluation while projects that generate less traffic will not require the in-depth scope and evaluation beyond the site access. In general, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) shall be required of all new developments or modifications to existing developments that generate 100 or more total trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. For developments generating less than 100 peak hour trips, a Traffic Statement (TS) shall be required. The estimated number of peak hour trips generated by a development should be based on the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual as described in Section 4.1 of this Manual. 1.2.1 Traffic Impact Study Traffic Impact Studies shall be required for all developments (new construction or modifications to existing sites) that generate 100 or more total trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. The magnitude of total trips to/from the site defines the category of TIS which in turn defines the scope of the analysis. The listed categories are: CATEGORY I - Developments which generate 100 or more peak hour trips but fewer than 400 trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. CATEGORY II - Developments which generate 400 or more peak hour trips but fewer than 1,000 trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. CATEGORY III - Developments which generate 1,000 or more peak hour trips but fewer than 1,500 trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. CATEGORY IV - Developments which generate more than 1,500 trips during the morning or afternoon peak hour. Traffic Impact Studies are typically required for the following development actions: • Planning Entitlements* o Special Use Permits (SUP) o Plan of Development (POD) • • o Military Compatibility Permits (MCP) Subdivisions (Preliminary Plats)* o Commercial, Residential, Industrial, Mixed Use Building Permits o Site Plans, Improvement Plans, Access Requests (*Requirement and scope to be determined during the PND pre-application meeting or at time of PND submittal.) Traffic Impact Studies prepared at the Planning Entitlement stage (Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Development Master Plan, SUP, POD, MCP, or Preliminary Plats) may require a new or revised TIS at subsequent development stages to ensure consistency with the progression of the development concept. 2025 Update 2 Traffic Impact Study Manual A new or revised TIS may be required during the subdivision or building permit processes if: • Two or more years have passed since the date of the previous TIS submittal and the current development action. • The land use type, ownership, or size of the development changes (regardless of Category designation). • There is a change in information regarding site access that was not available during the previous TIS. • There have been changes to, or anticipated changes to, the adjacent roadway or adjacent properties. While the threshold for a TIS Category I is 100 peak hour trips, the MCDOT Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Division may require a TIS for developments below the established threshold if any of the following conditions apply: • There are known traffic concerns in the immediate area which may pose operational or safety challenges. • There are adjacent neighborhoods or other sensitive land uses that may be, or perceived to be, adversely impacted. • The timing of adjacent improvements requires additional evaluation of geometry. • Other specific problems or concerns that may be aggravated by the proposed development, as determined by the County. The requirements and sample format for a TIS are listed in Section 5.1 and Appendix A, respectively. Study Area and Horizon Years The minimum study area for a TIS is governed by the number of trips generated by the development. Regardless of Category, all developments will be required to evaluate each proposed site access. Evaluation of off-site intersections should include both signalized and major unsignalized intersections based on the information provided in Table 1. Major unsignalized intersections are defined as those comprised as arterial/collector or collector/collector roadway combinations or as identified by the MCDOT TSMO Division. The MCDOT TSMO Division reserves the right to expand the study area based on project complexity, topography, or other roadway characteristics that may be impacted by the proposed development. For example, a large Category III development in a rural area located two miles from a freeway may be required to enlarge the study area to include evaluation of the freeway interchange if that is the anticipated route for most of the trips. Conversely, a small Category I development may be required to study unsignalized intersections beyond the 500-foot minimum if unique queuing occurs such as with adjacent school sites. Similar to the study area, the study horizon years are also governed by the trips generated by the development. Regardless of the Category, all developments will be required to evaluate the opening year. If the project has multiple phases, additional horizon years shall be included corresponding to the significant phases and the ultimate buildout year. A significant phase is defined as a distinguishable change in the site construction timeframe, either in terms of development location or development magnitude, that 2025 Update 3 Traffic Impact Study Manual changes trip generation. Proposed phasing should be separated by a minimum of 2 years or as identified by the MCDOT TSMO Division. Evaluation of future years beyond opening year and/or buildout year should be based on the information provided in Table 1 unless otherwise specified by MCDOT. Table 1: Study Area and Horizon Year Criteria Analysis Category Development Characteristic1 Study Horizon2 I Small Development 100-399 peak hour trips (AM or PM) II Moderate Development 400-999 peak hour trips (AM or PM) III Large Development 1000-1500 peak hour trips (AM or PM) 1. Opening Year2 2. Significant phases 3. 10 Years after Build Out Regional Development >1500 peak hour trips (AM or PM) 1. Opening Year2 2. Significant Phases 3. 15 Years after Build Out IV 1. Opening Year2 2. 3 Years after Opening/Build Out 1. Opening Year2 2. Significant phases 3. 5 Years after Build Out Minimum Study Area3 1. Site access driveways 2. Adjacent signalcontrolled intersections within ¼ mile 3. Major street intersections without signal control and driveways within 500 feet 1. Site access driveways 2. All signal-controlled intersections within ½ mile 3. Major street intersections without signal control and driveways within ½ mile 1. Site access driveways 2. All signal-controlled intersections within 1 mile 3. Major street intersections without signal control and driveways within 1 mile 1. Site access driveways 2. Key signal-controlled intersections and major street intersections without signal control within 3 miles 1 The total trips generated by the site must include all proposed land uses. A reduction in the number of trips based on prior site uses to determine the net change, or “new” trips, is not acceptable. 2 Assume full occupancy and build-out for single-phase developments. Multi-phase developments may require assessment of each horizon year corresponding to significant phases as directed by the MCDOT TSMO Division. 3 An enlarged study area may be required when the minimum study areas identified do not provide sufficient information to meet the intent of the Traffic Impact Study guidelines. 2025 Update 4 Traffic Impact Study Manual 1.2.2 Traffic Statement A Traffic Statement is a scaled down and simplified version of the TIS and is intended for smaller projects that are anticipated to have a lesser impact on existing traffic operations. While the requirements of a TS are less formal, the evaluation shall address all pertinent features of the proposed development which may impact traffic operations on the adjacent roadways. Typically, the horizon year for a TS is limited to opening year only and the study area is limited to the site access driveways. For content and scope of a TS, the applicant should generally follow the TIS Category I requirements with the reduced horizon years and study area requirements. Consultation with the MCDOT TSMO Division to define the specific scope is recommended; information on pre-submittal meetings is provided in Section 2.1 of this Manual. The requirements and sample format for a TS are listed in Section 5.2 and Appendix B, respectively. 1.2.3 Waiver Requests The MCDOT TSMO Division may grant a waiver for a TS if the applicant shows that the proposed development will not have a significant traffic impact on the surrounding transportation system. The applicant must submit a written request for such a waiver that includes (but is not limited to) the following: • Site map showing driveway locations with measurements from adjacent driveways and/or intersections. • Trip generation of the development. • Traffic counts along the immediate adjacent road (collected within one year from the waiver request submittal date). • Conclusion that no adverse traffic impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. To obtain a waiver approval by the MCDOT TSMO Division, the criteria listed below must be met at a minimum, however not limited to: • The average trip generation of the proposed development is less than 5 trips in the AM or PM peak hour. • Access is not being requested to either a State Highway or County arterial roadway. • The combination of the proposed development traffic plus existing traffic does not exceed an average of 150 vehicles per day on any unpaved road. • No current traffic problems or local area concerns, such as an offset intersection, high accident data, or high increase in neighboring development. The applicant must submit the waiver request to the MCDOT TSMO Division. Waiver response will generally be provided within 10 business days. 2025 Update 5 Traffic Impact Study Manual Reference Material The development of a TIS or TS largely focuses on traffic operations and traffic safety. However, evaluation of roadway design elements are required as part of the traffic analysis and TIS or TS recommendations must account for roadway configuration. The MCDOT Roadway Design Manual provides guidance for many aspects needed in recommending access and offsite improvements for developments. These RDM references may include: • • Chapter 1: Introduction o 1.1 Purpose, 1.2 Applicability, 1.3 Design Exception Chapter 2: Transportation Planning o 2.1 Functional Classification, 2.2 Design Hour Volumes, 2.3 Traffic Impact Studies • • • • Chapter 4: Design Procedure o 4.1 Basic Criteria, 4.12 Traffic Design Chapter 5: Geometric Design Standards o 5.1 Cross Sections, 5.5 Design Speeds Chapter 6: Intersections o 6.1 General Controls, 6.2 Roundabouts Chapter 7: Access to Maricopa County Roadway System o 7.1 Access Control, 7.5 Driveways, 7.6 Driveway Characteristics, 7.7 Driveway Design, 7.8 Number of Driveways, 7.9 Driveway Locations, 7.10 Driveway Storage, 7.15 Auxiliary Lanes for Driveways • Chapter 8: Design Guidelines for Bicycle Facilities o 8.1 Basic Criteria, 8.2 Roadway Facility Design Guidelines, 8.3 Shared Use Path Design Guidelines 2025 Update 6 Traffic Impact Study Manual 2 Process Overview The overall process of submitting a TIS or TS for approval is typically in response to a land development action on property regulated by the County or to land development that will access County operated and maintained roads. As described in Section 1.2.1, these actions can range from planning level projects to rezonings to site plans, each having different levels of detail and different levels of coordination. The overall submittal process requires agency coordination with each major step described below. Scoping (Pre-Submittal) with TSMO While not a requirement, it is suggested that developers and/or applicants schedule a pre-submittal meeting with the MCDOT TSMO Division to establish the TIS or TS scope, discuss any initial concerns, and identify any background information that may assist in the traffic assessment. The pre-submittal meeting should be held as early as possible to avoid any schedule challenges in the overall development process. The intent of the TIS pre-submittal meeting is to improve coordination and increase awareness and does not directly affect the review process. For planning level projects, it should be noted that this effort is separate from and in addition to the pre-application meetings held by the County Planning and Development Department (PND). Applicants should provide the following information at the pre-submittal meeting: • A conceptual site plan/layout of the development o Project location such as cross streets and parcels to be included and/or excluded. o Proposed access points and internal circulation (including designation for internal roadways to be public or private). • Intended site use and associated trip generation, or best estimate of traffic generated by the development. • Project phasing, including anticipated construction start and duration. Jurisdictional Coordination Traffic impacts from land development are not bound by jurisdictional boundaries and TIS or TS evaluations may require coordination with multiple jurisdictions. Based on the location of the site, the land use category, the development size, or other characteristics, it is likely that study area intersections may extend beyond Maricopa County’s jurisdiction or may include roadways shared with other jurisdictional agencies. The pre-submittal meeting with MCDOT TSMO can assist in determining the required jurisdictional coordination. In cases where the development property lies within a jurisdiction other than the County, the TIS process of the other jurisdiction shall be followed. The