The
main purpose of the 45‑page traffic‑impact
analysis was to identify which district campus–north or
south–would be the best location for the new high school
from a traffic perspective.
However,
the study’s conclusions were presented to the district’s
governing board on June 12, some weeks after the board
voted to site the new school on the south campus.
In
a later interview, SouthWest Traffic Engineering LLC principal
Andrew Smigielski said his associates
were in the process of putting the study together when
they read in The Desert Advocate that the board had already
voted on the matter.
Despite
the timing issue, the study contains information on how
the district can mitigate traffic issues when planning
the new school, as well as other pertinent information.
Briefly,
the traffic engineers concluded that, from a traffic standpoint,
siting a new high school in a less‑developed area
on the south campus is the better of the two alternatives.
“The
south campus (high school) can effectively exist before
adjacent land is developed with minimal impact to existing
intersections. When the adjacent state land is developed,
a planned community can be designed that surrounds and
includes the high school.”
Smigielski,
said “Siting the school on the south campus will not impact
the operation of existing
intersections as much” as if it were located on the north
campus.
At
the north campus, it is projected that southbound left‑turn
movement at the intersection of Dove Valley Road and Driveway
6 would operate at an inadequate level of service during
morning peak hours in 2009 with the addition of a new
high school, the study states. “Inadequate level of service”
refers to the amount of time a motorist has to wait to
move through an intersection.
Delays
are caused by the high east‑ and westbound volumes
on Dove Valley Road, limiting the number of adequate gaps
available to the southbound left‑turn movement out
of the main school entrance.
Although
the consultants conclude traffic mitigation measures are
limited, they suggest–if a new high school were constructed
on the north campus–the school should be placed in a way
so no new parking areas are created near Driveway 6, the
main school entrance.
The
study also looked at when traffic signals would be warranted
at Dynamite Boulevard and 56th Street, concluding signals
are warranted at this intersection in 2007 without consideration
of a new high school.
Smigielski
said the fact that the intersection “breaks down” or is
crowded at one time of the day, however, does not necessarily
mean it is worth spending the $250,000‑$300,000
it costs to install signals. The controlling municipal
jurisdiction must make this decision.
With
respect to the south campus,
the northbound left‑turn movement at the intersection
of Pinnacle Vista Drive and Driveway 2 is predicted to
operate at an inadequate level of service during morning
peak hours in 2009 with addition of a new high school,
according to the analysis.
Again,
delays are caused by high eastbound and westbound volumes
of traffic, but on Pinnacle Vista Drive, limiting the
number of adequate gaps available for northbound left
turns out of Driveway 2. The addition of a two‑way
left‑turn lane, along with an eastbound right‑turn
lane on Pinnacle Vista Drive, would facilitate turns out
of Driveway 2.
The
consultants propose a number of mitigation measures to
ease traffic in the south campus area when the new high
school is built.
For
example, Pinnacle Vista Drive will operate more effectively
with one lane in each direction and
two‑way left‑turn lanes, the survey states.
The two‑way left turn will also facilitate turning
vehicles into and out of the school driveways. In addition,
eastbound right‑turn lanes at the entrance driveways
should be added along Pinnacle Vista Drive.