developer is responsible for coordinating with all jurisdictions impacted by the development and facilitating required submittals and reviews. To aid in coordination across jurisdictions, the County has developed a TIS submittal cover that allows the consultant to list the other agencies that have been provided copies of the TIS or TS for review/approval. This cover sheet is provided in Appendix A for the TIS and Appendix B for the TS. A copy of each of agencies comments, requirements, and approvals shall be provided to MCDOT TSMO and Maricopa County PND. 2025 Update 7 Traffic Impact Study Manual Coordination with County Departments The TIS or TS is just one technical requirement for development actions within the County; numerous other topics and coordination are required. For planning and development actions, the County PND is the primary group involved in the processing, review, and approval of activities. For site or access improvements that do not require planning entitlements, either PND or the MCDOT Permits Branch may be involved in the processing, review, and approval of activities. The developer is responsible for coordinating with the other County groups as required by the specific development activity being proposed. These coordination activities will be identified through the PND pre-application meeting and/or the TSMO pre-submittal meeting. Documentation of all pre-application meetings should be included in the TIS/TS appendix. Certification All TIS and TS evaluations, or waiver requests, shall be prepared under the supervision of a Professional Engineer (Civil) registered in the State of Arizona. When submitted to MCDOT, the final TIS or TS shall be signed and sealed by the professional engineer overseeing the study. If the TIS or TS is not signed upon submittal, the MCDOT TMSO Division will notify the applicant and suspend all reviews until proper documentation is provided. Review and Approval The review of all submitted TIS and/or TS will be conducted by the MCDOT TSMO Division once a final sealed copy is received. [Detailed engineering plans shall not be submitted to the TSMO Division as part of the TIS and/or TS.] Review comments are typically provided to the internal County department leading the activity within two to four weeks of submittal. If the proposed development impacts adjacent governmental jurisdictions, additional time will be required for coordination with and review by the other agencies. It is the responsibility of the applicant to resubmit the TIS or TS addressing all review comments. To aid in the review process, the County has developed a TIS submittal cover that provides signature lines for each review/approval. Approval of the TIS or TS will be provided in writing by the MCDOT TSMO Division when all recommendations align with the County expectations. Such approvals are valid for one year from issuance. Projects that have not started the permit process within one year will be required to consult with the MCDOT TSMO Division to determine whether an updated study will be required based on current conditions. Any changes to the development, including land use or access, shall void any prior approvals and will require an updated study. See Section 1.2.1 of this Manual for a list of development actions warranting an updated traffic study. Review and approval of a TIS or TS by the MCDOT TSMO Division does not indicate approval of any plan submitted within or as a part of the TIS or TS package. Approval by the TSMO Division also does not provide authorization to initiate any site development activity. 2025 Update 8 Traffic Impact Study Manual 3 Submittal Requirements The submittal of a TIS or TS to the County for evaluation must provide adequate information and analysis to allow for technical review and approval. Specific elements of the submittal have been standardized to increase the efficiency and completeness of the agency review process. These requirements are outlined in the following sections. Proposed Development The submittal shall provide an overview of the project including a project description, proposed land use, construction timing and phasing, and proposed access/circulation throughout the development. 3.1.1 Project Description The submittal shall include a general description of the project including the number of acres of the parcel(s), a description of the surrounding area (agricultural, residential, industrial, etc.), and information related to the immediate adjacent land uses. This section shall include a map of the project site with adequate information to locate the site including reference to at least one MCDOT roadway. This section should also include a discussion of jurisdictional boundaries to determine which jurisdictions besides Maricopa County may be impacted by the project and may need to review and approve the submittal. See Section 2.2 for more information on jurisdictional coordination. 3.1.2 Proposed Land Use The submittal shall provide detail of the proposed land use(s) within the project including type of development (residential, commercial, etc.) and development size (number of lots, building square footage, etc.). This information should correlate with land uses contained in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook and should provide adequate detail to allow for the trip generation calculations that are required in Section 3.3.4. For projects with mixed-use development, the submittal shall also indicate the location within the project for each land use, preferably demarcated on a site plan. 3.1.3 Construction Timeline/Phasing The submittal shall indicate whether the project will be built in one or multiple phases. If multiple phasing is planned, the study shall identify each phase and what land use will be developed during each phase. Each development phase should also correlate to a calendar year. It should be noted that future traffic studies may be required for large and multiple-phased projects, depending on changes to the land use and/or time elapse from original approval. See Section 1.2.1 for more information on the required study horizon years and changes that may trigger a future resubmittal. 2025 Update 9 Traffic Impact Study Manual 3.1.4 Access/Circulation The submittal shall provide detail on the proposed access points and any internal circulation for the development. For all developments, site driveways should be shown on a graphic site plan along with reference to any existing (adjacent and opposing) driveways. For large and multiple-phased projects, internal roadways and intersections should also be identified. All site driveways and internal circulation should correlate to the development phasing identified in Section 3.1.3 as applicable. Exhibits demonstrating turning movements and the associated vehicle turn paths may be required. See Section 4.2 of this Manual for more information on the number, type, location, and design of site access points. Existing Conditions The submittal shall provide an overview of the existing conditions including the roadway characteristics, traffic volumes, traffic operations, and safety conditions. 3.2.1 Adjacent Land Use The submittal shall include a general description of the existing land use patterns surrounding the proposed development. Any specific sites that generate unusual travel patterns or may impact the study area should be noted. 3.2.2 Roadway Characteristics The submittal shall include descriptions of the existing roadway configuration and geometry for all roadway segments within the defined study area. This shall include the roadway classification, number and type of lanes, lane and shoulder widths, bicycle lanes, pedestrian sidewalks or paths, horizontal and/or vertical alignment changes, and posted speed limits. 3.2.3 Intersection Characteristics The submittal shall include descriptions of the existing intersection configuration and geometry for all intersections within the defined study area. This shall include turn lane designations, type of intersection control (signalized or stop controlled), traffic signal operational characteristics, special striping configurations (extra wide lanes, carrots, etc.), and multimodal accommodations. The distance of existing intersections and adjacent driveways from the proposed external access points should be listed and labeled on a site plan. 3.2.4 Traffic Volumes The submittal shall include existing traffic data including average daily traffic (ADT) volumes and peak-hour turning movement counts for each of the roadway segments and intersections discussed in Section 3.2.1, respectively. For roadway segments, available daily count data may be obtained from the MCDOT Traffic Counts website and extrapolated over a maximum of two years with the concurrence of the MCDOT TSMO Division. Where daily count data are not available, the MCDOT TSMO Division may require counts be collected for those roadway segments. 2025 Update 10 Traffic Impact Study Manual For intersections, both AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts should be obtained for all study area intersections. Available turning movement counts may be extrapolated a maximum of two years with concurrence of the MCDOT TSMO Division. Depending on adjacent land uses and travel patterns of the area, additional turning movement counts may be required outside the typical weekday AM and PM peak hours. All data is to be collected in accordance with the latest edition of the ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies or as directed by the MCDOT TSMO Division if not specifically covered in the ITE Manual. Traffic counts and related data must be recent (within 12 months of the study) unless approved explicitly by MCDOT TSMO staff. 3.2.5 Operational Analysis The submittal shall include existing Level of Service (LOS) for all roadway segments and intersections within the study area for the AM and PM peak hours. Individual LOS for each turning movement should be identified along with a queuing analysis. If any location or movement results in a LOS E or F, that particular location or movement should be discussed further. See Section 4.3 of this Manual for more information on operational analysis methods and thresholds. 3.2.6 Safety Analysis The submittal shall include an evaluation of traffic crash data for the most current threeyear period available. Crash data shall be obtained from Maricopa County or ADOT (ALISS). The safety analysis shall identify trends in the crash information and should include a collision discussion. See Section 4.4 of this Manual for more information on safety analysis methods. Future Conditions The submittal shall provide an overview of the future conditions including any planned projects, external traffic growth, project traffic, and an operational analysis of the future condition. 3.3.1 Planned Street Improvements The submittal shall include information on planned and/or programmed public roadway improvement projects near the development. These are infrastructure changes that are not related to the project but are within the study area. Improvements anticipated to be built within the study horizon year(s) shall be considered in the operational analysis of the future condition. Improvements that are beyond the study horizon year(s) shall be documented in the report but not included as part of the operational analysis. Confirmation on the specifics of a planned and/or programmed MCDOT roadway improvement shall be coordinated with the MCDOT TSMO and Engineering Divisions. 3.3.2 Adjacent Developments The submittal shall include information on known land use projects/developments near or adjacent to the proposed development. Any known significant developments within the study area that have been approved or are planned within the specified horizon year shall be identified and discussed in the study. Confirmation on the specifics of the development, as well as any planned off-site improvements, shall be coordinated with the MCDOT TSMO Division. 2025 Update 11 Traffic Impact Study Manual 3.3.3 Regional Traffic Growth (Background Traffic) The submittal shall include discussion of the methodology and calculation of background traffic growth on the roadway network surrounding the proposed development. Background traffic should reflect estimated growth unrelated to the proposed development within each of the study horizon year(s). The report should include documentation associated with the data source and references. Typical resources for obtaining future background traffic data include regional travel demand models, historic growth trends, and previously approved studies. If the proposed background traffic growth rate is less than 3 percent per year, the consultant should contact MCDOT TSMO Division to discuss prior to TIS or TS submittal. Future non-project roadway segment average daily traffic (ADT) volumes and intersection peak hour turning movement volumes should be calculated from the background traffic growth assumptions and documented for each study area roadway and intersection. 3.3.4 Site Traffic The submittal shall include discussion and calculation of future traffic generated by the proposed development. The site trip generation volumes should be developed for both daily and peak hour periods. For sites with multiple land uses, site trip generation calculations shall be provided for each land use and each phase with further discussion on any internal capture or reduction. See Section 4.1 of this Manual for more information on trip generation analysis methods. Distribution patterns for site traffic should be developed based on regional land uses, roadway network, and other pertinent factors. Site distribution should be provided for the cardinal directions (N, S, E, W). Projected site traffic should be assigned to the site driveways and study area intersections and provided for each study horizon year. 3.3.5 Total Traffic The submittal shall include the total traffic volumes, which is the combination of the background traffic and site traffic. The total traffic volumes shall be provided for the roadway segment ADT and the intersection peak hour turning movement volumes for each study horizon year. 3.3.6 Operational Analysis The submittal shall include operational/capacity analysis for all roadway segments, intersections, and proposed site driveways within the study area under each future study horizon year considering both “with” and “without” the proposed development. The analysis shall identify and discuss any projected impacts in regard to level of service and safety. The LOS shall be provided for all roadway segments and intersections within the study area for the AM and PM peak hours. Individual LOS for each turning movement shall be identified along with a queuing analysis. If any location or movement results in a LOS E or F, that particular location or movement should be discussed further. See Section 4.3 of this Manual for more information on operational analysis methods and thresholds. For intersections that require changes to the basic configuration to maintain acceptable LOS, additional documentation may be required to summarize signal and/or turn lane warrants. 2025 Update 12 Traffic Impact Study Manual Signal Warrant Analysis The submittal shall summarize all signal warrant analyses performed, highlighting which warrants are met and the recommendation. A full signal warrant study should be submitted under separate cover. Turn Lane Warrant Analysis The submittal shall summarize all turn lane warrant analyses performed for new exclusive turn lanes, highlighting which warrants are met and the recommendation. Recommendations The submittal shall recommend any improvements that will be required to the surrounding roadways and intersections to accommodate the proposed site traffic. For phased developments, recommendations shall be separated by project phase and/or horizon year as applicable. These include roadway improvements, intersection improvements, traffic calming, multimodal accommodations, and other considerations. Mitigation measures to accommodate the proposed development should be listed by priority. See Section 4.5 and 4.6 of this Manual for more information on traffic control and turn lane improvements, respectively. The submittal shall discuss the results and findings of the study including: • Overall and peak hour LOS at all study area roadway segments, intersections and proposed driveways (all movements) for each study horizon year. • Potential conflicts with surrounding land uses (existing or planned). • Driveway/intersection sight distance analysis per AASHTO or MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. • Changes in traffic control including new signal warrants met or adjustment of timing to existing signals. • Impacts of any known future roadway improvements whether by developers, MCDOT or other jurisdictions. 3.4.1 Roadway Improvements The submittal shall recommend any roadway improvements required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS thresholds. Roadway improvements may include the addition of through lanes, medians (raised or continuous two-way left-turn lanes), acceleration/deceleration lanes, or other features and should follow the standard MCDOT roadway cross sections. 3.4.2 Intersection Improvements The submittal shall recommend any intersection improvements required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS threshold at all study area intersections and proposed site driveways. Intersection improvements may include the addition of turn lanes, changes to traffic control (stop-controlled, signalized), changes to signing and/or striping, changes to signal timing, or other features. 2025 Update 13 Traffic Impact Study Manual 3.4.3 Traffic Calming Measures The submittal shall recommend any traffic calming features required to mitigate future traffic conditions with the proposed development. Proposed developments that access local roads or collector roadways that function as local roads where significant residential driveway access exists shall evaluate the impacts of site traffic on those roadways. If necessary, traffic calming features may be required on existing roadways as outlined in the current Maricopa County Traffic Calming Ordinance No. P-29. 3.4.4 Multimodal Accommodations The submittal shall recommend any multimodal accommodations required to support the proposed development. This includes pedestrian, bicycle, golf carts, transit, and other modes. • Pedestrian accommodations may include sidewalks, marked crosswalks, ADA ramps, signal phasing/timing, activated/signalized crossings, separated paths, and lighting. • Bicycle accommodations may include dedicated bicycle lanes, shoulder paving, signing and striping, multiuse paths, and activated/signalized crossings. • Golf cart and other Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) accommodations may be required, especially if the development or project is within a retirement community. A circulation plan may be required where there is a high usage of these vehicles. Per state law, golf carts are allowed to travel on roadways posted at 35 mph or less in retirement communities. Continuity of infrastructure may be a concern and early coordination with the County is recommended. In cases where multimodal facilities are planned along the adjacent roadway but not currently provided, dedicated right-of-way for future accommodation may be requested. 3.4.5 Other Considerations The submittal shall discuss any additional considerations relevant to the proposed development that are not specifically addressed in the earlier sections. These may include but are not limited to the following: • Impacts from heavy vehicle types. If a proposed project is industrial or heavy commercial relying on large trucks (WB-40 or larger), auxiliary lane storage and return radii will need to be evaluated. Exhibits showing truck turning paths at all study intersections and driveways shall be provided to show the accommodation of the design vehicle. See Section 4.1.2 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual for design vehicle requirements. • High operating speeds. If existing vehicle speeds are higher than the posted speed limit, the 85th percentile speed shall be used to estimate stopping sight distances for site driveways, as directed by the MCDOT TSMO Division. • Median openings. If a development is anticipated to have a restricted driveway prohibiting left turns, the adjacent median openings shall be evaluated to determine the impacts of vehicles performing u-turns at those locations. If the volumes are shown to increase, the storage lengths of the median opening turn lanes shall be reviewed and extended if necessary. 2025 Update 14 Traffic Impact Study Manual 4 Technical Analysis Guidance The development of a TIS or TS must follow acceptable methodologies for performing traffic analysis in order to be technically sound and accepted by MCDOT. Guidance on trip generation, operational analysis, safety analysis, signal warrant analysis, turn lane analysis, and design exceptions are provided in this chapter. Trip Generation [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 2.2 Design Hour Volumes] The development of daily and peak-hour trips for the proposed development shall follow the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual which provides national averages for trip generation rates for many common land uses. The TIS or TS shall demonstrate which land use categories in the ITE Trip Generation Manual are the most appropriate for the proposed project and why. Other trip rates can be used if the ITE Trip Generation Manual does not include rates for a specific land use, the available data is limited, or where local trip rates (if available) differ from the ITE rates. Applicants must obtain approval from the MCDOT TSMO Division before using other rates outside of those provided in the ITE Manual. If the proposed development utilizes one of the ITE land use categories, the TIS or TS must reference the guidelines in the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine whether the average trip generation rate or a trip generation equation should be used. Often this determination depends on the quantity and quality of the published reference data and how it compares to the proposed development. For external trips, trip reduction factors may be used to account for internal capture and/or pass-by trips. If an internal capture rate greater than 15% is proposed, the TIS shall clearly indicate and refer to other studies of comparable projects to justify the higher rate. For some projects, such as large commercial retail projects, both internal capture rates and pass-by trip reductions may be appropriate. Any internal capture rate or pass by trip reduction used in the analysis shall follow the ITE methodology and be clearly shown in a summary table. 4.1.1 Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of site traffic to the proposed driveways and adjacent intersections should be based on anticipated origin/destination patterns and available circulation. Trip distribution should be shown in percentages for each major direction. All assumptions and/or data sources used in deriving trip distribution and assignment shall be documented and referenced in the report. Daily and AM/PM peak hour volumes should be shown using figures/exhibits that clearly indicate the volume for each available movement at all study area roadway segments, intersections, and proposed driveways. For phased developments, distribution and assignment may change between horizon years and may require additional discussion. 2025 Update 15 Traffic Impact Study Manual Site Access [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 7.1 Access Control, 7.5 Driveways, 7.6 Driveway Characteristics, 7.7 Driveway Design, 7.8 Number of Driveways, 7.9 Driveway Locations] The number and location of direct access points to a development should consider onsite circulation needs, truck delivery routes, driveway operations, traffic safety, and spacing with existing and planned adjacent driveways and roadway intersections. The TIS must evaluate the proposed driveways against the guidance and requirements contained in Chapter 7 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. Full access points that allow all logical movements to/from a development must satisfy the requirements for operational analysis and not impact the safe and efficient movement of traffic on the adjacent roadways. If operational or safety concerns are identified, partial access points that restricts certain movements may be considered. If the spacing of adjacent access points is too close, joint access with neighboring parcels may be considered. The evaluation of proposed access points must also include evaluation of required turn (auxiliary) lanes and associated storage. Additional details are provided in Section 4.6 of this Manual. Operational Analysis [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 2.1 Functional Classification, 2.2 Design Hour Volumes] Operational analysis for existing and future conditions shall follow the industry standards for Level of Service (LOS) which is based on average density and vehicular delay. Level of service shall be computed using the latest edition of the Highway Capacity Manual, the HCS software, or Synchro. If other analysis methods are desired, the applicant must first obtain approval from the MCDOT TSMO Division. 4.3.1 Analysis Peak Hours The operational analysis shall analyze the peak traffic hours which generally occur on weekdays during the morning and afternoon commutes, typically between 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM, respectively. Under certain conditions, the peak hours to be evaluated may vary due to project characteristics and/or adjacent roadway characteristics. The requirement to analyze one or both of the typical peak hours may be waived by the MCDOT TSMO Division if the proposed development is expected to generate no trips or a very low number of trips during either the morning or afternoon peak hours. Additional, or different, peak hours may be required for analysis if the proposed development has any of the following characteristics: • Unusual peak hour characteristics (such as a church or retirement community) • Location is adjacent to special traffic patterns (such as schools) • Potential concerns related to weekend traffic (such as park events, shopping centers) 2025 Update 16 Traffic Impact Study Manual 4.3.2 Peak Hour Factors The operational analysis shall utilize peak hour factors (PHF) in the LOS calculations. For existing conditions, the PHF derived from traffic counts collected as part of the study are to be used. For future conditions, the PHF should reflect anticipated conditions. This could be the existing PHF or the default PHF values provided in the Highway Capacity Manual. An explanation of the approach shall be included in the report. 4.3.3 Seasonal Adjustments The operational analysis shall consider seasonal adjustments to the traffic volumes if there are known variations throughout the year. The intent of this adjustment is not to maximize volumes but to address variations in peak seasonal volumes. For example, if traffic counts were collected in a retirement community in July, the counts shall be adjusted to winter months as the peak traffic period occurs during the winter months. Use of seasonal adjustment factors should be coordinated with and approved by the MCDOT TSMO Division. 4.3.4 LOS Thresholds and Improvements Analysis The operational analysis and subsequent mitigation shall follow the MCDOT thresholds for acceptable vehicle density and delay. Roadway segment LOS objectives shall align with the recommendations listed for each functional classification of roadway type in Chapter 2 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. While these depend on the roadway function and location, the minimum acceptable LOS is LOS D which applies to urban parkways and principal arterials. Intersection LOS is calculated by individual movements as well as intersection average. For retirement communities, LOS B shall be the design objective for average intersection LOS. For all other developments, LOS C shall be the design objective for average intersection LOS. With respect to individual movement LOS, through lane movements shall not fall below LOS D and no turning movement shall fall below LOS E. If any individual movement is shown with a LOS E or F, mitigation measures should be provided that will reduce delay. If mitigation measures will not improve the LOS designation, then a detailed discussion on operational impacts must be included in the report. Site driveway LOS shall be LOS D or better in the AM and PM peak hours. Proposed site driveways that result in individual turn movements with LOS E or F will require a restricted access such as a ¾ or right in/right out access. Variations from the above thresholds may be allowed with specific approval from the MCDOT TSMO Division. Such variations will require specific documentation and may require future mitigation measures that can be implemented with future phases. Safety Analysis Safety analysis shall identify trends in the crash data related to injury severity, crash type, environmental conditions, first violations, travel direction, and other applicable factors. The information shall be summarized into tables and figures that exemplify the notable trends. Any additional safety considerations related to the addition of the proposed development should also be discussed, evaluated, and mitigated as appropriate. 2025 Update 17 Traffic Impact Study Manual Traffic Control [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 6.1 General Controls, 6.2 Roundabouts] Evaluation of intersection traffic control shall be completed for all study area intersections and proposed site driveways within each horizon year. The evaluation shall determine the need for stop-control or signal-control based on guidance from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and MCDOT. For existing traffic signals, adjustments to signal timing parameters shall also be evaluated including but not limited to the cycle length, split times, offset, and left-turn phasing. 4.5.1 Traffic Signal Warrants Traffic signal warrant evaluations based on the MUTCD shall be conducted for all unsignalized arterial/arterial, arterial/collector and collector/collector intersections within the study area. If the proposed development is phased, signal warrant evaluations may need to be evaluated for each horizon year. For large commercial developments with high peak hour volumes, the major proposed site driveways may also require a signal warrant analysis. The warrants provided by the MUTCD consider factors related to the existing operation and safety at the intersection and the potential to improve these conditions. The following is a list of the current warrants: • Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume • Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System • Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume • Warrant 7: Crash Experience • Warrant 3: Peak Hour • Warrant 8: Roadway Network • Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume • Warrant 9: Intersection Near a Grade Crossing • Warrant 5: School Crossing Refer to MUTCD Chapter 4C Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies for the full description of each warrant and its associated threshold requirements. Traffic signals will be installed only when they meet warrants in the MUTCD and as determined by the MCDOT TSMO Division. As a planning-level reference to determine if a signal warrant may be needed, MCDOT has developed a guide provided as Table 2. Signal warrants may be met when the estimated ADTs on the major street and on the higher volume minor street or driveway approach to the intersection equals or exceeds the given values. 2025 Update 18 Traffic Impact Study Manual Table 2: Guidelines for Determining if a Signal may be Warranted Lanes for Moving Traffic on Each Estimated Approach ADT* Major Street Minor Major Minor Street Street Street 1 1 10,000 3,000 2 or more 1 12,000 3,000 2 or more 2 or more 12,000 4,000 1 2 or more 10,000 4,000 1 1 15,000 1,500 2 or more 1 18,000 1,500 2 or more 2 or more 18,000 2,000 1 2 or more 15,000 2,000 *Based on the roadway segment volumes projected to be present within the horizon year(s) for the TIS or TS. Turn Lane Warrants [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 6.1 General Controls, 6.2 Roundabouts, 7.10 Driveway Storage, 7.15 Auxiliary Lanes for Driveways] The evaluation of intersection turn lanes shall be conducted at all study area intersections and proposed site driveways following the requirements within the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. A queueing analysis shall be performed for all turn lanes in the study area to determine storage length requirements. 4.6.1 Intersection Turn Lanes For dedicated turn lanes at study area intersections (public roadways), the analysis shall follow Section 6.1 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual, which provides warrants for right turn lanes and left turn lanes. These warrants are a function of the total peak hour traffic volume on the roadway, the peak hour turning volume, number of lanes, and posted speed limit. While the turn lane warrants provided in the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual assume a normal mix of vehicle types, the turn lane warrants should be adjusted based on engineering judgement. The total storage length required for a turn lane shall be determined using a queueing analysis to ensure the traffic queue does not spill into the adjacent through lane. Turn lane design shall follow Section 6.1 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual, which provides turn lane taper, storage, and sight distance requirements for intersections. 4.6.2 Driveway Turn Lanes For dedicated turn lanes at proposed site driveways, the analysis shall follow Section 7.15 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual, which provides warrants for right turn lanes and left turn lanes. These warrants are a function of the total peak hour traffic volume on the roadway, the peak hour turning volume, number of lanes, and posted speed limit. 2025 Update 19 Traffic Impact Study Manual If the development is proposing a full access driveway onto an arterial and no left turn lane exists on that arterial, a left turn lane and any associated roadway widening will be required to be constructed by the proposed development. Alternatively, left turn access into a driveway may be restricted as part of an access control effort to improve safety of roadway users and will be evaluated by MCDOT on a case-by-case basis. Turn lane design shall follow Section 7 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual which provides turn lane taper, storage, and sight distance requirements for driveways. 4.6.3 Queuing Analysis Queuing analysis shall be conducted for all dedicated turn lanes at study area intersections and proposed site driveways under stop or signal control in order to determine appropriate storage lengths. For turn lane queue analysis, MCDOT requires the calculation of queue lengths using the 95th percentile queue estimation formulas for signal controlled and non-signal controlled intersections provided below. The results of the estimation approach may be compared to more detailed Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) procedures and/or output from computer software packages used in the operational (LOS) calculations. However, in all cases, the more conservative (longest) output for 95th-percentile queue lengths shall govern for each turn lane. All results should be rounded up to the nearest 25-foot interval based on the assumed vehicle length. Storage for dedicated turn lanes shall be adequate to accommodate the projected traffic volumes with no queuing or spillover into the through lanes for the horizon years with a minimum turn lane storage length of 160-ft per Section 6.1 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. Signal Controlled Intersections For signal-controlled intersections, queue is based on the number of vehicles arriving at the intersection per turn movement per cycle: Vehicles/cycle (individual turn movement) = 2 x (vehicles/hour)/(cycles/hour) Storage length = vehicles/cycle x 25 feet (vehicle length) Example: Find the storage length required for 150 vph turning left if the signal cycle is 90 seconds. Vehicles/cycle = 2 x (150 veh/hr) / ((3600 sec/hr)/(90 sec)) = 7.5 veh/cycle Storage length = 7.5 veh/cycle x 25 feet = 187.5 feet USE 200 feet 2025 Update 20 Traffic Impact Study Manual Non-Signal Controlled Intersections For non-signal controlled intersections, queue is based on the number of vehicles per average 2 minute period: (from AASHTO) Vehicles/2 min period = (vehicles/hour) / (30 periods/hour) Storage length = vehicles/2 min period x 25 feet (vehicle length) Example: Find the storage length required for 150 peak hour vehicles turning left at a nonsignal controlled intersection. Vehicles/2 min period = (150 veh/1 hr) / (30 periods/hr) = 5 vehicles Storage length = 5 veh x 25 feet = 125 feet USE 160 feet (MCDOT RDM minimum) Design Exceptions [MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Reference: 1.1 Purpose, 1.3 Design Exceptions] Exceptions to the design requirements contained in this document may be made to the MCDOT TSMO Division if it is perceived that the application of these requirements would create an undue hardship to the developer and the developer can provide other alternatives that maintain adequate traffic management practices. Specific information on the design exception process is provided in Section 1.3 of the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. 2025 Update 21 Traffic Impact Study Manual 5 Report Format Requirements TIS Report Format The following outline provides a suggested format for a TIS. As all developments and projects are somewhat unique, all sections listed below may not be applicable to every project and the report preparer should use their judgement to decide which sections are applicable or if additional sections are required. See Appendix A for sample format. • Executive Summary • Introduction • Proposed Development o Project Description o Proposed Land Use o Construction Timeline/Phasing • o Access/Circulation Existing Conditions o Adjacent Land Use o Roadway Characteristics o Intersection Characteristics o Traffic Volumes o Operational Analysis • o Safety Analysis Future Conditions o Planned Street Improvements o Adjacent Developments o Background Traffic o Site Traffic  Trip Generation  Trip Distribution o Total Traffic o Operational Analysis  LOS Results without Improvements  LOS Results with Improvements  Signal Warrant Analysis  Turn Lane Warrant Analysis o Design Exceptions 2025 Update 22 Traffic Impact Study Manual • Recommendations o Roadway Improvements o Intersection Improvements o Traffic Calming Measures o Multimodal Accommodations • o Other Considerations Appendices o Pre-Application Meeting Notes o Existing Traffic Counts o Crash Data o Synchro/HCS Analysis for Existing and Future Conditions o Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis o Queueing/Storage Analysis o Other Pertinent Information (Future Project Plans, Adjacent Projects, etc.) TS Report Format The following outline provides a suggested format for a TS. A TS is a reduced version of a TIS and does not include all components that a TIS generally would. See Appendix B for sample format. • Executive Summary • Introduction • Proposed Development o Project Description • o Proposed Land Use Existing Conditions o Roadway Characteristics o Intersection Characteristics o Traffic Volumes • o Operational Analysis Future Conditions o Planned Street Improvements o Background Traffic o Site Traffic 2025 Update  Trip Generation  Trip Distribution 23 Traffic Impact Study Manual o Total Traffic o Operational Analysis •  LOS Results without Improvements  LOS Results with Improvements  Turn Lane Warrant Analysis o Design Exceptions Recommendations o Roadway Improvements o Intersection Improvements • o Other Considerations Appendices o Pre-Application Meeting Notes o Existing Traffic Counts o Synchro/HCS Analysis for Existing and Future Conditions o Queueing/Storage Analysis o Other Pertinent Information (Future Project Plans, Adjacent Projects, etc.) 2025 Update 24 Traffic Impact Study Manual Appendix A Sample TIS Report 2025 Update TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COVER SHEET DEVELOPMENT NAME: _________________________________________________ OWNER: ______________________________________________________________ DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: ________________________________________________ LAND USE: _____________________________________________________________ REPORT CONSULTANT: ____________________________________________ REPORT PREPARATION DATE (PE STAMP): ______________________________ COORDINATING AGENCIES: ______________________________________SUBMITTAL DATE: _______________ ______________________________________ SUBMITTAL DATE: ______________ ______________________________________ SUBMITTAL DATE: ______________ ______________________________________ SUBMITTAL DATE: ______________ Traffic Impact Study for [Development Name] at [Development Location] [DEVELOPMENT NAME] TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: [Developer Name] [Developer Address] [Developer Phone Number] Prepared by: CONSULTANT LOGO [Consultant Name] [Consultant Address] [Consultant Phone Number] [Month, Day, Year] File No. [XXXXXXX] Traffic Impact Study for [Development Name] at [Development Location] TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. iii Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Proposed Development ........................................................................................................................ 2 Project Description........................................................................................................................ 2 Proposed Land Use....................................................................................................................... 2 Construction Timing and Phasing ............................................................................................... 2 Access and Circulation ................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 6 Adjacent Land Use ........................................................................................................................ 6 Roadway Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 6 Intersection Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 6 Traffic Volumes............................................................................................................................. 8 Operational Analysis ...................................................................................................................10 Safety Analysis ............................................................................................................................12 Future Conditions ...............................................................................................................................14 Planned Street Improvements ...................................................................................................14 Adjacent Developments..............................................................................................................14 Background Traffic .....................................................................................................................14 Site Traffic ...................................................................................................................................16 Total Traffic .................................................................................................................................20 Operational Analysis ...................................................................................................................22 Design Exceptions.......................................................................................................................26 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................27 Roadway Improvements.............................................................................................................27 Intersection Improvements ........................................................................................................27 Traffic Calming Measures ..........................................................................................................27 Multimodal Accommodations ...................................................................................................27 Other Considerations ..................................................................................................................28 Consultant Name ii | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section should provide a brief summary of the proposed development, the anticipated number of trips, the recommended improvements, and the resulting future traffic operations. [Maximum of 2-pages] Consultant Name iii | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for [Development Name] at [Development Location] INTRODUCTION [This section should provide a high-level description of the project location, the type of development, the TIS category, and the analysis scope (analysis years, intersections, etc).] This report documents a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) performed for the proposed [Development Name] located at [Development Location]. The site is approximately [Description of Size] and is planned to consist of [General Type and Scale of Development]. The site will be constructed in [Describe Development Phasing and Associated Years of Completion as Applicable]. [Description of Individual Parcels as Applicable] The [Development Name] TIS has been performed in general accordance with the requirements established by Maricopa County Department of Transportation, [Additional Jurisdictions Involved], locally accepted standards, and industry practice to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding street network. Requirements for the [Development Name] TIS are set forth by the Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) Traffic Impact Study Manual, MCDOT Roadway Design Manual, and [Additional Standards from Other Jurisdictions as Applicable]. Based on the County [and Other Jurisdictions as Applicable] guidelines, the site will be analyzed as a TIS Category [##] with peak hour trips between [###] and [###] vehicles/hour. The study horizon years include [List Analysis Years as Applicable]. The goal of the [Development Name] TIS is to develop a comprehensive document to guide transportation planning decisions by: • Identifying the appropriate number, type, and location of site access points. • Providing the County and developer with quantitative analysis of future traffic operational changes driven by site land uses. • Recommending short- and mid-range off-site improvements needed to satisfactorily accommodate future site and non-site traffic. This study presents the current and projected traffic volumes, access management and site circulation, and traffic capacity analysis. Recommended improvements are summarized in the final section of this study. Consultant Name 1|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT [This section should provide a detailed description of the proposed development including project location, land use (separated by type and size), construction phasing, and site access and circulation. Further subsections are listed below along with appropriate locations for tables and graphics.] Project Description [Include a description of the project location. A map (Figure 1) illustrating the overall location of the site should be provided and reflect a regional perspective showing roadway connectivity to major arterials and/or higher classification roads. An additional map (Figure 2) should be provided illustrating the specific parcel with study area roadways and intersections.] Proposed Land Use [Include a description of the proposed land uses with associated size/intensity. Land use descriptions should align with the applicable guidance for ITE trip generation categories. A table is not required but may be helpful in larger and/or more mixed-use projects.] Construction Timing and Phasing [Include a timeline for construction of the site complete with opening year identified and any phased completion. If the land use changes between analysis years, a table should be provided highlighting the specific land use type and size/intensity for each year.] Access and Circulation [Include a description of site access points, site driveways, and proposed circulation. An associated phased site plan (Figure 3) should be provided showing the on-site layout and access. Where applicable, the site plan should show existing (adjacent and opposing) driveways.] Consultant Name 2|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 1: Vicinity Map should include: • Regional perspective and network connectivity • Major arterials and/or higher classification roadways labeled • Known future developments adjacent to project site, if applicable Consultant Name 3|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 2: Study Area Figure 2: Study Area should include: • Aerial imagery • Entire study area • Adjacent roadways labeled Consultant Name 4|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 3: Site Plan Figure 3: Site Plan should include: • Adjacent roadways labeled • Lots/buildings labeled, if applicable • Site development phasing, if applicable • Site access points labeled • Existing (adjacent and opposing) driveways Consultant Name 5|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] EXISTING CONDITIONS [This section should provide a detailed description of the existing conditions including physical characteristics of study area roadways and intersections, traffic volumes, level of service analysis, and crash analysis. Further subsections are listed below along with appropriate locations for tables and graphics.] The TIS study area was determined based on MCDOT guidelines and discussions with MCDOT TSMO staff. According to the MCDOT Traffic Impact Study Manual, the minimum study area includes all site access drives, adjacent signal-controlled intersections within [Distance], and major street intersections without signal control and driveways within [Distance]. Based on discussions with MCDOT TSMO staff [and Additional Jurisdictions Involved], the study area also includes the intersections of which are beyond the minimum scope: • XXX at XXX • XXX at XXX • … Adjacent Land Use [Include a general description of the existing land use patterns surrounding the proposed development. Note any specific sites that generate unusual travel patterns or impacts to the study area.] Roadway Characteristics [Include a description of each study area roadway.] [Roadway Name] has an [east/west/north/south] alignment and is classified as a [Functional Classification] per [Reference the Municipal Source]. Within the vicinity of the site, [Roadway Name] is a [##]-lane roadway with [Median Type/Undivided, Shoulder Type, Sidewalk/Bicycle Lanes]. The posted speed limit is [##] miles per hour. Within the study area, [Roadway Name] is owned, operated, and maintained by [Jurisdiction]. Intersection Characteristics [Include a description of each study area intersection. A map (Figure 4) illustrating the study area intersection configurations should be provided.] Consultant Name 6|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] The intersection of [Roadway 1] / [Roadway 2] operates as a [Intersection Control Type] intersection. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. [If signalized, describe the signal phasing and operation.] Figure 4: Existing Conditions Consultant Name 7|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 4: Existing Conditions should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Speed limits • Intersection ID #’s • Intersection traffic control and lane configuration. Traffic Volumes [Include a description of the traffic count process and resulting data. A graphic (Figure 5) illustrating the existing peak hour traffic volumes should be provided. Traffic counts and related data must be recent (within 12 months of the study) unless approved explicitly by MCDOT TSMO staff.] Existing turning movement counts were collected at the study area intersections on [Date]. The turning movement counts were collected in 15-minute intervals for the morning peak period [XX:XX] AM – [XX:XX] AM, afternoon peak period [XX:XX] PM – [XX:XX] PM, and evening peak period [XX:XX] PM – [XX:XX] PM. Unadjusted peak hour traffic volumes at the study area intersections are included in Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts. [If required, describe any adjustments made to the existing count data and the justification.] Consultant Name 8|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 5: Existing Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 5: Existing Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Existing peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement counts at each intersection. Consultant Name 9|Page Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Operational Analysis [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis including vehicular delay, resulting LOS, and queuing. Tables illustrating the existing LOS and queuing should be provided.] The existing peak hour traffic operations at the study area intersections were evaluated using the [Year] intersection lane configuration, traffic control, and turning movement volumes as shown in Figures 4 and 5. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. Average vehicular delay, corresponding level of service (LOS), and queuing were reported for each intersection movement and evaluated against field observations. LOS is a qualitative measure of the traffic operations at an intersection or on a roadway segment. Level of service is ranked from LOS A, which signifies little or no congestion and is the highest rank, to LOS F, which signifies congestion and jam conditions. LOS D is typically considered adequate operation at signalized and un-signalized intersections in developed areas. The intersection LOS is presented in Table 1 and queuing is presented in Table 2. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix B: Existing Operational Analyses. Appendix D: Existing Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] Consultant Name 10 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] R L T R L T R Overall Intersection Average Delay/LOS Total L T Total L T R Total Intersection Total Table 1: [Year] Existing Conditions Level of Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Table 2: [Year] Existing Conditions Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R L Westbound T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 11 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Safety Analysis [Include a description of the historic crash data for the past 5 years at all study area intersections. Summary tables should include crashes totals by injury severity and collision manner. Depending on the crash patterns and findings, additional discussion and summary tables may be needed.] Historic crash data within the study area between [Start Date] and [End Date] were obtained from [Reference the Municipal Source]. The data was analyzed for all study area intersections and includes all crashes that occurred within a 300-foot radius from each intersection. A total of [##] crashes were reported at the study are intersections over the 5-year period. Table 3 summarizes the total number of crashes at each intersection by severity. Crash severity is determined by the reporting officer at the time of the crash or soon thereafter based on the most severe injury sustained by an involved party. Crashes are shown from most severe (Fatal) to least severe (No Injury). [Explain any notable highlights or patterns in the crash severity in paragraph form.] Table 4 summarizes the total number of crashes at each intersection by collision manner. Categories include Single Vehicle, Left Turn, Angle (front to side, other than left turn), Rear End, and Other/unknown. [Explain any notable highlights or patterns in the collision manner in paragraph form.] Consultant Name 12 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] No Injury Possible Injury Suspected Minor Injury Year Suspected Serious Injury Fatal Table 3: Crashes by Injury Severity Total Intersection 1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 … … Total Intersection 2 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 … … Total Other/ Unknown Rear to Side Sideswipe Same or Opposite Direction Head On Rear End Left Turn Angle Year Single Vehicle Table 4: Crashes by Collision Manner Total Intersection 1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 … … Total Intersection 2 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 … … Total Consultant Name 13 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] FUTURE CONDITIONS [This section should provide a detailedoverview of the future conditions including planned street improvements, known adjacent developments, traffic volumes, and operational analysis. Further subsections are listed below along with appropriate locations for tables and graphics.] Planned Street Improvements [Include a general description of any planned street improvements surrounding the proposed site. Describe proposed roadway characteristics, intersection characteristics, etc. that could affect travel patterns or impacts to the site.] Adjacent Developments [Include a general description of any adjacent developments known. Describe land use patterns and note any specific sites that generate unusual travel patterns or impacts to the study area.] Background Traffic [Include a general definition of background traffic. Describe the growth rate utilized for each applicable horizon year of the development. At least one graphic (Figure 6) should be included illustrating the background peak hour traffic volumes. Additional Figures should be replicated for each horizon year of the development.] Non-site or background traffic volumes representing the amount of traffic estimated to be on the roadway network without the proposed development were projected for the horizon years of the development - [Year XXXX], [Year XXXX], and [Year XXXX]. A yearly growth rate of [XX%] for the area was assumed along [Study Area Roadway] based on [Describe Methodology and Resources]. Figure 6 displays the future background traffic projections resulting from the anticipated regional growth and projected traffic from the surrounding developments. Consultant Name 14 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 6: Background Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 6: Background Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Background peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection. Consultant Name 15 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Site Traffic Trip Generation [Include a breakdown of site trip generation utilizing the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. List the ITE land use codes and resulting volumes in a table format.] Estimates of the traffic volumes that will be generated by the development were determined from transportation planning data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. The ITE rates are based on studies that measure trip generation characteristics for various types of land uses. The rates are expressed in terms of trips per unit of land use type. The ITE land use code[s] utilized for the [Development Name] were ITE Land Use Code[s] (LUC) [XXX] – [Land Use Name(s)]. Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, [Land Use Code] primarily serves [Land Use Description]. [Describe each land use code in a sentence.] Table 5 presents the estimated daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the [Development Name] for a typical weekday. [If there are multiple phases and/or design years the table should include rows with estimated daily and peak hour volumes for each.] Table 5: [Development Name] Trip Generation Land Use ITE Code Units Total Size AM Peak MD Peak Daily In Out Total In Out Total Phase 1 / Build Out (as applicable) In PM Peak Out Total Phase 2 / Build Out (as applicable) … TOTAL Trip Distribution [Include a description of the trip distribution for vehicles entering and exiting the site. Explain traffic patterns and any references/justifications for directional distribution. This section should include entering and exiting percentages in either a graphic figure or tabular format. Additional Figures should be replicated for each horizon year of the development.] Consultant Name 16 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] The trip distribution percentages determine the general pattern of travel for vehicles entering and leaving the subject site and the study area. The assumed trip distribution percentages for the development are shown in Figure 7. These distribution patterns were based on [Describe Methodology and Resources]. Figure 7: Traffic Distribution Percentages [Year] Consultant Name 17 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 7: Traffic Distribution Percentages should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Entering / Exiting Percentages at applicable intersections, including site driveways. • Suggestion to color code entering and exiting % values with defining legend. [Include a general description of site-generated traffic volumes. Describe the distribution and assignment of volume to primary roadways within the project study limits. At least one graphic (Figure 8), illustrating the site peak hour traffic volumes, should be provided. Additional Figures should be replicated for each horizon year of the development.] The site-generated traffic volumes based on the trip generation and trip distribution are shown in Figure 8. Consultant Name 18 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 8: Site-Generated Traffic Volumes [Year] Consultant Name 19 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 8: Site-Generated Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Site-generated peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection, including site driveways. • Trip Distribution percentage for surrounding roadways, based on entering and exiting of the project site. Total Traffic [Include a general description of total-generated traffic volumes. At least one graphic (Figure 9), illustrating the total peak hourtraffic volumes, should be provided. Additional Figures should be replicated for each horizon year of the development.] The total peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 9. Consultant Name 20 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 9: Total Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 9: Total Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Total peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection. • Include Site Driveways with total peak hour AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each driveway. Consultant Name 21 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Operational Analysis LOS Results Without Improvements [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis assuming no improvements to the study area intersections. Tables illustrating the future LOS and queuing should be provided.] The future peak hour traffic operations at the study area intersections were evaluated using the existing [Year] intersection lane configuration, assuming no change to traffic control or geometry. Future [Year] turning movement volumes used in the analysis are those shown in Figure 9. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. The future intersection LOS is presented in Table 6 and the predicted queuing is presented in Table 7. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix C: Future Operational Analyses. Appendix E: Future Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any existing concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] R L T R L T R Total L T Total L T R Total Intersection Total Table 6: [Year] Future No-Build Level of Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Overall Intersection Average Delay/LOS Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 22 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Intersection Table 7: [Year] Future No-Build Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R Westbound L T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Results With Improvements [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis assuming all necessary improvements required to provide acceptable LOS. Tables illustrating the future LOS and queuing should be provided.] The future peak hour traffic operations at the study area intersections were evaluated with the necessary improvements to the study are intersection traffic control and configuration. Future [Year] turning movement volumes used in the analysis are those shown in Figure 9. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. [Summarize the changes to study area intersections and roadway geometrics over existing conditions, identifying the recommended improvements to provide acceptable traffic operations and safety.] The future intersection LOS is presented in Table 8 and the predicted queuing is presented in Table 9. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix C: Future Operational Analyses. Appendix E: Future Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any existing concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] Table 8: [Year] Future Build Level of Service Consultant Name 23 | P a g e L T R Eastbound L T R Total L T R Southbound Total Intersection Total Northbound Westbound Overall Intersection Total Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Average Delay/LOS L T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Table 9: [Year] Future Build Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R Westbound L T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Signal Warrant Analysis [Include a summary of any signal warrant analyses prepared for existing unsignalized intersections using the MUTCD warrants. Tables summarizing the results of each warrant (met/not met) should be provided. If the proposed development is phased, signal warrant evaluations may need to be evaluated for each horizon year. For intersections that meet warrants and are recommended to be signalized, a full Traffic Signal Warrant report shall be provided under separate cover.] Existing unsignalized study area intersections were evaluated for future signalization using the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) warrants. The intersection of [Roadway 1 & Roadway 2] was evaluated for signalization using [Year] future traffic volumes. There are nine specific signal warrants in the MUTCD, however, not all warrants are applicable to this study. The warrants used in the analysis for the intersection [Roadway 1 & Roadway 2] include Warrants [#,#,#,etc.]. [Describe which warrants were applicable to analyze and which were met.] Consultant Name 24 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Table 10 summarizes the signal warrant analysis results. Intersection Near a Grade Crossing Roadway Network Crash Experience Coordinated Signal System School Crossing Pedestrian Volume Peak Hour 4-hr Vehicular Volume 8-hr Vehicular Volume Table 10: Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Warrants Intersection 1 Existing Year Future Year 1 Future Year 2 (if applicable) … Intersection 2 Existing Year Future Year 1 Future Year 2 (if applicable) … Intersection 3 Existing Year Future Year 1 Future Year 2 (if applicable) … Legend: Met Not Met Not Evaluated ● ○ X Turn Lane Warrant Analysis [Include a summary of all turn lane warrants/thresholds that were performed for new exclusive turn lanes at study area intersections and driveways. Include reference to the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual and state applicable turn lane storage length requirements, including equations and assumptions. A table should be provided to summarize the calculated and recommended storage lane lengths warranted for all right and left-turn lanes. Note that the minimum turn lane storage length is 160 feet per MCDOT Roadway Design Manual.] Consultant Name 25 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Existing study area intersections and site driveways were evaluated for exclusive turn lanes using the criteria in the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. The intersection of [Roadway 1 & Roadway 2] was evaluated for exclusive turn lanes using [Year] future traffic volumes. [Describe which turn lanes were analyzed and which were met.] Table 11 summarizes the turn lane analysis results. Table 11: Turn Lane Warrant Analysis Summary Location Intersection 1 1 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 2 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 3-… Intersection 2 1 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 2 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 3-… Intersection 3 1 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 2 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 3-… Peak Hour Traffic Volume On Roadway in Turn Lane Advancing [Left/Right] Direction Turn Lane Warrant Met? [Yes/No] Design Exceptions [This section is only applicable if the analyses above result in improvements deemed as unreasonable to the developer. If this is the case, the engineering consultant must contact the MCDOT TSMO Division to discuss. For any proposed design exceptions, describe the improvement and why a design exception is justified. Reference the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual were applicable and provide available alternatives that provide sufficient traffic operations and safety.] Consultant Name 26 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] RECOMMENDATIONS [This section should provide a brief summary of the recommended improvements and the resulting future traffic operations. This section should include a figure of the proposed configuration, defining recommendations to accommodate future conditions.] Roadway Improvements [Describe the roadway improvements within the project study area required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS thresholds. Roadway improvements may include the addition of through lanes, medians (raised or continuous two-way left-turn lanes), acceleration/deceleration lanes, or other features and should follow the standard MCDOT roadway cross sections.] Intersection Improvements [Describe the intersection improvements within the project study area required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS threshold at all study area intersections and proposed site driveways. Intersection improvements may include the addition of turn lanes, changes to traffic control (stop-controlled, signalized), changes to signing and/or striping, changes to signal timing, or other features.] Traffic Calming Measures [Describe the any traffic calming measure recommendations required to mitigate future traffic conditions with the proposed development. Example recommendations could be median landscaping, bulbed corners at intersections for pedestrian crossings, and additional signing/striping to improve safety. If necessary, traffic calming features may be required on existing roadways as outlined in the current Maricopa County Traffic Calming Ordinance No. P-29.] Multimodal Accommodations [Describe any multimodal accommodations recommended within the project study area required to support other modes including pedestrian, bicycle, golf carts, and transit. Multimodal accommodations may include sidewalks, marked crosswalks, ADA ramps, activated/signalized crossings, separated paths, lighting, or dedicated bicycle lanes.] Consultant Name 27 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Other Considerations [Describe any additional considerations, such as design exceptions.] Proposed lane configurations and traffic control are shown in Figure 10. Figure 10: Proposed Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Consultant Name 28 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 10: Proposed Lane Configuration and Traffic Control should include: • Roadway schematic of entire study area network • Street names • Intersection ID #’s • Intersection traffic control and lane configuration, proposed and existing in separate colors/shapes as defined in legend • Intersection configuration, proposed and existing in separate colors/shapes as defined in legend Consultant Name 29 | P a g e Traffic Impact Study Manual Appendix B Sample TS Report 2025 Update TRAFFIC STATEMENT COVER SHEET DEVELOPMENT NAME: __________________________________________________ OWNER: ______________________________________________________________ DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: ________________________________________________ LAND USE: _____________________________________________________________ REPORT CONSULTANT: ____________________________________________ REPORT PREPARATION DATE (PE STAMP): ______________________________ REVIEWED BY: Maricopa County DOT TSMO Traffic Branch Date Traffic Statement for [Development Name] at [Development Location] [DEVELOPMENT NAME] TRAFFIC STATEMENT Prepared for: [Developer Name] [Developer Address] [Developer Phone Number] Prepared by: CONSULTANT LOGO [Consultant Name] [Consultant Address] [Consultant Phone Number] [Month, Day, Year] File No. [XXXXXXX] Traffic Statement for [Development Name] at [Development Location] TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Proposed Development ........................................................................................................................ 2 Project Description........................................................................................................................ 2 Proposed Land Use....................................................................................................................... 2 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 5 Roadway Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 5 Intersection Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 5 Traffic Volumes............................................................................................................................. 6 Operational Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 8 Future Conditions ...............................................................................................................................10 Planned Street Improvements ...................................................................................................10 Background Traffic .....................................................................................................................10 Site Traffic ...................................................................................................................................11 Total Traffic .................................................................................................................................15 Operational Analysis ...................................................................................................................16 Design Exceptions.......................................................................................................................20 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................21 Roadway Improvements.............................................................................................................21 Intersection Improvements ........................................................................................................21 Other Considerations ..................................................................................................................21 Consultant Name i|Page Traffic Statement for [Development Name] at [Development Location] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section should provide a brief summary of the proposed development, the anticipated number of trips, the recommended improvements, and the resulting future traffic operations. [Maximum of 1-page] Consultant Name ii | P a g e Traffic Statement for [Development Name] at [Development Location] INTRODUCTION [This section should provide a high-level description of the project location, the type of development, and the analysis scope (analysis year, intersections, etc).] This report documents a Traffic Statement (TS) performed for the proposed [Development Name] located at [Development Location]. The site is approximately [Description of Size] and is planned to consist of [General Type and Scale of Development]. The site will be constructed in a single phase and completed in [Year of Completion]. The [Development Name] TS has been performed in general accordance with the requirements established by Maricopa County Department of Transportation, [Additional Jurisdictions Involved], locally accepted standards, and industry practice to determine the improvements needed at site driveways. Requirements for the [Development Name] TS are set forth by the Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) Traffic Impact Study Manual, MCDOT Roadway Design Manual, and [Additional Standards from Other Jurisdictions as Applicable]. Based on the County [and Other Jurisdictions as Applicable] guidelines, the site will generate [###] peak hour trips which is less than the threshold for developing a Traffic Impact Study. The study horizon will be limited to opening year [Year of Completion]. The goal of the [Development Name] TS is to develop a comprehensive document to guide transportation planning decisions by: • Identifying the appropriate number, type, and location of site access points. • Recommending improvements needed to satisfactorily accommodate future site traffic. This study presents the current and projected traffic volumes, access management and site circulation, and traffic capacity analysis. Recommended improvements are summarized in the final section of this study. Consultant Name 1|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT [This section should provide a detailed description of the proposed development including project location and land use (separated by type and size). Subsections are listed below along with appropriate locations for tables and graphics.] Project Description [Include a description of the project location. A map (Figure 1) should be provided illustrating the specific parcel with study area roadways and adjacent intersections.] Proposed Land Use [Include a description of the proposed land uses with associated size/intensity. Land use descriptions should align with the applicable guidance for ITE trip generation categories. A table is not required but may be helpful.] Consultant Name 2|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 1: Study Area Figure 1: Study Area should include: • Aerial imagery • Adjacent roadways labeled Consultant Name 3|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 2: Site Plan Figure 2: Site Plan should include: • Adjacent roadways labeled • Lots/buildings labeled, if applicable • Site access points labeled • Existing (adjacent and opposing) driveways Consultant Name 4|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] EXISTING CONDITIONS [This section should provide a detailed description of the existing conditions including physical characteristics of study area roadways and intersections, traffic volumes, and level of service analysis.] The TS study area was determined based on MCDOT guidelines and discussions with MCDOT TSMO staff. According to the MCDOT Traffic Impact Study Manual, the study area is limited to the site access drives. Roadway Characteristics [Include a description of each adjacent study area roadway.] [Roadway Name] has an [east/west/north/south] alignment and is classified as a [Functional Classification] per [Reference the Municipal Source]. Within the vicinity of the site, [Roadway Name] is a [##]-lane roadway with [Median Type/Undivided, Shoulder Type, Sidewalk/Bicycle Lanes]. The posted speed limit is [##] miles per hour. Within the study area, [Roadway Name] is owned, operated, and maintained by [Jurisdiction]. Intersection Characteristics [Include a description of any adjacent study area intersections. A map (Figure 4) illustrating the study area intersection configurations should be provided.] The intersection of [Roadway 1] / [Roadway 2] operates as a [Intersection Control Type] intersection. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. The [Direction] approach consists of [Describe Lane Configuration]. [If signalized, describe the signal phasing and operation.] Consultant Name 5|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 4: Existing Conditions Figure 4: Existing Conditions should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Speed limits • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Intersection traffic control and lane configuration. Traffic Volumes [Include a description of the traffic count process and resulting data. A graphic (Figure 5) illustrating the existing peak hour traffic volumes should be provided. Traffic counts and related data must be recent (within 12 months of the study) unless approved explicitly by MCDOT TSMO staff.] Consultant Name 6|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Existing traffic counts were collected adjacent to the site on [Date]. The counts were collected in 15-minute intervals for the morning peak period [XX:XX] AM – [XX:XX] AM, afternoon peak period [XX:XX] PM – [XX:XX] PM, and evening peak period [XX:XX] PM – [XX:XX] PM. Unadjusted peak hour traffic volumes are included in Appendix A: Existing Traffic Counts. [If required, describe any adjustments made to the existing count data and the justification.] Figure 5: Existing Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 5: Existing Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Existing peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement count. Consultant Name 7|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Operational Analysis [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis including vehicular delay, resulting LOS, and queuing for any existing site drives (i.e., redevelopment). Tables illustrating the existing LOS and queuing should be provided.] The existing peak hour traffic operations at the site access points were evaluated using the [Year] intersection lane configuration, traffic control, and turning movement volumes as shown in Figures 4 and 5. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. Average vehicular delay, corresponding level of service (LOS), and queuing were reported for each intersection movement and evaluated against field observations. LOS is a qualitative measure of the traffic operations at an intersection or on a roadway segment. Level of service is ranked from LOS A, which signifies little or no congestion and is the highest rank, to LOS F, which signifies congestion and jam conditions. LOS D is typically considered adequate operation at signalized and un-signalized intersections in developed areas. The intersection LOS is presented in Table 1 and queuing is presented in Table 2. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix B: Existing Operational Analyses. Appendix D: Existing Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] T R L T R L T R Total L Total L T R Total Intersection Total Table 1: [Year] Existing Conditions Level of Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Overall Intersection Average Delay/LOS Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 8|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Intersection Table 2: [Year] Existing Conditions Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R Westbound L T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 9|Page Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] FUTURE CONDITIONS [This section should provide a detailedoverview of the future conditions including planned street improvements, known adjacent developments, traffic volumes, and operational analysis. Further subsections are listed below along with appropriate locations for tables and graphics.] Planned Street Improvements [Include a general description of any planned street improvements surrounding the proposed site. Describe proposed roadway characteristics, intersection characteristics, etc. that could affect travel patterns or impacts to the site.] Background Traffic [Include a general definition of background traffic. Describe the growth rate utilized for opening year of the development. At least one graphic (Figure 6) should be included illustrating the background peak hour traffic volumes.] Non-site or background traffic volumes representing the amount of traffic estimated to be on the roadway network without the proposed development were projected for opening year. A yearly growth rate of [XX%] for the area was assumed along [Study Area Roadway] based on [Describe Methodology and Resources]. Figure 6 displays the future background traffic projections resulting from the anticipated regional growth and projected traffic from the surrounding developments. Consultant Name 10 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 6: Background Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 6: Background Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Background peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection. Site Traffic Trip Generation [Include a breakdown of site trip generation utilizing the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. List the ITE land use codes and resulting volumes in a table format.] Consultant Name 11 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Estimates of the traffic volumes that will be generated by the development were determined from transportation planning data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. The ITE rates are based on studies that measure trip generation characteristics for various types of land uses. The rates are expressed in terms of trips per unit of land use type. The ITE land use code[s] utilized for the [Development Name] were ITE Land Use Code[s] (LUC) [XXX] – [Land Use Name(s)]. Per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, [Land Use Code] primarily serves [Land Use Description]. [Describe each land use code in a sentence.] Table 5 presents the estimated daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the [Development Name] for a typical weekday. Table 5: [Development Name] Trip Generation Land Use ITE Code Units Total Size Daily In AM Peak Out Total In MD Peak Out Total In PM Peak Out Total TOTAL Trip Distribution [Include a description of the trip distribution for vehicles entering and exiting the site. Explain traffic patterns and any references/justifications for directional distribution. This section should include entering and exiting percentages in either a graphic figure or tabular format.] The trip distribution percentages determine the general pattern of travel for vehicles entering and leaving the subject site. The assumed trip distribution percentages for the development are shown in Figure 7. These distribution patterns were based on [Describe Methodology and Resources]. Consultant Name 12 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 7: Traffic Distribution Percentages [Year] Figure 7: Traffic Distribution Percentages should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Entering / Exiting Percentages at site driveways. • Suggestion to color code entering and exiting % values with defining legend. [Include a general description of site-generated traffic volumes. Describe the distribution and assignment of volume to primary roadways. At least one graphic (Figure 8), illustrating the site peak hour traffic volumes, should be provided.] Consultant Name 13 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] The site-generated traffic volumes based on the trip generation and trip distribution are shown in Figure 8. Figure 8: Site-Generated Traffic Volumes [Year] Figure 8: Site-Generated Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Site-generated peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection, including site driveways. • Trip Distribution percentage for surrounding roadways, based on entering and exiting of the project site. Consultant Name 14 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Total Traffic [Include a general description of total-generated traffic volumes. At least one graphic (Figure 9), illustrating the total peak hour traffic volumes, should be provided.] The total peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 9. Figure 9: Total Traffic Volumes [Year] Consultant Name 15 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 9: Total Traffic Volumes should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Total peak hour [AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each intersection. • Include Site Driveways with total peak hour AM/Mid/PM] turning movement volumes at each driveway. Operational Analysis LOS Results Without Improvements [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis assuming no improvements to the study area intersections. Tables illustrating the future LOS and queuing should be provided.] The future peak hour traffic operations at the site driveways were evaluated using the existing [Year] intersection lane configuration, assuming no change to traffic control or geometry. Future [Year] turning movement volumes used in the analysis are those shown in Figure 9. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. The future intersection LOS is presented in Table 6 and the predicted queuing is presented in Table 7. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix C: Future Operational Analyses. Appendix E: Future Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any existing concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] Consultant Name 16 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] T R L T R L T R Overall Intersection Average Delay/LOS Total L Total L T R Total Intersection Total Table 6: [Year] Future No-Build Level of Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Table 7: [Year] Future No-Build Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound Intersection L T R L T R L T Westbound R L T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 17 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] LOS Results With Improvements [Include a description of the traffic operational analysis assuming all necessary improvements required to provide acceptable LOS. Tables illustrating the future LOS and queuing should be provided.] The future peak hour traffic operations at the site driveways were evaluated with the necessary improvements to the study are intersection traffic control and configuration. Future [Year] turning movement volumes used in the analysis are those shown in Figure 9. Synchro [Version #] traffic modeling software, employing the methodologies as presented in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), was utilized for the analyses. [Summarize the changes to study area intersections and roadway geometrics over existing conditions, identifying the recommended improvements to provide acceptable traffic operations and safety.] The future intersection LOS is presented in Table 8 and the predicted queuing is presented in Table 9. Summary reports of the Synchro output are included in Appendix C: Future Operational Analyses. Appendix E: Future Queuing Analysis Computations includes the formulas and calculations used to estimate queue lengths based on the MCDOT guidelines. [Explain the analysis results of the operational analysis in paragraph form. Highlight any existing concerns in terms of excessive delay or queuing.] Consultant Name 18 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] T R L T R L T R Overall Intersection Average Delay/LOS Total L Total L T R Total Intersection Total Table 8: [Year] Future Build Level of Service Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Table 9: [Year] Future Build Queuing Northbound Southbound Eastbound L T R L T R L T R L Westbound T R Intersection 1 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection 2 AM Peak Hour MID Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Consultant Name 19 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Turn Lane Warrant Analysis [Include a summary of all turn lane warrants/thresholds that were performed for new exclusive turn lanes at study area driveways. Include reference to the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual and state applicable turn lane storage length requirements, including equations and assumptions. A table should be provided to summarize the calculated and recommended storage lane lengths warranted for all right and left-turn lanes. Note that the minimum turn lane storage length is 160 feet per MCDOT Roadway Design Manual.] Existing site driveways were evaluated for exclusive turn lanes using the criteria in the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual. The intersection of [Roadway 1 & Roadway 2] was evaluated for exclusive turn lanes using [Year] future traffic volumes. [Describe which turn lanes were analyzed and which were met.] Table 11 summarizes the turn lane analysis results. Table 11: Turn Lane Warrant Analysis Summary Location Intersection 1 1 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 2 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 3-… Intersection 2 1 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 2 - Direction, [Left/Right] Turn Lane 3-… Peak Hour Traffic Volume On Roadway in Turn Lane Advancing [Left/Right] Direction Turn Lane Warrant Met? [Yes/No] Design Exceptions [This section is only applicable if the analyses above result in improvements deemed as unreasonable to the developer. If this is the case, the engineering consultant must contact the MCDOT TSMO Division to discuss. For any proposed design exceptions, describe the improvement and why a design exception is justified. Reference the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual were applicable and provide available alternatives that provide sufficient traffic operations and safety.] Consultant Name 20 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] RECOMMENDATIONS [This section should provide a brief summary of the recommended improvements and the resulting future traffic operations. This section should include a figure of the proposed configuration, defining recommendations to accommodate future conditions.] Roadway Improvements [Describe the roadway improvements within the project study area required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS thresholds. Roadway improvements may include the addition of medians (raised or continuous two-way left-turn lanes), acceleration/deceleration lanes, or other features and should follow the standard MCDOT roadway cross sections.] Intersection Improvements [Describe the intersection improvements within the project study area required to accommodate future traffic volumes and meet the LOS threshold at all proposed site driveways. Intersection improvements may include the addition of turn lanes, changes to traffic control (stop-controlled, signalized), changes to signing and/or striping, or other features.] Other Considerations [Describe any additional considerations, such as design exceptions.] Proposed lane configurations and traffic control are shown in Figure 10. Consultant Name 21 | P a g e Traffic Statement for the Proposed [Development Name] at [Development Location] Figure 10: Proposed Lane Configuration and Traffic Control Figure 10: Proposed Lane Configuration and Traffic Control should include: • Roadway schematic of study area • Street names • Intersection/Driveway ID #’s • Intersection traffic control and lane configuration, proposed and existing in separate colors/shapes as defined in legend • Intersection configuration, proposed and existing in separate colors/shapes as defined in legend Consultant Name 22 | P a g e